Quote:
Originally Posted by vaylorie
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
Atari, your too smart for me. Your ability to read raw data and 'apply' them 'correctly' is astonishing. You could at least bring the argument to the level of causation vs. correlation since the data clearly depicts an increase in violent crime after a gun ban was enabled. By the way, did you happen to look up data from before and after the gun ban went into effect or are you talking about a 3 year reduction in overall crime that has nothing to do with a gun ban that was implemented in the 90s?
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
What about in D.C. when they banned handuns?
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.] |
This is the crime of Cherry picking. You picked a localized statistic. When you want to show trends you should broaden your scope.
Referring to DC charts you are trying to tell me that the effect of handguns being banned didnt start affecting the statistics for 10 years? Do you have a functioning brain?
Referring to the UK charts..... again it doesnt show the RATES. From 1991 to 2001 the population increased by 1.1million. From 2001-2004 the UK population increased by another 1million. That easily explains the # differences. Again you need rates not raw numbers
Honestly, I feel like I am arguing with children.