packersfan
Footballguy
The only thing Obama does slower than talking is taking everyone’s guns.No yet. There’s still plenty of time for him to take our guns.
The only thing Obama does slower than talking is taking everyone’s guns.No yet. There’s still plenty of time for him to take our guns.
I quoted your post because I was attempting to show you are doing the same thing you are accusing others of. Conversations go two ways and when one begins comparing golf clubs to guns they can't legitimately expect an honest discussion. This is the jon_mx "woe is me" syndrome. If you aren't going to try and rise above the fray and have meaningful discussion, don't expect others to.Then why did you quote my post? This is the issue with forums like this. Someone may be having a discussion with another poster, then someone like you jumps in and says "I didn't say that, I said this", which has nothing to do with the original conversation.
When you make sweeping generalizations about "this board", that includes all of us. Is it specifically about me? Of course not, but the generalization is bull#### because there are plenty having legitimate discussion. The attempt was made to engage everyone and all of you chose to back and forth at each other rather than engage in meaningful discussion. I can't force people to not do that. It's your decision.Don't assume that every conversation is about you. Maybe you should have had a conversation about registration with all those people in that thread that felt it was about money. Or is it not worth you time to discuss with them why they are wrong? The same way Henry made a blanket statement, but chose to avoid calling everyone an idiot. Because after all, only someone that owns more than 30 guns is an idiot.
I don't know who "you guys" is, but feel free to point out which of my positions is "idiotic" in your eyes and I'd be happy to discuss it with you. I quoted this whole comment because it's leading me to believe that you don't even know my positions here or you wouldn't have said the bold. The last sentence is exactly what I am trying to do by engaging you in the first place. Normally, I wouldn't bother but I'd like to see this place change for the better.You guys need to step back and look at your own idiocies. You rail against guns so much that it blinds your ability to think or accept another persons point of view. You think you're on the side of right because it saves lives, but choose to ignore other areas that are even more dangerous. Maybe it's you that needs to be the change you want to see.
When you make sweeping generalizations about the use of guns, that includes all of us. The massive number of law abiding gun owners that never use their guns to commit violent crimes outweighs those that do.I quoted your post because I was attempting to show you are doing the same thing you are accusing others of. Conversations go two ways and when one begins comparing golf clubs to guns they can't legitimately expect an honest discussion. This is the jon_mx "woe is me" syndrome. If you aren't going to try and rise above the fray and have meaningful discussion, don't expect others to.
When you make sweeping generalizations about "this board", that includes all of us. Is it specifically about me? Of course not, but the generalization is bull#### because there are plenty having legitimate discussion. The attempt was made to engage everyone and all of you chose to back and forth at each other rather than engage in meaningful discussion. I can't force people to not do that. It's your decision.
I don't know who "you guys" is, but feel free to point out which of my positions is "idiotic" in your eyes and I'd be happy to discuss it with you. I quoted this whole comment because it's leading me to believe that you don't even know my positions here or you wouldn't have said the bold. The last sentence is exactly what I am trying to do by engaging you in the first place. Normally, I wouldn't bother but I'd like to see this place change for the better.
I've said that, and I feel that way. Although not from a punishing perspective. I think the NRA and most pro-gun folks have not compromised or made any concessions for decades. The children that are in schools now lived through school shootings the way that none of us have. They grew up with it and they've watched the adults do nothing about it. These kids are coming up on voting age and are going to be getting into positions of leadership themselves over the next 10 years and they'll make changes, changes that will probably be too drastic and changes I probably won't want personally.No, the analogies don't work because anti gun people only see things one way.
I've been willing to discuss compromises that include background checks, limited magazine capacity, and limited caliber size for certain types of guns. Some of the responses were that it's too late for that. That gun owners should have made changes a long time ago, and because they didn't, they need to be punished with outright bans. The fact that someone makes a statement like that shows that they don't think the answer is to ban guns, but they want to over punish for the lack of change thus far. That to me is being pretty silly.
