JustUsBoys.com gay porn forum

logo

remove these banner ads by becoming a JUB Supporter.

Page 4 of 4 FirstFirst ... 34
Results 151 to 192 of 192
  1. #151
    JUB Addict T-Rexx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    4,620

    Code of Conduct

    Re: California Shooting: The spin begins

    Quote Originally Posted by bankside View Post
    It's fairly easy to find info supporting t-rexx's position.

    http://vacps.org/index.php/public-po...tions-of-kleck
    Thank you for that link. It's a fair discussion of some of the problems with Kleck's research.


    Quote Originally Posted by bankside View Post
    This "cdc study" really just summarised to get a figure of 500 000 to 3 000 000 defensive gun uses per year “based on an extrapolation from a small number of responses taken from more than 19 national surveys."* They did not research this figure, they just published the results of other studies. Perhaps including Kleck's whackadoo gun nut study?
    Yes, exactly.

    The 3 million figure is surely Kleck's.

    The CDC report we are talking about here is NOT some kind of study. The CDC is prohibited from studying gun violence by the NRA. All the CDC can do is comment on what other people are reporting.


    Quote Originally Posted by Kulindahr View Post
    My facts came from the CDC.
    What you are claiming is NOT fact, and it does not come from the CDC.

    You are claiming the CDC supports the conclusion of 500,000 to 3,000,000 defensive gun uses per year, based on the report that it issued to president Obama in July 2013. The CDC has made no such claims, and it has conducted NO study into this matter. Indeed, the CDC is prevented from conducting such studies by the NRA, and this is not about to change anytime soon:

    Republicans Say No to CDC Gun Violence Research

    President Obama requested, in January 2013, a report from the CDC on gun violence. The CDC complied with that request with a report in July 2013. Six months is not sufficient time in which to plan, conduct, and publish the results of any national study of gun violence. All that the CDC's report to the president says it that some studies have claimed 500,000 to 3,000,000 defensive gun uses per year and that these claims deserve to be investigated (which, again, the CDC cannot do, because the NRA is afraid of what it would find).


    Quote Originally Posted by Kulindahr View Post
    My facts came from the CDC.
    Do you now support the CDC conducting scientific studies on gun use? Because earlier in this thread, you did not:

    Quote Originally Posted by Kulindahr View Post
    Everything that I've seen from medical people about guns is lying with statistics
    Last edited by T-Rexx; June 7th, 2014 at 09:53 PM.

  2. #152
    FEAR THE LIBERAL DETENTE! TX-Beau's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Austin
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Open Relationship
    Posts
    8,061

    Code of Conduct

    Re: California Shooting: The spin begins

    Guns don't kill people, people with guns kill people REGULATE THE PEOPLE!!!
    ATTACK OF THE LIBERAL ELITE

  3. #153
    Bammer's Papa
    Kulindahr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    on the foggy, damp, redneck Oregon coast
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Bisexual
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    101,365
    Blog Entries
    78

    Code of Conduct

    Re: California Shooting: The spin begins

    Quote Originally Posted by bankside View Post
    It's fairly easy to find info supporting t-rexx's position.

    http://vacps.org/index.php/public-po...tions-of-kleck
    Citing Kellerman leads right back to the biggest issue with T-rexx' position: if Kellerman's numbers are right, then someone is hiding hundreds of thousands to millions of bodies annually. Kellerman's methodology is on par with Kleck's opener (I can't believe he included self-defense against animals!). And Cummings' figure is statistically lying unless it's noted that suicide is the one factor driving the result.

    One statement in his (and colleague's) work is astounding: "More accurate information is needed regarding the effect of firearm storage practices on the balance of risks." That's a no-brainer, given how many firearms used in crimes are stolen! in fact, it's such a no-brainer it should be acted on without further study.

    Quote Originally Posted by bankside View Post
    This "cdc study" really just summarised to get a figure of 500 000 to 3 000 000 defensive gun uses per year “based on an extrapolation from a small number of responses taken from more than 19 national surveys."* They did not research this figure, they just published the results of other studies. Perhaps including Kleck's whackadoo gun nut study? Perhaps including a survey of NRA members "Oh yeah we shoot criminals all the time!"


