Did you actually read what he posted?
I am not obligated to continue to debate an issue when someone starts posting rubbish in reply.
Stop worrying about my replies and report my posts if you feel they are out of line.
best
mqqn
You might want to note that tomndebb is a moderator, and he did use mod-mode in that post you quoted. He may actually have been responding to someone else’s reports of your posts.
If by “not obligated to continue to debate” you mean that you are free to ignore another poster, you are correct.
That, however, does not permit you to make nothing but snide comments.
Unfortunately, I am required to “worry about” your replies. I do not “report” posts; I issue Warnings to posters who have violated the rules. You have now been told how you may improve your own posting style so that you may continue to enjoy posting here. Ignoring those instructions will jeopardize your privilege to post on this board.
[ /Moderating ]
Please keep in mind I used a conservative estimate of DGU as a counterpoint to your earlier figure of 8800ish gun murders before you [del]moved the goalposts[/del] expanded your argument to now include all non fatal gun crime.
Several researchers have estimated that there are MILLIONS–literally–of defensive uses of guns every single year.
On the contrary–there are many well-documented accounts of people defending themselves. Several posters on this board have mentioned this on multiple occasions. And yet, within the last month or so, I saw a post on this board claiming that nobody has ever stopped a mass murderer.
Why? Largely because the mainstream media does everything in its power to keep from reporting such incidents. Therefore, unless you see a local source, or read it in the NRA magazine, you’re extremely unlikely to be aware of it.
John Lott has estimated that a burglar in America has approximately equal chances of getting shot by a resident and going to jail.
Well, if one third of Americans own guns, that’s 100 million people; if conservatively ‘millions’ means 2 million, that means there is a 1 in 50 chance these folk will point a gun, or shoot, at another person each year.
I can see why this makes America safer than places without guns.
[ And I support gun ownership. ]
[ But from that Pew link, prolly not people who keep their guns in the garage. ]
:dubious:
You’ve certainly ascribed a lot of positions to me, despite having little (I’m being generous here) to no evidence to support you.
At any rate, I offered one example, shall I add to the list?
How about a young man who falls ill, so ill that although his body still functions, his mind never will again. His parents decide to withdraw life support; a doctor and a police officer assist them in doing so. Four people have taken an innocent life, and none of them are mentally ill.
That’s two examples; how many more do you need before you admit your assertion is false?
Are you saying that there is some kind of vast conspiracy involving the press, across all states in the nation and all major cities and markets, and possibly the police, at the city, county, state and federal levels, that suppresses information on defensive gun use?
Why do you think that and why would all those people, (thousands, possibly hundreds of thousands of Americans), do such a thing?
And if they are, how is the NRA, with a journalistic staff of ??.. how many?.. getting all the real stories?
Well, not quite. He was responding to your cite on defensive gun use, which was not just about murders but about crime in general. So with respect, I think each of you sorta grabbed one of the goalposts and moved them beyond the original point.
I suppose, as an incredibly petty point, this is accurate. If someone kills lots of people and is then killed in turn, they weren’t stopped from being a mass murderer. If they’re killed before they kill many, then they aren’t yet a mass murderer. Torturous!
That said, I’d be curious to see the cite. Did you argue the point with them at the time?
As a general rule, attributing conspiratorial behavior to “mainstream media” is pretty good evidence that the axe that one is grinding has become irrational obsession.
Beginning any sentence with those words is a self-parody. If guns are a religion, John Lott is the High Priest and official Keeper of the Mythologies.
the dude who shot the people watching batman in Colorado picked the one theatre out of the three that were within driving distance of where he lived that had a posted “no guns” sign
in general many spree shootings are in places that are obviously/well-known gun-free-zones
There are many examples of people with guns stopping spree shooters. Not that the anti-gun side is actually going to do the research. Better to just be stubborn and never really truly test your own beliefs
There doesn’t always need to be a conspiracy. If an occupation tends to attract a certain political demographic of people, then clearly they’ll tend to be in agreement on issues and slant things to their worldview.
