Mass shooting at Oregon college: 15+ dead...

Page 13 of 14 [ 219 posts ]  Go to page Previous  1 ... 10, 11, 12, 13, 14  Next

Lukeda420
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Jul 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,640
Location: Chicago suburbs.

13 Oct 2015, 3:28 pm

Dox47

Yeah I apologize, that comment wasn't called for. But I stand by the rest. I just made the claim that some people get ripped off and others make a lot of money by doing it.

I agree with a lot of your bottom statement but I still don't think gun laws should be ignored.



Dox47
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Jan 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,671
Location: Seattle

13 Oct 2015, 3:37 pm

timtowdi wrote:
Sorry, man, there just isn't a way to BS away from this graph's badness.

It's a very simple graph that's the equivalent of standing on your head with night-vision goggles and announcing that the world is upside-down, monochrome, and glowy. Also, if you're going to wave BS in my face by making it giant, then yes, I will likely notice it preferentially.


I hear an awful lot of opinion without anything to back it up besides you saying so, which frankly isn't very convincing.

timtowdi wrote:
It wants to talk about gun homicides while ignoring gun suicides, far and away the largest cause of gun death.


I must have missed the part where this thread was dedicated to discussing suicide, last I checked it was about homicide pretty exclusively.

timtowdi wrote:
It wants to pretend that the rise in gun ownership is responsible for the drop in gun homicide since 1993, when in fact it's well-known that all crime has dropped precipitously since 1993, and that *nobody knows why*. Not because people are standing around shrugging, but because after a lot of study, the people who study these things are forced to admit that they really do not know why crime across the board is down. They have some guesses. Gun proliferation as a reason is on the map only for gun rights activists.


You can project all you want, but I clearly explained that my reasoning in posting the graph was to demonstrate to another poster who was inordinately concerned with the number of guns in America that the number didn't correlate with the crime rate, any other interpretation is coming straight from your own mind. You do actually read what other people write before responding, right?

timtowdi wrote:
It wants to decontextualize America and help you forget that we have, next to the rest of the world, a positively obscene gun death rate, and that something is clearly wrong in what we're doing. Again, not an inactive subject of study.


Again, projection, and irrelevant besides, as we're not talking about the rest of the world. Further, your insistence on focusing only on gun violence and not total violence suggests that you're more interested in the guns than saving lives, an impression that is only strengthened by the rest of your post.

timtowdi wrote:
I'm not looking at the graph right now, because this is the last post I'll make on the subject, but I would guess that the scale is also truncated mightily so that this homicide-rate drop looks precipitious when in fact it's not, and that it's way out of proportion to the opposing scale, the one in gun ownership. And that if you rectified that situation the picture would look very different.


So, you think the graph is wrong, but you're above actually confirming your belief, and we should just take your word for it?

timtowdi wrote:
So yeah, distortion and cherrypicking of facts by an interested party to promote a preferred view in a simplistic, highly memorable manner? That's pretty much the textbook definition of propaganda.


Sounds like an accurate summary of this post of yours, actually.

timtowdi wrote:
Okay, I have a life to go live. Enjoy turning yourself into a pretzel to defend something indefensible. I think the political reality is that your time's just up on this issue, anyhow.


Ahh yes, the "argument from 'my opponent is probably a loser living in his parents basement', drop the mike" strategy, favored by people with strong opinions who aren't up to backing them up when challenged.


_________________
Murum Aries Attigit


Dox47
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Jan 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,671
Location: Seattle

13 Oct 2015, 3:45 pm

Lukeda420 wrote:
Dox47

Yeah I apologize, that comment wasn't called for.


Thank you, I'm really trying to keep this civil this time, as opposed to the river of snark that these threads usually devolve into.

Lukeda420 wrote:
I agree with a lot of your bottom statement but I still don't think gun laws should be ignored.


The issue is that the anti-gun people can't ever make a convincing case as to the efficacy of their pet laws, and the pro-gun people aren't inclined to trust them not to ratchet up the restrictions when they don't work as expected, as has happened in other countries. The contempt with which gun owners are treated by the anti-gun people doesn't help either, as can be seen by perusing any liberal website (I prefer Salon myself), or this website for that matter.


