Gun Control
Couldn't resist...
edit: Where the F did that slash come from in "couldn't"? It's not showing up in the text box for editing...
Last edited:
Man, took long enough to find out that, no, they didn't say it.
http://freedomoutpost.com/2013/02/did-feinstein-boxer-claim-turn-in-your-weapons-gunman-will-turn-himself-in/
Wading through the amount of Teatards reposting it must've taken a good 10min though...
http://freedomoutpost.com/2013/02/did-feinstein-boxer-claim-turn-in-your-weapons-gunman-will-turn-himself-in/
Wading through the amount of Teatards reposting it must've taken a good 10min though...
Really disappointed in your guys. Would have expected more statistics and less emotional arguements. I read all these posts and I believe Westy, Kevin and Gastro only posted 2 stats each at best. Dante did try to dispell Gastro's video illustrating how gun violence has decreased and violent crime is higher in the UK. I like how the video used the FBI statistic source.
The theory rational people, and Woo the NRA doesn't own this, is that guns prevent violent crimes because "criminals" don't know who is armed. Plus armed citizens can protect themselves. So since the UK has taken us back into their banking system and media, the "free press" likes to compare us to them. TO Gastro's video point, our 1.4/100000 crime rate is almost 4X lower than the UK's 4/100000. Of course the counter arguement, which Dante has also provided, is that violent crime is recorded differently. Now I do look for truth on both sides and have not found how the crime is recorded differently. The UK records "affrays" or all fights. I looked at the FBI stat page and found the defininition, which includes aggravated assault. I believe aggravated assault can be minor, like an affray. So Dante or anyone else, I would like to see the source that says the FBI does not include this in violent crimes. My source and definition is below:
Definition
In the FBI?s Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) Program, violent crime is composed of four offenses: murder and nonnegligent manslaughter, forcible rape, robbery, and aggravated assault. Violent crimes are defined in the UCR Program as those offenses which involve force or threat of force.
http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2010/crime-in-the-u.s.-2010/violent-crime
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1196941/The-violent-country-Europe-Britain-worse-South-Africa-U-S.html
For me, it's all about statistical risk and not SCARY guns. Standard stat is how many per 100K. I try to get all my stats straight from the CDC and will provide them if you emotional guys want to discuss the stats.
I was anti gun during the Clinton years, but have become very pro gun lately. I feel lied to by the media and gov't. I could write a chapter on this, but will just list these things now:
1. I thought "assault rifles were automatics. They are not. Sydasti posted a something about automatics being legal. They are, but require huge background clearances and regulations. So what the gov't wants to outlaw is simply a semi auto hand gun with a rifle body. So they really want all semi auto's in the long run, so if you are a moderate you need to realize that.
2. All rifles, assault rifles included, only account for less than knife deaths (I thought it was less than 400 per year, but can't find that source right now and I do look for truth). That is so low statiscally.
3. Guns account for 26,000 deaths. True, but over 19000 are suicides. DId you know 22 vets kill themselves each day!! So we are a war machine country and our soldiers kill themselves- to me that is not a gun issue. I looked at the suicide rate of the US (11.8 according to this http://statehealthfacts.org/profileind.jsp?ind=667&cat=2&rgn=1) and UK (11.8 according to this http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2013/jan/22/suicide-numbers-rise-men) and they are relatively equal even though there are 19K gun suicides in this country.
http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/02/01/16811249-22-veterans-commit-suicide-each-day-va-report?lite
4.NRA talking point, but that doesn't mean it's not true. 75% of gun deaths are gang related, 90% in oakland. So it is tragic that our poor country has such a huge gang presence, but that doesn't mean it is statistically significant enough for me to give up my right. Motorcycles killed over 4800 in 2008, so if 75% of 8000 gun homicide (number is actually less than 8K) puts real gun violence for average citizens at 2000, but what the hell, lets go 4000. That's still less than motorcycle deaths, but again the cycle death stat is not enough for me to start yelling at super bikes and such. The number of racers hurt or killed at Isle of man every year is similar to a gun show. So you want to eliminate Isle of Man TT?
