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? (1/27/2013 4:34:10 PM)
Did I also mention in this study that defenders using a gun, perception that if the gun was not used someone would have died Almost certainly not 20.8% Problably not 19.3% Might have 16.2% Could not say 13.7% Only 64.2% called the police....yeah other victims....right [sm=dancer.gif]

imdoingitagain -> RE: What about the other victims? (1/28/2013 11:48:00 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen 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? These, apparently, being the only two options... Extreme #1 or Extreme #2, that's all you get. No middle ground...

jlf1961 -> RE: What about the other victims? (1/28/2013 11:54:08 PM)
How about this, we pass a bill that limits the law enforcement protection for liberal extremists, and not allow them to own anything deadlier than a pea shooter? Actually a better idea, deport the extremists on both sides, liberal and conservative to GITMO and release the terrorist detainees. Maybe remove the entire US presence with the exception of the extremists. Look at the tax dollars saved.

imdoingitagain -> RE: What about the other victims? (1/28/2013 11:57:03 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Nosathro Did I also mention in this study that defenders using a gun, perception that if the gun was not used someone would have died Almost certainly not 20.8% Problably not 19.3% Might have 16.2% Could not say 13.7% Only 64.2% called the police....yeah other victims....right [sm=dancer.gif] In other words, you are saying as long as no one is going to die, there is no victim..?

jlf1961 -> RE: What about the other victims? (1/29/2013 12:00:19 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: imdoingitagain quote: ORIGINAL: Nosathro Did I also mention in this study that defenders using a gun, perception that if the gun was not used someone would have died Almost certainly not 20.8% Problably not 19.3% Might have 16.2% Could not say 13.7% Only 64.2% called the police....yeah other victims....right [sm=dancer.gif] In other words, you are saying as long as no one is going to die, there is no victim..? Under that theory, it would sure cut down the number of inmates in the prison system. And he is one of those that want to take away guns.

DomKen -> RE: What about the other victims? (1/29/2013 6:13:47 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: imdoingitagain quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen 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? These, apparently, being the only two options... Extreme #1 or Extreme #2, that's all you get. No middle ground... The claim was that a woman should carry a gun to protect herself from rape. I pointed out the likely scenario and was told I erected a strawman therefore some part of that scenario had to be incorrect. I want to know which part.

Nosathro -> RE: What about the other victims? (1/29/2013 6:24:26 AM)
Now getting back to victims...here a something that really shows the true pro gun side http://news.yahoo.com/newtown-parents-urge-enforcement-gun-laws-171101155.html

Nosathro -> RE: What about the other victims? (1/29/2013 6:32:47 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: imdoingitagain quote: ORIGINAL: Nosathro Did I also mention in this study that defenders using a gun, perception that if the gun was not used someone would have died Almost certainly not 20.8% Problably not 19.3% Might have 16.2% Could not say 13.7% Only 64.2% called the police....yeah other victims....right [sm=dancer.gif] In other words, you are saying as long as no one is going to die, there is no victim..? I am showing what the results of the studied showed. Like some 160,000 of these people had a gun when they believed no one was in danger, some victim.

jlf1961 -> RE: What about the other victims? (1/29/2013 7:47:07 AM)
I have a suggestion, if you do not like private gun ownership, move to a country that does not allow it. China is a good choice, or if you prefer a tropical climate, there is Cuba.

Kirata -> RE: What about the other victims? (1/29/2013 7:51:23 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Nosathro quote: 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. I would really like to see the evidence on that one...... Where a firearm was used in a murder and the weapon could be identified, 72 percent were handguns, 4.1 percent were shotguns, and 3.7 percent were rifles. FBI Uniform Crime Reports 2011 K.

Nosathro -> RE: What about the other victims? (1/29/2013 8:57:37 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: Nosathro quote: 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. I would really like to see the evidence on that one...... Where a firearm was used in a murder and the weapon could be identified, 72 percent were handguns, 4.1 percent were shotguns, and 3.7 percent were rifles. FBI Uniform Crime Reports 2011 K. So you agree we should outlaw handguns, yeah right.[sm=mop.gif]. I am still waiting for your many people who support John Lott study, I still only have 10 and that what I gave you. But I do have some interesting little bits for you. Lott attempted two lawsuits for defamation on two people who questioned his study. Lott lost one, Steven Levitt who wrote Freakonomics, an review of Lotts' study. Lott won half the other lawsuit, his win focused on emails Lott and John McCall which was settled out of court. Since as part of any study requires independent verification John Lott used an fake persona "Mary Rosh" and sent in his own study as done by Mary Rosh. Lott claimed to have undertaken a national survey of 2,424 respondents in 1997, the results of which were the source for claims he had made beginning in 1997.[55] However, in 2000 Lott was unable to produce the data, or any records showing that the survey had been undertaken. Rumors contine that Lott work was bankrolled by the NRA and the gun manufactors. David Gross an NRA member and former board member is only one of two person who ever claimed to have taken Lotts survey. And if you think the recent Piers Morgan interview about guns was something, in July 23 2012 Harvard Law School Professor Alan Dershowitz had this to say about Lotts work Harvard Law School Professor Alan Dershowitz claimed: "This is junk science at its worst. Paid for and financed by the National Rifle Association." Lott countered: "The NRA hasn't paid for my research." Dershowitz continued: "Your conclusions are paid for and financed -- The National Rifle Association -- only funds research that will lead to these conclusions." I did not see this interview but I am told it makes Piers Morgan interview with Alex Morgan look tamed.

