By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close

Forums - Politics Discussion - Are you Democrat or Republican?? Take the Quiz.

Kasz216 on 07 January 2013
Michael-5 said:
Kasz216 said:
Michael-5 said:

For the second test I'm 80% Democrat.


Question: Who is pro-gun? Who does anyone need a handgun? In Ontario, Canada Handguns, Shotguns, and Rifles are illegal, but there is a big push to ban handguns outright. This makes sense to me. If someone robs your house, a rifle is far more intimidating then a handgun. Rifles are much more difficult to conceil, making it harder to commit a crime with one, and well Hunting is uneffected. My gf is Korean, and South Korea has one of the lowest homicide rates in the world. Why? Guns are banned, almost all murders are done with a knife. It's much harder to kill with a knife, and no accidents involving children shooting each other.


A) Lots of people are pro gun.

B) There is no correlation between gun ownership and homicde rates.  In fact, there tends to be a slight negative correlation.  IE Higher ownership rates = Less homicdes.

A) Why? why do you need a handgun, does a rifle not serve the exact same purpose?

B) Compare countries, not populations. Countries with stricter gun regulations have lower homicide rates. Great example, Canada, Toronto's Homicide rate is in less then 5% of Manhattan New Yorks, despite only a 25% smaller population. It's an 8 hour drive between cities, and I have family in both cities, the culture isn't that different.

South Korea, Japan, Finland, all have heavy gun regulation and low homicide rates as well. They also serve very minimal jail sentences compared to USA and China and are all about rehabilitation.

A) Not for a lot of things no.  For example, target practice, protection outside of the home.

B) The above is comparing countries.  The difference is, the above is the data put scientifically, while you are cherry picking countries to try and make a point. 

 

Here is an informative harvard review.

http://www.law.harvard.edu/students/orgs/jlpp/Vol30_No2_KatesMauseronline.pdf



Around the Network
Michael-5 on 07 January 2013
Kasz216 said:
Michael-5 said:
Kasz216 said:
Michael-5 said:

For the second test I'm 80% Democrat.


Question: Who is pro-gun? Who does anyone need a handgun? In Ontario, Canada Handguns, Shotguns, and Rifles are illegal, but there is a big push to ban handguns outright. This makes sense to me. If someone robs your house, a rifle is far more intimidating then a handgun. Rifles are much more difficult to conceil, making it harder to commit a crime with one, and well Hunting is uneffected. My gf is Korean, and South Korea has one of the lowest homicide rates in the world. Why? Guns are banned, almost all murders are done with a knife. It's much harder to kill with a knife, and no accidents involving children shooting each other.


A) Lots of people are pro gun.

B) There is no correlation between gun ownership and homicde rates.  In fact, there tends to be a slight negative correlation.  IE Higher ownership rates = Less homicdes.

A) Why? why do you need a handgun, does a rifle not serve the exact same purpose?

B) Compare countries, not populations. Countries with stricter gun regulations have lower homicide rates. Great example, Canada, Toronto's Homicide rate is in less then 5% of Manhattan New Yorks, despite only a 25% smaller population. It's an 8 hour drive between cities, and I have family in both cities, the culture isn't that different.

South Korea, Japan, Finland, all have heavy gun regulation and low homicide rates as well. They also serve very minimal jail sentences compared to USA and China and are all about rehabilitation.

A) Not for a lot of things no.  For example, target practice, protection outside of the home.

B) The above is comparing countries.  The difference is, the above is the data put scientifically, while you are cherry picking countries to try and make a point. 

 

Here is an informative harvard review.

http://www.law.harvard.edu/students/orgs/jlpp/Vol30_No2_KatesMauseronline.pdf

A) If Handguns are illegal, why do you need a handgun for rifle target practice? Protection outside of the home? It's called pepper pray, or a non lethal taser gun. Also aren't homicide rates 3x higher during burglery for residents with guns then those without? At least that's what it is in Canada.