_________________
Murum Aries Attigit


Dox47
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Jan 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,671
Location: Seattle

13 Oct 2015, 3:52 pm

luan78zao wrote:
Most Americans freely admit to knowing little about the rest of the world, and for that they are derided as ignorant and insular. But between Hollywood shoot-em-ups and the international media, most of which is somewhere to the left of the Daily Worker, many foreigners have an image of life in the US which bears little resemblance to reality.


I think you're right on this one, my experience on WP over the years has included a lot of Brits and Aussies in particular who seem to think that life in America is some sort of post-apocalyptic horror show rather than the rather pedestrian experience it actually is, and cannot be dissuaded from this view. As to what the average American knows about the rest of the world, I put most of that down to knowledge prioritization, as a lot of that info just isn't relevant to day to day life, and if it suddenly pops up, Google is but a smartphone away.


_________________
Murum Aries Attigit


Lukeda420
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Jul 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,640
Location: Chicago suburbs.

13 Oct 2015, 3:57 pm

Dox47
Don't worry about the anti-gun people they are on the fringe. The majority as I said are not anti-gun they just support certain regulations. Talk to them. This is why I don't usually participate in these conversations. It always comes back to "the anti-gun people" or "they're going to take are guns." It's repetitive.



Dox47
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Jan 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,671
Location: Seattle

13 Oct 2015, 4:16 pm

Lukeda420 wrote:
Nobody proposing legislation are trying to ban scary looking weapons. The most common proposals I have heard is, make sure all buyers go through background checks even at gun shows and banning high capacity magazines that allow the shooter to get thirty rounds of before they have to reload. Some say we should also ban assault rifles and weapons made specifically for military use.


Alex already pointed out the contradiction concerning "assault weapons", which are just modern looking semi-auto rifles that are very seldom used in crime, but the other stuff is questionable at best too, as a negligible number of criminals get their weapons at gun shows, and extended magazines rarely factor into crime. To me, these are just further examples of the anti-gun people being ignorant about guns and refusing to educate themselves, and that's the charitable explanation that assumes they're acting in good faith and not deliberately trying to ease the country into much more restrictive laws.

Lukeda420 wrote:
This is not a case of both sides being equal either. The vast majority of people pushing for further gun control actually support the individual right to own a gun.


Ahh, but the devil is in the details, as many of these people, when pressed, will clarify that when they say people have a right to own guns, they mean hunting rifles and such, not pistols or modern rifles or other commonly owned firearms.

Lukeda420 wrote:
It's groups like Gun Owners of America that are pushing the paranoid fantasy that the government is coming for your guns and the NRA is just a front for gun manufactures. The NRA poses as a gun owners group but one of their main purpose is to prevent any law from being passed that would hurt gun sales.


And you know this because? You read it somewhere? I have actual firsthand experience with these groups, they're driven by the interests of their members, not some cabal of firearms manufacturers, who incidentally are not exactly rolling in cash. You know how the NRA twists arms? It's not with money, they don't actually spend all that much, but rather with their influence in the gun owning community, influence that extends beyond their membership rolls. Other lobbyists can cajole with money, the NRA uses the massive number of votes it can swing by getting the word out about a candidates pro or anti gun views, which is how politics is supposed to work, right?

Lukeda420 wrote:
This constant talk about a gun ban is paralyzing the conversation because to some any gun control law is just a slippery slope to a gun free tyranny.


You know that quote about those not knowing history being doomed to repeat it? Gun owners know it very well, and we know our history very well too; we're still trying to undo the damage of decades of appeasing the anti-gun people, and that's not a lesson we're going unlearn.

Lukeda420 wrote:
If someone is trying to ban all guns, they are on the fringe of the conversation. Also if someone is going to oppose any law regarding guns then they are on the fringe. Both people should be ignored. There are too many things the majority if people agree on to waste time arguing with the fringes.


You know what the majority of the people are? Uninformed and prone to flights of emotion, which is why the Founders out certain rights beyond their reach barring incredible amounts of effort, gun rights being one of those things.


