• Log InLog In
  • Register
Liquid`
Team Liquid Liquipedia
EDT 19:29
CEST 01:29
KST 08:29
  • Home
  • Forum
  • Calendar
  • Streams
  • Liquipedia
  • Features
  • Store
  • EPT
  • TL+
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Smash
  • Heroes
  • Counter-Strike
  • Overwatch
  • Liquibet
  • Fantasy StarCraft
  • TLPD
  • StarCraft 2
  • Brood War
  • Blogs
Forum Sidebar
Events/Features
News
Featured News
Power Rank - Esports World Cup 202530RSL Season 1 - Final Week8[ASL19] Finals Recap: Standing Tall15HomeStory Cup 27 - Info & Preview18Classic wins Code S Season 2 (2025)16
Community News
BSL Team Wars - Bonyth, Dewalt, Hawk & Sziky teams1Weekly Cups (July 14-20): Final Check-up0Esports World Cup 2025 - Brackets Revealed19Weekly Cups (July 7-13): Classic continues to roll8Team TLMC #5 - Submission re-extension4
StarCraft 2
General
Power Rank - Esports World Cup 2025 RSL Revival patreon money discussion thread The GOAT ranking of GOAT rankings Esports World Cup 2025 - Final Player Roster Why doesnt SC2 scene costream tournaments
Tourneys
Esports World Cup 2025 Sparkling Tuna Cup - Weekly Open Tournament Sea Duckling Open (Global, Bronze-Diamond) FEL Cracov 2025 (July 27) - $8000 live event RSL: Revival, a new crowdfunded tournament series
Strategy
How did i lose this ZvP, whats the proper response
Custom Maps
External Content
Mutation # 483 Kill Bot Wars Mutation # 482 Wheel of Misfortune Mutation # 481 Fear and Lava Mutation # 480 Moths to the Flame
Brood War
General
BSL Team Wars - Bonyth, Dewalt, Hawk & Sziky teams BW General Discussion BGH Auto Balance -> http://bghmmr.eu/ Flash Announces (and Retracts) Hiatus From ASL Corsair Pursuit Micro?
Tourneys
[Megathread] Daily Proleagues [BSL 2v2] ProLeague Season 3 - Friday 21:00 CET The Casual Games of the Week Thread BWCL Season 63 Announcement
Strategy
Simple Questions, Simple Answers I am doing this better than progamers do.
Other Games
General Games
Nintendo Switch Thread Stormgate/Frost Giant Megathread [MMORPG] Tree of Savior (Successor of Ragnarok) Path of Exile CCLP - Command & Conquer League Project
Dota 2
Official 'what is Dota anymore' discussion
League of Legends
Heroes of the Storm
Simple Questions, Simple Answers Heroes of the Storm 2.0
Hearthstone
Heroes of StarCraft mini-set
TL Mafia
TL Mafia Community Thread Vanilla Mini Mafia
Community
General
Things Aren’t Peaceful in Palestine US Politics Mega-thread Russo-Ukrainian War Thread The Games Industry And ATVI Stop Killing Games - European Citizens Initiative
Fan Clubs
SKT1 Classic Fan Club! Maru Fan Club
Media & Entertainment
[\m/] Heavy Metal Thread Anime Discussion Thread Movie Discussion! [Manga] One Piece Korean Music Discussion
Sports
2024 - 2025 Football Thread Formula 1 Discussion TeamLiquid Health and Fitness Initiative For 2023 NBA General Discussion
World Cup 2022
Tech Support
Computer Build, Upgrade & Buying Resource Thread
TL Community
The Automated Ban List
Blogs
Ping To Win? Pings And Their…
TrAiDoS
momentary artworks from des…
tankgirl
from making sc maps to makin…
Husyelt
StarCraft improvement
iopq
Socialism Anyone?
GreenHorizons
Customize Sidebar...

Website Feedback

Closed Threads



Active: 597 users

If you're seeing this topic then another mass shooting hap…

Forum Index > General Forum
Post a Reply
Prev 1 398 399 400 401 402 891 Next
Although this thread does not function under the same strict guidelines as the USPMT, it is still a general practice on TL to provide a source with an explanation on why it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion. Failure to do so will result in a mod action.
micronesia
Profile Blog Joined July 2006
United States24676 Posts
Last Edited: 2013-02-01 05:07:00
February 01 2013 05:03 GMT
#7981
On February 01 2013 13:58 deathly rat wrote:
Show nested quote +
On February 01 2013 13:45 micronesia wrote:
On February 01 2013 13:44 deathly rat wrote:
+ Show Spoiler +
On February 01 2013 13:37 sunprince wrote:
Show nested quote +
On February 01 2013 13:28 deathly rat wrote:
Murder rate
[image loading]

Murders using guns
[image loading]

These figures don't even account for people who accidentally kill or injure other people with their guns.

The stats show that guns mean more deaths and more murders. This is why the burden of proof is on YOU to show that the right to own guns outweighs all those who have been killed rights to live.


