says, Since you have no data or applicable “control” you have no basis for comparison.
False. We have before the gun laws go into effect, and after. For example, we know
that the assault weapons ban had no effect. If you look at the gun violence trends before the ban, during the ban, and after the ban, you cannot see any differences.More likely that the violence would be much worse.
You are implying that there is evidence of this, when there is not. Please do not continue to be dishonest.The NRA was pushing for background checks full of loopholes.
It's essentially the same background checks we have today, and it is one of the very few pieces of legislation that appear to have actually made a significant difference.Your data regarding this?
Fuck you. No, really. When you demanded the data backing up my assertion that the claim that Fox News was only factual a certain percentage of the time was false, I provided that data. You denied that I had done so. So, fuck you. I am not going to spend my time gathering data that you have proven
you will not rationally consider.The NRA made no improvement on registration.
I never said anything about registration. Please stop lying.“Obama has advocated outlawing handguns in cities, literally” Where has he stated this?
He was in favor of a ban on handguns in Chicago when he was a legislator in IL, and when he was President he supported the handgun ban in DC (which was overturned in DC v. Heller
).And regardless of his personal position, what laws has he passed on this regard?
You asked for advocacy, and now you are shifting the goalposts to passed legislation. In other words: you are lying, again.
However, the good news is that in your lying, you are tacitly admitting that you were wrong when you asserted that no one was advocating for outlawing guns.“In Connecticut, they already did outlaw "assault weapons” Good.
Once again, you tacitly admit you were wrong that no one was advocating for outlawing guns.Personal protection is one thing, Assault is another. No need for these.
The reason I put "assault weapons" in quotes is because it is a made-up term. An "assault weapon" is usually nothing more than a simple semi-automatic rifle, which many people use for hunting and target practice.
By focusing on the made-up term "assault," you are proving you literally have no idea what you're talking about. Guns are not being banned. Certain types yes, ownership limitations sure.
Um. So you're now saying that guns are not being banned ... but guns are being banned.
Is English not your first language?And you don't tell me what I know to be true or not.
Don't tell me to not tell you what you know to be true or not.You are making self serving assumptions that are FALSE.
You're lying.I know what it means
False.I am using it correctly.