Splinter thread from this COR thread about the Montreal shootings, at the request of Groundhog Boy:

quote:

Originally posted by Groundhog Boy Yeah, so much for Canada's highly touted gun laws, huh?

quote:

Originally posted by Renegade Yeah, so much for Canada's significantly lower homocide rate, huh?

quote:

Originally posted by Groundhog Boy Personally, i feel that culture plays a lot more of a role than gun accessibility.

quote:

Originally posted by Renegade So Americans, by virtue of culture, are inherently more sociopathic than Candians? Care to back that up with neurological or psychological studies?

quote:

Originally posted by Groundhog Boy Have you seen the way our government handles conflicts? If we don't get our way, we just invade countries and kill people. When was the last time Canada was in a war. It's not too much of a stretch to say that the people follow their government's actions much like a child follows their parent's.

quote:

Originally posted by Renegade I'm not about to justify US foreign policy here - actually, for the most part, I oppose it. My point is that you're attributing US homicide rates to abstract political philosophies, whereas I'm attributing it to the fact that people in the US can quite easily buy tools explicitly designed to kill lots of existent beings in a short space of time. On the balance of probabilities here, which would you suggest is more likely responsible for the US's high homicide rate? quote: Originally posted by Groundhog Boy It's not too much of a stretch to say that the people follow their government's actions much like a child follows their parent's. Actually, I'd argue that it is quite a stretch to say that people consider the actions of their government before performing an immoral action in civil life. Are you really saying that people are more likely to kill someone as a result of misguided US foreign policy than because they just happen to be a bit mad and have have a gun capable of depositing 40 rounds per minute into a human body sitting beside them?

quote:

Originally posted by Groundhog Boy As the guy above stated, maybe it's not the best to have this discussion in here. If you want to start a thread in PDD and post in the link or quote what's relevant from this thread to there, i'm willing to continue it there, though.

Feel free to jump in wherever, guys.

___________________
http://eschatonnow.blogspot.com/

Last edited by Renegade on Sep-15-2006 at 20:13

IMO the gun violence problem in the US is a much more complex problem then either of your positions reflect. It is the result of a multitude of things of which ease of access and this so called "culture of violence" (if you will) are only two. In addition I think you need to add the incredible economic clevage, systemic racism, hyper-individualism, and probably a whole host of things I simply can't bring to mind right now. That said, I think that the manner in which your country pursues it's foriegn policy is a symptom of the same mix of influances that lead to your elevated levels of violence rather then the cause thereof. Additionally, while I am a proponent of certain gun control measures we must be realistic and understand that if there is a demand for guns those that really want them will get them regardless of the law, unfortunatly it just happens to be that they are also the ones who are most likely to use them against other people.

___________________

quote:

Originally posted by RickyM you're just a shit version of Moral Hazard. At least he knows what he's talking about.

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN lol, i love it when moral feels the need to lay the smack down

quote:

Originally posted by Moral Hazard IMO the gun violence problem in the US is a much more complex problem then either of your positions reflect. It is the result of a multitude of things of which ease of access and this so called "culture of violence" (if you will) are only two. In addition I think you need to add the incredible economic clevage, systemic racism, hyper-individualism, and probably a whole host of things I simply can't bring to mind right now. That said, I think that the manner in which your country pursues it's foriegn policy is a symptom of the same mix of influances that lead to your elevated levels of violence rather then the cause thereof. Additionally, while I am a proponent of certain gun control measures we must be realistic and understand that if there is a demand for guns those that really want them will get them regardless of the law, unfortunatly it just happens to be that they are also the ones who are most likely to use them against other people.

Sorry, I was away in a meeting, just got back.

I completely agree that it's more complex than what I was saying. I was just giving an example. The grew up in an area where EVERYONE owns a gun. I live in NYC now, so it's a no-no, but I own a few guns that stay at my parents house. I've never thought of flipping out and going on a shooting rampage of random people. There's hardly any gun violence from where I'm from to start with. It's interesting that NYC would have a higher rate of gun violence (which in comparison to Detroit, D.C. and a lot of other large cities in the US, is still pretty low) than my area, considering the percentage of the population that owns weapons. I think this stems from a lot of what moralhazard was talking about above (economics, racial issues, population density (not on its own, but in tandem with these other things). Where I grew up, you were taught that guns were for hunting, target shooting, and self defense. In larger cities, kids grow up learning that guns are a means of getting your way and gaining respect.