"Correlation does not imply causation. The burden is on YOU to prove that guns mean more murders."

+ Show Spoiler +
In reality, the United States has a very high non-gun violent crime rate as well. The problems with the US stem from income inequality, racial heterogeneity, the War on Drugs, demographic problems like fatherlessness, a poor education system, and the list goes on. The availability of guns only means that criminals kill with guns instead of other means, and even if you removed every firearm the violent crime rate would still be ridiculously high compared to Europe.


Actually relevant correlation strongly implies causation, it just doesn't prove causation, and I can't really see the situation in which it could be scientifically proven to someone who is willing to look for any unreasonable not to agree.

In this case the stats are the best kind of proof you can get.

Why are you completely ignoring the point about how you need to look at murder rates without guns as well? You just seem like you have an agenda here.


Sources
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-21033709
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate

Since when was it a crime to have an agenda? Does anybody not have an agenda?

I'm not ignoring murders without guns. Clearly murder rate is a complex issue, but what you have here are all developed countries. You have one hugely significant piece of statistical evidence, combined with what seems common sense that guns are incredibly dangerous because they are designed to kill people.

Those people who think guns are a necessary evil, which I hope would any sane person arguing they need guns, should be wondering is, Is it really possible to live in a utopia where these terrible things which cause death and misery are not widely available, and where people go their whole lives without even seeing a gun. The answer is yes, in many countries, and you could live in that place too, if you really wanted to.


What I'm saying is, your conclusion is not evident. The two tables/graphs you chose to show show that the USA has higher gun murder rates and higher murder rates than several other 'developed' countries, but it does not necessarily imply that the higher gun murder rate causes the higher murder rate. It proves that the USA has more murders. It is certainly possible that guns are the cause of this, but you have not provided evidence towards this conclusion.

edit: I should clarify that seeming like you 'have an agenda' makes you less credible. It's okay to have a goal to spread the knowledge of <your stance here> so long as you do so in good faith meaning you are willing to listen to the other side and actually be honest/truthful and not misleading as you present your case. For example, you are being misleading if you provide statistics that do not support a conclusion significantly and then claim that people should have been steered towards that conclusion.
ModeratorThere are animal crackers for people and there are people crackers for animals.
striderxxx
Profile Joined February 2011
Canada443 Posts
Last Edited: 2013-02-01 05:10:11
February 01 2013 05:07 GMT
#7982
On February 01 2013 14:03 micronesia wrote:
Show nested quote +
On February 01 2013 13:58 deathly rat wrote:
On February 01 2013 13:45 micronesia wrote:
On February 01 2013 13:44 deathly rat wrote:
+ Show Spoiler +
On February 01 2013 13:37 sunprince wrote:
Show nested quote +
On February 01 2013 13:28 deathly rat wrote:
Murder rate
[image loading]

Murders using guns
[image loading]

These figures don't even account for people who accidentally kill or injure other people with their guns.

The stats show that guns mean more deaths and more murders. This is why the burden of proof is on YOU to show that the right to own guns outweighs all those who have been killed rights to live.


"Correlation does not imply causation. The burden is on YOU to prove that guns mean more murders."

+ Show Spoiler +
In reality, the United States has a very high non-gun violent crime rate as well. The problems with the US stem from income inequality, racial heterogeneity, the War on Drugs, demographic problems like fatherlessness, a poor education system, and the list goes on. The availability of guns only means that criminals kill with guns instead of other means, and even if you removed every firearm the violent crime rate would still be ridiculously high compared to Europe.




Actually relevant correlation strongly implies causation, it just doesn't prove causation, and I can't really see the situation in which it could be scientifically proven to someone who is willing to look for any unreasonable not to agree.

In this case the stats are the best kind of proof you can get.

Why are you completely ignoring the point about how you need to look at murder rates without guns as well? You just seem like you have an agenda here.


Sources
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-21033709
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate

Since when was it a crime to have an agenda? Does anybody not have an agenda?

I'm not ignoring murders without guns. Clearly murder rate is a complex issue, but what you have here are all developed countries. You have one hugely significant piece of statistical evidence, combined with what seems common sense that guns are incredibly dangerous because they are designed to kill people.

Those people who think guns are a necessary evil, which I hope would any sane person arguing they need guns, should be wondering is, Is it really possible to live in a utopia where these terrible things which cause death and misery are not widely available, and where people go their whole lives without even seeing a gun. The answer is yes, in many countries, and you could live in that place too, if you really wanted to.


What I'm saying is, your conclusion is not evident. The two tables/graphs you chose to show show that the USA has higher gun murder rates and higher murder rates than several other 'developed' countries, but it does not necessarily imply that the higher gun murder rate causes the higher murder rate. It proves that the USA has more murders. It is certainly possible that guns are the cause of this, but you have not provided evidence towards this conclusion.


