RE: What about the other victims?

RE: What about the other victims? (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

Nosathro -> RE: What about the other victims? (1/26/2013 9:41:05 PM)
I thought you said you were not in favor of a complete ban of all guns? the most prevalent gun used in drive buys is the semi auto pistol, 9mm, 10mm, 40 cal, 380, 45, actually every pistol caliber. So you have to ban all pistols. [/quote] I would really like to see the evidence on that one......

Nosathro -> RE: What about the other victims? (1/26/2013 9:42:25 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: jlf1961 quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl If you make them illegal with a stiff enough penalty for being caught with one, then offer enough on a buy back, you may find you get a big part of those as well. Just a guess. It has not worked in cities in the US that have such programs, the criminals turn in one or two while they have six or ten more at home. This is by their own words. So, try again. You have the right to opinion...but you always lack proof....

jlf1961 -> RE: What about the other victims? (1/26/2013 9:53:42 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Nosathro quote: ORIGINAL: jlf1961 quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl If you make them illegal with a stiff enough penalty for being caught with one, then offer enough on a buy back, you may find you get a big part of those as well. Just a guess. It has not worked in cities in the US that have such programs, the criminals turn in one or two while they have six or ten more at home. This is by their own words. So, try again. You have the right to opinion...but you always lack proof.... I gave links backing up my statement, but sense you missed them here and here.

Nosathro -> RE: What about the other victims? (1/26/2013 10:55:39 PM)
I find this all very interesting, especilly when I used this same report on another thread, Kirate that this report proved nothing. Now he uses to support his view. There are a few things in this report Kirate did not use, as he claims I also exclude crime victims are willing to take the risks of forcefully resisting the offender is that most offenders faced by victims choosing such an action are unarmed, or armed only with less lethal weapons. Relatively few victims try to use a gun against adversaries who are themselves armed with guns. According to this survey, offenders were armed with some kind of weapon in 48% of DGU (Meaning 52% were unarmed, really brave thise armed "other victims" are facing unarmed people with a gun). but to be hone, only 14% of all violent crime victims face offenders armed with gun. Only 19% of all DGU cases involved only assault. Only 24% of the gun defenders in the present study reported firing the gun, and only 8% report wounding an adversary Further, 17% of the gun crimes reported in the NCVS involve the offender shooting at the victim, and only 3% involve the victim suffering a gunshot wound. Only 24% of the incidents involved the defender firing their gun, and only 16% involved the defender shooting at their adversary. [89] In only 4.5% of the cases did the offender shoot at the defender (I wonder who they were shooting at in the other 84% let alone who the hit in other 96.5%) 46% of the Defender were not threaten nor attacked. 11% did have property taken. The Crime most Defender thought was being commited, burglary 33.8%, rape and sexual assualt was only 8.2%. The Offender shot at the Defender 4.5% as compaired to 24% of Defenders shooting and remember it was only 16% did they shoot at Offender only hiting the Offender 3% of the time. I also use the same FBI report that you again stated was meaningless because it came from the government. I have stated that studies like the FBI report, but yours was for 2010 the latest 2012 show crime going back up... http://www.cnn.com/2012/10/17/us/violent-crime/index.html http://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Society/2012/1018/Spike-in-assaults-leads-US-violent-crime-rate-to-first-increase-since-93 So all you Munchausen (including those "other victims") out there...sorry go solicite sympathy elsewhere[sm=boohoo.gif]

Nosathro -> RE: What about the other victims? (1/26/2013 11:00:07 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: jlf1961 quote: ORIGINAL: Nosathro quote: ORIGINAL: jlf1961 quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl If you make them illegal with a stiff enough penalty for being caught with one, then offer enough on a buy back, you may find you get a big part of those as well. Just a guess. It has not worked in cities in the US that have such programs, the criminals turn in one or two while they have six or ten more at home. This is by their own words. So, try again. You have the right to opinion...but you always lack proof.... I gave links backing up my statement, but sense you missed them here and here. First link Here was something werid, second still had no proof as to it effectness... Thursday, January 6, 1994 - Page updated at 12:00 AM E-mail article Print Do Gun Buybacks Really Do Any Good? -- Effectiveness, If Any, Is Hard To Measure By Mike Mokrzycki AP NEW YORK - A toys-for-guns swap brings in hundreds of weapons in one of New York City's toughest neighborhoods, and gun-related crime drops by more than 50 percent.

