to fellow americans, anyone catch the debate?

haz

I AM OT!
Joined
May 28, 2004
Messages
5,519
Location
Oslo
Car(s)
Tesla Model S 75D BMW E39 Wagon
you never called me uneducated did you? You called the Kerry voters for that .. not me. I'm just standing up for the peeps you are knocking for no reason.

I'm highly educated thank you very much, but as this discussion becomes less and less serious (thx to MPower) I can't help myself :lol:

btw, keep on knockin' dude ... I'm laughing all the way anyways, and you just make it better :lol:

haz
 

MPower

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 10, 2004
Messages
767
Location
California, USA
How does it become less and less serious when I ask detailed quesions and get no answers and make detailed posts about my political posts and get comments back that I am a moron? I mean, you can all me uneducated all you want... at least I have responded to the questions asked and have shown that I have a knowledge of the issues, which everyone here clearly does not or else they wouldnt have avoided all the questions I have asked... :wink:
 

haha604

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 28, 2003
Messages
1,051
Location
Vancouver, Canada
MPower said:
First off, calling me a moron is a totally class-less remark. Everyone who said something like that should be ashamed.
I think you will do very well by sticking to your own rule. Just because someone else has a different political view from you doesn't mean he is stupid :roll: . Guess who is going to win in Boston, University Town? I guess all those academics at Harvard are idiots for voting for Kerry.

And there are somethings I like and dislke about both candidates.
I like Bush for his pro-free-trade stance, but I dislike him for his handling of post-war Iraq and Afganistan, and his budget policy. His only remedy for the economy seems to be tax cut, and that by itself will not turn the economy around. Furthermore, his speeches about the biggest ever wealth creation during his term in America are rubbish. Rising house prices do not equal rising wealth. It merely redistributes wealth from non-home owners to home owners.

I like Kerry for his softer foreign policy and his more liberal stance on social issues, but dislike him for his (potentially) more protectionist stance.
 

Jostyrostelli

Forum Addict
Joined
May 29, 2004
Messages
8,061
Nor did I, but MPower, like I said...why do I have to know all those facts and numbers about Bush? I know a bit about both...I know how they "think" and I have a better feeling for Kerry then for Bush...let it be...everybody his own opinion right?

*Yeah but how many lives is worth that?
 

MPower

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 10, 2004
Messages
767
Location
California, USA
Jostyrostelli said:
Nor did I, but MPower, like I said...why do I have to know all those facts and numbers about Bush? I know a bit about both...I know how they "think" and I have a better feeling for Kerry then for Bush...let it be...everybody his own opinion right?
All I am asking for are some answers to some questions as posted earlier. Everyone has their own opinion, absolutely. All I want is a civilized discussion on the issues, and apparently I cant get any answers to the questions.
 

haha604

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 28, 2003
Messages
1,051
Location
Vancouver, Canada
MPower said:
I guess creating free-elections in Afghanistan and having them go smoothly is poor handling... :?
If you leave out the warlord fightings I guess you can consider the process "smooth".
.
 

MPower

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 10, 2004
Messages
767
Location
California, USA
haha604 said:
MPower said:
I guess creating free-elections in Afghanistan and having them go smoothly is poor handling... :?
If you leave out the warlord fightings I guess you can consider the process "smooth".
.
There were no attacks on the election centers during the election.

I believe there was a small battle but that resulted in only 22 Taliban deaths. So good news... :D
 

haha604

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 28, 2003
Messages
1,051
Location
Vancouver, Canada
A) If Kerry/Edwards are the leaders they say they are, why do they miss more than seventy percent of their required meetings and do not attend one senate meeting in one whole year?
This question is vague. Don't know what you are asking.

B) If Kerry/Edwards's healthcare plan is so much better than Bush/Cheneny's why has it proven not to work, and why has it not been clarified at all except for one aspect: the lawsuits?
Kerry's healthplan has not been proven to fail. It has never been implemented. And no its not the Clinton health plan. And while I do very much want to get rid of those trial lawyers, the Republicans have their own share of lobby groups to cater to, among which includes the Sons of the Second Amendment.

C) If Kerry/Edwards plans on using international allies to resolve the issues in Iraq, why do they intentionally insult the choosen leader of Iraq?
That leader was chosen and backed by America.

D) If Bush/Cheney's tax plan is so bad, why is it that Kerry/Edwards will go into the White House (assuming they get elected, which they wont) with the intention to raise taxes?
Duh, that is because Kerry does not think Bush's tax cuts are good.
 

MPower

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 10, 2004
Messages
767
Location
California, USA
Here is a fact sheet that might make you rethink the Kerry stance. BTW, I did not make this... dont have that much time on my hands:

JOBS

NET JOBS GAINED


MANY HIGHER PAYING JOBS GROWING FAST 7-9-04
http://factcheck.org/article.aspx?docid=208
A new set of numbers from the Bureau of Labor Statistics actually shows solid growth in employment in relatively higher -paying occupations including construction workers, health-care professionals, business managers, and teachers, and virtually no growth at all in relatively lower-paying occupations including office clerks and assembly-line workers. It's the most detailed breakdown yet -- looking at 154 different job and industry groupings. These statistics are a FactCheck.org exclusive -- supplied to us by BLS at our request and not previously published.

ECONOMISTS SAY OUTSOURCING NOT AS BAD AS KERRY SAYS 7-28-04
http://factcheck.org/article.aspx?docID=225
But recent Labor Department data underscore what even Democratic economists have said for some time -- outsourcing jobs overseas, or "offshoring," accounts for just a small fraction of the many millions of jobs that are lost each year even in a good economy.

There is indeed a tax break for US-based multinational corporations to locate operations overseas. Bush isn't to blame for it -- it's been there for decades. It's also true that Bush doesn't support Kerry's proposed remedy, which is controversial.

RECENT ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENTS
http://jec.senate.gov/index.cfm?FuseAction=Releases.Release&ReleaseID=219262
The economic expansion continues to be vibrant, but growth in employment and gross domestic product (GDP) moderated this summer. Much of the moderation in GDP growth was from slower consumer spending after rapid spending earlier this year. The recent economic soft patch is attributed by the Federal Reserve (Fed) ?importantly to the substantial rise in energy prices.? Many, including the Fed, believe that the economy is poised to resume sustained robust growth in jobs and output. Consistent with that belief, recent indicators show rising consumer confidence, vigorous activity in manufacturing and service industries, still-vibrant housing markets, strong business investment, and continued low inflation.

EMPLOYMENT SUMMARY 6-1-04
http://www.bls.gov/news.release/empsit.nr0.htm
A rather thurough and bipartisan report on all aspects of jobs, from earnings, to unemployment, to new jobs created. EXCERT
Within the service-providing sector, health care and social assistance
continued to grow, adding 30,000 jobs over the month. Employment in thisindustry has increased by 279,000 over the year. In June, employment rose in hospitals and in ambulatory health care services, which includes doctors'offices and home health care services. Child day care services added 11,000 jobs.

REAL EARNINGS "REAL EARNINGS IN JULY 2004," BLS, 8/17/04

Measurement: "Average hourly earnings do not represent total labor costs per hour for the employer, because they exclude retroactive payments and irregular bonuses, employee benefits, and the employer's share of payroll taxes"- adjusted for inflation.