Also, I will agree that maybe our foreign policy is caused by a lot of these influences, rather than a cause of the gun violence. I would say that it can work both ways, though. When I made the children/parents analogy, I was talking about the way in which children who come from abusive families tend to be abusive themselves, etc. Obviously, this isn't everyone, just a fraction. I can easily see the same type of mentality and psychology working here, too. It doesn't happen to everyone, but some people can find that as a subconcious validation of their desires. Compare the financial spending of individuals here with that of our government: We're both incredibly in debt, and I think when people see that the national debt is increasing all the time, they think, well, if the government can spend money it doesn't have, so can I. I think a similar pattern could be found here, too. Our government has shown the people that they think it's acceptable to use any means necessary to accomplish a goal. Why shouldn't individuals under that government develop the same mentality.

The other thing that I want to point out is that even without guns, things like the Montreal shooting are still quite possible. Instead of walking in and shooting up the place, he could have just bombed it like they do every day in the Middle East to get their points across. If the will is there, it's still not hard to accomplish, sometimes even more efficiently than with a gun.

___________________
"Go back to bed america your government is in control
Here's American Gladiators, here is 56 channels of it,
Watch these picturary retards bang their fuckin' skulls together and congratulate you on living in the land of freedom,
Here you go America you are free to do as we tell you
We want your soul
Your cash, your house, your phone, your cash, your house, your life" -Adam Freeland - We Want Your Soul

the accessibility of firearms is the single greatest reason for the US' high firearms homicide rate. i dont see how you could argue otherwise.

___________________

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN the accessibility of firearms is the single greatest reason for the US' high firearms homicide rate. i dont see how you could argue otherwise.

There are many ways to argue otherwise, both with actual data and opinions.

Or did you actually think that saying "I don't see how you could argue otherwise" was some kind of factual end-all to the issue?

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN the accessibility of firearms is the single greatest reason for the US' high firearms homicide rate. i dont see how you could argue otherwise.

So why is it that states in the US with stricter gun laws, like Washington DC, have lower murder rates than areas with less restricted laws, and with a higher population owning firearms? To give an example, here are the rates and laws for Washington DC and Pennsylvania, where I grew up, and where firearms are owned by the MAJORITY of the population.

DC Murder rate (2002) - 43.67/100,000
Pennsylvania Murder Rate(2002) - 5.1/100,000

Gun owner laws for each -

DC

quote:

POSSESSION Rifles and Shotguns All rifles and shotguns must be registered with the Metropolitan Police. To obtain a registration certificate, the applicant must be 21 years old (or be over 18 and have a liability statement signed by his guardian), pass a vision test or have a valid D.C. driver`s license, and not be: Convicted of a crime of violence or a weapons offense. Under indictment for a crime of violence. Convicted of a narcotics or an assault or battery charge within the last five years. Acquitted of a crime by reason of insanity or adjudicated an alcoholic within the past five years. Committed to a mental hospital within the past five years. Suffering from a physical defect which might render his possession of a gun unsafe. Found negligent in any firearm mishap. No firearm may be acquired unless an application is first filed with the Metropolitan Police Department and a registration certificate issued. Any person bringing a rifle or shotgun into the District must "immediately" notify the Identification and Records Division. An application for registration must be filed within 48 hours after such notification. Handguns No handgun can be legally possessed in the District unless it is registered. All handguns registered in the District prior to Sept. 24, 1976, were required to have been reregistered by Feb. 5, 1977. After that date, no more handguns could be registered. Thus, it is unlawful to possess, acquire, or bring into D.C. any handgun which was not registered as of Feb. 5, 1977. CARRYING Carrying a handgun in the District is prohibited. All firearms are to be kept at one`s home or place of business. All firearms must be unloaded and disassembled or locked with a trigger lock except when kept at a registrant`s place of business or while being used for lawful "recreational" purposes. A D.C. license to carry a pistol is needed for one`s home or business and the pistol must also have been registered prior to September 24, 1976. Self-defense in one`s home with a firearm is therefore legally precluded.