Nosathro -> RE: What about the other victims? (1/26/2013 11:12:48 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: jlf1961 Why are phone surveys valid, as referred by you in popularity of the president or someone running for that office, but not valid in this instance? The survey that was conducted in the Dewey/Truman election that showed Dewey winning was conducted by telepone.

Nosathro -> RE: What about the other victims? (1/26/2013 11:15:44 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl http://www.politifact.com/truth-o-meter/statements/2011/jul/29/judson-phillips/founder-tea-party-nation-claims-us-government-has-/ Please, do so. That 2.5 million Isnt to teach prostitutes to drink responsibly. Its for the effects of alcohol and the transmission rate of HIV. And, where are we going to study this in the US? Oh god..this is a Tea Party claim....[sm=lame.gif]

Nosathro -> RE: What about the other victims? (1/26/2013 11:38:43 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Rule quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen Do you really think asking random people over the phone, with no attempt at verifying the facts of the claims, is a proper way to measure how often something occurs? Yes. You should read the report, even the authors had questions about it's accuracy.

Nosathro -> RE: What about the other victims? (1/26/2013 11:53:29 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: tazzygirl If you make them illegal with a stiff enough penalty for being caught with one, then offer enough on a buy back, you may find you get a big part of those as well. Just a guess. The buyback offered would have to be greater than the cost of the gun so criminals could profit from it. [:D] K. Really, care to read..... http://www.philly.com/philly/news/new_jersey/20130126_ap_trentongunbuybacknetsmorethan1000weapons.html?ref=twitter.com http://sanfrancisco.cbslocal.com/2013/01/26/saturday-san-mateo-gun-buyback/ http://blog.seattlepi.com/seattlepolitics/2013/01/26/big-lines-at-gun-buyback-which-nets-a-missile-launcher/ http://www.kpbs.org/news/2013/jan/08/tucson-shootings-spark-gun-buyback/ http://www.thestewpot.org/buyback.asp You do have wit, Kirata, you should try a career in stand up comedy.

Aylee -> RE: What about the other victims? (1/27/2013 3:45:22 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: Aylee quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen FR The one and only even remotely accurate survey of defensive gun use, the National Crime Victimization Survey, which is based on face to face interviews done by Census Bureau employees shows that the defensive use of guns is much lower than the phone surveys used in this journal article. As a matter of fact the article spends an early section trying to handwave away the facts and trying to justify using a random phone sample with no attempts to verify the claims made which is a valid survey about opinions but not about facts. So. . . the chart does not count because it does not fit your reality. Great. Good of you to open your mind. No the chart is irrelevant because it does not reflect reality. The chart is data from a bunch of phone surveys. Do you really think asking random people over the phone, with no attempt at verifying the facts of the claims, is a proper way to measure how often something occurs? It seems that you go with the thought that a woman raped and strangled with her own panties is morally superior to the woman standing over her attacker with a smoking gun. I know which reality I want to live in. It would be the one in which I get to hold the smoking gun. (Do guns even smoke anymore?)

DomKen -> RE: What about the other victims? (1/27/2013 6:35:00 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Aylee quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: Aylee quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen FR The one and only even remotely accurate survey of defensive gun use, the National Crime Victimization Survey, which is based on face to face interviews done by Census Bureau employees shows that the defensive use of guns is much lower than the phone surveys used in this journal article. As a matter of fact the article spends an early section trying to handwave away the facts and trying to justify using a random phone sample with no attempts to verify the claims made which is a valid survey about opinions but not about facts. So. . . the chart does not count because it does not fit your reality. Great. Good of you to open your mind. No the chart is irrelevant because it does not reflect reality. The chart is data from a bunch of phone surveys. Do you really think asking random people over the phone, with no attempt at verifying the facts of the claims, is a proper way to measure how often something occurs? It seems that you go with the thought that a woman raped and strangled with her own panties is morally superior to the woman standing over her attacker with a smoking gun. I know which reality I want to live in. It would be the one in which I get to hold the smoking gun. (Do guns even smoke anymore?) No and your claim is repugnant beyond belief.

Yachtie -> RE: What about the other victims? (1/27/2013 6:57:56 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen No and your claim is repugnant beyond belief. Then why do you not champion the woman standing over her attacker with a smoking gun? (pro-gunners would applaud it) You do argue against the smoking gun, don't you? All the time and all over the P&R people like you do. It's always about the criminal and never about the victim. How can it be repugnant?

