Ribbon are incredibly intuitive. I see non computer people understand them immediately. People who can't think beyond what is staring them in the face may have some issues.
What if you were attacked by a tiger 3- 8 times a decade before you got that rock? And the 10 years that followed you didn't get attacked by a tiger. Would that be an indicator the rock worked?
oh, you can replaces tiger with hijackings and rock with TSA.
Of course it is. Also, you perception of Japan is probably wrong.
However it is another data point. And if you look at every 1st world nation that enforces strict gun laws, the stricter the less crime. It's not hard to find that out, just inconvenient.
Once agail someone who has no clue brings up cars.
If you must use that comparison, then you need to normalize it. Look an how much time is spent in a car, total. How many miles driven, total.
30,000 deaths per 3000 Billion miles driven. 30,000 per 500 million hours spent commuting? Are those bad statistics? seems low when you look at how many people are in cars all the time.
Not to imply we shouldn't work to make it safer. interesting note: car fatalities has been declining for decades, even during this media storm about texting and phone sand driving. Number keep going down.
Japan is just one example of lower deaths and no guns.. Every other 1st world nation that enforce strict gun control laws has lower gun deaths and violent crime then the US.
" gun control will magically make serial killers disappear." It isn't magic when you have all the data we have. It's counter intuitive, but that's different. And if the best you can do is 'serial killer' as you comparison, then you got nothing.
"group could overthrow the US government." no, they couldn't. You don't understand how are government work, you don't understand why Batista was 'easily' over thrown at all.
wrong. They couldn't afford a standing army, so they used a militia. That's why, and it's pretty clear in the documentations of their discussions on the topic.
It's EVEN IN THE CONSTITUTION that's why. oh..but the NRA ignores the inconvenient half of that sentence. You idea was completely made up years later.
That wsa a reasonable question 40 years ago. Now we can look at the last 40 years of countries tightening up on gun control. The countries that did that have fewer homicides, crime, and gun deaths.
It's a question that's been answered. Of course it's in the NRA's best interest to keep pretending to ask that question, and saying they will come to the table and all the other misdirection they do until people start to forget the mass deaths.
I like that in order to prove how smart you are you did that wrong; Which part of "isn't" do Texans not understand?
Unfortunately, current federal law requires criminal background checks only for guns sold through licensed firearm dealers, which account for just 60% of all gun sales in the United States. A loophole in the law allows individuals not “engaged in the business” of selling firearms to sell guns without a license—and without processing any paperwork. That means that two out of every five guns sold in the United States change hands without a background check.
Um, you know you got nothing, right? United Kingdom
Violent crime rates in the UK Includes all violence against the person, sexual offences, and robbery as violent crime.
The United States Department of Justice Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) counts five categories of crime as violent crimes: murder, forcible rape, robbery, aggravated assault, and simple assault.
you got nothing. But hey, any lie to back your gun stance is ok. Twit.
Their category is broader. With all the industrialized countries that enforce strict gun controls, that's the best you can do? Look at all the other stricter nations, and they to have less violent crime and homicides.
Slashdot Mirror
A person who makes up and embellishes stories? yes, I agree.
Ribbon are incredibly intuitive. I see non computer people understand them immediately.
People who can't think beyond what is staring them in the face may have some issues.
in short:
"It's not what I am use to so I won't bother with a in depth analyses that may not support my bias."
Fewer then people who think apples and oranges are the same thing.
"You are more likely to die in a car crash than by all airplane incidents combined."
not when you look at miles and hours.
Wrong.
there is good poll data. Yes you need to also look at other factors, but don't dismiss polls out of hand, they can be extremely accurate.
So what? all that means is you look at the questions, methodology and data...just like any other study. Doesn't make it wrong, or right.
What if you were attacked by a tiger 3- 8 times a decade before you got that rock? And the 10 years that followed you didn't get attacked by a tiger. Would that be an indicator the rock worked?
oh, you can replaces tiger with hijackings and rock with TSA.