- http://www.nraila.org/GunLaws/StateLaws.aspx?ST=PA

PA

quote:

RCHASE Any individual or dealer selling a handgun is required to sell or transfer it at the place of business of a licensed dealer or county sheriff`s office. Transfers of all firearms (handguns, rifles and shotguns) by a licensed dealer are subject to an instant records check of the purchaser. The purchaser must sign a transfer application/record of sale for the purchase of a handgun. No transfer application/record is necessary to transfer a rifle or shotgun. There is a $2 fee for the instant check and a $3 firearm sale surcharge to cover telephone costs. Transfers between spouses, parent and child or grandparent and grandchild or between active law enforcement officers are exempt from the above requirements. Rifles and shotguns may be transferred between unlicensed individuals. Antique firearms are exempt from the requirements regarding transfer of firearms through dealers. It is unlawful for any licensee to sell, deliver or transfer any handgun, other than an antique firearm, to any person unless the transferee is provided or purchases a locking device for that firearm, or the design of the firearm incorporates a locking device. Exempt from this requirement are transfers between licensed dealers and any law enforcement officer. A locking device is a device that when installed on a firearm prevents the firearm from being operated without deactivating the device or a device that is incorporated into the design of a firearm and that is designed to prevent the operation of the firearm by anyone not having access to the device. It is unlawful to lend, give, or otherwise transfer a handgun unless exempted by law or by following the procedure previously described. Exempted is a person who receives the handgun and has a license to carry; or who is engaged in a Pennsylvania Game Commission or NRA hunter safety, firearm training, or competition program; or who is engaged in hunting or trapping. Also exempted is the loaning or giving of a handgun to another person who will remain within the transferor`s dwelling or place of business; a transfer to carry out a bequest or intestate succession; and a person under 18 who is under the direct supervision of a responsible person at least 21. No person may knowingly or intentionally transfer any firearm to any person who is prohibited from possession. No Pennsylvania resident who may lawfully purchase, possess, sell, or transfer a firearm shall be prohibited from purchasing or otherwise obtaining a rifle or shotgun in a jurisdiction outside the Commonwealth. Persons convicted of drunk driving three times within a five-year period may possess but may not purchase a firearm. A person with certain disabling convictions that keep him or her from purchasing and possessing firearms may apply to the Court of Common Pleas for restoration of his or her firearms rights. Such restoration does not constitute a pardon or guarantee an expungement of a criminal record. Free brochures summarizing state law relating to the buying, selling, and transferring of firearms shall be provided by the State Police to every licensed firearms dealer and each individual who purchases a firearm from a licensed dealer. POSSESSION No license is required to possess rifles and shotguns, or to possess handguns in one`s home or place of business. It is unlawful for the following to possess any firearm: any person convicted of a crime of violence (murder, rape, assault, burglary, etc.,); who is a fugitive, or has been convicted of a controlled substance offense punishable by more than 2 years, adjudicated mentally incompetent or involuntarily committed to a mental institution, illegal alien, adjudicated a delinquent for an offense that would disqualify one from possessing a firearm if committed by an adult, or subject to a protection from abuse court order that prohibits possession of a firearm. It is unlawful to possess any firearm in a court facility. At or within the building containing a court facility, lockers or similar facilities shall be available by July 1, 2002, at no charge, for the temporary checking of firearms by persons lawfully carrying same. A receipt must be issued to the individual checking a firearm. It is unlawful for a person under 18 to possess a handgun. This does not apply to a minor who is under the supervision of a parent, grandparent, legal guardian or adult acting with the consent of the minor`s custodial parent or legal guardian, when the minor is engaged in lawful activity including training, target shooting or competition, or the firearm is unloaded and the minor is transporting it for lawful purpose or a person under the age of 18 who is lawfully hunting or trapping in accordance with the Pennsylvania Game Code. CARRYING It is unlawful to possess any firearm on school property but it shall be a defense that the weapon is possessed and used in conjunction with a lawful supervised school activity or course or is possessed for other lawful purpose. It is unlawful to carry a handgun, rifle or shotgun upon the public streets or upon any public property during an emergency proclaimed by a governmental executive unless the person carrying is actively engaged in lawful self defense, is licensed to carry firearms, or is exempt from licensing requirements. It is unlawful to carry a handgun, rifle or shotgun upon the public streets or upon any public property in Philadelphia unless the person carrying is licensed to carry firearms or is exempt from licensing requirements. Any person carrying a handgun `in any vehicle or concealed on or about his person` is required to have a license to carry or a Sportsman`s Firearm Permit (good only for hunting, fishing, trapping and dog training). However, no license is required: (1) to carry a handgun in one`s home or fixed place of business; (2) when engaged in target shooting or while going to or from shooters` places of assembly or target practice, provided the firearm is unloaded and the ammunition is carried in a separate container; (3) for law enforcement personnel, including policemen, jail wardens, and sheriffs and their deputies; (4) to carry an unloaded and securely wrapped firearm from place of purchase to one`s home or place of business, to or from a place of repair, or in moving from one place of abode or business to another, or from one`s home to a vacation or recreational home or dwelling or back, to recover stolen property, or to a location to which the person has been directed to surrender firearms or back upon return of the surrendered firearm; (5) to carry while lawfully hunting or fishing or going to the place of hunting or fishing, provided one has a hunting or fishing license and a Sportsman`s Firearm Permit; (6) while carrying a firearm in any vehicle when the person possesses a valid and lawfully issued license for that firearm which has been issued under the laws of the U.S. or any other state; (7) by a person who has a lawfully issued license to carry a firearm and said license expired within six months prior to the date of arrest and that individual is otherwise eligible for renewal of that license; (8) by any person who is otherwise eligible to possess a firearm and who is operating a motor vehicle which is registered in the person`s name or the name of a spouse or parent and which contains a firearm for which a valid license has been issued to the spouse or parent owning the firearm. A Sportsman`s Firearm Permit is valid only for sporting purposes. It is obtained by applying to the county treasurer. The applicant must present his hunting or fishing license and pay a fee of $6.00. The permit is valid for five years. It must be carried with a valid hunting or fishing license. Application for a license to carry may be made to the chief of police in a city of the first class (Philadelphia) or sheriff in the county where the applicant resides. Non-residents may apply to any county sheriff but must first possess any applicable license required by their state of residence. All information provided by the potential purchaser, transferee or applicant, including but not limited to, the potential purchaser, transferee or applicant`s name or identity, is confidential and not subject to public disclosure. The license is valid for five years from the date of issuance unless sooner revoked for good cause. The fee is $19.00. The issuing officer shall, within 45 days, issue the license unless good cause exists to deny. The state code lists several factors which preclude issuance of a license, including, but not limited to: (1) being of a character and reputation that the applicant is likely to act in a manner dangerous to public safety; (2) currently charged with or convicted of certain crimes; (3) being a habitual drunkard or abuser of controlled substances; (4) being of unsound mind or having been involuntarily committed to a mental institution; or (5) having been dishonorably discharged from the Armed Forces. When carrying a handgun, the licensee shall, upon demand of a law enforcement officer, produce the license for inspection. A license to carry or a Sportsman`s Firearm Permit does not authorize carrying a loaded shotgun or rifle in any vehicle. A Sportsman`s Firearm Permit does not authorize carrying a loaded handgun in a vehicle. A weapon is "loaded" if there is ammunition capable of being fired in the firing chamber, any cylinder of a revolver, in a nondetachable magazine, or in a detachable magazine that is attached or in the same container or compartment as the firearm.

