The Gun debate sandbox


Discussion Topic

Return to Forum List
This thread has been locked
Messages 4261 - 4280 of total 5441 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>

Trad climber
Jul 10, 2014 - 04:12pm PT
madbolter posted
As predicted, we see that Washington DC leads by a mile (most gun-controlled region in the USA).

And as anyone who understands statistics knows, correlation = causation!

madbolter responded
If that is how you interpret my statement, then I think that you are the one that's impaired, perhaps at this very moment.

You said it pretty clearly. Don't think there's a whole lot of reading between the lines there.

Trad climber
Ouray, Colorado
Jul 10, 2014 - 04:13pm PT
A large sign just appeared on private property along the road between my house and Ouray.

It says: Armed = Citizen
Unarmed = Subject

The abject ignorance of SO many Americans never fails to both amaze and sadden me.


Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Jul 10, 2014 - 04:18pm PT
StahlBro, ROFL!!!

I mean, side-splitting ROFLLLLL!!!

That is a classic example of exactly what I've been talking about! Damned lies and MORE, indeed!

Here the issue is that the chart's rows are divided up into insignificantly tiny increments, which stretches the chart to make the differences seem HUGE, when the differences are really TINY. Point-five... are you KIDDING???

And note the note: "excluding Mexico." But WHY exclude Mexico? Mexico isn't among "developed nations?" WHY the note in the first place, if Mexico is not?

No, the reason is because Mexico's rate is 11.17, which would put IT wildly, completely OFF THE CHART!!!

Now, let's compare Mexico's rate with the US at a little over 3.

Uhhh... getting the picture yet?

So, yup, the USA has a higher murder-by-gun rate than other developed nations. Big deal. See my points above regarding socioeconomic comparisons, and quit wasting our time with ridiculous, STRETCHED charts!

Edit: And, frankly, if the USA was not joined at the hip with Mexico, we would probably have a lower murder-by-gun rate than we do, and I'm NOT referring to the tide of incoming Mexicans, btw!
the Fet

Jul 10, 2014 - 04:20pm PT
It's interesting that even the NRA agrees that mentally ill people should be added to the background check system. But doesn't want to ensure that everyone gets a background check.

Trad climber
greater Boss Angeles area
Jul 10, 2014 - 04:28pm PT
M. Bolter writes:

" But WHY exclude Mexico? Mexico isn't among "developed nations?" "

How about Brazil?

Brazil has nuclear capabilities, an aircraft industry, aircraft carriers in their Navy. They even have a space program. It's not a manned space program, but neither is ours anymore.

Brazil's hosting Formula 1, the World Cup soccer tournament, and the Olympic Games.

What more does it take to be "developed", besides getting their gun-death rate down lower than the U.S.?

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Jul 10, 2014 - 04:29pm PT
again, I have now presented studies (plural) and links that clearly refute the notion that laws "don't work" to mitigate firearm deaths

thedailybeast? Are you kidding?

And now you've switched the TYPE of statistic you are playing around with.

Oh, and by the clever use of "states," DC has conveniently been left off this list. LOL

Try to get serious, will you?

DC's laws DON'T WORK! Period. By ANY chart you want to trot out.

The question, for people that actually care to analyze the issues carefully and find WORKABLE solutions, is WHY are DC's numbers off the charts DESPITE DC's stringent gun control.
the Fet

Jul 10, 2014 - 04:30pm PT
when the differences are really TINY. Point-five...

Point five per 100,000 people. That's 1,500 people for the US. That's not insignificant.

And that's for the difference between us and Chile.

Compared to Canada at 3.0 to .5 that's a 2.5 difference. Or 7,500 people.

I'd expect Canada to be lower but it shouldn't be that much. What causes the US to be so much higher compared to Canada or Italy?


Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Jul 10, 2014 - 04:37pm PT
That's not insignificant.

You are not being charitable regarding my use of the term.

