Hey Liberals? Guns work!!

[red w. blue]

The two sides are looking at different information and claiming the other is wrong. The problem is, one side quotes the NRA, the gun industry lobby, FOX news and cherry picks one-off press releases.

1 Will you show us where any of the quotes from the above were wrong?

2 Tell us where a quote from fox was used in this thread?

3 Please tell us anywhere in this forum where ALL press releases were used?

4 Please show anywhere in this forum a single press release was used that was not cherry picked?

The other side quotes universities, government statistics and UN reports. But hey, if a person only cherry picks media to confirm their bias, they have the right to do that too. And I have the right to ignore them.

As for statistics- where are the statistics for drug dealers who have not been robbed or killed because it is known they carry or have a gun? Where are the statistics for those who pull a gun and the robber/killer just goes away and the gun may not be legal or they may be smart and not wish to call the cops while having a gun, or maybe the cops wouldn't be called because the cops would put them through a lot of crap for no good result, and just waste a lot of time. I know of many times a gun was used as a show of force to stop a fight from starting make someone drop a knife. A gut I know well stopped a thug from beating guy with a bat, he fired a shot in the air told him to drop it and he did than ran off, later from prints on the bat was caught. The guy being beaten lived but not by very much and was in ICU for 2 weeks or so in the hospital + rehab for close to a year. THIS is WHY I fill that its MY RESPONSIBILITY TO CARRY. I know the guy would have died and have no doubt of it. This guy has a life such as it is today because of a gun that wasn't legal, although he did say to the cops that he took it from the trunk he also said that they didn't believe him. Nothing was in the paper about a gun and only that the noise caused them to call the cops not that my buddy had beat on the door If I am not armed and it comes up where I could have saved a life with a gun I would never forget and it would bother me for the rest of my life.
For these things to get in the statistics someone needs to be shot and then call the cops.

5 Universities, our government and the un ARE THEY NOT the very orgs that wish to take away our right to OWN guns?

Guns are used for many things and in many ways. Many are only used for shooting sports, skeet, trap and other types of targets and are made for only for this.
Guns are also made to defend and protect us.

The same can not be said of spear guns, they are only made to kill and for my part thousands of times I have shot them and only a hand full of times have they failed to kill. [I shoot though the gills, so no pull offs] So spear guns are very deadly. Many people have been killed or injured by spear guns, kids have killed or injured others and have been killed or injured by spear guns.
There are few if any laws regarding negligence of spear guns. Who's only use is to KILL.

6 Do you think there's a need for such laws?

You have questioned many in this thread as to how their guns are kept and demanded answers so I ask you.

7 Do you have a safe properly installed and have your spear gun in it and locked?

8 Do you have your gun and spear locked in different places?

9 Do you not agree that if you keep it locked up at home there is less chance of someone being killed or injured by it?

10 Do you keep your spear gun locked up at home as a responsible person would do?

11 Is it not the obligation of every spear gun owner to take safety training?

12 Tell us of the safety training that you have taken?

Show us your accountability in this disputed controversy you have played such a LARGE PART in.

Or are you not answerable for your own dogmatic spin

 

[red w. blue]

name one time i have been wrong when dealing with you, ya skinhead.

At the top of all the threads here it says "NAME CALLING OR GENERAL RUDE BEHAVIOR IS NO LONGER ACCEPTABLE" Your always calling people names just as you did to me here.
As for you being rude, calling you rude would be a weak euphemism.

 

[londonfog]

At the top of all the threads here it says "NAME CALLING OR GENERAL RUDE BEHAVIOR IS NO LONGER ACCEPTABLE" Your always calling people names just as you did to me here.
As for you being rude, calling you rude would be a weak euphemism.

Damn dude, please tell me you are not crying right now

 

[UncleBuck]

At the top of all the threads here it says "NAME CALLING OR GENERAL RUDE BEHAVIOR IS NO LONGER ACCEPTABLE" Your always calling people names just as you did to me here.
As for you being rude, calling you rude would be a weak euphemism.

when i call you a skinhead, it is not a name but rather an accurate label, and it is not a rude one given some of the racist statements you have made.

Neutron bombs would be good for sterilizing the infestations of blacks and Mexicans on federal welfare.

ya know, like that one right there. ya fucking skinhead.

