- Joined
- Oct 17, 2006
- Messages
- 59,298
- Reaction score
- 26,919
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Undisclosed
Re: What are reasonable restrictions/infringements on 1st and second amendment rights
You keep spreading the goal posts in order to help muddy the argument further. People who are pro-gun are just as subject to bias as people who are pro-regulation. You've argued that there should be the same kind of measures regulating free speech as there are for guns. This is ridiculous and would be laughed out of a court room in every state. The reality is that there are reasonable restrictions and 'infringements' on the use of free speech. These restrictions are regulated by government bodies, laws etc. From the FCC to the ability to sue people for slander - the restrictions on 'free speech' are there.
For every study hatuey can cite promoting gun control as crime control I can post as many in opposition such as More Guns Less crime by Lott. What is funny is that most of the anti gun studies were started by anti gunners while many of the studies that support gun ownship were also started by anti gunners such as Lott and Kleck who saw the light
Another Example is Paxton Quigley who was a militant gun hater who investigated why so many women were buying guns --she is now a major league proponent of gun ownership.
and we have those studies that tried to prove that the clinton gun ban helped things and turned out it the best they could find was no impact whatsoever (NEJoM)
In other words, the issue is unsettled. We do have lots of empirical evidence of how gun control only disarms victims which is why DC and Chicago experienced more crime after handgun bans were imposed
can you find one study where a pro gunner studied the issue and came to conclude guns needed to be banned?
I was a classmate of Ian Ayers at Yale (81) he was a very good scholar but not one I'd trust as objective. People like him are the sort of people who hate guns because its a form of power he doesn't know much about and cannot control
You keep spreading the goal posts in order to help muddy the argument further. People who are pro-gun are just as subject to bias as people who are pro-regulation. You've argued that there should be the same kind of measures regulating free speech as there are for guns. This is ridiculous and would be laughed out of a court room in every state. The reality is that there are reasonable restrictions and 'infringements' on the use of free speech. These restrictions are regulated by government bodies, laws etc. From the FCC to the ability to sue people for slander - the restrictions on 'free speech' are there.