So if it's not easy access to guns, then the cause for the higher murder rates in the US must be because THE PEOPLE there are more corrupt and devious. Yah that sounds about right, thanks for clearing that up!
deathly rat
Profile Blog Joined October 2010
United Kingdom911 Posts
February 01 2013 05:09 GMT
#7983
Usually when people say "you have an agenda" in a pejorative sense, it means that the person is personally involved or will gain from the outcome of the discussion. Otherwise having an agenda, being one that you wouldn't benefit from (ie, trying to convince others that guns are bad) is perfectly reasonable.
No logo (logo)
micronesia
Profile Blog Joined July 2006
United States24676 Posts
Last Edited: 2013-02-01 05:11:15
February 01 2013 05:10 GMT
#7984
On February 01 2013 14:07 striderxxx wrote:
Show nested quote +
On February 01 2013 14:03 micronesia wrote:
On February 01 2013 13:58 deathly rat wrote:
On February 01 2013 13:45 micronesia wrote:
On February 01 2013 13:44 deathly rat wrote:
+ Show Spoiler +
On February 01 2013 13:37 sunprince wrote:
Show nested quote +
On February 01 2013 13:28 deathly rat wrote:
Murder rate
[image loading]

Murders using guns
[image loading]

These figures don't even account for people who accidentally kill or injure other people with their guns.

The stats show that guns mean more deaths and more murders. This is why the burden of proof is on YOU to show that the right to own guns outweighs all those who have been killed rights to live.


"Correlation does not imply causation. The burden is on YOU to prove that guns mean more murders."

+ Show Spoiler +
In reality, the United States has a very high non-gun violent crime rate as well. The problems with the US stem from income inequality, racial heterogeneity, the War on Drugs, demographic problems like fatherlessness, a poor education system, and the list goes on. The availability of guns only means that criminals kill with guns instead of other means, and even if you removed every firearm the violent crime rate would still be ridiculously high compared to Europe.




Actually relevant correlation strongly implies causation, it just doesn't prove causation, and I can't really see the situation in which it could be scientifically proven to someone who is willing to look for any unreasonable not to agree.

In this case the stats are the best kind of proof you can get.

Why are you completely ignoring the point about how you need to look at murder rates without guns as well? You just seem like you have an agenda here.


Sources
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-21033709
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate

Since when was it a crime to have an agenda? Does anybody not have an agenda?

I'm not ignoring murders without guns. Clearly murder rate is a complex issue, but what you have here are all developed countries. You have one hugely significant piece of statistical evidence, combined with what seems common sense that guns are incredibly dangerous because they are designed to kill people.

Those people who think guns are a necessary evil, which I hope would any sane person arguing they need guns, should be wondering is, Is it really possible to live in a utopia where these terrible things which cause death and misery are not widely available, and where people go their whole lives without even seeing a gun. The answer is yes, in many countries, and you could live in that place too, if you really wanted to.


What I'm saying is, your conclusion is not evident. The two tables/graphs you chose to show show that the USA has higher gun murder rates and higher murder rates than several other 'developed' countries, but it does not necessarily imply that the higher gun murder rate causes the higher murder rate. It proves that the USA has more murders. It is certainly possible that guns are the cause of this, but you have not provided evidence towards this conclusion.


So if it's not easy access to guns, then the cause for the higher murder rates in the US must be because the people there are more corrupt and devious. Yah that sounds about right, thanks for clearing that up!

Are you seriously saying that the degree of access to guns is the only significant factor that explains why murder rates are different for different countries? I just want to be clear here.

On February 01 2013 14:09 deathly rat wrote:
Usually when people say "you have an agenda" in a pejorative sense, it means that the person is personally involved or will gain from the outcome of the discussion. Otherwise having an agenda, being one that you wouldn't benefit from (ie, trying to convince others that guns are bad) is perfectly reasonable.

I don't know what your reasoning is for what you say in this thread, but I do know it was beginning to look like you cared more about changing people's minds than seeking the truth. If I was wrong then that's good.
ModeratorThere are animal crackers for people and there are people crackers for animals.
mecra
Profile Joined May 2010
United States83 Posts
February 01 2013 05:13 GMT
#7985
Actually, I would point you to the population differences between the US and other countries. That statistic alone helps speak for why violence is so high in the US. You also have to consider the various sub-subcultures within cities in addition. Guns certainly do cause violent crimes, but the numbers would indicate crimes occurring regardless.

Your corrupt and devious descriptor unfortunately doesn't quite fit most of the US. However, there are a great number of concepts similar that contribute to the reason behind most of the murders. Unfortunately, I don't have the space nor the energy to discuss such things.

The biggest thing to take away from this is this: The US is a vastly diverse and high populated country. Those two things will shed some light on the violence that occurs.
deathly rat
Profile Blog Joined October 2010
United Kingdom911 Posts
February 01 2013 05:13 GMT
#7986
Everybody has an agenda. My sane mind tells me that the only point of posting on a forum is for fun. Never found too many "truths"
No logo (logo)
TheRealArtemis
Profile Joined October 2011
687 Posts
Last Edited: 2013-02-01 05:15:43
February 01 2013 05:14 GMT
#7987
Hate to butt in and all. Just want to ask a few questions.

