How far do you gun grabbers want to go?
Comments
-
Those scribbled out ratios put legally exercised gun ownership rights in context of illegal acts against others by use of a firearm. In the US, that is between 0.002 and 0.0047 incidences of firearm violence per admitted gun owner, annually. In the UK—though not a right but a privilege of Her Majesty's subjects, there are between 0.0031 and 0.0079 incidences per registered gun owner.2001400ex said:
Sorry. Number of gun owners. And your argument was implied.GrundleStiltzkin said:
Number of guns? Who gives a shit about that. And I made no argument. Read.2001400ex said:
A more meaningful stat is the number of gun deaths compared to total population. Not compared to the number of guns. Which is posted somewhere here the last couple days and destroys your argument.GrundleStiltzkin said:
In the UK in 2016, there were 5864 of "gun crime." I don't know if their definitions are the same as BJS, but let's say they're close. There are 735,000 registered gun owners in the UK.2001400ex said:
Imagine how many more car deaths there would be without airbags, seat belts, etc. Imagine how many more deaths from guns there would be if we allowed fully automatic weapons, you could buy guns anywhere, you could bring guns into bars, etc.YellowSnow said:
Don't disagree with your statistical analysis Grundle. 10,000 to 12,000 dying a year on average is still a yuge number and the stats aren't of much use for them. It's not anyone of is statistically likely to kill someone with our cars and yet 30,000 or so of us die a year in car accidents and we heavily regulate the transportation segment to try and save lives.GrundleStiltzkin said:
2011, 478,400 violent crimes involving a firearm.YellowSnow said:
Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness will always be a balancing act- i.e., your rights end when you infringe upon mine. Right now, the scales are tilted way too far in favor of the right's of gun owners (legal and otherwise).
No solid numbers on firearm ownership, but call it 100,000,000 owners.
478,400 / 100,000,000 == 0.47%.
Bring in recidivism rates (~60%) as an arbitrary metric to remove a single "owner" committing multiple crimes in a year, and that comes down to around 0.20% of gun owners unlawfully chinfringing on another's rights.
About the same odds of a high school football player making a NFL team.
( (5864 / 735000) = 0.79%) - 60% recidivism) ) == 0.31%, 60% higher than the same math as for the US. -
So you are saying America needs more guns. Because the rate of gun deaths is lower per gun owner. But yet, you don't mention that the rate of gun deaths per capita is way higher in the US.GrundleStiltzkin said:
Those scribbled out ratios put legally exercised gun ownership rights in context of illegal acts against others by use of a firearm. In the US, that is between 0.002 and 0.0047 incidences of firearm violence per admitted gun owner, annually. In the UK—though not a right but a privilege of Her Majesty's subjects, there are between 0.0031 and 0.0079 incidences per registered gun owner.2001400ex said:
Sorry. Number of gun owners. And your argument was implied.GrundleStiltzkin said:
Number of guns? Who gives a shit about that. And I made no argument. Read.2001400ex said:
A more meaningful stat is the number of gun deaths compared to total population. Not compared to the number of guns. Which is posted somewhere here the last couple days and destroys your argument.GrundleStiltzkin said:
In the UK in 2016, there were 5864 of "gun crime." I don't know if their definitions are the same as BJS, but let's say they're close. There are 735,000 registered gun owners in the UK.2001400ex said:
Imagine how many more car deaths there would be without airbags, seat belts, etc. Imagine how many more deaths from guns there would be if we allowed fully automatic weapons, you could buy guns anywhere, you could bring guns into bars, etc.YellowSnow said:
Don't disagree with your statistical analysis Grundle. 10,000 to 12,000 dying a year on average is still a yuge number and the stats aren't of much use for them. It's not anyone of is statistically likely to kill someone with our cars and yet 30,000 or so of us die a year in car accidents and we heavily regulate the transportation segment to try and save lives.GrundleStiltzkin said:
2011, 478,400 violent crimes involving a firearm.YellowSnow said:
Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness will always be a balancing act- i.e., your rights end when you infringe upon mine. Right now, the scales are tilted way too far in favor of the right's of gun owners (legal and otherwise).