    *quoted by William Saletan in Slate:
    http://www.slate.com/articles/health...gs_from_a.html
    This doesn't support t-rexx at all:

    7. Guns are used for self-defense often and effectively.
    Nor this:

    2. Most indices of crime and gun violence are getting better, not worse.
    And this is significant:

    The prevalence of firearm violence near “drug markets … could be a consequence of drug dealers carrying guns for self-defense against thieves or other adversaries who are likely to be armed,” says the report. In these communities, “individuals not involved in the drug markets have similar incentives for possessing guns.
    How people can ignore the fact that the two greatest periods of firearms violence in the country have been periods of prohibition of substances which alter mental states is beyond me. It's why all drug-related use of guns in crime should be dropped out of the figure.

    As for suicide, I want some studies on whether people would ask for help if being suicidal wasn't so looked down on and treated lightly. When you have countries on the one hand where mental health care is provided to everyone, and on the other where it's almost only for an elite few, asking whether firearms increase the likelihood of successful suicide is secondary.

    "Thirty-one* states allow all qualified citizens to carry concealed weapons. In those states, homosexuals should embark on organized efforts to become comfortable with guns, learn to use them safely and carry them. They should set up Pink Pistols task forces, sponsor shooting courses and help homosexuals get licensed to carry. And they should do it in a way that gets as much publicity as possible. "

    --Jonathan Rauch, Salon Magazine, March 13, 2000

    *the number is now forty

  4. #154
    Bammer's Papa
    Kulindahr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    on the foggy, damp, redneck Oregon coast
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Bisexual
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    101,365
    Blog Entries
    78

    Code of Conduct

    Re: California Shooting: The spin begins

    Quote Originally Posted by T-Rexx View Post
    The 3 million figure is surely Kleck's.
    I wouldn't be so sure. Marion Hammer used to proclaim that number -- you know, the bitch behind the Florida "Stand Your Ground" crap? She may have just made it up.

    It's not Lott, BTW, someone I am familiar with. His high figure used to be 2.2 million, but I see him cited as 2.5 as well. For that matter, there was a letter to the NRA recently asserting that they should stop using the 2.5 million number because Kleck and Gertz apparently have arrived at 1.5 million more recently (unfortunately, as with most things NRA under La Pierre, no sources were provided).

    I just spent a chunk of time googling the figure, and the only place I can find it is in the CDC statement and from Marion Hammer. Along the way, though, I ran across a figure in Forbes that victims take a criminal's gun twenty times as often as the reverse (! not sure I believe that, but ....), and that the Brady people are indeed wrong about the number of gun owners decreasing; the proportion is decreasing even though the absolute numbers are rising.



    I skipped the rest because I'm not masochistic enough to try to sort through your lies. I'll just say I don't know where the CDC got either figure -- I can find 600k as a bottom easily enough, but couldn't find 3mn as a top figure from anywhere but them and Hammer.

    "Thirty-one* states allow all qualified citizens to carry concealed weapons. In those states, homosexuals should embark on organized efforts to become comfortable with guns, learn to use them safely and carry them. They should set up Pink Pistols task forces, sponsor shooting courses and help homosexuals get licensed to carry. And they should do it in a way that gets as much publicity as possible. "

    --Jonathan Rauch, Salon Magazine, March 13, 2000

    *the number is now forty

  5. #155
    Bammer's Papa
    Kulindahr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    on the foggy, damp, redneck Oregon coast
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Bisexual
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    101,365
    Blog Entries
    78

    Code of Conduct

    Re: California Shooting: The spin begins

    Quote Originally Posted by TX-Beau View Post
    Guns don't kill people, people with guns kill people REGULATE THE PEOPLE!!!
    That does seem to be the Constitution's view: the people are the militia, and the Congress is to provide for the discipline of the militia.

    Here's an idea: Democrats should offer to vote for the National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Bill, but as part of a new Militia Act that would require safe and secure storage and authorize mental health personnel who have concluded that a patient is a danger to report such to the NICS to be flagged. If a firearm was not safely stored, then a person who left one lying about and someone used it for a crime could be prosecuted as an accessory. In addition, free mental health care would be provided for anyone feeling suicidal or doomed.

    All pursuant to having a more "regulated" (i.e. responsible and disciplined) militia.

