The NRA Is Suing Florida Over New Gun Control Laws

[maracho]

Not exactly sure what that first graph shows, but it looks like about half the country has exemptions to the MLDA. I guess that shows the level of enforcement prior to 1986.

You say drunk driving deaths increased "right after" (I guess this is a change from the 5 years you originally wanted to argue). One of the graphs you shared seems to indicate otherwise. Notice the trough of the curve is at 1983, and increases until around the time the MLDA was fully implemented and then drops off significantly.



Most of the rest of the post has nothing at all to do with your original argument. Lastly, it freebly ends with the argument that laws still get broken, so there's no sense in having any.

That wasnt a graph but rather a map and you were supposed to read the paragraph underneath it about 1984 mandate and some state exemptions that allowed parents to buy the beer, etc etc.

Again, my graph that you posted above was meant to compare decreases over time between age groups and supplemented my graph on the decrease in percentage of adolescents over time. However, it too shows a huge trough and then a huge spike right after 1984 and then went down again but my other graph shows that that deaths are on the rise again in 2000s. Again, I attribute the spike to the government's MLDA insinuating that drinking makes you grown up. But my original premise was that your prohibition ideas and government backup was shatty

Wrong again, my argument is about doing laws right without hypocritical lobbying. There is a highly defined profile for these cshool shooters but the government refuses to look at it. Likewise, if the government really wanted to reduce alcohol related deaths they would stop pandering to their shltty brewery lobbies and let people make and grow their own, which would be a huge psychological factor. If You really want to lower traffic deaths, then raise the driving age but comparing these young drinkers to satanic shool shooters is ludicrous. Oo but the car lobby

[GGG Gloveking]

That wasnt a graph but rather a map and you were supposed to read the paragraph underneath it about 1984 mandate and some state exemptions that allowed parents to buy the beer, etc etc.

Again, my graph that you posted above was meant to compare decreases over time between age groups and supplemented my graph on the decrease in percentage of adolescents over time. However, it too shows a huge trough and then a huge spike right after 1984 and then went down again but my other graph shows that that deaths are on the rise again in 2000s. Again, I attribute the spike to the government's MLDA insinuating that drinking makes you grown up. But my original premise was that your prohibition ideas and government backup was shatty

Wrong again, my argument is about doing laws right without hypocritical lobbying. There is a highly defined profile for these cshool shooters but the government refuses to look at it. Likewise, if the government really wanted to reduce alcohol related deaths they would stop pandering to their shltty brewery lobbies and let people make and grow their own, which would be a huge psychological factor. If You really want to lower traffic deaths, then raise the driving age but comparing these young drinkers to satanic shool shooters is ludicrous. Oo but the car lobby

So, your map talks about exemptions to the law and has no bearing at all to the number of alcohol related crashes during the late 80s. Got it.

The chart shows that the number of fatalities was going up in 1984 from 1983. It also shows an increase, however the NTSA data shows this is misleading. While the total number of crashes goes up, the percentage (and actual number) of intoxicated drivers goes down during this period. If we consider when the law actually went into effect, the results appear to be much quicker.

[maracho]

So, your map talks about exemptions to the law and has no bearing at all to the number of alcohol related crashes during the late 80s. Got it.

The chart shows that the number of fatalities was going up in 1984 from 1983. It also shows an increase, however the NTSA data shows this is misleading. While the total number of crashes goes up, the percentage (and actual number) of intoxicated drivers goes down during this period. If we consider when the law actually went into effect, the results appear to be much quicker.

I never said it did. I merely put it up because I found it interesting that that the ACT was not only implemented in 1986 with sanction on states that didnt immediately abide.

I find Your problem with graphs is psychosomatic

[Vasyl’s dad]

Change the age to buy a weapon.
Change the age to enlist.
Change the age to buy tobacco.
Change the age to vote as well.


You can’t have these random ages scattered of when a segment of people become responsible based on the action they will perform.

Raise the age to vote and see what these school kids think. If they can’t be responsible enough to buy a gun, how can they be responsible with their vote?