No solid numbers on firearm ownership, but call it 100,000,000 owners.
478,400 / 100,000,000 == 0.47%.
Bring in recidivism rates (~60%) as an arbitrary metric to remove a single "owner" committing multiple crimes in a year, and that comes down to around 0.20% of gun owners unlawfully chinfringing on another's rights.
About the same odds of a high school football player making a NFL team.
( (5864 / 735000) = 0.79%) - 60% recidivism) ) == 0.31%, 60% higher than the same math as for the US. -
Hillary waited almost 30 seconds to say it was lucky he wasn't using a suppressor! No agenda there huh?AZDuck said:Things are getting better. The pro-gun folks moved almost immediately from "this isn't the time to talk politics in the aftermath of a tragedy," to "nothing would help anyway" in less than 48 hours.
-
When it happens to you, it might as well be 10 million.YellowSnow said:
Don't disagree with your statistical analysis Grundle. 10,000 to 12,000 dying a year on average is still a yuge number and the stats aren't of much use for them. It's not anyone of is statistically likely to kill someone with our cars and yet 30,000 or so of us die a year in car accidents and we heavily regulate the transportation segment to try and save lives.GrundleStiltzkin said:
2011, 478,400 violent crimes involving a firearm.YellowSnow said:
Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness will always be a balancing act- i.e., your rights end when you infringe upon mine. Right now, the scales are tilted way too far in favor of the right's of gun owners (legal and otherwise).
No solid numbers on firearm ownership, but call it 100,000,000 owners.
478,400 / 100,000,000 == 0.47%.
Bring in recidivism rates (~60%) as an arbitrary metric to remove a single "owner" committing multiple crimes in a year, and that comes down to around 0.20% of gun owners unlawfully chinfringing on another's rights.
About the same odds of a high school football player making a NFL team. -
I want to keep all my guns but take away Sledog's and Race's. Just for spite.
-
Imagine all the people living for today2001400ex said:
Imagine how many more car deaths there would be without airbags, seat belts, etc. Imagine how many more deaths from guns there would be if we allowed fully automatic weapons, you could buy guns anywhere, you could bring guns into bars, etc.YellowSnow said:
Don't disagree with your statistical analysis Grundle. 10,000 to 12,000 dying a year on average is still a yuge number and the stats aren't of much use for them. It's not anyone of is statistically likely to kill someone with our cars and yet 30,000 or so of us die a year in car accidents and we heavily regulate the transportation segment to try and save lives.GrundleStiltzkin said:
2011, 478,400 violent crimes involving a firearm.YellowSnow said:
Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness will always be a balancing act- i.e., your rights end when you infringe upon mine. Right now, the scales are tilted way too far in favor of the right's of gun owners (legal and otherwise).
No solid numbers on firearm ownership, but call it 100,000,000 owners.
478,400 / 100,000,000 == 0.47%.
Bring in recidivism rates (~60%) as an arbitrary metric to remove a single "owner" committing multiple crimes in a year, and that comes down to around 0.20% of gun owners unlawfully chinfringing on another's rights.
About the same odds of a high school football player making a NFL team.
Imagine there's no countries
It isn't hard to do
Nothing to kill or die for
And no religion too
Imagine all the people living life in peace, you
You may say I'm a dreamer
But I'm not the only one
I hope some day you'll join us
And the world will be as one
-
Fag.doogie said:
Imagine all the people living for today2001400ex said:
Imagine how many more car deaths there would be without airbags, seat belts, etc. Imagine how many more deaths from guns there would be if we allowed fully automatic weapons, you could buy guns anywhere, you could bring guns into bars, etc.YellowSnow said:
Don't disagree with your statistical analysis Grundle. 10,000 to 12,000 dying a year on average is still a yuge number and the stats aren't of much use for them. It's not anyone of is statistically likely to kill someone with our cars and yet 30,000 or so of us die a year in car accidents and we heavily regulate the transportation segment to try and save lives.GrundleStiltzkin said:
2011, 478,400 violent crimes involving a firearm.YellowSnow said:
Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness will always be a balancing act- i.e., your rights end when you infringe upon mine. Right now, the scales are tilted way too far in favor of the right's of gun owners (legal and otherwise).