    "Thirty-one* states allow all qualified citizens to carry concealed weapons. In those states, homosexuals should embark on organized efforts to become comfortable with guns, learn to use them safely and carry them. They should set up Pink Pistols task forces, sponsor shooting courses and help homosexuals get licensed to carry. And they should do it in a way that gets as much publicity as possible. "

    --Jonathan Rauch, Salon Magazine, March 13, 2000

    *the number is now forty

  6. #156
    JUB Addict T-Rexx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    4,620

    Code of Conduct

    Re: California Shooting: The spin begins

    Quote Originally Posted by Kulindahr View Post
    Citing Kellerman leads right back to the biggest issue with T-rexx' position: if Kellerman's numbers are right, then someone is hiding hundreds of thousands to millions of bodies annually.
    Please explain this calculation. How do you come up with "hundreds of thousands to millions of bodies" which should be dying every year, if Kellerman is correct?

    Here is Kellerman's paper: http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056...99310073291506

    What is it about Kellerman's numbers that you disagree with? How do you calculate such large numbers of people who "should" be dying?


    Quote Originally Posted by Kulindahr View Post
    Kellerman's methodology is on par with Kleck's opener
    Kellerman published in the New England Journal of Medicine, one of the most rigorously peer-reviewed journals in the world.

    Kleck published in a student puplication at Northwestern University.

    Your opinion of the quality of the comparative methodologies is not shared - by practically anyone!



    Quote Originally Posted by Kulindahr View Post
    One statement in his (and colleague's) work is astounding: "More accurate information is needed regarding the effect of firearm storage practices on the balance of risks." That's a no-brainer, given how many firearms used in crimes are stolen! in fact, it's such a no-brainer it should be acted on without further study.
    If it's such a no-brainer that this needs to be studied, why does the NRA and the Republican Party refuse to allow it to be studied?

    And, as far as thefts are concerned, you advocate more guns in the general population. Do you believe that more guns laying around will lead to fewer thefts?


    Quote Originally Posted by Kulindahr View Post
    This doesn't support t-rexx at all:

    7. Guns are used for self-defense often and effectively.
    Please cite the study that demonstrates this. (The CDC's letter to Obama is not a study).

    The scientific studies disagree with that statement:

    1-3 Guns are not used millions of times each year in self-defense

    4. Most purported self-defense gun uses are gun uses in escalating arguments and are both socially undesirable and illegal

    5. Firearms are used far more often to intimidate than in self-defense.

    6. Guns in the home are used more often to intimidate intimates than to thwart crime.

    7. Adolescents are far more likely to be threatened with a gun than to use one in self-defense.

    8. Criminals who are shot are typically the victims of crime.

    9-10. Few criminals are shot by decent law abiding citizens.


    http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/hicrc/fi...nse-gun-use-2/

    Quote Originally Posted by Kulindahr View Post
    Nor this:

    2. Most indices of crime and gun violence are getting better, not worse.
    Over the past 40 years, the number of households in America with guns has declined steadily.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/10/us...vey-shows.html

    Yes, I know, gun sales are up. That's because, for you gun people, no number of guns is enough to protect you. You require an ever-larger arsenal to defend yourselves against ever-fewer Americans with guns. It's an increasingly safe world out there. But not because you select few are arming yourselves to the teeth.


    Quote Originally Posted by Kulindahr View Post
    How people can ignore the fact that the two greatest periods of firearms violence in the country have been periods of prohibition of substances which alter mental states is beyond me.
    You seem to be suggesting that legal access to mind-altering drugs will lead to less gun violence.


    Quote Originally Posted by Kulindahr View Post
    It's why all drug-related use of guns in crime should be dropped out of the figure.
    If drugs are a major cause of gun violence, why on earth do you think such cases should be left out of gun violence statistics?!?


    Quote Originally Posted by Kulindahr View Post
    As for suicide, I want some studies on whether people would ask for help if being suicidal wasn't so looked down on and treated lightly. When you have countries on the one hand where mental health care is provided to everyone, and on the other where it's almost only for an elite few, asking whether firearms increase the likelihood of successful suicide is secondary.
    No, "asking whether firearms increase the likelihood of successful suicide" is NOT "secondary." One of the major factors in whether or not a suicide is successful is access to the means of death. One of the reason that suicide by gun is so common in the USA is that guns are so common in the USA.

    Would these people commit suicide by some other means if the convenience of a gun were not so readily available. No doubt, some of them would. But, a lot of them certainly would not.