- http://www.nraila.org/GunLaws/StateLaws.aspx?ST=PA

And before you complain that my gun laws are from the NRA, they are laws, they were just the first google hit when I searched for actual language.

___________________
"Go back to bed america your government is in control
Here's American Gladiators, here is 56 channels of it,
Watch these picturary retards bang their fuckin' skulls together and congratulate you on living in the land of freedom,
Here you go America you are free to do as we tell you
We want your soul
Your cash, your house, your phone, your cash, your house, your life" -Adam Freeland - We Want Your Soul

quote:

Originally posted by DJ Shibby There are many ways to argue otherwise, both with actual data and opinions. Or did you actually think that saying "I don't see how you could argue otherwise" was some kind of factual end-all to the issue?

well, for starters, exactly how do you have a high rate of gun-related homicide if you dont have weapons around for people to use?

quote:

Originally posted by Groundhog Boy So why is it that states in the US with stricter gun laws, like Washington DC, have lower murder rates than areas with less restricted laws, and with a higher population owning firearms? (sic) To give an example, here are the rates and laws for Washington DC and Pennsylvania, where I grew up, and where firearms are owned by the MAJORITY of the population. DC Murder rate (2002) - 43.67/100,000 Pennsylvania Murder Rate(2002) - 5.1/100,000

um, whats your point? that comparing two states shows a causal relationship between guns & crime? murder rates arent important as firearm murder rates in the context we're talking by the way.