Most recent report: "Real average weekly earnings increased by 0.7 percent from June to July after seasonal adjustment, according to preliminary data released today by the Bureau of Labor Statistics of the U.S. Department of Labor. This was due to a 0.3 percent increase in average hourly earnings, a 0.3 percent rise in average weekly hours, and a 0.1 percent decrease in the Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers (CPI-W)."

During Bush Administration: Real average weekly earnings have increased 1.0% versus 0.4% during the Clinton Administration. In addition, real average hourly earnings have increased 2.5%. At this point in President Clinton's first term real average hourly earnings had increased just 0.4%.

HOURLY COMPENSATION "PRODUCTIVITY & COSTS," BLS, 8/10/04

Measurement: Real hourly compensation includes wages and salaries, supplements, employer contributions to employee benefit plans, and taxes. It is adjusted for inflation.

Most recent report: "When the rise in consumer prices is taken into account, real hourly compensation rose 0.1 percent in the second quarter of 2004 and 0.3 in the first quarter."

During Bush Administration: Real hourly compensation has gone up 5.2%. During the same period of President Clinton's first term it dropped 0.4%.

EMPLOYMENT COST INDEX ? JUNE 2004, BLS, 7/29/04

Measurement: It includes both wages and salaries, and benefits. It is not adjusted for inflation.

Most recent report: "[T]otal compensation costs for civilian workers increased 0.9% from March 2004 to June 2004?"

During Bush Administration: Total civilian compensation has increased 14.4%. Compensation was only up 11.3% at the same point in the Clinton administration.

PERSONAL INCOME "PERSONAL INCOME AND OUTLAYS: JUNE 2004," BEAREAU OF LABOR STATISTICS, 8/03/04

Measurement: Real disposable personal income (DPI) includes wage and salaries, proprietors', rental, interest, dividend and transfer income. It excludes individual and payroll income taxes and is adjusted for inflation.

Most recent report: "Real DPI ? DPI adjusted to remove price changes ? increased less than 0.1% in June, compared with an increase of 0.1% in May."

During Bush Administration: Since President Bush has been in office, real per capita disposable personal income has increased $1,521 versus $1,332 for the same period of President Clinton's first term.

IS THE WORST OVER FOR THE JOB MARKET? 10-3-03
http://money.cnn.com/2003/10/03/news/economy/jobs/
Unemployment held steady at 6.1 percent in September, the Labor Department reported, while payrolls outside the farm sector rose by 57,000 jobs after falling a revised 41,000 in August. It was the first gain for payrolls since 158,000 in January.

UNEMPLOYMENT RATE DROPS TO 5.4% 9-3-04
http://money.cnn.com/2004/09/03/news/economy/jobless_august/index.htm?cnn=yes
The Labor Department said the economy created 144,000 jobs in August, the strongest reading since May and up from a revised 73,000 jobs in July. Economists surveyed by Briefing.com had forecast 150,000 new jobs.

The report could give a lift to the Bush campaign, coming just hours after the Republicans renominated him. The president and his advisers like to point to the nearly 1.7 million jobs created since August 2003.

GOOD NEWS AT LAST 12-19-03
http://www.darwinmag.com/read/120103/jobs.html
The majority of companies plan to either increase their number of employees or at least keep headcount the same over the next year, based on a survey of senior executives and managers in a base of more than 1,000 companies nationwide, conducted by my company, NFI Research.

INDIAN OUTSOURCING FIRM TO INVEST IN US, CREATE US JOBS 4-8-04
http://searchcio.techtarget.com/newsItem/0,289139,sid19_gci958902,00.html
Infosys, an Indian beneficiary of the offshore outsourcing trend, has announced that it will invest $20 million to create nearly 500 consulting jobs in the United States. The company's American employees would advise U.S. firms on the benefits of outsourcing and sending work to India.

BUSH GETS LITTLE CREDIT FOR JOBS CREATED 6-12-04
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/5189042/
The U.S. economy has gained about 1.2 million jobs in the last six months, but word hasn?t trickled down to most Americans, according to voters in a survey by The Associated Press.

UNDERSTANDING POVERTY IN AMERICA 1-5-04
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1200218/posts

By Robert E. Rector and Kirk A. Johnson, Ph.D.

If poverty means lacking nutritious food, adequate warm housing, and clothing for a family, relatively few of the 35 million people identified as being "in poverty" by the Census Bureau could be characterized as poor. While material hardship does exist in the United States, it is quite restricted in scope and severity.

The average "poor" person, as defined by the government, has a living standard far higher than the public imagines. The following are facts about persons defined as "poor" by the Census Bureau, taken from various government reports:

*** Forty-six percent of all poor households actually own their own homes. The average home owned by persons classified as poor by the Census Bureau is a three-bedroom house with one-and-a-half baths, a garage, and a porch or patio.

*** Seventy-six percent of poor households have air conditioning. By contrast, 30 years ago, only 36 percent of the entire U.S. population enjoyed air conditioning.

*** Only 6 percent of poor households are overcrowded. More than two-thirds have more than two rooms per person.

*** The typical poor American has more living space than the average individual living in Paris, London, Vienna, Athens, and other cities throughout Europe. (These comparisons are to the average citizens in foreign countries, not to those classified as poor.)

*** Nearly three-quarters of poor households own a car; 30 percent own two or more cars.

*** Ninety-seven percent of poor households have a color television; over half own two or more color televisions.

*** Seventy-eight percent have a VCR or DVD player; 62 percent have cable or satellite TV reception.

*** Seventy-three percent own microwave ovens, more than half have a stereo, and a third have an automatic dishwasher.

*** Overall, the typical American defined as poor by the government has a car, air conditioning, a refrigerator, a stove, a clothes washer and dryer, and a microwave. He has two color televisions, cable or satellite TV reception, a VCR or DVD player, and a stereo. He is able to obtain medical care. His home is in good repair and is not overcrowded. By his own report, his family is not hungry, and he had sufficient funds in the past year to meet his family's essential needs. While this individual's life is not opulent, it is equally far from the popular images of dire poverty conveyed by the press, liberal activists, and politicians.

JOB NUMBERS YOU DON'T HEAR ABOUT 8-25-04
http://www.usatoday.com/news/opinion/editorials/2004-08-25-kane-grossman_x.htm
The U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) recently snuck out a telling confession beneath everyone's radar: Its flagship payroll survey is likely undercounting hundreds of thousands of jobs.

Most economic observers were too busy fretting over the lackluster gain of 32,000 payroll jobs in July to take notice of the other positive indicators, let alone the quiet little study that acknowledges payrolls have a problem.

The study describes how job-changing can inflate the payroll survey's numbers artificially. When worker turnover is brisk, as in the late 1990s, millions of workers are counted twice when they switch jobs. About 3.9 million people changed employers during a typical month during the 1990s, but only 3.1 million do so now.

Why is job-changing dropping? Maybe stability is preferred since 9/11. Perhaps lower turnover is a reflection of the aging workforce and low participation rate of current teens. Or maybe more workers are becoming self-employed. The reason doesn't matter, but the effect on payrolls does.

