Going to be hard to stop the Train.

Suicide is rarely a rational choice. Not something worth protecting

 

I already told you.... Provide additional data that proves that after specific gun laws were passed and the before and after stats. show the states where gun death stats significantly dropped after passing gun laws.
One stat is not proof of anything.

 

This refutes none of what I said.

 

But it is not one stat. First world countries that have gun control have much fewer gun deaths. Big numbers do not lie

 

To prove if something works or not, we look at the performance of the law.

 

Or we could look at the effect it has on gun deaths

 

"Performance" and "effect" are one in the same. Please show how your gun control laws have performed before and after in the states with fewer gun deaths. If you can't show improvement after passage of such laws then your entire premise is flawed.

 

I can show what works. I can show first world countries that have far statistically fewer gun deaths than we do. The same for states. The commonality among them all is gun control. The evidence is overwhelming

 

If a state has a worse track record after implementing gun control then your entire theory is flawed.

 

You think one data point destroys an entire theory? Really?

 

If it's not working, it's not working. It's what is known as proof.

The idea of passing gun control laws is to reduce firearm deaths correct?

If deaths are not reduced then the law is a failure. Common sense.

 

It is not known as proof. It is a single data point that could be the exception that proves the rule. Have you ever heard that term?

 

Either it's history proves it has been effective, or it proves it has been failing.

We judge upon performance.

 

So if my uncle smoked for 30 years and never got cancer cigarettes do not cause cancer. The brilliance of small numbers

 

If he got cancer and started chemo, would we not use diagnostic testing to see if the chemo is effective?

We judge about everything in life on performance of the actual relative data.

 

But if he did not get cancer.....then do cigarettes cause cancer or not?

 

The point is that we judge a laws effectiveness on its performance. Not on anything else.

 

I agree. The laws work

 

Not in Chicago.... Shootings up a whopping 88% in 2016.

 

Ranked 17. That's pretty darn good

 

It's not good if it isn't still 17 next year, and by all stats so far for 2016, it doesn't look good.

I have no idea if 17 is good, I don't think you ever said out of how many. 17 means nothing without context.

Shootings up 88%

 

17 is good. It might be safer than the city you live in. Lol

 

17 means nothing without context. I highly doubt it will still be 17 next year given that gun murders are up a whopping 77%

 

Context is all that matters. It may be safer to live in chicago then your city. Lol

 

However such proof is indeed required for a debate, and to convince one side that the other is indeed correct, and knows what it is talking about. Therefore it is your obligation to present the proof you believe supports your claims.