• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Gun control ad - 1981

vegas giants said:
Yes. They help prevent traffic deaths like gun laws prevent gun deaths
Click to expand...

Actually no.. as the study I presented on Montana can attest to.. they do not prevent traffic deaths. When Montana got rid of their daytime speed regulations.. traffic deaths went down.
 
ataraxia said:
The NRA is. I am sure you’re familiar with their “any regulation is a slippery slope to the government taking all your weapons away”.

The NRA Has Been Making the Same Slippery Slope Argument Since 1934
Click to expand...

Nope.. that's a bald face lie. Sorry the NRA is NOT making the argument that there should be NO regulation on firearms. They are not arguing that 6 year olds should go into a store and buy a glock. they are not arguing that convicted violent felons should be able to purchase a firearm.. They are not arguing their should be no safety standards on firearms.

So. no..they are not arguing for NO regulations on firearms.

So stop lying.
 
jaeger19 said:
Actually no.. as the study I presented on Montana can attest to.. they do not prevent traffic deaths. When Montana got rid of their daytime speed regulations.. traffic deaths went down.
Click to expand...

Montana has traffic laws. They did not do away with traffic laws. Please name the place that has. Lol
 
ataraxia said:
What are you talking about? Every study done shows that the more guns there are in a place, the more violence. This holds across countries, as well as states in the United States. Just because guns are being used a lot defensively, does not mean the place is safer. Just means the place is a war zone. Guns are used a lot defensively in war zones as well. But would you say that place is safer because it has more guns?
Click to expand...

Yeah.. not true at all.... not violence. Oh..there may be more "gun violence".. but actually studies are quite clear that overall violence.. not so.

That fact is why no anti gunners really argue about violence. that's why they have to use "gun violence" as a statistic.. because the United states is a pretty dang safe place compared to the rest of the developed world.. just a fact.. yet we have the highest gun ownership in the world. Yes on violent crime.. we have less than say the UK. In fact.. if you took away a few violent cities (outliers) in America.. usually the ones with the highest gun control.. by the way.. we would be better on homocides/murders than almost any country.

That's why.. anti gunners need to use "gun violence" to make the US appear more violent than it is. As I already pointed out.. factually guns sales have been off the charts for years, more new buyers and more carry permits and in that same time.. violent crime has dropped and is at close to a all time low..

Your theory.. more guns more crime.. just doesn;t fit the facts.
 
Manc Skipper said:
"Would be king"? That's delusion speak! As is the rest of the NRA-drone nonsense. Better regulation is not "taking your gunz"
Click to expand...

Says the fellow whose country is so afraid of private ownership of firearms that it won't let its own Olympic shooting team practice in their own country. Please.. you have no credibility here.
 
vegas giants said:
Well the science disagrees but more importantly this is not a solution to gun violence
Click to expand...

Actually the facts disagree with you. As you have been shown multiple times.. Japan has a much higher suicide rate than the US.. yet has much fewer firearms.

Facts are not your friend vegas.
 
Rich2018 said:
I really don't care what Obama thought he could achieve in a Republican dominated Congress.


All privately owned guns need to be banned.
Click to expand...

Well at least you are honest. Completely illogical.. but honest.
 
vegas giants said:
Culture is a factor. The US culture is clear. States with lax gun laws have high suicide rates
Click to expand...

According to your premise.. culture is not a factor.. according to you.. guns are the factor.. but.. wait.. that's not true.
 
jaeger19 said:
According to your premise.. culture is not a factor.. according to you.. guns are the factor.. but.. wait.. that's not true.
Click to expand...

That is the exact opposite of the post you responded to. Lol
 
jaeger19 said:
Actually the facts disagree with you. As you have been shown multiple times.. Japan has a much higher suicide rate than the US.. yet has much fewer firearms.

Facts are not your friend vegas.
Click to expand...

Nope you are wrong. Sorry
 
Rich2018 said:
yet people keep doing it...espectially in schools.

But take away their guns and what will they use - water pistols...I'm kinda OK with that.
Click to expand...

how do you plan to "take away their guns".. I am really curious how you think that is going to work in our society.

So if you took away their guns, how would they kill ?
Click to expand...
Well first.. I don't see how you are going to take away their guns. We have a ton of illegal drug use in America.. yet those drugs have been banned completely..

