It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

10 Pro-Gun Myths, Shot Down

page: 3
8
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 25 2015 @ 06:16 AM
link   
a reply to: Kapusta

I remember reading, or hearing on a video posted here not too long back, that Plano, which is apparently in Texas, has the largest gun ownership per head of any place in America. It also boasts a very low murder rate, much lower than that of locations with fewer guns owned, and more restrictive legislation on guns in place.

I have no idea how valid that is, since I have never been to Plano, or indeed anywhere in the United States, and therefore cannot check these facts empirically. However, it is something I heard, and may have bearing on the subject matter with which this thread deals. Its worth is entirely someone else's task to evaluate!




posted on Jun, 25 2015 @ 06:31 AM
link   

originally posted by: TrueBrit
a reply to: Kapusta

I remember reading, or hearing on a video posted here not too long back, that Plano, which is apparently in Texas, has the largest gun ownership per head of any place in America. It also boasts a very low murder rate, much lower than that of locations with fewer guns owned, and more restrictive legislation on guns in place.

I have no idea how valid that is, since I have never been to Plano, or indeed anywhere in the United States, and therefore cannot check these facts empirically. However, it is something I heard, and may have bearing on the subject matter with which this thread deals. Its worth is entirely someone else's task to evaluate!



yeah I recall hearing or reading about that as well, Ill have to do a search on that .

Off Topic: are you sick of drinking that beer yet ? lol
edit on 06/17/2015 by Kapusta because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 25 2015 @ 06:33 AM
link   

originally posted by: TrueBrit
a reply to: Kapusta

I remember reading, or hearing on a video posted here not too long back, that Plano, which is apparently in Texas, has the largest gun ownership per head of any place in America. It also boasts a very low murder rate, much lower than that of locations with fewer guns owned, and more restrictive legislation on guns in place.

I have no idea how valid that is, since I have never been to Plano, or indeed anywhere in the United States, and therefore cannot check these facts empirically. However, it is something I heard, and may have bearing on the subject matter with which this thread deals. Its worth is entirely someone else's task to evaluate!




Well it's also one the wealthiest city per capita in the US regarding median income. Things like it being the city with the most teachers per child, with some of the best student scores and the less crimes are all merely consequences of that. It's a big business center and many corporate headquarters are located there, ensuring high-paying jobs.


Everyone knows gun violence in general (excluding outliers like mentally ills) is linked to poor education and ultimately to poverty.

To think there is a direct causation between gun violence in Plano and the number of guns is IMHO incorrect and gives a bad message to the rest of the population.


If you want to reduce gun violence (and other kinds of violence FWIW the correct message isn't "buy more guns" but "study more" and "reduce poverty".
edit on 25-6-2015 by JUhrman because: (no reason given)

edit on 25-6-2015 by JUhrman because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 25 2015 @ 06:41 AM
link   
a reply to: Kapusta

Use this www.google.com...://concealedguns.procon.org/sourcefiles/arrest-rate-texas.pdf&ved=0CB 8QFjAB&usg=AFQjCNHVcjd--1zl7azd1yt1uFR4eyO63A&sig2=SFcDFFIbAM1o2_rBilkGPA.

Around page 20 it starts to compare Texas concealed carry people's arrest rates vs the total Texas Population . It's not even close.



posted on Jun, 25 2015 @ 06:42 AM
link   
a reply to: Kapusta
In a word... No! I LOVE my Rum and Coke, and I will stop drinking it when I am good and ready


a reply to: JUhrman
I am not for a moment suggesting that the number of guns in Plano is responsible for the lack of murders. What I am saying is that more guns does not equal more murders. So people should be allowed many guns, but no one should be allowed to exit childhood without a high minimum standard of education, and state and federal government should not be permitted to allow companies to offer too little work in a given region to allow all persons to have a job which pays enough to live on, educate a child on.

There should not be families who cannot send their kids to university, there should not be people in work, who have to work two jobs just to pull in enough to pay for rent, food, and utilities. Poverty should be abolished, before anyone ever tries to remove any individuals guns from their possession. Living wages for all would solve more gun crime than yet more unnecessary gun legislation.



posted on Jun, 25 2015 @ 06:58 AM
link   

originally posted by: TrueBrit
There should not be families who cannot send their kids to university, there should not be people in work, who have to work two jobs just to pull in enough to pay for rent, food, and utilities. Poverty should be abolished, before anyone ever tries to remove any individuals guns from their possession. Living wages for all would solve more gun crime than yet more unnecessary gun legislation.