_________________
Murum Aries Attigit


Dox47
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 28 Jan 2008
Gender: Male
Posts: 9,671
Location: Seattle

13 Oct 2015, 4:21 pm

Lukeda420 wrote:
Dox47
Don't worry about the anti-gun people they are on the fringe. The majority as I said are not anti-gun they just support certain regulations. Talk to them. This is why I don't usually participate in these conversations. It always comes back to "the anti-gun people" or "they're going to take are guns." It's repetitive.


You assume I don't talk to those people? I live in Seattle, I used to be one of those people who supported "reasonable" restrictions on firearms, until I actually educated myself on the subject and realized how much of what I knew about guns was wrong. Like I said, most people are completely ignorant on firearms, and most of their ideas about regulating them are complete rubbish when examined critically; what does it matter if they explicitly identify as anti gun or not if their ideas are wrong?


_________________
Murum Aries Attigit


cyberdad
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 21 Feb 2011
Age: 53
Gender: Male
Posts: 16,588

14 Oct 2015, 1:24 am

Lukeda420 wrote:
Dox47
Don't worry about the anti-gun people they are on the fringe. .

How is being anti-gun on the fringe?
The literature is fairly clear that gun culture is associated with aggression and people who use guns are more likely to be aggressive or violent
http://www.psmag.com/health-and-behavio ... -with-guns

Lukeda420 wrote:
This is why I don't usually participate in these conversations. It always comes back to "the anti-gun people" or "they're going to take are guns." It's repetitive.


On the flip side the gun lobby seem to conveniently ignore the data...



Raptor
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Mar 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,694
Location: Southeast U.S.A.

14 Oct 2015, 2:07 am

cyberdad wrote:
Lukeda420 wrote:
Dox47
Don't worry about the anti-gun people they are on the fringe. .

How is being anti-gun on the fringe?
The literature is fairly clear that gun culture is associated with aggression and people who use guns are more likely to be aggressive or violent
http://www.psmag.com/health-and-behavio ... -with-guns.

How many gun owners have you actually known?

cyberdad wrote:
Lukeda420 wrote:
This is why I don't usually participate in these conversations. It always comes back to "the anti-gun people" or "they're going to take are guns." It's repetitive.


On the flip side the gun lobby seem to conveniently ignore the data...

You ignore ours and we ignore yours.


_________________
“Liberals claim to want to give a hearing to other views, but then are shocked and offended to discover that there are other views.”
- William F. Buckley


Raptor
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Mar 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,694
Location: Southeast U.S.A.

14 Oct 2015, 2:24 am

envirozentinel wrote:
I would concur. Relative to the rest of the West, it is high. But Raptor likes to have his fun by playing devil's advocate!

I am the devil. :twisted:


_________________
“Liberals claim to want to give a hearing to other views, but then are shocked and offended to discover that there are other views.”
- William F. Buckley


Lukeda420
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 31 Jul 2014
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,640
Location: Chicago suburbs.

14 Oct 2015, 7:44 am

Cyberdad
Because abolishing the individual right to own a gun is unrealistic and the majority of the U.S. population support an individual's right to bear arms. I'm only referring to people who want an outright ban on guns. From what I've seen when people call someone "anti-gun" typically they are referring to this group. That's just an opinion though.

And Dox47 just let it go, we're not going to change each others minds. We have a fundamentally different of of the nature of people. So let's just agree to disagree.



Jacoby
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 10 Dec 2007
Age: 29
Gender: Male
Posts: 14,284
Location: Permanently banned by power tripping mods lol this forum is trash

14 Oct 2015, 9:17 am

Anti-gun people take an incrementalist approach, none of their proposals ever would prevent the tragedies these people work up crocodile tear's for. It's like clockwork every time, Dox should just write a book considering the amount of time he has taken trying to educate people on this subject. You can't give an inch, there is no room to be reasonable or compromise because we already have plenty. If we were true to the actual word and intent of the 2nd amendment, we would have access to all weapons that are in common use meaning everything that the military and police have access too because the entire point was to be able to form militias to overthrow a tyrannical government. I look at our government right now and think they're pretty tyrannical so imagine how they would treat us if we weren't armed to the teeth. I can't imagine there are too many students of history that support gun control.



glebel
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Jul 2015
Age: 58
Posts: 1,665
Location: Mountains of Southern California

14 Oct 2015, 9:46 am

Lukeda420 wrote:
Glebel our country grew out of 13 colonies. So we evolved from the previous British establishment. The thing that was supposed to make our country exceptional is that we were the first modern democracy. The only thing that is making us exceptional among first world nation is the massive amount of gun massacres. People are people and mostly the same all over the world.

