I believe that the study went out of it's way to point out that that conclusion, while plausible, is outside its scope until more data in the coming years is available for analysis.
guns
- Thread starter moreluck
- Start date
that's not a good enough explanation... you put comma's in there
did you not bother to read it?
I'm not. They are.
BigUnionGuy
Got the T-Shirt
"According to the US Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) non-Hispanic blacks accounted for 39.4% of the total prison and jail population in 2009 (841,000 black males and 64,800 black females out of a total of 2,096,300 males and 201,200 females).[46] According to the2010 census of the US Census Bureau blacks (including Hispanic blacks) comprised 13.6% of the US population.[47][48][49]
Hispanics (of all races) were 20.6% of the total jail and prison population in 2009.[46] Hispanics comprised 16.3% of the US population according to the 2010 US census.[47][50] The Northeast has the highest incarceration rates of Hispanics in the nation.[51] Connecticut has the highest Hispanic-to-White incarceration ratio with 6.6 Hispanic males for every white male. The National Average Hispanic-to-White incarceration ratio is 1.8. Other states with high Hispanic-to-White incarcerations include Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, and New York.[52]"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incarceration_in_the_United_States
So in other words, you cannot explain it. Again, like I said, you being a gun owner means, you leave english at the curb, and create something that doesnt exist to fit your demented need to feel safe with an inanimate object.
Why not a bat? Or a blankey?
If your insecurity means the rest of the hundreds of millions of americans have to fear gun owners, then I think you are the one with the problem.
I get it, the comma is a little inconvenient for you in your argument. I also asked you not to fall back onto the supreme courts ruling. I asked for your explanation how the commas explain conjuntive meanings vs. the stand alone meanings you want to assign the second amendment.
There are NOT phrases in the second amendment, there are fragments, fragments that conjunctively attach themselves to the preamble.. "a well regulated militia,"
Using your logic, if we connect the last two fragments separated by a comma yet give them one meaning, how do you then explain the first two fragments, as to themselves, standing alone, have no meaning?
"A well regulated militia," By whom? For what reason? Standing alone, it has no meaning.
" ,being necessary for the security of the state, " What security? what state? What is being secured? Standing alone, it means nothing.
" the right of the people to keep and bear arms, " Ok, what about that right? Is it removed? Is it protected? Is it stupid? Standing alone, it has no meaning.
",shall not be infringed." What shall not be infringed? Standing alone, it has no meaning.
You on the other hand, want to claim that only the last two parts complete a meaning, even though separated by a comma, and anyone with a decent education knows that conjunctively, the comma connects both parts, BUT, and this is a GIANT BUT, it also means that everything before those two fragments also CONNECT, giving a complete meaning.
Somehow, gun owners want to ignore the construction of the second amendment, and extract only the portions they believe apply to them and giving the second amendment and different interpretation.
Its clear to anyone with a decent education what the sentence is intended to mean. In 1791, the founders needed an armed force to deal with not only the british, but the indians and the slaves as well. They also knew, that land grabbers had to be fended off and states borders protected as they were created.
Since there were no navy, marines, army, air force or national guard, the civilian militias is all they could rely upon.
They had to be regulated by the government and subject to on call status by a simple or of the president.
But, as anyone knows, leaving an armed populace in place would also threaten the newly formed government, so a limitation on weapons and ammo was placed upon the militias.
Also, age and race played the biggest part of the regulation of the second amendment. YOU believe, that the founders wanted all citizens to own guns, as many as they wanted, yet, slaves couldnt own guns, mexicans couldnt own guns, women couldnt own guns. Further, the founders knew that older white men with guns poised a larger problem as they would get to a point where they knew too much, and this could jeopardize the new government, so a restriction on age was inserted into the militia act.
ONLY white men ages 18 to 45 could be in the militia, and if you were older than that, then sorry bub, NO GUNS FOR YOU.
Now, if you want to propose that the founders intended on ALL civilians to be armed, then you are clearly going against our history, considering, at the time, if they found a black man with a gun, he was instantly hanged by the neck until he was dead. Indians were shot, and mexicans shot and killed for owning guns.
Now, considering that you are white, you may now want to change history and its intentions.
