4 kids executed near me.

[Kester^]

No, but the fact they are misusing statistics to show a pro-gun point of view kind of does matter.

It's the same as a cig company saying cigs are good for you, look at all this research we did!

 

[Aki]

No, but the fact they are misusing statistics to show a pro-gun point of view kind of does matter.

It's the same as a cig company saying cigs are good for you, look at all this research we did!

Your failed analogy makes baby Jesus cry. D:

I don't see how they're misusing statistics. Examples, plz.

 

[Jintor]

The point is that they're statistics from a biased source. Like Democratic News from Fox.

 

[Aki]

The point is that they're statistics from a biased source. Like Democratic News from Fox.

Well then, dig up the same statistics from an unbiased source. I'm sure they'll still be the same.

Besides, the site isn't terribly biased. If you pay attention to the wording, the author at times pauses and says stuff like "Gun control opponents can play similar games. The Swiss with 7 million people have hundreds of thousands of fully-automatic rifles in their homes (see GunCite's "Swiss Gun Laws") and the Israelis, until recently, have had easy access to guns (brief summary of Israeli firearms regulations here). Both countries have low homicide rates. Likewise this doesn't mean more guns less crime." from an earlier link.

 

[Jintor]

But that's your job - you're the one arguging based on those statistics. In any case, take the gun control/non gun control arguements to politics.

 

[Aki]

But that's your job - you're the one arguging based on those statistics. In any case, take the gun control/non gun control arguements to politics.

Point taken.

But meh, I ain't taking it to politics. I've grown sick of it by now. Lost it's interest. :|

 

[Ennui]

I'm not sure with how familiar all of you are with the actual process and reliability of statistics, but they mean somewhere between jack shit and almost nothing. Validity of facts derived from studies and stuff like that is reliant almost entirely on an informed analysis of the study itself and the methodology of said study. It's extremely subjective. I took a college-level Statistics class and I'm happy that it makes me capable of analyzing these things on my own, because it's infinitely more reliable.

We don't get too many up here in Massachusetts.

And just because where you or I live ain't feeling the hurt doesn't mean it don't happen. Not every illegal is a bad person, but there are some. And the fact that an illegal is, well illegally here raises problems. Some that simply come from them existing - like how they don't pay taxes.

And ...we do. Basically, they're getting a free ride that the citizens of the nation, and the nice folk who went through the stupidly complicated legal immigration process or migrant worker programs, etc, are getting screwed for it. And then end up hurting themselves in that some things aren't available to them that would be if they found a legal way in, y'know?

Funny, I thought the war comment would've been the one to derail this thread, haha. :cheese:

Well, I agree with the fact that it's unfair. I'm more towards being more open about immigration, though, not trying to close the border (which is asinine in addition to being an exercise in futility).