We didn't 'grow' out of 13 colonies. Our ancestors threw out the English; the English didn't let them go. So we are not like Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Zimbabwe, etc. We are unique in all the world.


_________________
When everyone is losing their heads except you, maybe you don't understand the situation.


Raptor
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 8 Mar 2007
Gender: Male
Posts: 12,694
Location: Southeast U.S.A.

14 Oct 2015, 10:40 am

glebel wrote:
Lukeda420 wrote:
Glebel our country grew out of 13 colonies. So we evolved from the previous British establishment. The thing that was supposed to make our country exceptional is that we were the first modern democracy. The only thing that is making us exceptional among first world nation is the massive amount of gun massacres. People are people and mostly the same all over the world.

We didn't 'grow' out of 13 colonies. Our ancestors threw out the English; the English didn't let them go. So we are not like Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Zimbabwe, etc. We are unique in all the world.


Those other countries pretty much patiently waited to be given their independence.
The 13 colonies basically told King George to stick his crown up his ass and became independent by force of arms.
That general mentality seems to exist to this day and therein lies one of the significant differences between the people of the United States and those of the commonwealth nations.
It is a distinction that I'm rather proud of.


_________________
“Liberals claim to want to give a hearing to other views, but then are shocked and offended to discover that there are other views.”
- William F. Buckley


glebel
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 24 Jul 2015
Age: 58
Posts: 1,665
Location: Mountains of Southern California

14 Oct 2015, 10:52 am

Raptor wrote:
glebel wrote:
Lukeda420 wrote:
Glebel our country grew out of 13 colonies. So we evolved from the previous British establishment. The thing that was supposed to make our country exceptional is that we were the first modern democracy. The only thing that is making us exceptional among first world nation is the massive amount of gun massacres. People are people and mostly the same all over the world.

We didn't 'grow' out of 13 colonies. Our ancestors threw out the English; the English didn't let them go. So we are not like Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Zimbabwe, etc. We are unique in all the world.


Those other countries pretty much patiently waited to be given their independence.
The 13 colonies basically told King George to stick his crown up his ass and became independent by force of arms.
That general mentality seems to exist to this day and therein lies one of the significant differences between the people of the United States and those of the commonwealth nations.
It is a distinction that I'm rather proud of.

Damn straight!


_________________
When everyone is losing their heads except you, maybe you don't understand the situation.


pluto
Veteran
Veteran

User avatar

Joined: 26 Aug 2006
Age: 59
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,568
Location: Paisley,Scotland UK

14 Oct 2015, 3:55 pm

glebel wrote:
Raptor wrote:
glebel wrote:
Lukeda420 wrote:
Glebel our country grew out of 13 colonies. So we evolved from the previous British establishment. The thing that was supposed to make our country exceptional is that we were the first modern democracy. The only thing that is making us exceptional among first world nation is the massive amount of gun massacres. People are people and mostly the same all over the world.

We didn't 'grow' out of 13 colonies. Our ancestors threw out the English; the English didn't let them go. So we are not like Canada, Australia, New Zealand, Zimbabwe, etc. We are unique in all the world.


Those other countries pretty much patiently waited to be given their independence.
The 13 colonies basically told King George to stick his crown up his ass and became independent by force of arms.
That general mentality seems to exist to this day and therein lies one of the significant differences between the people of the United States and those of the commonwealth nations.
It is a distinction that I'm rather proud of.

Damn straight!


While it's good that you guys have a healthy pride in the USA,and you do have a lot to be proud of,it's also good to retain a healthy respect for other countries as many of them can claim similar worthy attributes,e.g.
Mexico forcibly ejected the Spanish
Switzerland has never been subjugated by anyone and gave the world the Red Cross and Geneva Convention.


_________________
I have lost the will to be apathetic