I'll be the first to admit that I am no statistician, and that the endless back-and-forth squabbling seems only to prove that one can use statistics to prove anything one wants to prove. Personally, my belief is that such debates might serve well to show off one's statistical chops, but miss the real point.Please head on over and give it a look.
"The real point," as I see it, is that those private citizens who choose to carry a defensive firearm do not do so with the objective of "fighting crime," but instead have the much more limited aim of defending themselves and their loved ones. [More]
This morning, St. Louis Gun Rights Examiner (briefly) cracked the Top 5 Political Examiners nationwide. That's a first for me (the others do it pretty routinely). Gotta like that.
Speaking of the others, please give them a look, too.
National Gun Rights Examiner
LA Gun Rights Examiner
Cleveland Gun Rights Examiner
Stumble it!
5 comments:
To add people want the police to go out and look for criminals (and nobody else). However, there is an effect of discouraging criminals when some people are able to protect themselves. Clearly children don't have that ability but criminals know that parents are nearby.
Now if one were to pass a law that said stores open 24 hours a day could not have weapons, there would be an effect ... criminals would know the stores would be unarmed.
Very nice job. Thanks for using your eloquence on behalf of us who ain't!
Thanks, '57--but I've seen enough from you to know that I don't have anything in the eloquence department that you lack.
Even though I used the dreaded "ain't"?
Even though I used the dreaded "ain't"?
That doesn't raise any flags for me until people start using it twice in one sentence.
Post a Comment