For months, the debate has been raging over how to measure jobs. Being that we're in a presidential election year, the issue has been magnified. But why should the average person care? Because only an accurate reading can gauge the country's true economic health and affect everything from interest rates to consumer confidence.

KERRY SAYS JOBS PAYING $9,000 LESS. NOT TRUE. 8-3-04
http://factcheck.org/article.aspx?docID=228
In his acceptance speech at the Democratic National Convention July 29 Kerry repeated a claim that the economy is creating jobs that pay $9,000 a year less than those they replace. He bases that on disputed analysis from a liberal think tank.
In fact, economists disagree about whether jobs are getting worse or better. As we said before, there's evidence both ways. Even some Democratic economists say the economic numbers are simply too rough and contradictory to allow any conclusion about the direction of change, let alone about how much less or more the new jobs pay.
Kerry also said "wages are falling" when in fact they are increasing. It's true wages haven't kept up with inflation for the past several months. But even after adjusting for inflation they're still higher than when Bush took office.


TAXES AND TAX CUTS

TOP 5% PAY HALF THE TAXES 4-1-04
http://www.ustreas.gov/press/releases/js1287.htm
In 2001, the latest year of available data, the top 5 percent of taxpayers paid more than one-half (53.3 percent) of all individual income taxes, but reported roughly one-third (32.0 percent) of income.



RICHEST 1% PAY 33.89% OF TAXES, ONLY GET BACK 22%
http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn?pagename=article&node=&contentId=A16313-2001Mar2
President Bush, under pressure from Democrats to disclose how much of his tax cut would go to the wealthiest 1 percent of Americans, released a partial calculation yesterday showing top earners would get 22 percent of the total dollar value of the tax cut.

2003 TAX CUT ASSESSMENT 7-21-04
http://www.heritage.org/Research/Taxes/wm543.cfm
If the significant expansion of economic well-being is one of this Congress?s enduring legacies, that place in history will stem primarily from the passage of the Jobs and Growth Tax Relief Reconciliation Act (JGTRRA), which President George W. Bush signed into law on May 27, 2003. That legislation is one of the greatest supply-side changes to tax law in U.S. history. And JGTRRA has delivered on its economic promise.

TAX RELIEF MAKES AMERICA PROSPER
http://www.heritage.org/research/features/agenda_taxes.cfm
By Daniel J. Mitchell, Ph. D. of Political Economics
America's tax burden is too high. Federal revenues are consuming about 20 percent of economic output, far above the post-World War II average. Even more important, the tax system collects that excessive amount of money in a way that needlessly damages growth; marginal tax rates on personal income are too high; and the multiple layers of taxation on income that is saved and invested result in extremely punitive effective tax rates on capital formation. As if that were not enough, the Internal Revenue Code even taxes income earned in other nations, making it much more difficult for U.S.-based companies to compete in the global economy. And to add insult to injury, the needless complexity of the code imposes heavy compliance costs on individual and businesses taxpayers and creates an environment in which special-interest deal-making often supplants pro-growth tax policy.

HOW KERRY'S TAX PLAN WOULD EFFECT ECONOMY 4-16-04
http://www.heritage.org/Research/Taxes/wm483.cfm#_ftn1
Senator John F. Kerry, the presumptive presidential nominee of the Democratic Party, has proposed a number of changes to U.S. tax policy that he argues will boost the economy?s performance and increase jobs. However, an econometric analysis of his plan shows that the negative effects of an increase in taxes for high-income taxpayers overwhelm the positive effects of making key elements of the Bush tax plan permanent for taxpayers with incomes under $200,000. The net effect is a slower economy and job creation significantly below potential.

PLUGGING THE HOLE, ENDING THE DEFECIT
BY The Outspoken

http://www.joeuser.com/index.asp?AID=542 by Brad Wardell
http://www.home-mortgage-loan-refinancing.com/Mortgage01_21_04/Mortgage9H_Refinancing.htm by Deborah Lagomarsino http://216.239.53.104/search?q=cache:fUwBdhPJEUoJ:www.fb.com/issues/analysis/Bush_Deficits.pdf+current+deficit&hl=en&ie=UTF-8 by John Skorburg
http://eire.census.gov/popest/data/national/tables/asro/NA-EST2002-ASRO-01.php by Census Beauro
http://www.argmax.com/mt_blog/archive/000062.php by John Irons
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-srv/politics/special/budget/budget.htm by Mark Stencel
Our current deficit is said to be many things, it just depends on who's saying them. Talk to any liberal person and they will undoubtable focus on a few things: 1: Bush made tax cuts for the rich [and only the rich] 2: Our deficit now is dangerously high 3: Bush is the worst fiscal president ever.

Talk to any conservative person and they will tell you a few different things: 1: Our extra military spending was neither foreseen nor expected 2: Bush's tax cut has stimulated the economy 3: There is too much waste in government.

Many of these positions are highly exaggerated, though not completely false. Let's examine them one by one.

Bush's Tax Cuts

Bush, early in his first term, did something most liberals can't stand: he cut taxes. It's not that liberals don't like paying less money, it's that they feel entitled to more of it than the next person. I hear many of them constantly berate conservatives for supporting greedy executives. Do the liberals not advocate that they be given a larger portion back than they paid? Sounds greedy to me.

Both are greedy in a sense, and rightfully so as greed is part of human nature, however something separates these two: corporations provide society with a product or service while a person provides society with their existence. A corporation receiving less money may curb their contribution to society easily, however, it is highly unlikely that a single person will curb their existence when receiving less money back from the government.

But are the accusations even true? It's hard to tell. We can write a few things off right away. The notion that Bush's tax cuts benefit only those with enormous amounts of money is obviously false, as his tax cut clearly benefited anyone who has children, and we can all agree that people of all social classes have children.


RECOUNTS


http://www.uselectionatlas.org/USPRESIDENT/frametextj.html



GORE RESPECTS COURT RULING
http://www.presidency.ucsb.edu/docs/florida2000/gore12-05.php
GORE: Well, I think the U.S. Supreme Court ruling was neutral. It may have even been slightly favorable to us, in the sense that it gave a clear road map to the Florida Supreme Court. But those are things that the lawyers can tell you more about than I can.

I just don't want to accept your premise that they've all been negative. I don't think the U.S. Supreme Court decision was negative.

IF THE COURTS HADN'T INTERVENED
http://www.sptimes.com/News/webspecials/lostvotes/what_would_have_happ.shtml
On Dec. 8, the Florida Supreme Court ordered counties around the state to do a hand recount of undervotes ? ballots where the machines did not record a vote for president. n The court also ordered state election officials to accept results from counties where recounts already had been completed (Palm Beach, Volusia and 139 precincts in Miami-Dade). n It was up to each county to decide what would constitute a vote. More than half the counties that used punch card ballots said they would consider a vote if at least one corner of the tiny chad was dangling off the ballot. Some were more restrictive (two corners), others were willing to settle for just a dimple. n Nine counties intended to review overvotes ? optical scan ballots that had been disqualified for extra marks ? to determine if the voter?s choice was clear. And four counties refused to do any more counting. n As the recounts began that next morning, Bush led Gore by 195 votes. n Shortly before 3 p.m. on Dec. 9 the U.S. Supreme Court ordered the recounts to stop.
FLORIDA OUTCOME:
BUSH BY 493 VOTES

TEN ELECTION PROBLEMS
http://www.sptimes.com/News/webspecials/lostvotes/ten-problems.shtml
Read a nice summary of what went wrong in Florida, and what has been changed.

