What can we as individuals or a group do about gun violence? - Page 54
Close
Login to Your Account
Page 54 of 70 FirstFirst ... 444525354555664 ... LastLast
Results 1,061 to 1,080 of 1393
  1. #1061
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Eastern Massachusetts, USA
    Posts
    3,912
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    4282
    Likes (Received)
    4130

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Fal Grunt View Post
    Your doing an excellent job of this. Instead of answering legitimate questions, you mock. Instead of participating in discussion you insult. Instead of listening to anything you claim "radical" "extremist".

    You and Scottl have polls that show the opposite of each other, yet he takes the time to actually discuss and reference the information in his. You mock and insult him. For someone (myself) who is interested to hear what proposals the left have for solving our current societal issues with firearms, you are making a terrible case.

    Something does need to change, whether with our society or with our laws. So far from what I see, expanding mental health resources seems to be the best option. I know this because I have talked to a number of people who are willing to have rational conversations about the options. You seem to want to crucify the right and gun owners, and if you have a rational argument your making a horrible case at it. So then I question whether you are one of these political internet trolls that the news is always talking about.

    If your hope is to just insult people and drive them further apart, you are doing a fantastic job. If your attempt is to make a rational discussion to inform people, you are doing a terrible job. If scottl is a right wing extremist, based on your posts it seems to make you out to be a left wing extremist. A perfect case study of the current political affairs in our country.
    They HAVE TO mock, insult and ridicule because their positions are based on emotion rather than logic and reason. None of their arguments or claims can withstand close scrutiny which is why they try to distract with this sideshow. It's called confrontational politics and the left has always excelled at it while those on the other side were usually helpless in the face of it - until now.

    He says "do the math" and then ignores the real math which is that they are proposing further serious infringements on millions of law abiding citizens in hopes that they MIGHT catch a few of these very rare and elusive mass murderers. And they often ARE elusive. More than a few passed existing background checks because there was nothing in their past that would "red flag" them. After the fact everyone says "should have seen this coming" but as we all know hindsight has perfect accuracy whereas predicting future human behavior is extreme;y difficult. Look at the difficulty in catching serial killers. Despite years of practice in behavioral profiling and huge teams assigned to cases they often can't catch them until they make a mistake. Now they would have us believe they can pick one or two young men out of many thousands using "pre-crime" analytics.

    Are there people who shouldn't have access to firearms? ABSOLUTELY, but I'll quote JPFO founder Aaron Zelman, who has stated my feelings exactly.

    "People too dangerous to have their own firearms are too dangerous to be left out on the street by themselves."


    And "Universal Background Checks"? As they well know, this concept is not really possible unless they also have universal gun registration, which is their real goal. They know full well that it is impossible to regulate private transfers unless they know what each person already owns. And they also know that even if they do pass registration laws noncompliance will be large enough to leave a large pool of unregistered guns, but they don't care. The main goal is to further hem in the law-abiding so they are easier to control.

  2. Likes Yan Wo, mhajicek, john worden liked this post
  3. #1062
    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Country
    UNITED KINGDOM
    Posts
    1,698
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    787

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 9100 View Post
    I was referring to the citizen soldiers. Most are gone now.
    Absolutely agree with you on every one of these points.

    But at the same time, I am sure you have noticed that there is a propaganda effort to spread that blanket of heroism to people who are totally undeserving. Since 1945, no wars have been "fought for our freedom". Every one of them has been a lie. The people in the miltary today are not "citizen soldiers", they are either goons or people who economically have very limited opportunities. The uses that those dried-up old assholes in Washington put the military to are even worse. The whole thing is disgusting, immoral, unethical, and dishonest. The military is nothng but a bunch of thugs for the gangsters in Washington.

    Thank you for your service my ass. Eat shit and die is more like it.

