kelpdiver 2 #26 April 4, 2005 QuoteYou have done nothing to dispell the argument that guns would be more efficient at killing people than swords. all you have said is that bombs would be more efficient. But pointing to something more efficient doesn't take away from the first statement. I addressed that matter 3 hours ago. Efficiency can be measured many ways. Or put another way, watch how Uma Thurman took out the Crazy 88s. And they weren't defenseless. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
leroydb 0 #27 April 5, 2005 if they ban guns... they will use swords, sticks and stones, strinng or rope... Murders will continue to happen no matter if there are guns or not. I hypothesize that the murder rate would most likely stay the same.Leroy ..I knew I was an unwanted baby when I saw my bath toys were a toaster and a radio... Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnRich 4 #28 April 5, 2005 QuoteMurders will continue to happen no matter if there are guns or not. I hypothesize that the murder rate would most likely stay the same. Agree. Japanese-Americans, with full access to all the firearms they want here in the U.S., murder each other at the same low rate as do their Japanese friends back home in Japan, who have no access to guns at all. This is proof that murder rates are driven by culture rather than the availability of guns. Trying to ban guns does nothing to stop the culture of violence which actually drives the desire to commit murder. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,119 #29 April 5, 2005 >Trying to ban guns does nothing to stop the culture of violence which >actually drives the desire to commit murder. Wow, that's exactly what Michael Moore said in Bowling for Columbine. You find wisdom in odd places I guess. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
