Guns Used.....cont

[JimC]

Meanwhile, in South Africa ...

"I thought this pretty young blond model was a hulking black Zulu with an assegai, so naturally I pulled the trigger..."

[Seth]

Meanwhile, in South Africa ...

"I thought this pretty young blond model was a hulking black Zulu with an assegai, so naturally I pulled the trigger..."

Pretty tragic event for you to be making light of.

[Blind groper]

Pretty tragic event for you to be making light of.

The important point is that if the murderer did not have access to that kind of gun, the pretty young blonde would still be alive. Give people guns, and the murder rate goes up. It is real simple.

The USA has the highest murder rate, by a long way, in the Western world. So high that 85% of all gun murders in the 24 richest nations all happen in the USA. Yet the total rate of violent crime in the USA is lower than in many of those other 23 nations, which proves the high murder rate is not caused by gangs, ethnic violence etc. It is high mainly because of the availability of hand guns, and the sick attitude to the use of guns in the USA.

I notice, Seth, your dependence of anecdotes in promulgating your arguments. Anyone who descends to using anecdotes in debate is scraping the bottom of the barrel, because overall anecdotes mean diddly squat.

[Seth]

Pretty tragic event for you to be making light of.

The important point is that if the murderer did not have access to that kind of gun, the pretty young blonde would still be alive.

Prove it. Prove that she could not possibly have been murdered with another implement.

Give people guns, and the murder rate goes up. It is real simple.

Wrong. Give law-abiding people guns and the murder rate goes down, dramatically. Take guns away from law-abiding people and the murder rate skyrockets, as in Chicago, which now exceeds ever the murder capital of the US, Washington DC, where they have the strictest anti-gun laws in the nation.

The USA has the highest murder rate, by a long way, in the Western world.

Cherry picking.

So high that 85% of all gun murders in the 24 richest nations all happen in the USA.

More cherry picking.

Yet the total rate of violent crime in the USA is lower than in many of those other 23 nations, which proves the high murder rate is not caused by gangs, ethnic violence etc.

It proves nothing of the kind. The high murder rate is indeed directly related to gang violence in urban areas.

It is high mainly because of the availability of hand guns, and the sick attitude to the use of guns in the USA.

Wrong. It's not nearly as high as it would be because law-abiding citizens are armed for self defense.

I notice, Seth, your dependence of anecdotes in promulgating your arguments.

They aren't anecdotes, they are evidence.

Anyone who descends to using anecdotes in debate is scraping the bottom of the barrel, because overall anecdotes mean diddly squat.

The thread was intended to, in some small way, refute the common hoplophobe lie that lawfully-owned firearms are not used for self defense. The fact is that they are used for lawful self defense FAR MORE OFTEN than criminals use firearms to commit crimes, as many as 2 million plus times every year.

This thread is proof positive that you don't know what the fuck you're talking about, and neither do the rest of the gun-hating hoplophobes on this site.

Just by the way, the incident you are referring to happened in South Africa, one of the most dangerous nations on earth, in one of the most dangerous cities in the nation, Pretoria. So, it has nothing whatever to do with US gun policy, does it?

[Blind groper]

Prove it. Prove that she could not possibly have been murdered with another implement.

Of course she could have been murdered by some other instrument. However, the statistics show that women who live in homes where a hand gun is present have a three fold increase in probability of being murdered, and 60% of such murders are by the male partner. This example fits that pattern exactly.

Wrong. Give law-abiding people guns and the murder rate goes down, dramatically. Take guns away from law-abiding people and the murder rate skyrockets, as in Chicago, which now exceeds ever the murder capital of the US, Washington DC, where they have the strictest anti-gun laws in the nation.

Studies have shown that the majority of guns used in murders in Chicago come from outside Chicago city. There are always shady gun dealers, who will make money selling to criminals from a safe distance. Local city restrictions will never stop gun crime. Legal limits have to be nationwide.
http://www.suntimes.com/news/crime/1471 ... -guns.html

Seth.
Your accusation of cherry picking is a very sorry excuse for an argument, since these are widely accepted figures. Good solid data, which only a person who relies on emotion based illogic of the religious variety could dismiss.

It proves nothing of the kind. The high murder rate is indeed directly related to gang violence in urban areas.

Yes, it often is. But the very high rate of murders is permitted by easy gun availability and a sick gun culture. Other countries with a quarter or less homicide rate by capita have just as much gang violence. Just a lot fewer guns, and thus a much lower murder rate.