    Quote Originally Posted by Scottl View Post
    It's called confrontational politics and the left has always excelled at it while those on the other side were usually helpless in the face of it - until now.
    Disagree with this part, senor. The thugs and nazis have been very effective as well, for decades. Trump didn't invent the "pocahontas" type of slur. The right, during vietnam, was even better at "confrontational politics." Banging the drum, waving the bloody shirt, defaming anyone who has a different opinion, the right does that equally well.

    Both sides are equal opportunity assholes

    One thing you mentioned, about governments fearing an armed population (and I assume that makes them behave better.) Santa Cruz Mike once said to me, "The difference is, the people of the US fear the government while the government of China fears the people." I think he was right.

    What does that say ?

  4. #1063
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Location
    Walla Walla Wine and Wild Turkey
    Posts
    4,482
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    1
    Likes (Received)
    247

    Default

    Sometimes the propaganda lets the truth slip by.
    The photos here show the heroes of Austria, displaying the weapons they say they are after, but are sitting on a mountain of rifles and shotguns they are really after.
    Australia confiscated 650,000 guns. Murders and suicides plummeted. - Vox

  5. Likes Scottl liked this post
  6. #1064
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Eastern Massachusetts, USA
    Posts
    3,912
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    4282
    Likes (Received)
    4130

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by donie View Post
    Sometimes the propaganda lets the truth slip by.
    The photos here show the heroes of Austria, displaying the weapons they say they are after, but are sitting on a mountain of rifles and shotguns they are really after.
    Australia confiscated 650,000 guns. Murders and suicides plummeted. - Vox
    Yes, and if you look closely at the photo most of them seem to be the type of sporting arms that are common in the USA and have been for years. I spot what appears to be an old Browning "humpback" shotgun and quite a few more modern types. Almost nothing there looks "tactical" and when politicians praise an Australian type buyback this is what they really mean; outlaw many common types of guns and demand they be turned in, then impose strict tests for the remaining gun owners making them prove "need".

    Estimates of the compliance rate (guns turned in vs total guns owned) range from roughly 20 percent to 34 percent. Since they got at best one third of the existing stock of guns in Australia, and likely most of those from the most inoffensive members of society, calling it a success smacks of hubris.

    And what is the compliance rate elsewhere for laws either banning or requiring registration of existing firearms? Estimates of compliance with New York's SAFE act are about 4-5% and in California estimated at 3% with projections it won't rise above 10%. In Canada compliance with mandatory long gun registration was so low they eventually passed new legislation (Bill C-19) to abolish the long gun registry. In New Zealand the most optimistic estimates of compliance with the new gun confiscation program is 13-20%.

    Someone should point these figures out to people like "Bozo" O'Rourke and ask them just how successful they think THEIR schemes would be.

  7. Likes john worden liked this post
  8. #1065
    Join Date
    Nov 2013
    Location
    Eastern Massachusetts, USA
    Posts
    3,912
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    4282
    Likes (Received)
    4130

    Default

    And one I missed. Estimates of noncompliance with Connecticut's law requiring the registration of "assault weapons" and “high capacity magazines” were equally low.

    Not surprising when according to the editor of BearingArms.com "Historically speaking, 90-percent or more of those required to comply with gun registration laws in the U.S. refuse to do so".

  9. Likes john worden liked this post
  10. #1066
    Join Date
    May 2017
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Minnesota
    Posts
    858
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    964
    Likes (Received)
    510

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gustafson View Post
    Laughable is you not knowing how polls work

    how did you think they work?
    I wonder what the correlation is between people who will put up with BS phone interviews and people who will put up with BS background checks.

    I wonder what the correlation is between people who think it's right to exert their will and control over others and people who will falsely claim to be a member of the opposition to skew the results.

  11. #1067
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    People's Republic
    Posts
    2,924
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    212
    Likes (Received)
    2039

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mram10 View Post
    I like to debate and hear the other side, yet you are losing credibility by ignoring the statistics and simple logic. This is normal for anti gun types. A decade of polls from large cities that are perhaps left leaning makes no difference. We have the second along with the natural right to defend ourselves. If the left cares about gun violence, they would bring back the death penalty. Considering violent offenders recidivism rates, we would instantly erase a minimum of 50% of the violent crime in America. That’s a big dent.
    Ignoring statistics?

