3 ms·

I did read it. Ultimately, you have to look at the purpose of certain tools and their net effect on society. I respect the debate and will leave you with these

• bmelton 14y ago
  I have looked at exactly that. The rate at which guns are used lawfully far outstrips the number of times they are not. As such, their benefit to society is easily a net positive. That crazy people might misuse them is statistically no more reason to outlaw guns than it is to outlaw hammers or baseball bats. All that said, I'll end this debate as you obviously aren't in any position to prove your assertions and are happy to sit in the umbrella that "Guns are bad, mmkay?" If you'd like to actually debate the position, I'd be happy to, but thus far you haven't indicated to me that you're capable. Edit: Actually, I take that back. I have no desire to engage in a discussion with someone who has admitted they don't care about law while simultaneously advocating that the law be used to curtail a Constitutionally enumerated right.
  • rooshdi 14y ago
    "I have looked at exactly that. The rate at which guns are used lawfully far outstrips the number of times they are not. As such, their benefit to society is easily a net positive." This Harvard study doesn't think so: http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/hicrc/firearms-research/guns-and-death/ http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/hicrc/firearms-research/guns-and... Also, read this for your other arguments: http://www.cracked.com/blog/the-4-most-meaningless-arguments-against-gun-control_p1/ http://www.cracked.com/blog/the-4-most-meaningless-arguments... Good debate. I gotta finish work on some software now. Take care sir. Edit for your edit about rights: http://youtu.be/bx71U-1O-eY http://youtu.be/bx71U-1O-eY
    • deleted 14y ago
      [deleted]