Getbig Bodybuilding, Figure and Fitness Forums
Getbig Main Boards => Gossip & Opinions => Topic started by: SF1900 on March 24, 2018, 02:42:44 PM
-
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/commentisfree/2018/mar/23/parkland-students-manifesto-americas-gun-laws
-Ban accessories that simulate automatic weapons
-Establish a database of gun sales and universal background checks
-Change privacy laws to allow mental healthcare providers to communicate with law enforcement
-Close gun show and secondhand sales loopholes
-Allow the CDC to make recommendations for gun reform
-Raise the firearm purchase age to 21
-Dedicate more funds to mental health research and professionals
-Increase funding for school security
-
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/commentisfree/2018/mar/23/parkland-students-manifesto-americas-gun-laws
-Ban accessories that simulate automatic weapons
-Establish a database of gun sales and universal background checks
-Change privacy laws to allow mental healthcare providers to communicate with law enforcement
-Close gun show and secondhand sales loopholes
-Allow the CDC to make recommendations for gun reform
-Raise the firearm purchase age to 21
-Dedicate more funds to mental health research and professionals
-Increase funding for school security
If they're trying to prevent school shootings, the only one on the list that would help, is the last. All the rest is fluff. :-\
-
If they're trying to prevent school shootings, the only one on the list that would help, is the last. All the rest is fluff. :-\
Imagine putting two getbiggers at every school entrance!!
-
Imagine putting two getbiggers at every school entrance!!
"What are you two doing? Oh my God!"
-
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/commentisfree/2018/mar/23/parkland-students-manifesto-americas-gun-laws
-Ban accessories that simulate automatic weapons
-Establish a database of gun sales and universal background checks
-Change privacy laws to allow mental healthcare providers to communicate with law enforcement
-Close gun show and secondhand sales loopholes
-Allow the CDC to make recommendations for gun reform
-Raise the firearm purchase age to 21
-Dedicate more funds to mental health research and professionals
-Increase funding for school security
Other than the two highlighted, I could talk/listen about the others.
-
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/commentisfree/2018/mar/23/parkland-students-manifesto-americas-gun-laws
-Ban accessories that simulate automatic weapons
-Establish a database of gun sales and universal background checks
-Change privacy laws to allow mental healthcare providers to communicate with law enforcement
-Close gun show and secondhand sales loopholes
-Allow the CDC to make recommendations for gun reform
-Raise the firearm purchase age to 21
-Dedicate more funds to mental health research and professionals
-Increase funding for school security
Totally agree
-
MANIFESTOS do not have a very good history... I believe that is an unfortunate choice of words. However, So Be It.
Here are a couple of "manifestos".
“In the name of the best within you, do not sacrifice this world to those who are at its worst. In the name of the values that keep you alive, do not let your vision of people be distorted by the ugly, the cowardly, the mindless in those who have never achieved integrity. Do not lose your knowledge that our proper estate is an upright posture,
an intransigent mind and a step that travels unlimited roads. Do not let your fire go out, spark by irreplaceable spark, in the hopeless swamps of the approximate, the not-quite, the not-yet, the not-at-all. Do not let the hero in your soul perish, in lonely frustration for the life you deserved, but have never been able to reach. Check your road and the nature of your battle. The world you desired can be won, it exists, it is real, it's yours.”
― Ayn Rand
Invictus
BY WILLIAM ERNEST HENLEY
Out of the night that covers me,
Black as the pit from pole to pole,
I thank whatever gods may be
For my unconquerable soul.
In the fell clutch of circumstance
I have not winced nor cried aloud.
Under the bludgeonings of chance
My head is bloody, but unbowed.
Beyond this place of wrath and tears
Looms but the Horror of the shade,
And yet the menace of the years
Finds and shall find me unafraid.
It matters not how strait the gate,
How charged with punishments the scroll,
I am the master of my fate,
I am the captain of my soul.
-
Hope they enjoy their clear backpacks. :)
-
"What are you two doing? Oh my God!"
Hahahahaha that was fucking reat
-
Hope they enjoy their clear backpacks. :)
Also the metal detectors and groping pat-downs.
-
By students ::)
-
-Establish a database of gun sales and universal background checks
Fuck you.
-
By students ::)
Yeah, I'm sure those teens came up with this list.
-
Yeah, I'm sure those teens came up with this list.
There are lots of other "teens" that don't agree with the almighty leader O Hogg but you will never hear their voices.
-
There are lots of other "teens" that don't agree with the almighty leader O Hogg but you will never hear their voices.
Doesn't fit the msm agenda.
-
I love it
-
If they're trying to prevent school shootings, the only one on the list that would help, is the last. All the rest is fluff. :-\
Exactly.also do all these anti gun people really think this will help?You do know how easy it is to get illegal guns right?also take away legal guns and the only ones with guns will be the criminals,great idea.
-
“I wanted to change the world & all I got was this stupid see-through backpack.”
-David Hogg
-
“I wanted to change the world & all I got was this stupid see-through backpack.”
-David Hogg
Hahaa and he's doing interviews whining about that infringing his rights. Hahaaa hypocritical little fucker.
-
By students ::)
What does the age or occupation of the person have to do with anything?
There was a lawmaker in Montana who was a 50+ year old republican who wanted to ban women from wearing biker/yoga pants because it was indecent, according to the bible. Are we to assume this is a sound law because of the his age and occupation?
With that said, the argument and the evidence for the argument stands on its own. Either you can back up a hypothesis with sound data or you can't. Age or occupational status means nothing. All the matters is the argument and evidence put forward.
-
With that said, the argument and the evidence for the argument stands on its own. Either you can back up a hypothesis with sound data or you can't. Age or occupational status means nothing. All the matters is the argument and evidence put forward.
They can't back up their argument , and they have no evidence. Ban AR15s? they're used in 0.2% of all gun murders . moronic logic. That's the problem with you anti-gun people , you're ignorant , you don't have the first clue on what you're talking about. You're in hopelessly over your heads and want to be taken seriously. More gun laws? There are over 50K on the books. moronic logic. Ban bump-stocks , When you can bumpfire with a beltloop or a wooden dowel. moronic logic. Can't buy guns until you're 21? Can fight wars at 18 , moronic logic. Don't want mentally ill with gun? Wants trans-gendered in the military with a known suicide rate around 40% moronic logic.
Your arguments suck , your logic sucks , you have no seat at the table.
-
These are the fucking idiots making laws
-
“I wanted to change the world & all I got was this stupid see-through backpack.”
-David Hogg
Hahahahaha
-
They can't back up their argument , and they have no evidence. Ban AR15s? they're used in 0.2% of all gun murders . moronic logic. That's the problem with you anti-gun people , you're ignorant , you don't have the first clue on what you're talking about. You're in hopelessly over your heads and want to be taken seriously. More gun laws? There are over 50K on the books. moronic logic. Ban bump-stocks , When you can bumpfire with a beltloop or a wooden dowel. moronic logic. Can't buy guns until you're 21? Can fight wars at 18 , moronic logic. Don't want mentally ill with gun? Wants trans-gendered in the military with a known suicide rate around 40% moronic logic.
Your arguments suck , your logic sucks , you have no seat at the table.
I never said they backed up their arguments.
I said an argument stands along irrespective of age.
Plain and simple.
-
I never said they backed up their arguments.
I said an argument stands along irrespective of age.
Plain and simple.
And you're wrong because their " arguments " aren't standing on their own merits and gun laws are still being passed that have had and will have NO effect what so ever. That's why gun owners fed up. It punishes no one but law abiding citizens and presupposes that they are criminals. It's immoral to punish me for the actions of another.
And age is an indication of experience , life experience , the anti gun morons aren't well versed in what they are talking about. Don't preach to be about gun laws and rights when you don't even know what you're talking about.
-
And you're wrong because their " arguments " aren't standing on their own merits and gun laws are still being passed that have had and will have NO effect what so ever. That's why gun owners fed up. It punishes no one but law abiding citizens and presupposes that they are criminals. It's immoral to punish me for the actions of another.
And age is an indication of experience , life experience , the anti gun morons aren't well versed in what they are talking about. Don't preach to be about gun laws and rights when you don't even know what you're talking about.
I am not wrong because I never said I agreed with their arguments. I simply posted their arguments. Nowhere once did I say I agreed with them, nor did I state that they presented good evidence in defense of their argument.
Try again.
-
I am not wrong because I never said I agreed with their arguments. I simply posted their arguments. Nowhere once did I say I agreed with them, nor did I state that they presented good evidence in defense of their argument.
Try again.
::) You're beyond the point of trolling now , seriously just stop.
-
::) You're beyond the point of trolling now , seriously just stop.
Nice comeback. :D :D You have nothing. :D :D
For what it's worth, I don't agree with all of their proposals, especially raising the buying age to 21, since most mass shooters are above 18. So, that would do nothing to stop shootings.
-
Nice comeback. :D :D You have nothing. :D :D
For what it's worth, I don't agree with all of their proposals, especially raising the buying age to 21, since most mass shooters are above 18. So, that would do nothing to stop shootings.
I got facts kids ;) and a wealth of experience on the subject. 8)
-
I got facts kids ;) and a wealth of experience on the subject. 8)
But, your meltdown was rather epic.
-
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/commentisfree/2018/mar/23/parkland-students-manifesto-americas-gun-laws
-Ban accessories that simulate automatic weapons
-Establish a database of gun sales and universal background checks
-Change privacy laws to allow mental healthcare providers to communicate with law enforcement
-Close gun show and secondhand sales loopholes
-Allow the CDC to make recommendations for gun reform
-Raise the firearm purchase age to 21
-Dedicate more funds to mental health research and professionals
-Increase funding for school security
Amazing how the "students" gun law changes exactly mirror the Democratic parties's gun change laws...
I love how this organic movement is able to secure so much corporate backing. Travel accommodations, permits, stages and audio equipment, media coverage. Just amazing....
-
But, your meltdown was rather epic.
You're grasping at straws now ;)
-
It's immoral to punish me for the actions of another.
Holy fuck you always repeat the same stupid shit , I can give you 1000's examples where one person ruins it for everyone else , that's how society works , deal with it .
-
Or how about the schools just teach some discipline and respect?
-
Holy fuck you always repeat the same stupid shit , I can give you 1000's examples where one person ruins it for everyone else , that's how society works , deal with it .
Yeah facts need repeating ;)
-
Need to bring back corporal punishment in schools. Kids are stupid these days.
-
Another establishment attack - pretty shameful to hide behind "educated" dummies.
-
These kids are fucking retarded.
I wonder what groups are behind this latest "spontaneous" anti-gun action?
-
You're grasping at straws now ;)
Nope. Its quite clear you get riled up regarding this topic. Everyone sees it. Just admit it--you meltdown whenever someone mentions something about gun control. Its clear as day.
-
Nope. Its quite clear you get riled up regarding this topic. Everyone sees it. Just admit it--you meltdown whenever someone mentions something about gun control. Its clear as day.
Again , stop. I get riled up , absolutely. melting down? ::) Just stop it. I back up my claims with facts not emotion.
-
Again , stop. I get riled up , absolutely. melting down? ::) Just stop it. I back up my claims with facts not emotion.
Yes, you do get riled up. Meltdown? Well, you seem pretty damn close.
Yup, lots of facts in this statement:
"And age is an indication of experience , life experience , the anti gun morons aren't well versed in what they are talking about. Don't preach to be about gun laws and rights when you don't even know what you're talking about."
We all know when scientists present facts at national conferences, they often talk about their "life experience." :D :D :D Yes, lots of facts in the aforementioned statement!! :D :D
-
Yes, you do get riled up. Meltdown? Well, you seem pretty damn close.
Yup, lots of facts in this statement:
"And age is an indication of experience , life experience , the anti gun morons aren't well versed in what they are talking about. Don't preach to be about gun laws and rights when you don't even know what you're talking about."
We all know when scientists present facts at national conferences, they often talk about their "life experience." :D :D :D Yes, lots of facts in the aforementioned statement!! :D :D
-
lol haha, it's okay, we know that is how you get when talking about gun control.
Don't worry, no one is taking away your guns.............yet.
-
lol haha, it's okay, we know that is how you get when talking about gun control.
Don't worry, no one is taking away your guns.............yet.
Thanks for playing 8)
-
Thanks for playing 8)
They keyword being "yet."
Give it a few years and you will be required to relinquish that gun.
-
They keyword being "yet."
Give it a few years and you will be required to relinquish that gun.
Yeah sure and who is going to enforce these unconstitutional laws? You?
-
that alien face kid is so annoying
-
They keyword being "yet."
Give it a few years and you will be required to relinquish that gun.
I live in Massachusetts , They've already banned bump-stocks , they had 4 people turn them in. lol
So the solution to ending gun violence is more gun violence. Gotcha
-
Yeah sure and who is going to enforce these unconstitutional laws? You?
Yes.
-
I live in Massachusetts , They've already banned bump-stocks , they had 4 people turn them in. lol
So the solution to ending gun violence is more gun violence. Gotcha
They will eventually go door-to-door and get warrants to search everyones home and remove all guns.
Wait and see.
-
Yes.
How? You think you going to knock on someones door and they are just going to hand them over?
-
They will eventually go door-to-door and get warrants to search everyones home and remove all guns.
Wait and see.
So we are going to suspend the 4th amendment and issue general warrants?
-
So we are going to suspend the 4th amendment and issue general warrants?
Of course, anything for the children ::)
-
They will eventually go door-to-door and get warrants to search everyones home and remove all guns.
Wait and see.
You sound excited to see that happen. I hope it doesn't because what will unfold what be good for any Americans.
-
How? You think you going to knock on someones door and they are just going to hand them over?
Yes.
-
So we are going to suspend the 4th amendment and issue general warrants?
Not suspend. Amendments are meant to be "amended." Thus, a minor change in the document. Just modify the 4th amendment to allow general warrants to be given to appropriate people.
-
You sound excited to see that happen. I hope it doesn't because what will unfold what be good for any Americans.
On a ten-point scale, my excitement is about a 5-6.
-
On a ten-point scale, my excitement is about a 5-6.
You used to be good at trolling :-\ What happened?
-
You used to be good at trolling :-\ What happened?
I don't know, I seem to be keeping this thread going. :D :D
But, mostly lack of care due to lifestyle changes.
-
The entire "Gun control" narrative is retarded. I haven't came across ONE anti-gun (yes, that's exactly what they/you are) advocate that can make a coherent argument/debate for ANY of this. Not here, not on my community boards in my town where there must 10 threads about the protests we had here, not on TV, not on radio. These people are complete retards and organizers of these protests know it. This is ALL about securing a leftist voting base for kids that can pre-register to vote and vote.
I'll say it again, the political leftists with an agenda couldn't give two shits about ANYONE's life. They thrive on tragedies like this and cheer when it happens. laws are already in place, California has the toughest gun laws in the country, yet the left is still protesting for more strict laws. The only thing that's left for them is confiscation.
It's a TOTAL bullshit narrative. Oh, not completely sure, but it seems most if not all of these shootings are in "gun free" zones in democRAT ran cities.
-
Pointless arguing over nothing. The really issue is will Kevin be doing the NY Pro????
-
Pointless arguing over nothing. The really issue is will Kevin be doing the NY Pro????
With or without legs?
-
The entire "Gun control" narrative is retarded. I haven't came across ONE anti-gun (yes, that's exactly what they/you are) advocate that can make a coherent argument/debate for ANY of this. Not here, not on my community boards in my town where there must 10 threads about the protests we had here, not on TV, not on radio. These people are complete retards and organizers of these protests know it. This is ALL about securing a leftist voting base for kids that can pre-register to vote and vote.
I'll say it again, the political leftists with an agenda couldn't give two shits about ANYONE's life. They thrive on tragedies like this and cheer when it happens. laws are already in place, California has the toughest gun laws in the country, yet the left is still protesting for more strict laws. The only thing that's left for them is confiscation.
It's a TOTAL bullshit narrative. Oh, not completely sure, but it seems most if not all of these shootings are in "gun free" zones in democRAT ran cities.
The agenda is obvious unless one's a total zealot BUT the eternal "dem vs rep" dynamic is getting tiresome. Republicucks are as bad as their adversaries except for a few straight "shooters".
-
The agenda is obvious unless one's a total zealot BUT the eternal "dem vs rep" dynamic is getting tiresome. Republicucks are as bad as their adversaries except for a few straight "shooters".
I agree, our Republicans are for shit, not better than the left really. McConnell and Ryan can blow each other.
-
With or without legs?
;D
-
They keyword being "yet."
Give it a few years and you will be required to relinquish that gun.
Our military has been in Iraq for over 15 years a country about half the size of Texas and in that amount of time still can't get all the guns and you think our local police are just gonna go into peoples homes and grab them? You mean the local police like the the guy who wouldn't go into a school because he was too scared because a student had a rifle? HAHHAHAHAHAAAHAHAHHAHA Yeah OK I'll wait on that. You gotta be the most most stupid MFer on this board.
-
Our military has been in Iraq for over 15 years a country about half the size of Texas and in that amount of time still can't get all the guns and you think our local police are just gonna go into peoples homes and grab them? You mean the local police like the the guy who wouldn't go into a school because he was too scared because a student had a rifle? HAHHAHAHAHAAAHAHAHHAHA Yeah OK I'll wait on that. You gotta be the most most stupid MFer on this board.
Not the local police. The FBI, CIA and military will be sent in and go door-to-door to take away our guns.
Just wait and see.
-
Not the local police. The FBI, CIA and military will be sent in and go door-to-door to take away our guns.
Just wait and see.
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA Yeah OK I'm waiting. You're the comic relief here bro. Adding in the "you just wait and see" was great, I like it. ;D
-
HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA Yeah OK I'm waiting. You're the comic relief here bro. I like it.
You will not have to wait long.
-
You will not have to wait long.
Do I have time to makes some eggs? ;D
-
Do I have time to makes some eggs? ;D
Yes, but over-easy, not scrambled.
-
Yes, but over-easy, not scrambled.
F@#K >:(
-
Not the local police. The FBI, CIA and military will be sent in and go door-to-door to take away our guns.
Just wait and see.
Seriously lets put this into perspective. The CIA and the FBI employ about 50K people. Well over half of them are pencil pushers that sit behind a desk. So that's less than half of the amount of people that attend the super bowl. So lets take those say 19,000 people out of the stadium and gather them together in the parking lot and assume they are armed and ready. Now we tell them to spread out and cover the entire country grab all the guns and meet back here in X amount of centuries. ;D
-
Thanks for playing 8)
(http://www.getbig.com/boards/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=644064.0;attach=758488;image)
What the hell is this fancy, Buck Rogers looking pea shooter? Is that a gold barrel? ???
-
Seriously lets put this into perspective. The CIA and the FBI employ about 50K people. Well over half of them are pencil pushers that sit behind a desk. So that's less than half of the amount of people that attend the super bowl. So lets take those say 19,000 people out of the stadium and gather them together in the parking lot and assume they are armed and ready. Now we tell them to spread out and cover the entire country grab all the guns and meet back here in X amount of centuries. ;D
I am the dumbest motherf*cker here. Sorry, I cannot comprehend your highly intellectual post.
Can you please rewrite it?
-
I am the dumbest motherf*cker here. Sorry, I cannot comprehend your highly intellectual post.
Can you please rewrite it?
I'm done eating my eggs and still no one is knocking on my door? Should I wait. ???
-
What the hell is this fancy, Buck Rogers looking pea shooter? Is that a gold barrel? ???
TiN coated Titanium Nitrate
-
What does the age or occupation of the person have to do with anything?
There was a lawmaker in Montana who was a 50+ year old republican who wanted to ban women from wearing biker/yoga pants because it was indecent, according to the bible. Are we to assume this is a sound law because of the his age and occupation?
With that said, the argument and the evidence for the argument stands on its own. Either you can back up a hypothesis with sound data or you can't. Age or occupational status means nothing. All the matters is the argument and evidence put forward.
good point
-
I'm done eating my eggs and still no one is knocking on my door? Should I wait. ???
Make bacon.
-
TiN coated Titanium Nitrate
What does it do? ???
-
What does it do? ???
Reduces friction one moving parts and extends the life of the barrel
-
Reduces friction one moving parts and extends the life of the barrel
I nevet checked, do they coat inside as well?
-
Reduces friction one moving parts and extends the life of the barrel
Sounds like a bunch of hooey. I've never had a need for any friction reducers, nor the need to extend the life of a pistol barrel. :-\
-
The entire "Gun control" narrative is retarded. I haven't came across ONE anti-gun (yes, that's exactly what they/you are) advocate that can make a coherent argument/debate for ANY of this. Not here, not on my community boards in my town where there must 10 threads about the protests we had here, not on TV, not on radio. These people are complete retards and organizers of these protests know it.
Agreed. The same people who'd claim "concern for the children" and who put those kids up to "demonstrating" the other day, are the ones who stole all opportunity over the past 30 or more years -- to sell to the evil pits of the outside world, of all things. They don't care about children, and their "concern" is least of all for children from poorer backgrounds.
Everything they publicly claim about their motivation, is the opposite of what a person should know to be true.
-
Make bacon.
You are missing out if you haven't tried this.
-
You are missing out if you haven't tried this.
My wife cures our own bacon. You're missing out, if you haven't tried my wife's bacon. :)
-
My wife cures our own bacon. You're missing out, if you haven't tried my wife's bacon. :)
I'm not even going there. ;D
-
My wife cures our own bacon. You're missing out, if you haven't tried my wife's bacon. :)
All getbiggers have tried your wifes bacon. :-X
-
You are missing out if you haven't tried this.
I do not eat bacon any more.
I stick to turkey bacon.
-
I do not eat bacon any more.
I stick to turkey bacon.
Outed
-
I do not eat bacon any more.
I stick to turkey bacon.
Poor substitute. Like bring a knife to a gun fight.
-
I nevet checked, do they coat inside as well?
Yup
-
Yup
Does it make the bullets slipperier? ??? Can you shoot lead through it? ???
-
Outed
It's healthier.
-
Does it make the bullets slipperier? ??? Can you shoot lead through it? ???
Theoretically
-
The end of mass shootings = ban all guns and legalize prostitution .
-
There are lots of other "teens" that don't agree with the almighty leader O Hogg but you will never hear their voices.
can't those other teens organize their own pro-gun rally?
-
can't those other teens organize their own pro-gun rally?
They're too busy leading normal lives, working, contributing to society, etc. ;)
-
Theoretically
I see, so it's mostly for the bling? :D
-
They're too busy leading normal lives, working, contributing to society, etc. ;)
then you should stop whining about their voices never being heard
-
then you should stop whining about their voices never being heard
When and where did I whine about their voices not being heard? Are you okay? ???
-
can't those other teens organize their own pro-gun rally?
None of them are. Plus the media ignores them.
-
It's healthier.
Why
-
Why
No saturated fat.
-
Fact is, pro-gun rally teens supposedly love the constitution, yet won't defend it when "push comes to shove."
Call it what you want, but these teens are taking action, whether or not you agree with them.
-
When and where did I whine about their voices not being heard? Are you okay? ???
Sorry, didn't notice that you answered my reply to another poster.
-
Fact is, pro-gun rally teens supposedly love the constitution, yet won't defend it when "push comes to shove."
Call it what you want, but these teens are taking action, whether or not you agree with them.
They really aren't doing much of anything, though.
-
Fact is, pro-gun rally teens supposedly love the constitution, yet won't defend it when "push comes to shove."
Call it what you want, but these teens are taking action, whether or not you agree with them.
They are being used and taken advantage of. I feel pity for them becoming slaves to push the demoncratic agenda.
-
They are being used and taken advantage of. I feel pity for them becoming slaves to push the demoncratic agenda.
Great point. There no fucking way those kids could have their own thoughts or possibly agree with the others in this country regarding common sense gun legislation. It's just not possible. Everyone knows all kids agree with the agenda if the NRA and their Republican Cucks.
-
Great point. There no fucking way those kids could have their own thoughts or possibly agree with the others in this country regarding common sense gun legislation. It's just not possible. Everyone knows all kids agree with the agenda if the NRA and their Republican Cucks.
You've proven yourself to be an uneducated idiot afraid of forming your own opinion. The perfect sheepocrat.
-
You've proven yourself to be an uneducated idiot afraid of forming your own opinion. The perfect sheepocrat.
Why so cranky Trumptard
I'm agreeing with you
These kids are clearly being used and taken advantage of.
That's the only possible explanation for why they don't agree with the NRA and their Republican cucks
Damn, whoever found a way to use these hundreds of thousands of kids must be pretty damn smart
-
No saturated fat.
And?
-
They are being used and taken advantage of. I feel pity for them becoming slaves to push the demoncratic agenda.
This attitude that they are being manipulated is ridiculous. I’ve even heard some journalists say this. There are some good arguments to disagree with them but at least give them credit for the sincerity of their views. It’s like back in the era of MLK when people said the civil rights advocates were being manipulated by the communists.
-
What part of "shall not be infringed" is everyone missing or is confusing?
???
-
Quick question here. What happens when they ban bump stocks, introduce more stringent mental health policies, dedicate more resources etc......and then.....a kid walks into a school with a basic handgun and shoots/kills 15-20 people? Mental health needs to be at the forefront of this. We need to find out why are we slowly going mad??
-
Quick question here. What happens when they ban bump stocks, introduce more stringent mental health policies, dedicate more resources etc......and then.....a kid walks into a school with a basic handgun and shoots/kills 15-20 people? Mental health needs to be at the forefront of this. We need to find out why are we slowly going mad??
No one can predict when someone is going to get pissed off.
-
Quick question here. What happens when they ban bump stocks, introduce more stringent mental health policies, dedicate more resources etc......and then.....a kid walks into a school with a basic handgun and shoots/kills 15-20 people? Mental health needs to be at the forefront of this. We need to find out why are we slowly going mad??
that's exactly the same reason why Republicans know it's futile to make laws restricting a woman's access to abortion
If she really wants one she's going to find a way to get one
that's why Republican never bother to create any legislation on the issue
-
This attitude that they are being manipulated is ridiculous. I’ve even heard some journalists say this. There are some good arguments to disagree with them but at least give them credit for the sincerity of their views. It’s like back in the era of MLK when people said the civil rights advocates were being manipulated by the communists.
agreed
-
This attitude that they are being manipulated is ridiculous. I’ve even heard some journalists say this. There are some good arguments to disagree with them but at least give them credit for the sincerity of their views. It’s like back in the era of MLK when people said the civil rights advocates were being manipulated by the communists.