No solid numbers on firearm ownership, but call it 100,000,000 owners.
478,400 / 100,000,000 == 0.47%.
Bring in recidivism rates (~60%) as an arbitrary metric to remove a single "owner" committing multiple crimes in a year, and that comes down to around 0.20% of gun owners unlawfully chinfringing on another's rights.
About the same odds of a high school football player making a NFL team.
Imagine there's no countries
It isn't hard to do
Nothing to kill or die for
And no religion too
Imagine all the people living life in peace, you
You may say I'm a dreamer
But I'm not the only one
I hope some day you'll join us
And the world will be as one -
So is my father in law 2.0. Retired from the North Platte Railroad a few years back.HuskyJW said:
My dad is from North Platte.RaceBannon said:
Classy postHuskyJW said:I would like to go on record as I am against cancer, diabetes,
AIDS, child pornography, murder, domestic violence, road rage, jaywalking, heart attacks, forest fires, racism, bigotry, gun violence and general disobedience. -
If by that you mean he's doing a solid job of pulling your dick, then yes.YellowSnow said:Race, as always, you do a solid job of playing devil's advocate...
-
There was a moslem in London who beheaded someone in the middle of the street. I wonder if someone had been around and had a gun to shoot him dead if it would have happened.
-
Proof, once again, that it's not about the gun, but who has the gun.oregonblitzkrieg said:There was a moslem in London who beheaded someone in the middle of the street. I wonder if someone had been around and had a gun to shoot him dead if it would have happened.
-
I would have shot the moslem myself if I encountered him attempting to kill someone with a machete. And so would many other people. But when everyone is unarmed, who is going to approach someone like that without a weapon?TurdBuffer said:
Proof, once again, that it's not about the gun, but who has the gun.oregonblitzkrieg said:There was a moslem in London who beheaded someone in the middle of the street. I wonder if someone had been around and had a gun to shoot him dead if it would have happened.
-
Of course you would, hero.oregonblitzkrieg said:
I would have shot the moslem myself if I encountered him attempting to kill someone with a machete. And so would many other people. But when everyone is unarmed, who is going to approach someone like that without a weapon?TurdBuffer said:
Proof, once again, that it's not about the gun, but who has the gun.oregonblitzkrieg said:There was a moslem in London who beheaded someone in the middle of the street. I wonder if someone had been around and had a gun to shoot him dead if it would have happened.
-
I love all the wing and/or gun nuts who were quick to the "HOW DARE YOU POLITICIZE THIS?" response, especially on social media and YouTube.
Go fuck yourselves. Their appropriate time to bring it up is 3 weeks later when there's some new story in the cycle all the idiots are going crazy over and it's mostly forgotten. -
I'll throw the liberals a bone. I used to sympathize with the argument that the 2nd amendment is to keep the government accountable so they cannot be involved in regulation argument. Now that there are 10s to 100s of millions guns in circulation, they couldn't round them up if they wanted to, it would take years and multiple civil wars.
Being in a conflict in the ME for 15+ years has obviously affected our culture and has given scale to the defense industry that's looked to private market to keep revenue up. The amount of tacticool wanna be operators running around Facebook and YouTube is alarming. I honestly don't want those untrained fucks thinking they can do whatever they see in the movies trying to protect me. I've seen it at the range, I've seen it from friends shooting on private property, first time shooters are idiots, and people that shoot less than once a year are almost as stupid. If you don't have the self awareness to know this is dangerous as fuck, you scare the shit out of me. Maybe it's metropolitian Texas but it's fucking scary the amount of bros buying pistols and ARs and knowing nothing.
