BREAKING NEWS: ARIZONA CONGRESS WOMAN SHOT IN HEAD!

[saxitoxin]

Try to not pull out their victim card when their rhetoric is criticized, and accept that words have consequences.

So far you're the only one criticizing it. A few others were a few days ago but, with new evidence that the once-vaunted consequences were not borne by any words, they've evaporated ... faded into the dark. Aradhus alone carries forward, teary eyed, desperately pleading for civility in US political discourse as the car bombs and RPGs of the RIRA detonate around him. As riots engulf London and the heir-to-the-throne is threatened with decapitation.

If I were American I would join them, firm and fast, in thanking you for your concern for North America first - concern placed above even the ticking time bomb: the sinking, burning EU North Sea Province. You truly are a mensch!

BOOM goes the dynamite!

[saxitoxin]

Which commenter in this thread does this guy remind you of ...

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=W45DRy7M1no

[Phatscotty]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8r0_TS09lJc

[Baron Von PWN]

An excerpt from the end of a good article about gun laws and the Tucson shooting:
"There have been dozens and dozens of people killed in school shootings in the U.S. since the Gun Free School Zones Act was passed in 1995, including, of course, the notorious massacre at Columbine. It’s been said countless times before, but it seems to bear constant repeating since it seems never to sink into the minds of those who think that laws can solve everything: criminals, by definition, don’t obey the law, no matter what it says about carrying guns to public events, while disarming the law-abiding public can only embolden them. If government can’t manage with the sensible laws it already has against letting volatile individuals own guns, it seems pointless to give it less sensible ones to enforce. After all, if the answer to stopping a lunatic assassin like Jared Lee Loughner were as easy as that, the U.S. could simply outlaw murdering people. Except it already has. That hasn’t worked, either."

Or maybe its because you can just cross a state border and get yourself an AK. A more reasonable comparison would be to look at countries where gun ownership is banned or severely restricted and compare them to the US. If in those countries Gun violence actually increased (or stayed the same) after the ban, the article's assertion (Gun bans only serve to embolden criminals and deny citizens protection) would be correct.

This is a logical fallacy. Because the absence of a firearm may inspire a murderer to use a different weapon, a more accurate measure would be to look at overall homicide rate relative to gun laws. The U.S. has the least restrictive gun laws and the highest homicide rate (0.005%) among the 34 OECD nations. However, the U.S. also has less restrictive gun laws - but a substantially lower homicide rate - than many non-OECD nations such as Costa Rica, Russia, Venezuela. But, in all of those countries - outside the 10 or 15 worst - the crime of murder is a statistical anomaly.

In common victim-crime categories, however, the U.S. generally has a lower crime rate than peer nations with restrictive gun laws.

RAPE (over the whole of the Earth you're 150 x more likely to get raped than murdered)
- you're twice as likely to get raped in Canada or Australia than the U.S. - Canada and Australia have more restrictive gun laws than the U.S.

SERIOUS ASSAULT (over the whole of the Earth you're 30 x more likely to be seriously assaulted than murdered)
- you're as likely to get assaulted in Canada or the UK than the U.S. - Canada and the UK have more restrictive gun laws than the U.S.

BURGLARY(over the whole of the Earth you're 30 x more likely to be burglarized than murdered)
- you're three-times more likely to be burglarized in Australia than the U.S., twice as likely in the UK than the U.S., roughly as likely in Canada as the U.S. - all of those nations have more restrictive gun laws than the U.S.

Do restrictive firearms laws lead to national crime pandemics? It's impossible to tell definitively with this data set. If so, though, the question is: if Americans had the option of decreasing their 5-in-100,000 homicide rate to, say, Canada's 2-in-100,000 - but, along with that, would come Canadian-level rapes/looting/pillaging/assaults, would they?

Does one feel safer with a low chance of being murdered in Denver and - also - a low chance of being raped, or, an even lower chance of being murdered in Van-City but a high chance of being anally raped and then stabbed in the shoulder with a butcher knife?