5. most of the young guys I know who are don't like gun rights have no kids or family. Let me tell you something, when you live in the country between gang related cities and are responsible for your kids and wife, you feel vulnerable. I never crashed on my GSXR and I don't plan on a gun accident (although statisticlally they are both low realities). That is an emotional arguement, but I'm still free enough to satisfy my vulnerable emotion.
6. I hate when gov't or management uses divide and conquer, especially when the stats aren't there. They want hand gun owners to turn on semi auto assault rifle owners and take away their rights. So for you gun haters, you will eventually get your way I believe. For you moderates who think the system is fair, I am starting to believe it is rigged and they fully intend to disarm all semi autos.
Woo, I expect more than a witty one word sentence from you on this!
The theory rational people, and Woo the NRA doesn't own this, is that guns prevent violent crimes because "criminals" don't know who is armed. Plus armed citizens can protect themselves. So since the UK has taken us back into their banking system and media, the "free press" likes to compare us to them. TO Gastro's video point, our 1.4/100000 crime rate is almost 4X lower than the UK's 4/100000. Of course the counter arguement, which Dante has also provided, is that violent crime is recorded differently. Now I do look for truth on both sides and have not found how the crime is recorded differently. The UK records "affrays" or all fights. I looked at the FBI stat page and found the defininition, which includes aggravated assault. I believe aggravated assault can be minor, like an affray. So Dante or anyone else, I would like to see the source that says the FBI does not include this in violent crimes. My source and definition is below:
Definition
In the FBI?s Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) Program, violent crime is composed of four offenses: murder and nonnegligent manslaughter, forcible rape, robbery, and aggravated assault. Violent crimes are defined in the UCR Program as those offenses which involve force or threat of force.
http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2010/crime-in-the-u.s.-2010/violent-crime
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1196941/The-violent-country-Europe-Britain-worse-South-Africa-U-S.html
For me, it's all about statistical risk and not SCARY guns. Standard stat is how many per 100K. I try to get all my stats straight from the CDC and will provide them if you emotional guys want to discuss the stats.
I was anti gun during the Clinton years, but have become very pro gun lately. I feel lied to by the media and gov't. I could write a chapter on this, but will just list these things now:
1. I thought "assault rifles were automatics. They are not. Sydasti posted a something about automatics being legal. They are, but require huge background clearances and regulations. So what the gov't wants to outlaw is simply a semi auto hand gun with a rifle body. So they really want all semi auto's in the long run, so if you are a moderate you need to realize that.
2. All rifles, assault rifles included, only account for less than knife deaths (I thought it was less than 400 per year, but can't find that source right now and I do look for truth). That is so low statiscally.
3. Guns account for 26,000 deaths. True, but over 19000 are suicides. DId you know 22 vets kill themselves each day!! So we are a war machine country and our soldiers kill themselves- to me that is not a gun issue. I looked at the suicide rate of the US (11.8 according to this http://statehealthfacts.org/profileind.jsp?ind=667&cat=2&rgn=1) and UK (11.8 according to this http://www.guardian.co.uk/society/2013/jan/22/suicide-numbers-rise-men) and they are relatively equal even though there are 19K gun suicides in this country.
http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/02/01/16811249-22-veterans-commit-suicide-each-day-va-report?lite
4.NRA talking point, but that doesn't mean it's not true. 75% of gun deaths are gang related, 90% in oakland. So it is tragic that our poor country has such a huge gang presence, but that doesn't mean it is statistically significant enough for me to give up my right. Motorcycles killed over 4800 in 2008, so if 75% of 8000 gun homicide (number is actually less than 8K) puts real gun violence for average citizens at 2000, but what the hell, lets go 4000. That's still less than motorcycle deaths, but again the cycle death stat is not enough for me to start yelling at super bikes and such. The number of racers hurt or killed at Isle of man every year is similar to a gun show. So you want to eliminate Isle of Man TT?