Commenting that someone owning more than 10 guns makes them a gun nut just proves that the anti gun people are uneducated when it comes to the use of guns. Multiple posters already pointed out why they have 10 or more guns. Because they each have a particular purpose or sentimental meaning. After Henry Ford posted that having 30 of anything makes someone an idiot, I started a thread in the FFA "what do you have 30 or more of". Three pages of idiot responses. Not one from Henry calling each of them idiots? When people posted that we need to register guns like cars, because doing so makes the world safer, I pointed out that auto registration has nothing to do with safety it has to do with money. Again, I created a thread in the FFA, "why do we register our car every year, but our drivers license is good for 4-10 years". Overall sentiment is because of money, not because of safety.
Those that want to discuss gun control want to talk about it in a vacuum. When they make a point, I compare it to other things we have that are similar. To say that a gun was made to kill is fine, but that is not the sole purpose of a gun. And definitely not to kill people. Especially not today. A vast majority of guns are purchased for hunting or target shooting or just for personal enjoyment.
I can continue to discuss possible compromises that I would be willing to make that may save lives. Or, when someone makes a post that I think it ridiculous, I can stay within my vacuum and simply post 2nd Amendment or NRA as a response. In the end, that's what stands on the opposing side and will be difficult for the other side to get around.
I saw thatAll we need to do is put Edelman at every school. And dotcom. And military base. And movie theatre. And casino.
no there are not "lots more" police station shootings if you mean there are many many examples of people attacking police stationsIt was literally the first google result for police station shooting. There are lots more.
No, I didn't. I did not say that. I never said that. I didn't see that thread, and if I had I would have explained to you in that thread that you're mischaracterizing what I said, which is a pretty disingenuous way to have a conversation.After Henry Ford posted that having 30 of anything makes someone an idiot, I started a thread in the FFA "what do you have 30 or more of". Three pages of idiot responses. Not one from Henry calling each of them idiots?
Provide a credible source for this, please.almost all mass shootings that do not happen in private homes happen in gun free zones
That's going to be tough, given that I posted the research saying that's not true somewhere on this board recently.Provide a credible source for this, please.
credible for you ?Provide a credible source for this, please.
all depends on how you define it doesn't it ?That's going to be tough, given that I posted the research saying that's not true somewhere on this board recently.
Uh, no, John Lott and the Crime Prevention Research Center are not credible sources.
Politifact found the claim that most mass shootings are in gun free zones inconclusive:Provide a credible source for this, please.
No, crimesearch.org and John Lott are NOT credible for me. Nor should they be for you.
who did they reference with the information they got ?Uh, no, John Lott and the Crime Prevention Research Center are not credible sources.
so you cross referenced what they said and found it to be untrue ?No, crimesearch.org and John Lott are NOT credible for me. Nor should they be for you.
They lied about having a peer reviewed article that was rejected by the publication they said it was in. That makes them not credible.who did they reference with the information they got ?
and BTW you don't get to dictate who is and isn't credible to suite your own ideas. sorry
You're the only one mentioning CNN, champ.so you cross referenced what they said and found it to be untrue ?
or it doesn't meet with what you are told by CNN and so it is automatically dismissed ?
Exactly. That's why I am pretty clear and don't use generalizations. If you'd pay attention, you'd see I am being the change I want to seeWhen you make sweeping generalizations about the use of guns, that includes all of us. The massive number of law abiding gun owners that never use their guns to commit violent crimes outweighs those that do.I quoted your post because I was attempting to show you are doing the same thing you are accusing others of. Conversations go two ways and when one begins comparing golf clubs to guns they can't legitimately expect an honest discussion. This is the jon_mx "woe is me" syndrome. If you aren't going to try and rise above the fray and have meaningful discussion, don't expect others to.
