Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #5101  
Old 07-14-2015, 11:47 AM
Damuri Ajashi is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 20,512
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hentor the Barbarian View Post
And then there are suburbs in every city where pudgy white guys are arming themselves to the teeth in fear that those people who live in those city neighborhoods will attack at any minute.
Well, that might be true but if the cost of letting people who really need self defense have access to guns is that a few overweight pasty white guys that would piss their pants before they ever drew a gun get to carry around a gun in their waistband, it doesn't seem like a bad tradeoff.

I would focus on reducing gun ownership among criminals rather than pudgy suburban white guys.
  #5102  
Old 07-14-2015, 11:48 AM
Damuri Ajashi is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 20,512
BTW, can I say, I am glad that Hentor has come back. Dealing with Elvis has made me appreciate arguing with him.
  #5103  
Old 07-14-2015, 11:48 AM
Hentor the Barbarian is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 14,427
Well, that and all the empirical evidence that you fatuously hand-wave away.

But fear is powerful, I know. I don't blame gun fucks for being pussies. I blame them for how they try to manage their fears.
  #5104  
Old 07-14-2015, 11:52 AM
Buck Godot's Avatar
Buck Godot is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: MD outside DC
Posts: 6,090
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lumpy View Post
False analogy. Studies have failed to show a vaccination-autism link, whereas having a gun has demonstrably enabled people to defend themselves.
Ok lets try the following more relevant scenario based on an actual conversion I had a number of years ago

Me: You should probably wear your seatbelt while your driving

Him: well some guy I knew got into an accident once and was thrown from the car which shortly there after burst into flames if he had been wearing his seatbelt he would have been burned to death as it survived to tell the tale.

Me: Well that is a highly unusual circumstance. For the most part wearing a seatbelt is safer.

Him: I don't care what the statistics say I say its safer to go without.
  #5105  
Old 07-14-2015, 11:54 AM
Hentor the Barbarian is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 14,427
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damuri Ajashi View Post
BTW, can I say, I am glad that Hentor has come back. Dealing with Elvis has made me appreciate arguing with him.
Believe me, there's no margin in engaging you on this - you cannot reason someone from a position that fear has led them to. I just happened to see, once again, a gun nut advancing the position that they are masters of the fear stick! The hoplophobe argument that you've made.

You don't seem to realize what this reveals about yourself.

But you and Elv1sLives deserve each other, and you and Bullitt can stay here and oil each other up, you rough customers! I'll let you stand watch on the wall, protecting us all with your manliness. Just remember that a paunch makes you more visible in silhouette, and pasty skin is highly reflective. God bless you, and keep up with those quick draw skills!

Last edited by Hentor the Barbarian; 07-14-2015 at 11:55 AM.
  #5106  
Old 07-14-2015, 01:06 PM
Scumpup is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 14,322
Still waiting to hear abouty our personal motivations for not owning a gun, ElvisL1ves. We already know you believe everybody is one bad day from mass murder. Is that why you don't own one? Is it only not having a gun that keeps you from killing?

Last edited by Scumpup; 07-14-2015 at 01:06 PM.
  #5107  
Old 07-14-2015, 01:31 PM
steronz is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Oh-hiya-Maude
Posts: 5,146
Quote:
Originally Posted by Buck Godot View Post
Ok lets try the following more relevant scenario based on an actual conversion I had a number of years ago

Me: You should probably wear your seatbelt while your driving

Him: well some guy I knew got into an accident once and was thrown from the car which shortly there after burst into flames if he had been wearing his seatbelt he would have been burned to death as it survived to tell the tale.

Me: Well that is a highly unusual circumstance. For the most part wearing a seatbelt is safer.

Him: I don't care what the statistics say I say its safer to go without.
Right, this is much better than the anti-vaxxer analogy because we can actually conceive of a scenario where an otherwise survivable accident becomes fatal because of a seat belt. I searched and I couldn't find a single case of it happening, but I can imagine it. I can imagine possibly being in a low speed collision where by some fluke chance I'm partially mentally incapacitated in a burning car and can't escape because of a seat belt.