People who are against the guns like to point out the school shootings as their main argument. No guns = no school shootings. But those 14.500 murder per year in the USA, are there any statistics that they are guns bought legally, by regular non criminals? Just saying that I have the feeling that a vast majority of those murders happen by gangbangers shooting other gangbanger over poverty, drugs, hood control etc.

And I take it, that they don stroll in and buy a couple of guns, they buy them on the black market?

Arent it then a bit misleading if a vast majority of the murders, are commited by criminals, and with black market guns? (and with criminals I mean, they wont be able to buy the guns in the first place, if they got a record)
religion is like a prison for the seekers of wisdom
striderxxx
Profile Joined February 2011
Canada443 Posts
February 01 2013 05:16 GMT
#7988
On February 01 2013 14:10 micronesia wrote:
Show nested quote +
On February 01 2013 14:07 striderxxx wrote:
On February 01 2013 14:03 micronesia wrote:
On February 01 2013 13:58 deathly rat wrote:
On February 01 2013 13:45 micronesia wrote:
On February 01 2013 13:44 deathly rat wrote:
+ Show Spoiler +
On February 01 2013 13:37 sunprince wrote:
Show nested quote +
On February 01 2013 13:28 deathly rat wrote:
Murder rate
[image loading]

Murders using guns
[image loading]

These figures don't even account for people who accidentally kill or injure other people with their guns.

The stats show that guns mean more deaths and more murders. This is why the burden of proof is on YOU to show that the right to own guns outweighs all those who have been killed rights to live.


"Correlation does not imply causation. The burden is on YOU to prove that guns mean more murders."

+ Show Spoiler +
In reality, the United States has a very high non-gun violent crime rate as well. The problems with the US stem from income inequality, racial heterogeneity, the War on Drugs, demographic problems like fatherlessness, a poor education system, and the list goes on. The availability of guns only means that criminals kill with guns instead of other means, and even if you removed every firearm the violent crime rate would still be ridiculously high compared to Europe.




Actually relevant correlation strongly implies causation, it just doesn't prove causation, and I can't really see the situation in which it could be scientifically proven to someone who is willing to look for any unreasonable not to agree.

In this case the stats are the best kind of proof you can get.

Why are you completely ignoring the point about how you need to look at murder rates without guns as well? You just seem like you have an agenda here.


Sources
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-21033709
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate

Since when was it a crime to have an agenda? Does anybody not have an agenda?

I'm not ignoring murders without guns. Clearly murder rate is a complex issue, but what you have here are all developed countries. You have one hugely significant piece of statistical evidence, combined with what seems common sense that guns are incredibly dangerous because they are designed to kill people.

Those people who think guns are a necessary evil, which I hope would any sane person arguing they need guns, should be wondering is, Is it really possible to live in a utopia where these terrible things which cause death and misery are not widely available, and where people go their whole lives without even seeing a gun. The answer is yes, in many countries, and you could live in that place too, if you really wanted to.


What I'm saying is, your conclusion is not evident. The two tables/graphs you chose to show show that the USA has higher gun murder rates and higher murder rates than several other 'developed' countries, but it does not necessarily imply that the higher gun murder rate causes the higher murder rate. It proves that the USA has more murders. It is certainly possible that guns are the cause of this, but you have not provided evidence towards this conclusion.


So if it's not easy access to guns, then the cause for the higher murder rates in the US must be because the people there are more corrupt and devious. Yah that sounds about right, thanks for clearing that up!

Are you seriously saying that the degree of access to guns is the only significant factor that explains why murder rates are different for different countries? I just want to be clear here.


Of course I didn't say that. There are a billion other factor besides easy gun access, However, those other billion factors are way to complicated to control and change. Gun control happens to be the easier route, bang for the buck step to begin the progress of reducing the murder rate. Some of the other factors you mention are indeed a contributing factor, but it cannot be easily altered as introducing gun control to LIMIT(not ban) who can get their hands on the guns.
micronesia
Profile Blog Joined July 2006
United States24676 Posts
February 01 2013 05:17 GMT
#7989
On February 01 2013 14:13 deathly rat wrote:
Everybody has an agenda. My sane mind tells me that the only point of posting on a forum is for fun. Never found too many "truths"

I'll use an example.

Person #1 and person #2 are both participating in a discussion on abortion. These two posts are independent:

Person #1: How can you kill babies? They are so cute. You are a monster!!!

Person #2: It is illegal to kill people. It can be shown that babies, before they are born, exhibit most of the same life-signs as babies after they are born. Thus, we should seriously consider extending rights such as the right not to be killed to pre-birth babies.