And giving guns to law abiding citizens always ends up with more guns also in the hands of criminals, which leads to more murders. The whole USA is a testament to that.

they are used for lawful self defense FAR MORE OFTEN than criminals use firearms to commit crimes, as many as 2 million plus times every year.

This is according that fraud and swindler, John Lott, who wrote a book to say this. The book made him rich, because it catered to the prejudices of the NRA and its supporters. But Lott's peers in various universities have pointed out that the so-called study which gave this result has never been published in a peer reviewed journal, and there is no good evidence that it ever happened. It is far more probable that Lott simply invented a set of convenient numbers that permitted him to write a very lucrative book. Corrupt behavior.

[Seth]

Prove it. Prove that she could not possibly have been murdered with another implement.

Of course she could have been murdered by some other instrument. However, the statistics show that women who live in homes where a hand gun is present have a three fold increase in probability of being murdered, and 60%

Wrong. Give law-abiding people guns and the murder rate goes down, dramatically. Take guns away from law-abiding people and the murder rate skyrockets, as in Chicago, which now exceeds ever the murder capital of the US, Washington DC, where they have the strictest anti-gun laws in the nation.

of such murders are by the male partner. This example fits that pattern exactly.

I guess she should have had a gun too.

Wrong. Give law-abiding people guns and the murder rate goes down, dramatically. Take guns away from law-abiding people and the murder rate skyrockets, as in Chicago, which now exceeds ever the murder capital of the US, Washington DC, where they have the strictest anti-gun laws in the nation.

Studies have shown that the majority of guns used in murders in Chicago come from outside Chicago city. There are always shady gun dealers, who will make money selling to criminals from a safe distance.

Prove it. Fact is that the vast majority of criminals get their guns by theft or from other criminals. The percentage of guns obtained from gun shows by criminals is 0.07%.

Local city restrictions will never stop gun crime. Legal limits have to be nationwide.

Indeed. Local city restrictions will never stop gun crime, in fact they massively INCREASE gun crime, which is why the crime rate in Chicago is so high.

Seth.
Your accusation of cherry picking is a very sorry excuse for an argument, since these are widely accepted figures. Good solid data, which only a person who relies on emotion based illogic of the religious variety could dismiss.

Widely accepted by brainless hoplophobes. Actual smart people know the books have been cooked on your bogus statistics.

It proves nothing of the kind. The high murder rate is indeed directly related to gang violence in urban areas.

Yes, it often is. But the very high rate of murders is permitted by easy gun availability and a sick gun culture. Other countries with a quarter or less homicide rate by capita have just as much gang violence. Just a lot fewer guns, and thus a much lower murder rate.

And a much higher violent crime rate.

And giving guns to law abiding citizens always ends up with more guns also in the hands of criminals, which leads to more murders. The whole USA is a testament to that.

Oh well. We don't restrict the ownership of automobiles merely because crooks steal lots of them. No reason to do so for guns. It's a crime to steal a gun, it's a crime to possess a gun if you're a criminal, it's a crime to possess a gun if you have criminal intent. But it's not a crime to possess a gun if you are a law-abiding citizen with no criminal intent, and the Supreme Court has said that possessing a handgun for self defense is a constitutional right protected by the 2nd Amendment.

Game over.

they are used for lawful self defense FAR MORE OFTEN than criminals use firearms to commit crimes, as many as 2 million plus times every year.

This is according that fraud and swindler, John Lott, who wrote a book to say this.

Liar.

The book made him rich, because it catered to the prejudices of the NRA and its supporters. But Lott's peers in various universities have pointed out that the so-called study which gave this result has never been published in a peer reviewed journal, and there is no good evidence that it ever happened. It is far more probable that Lott simply invented a set of convenient numbers that permitted him to write a very lucrative book. Corrupt behavior.

And those "peers" have been thoroughly and decisively debunked and shown to be the frauds involved. They are gun-hating hoplophobes who cooked up their own statistics and engaged in biased, bad science to try to impeach Lott's work, but they were entirely unsuccessful in doing so. They are liars, just like you are.

[Woodbutcher]

Oooh...! Name calling, Seth. Proves you only have your armaphile anecdotes to call on. More guns equals more murders. More handguns and assault weapons with public means more thefts of guns by criminals. USA cannot do a fucking thing about gun violence because they have passed the point of ever regaining control of the guns in public hands. Seth is correct, you are going to descend into armageddon. That's the only direction you can go. A civil war!

