California Democrats Propose Strictest Gun Regulations In The Nation

[The Rabbi]

A University of Chicago Crime Lab says nearly 20 percent of the guns recovered by Chicago police from 2008 to 2012 were purchased in Indiana.

.

It is illegal for a resident of IL to purchase a handgun in IN. So how do you suppose that happened?

 

[The Rabbi]

.
Ted Cruz (R-TX)

Says "the jurisdictions with the strictest gun control laws, almost without exception … have the highest crime rates and the highest murder rates."​

Ted Cruz on Monday, January 7th, 2013 in an interview on PBS​

9. States with stricter gun control laws have fewer deaths from gun-related violence.

Last year, economist Richard Florida dove deep into the correlations between gun deaths and other kinds of social indicators. Some of what he found was, perhaps, unexpected: Higher populations, more stress, more immigrants, and more mental illness were not correlated with more deaths from gun violence. But one thing he found was, perhaps, perfectly predictable: States with tighter gun control laws appear to have fewer gun-related deaths. The disclaimer here is that correlation is not causation. But correlations can be suggestive:

​

“The map overlays the map of firearm deaths above with gun control restrictions by state,” explains Florida. “It highlights states which have one of three gun control restrictions in place – assault weapons’ bans, trigger locks, or safe storage requirements. Firearm deaths are significantly lower in states with stricter gun control legislation. Though the sample sizes are small, we find substantial negative correlations between firearm deaths and states that ban assault weapons (-.45), require trigger locks (-.42), and mandate safe storage requirements for guns (-.48).”



Post hoc, ergo propter hoc? Perhaps, but-----but the empirical evidence is, the tighter the controls on guns... the less gun violence.
.

You're all over the place. Your map shows "number of deaths due to injury". That's meaningless here, as injury could be accident or suicide as well.
Try harder.

And Sen Cruz's statement is still true, as "jurisdiction" could mean Chicago as well as IL.

 

[The Rabbi]

.
Post hoc, ergo propter hoc? Perhaps, but-----but the empirical evidence is, the tighter the controls on guns... the less gun violence.
.

Did the law [Assault Weapons Ban] have an effect on mass shootings?

That’s possible, though not certain. As this chart from Princeton’s Sam Wang shows, the number of people killed in mass shootings did go down in the years the ban was in effect (save for a surge in 1999, a year that included Columbine):

​

Because mass shootings are relatively rare, it’s difficult to tell whether this was just a random blip or caused by the ban. Still, the number of mass shootings per year has doubled since the ban expired. That’s suggestive, at least.

.

Statistical fallacy as mass shootings are rare, thus not providing enough data In fact you are more likely to be killed by lightning than a mass shooting. So why all the fuss?

 

[Dubya]

.
Ted Cruz (R-TX)

Says "the jurisdictions with the strictest gun control laws, almost without exception … have the highest crime rates and the highest murder rates."​

Ted Cruz on Monday, January 7th, 2013 in an interview on PBS​

9. States with stricter gun control laws have fewer deaths from gun-related violence.

Last year, economist Richard Florida dove deep into the correlations between gun deaths and other kinds of social indicators. Some of what he found was, perhaps, unexpected: Higher populations, more stress, more immigrants, and more mental illness were not correlated with more deaths from gun violence. But one thing he found was, perhaps, perfectly predictable: States with tighter gun control laws appear to have fewer gun-related deaths. The disclaimer here is that correlation is not causation. But correlations can be suggestive:

​

“The map overlays the map of firearm deaths above with gun control restrictions by state,” explains Florida. “It highlights states which have one of three gun control restrictions in place – assault weapons’ bans, trigger locks, or safe storage requirements. Firearm deaths are significantly lower in states with stricter gun control legislation. Though the sample sizes are small, we find substantial negative correlations between firearm deaths and states that ban assault weapons (-.45), require trigger locks (-.42), and mandate safe storage requirements for guns (-.48).”



Post hoc, ergo propter hoc? Perhaps, but-----but the empirical evidence is, the tighter the controls on guns... the less gun violence.
.

You're all over the place. Your map shows "number of deaths due to injury". That's meaningless here, as injury could be accident or suicide as well.
Try harder.

And Sen Cruz's statement is still true, as "jurisdiction" could mean Chicago as well as IL.

Can't you read and comprehend more than one line?

 

[Dubya]

.
Post hoc, ergo propter hoc? Perhaps, but-----but the empirical evidence is, the tighter the controls on guns... the less gun violence.
.

Did the law [Assault Weapons Ban] have an effect on mass shootings?

That’s possible, though not certain. As this chart from Princeton’s Sam Wang shows, the number of people killed in mass shootings did go down in the years the ban was in effect (save for a surge in 1999, a year that included Columbine):

​

Because mass shootings are relatively rare, it’s difficult to tell whether this was just a random blip or caused by the ban. Still, the number of mass shootings per year has doubled since the ban expired. That’s suggestive, at least.

.

Statistical fallacy as mass shootings are rare, thus not providing enough data In fact you are more likely to be killed by lightning than a mass shooting. So why all the fuss?