5. most of the young guys I know who are don't like gun rights have no kids or family. Let me tell you something, when you live in the country between gang related cities and are responsible for your kids and wife, you feel vulnerable. I never crashed on my GSXR and I don't plan on a gun accident (although statisticlally they are both low realities). That is an emotional arguement, but I'm still free enough to satisfy my vulnerable emotion.
6. I hate when gov't or management uses divide and conquer, especially when the stats aren't there. They want hand gun owners to turn on semi auto assault rifle owners and take away their rights. So for you gun haters, you will eventually get your way I believe. For you moderates who think the system is fair, I am starting to believe it is rigged and they fully intend to disarm all semi autos.
Woo, I expect more than a witty one word sentence from you on this!
Last edited:
where is the threshold, where the number of killed people would demand a limitation of any kind to your right to bear arms? 40.000? 50.000? serious question. when would you personally say: "man, now that is REALLY getting out of hand! we must do something about that!" ? i'd really like to know.
My right to own a gun for the purpose of lawful defense of self and others is not tied to the violent crime rate (which is near a 40 year low, btw). But statistically speaking, an increase in violent crime would mean a greater probability that I would need (or wish I had) a gun for that purpose of lawful defense.
Thank god this shooting was gang-related, I was feeling really sorry for the girl's family at having to deal with the tragedy of gun violence.
Then I found out that it was probably gang-related, and suddenly I don't have to feel bad anymore! I mean, calling something "gang-related" means it happens to other people, black or brown people living in an area where I don't.
*whew*
That was close, I thought I was actually developing a conscience for a moment there.
Then I found out that it was probably gang-related, and suddenly I don't have to feel bad anymore! I mean, calling something "gang-related" means it happens to other people, black or brown people living in an area where I don't.
*whew*
That was close, I thought I was actually developing a conscience for a moment there.
Btw, SPINTECK, I agree 100% on the whole "OMFG Assault Weapons!!!" bullsh!t. I'm far more concerned with handguns flooding the nation than I am about the once-per-year nutjob shooting with a rifle that has a "shoulder thingy". I also think that it detracts from aspects of the bill that might have a real impact like a magazine limit and universal background checks.
Also, I'm pretty sure that this was the graph you were looking for that shows that rifles kill fewer people than kives:
The difference, of course, is that I can outrun a knife....
Also, I'm pretty sure that this was the graph you were looking for that shows that rifles kill fewer people than kives:
The difference, of course, is that I can outrun a knife....
Anyone can do that. The question is can you outrun a person with a knife? Can your parents? Can your wife? Can your kids?
Dude, my kids can't outrun Depo-Provera, so that point is moot.
As for my wife or I outrunning a guy with a knife? Far more easily than either of us could outrun a guy with a gun. And no, I'm not getting her a gun to fight off said guy with a gun... I've seen her try to learn to drive a stick-shift, and let me just say that her hand-eye coordination isn't something that I'd want my life to depend on anytime soon.
i see no significant objection to possession of the currently available weapons, but i'd like to see appropriate training/qualification matched to both the weapon & persons who have access to it.
.50c musket? watch a u2b vid & call it good.
.308 w/ all the fixins? SSI bg check & ranger school qualification, to be renewed annually
.50c musket? watch a u2b vid & call it good.
.308 w/ all the fixins? SSI bg check & ranger school qualification, to be renewed annually
I thought the euros had this whole situation figured out.
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/28/world/europe/deadly-shooting-in-swiss-factory.html?_r=0
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/28/world/europe/deadly-shooting-in-swiss-factory.html?_r=0
I can prove I can outrun a 16 year old who just tried to steal shlt from me, tackle his ass to the ground and use zero penis compensators.
edit: in my underwear
Last edited:
So you used the penis compensators OUTSIDE of your underwear?
