This week has been pretty rough on everybody, and I'll admit I was caught off guard by the new trolls (and some older members) coming on the board to say that the students were pussies for letting themselves be shot and that all these killings would be prevented if everyong was armed. Oh, and the joyful, crowing messages about how I'm gonna git my guns and go out in my truck and look for girls. Those started about 3 hours after the last body fell in VaTech.
I'm used to debating people who vehemently disagree with me, but this discussion has a different, darker character. I've had at least two people threaten to shoot me (though that may have been one guy twice), I've been called a coward for not having a carry permit and had no end of homophobic insinuations directed at me.
But my main source of annoyance comes from the fact that I'm in this discussion mainly to learn and develop my views, not to hold forth or convert others. And that goal has been constantly frustrated by the huge glut of misinformation, mostly coming from the pro-gun side. People quote stats and stories that have been repeatedly debunked (Bridges and Gross, John Lott's study) instead of using factual statements to support their positions.
What you did a few posts ago was to look at a scientific poll, done over a period of almost 2 decades, and dismiss it with "your mileage may vary" while using a web poll as an example. You either didn't read or understand the data that was presented, which was a significant refutation of the assertion that gun control is a bad issue for politicians.
Now you don't have to agree with the conclusions I draw from that poll, but you DO have to deal with it sensibly. That's the part where I get annoyed. I'm not expecting agreement or even minor compromise on the basic issues. I do want honest debate and I don't feel like that's what you were doing in the previous postings.
I can agree wholeheartedly, that theres absolutely no question that this has been hard on everyone. Everyone except perhaps the media. It is my opinion, that there is no single issue that can bring out the worst in people who might generally agree on just about every other topic.
On the topic of misinformation, every bit as much misinformation has come and been expressed by both sides. This IS something that can be shown. And realisticly, once it gets betond a certain amount and the debating process is so damaged, does it matter anymore which side is the source of more? (I don't say this is permanent, but it defenitely adds to the "somehow darker" that you attributed to it)
As far as those polls...My point, or points, was that polls that ask general questions can be interpreted a host of different ways, depending on the questions asked. The poll I linked, while not scientific or done over ten years is an example of a poll that asks fairly specific questions. And it gives options that are distinctly more polar. The poll you linked, while being done over time, asks verry general questions and in my opinion is much harder to interpret any one way, since respondants quite likely all have thier own differing interpretations of what the poll is asking them. For example:
"*Gallup: "Do you strongly favor, favor, oppose, or strongly oppose enacting tougher gun control laws?"
What does that mean? "Enacting tougher gun laws". A respondant might have answered yes to that, even being pro-gun, if they interpreted "tougher gun laws" as the same basic package of gun laws we have now, with harsher penalties for breaking them, and tougher enforcement. If it had said "more restrictive" gun laws, quite a different responce would be illicited on the part of that same respondant.
"Do you favor or oppose stricter gun control laws in this country? Is that strongly or somewhat favor/oppose?"
Same can be said for the above. I being pro-gun tend to favor stricter gun laws. Not more restrictive ones. In my mind, those are 2 different things.
While a poll such as the one you linked done over a long period of time may show trends, unless some more specific questions are asked
its verry difficult to point a finger and say that it definitively means any one thing, or supports any one stance more than another.
Where as the poll I linked, while being completely unscientific, taking smaller samples, and being an internet poll, CAN be easily interpreted in terms of what respondants mean by thier answers. Thats not saying that the poll I linked is even accurate, just that the formula in terms of the questions posed and thier degree of ambiguity are far more likely to lead to a specific logical conclusion.
Hence, your milage may vary. I will admit, that I didn't do the best job of making that point. Often times when debate gets as heated and dark as this has, I don't.
Like you said. Things have been hard on everyone. Both sides see this (VT) as evidence that what they have been saying is true. One side sees this as an issue that they're backed into a corner on, have been backed into a corner on, and can't afford to give one inch. The other side does not understand it,sees it as unreasonable, and characterizes the other side as x. That other side sees that characterization and says "I was right, your intent is Y otherwise you wouldn't be making such a characterization". And round and round until we get where we are collectively, today.
May a genie remove the splinters from your bathroom tissue.