if youre going to compare "murder" statistics across the US, im not really sure what the relevance is. also not that the average homicide rate for DC went down over the 10 years following stricter guns laws.



again, im hesitant to draw a conclusion about this of course, but you used the same comparison

the US has a high rate of homicide. average homicide rate 1987-1996 22,330. where the use of firearms was used in an average of 65% of those homicides.

link

65% sounds like an awful lot to me. so, again, im gonna go with the more guns you have in a market, the more likely there is to be abuse of those guns link

if a kid in australia wanted to take an semi-auto rifle to school i guarantee you he'd have a far harder time of it than if he were in america.

quote:

* Since 1960, more than a million Americans have died in firearm-related homicides, suicides, and unintentional shootings. In 1996 alone, 34,040 Americans died by gunfire: 18,166 in firearm suicides, 14,327 in firearm homicides, 1,134 in unintentional shootings, and 413 in firearm deaths of unknown intent. * Most gun deaths in America are not the result of murder (14,327 in 1996), but suicide (18,166 in 1996). * A gun is far more likely to be used in suicide, murder, or unintentional shooting than to kill a criminal. According to federal government figures, for every time a citizen used a firearm in 1996 in a justifiable homicide, 160 lives were ended in firearm suicides, murders, and unintentional shootings. * The United States leads the industrialized world in rates of firearm death among children. In 1997 the federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention reported that of firearm deaths among children less than 15 years old, 86 percent occurred in the U.S. * Guns are virtually the only manufactured consumer product exempt from health and safety regulation in the United States. Firearm injuries result in substantial health care costs, trauma, and death.1 Firearms are the second leading cause of traumatic death related to a consumer product in the United States and are the second most frequent cause of death overall for Americans ages 15 to 24.2 Since 1960, more than a million Americans have died in firearm suicides, homicides, and unintentional injuries. In 1996 alone, 34,040 Americans died by gunfire: 18,166 in firearm suicides, 14,327 in firearm homicides, 1,134 in unintentional shootings, and 413 in firearm deaths of unknown intent, according to the National Center for Health Statistics.3 Nearly three times that number are treated in emergency rooms each year for nonfatal firearm injuries. 4 Today, guns are outpaced only by motor vehicles as a cause of fatal injury stemming from a household or recreational consumer product. The federal Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) has estimated that by the year 2001, firearms will surpass motor vehicles as the leading cause of product-related death in our nation.5 In 1996, this crossover had already occurred in five states and the District of Columbia. 6 Contrary to popular perception, most gun death in America is not crime related. Most firearm deaths stem not from homicide (14,327 in 1996) but suicide (18,166 in 1996). And even for those who are murdered with firearms,a the Uniform Crime Reports published by the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) reveals that the majority of firearm homicide victims die not as the result of criminal activity, but because of arguments between people who know each other. When compared to other industrialized nations, the United States stands alone in the number of its citizens felled by guns. A 1997 study by the CDC analyzed firearm deaths for children less than 15 years old in 26 countries and found that 86 percent of the deaths occurred in the U.S.7 A 1998 study in the International Journal of Epidemiology found that the overall rate of firearms death in the U.S. is eight times higher than the firearms death rate of 25 other high-income countries combined.8 The higher mortality rate in the U.S. is not the result of more violence, but of more lethal violence. For example, a recent analysis by the U.S. Department of Justice’s Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) compared crime rates in the U.S. with those in England and Wales from 1981 to 1996. BJS found that British crime rates now exceed those of the U.S. in several categories, and to a surprising degree. The British assault rate has been rising steadily, for instance, and is now more than double the U.S. rate.9 However, violent crimes in England and Wales are far less likely to involve guns, and thus far less likely to end in death. According to 1996 police statistics, firearms were used in five percent of British robberies and seven percent of murders, compared with 41 percent of American robberies and 68 percent of American murders. In addition to the human toll exacted by firearms, the monetary cost—as measured in hospitalization, rehabilitation, and lost wages—is staggering. In 1995, the cost of providing medical care for firearm-related injuries was estimated to be $4 billion—with much of the financial cost passed on to private health insurance subscribers and taxpayers.10 Annually, each bullet sold in the United States carries an injury price tag of almost $23—including 60 cents for medical care and emergency services, $7.20 for lost work, and $15.10 for lost quality of life.11 Other less tangible costs associated with firearms violence include the fear that perme-ates our streets, a gnawing concern for our children's safety, and, perhaps worst of all, a debilitating hopelessness that anything can ever be done to stop the bloodshed. In reality, firearms violence stems not from "guns in the wrong hands," but from the virtually unregulated distribution of an inherently dangerous consumer product. Unlike virtually every other consumer product, firearms are exempt from federal health and safety regulations. Specific categories of firearms—such as handguns and assault weapons—have very limited utility and inflict high costs on society in the form of premature death and debilitating injury. Identifying the variations in firearms death and injury among demographic groups provides an opportunity to move beyond the popular but narrow perception of firearms violence as solely a crime issue to place it in its proper perspective: a widespread public health problem of which crime is merely the most recognized aspect. While no segment of American society is immune to firearms violence, there are those who bear a disproportionate share of victimization. Lower-income urban neighborhoods consistently record higher rates of homicide12—especially among young males.c Firearms suicide is most prevalent in western13 states, and rates have remained highest among elderly white males.14 The nature of victimization also varies among groups. In its 1996 Uniform Crime Reports, the FBI reports that, in single victim/single offender incidents, while male victims were murdered by other males 89 percent of the time, nine out of 10 female victims were slain by a male.15 The following sections provide an overview of the differences in firearms homicide and suicide among groups by sex, age, and race. The examination then turns to a general analysis of unintentional firearms death, nonfatal firearm injuries, and the economic burden created by this violence. Finally, the study ranks the difference in firearms death and injury rates among states.

