0
brenthutch

Shocking results from CDC gun violence study!

Recommended Posts

brenthutch

******>If anyone is guilty of plagiarism, it is Guns and Ammo.

Why do you say that? Is it because you copied it from Guns and Ammo? If so, that's the first time you have admitted that. Congratulations for finally deciding to come clean after 78 posts. Better late than never I guess.



Why is how the information so important.

This seems like just a distraction from what you don't want to admit.

So fucking what - it was a paraphrase - and yes, anyone with a brain can see the statements are not exactly identical, but they are both correct in spirit and meaning.

Sorry you don't like the message - but it is what it is.

Sorry you have to now try to find a way to discredit a government organization.

Get over the stupid semantics of the issue and address the content of what the CDC actually did say.

They can't process the information, their collective minds are blown and their panties are firmly bunched. They feel confused and betrayed, the CDC report was not supposed to come out that way. Kallend, per usual, has to resort to ad hominem attacks as he lacks the capacity to engage on an intellectual level, and BillV can't get beyond Guns and Ammo.

How EXACTLY is pointing out your plagiarism an "ad hominem attack"?

I think you need a better dictionary.
...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Wow the CDC report must have really left a mark. More than 100 posts and you guys are still playing the man and not the ball. I know it is tough, science was, once and for all, going to put an end to the gun debate and it backfired, just acknowledge it and we can move on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kallend

***Because.......Science



When did Guns and Ammo become a science journal?

Approximately 90% of his post consisted of direct quotes from the CDC. The other 10% consisted of brief summaries of those quotes from G&A to encourage people to read, lest they remain willfully ignorant.

If you had anything constructive to say against the data, you would - but you don't, because you can't.
Never was there an answer....not without listening, without seeing - Gilmour

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SkyDekker

So you got it from Facebook



Yes, he got it from facebook - a private entity within a global communication network that allows carbon units to share information - even factual information that you don't want to hear.
Never was there an answer....not without listening, without seeing - Gilmour

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Coreeece

***So you got it from Facebook



Yes, he got it from facebook - a private entity within a global communication network that allows carbon units to share information - even factual information that you don't want to hear.

Even a stopped clock is right twice a day.

If you believe what you read on Facebook, it explains a lot of your other beliefs.
...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kallend

******So you got it from Facebook



Yes, he got it from facebook - a private entity within a global communication network that allows carbon units to share information - even factual information that you don't want to hear.

Even a stopped clock is right twice a day.

If you believe what you read on Facebook, it explains a lot of your other beliefs.

So you don't believe the CDC info because it was posted on facebook?Sounds like a bad excuse for willfull ignorance. . .
Never was there an answer....not without listening, without seeing - Gilmour

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You keep saying this is a case of plagiarism. It's not in my definition. In today's technological time's the internet and social media sites like Face book are hyped up as way's to get more information to more of the population faster and way's to communicate. That's what he did. He shared information on an device made for that and said right away where he got it from.He did not lead me to believe in any way that this was his work. Nor is he a reporter trying to earn a paycheck, or one of your students turning in a paper and trying to get credit for it as his own.
And yes I looked up the definition of plagiarism on the computer, using google, and it took me to dictionary.com. Don't want to be accused of plagiarism.;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Coreeece

*********So you got it from Facebook



Yes, he got it from facebook - a private entity within a global communication network that allows carbon units to share information - even factual information that you don't want to hear.

Even a stopped clock is right twice a day.

If you believe what you read on Facebook, it explains a lot of your other beliefs.

So you don't believe the CDC info because it was posted on facebook?Sounds like a bad excuse for willfull ignorance. . .

What brenthutch copied word-for-word (and without attribution or any indication that he had copied it) from Facebook was not from the CDC. It was itself copied word-for-word from a three year old article in Guns and Ammo. Brenthutch even admitted when challenged that he didn't know its source yet he posted it anyway as if it were objective truth.
...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
brenthutch

Wow the CDC report must have really left a mark. More than 100 posts and you guys are still playing the man and not the ball. I know it is tough, science was, once and for all, going to put an end to the gun debate and it backfired, just acknowledge it and we can move on.