    In 2010 in the U.S., 19,392 people committed suicide with guns, compared with 11,078 who were killed by others. According to Matthew Miller, associate director of the Harvard Injury Control Research Center (HICRC) at Harvard School of Public Health,
    Last edited by T-Rexx; June 9th, 2014 at 01:26 PM.

  7. #157
    Thankfully Liberal & Gay
    frankfrank's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2005
    Location
    Illinois (Agent Provocateur and Refujiunderground you can do it)
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    15,212
    Blog Entries
    5

    Code of Conduct

    Re: California Shooting: The spin begins

    Quote Originally Posted by Kulindahr View Post
    In addition, free mental health care would be provided for anyone feeling suicidal or doomed.
    If free mental health care is funded, then offsetting funding MUST be removed from the next devastating natural disaster, such as a major earthquake or tornado. - Republican Party, 2014.
    "All legal U. S. residents who are 18 years or older, shall have an unconditional right to vote." - 28th Amendment, US Constitution?
    "But, hey, who cares about women and their rights when the religious liberty of a nationwide chain of arts and crafts stores is at stake?" - Daily Kos, 30 June 2014
    "I distrust those people who know so well what God wants them to do, because I notice it always coincides with their own desires" - Susan B. Anthony

  8. #158
    auribus teneo lupum Stardreamer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Over the Hedge and Under the Hill
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Bisexual
    Status
    Married
    Posts
    3,095

    Code of Conduct

    Re: California Shooting: The spin begins

    Quote Originally Posted by T-Rexx View Post
    Please explain this calculation. How do you come up with "hundreds of thousands to millions of bodies" which should be dying every year, if Kellerman is correct?
    He is basing it on a position you put out somewhere along the line that a person using a gun for self defense was much more likely to be killed or injured, in other words there is a high probability of them being killed. I forget what the figure you put out was. He applied that figure to the number of estimated defensive gun use in the study and that says there should be a LOT more people dying in these encounters than the actual amount of deaths. So this calls into question your claim that it is more dangerous than not to use a gun defensively.
    Under democracy one party always devotes its chief energies to trying to prove that the other party is unfit to rule - and both commonly succeed, and are right. H. L. Mencken US editor (1880 - 1956)

  9. #159
    Bammer's Papa
    Kulindahr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    on the foggy, damp, redneck Oregon coast
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Bisexual
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    101,365
    Blog Entries
    78

    Code of Conduct

    Re: California Shooting: The spin begins

    Quote Originally Posted by T-Rexx View Post
    Please explain this calculation. How do you come up with "hundreds of thousands to millions of bodies" which should be dying every year, if Kellerman is correct?

    Here is Kellerman's paper: http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056...99310073291506

    What is it about Kellerman's numbers that you disagree with? How do you calculate such large numbers of people who "should" be dying?
    It's flawed from the outset, which just shows the dishonesty of the people who agreed to publish it. For starters, he just picks a couple of locations instead of going for complete data, which makes is suspect from the beginning. Then he looks only at homicides, at least according to the statement of methods. So he didn't even study defensive firearms use.

    Quote Originally Posted by T-Rexx View Post
    Your opinion of the quality of the comparative methodologies is not shared - by practically anyone!
    Nonsense. Add to the reasons above that Kellerman refuses to provide his raw data. Any time someone does that, it's a red flag that sinks the work.

    Quote Originally Posted by T-Rexx View Post
    If it's such a no-brainer that this needs to be studied, why does the NRA and the Republican Party refuse to allow it to be studied?

    And, as far as thefts are concerned, you advocate more guns in the general population. Do you believe that more guns laying around will lead to fewer thefts?
    Do you seriously expect me to answer a question you built around a lie? THe lie rests inb the fact that your question is not related to your statement.

    Quote Originally Posted by T-Rexx View Post
    Please cite the study that demonstrates this. (The CDC's letter to Obama is not a study).
    The CDC believes that the studies say that.

    Quote Originally Posted by T-Rexx View Post
    Over the past 40 years, the number of households in America with guns has declined steadily.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/10/us...vey-shows.html

    Yes, I know, gun sales are up. That's because, for you gun people, no number of guns is enough to protect you. You require an ever-larger arsenal to defend yourselves against ever-fewer Americans with guns. It's an increasingly safe world out there. But not because you select few are arming yourselves to the teeth.
    More of your fantasies -- including that the article you cite does not say what you claim (can we call that "Springer's Syndrome"?)

