NY passes 1st US gun control bill since massacre

Foxrac

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
it means there is a deep flaw in your reasoning.

What? :eek3:

Care to explain about deep flaw in my reasoning?

I don't believe in relation between gun law and crime rate, especially more gun = less crime, less gun = less crime.

If you want me to believe your claim so you have to prove it.
 

Jiro

If You Know What I Mean
Premium Member
What? :eek3:

Care to explain about deep flaw in my reasoning?

I don't believe in relation between gun law and crime rate, especially more gun = less crime, less gun = less crime.

If you want me to believe your claim so you have to prove it.

you made a correlation that a bad economy = more crimes even though there's no solid evidence proving so.

figure it out yet?
 

Foxrac

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
you made a correlation that a bad economy = more crimes even though there's no solid evidence proving so.

figure it out yet?

That was true in past - in 80's and 90's, but it didn't work for late 2000's recession.

Do you want me to accept that more gun = less crime? If so, you have to prove it.
 

Jiro

If You Know What I Mean
Premium Member
That was true in past - in 80's and 90's, but it didn't work for late 2000's recession.

Do you want me to accept that more gun = less crime? If so, you have to prove it.
that's my point - there is no PROOF confirming your correlation. you are simply making a correlation just like what we did.

do you not see any flaw in your reasoning?
 

Foxrac

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
that's my point - there is no PROOF confirming your correlation. you are simply making a correlation just like what we did.

do you not see any flaw in your reasoning?

I don't know about any flaws with my reasoning and I think that I don't understand about what are you saying. :(

Do you have proof that confirming your correlation about more gun = less crime?
 

Jiro

If You Know What I Mean
Premium Member
for all researches?
I'm not talking about other researches. I'm talking about your claim.

What about increase of texting while driving will result in more car accidents? I think those claim is true.
no solid claim but there is fairly reasonable correlation between those but I wouldn't put it that way.

My statement would be distractive driving = accidents.
 

Jiro

If You Know What I Mean
Premium Member
I don't know about any flaws with my reasoning and I think that I don't understand about what are you saying. :(
let's try it again.

you kept saying that there is no correlation or whatsoever when we say "more gun laws = more crimes" and yet... you're saying there is a correlation for "bad economy = more crimes".

so why is our correlation wrong and your correlation is right?

Do you have proof that confirming your correlation about more gun = less crime?
you are missing the point...... if there is a proof, then there wouldn't be any further debates.

sometimes you are really in over your head especially in this subject and I think it's probably best if you take a step away unless you truly know this subject inside out and truly care about it. making a simple correlation and playing with statistic are just not good enough. it's not a number game. it's a matter of life and death and most importantly - the fight for our rights and freedom.
 

Foxrac

Well-Known Member
Premium Member
let's try it again.

you kept saying that there is no correlation or whatsoever when we say "more gun laws = more crimes" and yet... you're saying there is a correlation for "bad economy = more crimes".

so why is our correlation wrong and your correlation is right?

you are missing the point...... if there is a proof, then there wouldn't be any further debates.

sometimes you are really in over your head especially in this subject and I think it's probably best if you take a step away unless you truly know this subject inside out and truly care about it. making a simple correlation and playing with statistic are just not good enough. it's not a number game. it's a matter of life and death and most importantly - the fight for our rights and freedom.

I reviewed the posts between you and me, so I didn't use "correlation" in between recession and crime rate until you questioned me about need find a claim to support my argument. That how mixed up the argument and I don't know if correlation between recession and crime rate, but I felt it was obvious because I learned from someone about recession caused increase of crime rate, so it wasn't well with some sources that I'm trying to find it.

I felt overwhelmed now. *OMG*
 

Jiro

If You Know What I Mean
Premium Member
I have to break this up in 2 or 3 posts because it's a long read. sorry :lol:

let me explain more about "correlation". there isn't really any solid evidence or conclusive proof to establish a correlation unless you're performing a chemistry lab experiment.

A correlation means establishing a statistical relationship over broad variables. this is a very difficult task to do.

A simple correlation - if you increase oxygen to fire, it will burn hotter. that is a "direct correlation" between O2 and fire.