 

[UncleBuck]

Damn dude, please tell me you are not crying right now

that thin skinned, cowardly, racist little bitchmade loser is crying as we speak.

 

[Fogdog]

1 Will you show us where any of the quotes from the above were wrong?

2 Tell us where a quote from fox was used in this thread?

3 Please tell us anywhere in this forum where ALL press releases were used?

4 Please show anywhere in this forum a single press release was used that was not cherry picked?



As for statistics- where are the statistics for drug dealers who have not been robbed or killed because it is known they carry or have a gun? Where are the statistics for those who pull a gun and the robber/killer just goes away and the gun may not be legal or they may be smart and not wish to call the cops while having a gun, or maybe the cops wouldn't be called because the cops would put them through a lot of crap for no good result, and just waste a lot of time. I know of many times a gun was used as a show of force to stop a fight from starting make someone drop a knife. A gut I know well stopped a thug from beating guy with a bat, he fired a shot in the air told him to drop it and he did than ran off, later from prints on the bat was caught. The guy being beaten lived but not by very much and was in ICU for 2 weeks or so in the hospital + rehab for close to a year. THIS is WHY I fill that its MY RESPONSIBILITY TO CARRY. I know the guy would have died and have no doubt of it. This guy has a life such as it is today because of a gun that wasn't legal, although he did say to the cops that he took it from the trunk he also said that they didn't believe him. Nothing was in the paper about a gun and only that the noise caused them to call the cops not that my buddy had beat on the door If I am not armed and it comes up where I could have saved a life with a gun I would never forget and it would bother me for the rest of my life.
For these things to get in the statistics someone needs to be shot and then call the cops.

5 Universities, our government and the un ARE THEY NOT the very orgs that wish to take away our right to OWN guns?

Guns are used for many things and in many ways. Many are only used for shooting sports, skeet, trap and other types of targets and are made for only for this.
Guns are also made to defend and protect us.

The same can not be said of spear guns, they are only made to kill and for my part thousands of times I have shot them and only a hand full of times have they failed to kill. [I shoot though the gills, so no pull offs] So spear guns are very deadly. Many people have been killed or injured by spear guns, kids have killed or injured others and have been killed or injured by spear guns.
There are few if any laws regarding negligence of spear guns. Who's only use is to KILL.

6 Do you think there's a need for such laws?

You have questioned many in this thread as to how their guns are kept and demanded answers so I ask you.

7 Do you have a safe properly installed and have your spear gun in it and locked?

8 Do you have your gun and spear locked in different places?

9 Do you not agree that if you keep it locked up at home there is less chance of someone being killed or injured by it?

10 Do you keep your spear gun locked up at home as a responsible person would do?

11 Is it not the obligation of every spear gun owner to take safety training?

12 Tell us of the safety training that you have taken?

Show us your accountability in this disputed controversy you have played such a LARGE PART in.

Or are you not answerable for your own dogmatic spin

Ok, by the numbers for your questions, here are my answers.
1) no; 2) no; 3) no; 4) no; 5) no; 6) maybe; 7) I don't own a fire arm; 8.) I don't own a fire arm; 9) I don't own a fire arm 10) I don't own a fire arm; 11) I don't own a fire arm; 12) Hunter safety classes

Are you really equating my spear gun, basically a bow with a range of about 4 feet with a Glock? That's nuts.

The shaft is about 22" long. I'm practically one foot maybe two from my prey when I fire. And I always fire towards sand or rocks when I do.

I'd be perfectly satisfied if gun owners traded their weapons for something that took forever to load, could not be loaded by young children, had a single shot, a range of 4 feet and could not be carried at the hip or concealed. My concerns would completely be addressed.

 

[NLXSK1]

Ok, by the numbers for your questions, here are my answers.
1) no; 2) no; 3) no; 4) no; 5) no; 6) maybe; 7) I don't own a fire arm; 8.) I don't own a fire arm; 9) I don't own a fire arm 10) I don't own a fire arm; 11) I don't own a fire arm; 12) Hunter safety classes

Are you really equating my spear gun, basically a bow with a range of about 4 feet with a Glock? That's nuts.
View attachment 3600409
The shaft is about 22" long. I'm practically one foot maybe two from my prey when I fire. And I always fire towards sand or rocks when I do.