    Like dozens of polls over a decade that say the same thing?
    Ignoring any facts you disagree with is normal for right wing types

    The death penalty has not , nor has it ever, reduced gun violence

    ever

    among the 25 states with the highest murder rate, 20 have the death penalty. These include Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, South Carolina, Alabama, Delaware, Nevada, Tennessee, Arkansas, Georgia, Oklahoma, Indiana, Florida, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, California, Texas, Kentucky, Virginia and Arizona). Five states (Maryland, Alaska, Illinois, Michigan and New Mexico) also have high murder rates, but not the death penalty.

    Among the 25 states with low murder rates, 11 have the death penalty (Kansas, Ohio, South Dakota, Montana, Colorado, Washington, Wyoming, Oregon, Idaho, Utah, New Hampshire). The other 14 states with low murder rates don’t have the death penalty. They include Wisconsin, New Jersey, West Virginia, Connecticut, Nebraska, New York, North Dakota, Rhode Island, Minnesota, Iowa, Massachusetts, Maine, Vermont and Hawaii.

    For those keeping score, these results are far higher than what an expected model would show. Having the death penalty means you’re more likely to be a state with a high murder rate as well, just as states which have eliminated the death penalty are, more likely than not, to have abolished the practice, or never ratified it.

    It is you who deny facts

  12. #1068
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    People's Republic
    Posts
    2,924
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    212
    Likes (Received)
    2039

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by mhajicek View Post
    I wonder what the correlation is between people who will put up with BS phone interviews and people who will put up with BS background checks.

    I wonder what the correlation is between people who think it's right to exert their will and control over others and people who will falsely claim to be a member of the opposition to skew the results.
    And science is magic and everyone lies so everything is fake

  13. #1069
    Join Date
    Dec 2017
    Country
    UNITED STATES
    State/Province
    Idaho
    Posts
    355
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    98
    Likes (Received)
    77

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gustafson View Post
    Ignoring statistics?

    Like dozens of polls over a decade that say the same thing?
    Ignoring any facts you disagree with is normal for right wing types

    The death penalty has not , nor has it ever, reduced gun violence

    ever

    among the 25 states with the highest murder rate, 20 have the death penalty. These include Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, South Carolina, Alabama, Delaware, Nevada, Tennessee, Arkansas, Georgia, Oklahoma, Indiana, Florida, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, California, Texas, Kentucky, Virginia and Arizona). Five states (Maryland, Alaska, Illinois, Michigan and New Mexico) also have high murder rates, but not the death penalty.

    Among the 25 states with low murder rates, 11 have the death penalty (Kansas, Ohio, South Dakota, Montana, Colorado, Washington, Wyoming, Oregon, Idaho, Utah, New Hampshire). The other 14 states with low murder rates don’t have the death penalty. They include Wisconsin, New Jersey, West Virginia, Connecticut, Nebraska, New York, North Dakota, Rhode Island, Minnesota, Iowa, Massachusetts, Maine, Vermont and Hawaii.

    For those keeping score, these results are far higher than what an expected model would show. Having the death penalty means you’re more likely to be a state with a high murder rate as well, just as states which have eliminated the death penalty are, more likely than not, to have abolished the practice, or never ratified it.

