Supreme Court could take guns case
WASHINGTON - Supreme Court justices have track records that make predicting their rulings on many topics more than a mere guess. Then there is the issue of the Second Amendment and guns, about which the court has said virtually nothing in nearly 70 years.
http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20071111/.../scotus_guns_5 |
I've read about countries where gun control was passed and it actually made homocides even worse.
|
They'll probably decline to hear it...again.
Even if they do rule on it there's no guarantee their decision will affect anywhere outside DC, it all depends on what specifically they decide and how they word it. |
Quote:
|
So is it any coincidence that D.C. has the highest homicide rate per capita in the U.S.? Well is it? NO...it aint! See how that works?
|
D.C. does not have the highest homicide rate per capita in this country. In fact, their MSA homicide rate in 2006 (8.8/100,000) was lower than the Shreveport-Bossier City MSA (11.3/100,000). The homicide rate for the D.C. MSA was slightly higher than Alexandria, LA's, and slightly lower than Tulsa, OK's, around 63rd in the nation.
#1 was, unsurprisingly, New Orleans (21.7/100,000). #2 was Flint, MI (15.4), and #3 was Baton Rouge (14.4). The national average was 5.7. The only way Washington gets near the top is if you start adding restrictions such as "among cities over a certain size" or "only counting crimes counted within the city limits instead of the MSA," neither of which reflect reality. The FBI doesn't publish stats for crimes committed within the actual, physical city limits (only publishes by MSA) but MorganQuinto does (a year behind). Restricting it like that puts Washington at #13 for 2005 (latest year available from them). Source: 2006 FBI Uniform Crime Report |
Quote:
|
When they kick out your front door
How you gonna come? With your hands on your head Or on the trigger of your gun When the law break in How you gonna go? Shot down on the pavement Or waiting in death row You can crush us You can bruise us But you'll have to answer to Oh, Guns of Brixton ------ Guns of Brixton The Clash |
Alright Joe, upon further investigation, it turns out that you're correct. However,
In 1976, Washington, D.C., enacted one of the most restrictive gun control laws in the nation. Since then, the city's murder rate has risen 134 percent while the national murder rate has dropped 2 percent. 20 percent of U.S. homicides occur in four cities with just 6 percent of the population - New York, Chicago, Detroit and Washington, D.C. - and each has a virtual prohibition on private handguns. Drastically increasing homicide led Washington, D.C., to ban handguns in the 1970s. So useless was this that D.C. soon had (and continues to have) some of the nation’s highest murder rates. So, suffice it to say that D.C. is a dangerous place, in large part due to the prohibitive gun laws. Now, ya smartypants nitpickin little busybody, I'm gonna hafta ask ya to refrain from commentin on my posts since you're so goddamn selective about it, ok? Quid pro quo...if ya want to add your less-than-useful .02, you're gonna hafta reciprocate by addressin questions directed back at you, just as if we were conversin in person. |
Quote:
Quote:
Quote:
|
Quote:
|
>So, suffice it to say that D.C. is a dangerous place, in large part due to the prohibitive gun laws.
Why do you say "in large part?" It may be true, it may not, what evidence do you have either way? Correlation does not equal causation. NYC upped their handgun restrictions in 1992 and the homicide rate has fallen over 50%. Shreveport's gun laws haven't changed at all in 30 years (except for getting looser by allowing concealed carry and tighter by restricting them in school zones) so what explains our homicide rate roller coaster? Crime follows poverty, poverty follows low intelligence, and low intelligence partly (if not mainly in this country) follows dysgenic social programs. >I'm gonna hafta ask ya to refrain from commentin on my posts since you're so goddamn selective about it, ok? And if I don't you're going to...??? Ground me? I think I'll continue to post how I want instead of how you would like me to. Selective? That was your only post in the thread until now. |
Quote:
http://www.shreveport.com/forums/pho...a788333e71.jpg |
Quote:
"Ground" ya? Wish I could. Obviously there's not much I can do to discourage ya from makin a nuisance of yourself if you're of a mind, which is why I asked ya not to. I suppose I could lobby the administrators to censor any posts ya make referencin my posts, but I shouldnt have to do that...that I asked ya should be enough. I dont care what ya post or how ya post it as long as you're not snipin at mine every time I turn around with your hairsplittin nitpickin snivelin semantics, seizin on every lil detail and generally makin a giant pain in the ass of yourself (which by the way I'm convinced is how ya obtain sexual gratification). Like a pesky gnat flittin about my head, the level of annoyance ya inspire is wayyyyy out of proportion to your presence. Now I realize you've got an axe to grind with me for all the times I highlighted your rather pedestrian thought processes, and I can understand how frustratin that must be for ya. Ya have my sympathy, but badgerin me aint gonna make ya appear any smarter. So again, I'll thank ya kindly to leave off and find someone else to bother. Fair enough? And yes...selective...as ya know damn well you've been dodgin direct questions put to ya on other threads, so dont play dumb. Nice Super Redhawk...can ya hit anythin with it? Personally, I've always found the standard Redhawk more aesthetically pleasin. |
Quote:
|
All times are GMT -5. The time now is 08:45 PM. |
Powered by: vBulletin Version 3.7.2
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Limited.
2008 Shreveport.com