@27: HAH! You did it again!
YOU DO NOT UNDERSTAND WHAT ARGUMENTUM AD HOMINEM MEANS
It translates literally to "argument to the man" and refers to a line of argument focusing not on the point it intends to rebut but rather on the person delivering the point. Saying that an argument "will only convince morons" is NOT IN ANY WAY OR UNDER ANY INTERPRETATION an example of argumentum ad hominem
. You are wrong. You have been wrong many times on the use of this term, and you obstinately continue to be wrong. Wrong wrong wrong wrong wrong. "Wrong" meaning "not correct". W-R-O-N-G. That spells wrong!
Now that the word "wrong" as written has lost any meaning to the eye of the reader, and speaking of things that are wrong, I shall move on to your actual argument (as it were).
"there is not a single shred of evidence that tougher gun control laws result in less gun violence"
In fact, a study done in the wake of Boston's enactment of gun-control legislation in 1975 found that the law was followed by a significant decrease in some categories of violent crime and that the law was likely the cause of this decrease (source
). Want more? You got more.
A 2010 study found that handgun control laws significantly reduced firearms suicides but not homicides, and that restricting sale rather than possession of handguns had a stronger effect. A 2007 study
found that stricter gun control and disarmament campaigns significantly reduced injury and death by firearm in Brazil.
"The people don't want stronger gun control laws."
Actually, the picture is more complex than you claim it to be. According to a Gallup poll
, a strong plurality of Americans are okay with gun laws as they are now, and of the remainder about twice as many want the laws tightened as want them loosened. A CBS poll
finds support for tougher gun laws to be much higher, reaching 49%, as opposed to the only 12% who want weaker gun laws. Additionally, the CBS poll confirmed that an overwhelming majority of Americans still support universal background checks.
Finally, you're not going to convince anyone if you're incapable of correctly using "your" and "you're" in sentences. Fuck sake, that's even worse than your habitual offenses against the phrase "ad hominem".