I think those are personal judgment calls and can really depend on one's tolerance/interest in having things inserted in one's rectum against one's will. I think many people in Sydney, for instance, have come to tolerate - and in some cases enjoy - getting pinned down in an alley and having a bottle of Dr Pepper shoved in their anus while their wallet gets nicked. In fact, I've come to greet Australian friends recently by stabbing them in the eye with a pencil, then sodomizing them with my bare fist. But I respect different cultural norms and traditions. This is just a difference in experience and value-sets and why a nation's residents are best-equipped to legislate themselves rather than sit in judgment on others from a cracker jack throne.

Nice job conflating Gun violence with general crime levels. I was talking specifically about violence with firearms, not general prevalence of crime. I would suggest that a readily available supply of firearms make events such as the one discussed more likely. It's quite obvious the number of firearms available would have just about 0 effect on general crime levels. General levels of crime are a reflection of social economic factors within a nation and aren't tied to specific items. Gun violence is far more likely to result in death and serious injury, than say an attack with a knife. Therefore there is a benefit in restricting access to firearms in order to reduce the damage caused by crime.

[BigBallinStalin]

Violent games, movies etc have certifications, you know, so young impressionable malleable persons are somewhat protected. They're also fiction. Politics is not.

Good. Put a certification on radio personalities.

Yes..

Why?

Because it can lead to more violence against the government, against government workers. It has more potentionally dangerous consequences than if joe schmoe is murdered. We can be as cynical about politiicians as we like, but at the end of the day, they are putting themselves out there because they want to improve the country, state, district they're representing.

That's a huge assumption and not at all fact.

Then the analyzed intention of every single human action cannot be classified as anything more than assumption.

Aradhus, that's not true at all either.

You assuming that politicians become politicians in order to improve the country, state, and/or district that they want to represent. Are you aware that there are plenty of other incentives on which they act other than the "for the people" one?

[Aradhus]

Because it can lead to more violence against the government, against government workers. It has more potentionally dangerous consequences than if joe schmoe is murdered. We can be as cynical about politiicians as we like, but at the end of the day, they are putting themselves out there because they want to improve the country, state, district they're representing.

That's a huge assumption and not at all fact.

Then the analyzed intention of every single human action cannot be classified as anything more than assumption.

Aradhus, that's not true at all either.

You assuming that politicians become politicians in order to improve the country, state, and/or district that they want to represent. Are you aware that there are plenty of other incentives on which they act other than the "for the people" one?

You don't know the motivations of a single person on this planet, when it comes to what they do, and why they do it.

Are you aware that even with all the many many incentives to be the politician you speak of, they're still putting themselves out there, and all those incentives doesn't mean that, whilst representing state, district etc, they will try their damndest to ruin what they're representing, or they wil not try to improve the place they're elected to represent.

[thegreekdog]

You don't know the motivations of a single person on this planet, when it comes to what they do, and why they do it.

NEITHER DO YOU! That's his point!

[saxitoxin]

I would suggest that a readily available supply of firearms make events such as the one discussed more likely.

Would you also suggest that a readily available supply of firearms deters more common crimes like assault, rape, kidnapping and burglary? If not, why - in Australia - are you three times more likely to have objects inserted in your anus against your will or have your home broken into and smashed up than in the U.S.?

I'm not saying there aren't reasons, I'm just curious what are those reasons? What are the socio-economic factors at play, if not the presence of firearms? Are Australians and New Zealanders chronically amoral, deviant, degenerate cultures? I don't personally believe that. Naturally you're free to disagree.