I am not saying that the loss of human life is not "significant."

And I am not saying that the US having more than three times the rate of, say, Turkey is not "significant."

MY point is that compared to, say, Mexico, which was conveniently left off the chart, the entire chart is highly compressed in what is really a VERY narrow range, with ALL developed nations having a VERY LOW rate compared to many, many other nations that could well be on the chart... Mexico being a CLASSIC example and one that was intentionally and NOTABLY left off the chart.

Thus, the differences (statistically speaking) between the charted nations is not "significant" compared to nations that by rights SHOULD be on the chart but are not.

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Jul 10, 2014 - 04:40pm PT
What causes the US to be so much higher compared to Canada or Italy?

Interesting question. I do think that being joined at the hip with Mexico is not insignificant. And I think that if some study correlated gangland activities with rates of gun-related murder in a country, we would get some very revealing data. The USA has become absolutely gang-infested!
Toker Villain

Big Wall climber
Toquerville, Utah
Jul 10, 2014 - 04:51pm PT
Damn, those Chileans must be angry that they live in such a skinny country.

Unfortunately, seeing that we lead the world's murder rate is a good reason to have a gun for defense.


Trad climber
San Diego, CA
Jul 10, 2014 - 05:19pm PT
For a supposedly "civilized" society we have a lot of gun violence. I find it ironic that several feel the answer to that problem is more guns. It must suck to be that paranoid every day.

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Jul 10, 2014 - 06:01pm PT
I find it ironic that several feel the answer to that problem is more guns. It must suck to be that paranoid every day.

Oh, now that's funny. And disingenuous.

Do you lock your house? Your car? Do you have a car alarm? Do you protect your wallet when you're out in public? It must suck to be that paranoid every day.

Oh, wait! Silly me. These are all PASSIVE approaches to fighting crime. You would never engage in any ACTIVE approach.

Oh, wait! Silly me. You DO believe in hiring cops and perhaps even more cops. THAT'S the only "legitimate" approach to ACTIVE crime fighting.

So, you would much prefer to proxy off your active crime fighting. You still do it, but you just prefer to not get your own hands dirty (or take any personal responsibility for it). And if the cops are bad (and terrible shots!), oh well, not YOUR problem, because YOU don't take any personal responsibility.

And the line is very true: When seconds count, the cops are mere moments away. But that's okay, because it's "paranoid" to have ANY capacity to respond (probably BETTER than the cops) within seconds rather than to wait minutes.

Yeah, right. Look at this "highly trained" goofball:

My favorite line is: "Okay, I'm the only one in this room professional enough, that I know of, to carry the Glock 40."

For myself, my wife, and other gun-carriers I know, we ALL put in far, far more time in practice and training than the vast majority of the cops. And if you want to talk knowledge of the law, well, I'd be happy to supply a bunch more videos showing how clueless so many cops are.

These are, of course, generalizations. But there is a hard core of reality behind the generalizations.

If you prefer to wait and let the cops "protect you," be my guest. Just don't think you have the high moral ground because you choose to PROXY your self defense off to "professionals" that literally CANNOT do it as well or in as timely fashion as you can yourself (with a bit of personal responsibility and training).

Social climber
Desolation Basin, Calif.
Jul 10, 2014 - 06:10pm PT
Without delving DEEPLY into socioeconomic issues, serious discussion of gun-related violence is a non-starter.

Spot on.

In the past I've had some, er, "interactions" with the police. It was not a comfortable situation. These guys were scary. They were armed and had the Dirty Harry look and attitude. If these guys, trained professionals, scared the bejesus out of me, and rightfully so, how is it you think people are supposed to feel all warm and fuzzy inside when some tatted up guy with a braided beard and a weapon shows up in public?

In Florida, if the guy in the video a few pages back showed up at a restaurant, would it be legal to shoot if you feel threatened?