RECOUNT RESULTS
http://www.sptimes.com/News/webspecials/lostvotes/67counties.shtml
But to find out what might have happened that day if the count went on, reporters interviewed canvassing board members across the state. The standards they intended to use that day for finding valid votes were then applied to the ballots reviewed and categorized by the National Opinion Research Center. Votes are considered potentially valid where two of the three NORC coders agreed on what they saw on the ballot, based on the individual county standards for undervotes. Nine counties also intended to review overvoted ballots to find those cases where a voter essentially voted for the same candidate twice, rather than invalidating their ballot. The review on these pages takes into account overvotes in only those counties that intended to review them on Dec. 9.
Had they finished their work that day using the standards they described, Bush?s lead would have grown to 493 votes.

GORE ENDORSES LAWSUIT TO REJECT ABSENTEE (INCLUDING MILITARY) VOTES
http://www.geocities.com/CapitolHill/Lobby/2897/29.html
By Bill Sammon / The Washington Times
TALLAHASSEE, Fla. ? Al Gore, whose post-election mantra has been to "count every vote," yesterday for the first time endorsed Democratic lawsuits seeking to throw out more than 20,000 absentee ballots in Seminole and Martin counties. The dramatic shift in strategy came just hours after the Florida Supreme Court announced it might not accept the vice president's appeal of a lower court's sweeping rejection of his lawsuit contesting the election. Even if the case is accepted, legal professionals doubt the court would reverse Monday's ruling by Leon County Judge N. Sanders Sauls.

2000 ELECTION CHRONOLOGY
http://www.infoplease.com/ipa/A0884144.html
A thorough and Bipartisan look chronologically of all the events of the election, focusing on Florida. Includes several links within the link.

Tuesday, Nov. 7?Election Day. Pundits have predicted a tight race between Texas governor George W. Bush and Vice President Al Gore, but few expect one of the closest elections in U.S. history. By early evening, it's clear the election hinges on Florida.
Wednesday, Nov. 8?Gore calls Bush at approximately 3 A.M. to concede, but retracts the concession shortly after, because Bush's razor-slim lead prompts an automatic recount. He leads Gore by about 1,210 votes out of nearly 6 million cast in Florida. Meanwhile Gore leads in both the national popular count and the electoral college.
An unusual amount of votes for third-party candidates in Palm Beach County leads to disputes over the county's ?butterfly ballots.? A number of ballots in other counties are disqualified because the chad?the small piece of paper punched out of punch-card ballots?did not fully detach from the ballot.
Thursday, Nov. 9?Gore's camp requests a hand recount of the approximately 1.8 million ballots cast in Palm Beach, Miami-Dade, Broward, and Volusia counties, Democratic strongholds.
Friday, Nov. 10?Florida's automatic recount is completed. The Associated Press reports that Bush has retained his lead but only by 327 votes.
Saturday, Nov. 11?The Bush team, led by former secretary of state James Baker, files suit in federal court to block Gore's request for a hand recount.
Monday, Nov. 13?Florida secretary of state Katherine Harris announces she will not extend the Nov. 14 deadline for the submission of all state results, excluding absentee ballots from overseas.
A federal judge in Miami rejects Bush's efforts to halt manual recounts. Bush appeals the decision.
Tuesday, Nov. 14?Harris postpones certification of the state's votes until Nov. 15, so Miami-Dade, Palm Beach, and Broward counties have time to prepare an explanation of why they should hand count their ballots.
Wednesday, Nov. 15?Harris decides that no county offered adequate evidence to justify further hand recounts.
Florida Supreme Court denies a request from Harris to stop the hand recounts. Certification is again postponed.
Thursday, Nov. 16?Bush's lawyers present written arguments to the U.S. federal appeals court in Atlanta to end the manual recounts. Gore's team files a counter motion.
Friday, Nov. 17?The Florida Supreme Court blocks Harris from certifying election until it rules on the Democrats' motion to include hand recounts.
The 11th Circuit Court of Appeals denies the Republicans' motion to stop manual recounts on constitutional grounds.
Saturday, Nov. 18?With a tally of absentee ballots, uncertified count has Bush ahead of Gore by 930 votes.
Tuesday, Nov. 21?Florida Supreme Court rules that results of hand counts of ballots in Miami-Dade, Palm Beach, and Broward counties must be included in the vote tally if the counts are completed by Nov. 26.
Sunday, Nov. 26?Harris certifies Bush as the winner of Florida?s 25 electoral votes, with a 537-vote lead over Gore. Gore pledges to challenge certification in court. The tally does not include results from Palm Beach County, which finished its hand recount hours after the deadline.
Monday, Nov. 27?Gore contests the Florida results in a circuit court in Tallahassee.
Wednesday, Nov. 29?Leon County Circuit Court judge N. Sanders Sauls orders that all ballots from Palm Beach and Miami-Dade counties be sent to Tallahassee for a hearing on whether the hand count, which was incomplete at the time of the court-ordered Nov. 26 deadline, should be included in the final vote tally.
Thursday, Nov. 30?Florida lawmakers, voting along party lines, recommend holding a special session to name the state's 25 electors if the election dispute is not resolved by Dec. 12, six days before the electoral college meets.
Friday, Dec. 1?The U.S. Supreme Court hears arguments on whether the Florida Supreme Court acted properly when it forced the Florida secretary of state to accept manual recounts submitted after the legal deadline.
The Florida Supreme Court denies Gore's appeal to immediately begin recounting ballots and rejects motion filed by some Palm Beach County citizens who questioned the integrity of the ?butterfly ballot.?
Gore requests a count of approximately 14,000 ?undervotes? from Palm Beach and Miami-Dade counties.
Monday, Dec. 4?Judge Sauls rejects Gore?s contest of the election results, saying the vice president failed to prove that hand recounts would have altered the results. Gore appeals to the Florida Supreme Court.
U.S. Supreme Court asks Florida Supreme Court to explain why it ordered Harris to accept results submitted after the Nov. 14 deadline mandated by state law, thus returning the case to Tallahassee.
Thursday, Dec. 7?Gore's legal team appeals Sauls's ruling. Bush's lawyers argue that the decision should stand.
Friday, Dec. 8?The Florida Supreme Court, ruling on Gore's appeal, orders manual recounts in counties with large numbers of undervotes. Bush appeals to the U.S. Supreme Court and seeks injunction to stop recounts.
In two separate lawsuits, Leon County Circuit Court judges refuse to throw out absentee ballots from Seminole and Martin counties that had been disputed by Gore.
Saturday, Dec. 9?The U.S. Supreme Court votes 5?4 to halt the hand recounts and sets a hearing for Dec. 11.
Florida Supreme Court hears appeal on whether absentee ballots in Martin and Seminole counties should be counted.
Tuesday, Dec. 12?The U.S. Supreme Court rules in Bush v. Gore 7?2 to reverse the Florida Supreme Court, which had ordered manual recounts in certain counties. The Court contends that the recount was not treating all ballots equally, and was thus a violation of the Constitution's equal protection and due process guarantees. The Supreme Court of Florida would be required to set up new voting standards and carry them out in a recount. The justices, however, split 5?4 along partisan lines about implementing a remedy. Five justices maintain that this process and the recount must adhere to the official deadline for certifying electoral college votes: midnight, Dec. 12; other justices question the importance of this date. Since the Court makes its ruling just hours before the deadline, it in effect ensures that it is too late for a recount. The decision generates enormous controversy. Those objecting to the ruling assert that the Supreme Court, and not the electorate, has effectively determined the outcome of the presidential election. As Justice Ruth Bader Ginsburg writes in a scathing dissent, ?the Court?s conclusion that a constitutionally adequate recount is impractical is a prophecy the Court?s own judgment will not allow to be tested. Such an untested prophecy should not decide the Presidency of the United States.?
Wednesday, Dec. 13?In another decision, Florida Supreme Court decides not to hear an appeal from Gore asking that absentee ballots from Martin and Seminole counties be thrown out.
In televised speeches, Gore concedes, and Bush accepts the presidency.
Monday, Dec. 18?Electoral college representatives meet in state capitals and cast votes to select president.
Wednesday, Jan. 5?Congress meets to tally electoral college results.
Saturday, Jan. 20?George W. Bush sworn in as 43rd president of the United States.


