On Sun, 23 Dec 2012 14:14:28 -0600, " Attila Iskander"
wrote:


"Doug" wrote in message
.. .
On Sun, 23 Dec 2012 05:55:19 -0800 (PST), "
wrote:


Do you realize that we did ban "assault weapons" and high
capacity magazines for a decade, starting in 1994. Study after
study done by various organizations, including the CDC, which
clearly has no pro-gun agenda, concluded it made no difference
in crime rates, murder rates, etc.


Oh by the way, that's not what the CDC said. If you go to their
website...http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/rr5214a2.htm
they say ....
"Evidence was INSUFFICIENT to determine the effectiveness of any of
these laws for the following reasons." They explain this as
depending on which study you go by, some say it went higher and other
studies say it went lower.


DOH !
1) The CDC has a history of being pro gun-control
2) The CC has had it's knuckles rapped by Congress because they got caught
at it
3) They studied more than 30 years of studies, and all they could come up
with is that ?

HELLO ?

How long do you want to study something before you go..
Hmmm
No evidence to support this theory after 30 years of studies
Maybe it's time to come up with a different theory
This is not "global warming" with a planet that operates by millenia
This is simple social issues that operate a MUCH, MUCH SHORTER scale
Try 5-10 years to have meaninfull data

Therefore, since it's inconclusive, I'd say to do it because taking no
action is NOT the solution.

Fine
But since it's INCONCLUSIVE after 30 years, then intelligent people are NOT
going to go back and do the same old, same old that has proven inconclusive
after all this time
SMART people are going to try something COMPLETELY DIFFERENT.

How about trying to do what the Israeli did to protect their schools after
the palestinian terrorists decided to target their schools
They have nearly 40 years of NO MORE attacks on schools, while we with our
"Gun Free Zones" have 30+ years of school attacks being repeated over and
over...

HELLO ??




I have no problem with trying DIFFERENT so we may agree on that point
but I bet we'll disagree after that.