Madbolter, if you showed up carrying, it wouldn't worry me, but how about a stranger. Or even worse, Ron, looking for biscuits!

Big Wall climber
Denver, CO
Jul 10, 2014 - 06:18pm PT
Madbolter, if you showed up carrying, it wouldn't worry me, but how about a stranger.

I appreciate the vote of confidence, and I TOTALLY get your point and concern. I don't know any answer to that one, much less an easy one.

There really is no panacea solution, imho. Perhaps it should be HARDER to get a license to open-carry than to CC. I don't know.

Big Wall climber
Kalispell, Montanagonia
Jul 10, 2014 - 06:19pm PT
You may want to read the beginning of this thread. A nice doctor explained the fear you describe.The problem is it's not the gun adadvocates that have the issues. It's a must read before spouting off in the same thread many pages later.

Just makes so many on here look so bad it's literally hilarious.

Burly Bob

Social climber
Desolation Basin, Calif.
Jul 10, 2014 - 06:36pm PT
Do they make bulletproof jam?

Trad climber
San Diego, CA
Jul 10, 2014 - 06:52pm PT
I did read it. I don't agree. I have stated my position plainly. Convince me otherwise.


Trad climber
Philadelphia, PA
Jul 11, 2014 - 08:34am PT
I'm still waiting for any legitimate reason for a civilian to carry a loaded military rifle in a public place (or even a single shot hunting rifle, or black powder musket for that matter). What you do on private property is your business.


the Fet

Jul 11, 2014 - 10:04am PT
It really seems there should be different rules for cities vs. the country. In a small town with a lot of hunting I wouldn't be surprised or offended if a group of guys came into a coffee shop with rifles. But at a club in the city it would be far different.

But there are some gun nut state legislators who have passed laws that say municipalities can't pass laws banning carrying in cities/towns if it's allowed in the state.

Open carry is probably a much better deterrent than concealed. If a criminal sees you with a gun they would likely leave you alone and look for an easier target. It's like a big dog on your property. Someone could still poison it or kill it, but why when they can find other properties without dogs.

Any type of carry may help. But it can only do so much. If someone draws on you first, it doesn't really matter that you have a gun. I'm sure there are lots of people who carry who engage in riskier behavior because they have a gun. It's much safer to avoid a bad situation in the first place.

I was thinking about if I would carry why would I. And I realized probably a lot of people who carry want to be heroes (I just realized if I'm honest with myself it would be one of the primary reasons I'd carry). I've gone my whole life without ever needing a gun (I'm glad I didn't carry one all this time for no reason, that's like carrying the weight of two cams around with you everyday). And I will probably go the rest of my life without every needing a gun. But I imagine in the extremely small chance that I'd be at a public shooting situation in a school, theater, etc. the thought of being able to stop that is really appealing. The whole "a good guy with a gun" thing you hear about.

Trad climber
Jul 11, 2014 - 10:18am PT
TE, I'm not one of the texas long gun open carry folks but this is why they are doing what they are. They are carrying long guns openly to protest that they can't carry pistols openly. In Texas, they can conceal carry pistols, but open carry pistols is illegal and they believe that's silly. I understand if you don't want anybody carrying rifles and maybe pistols, for whatever reasons you may have. Let me say that in Texas, there are about 65,000 criminal convictions each year. of those 65,000 convictions, about 120 of the convictions are from those licensed to carry a gun. in 2012 texas there were 395 murders. one murder by a licensed CCW holder. So to say that they are violent and harming others is at a rate more than the average person is completely wrong.
65,000 criminal conviction. about 120 by CCW holders. and not all of those convictions are violent in nature.

Messages 4261 - 4280 of total 5441 in this topic << First  |  < Previous  |  Show All  |  Next >  |  Last >>
Return to Forum List
Our Guidebooks
Check 'em out!
SuperTopo Guidebooks

Try a free sample topo!

SuperTopo on the Web

Review Categories
Recent Route Beta