BUSH NATIONAL GUARD

NEW EVIDENCE SUPPORTS BUSH'S RECORD 2-15-04
http://factcheck.org/article.aspx?docid=140
White House released personnel and payroll records showing Bush was paid and credited for service during the period in question. Bush was credited with enough points to meet his requirements for that year.

BUSH NO DESERTER 2-11-04
http://www.factcheck.org/article.aspx?docID=131
The fact is Bush was honorably discharged without ever being officially accused of desertion or being away without official leave.

UPDATE NEW RECORDS PROVE HE WAS IN ALABAMA 2-12-04
http://www.factcheck.org/MiscReports.aspx?docid=142
And in fact, Bush was at Dannelly Air National Guard base in Montgomery as late as Jan. 6, 1973, according to a document released by the White House Feb. 11. The document is a record of a dental examination of Bush on that date. The payroll records released two days earlier show Bush received pay and credit for service for Jan. 6 and for five other days closely clustered between Jan. 4 and Jan. 10.[/quote]

MISSING DOCUMENTS FOUND 7-23-04
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/B/BUSH_MILITARY_RECORDS?SITE=WIWAF&SECTION=HOME
The Pentagon on Friday released newly discovered payroll records from President Bush's 1972 service in the Alabama National Guard.

BUSH AND THE NATIONAL GUARD: CASE CLOSED 3-8-04
http://www.nationalreview.com/york/york200402180840.asp
Those records... make a strong case that Bush fulfilled his duties and met the requirements for Air National Guard officers during his service from 1968 to 1973. A look at those records, along with interviews with people who knew Bush at the time, suggests that after all the shouting is over, and some of the basic facts become known, this latest line of attack on the president will come to nothing.

DOCUMENTING BUSH'S RECORDS 9-13-04
http://www.usatoday.com/news/2004-02-14-bush-docs.htm

President Bush released his official Vietnam-era military records in February to counter Democrats' suggestions that he shirked his duty in the Texas Air National Guard. These documents detailed Bush's service in the Guard from 1968 until 1973. Bush's medical records were opened for examination by reporters in the Roosevelt Room, but those documents were not allowed to leave the room and are not included below.

In September, additional documents surfaced which purported to show a National Guard commander, Lt. Col. Jerry Killian, criticizing Bush's guard service. In them, Killian said Bush was failing to meet standards for fighter pilots, but said he felt pressure from superiors to "sugar coat" his judgments. Killian died in 1984. Copies of the documents, first reported upon by CBS, were obtained independently by USA TODAY shortly after the show aired. A number of document experts have questioned the authenticity of these newly disclosed memos .


PDF (Portable Document Format) requires Adobe Acrobat Reader.

Official records released in February

1. Enlistment Packet (1.02 MB)
2. Discharge (193 K)
3. Grade Determination (1.54 MB)
4. Performance Grades (449 K)
5. Performance Points (787 K)
6. Reassignments Split Training (224 K)
7. Security Clearance (227 K)
8. School Training (490 K)
9. Miscellaneous (674 K)

2000 Personnel files

10. 2000 Personnel file (1.32 MB)
11. 2000 Personnel file (1.21 MB)
12. 2000 Personnel file (882 K)
13. 2000 Personnel file (841 K)
14. 2000 Personnel file (899 K)

2004 Personnel files

15. 2004 Personnel file (1.20 MB)
16. 2004 Personnel file (1.56 MB)
17. 2004 Personnel file (946 K)
18. 2004 Personnel file (662 K)
19. 2004 Personnel file (821 K)

Killian memos

See the documents (88 K)


WMD IN IRAQ

US REMOVES TWO TONS OF RADIOLOGICAL MATERIALS
http://www.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/07/07/iraq.nuclear/
WASHINGTON (CNN) -- The United States removed nearly two tons of radiological and nuclear materials from Iraq last month, the Energy Department said.
The material could have potentially been used to make a "radiological dispersal device" -- a so-called dirty bomb -- "or diverted to support a nuclear weapons program," the department said Tuesday.
Radiological sources for medical, agricultural or industrial purposes were not removed, the department said. Less-sensitive materials were repackaged and remained in Iraq.
The departments of Energy and Defense removed "1.77 metric tons of low-enriched uranium and roughly 1,000 highly radioactive sources from the former Iraq nuclear research facility," Energy Secretary Spencer Abraham said Tuesday.
"This operation was a major achievement for the Bush administration's goal to keep potentially dangerous nuclear materials out of the hands of terrorists," Abraham said. "It also puts this material out of reach for countries that may seek to develop their own nuclear weapons."
The material was gathered from around Iraq and taken to the Tuwaitha Nuclear Research Center, 11 miles southeast of Baghdad and the main site for the Iraqi nuclear program before the war.
The United States notified the International Atomic Energy Agency of the planned transfer on June 19, but "requested IAEA to keep the information about the intended transfer confidential for ... security reasons," Mohamed ElBaradei said in a letter released Wednesday by the United Nations.
It was then was flown to the United States on June 23, where it will be held at secure sites, said Brian Wilkes, a spokesman for the National Nuclear Security Administration.

LETTER BY SENATOR GRAHAM
http://www.fas.org/irp/news/2002/10/dci100702.html
Our understanding of the relationship between Iraq and al- Qa'ida is evolving and is based on sources of varying reliability. Some of the information we have received comes from detainees, including some of high rank.

We have solid reporting of senior level contacts between Iraq and al-Qa'ida going back a decade.

