StreetScooby 5 #26 June 9, 2008 Quote Apparently the high homicide rate in Dallas and New Orleans is lost on pro-gun types. I doubt these homicides were committed by legal gun owners. Maybe we should provide the gang bangers, etc. an amnesty, them send them to pistol school where they can actually learn how to aim.We are all engines of karma Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #27 June 9, 2008 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuotePostulation != proof. You can simply disprove my assertion by finding another large US metropolitan area with gun control that (a) has a gun shop within 2 miles of its downtown, (b) has more lawyers and politicians per square mile, (c) has no Senator. All you have to do is find one. Should be pretty easy for you. Desperation does not become you. But it is very normal (for you) We still await your PROOF! I have made an assertion and when asked for evidence, I provided clear, unambiguous, factual evidence showing that Washington DC differs in significant ways from any other US city. Provide evidence to the contrary and we have a basis for discussion. Otherwise, stop moving the goalposts. You provided "proof" that in NO way has anything to do with crime or availability, except for the first point of having gunshops local to the city - you were asked for PROOF that said gunshop was selling guns to criminals and have not provided it. Your point about about the job choices of the residents and whether or not the district has a Senator has ABSOLUTELY ZERO to do with the issue and is nothing more than a red herring. NOW, Professor - you can provide PROOF that the gunshops are deliberately selling to criminals (and if that is true - WHERE ARE THE ARRESTS, since selling to a criminal is illegal), or you can just admit that you have no proof and you're trying to throw us off-track. Which is it?Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,147 #28 June 9, 2008 QuoteQuote I have made an assertion... That has nothing to do with the topic, IMO. Just a response to Gawain's silly post comparing a small rural town to a large metro area. Since you gun-o-philes seem to have such a hard time with statistics when guns are involved, here's an equivalent problem without the emotional content: You have a 5k race between a 6 ft guy and a 5 ft guy, and the 5 ft guy wins. You then declare that short guys are faster than tall ones, completely ignoring the fact that the tall guy has emphysema and a wooden leg. Washington DC is an anomaly for a number of reasons. And that's all there is to it.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
StreetScooby 5 #29 June 9, 2008 You are not making any sense in this thread.We are all engines of karma Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,147 #30 June 9, 2008 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuotePostulation != proof. You can simply disprove my assertion by finding another large US metropolitan area with gun control that (a) has a gun shop within 2 miles of its downtown, (b) has more lawyers and politicians per square mile, (c) has no Senator. All you have to do is find one. Should be pretty easy for you. Desperation does not become you. But it is very normal (for you) We still await your PROOF! I have made an assertion and when asked for evidence, I provided clear, unambiguous, factual evidence showing that Washington DC differs in significant ways from any other US city. Provide evidence to the contrary and we have a basis for discussion. Otherwise, stop moving the goalposts. You provided "proof" that in NO way has anything to do with crime or availability, except for the first point of having gunshops local to the city - you were asked for PROOF that said gunshop was selling guns to criminals and have not provided it. Your point about about the job choices of the residents and whether or not the district has a Senator has ABSOLUTELY ZERO to do with the issue and is nothing more than a red herring. NOW, Professor - you can provide PROOF that the gunshops are deliberately selling to criminals (and if that is true - WHERE ARE THE ARRESTS, since selling to a criminal is illegal), or you can just admit that you have no proof and you're trying to throw us off-track. Which is it? I don't have to provide proof of anything at all. YOU want to use Washington DC for your epidemiological study on gun violence and gun laws. YOU have to demonstrate that it is a legitimate data point for the analysis you wish to perform. I have given you several reasons why it is an illegitimate choice. The burden of proof is on you to show that it's legitimate.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,147 #31 June 9, 2008 QuoteYou are not making any sense in this thread. How about we compare Dallas to Moreton Grove, Illinois. Do you think that's a fair comparison? If you can cherry pick, so can I.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
