|
Walter posted:I don't want to be a huge douche here, and I'm not trying to pick on you specifically, but can we please not turn into Reddit with this reflexive "citations please" posting garbage? The side in a discussion that makes a claim should always be the side that backs up the claim with citations/sources; in any responsible discussion, the other side should not have to run around and figure out if what you said is true. Similarly, just because people use "citations please" as a snarky response on Reddit(that's what I'm assuming happens because it riled you, I never have occasion to visit Reddit) does not mean that all people who do it are being similarly snark; I would rather be in a discussion where everyone demands sources than a discussion where no one does.
|
# ? Jan 10, 2013 17:01 |
|
|
# ? Jun 6, 2024 19:02 |
|
Plus this thread is supposed to be about sharing ideas and data about why these emails/facebook messages are wrong or at the least misleading. I could go out and google a claim made by someone in this thread, and maybe I'll find the source they're using, or maybe I won't. But the only way to know for sure that I'm looking at the same information they're using is to ask them. Regardless of whether it's a "I like your argument and want to use it, too" or a "I don't believe you" response, I think asking for sources is a good thing.
|
# ? Jan 10, 2013 17:15 |
|
Capitalism BAD!
|
# ? Jan 10, 2013 17:16 |
|
SalTheBard posted:One of the people I posted this link too accused it of having a liberal bias and then proceeded to counter with the "War of Words" video that was posted earlier in this thread. Anytime I hear the words liberal bias or any other bias meme that the republicans have thought of, my brain shuts off and I can't continue on with the conversation anymore.
|
# ? Jan 10, 2013 17:19 |
|
ratbert90 posted:Anytime I hear the words liberal bias or any other bias meme that the republicans have thought of, my brain shuts off and I can't continue on with the conversation anymore. I feel the same way. This same person also linked this website http://memoryholeblog.com/2012/12/20/analyzing-the-newtown-narrative-sandy-hooks-disappearing-shooter-suspects/ and told me to get educated.
|
# ? Jan 10, 2013 17:27 |
|
ratbert90 posted:Anytime I hear the words liberal bias or any other bias meme that the republicans have thought of, my brain shuts off and I can't continue on with the conversation anymore.
|
# ? Jan 10, 2013 17:31 |
|
Ghost of Reagan Past posted:I'm always reminded of this research when someone accuses me of bias. Very interesting. Thanks for this.
|
# ? Jan 10, 2013 17:38 |
|
peak debt posted:When the Allies disarmed the Germans again in 1945 there were tons of weapons in private ownership. Didn't help those Germans against either the Soviet or American armies, unlike those brave American patriots who would use them to beat both, simultaneously.
|
# ? Jan 10, 2013 17:48 |
|
Ghost of Reagan Past posted:I'm always reminded of this research when someone accuses me of bias. Oh I agree completely with the article. I try to be as non-bias as possible; but if you are going to talk or debate with me, and I am the only one citing studies not from blogs of random schizophrenics, my brain tends to shut down because I don't want to loose other valuable information that I have previously stored. Such as how not to have a aneurysm.
|
# ? Jan 10, 2013 17:51 |
|
KillerJunglist posted:My one facebook "friend" is on a roll: I've determined that the issue with guns is that people in America are willing to die over them ("Pry them from my cold, dead hands"). People love their guns more than they love their children. And that's where it gets weird and crazy.
|
# ? Jan 10, 2013 17:55 |
|
This quote keeps being attibuted to George Washington on my FB feed. [quote="George Washington"] When any nation mistrusts it's citizens with guns it is sending a clear message. It no longer trusts it's citizens because such a government has evil plans. [quote] The problem is I can't find a single source that has him saying this. I'm starting to think it's completely made up.
|
# ? Jan 10, 2013 18:01 |
|
downout posted:I'm starting to think it's completely made up.
|
# ? Jan 10, 2013 18:03 |
|
seiferguy posted:I've determined that the issue with guns is that people in America are willing to die over them ("Pry them from my cold, dead hands"). People love their guns more than they love their children. And that's where it gets weird and crazy. Has anyone seen a study that shows a comparison between the number accidental child gun deaths and the number of crimes stopped by citizens using their guns? I have a feeling it the first number is much larger than the second.
|
# ? Jan 10, 2013 18:04 |
|
downout posted:This quote keeps being attibuted to George Washington on my FB feed. It's a misattribution, Morgan Freeman actually said that.