B) What populations is this chart based on? What does each dot represent? a population of a thousand, a million, an entire country? Where do literally, the countries with the lowest homicide rate reside? How many guns per Capita does each spot represent? I'm not nit picking, I'm being specific, Nevada has one the highest homicide rate in all the US states along with Michigan, New York, and I forget the rest. They also have the highest gun ownership per capita.

As for your link, I used google, and the first article for harvard states "We found that states with higher levels of household gun ownership had higher rates of firearm homicide and overall homicide.  This relationship held for both genders and all age groups, after accounting for rates of aggravated assault, robbery, unemployment, urbanization, alcohol consumption, and resource deprivation (e.g., poverty)"

http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/research/hicrc/firearms-research/guns-and-death/index.html

Actually....so far every article on google I see seems to support the claim that lower gun ownership rates relate to lower homicide rates.

http://www.nber.org/digest/feb01/w7967.html




What is with all the hate? Don't read GamrReview Articles. Contact me to ADD games to the Database
Vote for the March Most Wanted / February Results

Kasz216 on 07 January 2013
Michael-5 said:
Kasz216 said:
Michael-5 said:
Kasz216 said:
Michael-5 said:

For the second test I'm 80% Democrat.


Question: Who is pro-gun? Who does anyone need a handgun? In Ontario, Canada Handguns, Shotguns, and Rifles are illegal, but there is a big push to ban handguns outright. This makes sense to me. If someone robs your house, a rifle is far more intimidating then a handgun. Rifles are much more difficult to conceil, making it harder to commit a crime with one, and well Hunting is uneffected. My gf is Korean, and South Korea has one of the lowest homicide rates in the world. Why? Guns are banned, almost all murders are done with a knife. It's much harder to kill with a knife, and no accidents involving children shooting each other.


A) Lots of people are pro gun.

B) There is no correlation between gun ownership and homicde rates.  In fact, there tends to be a slight negative correlation.  IE Higher ownership rates = Less homicdes.

A) Why? why do you need a handgun, does a rifle not serve the exact same purpose?

B) Compare countries, not populations. Countries with stricter gun regulations have lower homicide rates. Great example, Canada, Toronto's Homicide rate is in less then 5% of Manhattan New Yorks, despite only a 25% smaller population. It's an 8 hour drive between cities, and I have family in both cities, the culture isn't that different.

South Korea, Japan, Finland, all have heavy gun regulation and low homicide rates as well. They also serve very minimal jail sentences compared to USA and China and are all about rehabilitation.

A) Not for a lot of things no.  For example, target practice, protection outside of the home.

B) The above is comparing countries.  The difference is, the above is the data put scientifically, while you are cherry picking countries to try and make a point. 

 

Here is an informative harvard review.

http://www.law.harvard.edu/students/orgs/jlpp/Vol30_No2_KatesMauseronline.pdf

A) If Handguns are illegal, why do you need a handgun for rifle target practice? Protection outside of the home? It's called pepper pray, or a non lethal taser gun. Also aren't homicide rates 3x higher during burglery for residents with guns then those without? At least that's what it is in Canada.

B) What populations is this chart based on? What does each dot represent? a population of a thousand, a million, an entire country? Where do literally, the countries with the lowest homicide rate reside? How many guns per Capita does each spot represent? I'm not nit picking, I'm being specific, Texas has one the highest homicide rate in all the US states along with Michigan, New York, and I forget the rest. They also have the highest gun ownership per capita.

As for your link, I used google, and the first article for harvard states "We found that states with higher levels of household gun ownership had higher rates of firearm homicide and overall homicide.  This relationship held for both genders and all age groups, after accounting for rates of aggravated assault, robbery, unemployment, urbanization, alcohol consumption, and resource deprivation (e.g., poverty)"

http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/research/hicrc/firearms-research/guns-and-death/index.html

A) That's the point.  Handguns shouldn't be illegal.  Pepperpray or a taser... good luck.   As for Burglary?  No.  In the US, we actually have VERY few home invasions where residents are home.  Gun ownership prevents "hot" invasion.

B) I told you.  The charts represent countries.  As for the rest. read the graph.


If you want another one....

 

As for your harvard study.. you'd note that it's not a significant correlation.