Likewise, I can imagine a scenario where I need some life-saving medication but I can't open the bottle in my degraded state because of the child-proof cap.

In both cases, my last thoughts would be "fuck these goddamn seat belts/child-proof caps!" But decisions shouldn't be made by people in their death throes, they should be made by calm, rational people who have access to all the evidence. And the evidence is unambiguous that seat belts and child-proof medicine bottles save lives.

So yeah, if I were getting hacked to pieces by a crazy person in my own home, my last thought might be, "Fuck, wish I had a gun!" But that doesn't mean I'm going to go out and buy a gun, because in the cold light of day I can read the statistics and I know that bringing a gun into my house is a poor decision.

Frankly, I'm surprise this argument is being proposed by Lumpy. The gun-rights activists are always saying that we shouldn't create knee-jerk legislation in reaction to traumatic events like Newtown. But now he's proposing that we all make knee-jerk decisions in reaction to hypothetical traumatic events...???

Last edited by steronz; 07-14-2015 at 01:33 PM.
  #5108  
Old 07-14-2015, 01:41 PM
Hentor the Barbarian is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 14,427
When all you do is spend time thinking about hypothetical scenarios in which you're being attacked, you can hardly make decisions in any other way.
  #5109  
Old 07-14-2015, 01:48 PM
Bruce Wayne is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Michigan
Posts: 822
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hentor the Barbarian View Post
When all you do is spend time thinking about hypothetical scenarios in which you're being attacked, you can hardly make decisions in any other way.
Don't both sides of the gun debate do that?
  #5110  
Old 07-14-2015, 01:49 PM
Hbns is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Posts: 1,418
Quote:
Originally Posted by steronz View Post
But that doesn't mean I'm going to go out and buy a gun, because in the cold light of day I can read the statistics and I know that bringing a gun into my house is a poor decision.
Serious question here. Did the studies those statistics come from only include households with legally owned guns?
  #5111  
Old 07-14-2015, 01:57 PM
Gary Kumquat is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2000
Posts: 4,389
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lumpy View Post
If guns ever were banned, and some machete-wielding psycho on PCP was kicking down your door, would your last thoughts be of all the people you saved by opposing guns?
Does this happen a lot around your neck of the woods?
  #5112  
Old 07-14-2015, 01:57 PM
Hentor the Barbarian is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 14,427
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bruce Wayne View Post
Don't both sides of the gun debate do that?
No.
  #5113  
Old 07-14-2015, 02:10 PM
Damuri Ajashi is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 20,512
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hentor the Barbarian View Post
Well, that and all the empirical evidence that you fatuously hand-wave away.

But fear is powerful, I know. I don't blame gun fucks for being pussies. I blame them for how they try to manage their fears.
And what empirical evidence do you have that banning guns would reduce gun murders?

unless there is another study that has come out since the last time you were here, what do you have that would provide sufficient evidence to warrant truncating a constitutional right?
  #5114  
Old 07-14-2015, 02:12 PM
Damuri Ajashi is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 20,512
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hentor the Barbarian View Post
Believe me, there's no margin in engaging you on this - you cannot reason someone from a position that fear has led them to. I just happened to see, once again, a gun nut advancing the position that they are masters of the fear stick! The hoplophobe argument that you've made.

You don't seem to realize what this reveals about yourself.

But you and Elv1sLives deserve each other, and you and Bullitt can stay here and oil each other up, you rough customers! I'll let you stand watch on the wall, protecting us all with your manliness. Just remember that a paunch makes you more visible in silhouette, and pasty skin is highly reflective. God bless you, and keep up with those quick draw skills!
I don't think either of us is going to convince the other but we can at least try to keep each other honest.
  #5115  
Old 07-14-2015, 02:17 PM
Damuri Ajashi is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 20,512
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hentor the Barbarian View Post
When all you do is spend time thinking about hypothetical scenarios in which you're being attacked, you can hardly make decisions in any other way.
These attacks don't need to occur with high levels of frequency to justify gun ownership. I have freely admitted that I probably don't need a gun for self defense and I am more of a gun nerd than a gun nut BUT I have been in (or at least near) situations where having a gun made a huge difference and I would not deny someone the ability to defend themselves because of some queasiness about guns in general.

