Vallhall wrote:

etudiant wrote: We are in a form of virtual dialogue here, so I can only assume that you are engaging in a bit of virtual humor.

The correlation between gun ownership and gun death is massive and undeniable. The US has many more guns in circulation, and many more gun deaths. Canada has considerably less guns, and considerably less gun death. The UK has even less access to firearms, and even less death by gunfire.

And you don't believe someone with paranoid schizophrenia who is convinced God is telling him to kill the demon, that masquerades daily as an elementary school teacher at the local school, might just up the gun death statistics?

You are making light of a dark subject, I believe.

I am only providing facts. Like the fact of correlation not being causation.

Listen to Steven Pinker about the subject. I recommend the entire segment. But to jump directly to the core of discussion you can start at 18:30.




I really don`t care what anyone believes, so I will not waste my time arguing. All I intended was to inform you about the problem being far more complex than the simple answer people would like it to be. Scientific data and examination of them are easy to find.

It seems odd that if you don't care and don't want to discuss the subject that you would go to the bother of posting an item on a discussion forum.

Anyway, your position is ludicrous. Although the majority of those with psychosis are not violent in the least, but a few most definitely are, and are capable of murder for the most obscure and unpredictable reasons. Let them all have guns, and we don't need a mathematician to give us the results.

If you are suggesting that the US has more social and criminal problems than other countries, or perhaps a greater acceptance of violence in general, then all the more reason to limit guns. I'm sure there are multiple factors to consider in gun control, but the basics are not really rocket science. If you had more cars in a city, you can safely bet that you would have more automobile accidents. More guns mean more gun deaths.

etudiant wrote: It seems odd that if you don't care and don't want to discuss the subject that you would go to the bother of posting an item on a discussion forum.

I don`t care because it is not my problem.

When I try to provide some information, present the leading researcher on the subject which can be a good starting point regarding facts. All I get in return are your view of me as a person.

It seems like you have no interest in what scientists actually say. I see no problem with gun control, and live in a country with one of the strictest laws regarding guns. But your reasoning leading to such argument are flawed, like it or not.

When one of the most prominent scientist in the world on this subject, a very left wing one as such, simply does not interest you. What then would there be for me to argue, other than to rant on with personal attacks like a little child? No thanks.

Vallhall wrote:When I try to provide some information, present the leading researcher on the subject which can be a good starting point regarding facts. All I get in return are your view of me as a person.

I researched Pinker's position, and it seems that he favors gun control, but also thinks that it's only part of the solution, and likely not the main part. He doesn't take the position that gun control has no effect on gun crimes.

Steven Pinker: "I think guns themselves probably aren’t the main place to look for an answer; although of course there are many common-sense gun control measures that any sane person would agree should be implemented."

http://www.csicop.org/si/show/steven_pinker_on_violence