BANG !

[Sam]

Good article. Doubt though that our Wise Guy will approve. After all I believe that all articles quoted on this forum must be approved by him. Hey Folks makes me wonder what level he is in control here.

[Wise One]

... John Lott wrote a VERY important book which would satisfy WO's criteria ...

I beg to differ.

John Lott is a discredited contrarian in the S. Fred Singer mold (but Singer did good work until he "cashed in" in the end days of his career to become a whore for Exxon on climate change and the tobacco industry on second hand smoke.)

Lott is a similar contrarian whore. Name the issue ... you can predict his result before he ever does the "research." It will always be pro-gun, anti-environment, anti-women, pro-discrimination, anti-abortion. He is dependably untra-rightest in his conclusions, facts be damned (or cherry-picked, whichever gives the result he pre-ordains.)

His lying impersonation of an "independent supporter" to buff his own credentials got found out and disgraced him . He was caught making up survey data to support his crackpot gun theory. A full committee of the National Academy of Sciences, reviewing his work agreed that there was not convincing evidence supporting his gun theories.

The vast majority of genuine experts in the fields he has posed in dismiss him as a dishonest crackpot who is just smart enough to polish his bullshit to appear fleetingly as though it might be rhinestone. But if one scratches the veneer of polish, one finds only bullshit.

[Sam]

Hey WG I have been defending you, when others say you are a perfect idiot, I tell him no way you are in no way perfect.

[Wise One]

I shall forever be in your debt.

[crux]

...from reading a wikipedia page? What a joke. Your bias is clear. Lott's? Not so much.

More Guns, Less Crime...
Facts over the last 50 years or so. I have given you the sources and facts. Is there DIRECT causality say, between lower crime rates and say, much higher numbers of states and citizens keeping, concealing, and carrying...

Lott says so.

Are you and your politics opposed to personal liberty on the issue, private gun ownership, and the right to keep, and bear?

Absolutely.

Keep putting up additions to your list of madness and mayhem if it makes you feel more the righteous Liberal man.

Sadly though, you are hardly LIBERAL...

double barrel crux

By the way, Gary Kleck, disagrees with you too, and his research supports Lott, and many others.
Taken from:http://civilliberty.about.com/od/profiles/a/Gary-Kleck-Biography.htm

"An Argument For Gun Ownership From an Unlikely Source"

"Ask the average gun owner which of America’s major political parties is most likely to support gun control and gun bans, and the overwhelming answer will be Democrats. Therefore, if a person who was unfamiliar with Kleck’s research reviewed only the titles of his books and articles and compared them with Kleck’s political ideology, they might expect him to be making the case for gun control.

In his 1997 book, Targeting Guns, Kleck revealed that he is a member of several liberal organizations, including the American Civil Liberties Union, Amnesty International, and Democrats 2000. He is registered as an active Democrat and has contributed financially to the campaigns of Democrat political candidates. He is not a member of the National Rifle Association, or any other pro-gun organization.

Yet Kleck’s 1993 study on guns and their use in self-defense proved to be one of the most damaging arguments against restricted gun rights as the gun control movement reached its peak in American politics.

Kleck’s Survey Findings

Kleck surveyed 2,000 households across the nation, then extrapolated the data to reach his findings. In the process, he managed to shatter many previous survey claims and found that guns are used far more often for self-defense than they are used to commit crimes.

Among Kleck’s findings:

* For every use of a gun to commit a crime, there are three-to-four cases of guns being used in self-defense of a crime.
* Assault and robbery rates are lower when victims are armed with a gun.
* A gun is used in self-defense to protect its owner from crime 2.5 million times per year, an average of once every 13 seconds.
* Fifteen percent of the gun defenders interviewed believed someone would have died if they had not been armed. If true, that’s an average of one life saved due to firearm self-defense every 1.3 minutes.
* In nearly 75% of the cases, the victim did not know his attackers. In nearly 50% of the cases, he faced at least two attackers and in nearly 25% of the cases, there were three or more attackers. A quarter of the incidents of self-defense occurred away from the home.