They are being manipulated because they because unbeknownst to them (most) they are only getting one side of the issue while being while being turned away from listening to the other side of the debate. I’ll say it again. There isn’t ONE leftist that can make a coherent argument for their agenda. Driving and texting is the number one cause of deaths in teens, have a protest to ban cell phones and then tell me how that goes. It’s not fucking guns.
-
They are being manipulated because they because unbeknownst to them (most) they are only getting one side of the issue while being while being turned away from listening to the other side of the debate. I’ll say it again. There isn’t ONE leftist that can make a coherent argument for their agenda. Driving and texting is the number one cause of deaths in teens, have a protest to ban cell phones and then tell me how that goes. It’s not fucking guns.
Joe you are making too much sense. That is not acceptable here on Getbig.
-
They are being manipulated because they because unbeknownst to them (most) they are only getting one side of the issue while being while being turned away from listening to the other side of the debate. I’ll say it again. There isn’t ONE leftist that can make a coherent argument for their agenda. Driving and texting is the number one cause of deaths in teens, have a protest to ban cell phones and then tell me how that goes. It’s not fucking guns.
so true
there is no connection with a kid getting a gun and shooting up his school
he could have just as easily and much more likely killed them all by texting while driving
and of course these "manipulated kids" are only getting one side of the story
where can they get access to the other side (right side obviously) of the story?
I'd be curious to see what happens when they become aware of this information
-
They are being manipulated because they because unbeknownst to them (most) they are only getting one side of the issue while being while being turned away from listening to the other side of the debate. I’ll say it again. There isn’t ONE leftist that can make a coherent argument for their agenda. Driving and texting is the number one cause of deaths in teens, have a protest to ban cell phones and then tell me how that goes. It’s not fucking guns.
All well and good. But history tends to suggest that when you have to fall back on the “oh, they are just being manipulated” argument to refute your opposition, you are likely going to end up on the losing side of the issue. Although in this case it will be a while.
-
All well and good. But history tends to suggest that when you have to fall back on the “oh, they are just being manipulated” argument to refute your opposition, you are likely going to end up on the losing side of the issue. Although in this case it will be a while.
I see it all over facebook. Adults who don't like the fact someone doesn't share their personal opinion so they do one of a few things.. label the other person "mentally disturbed" or "Uninformed" or the new one, "Manipulated" . It couldnt possibly be that the other party just happens to hold a different opinion on what is widely known to be a controversial or divisive subject. It really says more about them than the other party
-
This attitude that they are being manipulated is ridiculous. I’ve even heard some journalists say this. There are some good arguments to disagree with them but at least give them credit for the sincerity of their views. It’s like back in the era of MLK when people said the civil rights advocates were being manipulated by the communists.
And the communist did try and flirt with MLK and others. So, it ain't too far from the truth in terms of that. And let's not forget the Russian propaganda done by Russian artists.
https://amp.theguardian.com/artanddesign/shortcuts/2016/jan/24/racial-harmony-in-a-marxist-utopia-how-the-soviet-union-capitalised-on-us-discrimination-in-pictures (https://amp.theguardian.com/artanddesign/shortcuts/2016/jan/24/racial-harmony-in-a-marxist-utopia-how-the-soviet-union-capitalised-on-us-discrimination-in-pictures)
https://www.newstatesman.com/world/europe/2016/03/what-untold-soviet-history-red-africa-reveals-about-racism-modern-russia?amp (https://www.newstatesman.com/world/europe/2016/03/what-untold-soviet-history-red-africa-reveals-about-racism-modern-russia?amp)
https://www.theatlantic.com/amp/article/542796/ (https://www.theatlantic.com/amp/article/542796/)
-
Seems this kid just might have lied..
UPDATE: CBS Video Confusing. Hogg Was on Campus.
https://www.redstate.com/sarah-rumpf/2018/03/26/new-video-casts-doubt-whether-david-hogg-school-day-shooting/?utm_content=bufferdb71d&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=buffer
-
Seems this kid just might have lied..
UPDATE: CBS Video Confusing. Hogg Was on Campus.
https://www.redstate.com/sarah-rumpf/2018/03/26/new-video-casts-doubt-whether-david-hogg-school-day-shooting/?utm_content=bufferdb71d&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=buffer
have a look at your link again.. It's been updated to say the original story was horribly inaccurate. I hate to be the bearer of bad news, I know you were excited about this
-
have a look at your link again.. It's been updated to say the original story was horribly inaccurate. I hate to be the bearer of bad news, I know you were excited about this
Ouch..
Meanwhile, prior to deleting the tweet, former RedState editor-in-chief Erick Erickson claimed that Hogg had contradicted himself in two separate interviews regarding his whereabouts, adding that it wasn’t a “fake news Gateway Pundit bs story.”
OK then.
https://www.mediaite.com/online/redstate-issues-insane-correction-to-article-implying-david-hogg-wasnt-at-school-during-shooting/amp/?__twitter_impression=true
-
Ouch..
Meanwhile, prior to deleting the tweet, former RedState editor-in-chief Erick Erickson claimed that Hogg had contradicted himself in two separate interviews regarding his whereabouts, adding that it wasn’t a “fake news Gateway Pundit bs story.”
OK then.
https://www.mediaite.com/online/redstate-issues-insane-correction-to-article-implying-david-hogg-wasnt-at-school-during-shooting/amp/?__twitter_impression=true
I'll leave you to your hope that somehow David Hogg is an actor, or imposter or whatever the C.T. crowd hopes for to undermine the messages coming from the group of students. I get that half the country doesn't agree with anything he says, or almost anyone that mentions more restrictive gun laws, are labeled as communist etc.. but this insane attempt by them to create fiction to undermine them is sad, to quote the POTUS, just sad.
-
I'll leave you to your hope that somehow David Hogg is an actor, or imposter or whatever the C.T. crowd hopes for to undermine the messages coming from the group of students. I get that half the country doesn't agree with anything he says, or almost anyone that mentions more restrictive gun laws, are labeled as communist etc.. but this insane attempt by them to create fiction to undermine them is sad, to quote the POTUS, just sad.
An actor? Probably not. An opportunist, most definitely.
David Hogg: “On The Day Of The Shooting, I Got My Camera And Got On My Bike And Road As Fast As I Could Three Miles From My House To The School Go Get As Much Video And To Get As Many Interviews As I Could Because I Knew That This Could Not Be Another Mass Shooting."
I’m not 100% blaming this kid. I believe he was (maybe because of his interest in Journalism) might be being used by the ones that are doing his PR. If you listen to the kids take on the this, he’s as dumb as a box of rocks, as is his skin headed lesbian friend.
-
An actor? Probably not. An opportunist, most definitely.
David Hogg: “On The Day Of The Shooting, I Got My Camera And Got On My Bike And Road As Fast As I Could Three Miles From My House To The School Go Get As Much Video And To Get As Many Interviews As I Could Because I Knew That This Could Not Be Another Mass Shooting."
I’m not 100% blaming this kid. I believe he was (maybe because of his interest in Journalism) might be being used by the ones that are doing his PR. If you listen to the kids take on the this, he’s as dumb as a box of rocks, as is his skin headed lesbian friend.
Hmmmm....
-
https://twitter.com/kfrank0629/status/978500430295654400?s=21
I’m giving this kid the benefit of the doubt because I feel he’s too stupid to realize he’s being used. Apparently his parent are as well because they’re not stopping him.
-
Being a victim of violent crime doesn't make you an expert on anything. It doesn't make your ideas and opinions correct. It does not make you an authority.
Besmirching politicians, or the NRA, or the 2nd Amendment, or gun owners is not going to solve this complex societal problem.
Not only are these little twats wrong about what they are saying, but the way they are conducting themselves is disgraceful.
-
Being a victim of violent crime doesn't make you an expert on anything. It doesn't make your ideas and opinions correct. It does not make you an authority.
Besmirching politicians, or the NRA, or the 2nd Amendment, or gun owners is not going to solve this complex societal problem.
Not only are these little twats wrong about what they are saying, but the way they are conducting themselves is disgraceful.
On that same note, what makes you an expert on the subject matter? I'm not trolling you, but there are a lot of people, probably smarter than you or I, that believe leaving things as the status quo isn't working. I don't buy into the argument that anyone who suggests looking at stricter gun regulations or closing loopholes in the current ones are automatically wanting to repeal the 2nd amendment. I think that is just a red herring. And conducting themselves disgracefully? They are kids and young adults. Where is your outrage over how the POTUS has been conducting himself?
-
Quick question here. What happens when they ban bump stocks, introduce more stringent mental health policies, dedicate more resources etc......and then.....a kid walks into a school with a basic handgun and shoots/kills 15-20 people? Mental health needs to be at the forefront of this. We need to find out why are we slowly going mad??
You just described the 2007 Virginia Tech shooting - the worst on-campus shooting in American history. The shooter killed 32 and shot another 17 using two handguns. It was at a college, so the shooter and victims were adults and couldn't tug the heart strings like last weekend's crop of noisy kids.
If you have a beer belly you have a built-in bump stock. One can use a shoelace or a belt loop to get the same effect, so a bump stock ban would be of no consequence, except to make bump stock owners immediate felons.
Reviewing the history of these mass shooters should reveal some useful metrics, but the Florida shooter was on local PD and FBI radar, and that wasn't of any benefit.
-
On that same note, what makes you an expert on the subject matter? I'm not trolling you, but there are a lot of people, probably smarter than you or I, that believe leaving things as the status quo isn't working. I don't buy into the argument that anyone who suggests looking at stricter gun regulations or closing loopholes in the current ones are automatically wanting to repeal the 2nd amendment. I think that is just a red herring. And conducting themselves disgracefully? They are kids and young adults. Where is your outrage over how the POTUS has been conducting himself?
When did I say that I was an expert? What I said is that being a victim doesn't automatically make someone an expert. What I am, is a person that has done a bit of study on the intent of the 2nd Amendment and the real statistics of violent crime and gun related homicides in this country. What I am, is a law abiding citizen with an informed opinion that is supported by what I believe to be some pretty compelling evidence. I never positioned myself as an expert. The press and the Democrat party, which are essentially one and the same, have positioned these kids as experts. Experts whose victim status gives them authority on the subject and as a result, anyone who questions their ideas is "bullying children" or some other such nonsense.
The "status quo not working" is not an argument. While every person who suggests stricter gun regulation doesn't automatically want to abolish the second amendment, there are a lot of people who do. Powerful people with a lot of money that are paying for and organizing these very "protests". People that have had an anti-gun agenda for many years. They aren't reacting to a recent tragedy and trying to solve a problem, they are using the recent tragedy to pull on people's heart strings and get them to agree to things that they wouldn't have agreed to in years past. Furthermore, you don't have to repeal the 2nd amendment in order to infringe upon it and render it ineffective.....and in my opinion, that is exactly what a lot of these proposed solutions will do.
Yes these kids are conducting themselves disgracefully. If you haven't done so I urge you to watch some of their speeches interviews and conversations. During which, they have blamed, slandered and besmirched several individuals, groups of people, and organisations. They have attributed motive to people that they don't know, cursed and mocked them. They have asserted that these people are responsible for the shootings, don't care about the kids, want more kids to die, etc, etc, etc. As for Trumps conduct I urge you to discuss that in one of the many Trump related threads as I have no desire to switch the topic of this conversation from the students to someone that has nothing to do with them.
-
Being a victim of violent crime doesn't make you an expert on anything. It doesn't make your ideas and opinions correct. It does not make you an authority.
Besmirching politicians, or the NRA, or the 2nd Amendment, or gun owners is not going to solve this complex societal problem.
Not only are these little twats wrong about what they are saying, but the way they are conducting themselves is disgraceful.
Well said^^
Attention whoredom at its finest by these twinks. If all guns are banned, BANG, mental illness is now cured and no one will get murdered.
No Molotov's, no machete killings, nothing... Seems like they have everything well under control. ::)
Modern day twinks ::) ???
-
A candidate for sheriff in Buncombe County, North Carolina recently joked about killing people who wish to retain their constitutional right to bear arms. R. Daryl Fisher, who is running as a Democrat, quipped at a campaign event:
“You’ve heard people say: ‘You’ll have to pry my gun from my cold, dead hands.’ Okay!”
https://www.nraila.org/articles/20180326/nc-democratic-sheriff-candidate-jokes-about-killing-gun-owners
-
A candidate for sheriff in Buncombe County, North Carolina recently joked about killing people who wish to retain their constitutional right to bear arms. R. Daryl Fisher, who is running as a Democrat, quipped at a campaign event:
“You’ve heard people say: ‘You’ll have to pry my gun from my cold, dead hands.’ Okay!”
https://www.nraila.org/articles/20180326/nc-democratic-sheriff-candidate-jokes-about-killing-gun-owners
To all of those folks that like to say gun owners are exaggerating and nobody wants to take their guns, etc.
Here we have a Democrat, running for a position of power in law enforcement, joking about killing US citizens that don't want to turn over their guns........which he wants to ban and confiscate.
His "joke", is met with much laughter from the audience.
-
Here's a quote by one of the students at the recent March. The blonde girl with glasses. One of the students that was at the school with David Hogg. Her name is Delaney Tarr. I think this speaks to the true ambitions of the people organizing these protests.
"When they give us that inch, that bumpstock ban, we will take a mile. We are not here for breadcrumbs, we are here for real change".
Think I'm making all this up? Take a little time, do a little research, and watch the fucking videos of this stuff coming directly out of their mouths.
-
Not paying too much attention to the kids but they seem to be creating a stir. Grown men meltdown or two occurring around here for it being youngsters.
-
The first civil war in America was about states rights, the second will be about individual rights.
-
so much for generation of nothingness, its nice to see youth getting involved in politics from a young age
-
so much for generation of nothingness, its nice to see youth getting involved in politics from a young age
It's easy to be an activist when you aren't burdened with understanding any of the issues you are ranting about.
-
beginning of time = tons of guns ...... school shootings = yawn
2000's = still tons of guns..... school shootings = ban guns!!!!
WTF changed... as it sure wasn't the availability of guns
Therefore anyone with at least 1/2 a brain should conclude GUNS aren't the problem.
-
beginning of time = tons of guns ...... school shootings = yawn
2000's = still tons of guns..... school shootings = ban guns!!!!
WTF changed... as it sure wasn't the availability of guns
Therefore anyone with at least 1/2 a brain should conclude GUNS aren't the problem.
Logic? who needs it. We have feelings.
-
I remember, in my high school days, all the trucks in the parking lot had rifles and shotguns in the rear window. Those were the days. :)
-
Logic? who needs it. We have feelings.
While you claim you don't claim to be an expert, it is clear you believe anyone who disagrees with your position isn't as knowledgeable about the subject and therefore wrong. What is the difference?
-
If they're trying to prevent school shootings, the only one on the list that would help, is the last. All the rest is fluff. :-\
Better point of view:
-
A candidate for sheriff in Buncombe County, North Carolina recently joked about killing people who wish to retain their constitutional right to bear arms. R. Daryl Fisher, who is running as a Democrat, quipped at a campaign event:
“You’ve heard people say: ‘You’ll have to pry my gun from my cold, dead hands.’ Okay!”
https://www.nraila.org/articles/20180326/nc-democratic-sheriff-candidate-jokes-about-killing-gun-owners
I watched the video. Bet you didnt.. he said "when you pass away, we'll come get it" because...he ALSO went on to explain, if a gun ban passed today, it would be UNCONSTITUTIONAL to take guns already purchased legally. That they couldn't simply go confiscate guns because that would be again.... UNCONSTITUTIONAL. please stop spreading false news like a Liberal Pundit.
-
I watched the video. Bet you didnt.. he said "when you pass away, we'll come get it" because...he ALSO went on to explain, if a gun ban passed today, it would be UNCONSTITUTIONAL to take guns already purchased legally. That they couldn't simply go confiscate guns because that would be again.... UNCONSTITUTIONAL. please stop spreading false news like a Liberal Pundit.
It's not fake news. He said it , paused for laughter & applause , then continued. And a gun ban is Unconstitutional in itself. But ultimately there a movement towards abolishing the Second Amendment which will lead to another Civil war https://mobile.nytimes.com/2018/03/27/opinion/john-paul-stevens-repeal-second-amendment.html
-
It's not fake news. He said it , paused for laughter & applause , then continued. And a gun ban is Unconstitutional in itself. But ultimately there a movement towards abolishing the Second Amendment which will lead to another Civil war https://mobile.nytimes.com/2018/03/27/opinion/john-paul-stevens-repeal-second-amendment.html
[/quote
There is no way to up and abolish the Second Amendment. It would have to get two thirds vote in each chamber of the national Congress (I guess possible but highly unlikely in any of our life times) and then get marched around to each and every one of the states and have three quarters of the 50 states vote in their state legislatures to get rid of it (totally unlikely, I can easily count 12 or 13 states that would NEVER do it). I guess anything is possible, say if there continued to be one tragedy after another. This process was successful for making alcohol illegal when the population got worried that society was falling apart over drunkenness (Prohibition) but we changed our mind on that one in less than 15 years.
The more likely scenario is what gun rights advocates would call “chipping away” at the Second Amendment by various legislatures, state and federal, passing gun control legislation (e.g., you have to be 21, assault weapons for law enforcement officers and military only, etc) and then the courts upholding those laws when they get challenged.
-
It's not fake news. He said it , paused for laughter & applause , then continued. And a gun ban is Unconstitutional in itself. But ultimately there a movement towards abolishing the Second Amendment which will lead to another Civil war https://mobile.nytimes.com/2018/03/27/opinion/john-paul-stevens-repeal-second-amendment.html
His statement was taken out of context. Context matters, but only if you are looking for the truth. An agenda.. not so much. in fact, out of context usually helps
-
His statement was taken out of context. Context matters, but only if you are looking for the truth. An agenda.. not so much. in fact, out of context usually helps
It was and it wasn't , He knew what he was saying when he paused and the continued. These idiots wouldn't have anything to work with if he never paused.
-
Heil David
-
Heil David
not hard to find pictures of people doing that
for example, this moron and moron jr.
-
People just need to come to terms with the fact that David is calling the shots now and will probably becomes our next president, as well he should. He’s supremely knowledgeable and insightful. A natural born leader.
-
not hard to find pictures of people doing that
for example, this moron and moron jr.
stop being reasonable
-
not hard to find pictures of people doing that
for example, this moron and moron jr.
They can’t even do it right. The arm needs to be straight. David does it correct.
-
People just need to come to terms with the fact that David is calling the shots now and will probably becomes our next president, as well he should. He’s supremely knowledgeable and insightful. A natural born leader.
fair point
bar has been lowered to the point that any idiot can someday become POTUS
-
They can’t even do it right. The arm needs to be straight. David does it correct.
keep in mind they are morons so can't do much of anything right
-
If I had a time capsule and the rule was I couldn't make a dime off it.. I think I would just go back 15 years before FB and social media where I thought that with a few exceptions, most Americans were smart, decent people who reviewed information before forming an opinion and cared about their fellow man... I miss those days.
-
Some of you guys are getting it all wrong...
They are not anti-gun. They are anti you with gun.
How many of those anti politicians have SS protection? How many Hollywood freaks have their own armed security? How many of them made their fortunes by making movies where they go around pretending to kill others with... a fake gun.
So, no my friends. It's not about the children. It's not about mass shootings or AR47s. It's about them having their guns, and you not having yours. All you guys need to do is turn in your guns, sit back, have a nice cup of STFU, and get in the boxcars when they tell you to.
-
Some of you guys are getting it all wrong...
They are not anti-gun. They are anti you with gun.
How many of those anti politicians have SS protection? How many Hollywood freaks have their own armed security? How many of them made their fortunes by making movies where they go around pretending to kill others with... a fake gun.
So, no my friends. It's not about the children. It's not about mass shootings or AR47s. It's about them having their guns, and you not having yours. All you guys need to do is turn in your guns, sit back, have a nice cup of STFU, and get in the boxcars when they tell you to.
Exactly and this man will show you your seat.
-
I am not saying I agree or disagree with these students, but times are changing.
Give it time, eventually the government will make all guns illegal.
It's just the way it is.
-
not hard to find pictures of people doing that
for example, this moron and moron jr.
Except one is advocating for gun rights the other, a brainwashed leftist CHILD that you defend wants to take our guns. But you’re here just to argue about nothing
-
fair point
bar has been lowered to the point that any idiot can someday become POTUS
Off you go then.
The Fcuk do you need to Wake up & live in the Real world.
-
I am not saying I agree or disagree with these students, but times are changing.
Give it time, eventually the government will make all guns illegal.
It's just the way it is.
Not in our lifetime
-
Except one is advocating for gun rights the other, a brainwashed leftist CHILD that you defend wants to take our guns. But you’re here just to argue about nothing
Does he?Does he want to take your guns?
-
Some of you guys are getting it all wrong...
They are not anti-gun. They are anti you with gun.
How many of those anti politicians have SS protection? How many Hollywood freaks have their own armed security? How many of them made their fortunes by making movies where they go around pretending to kill others with... a fake gun.
So, no my friends. It's not about the children. It's not about mass shootings or AR47s. It's about them having their guns, and you not having yours. All you guys need to do is turn in your guns, sit back, have a nice cup of STFU, and get in the boxcars when they tell you to.
It is the impulse of progressives to reduce gun rights for the hoi polloi. A few years ago in California, lawmakers drafted a bill (SB-610) defining the requirements and restrictions for obtaining a CCW. Thing is, it exempted lawmakers from the law. The final bill didn't include the exemption, though.
-
Does he?Does he want to take your guns?
Yes.
-
Yes.
Link?
-
Yes.
59 seconds in he says he is not trying to take your guns. Provide a link where HE says he is trying to take your guns
a quote from another interview
"As activists prepare to take to the streets in Washington and elsewhere on Saturday for the March for Our Lives, students from the Marjory Stoneman Douglas high school urged lawmakers on Capitol Hill to heed their calls and enact stricter gun laws.
“We’re not trying to take away your guns. We’re trying to take back our lives,” said David Hogg, a survivor of the 14 February shooting in Parkland, Florida.
“It’s not a Democrat problem. It’s not a Republican problem. It’s an American problem.”
-
lol, this cringy little phaggot fuk delusionite may have the most punchable face on earth.
-
lol, this cringy little phaggot fuk delusionite may have the most punchable face on earth.
LMFAO I said the exact thing today to a friend of mine. THE most punchable face ever in the history of person kind. Don't want to trigger anyone. ::)
-
I am not saying I agree or disagree with these students, but times are changing.
Give it time, eventually the government will make all guns illegal.
It's just the way it is.
You ever tell anyone how you went gun shopping with me?
-
59 seconds in he says he is not trying to take your guns. Provide a link where HE says he is trying to take your guns
a quote from another interview
"As activists prepare to take to the streets in Washington and elsewhere on Saturday for the March for Our Lives, students from the Marjory Stoneman Douglas high school urged lawmakers on Capitol Hill to heed their calls and enact stricter gun laws.
“We’re not trying to take away your guns. We’re trying to take back our lives,” said David Hogg, a survivor of the 14 February shooting in Parkland, Florida.
“It’s not a Democrat problem. It’s not a Republican problem. It’s an American problem.”
Don’t split hairs. He’s a child brainwashed leftist. This is the ultimate goal as leftists. This isn’t no longer rhetoric. It’s reality.
-
Probably been posted here but is no longer embeddable on forums. You have to click the link to watch on Youtube.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BRi-UouACL8&bpctr=1522213382 (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BRi-UouACL8&bpctr=1522213382)
-
He’s a child brainwashed leftist.
he's the future - your end.
-
he's the future - your end.
Bet me
-
Bet me
r u immortal?
-
r u immortal?
I’ll let you know
-
Don’t split hairs. He’s a child brainwashed leftist. This is the ultimate goal as leftists. This isn’t no longer rhetoric. It’s reality.
You know what...forget my request to supply anything to support your thinking. I realized after I posted this that you are determined to believe what makes you feel right, regardless of the accuracy. It's happened over and over again and I have no idea why I think this time might be different. You win
-
While you claim you don't claim to be an expert, it is clear you believe anyone who disagrees with your position isn't as knowledgeable about the subject and therefore wrong. What is the difference?
I don't believe they are as knowledgeable because they demonstrate very little actual knowledge. That's kinda how it works.
I could give you a lot of examples of what I mean but at this point I'm just repeating myself. We aren't addressing the real issue. We've had millions of guns in this country pretty much since forever.
Why are school shootings a recent phenomenon? What has changed? Can we legislate our way out of this problem? At what cost?
When you are asking the wrong questions, it's impossible to find the right solution.
-
Some of you guys are getting it all wrong...
They are not anti-gun. They are anti you with gun.
How many of those anti politicians have SS protection? How many Hollywood freaks have their own armed security? How many of them made their fortunes by making movies where they go around pretending to kill others with... a fake gun.
So, no my friends. It's not about the children. It's not about mass shootings or AR47s. It's about them having their guns, and you not having yours. All you guys need to do is turn in your guns, sit back, have a nice cup of STFU, and get in the boxcars when they tell you to.
Kazan understands the issue at the root of this debate.
These gun grabbers love guns. As we speak they are trying to figure out out how to get men with guns to come and take other people's guns.
If they can do that, a little while later..........
(https://i.ytimg.com/vi/sy2Wbb8dttI/hqdefault.jpg)
Nothing in this world is what it seems. It's never about what they tell you it's about. Who is pushing this large scale movement for gun control? Who is paying for the marches? Why?
If you think it's about children you are a fucking fool. Maybe a well intentioned fool, but a fool nonetheless.
-
Everybody should have guns
How to prevent school / mass shootings is a very different matter.
The government want the police / military to have guns & lots of them
Just not You the individual / public
That alone should be ringing alarm bells.
-
Kazan understands the issue at the root of this debate.
These gun grabbers love guns. As we speak they are trying to figure out out how to get men with guns to come and take peoples guns.
If they can do that, a little while later..........
(https://i.ytimg.com/vi/sy2Wbb8dttI/hqdefault.jpg)
Nothing in this world is what it seems. It's never about what they tell you it's about. Who is pushing this large scale movement for gun control? Who is paying for the marches? Why?
If you think it's about children you are a fucking fool. Maybe a well intentioned fool, but a fool nonetheless.
Exactly. You are both correct. Pro gun people need to become very vocal about their rights and force it down the throats of these libtards. There is no debate. We are here to dictate what we want - and they need to listen and accept it. We are not interested in a debate so fuck off.