Riots don't happen often but there have been several in my lifetime. I have seen the presence of guns make a huge difference.
  #5116  
Old 07-14-2015, 02:20 PM
Damuri Ajashi is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 20,512
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bruce Wayne View Post
Don't both sides of the gun debate do that?
Yes, except the gun rights side is concerned about being attacked by criminals with guns while the gun control side of the debate is concerned about being attacked by law abiding citizens with guns.
  #5117  
Old 07-14-2015, 02:20 PM
steronz is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Oh-hiya-Maude
Posts: 5,146
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hbns View Post
Serious question here. Did the studies those statistics come from only include households with legally owned guns?
I couldn't tell you without digging into more weeds than I care to at the moment. I'd kick that one back over to you.

What I can do is wildly speculate that A) people who own guns illegally are probably going to be less than likely to self-report to having a gun in the house than people who own guns legally, so if the statistics are skewed by illegal gun ownership then they're probably skewed more in favor of owning a gun, meaning this isn't going to help the gun-owners any, and B) if there were studies that controlled for legal/illegal gun* ownership that showed a net safety benefit for legal gun owners, we'd all have heard about it.

*Gun in this paragraph refers to handgun; as far as I know, there's no evidence that long guns present a statistically significant health risk.
  #5118  
Old 07-14-2015, 02:21 PM
Fear Itself is offline
Cecil's Inner Circle
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Flavortown
Posts: 36,020
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damuri Ajashi View Post
And what empirical evidence do you have that banning guns would reduce gun murders?
Don't even need to ban them:

Largest Gun Study Ever: More Guns, More Murder
Quote:
The largest study of gun violence in the United States, released Thursday afternoon, confirms a point that should be obvious: widespread American gun ownership is fueling America’s gun violence epidemic.

The study, by Professor Michael Siegel at Boston University and two coauthors, has been peer-reviewed and is forthcoming in the American Journal of Public Health. Siegel and his colleagues compiled data on firearm homicides from all 50 states from 1981-2010, the longest stretch of time ever studied in this fashion, and set about seeing whether they could find any relationship between changes in gun ownership and murder using guns over time.

...

With all this preliminary work in hand, the authors ran a series of regressions to see what effect the overall national decline in firearm ownership from 1981 to 2010 had on gun homicides. The result was staggering: “for each 1 percentage point increase in proportion of household gun ownership,” Siegel et al. found, “firearm homicide rate increased by 0.9″ percent. A one standard deviation change in firearm ownership shifted gun murders by a staggering 12.9 percent.

Last edited by Fear Itself; 07-14-2015 at 02:22 PM.
  #5119  
Old 07-14-2015, 02:35 PM
septimus's Avatar
septimus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: The Land of Smiles
Posts: 19,978
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damuri Ajashi View Post
Quote:
... people who break into your house are armed with knives and baseball bats and breaking in with the specific intent to doing you harm
There are entire neighorhoods in almost every city in this country where this is a real concern for many people.
Yes, but typically those are the very same poor neighborhoods where citizens who are armed are most likely to be blown away in random confrontations, especially, due in part to ethnic biases, with police.
  #5120  
Old 07-14-2015, 02:50 PM
ElvisL1ves is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: The land of the mouse
Posts: 50,549
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fear Itself View Post
Already shoved in his face. Futilely, of course.
  #5121  
Old 07-14-2015, 02:51 PM
Hentor the Barbarian is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 14,427
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damuri Ajashi View Post
I don't think either of us is going to convince the other but we can at least try to keep each other honest.
I would never put myself in the position of being responsible for your honesty.
  #5122  
Old 07-14-2015, 03:21 PM
ElvisL1ves is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: The land of the mouse
Posts: 50,549
That gun show security is reeeeely tight, ain't it, y'all?
Quote:
Surveillance video obtained by WFTV shows more than a dozen people stealing weapons from a gun show at the Central Florida Fairgrounds in Orange County over the Fourth of July weekend.

