While carrying a sack of anvils and wearing poorly fitting shoes. Why? Because people with access to the Internet and all its vast stores of data and statistics who can, with a click or two of a mouse and a few keystrokes and find out any information they want, still believe this
That’s not a fact, that is a belief and one from a religion stronger than any god could dream of. It’s willful ignorance which is the anti’s only weapon. Sadly, it’s a powerful weapon at that. It’s like someone denying that they are on fire while flames leap from their clothing.
And they want to give you a hug.
Advertisement
Comments
So how many people have been killed by Guns in Great Britain this year? You know, that place that bans EVERYTHING?
Barron Barnett
says:
I haven't updated my Brady Campaign rankings recently, it's on my to do list. The reason I haven't is because every year it looks like a shotgun blast with the highest Brady scores well above the low end.
Anyone can recreate these graphs and examine the facts, they just don't want to.
Anyone can recreate these graphs and examine the facts, they just don't want to.
"Don't bother me with little details like reality kid, I have an agenda to work on."
s
s
Hell, I'll even take Texas, although Texas isn't actually all _that_ permissive, when you look at the facts.
As a Texan, I fully agree with the lack of permissive carry but it is at the top of states that don't persecute those who use them for defense.
Blaming guns is easy, especially when everyone is emotional like they are now.
TS
As a Texan, I fully agree with the lack of permissive carry but it is at the top of states that don't persecute those who use them for defense.
Blaming guns is easy, especially when everyone is emotional like they are now.
TS
In light of the tragedy at Sandy Hook elementary, it is time to re-read a 1997 report from CDC (http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/00046149.htm): “CDC analyzed data on childhood [less than 15 years of age] homicide, suicide, and firearm-related death in the United States and 25 other industrialized countries…. The firearm-related homicide rate in the United States was nearly 16 times higher than that in all of the other countries combined; the firearm-related suicide rate was nearly 11 times higher; and the unintentional firearm-related death rate was nine times higher.” Fortunately, firearms deaths of children in the United States ( www.cdc.gov/ncipc/wisqars ), after peaking at 935 in 1993, fell to 426 by 2000. Since that year, roughly 400 children have died from guns every year, leaving the United States with a childhood firearms death rate that is several times the average seen in other industrialized countries. This is the price that American children pay for our current firearms practices. For their sake as well as ours, how can we do better?
Tam
says:
Because Bot... er, "Bob" is spamming. I got that same comment, verbatim, at my place, too.
+1 for Bob is a spammer.
Heck, I got that exact same comment on MY blog, and NO-ONE comments there.
Heck, I got that exact same comment on MY blog, and NO-ONE comments there.
NotClauswitz
says:
Sendarius has a blog? Where's the link? ;-)
And why not point out that 2xNewton happen to children every year in Chicago where firearms are even more restricted.
And why not point out that 2xNewton happen to children every year in Chicago where firearms are even more restricted.
Comments have been closed on this topic.
Line it up against whatever state you feel like having carry the banner for permissiveness. Vermont? Alaska? Wyoming? Arizona? Hell, I'll even take Texas, although Texas isn't actually all _that_ permissive, when you look at the facts.
But yeah. Let's count murders. Gun banners lose.
Oh, you wanna complain about the distorting effect of a really big and densely packed city in Illinois (like there's no cities in Texas or Arizona, but whatever...). OK, fine. Let's count murders _per capita_. Well, lookee here. Gun banners _still_ lose.
But just bloody TRY to get one of them to admit that they MIGHT be wrong.
*sigh*