-
If they're trying to prevent school shootings, the only one on the list that would help, is the last. All the rest is fluff. :-\
Exactly. Leftists are idiots. Let's prevent citizens from having tools in their hands that literally prevent their government from committing genocide or democide against them just to say, what, 500 students in all of American history? ::)
Ukrainians didn't have guns in 1932-1933 either. How did that turn out for "the children".
-
Kazan understands the issue at the root of this debate.
These gun grabbers love guns. As we speak they are trying to figure out out how to get men with guns to come and take other people's guns.
If they can do that, a little while later..........
(https://i.ytimg.com/vi/sy2Wbb8dttI/hqdefault.jpg)
Nothing in this world is what it seems. It's never about what they tell you it's about. Who is pushing this large scale movement for gun control? Who is paying for the marches? Why?
If you think it's about children you are a fucking fool. Maybe a well intentioned fool, but a fool nonetheless.
that picture is disturbing!
-
I wonder if the 2018 version of Rachel Maddow agrees with the Rachel Maddow from 2010?
"But here’s the thing about rights. They’re not actually supposed to be voted on. That’s why they’re called rights."
– Rachel Maddow, 2010 discussing Gay Marriage
(https://i.pinimg.com/originals/34/c8/c8/34c8c84a84d957dd35a50d64c882b4e3.jpg)
full video:
https://www.msnbc.com/rachel-maddow-show/watch/inalienable-rights-are-not-subject-to-vote-44133955580
-
-
that picture is disturbing!
So are your posts, shi...
-
Exactly. Leftists are idiots. Let's prevent citizens from having tools in their hands that literally prevent their government from committing genocide or democide against them just to say, what, 500 students in all of American history? ::)
Ukrainians didn't have guns in 1932-1933 either. How did that turn out for "the children".
I never understood this, its not unreasonable to say what mass majority of gun owners are also bootlickers? which one is it are y'all pro military or afraid they'll commit democide?
also what could any civilian have at their disposal that would stop a Abrams ?
-
I never understood this, its not unreasonable to say what mass majority of gun owners are also bootlickers? which one is it are y'all pro military or afraid they'll commit democide?
also what could any civilian have at their disposal that would stop a Abrams ?
You really are historically illiterate, its not the army you have to worry about, its the secret police that seems to always do the dirty work, while the army is occupied fighting endless wars ( sound familiar)
Germany - Gestapo ( Geheime Staatspolizei ) SS (Schutzstaffel) paramilitary force
China - the Red Guard
Russia - NKVD (People's Comissariat for Internal Affairs) KGB
Pol Pot - Khmer Rouge
-
https://www.westernjournal.com/david-hoggs-college-applications-arent-going-the-way-he-hoped/
Poor kid, after all he has done for changing our country to make it a safer place. I think he should just be awarded a PHD in the degree he choses.
-
https://www.westernjournal.com/david-hoggs-college-applications-arent-going-the-way-he-hoped/
Poor kid, after all he has done for changing our country to make it a safer place. I think he should just be awarded a PHD in the degree he choses.
I believe his major is shit talking..
-
These kids are idiots.
They don't realized that they are being used because they want their fifteen minutes.
Stormy Daniels and Karen McDougal are not different.
Morons all.
-
David Hoggs is a major inspiration to many teenagers.
-
David Hoggs is a major inspiration to many teenagers.
Exactly, in fact he should be referred to from here on in as Major Inspiration. Literally over night he went from victim to disarming the country and schooling congress and our president. He an inspiration to all the American people. He is a true alpha male.
-
These kids are idiots.
They don't realized that they are being used because they want their fifteen minutes.
Stormy Daniels and Karen McDougal are not different.
Morons all.
Does labeling anyone who disagrees with your opinion really help you feel you are superior? I ask because I see this a lot from both sides.
-
Exactly, in fact he should be referred to from here on in as Major Inspiration. Literally over night he went from victim to disarming the country and schooling congress and our president. He an inspiration to all the American people. He is a true alpha male.
Not too difficult to school Trump on politics.
-
Not too difficult to school Trump on politics.
Are you insinuating the Major Inspiration is not as intelligent as he seems?
-
Are you insinuating the Major Inspiration is not as intelligent as he seems?
Maybe.
-
Maybe.
that's like saying maybe Rosanne Barr could stand to lose a few pounds
-
-
I'm sorry but David Hogg is a fucking idiot. The rest of this carefully selected group of students are morons as well but he's the most visible.
Listen to this shit.
-
I can't believe the "arguments" that these kids are making and how we are expected to take them seriously.
I can not believe how low our country has sunk that this kind of incoherent babble is being passed off as logic. What in the ever loving fuck?
-
I can't believe the "arguments" that these kids are making and how we are expected to take them seriously.
I can not believe how low our country has sunk that this kind of incoherent babble is being passed off as logic. What in the ever loving fuck?
Advanced civilisation ::)
And Left wing Liberal Mental illness
Only have to look at how many reacted to a 2 person presidential election
When 1 of them lost - and how they continue to be able to deal with it
I sincerely hope there is not a major problem that ever affects them,
Jeez if there was to be a war & it was to directly affect American people
/ cities / soil - it just doesn’t bare thinking about.
-
Does labeling anyone who disagrees with your opinion really help you feel you are superior? I ask because I see this a lot from both sides.
No, I already know that I'm superior.
Oh, and I didn't find it difficult getting into UCLA. ::) :P
But speaking of our little friend, Mr. Hogg, isn't it interesting that the new school policy making kids carry only see-through/transparent backpacks is an assault on his First Amendment rights, but he has no problem coming after other people's rights where the Second Amendment is concerned.
https://www.theblaze.com/news/2018/03/24/anti-gun-david-hogg-complains-clear-backpacks-at-school-infringes-on-students-constitutional-rights (https://www.theblaze.com/news/2018/03/24/anti-gun-david-hogg-complains-clear-backpacks-at-school-infringes-on-students-constitutional-rights)
https://www.dailywire.com/news/28609/watch-parkland-student-complains-clear-backbacks-ryan-saavedra (https://www.dailywire.com/news/28609/watch-parkland-student-complains-clear-backbacks-ryan-saavedra)
https://hotair.com/archives/2018/03/23/gun-control-activist-david-hogg-draws-line-clear-backpacks/ (https://hotair.com/archives/2018/03/23/gun-control-activist-david-hogg-draws-line-clear-backpacks/)
-
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/commentisfree/2018/mar/23/parkland-students-manifesto-americas-gun-laws
-Ban accessories that simulate automatic weapons
-Establish a database of gun sales and universal background checks
-Change privacy laws to allow mental healthcare providers to communicate with law enforcement
-Close gun show and secondhand sales loopholes
-Allow the CDC to make recommendations for gun reform
-Raise the firearm purchase age to 21
-Dedicate more funds to mental health research and professionals
-Increase funding for school security
The day we start refining the constitution because a bunch of little snot nosed KIDS with no life experience, no education and no wisdom, think we should... is the day this country is officially over.
-
Are their "15 minutes of fame" over yet? ???
-
The day we start refining the constitution because a bunch of little snot nosed KIDS with no life experience, no education and no wisdom, think we should... is the day this country is officially over.
The fact that many of them witnessed such a traumatic experience, automatically gives them more life experience than most adults.
Not many people can say they lived after such a traumatic experience.
What a profound awakening.
-
The fact that many of them witnessed such a traumatic experience, automatically gives them more life experience than most adults.
Not many people can say they lived after such a traumatic experience.
What a profound awakening.
Bad troll
-
Steven Crowder gets it, but it shouldn't be up to him to explain the dishonest manipulation and hypocrisy of this carefully selected group of students.
If you have any interest in the game that's being run on all of us, you should watch this video.
-
Got another firearm today with the click of a button online, this dude is selling more guns than Obama lately...
New model M&P came out that I've been eyeing. No humans will be shot, just gun range targets. (Some have Hilary's face on them though, not mine, but gun range has them).
(https://i.imgflip.com/27ao1x.jpg)
-
Got another firearm today with the click of a button online, this dude is selling more guns than Obama lately...
New model M&P came out that I've been eyeing. No humans will be shot, just gun range targets. (Some have Hilary's face on them though, not mine, but gun range has them).
(https://i.imgflip.com/27ao1x.jpg)
I've got the M&P .40. Carried it on duty and bought it from them when I retired. I didn't have a choice on what to carry, the Department went to a one size fits all, but I liked it.
-
I've got the M&P .40. Carried it on duty and bought it from them when I retired. I didn't have a choice on what to carry, the Department went to a one size fits all, but I liked it.
When was the last time you had a desk pop?
(http://s.quickmeme.com/img/a3/a375ac37deabb2b7060de741e28976f93e0d912b2c190848904dd0d92dcb9c0d.jpg)
-
Got another firearm today with the click of a button online, this dude is selling more guns than Obama lately...
New model M&P came out that I've been eyeing. No humans will be shot, just gun range targets. (Some have Hilary's face on them though, not mine, but gun range has them).
(https://i.imgflip.com/27ao1x.jpg)
Which one? I'm looking at the compact 2.0 from Frank Proctors site (has a few upgrades to it).
-
the Lunacy of "gun laws"
first of all liberal politicians are behind the progressive views encouraging reform over punishment in the criminal justice system. it's why you see people with arrest records a mile long. reduced charges, reduced sentences, probation over incarceration time and time again. It's these same liberals that want to pass a law that only affects law abiding citizens whenever there is a media frenzy involving a firearm. liberals dont like law enforcement yet create new laws every chance they get. they largely confuse Law with Social agenda.There are already way too many laws on the books that aren't enforced as it is. We already HAVE gun laws.
Laws have traditionally prohibited Actions. robbery, rape, burglary etc... not possessing inert objects. I mean the very nature of Gun Control would depend on gun owners being Law Abiding in the first place. The very nature of it affects only those people who obey the law. Sheer and absolute lunacy.
pass all the God damned laws you want. it will be very useful to have a completely irrational law on a piece of paper in Washington the next time someone in Florida walks into a school and starts wasting children. I'm sure just before the first persons head explodes from a 7.62 mm round they will be thinking "thank God they passed that law."
-
Also I'm tired of seeing this Hogg kid everywhere. He isn't an expert in guns, or active shooter profiles, or laws, or survival. He's just a kid that wasn't shot. His opinion holds NO wieght. He's merely a prop. it's unfortunate that he was subject to such a trauma but he needs to know that he's being used and probably manipulated.
-
Also I'm tired of seeing this Hogg kid everywhere. He isn't an expert in guns, or active shooter profiles, or laws, or survival. He's just a kid that wasn't shot. His opinion holds NO wieght. He's merely a prop. it's unfortunate that he was subject to such a trauma but he needs to know that he's being used and probably manipulated.
is it not possible that he isn't an expert in guns, or active shooter profiles, or laws or survival... he is just a kid that wasnt shot.. his opinions hold no weight, but that he is not being manipulated, just doesn't agree with you and some of your friends view?
-
is it not possible that he isn't an expert in guns, or active shooter profiles, or laws or survival... he is just a kid that wasnt shot.. his opinions hold no weight, but that he is not being manipulated, just doesn't agree with you and some of your friends view?
If his views didn't parrot the Democrat gun control talking points I'd be inclinded to agree with you. If CNN had put some of the pro gun students on air too instead of picking four vitriol spewing anti-gunners I'd be inclined to agree with you.
I don't know if Hogg being manipulated is the right word but he is certainly being used. He can say all the irrational shit that CNN wants to say but doesn't for fear of being held accountable for their words. These teens are being presented as experts but then when someone criticizes their opinion we're being told "Aw, they're just kids, don't be mean". Convenient. I call that having your cake and eating it too.
When I was his age I also had a lot of strong opinions about shit I didn't fully understand. Thank God back then the adults told me to shut the fuck up instead of putting me on television.
-
how many gun loving trump tards do we have on getbig? the number is staggering.
don't worry, baby donald will not be around much longer. His corrupt behavior will be his downfall.
-
"Nobody wants to take your guns away"
Except that they do, and now they are. Queerfield Illinois just banned so-called "assualt weapons". Citizens have 60 days to sell, render inoperable, or turn these guns in.
If they don't comply it's a $1000 fine PER DAY. And then what happens? Who knows.
-
it is unlawful for a person "to carry, keep, bear, transport or possess an assault weapon in the Village," except if the weapon is "broken down in a non-functioning state," is "not immediately accessible to any person," or is "unloaded and enclosed in a case, firearm carrying box, shipping box, or other container by a person who has been issued a currently valid Firearm Owner's Identification Card."
Law enforcement officers, current and retired, are exempted.
Seems like a lot of exceptions
-
it is unlawful for a person "to carry, keep, bear, transport or possess an assault weapon in the Village," except if the weapon is "broken down in a non-functioning state," is "not immediately accessible to any person," or is "unloaded and enclosed in a case, firearm carrying box, shipping box, or other container by a person who has been issued a currently valid Firearm Owner's Identification Card."
Law enforcement officers, current and retired, are exempted.
Seems like a lot of exceptions
Seems like infringement , It's not an exception it's bullshit designed to deprive people of their civil rights.
-
Seems like infringement , It's not an exception it's bullshit designed to deprive people of their civil rights.
Theoretically using THEIR same logic... couldn't the city come up with some "law" saying
"People in this city can only speak when spoken to by a city official and must get rid of any money they own, and cannot use a cellphone, car or own a tv ...etc..etc"
"People in this city are not allowed to use any writing utensils ever"
"People in this city are never allowed to criticize public officials for any reason and we will fine you $1000 for every word we deem offensive"
How the FARK can you get away with circumventing federal law?
-
Citys pass ordinances all the time that are tougher than federal law. No texting while driving, no cell phone use while driving. I think this particular law will get challenged and thrown out due to the 2nd amendment.
-
Seems like infringement , It's not an exception it's bullshit designed to deprive people of their civil rights.
The amount of stuff you can’t own in terms of weapons is largely disproportionate to what you can own. The government has infringed on the 2nd amendment for a long time and it will only get worse. Once the old schoolers die out, watch what will happen to the 2nd amendment. It’s bound to happen,
-
Seems like infringement , It's not an exception it's bullshit designed to deprive people of their civil rights.
That's exactly what it's designed to do. Incrementally tear down the right to keep and bear arms until it ether no longer exists, or they have destroyed your ability to use it effectively.
Gunfights happen in seconds. You don't have time to take your firearm out of a safe and run around to assemble it. You are dead.
The people behind these tactics know that. They are trying to make it impossible to exercise your right and once the right has been neutered they will take it away completely.
-
That's exactly what it's designed to do. Incrementally tear down the right to keep and bear arms until it ether no longer exists, or they have destroyed your ability to use it effectively.
Gunfights happen in seconds. You don't have time to take your firearm out of a safe and run around to assemble it. You are dead.
The people behind these tactics know that. They are trying to make it impossible to exercise your right and once the right has been neutered they will take it away completely.
they don't have to do anything other than wait for the millenials and x/y/z to take over power
party's over anyhow
-
they don't have to do anything other than wait for the millenials and x/y/z to take over power
party's over anyhow
I think that it always becomes cool to go against the establishment. Far left liberalism is the establishment now so I think a younger generation will rise up against their authoritarianism as start to love liberty again.
I just hope it's not too late by the time they figure it out. I hope the United States doesn't have to learn the hard way why it's a good idea to protect you borders, culture and rights.
-
Got another firearm today with the click of a button online, this dude is selling more guns than Obama lately...
New model M&P came out that I've been eyeing. No humans will be shot, just gun range targets. (Some have Hilary's face on them though, not mine, but gun range has them).
(https://i.imgflip.com/27ao1x.jpg)
They shouldn't do that. It's not helpful, especially now.
-
is it not possible that he isn't an expert in guns, or active shooter profiles, or laws or survival... he is just a kid that wasnt shot.. his opinions hold no weight, but that he is not being manipulated, just doesn't agree with you and some of your friends view?
I wouldn't know if he agrees with my views. I've never sat down with him. You don't believe he is being used? Surely you cant be that naive?
I dont want to be petty but ,you will note, what I said was PROBABLY manipulated. I dont know for sure. Like I said Ive never met him. But it is hard not to envision all of the fame, media frenzy, politicians, journalists,24 hr news networks surrounding this child and NO ONE in those circles not using their influence on him. It's possible but highly doubtful.
He's just a kid, who not all that long ago was exposed to a horrible tragedy. It is shameless the way he's being used. And it's not his fault. But recovering from that type of trauma takes a long time and alot of help. The position hez been thrust into is PROBABLY not the best thing for him.
-
The fact that many of them witnessed such a traumatic experience, automatically gives them more life experience than most adults.
Not many people can say they lived after such a traumatic experience.
What a profound awakening.
It isn't yet experience. It just happened. yes down the road you could day that. Being victimized is not the same thing as life experience. Coping with it, moving on and learning from it is. it takes time.
-
I get raped one day....
Doesn't make me a rape expert, nor does it make me an expert on how to deter rapes..
-
I wouldn't know if he agrees with my views. I've never sat down with him. You don't believe he is being used? Surely you cant be that naive?
I dont want to be petty but ,you will note, what I said was PROBABLY manipulated. I dont know for sure. Like I said Ive never met him. But it is hard not to envision all of the fame, media frenzy, politicians, journalists,24 hr news networks surrounding this child and NO ONE in those circles not using their influence on him. It's possible but highly doubtful.
He's just a kid, who not all that long ago was exposed to a horrible tragedy. It is shameless the way he's being used. And it's not his fault. But recovering from that type of trauma takes a long time and alot of help. The position hez been thrust into is PROBABLY not the best thing for him.
Fair enough. You said probably. I think his beliefs align with many others. If that equates being used.. we can certainly apply that to many others on the other side as well.
-
"he's being manipulated" he's only a kid" "they're using him".... crock of sht.
he may be a kid (not sure of his age). but he is unquestionably on the side of logic and rationale.
there is no logical argument for having so many guns in society beyond, "we like our guns" , "we like playing with our guns" , "our guns make us feel safe" .even though all the evidence shows gun owners and their families are more at risk of harm.
there's a reason why no other first world country has a huge gun violence problem....can you guess what it is? ???
-
"he's being manipulated" he's only a kid" "they're using him".... crock of sht.
he may be a kid (not sure of his age). but he is unquestionably on the side of logic and rationale.
there is no logical argument for having so many guns in society beyond, "we like our guns" , "we like playing with our guns" , "our guns make us feel safe" .even though all the evidence shows gun owners and their families are more at risk of harm.
there's a reason why no other first world country has a huge gun violence problem....can you guess what it is? ???
He's not on the side of logic, he's on the side of emotion and he thinks he knows what he is talking about, but he doesn't. He's saying that the adults don't know how to use democracy, so the kids must show the adults how to ::)
And what evidence shows this?
even though all the evidence shows gun owners and their families are more at risk of harm.
What you just said is a backdoor way of saying, "you are at more risk for being a gun owner (legally), so you shouldn't have guns, so we will pass a law to take your guns away....And we will protect you from yourself and others."
Now what ideology espouses such beliefs? Could it be, European socialist? And could this also be used against your own when it comes to knives?
-
He's not on the side of logic, he's on the side of emotion and he thinks he knows what he is talking about, but he doesn't. He's saying that the adults don't know how to use democracy, so the kids must show the adults how to ::)
And what evidence shows this?
What you just said is a backdoor way of saying, "you are at more risk for being a gun owner (legally), so you shouldn't have guns, so we will pass a law to take your guns away....And we will protect you from yourself and others."
Now what ideology espouses such beliefs? Could it be, European socialist? And could this also be used against your own when it comes to knives?
tbf he's right to a great extent. adults are in charge and the gun laws are currently idiotic. a child could see that.
you are and your family are more at risk of coming to harm from your own gun than a non gun owning household are of coming to harm from any external threat.
having reasonable gun laws is now "socialist" ??? is just more complete rubbish i'm afraid.
-
tbf he's right to a great extent. adults are in charge and the gun laws are currently idiotic. a child could see that.
you are and your family are more at risk of coming to harm from your own gun than a non gun owning household are of coming to harm from any external threat.
having reasonable gun laws is now "socialist" ??? is just more complete rubbish i'm afraid.
Yeah OK, you are more likely to be struck and killed by lightening than shot and killed by an active shooter. 37 per year vs 51 per year, those idiotic gun laws ::)
This is what I love about the limey's always trying to tell the US what to do, guess what we fought a war to get away from your idiocy, what make you think we want your advice now?
-
Yeah OK, you are more likely to be struck and killed by lightening than shot and killed by an active shooter. 37 per year vs 51 per year, those idiotic gun laws ::)
This is what I love about the limey's always trying to tell the US what to do, guess what we fought a war to get away from your idiocy, what make you think we want your advice now?
what gun problem? lightning kills more!!
(http://www.abc.net.au/news/image/2371450-3x2-940x627.jpg)
-
"he's being manipulated" he's only a kid" "they're using him".... crock of sht.
he may be a kid (not sure of his age). but he is unquestionably on the side of logic and rationale.
there is no logical argument for having so many guns in society beyond, "we like our guns" , "we like playing with our guns" , "our guns make us feel safe" .even though all the evidence shows gun owners and their families are more at risk of harm.
there's a reason why no other first world country has a huge gun violence problem....can you guess what it is? ???
"he's being manipulated" he's only a kid" "they're using him".... crock of sht.
He's being exploited and he's ignorant on the subject just like you.
he may be a kid (not sure of his age). but he is unquestionably on the side of logic and rationale.
Logic and rationale? ::) His logic is to ban a gun that is used in less than 3% of all gun deaths , that's not logical or good rationale. He wants to punish law abiding citizens for the crimes of criminals , that's the antithesis of logic and rationale , it's ignorance fuel by emotion and directed at the wrong people.
there is no logical argument for having so many guns in society beyond, "we like our guns" , "we like playing with our guns" , "our guns make us feel safe" .even though all the evidence shows gun owners and their families are more at risk of harm.
Bullshit , anti-gun propaganda!! I'll take the absolute lowest estimate of defensive use of a firearm Lower-end estimates include that by David Hemenway, a professor of Health Policy at the Harvard School of Public Health, which estimated approximately 55,000–80,000 such uses each year. It may be as high as 2.5 Million !! Your ignorance knows no bounds.
there's a reason why no other first world country has a huge gun violence problem....can you guess what it is? ???
The old semantics game " first world country " ::) The vast majority of " gun violence " is is suicides and going on numbers alone , considering the amount of guns per capita our rates are low. And your can't compare any of the other " first world countries " to us because they don't have our population or guns per capita
According to the Congressional Research Service, as of 2009 there were roughly twice as many guns per capita in the United States as there were in 1968: more than 300 million guns in all
And directly contradicting your bullshit , our rates of gun ownership have doubled yet our murder rates have been steadily been dropping since the 90s. and I'll post this once again because you don't have the fucking mental capacity to comprehend it or you're to intellectually dishonest to look for the truth on the subject
http://www.law.harvard.edu/students/orgs/jlpp/Vol30_No2_KatesMauseronline.pdf
" Would Banning Murder and Suicide? " read the whole study if you dare , I know you wont because you're a fucking idiot , so I'll let you know the answer. It's a resounding NO ;)
Now what was that about " logic and rationale?" Yeah I thought so , fuck off back to your part of the world where it's a crime to say means things , and you're more likely to get stabbed to death on London than NYC
-
tbf he's right to a great extent. adults are in charge and the gun laws are currently idiotic. a child could see that.
you are and your family are more at risk of coming to harm from your own gun than a non gun owning household are of coming to harm from any external threat.
having reasonable gun laws is now "socialist" ??? is just more complete rubbish i'm afraid.
Get this through your ignorant pea-brain , It's NOT reasonable to ban a gun that is used in less than 3% of gun murders , it's NOT reasonable to punish the law abiding for the crimes of criminals , it's not reasonable , it's NOT reasonable to pass laws criminals will NOT obey.
tbf he's right to a great extent. adults are in charge and the gun laws are currently idiotic. a child could see that.
You don't know the guns laws , you're being fed lies from The Guardian and wherever else you're getting your information , You're ignorant on the subject and that even a child can see
you are and your family are more at risk of coming to harm from your own gun than a non gun owning household are of coming to harm from any external threat.
Bullshit debunked above , keep typing this maybe someone will believe it. You moron Europeans think you know what you're talking about , you don't , you don't have the first fucking clue on what's going on in this country in regards to Gun laws , we have 20K gun laws on the books , all sold to us as being " common sense " and " rationale " and we're expected to believe another one will cure the problem? ::) Da Fuck Outta Here
Worry about getting ripped off from gh15 with his fake gear or do your research because you're in way over your fucking head on this subject dumbass
-
what gun problem? lightning kills more!!
(http://www.abc.net.au/news/image/2371450-3x2-940x627.jpg)
(https://i.imgflip.com/no0jx.jpg)
-
which one is you?
