Why?
Paranoid that they are 'commin fer ye guns'?
they are.
they also want my unicorn... but i have her hidden
The studies I have been posting and posting about are conducted by universities for the most part.
and?
posting a study from a university who can't access the relevant information because it isn't there is like...?
If you had read the links that were provided, those questions would have been answered.
if you had all the information we wouldn't be having this conversation
you would be king of the US
Do you also disagree with removing someone's driving license from them if they use their car to mow down other people?
After all, that's just focusing on the tool and not the core problem, yes?
1- i would also ask (and ask for proof of) their intent. if it was intentional. if it was accidental. if it was negligent homicide. if it was caused by another person. facts are important in that kind of case, just like all cases
2- that is also a bad analogy ... you see, you do not have the
right to drive a car in the US. it is a
privilege, and that is why it is licensed by the state. you have the right to freedom of movement, access to public roads, access to public areas, and more... but driving is a privilege, not a right at all
but yes, i do advocate for the removal of a license for mowing down people because the law specifically states that it is illegal, thus a weapon
however, i don't advocate for the removal of the license because the car was
a tool...
i would advocate the removal of the license because of the intent, nature of the crime (if any) and the individual culpability in said crime
You have strict laws that govern your use of cars. Hospitals and the law in general have strict laws to try to prevent deaths in hospitals. As for hammers,
it is a fallacy parroted by the NRA that has no actual basis in reality.
yes, and there are strict laws that govern gun use and ownership too (actual application of said laws depends upon the prosecutors office etc)
hospitals also have strict laws and regulatory mechanisms, just like guns... in fact, far, far stricter than guns
as for your fallacy link: if it aint to relevant statistics from the above links (last post), then it is a biased interpretation
period
So, would you like to try again? I noticed you've left out homicide by forks and spoons
if you want, i can include them... of course, you would also have to include the cultural foods they use to feed with too, as it is common and always relevant , so...
The science is still there, with the facts and the figures.
sure
except that the science in said facts and figures (and in your links, etc) are also severely lacking in a lot of detail and information that i know isn't collected...
go ahead, read the links i left and learn what is collected where... even within a state the data collected is not the same depending on the org collecting the data, so again, if you would read the source material you would understand what the problem is
I am not ignoring it. I am simply curious as to why you are trying to change the subject and move the goal post.
not moving any goal post
haven't changed the argument at all, in fact
And yet, which you keep ignoring, even with criminal gangs still having guns, their rate of gun crime is still below yours.
reported crime
don't forget that important qualifier to your point
and don't forget my point that crime is a part of the culture - so there is a lot of "crime" that is technically a crime (by law) that isn't a crime (by culture) or reported as such, like beating the heck out of a stalker
but that is still not important because the culture is completely different... which
is the point!
comparing subaru to Bud-K again
wait... you want to argue about taking away the 2nd amendment but you can't take 2 minutes to actually read what it is or it's basic history and why it was put in the constitution?
really?
i expected a little better considering you are digging up irrelevant biased sites to prove your point while forgetting the major points i made about the fact that the bulk of the relevant data is either not there, not divided up or reported at all, different, not standardized or just plain not reported to the national statistics database
There is a wealth of scientific research on this subject. Some of which I posted or posted articles that links to them.
yeah... read my lines directly above this quote
Perhaps you can do your own research on the matter and see for yourself. There's only so much scientific studies I can put in front of you and you ignore it and claim there is none before you will start to look a tad foolish at claiming there is no scientific research on the issue.
you mean like the UCR?
https://www.fbi.gov/stats-services/crimestats/
yeah... if only i had thought of that
oh wait... i linked it above
nevermind
lets look at something important on that very page though
Figures used in this
Report were submitted voluntarily by law enforcement agencies throughout the country. Individuals using these tabulations are cautioned against drawing conclusions by making direct comparisons between cities. Comparisons lead to simplistic and/or incomplete analyses that often create misleading perceptions adversely affecting communities and their residents. Valid assessments are possible only with careful study and analysis of the range of unique conditions affecting each local law enforcement jurisdiction. It is important to remember that crime is a social problem and, therefore, a concern of the entire community. In addition, the efforts of law enforcement are limited to factors within its control. The data user is, therefore, cautioned against comparing statistical data of individual agencies. Further information on this topic can be obtained in
Uniform Crime Reporting Statistics: Their Proper Use.
did you know that the UCR submissions differed from the local databases?
that is why it says "The data user is, therefore, cautioned against comparing statistical data of individual agencies"... because the local agancies will be using a different method, reporting, statistical analysis and more... likely with more data to differentiate crimes and concentrate on "hot spots" or local problems due to special needs, etc...
now do you see the problem?
now do you get what i am saying about not having all the information?
EDIT
important note and qualifier: when researching national statistics, you must,
absolutely must, have and use multiple databases to cover all the potential issues and problems that may be reported incorrectly, falsely, not reported in all databases or simply just misfiled etc.
not all databases will have all the info either, and no single database can be definitive or the single source of information because of reporting practices and things like HIPA which may not even be covered even with the NIH or CDC databases.
Also note, not all databases will cover all places for all years either, so you must be very methodical to unsure your comparisons include all the same info, relevant areas, dates times and crimes as well as conform to the same criteria which may or may not be included in the information which will also require research and public arrest records and necessitate checking facts.
almost forgot... you should also use the Census information collected for population and other factors etc
(see the problem now?)