Originally Posted by dteowner
All very impressive, and yet when confronted with conflicting real-world evidence such as Chicago, which did exactly as you propose in the exact nation in question and had exactly the opposite result as you predict, you're quick to point out that it's more complicated than just guns. Personally, I find that response typical of someone that realizes they've gotten a logical wedgie but throw up some "you wouldn't understand, silly child" nonsense to try to reclaim their dignity and intellectual standing. Regardless, either the problem is simple and your answer simply doesn't hold water, or the problem is complex and you're offering up a simplistic one-pronged solution as some sort of panacea. Crappy logic either way.

The theory that firearms is a catalyst rather than a cause have been my theory from the beginning. Inconsistencies you may spot in my logic is based on you ignoring the premise.