Just like lawyers aren’t actively colluding to create a litigious society, but they still in congress managed to do so in America. They tend to view lawsuit solutions as morally OK regardless of the damage or chilling effect, they all get paid no matter what side they’re on, judges are often former lawyers and can later go back into practice, etc. Not everything has to be a conspiracy for people to ultimately act in congress together
If you insist in putting these asinine “situations” out there.
First off, in your most recent spew, there is no mass murder with a firearm as I posted in the post that got you on the edge of your chair.
So - to humor you:
In your most recent blather, the police officer is committing the crime of murder, and it is unlikely that he / she would “assist” in this way.
What if alien beings landed on earth, implanted alien brain-frogs in sane people, and one of those alien brain-frogs caused a sane person to walk into a mall and beat 254 people to death with a vintage burton snowboard.
What then, huh? Huh?
Your gun-grabbing ideology is flawed, you have nothing in terms of fact or basis for anything you have posted in our debate.
You apparently don’t think anyone should have a gun, is that your position? If not, what IS your position?
I did not post a list of facts, I posted a list of assertions that I wanted someone to dispute, and all you have done is spend all day with your face beet red trying to come up with the perfect way a sane person could commit a mass murder with a gun (and you have failed miserably by the way).
IF you have some sort of reasonable argument to my post #35
I will spare you the need to go back to that post, and will post the statement I made in in the above post to which you have been (I think) trying unsuccessfully to provide debate points.
Please by all means let’s have a debate.
IF all you can do is think up unlikely and un-related scenarios, maybe you should just quit and know your limitations.
best
mqqn
Thanks orangeapples - I did not see that this person was a mod, nor have I ever seen someone using “moderator” tags -
I do disagree that calling an asinine argument is a defacto insult to the person that posted said twaddle, but I’ll take my lumps like a man if that is the position here.
best
mqqn
Hi tomndebb -
Good information -
Did you know that in England at the time, these “shirttail rangers” were feared, and the word on the street at the time (by reports of course, I could not know this first hand) was that any English officer coming to the colonies to fight should get their affairs in order, as they were the first targets.
These marksmen may not have ultimately WON the war (however you peel it, we did gain our independence), they certainly were part of several key conflicts, at least one of which resulted in the elimination of all the present English officers, and the surrender of over 5000 British troops. (Battles of Freeman’s Farm - General Burgoyne)
Interesting stuff though - and if one wanted to start a discussion on revolutionary ware arms, THAT would be a very interesting and , for me, educational thread.
best
mqqn
Sheer nonsense.
http://www.gunfaq.org/2013/04/aurora-and-the-gun-free-zone-theory/
Cite the proportion of incidents that occur in either type of setting please.
Ironic.
Why is it that any other method to assess defensive gun use than self-report turns up estimates in the dozens to hundreds, while estimates relying on self-report turn up hundreds of thousands to “literally” millions?
I know the standard answer is that these folks are too scared to make official reports of incidents of dgu, out of fear that their guns will be confiscated. But that doesn’t seem likely. I mean, millions of incidents of non-reporting out of fear?
When researchers take a closer look at the circumstances described in survey data of self reported dgu, they find that most incidents are themselves illegal (e.g., a guy provoking an argument and then brandishing his weapon) or are simply unbelievable (e.g., one person reporting dozens of dgu incidents).
The impact of these erroneous dgu cases in surveys is not trivial either. Population estimates are derived from smallish samples. If 12 people in a sample of 5000 report a dgu, that’s going to end up looking like a huge number of annual incidents. If most of those 12 are bullshit, that means that the estimated population rate is way overblown.
I have noted, twice that this sort of snide comment is not appropriate. While passionate discussion may lead one to engage in this behavior once in a while, a steady stream of it is not acceptable, particularly when it is directed more against the poster than the post.
If this behavior continues, you will begin collecting formal Warnings.
[ /Moderating ]