Nosathro -> RE: What about the other victims? (1/29/2013 9:03:30 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: jlf1961 I have a suggestion, if you do not like private gun ownership, move to a country that does not allow it. China is a good choice, or if you prefer a tropical climate, there is Cuba. I love my country, where else can someone listen to so many stand up comics. If I was going to move to another country I would go to Scotland. Oh yes God is an Englishmen.

Kirata -> RE: What about the other victims? (1/29/2013 9:54:56 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Nosathro I am still waiting for your many people who support John Lott study... I am still waiting for you to stop making shit up. I've cited Kleck, Gertz, Kates, and Mauser. Not Lott. I'll now cite Wolfgang: Gary Kleck and Marc Gertz... have provided an almost clearcut case of methodologically sound research in support of something I have theoretically opposed for years, namely, the use of a gun in defense against a criminal perpetrator... I have to admit my admiration for the care and caution expressed in this article and this research... The Kleck and Gertz study impresses me for the caution the authors exercise and the elaborate nuances they examine methodologically. I do not like their conclusions that having a gun can be useful, but I cannot fault their methodology. They have tried earnestly to meet all objections in advance and have done exceedingly well. Reference: http://www.thefreelibrary.com/A+tribute+to+a+view+I+have+opposed.-a017819461 K.

Nosathro -> RE: What about the other victims? (1/29/2013 10:47:31 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: Nosathro I am still waiting for your many people who support John Lott study... I am still waiting for you to stop making shit up. I've cited Kleck, Gertz, Kates, and Mauser. Not Lott. I'll now cite Wolfgang: Gary Kleck and Marc Gertz... have provided an almost clearcut case of methodologically sound research in support of something I have theoretically opposed for years, namely, the use of a gun in defense against a criminal perpetrator... I have to admit my admiration for the care and caution expressed in this article and this research... The Kleck and Gertz study impresses me for the caution the authors exercise and the elaborate nuances they examine methodologically. I do not like their conclusions that having a gun can be useful, but I cannot fault their methodology. They have tried earnestly to meet all objections in advance and have done exceedingly well. Reference: http://www.thefreelibrary.com/A+tribute+to+a+view+I+have+opposed.-a017819461 K. I didn't make it up, it is documented. A study of gun use in the 1990s, by David Hemenway at the Harvard Injury Control Research Centermake, on Gary Kleck. "We might expect that unlawful 'self-defense' gun uses will outnumber the legitimate and socially beneficial ones." Critics, including Hemenway, respond that these estimates are difficult to reconcile with comparable crime statistics, are subject to a high degree of sampling error, and that "because of differences in coverage and potential response errors, what exactly these surveys measure remains uncertain; mere repetition does not eliminate bias. More on Kleck: "Guns in America: National Survey on Private Ownership and Use of Firearms" by Philip J. Cook and Jens Ludwig, the authors quote the National Crime Victim Survey as finding 108,000 DGUs per year. One section of the article compares the U.S. crime rate to the number of DGUs reported by Kleck and Kleck-like studies and concludes that their estimate of the DGUs is improbably high. So you still short about 50,000 or so....You should also look at the studies not just copy some view.....

Powergamz1 -> RE: What about the other victims? (1/29/2013 5:33:57 PM)
Do you have any horses that aren't dead? This argument was over and done with a decade ago, why are you digging up the corpse now? quote: ORIGINAL: Nosathro quote: ORIGINAL: Kirata quote: ORIGINAL: Nosathro I am still waiting for your many people who support John Lott study... I am still waiting for you to stop making shit up. I've cited Kleck, Gertz, Kates, and Mauser. Not Lott. I'll now cite Wolfgang: Gary Kleck and Marc Gertz... have provided an almost clearcut case of methodologically sound research in support of something I have theoretically opposed for years, namely, the use of a gun in defense against a criminal perpetrator... I have to admit my admiration for the care and caution expressed in this article and this research... The Kleck and Gertz study impresses me for the caution the authors exercise and the elaborate nuances they examine methodologically. I do not like their conclusions that having a gun can be useful, but I cannot fault their methodology. They have tried earnestly to meet all objections in advance and have done exceedingly well. Reference: http://www.thefreelibrary.com/A+tribute+to+a+view+I+have+opposed.-a017819461 K. I didn't make it up, it is documented. A study of gun use in the 1990s, by David Hemenway at the Harvard Injury Control Research Centermake, on Gary Kleck. "We might expect that unlawful 'self-defense' gun uses will outnumber the legitimate and socially beneficial ones." Critics, including Hemenway, respond that these estimates are difficult to reconcile with comparable crime statistics, are subject to a high degree of sampling error, and that "because of differences in coverage and potential response errors, what exactly these surveys measure remains uncertain; mere repetition does not eliminate bias. More on Kleck: "Guns in America: National Survey on Private Ownership and Use of Firearms" by Philip J. Cook and Jens Ludwig, the authors quote the National Crime Victim Survey as finding 108,000 DGUs per year. One section of the article compares the U.S. crime rate to the number of DGUs reported by Kleck and Kleck-like studies and concludes that their estimate of the DGUs is improbably high. So you still short about 50,000 or so....You should also look at the studies not just copy some view.....

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

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

2.734375E-02