As someone who is more "left-inclined" living in a country where university education is almost free for everyone I can only agree with you here


The problem is that usually those who are pro-guns in the US are not really in favor of having to participate in paying other people their education or reducing poverty if you know what I mean.



posted on Jun, 25 2015 @ 07:04 AM
link   

originally posted by: JUhrman

originally posted by: Kapusta
to make it harder for people to purchase guns thus "taking the guns out of the hands of people" .


How making something harder to purchase is the same as taking it from your hand? Sorry but this is a logical fallacy.

Also aren't these laws at state level?

So why are pro-guns people ranting about the federal government trying to grab their guns? Really if someone can explain this to me?


I disagree. If you had to wait 6-8 months to exercise your first amendment rights, say buy a typewriter, would you not consider than an infringement?



posted on Jun, 25 2015 @ 07:06 AM
link   

originally posted by: JUhrman

originally posted by: TrueBrit
There should not be families who cannot send their kids to university, there should not be people in work, who have to work two jobs just to pull in enough to pay for rent, food, and utilities. Poverty should be abolished, before anyone ever tries to remove any individuals guns from their possession. Living wages for all would solve more gun crime than yet more unnecessary gun legislation.


As someone who is more "left-inclined" living in a country where university education is almost free for everyone I can only agree with you here


The problem is that usually those who are pro-guns in the US are not really in favor of having to participate in paying other people their education or reducing poverty if you know what I mean.



That is complete Hogwash , I am "pro gun" as you put it and I have no problems with programs to reduce poverty , my problem is when people abuse the programs .

You can't assume people who are "pro gun" all have the same mind set , that just pure ignorance to believe such a thing.



posted on Jun, 25 2015 @ 07:11 AM
link   

originally posted by: Kapusta

originally posted by: JUhrman

originally posted by: TrueBrit
There should not be families who cannot send their kids to university, there should not be people in work, who have to work two jobs just to pull in enough to pay for rent, food, and utilities. Poverty should be abolished, before anyone ever tries to remove any individuals guns from their possession. Living wages for all would solve more gun crime than yet more unnecessary gun legislation.


As someone who is more "left-inclined" living in a country where university education is almost free for everyone I can only agree with you here


The problem is that usually those who are pro-guns in the US are not really in favor of having to participate in paying other people their education or reducing poverty if you know what I mean.



That is complete Hogwash , I am "pro gun" as you put it and I have no problems with programs to reduce poverty , my problem is when people abuse the programs .

You can't assume people who are "pro gun" all have the same mind set , that just pure ignorance to believe such a thing.


A mass of irrational contradictions. First he goes on about how gun ownership causes crimes then he goes on about how societal things other than guns cause crime, such as poverty and lack of education.



posted on Jun, 25 2015 @ 07:11 AM
link   

originally posted by: Kapusta
That is complete Hogwash , I am "pro gun" as you put it and I have no problems with programs to reduce poverty , my problem is when people abuse the programs .


Well of course it was a generalization and I'm glad people like you are proof it's not always like that.

Regardless, you just need a quick read at ATS to see many people who are defending gun-rights will also claim it's "leftists" who are trying to grab guns (which is probably another generalization), illustrating in that way that they aren't really in favor of social policies, especially if it means they must participate financially to them...



posted on Jun, 25 2015 @ 07:12 AM
link   

originally posted by: NavyDoc
First he goes on about how gun ownership causes crimes



Please quote where I say so.

I think either you assume wrongly either you are deliberately lying. I hope it's the former and you just made a mistake.



posted on Jun, 25 2015 @ 07:18 AM
link   

originally posted by: JUhrman

originally posted by: irishhaf
a reply to: JUhrman

They have failed repeatedly with banning through regulations, (thanks to hyper vigilance by gun owners )so the next step is pricing things out of the reach of the regular person... Be it ammo or the guns themselves.

I don't think guns are the perfect security blanket, but there is that old saying ... When seconds count cops are minutes away... A gun gives me better odds against multiple attackers or an armed attacker.


Then why pro-guns always claim the gov wants to grab their guns when in reality the only thing happening is that new guns are a bit more expensive (and isn't there also a market for used guns sold between individuals with much less administrative trouble)?


Sounds like they wildly exaggerate everything in their claims. Like they try to appeal to emotions of people rather than discussing things in a rational fashion if you ask me. Probably because they know deep down there is no real reasons to be mad.


It's cool how you have a toolbag of snipits to counter any comment with.

The whole, "der gonna take r guns" thing comes from the repeated attempts to change the laws. If not for the vigilant gun rights groups, I firmly believe we would be in the same boat as other restricted countries. Lets look at you for example. Wouldn't you be for the banning of all guns if you had that power? If not, why?



posted on Jun, 25 2015 @ 07:21 AM
link   

originally posted by: network dude
Lets look at you for example. Wouldn't you be for the banning of all guns if you had that power? If not, why?