A complicated correlation - Person A says when the economy goes bad, the crime rate goes up. Person B says when the economy goes bad, the robbery crimes go up but the murder rate goes down".

The real answer? Both correlations is neither true nor false. why? well we can just "agree to disagree" :lol:
 

Jiro

If You Know What I Mean
Premium Member
A simple correlation is easy to come up with if you're performing a scientific experiment in a lab but it's nearly impossible to come up with a direct correlation for a socioeconomic problem because there are at least thousands of different variables. An expert said this at the conference I attended last year - "Information is cheap and easy to find. Meaning is difficult to acquire!"

A more detailed quote - “We now live in a world where information is potentially unlimited. Information is cheap, but meaning is expensive. Where is the meaning? Only human beings can tell you where it is. We’re extracting meaning from our minds and our own lives,” George Dyson.

NRA is an organization with a pro-gun agenda and Brady Campaign is an organization with a anti-gun agenda. NRA has a team of experts stating a correlation - "more guns = less crimes" while Brady Campaign has a team of experts saying "less guns = less crimes".

Both organizations have same access to same information and yet both of them came up with 2 completely different meanings.

There has to be a sensible approach for a problem. This new law passed by NY does not prevent people from owning guns but it's grossly misguided and a terribly wrong approach to a problem when in fact there isn't really a problem to begin with. It's a wrong solution for wrong problem.
 

Jiro

If You Know What I Mean
Premium Member
Anybody can establish a correlation as long as it's a sound, valid theory supported by statistic, data, etc.

So my correlation? more gun control laws lead to more crimes because our gun laws are so terribly confusing that it's preventing government from effectively prosecuting criminals swiftly and justly. because of this untimely delay, more criminals think they can get away with anything because the courts are full of people quibbling around over complicated laws therefore they continue to commit more violent crimes with illegal weapons. How can prosecutors and police officers do their job if courts are full of people quibbling around over complicated laws?

That's why NRA pushed for Project Exile. I remind you again - under Project Exile, it mandates a 5 year prison sentence without possibility of probation or parole for felons caught in possession of a firearm and mandates a 15 year prison sentence without possibility of probation or parole for felons caught in possession of a firearm during the commission of a crime. This program was so effective in Virginia that crime rates dropped by a huge margin. This would deter criminal from robbing a store with a gun and this also means a criminal would use a bat instead and that's fine with me since many store owners have a shotgun hidden under their counter :lol:

A correlation established by Malcolm Gladwell stated that a swift justice and punishment can result in lesser crime rate. He was implying that if the death penalty was delivered swiftly and justly, it would serve a reasonably effective deterrent for violent criminals.

This is not a very complicated law. If you're a felon and you're found with a gun on your hand... very very simple - you go to jail. nothing complicated about it. So why this Project Exile is not adopted on federal level? I have no idea. My guess? more senseless quibbling at Congress and White House.

Another example - murdering a federal agent or police officer is an automatic death penalty. Many hardcore gangsters are armed to the teeth with powerful illegal weapons like automatic AK-47 or UZI and there's enough of them to take down even half of LAPD or wipe out entire SWAT teams and yet.... they don't mow down police officers often like in Mexico. there you go. that's a very strong correlation between swift justice and crime rate.

Correlation is not a PROOF. It's establishing a relationship between this and that based on years of variables and what works & what doesn't work. There are a strong correlation and a weak correlation. Brady Campaign came up with a very weak correlation which was why they kept losing for years but this time, they took advantage of Newton shooting and play on their fear. What a shameless thing to do. very shameless.
 

airportcop

New Member
harsher penalty with no possibility of parole/probation for felons caught with illegal possession of firearms.

mandatory 5-10 years with no possibility of parole/probation. this was found to be fearful for criminals. we should renew this Project Exile and continue it for entire America.


Thanks. I didn't know what it was. I'll have to look it up to gain more insight.
 

VacationGuy234

Active Member
you made a correlation that a bad economy = more crimes even though there's no solid evidence proving so.

figure it out yet?

I agree with Foxrac.

The vast majority commit crimes for resources not sport. Because of this, there is a correlation between the economy and crime. You need food so you steal, direct correlation.

There is no link between gun ownership and resources because you do not need a gun to obtain resources.
 
Top