|
tsa posted:Studies on guns are hilariously bad, on average. Among the ones with decent methodology they are pretty much mixed in their view on gun control. It's safe to say, statistically, that guns have a very small effect on safety in either direction, if any. So you're making a claim without any data what-so-ever, while also attacking the research of any number of scientist based upon other claims you make with no evidence, right? tsa posted:The good standard studies on guns and suicide show very little to no correlation, once adjusting for lurking variables. People who actually want to commit suicide substitute for other methods that are equally effective. Do you have any evidence for your claims about "lurking variables" or are you going to just keep using nothing but your own word to hand wave all science on guns?
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2016 02:30
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 17:52 |
|
|
Trabisnikof posted:So you're making a claim without any data what-so-ever, while also attacking the research of any number of scientist based upon other claims you make with no evidence, right? Tsa is good at that. See: His posts in the I/P thread, in the Bundy thread, etc.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2016 02:32
|
|
|
icantfindaname posted:Whoever said gun owners should be shot, I agree. We can even take a page from The Donald's playbook and shoot their families too It's a shame that you're so terrified of guns that the best you can do is fantasize about the armed leftist insurrection and killing gunhavers. It's a riot how you and your fellow betas always need someone else to carry out your violent plans.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2016 02:33
|
|
|
Pauline Kael posted:It's a riot how you and your fellow betas always need someone else to carry out your violent plans. Obviously Pauline Kael is an alpha dog that leads the pack Or a fish. Dunno which.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2016 02:35
|
|
|
A lot of authoritarian anti-intellectuals in this thread here.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2016 02:41
|
|
|
LeJackal posted:A lot of authoritarian anti-intellectuals in this thread here. 14. The number of times the word 'Gun' appears in your rap sheet. \/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/ I don't know how to respond to this foam-at-the-mouth stuff. But let me finish my hot pocket first. CommieGIR fucked around with this message at 02:48 on Jan 13, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2016 02:44
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:Obviously Pauline Kael is an alpha dog that leads the pack Hot take, poster commiegir. I'm sure you're part of the vanguard that's ready to carry out the violent plans of less able souls like icantfindname against the normals and their cishet traditionalist view of rights. Right after you finish that hot pocket and your dad lets you use his car, for sure.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2016 02:46
|
|
|
Pauline Kael posted:It's a shame that you're so terrified of guns that the best you can do is fantasize about the armed leftist insurrection and killing gunhavers. It's a riot how you and your fellow betas always need someone else to carry out your violent plans. tell me more about your philosophy of betas, if you refuse to tell us about what particular thoughts the liberal thoughtpolice have been putting you in the public stocks and flogging you for
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2016 02:47
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:14. Yeah you sure showed him, I doubt the second amendment can survive long against your moral and urgent onslaught.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2016 02:48
|
|
|
Pauline Kael posted:Yeah you sure showed him, I doubt the second amendment can survive long against your moral and urgent onslaught. Not if my dad doesn't let me borrow the car.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2016 02:51
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:tell me more about your philosophy of betas, if you refuse to tell us about what particular thoughts the liberal thoughtpolice have been putting you in the public stocks and flogging you for You're not a mod anymore, jackass. Keep up the good work though, I'm sure there some pedophile that needs some pro bono legal help.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2016 02:52
|
|
|
Pauline Kael posted:You're not a mod anymore, jackass. Keep up the good work though, I'm sure there some pedophile that needs some pro bono legal help. "i'm so sick of you demonizing your opponents, its just what i expect from a pedo-loving liberal human being"
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2016 02:53
|
|
|
Pauline Kael posted:You're not a mod anymore, jackass. Keep up the good work though, I'm sure there some pedophile that needs some pro bono legal help. A thorough and well thought out argument. We are beaten.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2016 02:55
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:Not if my dad doesn't let me borrow the car. Yeah too bad, icantfindname is getting shoved into a locker again and certainly can't start his gunhaver execution scheme from there with his underwear up over the point on his head. Maybe when you guys meet up at party headquarters you can go over how the plan went wrong but just be quick about it before the quarters run out or someone knocks on the booth door.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2016 02:56
|
|
|
Pauline Kael posted:Yeah too bad, icantfindname is getting shoved into a locker again and certainly can't start his gunhaver execution scheme from there with his underwear up over the point on his head. Maybe when you guys meet up at party headquarters you can go over how the plan went wrong but just be quick about it before the quarters run out or someone knocks on the booth door. You think about this way too much.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2016 02:59
|
|
|
CommieGIR posted:You think about this way too much. Not just this. On that note, fellow goons, I shall take my leave for this evening. Goddess bless, (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2016 03:03
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:if i dont have a gun in my house when an intruder comes how will i Cases like this are pretty poo poo. It's scary to have your house broken into. You wake up in the middle of the night, not suspecting, but knowing that someone is there. Your adrenaline glands go nuts and that primitive reptilian part of your brain screams gibberish. A lot of those accidents wouldn't happen if the people involved practiced basic gun rules. Finger off the trigger, gun pointed down until you're ready to shoot. If you're going to own one for self-defense, you should have some basic knowledge about how to use it. Then again, I never understood why people would go looking for the person in their house. Stay in your room or your hallway or whatever and wait it out if you're that drat scared. You're better off in a defensive position anyways. icantfindaname posted:Whoever said gun owners should be shot, I agree. We can even take a page from The Donald's playbook and shoot their families too what if it's like werewolves what if they all turn into guns 
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2016 03:42
|
|
|
Logically speaking, if the majority of people are unable to practice basic gun safety enough to avoid shooting their children thinking they're burglars, that would seem to suggest that we shouldn't encourage people to own guns for home defense. This, of course, is why we have phantom self-defense uses, to keep this unpleasant conclusion from interfering with our right to repeatedly polish our collection.