It is 3 years old. Why are you now bringing it forward as this earth shattering scientific study putting an end to the gun debate?

If that was the case, wouldn't the debate have ended 3 years ago when this report actually came out?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
What ball? If you want to get down to brass tacks you have to say something. All you did was post a summary of the points G&A decided to focus on, three years ago, and then call it "shocking". Just what point would you like to address in this forum? Bring some focus if you want real discussion.
Always remember the brave children who died defending your right to bear arms. Freedom is not free.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
SkyDekker

***Wow the CDC report must have really left a mark. More than 100 posts and you guys are still playing the man and not the ball. I know it is tough, science was, once and for all, going to put an end to the gun debate and it backfired, just acknowledge it and we can move on.



It is 3 years old. Why are you now bringing it forward as this earth shattering scientific study putting an end to the gun debate?

If that was the case, wouldn't the debate have ended 3 years ago when this report actually came out?

And one wonders why the NRA backed 1996 ban on the CDC doing research on gun violence has continued under the GOP controlled Congress (which refused to fund Obama's request for the research to resume), if the CDC really finds that guns are so good for us.
...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
kallend

******Wow the CDC report must have really left a mark. More than 100 posts and you guys are still playing the man and not the ball. I know it is tough, science was, once and for all, going to put an end to the gun debate and it backfired, just acknowledge it and we can move on.



It is 3 years old. Why are you now bringing it forward as this earth shattering scientific study putting an end to the gun debate?

If that was the case, wouldn't the debate have ended 3 years ago when this report actually came out?

And one wonders why the NRA backed 1996 ban on the CDC doing research on gun violence has continued under the GOP controlled Congress (which refused to fund Obama's request for the research to resume), if the CDC really finds that guns are so good for us.

That is why the result were "shocking"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hooknswoop

Quote

What ball?



http://matthiasmedia.com/briefing/2013/03/playing-the-man-and-not-the-ball-2/

Basically Kallend's go-to move, attack the person when the facts are working against you. Keep shouting "Facebook!" and "Plagiarism!" and do not discuss the facts in the CDC study.

Derek V



What a load of utter crap. Don't people know how to scroll anymore?

Brent posted first.

Kallend then posted a WaPo article with the opposing view.

Rush played the man.

Brent didn't want to deal with the opposing view and called it biased, probably not realizing what he copied from Facebook wasn't from CDC but from Guns and Ammo.

And we are off to the races....

(just scroll up, it is all there to see, really not that difficult.)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hooknswoop

Quote

What ball?



http://matthiasmedia.com/briefing/2013/03/playing-the-man-and-not-the-ball-2/

Basically Kallend's go-to move, attack the person when the facts are working against you. Keep shouting "Facebook!" and "Plagiarism!" and do not discuss the facts in the CDC study.

Derek V



Rubbish.

The OP was not about the CDC study, it was a plagiarized 3 year old spin job from G&A.

Pointing out that it was plagiarized is not a PA.
...

The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Quote

Rubbish.

The OP was not about the CDC study, it was a plagiarized 3 year old spin job from G&A.

Pointing out that it was plagiarized is not a PA.



BillVon was kind enough to post a link to the CDC study. We can discuss the CDC study or the other nonsense. One choice is productive, the other is not.

Derek V

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Hooknswoop

Quote

Rubbish.

The OP was not about the CDC study, it was a plagiarized 3 year old spin job from G&A.

Pointing out that it was plagiarized is not a PA.



BillVon was kind enough to post a link to the CDC study. We can discuss the CDC study or the other nonsense. One choice is productive, the other is not.

Derek V



The last thing Kallend, and others, want to discuss, is the Obama's administration's CDC report. This is what they think of the CDC report: (replace Sith with NRA),

https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=QiZNSzWIaLo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

0