Page 2 of 2
Posted: Tue Jul 04, 2006 10:52 pm
by Brains
i have the impression you both have not read the report.
bm: who used that logic?
raum: he may have strange ideas (I don't have a clue and you can tall me whatever), but the academic world has accepted his analysis concerning this question.
Posted: Wed Jul 05, 2006 3:22 am
by deepdiver32073
If the UN wants my guns, they can have them. But let them be warned, I WILL defend my 2nd Amendment rights to the death. They can have them after I've expended every round in my possession protecting that right. If you prefer to live in a gunless society, move to the UK or Japan. I much prefer to put my security in my own hands because I know my abilities, I have trained and kept my abilities proficient. I have both an Armed Security license and a Concealed Carry Permit. I go the range at least once a week to keep myself honed.
Yes, I'm a member of the NRA. No, I don't subscribe to every thing they espouse. BUT, I do believe VERY strongly in my RIGHT to keep and bear arms.
Posted: Wed Jul 05, 2006 8:18 am
by Brains
that amendment also talks about "a well regulated militia", which individuals hardly are....
Posted: Wed Jul 05, 2006 5:28 pm
by raum
QUOTEraum: he may have strange ideas (I don't have a clue and you can tall me whatever), but the academic world has accepted his analysis concerning this question.
two questions-
What makes you believe this guy, other than bias? Do you actually know how to determine statistics? That is what I did for 20 hours yesterday.
AND
What "academic world" has accepted his analysis, that denied John Lott's, who has authored a full set of socio-economics text books? and ranks WORLDWIDE as the 26th most respected economist on the planet from 1969-2000, by publication, and is the 86th most quoted by citation? This is, of course, only according to the Univesite' Libre de Bruxelles.
http://student.ulb.ac.be/~tcoupe/update ... mances.pdf