One of these people is posting like they have an agenda; the other is simply trying to discuss a topic reasonably. Basically, if your post is contributing and not misleading then you are not, in my opinion, posting like you have an agenda. There needs to be intellectual honesty for this type of a discussion to have any chance of accomplishing something. Of course, the post I was concerned about before was nowhere like the sample person #1 above.
ModeratorThere are animal crackers for people and there are people crackers for animals.
micronesia
Profile Blog Joined July 2006
United States24676 Posts
February 01 2013 05:18 GMT
#7990
On February 01 2013 14:16 striderxxx wrote:
Show nested quote +
On February 01 2013 14:10 micronesia wrote:
On February 01 2013 14:07 striderxxx wrote:
On February 01 2013 14:03 micronesia wrote:
On February 01 2013 13:58 deathly rat wrote:
On February 01 2013 13:45 micronesia wrote:
On February 01 2013 13:44 deathly rat wrote:
+ Show Spoiler +
On February 01 2013 13:37 sunprince wrote:
Show nested quote +
On February 01 2013 13:28 deathly rat wrote:
Murder rate
[image loading]

Murders using guns
[image loading]

These figures don't even account for people who accidentally kill or injure other people with their guns.

The stats show that guns mean more deaths and more murders. This is why the burden of proof is on YOU to show that the right to own guns outweighs all those who have been killed rights to live.


"Correlation does not imply causation. The burden is on YOU to prove that guns mean more murders."

+ Show Spoiler +
In reality, the United States has a very high non-gun violent crime rate as well. The problems with the US stem from income inequality, racial heterogeneity, the War on Drugs, demographic problems like fatherlessness, a poor education system, and the list goes on. The availability of guns only means that criminals kill with guns instead of other means, and even if you removed every firearm the violent crime rate would still be ridiculously high compared to Europe.




Actually relevant correlation strongly implies causation, it just doesn't prove causation, and I can't really see the situation in which it could be scientifically proven to someone who is willing to look for any unreasonable not to agree.

In this case the stats are the best kind of proof you can get.

Why are you completely ignoring the point about how you need to look at murder rates without guns as well? You just seem like you have an agenda here.


Sources
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-21033709
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_intentional_homicide_rate

Since when was it a crime to have an agenda? Does anybody not have an agenda?

I'm not ignoring murders without guns. Clearly murder rate is a complex issue, but what you have here are all developed countries. You have one hugely significant piece of statistical evidence, combined with what seems common sense that guns are incredibly dangerous because they are designed to kill people.

Those people who think guns are a necessary evil, which I hope would any sane person arguing they need guns, should be wondering is, Is it really possible to live in a utopia where these terrible things which cause death and misery are not widely available, and where people go their whole lives without even seeing a gun. The answer is yes, in many countries, and you could live in that place too, if you really wanted to.


What I'm saying is, your conclusion is not evident. The two tables/graphs you chose to show show that the USA has higher gun murder rates and higher murder rates than several other 'developed' countries, but it does not necessarily imply that the higher gun murder rate causes the higher murder rate. It proves that the USA has more murders. It is certainly possible that guns are the cause of this, but you have not provided evidence towards this conclusion.


So if it's not easy access to guns, then the cause for the higher murder rates in the US must be because the people there are more corrupt and devious. Yah that sounds about right, thanks for clearing that up!

Are you seriously saying that the degree of access to guns is the only significant factor that explains why murder rates are different for different countries? I just want to be clear here.


Of course I didn't say that. There are a billion other factor besides easy gun access, However, those other billion factors are way to complicated to control and change. Gun control happens to be the easier route, bang for the buck step to begin the progress of reducing the murder rate. Some of the other factors you mention are indeed a contributing factor, but it cannot be easily altered as introducing gun control to LIMIT(not ban) who can get their hands on the guns.

You just completely changed your tune here. This post is much less ridiculous than your previous one, even if I don't necessarily agree with it.
ModeratorThere are animal crackers for people and there are people crackers for animals.
deathly rat
Profile Blog Joined October 2010
United Kingdom911 Posts
February 01 2013 05:18 GMT
#7991
On February 01 2013 14:14 TheRealArtemis wrote:
Hate to butt in and all. Just want to ask a few questions.

People who are against the guns like to point out the school shootings as their main argument. No guns = no school shootings. But those 14.500 murder per year in the USA, are there any statistics that they are guns bought legally, by regular non criminals? Just saying that I have the feeling that a vast majority of those murders happen by gangbangers shooting other gangbanger over poverty, drugs, hood control etc.

And I take it, that they don stroll in and buy a couple of guns, they buy them on the black market? I just have a really hard time picturing a "normal people"

Arent it then a bit misleading if a vast majority of the murders, are commited by criminals, and with black market guns? (and with criminals I mean, they wont be able to buy the guns in the first place, if they got a record)


Yeah, but i'd just as well the "gangbangers" didn't kill each other as well, because they are sons and fathers to their families all the same, and in another life I feel sure it could have been so different. Basically I'm saying they are humans too.