[Blind groper]

I guess she should have had a gun too.

Fortunately for the continued survival of those of us of male gender, women are smarter than men, and most of them do not feel the sick fascination with guns. With a few exceptions, of course.

Prove it. Fact is that the vast majority of criminals get their guns by theft or from other criminals. The percentage of guns obtained from gun shows by criminals is 0.07%.

Obviously, you did not read my reference. Apparently, 20% of all guns used in crimes in Chicago came from one single supplier - a gun shop in another county.

Bogus statistics?
No. Correct statistics. 85% of all gun homicides in the richest 24 nations are carried out in the USA - the only one of those 24 countries where the government are stupid enough to permit widespread ownership of hand guns. The link between massively high gun murder rates and high hand gun ownership is no coincidence. My country has a higher violent crime rate per capita than the USA, but 20% of the murder rate. We have gang violence, but few homicides. We also have very, very few hand guns in the possession of civilians, and that makes the difference.

The amount of violent crime in wealthy nations other than the USA varies a lot. Some are more violent than the USA, and some less. But they all have lower murder rates, and they all control possession of guns much more rigidly. The most rigid controller of guns is Japan, which also has almost the lowest murder rate. No coincidence.

John Lott's peers are not liars. John Lott says they are, but then that is expected. One academic quoting data designed to make him rich is arguing against a number of other academics with no such motive.

[Gallstones]

Sacred Cow Slaughterhouse
Michael Williamson
The post in which I piss off everybody

Yo, Liberals!

[Seth]

Oooh...! Name calling, Seth. Proves you only have your armaphile anecdotes to call on. More guns equals more murders. More handguns and assault weapons with public means more thefts of guns by criminals. USA cannot do a fucking thing about gun violence because they have passed the point of ever regaining control of the guns in public hands. Seth is correct, you are going to descend into armageddon. That's the only direction you can go. A civil war!

Better a civil war than an extermination, which is what you'll get.

[Seth]

I guess she should have had a gun too.

Fortunately for the continued survival of those of us of male gender, women are smarter than men, and most of them do not feel the sick fascination with guns. With a few exceptions, of course.

So...let's see here. How does this logic train derail...hmm. Women are smarter than men, and don't have a "sick fascination with guns" and therefore (according to you) women are killed so often with guns at home that we need to ban guns?

Remarkably stupid chain of thought if you ask me. If I were a target gender, as you claim, the smart thing to do would to be armed for self defense.

So, evidently women are NOT smarter than men because they don't take advantage of the "Great Equalizer" to level the playing field between themselves and their physical superiors.

Prove it. Fact is that the vast majority of criminals get their guns by theft or from other criminals. The percentage of guns obtained from gun shows by criminals is 0.07%.

Obviously, you did not read my reference. Apparently, 20% of all guns used in crimes in Chicago came from one single supplier - a gun shop in another county.

Even if true, which I doubt, so what? If the gun shop is selling the guns legally to people who are qualified to purchase them and who pass a federal NICS background check, it's not their problem if criminals happen to steal those guns from their owners.

Bogus statistics?

Yup.

No. Correct statistics.

Nope. Cherry picking and lying.

[Seth]

...And here's an AR-15 being used for lawful self defense against robbers...

Crime
Surveillance Camera Captures the Dramatic Moment a Security Guard Used an AR-15 to Fend Off Armed Holdup
Feb. 16, 2013 11:04am Madeleine Morgenstern

112
5.6K
9
1
130

Surveillance Camera Captures the Dramatic Moment a Security Guard Used an AR 15 to Fend Off Armed Holdup

(Image source: WJBK-TV)

Dramatic surveillance footage out of the Detroit area shows the heart-stopping moment when a gun-wielding couple stormed into a tax business and started shooting — and a security guard pulled out an AR-15 and drove them away.

The security guard suffered a non-life-threatening wound to the leg and the suspects got away, but otherwise no one was seriously injured in the shootout.

It happened Thursday at a converted home business in Inkster, Mich. A man and woman armed with handguns showed up at the door and announced a holdup, despite the security vehicle parked outside, WJBK-TV reported. The receptionist had gone up to greet them, with the business owner sitting in a chair in the corner. Surveillance footage shows the male suspect pointing a gun at the receptionist’s head, and the security guard scrambling in the back office for the rifle.

“The security guard that was inside returned fire, two shots at the suspect. Did not hit him. The suspects then fled the location,” Inkster, Mich. police Lt. Jeffrey Smith told WJBK. “There was quite a few people inside the location. Very lucky that nobody was seriously injured. The security guard did suffer a wound to the upper leg area, but he’s going to be okay.”

