View Single Post

Default 

January 15th, 2013, 22:06
Originally Posted by dteowner View Post
OK, Pladio, allow me to summarize as well. Keep in mind that I'm also responding to the broader issue here, so my answer might not line up word-for-word with your exact position. I'll try to keep it close.

Even if you propose gun control as part of a broader initiative (WHICH YOU DID NOT until faced with the Chicago evidence)
Uhmm, not true. We've raised the issue of poverty and I've said there were other factors quite a few times before Chicago was raised.

I remember at least once where not only I, but Jemy too told you (probably repeatedly) that comparing developing countries to the US is not the same due to poverty.

, it has been demonstrated that your proposal failed in the real world.
It has not if you consider every Western European nation, which you like to ignore… You also seem to probably ignore every other city in the US where the opposite is showing (which might not only be the result of gun control)

Now, the gun control folks haven't said jack shit about poverty, and you know it. "Take away the guns and you take away the opportunity." Throwing it in there after you've gotten a logic wedgie is sloppy and disingenuous. But let's allow it for a moment.
Why would I care about what "the gun control folks" have to say. I'm not debating for them. I'm debating for myself.

Presumably, over the 28 years where Chicago had a gun ban in place, you folks have been working on poverty as well, yes? Let's call all those fantastic ideas, programs, activities, and feel-goodie hubbub, X.
I don't know what they are but if they don't work then others should be found.

Now, unless you've got a major unveiling waiting in the wings, you intend to continue doing X, yes? After all, that's working on the problem of poverty. For my purposes, I don't give two shits what is contained in X. You get full credit for doing it, you get impressive medals for its rousing success, and you get full credit for continuing it forever and ever going forward.

SO….

guns + X = baseline quantity of gun-related violence
gun ban + X = HIGHER QUANTITY OF GUN VIOLENCE
If X is a negative force stronger than the gun control (I have NOT ONCE spoken of a gun ban and that's not what's happened in Chicago either, I presume) then that's quite normal.

5 + x = y
If x = 10 then y =15
If x = -2 then y = 3

See, your maths do make sense if you actually put numbers in them.

Our point is that x is negative in Chicago, so that even though gun control is a positive element, the negative x'es are too strong to make the gun control felt.

Let's say that you feel that X is, in truth, a dismal failure. For clarity, let's call that, Y. We can even say that Y means we didn't do shit about poverty, wealth distribution, mental health, and phases of the moon—whatever it is in that completely undefined lump that you're so hung up on.

guns + Y = level of gun related violence
gun ban + Y = HIGHER LEVEL OF GUN VIOLENCE

So, unless you've got new things to offer that make up X, all your whining about outside factors makes no difference to the topic whatsoever and the continued attempts to hang a gun ban on it would have to be considered, at the most generous possible, misdirection.
So, no it's part of the solution, just not all of it. x being a failure doesn't mean gun control shouldn't be there. It just means x has to be done better. So the goal would be to make x go from -2 to +10 if you need maths to help. (I'm not bad with maths as that's part of my job and I studied engineering. Even though x + y can be quite troublesome sometimes…_
Pladio is offline

Pladio

Pladio's Avatar
Guardian of Nonsense
RPGWatch Donor

#171

Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: London, uk
Posts: 3,017
Send a message via MSN to Pladio