Voidwar

This line is a falsehood, plain and simple. You imply a causal connection where the very best your method can provide is a correlation. Thanks for playing, but those two sentences just blew your "externalities" crap out of the water.

Ikari

So you have no point what so ever and can't back it up at all.

__________________
WAR IS PEACE
FREEDOM IS SLAVERY
IGNORANCE IS STRENGTH

Scucca

Nope. The analysis I've referred to is regression analysis, rather than simple correlation analysis. For example, as I've already noted, correlation analysis cannot be used as it is possible that higher gun ownership occurs because of higher crime.

I'd love it if you'd made a relevant remark. This thread has suffered too much from tabloidism. However, you haven't achieved those heady heights quite yet.

It upsets me that you fellows have still failed to refer to any relevant empirical analysis

__________________

aegyptos

He's knows its a lot of crap. Its just a game he plays with people who give him the benefit of the doubt. He's a college student with an economics text out for a troll.

Scucca

You simply do not understand the nature of externalities and how it impacts on supply/demand orientated analysis. Perhaps you need to do some reading and then get back to me?

Ikari

You simply do not understand individual rights. Your arguing collectivism, not rights. You claim I am costing people money, that I am coercing people through the exercise of my rights. I'm saying, show me that. Where have I personally cost any other individual money or infringed upon that individual's rights through the exercise of my own rights. You are looking to limit the exercise of the rights of freemen, that is the crux of your argument. You don't want people exercising their rights because aggregated over the whole it makes things more dangerous. Well duh! Free is not safe, free has never been safe, and free will never be safe. Free is free, and because we are free to choose, some are going to choose to be asses. You just deal with it, it's a consequence of freedom and liberty. We have courts for this crap.

I can not be held responsible for the actions and choices of another individual. But you want to punish me collectively because I happen to exercise one of my rights. If freedom and liberty are your charge, then you have to deal with thing individually. An individual makes the choice to commit crimes with a gun, and that individual is responsible for the consequences of that action. I can not be held accountable for the actions of that person. I can not be fined, I can not be thrown in jail, I can not have my rights curtailed in any way less I personally have done something to infringe upon the rights of another individual. And I have done nothing of the sorts, I am merely a man looking to exercise the full of his rights. And in a free society, I shouldn't be punished for doing so.

Voidwar

poppycock

Your "regression" is in the exact same boat. You cannot meet Ikari's challenge . . .

And since you cannot, you have no causal connection, merely a correlation, since you cannot directly show his exercise of his rights having any effect on anyone else. Show us a concrete example of his "negative externalities", or admit they are a fabrication.

Scucca

Thats a mighty awkward statement, given the externalities analysis is based on supply/demand and therefore ultimately methodological individualism.

You'd only have a point if I was arguing "you should not have guns because the government knows better". I'm not. I'm only describing market failure and the need to correct for sub-optimal prices. You still have your free will, you just will face the correct price if your preferences sway towards gun ownership

You're asking for irrelevance. We only need a distinction between private and social costs. We achieve that because gun demand leads to crime. You're still failing to refer to supply/demand and the nature of market failure.

Scucca

You're typing from ignorance. For example, regression analysis allows us to test whether higher gun ownership is due to higher crime rates. You should be referring to potential empirical methodology flaw, such as concerns over robustness. You're not and therefore you have no point

Ikari

Supply/demand of market doesn't matter, the only thing that matters are the rights of the individual. You don't address all my points, and just repeat the same garbage as before. Collectivism sucks, once you glance over the rights of the individual you'll start doing bad bad things. You are looking to punish me for actions not taken by me. There will be crime, and allowing guns means there will be gun crime. But only the individual making the choice to commit crimes with guns can be rightfully punished for infringing upon the rights of others. You can't rightfully punish me for exercising my own rights when I have done nothing to infringe upon the rights of others.

You don't like guns, you don't like the effects of allowing guns in society, you are looking for ways to infringe upon the rights of the individual because you don't like the collective result. It's called freedom, this happens in free societies. You can either engage in treason and tyranny against the People as you call for, or you can accept and shoulder the consequences and responsibilities that come with being free. I suggest the latter.