AR-15-style rifles have been at the center of the debate over gun control in the wake of the Newtown, Conn. elementary school massacre.

[Blind groper]

Another anecdote, Seth.

As I told you, anecdotes are meaningless. It is like the Christian who says that someone was prayed for and recovered from an illness immediately afterwards. Such anecdotes are available in quite some numbers, and mean nothing at all.

In my country, with strict gun laws, we rarely get criminals with hand guns demanding stuff. Reason : almost no hand guns. However, you guys, with your idiotic willingness to let any moron buy a hand gun, get numerous hand gun crimes, 8,000 hand gun murders per year, 12,000 hand gun suicides per year, and a total of 100,000 people each year who get a bullet through their body. In fact, amazingly, a simple calculation shows that one in 50 Americans will be shot at some time in their lives. 4 out of 5 will not die from the bullet, but many will be permanently disabled. No other western nation has that problem.

More guns means more crime and more murders, as shown by the simple fact that nations with fewer guns get fewer killings.

[Seth]

Another anecdote, Seth.

Again, it's not an anecdote, it's evidence of a factual event.

As I told you, anecdotes are meaningless.

I'm sure they are to you, but then again you're just a hoplophobe who won't accept any evidence outside your own preconceptions.

It is like the Christian who says that someone was prayed for and recovered from an illness immediately afterwards. Such anecdotes are available in quite some numbers, and mean nothing at all.

Wrong. In the case of the Christian there is no causation, only correlation. In the incidents cited, there is both correlation and causation: Some law-abiding citizen who is lawfully in possession of a firearm uses that firearm to thwart a crime and/or protect the lives of other law-abiding citizens. That's a fact, not an anecdote, and it means that your argument is specious and irrelevant because despite your denials, firearms ARE used lawfully by armed citizens to prevent and stop crime and to defend the lives of innocent people quite regularly, as many as two million times per year. Just because you are engaged in colon-gazing doesn't mean these things do not and have not happened. They do, and they have, in enormous numbers, far more so than all the murders committed with firearms, each and every year.

In my country, with strict gun laws, we rarely get criminals with hand guns demanding stuff. Reason : almost no hand guns. However, you guys, with your idiotic willingness to let any moron buy a hand gun, get numerous hand gun crimes, 8,000 hand gun murders per year, 12,000 hand gun suicides per year, and a total of 100,000 people each year who get a bullet through their body. In fact, amazingly, a simple calculation shows that one in 50 Americans will be shot at some time in their lives. 4 out of 5 will not die from the bullet, but many will be permanently disabled. No other western nation has that problem.

No other nation is free.

More guns means more crime and more murders, as shown by the simple fact that nations with fewer guns get fewer killings.

Nope.

[FBM]

I think a lot of this applies to certain people at both extremes of this debate.

...And since Festinger's day, an array of new discoveries in psychology and neuroscience has further demonstrated how our preexisting beliefs, far more than any new facts, can skew our thoughts and even color what we consider our most dispassionate and logical conclusions. This tendency toward so-called "motivated reasoning" helps explain why we find groups so polarized over matters where the evidence is so unequivocal: climate change, vaccines, "death panels," the birthplace and religion of the president (PDF), and much else. It would seem that expecting people to be convinced by the facts flies in the face of, you know, the facts.

The theory of motivated reasoning builds on a key insight of modern neuroscience (PDF): Reasoning is actually suffused with emotion (or what researchers often call "affect"). Not only are the two inseparable, but our positive or negative feelings about people, things, and ideas arise much more rapidly than our conscious thoughts, in a matter of milliseconds—fast enough to detect with an EEG device, but long before we're aware of it. That shouldn't be surprising: Evolution required us to react very quickly to stimuli in our environment. It's a "basic human survival skill," explains political scientist Arthur Lupia of the University of Michigan. We push threatening information away; we pull friendly information close. We apply fight-or-flight reflexes not only to predators, but to data itself.

We apply fight-or-flight reflexes not only to predators, but to data itself.
We're not driven only by emotions, of course—we also reason, deliberate. But reasoning comes later, works slower—and even then, it doesn't take place in an emotional vacuum. Rather, our quick-fire emotions can set us on a course of thinking that's highly biased, especially on topics we care a great deal about...

Seems it's a rare person who (or a rare event when someone) changes their beloved bias in view of data.