Results of Kleck’s Findings

Kleck’s National Self-Defense Survey findings provided a strong argument for concealed carry laws and keeping guns in the home for self-defense purposes. It also provided a counter argument to other surveys at the time which claimed that keeping guns for the purpose of self-defense was inadvisable due to their overall danger to the gun owner and his family members.

Marvin Wolfgang, a noted criminologist who was on record favoring a ban on all firearms, even those carried by law enforcement officers, was quoted as saying that the Kleck survey was nearly foolproof, saying: “What troubles me is the article by Gary Kleck and Marc Gertz. The reason I am troubled is that they have provided an almost clear-cut case of methodologically sound research in support of something I have theoretically opposed for years, namely, the use of a gun in defense against a criminal perpetrator…I do not like their conclusions that having a gun can be useful, but I cannot fault their methodology.”"

You can not escape these findings, and must grudgingly admit at some point, your mistaken assumptions.

crux double barrel redux

[Wise One]

For the nineteenth time, the gun issue that interests me is the one that involves the largest number of injuries and deaths – in other words, the public health issue. Crime is a minority contributor to those injuries and deaths – important but not as important as others.

The majority contributors involve family, friends and acquaintances simply going about the sometimes messy business of life. Strategies and policies that will reduce casualties within this majority are more useful than those confined to crime.

Gunnies, who always couch their arguments in terms of crime alone, don't even tell the truth in that arena.

[crux]

We have a disconnect. So. Are the SHOOTERS you speak of CRIMINALS?

And. Are the victims of these shooters the victims of CRIMES?

[Wise One]

You are still playing tiresome word games.
No. My wife is not a criminal. She's ordinarily a very nice person. My children are not criminals. They are ordinarily responsible, good natured and curious.
But if there are loaded guns about the house there is a small chance that she will blast me the hundredth time I fail to make my side of the bed, or that one of the kids will shoot another as they pursue their natural curiosity.

That small chance, multiplied by 100 million US households, gives a significant number of dead people.

Crime has nothing to do with it except in the warped minds of Javert-like sanctimonious ideologues who have only one objective ... guns everywhere regardless of the consequences.

[crux]

...we could ban and regulate and curb! Trans fats, Cars, Tour Buses, Knives, Bath Tubs, Escalators, Hot Dogs, Weebles, Fire, Fireworks, Legos, Cigarrettes, Liquor, Cab Rides, Carnival Rides, Body Surfing, Guns, The Lottery, Cough Medicine...LIFE.

Fella. We will have to disagree. I appreciate your reference to your wife and kids. You made me chuckle.

G'night...

If you hear a loud and repeated noise I am either snoring...or practicing my trigger control...

cruxmm

[Neck-aint-red]

[my comments in red]

...we could ban and regulate and curb!
Trans fats, (we do) reference
Cars, (we do) reference: a thousand federal, state and local laws
Tour Buses, (we do) ditto
Knives, (we do) reference
Bath Tubs, (we do) reference, ANSI in turn referenced by states and localities
Escalators, (we do) reference: a thousand federal, state and local laws
Hot Dogs, (we do) reference
Weebles, (we do) reference
Fire, (we do) reference: a thousand federal, state and local laws
Fireworks, (we do) reference: a thousand federal, state and local laws
Legos, (we do) reference
Cigarrettes, (we do) reference: a thousand federal, state and local laws
Liquor, (we do) reference: a thousand federal, state and local laws
Cab Rides, (we do) reference: a thousand state and local laws
Carnival Rides, (we do) reference: a thousand state and local laws
Body Surfing, (we do) reference: a thousand state and local laws
The Lottery, reference: a thousand federal, state and local laws
Cough Medicine... (under serious consideration) reference
Guns: Only this item, among the most dangerous one on the list in terms of deaths and injuries, is defended against sober and sensible regulation by fanatic gun nuts around the nation.

[crux]

Look BIG guy, There are thousands of laws pertaining to guns...