As for size being the determining factor, clearly you're not familiar with the concept of murder "rates"
No logo (logo)
deathly rat
Profile Blog Joined October 2010
United Kingdom911 Posts
Last Edited: 2013-02-01 05:27:21
February 01 2013 05:26 GMT
#7992
On February 01 2013 14:17 micronesia wrote:
Show nested quote +
On February 01 2013 14:13 deathly rat wrote:
Everybody has an agenda. My sane mind tells me that the only point of posting on a forum is for fun. Never found too many "truths"

I'll use an example.

Person #1 and person #2 are both participating in a discussion on abortion. These two posts are independent:

Person #1: How can you kill babies? They are so cute. You are a monster!!!

Person #2: It is illegal to kill people. It can be shown that babies, before they are born, exhibit most of the same life-signs as babies after they are born. Thus, we should seriously consider extending rights such as the right not to be killed to pre-birth babies.

One of these people is posting like they have an agenda; the other is simply trying to discuss a topic reasonably. Basically, if your post is contributing and not misleading then you are not, in my opinion, posting like you have an agenda. There needs to be intellectual honesty for this type of a discussion to have any chance of accomplishing something. Of course, the post I was concerned about before was nowhere like the sample person #1 above.


I think I've been pretty logical working from first principles, making reasonable statements using evidence. Nobody has actually addressed my points rationally other than "correlation doesn't imply causation", which I've dealt with (see comment re: imply / prove). You sir are the one with the agenda here, undermining rational arguments from evidence with "you have an agenda" type personal comments, or "correleation doesn't imply causation" type stuff, which is both false and irrelevant. Anyway, enough with this agenda nonsense, I feel it's getting away from the main topic at hand.
No logo (logo)
micronesia
Profile Blog Joined July 2006
United States24676 Posts
February 01 2013 05:28 GMT
#7993
On February 01 2013 14:26 deathly rat wrote:
Show nested quote +
On February 01 2013 14:17 micronesia wrote:
On February 01 2013 14:13 deathly rat wrote:
Everybody has an agenda. My sane mind tells me that the only point of posting on a forum is for fun. Never found too many "truths"

I'll use an example.

Person #1 and person #2 are both participating in a discussion on abortion. These two posts are independent:

Person #1: How can you kill babies? They are so cute. You are a monster!!!

Person #2: It is illegal to kill people. It can be shown that babies, before they are born, exhibit most of the same life-signs as babies after they are born. Thus, we should seriously consider extending rights such as the right not to be killed to pre-birth babies.

One of these people is posting like they have an agenda; the other is simply trying to discuss a topic reasonably. Basically, if your post is contributing and not misleading then you are not, in my opinion, posting like you have an agenda. There needs to be intellectual honesty for this type of a discussion to have any chance of accomplishing something. Of course, the post I was concerned about before was nowhere like the sample person #1 above.


I think I've been pretty logical working from first principles, making reasonable statements using evidence. Nobody has actually addressed my points rationally other than "correlation doesn't imply causation", which I've dealt with (see comment re: imply / prove). You sir are the one with the agenda here, undermining rational arguments from evidence with "you have an agenda" type personal comments, or "correleation doesn't imply causation" type stuff, which is both false and irrelevant. Anyway, enough with this agenda nonsense, I feel it's getting away from the main topic at hand.

No. Your data does not support your conclusion. It's not completely unrelated, and I shouldn't criticize you simply for this, but you have failed to follow it up, which was the next logical step.
ModeratorThere are animal crackers for people and there are people crackers for animals.
TheFrankOne
Profile Joined December 2010
United States667 Posts
February 01 2013 05:33 GMT
#7994
"Greater gun availability increases the rates of
murder and felony gun use, but does not appear to
affect general violence levels."

"In robberies and assaults, victims are far more
likely to die when the perpetrator is armed with a
gun than when he or she has another weapon or is
unarmed."

https://www.ncjrs.gov/txtfiles/fireviol.txt

There's the missing peice!
SamsungStar
Profile Blog Joined January 2013
United States912 Posts
February 01 2013 05:34 GMT
#7995
The USA in general is more violent than other Western developed countries. We also go to war way more than other Western developed countries. We have more nukes, more tanks, more airplanes, more bombs, more guns, more murders, more money, more of everything. America is the land of exceptionalism. We have more of everything. Guns and murders just happen to be one of those things. I see no correlation between guns and murders. I do see a correlation between AMERICA and murders.
micronesia
Profile Blog Joined July 2006
United States24676 Posts
February 01 2013 05:37 GMT
#7996
On February 01 2013 14:33 TheFrankOne wrote:
"Greater gun availability increases the rates of
murder and felony gun use, but does not appear to
affect general violence levels."

"In robberies and assaults, victims are far more
likely to die when the perpetrator is armed with a
gun than when he or she has another weapon or is
unarmed."

https://www.ncjrs.gov/txtfiles/fireviol.txt

There's the missing peice!