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2016 03:48
|
|
|
Effectronica posted:Logically speaking, if the majority of people are unable to practice basic gun safety enough to avoid shooting their children thinking they're burglars, that would seem to suggest that we shouldn't encourage people to own guns for home defense. This, of course, is why we have phantom self-defense uses, to keep this unpleasant conclusion from interfering with our right to repeatedly polish our collection. Pretty big if you have there, though.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2016 03:53
|
|
|
LeJackal posted:Pretty big if you have there, though. if only there was a study about if your gun was far more likely to shoot a family member rather than an intruder that could resolve that
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2016 04:00
|
|
LeJackal posted:Pretty big if you have there, though. It's too bad y'all implemented some gosh-darn chilling effects against the CDC and thought it justified, ain't it?
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2016 04:02
|
|
|
Effectronica posted:Logically speaking, if the majority of people are unable to practice basic gun safety enough to avoid shooting their children thinking they're burglars, that would seem to suggest that we shouldn't encourage people to own guns for home defense. This, of course, is why we have phantom self-defense uses, to keep this unpleasant conclusion from interfering with our right to repeatedly polish our collection. It seems evident that the majority can.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2016 04:14
|
|
SedanChair posted:It seems evident that the majority can. The majority of people, the majority of gun owners, the majority of people who bought a gun explicitly for home defense? These are all going to produce different results, no? And maybe the solution is just good ol' fashioned censoring of advertising and scaremongering.
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2016 04:17
|
|
|
They should do a better job of prosecuting people for bad shoots. A number of cases from Texas and Florida come to mind. I'm fine with owning and using a gun for self-defense, but if you make the wrong call, you should be held accountable. Seems like some people seek needless confrontation and use the law to excuse the results. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2016 04:36
|
|
|
NerdyMcNerdNerd posted:It would be interesting to have the CDC and such do some studies. They should be allowed to do their research. The whole point of it is to get more information. If you believe what you advocate is the truth, you should welcome it. They are allowed to do said research. Always have been. They were disallowed from using said research to push gun control policy. The only threat now is that the idiots in the House will try to defund them. NerdyMcNerdNerd posted:They should do a better job of prosecuting people for bad shoots. A number of cases from Texas and Florida come to mind. I'm fine with owning and using a gun for self-defense, but if you make the wrong call, you should be held accountable. At the same time, the last thing anyone needs is more armchair quarterbacking when they acted within the law. I mean, the government argues against that for police all the time in identical situations, and they are as a class involved in vastly more bad shoots a year than CCW holders as a whole. Effectronica posted:The majority of people, the majority of gun owners, the majority of people who bought a gun explicitly for home defense? These are all going to produce different results, no? And maybe the solution is just good ol' fashioned censoring of advertising and scaremongering. Given the number of guns in circulation versus the number of accidentally killed children, I'd say none of these results are going to be statistically significant. But sure, you just keep building that strawman. Liquid Communism fucked around with this message at 04:52 on Jan 13, 2016 |
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2016 04:44
|
|
|
NerdyMcNerdNerd posted:They should do a better job of prosecuting people for bad shoots. A number of cases from Texas and Florida come to mind. I'm fine with owning and using a gun for self-defense, but if you make the wrong call, you should be held accountable. Shooting someone mistakenly isn't a crime, even if you're swirling your gun around your finger and it kills someone. It is "gun control" to try and change this.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2016 05:10
|
|
|
Actually it is a crime in just about any jurisdiction you'd care to name.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2016 05:21
|
|
|
Liquid Communism posted:At the same time, the last thing anyone needs is more armchair quarterbacking when they acted within the law. I mean, the government argues against that for police all the time in identical situations, and they are as a class involved in vastly more bad shoots a year than CCW holders as a whole. The police should also be raked over the coals for bad shoots. I can think of a number of them in the past year or so that should have resulted in trials, at the very least. For what it's worth, I agree with castle doctrine, disagree with stand your ground, and disagree with a duty to retreat. If you seek out confrontation and escalate a situation to the point where lethal force becomes necessary, or if you use it mistakenly, I'm A-OK with the long arm of the law reaching way up your rear end in a top hat, regardless of your profession. -Troika- posted:Actually it is a crime in just about any jurisdiction you'd care to name. Pretty sure he's kidding.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2016 05:36
|
|
|