Of course not. I already explained above my position and why a ban makes no sense.

But why coming up with bans all the time?

Are there even democratic countries where guns are banned altogether? Can you cite one?



posted on Jun, 25 2015 @ 07:28 AM
link   

originally posted by: JUhrman

originally posted by: Kapusta
That is complete Hogwash , I am "pro gun" as you put it and I have no problems with programs to reduce poverty , my problem is when people abuse the programs .


Well of course it was a generalization and I'm glad people like you are proof it's not always like that.

Regardless, you just need a quick read at ATS to see many people who are defending gun-rights will also claim it's "leftists" who are trying to grab guns (which is probably another generalization), illustrating in that way that they aren't really in favor of social policies, especially if it means they must participate financially to them...


please provide me with a "quick look" and proof of this .



posted on Jun, 25 2015 @ 07:35 AM
link   

originally posted by: JUhrman

originally posted by: NavyDoc
First he goes on about how gun ownership causes crimes



Please quote where I say so.

I think either you assume wrongly either you are deliberately lying. I hope it's the former and you just made a mistake.


AH, so gun ownership doesn't cause crime? I'm glad that's settled. I guess you can stop calling for restricting ownership then.



posted on Jun, 25 2015 @ 07:42 AM
link   

originally posted by: Kapusta

please provide me with a "quick look" and proof of this .



OK very quick look then. You could use the search tool too :p Just look for "liberals" or "leftists" and "gun grab" and you will see how these are often associated. Certainly more than "conservative gun grab".

www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...
www.abovetopsecret.com...



posted on Jun, 25 2015 @ 07:47 AM
link   

originally posted by: NavyDoc
I guess you can stop calling for restricting ownership then.


Again, please quote where I said so?

Really it seems some people get so emotional over their guns they start assuming a whole lot about the people they talk with. That's the main thing I denounced throughout the thread.

How can we have a good debate when you keep being accused of being a "gun grabber" or "gun banner" when it's not the case? This is all appeal to emotion.


I'm in favor of a strict regulation that is all. And I know that some people will not like this. It's normal we have different opinion.


I have hunters in my family. They have guns and I never had the impression that they had any difficulty buying them and getting authorizations to use them. And we don't even live in the US. It really puzzles me how so many people spread disinformation regarding how there is supposedly a cabal to try to disarm people to better subdue them. I think I only hear this rhetoric in the US, the country where actually this is the LEAST probable to happen. It sounds very much like a false argument deliberately spread by lobbies.
edit on 25-6-2015 by JUhrman because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 25 2015 @ 07:57 AM
link   

originally posted by: JUhrman

originally posted by: NavyDoc
I guess you can stop calling for restricting ownership then.


Again, please quote where I said so?

Really it seems some people get so emotional over their guns they start assuming a whole lot about the people they talk with. That's the main thing I denounced throughout the thread.

How can we have a good debate when you keep being accused of being a "gun grabber" or "gun banner" when it's not the case? This is all appeal to emotion.


I'm in favor of a strict regulation that is all. And I know that some people will not like this. It's normal we have different opinion.


I have hunters in my family. They have guns and I never had the impression that they had any difficulty buying them and getting authorizations to use them. And we don't even live in the US. It really puzzles me how so many people spread disinformation regarding how there is supposedly a cabal to try to disarm people to better subdue them. I think I only hear this rhetoric in the US, the country where actually this is the LEAST probable to happen. It sounds very much like a false argument deliberately spread by lobbies.


You said it right here.




I'm in favor of a strict regulation that is all.


What is that but restricting who owns what where?

You already have the deluded idea from that other thread where you think that full-auto is non-regulated in the US.

Do you think I should be able to have an AR-15 in my own home? Handgun? Concealed carry license?


edit on 25-6-2015 by NavyDoc because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 25 2015 @ 08:08 AM
link   
a reply to: NavyDoc

I'm sorry you think regulation and restriction have the same meaning.

That must explain why I can't have a discussion with you.


I think people have the right to be armed, as per the their constitution.

I don't think it gives them the right to own any kind of firearm. This is subject to interpretation and where we agree to disagree.


Also I never wrote "full-auto" in the thread yo talk about (though I willingly admit I'm not a firearm expert). More distortion of my words it wouldn't be the first time.
edit on 25-6-2015 by JUhrman because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 25 2015 @ 08:11 AM
link   
a reply to: JUhrman

The problem with strict regulation, is that none of our 57 States are on the same page with regulations. Hell, regulations vary from City to City in every State.







 
8
<< 1  2    4  5 >>

log in

join