Credible information indicates that Iraq and al-Qa'ida have discussed safe haven and reciprocal non-aggression.

Since Operation Enduring Freedom, we have solid evidence of the presence in Iraq of al-Qa'ida members, including some that have been in Baghdad.

We have credible reporting that al-Qa'ida leaders sought contacts in Iraq who could help them acquire WMD capabilities. The reporting also stated that Iraq has provided training to al-Qa'ida members in the areas of poisons and gases and making conventional bombs.

Iraq's increasing support to extremist Palestinians, coupled with growing indications of a relationship with al- Qa'ida, suggest that Baghdad's links to terrorists will increase, even absent US military action.

US MILITARY FINDS SARIN/MUSTARD SHELLS http://washingtontimes.com/national/20040624-112920-5897r.htm
"We're not sure how many more are out there that haven't been found, but we've found 10 or 12 sarin and mustard rounds," he said. "I'm reluctant to judge what that means at this point, but there's other aspects of the program which we still have to flush out."
U.S. military officials in Baghdad found two bombs in May containing chemicals. A roadside bomb made from an artillery shell discovered May 15 contained chemicals that, when combined, form sarin.
Earlier on May 7, another improvised explosive device was found containing mustard agent.
All such weapons were supposed to have been destroyed by Saddam's regime under U.N. sanctions and the terms of the cease fire from the 1990-91 Persian Gulf war.

SARIN, MUSTARD GAS FOUND SEPERATELY IN IRAQ
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,120137,00.html
BAGHDAD, Iraq ? A roadside bomb containing sarin nerve agent recently exploded near a U.S. military convoy, the U.S. military said Monday. Bush administration officials told Fox News that mustard gas was also recently discovered.

BRITISH INTEL SAID SADDAM HAD PLANS FOR WMD
http://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/library/news/iraq/2002/iraq-020924-usia01.htm
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

1. Under Saddam Hussein Iraq developed chemical and biological weapons, acquired missiles allowing it to attack neighbouring countries with these weapons and persistently tried to develop a nuclear bomb. Saddam has used chemical weapons, both against Iran and against his own people. Following the Gulf War, Iraq had to admit to all this. And in the ceasefire of 1991 Saddam agreed unconditionally to give up his weapons of mass destruction.

2. Much information about Iraq's weapons of mass destruction is already in the public domain from UN reports and from Iraqi defectors. This points clearly to Iraq's continuing possession, after 1991, of chemical and biological agents and weapons produced before the Gulf War. It shows that Iraq has refurbished sites formerly associated with the production of chemical and biological agents. And it indicates that Iraq remains able to manufacture these agents, and to use bombs, shells, artillery rockets and ballistic missiles to deliver them.

3. An independent and well-researched overview of this public evidence was provided by the International Institute for Strategic Studies (IISS) on 9 September. The IISS report also suggested that Iraq could assemble nuclear weapons within months of obtaining fissile material from foreign sources.

4. As well as the public evidence, however, significant additional information is available to the Government from secret intelligence sources, described in more detail in this paper. This intelligence cannot tell us about everything. However, it provides a fuller picture of Iraqi plans and capabilities. It shows that Saddam Hussein attaches great importance to possessing weapons of mass destruction which he regards as the basis for Iraq's regional power. It shows that he does not regard them only as weapons of last resort. He is ready to use them, including against his own population, and is determined to retain them, in breach of United Nations Security Council Resolutions (UNSCR).

5. Intelligence also shows that Iraq is preparing plans to conceal evidence of these weapons, including incriminating documents, from renewed inspections. And it confirms that despite sanctions and the policy of containment, Saddam has continued to make progress with his illicit weapons programmes.
...

10. The paper briefly sets out how Iraq is able to finance its weapons programme. Drawing on illicit earnings generated outside UN control, Iraq generated illegal income of some $3 billion in 2001.

EFFECTS OF MUSTARD GAS
http://www.encyclopedia.com/html/m1/mustardg.asp
A powerful vesicant, mustard gas causes severe blistering even in small quantities. Highly irritating to the eyes, it quickly causes conjunctivitis and blindness. If inhaled, it attacks the respiratory tract and lungs, causing pulmonary edema. Some effects of exposure to mustard gas are delayed up to 12 hr; death may result several days after exposure.


ELECTED DEMOCRATS ON IRAQ WMD

"One way or the other, we are determined to deny Iraq the capacity to develop weapons of mass destruction and the missiles to deliver them. That is our bottom line."
President Clinton, Feb. 4, 1998.

"If Saddam rejects peace and we have to use force, our purpose is clear. We want to seriously diminish the threat posed by Iraq's weapons of mass destruction program."
President Clinton, Feb. 17, 1998.

"[W]e urge you, after consulting with Congress, and consistent with the U.S. Constitution and laws, to take necessary actions (including, if appropriate, air and missile strikes on suspect Iraqi sites) to respond effectively to the threat posed by Iraq's refusal to end its weapons of mass destruction programs."
Letter to President Clinton, signed by Sens. Carl Levin, Tom Daschle, John Kerry, and others Oct. 9, 1998.

"Saddam Hussein has been engaged in the development of weapons of mass destruction technology which is a threat to countries in the region and he has made a mockery of the weapons inspection process."
Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D, CA), Dec. 16, 1998.

"There is no doubt that . Saddam Hussein has reinvigorated his weapons programs. Reports indicate that biological, chemical and nuclear programs continue apace and may be back to pre-Gulf War status. In addition, Saddam continues to redefine delivery systems and is doubtless using the cover of a licit missile program to develop longer-range missiles that will threaten the United States and our allies."
Letter to President Bush, Signed by Sen. Bob Graham (D, FL,) and others, Dec, 5, 2001.

"We begin with the common belief that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant and a threat to the peace and stability of the region. He has ignored the mandate of the United Nations and is building weapons of mass destruction and the means of delivering them."
Sen. Carl Levin (D, MI), Sept. 19, 2002.

"We know that he has stored secret supplies of biological and chemical weapons throughout his country."
Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002.

"Iraq's search for weapons of mass destruction has proven impossible to deter and we should assume that it will continue for as long as Saddam is in power."
Al Gore, Sept. 23, 2002.

"We have known for many years that Saddam Hussein is seing and developing weapons of mass destruction."
Sen. Ted Kennedy (D, MA), Sept. 27, 2002.

"The last UN weapons inspectors left Iraq in October1998. We are confident that Saddam Hussein retains some stockpiles of chemical and biological weapons, and that he has since embarked on a crash course to build up his chemical and biological warfare capabilities. Intelligence reports indicate that he is seeking nuclear weapons..."
Sen. Robert Byrd (D, WV), Oct. 3, 2002.

"I will be voting to give the President of the United States the authority to use force ? if necessary ? to disarm Saddam Hussein because I believe that a deadly arsenal of weapons of mass destruction in his hands is a real and grave threat to our security."
Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Oct. 9, 2002.

"There is unmistakable evidence that Saddam Hussein is working aggressively to develop nuclear weapons and will likely have nuclear weapons within the next five years . We also should remember we have alway s underestimated the progress Saddam has made in development of weapons of mass destruction."
Sen. Jay Rockerfeller (D, WV), Oct 10, 2002.