According to Orlando police, nearly 20 guns were taken from one of the gun show booths after the show closed for the day on July 6.
  #5123  
Old 07-14-2015, 03:34 PM
Death of Rats is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: A Humid Oven
Posts: 3,589
Quote:
Originally Posted by ElvisL1ves View Post
If only those poor booth owners could have had a gun to defend their wares!
  #5124  
Old 07-14-2015, 03:43 PM
Scumpup is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 14,322
Quote:
Originally Posted by ElvisL1ves View Post
Already shoved in his face. Futilely, of course.
Why don't you own a gun? Is it because you would kill someone with it?
  #5125  
Old 07-14-2015, 03:44 PM
Scumpup is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 14,322
Quote:
Originally Posted by ElvisL1ves View Post
Do you ever worry that you might stab somebody in a fit of rage? Do you own any knives?
  #5126  
Old 07-14-2015, 03:58 PM
ElvisL1ves is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: The land of the mouse
Posts: 50,549
You do know all about uncontrollable urges, don't you?
  #5127  
Old 07-14-2015, 04:03 PM
Damuri Ajashi is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 20,512
Quote:
Originally Posted by steronz View Post
I couldn't tell you without digging into more weeds than I care to at the moment. I'd kick that one back over to you.

What I can do is wildly speculate that A) people who own guns illegally are probably going to be less than likely to self-report to having a gun in the house than people who own guns legally, so if the statistics are skewed by illegal gun ownership then they're probably skewed more in favor of owning a gun, meaning this isn't going to help the gun-owners any, and B) if there were studies that controlled for legal/illegal gun* ownership that showed a net safety benefit for legal gun owners, we'd all have heard about it.

*Gun in this paragraph refers to handgun; as far as I know, there's no evidence that long guns present a statistically significant health risk.
Or it might be self reporting on gun ownership with police reporting on who gets killed.
  #5128  
Old 07-14-2015, 04:19 PM
Damuri Ajashi is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 20,512
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fear Itself View Post
Can we at least wait for the study to be published before we hold it up as conclusive proof that banning firearms would reduce the murder rate? These studies have a bad habit of equating correlation with causation and counting murders by people who are not allowed to own firearms as if a gun ban would have done anything to prevent that murder.

I'd be interested to see how they control for the generally decreasing crime rate during the study period.
  #5129  
Old 07-14-2015, 04:24 PM
Damuri Ajashi is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 20,512
Quote:
Originally Posted by septimus View Post
Yes, but typically those are the very same poor neighborhoods where citizens who are armed are most likely to be blown away in random confrontations, especially, due in part to ethnic biases, with police.
Are you arguing for disarming the police as well now?

There are a lot of shitty neighborhoods that are not black.
  #5130  
Old 07-14-2015, 04:36 PM
Damuri Ajashi is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 20,512
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hentor the Barbarian View Post
I would never put myself in the position of being responsible for your honesty.
Are you still butthurt over losing almost every political and legal battle in the last decade?

In the last several years do you think more people on this board have shifted towards your position or towards mine? I am not asking whether more people are more in line with your position or mine, I think it is clear that most of the people on this board (if pressed for an opinion) are more in line with you but more of them have shifted towards me than towards you in the several years.

I think it is equally clear that more people have shifted away from your position than away from my position. I don't know many posters that went from being against an AWB to being for it while there seem to be a lot of posters that went from being for an AWB to being ambivalent or against it. This sort of shift in opinion is fairly rare on this board (and even more rare anywhere else on the internet).

So, if I am being so dishonest and you are being so honest about everything then how do you explain this? Why are you having so much trouble getting the truth out on this board? How is the gun control side able to bamboozle what is largely a gun control friendly board? Is it possible that you are disconnected from reality and you are vilifying gun rights advocates because you just KNOW you are right and anyone that disagrees with you is immoral?

Are you still butthurt over losing every legal and political battle on gun control over the last decade? Perhaps its time to take a different approach to gun control because your current approach is failing badly.