 

Additionally, it doesn't really work that way anymore.  If you'll note, that study is pretty old.

Then there is the study on actual changes in the law.

http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/research/hicrc/files/bullet-ins_ccw_reissue.pdf

 

The science is clearly against you.



Michael-5 on 07 January 2013
Kasz216 said:
Michael-5 said:
 

A) If Handguns are illegal, why do you need a handgun for rifle target practice? Protection outside of the home? It's called pepper pray, or a non lethal taser gun. Also aren't homicide rates 3x higher during burglery for residents with guns then those without? At least that's what it is in Canada.

B) What populations is this chart based on? What does each dot represent? a population of a thousand, a million, an entire country? Where do literally, the countries with the lowest homicide rate reside? How many guns per Capita does each spot represent? I'm not nit picking, I'm being specific, Texas has one the highest homicide rate in all the US states along with Michigan, New York, and I forget the rest. They also have the highest gun ownership per capita.

As for your link, I used google, and the first article for harvard states "We found that states with higher levels of household gun ownership had higher rates of firearm homicide and overall homicide.  This relationship held for both genders and all age groups, after accounting for rates of aggravated assault, robbery, unemployment, urbanization, alcohol consumption, and resource deprivation (e.g., poverty)"

http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/research/hicrc/firearms-research/guns-and-death/index.html

A) That's the point.  Handguns shouldn't be illegal.  Pepperpray or a taser... good luck.   As for Burglary?  No.  In the US, we actually have VERY few home invasions where residents are home.  Gun ownership prevents "hot" invasion.

B) I told you.  The charts represent countries.  As for the rest. read the graph...

As for your harvard study.. you'd note that it's not a significant correlation.

 

Additionally, if you study the impact of gun control laws.  You find they tend to increase homicides.  Again, read the actual papers.

A) Why shouldn't handguns be illegal? What purpose do you have for target practice with a handgun when a hundgun is banned? I don't follow your logic. If you need target practice, use a rifle.

In USA you have very few home invasions when the residents are home? When is the last time you left your front door unlocked? I have never once been in the states and been to someones house, a friend or family, to find the house unlocked. In Canada it's common to have houses unlocked, robery rates in Canada are a fraction of those in USA, and I don't blaime just guns.

B) Doesn't matter if it's not an important correlation or not, guns increase homicide rates, simple as that. There is no reason to have a handgun. Why would you need a handgun for protection when no one has a handgun? Like I said countries which ban guns completly have the lowest homicide rates by far. Singapore, Japan, South Korea all have the lowest homicide rates in the world, and guess what? Guns are banned. Countries with low gun ownership rates in countries like Lithuania, Romania, Poland, Mongolia, and Hungary (.....wow mostly all countries in Eartern Europe and Asia....hmm..) also have very low homicide rates.

Read the papers I linked for you, I did (they are short).

Anyway, my arguement isn't to band guns, just handguns. If you want to protect your house with a gun, use a shotgun or a rifle. You don't need a conceilable handgun to do this. I believe Nevada is the state which requires you to conceil handguns in you carry them, and you know what? The Rate of Violent Crimes is nearly twice as high in Nevada then any other state. Handguns don't help anyone.

Lol, telling me to read the article. The PDF you sent me relates African Americans to high crime rates, and have you ever heard of an African American kill someone with a rifle? They use handguns. Your PDF supports my arguement LOL



What is with all the hate? Don't read GamrReview Articles. Contact me to ADD games to the Database
Vote for the March Most Wanted / February Results

deskpro2k3 on 07 January 2013

First link:
You side with Democrats 43%
You side with Republicans 33%

Second link:
Democrat 86%
Republican 14%



CPU: Ryzen 7950X
GPU: MSI 4090 SUPRIM X 24G
Motherboard: MSI MEG X670E GODLIKE
RAM: CORSAIR DOMINATOR PLATINUM 32GB DDR5
SSD: Kingston FURY Renegade 4TB
Gaming Console: PLAYSTATION 5
Around the Network
Kasz216 on 07 January 2013
Michael-5 said:
Kasz216 said:
Michael-5 said:
 

A) If Handguns are illegal, why do you need a handgun for rifle target practice? Protection outside of the home? It's called pepper pray, or a non lethal taser gun. Also aren't homicide rates 3x higher during burglery for residents with guns then those without? At least that's what it is in Canada.