billvon 3,114 #32 June 9, 2008 >That has nothing to do with the topic, IMO. But the range of city buses, apparently, does. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #33 June 9, 2008 QuoteQuoteQuote Right, and it's plain to see where that line was drawn and its effect on DC. Gun violence is so high now that police have set up check points in and out of certain neighborhoods. While I was at Walter Reed, in July 2006, there were 21 murders in the first 20 days of the month, the Mayor mandated a curfew. Just two weekends ago, they had 8 killed. Chicago followed suit and they're in the same boat. Kennesaw Gerogia... Let's compare: Washington, DC Chicago, IL Kennesaw, GA This point is completely lost on liberal anti-gun types. They don't get it. Apparently the high homicide rate in Dallas and New Orleans is lost on pro-gun types. Evidently the high homicide rate in Washington City is due to the number of lawyers and Congressmen, according to anti-gun types.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #34 June 9, 2008 QuoteI have given you several reasons why it is an illegitimate choice. The burden of proof is on you to show that it's legitimate. So provide the data that shows that the number of lawyers and Congressmen, or whether or not a geographic region has a Senator has ANY impact on the number of gun crimes. QuoteYOU have to demonstrate that it is a legitimate data point for the analysis you wish to perform Why, yes...yes you do.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,147 #35 June 9, 2008 QuoteQuoteI have given you several reasons why it is an illegitimate choice. The burden of proof is on you to show that it's legitimate. So provide the data that shows that the number of lawyers and Congressmen, or whether or not a geographic region has a Senator has ANY impact on the number of gun crimes. QuoteYOU have to demonstrate that it is a legitimate data point for the analysis you wish to perform Why, yes...yes you do. That's a stupid childish response like we see from rushmc. Since I'm not trying to use an atypical anomalous city to prove anything, I don't have to make a case for using it. You are very unclear on the concept of data analysis. How about we compare Dallas, TX to Morton Grove, or Winnetka, Illinois. Do you think that's a fair comparison? Well, gee, Dallas has a humungous homicide rate, while Morton Grove and Winnetka don't. Alert the NRA!... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #36 June 9, 2008 QuoteQuoteQuoteI have given you several reasons why it is an illegitimate choice. The burden of proof is on you to show that it's legitimate. So provide the data that shows that the number of lawyers and Congressmen, or whether or not a geographic region has a Senator has ANY impact on the number of gun crimes. QuoteYOU have to demonstrate that it is a legitimate data point for the analysis you wish to perform Why, yes...yes you do. That's a stupid childish response like we see from rushmc. Since I'm not trying to use an atypical anomalous city to prove anything, I don't have to make a case for using it. You are very unclear on the concept of data analysis. How about we compare Dallas, TX to Morton Grove, or Winnetka, Illinois. Do you think that's a fair comparison? Well, gee, Dallas has a humungous homicide rate, while Morton Grove and Winnetka don't. Alert the NRA! You have YET to prove that your assumptions make DC anomalous. Provide your proof.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 23 #37 June 9, 2008 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuotePostulation != proof. You can simply disprove my assertion by finding another large US metropolitan area with gun control that (a) has a gun shop within 2 miles of its downtown, (b) has more lawyers and politicians per square mile, (c) has no Senator. All you have to do is find one. Should be pretty easy for you. Desperation does not become you. But it is very normal (for you) We still await your PROOF! I have made an assertion and when asked for evidence, I provided clear, unambiguous, factual evidence showing that Washington DC differs in significant ways from any other US city. Provide evidence to the contrary and we have a basis for discussion. Otherwise, stop moving the goalposts. You provided "proof" that in NO way has anything to do with crime or availability, except for the first point of having gunshops local to the city - you were asked for PROOF that said gunshop was selling guns to criminals and have not provided it. Your point about about the job choices of the residents and whether or not the district has a Senator has ABSOLUTELY ZERO to do with the issue and is nothing more than a red herring. NOW, Professor - you can provide PROOF that the gunshops are deliberately selling to criminals (and if that is true - WHERE ARE THE ARRESTS, since selling to a criminal is illegal), or you can just admit that you have no proof and you're trying