Last edited by Damuri Ajashi; 07-14-2015 at 04:37 PM.
  #5131  
Old 07-14-2015, 04:39 PM
Fear Itself is offline
Cecil's Inner Circle
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Flavortown
Posts: 36,020
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damuri Ajashi View Post
Can we at least wait for the study to be published before we hold it up as conclusive proof that banning firearms would reduce the murder rate? These studies have a bad habit of equating correlation with causation and counting murders by people who are not allowed to own firearms as if a gun ban would have done anything to prevent that murder.
Their methodology is right there in my cite:
Quote:
Since we know that violent crime rates overall declined during that period of time, the authors used something called “fixed effect regression” to account for any national trend other than changes in gun ownership. They also employed the largest-ever number of statistical controls for other variables in this kind of gun study: “age, gender, race/ethnicity, urbanization, poverty, unemployment, income, education, income inequality, divorce rate, alcohol use, violent crime rate, nonviolent crime rate, hate crime rate, number of hunting licenses, age-adjusted nonfirearm homicide rate, incarceration rate,and suicide rate” were all accounted for.
  #5132  
Old 07-14-2015, 08:45 PM
Scumpup is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Posts: 14,322
Quote:
Originally Posted by ElvisL1ves View Post
You do know all about uncontrollable urges, don't you?
Just answer the question. I fucking dare you. Just. Answer. The. Question.
  #5133  
Old 07-16-2015, 01:42 AM
Bullitt's Avatar
Bullitt is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: SF Giants Nation
Posts: 26,007
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hentor the Barbarian View Post
Anything you say. Just please stop being so darn intimidating! Yikes!
Oh bother.

Pathetic.

Eeyore.
  #5134  
Old 07-16-2015, 06:18 AM
septimus's Avatar
septimus is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: The Land of Smiles
Posts: 19,978
Quote:
Originally Posted by Damuri Ajashi View Post
Are you arguing for disarming the police as well now?

There are a lot of shitty neighborhoods that are not black.
No. But I think it's ridiculous to taser unthreatening citizens who are slow to comply with orders. And the many cops we see who shoot at innocent citizens should be disarmed and dismissed from law enforcement.

And yes, some (but not all or even most) bigotry by cops and others is directed against the poor in general rather than blacks specifically. But the poverty rate is about three times higher among blacks than among whites, so poor==black is often an informative approximation. In fact, despite that whites outnumber blacks in America by a huge margin, poor black kids now, for the very first time since records were kept, outnumber poor white kids: "black children make up 4.2 million [of the 20% of U.S. children living in poverty] while white children account for 4.1 million."
  #5135  
Old 07-16-2015, 09:46 AM
Lumpy's Avatar
Lumpy is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Aug 1999
Location: Minneapolis, Minnesota US
Posts: 16,697
Why do the gun control advocates on this board always scorn people who choose to carry? Let's say purely for the sake of argument that gun carriers are motivated by paranoid fear (and I deny it). So what? What skin is it off your nose if they carry? If there was an epidemic of permit holders committing rage or panic shootings, then you'd have a case. All I can see is that your hatred of people who lawfully carry is because they're getting in the way of the crusade to ban guns.

Guns were never more restricted than in the period from 1970 to the mid-1980s, when most states were "May Issue" (in practice meaning "No"), and federal gun regulations were at their peak. Yet that didn't check the wave of crime and violence during that era. Gun owners with clean records always end up being the low-hanging fruit of gun control- the most infringed and the least likely to show a benefit from gun control.
  #5136  
Old 07-16-2015, 09:57 AM
Fear Itself is offline
Cecil's Inner Circle
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Flavortown
Posts: 36,020
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lumpy View Post
Why do the gun control advocates on this board always scorn people who choose to carry? Let's say purely for the sake of argument that gun carriers are motivated by paranoid fear (and I deny it). So what? What skin is it off your nose if they carry? If there was an epidemic of permit holders committing rage or panic shootings, then you'd have a case.
Why would it have rise to the level of an epidemic? How many deaths of innocent bystanders is acceptable to you?
  #5137  
Old 07-16-2015, 10:00 AM
ElvisL1ves is offline
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: The land of the mouse
Posts: 50,549
What skin is it off my nose? You mean what hole is it in my chest, don't you?