    It is you who deny facts
    I am looking at stats. When has the death penalty been enforced to a degree that would make a difference? Since 1976, states other than Texas have executed less than 1000 criminals total. Is that enough to make a difference? Try an automatic death penalty for murder and see what the numbers do. Stats alone tell you there would be half the murders based on recidivism rates. Your turn

  14. #1070
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    People's Republic
    Posts
    2,924
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    212
    Likes (Received)
    2039

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Mram10 View Post
    I am looking at stats. When has the death penalty been enforced to a degree that would make a difference? Since 1976, states other than Texas have executed less than 1000 criminals total. Is that enough to make a difference? Try an automatic death penalty for murder and see what the numbers do. Stats alone tell you there would be half the murders based on recidivism rates. Your turn
    Oh, wait, wait, now you are talking about enforcement

    how very tedious of you

    of the top 1/3 [17] states in murder rate, 13 have the death penalty

    you have no point

  15. #1071
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    California, Central Coast
    Posts
    3,201
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    2132
    Likes (Received)
    1252

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gustafson View Post
    And science is magic and everyone lies so everything is fake
    Did you just admit to being a fake?

  16. #1072
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    People's Republic
    Posts
    2,924
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    212
    Likes (Received)
    2039

    Default

    And 10 of the top 17 least restrictive gun law states are above the median murder rate

    And the 7 that are not, yeah, no one lives there, 5 are in the bottom 10 as far as density

  17. #1073
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    People's Republic
    Posts
    2,924
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    212
    Likes (Received)
    2039

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Rob F. View Post
    Did you just admit to being a fake?
    seek professional help

  18. #1074
    Join Date
    Sep 2002
    Location
    People's Republic
    Posts
    2,924
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    212
    Likes (Received)
    2039

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Fal Grunt View Post
    Your doing an excellent job of this. Instead of answering legitimate questions, you mock. Instead of participating in discussion you insult. Instead of listening to anything you claim "radical" "extremist".

    You and Scottl have polls that show the opposite of each other, yet he takes the time to actually discuss and reference the information in his. You mock and insult him. For someone (myself) who is interested to hear what proposals the left have for solving our current societal issues with firearms, you are making a terrible case.

    Something does need to change, whether with our society or with our laws. So far from what I see, expanding mental health resources seems to be the best option. I know this because I have talked to a number of people who are willing to have rational conversations about the options. You seem to want to crucify the right and gun owners, and if you have a rational argument your making a horrible case at it. So then I question whether you are one of these political internet trolls that the news is always talking about.

    If your hope is to just insult people and drive them further apart, you are doing a fantastic job. If your attempt is to make a rational discussion to inform people, you are doing a terrible job. If scottl is a right wing extremist, based on your posts it seems to make you out to be a left wing extremist. A perfect case study of the current political affairs in our country.
    He did no such thing

    he raised spurious objections to polls with no backup, or any alternatve

    You claim to be interested, go figure it out

    I mock the foolish who read only right wing conspiracy theories and NRA newsletters and think themselves informed

    the radical extremists make up a tiny minority of gun owners, and it is the radicals who seek to drive people apart

    I list statistics, he lists doubts

    I have on multiple occasions listed the things I have agreed with gun owners on

    Scott?

    Zero

    you read into it according to your bias, just don't try to pretend to be a neutral party

  19. #1075
    Join Date
    Feb 2004
    Location
    peekskill, NY
    Posts
    24,182
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    4391

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Fal Grunt View Post
    When the NFA act was passed in 1932, it had two primary purposes in my opinion. First and foremost was to obstruct the common person from owning "machine guns". This was done by the $200 stamp tax, that put it out of reach from the common person. Second, this was not passed under the guise of gun control, it was, simply put, a desperate attempt to find something that would stick in a court of law against "gangsters". Remember, this was a time that criminals were better equipped than our police forces.
    Evidently Clyde Barrow and company used to raid armories and would carry off BARs. So yes, the local law with six shooters
    and lever guns were somewhat outgunned.

  20. #1076
    Join Date
    Aug 2010
    Location
    Medina OH
    Posts
    1,674
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    90
    Likes (Received)
    672

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by gustafson View Post
    He did no such thing

    he raised spurious objections to polls with no backup, or any alternatve

    You claim to be interested, go figure it out

    I mock the foolish who read only right wing conspiracy theories and NRA newsletters and think themselves informed

    the radical extremists make up a tiny minority of gun owners, and it is the radicals who seek to drive people apart

    I list statistics, he lists doubts

    I have on multiple occasions listed the things I have agreed with gun owners on

    Scott?