    Quote Originally Posted by T-Rexx View Post
    You seem to be suggesting that legal access to mind-altering drugs will lead to less gun violence.
    Absolutely. Four-fifths of violent crime in the US is caused by the misnamed "War on Drugs". That disfunctional set of programs makes all the stuff worth shooting people over. We saw the same thing in Prohibition, where afterward the legal access to a articular mind-altering drug brought about a plunge in violent crime of roughly ninety percent.

    Quote Originally Posted by T-Rexx View Post
    If drugs are a major cause of gun violence, why on earth do you think such cases should be left out of gun violence statistics?!?
    Drugs aren't "a major cause of gun violence" -- the mendaciously-labeled "War on Drugs" is. And those should be left out of the statistics because they skew the situation and make understanding of what the situation really is impossible. Artificially-generated situations always skew the results.

    Quote Originally Posted by T-Rexx View Post
    No, "asking whether firearms increase the likelihood of successful suicide" is NOT "secondary." One of the major factors in whether or not a suicide is successful is access to the means of death. One of the reason that suicide by gun is so common in the USA is that guns are so common in the USA.

    Would these people commit suicide by some other means if the convenience of a gun were not so readily available. No doubt, some of them would. But, a lot of them certainly would not.
    Thank you for describing why it's secondary. The primary is deterring suicide.

    "Thirty-one* states allow all qualified citizens to carry concealed weapons. In those states, homosexuals should embark on organized efforts to become comfortable with guns, learn to use them safely and carry them. They should set up Pink Pistols task forces, sponsor shooting courses and help homosexuals get licensed to carry. And they should do it in a way that gets as much publicity as possible. "

    --Jonathan Rauch, Salon Magazine, March 13, 2000

    *the number is now forty

  10. #160
    Bammer's Papa
    Kulindahr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    on the foggy, damp, redneck Oregon coast
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Bisexual
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    101,365
    Blog Entries
    78

    Code of Conduct

    Re: California Shooting: The spin begins

    Quote Originally Posted by frankfrank View Post
    If free mental health care is funded, then offsetting funding MUST be removed from the next devastating natural disaster, such as a major earthquake or tornado. - Republican Party, 2014.
    Somehow I think that if passage of the Right-to-Carry Reciprocity legislation was in the offing, the deal would go through despite the party line.

    It's a simple argument: As was said in the debate for ratification, "the militia is the whole people". Some of the people aren't mentally competent to be handling firearms. Having people who aren't competent included in the militia makes it difficult to impossible to have a "well-regulated militia". Ergo, free mental health care, at least in areas pertaining to competence to use weapons, is essential to the maintenance of a well-regulated militia.

    QED

    "Thirty-one* states allow all qualified citizens to carry concealed weapons. In those states, homosexuals should embark on organized efforts to become comfortable with guns, learn to use them safely and carry them. They should set up Pink Pistols task forces, sponsor shooting courses and help homosexuals get licensed to carry. And they should do it in a way that gets as much publicity as possible. "

    --Jonathan Rauch, Salon Magazine, March 13, 2000

    *the number is now forty

  11. #161
    Bammer's Papa
    Kulindahr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    on the foggy, damp, redneck Oregon coast
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Bisexual
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    101,365
    Blog Entries
    78

    Code of Conduct

    Re: California Shooting: The spin begins

    Quote Originally Posted by Stardreamer View Post
    He is basing it on a position you put out somewhere along the line that a person using a gun for self defense was much more likely to be killed or injured, in other words there is a high probability of them being killed. I forget what the figure you put out was. He applied that figure to the number of estimated defensive gun use in the study and that says there should be a LOT more people dying in these encounters than the actual amount of deaths. So this calls into question your claim that it is more dangerous than not to use a gun defensively.
    It's Kellerman's position. He once claimed that someone was something like forty times as likely to be killed with his own weapon than to defend himself with it. He's since reduced that substantially, but even with the lower figure, we have to ask "Where are the bodies?" That's just an internal-check question of the sort taught to college science students in any course where there's lab work or statistics involved: check the implications of your work!

    And Kellerman's figures aren't relevant anyway: he only studied situation where someone was killed. Self-defense doesn't mean someone was killed; hopefully it means no one was! The NRA self-defense instructor for the course I took hammered into us that killing the attacker was a form of failure, because ideally you want to give him to the cops (I know, that's contrary to the La Pierre line, that a dead bad guy saves the taxpayers money). So he deliberately limited his scope of study to exclude the majority of defensive uses -- which makes his work worthless except in some narrow academic way.

