Guns Reduce Crime Debate: Closing Arguments Part 2 and Results

[TheJimsock]

Helmke is on the Brady bunch payroll. Sensibility can't apply to him.  He MUST lie.

[BSS14285]

here is the answer to the restaurant question............. at a public event given the fact that there are maybe 0.05% criminals 0.05% crazy people and 99.9% lawful and normal people let me give you 4 scenarios. 1-all have guns I like the odds 99.9vs0.1......2-carry permit exists and maybe 10% have guns then the odds are 10vs0.1......3-aggressive gun bans are in effect and then the odds are 0vs0.05......4-no guns at all are an impossibility since guns have been invented and still exist.

[scasafrass]

it would be interesting to see if anyone who came to this with an opinion changed at the end or if all the movement was from the undecided portion of the audience.

[brucerobert]

I just dont understand what Helmke's position is. He is not against guns for self defence or hunting or target shooting - he just wants 'sensible restrictions'.

What the hell does this mean? I just hear him wanting more restrictions on various things.

What does he actually propose?

[ustfu]

@brucerobert Nothing. He just wants the paychecks.

[bighitter42]

Helmke's so incredibly anti-gun. His anti-gun positions make it very disturbing to hear him lie and say that he's not.

[stevebaus]

The anti gun side rarely addressed the issue put forth. They wanted to talk about keeping guns from criminals, fine, wait until the debate is how best to do that. That was not the topic here. Here is my question for the anti gun side, how many of you own a gun and if you do not, do you have a sign in the window of your house stating your residence is gun free? If not, why not?

[jayniesgottagun]

Kleck owned Helmke. Not particularly hard when his (Helmke's) position has no basis in fact and relies on emotion. And he's rather smarmy too.

[bighitter42]

Excessively smarmy. And always throwing up strawmen.