Nosathro -> RE: What about the other victims? (1/27/2013 7:25:19 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Aylee quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: Aylee quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen FR The one and only even remotely accurate survey of defensive gun use, the National Crime Victimization Survey, which is based on face to face interviews done by Census Bureau employees shows that the defensive use of guns is much lower than the phone surveys used in this journal article. As a matter of fact the article spends an early section trying to handwave away the facts and trying to justify using a random phone sample with no attempts to verify the claims made which is a valid survey about opinions but not about facts. So. . . the chart does not count because it does not fit your reality. Great. Good of you to open your mind. No the chart is irrelevant because it does not reflect reality. The chart is data from a bunch of phone surveys. Do you really think asking random people over the phone, with no attempt at verifying the facts of the claims, is a proper way to measure how often something occurs? It seems that you go with the thought that a woman raped and strangled with her own panties is morally superior to the woman standing over her attacker with a smoking gun. I know which reality I want to live in. It would be the one in which I get to hold the smoking gun. (Do guns even smoke anymore?) I sugguest you read the box "Smokeless ammuntion"

Nosathro -> RE: What about the other victims? (1/27/2013 7:26:30 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Yachtie quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen No and your claim is repugnant beyond belief. Then why do you not champion the woman standing over her attacker with a smoking gun? (pro-gunners would applaud it) You do argue against the smoking gun, don't you? All the time and all over the P&R people like you do. It's always about the criminal and never about the victim. How can it be repugnant? As for me I would rather champion this woman. Of course you would claim since she black she is on welfare and eating steaks. If you had read the report that is posted only 4.5% of the defenders actually shoot and hit the offender, chances are she missed anyway. http://news.yahoo.com/chicago-woman-loses-4th-child-gun-violence-050937554.html

imdoingitagain -> RE: What about the other victims? (1/27/2013 7:36:32 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Aylee (Do guns even smoke anymore?) Put enough rounds through them and they will...

DomKen -> RE: What about the other victims? (1/27/2013 7:53:10 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Yachtie quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen No and your claim is repugnant beyond belief. Then why do you not champion the woman standing over her attacker with a smoking gun? (pro-gunners would applaud it) You do argue against the smoking gun, don't you? All the time and all over the P&R people like you do. It's always about the criminal and never about the victim. How can it be repugnant? I advocate that every woman should know self defence techniques which actually work rather than some dumbass fanatsy where a woman being attacked fumbles in her purse for a handgun she has seldom fired and has never used against another human being.

Yachtie -> RE: What about the other victims? (1/27/2013 8:31:11 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: Yachtie quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen No and your claim is repugnant beyond belief. Then why do you not champion the woman standing over her attacker with a smoking gun? (pro-gunners would applaud it) You do argue against the smoking gun, don't you? All the time and all over the P&R people like you do. It's always about the criminal and never about the victim. How can it be repugnant? I advocate that every woman should know self defence techniques which actually work rather than some dumbass fanatsy where a woman being attacked fumbles in her purse for a handgun she has seldom fired and has never used against another human being. I thoroughly enjoy your strawman argumentation. I do. Really[:D]

Rule -> RE: What about the other victims? (1/27/2013 8:31:17 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Aylee (Do guns even smoke anymore?) If they do, I recommend that they stop: if they do not stop, they might get cancer.

DesideriScuri -> RE: What about the other victims? (1/27/2013 9:17:47 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Rule quote: ORIGINAL: Aylee (Do guns even smoke anymore?) If they do, I recommend that they stop: if they do not stop, they might get cancer. Those guns won't be allowed to smoke in a public restaurant or public building in Ohio. They better watch what they are doing, and where they are doing it.

DomKen -> RE: What about the other victims? (1/27/2013 10:11:23 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Yachtie quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: Yachtie quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen No and your claim is repugnant beyond belief. Then why do you not champion the woman standing over her attacker with a smoking gun? (pro-gunners would applaud it) You do argue against the smoking gun, don't you? All the time and all over the P&R people like you do. It's always about the criminal and never about the victim. How can it be repugnant? I advocate that every woman should know self defence techniques which actually work rather than some dumbass fanatsy where a woman being attacked fumbles in her purse for a handgun she has seldom fired and has never used against another human being. I thoroughly enjoy your strawman argumentation. I do. Really[:D] So it is your argument that every woman should carry a gun in hand at all times and fire it frequently and use it against many people?

Page: << < prev 2 3 4 [5] 6 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.046875