sc94597 said:
1. And you support the policy just because it is a "compromise." What's the point of that? I still don't understand.
3. These crimes involving AR15's are not however. Your point was that it would not allow people to kill a lot of people at once. The only instances in which this happens is when it is a mentally ill person planning out said attack, a terrorist, or a cartel killing off rival gang members.
4. There are plenty of impoverished people who know how to use guns in the U.S. Furthermore, safety courses are simple and free for those who need them. Testing will take the time of police officers and the paper work would have costs. This is a deadweight cost with no personal benefit. It is a poor policy for that reason. And it affects people differently. The people who need the weapons the most are the ones with the barriers of entry.
5. In the social sciences, yes. What benefits me or you, unless it harms another person, is my or your decision. Other people make decisions for me or you is indeed elitism, because they don't know my or your context.
Also, social science is a funny thing, it never agrees with itself. Real science based on real scientific methods on the otherhand is perfectly in agreement. It is quite obvious the experts, on both sides, don't kow if gun control works, any more than your average individual on the street, likely because the results in studies are too ambigious.
|
1. Let me get this straight? What policy are we talking about right now? The OP or the banning of AR15-esque weapons?
3. If someone is in possession of an ar15, would they not use it in a spur of the moment scenario? If someone was planning on commiting a large scale shooting, but did not have access to the black market, wouldn't they purchase/use the biggest gun they could?
4. If safety courses are free, why are you whining about trying to make them mandatory? Also, who is to say that police officers have to be the ones doing the training? NO PERSONAL BENEFIT. ARE YOU INSANE?! ...at this point, I'm pretty sure you are just fucking with me.
5. ...what? Implying that guns don't cause harm? What? Just....what?
" Also, social science is a funny thing, it never agrees with itself. Real science based on real scientific methods on the otherhand is perfectly in agreement."
Bullshit. All the bullshit in the world. Huge piles of bullshit. You must have never gotten deep into science if you think that science agrees with itself. Science is always bickering and trying to prove that everybody else did everything wrong.
I think I'm done at this point...this is getting satirically ridiculous