When you make sweeping generalizations about "this board", that includes all of us. Is it specifically about me? Of course not, but the generalization is bull#### because there are plenty having legitimate discussion. The attempt was made to engage everyone and all of you chose to back and forth at each other rather than engage in meaningful discussion. I can't force people to not do that. It's your decision.
I don't know who "you guys" is, but feel free to point out which of my positions is "idiotic" in your eyes and I'd be happy to discuss it with you. I quoted this whole comment because it's leading me to believe that you don't even know my positions here or you wouldn't have said the bold. The last sentence is exactly what I am trying to do by engaging you in the first place. Normally, I wouldn't bother but I'd like to see this place change for the better.
Be the change you want to see.
Oh, and 2nd Amendment.
if the analysis of data and the sources are lied about and fraudulent and changed to meet an end goal agenda I'd agree with youCall me crazy but I don't think a guy whose fellowship was funded by the Olin Corporation (one of the largest ammo manufacturers in the world) would be an unbiased and reliable source on gun violence.
almost all mass shootings that do not happen in private homes happen in gun free zones
You posted the crimesearch.org stuff in order to back up your statement about "almost all mass shootings..."if the analysis of data and the sources are lied about and fraudulent and changed to meet an end goal agenda I'd agree with you
are they though ?
lets look at some basic things
So you see, lies built on lies leads to people believing things that are not true.
- "assault weapon" is a made up term with no definition really
- there are no military weapons on the streets
- a full 2/3 of gun deaths are people killing themselves
- AR15's are not the weapons of choice in gun crimes and not even the majority of the weapon in mass murders
- 18-21 isn't the age group killing people
- bump stocks have been used, once, ever in gun crimes that I can find
Possibly because it just involved one school in the entire state, compared to hundreds of schoos nationwide who had walk outs to call attention to anti-gun legislation. Plus the numbers were not that large, several dozen students versus hundreds in the other walk outs. http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/high-schoolers-stage-walkout-support-gun-laws-article-1.3916222I'll mention CNN again
CNN isn't reporting the pro 2nd Amendment school walkout in Colorado. Why? They're so big on reporting school students being politically active .... why are they not all over this ?
agenda?
the let believes a LOT of what isn't real - I listed a few of themYou posted the crimesearch.org stuff in order to back up your statement about "almost all mass shootings..."
Not sure what the rest of this has to do with that. You're off on a tangent.
but imagine if CNN did report it, and sparked other students who are pro-gun to rally around the nation and get a snowball of students being political going again, wouldn't that be awesome ?Possibly because it just involved one school in the entire state, compared to hundreds of schoos nationwide who had walk outs to call attention to anti-gun legislation. Plus the numbers were not that large, several dozen students versus hundreds in the other walk outs. http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/high-schoolers-stage-walkout-support-gun-laws-article-1.3916222
John Lott is a charlatan and a snake oil salesman. Find a peer-reviewed source that says what you're looking for. Barring that, find someone with credibility. Barring that, at least try to avoid citing an inveterate liar.the let believes a LOT of what isn't real - I listed a few of them
that mass shootings happens in gun free zones and they don't want to believe that is another perhaps ?
My favorite John Lott story is when, as a teacher, he created fictional students to post glowing reviews about him: “The best professor I’ve ever had!”
John Baron is envious...
http://i.imgur.com/kxay0.gifthe let believes a LOT of what isn't real - I listed a few of them
that mass shootings happens in gun free zones and they don't want to believe that is another perhaps ?
Fox News covered it, which I imagine is the favorite cable news station for these kids. Bunch of other media outlets did too, like The NY Daily News, ThinkProgress, not to mention all the Colorado related news sites like The Denver Post. If there is going to be a snowball effect, there has been enough coverage to start it.but imagine if CNN did report it, and sparked other students who are pro-gun to rally around the nation and get a snowball of students being political going again, wouldn't that be awesome ?
but if they don't report it, that won't help those students cause at all will it ?
Dude, you are quoting the same link I provided earlier, which not surprisingly, you didn't bother to read.