RESIDENTIAL BURGLARY RATES BY COUNTRY
# 1 Australia: 21.7454 per 1,000 people
# 2 Dominica: 18.7892 per 1,000 people
# 3 Denmark: 18.3299 per 1,000 people
# 4 Estonia: 17.4576 per 1,000 people
# 5 Finland: 16.7697 per 1,000 people
# 6 New Zealand: 16.2763 per 1,000 people
# 7 United Kingdom: 13.8321 per 1,000 people
# 8 Poland: 9.46071 per 1,000 people
# 9 Canada: 8.94425 per 1,000 people
# 10 South Africa: 8.89764 per 1,000 people (Worse than South Africa?! These countries sound frightening.)
United States: not in top ten

AUTO THEFT RATES BY COUNTRY
# 1 Australia: 6.92354 per 1,000 people
# 2 Denmark: 5.92839 per 1,000 people
# 3 United Kingdom: 5.6054 per 1,000 people
# 4 New Zealand: 5.45031 per 1,000 people
# 5 Norway: 5.08143 per 1,000 people
# 6 France: 4.9713 per 1,000 people
# 7 Canada: 4.88547 per 1,000 people
# 8 Italy: 4.19755 per 1,000 people
# 9 United States: 3.8795 per 1,000 people
# 10 Ireland: 3.69796 per 1,000 people

SEXUAL ASSAULT RATES BY COUNTRY
# 1 South Africa: 1.19538 per 1,000 people
# 2 Seychelles: 0.788294 per 1,000 people
# 3 Australia: 0.777999 per 1,000 people
# 4 Montserrat: 0.749384 per 1,000 people
# 5 Canada: 0.733089 per 1,000 people
# 6 Jamaica: 0.476608 per 1,000 people
# 7 Zimbabwe: 0.457775 per 1,000 people
# 8 Dominica: 0.34768 per 1,000 people
# 9 United States: 0.301318 per 1,000 people
# 10 Iceland: 0.246009 per 1,000 people

[saxitoxin]

Because it can lead to more violence against the government, against government workers. It has more potentionally dangerous consequences than if joe schmoe is murdered. We can be as cynical about politiicians as we like, but at the end of the day, they are putting themselves out there because they want to improve the country, state, district they're representing.

That's a huge assumption and not at all fact.

Then the analyzed intention of every single human action cannot be classified as anything more than assumption.

Aradhus, that's not true at all either.

You assuming that politicians become politicians in order to improve the country, state, and/or district that they want to represent. Are you aware that there are plenty of other incentives on which they act other than the "for the people" one?

You don't know the motivations of a single person on this planet, when it comes to what they do, and why they do it.

[Aradhus]

You don't know the motivations of a single person on this planet, when it comes to what they do, and why they do it.

Aradhus, that's not true at all either

NEITHER DO YOU! That's his point!

That wasn't his point.

[thegreekdog]

You don't know the motivations of a single person on this planet, when it comes to what they do, and why they do it.

Aradhus, that's not true at all either

NEITHER DO YOU! That's his point!

That wasn't his point.

You win... you've broken me.

[Aradhus]

Therefore? We analyze those decisions, try to increase the potential for understanding them
Your analysis is, they're politicians, they lie, always.

[Aradhus]

You don't know the motivations of a single person on this planet, when it comes to what they do, and why they do it.

Aradhus, that's not true at all either

NEITHER DO YOU! That's his point!

That wasn't his point.

You win... you've broken me.

He said what I said wasn't true, you're saying its unknowable. not the same point, you are not arguing the same thing.

[thegreekdog]

You don't know the motivations of a single person on this planet, when it comes to what they do, and why they do it.

Aradhus, that's not true at all either

NEITHER DO YOU! That's his point!

That wasn't his point.

You win... you've broken me.

He said what I said wasn't true, you're saying its unknowable. not the same point, you are not arguing the same thing.

Okay, I'll reword:

You're saying that politicians are motivated by serving others. He suggested politicians are motivated by serving themselves. In response, you say "you don't know the motivations of a single person on this planet."

NEITHER DO YOU!

[Aradhus]

I guess you missed this part TGd...

Are you aware that even with all the many many incentives to be the politician you speak of, they're still putting themselves out there, and all those incentives doesn't mean that, whilst representing state, district etc, they will try their damndest to ruin what they're representing, or they wil not try to improve the place they're elected to represent.

[thegreekdog]

I guess you missed this part TGd...