(http://www.abc.net.au/news/image/2371450-3x2-940x627.jpg)
keep being a moron ND it suits you
leave it to the younger generation to sort out the mess of your and previous generations. they may actually have the balls
https://academic.oup.com/aje/article/160/10/929/140858
Abstract
Results show that regardless of storage practice, type of gun, or number of firearms in the home, having a gun in the home was associated with an increased risk of firearm homicide and firearm suicide in the home.
http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJM199310073291506
"Although firearms are often kept in homes for personal protection, this study shows that the practice is counterproductive. Our data indicate that keeping a gun in the home is independently associated with an increase in the risk of homicide in the home"
http://injuryprevention.bmj.com/content/5/4/284
Although there is debate about the issue,1,2 the weight of evidence suggests that keeping a gun in the home increases the mortality risks of household members. The evidence that gun ownership increases risks is perhaps strongest for suicides, particularly suicides of adolescents
-
which one is you?
keep being a moron ND it suits you
leave it to the younger generation to sort out the mess of your and previous generations. they may actually have the balls
https://academic.oup.com/aje/article/160/10/929/140858
Abstract
Results show that regardless of storage practice, type of gun, or number of firearms in the home, having a gun in the home was associated with an increased risk of firearm homicide and firearm suicide in the home.
http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJM199310073291506
"Although firearms are often kept in homes for personal protection, this study shows that the practice is counterproductive. Our data indicate that keeping a gun in the home is independently associated with an increase in the risk of homicide in the home"
http://injuryprevention.bmj.com/content/5/4/284
Although there is debate about the issue,1,2 the weight of evidence suggests that keeping a gun in the home increases the mortality risks of household members. The evidence that gun ownership increases risks is perhaps strongest for suicides, particularly suicides of adolescents
So does having a swimming pool :o but you're not for calling for the banning of those are you? ;)
I'm glad you didn't address anything else you dolt , shows you're a coward 8) come back when you have facts. , facts are banning guns won't stop murder or suicides
-
Children and unintentional firearm death
"Children in the United States are at far greater risk of unintentional gun death than children in other developed countries. The relative figures may even be worse since the estimates for US child unintentional gun deaths are derived from the Vital Statistics which have been shown to be underestimates"
"The victims were predominantly male (81 %). Approximately two thirds of the shootings were other-inflicted, and in 97 % of those cases the shooter was a male. The typical shooter in other-inflicted shootings is a brother or friend. Indeed, children aged 11–14 are often shot in the home of friends"
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4602049/
-
Children and unintentional firearm death
"Children in the United States are at far greater risk of unintentional gun death than children in other developed countries. The relative figures may even be worse since the estimates for US child unintentional gun deaths are derived from the Vital Statistics which have been shown to be underestimates"
"The victims were predominantly male (81 %). Approximately two thirds of the shootings were other-inflicted, and in 97 % of those cases the shooter was a male. The typical shooter in other-inflicted shootings is a brother or friend. Indeed, children aged 11–14 are often shot in the home of friends"
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4602049/
Risk !! Owning a car puts your children at increased RISK of being the 1-in-1.3 MILLION
http://asirt.org/initiatives/informing-road-users/road-safety-facts/road-crash-statistics
Ban cars , it's for the kids
-
So does having a swimming pool :o but you're not for calling for the banning of those are you? ;)
I'm glad you didn't address anything else you dolt , shows you're a coward 8) come back when you have facts. , facts are banning guns won't stop murder or suicides
i don't have time to "address" your nonsensical faggotry. you can go back and forth with your drivel for months on end. some of us aren't unemployed bums and have lives and work to get on with.
but the FACT remain, there are way, way less murders in every developed country where guns are banned than the one where they aren't.
-
Common sense guns laws?
We want to keep guns out of the hands of terrorists , so no gun sales to people on the " terror watch list "
Makes sense? I could get behind that , who wants terrorists to get guns? Right?
Look further. Who's on the list? How do you get on the list? ( more importantly off the list? ) Let's see who's on the list shall we?
https://www.dailywire.com/news/6879/these-13-people-placed-terror-watch-list-will-blow-amanda-prestigiacomo
An 8 year old cub-scout? A 6 year old girl? a fucking 2 year old child?????
This is what's being foisted as " commonsense guns laws " Seriously , this is why people are fucking fed up with anti-gun people , just fuck off already.
-
i don't have time to "address" your nonsensical faggotry. you can go back and forth with your drivel for months on end. some of us aren't unemployed bums and have lives and work to get on with.
but the FACT remain, there are way, way less murders in every developed country where guns are banned than the one where they aren't.
Thanks for conceding defeat , now fuck off and learn what you're talking about before you get curb stomped some more ;)
-
i don't have time to "address" your nonsensical faggotry. you can go back and forth with your drivel for months on end. some of us aren't unemployed bums and have lives and work to get on with.
but the FACT remain, there are way, way less murders in every developed country where guns are banned than the one where they aren't.
You do this every time. You talk about logic, etc. yet you have none and bow out in an angry manner when ND confronts you.
Every single time he embarrasses you.
-
i don't have time to "address" your nonsensical faggotry. you can go back and forth with your drivel for months on end. some of us aren't unemployed bums and have lives and work to get on with.
but the FACT remain, there are way, way less murders in every developed country where guns are banned than the one where they aren't.
You sure about that? ???
-
You do this every time. You talk about logic, etc. yet you have none and bow out in an angry manner when ND confronts you.
Every single time he embarrasses you.
care to highlight where i bowed out in an angry manner?
ND is a monghead of the highest ordeer, with a hell of a lot of time on his hands. he talks utter nonsense. just tons and tons of it!
i said gun owning households were more at danger than non gun households. he said "that BS been debunked"
i then posted several peer reviewed studies as reference. he then posted some drivel about swimming pools, cars and terrorists....absolutely nothing that remotely "debunked" anything i said.
yet he embarrassed me? ....you're right though. i do feel embarrassed .....for him, nearly every time he posts.
he'll probably try hacking my personal info again following this :D
-
You sure about that? ???
yes.very sure 8)
-
care to highlight where i bowed out in an angry manner?
ND is a monghead of the highest ordeer, with a hell of a lot of time on his hands. he talks utter nonsense. just tons and tons of it!
i said gun owning households were more at danger than non gun households. he said "that BS been debunked"
i then posted several peer reviewed studies as reference. he then posted some drivel about swimming pools, cars and terrorists....absolutely nothing that remotely "debunked" anything i said.
yet he embarrassed me? ....you're right though. i do feel embarrassed .....for him, nearly every time he posts.
he'll probably try hacking my personal info again following this :D
No one hacked your info moron , you're to stupid to lock your photobucket account dummy , your stupidity transcends not only this topic. ;)
-
go snooping around another man's personal photos. then start posting pics of their feet on a BB forum!!! :-\
you're a different type of weird kid.
i sure as hell hope you're on some list that prohibits you from owning a gun! or any sharp object for that matter !
-
go snooping around another man's personal photos. then start posting pics of their feet on a BB forum!!! :-\
you're a different type of weird kid.
i sure as hell hope you're on some list that prohibits you from owning a gun! or any sharp object for that matter !
Awww still bitter I posted your ugly mug? ;D Not my fault everyone laughed at you and you cried to the mods :'( " Take it down Take it down " :'(
Bitch learn what you're talking about before I drop the knowledge hammer on your fucking head ;)
-
Awww still bitter I posted your ugly mug? ;D Not my fault everyone laughed at you and you cried to the mods :'( " Take it down Take it down " :'(
Bitch learn what you're talking about before I drop the knowledge hammer on your fucking head ;)
dude you have pictures of another man's feet stored on your hard drive....you're really in no position to be calling anyone "bitch"
lmfao ...foot bitch ! ;D
-
Children and unintentional firearm death
"Children in the United States are at far greater risk of unintentional gun death than children in other developed countries. The relative figures may even be worse since the estimates for US child unintentional gun deaths are derived from the Vital Statistics which have been shown to be underestimates"
"The victims were predominantly male (81 %). Approximately two thirds of the shootings were other-inflicted, and in 97 % of those cases the shooter was a male. The typical shooter in other-inflicted shootings is a brother or friend. Indeed, children aged 11–14 are often shot in the home of friends"
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4602049/
and of those.... what % are black?
-
dude you have pictures of another man's feet stored on your hard drive....you're really in no position to be calling anyone "bitch"
lmfao ...foot bitch ! ;D
I also have pictures of your retarded looking face , which everyone laughed at hence your cried like a little bitch to the mods :'( Take it down , Take it down lol
run along moron and figure out how not to get ripped off for fake gear by gh15 ;)
-
I also have pictures of your retarded looking face , which everyone laughed at hence your cried like a little bitch to the mods :'( Take it down , Take it down lol
run along moron and figure out how not to get ripped off for fake gear by gh15 ;)
you actually openly admit to having pics of another man's face and feet stored on your hard drive! ???
all i can say is you are one very strange and fked up individual and brazen with it! i hope you get some help to overcome your weird and unnatural fetishes.
-
you actually openly admit to having pics of another man's face and feet stored on your hard drive! ???
all i can say is you are one very strange and fked up individual and brazen with it! i hope you get some help to overcome your weird and unnatural fetishes.
I have pictures of your drugs too :o I wonder if it was the fake ones you got robbed for 8) a fool and his money are soon parted
-
I have pictures of your drugs too :o I wonder if it was the fake ones you got robbed for 8) a fool and his money are soon parted
you got pics of drugs, another man's face... and feet...
sounds like you're in for one helluva night! why not get yourself a bottle of wine...really go to town! ???
-
you got pics of drugs, another man's face... and feet...
sounds like you're in for one helluva night! why not get yourself a bottle of wine...really go to town! ???
How did your wife take it when you told you to got robbed buying fake gear? or is that something you don't let her in on? ;D LMAO Do you feel stupid? because you sure as fuck look it. 8)
-
How did your wife take it when you told you to got robbed buying fake gear? or is that something you don't let her in on? ;D LMAO Do you feel stupid? because you sure as fuck look it. 8)
not really. i was pretty p1ssed with the scamming sack of sht (gh15) at the time but it was peanuts to me in the grand scheme of things. probably a years salary welfare to you. hey-ho onwards and upwards! ;)
-
not really. i was pretty p1ssed with the scamming sack of sht (gh15) at the time but it was peanuts to me in the grand scheme of things. probably a years salary welfare to you. hey-ho onwards and upwards! ;)
Yes , yes that's right you live in a 20 million dollar home ::) yet wear Crocs lmfao
-
Yes , yes that's right you live in a 20 million dollar home ::) yet wear Crocs lmfao
so you're proud and boast about having the pics of a random stranger's body parts saved on your computer , and you gloat about someone getting scammed by a sack of sht...
wow you really are one of life's winners aren't you :-\
-
so you're proud and boast about having the pics of a random stranger's body parts saved on your computer , and you gloat about someone getting scammed by a sack of sht...
wow you really are one of life's winners aren't you :-\
We all can't be billionaires like you , but then again we all can't be morons like you either
-
ND, who has spent thousands of comments arguing over Dorian vs. Ronnie, is a worthy opponent.
Conker, who sticks to his anti-gun opinions no matter the evidence is a worthy opponent.
Which WARRIOR will win this bloody battle of wits?!?
-
ND, who has spent thousands of comments arguing over Dorian vs. Ronnie, is a worthy opponent.
Conker, who sticks to his anti-gun opinions no matter the evidence is a worthy opponent.
Which WARRIOR will win this bloody battle of wits?!?
Like General Zod , I win , I always win. 8)
-
"he's being manipulated" he's only a kid" "they're using him".... crock of sht.
he may be a kid (not sure of his age). but he is unquestionably on the side of logic and rationale.
there is no logical argument for having so many guns in society beyond, "we like our guns" , "we like playing with our guns" , "our guns make us feel safe" .even though all the evidence shows gun owners and their families are more at risk of harm.
there's a reason why no other first world country has a huge gun violence problem....can you guess what it is? ???
You're a pathetic twat. Your kind curl up in a corner and scream for the cops to come save you. Shouldn't you be out collecting knives for your Queen?
-
Like General Zod , I win , I always win. 8)
Except against me. 8)
-
Except against me. 8)
You've already been laid to waste ;) You're a dinosaur to blind to find your way into the nearest fucking tar pit
-
ND, who has spent thousands of comments arguing over Dorian vs. Ronnie, is a worthy opponent.
Conker, who sticks to his anti-gun opinions no matter the evidence is a worthy opponent.
Which WARRIOR will win this bloody battle of wits?!?
ND, Conker is too busy watching what he says on the internet for fear of being arrested.
-
You've already been laid to waste ;) You're a dinosaur to blind to find your way into the nearest fucking tar pit
Laid to waste on getbig lol.....okay.
-
Laid to waste on getbig lol.....okay.
Thanks for playing ;)
-
Thanks for playing ;)
Yes, I played into it lol.
Seems like you’re playing into Conkers trolling.
Do you actually believe that Conker believes everything he says? Or, he’s just getting a rise out of everyone? You know how getbig is. Why give Conker the time of day and waste your time?
-
Yes, I played into it lol.
Seems like you’re playing into Conkers trolling.
Do you actually believe that Conker believes everything he says? Or, he’s just getting a rise out of everyone? You know how getbig is. Why give Conker the time of day and waste your time?
You're talking about a guy who got ripped off for drugs on-online by a gimmick who they refer to as " God " and they are his elves ??? , He's not that sophisticated :-\
-
You're talking about a guy who got ripped off for drugs on-online by a gimmick who they refer to as " God " and they are his elves ??? , He's not that sophisticated :-\
So, then why give him the time?
-
ND, who has spent thousands of comments arguing over Dorian vs. Ronnie, is a worthy opponent.
Conker, who sticks to his anti-gun opinions no matter the evidence is a worthy opponent.
Which WARRIOR will win this bloody battle of wits?!?
there is not one single shred of evidence that exists to show that having the number of guns in society as in the US is anything other than a disaster.
sometimes i actually think the US (at least a large chunk of it) is in some kind of parallel universe where the usual laws of observation and comprehension don't exist.
the murder rate, the gun crime rate, the number of random massacres , the number of accidental shootings...some of you people really are stupid beyond belief. i truly feel sorry for the other half.
-
You're a pathetic twat. Your kind curl up in a corner and scream for the cops to come save you. Shouldn't you be out collecting knives for your Queen?
aren't you the guy that ran his mouth to another a mod and then sht in his pants when the other mod challenged you to get in a boxing ring?
drop the tough guy act, you're a proven pussy. (with an extremely odd shaped head) :D
-
there is not one single shred of evidence that exists to show that having the number of guns in society as in the US is anything other than a disaster.
sometimes i actually think the US (at least a large chunk of it) is in some kind of parallel universe where the usual laws of observation and comprehension don't exist.
the murder rate, the gun crime rate, the number of random massacres , the number of accidental shootings...some of you people really are stupid beyond belief. i truly feel sorry for the other half.
the solution is simple more guns...
-
there is not one single shred of evidence that exists to show that having the number of guns in society as in the US is anything other than a disaster.
sometimes i actually think the US (at least a large chunk of it) is in some kind of parallel universe where the usual laws of observation and comprehension don't exist.
the murder rate, the gun crime rate, the number of random massacres , the number of accidental shootings...some of you people really are stupid beyond belief. i truly feel sorry for the other half.
There is plenty of evidence that exists that contradicts your claim , but you're to biased to seek it out. Pay attention stupid , more guns doesn't mean more murders , this is a proven fact
Follow the bouncing ball
According to the Congressional Research Service, as of 2009 there were roughly twice as many guns per capita in the United States as there were in 1968: more than 300 million guns in all
We have twice has many guns per capita than 50 years ago AND..................... .... drum roll...
Gun violence in US has fallen dramatically over past 20 years, Justice Dept. report finds
http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/05/07/18108298-gun-violence-in-us-has-fallen-dramatically-over-past-20-years-justice-dept-report-finds
Oh shit , looks like everyone's favorite dumb Brit is wrong :D This mind you is a Department of Justice report. Now to kick more sand in your face
WOULD BANNING FIREARMS REDUCE
MURDER AND SUICIDE?
http://www.law.harvard.edu/students/orgs/jlpp/Vol30_No2_KatesMauseronline.pdf
No , banning firearms would NOT reduce murder & suicide. Ban guns you change the methods in which humans kill other humans ( and themselves ) and you also create score more victims who use firearms to protect themselves. You're an ideologue , you don't care about facts , only emotions. You're not steeped in this subject , you're a casual observer who is only getting his information from Anti-gun sources.
You can NOT argue these Facts More guns does NOT mean more gun deaths and banning guns wouldn't make a fucking dent in murders or suicides.
Class dismissed. 8)
-
the solution is simple more guns...
See above
-
aren't you the guy that ran his mouth to another a mod and then sht in his pants when the other mod challenged you to get in a boxing ring?
drop the tough guy act, you're a proven pussy. (with an extremely odd shaped head) :D
Aren't you the same guy who cried like a little bitch when I posted pictures of you in your Crocs LMAO drop the though guy act, you're a proven pussy. ( who looks like Vin Diesel with downs syndrome ) :D
-
a few more double blind peer reviewed studies, showing that guns owners and people in areas of high gun prevalence are at greater risk than non gun owners and people living in areas with less guns.
that's 7 now . let me know if you want any more . there's plenty more!
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1380933/
"CONCLUSIONS: Legal purchase of a handgun appears to be associated with a long-lasting increased risk of violent death."
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11834986
CONCLUSION:
A disproportionately high number of 5-14 year olds died from suicide, homicide, and unintentional firearm deaths in states and regions where guns were more prevalent.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11937613
The increased rate of suicide and homicide in states with high gun levels was accounted for primarily by significantly elevated firearm suicide and firearm homicide rates. Unintentional firearm death rates were also increased in states with more guns. At the regional level, qualitatively similar results were obtained.
-
Aren't you the same guy who cried like a little bitch when I posted pictures of you in your Crocs LMAO drop the though guy act, you're a proven pussy. ( who looks like Vin Diesel with downs syndrome ) :D
iv'e posted loads of pics of myself on here. the only pic i've ever objected to being posted was one that you hacked from my social media(weirdo ::) ) that identified me. something i'd rather not do given the number of weirdos and creeps on this board (you being the prime example).
how many pics have you posted of yourself in 60k posts?
after all those posts you still know fk all about BB forum etiquette...if you have never posted pics yourself you haven't earned the right to critique anyone else's.
-
a few more double blind peer reviewed studies, showing that guns owners and people in areas of high gun prevalence are at greater risk than non gun owners and people living in areas with less guns.
that's 7 now . let me know if you want any more . there's plenty more!
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC1380933/
"CONCLUSIONS: Legal purchase of a handgun appears to be associated with a long-lasting increased risk of violent death."
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11834986
CONCLUSION:
A disproportionately high number of 5-14 year olds died from suicide, homicide, and unintentional firearm deaths in states and regions where guns were more prevalent.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/11937613
The increased rate of suicide and homicide in states with high gun levels was accounted for primarily by significantly elevated firearm suicide and firearm homicide rates. Unintentional firearm death rates were also increased in states with more guns. At the regional level, qualitatively similar results were obtained.
Again stupid risk !!! And banning firearms would NOT reduce murders it suicides , only change the methods . Read the study I fucking dare you
-
Again stupid risk !!! And banning firearms would NOT reduce murders it suicides , only change the methods . Read the study I fucking dare you
lol. did mommy never teach you what the word "homicide"means
you dumb animal
-
lol. did mommy never teach you what the word "homicide"means
you dumb animal
Moron , we have twice as many guns as we did 50 years ago and the homicide and murder rate with them have falling dramatically ,.I.e more guns DO NOT mean more deaths. I will shove this diwn your fucking throat until you fucking choke on it ;)
-
Again stupid risk !!! And banning firearms would NOT reduce murders it suicides , only change the methods . Read the study I fucking dare you
It has been argued that the reason suicides are high among dentists and cops in US is easy access to the methods. But maybe mostly because the jobs end up depressing. Lawyers kill themselves disproportionately too and they don’t have guns or gas around.
-
It has been argued that the reason suicides are high among dentists and cops in US is easy access to the methods. But maybe mostly because the jobs end up depressing. Lawyers kill themselves disproportionately too and they don’t have guns or gas around.
Japan , no real access to firearms yet their suicide rate is higher. Get rid of all the firearms the method in which people kill themselves change ,same with murders.
-
Japan , no real access to firearms yet their suicide rate is higher. Get rid of all the firearms the method in which people kill themselves change ,same with murders.
I don’t disagree. But I would guess the evidence is more compelling for suicide than for homicide. Studies or no studies, if you look around the world, my guess is that generally, where there are more guns there is more violence and homicide. Switzerland is an exception because of their militia tradition (which we also have but mixed in with an entirely different culture from Switzerland). But I think the world can maybe understand USA traditions better by taking a closer look at Switzerland. Both we and they are extremely concerned about freedom and avoidance of external domination (given our respective histories). Thus, our Amendment 2 in our Constitution. Thus their “every citizen is a soldier with associated arms” tradition. I guess I am saying different things here, but the traditions and histories are relevant too.
-
Japan , no real access to firearms yet their suicide rate is higher. Get rid of all the firearms the method in which people kill themselves change ,same with murders.
yes that's true
only there's no denying that an awful lot of people can get shot dead very quickly
and a great many are being shot dead every day
No idea what the answer is - taking guns off law abiding people isn't it though
that just makes them more vulnerable.
-
London doing knife control now.
https://www.dailywire.com/news/29179/londons-mayor-declares-intense-new-knife-control-emily-zanotti
"An epidemic of stabbings and acid attacks in London has gotten so bad that London mayor Sadiq Khan is announcing broad new "knife control" policies designed to keep these weapons of war out of the hands of Londoners looking to cause others harm.
The "tough, immediate" measures involve an incredible police crackdown, a ban on home deliveries of knives and acid, and expanding law enforcement stop-and-search powers so that police may stop anyone they believe to be a threat, or planning a knife or acid attack......"
-
London doing knife control now.
https://www.dailywire.com/news/29179/londons-mayor-declares-intense-new-knife-control-emily-zanotti
"An epidemic of stabbings and acid attacks in London has gotten so bad that London mayor Sadiq Khan is announcing broad new "knife control" policies designed to keep these weapons of war out of the hands of Londoners looking to cause others harm.
The "tough, immediate" measures involve an incredible police crackdown, a ban on home deliveries of knives and acid, and expanding law enforcement stop-and-search powers so that police may stop anyone they believe to be a threat, or planning a knife or acid attack......"
Same as in prison yet doesn't stop anyone from making shivs...
shit... we'll be going back to underground blacksmitthing where they make knives for you..lol
-
London doing knife control now.
https://www.dailywire.com/news/29179/londons-mayor-declares-intense-new-knife-control-emily-zanotti
"An epidemic of stabbings and acid attacks in London has gotten so bad that London mayor Sadiq Khan is announcing broad new "knife control" policies designed to keep these weapons of war out of the hands of Londoners looking to cause others harm.
The "tough, immediate" measures involve an incredible police crackdown, a ban on home deliveries of knives and acid, and expanding law enforcement stop-and-search powers so that police may stop anyone they believe to be a threat, or planning a knife or acid attack......"
London mayor....what religion is he?
-
London mayor....what religion is he?
Religion of peace...
-
London mayor....what religion is he?
Brainwashed Peadophile Trouble Causing untrustworthy
Musli follower
-
Anti-gun Mark Zuckerberg arrives in Washington DC with a team of armed bodyguards.
Gun control for thee, but not for me.
-
Anti-gun Mark Zuckerberg arrives in Washington DC with a team of armed bodyguards.
Gun control for thee, but not for me.
It’s beyond hilarious it’s so hypocritical
Why doesn’t he try and explain that ::)
-
Mr Anti-gun himself De Blasio aide busted with gun in car
https://nypost.com/2018/04/08/director-of-citys-office-of-criminal-justice-busted-for-gun-possession/
-
Mr Anti-gun himself De Blasio aide busted with gun in car
https://nypost.com/2018/04/08/director-of-citys-office-of-criminal-justice-busted-for-gun-possession/
Another hypocrital libtard who says what the communists want to hear.
-
American citizens - Your little lives aren't worth protecting with guns. Your children aren't valuable enough to protect with guns.
Only billionaires, politicians, and Hollywood celebrities are worthy of that......along with their property and money. Even their pets are more important than you.
You are nothing. Your lives are meaningless. Do as we say, not as we do. We are above the law. You have only the rights and freedom that we allow you to have.
Fuck you.
-
American citizens - Your little lives aren't worth protecting with guns. Your children aren't valuable enough to protect with guns.
Only billionaires, politicians, and Hollywood celebrities are worthy of that......along with their property and money. Even their pets are more important than you.
You are nothing. Your lives are meaningless. Do as we say, not as we do. We are above the law. You have only the rights and freedom that we allow you to have.
Fuck you.
It certainly appears that way
Well Said.
-
Moron , we have twice as many guns as we did 50 years ago and the homicide and murder rate with them have falling dramatically ,.I.e more guns DO NOT mean more deaths. I will shove this diwn your fucking throat until you fucking choke on it ;)
although i've already thrashed your little feeble ramblings into the ground with 7 studies showing gun ownership makes you and your family less safe. i should just point that the number of guns may have gone up but looking at the data it's unlikely the number of gun owners has changed very much.
percentage of households in the US with a firearm in 1972 was 43% in 2018 42%
https://www.statista.com/statistics/249740/percentage-of-households-in-the-united-states-owning-a-firearm/
-
although i've already thrashed your little feeble ramblings into the ground with 7 studies showing gun ownership makes you and your family less safe. i should just point that the number of guns may have gone up but looking at the data it's unlikely the number of gun owners has changed very much.
percentage of households in the US with a firearm in 1972 was 43% in 2018 42%
https://www.statista.com/statistics/249740/percentage-of-households-in-the-united-states-owning-a-firearm/
You've done absolutely NOTHING at all You've addressed NOTHING. When push comes to shove you do what you've , bail out. And the link you posted is junk , it's a pay site. ::)
You glossed right over the fucking Harvard study that says plain as day , NO banning guns wouldn't reduce murders or suicides.
Post all the junk links and anti-gun propaganda you can , when you start posting facts I'll entertain you.
Recap
Banning guns will NOT stop murders or suicides , Banning guns means you'll get get stabbed like your hometown ::) Hey no more school shootings , just some lunatic driving into packs of children leaving school , but hey at least they're not getting shot ::) Bath school massacre 45 dead no guns https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bath_School_disaster
-
although i've already thrashed your little feeble ramblings into the ground with 7 studies showing gun ownership makes you and your family less safe. i should just point that the number of guns may have gone up but looking at the data it's unlikely the number of gun owners has changed very much.
percentage of households in the US with a firearm in 1972 was 43% in 2018 42%
https://www.statista.com/statistics/249740/percentage-of-households-in-the-united-states-owning-a-firearm/
What was the number of households in 1972 vs 2018, cuck? ;)
-
You've done absolutely NOTHING at all You've addressed NOTHING. When push comes to shove you do what you've , bail out. And the link you posted is junk , it's a pay site. ::)
You glossed right over the fucking Harvard study that says plain as day , NO banning guns wouldn't reduce murders or suicides.
Post all the junk links and anti-gun propaganda you can , when you start posting facts I'll entertain you.
Recap
Banning guns will NOT stop murders or suicides , Banning guns means you'll get get stabbed like your hometown ::) Hey no more school shootings , just some lunatic driving into packs of children leaving school , but hey at least they're not getting shot ::) Bath school massacre 45 dead no guns https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bath_School_disaster
i glossed over your "study" ?
you produced one highly dubious "study" . from a non peer reviewed journal.
an extract from that "study" which tries to blame russia for fudging international murder figures to make the US look bad!
"Since at least 1965, the false assertion that the United States has
the industrialized world’s highest murder rate has been an artifact
of politically motivated Soviet minimization designed to hide the
true homicide rates."
really ?! ::)
i produced several peer reviewed studies showing that gun owners are more at risk of harm .
you didn't gloss over them , you tried to lie about their content. claiming they all said only suicides rates were heightened by guns. when all of them said the risk of homicide, suicide and accidental death were all increased with gun ownership.
btw statistica is a highly respected statistics database. it is a corporate partner of the dow jones and many other internationally respected organisations. because it's a "paid site" that means it's "garbage"... ??? what a fkin numskull you are. the FT and forbes are also paid sites...are they garbage too?
have a look around there is plenty of data showing that while the number of guns may have increased the number of gun owners has not at anywhere near the same rate, if at all. gun owners are just tending to own more guns each.
let's face it ND you are degenerate moron of the highest order and you have been totally destroyed here with actual factual evidence. something you are incapable of producing to support your argument.