to throw us off-track. Which is it? I don't have to provide proof of anything at all. YOU want to use Washington DC for your epidemiological study on gun violence and gun laws. YOU have to demonstrate that it is a legitimate data point for the analysis you wish to perform. I have given you several reasons why it is an illegitimate choice. The burden of proof is on you to show that it's legitimate. All you have offered here is your opinion. You cant back it up so you ask for someone to prove you are wrong. Your opinion is not proof that DC should not be used as a data point"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rushmc 23 #38 June 9, 2008 Quote Quote Quote Quote I have given you several reasons why it is an illegitimate choice. The burden of proof is on you to show that it's legitimate. So provide the data that shows that the number of lawyers and Congressmen, or whether or not a geographic region has a Senator has ANY impact on the number of gun crimes. Quote YOU have to demonstrate that it is a legitimate data point for the analysis you wish to perform Why, yes...yes you do. That's a stupid childish response like we see from rushmc. Since I'm not trying to use an atypical anomalous city to prove anything, I don't have to make a case for using it. You are very unclear on the concept of data analysis. How about we compare Dallas, TX to Morton Grove, or Winnetka, Illinois. Do you think that's a fair comparison? Well, gee, Dallas has a humungous homicide rate, while Morton Grove and Winnetka don't. Alert the NRA! You have YET to prove that your assumptions make DC anomalous. Provide your proof. He cant, so insults someone outside his post. You got him by the short hairs on this one though, and he knows it"America will never be destroyed from the outside, if we falter and lose our freedoms, it will be because we destroyed ourselves." Abraham Lincoln Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,147 #39 June 9, 2008 Quote Quote Quote Quote I have given you several reasons why it is an illegitimate choice. The burden of proof is on you to show that it's legitimate. So provide the data that shows that the number of lawyers and Congressmen, or whether or not a geographic region has a Senator has ANY impact on the number of gun crimes. Quote YOU have to demonstrate that it is a legitimate data point for the analysis you wish to perform Why, yes...yes you do. That's a stupid childish response like we see from rushmc. Since I'm not trying to use an atypical anomalous city to prove anything, I don't have to make a case for using it. You are very unclear on the concept of data analysis. How about we compare Dallas, TX to Morton Grove, or Winnetka, Illinois. Do you think that's a fair comparison? Well, gee, Dallas has a humungous homicide rate, while Morton Grove and Winnetka don't. Alert the NRA! You have YET to prove that your assumptions make DC anomalous. Provide your proof. It is NOT an assumption that DC has gun shops with 2 miles of its downtown, it is FACT.It is not an assumption that it has no Senate representation, it is FACT.It is not an assumption that it has more lawyers per sq. mile than other cities, it is FACT.These alone make it an anomaly.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,147 #40 June 9, 2008 Quote Quote Quote Quote Quote I have given you several reasons why it is an illegitimate choice. The burden of proof is on you to show that it's legitimate. So provide the data that shows that the number of lawyers and Congressmen, or whether or not a geographic region has a Senator has ANY impact on the number of gun crimes. Quote YOU have to demonstrate that it is a legitimate data point for the analysis you wish to perform Why, yes...yes you do. That's a stupid childish response like we see from rushmc. Since I'm not trying to use an atypical anomalous city to prove anything, I don't have to make a case for using it. You are very unclear on the concept of data analysis. How about we compare Dallas, TX to Morton Grove, or Winnetka, Illinois. Do you think that's a fair comparison? Well, gee, Dallas has a humungous homicide rate, while Morton Grove and Winnetka don't. Alert the NRA! You have YET to prove that your assumptions make DC anomalous. Provide your proof. He cant, so insults someone outside his post. You got him by the short hairs on this one though, and he knows it Don't be silly. It's not me that's trying to claim Washington DC is a typical American town. It's about as far from typical as Berkeley, CA.