Are you aware that even with all the many many incentives to be the politician you speak of, they're still putting themselves out there, and all those incentives doesn't mean that, whilst representing state, district etc, they will try their damndest to ruin what they're representing, or they wil not try to improve the place they're elected to represent.

This is still inconsistent with your thought that we cannot know the motivations behind anyone.

I can cite many examples of politicans who made out swimmingly from representing a city or state and who left the city or state in a worse state (heh) than when they entered.

[Aradhus]

Are you aware of the conversation beyond the last post posted? That's s flame.

But I'm seriously asking you to read the last couple of pages, because my argument has been consistent.

[thegreekdog]

Are you aware of the conversation beyond the last post posted? That's s flame.

But I'm seriously asking you to read the last couple of pages, because my argument has been consistent.

I'm probably not aware of the conversation beyond the last post. Seriously. There is so much crap I'm involved with around here that it's tough to keep track of one person's argument through 20 pages of a thread.

For further evidence, note that I frequently like to sum up (in a list or with examples) my own arguments for ease of reference. This is why I had so much trouble with Player, I think.

[Baron Von PWN]

I would suggest that a readily available supply of firearms make events such as the one discussed more likely.

Would you also suggest that a readily available supply of firearms deters more common crimes like assault, rape, kidnapping and burglary? If not, why - in Australia - are you three times more likely to have objects inserted in your anus against your will or have your home broken into and smashed up than in the U.S.?

I'm not saying there aren't reasons, I'm just curious what are those reasons? What are the socio-economic factors at play, if not the presence of firearms? Are Australians and New Zealanders chronically amoral, deviant, degenerate cultures? I don't personally believe that. Naturally you're free to disagree.

RESIDENTIAL BURGLARY RATES BY COUNTRY
# 1 Australia: 21.7454 per 1,000 people
# 2 Dominica: 18.7892 per 1,000 people
# 3 Denmark: 18.3299 per 1,000 people
# 4 Estonia: 17.4576 per 1,000 people
# 5 Finland: 16.7697 per 1,000 people
# 6 New Zealand: 16.2763 per 1,000 people
# 7 United Kingdom: 13.8321 per 1,000 people
# 8 Poland: 9.46071 per 1,000 people
# 9 Canada: 8.94425 per 1,000 people
# 10 South Africa: 8.89764 per 1,000 people (Worse than South Africa?! These countries sound frightening.)
United States: not in top ten

AUTO THEFT RATES BY COUNTRY
# 1 Australia: 6.92354 per 1,000 people
# 2 Denmark: 5.92839 per 1,000 people
# 3 United Kingdom: 5.6054 per 1,000 people
# 4 New Zealand: 5.45031 per 1,000 people
# 5 Norway: 5.08143 per 1,000 people
# 6 France: 4.9713 per 1,000 people
# 7 Canada: 4.88547 per 1,000 people
# 8 Italy: 4.19755 per 1,000 people
# 9 United States: 3.8795 per 1,000 people
# 10 Ireland: 3.69796 per 1,000 people

SEXUAL ASSAULT RATES BY COUNTRY
# 1 South Africa: 1.19538 per 1,000 people
# 2 Seychelles: 0.788294 per 1,000 people
# 3 Australia: 0.777999 per 1,000 people
# 4 Montserrat: 0.749384 per 1,000 people
# 5 Canada: 0.733089 per 1,000 people
# 6 Jamaica: 0.476608 per 1,000 people
# 7 Zimbabwe: 0.457775 per 1,000 people
# 8 Dominica: 0.34768 per 1,000 people
# 9 United States: 0.301318 per 1,000 people
# 10 Iceland: 0.246009 per 1,000 people

From the site where you got your data.

" DEFINITION: Total recorded burglaries. Crime statistics are often better indicators of prevalence of law enforcement and willingness to report crime, than actual prevalence. Per capita figures expressed per 1,000 population."

It may suggest they have more efficient police forces or citizens more willing to report crimes. Maybe a prevalence of Guns does deter those types of crimes, it certainly increases the number of deaths cause by firearms though.