But.. if there were no guns.. how would folks kill? Like the have for thousands of years.. by bombs, hands, knives, swords, heck.. you name it.. its probably been used as a weapon. Fire.. etc.
Click to expand...
 
vegas giants said:
Nope you are wrong. Sorry
Click to expand...

Sure.. please provide the information that shows japan has a lower suicide rate than the us.. or that it has more firearms per capita.

THanks!..
 
vegas giants said:
Montana has traffic laws. They did not do away with traffic laws. Please name the place that has. Lol
Click to expand...

Vegas.. they did away with traffic laws.. not all traffic laws.. but some traffic laws.. daytime speeding.. and guess what.. traffic accidents and fatalities went down.

Sorry.. but that's evidence that traffic laws.. cannot simply be assumed to "reduce traffic deaths" as you claim.

Facts and science are simply not your friends.
 
jaeger19 said:
Sure.. please provide the information that shows japan has a lower suicide rate than the us.. or that it has more firearms per capita.

THanks!..
Click to expand...

Sure I will get right on that. Lol
 
jaeger19 said:
Vegas.. they did away with traffic laws.. not all traffic laws.. but some traffic laws.. daytime speeding.. and guess what.. traffic accidents and fatalities went down.

Sorry.. but that's evidence that traffic laws.. cannot simply be assumed to "reduce traffic deaths" as you claim.

Facts and science are simply not your friends.
Click to expand...

Is correlation proof of causation? Especially in one tiny small case?
 
vegas giants said:
Is correlation proof of causation? Especially in one tiny small case?
Click to expand...

Actually it was not "correlation proved causation".. The fact that there was NO positive correlation between daytime speeding laws.. and increased traffic deaths.. one can validly state that daytime speeding laws did not decrease traffic deaths.

And it was not "one tiny small case" it was a state wide change in the law..

Facts are simply not your friend Vegas.
 
jaeger19 said:
Actually it was not "correlation proved causation".. The fact that there was NO positive correlation between daytime speeding laws.. and increased traffic deaths.. one can validly state that daytime speeding laws did not decrease traffic deaths.

And it was not "one tiny small case" it was a state wide change in the law..

Facts are simply not your friend Vegas.
Click to expand...

My god you don't even know what correlation means. For one sparsely populated state a single traffic law that only applies to certain roads at certain times....that is freaking hilarious
 
vegas giants said:
My god you don't even know what correlation means. For one sparsely populated state a single traffic law that only applies to certain roads at certain times....that is freaking hilarious
Click to expand...

Actually its you that doesn;t seem to understand the correlation statistic. You are right.. you cannot assume that correlation equals causation.... but that's not whats happening in this case.

In this case.. there was a positive correlation between traffic laws being removed.. and traffic deaths..

thus.. you can validly state that traffic laws.. do not decrease traffic deaths... That's not a correlation equals causation assumption.

And yes.. the study was actually very large.. encompassing a whole state.. during all daylight hours.. and over a relatively long period of time.. that is actually a quite powerful N if you will...

Facts are not your friend Vegas.
 
jaeger19 said:
Actually its you that doesn;t seem to understand the correlation statistic. You are right.. you cannot assume that correlation equals causation.... but that's not whats happening in this case.

In this case.. there was a positive correlation between traffic laws being removed.. and traffic deaths..

thus.. you can validly state that traffic laws.. do not decrease traffic deaths... That's not a correlation equals causation assumption.

And yes.. the study was actually very large.. encompassing a whole state.. during all daylight hours.. and over a relatively long period of time.. that is actually a quite powerful N if you will...

Facts are not your friend Vegas.
Click to expand...

Your position is laughably stupid. Traffic laws prevent traffic deaths. Duh
 
vegas giants said:
Your position is laughably stupid. Traffic laws prevent traffic deaths. Duh
Click to expand...

Yeah, it’s really amazing. I think pretty soon we will start seeing traffic laws being attacked us “unconstitutional” and “attacks on our freedom” too. These people are really odd.
 
Manc Skipper said:
"Would be king"? That's delusion speak! As is the rest of the NRA-drone nonsense. Better regulation is not "taking your gunz"
Click to expand...

Dude, you're in the UK. You appear to be quite satisfied with the gun laws there. You can stay there and be happy.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom