BAN GARLIC

[billvon 2,400]

19 minutes ago, brenthutch said:

What lefties struggle with is the solution that Coreese has so clearly illustrated.  It is the efficacy of a program that doesn’t involve a big government solution is what lefties are unable to wrap their brains around.

This "lefty" will support anything that works.  Let's cancel the wall and transfer that money to Ceasefire (or a similar program) and make it harder for criminals to get guns.   Because at this point, if that wall keeps people like this IN, and keeps the less-criminal immigrants OUT, it's going to do a lot more harm than good.

[JoeWeber 2,299]

4 hours ago, JoeWeber said:

While we're trying to adopt programs that reduce all gun homicides, can we not start by banning assault rifles and high capacity magazines? I don't know if the El Paso shooter used an AR-15 style weapon but in the video I just listened to I heard at least 11 shots fired in quick succession. Except for indiscriminately killing humans what purpose do assault weapons and high capacity magazines serve? I have several guns and oppose a general ban but some weapons just make no sense to me.

My bad. Looks to me like an AK-47 knock off with a banana clip. In the words of Samual Jackson, " AK-47, the very best there is. When you absolutely, positively got to kill every motherfucker in the room..."

Well he did have the good sense to wear ear protection so at least his NRA training wasn't a complete waste.

[headoverheels 291]

2 hours ago, JoeWeber said:

Well he did have the good sense to wear ear protection so at least his NRA training wasn't a complete waste.

 

Maybe ear protection, maybe headphones for music appreciation.

 

[jakee 1,255]

8 hours ago, brenthutch said:

What lefties struggle with is the solution that Coreese has so clearly illustrated.  It is the efficacy of a program that doesn’t involve a big government solution is what lefties are unable to wrap their brains around.

Oakland, Richmond and San Fransisco are Democrat controlled at every level of government. The solutions that you say work are lefty solutions.

 

Does this "“In Oakland, we’ve embraced the notion that we can’t arrest our way out of the gun violence epidemic,” Oakland Mayor Libby Schaaf said in a statement. “Instead, we looked at who was actually most at risk of engaging in violence, and worked together as a community to open a new door for them.”" sound like something a lefty would have trouble with, or something a law and order righty would have trouble with? I mean, not arresting every criminal to reduce crime? Yeah, that's sounds like a familiar part of the Repblican manifesto.

 

By the way, do you have any comment on the fact that your data was a lie? Any inclination to revise the opinions you espoused on the nature of America's problems that were based on that lie?

[kallend 1,623]

3 hours ago, jakee said:

Oakland, Richmond and San Fransisco are Democrat controlled at every level of government. The solutions that you say work are lefty solutions.

 

Does this "“In Oakland, we’ve embraced the notion that we can’t arrest our way out of the gun violence epidemic,” Oakland Mayor Libby Schaaf said in a statement. “Instead, we looked at who was actually most at risk of engaging in violence, and worked together as a community to open a new door for them.”" sound like something a lefty would have trouble with, or something a law and order righty would have trouble with? I mean, not arresting every criminal to reduce crime? Yeah, that's sounds like a familiar part of the Repblican manifesto.

 

By the way, do you have any comment on the fact that your data was a lie? Any inclination to revise the opinions you espoused on the nature of America's problems that were based on that lie?

People believe even obvious lies and disregard obvious truths because doing that is what validates their own feelings.  We see it here most obviously in Ron, BH and Marc.

[kallend 1,623]

21 hours ago, Coreece said:

That's fine, ignore the evidence if you want -  but it doesn't change the fact that it's much more realistic than anything you've proposed.

 

All this talk about banning garlic and gorillas in the room.  Are you capable of articulating your thoughts and having a conversation like a normal person instead of playing these stupid word games?  If you have something meaningful to say, the please, for the love of fuck, spit it out.

Well, we HAD a long running, sensible thread about mass shootings that was shut down by the moderators because YOU, Coreece, had derailed it into a stupid and pointless argument  on the definition of zygotes.

So cast the beam out of your own eye before worrying about motes in others' eyes.

[JoeWeber 2,299]

11 hours ago, headoverheels said:

Maybe ear protection, maybe headphones for music appreciation.

 

Guns don't kill people, ear protection kills people. That's it.

[JoeWeber 2,299]

14 hours ago, JoeWeber said:

My bad. Looks to me like an AK-47 knock off with a banana clip. In the words of Samual Jackson, " AK-47, the very best there is. When you absolutely, positively got to kill every motherfucker in the room..."

Well he did have the good sense to wear ear protection so at least his NRA training wasn't a complete waste.

 

Next up.

Damn Dayton Ohio Gangbangers:

"Carper said the shooter fired multiple rounds from a “long gun” and was wearing body armor. Since then, Mayor Nan Whaley, a Democrat, has given more detail, noting that the shooter used a “.233 high-capacity” gun. She also said the suspect had additional magazines on him."