"He has systematically violated, over the course of the past 11 years, every significant UN resolution that has demanded that he disarm and destroy his chemical and biological weapons, and any nuclear capacity. This he has refused to do."
Rep. Henry Waxman (D, CA), Oct. 10, 2002.

"In the four years since the inspectors left, intelligence reports show that Saddam Hussein has worked to rebuild his chemical and biological weapons stock, his missile delivery capability, and his nuclear program. He has also given aid, comfort, and sanctuary to terrorists, including al Qaeda members. It is clear, however, that if left unchecked, Saddam Hussein will continue to increase his capacity to wage biological and chemical warfare, and will keep trying to develop nuclear weapons."
Sen. Hillary Clinton (D, NY), Oct 10, 2002

"We are in possession of what I think to be compelling evidence that Saddam Hussein has, and has had for a number of years, a developing capacity for the production and storage of weapons of mass destruction. "[W]ithout question, we need to disarm Saddam Hussein. He is a brutal, murderous dictator, leading an oppressive regime ... He presents a particularly grievous threat because he is so consistently prone to miscalculation. And now he has continued deceit and his consistent grasp for weapons of mass destruction ... So the threat of Saddam Hussein with weapons of mass destruction is real ...
Sen. John F. Kerry (D, MA), Jan. 23. 2003.

Sources:
http://www.fas.org/news/iraq/1998/02/20/980220j_voa.htm
http://www.hernandotoday.com/columnists/MGA1NRCFLLD.html
http://clinton.senate.gov/speeches/iraq_101002.html
http://www.senate.gov/~lieberman/speeches/02/09/2002913614.html
http://www.senate.gov/~feinstein/Releases02/r-iraq10.htm
http://www.waxman.house.gov/news_files/news_statements_res_iraq_10_10_02.htm
http://levin.senate.gov/floor/091902cs1.htm
http://edwards.senate.gov/statements/20021010_iraq.html
http://www.npr.org/programs/atc/transcripts/2002/dec/021208.ohara.html
http://rockefeller.senate.gov/2002/flrstmt0102002.html
http://usembassy-australia.state.gov/hyper/2003/0129/epf303.htm
http://www.johnkerry.com/site/PageServer?pagename=spc_2003_0123
http://www.cnn.com/US/9802/04/us.un.iraq/


GUNS AND CRIME

2ND AMENDMENT TO UNITED STATES CONSTITUTION 9-25-1789
http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitution.billofrights.html
Amendment II
A well regulated militia, being necessary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms, shall not be infringed.

AMERICA MOST VIOLENT? WORLD HOMICIDE/SUICIDE RATES
http://www.haciendapub.com/stolinsky.html
The accompanying table (Table 1) gives suicide and homicide rates for all 86 nations for which data are available. Rates are per 100,000 population and come from the United Nations 1996 Demographic Yearbook published in 1998.(1) Note that the latest U.S. suicide rate (for 1997) is 11.4, slightly below the 11.9 listed, while the 1997 U.S. homicide rate is 7.3, far below the 9.4 listed here. Figures exceeding published U.S. figures are starred, while those exceeding only the most recent (1997) U.S. figures are doubly starred. For a more contemporaneous comparison, the singly starred figures should be stressed.


VARIOUS PRO GUN STATISTICS
http://www.justfacts.com/gun_control.htm

A SITE TO ANSWER QUESTIONS ABOUT GUNS
http://www.gunfacts.info/
Gun facts is a free e-book that debunks common myths about gun control. It is intended as a reference guide for journalist, activists, politicians, and other people interested in restoring honesty to the debate about guns, crime, and the 2nd Amendment.

GUN MYTHS
www.ncpa.org

Myth No. 1: Guns cause crime.

The National Crime Survey estimates that 83 percent of Americans will be victims of violent crime at some time in their lives. Parties with diametrically opposed views on gun control seize on this estimate to support their positions. Those favoring gun control laws claim that such laws would keep more guns off the streets and out of the hands of criminals in an increasingly violent world. Opponents of new gun restrictions contend that a firearm in the hands of a law-abiding person is one of the best deterrents to crime, protecting people with limited physical strength from physically stronger criminals. Let's take a look at the available evidence.

Domestic Studies.

Several sophisticated statistical models have attempted to measure the net effect of firearms on criminal violence. On balance, they show that there is nothing to be gained from reducing the general level of gun ownership.

A thorough review of 18 studies of the effects of gun availability among potential victims and criminals found that the overall effect on criminal violence was zero.
In one study, researchers found no significant differences in total robbery rates between cities where guns were widely available and cities where they were not; in cities with fewer firearms, armed robbers simply used other weapons.
The best available evidence, based on at least eight national surveys of the general adult population, indicates that guns are used about as often for defensive as for criminal purposes.
This conclusion is especially true of handguns.

International Evidence.

The experience of other nations also provides little support for the notion that guns causecrime:
Switzerland has one of the lowest murder rates in the world, and it requires all able-bodied males between the ages of 20 and 50 to have a military-issued automatic weapon, ammunition and other equipment in their dwellings.
Israel, which has an extremely low crime rate but is vulnerable to enemies including terrorists, depends on the defensive value of widespread civilian gun possession.
Denmark and Finland also have high rates of gun ownership and low crime rates.
The experience of these countries shows that widespread gun possession is compatible with low crime rates. On the other hand, nations like Japan and England also have low crime rates but low gun ownership. There is no simple relationship between firearm availability and crime.

Crimes Involving Guns.

"Eighty-eight percent of violent crimes do not involve firearms."

How many violent crimes involving guns are committed each year? FBI data for 1990 show that criminals used firearms in about 258,000 violent offenses, or about 16 percent of the 1.6 million crimes reported to the police. Fewer than half of all violent crimes are reported to the police, however. The National Crime Survey (NCS) estimates that there are about 5.4 million violent crimes (both reported and unreported) and that guns of all types are involved in some 650,000 or 12 percent.10 In other words, 88 percent of violent crimes do not involve firearms.

While certainly a very large annual number, reported and unreported violent crimes committed with guns remain relatively rare events. Less than 2 percent of the estimated 36 million crimes of all types (in the National Crime Survey) committed each year involve a gun. A majority of gun crimes are assaults, but only one in 42 handgun crimes involves a victim being shot. While there is a lot of violent crime in America relative to other industrial nations, an overwhelming majority of the violence involves knives, hammers, sticks, broken bottles, hands and feet and other weapons besides firearms.

"Firearms were used in a higher percentage of homicides in the 1920s than in the 1980s."

Guns are used in a majority of murders (from 59 percent to 66.3 percent in each of the past 10 years) and accounted for 14,265 deaths in 1991. According to the FBI's Uniform Crime Reports, 53.1 percent of reported murders in 1991 were committed with handguns, 5.2 percent with shotguns and 3.4 percent with rifles, while miscellaneous and unknown firearms accounted for the remaining 4.6 percent. (Long guns, although virtually uncontrolled, were involved in only 8.6 percent of homicides.) By contrast, firearms were used to commit about 70 to 75 percent of homicides in the 1920s, a higher percentage than the average 60 percent rate during the 1980s.11 Firearms were the instrument of death in 60 percent of murders in 1980 and 66 percent in 1991 " the highest percentage in recent years " suggesting an upward trend. Firearms were used in 40 percent of all reported robberies but in only 11 percent of all rapes, 12 percent of severe assaults and 12 percent of all violent crimes.

