"Overproof" wrote in message

Good... then let's Outlaw, automobiles, dangerous sports, oil refineries,
war, gold mining, .... Aw ****... let's Outlaw everything fun and
profitable.... will that make you happy?

Certainly, even up there in the permafrost, it has occurred to you that
folks generally want to outlaw only those things that have no impact upon
their likes, activities, and such?

Max

"Capt. Neal®" wrote in message

Guns hardly ever kill people unless they blow up or something.

Bullets kill people, not guns. Ban bullets.

Actually people kill people. With guns, baseball bats, kitchen knives, full
bathtubs, automobiles, motorcycles, skateboards, power tools, chainsaws,
vases, bronze statues, bowling balls, ski poles, icecicles, bicycles, guitar
strings, garden tools, switchblades, meat cleavers, gasoline, fireworks,
golf clubs, golf balls, tennis rackets, cricket bats, gold-plated altar
crosses, dinner plates, steak knives, rope, lakes, rivers, puddles, shoes,
lawn tractors, garden hoses, electrical kitchen appliances, drugs, exhaust
fumes, boats, airplanes, fists, bare feet, nunchucks, pillows, bare hands,
oars, paddles, boat propellers, rocks, bottles, arrows, spears, 2x4s,
bricks, compressed air, dog toys, rat poison, chains, starvation,
electrocution, lethal injection, and lethal gas.

Ban all those things? Ban people?

Max

"Jeff Morris" wrote in message

And yet, your homicide rate is a small fraction of the rate in the US. Its
even lower than in Massachusetts. How do you explain that?

Easy. When you subtract the gang and drug-related murders, the US rates are
comparable with most other countries of similar population density. Gang
and drug murders are urban and cultural problems, which don't affect the
mainstream of US life. Less than 2% of the population has a murder rate
more than 1000x that of the other 98%. The fact that city, county, state,
and the federal government have chosen to do nothing about gangs and drugs
is the issue, not guns.

Of course the anti-gun extremists won't consider removing that population
demographic to make fair and accurate comparisons. Instead they refer to
the gang/drug killings as a bunch of "scare little kids" getting killed by
nasty guns.

Max

"Jeff Morris" wrote in message

And yet, your homicide rate is a small fraction of the rate in the US. Its
even lower than in Massachusetts. How do you explain that?

Hint: It hasn't significantly lowered the criminal use. We are only 32
million people in a country bigger than the USA. Canada as a country is
prone to complancency rather than violent action.
I could shoot clay pigeons on my beach 10 years ago...... now I'm prohibited
from firing a weapon unless it's a designated area. It all started 20 years
ago with the first step to infringe on our freedom to own a firearm.....
it's cost Billions and only served to run the business underground and
hobble the law abiding population.

Maybe you're right ... I've never even seen crack cocaine.

Neither have I..... in my day it was Window Pane or Purple Double Dome.

CM

Maxprop wrote:
"Jeff Morris" wrote in message
...

Well duh. If a village population has 200 people and one gets murdered,
the murder rate is astronomically higher than even NYC or Washington, DC.
Rates mean very little when presented completely out of context or with
no common frame of reference.

And what context are the rates "taken out of"? Its true that the murder
rate in Alaska fluctuates more than other state due to the limited
sampling, but even with that, its above average almost every year. There's
nothing wrong with the method, the rates are high. You can attribute that
to a variety of causes, but the numbers are real.


Are you implying that one has a greater chance of being murdered in Alaska
than say, NYC? Take a course in statistics and get back to me on that,
Jeff.

I think you're the one who needs a refresher course. According to the
2003 FBI reports, the rate of violent crime in Metro NYC (per 100,000)
is 483 while the murder/non negligent manslaughter rate is 5.2. For
Alaska those number are higher, 593 and 6.0 respectively. As I said,
you can find slightly lower numbers some years, much higher numbers in
other, but overall the rate in Alaska are rather high. New York, on the
other hand has had a remarkable "safety wave" where the crime rates have
fallen dramatically.

Sorry if the truth runs against your preconceived notions, MP. If you
live in Alaska, you run a higher risk of being murdered than if you live
in New York City. BTW, the murder rates in "rural Alaska" are actually
higher than in "metropolitan Alaska."

http://www.fbi.gov/ucr/ucr.htm#cius

"Overproof" wrote

Scotty


It obviously did in your case.

You sayin' Scotty is addicted to Pussy??


He's saying he never tried it.

Scotty

"Maxprop" wrote in message

Are you implying that one has a greater chance of being murdered in Alaska
than say, NYC? Take a course in statistics and get back to me on that,
Jeff.

It sounded to me that that was what he was implying...... the whole
concept is flawed... like most of his arguments.

It's simple..... they'll take it all away in little bits over the next
twenty years..... if you let them take the first step.

More People = More Rules... you wonder why I support rampant suicides?

CM

"Maxprop" wrote in message

Hypothermic suicide is probably best, according to those who've survived.
One apparently gets an extreme sense of well-being, almost to the point of
euphoria just before lights out.

There's a thought for the next Ice Fishing trip.......


CM

"Maxprop" wrote in message

Certainly, even up there in the permafrost, it has occurred to you that
folks generally want to outlaw only those things that have no impact upon
their likes, activities, and such?

Actually Max.... it's getting to feel more and more like a bunch of Liberal
assholes want to tell me what's good for me..... and everything they
propose takes a bite out of my wallet ... when nothing was wrong with the
way it was!!! They'll tell you that smoking is bad for you... drinking is
bad for you.... driving fast is bad for you... sailing in a gale is bad for
you.... climbing a mountain is bad for you.... hunting your own food is bad
for you..... protecting yourself is bad for you..... not doing as you are
told is bad for you...... How far are you willing to travel down this
road?

I can't believe the pillars of the conservative view on this newsgroup would
sink so low as to troll liberal values...... it's disgusting!

CM

"Maxprop" wrote in message
k.net...

"Scott Vernon" wrote in message

Nah, too messy. I think the running car in a garage would be a
nice
way to go.

Hypothermic suicide is probably best, according to those who've
survived.
One apparently gets an extreme sense of well-being, almost to the
point of
euphoria just before lights out.

And just how do they know this?