|
# ? Jan 10, 2013 19:02 |
|
There was a big study back in the 90s done by the CDC that showed that guns end up increasing your risk rather than reducing it. The NRA didn't like it, the next year the CDC had their budget cut by exactly the cost of that study and we're forbidden from doing research that could support gun control. http://www.cdc.gov/od/pgo/funding/grants/additional_req.shtm "Restrictions on lobbying activities described above also specifically apply to lobbying related to any proposed, pending, or future Federal, state, or local tax increase, or any proposed, pending, or future requirement or restriction on any legal consumer product, including its sale or marketing, including but not limited to the advocacy or promotion of gun control." Edit: I don't want to start a gun debate. If you have a gun to protect your family, I totally understand the values and feelings that go into that decision. I just hope you do a thorough risk assessment and take appropriate steps to protect yourself and family from the real dangers that an available firearm can present. Dr. Arbitrary fucked around with this message at 19:23 on Jan 10, 2013 |
# ? Jan 10, 2013 19:17 |
|
dalstrs posted:Has anyone seen a study that shows a comparison between the number accidental child gun deaths and the number of crimes stopped by citizens using their guns? I have a feeling it the first number is much larger than the second. According to this site: http://www.policymic.com/mobile/articles/21002/gun-control-debate-6-chilling-facts-about-guns-in-the-u-s There were 851 accidental deaths from guns (everyone, not just children). Preventing crimes with a gun is incredibly hard to predict. Additionally the site says half of suicides are by gunshots too. Something to think about.
|
# ? Jan 10, 2013 19:22 |
|
Not an email, but I need to post this somewhere so I don't froth with rage on facebook and get my whole family angry with me. This was posted by my ex-army cousin who is now a stay-at-home milwife popping out kids like it's out of style: And she's 100% serious. I want to bang my head against a wall.
|
# ? Jan 10, 2013 20:00 |
|
Aika posted:Not an email, but I need to post this somewhere so I don't froth with rage on facebook and get my whole family angry with me. I hate these ecards anyway, but when they get all political they become a special kind of annoying. I am confused about the "take our healthcare" thing tho. I know the rest are just conservative talking points, but I thought the right was super worried that liberals wanted to give everyone health care. Great picture too. Gun control? No way! Here, have a picture of a guy taken hostage at gun point.
|
# ? Jan 10, 2013 20:13 |
|
KillerJunglist posted:Great picture too. Gun control? No way! Here, have a picture of a guy taken hostage at gun point. Bonus points for her mom being a Chicago cop! I never heard the taking children one, though. I just can't believe I'm related to these people.
|
# ? Jan 10, 2013 20:16 |
|
I, too, randomly Capitalize words too.
|
# ? Jan 10, 2013 20:19 |
|
KillerJunglist posted:I know the rest are just conservative talking points, but I thought the right was super worried that liberals wanted to give everyone health care. No, you've got it absolutely wrong. All the honest doctors are changing professions because they don't like socialism or something. Also death panels.
|
# ? Jan 10, 2013 20:22 |
|
Dr. Arbitrary posted:There was a big study back in the 90s done by the CDC that showed that guns end up increasing your risk rather than reducing it.
|
# ? Jan 10, 2013 20:23 |
|
The part I don't understand about the "hitler took all the guns, look what happened!!" stuff (even if it were true), is there are other countries that have effectively banned guns and aren't under some crazy dictatorship, right? They say it like it will DEFINITELY happen. Doesn't England have super tough gun control laws? Or have they not gone all the way and outright banned/collected guns so it's ok? Or is it just a matter of time before English people are put into the ovens?
|
# ? Jan 10, 2013 20:31 |
|
This meme seems to be popping up on Facebook a lot and it is really bothering me. It's not like the colonists were stockpiling weapons for a Duty Free Indian Hunting Day in the Appalachians.
|
# ? Jan 10, 2013 20:40 |
|
myron cope posted:The part I don't understand about the "hitler took all the guns, look what happened!!" stuff (even if it were true), is there are other countries that have effectively banned guns and aren't under some crazy dictatorship, right? They say it like it will DEFINITELY happen. Doesn't England have super tough gun control laws? Or have they not gone all the way and outright banned/collected guns so it's ok? You'd be surprised what some people think Europe is like. I was back in the States last summer on vacation and while tubing I ran into a guy who seriously thought that western Europe is Soviet-style breadlines and 1984 police states. He didn't believe me when I told him otherwise and he was even skeptical of my claim that most Europeans even have TVs and watch American shows.