-
i glossed over your "study" ?
you produced one highly dubious "study" . from a non peer reviewed journal.
an extract from that "study" which tries to blame russia for fudging international murder figures to make the US look bad!
"Since at least 1965, the false assertion that the United States has
the industrialized world’s highest murder rate has been an artifact
of politically motivated Soviet minimization designed to hide the
true homicide rates."
really ?! ::)
i produced several peer reviewed studies showing that gun owners are more at risk of harm .
you didn't gloss over them , you tried to lie about their content. claiming they all said only suicides rates were heightened by guns. when all of them said the risk of homicide, suicide and accidental death were all increased with gun ownership.
btw statistica is a highly respected statistics database. it is a corporate partner of the dow jones and many other internationally respected organisations. because it's a "paid site" that means it's "garbage"... ??? what a fkin numskull you are. the FT and forbes are also paid sites...are they garbage too?
have a look around there is plenty of data showing that while the number of guns may have increased the number of gun owners has not at anywhere near the same rate, if at all. gun owners are just tending to own more guns each.
let's face it ND you are degenerate moron of the highest order and you have been totally destroyed here with actual factual evidence. something you are incapable of producing to support your argument.
i glossed over your "study" ?
This says everything we need to know about you. You admittedly didn't read it at all look for anything you can find wrong and write it all off. You're intellectually bankrupt. And that's not the only link I've posted moron. I like how you glossed over all of those and never once commented. Typical.
i produced several peer reviewed studies showing that gun owners are more at risk of harm .
Risk of harm and harm are two very different things stupid. Owning a swimming pool increases the risk of accidental drowning doesn't mean you're going to.
btw statistica is a highly respected statistics database. it is a corporate partner of the dow jones and many other internationally respected organisations. because it's a "paid site" that means it's "garbage"... ??? what a fkin numskull you are. the FT and forbes are also paid sites...are they garbage too?
It's garbage because I cannot access the data you're trying to link stupid. ::)
have a look around there is plenty of data showing that while the number of guns may have increased the number of gun owners has not at anywhere near the same rate, if at all. gun owners are just tending to own more guns each.
Entertaining that we still have more guns than ever and the gun violence has fallen dramatically http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/05/07/18108298-gun-violence-in-us-has-fallen-dramatically-over-past-20-years-justice-dept-report-finds So much for all the peer reviewed links you posted , Risk of harm and harm and two different things.
let's face it ND you are degenerate moron of the highest order and you have been totally destroyed here with actual factual evidence. something you are incapable of producing to support your argument.
Says the guy who " glossed over it " ::) Someone who ignored every link I've posted ::) Someone who is hopelessly lost in a debate he doesn't even comprehend ::) You're taking a bad beating in this thread and not just by me by everyone ;D and with all your lies the facts still haven't changed ;)
Run along stupid before you continue to get bitch slapped with facts & figures. ;)
-
You ban guns you create scores of victims who use guns to protect themselves , facts
The National
Survey of Private
Ownership of
Firearms found
approximately
1.5 million
defensive gun
uses per year.
https://object.cato.org/sites/cato.org/files/pubs/pdf/WP-Tough-Targets.pdf
Gun Control: Myths and Realities
By David Lampo
May 13, 2000
The number of well-publicized public shootings during the past few years, especially the tragedy at Columbine High School, has re-energized the gun control movement. As a show of strength, a coalition of gun control groups has organized a “Million Mom March” to be held in Washington, D.C. on Mother’s Day, an event designed to stir up emotions rather than promote rational thought. And when one looks at the facts about gun control, it’s easy to see why the anti-gun lobby relies on emotion rather than logic to make its case.
Think you know the facts about gun control? If your only source of information is the mainstream media, what you think you know may not be correct. Take the quiz below and test your knowledge.
1. Thousands of children die annually in gun accidents.
False. Gun accidents involving children are actually at record lows, although you wouldn’t know it from listening to the mainstream media. In 1997, the last year for which data are available, only 142 children under 15 years of age died in gun accidents, and the total number of gun-related deaths for this age group was 642. More children die each year in accidents involving bikes, space heaters or drownings. The often repeated claim that 12 children per day die from gun violence includes “children” up to 20 years of age, the great majority of whom are young adult males who die in gang-related violence.
2. Gun shows are responsible for a large number of firearms falling into the hands of criminals.
False. Contrary to President Clinton’s claims, there is no “gun show loophole.” All commercial arms dealers at gun shows must run background checks, and the only people exempt from them are the small number of non-commercial sellers. According to the U.S. Department of Justice, at most 2 percent of guns used by criminals are purchased at gun shows, and most of those were purchased legally by people who passed background checks.
3. The tragedy at Columbine High School a year ago illustrates the deficiencies of current gun control laws.
False. Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold violated close to 20 firearms laws in amassing their cache of weapons (not to mention the law against murder), so it seems rather dubious to argue that additional laws might have prevented this tragedy. The two shotguns and rifle used by Harris and Klebold were purchased by a girlfriend who would have passed a background check, and the TEC-9 handgun used by them was already illegal.
4. States that allow registered citizens to carry concealed weapons have lower crime rates than those that don’t.
True. The 31 states that have “shall issue” laws allowing private citizens to carry concealed weapons have, on average, a 24 percent lower violent crime rate, a 19 percent lower murder rate and a 39 percent lower robbery rate than states that forbid concealed weapons. In fact, the nine states with the lowest violent crime rates are all right-to-carry states. Remarkably, guns are used for self-defense more than 2 million times a year, three to five times the estimated number of violent crimes committed with guns.
5. Waiting periods lower crime rates.
False. Numerous studies have been conducted on the effects of waiting periods, both before and after the federal Brady bill was passed in 1993. Those studies consistently show that there is no correlation between waiting periods and murder or robbery rates. Florida State University professor Gary Kleck analyzed data from every U.S. city with a population over 100,000 and found that waiting periods had no statistically significant effect. Even University of Maryland anti-gun researcher David McDowell found that “waiting periods have no influence on either gun homicides or gun suicides.”
6. Lower murder rates in foreign countries prove that gun control works.
False. This is one of the favorite arguments of gun control proponents, and yet the facts show that there is simply no correlation between gun control laws and murder or suicide rates across a wide spectrum of nations and cultures. In Israel and Switzerland, for example, a license to possess guns is available on demand to every law-abiding adult, and guns are easily obtainable in both nations. Both countries also allow widespread carrying of concealed firearms, and yet, admits Dr. Arthur Kellerman, one of the foremost medical advocates of gun control, Switzerland and Israel “have rates of homicide that are low despite rates of home firearm ownership that are at least as high as those in the United States.” A comparison of crime rates within Europe reveals no correlation between access to guns and crime.
The basic premise of the gun control movement, that easy access to guns causes higher crime, is contradicted by the facts, by history and by reason. Let’s hope more people are catching on.
Where you at Conker you moron? ;)
-
Mass shootings rivet national attention, but are a small share of gun violence
http://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2013/09/17/mass-shootings-rivet-national-attention-but-are-a-small-share-of-gun-violence/
Where you at stupid? ??? 8)
-
THE TRUTH ABOUT AR-15 RIFLES AND MASS SHOOTINGS
https://barbwire.com/2018/02/23/truth-about-ar-15-rifles-mass-shootings/
Facts
-
Conker is correct. The 2007 Harvard study was not in a peer reviewed journal. It was in a student edited law reviews.
The Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy describes itself as “one of the most widely circulated student-edited law reviews and the nation’s leading forum for conservative and libertarian legal scholarship.”
Did a 2007 Harvard University study prove that areas with higher rates of gun ownership have lower crime rates?
There was no such official Harvard “study.”
It is true, however, that gun rights advocates Gary Mauser and Don Kates co-authored a 2007 paper in the Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy, arguing that higher rates of gun ownership correlated with lower crime rates, Snopes.com notes.
The paper, however, was not peer-reviewed, Harvard University does not consider it a study, and it misrepresented separate research to draw unsupported conclusions.
-
Conker is correct. The 2007 Harvard study was not in a peer reviewed journal. It was in a student edited law reviews.
The Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy describes itself as “one of the most widely circulated student-edited law reviews and the nation’s leading forum for conservative and libertarian legal scholarship.”
Did a 2007 Harvard University study prove that areas with higher rates of gun ownership have lower crime rates?
There was no such official Harvard “study.”
It is true, however, that gun rights advocates Gary Mauser and Don Kates co-authored a 2007 paper in the Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy, arguing that higher rates of gun ownership correlated with lower crime rates, Snopes.com notes.
The paper, however, was not peer-reviewed, Harvard University does not consider it a study, and it misrepresented separate research to draw unsupported conclusions.
Irrelevant because the point still stands Just because it's not peer reviewed . Banning guns will not reduce murders and suicides. So he's right about it not being peer reviewed and that it. And he never addressed ANY of the other topics I posted , which he can't , the best he could manage was increased risk ::)
You look at the points above , total silence
-
6 reasons gun control will not solve mass shootings
https://www.yahoo.com/news/6-reasons-gun-control-not-150300262.html
Where you at? Facts
-
Irrelevant because the point still stands Just because it's not peer reviewed . Banning guns will not reduce murders and suicides. So he's right about it not being peer reviewed and that it. And he never addressed ANY of the other topics I posted , which he can't , the best he could manage was increased risk ::)
You look at the points above , total silence
it wasn't just not "peer reviewed" it was not even a "study". and as SF stated it misrepresented existing data and drew unsupported conclusions...in other words it was "garbage" lmao
come on lets see if you're actually capable of providing ONE actual peer reviewed study that supports your argument here. i have produced several to back mine and can provide more.
and btw the studies i cited concluded that gun owners/families were at increased risk of homicide, suicide and accidental death....not just risk of harm. you absolute cretin.
you have been destroyed so completely in this thread. if you were a horse the only compassionate thing to do at this stage would be to put a bullet in your head. (pardon the pun!)
-
it wasn't just not "peer reviewed" it was not even a "study". and as SF stated it misrepresented existing data and drew unsupported conclusions...in other words it was "garbage" lmao
come on lets see if you're actually capable of providing ONE actual peer reviewed study that supports your argument here. i have produced several to back mine and can provide more.
and btw the studies i cited concluded that gun owners/families were at increased risk of homicide, suicide and accidental death....not just risk of harm. you absolute cretin.
you have been destroyed so completely in this thread. if you were a horse the only compassionate thing to do at this stage would be to put a bullet in your head. (pardon the pun!)
Peer reviewed? What there is an increased risk?? That's the best you managed?? Lmfao you've addressed absolutely NOTHING Your whole premise is pathetic , you've accomplished zero. Congrats there is an increased "risk " LMAO
Your whole premise is not proven , you've accomplished nothing. You're clueless on the subject , come back when have something other than risk. ;)
-
Peer reviewed? What there is an increased risk?? That's the best you managed?? Lmfao you've addressed absolutely NOTHING Your whole premise is pathetic , you've accomplished zero. Congrats there is an increased "risk " LMAO
Your whole premise is not proven , you've accomplished nothing. You're clueless on the subject , come back when have something other than risk. ;)
Why do you argue with someone who is afraid of an inanimate object? I have come to the conclusion why leftist want to get rid of guns, they have no self control and\or take personal responsibility for their actions, so they assume no one else will.
-
Conker is correct. The 2007 Harvard study was not in a peer reviewed journal. It was in a student edited law reviews.
The Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy describes itself as “one of the most widely circulated student-edited law reviews and the nation’s leading forum for conservative and libertarian legal scholarship.”
Did a 2007 Harvard University study prove that areas with higher rates of gun ownership have lower crime rates?
There was no such official Harvard “study.”
It is true, however, that gun rights advocates Gary Mauser and Don Kates co-authored a 2007 paper in the Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy, arguing that higher rates of gun ownership correlated with lower crime rates, Snopes.com notes.
The paper, however, was not peer-reviewed, Harvard University does not consider it a study, and it misrepresented separate research to draw unsupported conclusions.
Link?
-
ND, Conker is too busy watching what he says on the internet for fear of being arrested.
Lmao, ;D ;D ;D - and considering whether to call for a ban on knives (idk if he was serious, i hope not).
-
LMAO he keeps calling me hurtful names I'll have his ass arrested for " hate speech " ;D
-
Fuck you, come and take them.
-
Fuck you, come and take them.
They're going to try and paradoxically they're going to need jack boot thugs with guns to get them.
-
They're going to try and paradoxically they're going to need jack boot thugs with guns to get them.
Ha, And that's the irony
Your not allowed guns as they are dangerous & we're going to use our guns to to take yours away ::)
for your safety...... ???
-
Irrelevant because the point still stands Just because it's not peer reviewed . Banning guns will not reduce murders and suicides. So he's right about it not being peer reviewed and that it. And he never addressed ANY of the other topics I posted , which he can't , the best he could manage was increased risk ::)
You look at the points above , total silence
Epic meltdown. :D :D
-
Ha, And that's the irony
Your not allowed guns as they are dangerous & we're going to use our guns to to take yours away ::)
for your safety...... ???
...and yet a large chunk of US citizens are happy about it...nay, demanding it.
Dickless morons.
-
Epic meltdown. :D :D
Almost as " epic " as posting stories from 3 years ago :o ;)
-
Almost as " epic " as posting stories from 3 years ago :o ;)
Nice excuse lol.
Youve been melting down in every thread when arguing with Conker. :D :D
I mean, you stalked Conkers social media. Talk about Conker taking up real estate in your head. :D :D
-
...and yet a large chunk of US citizens are happy about it...nay, demanding it.
Dickless morons.
Hard to believe any right minded person could agree to that
Are they Liberals/ Leftists Mainly by any chance
Off they trott like lambs to the slaughter.
-
Are they Liberals/ Leftists Mainly by any chance
There's no doubt.
-
Lmao, ;D ;D ;D - and considering whether to call for a ban on knives (idk if he was serious, i hope not).
I'm sure he's going door to door begging his neighbors to disarm themselves of those awful cutting weapons of death.
-
Conker, were you being serious?
???
-
Nice excuse lol.
Youve been melting down in every thread when arguing with Conker. :D :D
I mean, you stalked Conkers social media. Talk about Conker taking up real estate in your head. :D :D
No " argument " with Conker it's been me just correcting his bullshit 8) and You're melting down with every new gun thread how many is that now? ;) couple that with the Trump threads , you used to be good with your trolling , now you're just playing your hand. :-\
-
Nice excuse lol.
Youve been melting down in every thread when arguing with Conker. :D :D
I mean, you stalked Conkers social media. Talk about Conker taking up real estate in your head. :D :D
the problem with debating with the likes of ND is they're too stupid to realise when they've lost. he keeps saying the studies i've posted only say "more at risk"...which happens to be the sole point i've been making from the outset.
the myth that owning a gun is great for protection, is just that a "myth". in reality, statistically speaking, as you soon as you buy a gun you and your family are more at risk of meeting a violent end than those that don't own guns. FACT
i have produced several peer reviewed studies that support that assertion. meanwhile ND has blabbered on about swimming, pools, cars, terrorists and a whole manner of other nonsensical claptrap, but is still yet to produce a single credible bit of data that disputes anything i've said.
-
42% of Americans are at risk for meeting a violent death. :(
Meanwhile the UKcuckolds are turning in their dangerous knives and censoring themselves for fear of being arrested for offended someone one the internet.
Lol, when one right falls, they'll take them all eventually.
-
42% of Americans are at risk for meeting a violent death. :(
Meanwhile the UKcuckolds are turning in their dangerous knives and censoring themselves for fear of being arrested for offended someone one the internet.
Lol, when one right falls, they'll take them all eventually.
It’s got to the point here ( uk ) the thought police are everywhere checking on
What you say or post - as it may cause offence to someone.
Seriously it’s got out of hand & is ridiculous
Yet oh so many dumb weak pathetic liberal leftists buy into it & push the agenda
-
the problem with debating with the likes of ND is they're too stupid to realise when they've lost. he keeps saying the studies i've posted only say "more at risk"...which happens to be the sole point i've been making from the outset.
the myth that owning a gun is great for protection, is just that a "myth". in reality, statistically speaking, as you soon as you buy a gun you and your family are more at risk of meeting a violent end than those that don't own guns. FACT
i have produced several peer reviewed studies that support that assertion. meanwhile ND has blabbered on about swimming, pools, cars, terrorists and a whole manner of other nonsensical claptrap, but is still yet to produce a single credible bit of data that disputes anything i've said.
You're to stupid to realize he's trolling and using you as bait you dolt lol and you fell for it. You're so predictable
Ban guns like the U.K meanwhile your murder rates are more than NYC where you can get guns LMFAO Yeah you really proved your point alright ::)
Oh and BTW Gun crime offences in London surged by 42% in the last year, according to official statistics. http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-london-39578500
What was that again Conker ;)
-
You're to stupid to realize he's trolling and using you as bait you dolt lol and you fell for it. You're so predictable
Ban guns like the U.K meanwhile your murder rates are more than NYC where you can get guns LMFAO Yeah you really proved your point alight ::)
Oh and BTW Gun crime offences in London surged by 42% in the last year, according to official statistics.
What was that again Conker ;)
i don't care if he's trolling, he still has more intelligence in his little finger tip than you possess in your whole body. anyway none of that changes the fact you got your @ss handed to you in this thread.
who cares if gun crime went up 42% in london. the total number is still minuscule compared to the US
-
i don't care if he's trolling, he still has more intelligence in his little finger tip than you possess in your whole body. anyway none of that changes the fact you got your @ss handed to you in this thread.
who cares if gun crime went up 42% in london. the total number is still minuscule compared to the US
LMAO you're so pathetic you're the laughing stock in this thread and you're so desperate you're kissing a troll's ass.
You turn in your knife yet nancy-boy? How is gun crime up in a country that banned guns? ??? ;)
You've not addressed ONE single fucking point I've made , the best you could manage was " if you own a gun you're at an increased risk " this is the best you've managed.
-
No " argument " with Conker it's been me just correcting his bullshit 8) and You're melting down with every new gun thread how many is that now? ;) couple that with the Trump threads , you used to be good with your trolling , now you're just playing your hand. :-\
lol, yes, I post some news articles that takes 4 minutes.
You argue with Conker for hours on end.
Who is melting down? :D :D
What are you correcting? Conker is posting counter evidence.
-
This ALPHA male is Teflon. Anyone who disagrees with him goes down and goes down hard!!! Even the fucking mosquitoes obey him.
-
lol, yes, I post some news articles that takes 4 minutes.
You argue with Conker for hours on end.
Who is melting down? :D :D
What are you correcting? Conker is posting counter evidence.
Continue on with your
-
LMAO you're so pathetic you're the laughing stock in this thread and you're so desperate you're kissing a troll's ass.
You turn in your knife yet nancy-boy? How is gun crime up in a country that banned guns? ??? ;)
You've not addressed ONE single fucking point I've made , the best you could manage was " if you own a gun you're at an increased risk " this is the best you've managed.
see this is what i'm saying about your stupidity. i came into this thread saying that guns statistically do not protect you, as all the evidence shows gun owners and their families are more in danger than non gun owners.
why do i need to come up with anything better than what iv'e been saying all along?
here is the exact quote from my original post
"there is no logical argument for having so many guns in society beyond, "we like our guns" , "we like playing with our guns" , "our guns make us feel safe" .even though all the evidence shows gun owners and their families are more at risk of harm."
you then decided to challenge my statement with a whole load absolute and utter crap. mostly completely unrelated. so far you still haven't come up with ANYTHING that remotely disputes what i said.
why do i need to address any of your points. it's just the ramblings of a retard. you challenged MY point...remember?
idiot dismissed. ;)
-
see this is what i'm saying about your stupidity. i came into this thread saying that guns statistically do not protect you, as all the evidence shows gun owners and their families are more in danger than non gun owners.
why do i need to come up with anything better than what iv'e been saying all along?
here is the exact quote from my original post
"there is no logical argument for having so many guns in society beyond, "we like our guns" , "we like playing with our guns" , "our guns make us feel safe" .even though all the evidence shows gun owners and their families are more at risk of harm."
you then decided to challenge my statement with a whole load absolute and utter crap. mostly completely unrelated. so far you still haven't come up with ANYTHING that remotely disputes what i said.
why do i need to address any of your points. it's just the ramblings of a retard. you challenged MY point...remember?
idiot dismissed. ;)
You're right guns do not protect you it's the person pulling the trigger. If someone is coming at you with a knife if you have no gun to defend yourself you "statistically" are going to die. Fuck statistics. I'll take a gun to protect myself over nothing at all.
-
see this is what i'm saying about your stupidity. i came into this thread saying that guns statistically do not protect you, as all the evidence shows gun owners and their families are more in danger than non gun owners.
why do i need to come up with anything better than what iv'e been saying all along?
here is the exact quote from my original post
"there is no logical argument for having so many guns in society beyond, "we like our guns" , "we like playing with our guns" , "our guns make us feel safe" .even though all the evidence shows gun owners and their families are more at risk of harm."
you then decided to challenge my statement with a whole load absolute and utter crap. mostly completely unrelated. so far you still haven't come up with ANYTHING that remotely disputes what i said.
why do i need to address any of your points. it's just the ramblings of a retard. you challenged MY point...remember?
idiot dismissed. ;)
You're still stuck on stupid huh? Increased risk doesn't mean fuck-all , Your children are at an increased risk of harm if you own an automobile , a swimming pool , doesn't mean just because you own either that you're going to die , the risk may be higher than not owning congrats , again you've accomplished nothing.
I've posted some many links and you ran like a bitch instead of addressing them. You've done zero. Lick your wounds from the ass kicking your received 8)
-
You're still stuck on stupid huh? Increased risk doesn't mean fuck-all , Your children are at an increased risk of harm if you own an automobile , a swimming pool , doesn't mean just because you own either that you're going to die , the risk may be higher than not owning congrats , again you've accomplished nothing.
I've posted some many links and you ran like a bitch instead of addressing them. You've done zero. Lick your wounds from the ass kicking your received 8)
i'm still waiting for anything from you that disputes anything i've said in this thread??? the only thing you produced that was even loosely related was a bogus "study" that was exposed as garbage by myself and SF....nothing else from you but bluster and BS.
i admit i am argumentative and persistent but you beat me hands down on both. but when it comes to intelligence, your'e not very sharp.
-
i'm still waiting for anything from you that disputes anything i've said in this thread??? the only thing you produced that was even loosely related was a bogus "study" that was exposed as garbage by myself and SF....nothing else from you but bluster and BS.
i admit i am argumentative and persistent but you beat me hands down on both. but when it comes to intelligence, your'e not very sharp.
Stupid you can't even pay attention. You cosigned all the things these moronic kids wanted to ban , you claimed he is unquestionably on the side of logic and rationale. and I commenced to showing you how exactly how and why their demands are the antithesis of " logic and rationale " you not really having a cognizant response clung onto this moronic " risk " tidbit , which means fuck all compared to their moronic list of solutions. Refresher course?
-Ban accessories that simulate automatic weapons
Mind you , YOU cosigned this shit. Where is the logic in banning bump-stocks when you can do the exact thing with a fucking beltloop or a stick? I'll ask again , where is the " logic or rationale " behind this? There is NONE if you say otherwise you're just as fucking dimwitted as they are ( that's already been established )
I could continue but for the sake of brevity I'll digress. Dude you've accomplished nothing other than exposing yourself as a fool.
-
i said he was ON THE SIDE of logic and rationale. i didn't say i agree with everything he's ever said did i? he's calling for stricter gun controls because the gun problem in the US is out of control...therefore he's on the side of logic and rationale.
i haven't got the time or the inclination to stalk other men like you do. so of course i don't know everything he's ever said
lol you are such a low intelligence creature :D
-
i said he was ON THE SIDE of logic and rationale. i didn't say i agree with everything he's ever said did i? he's calling for stricter gun controls because the gun problem in the US is out of control...therefore he's on the side of logic and rationale.
i haven't got the time or the inclination to stalk other men like you do. so of course i don't know everything he's ever said
lol you are such a low intelligence creature :D
You didn't say you agree with everything he's ever said? You're fucking worse than that moron , you think no one should own a gun LMAO
Follow the bouncing ball Dummy , stricter gun laws that will have ABSOLUTELY NO FUCKING EFFECT is NOT , I repeat for the simple minded I'm talking to , on the side of logic and rationale.
He's calling for ineffectual laws and you agree with him and think it's logical and on the side of rationale. Dude you didn't think what he said through and neither did he.
You have to be careful when insulting people when you agree with this dummy who wants to ban bump stocks which up until Las Vegas was NEVER ONCE used in a crime.
-
so he's causing all this furore and making guys like yourself meltdown and froth at the mouth just by calling for bump stocks to be banned?
lol when you're in a hole son....stop digging! ;)
-
so he's causing all this furore and making guys like yourself meltdown and froth at the mouth just by calling for bump stocks to be banned?
lol when you're in a hole son....stop digging! ;)
No , It's not that. Those of who own guns knew you could bump-fire with a belt-loop or a stick , they were overpriced pieces of plastic and a waste of money , However ,It's the infringement part that people have had enough of. All these new laws supposed to have an effect on crimes and NEVER have. And that's not all these dopes are proposing , it's ALL ineffectual fluff designed to keep simple minded people like yourself entertained " Gun free school zones " were supposed to keep kids safe , How'd that work out? ???
I have no attachment to any of my firearms , I would gladly give them all up if it would prevent any of these tragic events but lets get back to reality. These laws punish the wrong people and have no desired effect. Next to impossible for Brits to get firearms , what's taking place in it's stead? You've surpassed NYC in murders , but hey at least they're not dying of bullets.
