Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Nodrog
Making suggestions about the results of having human being walking around with guns based upon a priori beliefs about human nature, while ignoring what actually happens in places where carrying firearms is legal, is pretty much the definition of baseless emotionalism and is precisely the sort of thing I'm talking about.
Also: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appalac...f_Law_shooting |
Not only is your argument fatuous but it is disingenuous in the extreme.
It is a trite tool of frauds and charlatans to claim there is no 'evidence' to support the opposition case and that their 'case' as plenty of 'evidence'.
We have a tragedy where 30+ people died in this massacre which would not have occured without guns. We have a comparable country with highly similar culture and equal social problems where guns are outlawed and we see 11 massacre free years. We have 11 comparable years in American with appalling loss of life from multiple instances of gun massacre.
You have nothing more than a link to a smaller massacre which shows that sometimes if all of the circumstances are perfect the total number of people killed can be reduced.
I do not want to reduce the death toll at individual massacres because I want to stop them altogether.
I am sorry that you consider my reaction to the multiple occurances of pointless and easily preventable deaths of innocent people (frequently children) to be 'emotional'. But given that your reaction has been to spout irrational rubbish I do not feel embarrassed by your example.