Possibly because it just involved one school in the entire state, compared to hundreds of schoos nationwide who had walk outs to call attention to anti-gun legislation. Plus the numbers were not that large, several dozen students versus hundreds in the other walk outs. http://www.nydailynews.com/news/national/high-schoolers-stage-walkout-support-gun-laws-article-1.3916222
Student speakers voiced their opinions, too, including one who said he believes current gun laws are adequate, and should not be tightened.
“We believe that it will ultimately just lessen the school shootings rather than if we were to ban all guns,” he said.
It's an opinion piece from a non-journalist.ya'll can google
http://www.politifact.com/florida/statements/2017/feb/21/richard-corcoran/do-most-mass-shootings-happen-gun-free-zones/
the report was good enough for USA TODAY
https://www.usatoday.com/story/opinion/2018/02/15/repeal-gun-free-zones-erich-pratt-editorials-debates/110464412/
Two months ago they published one from Jerome Corsi.Erich Pratt is the executive director of Gun Owners of America, a grassroots lobby representing more than 1.5 million gun owners.
And that's most - rather than 98% as the CPRC claims.Dude, you are quoting the same link I provided earlier, which not surprisingly, you didn't bother to read.
As noted previously, they found the claim that most mass shootings happen in gun free zones inconclusive.
time will tellFox News covered it, which I imagine is the favorite cable news station for these kids. Bunch of other media outlets did too, like The NY Daily News, ThinkProgress, not to mention all the Colorado related news sites like The Denver Post. If there is going to be a snowball effect, there has been enough coverage to start it.
Bottom line is there is that comparatively, only a small percentage of HS students would be interested in a pro 2nd Amendment, pro NRA, pro gun rights walkout or march, which is why nothing of note materialized in response to the thousands who participated in The March For Our Lives
sometimes I miss posted - not intentionalDude, you are quoting the same link I provided earlier, which not surprisingly, you didn't bother to read.
As noted previously, they found the claim that most mass shootings happen in gun free zones inconclusive.
James Fenimore CooperIt's an opinion piece from a non-journalist.Erich Pratt is the executive director of Gun Owners of America, a grassroots lobby representing more than 1.5 million gun owners.
Two months ago they published one from Jerome Corsi.
Wait....you think the purpose of a news network is to cover events in order to spark others to do the same thing and help the cause of those they report on? I thought it was to inform viewers of important occurrences (and the sinking of ships 100 years ago when it's important not to cover current items).but imagine if CNN did report it, and sparked other students who are pro-gun to rally around the nation and get a snowball of students being political going again, wouldn't that be awesome ?
but if they don't report it, that won't help those students cause at all will it ?
103 years, one month, and two days to the anniversary of the sinking of the Lusitania.Wait....you think the purpose of a news network is to cover events in order to spark others to do the same thing and help the cause of those they report on? I thought it was to inform viewers of important occurrences (and the sinking of ships 100 years ago when it's important not to cover current items).
Another good one to hold onto. Fox needs all of these it can get.103 years, one month, and two days to the anniversary of the sinking of the Lusitania.
So HALF FALSE is good enough for "credible" these days.Our assessment is that it is difficult to draw broad conclusions about the motivations of the perpetrators of mass shootings or whether they are influenced by gun restrictions. We rate Corcoran’s statement Half True.
I'll say it again, I completely dig that we had such a cool ship name. I would much rather serve on the Cyclops than the Harold J. Ellison.Another good one to hold onto. Fox needs all of these it can get.
On March 14, as Rex Tillerson was fired, Trump's assistant John McEntee was fired, and Connor Lamb declared victory in Pennsylvania, Fox News's top story (for some period of time) was this.
I only wish the Ku Klux Klan hadn't ruined the title of "Cyclops."I'll say it again, I completely dig that we had such a cool ship name.
I think you're really underestimating the ol' hj.I would much rather serve on the Cyclops than the Harold J. Ellison.