link

___________________

Ok, you know what? Crime has been going down. All what happens is that the media is reporting more on violence for ratings. Look at Russia. Now that country has a problem with guns. In one year the number of deaths due to guns doubled. And what kind of violence happens in Australia? They have sunny days, nice beaches, good economy, and the women don't look like babushkas. Like you Aussies experience in one year of violence what Russia experiences in one day.


And ppl who want to commit suicide would do it otherwise without a gun. By having access to a gun, we are telling them, see we care about you. A bullet to the head ain't that painful like slashing your wrists.

Quick and easy death for you....you know what I mean?

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN well, for starters, exactly how do you have a high rate of gun-related homicide if you dont have weapons around for people to use?

Well, as long as you're asking, I'll answer. =)

I think it all goes down to cellular levels. The life and death mechanisms.

I'm talking cells, the millions that make up you. Some are survivors, some are killers, and some, as docile as they seem, provide some surprises along the way.

There's the reason for your guns, or whatever instrument you have to hurt your fellow man in the name of fabricated realities based upon language and habituated thought processes.

quote:

Originally posted by Nou I usually dont like to jump on the side of the pro gun people because they are either from the south or they are white trash (wait thats one in the same? ), but claiming that because there is a lot of guns is the reason for a lot of gun deaths is bad logic. Guns don't kill people, people kill people. If someone is going to go and kill someone they are just as likely to kill them by beating them with a baseball bat than they are shooting them.

its not bad logic at all. ill quote it again in case you missed it

quote:

The higher mortality rate in the U.S. is not the result of more violence, but of more lethal violence. For example, a recent analysis by the U.S. Department of Justice’s Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) compared crime rates in the U.S. with those in England and Wales from 1981 to 1996. BJS found that British crime rates now exceed those of the U.S. in several categories, and to a surprising degree. The British assault rate has been rising steadily, for instance, and is now more than double the U.S. rate.9 However, violent crimes in England and Wales are far less likely to involve guns, and thus far less likely to end in death. According to 1996 police statistics, firearms were used in five percent of British robberies and seven percent of murders, compared with 41 percent of American robberies and 68 percent of American murders.

___________________

quote:

Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN its not bad logic at all. ill quote it again in case you missed it

I don't get a quote?



I guess factual nature is something altogether too complicated for us to discuss.

Well, I'll discuss it. You won't.

quote:

Originally posted by Nou I usually dont like to jump on the side of the pro gun people because they are either from the south or they are white trash (wait thats one in the same? ), but claiming that because there is a lot of guns is the reason for a lot of gun deaths is bad logic. Guns don't kill people, people kill people. If someone is going to go and kill someone they are just as likely to kill them by beating them with a baseball bat than they are shooting them.

We are physically equipped, just by existing with opposable thumbs, with the capability, as carnivorous predators, to kill.

We are mentally adapted, through millennia of training and habit, to attempt to find the balance of peace for the greater role of evolution to flourish.