So that said I'm all for a thorough training and certification program for anyone that wants to own or operate anything more than a bolt gun (and buy ammo). Similar to a concealed handgun license but more thorough. I would like to have some confidence that some stranger with a gun has any idea what he's doing. Run it at the state level, encourage militia organization/communities, that would also help self regulate the idiots/nuts out into the open.
But what do I know, the Stockholm tap water is probably laced with liberal chemicals. -
LoneStarDawg said:
But what do I know, the Stockholm tap water is probably laced withliberalIslamic chemicals. -
oregonblitzkrieg said:LoneStarDawg said:
But what do I know, the Stockholm tap water is probably laced withliberalIslamic chemicals.
Took this photo for you at the Swedish History Museum -
Race is too old and Mike Pence lookin' @creepycoug but I'll let you pull my dick sometime behind the 7-11 if you want.creepycoug said:
If by that you mean he's doing a solid job of pulling your dick, then yes.YellowSnow said:Race, as always, you do a solid job of playing devil's advocate...
-
He was just freely exercising his religion (of peace).oregonblitzkrieg said:There was a moslem in London who beheaded someone in the middle of the street. I wonder if someone had been around and had a gun to shoot him dead if it would have happened.
Don't be an Islamaphobe. -
The vikings probable contact was rape and pillage.LoneStarDawg said:oregonblitzkrieg said:LoneStarDawg said:
But what do I know, the Stockholm tap water is probably laced withliberalIslamic chemicals.
Took this photo for you at the Swedish History Museum -
Sledog said:
The vikings probable contact was rape and pillage.LoneStarDawg said:oregonblitzkrieg said:LoneStarDawg said:
But what do I know, the Stockholm tap water is probably laced withliberalIslamic chemicals.
Took this photo for you at the Swedish History Museum
Yes...please. -
You would have shit the bed Taylor Alie style. Who are you kidding?oregonblitzkrieg said:
I would have shot the moslem myself if I encountered him attempting to kill someone with a machete. And so would many other people. But when everyone is unarmed, who is going to approach someone like that without a weapon?TurdBuffer said:
Proof, once again, that it's not about the gun, but who has the gun.oregonblitzkrieg said:There was a moslem in London who beheaded someone in the middle of the street. I wonder if someone had been around and had a gun to shoot him dead if it would have happened.
-
You don’t discuss your timing in this hypothetical encounter. Would you act first or wait to see how sharp the machete is, before engaging your inner Super-hero?oregonblitzkrieg said:
I would have shot the moslem myself if I encountered him attempting to kill someone with a machete. And so would many other people. But when everyone is unarmed, who is going to approach someone like that without a weapon?TurdBuffer said:
Proof, once again, that it's not about the gun, but who has the gun.oregonblitzkrieg said:There was a moslem in London who beheaded someone in the middle of the street. I wonder if someone had been around and had a gun to shoot him dead if it would have happened.
-
That's not what happens at the 7-11 boat boy. Axe Post Game; he's experienced it.YellowSnow said:
Race is too old and Mike Pence lookin' @creepycoug but I'll let you pull my dick sometime behind the 7-11 if you want.creepycoug said:
If by that you mean he's doing a solid job of pulling your dick, then yes.YellowSnow said:Race, as always, you do a solid job of playing devil's advocate...
-
Tipper Gore POTD.RaceBannon said:Violent video games that show realistic mass murder at the hands of your joy stick?
Violent movies?
Porn?
All these are linked to violence. Just like guns. Young minds of mush are very impressionable. We get desensitized to violence. Life is cheap.
How about mass surveillance to stop crime? Pre crime enforcement?
The left loves to quote about how those who would give up freedom for safety deserve neither when it suits them. That was Ben Franklin by the way hondoFS
But when it comes to guns they gots to go, If you wonder why nobody trusts you that's why.
And I'll save you the trouble. There are right wingers who would ban my opening items as well as rap music and rock who are pro gun.
I'll take freedom.
For teh record, I blame the hip hops music.