The scary thing is that you really don't get it, and at some point one has to think you can't.
  #5138  
Old 07-16-2015, 10:01 AM
running coach's Avatar
running coach is online now
Arms of Steel, Leg of Jello
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Riding my handcycle
Posts: 37,409
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fear Itself View Post
Why would it have rise to the level of an epidemic? How many deaths of innocent bystanders is acceptable to you?
The fact is, the crime rate among permit holders is well below that of the general population.
And most of those crimes involve carrying where it's not allowed (school, bar, Fed. building).


Hang on, I'll dig up some cites.
  #5139  
Old 07-16-2015, 10:04 AM
Fear Itself is offline
Cecil's Inner Circle
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Flavortown
Posts: 36,020
Quote:
Originally Posted by running coach View Post
The fact is, the crime rate among permit holders is well below that of the general population.
And most of those crimes involve carrying where it's not allowed (school, bar, Fed. building).


Hang on, I'll dig up some cites.
Crime rates a slippery things. Let's not start including any and all crimes here; limit it to crimes involving guns.
  #5140  
Old 07-16-2015, 10:08 AM
Hentor the Barbarian is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 14,427
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lumpy View Post
Why do the gun control advocates on this board always scorn people who choose to carry? Let's say purely for the sake of argument that gun carriers are motivated by paranoid fear (and I deny it). So what? What skin is it off your nose if they carry? If there was an epidemic of permit holders committing rage or panic shootings, then you'd have a case. All I can see is that your hatred of people who lawfully carry is because they're getting in the way of the crusade to ban guns.
For one, it is often literally skin off of other people's noses, or arms, or legs - there were 16,864 non-fatal unintentional firearms injuries in the US in 2013. People should be free to go to church or the store and not be injuried because someone dropped their fear-reducing amulet on the floor.

This doesn't even include accidental shootings that do not involve injuries - where someone has a bullet go through their house or is fortunate to not be struck by an accidental discharge at Walmart.

I think the more fundamental problem though is the ABSOLUTE OPPOSITION that gun fucks show towards doing anything to reduce the problems associated with gun carrying.

In fact, I am confident that you or your ilk are attempting right now to refute or disregard the nonfatal injury stat above, rather than say something reasonable like that's a problem we should do something about.

So, bottom line: the evidence is clear and compelling (to rational people not engaged in motivated reading) that guns are a net harm. Salving your crippling fear is not worth increasing the risk to everyone else.
  #5141  
Old 07-16-2015, 10:15 AM
Bullitt's Avatar
Bullitt is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: SF Giants Nation
Posts: 26,007
Quote:
Originally Posted by Hentor the Barbarian View Post
I think the more fundamental problem though is the ABSOLUTE OPPOSITION that gun fucks show towards doing anything to reduce the problems associated with gun carrying.
Whoa, slow down there, dude. Define gun fuck.

I own guns, and I want to work towards reducing gun deaths. Am I a gun fuck?
  #5142  
Old 07-16-2015, 10:18 AM
running coach's Avatar
running coach is online now
Arms of Steel, Leg of Jello
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Riding my handcycle
Posts: 37,409
Quote:
Originally Posted by running coach View Post


Hang on, I'll dig up some cites.
Conviction rates per year, Texas.
  #5143  
Old 07-16-2015, 10:28 AM
Hentor the Barbarian is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 14,427
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bullitt View Post
Whoa, slow down there, dude. Define gun fuck.

I own guns, and I want to work towards reducing gun deaths. Am I a gun fuck?
In general, you seem like a gun fuck.