Call me. I grew up in redneck-ville and have an m-14 legally registered in my name. I never grew up misunderstanding the difference between an automatic and semi-automatic firearm. And that doesn't mean for a second that the NRA hasn't made this country a more dangerous place......both in a home environment, and in the culture that allows and fosters morons with firepower. The media lights its hair on fire because that's their job. But what happens here doesn't happen in other places. There's a reason for that.Woo, I expect more than a witty one word sentence from you on this!
Last edited:
That's the whole point. Divert attention.
Gun rally in my town yesterday (the fair capital of Noo Yawk), estimated at 5-10K people:
Last edited:
You know, I'd almost blocked out the fact that upstate NY even existed and now you remind me....
Glad to see that they've started allowing women into these rallies, although it looks like only 4 got the message?
edit: Although maybe I was mistaken?
edit 2: Dammit, that was an EARLIER gun rally? FML....
Glad to see that they've started allowing women into these rallies, although it looks like only 4 got the message?
edit: Although maybe I was mistaken?
edit 2: Dammit, that was an EARLIER gun rally? FML....
Last edited:
Regardless of a few token 'rifle holders', it was a sea of camo wrapped white faces.
EDIT: one of the NRA big cheeses attended as well.
EDIT: one of the NRA big cheeses attended as well.
Last edited:
Ahh culture. So many bright young people with their own ideas there to express them.
still rather have them living in my 'hood than these:
http://www.zombietime.com/hall_of_shame/
the crazies you know...
http://www.zombietime.com/hall_of_shame/
the crazies you know...
CSB: i too chased dude down a street in my skivvies who tried to break in my house (middle of the night; didn't catch him, but i did smell poo after 300yds)
also, 'glock' rhymes with 'cock'
look it up
I am constantly amazed by the sh*t you seem to know about on the internet.
*edit: I kind of like this one.
Is the anarchist book mobile going to be coming to our part of the world any time soon?
Last edited:
This is my favorite!I kind of like this one.
Makes my brain feel funny.
To be fair women are terrible shots, so they may have a point.
Totally want to hold a sign there that says "If you need more than 7 bullets, try shooting lessons instead of a larger magazine".
edit: What's funny is that the NY law incorporates demands from both sides - strengthening the assault weapons ban, limiting clips (liberals) and includes a provision for mental health problems to show up on a background check and increased penalties for using guns in crimes (both are pretty solidly conservative ideas).
It's also funny that 7rd clips apparently don't exist, although there are 5rd ones specifically made for hunting restrictions.
Last edited:
So many people's perception of a gun incident is what they see in a movie, expending hundreds of rounds, holding an AR with one hand, shooting someone at 100 feet with an uzi, etc. Handguns are for close range, probably the distance of a room or less than 100'. If it's more than 100', you can probably get to safety and don't have to force yourself into a more dangerous situation. I think we mentioned earlier in this thread how so many people can't even hit a target that is 15 or 20 feet away. This is totally realistic for a large part of the population, they'll squeeze the gun as hard as they can, pull it way over in the direction they are pulling the trigger from, and probably miss and send rounds flying. If they need more than 7 rounds, those are more rounds that will be flying into the next house. Better to have a .357 with 5 rounds and wait until he is real close. You won't care about the recoil when you are so pumped up on adrenaline you are scared of dying, plus a real nice guy would train his wife to shoot .38s and switch them for .357s when she's not looking 
at first read i was all, "how do you shoot lessons?"
I'm so quick, I wrestled mine to the ground, took two punches in the head from his buddy (funny what skateboarding for two decades does to your perception of 'ouch'), and dry humped him until the cops showed up.
I win. Of course with the smell de' peu in the air, maybe you made the right call.
Last edited:
Oh, I don't know, maybe this?
thankfully NY's Supreme Court is calling the dictator, i mean governor, out on his gun laws that took almost no time to pass. he has until 4/29 to prove his "sweeping gun laws" are constitutional.
