Run , hide , tell in case of terror attack in England

[mayhem]

Zelda, I had a long post which somehow disappeared, so I'm sort of reposting it. The points I made were:

A. Many of us have Mayhem on "ignore", because he is a rambling, nonsensical troll

This is an example of the Straw Man ... this is a fallacy in which an opponent's argument is overstated or misrepresented in order to be more easily attacked or refuted.

Mayhem is rambling and nonsensical ... therefore he doesn't deserve to be heard. (Many others would not agree OR do you have specific examples?) I think in Britain this is called an Aunt Sally.
Although the term straw man is a recent coinage, the concept is ancient. In the Topics, Aristotle acknowledges "that in argument it would be inappropriate to interpret as someone's position an opinion that he did not express or is not committed to, in virtue of what he said"

B. Saying that Mexico can't be compared to the U.S. is about like saying Manchester can't be compared to Leeds. Texas cities like El Paso sit just across the Rio Grande river from Mexican counterparts. One example is El Paso (US) and Ciudad Juarez (Mexico). Ciudad Juarez has been basically a war zone for years, while El Paso has roughly an average amount of violence. El Paso residents have freedom of gun ownership, residents of CJ do not: draw your own conclusions.

OK. Any two things can be compared. Ciudad Juarez is completely different from El Paso and about every place else. It is swarmed by virtual armies. It is difficult to see how any number of armed civilians would have a chance against them.

C. As to Mayhem's slam on some of us considering gun ownership to be a "God-given right": Yes, we do.

OK. To say gun activists claim a God given right sounds entertaining, but it isn't. What happens when anti gun activists claim a god given right to live in a gunfree society that is best described as supporting the life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness ? Just claiming a god-given right isn't enough. To whom do the two groups appeal? The Bible? (aka God's Word)? The Bible supports no claim to weapons ... and is well known as projecting a time when swords will be beaten into plowshares and Jesus rebukes Peter for 'pulling' his sword.

Saying one has a right to something is bullshit if you only have the opinions of enlightenment heroes to backstop it. The whole of the enlightenment is opinion. The whole dang notion of 'natural rights' is opinion. It IS beloved opinion, but it is still opinion ... and opinions are like ass holes ....


"Unalienable rights" are a specific reference to natural rights (aa Locke), and the Bill of Rights of the U.S. Constitution codify them in our nation's founding. The first two of those, considered the most important by our Founders, were the First Amendment (Free Speech), and the Second (Gun ownership).

To argue that the First and the Second only mean what I say they mean is to assert something that is not all that clear. BOTH the First and Second are qualified and have been further qualified by subsequent opinion. If, for example, the Framers and Rights-makers had wanted an unqualified right to bear arms, would they not have said (since this is really, really important), "The right to bear arms is not now nor ever to be screwed with."?


One of the things that liberals here can't admit is that gun violence in the U.S. has dropped precipitously in the past 20+ years, even as gun ownership has reached record levels. The fact is that the mass of gun violence is black-on-black violence perpetrated by young males using illegally-obtained guns in the inner cities, usually by habitual criminal offenders. Liberals' answer is to restrict the right of ordinary citizens to arm themselves.

Putting word s in my mouth. I NEVER EVER said such a thing and would not without compelling factual support. And I believe there is support ... one way or the other.

[mayhem]

The next step on 'their' debate plan is to bring in all kinds of studies to attempt refutation of my ramblings and nonsense.

[Red Oak]

Eat shit and die waterhead.

[mayhem]

[size=150]The unvarnished truth of the matter Whether it's liked or not ..


... GUN LAWS MATTER gunlawscorecard.org

Gun violence is an epidemic in this country. Over 117,000 Americans are shot every year, with 33,000 dying — a rate that dwarfs every other industrialized nation. Adding insult to injury is the fact that we know so much of this pain is preventable. How do we know that? We've done the research.

Each year, the legal experts at the Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence analyze the strength of gun laws in all 50 states and assign letter grades. Then we compare those grades to the states’ gun death rates. Year after year, we’ve seen a powerful correlation: states with stronger laws have fewer gun deaths per capita while states with weaker laws have more gun deaths. And interstate gun trafficking has become a contagion — states with the weakest laws are also the source of the most crime guns. Simply put, smart gun laws are saving lives. But to reach their full potential, those laws urgently need to be adopted nationwide.

While Congress has been shamefully ineffective, the rising public outcry over gun violence has compelled more and more state legislators to stand up to the gun lobby. Since the tragedy at Sandy Hook Elementary, a remarkable 125 new smart gun laws have been enacted in 41 states, plus DC. And the momentum is only growing, with over 90% of Americans supporting common-sense policies like universal background checks.

Use the map above to see if your state makes the grade and learn about the laws your legislators can pass to reduce gun deaths in 2016. Then demand they do it.[/size]


(whomever told you to ignore Mayhem ... and how often it was done ... don't cut no ice. The above is truth. It is a truth with which one might toy, but, nevertheless, it's truth.

[GFB]

"Over 117,000 Americans get shot every year."

..and many of those needed to be..

[GFB]

"with [only] 33,000 dying"

Sorry..we'll try to do better.

[mayhem]

Cute.

"Over 117,000 Americans get shot every year."

..and many of those needed to be..

[mayhem]

Even more cute.

Almost adorable.

"with [only] 33,000 dying"

Sorry..we'll try to do better.

[Kiamichi]

I would like to see their definition of "industrialized country".

[mayhem]

I'm pretty sure it is a generally agreed upon definition. I don't know that I could name them tho'.

I would like to see their definition of "industrialized country".

[jellowrestling]

One thing that I found interesting:

As I posted on another thread, two-thirds of gun deaths in the US are suicides. In the UK, hanging is the most common means, and guns are used in fewer than 2% of suicides.

However, the suicide rates in the UK and the US are fairly similar. US rates are slightly higher, and have been on the rise in the past few years, even as homicides have been dropping.

One other difference I noticed: In the UK, males are about 3 times more likely than females to kill themselves. In the US, the ratio is 4 to 1. Those ratios have held pretty constant over the years.

[Kiamichi]

One thing that I found interesting:

As I posted on another thread, two-thirds of gun deaths in the US are suicides. In the UK, hanging is the most common means, and guns are used in fewer than 2% of suicides.

However, the suicide rates in the UK and the US are fairly similar. US rates are slightly higher, and have been on the rise in the past few years, even as homicides have been dropping.

One other difference I noticed: In the UK, males are about 3 times more likely than females to kill themselves. In the US, the ratio is 4 to 1. Those ratios have held pretty constant over the years.

And in all societies suicide attempts, or purported attempts, by females outnumber those by males by about the same proportion. China is the only country where female suicides outnumber those by males according to any figures I have ever seen. The U. S. suicide rate is about in the middle of first world countries. I don't think anyone takes the extremely low rates reported by most third world countries seriously.
'