Quote:
Quote by: Winter wind  No, i didn't. You said guns save more people then kill. |
I never said that, actually, though it might've been implied with my bolded quote from a separate source. I'll concede this error - feel free to deduct a point.
My main thrust, however, was "positive cost analysis" of the defensive use of guns in the prevention of all crime (including violent).
Quote:
|
The stat proved that wrong. Plus, your getting your stats from a strongly bias source, mine is a police study.
|
Your scenario deals with "justifiable homicides" where death occurred. And that's where it ends. It doesn't address the postive cost analysis of crimes that were deterred via self-defensive use of a gun with no death occurring.
Here is a very indepth analysis for you concerning guns and crime deterrence, using police studies and other official sources:
GUNS AND JUSTIFIABLE HOMICIDE: DETERRENCE AND DEFENSE Quote:
|
The black market is only there because of the ease to get guns in the united states. In China, there are close to zero gun homicides simply because they are so strict about it. And don't tell me China doesn't have gangs.
|
China's known for being secretive, yes? They're also known for being a bit strict with publication of crime stats, so it's rather difficult to know with certainty an accurate gun homicide rate - but I'll take your word for it.
Quote:
|
I strongly object to the sentiment that focusing on guns means we ignore drunk driving. I think teens shouldn't drive until they pass a test proving that amount testosterone in their vanes is no larger then the amount of blood (bad humor again)
|
Isn't testosterone responsible for 99.5%[1] of the world's ills? Maybe you're looking at banning the wrong thing.
[1] 86.2% of statistics are made up on the spot