View Single Post
Old January 18, 2013, 07:38 PM   #29
Koda94
Senior Member
 
Join Date: November 25, 2012
Location: Oregon
Posts: 366
Quote:
The OP is doing the perfect thing here, let's lean on each other, we have a very broad set of skills available here, and we have got to hang together.
^^I have to agree with this.^^ Facebook covers a large community of voters. Replying might not sway the person who posted that, but it might persuade some of the many who read through it that are on the fence, and those are the folks who need the truth.

I also got the same Facebook post, from a friend who shared it on his own wall. Here is my reply (and I am terrible at political debates so correct me if I am wrong)

my reply:
(first) Hitler: the author obviously did not read the entire snopes article he cited. The fact that Hitler did not say that quote does not dispute the fact that Hitler did establish gun control. I would cite a reference but that snopes article already clarified that.

(second) Secret Service protection: I am not self inflated to believe that my children are more of a target than any politicians children. There have been more school shootings in history than any attack on any politicians children.

(third) There are no laws requiring confiscation: False, registration laws are the first step. Registration does nothing to prevent crime and only affects law abiding citizens who are gun owners. Criminals do not register their guns. A majority of gun control laws attack ownership and place restrictions only for law abiding citizens and without any credible evidence these laws reduce crime. The argument that these laws are the first steps to total confiscation has no counter.

(fourth) ...ok, moot point on either side. Everyone knows the myth about baseball bats vs guns and it proves nothing for either side to discuss.

(fifth): "I find the fact that more children are killed in the US by guns than in the entire Middle East region, very disturbing." says who... ?

(sixth): "I find it disturbing that the NRA blames the rise in violent shootings on video games and then comes out with its own shooting video game" Does the Author not research his arguments.... the NRA video game does not shoot at virtual people, only training targets. It is not violent. If only the video games marketed today followed suit...

(seventh): "I find it disturbing that other countries spend in excess of twice as much as the US on violent video games and have a small fraction of the amount of gun related deaths/injuries. " says who?

(eighth): "I find it disturbing that instead of looking for a solution to a problem like Newtown, there are people wasting their time and energy by trying to turn it into a conspiracy theory. " totally agree.

(ninth): "I find it disturbing that guns are the third largest killer of children ages 5-14 in the US." says who? Not according to this article: http://www.guncite.com/gun_control_gcgvacci.html

(tenth): "I find it disturbing that a child in America is 12 times more likely to be killed with a gun than the rest of the "developed" world." says who? Where does the author get his statistics from?

(eleventh): "I find it disturbing that there are more guns privately owned in America than the next SEVENTEEN countries combined." says who? and the author claims in his own article that he is not anti-gun?

(twelve): "I find it disturbing that all of these statistics are not discussed but fake statistics about a baseball bat death rate are plastered everywhere." huh? So we are taking our advice from the author who does not read? Try this article: http://www.justfacts.com/guncontrol.asp#general

(thirteen): "I find it disturbing that some people believe that the ONLY answer to this problem is more guns. " there are a number of credible bi-partisan studies, statistics and articles that support this to be true. I suggest starting with reading the book "more guns = less crime". A good summary of the book can be read here: http://www.press.uchicago.edu/Misc/Chicago/493636.html

(14): "Banning all firearms is NOT the answer, which is exactly why it's not being proposed." see gun registration laws...

(15): "If armed guards are the only answer to ending school shootings, then explain the VT shooting. Virginia Tech had an entire police department complete with a SWAT unit. Explain Columbine, which had an armed officer on staff. When discussing an end to gun violence in schools, there should be NOTHING left off of the table. " Seriously, does the author really not understand his own argument. To keep it short, Virgina Tech has a complete ban on all firearms on campus. So do all public schools like Columbine. If you don't want to leave anything off the table, then consider removing the gun free zones in schools and campuses allowing law abiding teachers and parents to carry concealed guns. There is a reason these criminals target these venues...

(16): "And yes, criminals don't typically obey laws, but we still have them. Can you use that logic to say there should be none at all? No." um, I think the author just admitted the gun control laws ineffective.
not clear on the rest of his article except he says hes not anti gun... but clearly the author is.
__________________
lightweight, cheap, strong... pick 2
Koda94 is online now  
 
Page generated in 0.04616 seconds with 7 queries