It's likely the Mayor was mistaken about the caliber and it's actually .223 (or 5.56 if it's military). For a bonus, guess which sorts of guns typically chamber .223 caliber. Of course, once you've settled on the proper weapon to defend yourself against people who are running away you still need to choose the right ammo.

Edited August 4, 2019 by JoeWeber

[ryoder 1,384]

Odd thing is the Dayton shooter killed his own sister: 

https://www.thedailybeast.com/connor-betts-24-idd-as-dayton-ohio-shooter

[normiss 622]

2 hours ago, JoeWeber said:

 

Next up.

Damn Dayton Ohio Gangbangers:

"Carper said the shooter fired multiple rounds from a “long gun” and was wearing body armor. Since then, Mayor Nan Whaley, a Democrat, has given more detail, noting that the shooter used a “.233 high-capacity” gun. She also said the suspect had additional magazines on him."

It's likely the Mayor was mistaken about the caliber and it's actually .223 (or 5.56 if it's military). For a bonus, guess which sorts of guns typically chamber .223 caliber. Of course, once you've settled on the proper weapon to defend yourself against people who are running away you still need to choose the right ammo.

The federal government banned metal-tipped lawn darts because a single child died from one.

[JerryBaumchen 1,048]

51 minutes ago, normiss said:

The federal government banned metal-tipped lawn darts because a single child died from one.

Hi Mark,

The conclusion would be that the lawn dart folks did not contribute to the Congress Critters Election Fund.

Jerry Baumchen

[headoverheels 291]

3 hours ago, ryoder said:

Odd thing is the Dayton shooter killed his own sister: 

https://www.thedailybeast.com/connor-betts-24-idd-as-dayton-ohio-shooter

It seems likely that she was dating a black guy, and the shooter did not like that. 

[kallend 1,623]

2 hours ago, JerryBaumchen said:

Hi Mark,

The conclusion would be that the lawn dart folks did not contribute to the Congress Critters Election Fund.uy.

Jerry Baumchen

As you well know, we have the best government money can buy.

[normiss 622]

3 hours ago, headoverheels said:

It seems likely that she was dating a black guy, and the shooter did not like that. 

I'm seriously starting to think our "mental illness" issue is actually just hatred and racism, sometimes with a dash of religiousness.

[brenthutch 383]

On 8/3/2019 at 12:58 PM, kallend said:

You are dreaming if you think that.  And you continue to ignore the gorilla in the room.  

The gorilla in the room that Kallend is referring to must be handguns, which account for the vast majority of firearm deaths.  It is curious though that he brings this up in the context of a shooting involving a long gun.  I’m sure he was just confused.  Obviously anyone advocating for a “ban the most dangerous guns” policy would want to ban the guns that kill the most. 

[normiss 622]

30 minutes ago, brenthutch said:

The gorilla in the room that Kallend is referring to must be handguns, which account for the vast majority of firearm deaths.  It is curious though that he brings this up in the context of a shooting involving a long gun.  I’m sure he was just confused.  Obviously anyone advocating for a “ban the most dangerous guns” policy would want to ban the guns that kill the most. 

The goal posts of surrender are the fastest traffic on the internets.

[JoeWeber 2,299]

55 minutes ago, brenthutch said:

The gorilla in the room that Kallend is referring to must be handguns, which account for the vast majority of firearm deaths.  It is curious though that he brings this up in the context of a shooting involving a long gun.  I’m sure he was just confused.  Obviously anyone advocating for a “ban the most dangerous guns” policy would want to ban the guns that kill the most. 

I absolutely advocate for a ban on AR-15 and other military style assault rifles as well as high capacity magazines. I get it that a lot of people get hard just playing with their weapon but beyond that benefit assault type weapons have zero value in a civilized society. I also think hand guns for the majority of people are a stupid solution. Now if you are highly trained and current law enforcement or military and a teetotaller I can believe you might be able to use one effectively in the middle of the night or when someone smashes your car window with a ball bat. But for all the rest of us who insist on the privilege of defending our homes with a firearm then the only smart solution is a shotgun. I prefer a Berretta Tactical but to each his own. I personally believe that with hand guns education is key. When people are taught upfront that they are far more likely to shoot their nuts or neighbors than a bad guy with their nice new Glock then they might make a wiser choice.

[billvon 2,400]

1 hour ago, brenthutch said:

The gorilla in the room that Kallend is referring to must be handguns, which account for the vast majority of firearm deaths.  It is curious though that he brings this up in the context of a shooting involving a long gun.  I’m sure he was just confused.  

I doubt it, since he has in the past supported a ban on assault weapons.

[jakee 1,255]

8 hours ago, brenthutch said:

The gorilla in the room that Kallend is referring to must be handguns, which account for the vast majority of firearm deaths.  It is curious though that he brings this up in the context of a shooting involving a long gun.  I’m sure he was just confused.  Obviously anyone advocating for a “ban the most dangerous guns” policy would want to ban the guns that kill the most. 

But what about your confusion, Brent? You stated that the US didn't have to look at guns at all, because if you get rid of gangbangers you get rid of almost the entire gun murder problem.