I'd be perfectly satisfied if gun owners traded their weapons for something that took forever to load, could not be loaded by young children, had a single shot, a range of 4 feet and could not be carried at the hip or concealed. My concerns would completely be addressed.

If they took forever to load it would make sense that they would be carried already loaded which defeats most of your safety features right there.

I know, maybe if we made a law..... LOL!!! Round and Round!!

 

[Fogdog]

If they took forever to load it would make sense that they would be carried already loaded which defeats most of your safety features right there.

I know, maybe if we made a law..... LOL!!! Round and Round!!

no, your pigeon sized imagination has it wrong. I had no interest in spending time on something that would be ignored or refuted out of hand. I'm here for my own purposes. I'll never change your or RWBs' mind, why should I try? The list of questions was more of a statement of RWB's belief, not a request for information.

Tell me something I don't know. Don't ask me for references you can if you are interested look up.

And finally, the premise that my spear gun is somehow the same as a firearm is the same damn juvenile argument that I've had from you. "Oh, so if guns are dangerous, how about cars? Shouldn't we outlaw cars?" You gun nuts have nothing and revert to incredibly stupid and repetitive arguments. I'm not going to respond and give any effort to that.

 

[red w. blue]

Ok, by the numbers for your questions, here are my answers.
1) no; 2) no; 3) no; 4) no; 5) no; 6) maybe; 7) I don't own a fire arm; 8.) I don't own a fire arm; 9) I don't own a fire arm 10) I don't own a fire arm; 11) I don't own a fire arm; 12) Hunter safety classes

Are you trying to say that you don't own a firearm? I thought we were speaking of guns.
1 through 4 were not yes or no questions and I think your cognizant of it. Just asking you to back up what you said. Do you not think you should have accountability to back up your claim? You were just mischaracterizing the sources of gun owners. Your cherry picking crap was just your spin, or did you think it the truth?

Are you really equating my spear gun, basically a bow with a range of about 4 feet with a Glock? That's nuts.
The shaft is about 22" long. I'm practically one foot maybe two from my prey when I fire. And I always fire towards sand or rocks when I do.

It would be more like a rifle with a pistol grip. [shouldn't it be banned because the pistol grip?] you grab the grip pull the trigger and it fires a projectile does it not? Its just not a repeater like my ARs. Your full of it, the range 8ft+.

I'd be perfectly satisfied if gun owners traded their weapons for something that took forever to load, could not be loaded by young children, had a single shot, a range of 4 feet and could not be carried at the hip or concealed. My concerns would completely be addressed.

I am sure all gun owners will feel the obligation to do as you demand and would like to see you satiated.
I did think it was funny you playing like you were just trying to help gun owners.....

 

[red w. blue]

no, your pigeon sized imagination has it wrong. I had no interest in spending time on something that would be ignored or refuted out of hand. I'm here for my own purposes. I'll never change your or RWBs' mind, why should I try? The list of questions was more of a statement of RWB's belief, not a request for information.

Yes yes I understand your going to take your toys and go home. You don't want to play with us any more, Well go play with your supercilious buddies!

Tell me something I don't know. Don't ask me for references you can if you are interested look up.
And finally, the premise that my spear gun is somehow the same as a firearm is the same damn juvenile argument that I've had from you. "Oh, so if guns are dangerous, how about cars? Shouldn't we outlaw cars?" You gun nuts have nothing and revert to incredibly stupid and repetitive arguments. I'm not going to respond and give any effort to that.

Gee your quite emotional when you drop the façade.

 

[ChesusRice]

Wasn't James Brady a republican?

 

[Fogdog]

Are you trying to say that you don't own a firearm? I thought we were speaking of guns.
1 through 4 were not yes or no questions and I think your cognizant of it. Just asking you to back up what you said. Do you not think you should have accountability to back up your claim? You were just mischaracterizing the sources of gun owners. Your cherry picking crap was just your spin, or did you think it the truth?


It would be more like a rifle with a pistol grip. [shouldn't it be banned because the pistol grip?] you grab the grip pull the trigger and it fires a projectile does it not? Its just not a repeater like my ARs. Your full of it, the range 8ft+.

I am sure all gun owners will feel the obligation to do as you demand and would like to see you satiated.
I did think it was funny you playing like you were just trying to help gun owners.....

It was too broad a brush man. You went all over the place. If you want, pick a subject and I'll be glad to cite sources. An attempt to answer everything in your assignment would have been a waste of my time.

fire·arm
ˈfī(ə)rˌärm/
noun

1. a rifle, pistol, or other portable gun.
   synonyms: gun, weapon, rifle, pistol, handgun, revolver; More

The only addition to the above defintion would be:
firearm

1. : a weapon from which a shot is discharged by gunpowder —usually used of small arm
   

I don't own any of the above.

 

[red w. blue]

Yep, "hey liberals: guns work", they sure do, guns kill gun shop owners too.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/shootout-in-gun-shop-over-25-dollars-kills-2-wounds-2-sheriff-says-mississippi/

2 dead, two more hospitalized. Over a $25 service charge. Those guns are vital for protection.

Shootout in gun shop over $25 kills 2, sheriff says
The McCools came to pick up a gun and got angry because there was a $25 service charge even though the gun had not been fixed, Allison told CBS affiliate WJTV.

He said Jason McLemore's wife was at the shop, and called her husband in to clear up the dispute.

"We believe there might have been some pushing and shoving," Tucker told the Sun Herald.

McLemore's wife was not injured.

At least somebody was left alive so they could close up the shop.

Was this not a cherry of your picking?

Would you like me to point out all the cherries you have picked?

 

[Fogdog]

Was this not a cherry of your picking?

Would you like me to point out all the cherries you have picked?

That was a response to the original "hey liberals guns work" title. The answer is yes they do. I'm agreeing with the topic but showing they work both ways. It was a tit for tat, one-off headline in response to another one-off headlines about the very rare time that a gun was used to defend. And both are uninformative. I still don't know what you want. Is this just about refuting what I said? OK, bring it. Keep it focused on one topic at a time and I'll be glad to have a discussion.

 

[red w. blue]

That was a response to the original "hey liberals guns work" title. The answer is yes they do. I'm agreeing with the topic but showing they work both ways. It was a tit for tat, one-off headline in response to another one-off headlines about the very rare time that a gun was used to defend. And both are uninformative. I still don't know what you want. Is this just about refuting what I said? OK, bring it. Keep it focused on one topic at a time and I'll be glad to have a discussion.

Then lets discuss questions 1 and 2. What is your answers?

 

[Fogdog]

Then lets discuss questions 1 and 2. What is your answers?

First off, let's revisit what was said in a different post regarding cherry picking data and how it is used to mislead or make false conclusions:

What is not cherry picking and what I try to do is select pertinent data to support an argument. This is a completely valid debate tactic. What I try not to do is quote out of context, use anecdotal evidence as if it proved anything or select data to support an argument while hiding the rest. I'm not perfect at this. You on the other hand just ramble on without much information to support what you say.

Read this: http://scienceornot.net/2012/04/03/devious-deception-in-displaying-data-cherry-picking/

At the risk of being accused of cherry picking, I'm going to copy and paste a section in italic font that helps me make my point. Read the whole article and maybe you will understand why posting a link and quoting an article is not the same as cherry picking data or being dishonest as NLX has said of me a few times.

How to recognize this tactic
In cherry-picking, people use legitimate evidence, but not all of the evidence. They select segments of evidence that appear to support their argument and hide or ignore the rest of the evidence which tends to refute it.

Variations and related tactics
Quoting out of context , or quote mining, is a type of cherry picking. In this tactic, a spoken or written passage is lifted out of its surrounding text in a misleading way.

Use of anecdotal evidence is a form of cherry picking. Anecdotes are usually unrepresentative of the overall situation.

Closely related to cherry picking are attentional bias (noticing only that evidence that seems relevant), confirmation bias (noticing only that evidence that confirms existing beliefs) and anchoring bias (giving undue importance to one piece of evidence and ignoring other evidence).

Now on to your questions:

What I said earlier:
The two sides are looking at different information and claiming the other is wrong. The problem is, one side quotes the NRA, the gun industry lobby, FOX news and cherry picks one-off press releases.

Your question
1 Will you show us where any of the quotes from the above were wrong?

2 Tell us where a quote from fox was used in this thread?

My response in an earlier reply contained: Keep it focused on one topic at a time and I'll be glad to have a discussion.
I read your "questions" and don't know where to start. It is not focused nor does it even have a topic.

So, I'll start with my assertion that guns are used only once to protect or defend for every five times they cause an accidental death or injury at home.

The following is an article from the Violence Policy Center: http://www.vpc.org/studies/justifiable.pdf

In 2010, across the nation there were only 230 justifiable homicides1 involving a private citizen using a firearm reported to the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s Uniform Crime Reporting (UCR) Program as detailed in its Supplementary Homicide Report (SHR).2 That same year, there were 8,275 criminal gun homicides tallied in the SHR. In 2010, for every justifiable homicide in the United States involving a gun, guns were used in 36 criminal homicides.3 And this ratio, of course, does not take into account the thousands of lives ended in gun suicides (19,392) or unintentional shootings (606) that year.4

606 lives ended in unintentional shootings to 230 justifiable homicides. OK, in this report, the ration is 2.3:1 not 5:1 but the difference is pretty stark and these are just accidental deaths not deaths and injuries.

Here is another reference from the NIH: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/9715182
Its an abstract of a for fee article.
For every time a gun in the home was used in a self-defense or legally justifiable shooting, there were four unintentional shootings

This is a screen shot from accessing a data site: http://webappa.cdc.gov/sasweb/ncipc/nfirates2001.html. Sorted by unintentional intent, caused by firearm, year of 2010

From the government's own database on injury statistics, they recorded 14,161 nonfatal injuries from firearms. This may include unsuccessful suicide attempts. Assuming half of the 14,161 injuries were attempted suicides, leaves 7000 nonfatal injuries due to an accidentally inflicted gunshot.

Using the same database and sorting for nonfatal legal intent, there were 930 nonfatal gunshot injuries due to legal intent. Screenshot can be provided but I did not include it to save space in this post.

Pulling it all together: in 2010, there were 600 accidental deaths and about 7000 unintentional nonfatal injuries due to a firearm gunshot. There were 230 justifiable homicides and 930 nonfatal injuries due to legal intent. By these numbers, the ratio is 7600:1160 or 6.5 accidental deaths or injuries to 1 case of justifiable homicide.

Conclusion, reasonable estimate that there are 5 accidental shootings for every time a firearm is used to legitimately protect or defend. The actual number could be as low as 3:1 or as high as 17:1.

 

[MuyLocoNC]

How do they account for the number of incidences where a firearm is used to legitimately protect or defend, but not actually fired. If that number isn't 500-1000+ times more frequent than when the firearm is actually discharged, I would be surprised.

I have an honest question. What were the total deaths by firearms last year, not including police incidents and suicides?

 

[red w. blue]

The two sides are looking at different information and claiming the other is wrong. The problem is, one side quotes the NRA, the gun industry lobby, FOX news and cherry picks one-off press releases.

Here is where YOU wrongly call gun owners cherry pickers or call what they do as cherry picking and all the wile your were doing the very same thing.

 

[red w. blue]

How do they account for the number of incidences where a firearm is used to legitimately protect or defend, but not actually fired. If that number isn't 500-1000+ times more frequent than when the firearm is actually discharged, I would be surprised.

They don't nor do they want to. They just cherry pick statistics that fit their liberal goals.

 

[red w. blue]

First off, let's revisit what was said in a different post regarding cherry picking data and how it is used to mislead or make false conclusions:


Now on to your questions:

What I said earlier:
The two sides are looking at different information and claiming the other is wrong. The problem is, one side quotes the NRA, the gun industry lobby, FOX news and cherry picks one-off press releases.

Your question
1 Will you show us where any of the quotes from the above were wrong?

2 Tell us where a quote from fox was used in this thread?

My response in an earlier reply contained: Keep it focused on one topic at a time and I'll be glad to have a discussion.
I read your "questions" and don't know where to start. It is not focused nor does it even have a topic.

Why don't we call the topic [how fogdog can ignore 2 questions by posting long post].