Guns Involved in Crimes.

No one knows what fraction of firearms ultimately is used to commit crime, but the percentage is almost certainly tiny. Even if the same gun were never used more than once in committing a crime, only one out of every 309 guns would be involved in a crime in a given year. Overall:
Only one out of every 123 handguns (less than 1 percent) and one out of every 1,247 long guns (less than one-tenth of 1 percent) are used in crime in any given year.
Even under very generous assumptions to maximize the estimated percentage of guns used in a crime, at most 6.7 percent of handguns would ever be involved in a crime.
If we realistically allow for repeated criminal uses of the same weapons, the fraction of all guns that are ever involved in crime would be less than 1 percent, with long guns under 0.5 percent and handguns under 2 percent.
Gun control laws cannot possibly reduce the crime rate unless they affect the 1 percent of guns that are actually used in crimes. Even if the laws did this, criminals would find it easy to acquire new guns. The numbers by themselves raise doubts about the efficacy of general restrictions on gun ownership in decreasing the frequency of gun use in violent crime.

Case Study: Killeen, Texas.

George Hennard crashed a pickup truck through the front of a Luby's Cafeteria in Killeen, Texas, on October 16, 1991, got out with two semiautomatic pistols and methodically killed 23 people in 10 minutes before police finally arrived and killed him.

Dr. Suzanna Gratia, who watched as her mother and father were shot to death by Hennard, said later that she had left a pistol in her car outside the cafeteria because Texas law forbade carrying a weapon. From where she lay, she said, she had a clear shot at Hennard early on - and would have taken it. "We were sitting ducks and that just makes me so blasted mad," said Dr. Gratia, a chiropractor. "I've got a right to protect myself."

On that day, coincidentally, Congress was debating a crime control bill. Congressman Chet Edwards, in whose district the massacre occurred, said the event convinced him to favor a ban on so-called assault weapons (although assault weapons were not used in the Killeen massacre).

Case Study: Anniston, Ala.

Two months later, two armed robbers herded 20 customers and employees in an Anniston, Ala., Shoney's restaurant into a walk-in cooler and held the manager outside at gunpoint. Then they spotted Thomas Glen Terry, a customer, hiding under a table and began shooting at him. Unlike the situation in Texas, Terry, who had a permit, was carrying a .45 caliber automatic handgun. He shot back, killing one robber and wounding the other. The manager and the hostages were released. unharmed.

Case Study: Los Angeles, Calif.

Rioters in Los Angeles in the spring of 1992 looted and burned a store owned by Korean-Americans in Hollywood, even though they had to break through steel roll-down doors with crowbars and sledgehammers to get at it. But they spared a similar business in Koreatown. The reason? The rioters could see commandos with Uzi machine guns on top of the Koreatown building. The merchants later revealed that, although they did have a few guns that they fully intended to use if necessary, the "Uzis" were toys, and the "commandos" were costumed merchants.

The looters and arsonists tended to leave houses and apartment buildings in the riot area of Los Angeles alone - not out of compassion, but because, as a 13-year-old neighborhood resident said, "They (the residents) got guns and everybody knows that. Nobody's going to want to mess with folks in houses."

Myth No. 2: Gun Control Laws Reduce Crime

Despite some 20,000 gun laws in the United States, mostly at the state and local levels, there is little evidence that any but the most weakly motivated citizens have been discouraged from gun ownership. And there is no evidence that these gun control laws have made a dent in the crime rate.
 

haz

I AM OT!
Joined
May 28, 2004
Messages
5,519
Location
Oslo
Car(s)
Tesla Model S 75D BMW E39 Wagon
If you thought you've "won" this discussion or something, just cuz you post ca. 10.000 pages of facts .... think again. Who here is gonna read all that??? Anyone???


:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

this guy isn't real ...

haz
 

Jostyrostelli

Forum Addict
Joined
May 29, 2004
Messages
8,061
Dude...i did a check on your post with Word...
15 pages
8.408 words
46.566 letters
927 lines


I cant even finish a book if it has got more than 5 pages and no pictures
:lol:
 

MPower

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 10, 2004
Messages
767
Location
California, USA
Who said that I won the discussion? Im not here to win anything. Like I said, I just want to have a discussion on the issues

All it is there for is to make you rethink the status of the economy, the war, etc. Its very interesting and if you dont want to read it, thats fine. Its there for those who are interested or care.
 

MPower

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 10, 2004
Messages
767
Location
California, USA
Jostyrostelli said:
Dude...i did a check on your post with Word...
15 pages
8.408 words
46.566 letters
927 lines


I cant even finish a book if it has got more than 5 pages and no pictures
:lol:
Like I said, I didnt write it. It was a combination of facts that many people have found and put together in one document. Whoever wrote it has a lot of time on their hands... :lol:
 

justin syder

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 8, 2003
Messages
4,096
Location
New York, USA
Car(s)
1986 Mercedes-Benz 300E
All it is there for is to make you rethink the status of the economy, the war, etc. Its very interesting and if you dont want to read it, thats fine. Its there for those who are interested or care.
Its far easier to dismiss our side and continue to want Kerry in because of your ignorance and miseducation.

That is not to say that you guys are smart and educated but interms of the issues you are misinformed, dont care to research facts or read things or just want Kerry because of the ignorance in hating Bush. Hating Bush and wanting to vote for, "anyone but Bush" shows true ignorance.

That is why the democratic party goes after young people and minorities because they are the type to vote agains Republicans because they feel "the white man is holding me down" and that the democratic party helps out the "average american". :roll:
 

justin syder

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 8, 2003
Messages
4,096
Location
New York, USA
Car(s)
1986 Mercedes-Benz 300E
OH and one more thing, guess who proposed a Bill that would in effect create a draft.

Democratic Representive Charles Rangel (D-NY)

LOOK IT UP FOR YOURSELF, go on. then tell me that Republicans or Rich white guys or even BUSH wants a draft. :wink:
 

haha604

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 28, 2003
Messages
1,051
Location
Vancouver, Canada
MPower if you think posting up that will convince people then you are completely wrong. Anyone can google a bunch of "studies" supporting either Bush or Kerry. I study statistics so I know very well how (intentionally) misleading studies can get.

If you want a discussion you better stop calling yourself smart and the other side stupid.

Now if anyone can explain how Bush's budget policy is going to work then he derserves a Nobel prize in economics. Someone will have to close the tap, some day, and the later that happens, the more painful the eventual consequences will be.
 

MPower

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 10, 2004
Messages
767
Location
California, USA
Did you read any of those statistics? They ARE working. It is a proven that tax-cuts translates to a boost in economies. And if you also look at those statistics, you will see that the Kerry tax plan will make things worse. I posted that so that all of you could see that everything is working. And if you can find some stats that make a case for Kerry, POST IT! :wink:
 
Top