B) What populations is this chart based on? What does each dot represent? a population of a thousand, a million, an entire country? Where do literally, the countries with the lowest homicide rate reside? How many guns per Capita does each spot represent? I'm not nit picking, I'm being specific, Texas has one the highest homicide rate in all the US states along with Michigan, New York, and I forget the rest. They also have the highest gun ownership per capita.

As for your link, I used google, and the first article for harvard states "We found that states with higher levels of household gun ownership had higher rates of firearm homicide and overall homicide.  This relationship held for both genders and all age groups, after accounting for rates of aggravated assault, robbery, unemployment, urbanization, alcohol consumption, and resource deprivation (e.g., poverty)"

http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/research/hicrc/firearms-research/guns-and-death/index.html

A) That's the point.  Handguns shouldn't be illegal.  Pepperpray or a taser... good luck.   As for Burglary?  No.  In the US, we actually have VERY few home invasions where residents are home.  Gun ownership prevents "hot" invasion.

B) I told you.  The charts represent countries.  As for the rest. read the graph...

As for your harvard study.. you'd note that it's not a significant correlation.

 

Additionally, if you study the impact of gun control laws.  You find they tend to increase homicides.  Again, read the actual papers.

A) Why shouldn't handguns be illegal? What purpose do you have for target practice with a handgun when a hundgun is banned? I don't follow your logic. If you need target practice, use a rifle.

In USA you have very few home invasions when the residents are home? When is the last time you left your front door unlocked? I have never once been in the states and been to someones house, a friend or family, to find the house unlocked. In Canada it's common to have houses unlocked, robery rates in Canada are a fraction of those in USA, and I don't blaime just guns.

B) Doesn't matter if it's not an important correlation or not, guns increase homicide rates, simple as that. There is no reason to have a handgun. Why would you need a handgun for protection when no one has a handgun? Like I said countries which ban guns completly have the lowest homicide rates by far. Singapore, Japan, South Korea all have the lowest homicide rates in the world, and guess what? Guns are banned. Countries with low gun ownership rates in countries like Lithuania, Romania, Poland, Mongolia, and Hungary (.....wow mostly all countries in Eartern Europe and Asia....hmm..) also have very low homicide rates.

Read the papers I linked for you, I did (they are short).

B) Ok, so you clearly don't have any scientific understanding background.  Perhaps you didn't go to college?

A "Significant correlation" is just that... one that is significant... as in scientifically proveable.  If a correlation is not significant that means that there is no proof, and it could just be there due to background data. 


Also... Singapore does not ban guns.   You can keep argueing individual cases, but the actual data....

I mean, here's an idea... maybe countries in asia that have banned guns, have their guns banned because they've ALWAYS had low murder rates, therefore less people felt the need to own guns to protect themselves?  Due to asian cultures generally having a weaker culture of individualism?  Hence why world wide that doesn't really play out... and why decades of data are pretty much aligned against such a theory.

 

If you read the overview i posted it would somewhat explain some of this stuff better.



Michael-5 on 07 January 2013
Kasz216 said:
Michael-5 said:
 

A) Why shouldn't handguns be illegal? What purpose do you have for target practice with a handgun when a hundgun is banned? I don't follow your logic. If you need target practice, use a rifle.

In USA you have very few home invasions when the residents are home? When is the last time you left your front door unlocked? I have never once been in the states and been to someones house, a friend or family, to find the house unlocked. In Canada it's common to have houses unlocked, robery rates in Canada are a fraction of those in USA, and I don't blaime just guns.