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,147 #41 June 9, 2008 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuotePostulation != proof. You can simply disprove my assertion by finding another large US metropolitan area with gun control that (a) has a gun shop within 2 miles of its downtown, (b) has more lawyers and politicians per square mile, (c) has no Senator. All you have to do is find one. Should be pretty easy for you. Desperation does not become you. But it is very normal (for you) We still await your PROOF! I have made an assertion and when asked for evidence, I provided clear, unambiguous, factual evidence showing that Washington DC differs in significant ways from any other US city. Provide evidence to the contrary and we have a basis for discussion. Otherwise, stop moving the goalposts. You provided "proof" that in NO way has anything to do with crime or availability, except for the first point of having gunshops local to the city - you were asked for PROOF that said gunshop was selling guns to criminals and have not provided it. Your point about about the job choices of the residents and whether or not the district has a Senator has ABSOLUTELY ZERO to do with the issue and is nothing more than a red herring. NOW, Professor - you can provide PROOF that the gunshops are deliberately selling to criminals (and if that is true - WHERE ARE THE ARRESTS, since selling to a criminal is illegal), or you can just admit that you have no proof and you're trying to throw us off-track. Which is it? I don't have to provide proof of anything at all. YOU want to use Washington DC for your epidemiological study on gun violence and gun laws. YOU have to demonstrate that it is a legitimate data point for the analysis you wish to perform. I have given you several reasons why it is an illegitimate choice. The burden of proof is on you to show that it's legitimate. All you have offered here is your opinion. You cant back it up so you ask for someone to prove you are wrong. Your opinion is not proof that DC should not be used as a data point Those wishing to use it have the burden of proof. That's the way research works. You do know what "burden of proof" is, don't you?... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #42 June 9, 2008 Quote It is NOT an assumption that DC has gun shops with 2 miles of its downtown, it is FACT. It is NOT an assumption that Dallas or Houston have gun shops within 2 miles of their downtonwns, either. Immaterial point. Quote It is not an assumption that it has no Senate representation, it is FACT. WOW - I *NEVER* knew that the SENATE is out there committing these crimes - THANKS, John!! Immaterial. Quote It is not an assumption that it has more lawyers per sq. mile than other cities, it is FACT. First you say it's the SENATE commiting the crime, now you say it's the lawyers - which one is it? Immaterial. Quote These alone make it an anomaly. And they're ALL immaterial to the point. You suppositions fail to provide proof. Oh, btw, John - it's no anomaly that Washington city has no Senators - neither does any other city. That "D" behind Debbie Stabenow's name doesn't stand for "Detroit".Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #43 June 9, 2008 QuoteThose wishing to use it have the burden of proof. That's the way research works. You do know what "burden of proof" is, don't you? Incorrect - it is ALREADY being used as proof, by the US Government - you know, FBI stats and all. YOU are trying to say it is anomalous, therefore the burden of proof is on YOU - and so far, you're failing miserably.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,147 #44 June 10, 2008 QuoteQuoteThose wishing to use it have the burden of proof. That's the way research works. You do know what "burden of proof" is, don't you? Incorrect - it is ALREADY being used as proof, by the US Government - you know, FBI stats and all. Nonsense! The FBI does NOT draw ANY conclusions by comparing crime rates in DC with those in Kennesaw, GA, which is what Gawain suggested. Quote YOU are trying to say it is anomalous, therefore the burden of proof is on YOU - and so far, you're failing miserably. What Nonsense! - you have no idea what you are writing about. I am not trying to draw any conclusions - YOU, rushmc and Gawain are. Therefore the burden of proof is on YOU to show that your analysis is unbiased. YOU haven't even tried to do that. The bias in comparing large urban DC with small rural Kennesaw GA is so obvious that you look really foolish even attempting to argue your point.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,147 #45 June 10, 2008 Quote Quote It is NOT an assumption that DC has gun shops with 2 miles of its downtown, it is FACT. It is NOT an assumption that Dallas or Houston have gun shops within 2 miles of their downtonwns, either. Immaterial point. Quote It is not an assumption that it has no Senate representation, it is FACT. WOW - I *NEVER* knew that the SENATE is out there committing these crimes - THANKS, John!! Immaterial. Quote It is not an assumption that it has more lawyers per sq. mile than other cities, it is FACT. First you say it's the SENATE commiting the crime, now you say it's the lawyers - which one is it? Immaterial. Quote These alone make it an anomaly. And they're ALL immaterial to the point. You suppositions fail to provide proof. It's not for me to have to prove anything. The burden of proof is on those using the comparative crime data to try to reach a conclusion, to show that their data are unbiased by any confounding factors. It is not my job to prove bias, it is yours to show absence of bias. You haven't, and you can't, prove that data from DC is unbiased by its peculiar demographics. Quote Oh, btw, John - it's no anomaly that Washington city has no Senators - neither does any other city. That "D" behind Debbie Stabenow's name doesn't stand for "Detroit". Lame. So which senate candidates do DC voters get to choose from? Enquiring minds want to know.