-
nothing is taking "it's" place . the murder rate in the UK is still probably around 5 times lower than the US and that is primarily (if not solely) down to how easy it is for anyone to get their hands on a gun in the US. that is it. that is the fact
i like this kid hogg, of course he doesn't go anywhere near far enough in what he's calling for. but it's a start and he's most definitely on the side of logic and rationale ;)
-
nothing is taking "it's" place . the murder rate in the UK is still probably around 5 times lower than the US and that is primarily (if not solely) down to how easy it is for anyone to get their hands on a gun in the US. that is it. that is the fact
i like this kid hogg, of course he doesn't go anywhere near far enough in what he's calling for. but it's a start and he's most definitely on the side of logic and rationale ;)
Our population is also 5 times larger as well ;)
And your solution to stopping gun violence is to create more gun violence , if this sound logic and rationale to you then you need to get a refund from your University ;)
-
Conk,
you might want to look up how many guns (yes they are animate objects!!) actually save lives before posting things on an "increased risk".
-
Stupid you can't even pay attention. You cosigned all the things these moronic kids wanted to ban , you claimed he is unquestionably on the side of logic and rationale. and I commenced to showing you how exactly how and why their demands are the antithesis of " logic and rationale " you not really having a cognizant response clung onto this moronic " risk " tidbit , which means fuck all compared to their moronic list of solutions. Refresher course?
-Ban accessories that simulate automatic weapons
Mind you , YOU cosigned this shit. Where is the logic in banning bump-stocks when you can do the exact thing with a fucking beltloop or a stick? I'll ask again , where is the " logic or rationale " behind this? There is NONE if you say otherwise you're just as fucking dimwitted as they are ( that's already been established )
I could continue but for the sake of brevity I'll digress. Dude you've accomplished nothing other than exposing yourself as a fool.
Now, you're going True Adonis style with the bold black. Just add the red. :D :D ;D ;D
-
I think we should ban all guns all over the world.
-
Now, you're going True Adonis style with the bold black. Just add the red. :D :D ;D ;D
-
I think we should ban all guns all over the world.
What about on other planets?
-
Our population is also 5 times larger as well ;)
And your solution to stopping gun violence is to create more gun violence , if this sound logic and rationale to you then you need to get a refund from your University ;)
showing your ignorance again, failing to understand what the word "rate" means. it means there are around 5 x more murders per capita(possibly more), not total number. google "per capita" if you're struggling ;)
-
Conk,
you might want to look up how many guns (yes they are animate objects!!) actually save lives before posting things on an "increased risk".
i don't really buy this. how is it quantified when someone with a gun stops a crime? when a gun is drawn. when there is a verbal threat to draw a gun?
if all the scientific data shows that gun owners and those living in areas of high gun prevalence are more at risk of violence (which it does) how can guns be stopping more crimes than they're responsible for,( as i've heard claimed) ? it doesn't add up.
another thing the gun nuts say "the government wants to take our guns" when the evidence suggests it's the complete opposite. the government want you to keep your guns and all the revenue they rake in from them. why else would they try to stifle any research into firearms and their health implications.
-
showing your ignorance again, failing to understand what the word "rate" means. it means there are around 5 x more murders per capita(possibly more), not total number. google "per capita" if you're struggling ;)
How many firearms in the Uk vs the US? :o ;)
another thing the gun nuts say "the government wants to take our guns" when the evidence suggests it's the complete opposite. the government want you to keep your guns and all the revenue they rake in from them. why else would they try to stifle any research into firearms and their health implications.
Maybe you missed this? ::)
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/democrats-to-propose-weapons-ban-gun-confiscation-powers-in-bill-inspired-by-trump
https://www.bostonglobe.com/ideas/2017/11/10/hand-over-your-weapons/6IxJLanMKGak7RvCLipwbN/story.html
https://thepoliticalinsider.com/must-see-5-specific-times-democrats-wanted-confiscate-guns/
https://www.usnews.com/news/the-report/articles/2015/10/23/hillary-clinton-and-democrats-want-to-take-your-guns
http://freebeacon.com/issues/fmr-obama-senior-adviser-gun-confiscation-australia/
I could go on-and-on ;)
-
This just destroys any argument that is being foisted right now against gun control. I dare you to watch it all.
-
How many firearms in the Uk vs the US? :o ;)
exactly, you fkin moron. that's my point. the murder rate in the rest of the developed world is far lower than the US because there are far fewer guns.
Maybe you missed this? ::)
https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/democrats-to-propose-weapons-ban-gun-confiscation-powers-in-bill-inspired-by-trump
https://www.bostonglobe.com/ideas/2017/11/10/hand-over-your-weapons/6IxJLanMKGak7RvCLipwbN/story.html
https://thepoliticalinsider.com/must-see-5-specific-times-democrats-wanted-confiscate-guns/
https://www.usnews.com/news/the-report/articles/2015/10/23/hillary-clinton-and-democrats-want-to-take-your-guns
http://freebeacon.com/issues/fmr-obama-senior-adviser-gun-confiscation-australia/
I could go on-and-on ;)
i know full well you could go on and on...and on...and on...and on... but i also know it would just be more utter garbage. if the government really want to take the guns why do they not allow any public money to be used to fund firearm research ? when it's obviously a very big issue and hotly debated topic...
because they know, (as with all the existing data), the findings of any new studies will only strengthen the calls for stricter gun controls.
-
nothing is taking "it's" place . the murder rate in the UK is still probably around 5 times lower than the US and that is primarily (if not solely) down to how easy it is for anyone to get their hands on a gun in the US. that is it. that is the fact
i like this kid hogg, of course he doesn't go anywhere near far enough in what he's calling for. but it's a start and he's most definitely on the side of logic and rationale ;)
Thanks for the laugh. It's been rough lately.
-
What about those knives, Conker? Were you serious?
-
i know full well you could go on and on...and on...and on...and on... but i also know it would just be more utter garbage. if the government really want to take the guns why do they not allow any public money to be used to fund firearm research ? when it's obviously a very big issue and hotly debated topic...
because they know, (as with all the existing data), the findings of any new studies will only strengthen the calls for stricter gun controls.
. if the government really want to take the guns why do they not allow any public money to be used to fund firearm research
More ignorance on your behalf , dude just stop already. You don't know shit watch this video starting at 9:45 on and it will shed some light on your ignorance. And I love how you say they don't want your guns I posted several links to the contrary and this is what you present. You have no integrity.
-
More ignorance on your behalf , dude just stop already. You don't know shit watch this video starting at 9:45 on and it will shed some light on your ignorance. And I love how you say they don't want your guns I posted several links to the contrary and this is what you present. You have no integrity.
(https://st.depositphotos.com/1695366/1398/v/950/depositphotos_13982294-stock-illustration-cartoon-computer-meltdown.jpg)
-
-
(https://st.depositphotos.com/1695366/1398/v/950/depositphotos_13982294-stock-illustration-cartoon-computer-meltdown.jpg)
-
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_violence_in_the_United_States
https://www.nytimes.com/2015/10/09/upshot/gun-deaths-are-mostly-suicides.html
the American MSM(liberal) always leaves out the number one cause of death due to guns in America....Suicide.... not mass shooting or homicide
Mass shootings and homicides in America look pale in comparison to deaths by suicide... they just report the total deaths due to guns not the main reason. In my opinion...not being "journalists" but creating "fake news" and hysteria.... when someone tells you 33k people died due to guns last year....what would you think??? homicide correct? well the MSM always leaves out the number one factor due to deaths due to guns in America...suicide....als o...NYTIMES is super liberal
-
i don't really buy this. how is it quantified when someone with a gun stops a crime? when a gun is drawn. when there is a verbal threat to draw a gun?
You understand (I hope) that you've just pulled the rug from under the feet of all assertions you hope to make.
Fact is, I do believe you know it. That's why you won't claim to know the assertion is true, but rather you'll say "studies find..." and similar. Also why you include "really" above. You don't know.
if all the scientific data shows that gun owners and those living in areas of high gun prevalence are more at risk of violence (which it does) how can guns be stopping more crimes than they're responsible for,( as i've heard claimed) ? it doesn't add up.
You can't say either way, IOW. Statistics result when the worst situations force themselves to be recognized, in the case of guns. Add suicide to skew perception, and it's what we're left with as "gun information" to be studied as though it's balanced and realistic. It's not. Not even slightly.
another thing the gun nuts say "the government wants to take our guns" when the evidence suggests it's the complete opposite. the government want you to keep your guns and all the revenue they rake in from them.
They can rake money from every which way, regardless of the stand. The $1000 per day fine mentioned in a recent news story should tell you that. (posted on political board)
why else would they try to stifle any research into firearms and their health implications.
1. Because it's impossible to do an honest study which won't disagree with an anti-gun stand.
2. Because it will show an increasing problem of suicide, which can't help but to draw attention to failed policies.
There are two good reasons, right off the bat.
-
The best you can hope for, Conker, is to say, "Among those who improperly manage their guns..." That's it.
Even then, it's incomplete information. It still cannot account for all data. Far from it.
-
Btw: Any idea how suicides fit into such statistics? A person who commits suicide along these lines is/was considered a household with a gun, I'd have to say.
-
Btw: Any idea how suicides fit into such statistics? A person who commits suicide along these lines is/was considered a household with a gun, I'd have to say.
I'm sure it's added in to their numbers to skew the results to make owning a gun seem more dangerous that it really is. ::)
-
I'm sure it's added in to their numbers to skew the results to make owning a gun seem more dangerous that it really is. ::)
Lord knows we've had lots of opportunity to think about it, lately, and now (more than ever before) it should be obvious to everyone that an anti-gun stand is 100% thoughtless fakery for a common person to take.
Nonetheless, "someone" has thought it over and they're using MSM to push it. Any citizen who continues to help push it, along with MSM: I really don't know what to say. I don't understand why the person hasn't stopped and asked wtf is going on.
-
I have no interest in ever shooting a gun. It’s just not worth the risk.
-
Those with a limp wrist are not advised to shoot a gun.
No, SF ;D ;D
-
Those with a limp wrist are not advised to shoot a gun.
No, SF ;D ;D
;D ;D ;D ;D
What if the gun back fires and the bullet hits my eyeball? ??? ???
-
;D ;D ;D ;D
What if the gun back fires and the bullet hits my eyeball? ??? ???
Yes, everything's fun until someone loses an eye!!
-
Yes, everything's fun until someone loses an eye!!
“You’ll shoot your eye out.”
What movie?
-
“You’ll shoot your eye out.”
What movie?
Frozen part 2, coming to theaters in 2020.
Elsa comes out as a lesbian, shaves her head and becomes an activist.
-
“You’ll shoot your eye out.”
What movie?
Hate to be a spoiled sport, but I've never gotten into movies. Idk know why I reject them, immediately, but something about the social-engineering of Hollywood makes me angry with movies (for lack of a better description). Usually, it's impossible for me to pay the mind to follow it through. I know it's probably too extreme, but no way I can see changing at this point.
Though some comedies are funny, I'll admit. The Naked Gun series was just so damned stupid, as it was meant to be, it's actually hilarious (to me) for the wtf factor.
-
;D you got me to look, anyway. Christmas Story?
-
Frozen part 2, coming to theaters in 2020.
Elsa comes out as a lesbian, shaves her head and becomes an activist.
Crazy, but when I first read this it looked serious. Then I got to thinking about it, and it's like, "no, this can't be... can it?"
Lmfao that's why I looked it up.
-
Crazy, but when I first read this it looked serious. Then I got to thinking about it, and it's like, "no, this can't be... can it?"
Lmfao that's why I looked it up.
;D
-
Anyone heard anything about the Youtube shooting recently? lol.
-
Frozen part 2, coming to theaters in 2020.
Elsa comes out as a lesbian, shaves her head and becomes an activist.
Are you serious, broskie?!?!
(https://media1.tenor.com/images/782ba18e2ff1bb49a36ade1ab90f2869/tenor.gif?itemid=7549364)
-
;D you got me to look, anyway. Christmas Story?
Yup!!
-
You understand (I hope) that you've just pulled the rug from under the feet of all assertions you hope to make.
Fact is, I do believe you know it. That's why you won't claim to know the assertion is true, but rather you'll say "studies find..." and similar. Also why you include "really" above. You don't know.
i really have no idea. where do the figures come from for crimes prevented by use/presence of a firearm ?. my guess would be a survey of gun owners?
You can't say either way, IOW. Statistics result when the worst situations force themselves to be recognized, in the case of guns. Add suicide to skew perception, and it's what we're left with as "gun information" to be studied as though it's balanced and realistic. It's not. Not even slightly.
suicides do not skew the "perception". the studies i posted separated murder/suicide/accidents and gun owners were found to be more likely to die from each of those 3 causes than non gun owners
They can rake money from every which way, regardless of the stand. The $1000 per day fine mentioned in a recent news story should tell you that. (posted on political board)
1. Because it's impossible to do an honest study which won't disagree with an anti-gun stand.
i think it's more a case of given the statistics it would be impossible to produce an anywhere close to honest study that would support the pro gun stance. why else would the NRA have lobbied for the ban on studies?
2. Because it will show an increasing problem of suicide, which can't help but to draw attention to failed policies.
the suicide figures are readily available. that's not what they want to cover up. it's the fact that guns do not protect. anecdotally they may do. but across the board they have exactly the opposite effect.
There are two good reasons, right off the bat.
-
Women overwhelmingly commit suicide by more passive means like taking pills.. shall we ban pills to "save the women" A car in a sealed garage works too, lets ban those. I know someone who committed suicide by jumping off a cliff, better ban geology..its an infinite regression and knee jerk arguments which serve those who are looking for every excuse to ban weapons.
-
i really have no idea. where do the figures come from for crimes prevented by use/presence of a firearm ?. my guess would be a survey of gun owners?
Here's what you need to know: The fact that peacefulness is meant to be the norm, the state of existence through which all else is measured, makes it impossible to create statistics for matters which were stopped before they could become statistics.
For instance: A person notices a small group of strangers on his/her land, perhaps behaving in a way to indicate they're unconcerned/not respectful to the fact they're trespassing. They've noticed the house and are now approaching it. Upon being met with a gun pointed at them, they put on their best behavior and offer a reason or excuse for their presence, then leave. Perhaps now, even, the homeowner feels a little guilty after acting as s/he did. Maybe it can be believed it was "only a drink of water" they wanted. Or maybe not.
If they're criminals, any one of them, it's not at all unlikely that any future crime-planning they're involved in won't be done with an interest in meeting firepower. Much easier marks are everywhere. Did the homeowner save him/herself from robbery, assault, death? On that day? On a future day?
suicides do not skew the "perception". the studies i posted separated murder/suicide/accidents and gun owners were found to be more likely to die from each of those 3 causes than non gun owners
All based on the worst cases playing out. That's it. That's all it says.
i think it's more a case of given the statistics it would be impossible to produce an anywhere close to honest study that would support the pro gun stance. why else would the NRA have lobbied for the ban on studies?
the suicide figures are readily available. that's not what they want to cover up. it's the fact that guns do not protect. anecdotally they may do. but across the board they have exactly the opposite effect.
Do you think everyone, regardless of any potential agenda, wants to bring light to it?
-
Here's what you need to know: The fact that peacefulness is meant to be the norm, the state of existence through which all else is measured, makes it impossible to create statistics for matters which were stopped before they could become statistics.
well that was my question because i keep seeing people quoting stats for crimes prevented by a firearm. so they must exist. but as you say, i would guess it's very difficult to quantify. whereas it is much easier to work out the death rate between gun owners and non gun owners. maybe the death rate is higher for gun owners because they constantly running around risking their lives protecting non gun owners(?)
For instance: A person notices a small group of strangers on his/her land, perhaps behaving in a way to indicate they're unconcerned/not respectful to the fact they're trespassing. They've noticed the house and are now approaching it. Upon being met with a gun pointed at them, they put on their best behavior and offer a reason or excuse for their presence, then leave. Perhaps now, even, the homeowner feels a little guilty after acting as s/he did. Maybe it can be believed it was "only a drink of water" they wanted. Or maybe not.
If they're criminals, any one of them, it's not at all unlikely that any future crime-planning they're involved in won't be done with an interest in meeting firepower. Much easier marks are everywhere. Did the homeowner save him/herself from robbery, assault, death? On that day? On a future day?
All based on the worst cases playing out. That's it. That's all it says.
Do you think everyone, regardless of any potential agenda, wants to bring light to it?
logically it would follow that the people that don't want things brought to light are those who believe their agenda will be hindered if the true picture is uncovered.
-
well that was my question because i keep seeing people quoting stats for crimes prevented by a firearm. so they must exist. but as you say, i would guess it's very difficult to quantify. whereas it is much easier to work out the death rate between gun owners and non gun owners. maybe the death rate is higher for gun owners because they constantly running around risking their lives protecting non gun owners(?)
Or maybe it's because handling a gun is riskier than juggling air. I'd have to imagine that's it.
logically it would follow that the people that don't want things brought to light are those who believe their agenda will be hindered if the true picture is uncovered.
The story of MSM.
-
Next Soros/Hogg walk out is scheduled for “4/20” which happens to be Hitlers birthday. Coincidence? I don’t think so. He’s going to celebrate Hitler while smoking a joint
-
Next Soros/Hogg walk out is scheduled for “4/20” which happens to be Hitlers birthday. Coincidence? I don’t think so. He’s going to celebrate Hitler while smoking a joint
The kid is such a punk. How he's survived without getting his face smashed clear through his asshole, I really don't know. Doesn't make sense.
-
The kid is such a punk. How he's survived without getting his face smashed clear through his asshole, I really don't know. Doesn't make sense.
;D
-
;D
Something's fake about this whole thing. There's much more to this story than what's known, imo. He's been "trained" to shoot his mouth off, unchallenged, and that doesn't happen through any natural course I've ever seen.
-
Something's fake about this whole thing. There's much more to this story than what's known, imo. He's been "trained" to shoot his mouth off, unchallenged, and that doesn't happen through any natural course I've ever seen.
;)
-
Or maybe it's because handling a gun is riskier than juggling air. I'd have to imagine that's it.
agree 100%. it's a myth that guns in general "protect" . in reality gun owners, their families and those living in areas with lots of guns, die of a violent death more frequently than the rest of the population.
The story of MSM.
if it's just a media story, who would you say was responsible for getting the dickey amendment implemented? pro gun or anti gun lobbyists?
-
agree 100%.
Yes. Just now trying to think of something that's not, but I'm at a loss.
it's a myth that guns in general "protect"
Do you believe they may protect a LE officer?
in reality gun owners, their families and those living in areas with lots of guns, die of a violent death more frequently than the rest of the population
If you mean the ghetto, then guns are the least of their problems. And don't think for one minute that the elderly residents there aren't served by their guns. Will you tell them they can't have their peace? How will you explain it to them?
if it's just a media story, who would you say was responsible for getting the dickey amendment implemented? pro gun or anti gun lobbyists?
I don't know. If it's (really and truly) a mystery waiting for federal money to be solved, then how could anyone judge a motive?
-
Yes. Just now trying to think of something that's not, but I'm at a loss.
but it happens to be guns that are the choice instrument for the bi weekly random massacres in your schools and other public places and also for the vast majority of homicides.
Do you believe they may protect a LE officer?
in a country where there are more guns than citizens i would imagine it's a must. in the UK the vast majority of cops aren't armed and they kill way fewer civilians than in the states. also there a way fewer fatal attacks on cops, per capita. strange, how unarmed cops in the UK are safer than armed cops in the US...i wonder why??
If you mean the ghetto, then guns are the least of their problems. And don't think for one minute that the elderly residents there aren't served by their guns. Will you tell them they can't have their peace? How will you explain it to them?
no i didn't mean ghettos . the studies i cited i believe were talking about areas with a high prevalence of legal guns. as i said, anecdotally guns are great for protection. but the statistics show otherwise
I don't know. If it's (really and truly) a mystery waiting for federal money to be solved, then how could anyone judge a motive?
well when you have so many violent deaths and injuries caused by gun use, you would think it would be seen as a public health issue(?) in which case you would expect at least some proportion of public money would be allocated to researching that issue, no?
regardless of whether you think research is needed or not, who do YOU think lobbied for the dickey amendment, the anti or pro gun crowd?
-
but it happens to be guns that are the choice instrument for the bi weekly random massacres in your schools and other public places and also for the vast majority of homicides
Is that new?
If so: we need to look at what the fuck's going on. We know guns have been around for quite some time.
If not: then why this uproar, now?
in a country where there are more guns than citizens i would imagine it's a must. in the UK the vast majority of cops aren't armed and they kill way fewer civilians than in the states. also there a way fewer fatal attacks on cops, per capita. strange, how unarmed cops in the UK are safer than armed cops in the US...i wonder why??
Then why shouldn't a citizen see things in the same way?
no i didn't mean ghettos . the studies i cited i believe were talking about areas with a high prevalence of legal guns. as i said, anecdotally guns are great for protection. but the statistics show otherwise
Then it naturally follows to say that offenses by others should be lower in those areas -- increasing, by contrast, the appearance of events you mention.
well when you have so many violent deaths and injuries caused by gun use, you would think it would be seen as a public health issue(?) in which case you would expect at least some proportion of public money would be allocated to researching that issue, no?
Health is indeed linked with a peacefulness in mind, as well, knowing one shan't easily become subject to the will of a criminal. With murderous maniacs running around, at the center of the anti-gun argument: how can it be seen in any other way?
regardless of whether you think research is needed or not, who do YOU think lobbied for the dickey amendment, the anti or pro gun crowd?
I'd first have to envision what may be revealed by the magic of fed money, that has left us in the dark all these years, in any attempt to judge it. I can't possibly imagine that information exists, let alone what it could be.
-
-Raise the firearm purchase age to 21
they forgot "increase minimum age to join military to 21" if they're going to add this one.
-
Is that new?
If so: we need to look at what the fuck's going on. We know guns have been around for quite some time.
If not: then why this uproar, now?
i don't think the uproar has just arrived. i'm sure the gun debate has been going for quite some time. considering the amendment to stop funding research was introduced in 1996, it's been going since at least then, and no doubt way before that. it's probably that the whole random massacre thing seems to be getting more frequent, that is bringing the gun debate more to fore at present
Then why shouldn't a citizen see things in the same way?
i didn't say cops should be armed because of the way they "see" things. it's just an obvious necessity in a country where civilians are so heavily armed.
you live in a democracy so it should be how society as a whole "see" things. if society wants cops armed then they should be. if society wants stricter gun control, then there should be
Then it naturally follows to say that offenses by others should be lower in those areas -- increasing, by contrast, the appearance of events you mention.
because gun owners and those in high gun areas are at a heightened risk of violent death, why should it naturally follow that offenses by "others" would be lower?
all it shows is that the more/closer you're around guns the more chance you have of violent death, statistically.
Health is indeed linked with a peacefulness in mind, as well, knowing one shan't easily become subject to the will of a criminal. With murderous maniacs running around, at the center of the anti-gun argument: how can it be seen in any other way?
I'd first have to envision what may be revealed by the magic of fed money, that has left us in the dark all these years, in any attempt to judge it. I can't possibly imagine that information exists, let alone what it could be.
with the bolded you've highlighted exactly why you need research. there's a common misconception that owning a gun protects you from criminals. plenty of people are in the dark blindly believing that. i suppose it's intuitive to think "if i own/walk around with a lethal weapon i'm obviously safer".
when in reality statistics show as a gun owner you and you're family are more likely to meet a violent end than non gun owners.
when you have a public health issue that's as hotly contended and debated as the "gun issue" you would expect that some public money would be put into researching it.
-
with the bolded you've highlighted exactly why you need research. there's a common misconception that owning a gun protects you from criminals. plenty of people are in the dark blindly believing that. i suppose it's intuitive to think "if i own/walk around with a lethal weapon i'm obviously safer".
when in reality statistics show as a gun owner you and you're family are more likely to meet a violent end than non gun owners.
when you have a public health issue that's as hotly contended and debated as the "gun issue" you would expect that some public money would be put into researching it.
Already been done. The findings weren't consistent with the media's narrative, so it they weren't widely reported.
CDC Gun Violence Study's Findings Not What Obama Wanted
'The study, which was farmed out by the CDC to the Institute of Medicine and National Research Council, also revealed that while there were "about 300,000 violent crimes involving firearms in 2008," the estimated number of defensive uses of guns ranges "from about 500,000 to more than 3 million per year."'
https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/cdc-gun-violence-study-goes-against-media-narrative/
-
Already been done. The findings weren't consistent with the media's narrative, so it they weren't widely reported.
CDC Gun Violence Study's Findings Not What Obama Wanted
'The study, which was farmed out by the CDC to the Institute of Medicine and National Research Council, also revealed that while there were "about 300,000 violent crimes involving firearms in 2008," the estimated number of defensive uses of guns ranges "from about 500,000 to more than 3 million per year."'
https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/cdc-gun-violence-study-goes-against-media-narrative/
Great link , stupid Conker keeps repeating the anti-gun mantra but as usual facts are NOT on his side. He's a proud little man and thinks by sticking to his bullshit that will save him from the embarrassment of his lies.
-
These kids, including that punk Hogg, are over.
Their fifteen minutes have now come and gone.
Nobody cares.
-
i don't think the uproar has just arrived. i'm sure the gun debate has been going for quite some time. considering the amendment to stop funding research was introduced in 1996, it's been going since at least then, and no doubt way before that. it's probably that the whole random massacre thing seems to be getting more frequent, that is bringing the gun debate more to fore at present
Meaning you believe it is a new thing. But guns aren't new.
So, do you have an idea of what's changed?
i didn't say cops should be armed because of the way they "see" things. it's just an obvious necessity in a country where civilians are so heavily armed.
Because they shouldn't have to face it unarmed. Is that fair way to describe your opinion?
you live in a democracy so it should be how society as a whole "see" things. if society wants cops armed then they should be. if society wants stricter gun control, then there should be
Interesting. I didn't know that.
Does it extend to everything, or...?
because gun owners and those in high gun areas are at a heightened risk of violent death, why should it naturally follow that offenses by "others" would be lower?
all it shows is that the more/closer you're around guns the more chance you have of violent death, statistically.
Unless you can offer a reason how criminals may happen upon only those without arms in those locations (Can you?), then it's the only logical conclusion to be drawn.
with the bolded you've highlighted exactly why you need research. there's a common misconception that owning a gun protects you from criminals. plenty of people are in the dark blindly believing that. i suppose it's intuitive to think "if i own/walk around with a lethal weapon i'm obviously safer".
It's not a misconception to anyone who has experienced it. To those who have: What would you say, and would you look them in the eye while saying it? (honest question)
when in reality statistics show as a gun owner you and you're family are more likely to meet a violent end than non gun owners.
when you have a public health issue that's as hotly contended and debated as the "gun issue" you would expect that some public money would be put into researching it.
