![]() |
|
#11
|
|||
|
|||
|
[ QUOTE ]
They pay for it in other ways, like higher crimes for other weapons and the occasional genocide. [/ QUOTE ] Come on, that's a ludicrous assertion. (the genocide part) You can make the case that gun control is bad without showing that gun control has negative outcomes for societies (which is empircally tenuous at best) besides I think if you asked most people to consider if they'd rather live in a society where there were 1) one thousand gun crimes and zero property crimes or 2) zero gun crimes and two thousand property crimes they would choose 2 likewise 1) 1000 gun crimes and 0 stabbings or 2) 0 gun crimes and 2000 stabbings they would choose 2 as well -- if you want to make the case that widespread guns actually decrease all crime do so. likewise if you want to make the case that gun crimes and gun ownership are not connected (view Canada) for example then do so but you don't need to assert that gun control laws make people unsafer when they in fact don't. |
|
|