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 2,147 #46 June 10, 2008 Quote WOW - I *NEVER* knew that the SENATE is out there committing these crimes - THANKS, John!! Immaterial. Please cite the post where I said the Senate was committing crimes. I guess you hit "reply" without bothering to read what you are replying to, AGAIN.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kelpdiver 2 #47 June 10, 2008 QuoteQuoteQuoteI'll make no predictions. Grammar, punctuation and intent are all too confusing no matter what the NRA has said over the years. This sounds like Barbie - "Math is hard." Not if you actually can read and speak the english language! There have been a number of raging debates by minds greater than mine about the placement of a couple of commas there and how they separate this clause from another. Their minds were not greater than your's. And no, that's not a PA. As I said, these were wishful thinkers who lacking actual history to support their argument, tried a grammar attack that isn't accurate either. If you want to do a tired literal reading, the subordinate clause does not alter the meaning. If you look at the draft versions of the 2nd, the meaning remains ever clear. If you read the Federalist papers written the by authors, the meaning remains clear. Clarity is not useful to gun banners, however. Confusion and lies work much better. --- It seems apparent that the SCOTUS did not announce today. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #48 June 10, 2008 QuoteQuote Incorrect - it is ALREADY being used as proof, by the US Government - you know, FBI stats and all. Nonsense! The FBI does NOT draw ANY conclusions by comparing crime rates in DC with those in Kennesaw, GA, which is what Gawain suggested. As I recall, the original post that you tried to red herring your way out of had a comparison between Washington and Chicago - two large metropolitan cities. Your mention of the FBI drawing conclusions is yet another attempt to derail the conversation. QuoteQuote YOU are trying to say it is anomalous, therefore the burden of proof is on YOU - and so far, you're failing miserably. What Nonsense! - you have no idea what you are writing about. Oh? I'm not the one trying to blame crime rates on congressional representation or business demographics - you are. Speaking of which...do you have that data yet on Congress and the lawyers shooting up Washington, yet? I'm sure it will make FASCINATING reading. QuoteI am not trying to draw any conclusions - YOU, rushmc and Gawain are. Incorrect - you are making the argument that Washington cannot be considered in the same manner as Chicago, Dallas or Houston. Your claims that Senatorial representation or the primary occupations of the inhabitants of the city make comparison of the violent crime rate invalid is ludicrous and you have provided NO proof in support of that. The only POSSIBLE point you may have had was the gunshop angle, however, you provided NO proof that the gunshop is selling to criminals, no proof of arrests from the sales to criminals, AND it is negated by the fact that the other large cities ALSO have gunshops located in/near their downtown areas. As usual, when you cannot provide the data to prove your point, you try to derail the conversation with inconsequentialities.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
1969912 0 #49 June 10, 2008 Well, it looks like we have to wait until next Monday at the earliest.... "Once we got to the point where twenty/something's needed a place on the corner that changed the oil in their cars we were doomed . . ." -NickDG Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
mnealtx 0 #50 June 10, 2008 QuoteQuote WOW - I *NEVER* knew that the SENATE is out there committing these crimes - THANKS, John!! Immaterial. Please cite the post where I said the Senate was committing crimes. I guess you hit "reply" without bothering to read what you are replying to, AGAIN. No, I'm showing how LUDICROUS your comment was, AGAIN. BUT, since you mention it - why don't you just go ahead and show the DATA that proves that Senatorial representation affects crime rates? Go ahead - we'll wait for you.Mike I love you, Shannon and Jim. POPS 9708 , SCR 14706 Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