The statistics don't say that, no matter what a presentation surrounding them may say. Statistics can't possibly say that, since it would require seeing into the future to know what crime may or may not have happened if it was allowed to carry out -- and in every such incident it may apply. If anything, it'd be downright dangerous and irresponsible for anyone to present them conclusively, especially while claiming concern for life.
-
Already been done. The findings weren't consistent with the media's narrative, so it they weren't widely reported.
CDC Gun Violence Study's Findings Not What Obama Wanted
'The study, which was farmed out by the CDC to the Institute of Medicine and National Research Council, also revealed that while there were "about 300,000 violent crimes involving firearms in 2008," the estimated number of defensive uses of guns ranges "from about 500,000 to more than 3 million per year."'
https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/cdc-gun-violence-study-goes-against-media-narrative/
Sweet, Moontrane. Thanks, will look.
Conker: Were you aware of this?
-
Meaning you believe it is a new thing. But guns aren't new.
So, do you have an idea of what's changed?
no,not a new thing just "seems" to be happening more often. if more research was taking place maybe it'd be easier to work out's what changed(?)
Because they shouldn't have to face it unarmed. Is that fair way to describe your opinion?
no. they are paid by the public to "police" it would be very difficult to police a heavily armed population without being armed. civilians are not paid to police and in the vast majority of cases i would imagine lack the training to do so.
Interesting. I didn't know that.
Does it extend to everything, or...?
you have a representative democracy (like most of developed world). so you don't get to vote on every issue, you vote for the party that's policies most represent you. but for very contentious issues where there is very strong public opinion, you could hold a referendum. like in the UK with brexit.
Unless you can offer a reason how criminals may happen upon only those without arms in those locations (Can you?), then it's the only logical conclusion to be drawn.
the data i quoted showed that those with guns (and those living in high gun areas) die violently, more frequently than non gun owners and people in low gun areas. explain from that how you conclude this must mean that criminals are happening upon only those without arms in those locations.
as you have completely lost me there with your "logic".
It's not a misconception to anyone who has experienced it. To those who have: What would you say, and would you look them in the eye while saying it? (honest question)
i would just tell them the facts (as i've said several times) .anecdotally guns are great for protection. in reality the statistics show that gun owners are more at risk of harm. and that fact does not change even if you personally have used a gun 10 times successfully in self defence.
The statistics don't say that, no matter what a presentation surrounding them may say. Statistics can't possibly say that, since it would require seeing into the future to know what crime may or may not have happened if it was allowed to carry out -- and in every such incident it may apply. If anything, it'd be downright dangerous and irresponsible for anyone to present them conclusively, especially while claiming concern for life.
the statistics do say that. i think you are confused with how statistics are used in this context.
what these studies have done (simply speaking) is track different sample groups eg. gun owners and non gun owners ,then record how many from each group die of a certain type of death or whatever. when these studies are done using the proper methods and controls, the findings(statistics) can be used to assess (usually quite accurately) certain future risks. i.e the health risks of gun ownership. bear in mind the studies i cited were peer reviewed and published in medical journals and there are lots of these studies that have come up with similar findings.
-
Already been done. The findings weren't consistent with the media's narrative, so it they weren't widely reported.
CDC Gun Violence Study's Findings Not What Obama Wanted
'The study, which was farmed out by the CDC to the Institute of Medicine and National Research Council, also revealed that while there were "about 300,000 violent crimes involving firearms in 2008," the estimated number of defensive uses of guns ranges "from about 500,000 to more than 3 million per year."'
https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/cdc-gun-violence-study-goes-against-media-narrative/
well that could well be the case. as i said earlier i have no idea how guns used to prevent a crime is quantified. but regardless of how many crimes are prevented, it doesn't change the statistical fact that gun owners and their families die violently more frequently.
here's some more quotes from the study you quote
“By their sheer magnitude, injuries and deaths involving firearms constitute a pressing public health problem."
defensive gun use is " common occurrence, although the exact number remains disputed." "The variation in these numbers remains a controversy in the field,"
"and this is a sufficiently important question that it merits additional, careful exploration."
so your study says that the gun issue is a by it's "sheer magnitude" is a "pressing public health issue" the numbers are disputed and more research is needed.
yet the NRA and co are still blocking public money being used to carry out that needed research....i wonder why?
-
well that could well be the case. as i said earlier i have no idea how guns used to prevent a crime is quantified. but regardless of how many crimes are prevented, it doesn't change the statistical fact that gun owners and their families die violently more frequently.
here's some more quotes from the study you quote
“By their sheer magnitude, injuries and deaths involving firearms constitute a pressing public health problem."
defensive gun use is " common occurrence, although the exact number remains disputed." "The variation in these numbers remains a controversy in the field,"
"and this is a sufficiently important question that it merits additional, careful exploration."
so your study says that the gun issue is a by it's "sheer magnitude" is a "pressing public health issue" the numbers are disputed and more research is needed.
yet the NRA and co are still blocking public money being used to carry out that needed research....i wonder why?
yet the NRA and co are still blocking public money being used to carry out that needed research....i wonder why?
God you just don't fucking get it. Dummy , that study was funded with public money. Stop repeating this blatant lie. It's like the feminists who keep harping about the " Gender pay gap "
The CDC is allowed public money to research guns , they are however NOT allowed to advocate for gun control get it? wait , no you don't get it. That's the whole problem , you're speaking on a subject you know absolutely NOTHING about , using an anti-gun bias to do the talking for you.
-
https://www.policeone.com/active-shooter/articles/419451006-Cop-shares-gunfight-lessons-from-ISIS-inspired-Draw-the-Prophet-terrorist-attack/
-
God you just don't fucking get it. Dummy , that study was funded with public money. Stop repeating this blatant lie. It's like the feminists who keep harping about the " Gender pay gap "
The CDC is allowed public money to research guns , they are however NOT allowed to advocate for gun control get it? wait , no you don't get it. That's the whole problem , you're speaking on a subject you know absolutely NOTHING about , using an anti-gun bias to do the talking for you.
back from the dead! you've already been beheaded, had your body dismembered and disposed of in this thread.
the amendment may not have been worded as a ban but for all intents and purposes it served as a ban. by warning off the relevant agencies from carrying out any more gun research for fear of being stripped of their funding. why do you think there was a sudden halt in research from 1996? the study in 2013 only took place because obama ordered it following one mass shooting or another.
if it hasn't served as a ban why do you think the author of the amendment jay dickey , himself said he regretted the amendment passing as it led to a huge shortage of data and evidence in an area of public health where it's greatly needed.
https://www.npr.org/2015/10/09/447098666/ex-rep-dickey-regrets-restrictive-law-on-gun-violence-research
now fk off zombie and stay fked off.
-
back from the dead! you've already been beheaded, had your body dismembered and disposed of in this thread.
the amendment may not have been worded as a ban but for all intents and purposes it served as a ban. by warning off the relevant agencies from carrying out any more gun research for fear of being stripped of their funding. why do you think there was a sudden halt in research from 1996? the study in 2013 only took place because obama ordered it following one mass shooting or another.
if it hasn't served as a ban why do you think the author of the amendment jay dickey , himself said he regretted the amendment passing as it led to a huge shortage of data and evidence in an area of public health where it's greatly needed.
https://www.npr.org/2015/10/09/447098666/ex-rep-dickey-regrets-restrictive-law-on-gun-violence-research
now fk off zombie and stay fked off.
You already bailed out multiple times in this thread , you should have bowed out because you wouldn't keep getting your nose rubbed in your own shit.
Keep repeating lies , they won't change no matter how many times you keep typing them
That CDC study BACKFIRED it was publicly funded , you're owned ;)
-
You already bailed out multiple times in this thread , you should have bowed out because you wouldn't keep getting your nose rubbed in your own shit.
Keep repeating lies , they won't change no matter how many times you keep typing them
That CDC study BACKFIRED it was publicly funded , you're owned ;)
i see you avoided giving your thoughts on why jay dickey himself regretted the amendment (if it didn't serve as a ban) ::)
stick to arguing about who had the biggest ball sack., dorian...or... ronnie(?) your little pea brain is not advanced enough to debate issues such as this.
-
i see you avoided giving your thoughts on why jay dickey himself regretted the amendment (if it didn't serve as a ban) ::)
stick to arguing about who had the biggest ball sack., dorian...or... ronnie(?) your little pea brain is not advanced enough to debate issues such as this.
Your erroneously claimed the NRA is stopping the CDC from researching guns , you are flat out wrong. You're a liar , plain and simple because you've been proven wrong and continue to stick to your bullshit.
Pay attention LIAR ;)
https://www.forbes.com/sites/paulhsieh/2018/03/20/any-study-of-gun-violence-should-include-how-guns-save-lives/#1a1f4fc05edc
Currently, the federal government’s Centers For Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) is restricted by Congress from using tax money to promote gun control (although not from conducting research into gun-related violence).
They are restricted from using tax money to promote gun control and NOT I repeat for dishonest retarded fucking Croc wearing dolts like you , NOT from conducting research into gun related violence. And good thing too the CDC is anti-gun like you
http://thehill.com/blogs/congress-blog/politics/261307-why-congress-stopped-gun-control-activism-at-the-cdc
Check mate ;)
-
still avoiding to answer why you think the author of the dickey amendment himself expressed regret about it passing.
good tactic ;)
-
still avoiding to answer why you think the author of the dickey amendment himself expressed regret about it passing.
good tactic ;)
It's totally irrelevant , I don't fucking care of God regretted it. You're a proven LIAR and not a very bright one at that and this pathetic attempt to save face has FAILED like everything else you type. 8)
Do you feel stupid? Because you sure as fuck look it ;)
Check Mate , thanks for playing. We have a lovely pair of Crocs for you as a parting gift.
-
not relevant ? lol
so the author of the amendment himself has said he regretted it because it has served to halt much needed research from being done on gun violence since 1996...
but our resident "narcissistic dipsht" says otherwise...OK ::)
-
yet the NRA and co are still blocking public money being used to carry out that needed research....i wonder why?
https://www.forbes.com/sites/paulhsieh/2018/03/20/any-study-of-gun-violence-should-include-how-guns-save-lives/#1a1f4fc05edc
Currently, the federal government’s Centers For Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) is restricted by Congress from using tax money to promote gun control (although not from conducting research into gun-related violence)
LIAR ;)
Why would they block the CDC from promoting gun control? IGee I fucking wonder why?
Many gun rights advocates are wary of such research, fearing it will be used to fuel a partisan political agenda. Dr. Timothy Wheeler of Doctors for Responsible Gun Ownership has noted that CDC has a track record of anti-gun bias. In the 1990s, one CDC official even stated that his goal was to create a public perception of gun ownership as something “dirty, deadly — and banned.”
They've accomplished that deed and you bought it.
Let's continue kicking your Croc wearing ass from one corner of the web to the other ;)
https://www.forbes.com/sites/larrybell/2013/02/12/why-the-centers-for-disease-control-should-not-receive-gun-research-funding/#46961c6b282d
Why The Centers For Disease Control Should Not Receive Gun Research Funding
Ouch , does it hurt? :o This just demolishes ANYTHING you've typed.
-
not relevant ? lol
so the author of the amendment himself has said he regretted it because it has served to halt much needed research from being done on gun violence since 1996...
but our resident "narcissistic dipsht" says otherwise...OK ::)
See above dumbass it lays out in exact detail HOW and WHY the CDC should NOT be trusted , they're emotional anti-gun morons just like you.
And again , your words and they are proven soundly wrong. ;)
yet the NRA and co are still blocking public money being used to carry out that needed research....i wonder why?
Currently, the federal government’s Centers For Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) is restricted by Congress from using tax money to promote gun control (although not from conducting research into gun-related violence)
Don't fucking try it son , I told you before you better know what they fuck you're talking about on this subject if you're even going to attempt to type a response to me because I will bash you over the head with facts ;)
-
from the forbes article you linked:
"In 1996, the Congress axed $2.6 million allocated for gun research from the CDC out of its $2.2 billion budget, charging that its studies were being driven by anti-gun prejudice. While that funding was later reinstated, it was re-designated for medical research on traumatic brain injuries.
There was a very good reason for the gun violence research funding ban."
https://www.forbes.com/sites/larrybell/2013/02/12/why-the-centers-for-disease-control-should-not-receive-gun-research-funding/#46961c6b282d
see you fkin retard. even your own cited articles admit the amendment served as a ban on further gun violence studies.
now fk off. you're just embarrassing yourself now.
-
(https://st.depositphotos.com/1695366/1398/v/950/depositphotos_13982294-stock-illustration-cartoon-computer-meltdown.jpg)
-
from the forbes article you linked:
"In 1996, the Congress axed $2.6 million allocated for gun research from the CDC out of its $2.2 billion budget, charging that its studies were being driven by anti-gun prejudice. While that funding was later reinstated, it was re-designated for medical research on traumatic brain injuries.
There was a very good reason for the gun violence research funding ban."
https://www.forbes.com/sites/larrybell/2013/02/12/why-the-centers-for-disease-control-should-not-receive-gun-research-funding/#46961c6b282d
see you fkin retard. even your own cited articles admit the amendment served as a ban on further gun violence studies.
now fk off. you're just embarrassing yourself now.
LMFAO keep digging yourself deeper ;) Did you bother to read the article? Did you NOT watch this video I posted before?
Follow the bouncing ball stupid
Currently, the federal government’s Centers For Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) is restricted by Congress from using tax money to promote gun control (although not from conducting research into gun-related violence)
Restricted from Congress from using tax money to PROMOTE GUN CONTROL ALTHOUGH NOT FROM CONDUCTING RESEARCH INTO GUN-RELATED VIOLENCE
-
Thanks for playing ;) yet the NRA and co are still blocking public money being used to carry out that needed research....i wonder why?
Currently, the federal government’s Centers For Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) is restricted by Congress from using tax money to promote gun control (although not from conducting research into gun-related violence)
-
why do i want to read any more of your utter garbage?
you said there was no ban and kept calling me a liar. then you post an article that says there was a ban. ::)
you defeated yourself you cretin.
right i'm off to bed. hopefully tomorrow there will be some more worthy opponents rather than you. you dumb sht.
-
why do i want to read any more of your utter garbage?
you said there was no ban and kept calling me a liar. then you post an article that says there was a ban. ::)
you defeated yourself you cretin.
right i'm off to bed. hopefully tomorrow there will be some more worthy opponents rather than you. you dumb sht.
yet the NRA and co are still blocking public money being used to carry out that needed research....i wonder why?
Currently, the federal government’s Centers For Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) is restricted by Congress from using tax money to promote gun control (although not from conducting research into gun-related violence)
-
Already been done. The findings weren't consistent with the media's narrative, so it they weren't widely reported.
CDC Gun Violence Study's Findings Not What Obama Wanted
'The study, which was farmed out by the CDC to the Institute of Medicine and National Research Council, also revealed that while there were "about 300,000 violent crimes involving firearms in 2008," the estimated number of defensive uses of guns ranges "from about 500,000 to more than 3 million per year."'
https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/cdc-gun-violence-study-goes-against-media-narrative/
Man, Ol' Conk really doesn't care to see anything but what supposedly reaffirms his own prejudice. This was exactly what I meant with my post that he "might want to look up how guns save lives before posting.....". Apparently, he didn't take the advice.
-
More bad news Conker ;D
https://drgo.us/history-of-public-health-gun-control-part-i/
Dr. Kellermann’s article, “Gun Ownership as a Risk Factor for Homicide in the Home,” (New England Journal of Medicine vol. 329, no. 15, October 7, 1993) was supported by two grants from the CDC. The authors used a case-control method usually used in epidemiology research to investigate a criminology problem. Their conclusion, summarized as a factoid still quoted by gun control advocates to this day, was that people with a gun in the home are 2.7 times as likely to become homicide victims as people who don’t keep a gun in the home.
Gun control advocates and a sympathetic media cited Kellermann’s article endlessly, providing pseudoscientific justification for politicians looking for any reason to advance gun control. But the research methodology used by Kellermann and his coauthors was flawed. Aside from the unusual use of the case-control method more suited to epidemiology studies, the subjects for the study were highly aberrant. They were selected only from homicide victims in Shelby County, Tennessee; King County, Washington; and Cuyahoga County, Ohio. As the metropolitan areas including Memphis, Seattle, and Cleveland respectively, they were skewed toward inner city populations with high rates of violent crime.
The authors based their results entirely on people who had been murdered in their homes, a group wildly unrepresentative of gun owners in general. The authors themselves admit that half of the homicides occurred in connection with a “quarrel or romantic triangle” and 30 % occurred during the commission of drug dealing or another felony such as robbery, rape, or burglary. They made no attempt to consider the hundreds of thousands of responsible gun owners in the same geographical study areas who, like most gun owners, were not the type of people who commit violent felonies or become homicide victims.
Yet another flaw in this CDC-supported article was the authors’ failure to factor in the uses of guns in scaring off criminals. Fewer than 1% of all protective uses of firearms result in the death of the attacker. The article therefore underestimates the life-saving and injury-preventing utility of firearms kept at home.
Further weakening the article’s conclusions was the authors’ failure to show in even one case that the gun kept in the homicide victim’s home was the murder weapon. Establishing the use of that gun would be crucial to concluding that it was a hazard to the occupants, but whether by accidental omission or deliberate exclusion, the authors failed to show it.
-
https://www.policeone.com/active-shooter/articles/419451006-Cop-shares-gunfight-lessons-from-ISIS-inspired-Draw-the-Prophet-terrorist-attack/
That's a great piece. :D
-
well that could well be the case. as i said earlier i have no idea how guns used to prevent a crime is quantified. but regardless of how many crimes are prevented, it doesn't change the statistical fact that gun owners and their families die violently more frequently.
here's some more quotes from the study you quote
“By their sheer magnitude, injuries and deaths involving firearms constitute a pressing public health problem."
defensive gun use is " common occurrence, although the exact number remains disputed." "The variation in these numbers remains a controversy in the field,"
"and this is a sufficiently important question that it merits additional, careful exploration."
so your study says that the gun issue is a by it's "sheer magnitude" is a "pressing public health issue" the numbers are disputed and more research is needed.
yet the NRA and co are still blocking public money being used to carry out that needed research....i wonder why?
Conker, I don’t know if you want a repeal of the 2nd amendment or a ban on certain guns.
Whatever the number of uses of guns for defensive purposes, 1 out of 6 who do report they have, say that but for their gun, they’d be dead. And gun laws, like speed limits and restraining orders, affect the behavior of law-abiding citizens, not criminals.
If the number of uses of guns for defensive purposes is 100,000, banning guns results in 16,000 additional murders each year. If it’s 1,000,000 then 160,000 additional murders occur each year. And the number of rapes, muggings, burglaries, etc. would also necessarily skyrocket.
-
no,not a new thing just "seems" to be happening more often. if more research was taking place maybe it'd be easier to work out's what changed(?)
The "random shootings" we're referring to, aren't new, but they have increased along with that theme. Since we know it isn't the invention of guns, however, it could only leave one thing: us. We've changed. Some way, some how, we've failed to see to ourselves and our mindset.
First thing that comes to my mind, then, is economy. If money is the most-agreed upon "ruler" of our society, if money "changes everything", if money's void is seen as the primary obstacle in life worth living: then I must say economy is the first suspect.
no. they are paid by the public to "police" it would be very difficult to police a heavily armed population without being armed. civilians are not paid to police and in the vast majority of cases i would imagine lack the training to do so.
But you don't disagree that a civilian has every bit the desire to live as does someone wearing a uniform. So how do you reassure the person it's "worth" it to surrender his/her only peace against criminals with guns? Your best sales pitch, please, with respect to your stand.
you have a representative democracy (like most of developed world). so you don't get to vote on every issue, you vote for the party that's policies most represent you. but for very contentious issues where there is very strong public opinion, you could hold a referendum. like in the UK with brexit.
You understand "contentious" is related to what "seems" to be fact, and what "seems" to be fact comes from one source: MSM. That's the power it holds as our primary source of information. Since we cannot be everywhere at once, to investigate all things, we must rely on a source.
Tmk, for instance, random shootings have increased. I believe it to be true from what I've seen beyond MSM. So, that MSM proceeds to treat the matter as though a brand new invention has come about, called guns, and now we're to focus our attention on that, and only that: should tell us everything we need to know about the source.
Beware the battle you choose, or you'll be fighting yourself.
the data i quoted showed that those with guns (and those living in high gun areas) die violently, more frequently than non gun owners and people in low gun areas. explain from that how you conclude this must mean that criminals are happening upon only those without arms in those locations.
as you have completely lost me there with your "logic".
You mentioned "areas with high prevalance of legal guns", meaning law-conscious and defense-oriented communities. Interactions between strangers which might (otherwise) provide offense statistics, are more likely to remain as incidental occurrences. Not the best place for those who'd hope to successfully offend.
Other statistics (such as suicides, accidents and the others you mention) may appear higher against statistics of criminal offenses, if it's as you say.
i would just tell them the facts (as i've said several times) .anecdotally guns are great for protection. in reality the statistics show that gun owners are more at risk of harm. and that fact does not change even if you personally have used a gun 10 times successfully in self defence.
But the person who's done that ten times can't be told his/her life wasn't worth it, preservation of his/her family wasn't worth it. You're only saying it's not worth it to you -- which (I hope) you don't mean.
the statistics do say that. i think you are confused with how statistics are used in this context.
what these studies have done (simply speaking) is track different sample groups eg. gun owners and non gun owners ,then record how many from each group die of a certain type of death or whatever. when these studies are done using the proper methods and controls, the findings(statistics) can be used to assess (usually quite accurately) certain future risks. i.e the health risks of gun ownership. bear in mind the studies i cited were peer reviewed and published in medical journals and there are lots of these studies that have come up with similar findings.
Then it may provide a lesson in carelessness, which never hurts to give. An attempt to use it as anything but that, however, is dishonest.
-
Conker, I don’t know if you want a repeal of the 2nd amendment or a ban on certain guns.
Whatever the number of uses of guns for defensive purposes, 1 out of 6 who do report they have, say that but for their gun, they’d be dead. And gun laws, like speed limits and restraining orders, affect the behavior of law-abiding citizens, not criminals.
If the number of uses of guns for defensive purposes is 100,000, banning guns results in 16,000 additional murders each year. If it’s 1,000,000 then 160,000 additional murders occur each year. And the number of rapes, muggings, burglaries, etc. would also necessarily skyrocket.
He wants a gun ban.
I'll say, to his credit, his attempts at honesty are all good by me. I respect that about him, way more than I could ever disrespect his opinion (even on such an important matter). He's also from UK, so it requires taking that into account with his opinion.
Personally, I've lost track of how many individuals I've known (over the years) who've been forced to draw a firearm to settle a very pressing question of immediate safety. A once-in-a-lifetime thing, maybe (with hope and prayer), but how many times are required make it "worth" it?
-
Conker, I don’t know if you want a repeal of the 2nd amendment or a ban on certain guns.
Whatever the number of uses of guns for defensive purposes, 1 out of 6 who do report they have, say that but for their gun, they’d be dead. And gun laws, like speed limits and restraining orders, affect the behavior of law-abiding citizens, not criminals.
If the number of uses of guns for defensive purposes is 100,000, banning guns results in 16,000 additional murders each year. If it’s 1,000,000 then 160,000 additional murders occur each year. And the number of rapes, muggings, burglaries, etc. would also necessarily skyrocket.
“If the number of uses of guns for defensive purposes is 100,000, banning guns results in 16,000 additional murders each year. If it’s 1,000,000 then 160,000 additional murders occur each year. And the number of rapes, muggings, burglaries, etc. would also necessarily skyrocket.”
Ban all Dindu’s 1st & those numbers will drop significantly anyway
It may negate the Ban Gun argument altogether.
;D
-
Conker is English, he believes the government will protect him and has no problem with going to jail for having a pocket knife or saying mean things on the internet.
-
you would think if this was a genuine movement there would be a multi faceted approach. calling out politician s and judges who have gone easy on violent criminals, call for reform for mental health in the United States, some sort of early warning for potential active shooters based on profiling and red flags, like an alert system, comprehensive lockout and lockdown procedures with ballistic panels in us public schools...... it seems attacking weapons ma ufacturers would be the last place to look for change. But these activists are so single mindedly obsessed with the gun lobby while virtually ignoring other factors, that would actually save a life, that you have to wonder if it's part of a hidden agenda.
-
you would think if this was a genuine movement there would be a multi faceted approach. calling out politician s and judges who have gone easy on violent criminals, call for reform for mental health in the United States, some sort of early warning for potential active shooters based on profiling and red flags, like an alert system, comprehensive lockout and lockdown procedures with ballistic panels in us public schools...... it seems attacking weapons ma ufacturers would be the last place to look for change. But these activists are so single mindedly obsessed with the gun lobby while virtually ignoring other factors, that would actually save a life, that you have to wonder if it's part of a hidden agenda.
Bingo. One of many reasons why they can stick their proposed gun control up their dishonest asses.
This is something that Democrats have been wanting for a long time. These kids are just the latest tool that they are using to get it.
None of they shit they want to do will affect school shootings in any way and they know it.
-
you would think if this was a genuine movement there would be a multi faceted approach. calling out politician s and judges who have gone easy on violent criminals, call for reform for mental health in the United States, some sort of early warning for potential active shooters based on profiling and red flags, like an alert system, comprehensive lockout and lockdown procedures with ballistic panels in us public schools...... it seems attacking weapons ma ufacturers would be the last place to look for change. But these activists are so single mindedly obsessed with the gun lobby while virtually ignoring other factors, that would actually save a life, that you have to wonder if it's part of a hidden agenda.
Funny you mentioned this , perp with 112 priors shot and killed a Cape Cod police officer , stabbed someone while on parole , beat his pregnant g/f , these are the exact same anti-gun politicians & judges who allow these violent felons back on the street.
https://turtleboysports.com/the-judges-who-let-this-112-time-violent-felon-animal-remain-free-to-murder-yarmouth-cop-sean-gannon-need-to-resign-and-face-criminal-charges/
-
Are those kids back in school yet ???
-
Are those kids back in school yet ???