You do know there hasn't been a single hijacks of an American plane since the TSA started right?
That's the first decade since the 1950's that's been true?
The appearance of official security also can have a negative impact on crime. Something that's also been looked at.
Air flight in the US is too cheap.
Pre 9-11 airline were in charge of security. It was a failure of the private sector.
Of course it is. Also, you perception of Japan is probably wrong.
However it is another data point. And if you look at every 1st world nation that enforces strict gun laws, the stricter the less crime. It's not hard to find that out, just inconvenient.
Once agail someone who has no clue brings up cars.
If you must use that comparison, then you need to normalize it. Look an how much time is spent in a car, total. How many miles driven, total.
30,000 deaths per 3000 Billion miles driven.
30,000 per 500 million hours spent commuting?
Are those bad statistics? seems low when you look at how many people are in cars all the time.
Not to imply we shouldn't work to make it safer. interesting note: car fatalities has been declining for decades, even during this media storm about texting and phone sand driving. Number keep going down.
"A big part of our high murder rate is the drug war"
Unless you are in Mexico or Jamaica, that's not really true. not at all.
Japan is just one example of lower deaths and no guns..
Every other 1st world nation that enforce strict gun control laws has lower gun deaths and violent crime then the US.
" gun control will magically make serial killers disappear."
It isn't magic when you have all the data we have. It's counter intuitive, but that's different.
And if the best you can do is 'serial killer' as you comparison, then you got nothing.
"the assumption is that knife deaths will not fully replace gun deaths"
Except on Q'onoS. I hear a thousand people a night get killed by one running Klingon~
1) True, but that wouldn't happen.
2) Jamaica has much tougher gun control than the US.
no it doesn't. In some respects its 'slightly' tougher, maybe. However it isn't enforced very well.
"group could overthrow the US government."
no, they couldn't. You don't understand how are government work, you don't understand why Batista was 'easily' over thrown at all.
wrong. They couldn't afford a standing army, so they used a militia. That's why, and it's pretty clear in the documentations of their discussions on the topic.
It's EVEN IN THE CONSTITUTION that's why. oh..but the NRA ignores the inconvenient half of that sentence.
You idea was completely made up years later.
That wsa a reasonable question 40 years ago. Now we can look at the last 40 years of countries tightening up on gun control.
The countries that did that have fewer homicides, crime, and gun deaths.
It's a question that's been answered. Of course it's in the NRA's best interest to keep pretending to ask that question, and saying they will come to the table and all the other misdirection they do until people start to forget the mass deaths.
I like that in order to prove how smart you are you did that wrong; Which part of "isn't" do Texans not understand?
Unfortunately, current federal law requires criminal background checks only for guns sold through licensed firearm dealers, which account for just 60% of all gun sales in the United States. A loophole in the law allows individuals not “engaged in the business” of selling firearms to sell guns without a license—and without processing any paperwork. That means that two out of every five guns sold in the United States change hands without a background check.
Of course New York has more retarded people, they don't kill them.
Um, you know you got nothing, right?
United Kingdom
Violent crime rates in the UK
Includes all violence against the person, sexual offences, and robbery as violent crime.
The United States Department of Justice Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) counts five categories of crime as violent crimes: murder, forcible rape, robbery, aggravated assault, and simple assault.
you got nothing. But hey, any lie to back your gun stance is ok. Twit.
Their category is broader. With all the industrialized countries that enforce strict gun controls, that's the best you can do?
Look at all the other stricter nations, and they to have less violent crime and homicides.
all of them.
correlation does not imply causation.
!= means they would never be the same, and they can be.
Unless you can think of something that causes something and has no correlation to it?
Have you tried..the internet?
Apple IS the epitome of coolness and geekery,
", the folks who never tore a piece of electronics apart, let alone pu it back together with added functionality, "
those would be nerds, not geeks.