But let's see. Let's not restrict it to gun deaths, shall we. How do you propose reducing harmful gun incidents (injuries, deaths and non-injurious harm to others)?
  #5144  
Old 07-16-2015, 10:30 AM
Bullitt's Avatar
Bullitt is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: SF Giants Nation
Posts: 26,007
Define gun fuck.
  #5145  
Old 07-16-2015, 10:34 AM
Fear Itself is offline
Cecil's Inner Circle
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: Flavortown
Posts: 36,020
Quote:
Originally Posted by running coach View Post
As I expected, those documents include mostly crimes not involving guns. Find stats on gun-related crimes only, and break them down in rates per capita among permittees and non-permittees. That is the only way to tell if permittees have high rates of misusing their guns.
  #5146  
Old 07-16-2015, 10:36 AM
Hentor the Barbarian is offline
Guest
 
Join Date: Jun 2002
Posts: 14,427
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bullitt View Post
Define gun fuck.
A gun fuck is someone who proclaims to be interested in reducing gun injuries, but who, when asked how they propose reducing gun injuries, focuses instead on defining what a gun fuck is.
  #5147  
Old 07-16-2015, 10:37 AM
steronz is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Oh-hiya-Maude
Posts: 5,146
Quote:
Originally Posted by running coach View Post
I'm no statistician, but that seems like a completely pointless way to produce numbers. Let's pick one, sexual assault of a child in 2013. 693 total convictions, only 20 of which were by CHL holders. They even put a percentage on there, 2.886%! Seems small, until you go elsewhere on the internet to find that CHL holders make up less then 2% of the Texas population. Oops.

In short, this cite is completely unconvincing.
  #5148  
Old 07-16-2015, 10:57 AM
running coach's Avatar
running coach is online now
Arms of Steel, Leg of Jello
Charter Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Riding my handcycle
Posts: 37,409
Quote:
Originally Posted by steronz View Post
I'm no statistician, but that seems like a completely pointless way to produce numbers. Let's pick one, sexual assault of a child in 2013. 693 total convictions, only 20 of which were by CHL holders. They even put a percentage on there, 2.886%! Seems small, until you go elsewhere on the internet to find that CHL holders make up less then 2% of the Texas population. Oops.

In short, this cite is completely unconvincing.
(2013)
Murder 91-0
Manslaughter 364-3
Robbery 1495-0
Place weapon prohibited 78-0
Prohibited weapon 113-0
Unlicensed carry weapon 1947-16
Unlicensed carry weapon alcohol premises 42-0
Deadly conduct(?) 887-16
Deadly conduct weapon discharge 204-1
Deadly weapon in penal institution 28-0
  #5149  
Old 07-16-2015, 11:02 AM
Damuri Ajashi is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 20,512
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fear Itself View Post
Their methodology is right there in my cite:
I don't know if that is specific enough. They are basically just saying "we controlled for variables" In have seen these sort of claims before in other studies as proof that (legal access to guns)=(more murders) and all I have gotten was a correlation between guns in the home and higher murder rate.
  #5150  
Old 07-16-2015, 11:04 AM
Damuri Ajashi is online now
Guest
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 20,512
Quote:
Originally Posted by septimus View Post
No. But I think it's ridiculous to taser unthreatening citizens who are slow to comply with orders. And the many cops we see who shoot at innocent citizens should be disarmed and dismissed from law enforcement.

And yes, some (but not all or even most) bigotry by cops and others is directed against the poor in general rather than blacks specifically. But the poverty rate is about three times higher among blacks than among whites, so poor==black is often an informative approximation. In fact, despite that whites outnumber blacks in America by a huge margin, poor black kids now, for the very first time since records were kept, outnumber poor white kids: "black children make up 4.2 million [of the 20% of U.S. children living in poverty] while white children account for 4.1 million."
I don't think I disagree with any of that. I would add that the bad cops constitute a small minority of cops and that small minority of cops would be even smaller if the good cops didn't let the bad cops slide on so much of the bad shit they do.
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:32 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.

Send questions for Cecil Adams to: cecil@straightdope.com

Send comments about this website to: webmaster@straightdope.com

Terms of Use / Privacy Policy

Advertise on the Straight Dope!
(Your direct line to thousands of the smartest, hippest people on the planet, plus a few total dipsticks.)

Copyright © 2019 STM Reader, LLC.

 
Copyright © 2017