Biden's new home security tips: just shoot through the door
Biden's new home security tips: just shoot through the door
http://www.usnews.com/news/articles/2013/02/28/biden-advises-shooting-shotgun-through-door
THis is the most intelligent and thoughtful question when it comes to life and policy making. The only thing to watch out for is that the number can be distorted by including incidents to inflate the number. For moderate people who try to be realistic, this is the number to justify any rational arguement. You still won't make headway with the two extremes such as, "if we can save just on life, we must take away this freedom" or the other side who believes if half the people die, we still have to keep our guns in the name of our founding fathers.
Obviously I'm avoiding to answer this question because the truth is Idon't know what number I would be confortable with. What would the number be if gang incidents were taken out?? I know car numbers are hight, and they don't include gang numbers- so I would definitely fight to keep that freedom as long as it was below automotive numbers.
You can get all these numbers here and more. If you want to know how many kids are killed metro areas on bikes, you can get it. I ran all kinds of reports out of curiousity, but you can't share it because the person looking at it needs to agree to some legal acknowledgement before you use it.
http://wonder.cdc.gov/ucd-icd10.html
To use the CDS, the best way is to pick the year, then go down to part 6 and bullet the "intent and mechanism" category , and make sure stat is set to 100k in section 7. The section 6 is the one you can mess around with, but you can also base it on population density, age and other things, all of which make people our age out in the burbs even lower gun stats
Gang related shootings don't minimize the tragedy, but they probably would have happened anyway with illegal, legal, or straw guns. THere is an entire underground war w/soldiers fighting over territories for drugs and such. IF 75 percent of gun violence is gang related, why aren't gangs in the mainstream news more?? SO if this violence would most likely happen w/out regulation (and some argue it would happen less, but I doubt it and there is no way to prove it. Even if you compare it to islands like britain and australia), why should honest citizens have any rights taken away?
Last edited:
This is the data I was looking. Even you guys agains guns should ask if gun violence has gone down the last 5 years, why does the gov't want to take some away and limit that freedom? Again, I start feeling lied to by the media and gov't, and to me that is much worse than the current gun numbers.Btw, SPINTECK, I agree 100% on the whole "OMFG Assault Weapons!!!" bullsh!t. I'm far more concerned with handguns flooding the nation than I am about the once-per-year nutjob shooting with a rifle that has a "shoulder thingy". I also think that it detracts from aspects of the bill that might have a real impact like a magazine limit and universal background checks.
Also, I'm pretty sure that this was the graph you were looking for that shows that rifles kill fewer people than kives:
The difference, of course, is that I can outrun a knife....
http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2010/crime-in-the-u.s.-2010/tables/10shrtbl08.xls
I wouldn't mind calling and catching up. We just had baby boy number 4, so my life is crazy. The NRA does not represent all gun owners. It is a lobby group like everyone else. Every industry does it (oil, pharm, monsanto, smoking, military, automotive- why don't we have a movement for back-up cameras?? Backing over kids happen much more and kill more than kids than guns) but you know all this.
Gun Owners of America is a much more rational and data driven group. Their website has a ton of gun facts all with references. The NRA may have even been taken over from the inside, because the logic is the NRA is the face of American gun ownership, so the uglier that face looks the worse the general public views guns owners. http://gunowners.org/
What "freedom" is the government taking away again? Even the "OMFG NAZI SOCIALISM!!?!?!!" New York law is limited: "New measures included additional restrictions on assault weapons, reducing the maximum allowed magazine capacity from ten rounds to seven rounds, background checks on almost all gun sales including private sales, additional requirements for reporting of persons with mental health issues, and increased penalties for certain gun crimes."
Are you claiming that the government is taking away FREEDOM® by requiring you to do a background check on that drug dealer you're about to sell your just-purchased 38-special to? Oh, the horror....
Right, "data-driven" like this?
Followed up with the actual truth about the "poll" they did:
So they polled their own membership and are extrapolating that to the country at large. And you trust these guys over "the media", who you think is lying to you? Really?