OT: Nostradamus on Bush
wraith7 at mb.sympatico.ca
Thu Dec 28 07:37:56 EST 2000
On Thu, 28 Dec 2000 00:10:33 -0600, Don Staples
<dstaples at livingston.net> wrote:
>> So, genius, tell me why the US has the dubious distinction of
>> having the highest number of gun-related deaths in just about every
>> category there is when compared to every other industrialized country
>> in the world?
>Look at it another way, compare the total number of firearms owned in America to the
>number of homicides by firearms, and then compare the same number in other countries.
>Your comparing apples to oranges with the old and worthless "country" gambit.
In Canada, there are 300 gun related deaths - that's not just
homicides - per year. In the US, 16,000 homicides alone (using your
own figures). See a problem? Most of the industrialized world does.
Are American's so grossly ignorant that they can't? I don't think they
are. Do the math.
>> Duh...could it be because everybody and their dog owns a
>Yep, better than 80 million own guns, and only around 16,000 gun related homicides a
>year, the majority in minority neighborhoods and the victims, majority minority.
That's a tragedy, not something to be happy about.
>> Are you suggesting that every gun related death is due to some
>> criminal with an unregistered gun? Care to explain why the homicide
>> rate for children under the age of 15 by guns is 5 times higher in the
>> US than the next 25 industrialized countries combined?
>Can you explain why, in order to get these figures, the "experts" consider children to
>be of an age to 23 when they state this bogus fact?
The figures come from the CDC and include children under the
age of 15. Keep trying. Pretty soon you'll be able to turn a silk
purse into a sow's ear.
>> Why the suicide
>> rate is twice the next 25 industrialized countries combined?
>Oh? You only compare gun suicides, check the total number, genius.
The numbers come from the CDC, genius.
>> before you quote me chapter and verse of the "right to bear arms"
>> nonsense, remember the 2nd amendment to your own constitution of 1791
>> reads, "A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a
>> free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not
>> be infringed." Now, perhaps you could explain exactly how a homicide
>> rate among children 5 times that of most of the industrialized world
>> aids in the formation of a well regulated militia?
>See above. If the Second Amendment is bogus, than the rest are, so why do you post
>here in full righteous fervor in the 1st Amendment?
Actually, the US Constitution is something to be proud of. It
is a great historical document. Your interpretation of it is severely
flawed however. BTW, could you explain to me why there is a need for a
well regulated militia in the year 2000? Taken in historical context,
200 years ago, a militia was likely a good idea when there was no
standing army and no reserves. Exactly what context is there that
requires militia today? Oh, and could you also explain where in your
second amendment you see anything about automatic weapons?
More information about the Ag-forst