i dont know if dc did what kennasaw did would have the same outcome. Reason being is because how many percent of black people live in kennasaw? DC has a shit load of them. Like i mean almost every house there is full with black people, violent ones at that or theyre just drug addicts. If those people were forced to have guns i dont think the crime rate in dc would drop i think it would raise in that kind of place.
Originally Posted by WickedIXMR
oh oh.
this topic has/will go in another direction soon.
Lol its just the truth
el oh el
I agree
#1. It's certainly not comparing apples to apples for two reasons:
A. I'm comparing a city that requires gun ownership to a city that forbids it.
B. If you do the math and use per capita rates, you will see that it is a comparison worth making.
#2. A shotgun will actually penetrate less than some popular handgun rounds DEPENDING on the load you have in the shotgun. For personal protection in close quarters, the shotgun really doesn't need to be loaded down for bear with 3" magnum slugs or something. Some buckshot is more than enough. Hell, I wouldn't want to get hit with bird shot at any distance, let alone a few feet. This is the reason why a shotgun is sometimes a good choice for home defense. My shotguns have buckshot in them. I don't see a need for anything more than that.
BTW, they make frangible ammo for just about every caliber of handgun and rifle out there. It is specifically designed NOT to over penetrate and spend all it's energy in the target and nothing else. These are excellent personal defense loads, but that's it's ONLY use as it's not good for anything else. Ammo usually can be gauged to not over penetrate in just about any defense caliber.
#3. This is a function of perception. If the bad element PERCEIVES or THINKS that there is a CHANCE someone on the other side of that door they're about to kick in has a gun to defend themselves, the chances exponentially jump UP that he/she will NOT kick the door down in order to move onto an easier target.
#4. Numbers are numbers folks. A drop of 75% directly due to the passage of that law, eventhough we all KNOW not everybody went out and bought a gun to fulfill that law, is outstanding regardless. Look at it this way....DC and every other gun controlled city's crime rate has gone UP vs down eventhough they have tighter gun laws than any other cities in the country. So again, numbers don't lie. If the crime rate goes UP when you do something you swear was going to make it go DOWN, who's to blame? Use that same logic in the town of Kennesaw. What changed between 1982 and 1983 there? The new mandatory gun law. They didn't triple their police force. Actually their population had boomed from 5K to over 20K in a short period of time. So what made crime rate drop a whopping 75% in just ONE YEAR, and yet another 45% in the very next year after that???
Now look at DC in comparison. THE most restrictive city in just about everything. Hell, they won't even let you use a damn radar detector there. Freaking the worst crime rate in the whole country. Obviously gun control doesn't work, and it's the poster child of why not.
Besides, everyone has to remember that gun control laws only work for idiots like US who ABIDE by the laws. Criminals don't care. They will get their guns illegally, so they wipe their ass with laws. It's like punishing the good kids in a classroom for what 1 or 2 bad ones do. How's that make sense? It doesn't, and that is exactly why gun control will never work. It punishes good instead of bad.
THIS IS WHY the crime rate is high in DC
DC
About 16.7% of families and 20.2% of the population were below the poverty line, including 31.1% of those under age 18 and 16.4% of those over age 65.
Kennesaw
About 3.1% of families and 4.5% of the population were below the poverty line, including 4.8% of those under age 18 and 12.5% of those age 65 or over
Black ppl are not the problem, poor ass blk ppl are the problem (Can you say hilter's final solution to get rid of the problem)
Last edited by TIGERJC; 07-16-2007 at 08:10 PM.
2006 Evo IX - Bolt ons
That's what I'm thinking too, while I don't consider myself particularly pro strict gun control or against, it certainly is comparing apples to oranges to compare DC and Kennesaw. Statistics are so easily skewed, just ask Michale Moore, he's the king of that.
Please tell me if you think my car looks good. But don't tell me if you think it's ugly - only on IA
Good grief, stop with the apples to oranges and atleast try and semi-intelligently explain why you think it's not a fair comparison.
Is it the size? Is it the ratio of Black to White in the population? Is it that Michael Moore said so?
You want to know what's apples to oranges? Poverty levels, literacy levels, and the color of the land. What does any of that have to do with crime rates? There are poor, backward ass, country folk in the mountains that are way worse off than some "city" folk, yet they don't go around killing each other on a daily basis. Why is that? There's poorer, dumber, and yet less violent people out there.
Bottomline is pretty clear to me. Gun control at any level does not work, period. I challenge anyone to show a concrete example of how gun control works to help any crime rate anywhere. It doesn't. It is strictly a political strategy that works on the masses that don't use common sense, hence why they buy into it.
agreed
lol
clearly...
you've got issue
an issue with niggas...lol
clearly...
you've got issue
an issue with niggas...
uuum ...ok
Nope i dont. If you ever been to DC you would know what i mean. And i dont mean the good parts of itagreed
lol
clearly...
you've got issue
ive been to dc b4. it doesnt look any different than any other city that i have been to. no matter what part of town ( city wise ) not tha country.
Well u obviously havent been to the bad parts of it
LOL!! im sorry do you know me?
how are you going to tell me where i havent been?
chill out....i have no reason to lie.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
