California: Strict gun laws...Laws don't work

ZooL

Veteran XX
hmmm

http://www.cnn.com/2016/02/27/us/california-highway-shootings/index.html

Up to 6 drive-by shootings of cars since November along California highway


Shooting 'in the same style,' same location


Would you think they would have put a video camera in the location after like the 3rd shooting.......and like kept their mouths shut and not published it in the NEWS...so that now the criminal knows that the authorities know its isolated to like one area..and like you know the criminal now knows...and now they will never catch the criminal.



WE ARE LIVING IN RETARD NATION BROHS



WE ARE LIVING IN RETARD NATION BROHS



WE ARE LIVING IN RETARD NATION BROHS



WE ARE LIVING IN RETARD NATION BROHS



WE ARE LIVING IN RETARD NATION BROHS
 
California politicians getting busted for giving these dudes the guns and their husbands being well known gun sales people
 
Fresno, Bakersfield and Barstow are some of the worst places on the planet.

I've been living the last few years in Santa Barbara which is one of the better places on the planet.

People were like yo, go to a grad school that's best for what you want to do later in life, even if the grad school location sucks. I was like nah how bout I go to a fuckin beautiful place for grad school and still have the option of getting a job wherever I want.
 
Want to asplode the pieces?

Check the post IDs on 6 and 7.
giantwtf.gif
 
ZooL logic flow:
Some people break laws -> laws don't work -> we don't need laws.

LouCypher logic: Some people break laws -> write more laws of indiscernible effect on the people who break those laws and only effects one thing in particular (law abiding citizens)...

It's funny how people more intelligent than Mitch and you disagree with that assessment "that Gun control works in reducing homicide" and the only thing stopping it from working is a lack of more laws. You're both right when you narrow that down to specifically "Gun homicide" and ignore any negative trends that happen to other types of homicide (ie. increased knife homicides) but on overall homicide you're doing jack diddly squat aside from making people in general easier targets for criminal activity.

From Harvard
http://www.law.harvard.edu/students/orgs/jlpp/Vol30_No2_KatesMauseronline.pdf

Spoiler


In this connection, two recent studies are pertinent. In 2004, the U.S. National Academy of Sciences released its evaluation from a review of 253 journal articles, 99 books, 43 government
publications, and some original empirical research. It failed to identify any gun control that had reduced violent crime, suicide, or gun accidents.15 The same conclusion was reached in 2003 by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control’s review of thenextant studies.16

The peacefulness England used to enjoy was not the result of strict gun laws. When it had no firearms restrictions [nineteenth and early twentieth century] England had little violent crime, while the present extraordinarily stringent gun controls have not stopped the increase in violence or even the increase in armed violence.17 Armed crime, never a problem in England, has now become one. Handguns are banned but the Kingdom has millions of illegal firearms. Criminals have no trouble finding them and exhibit a new willingness to use them. In the decade after 1957, the use of guns in serious crime increased a hundredfold.18
 
Last edited:
LouCypher logic: Some people break laws -> write more laws of indiscernible effect on the people who break those laws and only effects one thing in particular (law abiding citizens)...
As I've said so many times that I'm amazed you still argue otherwise: I'm for registration of new sales and reporting of transfers. One is already done and the other is done is required in a few states (California requires report of transfers), or partially in most (requiring reports of theft or loss).
It's funny how people more intelligent than Mitch and you disagree with that assessment "that Gun control works in reducing homicide" and the only thing stopping it from working is a lack of more laws. You're both right when you narrow that down to specifically "Gun homicide" and ignore any negative trends that happen to other types of homicide (ie. increased knife homicides) but on overall homicide you're doing jack diddly squat aside from making people in general easier targets for criminal activity.
Did gun control work in Australia?
Howard cites a study (pdf) by Andrew Leigh of Australian National University and Christine Neill of Wilfrid Laurier University finding that the firearm homicide rate fell by 59 percent, and the firearm suicide rate fell by 65 percent, in the decade after the law was introduced, without a parallel increase in non-firearm homicides and suicides.
 
Chicago has stricter gun laws and has had 102 murders this year and 350 some non fatal shootings
Citing Chicago as "proof" gun laws don't work is stupid. You still have the rest of the country surrounding it. It's like complaining an island below sea level isn't flood proof.
 
Back
Top