The first quote, if properly supported which will require me to study the thing you linked, seems like it maybe actually be prepared to support a claim that greater gun availability increases the rate of murder, which is an improvement. It doesn't quantify how much though. The second one I don't really see as relevant to this specific subtopic, even though it is more generally relevant to the topic of the thread.

Assuming legitimacy which I won't try to verify tonight, this is an improvement over the data this small discussion has been going off of so far, towards drawing the more guns = more murders conclusion.
ModeratorThere are animal crackers for people and there are people crackers for animals.
FallDownMarigold
Profile Blog Joined December 2010
United States3710 Posts
February 01 2013 05:45 GMT
#7997
Micronesia, I appreciate your thorough academic approach! What would you say to those arguing that tyranny etc. is something important and at stake here? I probably missed your comments directed at them since I have not gone over the entire thread. You are replying in the same rigorous fashion to them right? Just curious!
micronesia
Profile Blog Joined July 2006
United States24676 Posts
February 01 2013 05:49 GMT
#7998
On February 01 2013 14:45 FallDownMarigold wrote:
Micronesia, I appreciate your thorough academic approach! What would you say to those arguing that tyranny etc. is something important and at stake here? I probably missed your comments directed at them since I have not gone over the entire thread. You are replying in the same rigorous fashion to them right? Just curious!

I don't think I've replied to anyone making an evidence-supported case regarding tyranny or rebellion from a government. The only thing I recall discussing on the topic is how we shouldn't be quick to dismiss people who worry about what situations might arise, even if they seem kind of ridiculous. Obviously "aliens might attack us" won't sway me for why we need a gun in every house, but "invasion from foreigners", while crazy to imagine today, might be possible in the future.
ModeratorThere are animal crackers for people and there are people crackers for animals.
SamsungStar
Profile Blog Joined January 2013
United States912 Posts
February 01 2013 05:58 GMT
#7999
On February 01 2013 14:49 micronesia wrote:
Show nested quote +
On February 01 2013 14:45 FallDownMarigold wrote:
Micronesia, I appreciate your thorough academic approach! What would you say to those arguing that tyranny etc. is something important and at stake here? I probably missed your comments directed at them since I have not gone over the entire thread. You are replying in the same rigorous fashion to them right? Just curious!

I don't think I've replied to anyone making an evidence-supported case regarding tyranny or rebellion from a government. The only thing I recall discussing on the topic is how we shouldn't be quick to dismiss people who worry about what situations might arise, even if they seem kind of ridiculous. Obviously "aliens might attack us" won't sway me for why we need a gun in every house, but "invasion from foreigners", while crazy to imagine today, might be possible in the future.


Or oppression from a non-representative government. HINT HINT.
TheFrankOne
Profile Joined December 2010
United States667 Posts
February 01 2013 06:32 GMT
#8000
More fun facts!
+ Show Spoiler +

"we find (among other results) that the likelihood of gun carrying increases
markedly with the prevalence of gun ownership in the given
community. We also analyze the propensity to carry other types of
weapons, finding that it is unrelated to the local prevalence of gun
ownership. The prevalence of youths carrying both guns and other
weapons is positively related to the local rate of youth violence (as
measured by the robbery rate), confirmatory evidence that weapons
carrying by youths is motivated in part by self-protection."

http://home.uchicago.edu/~ludwigj/papers/CookLudwig-TeenGunCarry-2004.pdf


+ Show Spoiler +

"theoretical considerationsdo not provide much guidance in predicting the net effects of widespread gun ownership. Guns in the home may pose a threat to burglars, but also serve as an inducement, since guns are particularly valuable loot. Other things equal, a gun-rich community provides more lucrative burglary opportunities than one
where guns are more sparse. The new empirical results reported here provide no support for a net
deterrent effect from widespread gun ownership. Rather, our analysis concludes that residential burglary
rates tend to increase with community gun prevalence."

http://www.nber.org/papers/w8926.pdf


+ Show Spoiler +

"This paper examines the relationship between gun ownership and
crime. Previous research has suffered from a lack of reliable data on
gun ownership. I exploit a unique data set to reliably estimate annual
rates of gun ownership at both the state and the county levels during
the past two decades. My findings demonstrate that changes in gun
ownership are significantly positively related to changes in the homicide
rate, with this relationship driven almost entirely by an impact
of gun ownership on murders in which a gun is used. The effect of
gun ownership on all other crime categories is much less marked.
Recent reductions in the fraction of households owning a gun can
explain one-third of the differential decline in gun homicides relative
to nongun homicides since 1993."

http://www.kellogg.northwestern.edu/faculty/dranove/htm/Dranove/coursepages/Mgmt 469/guns.pdf


Why the robberies with guns bit was relevant: "Criminologist Philip J. Cook hypothesized that if guns were less available, criminals might commit the same crime, but with less-lethal weapons. He finds that the level of gun ownership in the 50 largest U.S. cities correlates with the rate of robberies committed with guns, but not with overall robbery rates." http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_violence_in_the_United_States

Next sentence in the article:
Overall robbery and assault rates in the United States are comparable to those in other developed countries, such as Australia and Finland, with much lower levels of gun ownership.

