New Gun thread, for Dox

Post Reply New Topic

At least you're comparing them to Faux now, rather than the KKK.

Read my previous post again, I never compared anyone to the KKK, I used the analogy of asking the KKK their opinion on black people to demonstrate the absurdity of obtaining all of your information about the NRA from groups that hate the NRA, professionally in the case of the explicitly anti gun group links you provided. Why you'd think you'd get accurate information from those sources about a group they all despise is beyond me, unless it wasn't accurate information you were looking for in the first plaice, but bias confirmation instead.

you implied -strongly- that my posting of comments from Salon on gun control was the argumentative equivalent of asking the KKK for comments on black people.

Emphasis mine.

I think I see the problem...

Do you also go to the KKK website to get information about African Americans and the NAACP? Not a single non-left wing source in the bunch, and several explicitly anti-gun sites to boot. Do you normally go to partisan hacks with an axe to grind when you're looking for reliable info? That would explain a lot...

Salon et. all are not 'anti-gun' sites; they are progressive sites. That means that they are largely, but not always, pro-gun-control, but to varying degrees and consistencies; in addition, it was still an ad-hominem attack.

Be fair Dox, we have all seen that when pushed against the wall you will argue that the extra deaths do not undermine your reason for holding to your position.

The pro-gun position advocated from a position that the negatives are outweighed by the positives, like cars are to traffic considered to do with traffic deaths. The logic of your position is inaccessible to me because I just do not see what grand benefit owning firearms imparts and any mention of the negative externalities of your position speaks past you because of the way you take on your view.

There is no real need for you to engage in evasion and raise endless genetic fallacies.

Annnd, yeaahh, how much has Obama done to actually take away your guns, in this term or the last? His big push was for universal background checks, and even that didn't go through. So, yeah: paranoia.

'Good guys with guns' didn't do any good at Columbine. They didn't do any good for Gabby Giffords - that gunman was taken down when he paused to reload. They didn't do any good at the Navy Yard. They didn't do any good at Fort Hood. The 'good guy with a gun' who showed up at the Sikh temple massacre was lucky he was wearing a bulletproof vest, and he sure didn't stop the killer. All of those places had armed officers on scene, and the best those officers did was get shot.

Estimates over the number of defensive gun uses vary wildly, depending on the study's population, criteria, time-period studied, and other factors. Higher end estimates by Kleck and Gertz show between 1 to 2.5 million DGUs in the United States each year.[1]:64-65[2][3] Low end estimates cited by Hemenway show approximately 55,000-80,000 such uses each year.[4][5] Middle estimates have estimated approximately 1 million DGU incidents in the United States.[1]:65[6] The basis for the studies, the National Self-Defense Survey and the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS), vary in their methods, time-frames covered, and questions asked.[7] DGU questions were asked of all the NSDS sample.[3] Due to screening questions in the NCVS survey, only a minority of the NCVS sample were asked a DGU question.[8] Besides the NSDS and NCVS surveys, ten national and three state surveys summarized by Kleck and Gertz gave 764 thousand to 3.6 million DGU per year.[3] Hemenway contends the Kleck and Gertz study is unreliable and no conclusions can be drawn from it.[4] He argues that there are too many "false positives" in the surveys, and finds the NCVS figures more reliable, yielding estimates of around 100,000 defensive gun uses per year. Applying different adjustments, other social scientists suggest that between 250,000 and 370,000 incidences per year.[9]

Another survey including DGU questions was the National Survey on Private Ownership and Use of Firearms, NSPOF, conducted in 1994 by the Chiltons polling firm for the Police Foundation on a research grant from the National Institute of Justice. NSPOF projected 4.7 million DGU per year by 1.5 million individuals after weighting to eliminate false positives.[8] Discussion of over the number and nature of DGU and the implications to gun control policy came to a head in the late 1990s

And there's this:
http://www.cnn.com/2012/08/25/justice/n ... index.html
If the trained cops even injure more civilians than bad guys, how is the average Joe Dilettante CC man going to do any better?

As opposed to your arguments, which usually go, 'I'm a resoponsible gun owner!' n=1, really useful.

Don't pretend to be more stupid than you are.

If country A has an attempted suicide rate of 100/100K each year, and country B has an attempted suicide rate of 1/100K each year, country A is going to have a higher suicide rate even if there's not a single firearm within the borders. If they did have firearms, though, their success rate would be even worse. Culture has a lot to do with it, but the success rate has a lot to do with the weapon of choice.

Did I single out Salon? You keep mentioning them specifically as if I did...

I read Salon, I regularly post articles from it here, and I also have a commenting account there where I correct their authors in the comments when they write about guns, because they're so often wrong with even the technical details; they're not a credible source on guns.

Pointing out that you're using highly biased sites to buttress your opinion is now a personal attack?

100,000-2,500,000 defensive guns uses a year in the United states, depending upon who's doing the research. No one on the anti-gun side ever wants to talk about those, and how much worse our crime rate might potentially be if we didn't have the guns, especially considering that our non-firearms related crime rate is quite high relative to the rest of the world.