Man Of Kent
28-02-2002, 06:47 PM
The thread which this originally came from was closed before I had chance to respond. Now I'm <STRONG>not</STRONG> going to get into an argument about guns, because it has all been said before. No, what I am interested in is the post, and the motivation from the post...
Originally posted by Thanatos...AGAIN
<STRONG>I pasted a clip w/o comment from one of your news sources.</STRONG>
The post in question was made because of its content, because it backed a position you hold and because it was written by a UK reporter.
None of these makes it correct, and my response about the crime stats was to show that the reporter obviosuly hadn't done his research. He claimed that the US buglary rate was significantly lower than the UKs becuase of guns and the only place where there was gun control had high burglary rates. Now regardless of the gun element, this plainly isn;t the case becuase the percapita rate is approx. the same and is falling in both countries.
My assertion was that it was an ireelevant post, for that reason. Not becuase I disagreed with it.
<STRONG> Perhaps you would care to refute this one???
"The people of the various provinces are strictly forbidden to have in their posession any swords, bows, spears, firearms, or other type of arms. The posession of these elements makes difficult the collection of taxes and dues and tends to permit uprising. Therefore, the heads of provinces, official agents, and deputies are ordered to collect all weapons mentioned above and turn them over to the government."
-- Toyotomi Hideyoshi, Shogun, August 29, 1558
[Stephen R. Turnbull, The Samurai: A Military History (New York: Macmillan, 1977; reprinted by the University of Hawaii Press, 1996), n. 59]</STRONG>
1558? In 450 years do you think that we may have evolved a little?
Again regardless of whether guns are good/bad, I presume that even though you are armed, you pay taxes like everyone else?
Originally posted by Thanatos...AGAIN
<STRONG>I pasted a clip w/o comment from one of your news sources.</STRONG>
The post in question was made because of its content, because it backed a position you hold and because it was written by a UK reporter.
None of these makes it correct, and my response about the crime stats was to show that the reporter obviosuly hadn't done his research. He claimed that the US buglary rate was significantly lower than the UKs becuase of guns and the only place where there was gun control had high burglary rates. Now regardless of the gun element, this plainly isn;t the case becuase the percapita rate is approx. the same and is falling in both countries.
My assertion was that it was an ireelevant post, for that reason. Not becuase I disagreed with it.
<STRONG> Perhaps you would care to refute this one???
"The people of the various provinces are strictly forbidden to have in their posession any swords, bows, spears, firearms, or other type of arms. The posession of these elements makes difficult the collection of taxes and dues and tends to permit uprising. Therefore, the heads of provinces, official agents, and deputies are ordered to collect all weapons mentioned above and turn them over to the government."
-- Toyotomi Hideyoshi, Shogun, August 29, 1558
[Stephen R. Turnbull, The Samurai: A Military History (New York: Macmillan, 1977; reprinted by the University of Hawaii Press, 1996), n. 59]</STRONG>
1558? In 450 years do you think that we may have evolved a little?
Again regardless of whether guns are good/bad, I presume that even though you are armed, you pay taxes like everyone else?