Murders with firearms (per capita)
# 1 South Africa: 0.719782 per 1,000 people
# 2 Colombia: 0.509801 per 1,000 people
# 3 Thailand: 0.312093 per 1,000 people
# 4 Zimbabwe: 0.0491736 per 1,000 people
# 5 Mexico: 0.0337938 per 1,000 people
# 6 Belarus: 0.0321359 per 1,000 people
# 7 Costa Rica: 0.0313745 per 1,000 people
# 8 United States: 0.0279271 per 1,000 people
# 9 Uruguay: 0.0245902 per 1,000 people
# 10 Lithuania: 0.0230748 per 1,000 people
# 20 Canada: 0.00502972 per 1,000 people
# 27 Australia: 0.00293678 per 1,000 people
# 32 United Kingdom: 0.00102579 per 1,000 people

[saxitoxin]

Therefore? We analyze those decisions, try to increase the potential for understanding them
Your analysis is, they're politicians, they lie, always.

Turn the crazy down to about a 9, hon. All I did was post an emoticon.

It's "you're" BTW.

[Pedronicus]

Turn the crazy down to about a 9, hon. All I did was post an emoticon.

that made me laugh saxi you funny fucker. none of this lol shit. i laughed.

[saxitoxin]

Maybe a prevalence of Guns does deter those types of crimes, it certainly increases the number of deaths cause by firearms though.

Agree completely.

Americans have made the choice that a 1 in 5000 chance of being murdered is better than a 1 in 125 chance of being raped. Australians have made the opposite choice. The choice of Australians may be influenced by their prison culture history where being randomly pinned down and sexed up by a beefy, hairy, muscular dude is a more run-of-the-mill occurrence. That's why nations exist, so different sets of laws can reflect the different national norms, traditions, experiences - and, ultimately, preferences - of different people in different cultural contexts.

Ultimately, there's nothing wrong with either choice.

[HapSmo19]

Murders (per capita) by country
http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_m ... per-capita

# 1 Colombia: 0.617847 per 1,000 people
# 2 South Africa: 0.496008 per 1,000 people
# 3 Jamaica: 0.324196 per 1,000 people
# 4 Venezuela: 0.316138 per 1,000 people
# 5 Russia: 0.201534 per 1,000 people
# 6 Mexico: 0.130213 per 1,000 people
# 7 Estonia: 0.107277 per 1,000 people
# 8 Latvia: 0.10393 per 1,000 people
# 9 Lithuania: 0.102863 per 1,000 people
# 10 Belarus: 0.0983495 per 1,000 people
# 11 Ukraine: 0.094006 per 1,000 people
# 12 Papua New Guinea: 0.0838593 per 1,000 people
# 13 Kyrgyzstan: 0.0802565 per 1,000 people
# 14 Thailand: 0.0800798 per 1,000 people
# 15 Moldova: 0.0781145 per 1,000 people
# 16 Zimbabwe: 0.0749938 per 1,000 people
# 17 Seychelles: 0.0739025 per 1,000 people
# 18 Zambia: 0.070769 per 1,000 people
# 19 Costa Rica: 0.061006 per 1,000 people
# 20 Poland: 0.0562789 per 1,000 people
# 21 Georgia: 0.0511011 per 1,000 people
# 22 Uruguay: 0.045082 per 1,000 people
# 23 Bulgaria: 0.0445638 per 1,000 people
# 24 United States: 0.042802 per 1,000 people
# 25 Armenia: 0.0425746 per 1,000 people
# 26 India: 0.0344083 per 1,000 people
# 27 Yemen: 0.0336276 per 1,000 people
# 28 Dominica: 0.0289733 per 1,000 people
# 29 Azerbaijan: 0.0285642 per 1,000 people
# 30 Finland: 0.0283362 per 1,000 people
# 31 Slovakia: 0.0263303 per 1,000 people
# 32 Romania: 0.0250784 per 1,000 people
# 33 Portugal: 0.0233769 per 1,000 people
# 34 Malaysia: 0.0230034 per 1,000 people
# 35 Macedonia, The Former Yugoslav Republic of: 0.0229829 per 1,000 people
# 36 Mauritius: 0.021121 per 1,000 people
# 37 Hungary: 0.0204857 per 1,000 people
# 38 Korea, South: 0.0196336 per 1,000 people
# 39 Slovenia: 0.0179015 per 1,000 people
# 40 France: 0.0173272 per 1,000 people
# 41 Czech Republic: 0.0169905 per 1,000 people
# 42 Iceland: 0.0168499 per 1,000 people
# 43 Australia: 0.0150324 per 1,000 people
# 44 Canada: 0.0149063 per 1,000 people
# 45 Chile: 0.014705 per 1,000 people
# 46 United Kingdom: 0.0140633 per 1,000 people
# 47 Italy: 0.0128393 per 1,000 people
# 48 Spain: 0.0122456 per 1,000 people
# 49 Germany: 0.0116461 per 1,000 people
# 50 Tunisia: 0.0112159 per 1,000 people
# 51 Netherlands: 0.0111538 per 1,000 people
# 52 New Zealand: 0.0111524 per 1,000 people
# 53 Denmark: 0.0106775 per 1,000 people
# 54 Norway: 0.0106684 per 1,000 people
# 55 Ireland: 0.00946215 per 1,000 people
# 56 Switzerland: 0.00921351 per 1,000 people
# 57 Indonesia: 0.00910842 per 1,000 people
# 58 Greece: 0.0075928 per 1,000 people
# 59 Hong Kong: 0.00550804 per 1,000 people
# 60 Japan: 0.00499933 per 1,000 people
# 61 Saudi Arabia: 0.00397456 per 1,000 people
# 62 Qatar: 0.00115868 per 1,000 people