There were only 26 deaths by lightning in 2011.

 

[Rinata]

California Democrats Propose Strictest Gun Regulations In The Nation

More proof that California Democrats are stupid.

You know nothing about Californians. FYI, the only time we were stupid is when we helped make Arnold Schwarzenegger our governor.

No you people are stupid. I can prove it..........Jerry Brown!


Nuff said!

You're an idiot. We like him and he's doing a good job. Nuff said?? Why?? Because you don't know what you're talking about??

New Poll: Governor Jerry Brown Has Record High Approval Rating - capradio.org

 

[The Rabbi]

You know nothing about Californians. FYI, the only time we were stupid is when we helped make Arnold Schwarzenegger our governor.

No you people are stupid. I can prove it..........Jerry Brown!


Nuff said!

You're an idiot. We like him and he's doing a good job. Nuff said?? Why?? Because you don't know what you're talking about??

New Poll: Governor Jerry Brown Has Record High Approval Rating - capradio.org

You're proving his point. Yes, Jerry BRown is popular. Despite raising taxes and failing to solve the state's pressing financial problems, which they doubtless blame on Reagan.
Californicators are idiots. Look at their pols. Brown, Feinstein, Boxer, et al. Every one of them a self absorbed narcissist oblivious to political and economic realities. You have Nancy Pelosi marveling how great it would be for everyone to be on food stamps and welfare. One could go on and on here.
And the very fact that these morons keep getting elected is proof that Californicators deserve every last one of them.

 

[Redfish]

just another reason for anyone with normal functioning brain cells to leave California.

 

[Dubya]

just another reason for anyone with normal functioning brain cells to leave California.

Don't send the fools this way! Have you Ned Beattyite, Ted Nugent types considered living on icebergs? With global warming, we can find you some big ones.

 

[Redfish]

just another reason for anyone with normal functioning brain cells to leave California.

Don't send the fools this way! Have you Ned Beattyite, Ted Nugent types considered living on icebergs? With global warming, we can find you some big ones.

Ahhh, the evil man made global warming conspiracy makes its way into another thread. the prophet algore will be proud of you for continuing his hoax.

 

[Spoonman]

Did the law [Assault Weapons Ban] have an effect on mass shootings?

That’s possible, though not certain. As this chart from Princeton’s Sam Wang shows, the number of people killed in mass shootings did go down in the years the ban was in effect (save for a surge in 1999, a year that included Columbine):

​

Because mass shootings are relatively rare, it’s difficult to tell whether this was just a random blip or caused by the ban. Still, the number of mass shootings per year has doubled since the ban expired. That’s suggestive, at least.

.

Statistical fallacy as mass shootings are rare, thus not providing enough data In fact you are more likely to be killed by lightning than a mass shooting. So why all the fuss?

There were only 26 deaths by lightning in 2011.

Link

 

[Lakhota]

California Lawmaker Pushing Gun Control Got Death Threat | TPMMuckraker

 

[Dubya]

Statistical fallacy as mass shootings are rare, thus not providing enough data In fact you are more likely to be killed by lightning than a mass shooting. So why all the fuss?

There were only 26 deaths by lightning in 2011.

Link

I've already posted it and all I did was type lightning deaths in a search engine to get it. I'm not going to find it for every fool on this site, find it yourself! 2012 had a lot of lightning deaths early in the year, but mass murder deaths beat them. I don't see that trend reversing in the near future and it very well could get worse.

 

[Spoonman]

There were only 26 deaths by lightning in 2011.

Link

I've already posted it and all I did was type lightning deaths in a search engine to get it. I'm not going to find it for every fool on this site, find it yourself! 2012 had a lot of lightning deaths early in the year, but mass murder deaths beat them. I don't see that trend reversing in the near future and it very well could get worse.

hypocrite

 

[Spoonman]

so how did gun control work out in australia?

Myth: Gun control in Australia is curbing crime

Fact: Crime has been rising since a sweeping ban on private gun ownership. In the first two years after gun-owners were forced to surrender 640,381 personal firearms, government statistics show a dramatic increase in criminal activity. In 2001-2002, homicides were up another 20%.

From the inception of firearm confiscation to March 27, 2000, the numbers are:
• Gun murders up 19%
• Armed robbery up 69%
• Home invasions up 21%

The sad part is that in the 15 years before national gun confiscation:
• Firearm-related homicides dropped nearly 66%
• Firearm-related deaths fell 50%

Fact: Gun crimes are rising throughout Australia after guns were banned. In Sydney alone, robbery rates with guns rose 160% in 2001, more in the previous year.
Source(s):
-Australian Bureau of Statistics, “Crime and Justice - Crimes Recorded by Police”, 2000
-Australian Institute of Criminology, “Report #46: Homicide in Australia, 2001-2002", April 2003
-The Sydney Morning Herald, “Costa targets armed robbers”, April 4, 2002

plagiarism - definition of plagiarism by the Free Online Dictionary, Thesaurus and Encyclopedia.