|
# ? Jan 10, 2013 20:42 |
|
Doctor Butts posted:
The colonists were stock piling weapons because revolution was already being fermented with things that had nothing to do with guns. The attempt to seize the Concord stockpiles was just the catalyst that set it off. Also the minutemen on Lexington Green got mowed down and ran off the green because as always, a small group of random people with guns do terrible when up against professional troops.
|
# ? Jan 10, 2013 20:51 |
|
Amused to Death posted:The colonists were stock piling weapons because revolution was already being fermented with things that had nothing to do with guns. The attempt to seize the Concord stockpiles was just the catalyst that set it off. I do not think that the Federal Government has literly shut a major port/city down and forced unfair laws on them. The people of Boston had good reason to stockpile guns.
|
# ? Jan 10, 2013 21:00 |
|
Why did they have to photoshop M4s into the picture?
|
# ? Jan 10, 2013 21:02 |
|
Job Truniht posted:Why did they have to photoshop M4s into the picture? The Second Amendment was written in a context where the most powerful firearms available were horribly slow and inaccurate. It is very, very important that you not see evidence of this, or you might start thinking about how it might have been dependent on that context.
|
# ? Jan 10, 2013 21:06 |
|
Why doesn't that guy have trigger discipline? Why do the redcoats have standard muskets? This picture is mind numbingly stupid.
|
# ? Jan 10, 2013 21:19 |
|
Job Truniht posted:Why doesn't that guy have trigger discipline? Why do the redcoats have standard muskets? This picture is mind numbingly stupid. Trigger discipline doesn't look badass enough.
|
# ? Jan 10, 2013 21:32 |
|
I once met a holocaust survivor who hated my (and everyone else's) German Shepherd. I couldn't blame her, really. The best part of this one is that it inadvertently rebuts talking point "progressives just hate the rich!"
|
# ? Jan 10, 2013 22:06 |
|
Geez a lot of these have been turning up lately. I think some people I actually know and talk to are starting to develop opinions based on facebook crap. Follow up that I posted for her: http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2013/01/09/mom-shot-intruder/1821905/ by her own admission the guy pleaded for her to stop shooting. This is that "Break into my house to see how I feel about gun control!" fantasy but with a scarred woman being guided by her husband to empty a clip into the intruder.
|
# ? Jan 10, 2013 23:09 |
|
This posted yet?some republicans girlfriend posted:
|
# ? Jan 10, 2013 23:09 |
|
poopinmymouth posted:This posted yet? It's pretty ballsy to say "anti-poverty programs" as a pejorative instead of some buzzword like "entitlements."
|
# ? Jan 10, 2013 23:14 |
|
poopinmymouth posted:This posted yet? "(taxes went up, spending cuts never came to fruition)" "(again, the taxes came - and we still pay them today - but the spending cuts never happened)" Our guys agreed to spending cuts and didn't cut spending, why can't your guy cut spending?!?
|
# ? Jan 10, 2013 23:17 |
|
Eulogistics posted:The side in a discussion that makes a claim should always be the side that backs up the claim with citations/sources; in any responsible discussion, the other side should not have to run around and figure out if what you said is true. Similarly, just because people use "citations please" as a snarky response on Reddit(that's what I'm assuming happens because it riled you, I never have occasion to visit Reddit) does not mean that all people who do it are being similarly snark; I would rather be in a discussion where everyone demands sources than a discussion where no one does. This, I have looked at reddit maybe like 3 times in my life so I don't know what that refers to. Googling "hitler loosened gun control" does in fact return a plethora of good sources, although the first link is an article by William L. Pierce and I'm not keen to respond to right-wingers with something an actual Neo-Nazi wrote. Citing sources is important, even on an informal internet forum! Here's an email I got from one of my dad's crazy ex-military friends. It's from the day after the election so a bit old but on topic! quote:The Will of the People Has Spoken and America Died It is a shining example of empty rhetoric combined with factual inaccuracies (Allen West lost to Wasserman Schultz? Really?) that define modern conservatism in America.
