By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Kasz216 on 11 December 2012
Edit Thread
Soleron said:

This is incredibly biased. Next time just state the ruling and outcome. If you care to put an opinion, do if afterwards and make clear it's your own.

"So its nice that law abiding citizens will finally be able to defend themselves from criminals."

"Unfortunately, as is the chicago way, their felons... er im mean politicians, will still do what ever the possibly can to keep the citizens from defending themselves from crime."

"The theoretical and empirical evidence (which overall is inconclusive) is consistent with concluding that a right to carry firearms in public may promote self-defense." Contradiction.

The US currently bans possession of chemical, biological and nuclear weapons, for the sole reason that they can only be used to kill and injure people. Why does this not apply to guns (assuming the hunting and recreational practices get permits)?


--

Have you considered that maybe the constitution is wrong, outdated and needs to be changed? Is the only valid interpretation of that language that i) EVERYONE, in a militia or not, can bear arms and ii) absolutely no controls can be imposed in it?

If the studies are inconclusive then maybe do some more studies on it?

The studies aren't really inconclusive.  It's just  a matter of what you define "protecting yourself."

 

Some studies show concealed carry greatly lowers crime rates, others don't.

 

The ones that don't require that a person be shot at, or otherwise assualted before pulling out a gun, for it to be considered stopping a crime.  If they don't... even if they say, walked towards you with a knife shouting they were going to stab you.... it doesn't count.

While the ones that say they do, require that a person feel "sufficently threatened" when they pulled out a gun and the attacker fled done through testing of their stressors when they talk about it.  Sometimes with the result being judged by people to whether or not there really was a crime.

 

So it really depends on which one of those methods you think is more valid.    The whole "inconclusive" thing was just to pay lipservice to the other studies which are out there, and state that it doesn't stop crime, even though i'm sure most people would find their methods... off...