B) Doesn't matter if it's not an important correlation or not, guns increase homicide rates, simple as that. There is no reason to have a handgun. Why would you need a handgun for protection when no one has a handgun? Like I said countries which ban guns completly have the lowest homicide rates by far. Singapore, Japan, South Korea all have the lowest homicide rates in the world, and guess what? Guns are banned. Countries with low gun ownership rates in countries like Lithuania, Romania, Poland, Mongolia, and Hungary (.....wow mostly all countries in Eartern Europe and Asia....hmm..) also have very low homicide rates.

Read the papers I linked for you, I did (they are short).

B) Ok, so you clearly don't have any scientific understanding background.  A "Significant correlation" is just that... one that is significant... as in scientifically proveable.  If a correlation is not significant that means that there is no proof, and it could just be there due to background data. 



Also... Singapore does not ban guns.

A) I assume you agree with my logic here.

B) I got my degree in Astrophysics...LOL Resorting to insult is indication of an inability to conjure up a more intelligent response.

Also here are a links arguing a strong correlation between gun ownership and homicide rates:

http://arstechnica.com/science/2007/01/6601/

"Indeed, states in the top 25 percent of household firearm ownership had firearm-related homicide rates that were 114 percent greater than states that had household firearm ownership in the bottom 25 percent. Overall homicide rates were a full 60 percent higher in the same states."

Singapore doesn't ban guns, but they are heavily restricted.

Again, I agree that guns aren't the only reason why homicide rates are so high in USA (but it's a big factor in states like Nevada). I took a few classes in Law and I know that most homicides are alcohol influenced. Very few are planned out in advance, and the gun massecures are usually a result of psychological disorders. I know that homicide rates are more strongly affected by literacy rates and poverty, but I still see no reason why handguns should be legal. I also think the minimum age to own a rifle should be higher, every time I think about Virginia tech, it's a tragedy.

A Rifle does everything a handgun can do, and more. Plus it's difficult to conceil, so you don't have to worry about someone shooting you publicly as much.



What is with all the hate? Don't read GamrReview Articles. Contact me to ADD games to the Database
Vote for the March Most Wanted / February Results

Kasz216 on 07 January 2013
Michael-5 said:
Kasz216 said:
Michael-5 said:
 

A) Why shouldn't handguns be illegal? What purpose do you have for target practice with a handgun when a hundgun is banned? I don't follow your logic. If you need target practice, use a rifle.

In USA you have very few home invasions when the residents are home? When is the last time you left your front door unlocked? I have never once been in the states and been to someones house, a friend or family, to find the house unlocked. In Canada it's common to have houses unlocked, robery rates in Canada are a fraction of those in USA, and I don't blaime just guns.

B) Doesn't matter if it's not an important correlation or not, guns increase homicide rates, simple as that. There is no reason to have a handgun. Why would you need a handgun for protection when no one has a handgun? Like I said countries which ban guns completly have the lowest homicide rates by far. Singapore, Japan, South Korea all have the lowest homicide rates in the world, and guess what? Guns are banned. Countries with low gun ownership rates in countries like Lithuania, Romania, Poland, Mongolia, and Hungary (.....wow mostly all countries in Eartern Europe and Asia....hmm..) also have very low homicide rates.

Read the papers I linked for you, I did (they are short).

B) Ok, so you clearly don't have any scientific understanding background.  A "Significant correlation" is just that... one that is significant... as in scientifically proveable.  If a correlation is not significant that means that there is no proof, and it could just be there due to background data. 



Also... Singapore does not ban guns.

A) I assume you agree with my logic here.

B) I got my degree in Astrophysics...LOL Resorting to insult is indication of an inability to conjure up a more intelligent response.

Singapore doesn't ban guns, but they are heavily restricted.

Again, I agree that guns aren't the only reason why homicide rates are so high in USA (but it's a big factor in states like Nevada). I took a few classes in Law and I know that most homicides are alcohol influenced. Very few are planned out in advance, and the gun massecures are usually a result of psychological disorders. I know that homicide rates are more strongly affected by literacy rates and poverty, but I still see no reason why handguns should be legal. I also think the minimum age to own a rifle should be higher, every time I think about Virginia tech, it's a tragedy.

A Rifle does everything a handgun can do, and more. Plus it's difficult to conceil, so you don't have to worry about someone shooting you publicly as much.