 

But you now know that statement was based on a lie you were fed - in reality the vast majority of gun murders have absolutely nothing to do with gangs and gangbangers. Are you revisiting any of your opinions based on this important new information?

[Coreece 190]

On 8/3/2019 at 8:56 PM, JoeWeber said:

While we're trying to adopt programs that reduce all gun homicides, can we not start by banning assault rifles and high capacity magazines?

I can understand wanting to ban them based on principle alone,  but if we were to implement something like that, I'd prefer they be phased out over time at the state level with as little publicity as possible so as not to create commotion that drives the numbers in the wrong direction.  And tho the previous ban was shown to have had a minimal effect, we'd be better off had it never expired in the first place.

[Coreece 190]

On 8/3/2019 at 10:51 PM, jakee said:

Where is the data? Nothing in that linked report breaks down total gun murders into any subclassification whatsoever. As far as I can tell some random person on the internet just lied to you and assumed you would never bother checking the report (Did you look at it, by the way?). 

I remember that stat from several years ago and wasting a lot of time trying to find data to support it.  I never found out where it originated and whether or not it was based on a lie, some type of erroneous extrapolation or a very broad definition of "gang-related."

[brenthutch 383]

5 hours ago, jakee said:

But what about your confusion, Brent? You stated that the US didn't have to look at guns at all, because if you get rid of gangbangers you get rid of almost the entire gun murder problem.

 

But you now know that statement was based on a lie you were fed - in reality the vast majority of gun murders have absolutely nothing to do with gangs and gangbangers. Are you revisiting any of your opinions based on this important new information?

I never said getting rid of gangbangers would get rid of the “entire gun murder problem”. I said it would be significantly reduced.(we can quibble to what extent)

BTW I am all for looking at “assault style” rifles.  I am for looking at them, buying them, possessing them and most of all shooting them.  As a retired Army Ranger I spent two decades with one in my hands, I am well trained and my guns are stored in a safe just like millions of other responsible gun owners.  

[Coreece 190]

On 8/4/2019 at 1:51 AM, billvon said:

Let's cancel the wall and transfer that money to Ceasefire (or a similar program) and make it harder for criminals to get guns.

Ya right, the only time blacks can get special funding from the feds to improve their communities is after a natural disaster.  Maybe Lake Michigan's "record deepness" will flood Chicago and wash away their guns.  It might very well be the only hope given the level of obstinance displayed by both republican and democrat politicians (along with people like Kallend) that refuse to implement sensible gun laws AND prevention programs aimed at actually reducing the gun homicide rate.  

Given that, I wouldn't be surprised if the state of our inner cities remained exactly the same for another 50 years.

[jakee 1,255]

35 minutes ago, brenthutch said:

I never said getting rid of gangbangers would get rid of the “entire gun murder problem”.

I never said you said that. I was very careful not to say you said that. You know I didn't say you said that, because you quoted the relevant part of my post where I very clearly said something different.

 

Don't be that guy. Everyone hates that guy.

 

Quote

I said it would be significantly reduced.

You said, "remove the gangbangers and those trends reverse" - meaning you thought that without gangs the US gun murder rate would be lower than that of any comparable country. This is wrong, because gang violence does not account for the approximately 4/5 of US gun murders that you thought they did. Again, that's a lie that you were sold. Take away the 1/6 of gun murders that actually are gang related and the US still has a significant problem compared to other countries that you have not accounted for in your proposed solution. 

 

You see that, yes?

 

Quote

(we can quibble to what extent)

Quibble? You think that changing from 9 of 11 to less than 2 of 11 is a quibble? For real? It reverses the relationship you thought existed between US non-gang gun violence and the gun violence of comparable countries. It torpedoes your assertion that you can solve the unique scale of the US gun violence problem by solving the gang problem. And frankly, it's just a massive, massive difference between the real numbers and the lie you believed.

 

How do you expect to be taken seriously as a person who offers ideas and solutions based on data if you can see that the data you offered is wrong to such a staggering degree, but do not feel the need to even look at whether you need to change the conclusions you drew from that data?

Edited August 5, 2019 by jakee

[jakee 1,255]

29 minutes ago, Coreece said:

I remember that stat from several years ago and wasting a lot of time trying to find data to support it.  I never found out where it originated and whether or not it was based on a lie, some type of erroneous extrapolation or a very broad definition of "gang-related."

It's pretty simple, someone just made it up. Everywhere it exists on the web links to that same CDC report (and often just plagiarises the entire paragraph with the link verbatim) that contains the same overall gun death stats, but does not so much as mention gangs, let alone put a number on their homicides. When stats from other government agencies like the one I linked already, or the ones found here on page 26, fig. 40 are so radically different there's no mystery in where it came from. Someone just made it up, the right wing echo chamber spread it around (the way they always do with made up claims they think sound good and assume their readers won't bother to check) and, true to form, people like Brent believed it without ever checking.