Yes, they are more dangerous than say, hot dogs, but it would be a serious disadvantage to try to defend one's life with a Bratwurst. Oh. There is no constitutional amendment recognizing an individual right to Trans Fats either...

...though, even if there were, there would be STATE-IST busy body power-over (D)EMOCRATS seeking to undermine it...

crux

[Wise One]

[crux]

"Assault Clips" This is the use of loaded and poorly targeted language.

That vid was silly in it's assertion that there is only one purpose in the use of high capacity magazines.

I can think of two others. One, home or self defense, and two, just plain old FUN!!

.45cruxomatic...just because I like Bratwurst doesn't mean I wish to ever choke you to death with one!

Though there is a distinct possibility that a crazy relative might in a fit of uncontrolled RAGE cram one down their loved one's throat with the INTENT to KILL, which MIGHT cause them to be charged and convicted of a crime. Now, they might be judged to be criminally insane, and may avoid JAIL, and instead be placed into a mental hospital to serve out their sentence, but EITHER way, they would become known to all, as a member of statistical class known as CRIMINAL, except of course to the WISE ONE who will FAIL to see both the criminal act or the criminal perpetrator, whether adjudicated sane OR INSANE....

Whacky...BUT TRUE!

[coondog]

just because I like Bratwurst doesn't mean I wish to ever choke you to death with one!

Hahahahahahahahahaha!!!!!!!! Good One!
But, we know you wouldn't do that. That would constitute the socialist 'sharing' of food.

Coondog

Sharing: another commie liberal concept which has been allowed to be taught to young children in public schools.

[fangz1956]

Yo.......ya gotta lighten up. The following is courtesy of a Facebook friend.

Doctors vs. Gun Owners

Doctors

(A) The number of physicians in the U.S. Is 700,000.
(B) Accidental deaths caused by Physicians Per year are 120,000.
(C) Accidental deaths per physician Is 0.171

Statistics courtesy of U.S. Dept of Health and Human Services.

Now think about this:

Guns

(A) The number of gun owners in the U.S. Is 80,000,000. (Yes, that's 80 million)
(B) The number of accidental gun deaths Per year, all age groups, Is 1,500.
(C) The number of accidental deaths Per gun owner Is .0000188

Statistics courtesy of FBI

So, statistically, doctors are approximately 9,000 times more dangerous than gun owners.

Remember, 'Guns don't kill people, doctors do.'

FACT: NOT EVERYONE HAS A GUN, BUT Almost everyone has at least one doctor.
This means you are over 9,000 times more likely to be killed by a doctor as by a gun owner!!!

Please alert your friends To this Alarming threat. We must ban doctors Before this gets completely out of hand!!!!!

Out of concern for the public at large, We withheld the statistics on Lawyers For fear the shock would cause people to panic and seek medical attention!

[crux]

just because I like Bratwurst doesn't mean I wish to ever choke you to death with one!

Hahahahahahahahahaha!!!!!!!! Good One!
But, we know you wouldn't do that. That would constitute the socialist 'sharing' of food.

Coondog

Sharing: another commie liberal concept which has been allowed to be taught to young children in public schools.

I am all for SHARING... This is a voluntary act between two people. Like CHARITY.

You look the other person in the eye... There is a human connection. It is a personal RELATIONSHIP!!!

A government check, funded by the confiscation of one person's property, given to another, is not CHARITY.
It is redistribution. It teaches dependency and entitlement, far too often my friend.
I would argue this is destructive to the individual, and national psyche...

A CHILD in a GOVERNMENT school, who must put their school supplies into a pool for redistribution within the class,
is not being taught SHARING,
but rather, they are being taught SUBMISSION and REDISTRIBUTION by the State...

But thanks. I am starting to feel understood, and respected, if not appreciated...let alone AGREED WITH!

...like that'll last long...

Adieu....

c...

GOOD GOD what an evening! Even Fangz is coming through with GUN STATISTIC SANITY!!! viewtopic.php?f=1&t=85&p=6033#p6032
Pass the KOOL-AID, POP the HOPIATES, TOKE the HOPIUM DUDES!!!