How do you reconcile, that slavery was included in our constitution and civil rights only applied to white men, and yet today, you want to tell us , that the founders intended everyone to be able to own guns??
Notice by the way, how many comma's i've used in this post and yet, you seem to understand what I am talking about.
Peace.
TOS.
are you talking about the number of CC holders maybe higher because a handful of states don't require licensing???
MAKAVELI
Well-Known Member
So, what's your point?"According to the US Bureau of Justice Statistics (BJS) non-Hispanic blacks accounted for 39.4% of the total prison and jail population in 2009 (841,000 black males and 64,800 black females out of a total of 2,096,300 males and 201,200 females).[46] According to the2010 census of the US Census Bureau blacks (including Hispanic blacks) comprised 13.6% of the US population.[47][48][49]
Hispanics (of all races) were 20.6% of the total jail and prison population in 2009.[46] Hispanics comprised 16.3% of the US population according to the 2010 US census.[47][50] The Northeast has the highest incarceration rates of Hispanics in the nation.[51] Connecticut has the highest Hispanic-to-White incarceration ratio with 6.6 Hispanic males for every white male. The National Average Hispanic-to-White incarceration ratio is 1.8. Other states with high Hispanic-to-White incarcerations include Massachusetts, Pennsylvania, and New York.[52]"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Incarceration_in_the_United_States
I'm thinking that post was supposed to go into the Immigration thread
DriveInDriveOut
Inordinately Right
Maybe he was suggesting that certain races have a genetic disposition to crime.....
Or maybe he was pointing out the inequalities of the American justice system....
Maybe he just likes charts, I know I do.
728ups
All Trash No Trailer
That is about 10 minutes from Scratch's building and is in a high crime area. most businesses have armed security guards
728ups
All Trash No Trailer
i'm betting you don't sit around hoping you'll have to use your Fire Extinguisher or First Aid kit as much as you sit around hoping you can be Charles Bronson or Clint Eastwood. and thinking having a gun is on the same level as having a First Aid Kit or Fire Extinguisher is one of the most absurd things I have ever read on this forum
soberups
Pees in the brown Koolaid
You have your interpretation of what the Second Amendment means, and I have mine.
You hate and fear guns and want to ban them, so you will talk at great length about commas and conjunctive phrases and sentence fragments in a desperate attempt to try and twist the Second Amendment into meaning what you want it to mean, and there is no argument I could ever make that would change your mind on the subject.
And that's just fine, because 200 million gun owners agree with my interpretation, the 36 states that allow concealed carry agree with my interpretation, and the Supreme Court agrees with my interpretation. You got Bloomberg, Feinstein, and maybe a million or so whining moms who agree with your interpretation. I'm OK with that.
soberups
Pees in the brown Koolaid
Maybe you should consider learning some history.
Black men were armed and enlisted to fight against the British during the Revolutionary War.
Native American tribes were also armed and enlisted to fight alongside the Colonials during the Revolutionary War.
As far as Mexicans go....the country of Mexico did not even exist at the time, Americans had not yet explored far enough to the west or south to encounter people of "Mexican" descent, there would not have been any people of "Mexican" descent in any of the Colonies, and if there were they would have been mistaken for Natives.
You can have "your" interpretation of the second amendment as i stated before. Its clear you lose this battle. Just because a couple million other idiots believe what you believe, means nothing. Even fox news has 2.6 nightly idiots that believe everything they say.
I realize now, that language means nothing to you, and that somehow, you want to distort not only the second amendment, but the treatment of blacks in this country as well. As if they were equal citizens at the time, and women could vote.
I get it, your gun is your god.
The great equalizer.
As to the supreme court, they dont agree with you. Heller v DC didnt mean that you could have assault rifles bro, it only ruled that in the courts opinion (5 to 4) that a private person could own a handgun in the home, but deferred long rifles and assault type weapons back to the states.
Try to be a little more honest with guns. You are only fooling yourself.
Its clear, you lose this argument. Everytime, from now on, when you use a comma, you will know that I own you.
I still believe you are a smart man, with a strong conviction and the ability to use rational thinking, however, at some point, while you still have an opportunity to own guns, you could at least accept that you are wrong, but for the moment have the benefit of states rights versus national rights.
Attack me all you want, it matters not.
TOS.
Similar threads