|
# ? Jan 10, 2013 23:32 |
|
quote:Now, for every $43 in tax increases, there will only be $1 in spending cuts. Not only is the ratio not even anywhere close, it's going in the opposite direction. That's because Congress couldn't reach an agreement on the spending portion of sequestration so they kicked it down the road two months and resolved what they could reach an agreement on. Maybe the author of this would've preferred no agreement was reached and all the tax increases that were scheduled to go into place would have, but I doubt it. quote:Spending will continue and continue, and raised taxes will not even come close to covering it. Obama's "the rich pay a little more" plan would only run our government for eight days per year. However many "days" funding would run the government is a lovely metric because it makes any idea seem inconsequential: "During meetings of the Joint Select Committee on Deficit Reduction — a failed attempt to avert the looming sequestration — Republicans proposed raising an estimated $50 billion per year by eliminating deductions and closing tax loopholes. That covers only 4.8 days of government spending. Republican members of the committee also proposed trimming Medicare and Medicaid spending by about $28 billion per year. That would reduce government spending by only 2.7 days if you use the McConnell-McCarthy metric." Guess we shouldn't cut entitlements or close tax loopholes, it only covers half or a quarter of the days these tax increases do. A better metric is to look at how laws change the budget deficit, and see what percentage of that gap between revenues and expenses is covered by the changes: "Under current policies, the projected 2013 deficit is about $1 trillion. So the tax hike would eliminate 6.5 to 8.5 percent of that shortfall — and would obviously have an even greater impact in later years. Over a decade, the rate hikes and other provisions affecting the wealthy would raise $968 billion, which is essentially one year of the current deficit." http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs...06cc9_blog.html quote:Meanwhile, hypothetically, if we were able to somehow liquidize the money spent on entitlements like food stamps and Obamaphones, it would come out to approximately $67,000 per household, per year (which would mean that 100% of Americans would fall well above the poverty level). Did you know that Obama started giving out free phones in 1985? You're talking about the Lifeline Program for Low-Income Consumers, and it's paid for through the Universal Service Fee put in place in 1996. It cost about $1.3 billion in 2010. (Table 1.11) Total SNAP benefits were $64.7 billion in that same year. We can do the math, because there were 114.8 million householdsp, the sum of those two programs is $574.91 per household. In reality, $67k per household would be $7,691,600,000,000, so just shy of 8 trillion dollars. quote:Instead, our worthless government continues to throw money into entitlements. Anti-poverty programs have surged by 49% in just the past decade, even after adjusting for inflation. Spending for food stamps alone has more than tripled since 2002. Over $2 billion was spent on entitlements in fiscal year 2012. It is expected that it will be at least that next year as well, and none of these figures reflect the $1.7 trillion that Obamacare is going to cost us. Yeah, gently caress poor people spending all "my money" on food. quote:Meanwhile, our worthless president issued an executive order for people like Congress members and Joe Biden to receive a pay raise to make up for the tax increase so they don't have to adjust their lavish lifestyles. He also returned to his 20-day, $4 million vacation (complete with the guy who "handles" the family dog - and gets paid $102,000 of taxpayer dollars annually to do so) in Hawaii on the day that I, along with all my coworkers, will begin to pay a minimum of $100 per month in additional taxes. Also gently caress rich people spending all their money on vacations. Is there anyone you don't misguidedly hate, because you seem to be throwing poo poo everywhere and hoping it sticks in this tantrum. quote:Obama supporters who work for a living (I know that's a small group): how do you defend your president refusing to cut entitlement spending while raising taxes? Are you HAPPY to hand over this extra money every month? Yes.
|
# ? Jan 10, 2013 23:50 |
|
KillerJunglist posted:Geez a lot of these have been turning up lately. I think some people I actually know and talk to are starting to develop opinions based on facebook crap. Wow, she could have stopped him by answering the door or at any time actually confronting the guy, gun or no gun. +150 points for hiding in the closet and ambushing the guy though.
|
# ? Jan 10, 2013 23:52 |
|
|
# ? Jun 6, 2024 19:02 |
|
MariusLecter posted:Wow, she could have stopped him by answering the door or at any time actually confronting the guy, gun or no gun. And shooting SIX TIMES and not killing him. Wild bullets out the door into residential areas are such a great thing!
|
# ? Jan 11, 2013 00:52 |