Our overall crime is really not much different, it's just the murder rate that's much higher. The more I read the stronger I lean towards more gun control. A murder rate as high as ours is a tragedy that is real, some sort of tyrannical boogeyman isn't. The 14,000 people actually dying matter far more than this fear of "oppression from a non-representative government HINT HINT"

It may be objected that if weapons that are most useful in military service—M-16 rifles and the like—may be banned, then the Second Amendment right is completely detached from the prefatory clause... It may well be true today that a militia, to be as effective as militias in the 18th century, would require sophisticated arms that are highly unusual in society at large. Indeed, it may be true that no amount of small arms could be useful against modern-day bombers and tanks. - Antonin Scalia
Prev 1 398 399 400 401 402 891 Next
Please log in or register to reply.
Live Events Refresh
Next event in 10h 32m
[ Submit Event ]
Live Streams
Refresh
StarCraft 2
Liquid`TLO 244
Nathanias 207
StarCraft: Brood War
Hyuk 703
NaDa 54
Aegong 45
League of Legends
Dendi1125
syndereN199
Counter-Strike
Fnx 1552
flusha366
Super Smash Bros
AZ_Axe65
Other Games
tarik_tv8793
Grubby2572
FrodaN2110
Day[9].tv797
shahzam394
C9.Mang0260
ViBE141
Maynarde139
Livibee94
Liquid`Ken10
rubinoeu6
Organizations
Other Games
gamesdonequick989
BasetradeTV27
StarCraft 2
Blizzard YouTube
StarCraft: Brood War
BSLTrovo
sctven
[ Show 17 non-featured ]
StarCraft 2
• RyuSc2 41
• IndyKCrew
• sooper7s
• AfreecaTV YouTube
• Migwel
• intothetv
• LaughNgamezSOOP
• Kozan
StarCraft: Brood War
• Diggity16
• STPLYoutube
• ZZZeroYoutube
• BSLYoutube
Dota 2
• masondota22197
League of Legends
• Doublelift4548
Other Games
• imaqtpie1358
• Scarra1212
• Day9tv797
Upcoming Events
Esports World Cup
10h 32m
ByuN vs Zoun
SHIN vs TriGGeR
Cyan vs ShoWTimE
Rogue vs HeRoMaRinE
Clem vs Solar
Reynor vs Maru
herO vs Cure
Serral vs Classic
Esports World Cup
1d 10h
Esports World Cup
2 days
CranKy Ducklings
3 days
BSL20 Non-Korean Champi…
3 days
CSO Cup
3 days
BSL20 Non-Korean Champi…
3 days
Bonyth vs Sziky
Dewalt vs Hawk
Hawk vs QiaoGege
Sziky vs Dewalt
Mihu vs Bonyth
Zhanhun vs QiaoGege
QiaoGege vs Fengzi
FEL
4 days
BSL20 Non-Korean Champi…
4 days
BSL20 Non-Korean Champi…
4 days
Bonyth vs Zhanhun
Dewalt vs Mihu
Hawk vs Sziky
Sziky vs QiaoGege
Mihu vs Hawk
Zhanhun vs Dewalt
Fengzi vs Bonyth
[ Show More ]
Sparkling Tuna Cup
6 days
Online Event
6 days
Liquipedia Results

Completed

CSL Xiamen Invitational
Championship of Russia 2025
Murky Cup #2

Ongoing

Copa Latinoamericana 4
Jiahua Invitational
BSL20 Non-Korean Championship
Esports World Cup 2025
CC Div. A S7
Underdog Cup #2
FISSURE Playground #1
BLAST.tv Austin Major 2025
ESL Impact League Season 7
IEM Dallas 2025
PGL Astana 2025
Asian Champions League '25

Upcoming

CSLPRO Last Chance 2025
CSLPRO Chat StarLAN 3
BSL Season 21
RSL Revival: Season 2
SEL Season 2 Championship
uThermal 2v2 Main Event
FEL Cracov 2025
HCC Europe
ESL Pro League S22
StarSeries Fall 2025
FISSURE Playground #2
BLAST Open Fall 2025
BLAST Open Fall Qual
Esports World Cup 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall 2025
BLAST Bounty Fall Qual
IEM Cologne 2025
TLPD

1. ByuN
2. TY
3. Dark
4. Solar
5. Stats
6. Nerchio
7. sOs
8. soO
9. INnoVation
10. Elazer
1. Rain
2. Flash
3. EffOrt
4. Last
5. Bisu
6. Soulkey
7. Mini
8. Sharp
Sidebar Settings...

Advertising | Privacy Policy | Terms Of Use | Contact Us

Original banner artwork: Jim Warren
The contents of this webpage are copyright © 2025 TLnet. All Rights Reserved.