Don't post what you call evidence without a link! You haven't provided proof of anything.

for when you actually learn to read

Source(s):
Australian Bureau of Statistics, “Crime and Justice - Crimes Recorded by Police”, 2000
-Australian Institute of Criminology, “Report #46: Homicide in Australia, 2001-2002", April 2003
-The Sydney Morning Herald, “Costa targets armed robbers”, April 4, 2002

Watch what happens when Guns are banned in Australia, page 1

Fail Link it or lose it. No Exceptions. Infractions Follow.

well that wasn't the link, this was, but it won't do you any good, shich is why i didn't include it in the first place Login

 

[Dubya]

Link

I've already posted it and all I did was type lightning deaths in a search engine to get it. I'm not going to find it for every fool on this site, find it yourself! 2012 had a lot of lightning deaths early in the year, but mass murder deaths beat them. I don't see that trend reversing in the near future and it very well could get worse.

hypocrite

Don't you know how to use a search engine or are you just too fucking lazy?

People don't get struck by lightning much anymore, so why is that too hard to believe. I remember seeing a little spark of lightning near me (maybe 15 to 20 feet away) as a child when I was in an asphalted area need a gas station and I was walking in that direction. My grandmother said she raised a shovel above her head once and was struck by lightning that knocked her on her ass and claimed she was struck again, but I don't remember the details, if she even told me. I never thought to ask her why someone would raise a shovel above their head.

I remember seeing ball lightning once while hanging out with my girlfriend on a porch. That was neat and the only time I ever saw it. My favorite was when my brother and I were stopped at a traffic light in a city in the pouring rain. Lightning struck a pole right in front of us and set the top of it on fire. You could barely see that far in that rain, but it wasn't putting that fire out, the way it put that traffic light out. We made our left turn at the intersection and headed down the pike with that pole still blazing. I've also seen a static charge ground itself in a house after lightning struck nearby. It went from a electrical wall socket to a vacuum cleaner, parked near a floor vent in my neighbor's house. It makes people notice it and go damn. I imagine those sparks of lightning are high voltage and would wake you up, if you came in contact with it.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

California Democrats Propose Strictest Gun Regulations In The Nation

More proof that California Democrats are stupid.

You know nothing about Californians. FYI, the only time we were stupid is when we helped make Arnold Schwarzenegger our governor.

You don't think it was stupid to elect Moonbeam? How about taking up donations to keep the state parks open even though there was millions of dollars in the park budget?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

.
Ted Cruz (R-TX)

Says "the jurisdictions with the strictest gun control laws, almost without exception … have the highest crime rates and the highest murder rates."​

Ted Cruz on Monday, January 7th, 2013 in an interview on PBS​

9. States with stricter gun control laws have fewer deaths from gun-related violence.

Last year, economist Richard Florida dove deep into the correlations between gun deaths and other kinds of social indicators. Some of what he found was, perhaps, unexpected: Higher populations, more stress, more immigrants, and more mental illness were not correlated with more deaths from gun violence. But one thing he found was, perhaps, perfectly predictable: States with tighter gun control laws appear to have fewer gun-related deaths. The disclaimer here is that correlation is not causation. But correlations can be suggestive:

​

“The map overlays the map of firearm deaths above with gun control restrictions by state,” explains Florida. “It highlights states which have one of three gun control restrictions in place – assault weapons’ bans, trigger locks, or safe storage requirements. Firearm deaths are significantly lower in states with stricter gun control legislation. Though the sample sizes are small, we find substantial negative correlations between firearm deaths and states that ban assault weapons (-.45), require trigger locks (-.42), and mandate safe storage requirements for guns (-.48).”



Post hoc, ergo propter hoc? Perhaps, but-----but the empirical evidence is, the tighter the controls on guns... the less gun violence.
.

Let me try this one more time before I simply neg rep everyone who does not understand English.

Homicides by gun is not the same things as gun violence, violent crime, or even crime itself. It doesn't even cover suicide. To prove this all we need to do is is look at Japan, which has really strict gun control laws, yet has a higher suicide rate than the US.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

.
Post hoc, ergo propter hoc? Perhaps, but-----but the empirical evidence is, the tighter the controls on guns... the less gun violence.
.

Did the law [Assault Weapons Ban] have an effect on mass shootings?

That’s possible, though not certain. As this chart from Princeton’s Sam Wang shows, the number of people killed in mass shootings did go down in the years the ban was in effect (save for a surge in 1999, a year that included Columbine):

​

Because mass shootings are relatively rare, it’s difficult to tell whether this was just a random blip or caused by the ban. Still, the number of mass shootings per year has doubled since the ban expired. That’s suggestive, at least.

.

Negged for lying.

Mass shootings has only doubled since the ban expired if you ignore 1998 and 1999. I, on the other hands, you pay attention to those years you find that there is absolutely no trend in mass shootings, which, not surprisingly, is exactly what every single criminologist in the country has said repeatedly.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

A University of Chicago Crime Lab says nearly 20 percent of the guns recovered by Chicago police from 2008 to 2012 were purchased in Indiana.

.

It is illegal for a resident of IL to purchase a handgun in IN. So how do you suppose that happened?

It is illegal to transport a gun purchased anywhere into Chicago, yet Chicago still has gun violence.