---------------------------------------------------

Number of guns per 100 people:
http://www.worldlingo.com/ma/enwiki/en/ ... _ownership

United States 90.0
Yemen 61.0
Finland 55.0
Switzerland 46.0
Iraq 39.0
Serbia 37.5
France 32.0
Canada 31.5
Sweden 31.5
Austria 31.0
Germany 30.0
New Zealand 26.8
Saudi Arabia 26.3
Greece 23.0
Angola 20.5
Thailand 16.0
Australia 15.5
Mexico 15.0
South Africa 13.1
Turkey 13.0
Argentina 12.6
Italy 12.1
Pakistan 12.0
Spain 11.0
Russia 9.0
Ukraine 9.0
Brazil 8.8
Colombia 7.2
United Kingdom 5.6
Iran 5.3
Philippines 4.7
India 4.0
China 3.5
Nigeria 1.0


Hmmm, Russia has only 10% of the guns of the US public yet it has nearly five times the murder rate. Hmmm.

[Aradhus]

Therefore? We analyze those decisions, try to increase the potential for understanding them
Your analysis is, they're politicians, they lie, always.

Turn the crazy down to about a 9, hon. All I did was post an emoticon.

It's "you're" BTW.

Saxi - You are analysis. Ara "your analysis"

O..k hon.

Also I was responding to the conversation, forgive me for eliminating a zillion quotes to make the posts shorter, so that it would be easier for you to understand. Obviously that didn't work. Next time I will try pictures, k, hon?

[saxitoxin]

Therefore? We analyze those decisions, try to increase the potential for understanding them
Your analysis is, they're politicians, they lie, always.

Turn the crazy down to about a 9, hon. All I did was post an emoticon.

It's "you're" BTW.

Saxi - You are analysis. Ara "your analysis"

LOL - quoted the wrong post; should have copied your other one. My bad. Cut me some slack, this is just a hobby, not my vocation.

Also I was responding to the conversation, forgive me for eliminating a zillion quotes to make the posts shorter, so that it would be easier for you to understand. Obviously that didn't work. Next time I will try pictures, k, hon?

Best of luck. I've been trying that for several pages now and you're still screaming at passing cars.