Good Lord I must be in Heaven... Amy Coondog and Fangz I could kiss you all GOOD NIGHT. (YOU TOO SAM!...can you believe a tri-fecta???...where the heck is the Wise One to not be basking in all the sanity and koom-bahy-ya tonight?)

[Wise One]

Yo.......ya gotta lighten up. The following is courtesy of a Facebook friend.Doctors vs. Gun Owners

Very funny, Fangz. This old joke always gives a chuckle. But the real hilarity is seeing the boob Crux take this as serious "statistics" supporting his insane views on guns! I won't go into the reasons this is bunk because a child can understand them. They would flummox Crux.

Instead, I'll throw gasoline on the raging inferno that is our dear Crux.

In America there are about 2.4 million deaths per year from all causes, most attended by medical personnel.
There are also about 17,400 suicides per year by gun, almost none attended by medical personnel.

So deliberately shooting yourself through the head is 138 times less likely to kill you than seeing medical personnel.

Concerned as I am for his welfare, I recommend that Crux do the smart thing and act on these statistics.

[ParkerLongbaugh]

For the nineteenth time, the gun issue that interests me is the one that involves the largest number of injuries and deaths – in other words, the public health issue. Crime is a minority contributor to those injuries and deaths – important but not as important as others.

The majority contributors involve family, friends and acquaintances simply going about the sometimes messy business of life. Strategies and policies that will reduce casualties within this majority are more useful than those confined to crime.

Interesting.

So if we look at it from the perspective of other public health issues that are equipment-based, we could treat it like driving a car. You can do whatever you want with any type of car on your own property, but if you want to go out and about with one you had to have some training and such. When I was in high school, drivers' ed was a core curriculum item for that very reason- public safety is directly impacted by the inappropriate use of vehicles. Cars are everywhere and easy to get, so the community basically attempted to ensure everyone in the school had at least a basic understanding of safety concerns and operation.

And at that time we did the same general thing with firearms training and education, both in school (mine had a range!), and Scouts, and 4H, and other organizations.

Today, most of the folks who run our schools and/or set gov policies consider guns evil in and of themselves. So no support for ranges, shooting clubs, and training or education. Which in turn makes the problem WO is concerned about worse instead of better. The young people I work with today have less and less experience or knowledge of safe firearm use every year- that trend has been clearly visible in my line of work.

[coondog]

It is in the public interest, and therefore a function of government, that the poor and old don't create a health hazard by falling over dead in the streets from starvation or curable infectuous diseases, that the mentally ill receive attention prior to their excessive expression of their 2nd ammendment rights.

What I resent its the calling of Social Security and Medicare "entitlements"....like it's free. All my life I have paid into each as a form of insurance against being one of those rotting corpses in the street. The money I paid has gone to support the health and welfare of old folks. I understand that scenario, the expectation being that future generations will support me rather than eschewing social responsibility by putting all MY earned money in their own personal health and retirement plans.

Now, if this seems off topic, I will attempt to to tie this in by a rationalization the necessity of gun ownership in the context of the "Road Warrior" future the republicans forsee as a vision for the future of the average citizen. Without jobs, food, shelter or government responsibility, survival really does become a 2nd ammendment remedy. If we're going to have corpses in the streets, better a nice clean bullet hole than death by buck knives or finger nail clippers or being eaten alive by flesh devouring conservative zombies.

The argument for firearm possession for defensive purposes will have been at last settled once and for all. On the positive side, we can stop arguing all these statistics, because everyone responsible for keeping them will be among the jobless, homocidal scavangers we'll have to fend off to hold onto our remaining stash of pretzels and spam.

Coondog

The future's so bright, I gotta wear sha............. Damned Zombies!

[Juggler]

I'm stumped.. I cannot stand it another minute. It's driving me nuts. I consulted my Greek alphabet and dictionary and get zip.

Please translate, and tell us the significance of, your Avatar?