A) No I just skipped it because you didn't know what significant correlation meant.  "Unlocked doors" is an ancedote.  The Plural of Ancetdote isn't data.   As it is, there are a lot of places people leave their doors unlocked in the US.   Generally small towns with extremely high gun ownership rates.

B) It wasn't an insult.  I was being serious.   You didn't understand what the term "Significant correlation" meant.   I was trying to explain it to you as a lot of people don't have a requisite understanding of statistics or the scientific method which is sad.

A significant correlation looks more like this.

 

 (This is US States.)

 

Also. god no.  Nevada's high rates of crime and murder are due to all the drug addicts/gambling addicts who end up homeless on the streets because they keep feeding their addictions.  Seriously though, there are more then enough threads on this, so move to another one if you want to continue this, we've derailed this thread enough.  



Michael-5 on 07 January 2013
Kasz216 said:
Michael-5 said:

 

B) Ok, so you clearly don't have any scientific understanding background.  A "Significant correlation" is just that... one that is significant... as in scientifically proveable.  If a correlation is not significant that means that there is no proof, and it could just be there due to background data. 



Also... Singapore does not ban guns.

A) I assume you agree with my logic here.

B) I got my degree in Astrophysics...LOL Resorting to insult is indication of an inability to conjure up a more intelligent response.

Singapore doesn't ban guns, but they are heavily restricted.

Again, I agree that guns aren't the only reason why homicide rates are so high in USA (but it's a big factor in states like Nevada). I took a few classes in Law and I know that most homicides are alcohol influenced. Very few are planned out in advance, and the gun massecures are usually a result of psychological disorders. I know that homicide rates are more strongly affected by literacy rates and poverty, but I still see no reason why handguns should be legal. I also think the minimum age to own a rifle should be higher, every time I think about Virginia tech, it's a tragedy.

A Rifle does everything a handgun can do, and more. Plus it's difficult to conceil, so you don't have to worry about someone shooting you publicly as much.


A) No I just skipped it because you didn't know what significant correlation meant.

B) It wasn't an insult.  I was being serious.   You didn't understand what the term "Significant correlation" meant.   I was trying to explain it to you as a lot of people don't have a requisite understanding of statistics or the scientific method which is sad.

A significant correlation looks more like this.

 

 

Also. god no.  Nevada's high rates of crime and murder are due to all the drug addicts/gambling addicts who end up homeless on the streets because they keep feeding their addictions.

A) But you have no counter?

B) My arguement was poorly worded, the correlation might not be strong, but it's there, and I still beleive it's scientifivally significant. I'm not arguing to ban gun enitrely (although I do think it would help reduce homicide rates drastically), just arguing for smarter gun control. There is no need to own a handgun, handguns account for the vast majority of gun related homicides in the USA, and since 60% of homicides in the USA are gun related, I would bet that handguns are a primary killing tool in the USA.

You can protect your house fine with a rifle, and I really don't think anybody should be allowed to walk around with a gun. You can argue it's for protection, but I can't imagine anyone feeling safe if everyone was carrying a handgun. What's going to stop one mad man from going on a rampage? This is why USA has annual "school shootings" like Columbine and Virgina Tech, where Canada has none.

LOL about Nevada, I forgot Vegas was there. At least we agree that gun ownership isn't the only factor influencing homicide rates, and we agree that other factors are much more detrimental (like drugs and poverty).



What is with all the hate? Don't read GamrReview Articles. Contact me to ADD games to the Database
Vote for the March Most Wanted / February Results

RVDondaPC on 07 January 2013

I just read the first question and can already tell that it is poorly worded and will give off a false reading. It is the governments responsibility to provide jobs for their people, but that is done by legislating laws that encourage a free market and allow the private sector to develop not by collecting taxes and hiring drones.

The second question sucks too. Money from the wealthy should be redistributed to the poor that's the only way for society to succeed. , but how much of it and in what form it is given is the debate, not if it should take place.

This quiz is to determine if you are a brainless elephant or a delusional donkey. It has nothing to do with determining what party you belong to.