Effectronica posted:The majority of people, the majority of gun owners, the majority of people who bought a gun explicitly for home defense? These are all going to produce different results, no? In every case they are a vast majority, and manage not to shoot their own kids.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2016 05:42
|
|
|
-Troika- posted:Actually it is a crime in just about any jurisdiction you'd care to name. It is amazing how little you know about the topic you seem to care so much about. NerdyMcNerdNerd posted:Pretty sure he's kidding. Sadly I am not. http://www.cbsnews.com/news/when-is-an-accidental-shooting-really-a-crime/ quote:Last month, Florida prosecutors decided not to press charges against a man who fatally shot his pregnant friend while showing off one of his guns.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2016 06:06
|
|
|
To be fair, it isn't like Florida is a real state. It's just a meth-fueled Thunderdome where the rule of law randomly, briefly asserts itself like the last flickers of a madman's sanity. Also, there is no loving way that guy didn't shoot his friend on purpose.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2016 06:24
|
|
|
NerdyMcNerdNerd posted:The police should also be raked over the coals for bad shoots. I can think of a number of them in the past year or so that should have resulted in trials, at the very least. For what it's worth, I agree with castle doctrine, disagree with stand your ground, and disagree with a duty to retreat. I think we're on pretty much the same page as far as what we see as reasonable. I just worry about making people criminals after the fact because someone sitting calmly in a chair at the office thinks they could have 'shot to wound' or some other bullshit based on a perception of firearms entirely from action movies and police procedural drama shows.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2016 07:11
|
|
|
tsa posted:The good standard studies on guns and suicide show very little to no correlation, once adjusting for lurking variables. People who actually want to commit suicide substitute for other methods that are equally effective. This is hilariously wrong. http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/ss5307a1.htm Yes, suicide by gunshot is by far the most effective means, and it's not even close. Also, that was the latest study I could find... can't imagine why the gently caress that would be though. quote:The problem with studies on this topic is that they often use naive methods that assume each person who attempted suicide had an equal desire to kill themselves but we know that's not the case at all, many "attempted suicides" are cries for help and purposefully use methods that are very unlikely to work. Once you adjust for that the gun effect disappears. This is really the problem with public consumption of studies in the first place- laypeople don't have the training to tell if the study is actually any good or not or what the potential issues are. So the end effect is, as we see, people discard good studies that don't agree with their worldview and blindly accept any study that agrees. Of course most suicide attempts are cries for help, only if you try it with a gun you have an 85% of never getting that help because you're loving dead. Asphyxiation on the other hand is not only tried half as much as guns, but it's also the only method besides guns that has a success rate above 50%. So really, restricting gun ownership is actually a net good from a mental health position... you know that same position that gets trotted out by
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2016 09:44
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:if only there was a study about if your gun was far more likely to shoot a family member rather than an intruder that could resolve that
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2016 17:36
|
|
|
Liberals banning guns out of fear of a mass shooting is somewhat analogous to conservatives banning Syrian refugees out of fear of a terrorist attack.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2016 17:39
|
|
|
my right to pursue happiness involves shooting you in the head, sorry nothing you can do, its a rightSulphuric rear end in a top hat posted:Liberals banning guns out of fear of a mass shooting is somewhat analogous to conservatives banning Syrian refugees out of fear of a terrorist attack. i was unaware liberal candidates for president had called for the banning of guns
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2016 17:45
|
|
NathanScottPhillips posted:So what. It's a right. Trading rights for security is not a good thing to do. We should not trade our right to smoke a pack a day for security against lung cancer. We should not trade our right to eat whatever we want for security against mercury contamination. We should not trade our right to wear whatever we want for security against head injuries.
|
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2016 17:46
|
|
|
NathanScottPhillips posted:So what. It's a right. Trading rights for security is not a good thing to do. Says who, exactly? Rights and security are both good things, and part of politics is to find a suitable balance between the two. That involves trading one for the other.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2016 17:51
|
|
|
NathanScottPhillips posted:So what. It's a right. Trading rights for security is not a good thing to do. Cool, I'm gonna go yell fire in a crowded theater because my rights obviously trumps public safety. 
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2016 17:51
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 3, 2024 17:52 |
|
|
NathanScottPhillips posted:So what. It's a right. Trading rights for security is not a good thing to do.
|
|
#
?
Jan 13, 2016 17:54
|
|