[GGG Gloveking]

I never said it did. I merely put it up because I found it interesting that that the ACT was not only implemented in 1986 with sanction on states that didnt immediately abide.

I find Your problem with graphs is psychosomatic

I have a problem with graphs? Lol. Wasn't it you that said we should skip the BS graphs and look at the numbers? Once we got to looking at those numbers, you didn't want to look at them any more. You wanted graphs then

Can you show where drunk driving crashes went up for 5 years yet?

[maracho]

That's crazy projection of your own psychosis. I showed that even your bogus graphs prove your age prohibition law harmful, which prompted you to alter key numbers. I also showed that even though the percentage of drinking adolescents decreased over time, the deaths were decreasing before the law and then increased after the law and then again in the 2000s, which you totally deleted .
As I said, if the graphs could have easily charted all alcahol levels and all crashes to remove several biases but for some deceptive reason chose not too, which would have proved you and uncle sam even more in the dark

[GGG Gloveking]

That's crazy projection of your own psychosis. I showed that even your bogus graphs prove your age prohibition law harmful, which prompted you to alter key numbers. I also showed that even though the percentage of drinking adolescents decreased over time, the deaths were decreasing before the law and then increased after the law and then again in the 2000s, which you totally deleted .
As I said, if the graphs could have easily charted all alcahol levels and all crashes to remove several biases but for some deceptive reason chose not too, which would have proved you and uncle sam even more in the dark

What the fuçk are you even talking about? My psychosis?! You said that if we look at the real numbers, and then even gave said numbers, that we would see the answer. Don't you remember saying that? Now, you flip flop and say its my psychosis. Come on, now. You sat there for days standing behind your numbers. Once I actually analyzed YOUR numbers, you don't want to talk about them any more. Why is that? Why don't you want to talk about page 16 of your crashstat report anymore?

You haven't shown anything except an unwillingness to admit you made an error. You said drunk driving crashes went up for 5 years after the MLDA was raised to 21, and that simply isn't true. You just aren't man enough to admit it, so you throw a hundred other graphs (many of which aren't even related to the topic at hand) trying to muddy the water. We have all the stats we need, you just don't like what they really say

[maracho]

What the fuçk are you even talking about? My psychosis?! You said that if we look at the real numbers, and then even gave said numbers, that we would see the answer. Don't you remember saying that? Now, you flip flop and say its my psychosis. Come on, now. You sat there for days standing behind your numbers. Once I actually analyzed YOUR numbers, you don't want to talk about them any more. Why is that? Why don't you want to talk about page 16 of your crashstat report anymore?

You haven't shown anything except an unwillingness to admit you made an error. You said drunk driving crashes went up for 5 years after the MLDA was raised to 21, and that simply isn't true. You just aren't man enough to admit it, so you throw a hundred other graphs (many of which aren't even related to the topic at hand) trying to muddy the water. We have all the stats we need, you just don't like what they really say

Your psychosis involves a fanatical attempt to throw out babies with your bogus bathwater even after the bathwater was cleared up right in front of you.


You didn't think I'd expose your chart but the acute psychotic episodes surrounding your article's chart include failing to recognize the pre-law fatality decreases, the post-law spike, and the fact that there was a decline in legal aged drunk driving fatalities, which further indicates that the declining trend was not due to your prohibition ideas .

[GGG Gloveking]

Your psychosis involves a fanatical attempt to throw out babies with your bogus bathwater even after the bathwater was cleared up right in front of you.


You didn't think I'd expose your chart but the acute psychotic episodes surrounding your article's chart include failing to recognize the pre-law fatality decreases, the post-law spike, and the fact that there was a decline in legal aged drunk driving fatalities, which further indicates that the declining trend was not due to your prohibition ideas .

I guess after getting your ass whooped over those crash stats, you want to start talking psychology.

Can you show me those 5 years of increase, yet?

[maracho]

I guess after getting your ass whooped over those crash stats, you want to start talking psychology.

Can you show me those 5 years of increase, yet?

I did link it to you for various generations but you altered and fudged a decade, especially considering that uncle same only recorded alcohol levels of .08 and above even though the law restricts levels .02 and above.

In other words, their graphs are meant to fool the sheople