Guns used for lawful self defense

[Gallstones]

Ode to........you know who you are.

[Blind groper]

you're using this study to advance an argument not supported by the study itself.

I was using the published study in the New England Journal or Medicine to back up the statements of fact I had made about suicide, when they were challenged. A study like that is not an argument in itself. The way we interpret the facts, and use them to form an argument is up to us.

You, Seth, have repeatedly shown a serious lack of caring for people who are less fortunate. You have said "fuck'em" in relation those sad and depressed or lonely people who go on to attempt suicide. I am not sure that your arguments have any meaning at all, since very clearly, you do not give a shit about anyone else.

[FBM]

Just to clarify what I said earlier: I think that study justifies passing that law wrt unloading and locking up all firearms in houses where there are or potentially are children. I don't think it justifies an attempt at complete abolition. Abolition has failed every attempt, no matter what we've tried to apply it to, alcohol, drugs, black market guns, tax evasion, etc etc.

[Blind groper]

you refuse to address or acknowledge the facts that have been presented to you that demonstrates that lawful concealed carry substantially reduces violent crimes everywhere it's been made lawful, which translates directly into lives SAVED and people freed from criminal victimization through the availability of handguns in our society.

Frankly, I did not want to get into this one, because the data is so crappy. I like clear cut data, upon which sound conclusions can be drawn. The effect of concealed carry on crimes rates, though, falls into the region of academic argument. There have been studies to support what Seth is saying, and the gun enthusiast organisations quote them mightily. However, there have been other studies also.

Below is a reference to a Yale University study, which found that concealed carry had variable results. In a few states, it reduced crime. But, in more states it increased crime.
http://islandia.law.yale.edu/ayers/Ayre ... rticle.pdf

My conclusion is that no conclusion can be drawn, and anyone who uses such crappy data to try to make a point is skating on very thin ice.

[Gallstones]

My video---anybody here listen to it?
Yet.

You'll like it.

[amused]

I think we all need a big hug.

[Gallstones]

you're using this study to advance an argument not supported by the study itself.

I was using the published study in the New England Journal or Medicine to back up the statements of fact I had made about suicide, when they were challenged. A study like that is not an argument in itself. The way we interpret the facts, and use them to form an argument is up to us.

You, Seth, have repeatedly shown a serious lack of caring for people who are less fortunate. You have said "fuck'em" in relation those sad and depressed or lonely people who go on to attempt suicide. I am not sure that your arguments have any meaning at all, since very clearly, you do not give a shit about anyone else.

Logical fail.
An individual who either does not give a shit about other people, or who says s/he does not give a shit about other people, is not (from that) necessarily wrong in their argument.

[Gallstones]

you refuse to address or acknowledge the facts that have been presented to you that demonstrates that lawful concealed carry substantially reduces violent crimes everywhere it's been made lawful, which translates directly into lives SAVED and people freed from criminal victimization through the availability of handguns in our society.

Frankly, I did not want to get into this one, because the data is so crappy. I like clear cut data, upon which sound conclusions can be drawn. The effect of concealed carry on crimes rates, though, falls into the region of academic argument. There have been studies to support what Seth is saying, and the gun enthusiast organisations quote them mightily. However, there have been other studies also.

Below is a reference to a Yale University study, which found that concealed carry had variable results. In a few states, it reduced crime. But, in more states it increased crime.
http://islandia.law.yale.edu/ayers/Ayre ... rticle.pdf

My conclusion is that no conclusion can be drawn, and anyone who uses such crappy data to try to make a point is skating on very thin ice.

My conclusion is that east is east and west is west and never the twain shall meet.
God bless nationalism.

[Blind groper]

An individual who either does not give a shit about other people, or who says s/he does not give a shit about other people, is not (from that) necessarily wrong in their argument.

True, but it does cast doubt on their motives. Seth does not give a shit for other people. Ergo, it follows that any arguments he uses will not include the welfare of others. Unlike Seth, I am very concerned about people, and the welfare of all people. My arguments tend to be centered on this. In other words, I say that something (hand gun availability in this case) is bad for human welfare. Seth says that having hand guns available to him personally is all he cares about, and the rest of the world can get stuffed. I prefer my view point.

[Blind groper]

God bless nationalism.

I bet you and Seth both voted Romney. I am glad that the majority of Americans are smarter than that.

[Gallstones]

God bless nationalism.

I bet you and Seth both voted Romney. I am glad that the majority of Americans are smarter than that.

I think you should be smarter than this.

[Gallstones]

An individual who either does not give a shit about other people, or who says s/he does not give a shit about other people, is not (from that) necessarily wrong in their argument.

True, but it does cast doubt on their motives. Seth does not give a shit for other people. Ergo, it follows that any arguments he uses will not include the welfare of others. Unlike Seth, I am very concerned about people, and the welfare of all people. My arguments tend to be centered on this. In other words, I say that something (hand gun availability in this case) is bad for human welfare. Seth says that having hand guns available to him personally is all he cares about, and the rest of the world can get stuffed. I prefer my view point.

You don't know if Seth gives a shit about other people. The [fictional] character Seth might not, based on the only evidence we have; the posts--the typed text on an internet discussion site--allude to that for sure.

But you can't know what the person who plays the character of Seth really thinks or feels about anything.

[Blind groper]

But you can't know what the person who plays the character of Seth really thinks or feels about anything.

We respond to the character in the posts. Not to some mythical "might be".

[Gallstones]

But you can't know what the person who plays the character of Seth really thinks or feels about anything.

We respond to the character in the posts. Not to some mythical "might be".

All is rhetorical then.

[Blind groper]

I think you should be smarter than this.

I will take that as confirmation that you voted for the man who is so stupid and naive, that he follows a religion started by a con artist upon his release from prison for fraud, in which he demanded his followers give him 10% of their earnings and in which he claimed up to 50 women as 'wives'.

All religious people are irrational, of course, but Mormons must be even more stooooopid than the rest.