    Zero

    you read into it according to your bias, just don't try to pretend to be a neutral party
    I'll start at the end and loop back around to the beginning. We all live our lives according to our bias, that is a fact that we should both be able to agree on. However, I have never pretended to be a neutral party, and that is why I cannot understand how you are acting towards others. With the way you talk and respond, you seem to have no desire to change anyone's mind, or influence anyones decisions. You want me to "go figure it out", and yet do not answer any of my questions.

    I am not a neutral party, I have a vested interest in what happens. I would wager the effects may have a greater impact on me, either way. Gun control or no gun control, the consequences of both directly impact me. That is why I have been taking so much time to look at this subject. That is why I have taken my time to make appointments with law enforcement to talk about what their opinions are. I have met with a director in our county health department to ask questions about mental health improvements. That is why when you present something I examine it. CRITICALLY. Just like what anyone else posts.

    Lets look at the last page. In post 1054 you posted polls, in 1055 Scottl responded. Intelligently, questioning the validity of the polls. You responded "many polls, over a decade .... yawn". Both of you posted polls by politically minded and biased organizations. And yet your post qualifies as facts and statistics, his are spurious and doubts. You are the one being radical, for an organization driven on "open and accepting" you are being any BUT open and accepting.

    I have stated on numerous occasions, SOMETHING NEEDS TO CHANGE. You are, very pointedly, fixed on gun control. Yet the poll you posted says the respondents think mental health would be more effective. So I ask you why gun control over mental health?

    Quote Originally Posted by gustafson View Post
    the radical extremists make up a tiny minority of gun owners, and it is the radicals who seek to drive people apart
    You are the one driving people apart... you are the one insulting and mocking.

    If you want to discuss what we can do to stop gun violence, I am listening.

  21. Likes Yan Wo, tdmidget, CAMasochism, mhajicek liked this post
  22. #1077
    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Country
    UNITED KINGDOM
    Posts
    1,698
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    787

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by jim rozen View Post
    Evidently Clyde Barrow and company used to raid armories and would carry off BARs. So yes, the local law with six shooters and lever guns were somewhat outgunned.
    The other big difference was, Bonnie and Clyde had balls. Without a snitch in their group they'd still be drivin' down them dirt roads in their V8 Ford. Not a Toyota, a FORD !

    And Bonnie, who was like five feet tall and weighed ninety-seven pounds, pulled the trigger on that BAR with the best of 'em ... yay Bonnie ! you go, girl ! Female empowerment !

  23. #1078
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Webster Groves, MO
    Posts
    7,114
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    1780
    Likes (Received)
    3214

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by EmanuelGoldstein View Post
    And Bonnie, who was like five feet tall and weighed ninety-seven pounds, pulled the trigger on that BAR with the best of 'em ... yay Bonnie ! you go, girl ! Female empowerment !
    Actually, those who were there said Bonnie loaded while others did the shooting.

    Bill

  24. #1079
    Join Date
    Apr 2018
    Country
    UNITED KINGDOM
    Posts
    1,698
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    0
    Likes (Received)
    787

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 9100 View Post
    Actually, those who were there said Bonnie loaded while others did the shooting.
    Except in one case, where she definitely laid down a barrage of covering fire. I don't think she ever shot anyone, though.

    Those guys had guts

  25. #1080
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    West Coast, USA
    Posts
    7,548
    Post Thanks / Like
    Likes (Given)
    465
    Likes (Received)
    5015

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by EmanuelGoldstein View Post
    . . .

    Those guys had guts
    Or maybe just too sociopathic, stupidly overestimating themselves, or just got themselves in too deep to do anything other than keep shooting? Hard for me to see it as courage.

  26. Likes tdmidget, Fal Grunt, gustafson liked this post

Tags for this Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •