Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums
Sign in to follow this  
randall146

USA Shootings

Recommended Posts

4 minutes ago, KarmaPolice said:

Very true.  

I read a lot how a gun ban won't do a thing (i assume this means cause no reduction in deaths) because people will use bats and knives.  If that is true that must mean who writes that must believe that bats and knives are just as effective to kill people with.  If that is true, then they should be able to defend themselves with bats and knives.   

Only violent people can use anything as a weapon with equal effect.   Law abiding citizens need assault weapons.  

  • Laughing 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

If we’re going to have mandatory bat buybacks in the future, I vote we begin with my team, the Los Angeles Angels, (minus Mike Trout of course.) 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 hours ago, KarmaPolice said:

Very true.  

I read a lot how a gun ban won't do a thing (i assume this means cause no reduction in deaths) because people will use bats and knives.  If that is true that must mean who writes that must believe that bats and knives are just as effective to kill people with.  If that is true, then they should be able to defend themselves with bats and knives.   

It's also true that that person is not mentally fit enough to own a gun.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Funny how the people here are so concerned with the opinions of two pro gun posters on a random message board. But when we post about mandatory gun buybacks, proposed by two Presidential candidates, we are the ones being ridiculous.

Glad to know I carry as much power in regards to policy change as Beto and Kamala.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, KCitons said:

Funny how the people here are so concerned with the opinions of two pro gun posters on a random message board. But when we post about mandatory gun buybacks, proposed by two Presidential candidates, we are the ones being ridiculous.

Glad to know I carry as much power in regards to policy change as Beto and Kamala.

 

 

people are scared

they fear the violent people who terrorize with the rare actions of a mass shooting .... less fearful over everyday violence but its still a fear

they don't want to protect themselves, they want someone else to protect them .... and they'll agree with anything that's shouted at them that is under the disguise of " it will make you safer"

they don't have guns, they don't care if they're banned .... they don't care that other people lose rights. that's why its the way it is 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Amusing post coming from the guy living behind 4-5 layers of security at his house and is afraid of the government coming for his guns.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
51 minutes ago, Stealthycat said:

people are scared

people are dumb.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, KCitons said:

people are dumb.

I think that is universally true - I've lost my faith in people, even the best people you know are likely liars :(  and rotten at their core

Anybody wanting to ban a gun used in  2% of all deaths (BETO has finally at least shown everyone the truth on the Democrat agenda) using guns as weapons and thinking it'll help? 

yeah .. that's kinda dumb and truly not trying to fight the core problem

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
35 minutes ago, Stealthycat said:

I think that is universally true - I've lost my faith in people, even the best people you know are likely liars :(  and rotten at their core

Anybody wanting to ban a gun used in  2% of all deaths (BETO has finally at least shown everyone the truth on the Democrat agenda) using guns as weapons and thinking it'll help? 

yeah .. that's kinda dumb and truly not trying to fight the core problem

It's really more like 8% of gun crimes, but nobody expects you to tell the truth.   The real question is "do assault weapon bans accomplish anything?" Since we have data from a 10-year period where they were restricted (not banned) by the federal government (even with pretty poor legislation), based on the actual facts, the answer is yes, and multiple studies have confirmed it.

Quote

 

When looking more narrowly at active shooter incidents, researchers have found a correlation between the law and less frequent, less deadly gun rampages. There’s a logic to that finding: The weapons the ban covered are disproportionately used in mass shootings, so there was greater potential for them to make a difference with those crimes.

Louis Klarevas is a research professor at Columbia University Teachers College and the author of Rampage Nation, which examines American mass shootings and efforts to prevent the killings. His research looked at mass shootings resulting in six or more deaths, which he refers to as massacres, because they are “the most dangerous and threatening to American public safety.”

He found that deaths in such high-fatality mass shootings dropped by 25 percent under the ban. Massacre deaths involving assault weapons fell by 40 percent, fatalities involving both assault weapons and high-capacity magazines fell by 54 percent. After the ban lapsed, mass shootings and related deaths surged. “We know that during the federal assault weapon ban, we saw some significant reductions in high-fatality mass shootings compared to the decade before the ban and the decade after it expired,” he said. “What we don’t know exactly is the mechanism behind that change.”

A 2019 study looking at the impact of the federal law on mass shooting deaths arrived at a similar conclusion: While new assault weapons and high-capacity magazines were outlawed, mass shooting fatalities were 70 percent less likely than during the decades before and since.

 

If a restriction decreases the type of violence that it is addressing, even though nobody expects it to eliminate all gun deaths, a 70 percent reduction in mass shootings can only be called a success.  A more robust ban than the 1994 restriction can only be expected to have a greater effect.

Beto's extreme position also doesn't represent the majority of Democrats, but the NRA does love it as a talking point, even if the talking point is false.

Source

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, -fish- said:

It's really more like 8% of gun crimes, but nobody expects you to tell the truth.

Where did you get this number?

I found this that said it was 4% of gun murders. 

I find it very difficult to believe that the number of other gun crimes involving these weapons would be higher. I dont think ar15 stick ups are very common. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, parasaurolophus said:

Where did you get this number?

I found this that said it was 4% of gun murders. 

I find it very difficult to believe that the number of other gun crimes involving these weapons would be higher. I dont think ar15 stick ups are very common. 

It’s in the link I posted.  The numbers vary based on the source of the data and how a gun crime is defined.  4% could be accurate.  What I haven’t seen is a credible source that supports 2%. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Stealthycat said:

I think that is universally true - I've lost my faith in people, even the best people you know are likely liars :(  and rotten at their core

Pretty sad if this is the state of mind you are in.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, -fish- said:

It’s in the link I posted.  The numbers vary based on the source of the data and how a gun crime is defined.  4% could be accurate.  What I haven’t seen is a credible source that supports 2%. 

I think stealthy is speaking specifically to the ar15 when he says that, but i could be wrong. 

Looks like that 8% figure comes from a 2004 study. 

I dont care if it was 1% i am still in favor of banning them. Just thought it was a bit of an unfair characterization of what our feline friend said. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
25 minutes ago, parasaurolophus said:

I think stealthy is speaking specifically to the ar15 when he says that, but i could be wrong. 

Looks like that 8% figure comes from a 2004 study. 

I dont care if it was 1% i am still in favor of banning them. Just thought it was a bit of an unfair characterization of what our feline friend said. 

If I see a source for 2% that is credible I’ll acknowledge it.  I haven’t yet.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, -fish- said:

If I see a source for 2% that is credible I’ll acknowledge it.  I haven’t yet.

Well all rifles accounted for 4% of gun murders.

So it seems pretty logical that assault rifles would be less than that. 

Assault rifles are not an official statistic tracked by the fbi. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Stealthycat said:

 2% of all deaths

 

4 hours ago, -fish- said:

 8% of gun crimes

 

44 minutes ago, parasaurolophus said:

 4% of gun murders.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 hours ago, Stealthycat said:

people are scared

they fear the violent people who terrorize with the rare actions of a mass shooting .... less fearful over everyday violence but its still a fear

they don't want to protect themselves, they want someone else to protect them .... and they'll agree with anything that's shouted at them that is under the disguise of " it will make you safer"

they don't have guns, they don't care if they're banned .... they don't care that other people lose rights. that's why its the way it is 

Most of us aren't scared for ourselves. You, on the other hand...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

@KarmaPolice the only one of those stats that seems to be junk is the 8%.

If we are talking gun deaths, assault rifles definitely are less than 2%. 

I personally prefer to separate suicides when talking about guns. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, -fish- said:

If a restriction decreases the type of violence that it is addressing,

good gawd

you seriously believe that without guns, people won't be violent .... that's unbelievable to me, it really is

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 hours ago, KarmaPolice said:

Amusing post coming from the guy living behind 4-5 layers of security at his house and is afraid of the government coming for his guns.  

most people live behind 5 layers or more - how many layers do you think BETO has ?

how many layers do you have? locks, fencing, neighborhood watch, dog, security lights etcetc ?

I'm not "afraid" of the Govt coming for my guns, Beto has shown us that's exactly the plan , its a reality

Edited by Stealthycat

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Stealthycat said:

good gawd

you seriously believe that without guns, people won't be violent .... that's unbelievable to me, it really is

 

Next time someone is killed with a stray knife, please let me know.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, KarmaPolice said:

This is where it starts getting :confused:

We talking gun deaths, gun crimes, or gun murders? 

you mean deaths, crimes and murders?   why does the weapon being chosen matter that much ? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, moleculo said:

Next time someone is killed with a stray knife, please let me know.

exactly - nobody is killed by a stray knife and a gun isn't violent

"467 people were killed with “blunt objects,” like hammers and clubs in 2017, 403 were killed with rifles, the recent FBI crime statistics show."

"Knives or cutting instruments” were used to kill 1,591 people, the 2017 crime figures show, while 403 were killed with rifles."

 

so now .... what sense is this rallying cry for banning semi-auto rifles ?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, parasaurolophus said:

I dont care if it was 1% i am still in favor of banning them.

brilliant logic

would you be in favor of banning a car used in 1% of all drunk driving accidents in an effort to stop drunk driving?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, KarmaPolice said:

Pretty sad if this is the state of mind you are in.  

live in my shoes the last 4 months and you would believe it too :(

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Apple Jack said:

Most of us aren't scared for ourselves. You, on the other hand...

then tell me at night, do you lock your doors? do you lock your car when you park it? do you have a security system or yard fenced or live in a gated community ? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Stealthycat said:

most people live behind 5 layers or more - how many layers do you think BETO has ?

how many layers do you have? locks, fencing, neighborhood watch, dog, security lights etcetc ?

I'm not "afraid" of the Govt coming for my guns, Beto has shown us that's exactly the plan , its a reality

Who cares how much Beto has?

I have 1 of those listed I guess, but we don't really use it (locks).   I think you are an outlier that has that much security at your house, but I could be wrong.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Stealthycat said:

you mean deaths, crimes and murders?   why does the weapon being chosen matter that much ? 

If one weapon is a lot more effective at killing people and more likely to cause death by accident, then of course the weapon matters and should be considered as part of the discussion.  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, parasaurolophus said:

@KarmaPolice the only one of those stats that seems to be junk is the 8%.

If we are talking gun deaths, assault rifles definitely are less than 2%. 

I personally prefer to separate suicides when talking about guns. 

Just pointing out that is a huge part of the frustration with this topic.  We have 3 people in a discussion and they used 3 different terms to discuss a stat.   Then you say you like to take out suicides, but some people don't.  

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, Stealthycat said:

live in my shoes the last 4 months and you would believe it too :(

HARD PASS

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, Stealthycat said:

then tell me at night, do you lock your doors? do you lock your car when you park it? do you have a security system or yard fenced or live in a gated community ? 

Yes, I lock my doors at night. No, that doesn't have anything to do with guns. Anybody coming into my house or car, is not coming to kill me. They just want to rob me. I would not shoot somebody for robbing me.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, Stealthycat said:

brilliant logic

would you be in favor of banning a car used in 1% of all drunk driving accidents in an effort to stop drunk driving?

No. As mentioned to you a million times cars are a useful tool in our society whereas assault rifles are a silly hobby.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, moleculo said:

Next time someone is killed with a stray knife, please let me know.

So you're siting intent? Death without intending to kill.

What is the intent of a drunk driver? When a drunk driver kills someone, it is the equivalent of a stray bullet. 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
27 minutes ago, KarmaPolice said:

If one weapon is a lot more effective at killing people and more likely to cause death by accident, then of course the weapon matters and should be considered as part of the discussion.  

 

You mean the way alcohol is a likely cause of death by accident? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, parasaurolophus said:

No. As mentioned to you a million times cars are a useful tool in our society whereas assault rifles are a silly hobby.

Is alcohol or cigarettes a useful tool?

Could someone consider smoking a hobby?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, KarmaPolice said:

No, not like that at all, KC.  

 

Why not?

You want to make a statement like:

37 minutes ago, KarmaPolice said:

If one weapon thing is a lot more effective at killing people and more likely to cause death by accident, then of course the weapon that thing matters and should be considered as part of the discussion.  

 

We know that hard liquor has a different effect on people than wine or beer. Does the CDC, ATF, or main stream media report what percent of DUI fatalities are caused by Jack Daniels vs Riunite Lambrusco? 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
43 minutes ago, KarmaPolice said:

Just pointing out that is a huge part of the frustration with this topic.  We have 3 people in a discussion and they used 3 different terms to discuss a stat.   Then you say you like to take out suicides, but some people don't.  

 

Really nothing wrong with using various stats, as long as they aren't fabricated or outdated. 

Its like arguing about baseball players. If one guy says that Hank Aaron was the best player because he hit the most home runs without roids and then another guy thinks it was ted williams because of his OBP. The Aaron fan cant come back and say we have to only use home runs. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For the record, I am still an occasional smoker and I would be perfectly fine if tobacco was banned. I would never advocate for it, but I'd certainly be better off for it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, Apple Jack said:

For the record, I am still an occasional smoker and I would be perfectly fine if tobacco was banned. I would never advocate for it, but I'd certainly be better off for it.

But yet, you would expect gun owners to advocate for gun bans? 

There's a word for this. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, KCitons said:

But yet, you would expect gun owners to advocate for gun bans? 

There's a word for this. 

Reasonable?

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, KCitons said:

Is alcohol or cigarettes a useful tool?

Could someone consider smoking a hobby?

Smoking bans are everywhere now. 

And alcohol is a useful tool. That's why it's used in some cough and cold remedies. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Apple Jack said:

Reasonable?

Hypocrisy. 

You admit you won't advocate for something that you know would be better for your own health. But, you criticize others?

Also, smoking pretty much guarantees a negative return, gun ownership does not. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, KCitons said:

Hypocrisy. 

You admit you won't advocate for something that you know would be better for your own health. But, you criticize others?

Also, smoking pretty much guarantees a negative return, gun ownership does not. 

He criticizes others who oppose. They are different than people who won't advocate. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Politician Spock said:

Smoking bans are everywhere now. 

And alcohol is a useful tool. That's why it's used in some cough and cold remedies. 

People still die from smoking. If we are okay with people slowly killing themselves with cigarettes, shouldn't we be okay with people killing themselves quickly with a gun? 

And guns are a useful tool. That's why they are used by police and the military. Does this mean we should ban all guns and all alcohol. Only allow them for their useful purpose? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, Politician Spock said:

He criticizes others who oppose. They are different than people who won't advocate. 

Not really. I think you're smart enough to see how this thread has progressed. There is one person in here that doesn't want any changes to gun regulations. I've made a lots of suggestions. I don't own an assault rifle. Yet, we are lumped together. 

How many people here have advocated for changes to gun laws? And how many have just criticized gun owners and hunters. It's pretty easy to identify one group. The other not so much. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Restore formatting

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.