Parkland Students Are Not Happy About Their Clear Backpacks
https://www.thecut.com/2018/04/florida-school-shooting-clear-backpacks.html
(https://pbs.twimg.com/media/DZzIXbbUQAAQuYM.jpg)
-
ok, some good responses. i don't have time to address each one but just to summarise my point. i don't have any idea how many "lives are saved" or "crimes prevented" due to use of a firearm. as i've said, i have no idea how it's quantified and as the study from 20013 says, the estimated figures vary wildly.
but regardless of how many crimes are stopped etc, it still won't change the fact that statistics show gun owners/families are more risk of violent death than non gun owners. that is basically the only point i've been making here. if anyone has any data that disproves that i would be glad to see it
none of this has any impact on my life as i live in the UK, but sometimes when you're heavily involved in something it's hard to actually see what's really going on. as an outsider with no emotional attachment it's sometimes easier to look at the situation objectively.
and just by looking at the stats i.e murder rate, gun crime rate, random massacre frequency, the number of guns/gun owners and looking at the available studies that have been done, it's obvious to anyone outside of the US that the number of guns in circulation is at the very least is a huge part of the problem.
it's a shame that more research is not being done into gun violence to shed more light on the situation, then people would be able to form a more informed opinion rather than relying on anecdotal evidence. but it seems one side of the debate is keen to stop that happening.
-
ok, some good responses. i don't have time to address each one but just to summarise my point. i don't have any idea how many "lives are saved" or "crimes prevented" due to use of a firearm. as i've said, i have no idea how it's quantified and as the study from 20013 says, the estimated figures vary wildly.
but regardless of how many crimes are stopped etc, it still won't change the fact that statistics show gun owners/families are more risk of violent death than non gun owners. that is basically the only point i've been making here. if anyone has any data that disproves that i would be glad to see it
none of this has any impact on my life as i live in the UK, but sometimes when you're heavily involved in something it's hard to actually see what's really going on. as an outsider with no emotional attachment it's sometimes easier to look at the situation objectively.
and just by looking at the stats i.e murder rate, gun crime rate, random massacre frequency, the number of guns/gun owners and looking at the available studies that have been done, it's obvious to anyone outside of the US that the number of guns in circulation is at the very least is a huge part of the problem.
it's a shame that more research is not being done into gun violence to shed more light on the situation, then people would be able to form a more informed opinion rather than relying on anecdotal evidence. but it seems one side of the debate is keen to stop that happening.
ok, some good responses. i don't have time to address each one but just to summarise my point. i don't have any idea how many "lives are saved" or "crimes prevented" due to use of a firearm. as i've said, i have no idea how it's quantified and as the study from 20013 says, the estimated figures vary wildly.
Translation " I'm owned , I look like a fucking idiot so I'm trying to bow out gracefully " You have an idea of how many lives are saved because it was pointed out to you repeatedly , I've even gone with the lowest estimate multiple times to show you that firearms take lives as well as save lives. You kept repeating the anti-gun mantra and then I proved that was bullshit.
but regardless of how many crimes are stopped etc, it still won't change the fact that statistics show gun owners/families are more risk of violent death than non gun owners. that is basically the only point i've been making here. if anyone has any data that disproves that i would be glad to see it
RISK ::) and people are at much more RISK of drowning if they own a pool than those who don't. And that's basically the point you've been making here? BULLSHIT the point you've been selling is if America had no guns it would have no mass killings , which is childish and moronic.
none of this has any impact on my life as i live in the UK, but sometimes when you're heavily involved in something it's hard to actually see what's really going on. as an outsider with no emotional attachment it's sometimes easier to look at the situation objectively.
LMFAO No emotional attachment? Every " argument " you put forward is an argument from emotion. You can NOT look at the situation " objectively " because it's very nuanced and intricate. You cannot even get the basics correct. You're willfully ignorant on the subject trying to lecture people on a subject you know absolutely NOTHING about using anti-gun propaganda as your talking points. You're clueless on the subject that's a proven fact. And it's part of the reason you're looking for an out now with the " I don't have time to address everything " nonsense.
and just by looking at the stats i.e murder rate, gun crime rate, random massacre frequency, the number of guns/gun owners and looking at the available studies that have been done, it's obvious to anyone outside of the US that the number of guns in circulation is at the very least is a huge part of the problem.
Keep typing this nonsense. random massacres are very rare despite what you're being told , see above about you being clueless.
it's a shame that more research is not being done into gun violence to shed more light on the situation, then people would be able to form a more informed opinion rather than relying on anecdotal evidence. but it seems one side of the debate is keen to stop that happening.
It's a shame the people who were doing the research were politically anti-gun motivated and used their platform to punish & demonize legal gun owners. and LMFAO at " informed opinion " that's the last thing you have , you're ignorant on the subject that's blatantly obvious which is why you've been taking such as ass beating in this thread. Your farewell speech won't work , We'll see you next mass shooting crying " I told you so " maybe by then you'll actually read something other than your anti-gun Guardian propaganda and came back with facts.
-
lol. the resident lunatic stalker is back!
yes i was really owned . i produced 7 studies that all backed my point. for the 100th time! gun owners are more at risk of violent death than non gun owners and so far no one has offered anything that challenges that fact. saying how many lives are saved blah blah blah, does not alter that fact.
yes swimming pools do come with a health risk but people don't buy swimming pools thinking they're great for protection, do they ?. this is my point. one of the main reasons cited for owning a gun is protection. when the data (however counter-intuitive it may seem) shows us this a not a good reason to own one.
ok i'll leave you to keep chasing rainbows and beating up straw man arguments. i don't got time!
-
lol. the resident lunatic stalker is back!
yes i was really owned . i produced 7 studies that all backed my point. for the 100th time! gun owners are more at risk of violent death than non gun owners and so far no one has offered anything that challenges that fact. saying how many lives are saved blah blah blah, does not alter that fact.
yes swimming pools do come with a health risk but people don't buy swimming pools thinking they're great for protection, do they ?. this is my point. one of the main reasons cited for owning a gun is protection. when the data (however counter-intuitive it may seem) shows us this a not a good reason to own one.
ok i'll leave you to keep chasing rainbows and beating up straw man arguments. i don't got time!
That's not your " point " your whole premise is no one should own guns and after you get multiple people pointing out exactly how and why you're incorrect , you want out because you ran against a wall of facts. You think attacking me will deflect your lies? It won't
At bare minimum 500,000 people use firearms to protect themselves which is 10 X the amount from ALL homicides & suicides , so your bullshit premise you're more likely to die a violent death than to ever use your gun to protect yourself is a lie. You take away people's guns you create a least a million victims , you don't care though
Again owning a car puts you at risk for a violent death more than not owning one ,a much ,much higher risk than owning a firearm , you are not calling for a ban of cars though are you?? :D
Run Along with your tail between your legs and slag off back to your shit hole where you're a slave to your masters and live in fear of offending the wrong people and carrying a butter knife
-
Conker is English, he believes the government will protect him and has no problem with going to jail for having a pocket knife or saying mean things on the internet.
He's most likely an older fart too.
#BenOldFarts
-
Last time it was studied a couple years ago the UK and US were virtually identical for mass shootings per capita. You can look that up as well if you care to.
-
Last time it was studied a couple years ago the UK and US were virtually identical for mass shootings per capita. You can look that up as well if you care to.
trolling, much!
-
https://www.cnn.com/2017/10/03/americas/us-gun-statistics/index.html
-
https://www.cnn.com/2017/10/03/americas/us-gun-statistics/index.html
Anything "cnn " is anti-gun propaganda , all left leaning " news " is.
full semi automatic CNN coined term , which is a straight up lie. CNN is the definition of fake news.
-
Anything "cnn " is anti-gun propaganda , all left leaning " news " is.
full semi automatic CNN coined term , which is a straight up lie. CNN is the definition of fake news.
Does the CNN stand for Conning Nerds Network.
I don’t watch or take any notice of them
Just Like the BBC - Bollocks Bullshit Corporation
-
trolling, much!
Nope. As posted before if you really cared about truth you would look things up/do research on actual stats. Not hard to find. Hint: Crime Prevention Research Center.
-
https://www.cnn.com/2017/10/03/americas/us-gun-statistics/index.html
[ Invalid YouTube link ]
-
Anything "cnn " is anti-gun propaganda , all left leaning " news " is.
full semi automatic CNN coined term , which is a straight up lie. CNN is the definition of fake news.
Yes. When CNN chased-down that guy for posting a simple everyday political gif on Reddit, then didn't even bother to pin it on "misjudgment" by an individual employee - allowing it to be official - I stopped paying mind to it. Such a big fuck up, it should've stopped everyone from watching it.
-
Anything "cnn " is anti-gun propaganda , all left leaning " news " is.
full semi automatic CNN coined term , which is a straight up lie. CNN is the definition of fake news.
What, we need to get Brandon Ray on this, oh that's right, they canned him, I wonder why? ::)
-
Eventually, pro gun owners are going to have to relinquish their guns. Its only a matter of time.
With each new shooting, the anti gun movement is growing stronger and stronger.
-
Eventually, pro gun owners are going to have to relinquish their guns. Its only a matter of time.
With each new shooting, the anti gun movement is growing stronger and stronger.
Then our knives too :'(
-
yes, yes, yes. let's bury our heads in the sand a bit more. ignore the fact those stats came from the OECD, World Health organisation and a peer reviewed medical journal...but CNN reported it , so if we stick our fingers in our ears and shout as loud as we can, we can discount those facts.
lol@idiots ::)
-
Then our knives too :'(
(https://st.depositphotos.com/1695366/1398/v/950/depositphotos_13982294-stock-illustration-cartoon-computer-meltdown.jpg)
-
I like usa gun laws. Its nice to have a gun for protection. Alot of crazy asses around. Some mf broke into my house awhile ago and stole everything. I could not defend myself because guns are outlawed here! I wish i could just have blasted these asses!
-
yes, yes, yes. let's bury our heads in the sand a bit more. ignore the fact those stats came from the OECD, World Health organisation and a peer reviewed medical journal...but CNN reported it , so if we stick our fingers in our ears and shout as loud as we can, we can discount those facts.
lol@idiots ::)
What stats? That there is a increased " risk " This is the best you've managed? There is an increased risk? Hey dummy , there is an increased risk , owning a car , much , much higher than owning guns which are you calling for to be banned again? ;)
CNN promotes straight up lies , you consume them and repeat them. CNN is for uninformed morons like you who think they know what they're talking about.
-
This just in: people who drive cars are more likely to die in a car accident than people that walk. :o
Also just in: people that use drugs are more likely to die from a drug overdose that people who do not. :o
-
With a ban on guns, law-abiding citizens who'd otherwise own a gun are more likely to be a victim of crime.
Yes or no, Conker?
-
I like usa gun laws. Its nice to have a gun for protection. Alot of crazy asses around. Some mf broke into my house awhile ago and stole everything. I could not defend myself because guns are outlawed here! I wish i could just have blasted these asses!
What happened?
-
This just in: people who drive cars are more likely to die in a car accident than people that walk. :o
Also just in: people that use drugs are more likely to die from a drug overdose that people who do not. :o
This just in
Cigarette smoking is responsible for more than 480,000 deaths per year in the United States
https://www.cdc.gov/tobacco/data_statistics/fact_sheets/fast_facts/index.htm
Conker cigarettes kill 10X more than guns ever do , why aren't you crying for them to be banned? They kill more innocent people than ALL " gun violence "
including more than 41,000 deaths resulting from secondhand smoke exposure
Conker where you at? ;)
-
Conker where you at? ;)
http://reason.com/blog/2018/04/20/cdc-provides-more-evidence-that-plenty-o#comment
CDC contradicts your bullshit :o Shifty fucks no wonder why Congress had to intervene
CDC, in Surveys It Never Bothered Making Public, Provides More Evidence that Plenty of Americans Innocently Defend Themselves with Guns
CDC surveys in the 1990s, never publicly reported, indicate nearly 2.5 million defensive uses of guns a year. That matches the results of Gary Kleck's controversial surveys, and it indicates more defensive than offensive uses of guns.
2.5 Million, You take away people's guns you create millions more victims. ;)
-
With a ban on guns, law-abiding citizens who'd otherwise own a gun are more likely to be a victim of crime.
Yes or no, Conker?
possibly. maybe there'd be a trade off between higher total crime but lower violent deaths...more research would help dicerpher that one...
unfortunately that seems to be discouraged :-[
-
Conker where you at? ;)
http://reason.com/blog/2018/04/20/cdc-provides-more-evidence-that-plenty-o#comment
CDC contradicts your bullshit :o Shifty fucks no wonder why Congress had to intervene
CDC, in Surveys It Never Bothered Making Public, Provides More Evidence that Plenty of Americans Innocently Defend Themselves with Guns
CDC surveys in the 1990s, never publicly reported, indicate nearly 2.5 million defensive uses of guns a year. That matches the results of Gary Kleck's controversial surveys, and it indicates more defensive than offensive uses of guns.
2.5 Million, You take away people's guns you create millions more victims. ;)
so you rubbish CNN and now you're referring to some random obscure blog. your stupidity knows no bounds!
-
so you rubbish CNN and now you're referring to some random obscure blog. your stupidity knows no bounds!
I'm referring to the fucking CDC dumbass ;) and CNN is proven anti-gun bias , just like the CDC
I like how you didn't answer any of the questions.
Cars kill more people than guns by far , why are you not calling for them to be banned?
Cigarettes kill more people than guns bar far , why are you not calling for them to be banned?
Yeah I thought so , now fuck off with your bullshit. 8)
-
(https://st.depositphotos.com/1695366/1398/v/950/depositphotos_13982294-stock-illustration-cartoon-computer-meltdown.jpg)
-
possibly. maybe there'd be a trade off between higher total crime but lower violent deaths...more research would help dicerpher that one...
unfortunately that seems to be discouraged :-[
Do you accept the finding that defensive use of guns is much higher than might be expected by a typical MSM viewer?
-
Do you accept the finding that defensive use of guns is much higher than might be expected by a typical MSM viewer?
could be. but then again the majority of americans think gun ownership increases safety, when the data shows not.
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/3/23/17155596/gun-ownership-polls-safety-violence
-
could be. but then again the majority of americans think gun ownership increases safety, when the data shows not.
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/3/23/17155596/gun-ownership-polls-safety-violence
LMFAO quoting Vox ::) More anti-gun propaganda Vox is like CNN , worthless
-
could be. but then again the majority of americans think gun ownership increases safety, when the data shows not.
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/3/23/17155596/gun-ownership-polls-safety-violence
In a 2015 study using data from the FBI and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, for example, researchers at Boston Children's Hospital and Harvard University reported that firearm assaults were 6.8 times more common in the states with the most guns versus those with the least. Also in 2015 a combined analysis of 15 different studies found that people who had access to firearms at home were nearly twice as likely to be murdered as people who did not.
-
In a 2015 study using data from the FBI and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, for example, researchers at Boston Children's Hospital and Harvard University reported that firearm assaults were 6.8 times more common in the states with the most guns versus those with the least. Also in 2015 a combined analysis of 15 different studies found that people who had access to firearms at home were nearly twice as likely to be murdered as people who did not.
-
In a 2015 study using data from the FBI and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, for example, researchers at Boston Children's Hospital and Harvard University reported that firearm assaults were 6.8 times more common in the states with the most guns versus those with the least. Also in 2015 a combined analysis of 15 different studies found that people who had access to firearms at home were nearly twice as likely to be murdered as people who did not.
News Flash: cities with more people that drive, have more car accidents!
Also in: households where people abuse drugs have a higher rate of drug overdoses.
Late Breaking News: people that take their work home with them suffer higher stress levels and are more susceptible to die from stress related heart diseases, especially those that are already easily stressed. :o :o
-
could be. but then again the majority of americans think gun ownership increases safety, when the data shows not.
https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics/2018/3/23/17155596/gun-ownership-polls-safety-violence
I'll be the first to admit that before this thread, it was unknown (to me) how defensive use had already been figured. That's what I get for subjecting myself to MSM and its lies.
The way I've always seen it, is this: An individual, as averaged, has no interest in offending against others. It'd give a person the same unpleasant feeling as had through being victimized by an offense. Exactly the same. So, by that, the question of defense-statistics hasn't much concerned me when it comes to the reality of gun ownership.
To say nothing of the fact that we cannot control what happens around us - we can only hope to do it for ourselves. Nothing in this world can change that.
-
LMFAO quoting Vox ::) More anti-gun propaganda Vox is like CNN , worthless
this is why you're too stupid to have a serious discussion with.
the CNN article you rubbished gave the OECD, a medical journal and the WHO as the source for the statistics it quoted. the vox article i linked to referred to an NBC/wall street journal poll. as las vegas asked me what MSM viewers thought, that was relevant.
the random blog post you linked to referred to what source?
you're too stupid to understand the difference. please, just clear off and leave the adults to talk. ;)
-
I've done a fair bit of study on the subject and I feel confident that the facts and the stats are on my side as a gun owner.....but at the end of the day that's irrelevant because I have a right to keep and bear arms. Not a government granted privilege, but a God given right.
I have a right to keep...AND BEAR....arms. If you don't care about your rights, don't wish to exercise them, or want to find excuses to surrender them to the government, that's fine by me.
But....a right, is a right, is a m0therfucking right. Don't like it? Eat shit.
-
this is why you're too stupid to have a serious discussion with.
the CNN article you rubbished gave the OECD, a medical journal and the WHO as the source for the statistics it quoted. the vox article i linked to referred to an NBC/wall street journal poll. as las vegas asked me what MSM viewers thought, that was relevant.
the random blog post you linked to referred to what source?
you're too stupid to understand the difference. please, just clear off and leave the adults to talk. ;)
A serious discussion? with you? You're fucking clueless on the subject , no shit we can't have a serious discussion when you don't have the first clue on what you're talking about. You quote people who knowingly lie to promote an anti-gun agenda. and FYI retard they " random " blog I posted referenced the fucking CDC you dumbass.
We can NEVER have a serious discussion with someone who thinks no one should own guns when there is already 300 million of them. We're not having a discussion I'm exposing exactly how little you know and making you look like the retard you are.
This isn't a debate , it's a clinic ;)
-
What happened?
Thanks for asking. I could not defend myself because guns are outlawed here... Thats what happend. Now i have to go through a damn trial with jury with those assholes...
They were just some retards on speed that broke into my house and accused me of rating one of their sisters out. Totally made up and a fantasy of theirs... But i will get them! This was a real crime that will get them 6 years... Fuck it was traumatising!
-
FYI retard they " random " blog I posted referenced the fucking CDC you dumbass.
no it didn't. it made a claim about the CDC. what was the source of the claim? ...oh yeh the idiotic author of the random blog.
you rubbished 2 articles that provided sources for their claims/stats. then you post some sht from a blog ???. you fkin numskull. as i said to you earlier, go back to fantasizing over dorian's ball sack. something you have thoroughly studied.
leave the grown up subjects to the grown ups ;)
-
One thing that is completely left out of all of these studies is, demographics. Do any of the studies break down guns, murders, and race? People get shot and killed in NM all the time, and it's usually gang bullshit. When a study states, "People who have guns in their homes are more likely to die a violent death." Gang members have guns in their homes, they're more likely to die a violent death. No shit.
Do any of these studies break down law abiding gun owners vs death? Or, is all the gang bullshit lumped in? What percentage of gun homicides in the US is gang related? My guess, is the majority of gun homicides. Any studies or statistics on this? ???
-
One thing that is completely left out of all of these studies is, demographics. Do any of the studies break down guns, murders, and race? People get shot and killed in NM all the time, and it's usually gang bullshit. When a study states, "People who have guns in their homes are more likely to die a violent death." Gang members have guns in their homes, they're more likely to die a violent death. No shit.
Do any of these studies break down law abiding gun owners vs death? Or, is all the gang bullshit lumped in? What percentage of gun homicides in the US is gang related? My guess, is the majority of gun homicides. Any studies or statistics on this? ???
AFAIA all the studies quoted only include legal gun owners. criminals would no doubt be reluctant participants for obvious reasons. so when they say gun owners are more likely to die violently, they are talking about legal gun owners.
-
AFAIA all the studies quoted only include legal gun owners. criminals would no doubt be reluctant participants for obvious reasons. so when they say gun owners are more likely to die violently, they are talking about legal gun owners.
How do they know who legally owns a gun?
-
AFAIA all the studies quoted only include legal gun owners. criminals would no doubt be reluctant participants for obvious reasons. so when they say gun owners are more likely to die violently, they are talking about legal gun owners.
Are you sure? ???
-
How do they know who legally owns a gun?
don't know for sure. but logically, would you expect the criminal fraternity to want to take part in these types of studies?
also if you think it could be criminals they're focusing on in these studies, what's to say it's not criminals that are saying they're using a gun in self defence?
can't have it both ways...
-
Are you sure? ???
as above
-
(https://78.media.tumblr.com/01935ea083929e6d371a7d05cbb12d65/tumblr_p7nmke95sf1xqghp7o2_1280.png)
(https://68.media.tumblr.com/c57639a52a52ebc879433317bd831252/tumblr_p7nmlyrL1F1xqghp7o1_1280.png)
-
no it didn't. it made a claim about the CDC. what was the source of the claim? ...oh yeh the idiotic author of the random blog.
you rubbished 2 articles that provided sources for their claims/stats. then you post some sht from a blog ???. you fkin numskull. as i said to you earlier, go back to fantasizing over dorian's ball sack. something you have thoroughly studied.
leave the grown up subjects to the grown ups ;)
Again moron , why did I rubbish the two articles? Because CNN is known to make up blatant lies when it comes to reporting. They're not a source of trusted information so is Vox , using anti-gun left leaning fake news is NOT a credible source , even the CDC isn't a credible source because they have a proven history of bias. They claim to be objective and fair & balanced , they're NOT
You're NOT in the subject , you're an IGNORANT Brit who thinks he knows what he's talking about , you're getting beat the fuck down left-and-right in this thread. You're like a prison bitch everyone is taking a turn with you. You've proven with each post you're hopelessly clueless on the subject, You're NOT an American , you don't live here , you never fired a gun , you're NOT a gun owner , you knowing at all. You're a child interrupting the adults and getting put in your place.
Keep posting you will keep getting corrected. ;)
-
Are you sure? ???
don't know for sure. but logically, would you expect the criminal fraternity to want to take part in these types of studies?
also if you think it could be criminals they're focusing on in these studies, what's to say it's not criminals that are saying they're using a gun in self defence?
can't have it both ways...
as above
So, you're not sure? ???
-
(https://78.media.tumblr.com/01935ea083929e6d371a7d05cbb12d65/tumblr_p7nmke95sf1xqghp7o2_1280.png)
(https://68.media.tumblr.com/c57639a52a52ebc879433317bd831252/tumblr_p7nmlyrL1F1xqghp7o1_1280.png)
;D
(https://i.imgflip.com/28yga7.jpg)
-
Again moron , why did I rubbish the two articles? Because CNN is known to make up blatant lies when it comes to reporting. They're not a source of trusted information so is Vox , using anti-gun left leaning fake news is NOT a credible source , even the CDC isn't a credible source because they have a proven history of bias. They claim to be objective and fair & balanced , they're NOT
You're NOT in the subject , you're an IGNORANT Brit who thinks he knows what he's talking about , you're getting beat the fuck down left-and-right in this thread. You're like a prison bitch everyone is taking a turn with you. You've proven with each post you're hopelessly clueless on the subject, You're NOT an American , you don't live here , you never fired a gun , you're NOT a gun owner , you knowing at all. You're a child interrupting the adults and getting put in your place.
Keep posting you will keep getting corrected. ;)
(http://www.reactiongifs.com/r/cbfrm.gif)
-
don't know for sure. but logically, would you expect the criminal fraternity to want to take part in these types of studies?
also if you think it could be criminals they're focusing on in these studies, what's to say it's not criminals that are saying they're using a gun in self defence?
can't have it both ways...
Don't need it both ways, just need the facts, not some bullshit study by anti gun liberals.
-
Thank you David Hogg...
https://www.louderwithcrowder.com/thanks-david-hogg-nra-breaks-15-year-fundraising-record/
-
Don't need it both ways, just need the facts, not some bullshit study by anti gun liberals.
So, you're not sure? ???
ok, had a more in depth read of some of the studies. i was wrong in assuming they only use legal gun owners. they encompass a wide cross section of society. before calculating the risk/benefit of gun ownership they adjust for all other factors that increase risk of violent death. race, prior arrests, history of domestic violence in the house etc.
that is why you'll usually see in the results/conclusions words along the lines of "guns independently increase the risk"
for example
"Our data indicate that keeping a gun in the home is independently associated with an increase in the risk of homicide in the home"
http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJM199310073291506
After we adjusted for confounding factors, individuals who were in possession of a gun were 4.46 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.16, 17.04) times more likely to be shot in an assault than those not in possession.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2759797/
and the people conducting these studies are not anti gun lobbyists. they're highly respected professors entrusted with billions of dollars of public money to research all areas of public health.
they're only "bs studies" to those who would prefer to keep their heads buried in the sand. ;)
-
ok, had a more in depth read of some of the studies. i was wrong in assuming they only use legal gun owners. they encompass a wide cross section of society. before calculating the risk/benefit of gun ownership they adjust for all other factors that increase risk of violent death. race, prior arrests, history of domestic violence in the house etc.
that is why you'll usually see in the results/conclusions words along the lines of "guns independently increase the risk"
for example
"Our data indicate that keeping a gun in the home is independently associated with an increase in the risk of homicide in the home"
http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJM199310073291506
After we adjusted for confounding factors, individuals who were in possession of a gun were 4.46 (95% confidence interval [CI] = 1.16, 17.04) times more likely to be shot in an assault than those not in possession.
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2759797/
and the people conducting these studies are not anti gun lobbyists. they're highly respected professors entrusted with billions of dollars of public money to research all areas of public health.
they're only "bs studies" to those who would prefer to keep their heads buried in the sand. ;)
-
Thanks retarded celebs, and millenial libtard students...
https://pjmedia.com/trending/hollywoods-oscars-night-tanks-nra-membership-skyrockets/
-
Please stop this retard young uproars against having guns! Everyone should have one at home so they can protect themselves and their families. Look what happend to me. 5 drugaddicts broke into my house and stole my shit. Atleast i have a gun now although illegal because you cant owe one over here in this shit country....
-
Libtards, the gift that just keeps giving...
-
People and poverty/crime have nothing to do w/ gun deaths, its all the guns fault... (Never mind disarming the responsible owner).
Too bad radical gov't types focus on the wrong stuff. Millionaire celebs have a voice in this? Really?
And retards listen to them?? Sheeple...
-
Statistics prove that if we get rid of people no one will ever get murdered again.
-
We should just make murder illegal
-
Study: Firearm Homicide Rate for Black Men 29 Per 100,000; White Men 2 Per 100,000
https://www.gunsamerica.com/blog/homicide-suicide-white-black-men-study/?utm_source=email&utm_medium=20180421_FridayDigest_171&utm_campaign=/blog/homicide-suicide-white-black-men-study/