    "Thirty-one* states allow all qualified citizens to carry concealed weapons. In those states, homosexuals should embark on organized efforts to become comfortable with guns, learn to use them safely and carry them. They should set up Pink Pistols task forces, sponsor shooting courses and help homosexuals get licensed to carry. And they should do it in a way that gets as much publicity as possible. "

    --Jonathan Rauch, Salon Magazine, March 13, 2000

    *the number is now forty

  12. #162
    Virtus in medio stat JUB Admin opinterph's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Jawja
    Status
    Partnered
    Posts
    21,083
    Blog Entries
    14

    Code of Conduct

    Re: California Shooting: The spin begins

    Quote Originally Posted by luckynumbah7 View Post
    You don't have to be crazy to kill.
    That proposition is certainly debatable. Excluding situations involving defense of self or others, it is reasonable to presume that needless unprovoked killing involves a state of insanity – whether temporary or long-term.

  13. #163
    Virtus in medio stat JUB Admin opinterph's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Jawja
    Status
    Partnered
    Posts
    21,083
    Blog Entries
    14

    Code of Conduct

    Re: California Shooting: The spin begins

    Quote Originally Posted by Kulindahr View Post
    the NICS system
    National Instant Criminal Background Check System

  14. #164
    Virtus in medio stat JUB Admin opinterph's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Jawja
    Status
    Partnered
    Posts
    21,083
    Blog Entries
    14

    Code of Conduct

    Re: California Shooting: The spin begins

    Quote Originally Posted by Kulindahr View Post
    the NRA fought to block doctors from "studying" firearms issues
    That seems like an effort to abridge free speech.

  15. #165
    JUB Addict T-Rexx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    4,620

    Code of Conduct

    Re: California Shooting: The spin begins

    Quote Originally Posted by Kulindahr View Post
    It's flawed from the outset, which just shows the dishonesty of the people who agreed to publish it. For starters, he just picks a couple of locations instead of going for complete data, which makes is suspect from the beginning.
    Kellermine is a prospective, case-controlled study! That's almost unheard of in gun research.

    You can't do a prospective study on every houshold in America!

    And I doubt that the NEJM is offended that you think them dishonest because they published a study with conclusions you don't like.


    Quote Originally Posted by Kulindahr View Post
    Then he looks only at homicides, at least according to the statement of methods.
    It was a study of homicides (and, for that matter, only homicides in homes).


    Quote Originally Posted by Kulindahr View Post
    So he didn't even study defensive firearms use.
    No. Kellarmine was a study of homicides. He was not trying to look at defensive uses of firearms. However, because he was recording events in these households, he did encounter a handful of cases of forced entry into gun-owning homes and non-gun-owning homes, on which he commented.

    Quote Originally Posted by Arthur Kellermine
    We did not find evidence of a protective effect of keeping a gun in the home, even in the small subgroup of cases that involved forced entry.

    Quote Originally Posted by Kulindahr View Post
    Nonsense. Add to the reasons above that Kellerman refuses to provide his raw data. Any time someone does that, it's a red flag that sinks the work.
    *Gasp*

    Have you ever read a scientific study in your life that includes raw data? I can't imagine that any journal would print such a monstrosity. Every paper would require a separate volume, and would be completely unreadable.

    I appreciate that guns are a religion to you, Kuli, but you are posting absolute nonsense here!


    Quote Originally Posted by Kulindahr View Post
    Do you seriously expect me to answer a question you built around a lie? THe lie rests inb the fact that your question is not related to your statement.
    So, you're claiming the NRA did not lobby Congress to stop the CDC from studying guns?

    Who did it, then?


    Quote Originally Posted by Kulindahr View Post
    The CDC believes that the studies say that.
    No, the CDC said those claims deserved to be investigated.


    Quote Originally Posted by Kulindahr View Post
    More of your fantasies -- including that the article you cite does not say what you claim (can we call that "Springer's Syndrome"?)
    The article does not say what I claimed?!? The very first sentence of the article states what I claimed:

    The share of American households with guns has declined over the past four decades, a national survey shows, with some of the most surprising drops in the South and the Western mountain states, where guns are deeply embedded in the culture.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/10/us...vey-shows.html
    So does the second sentence:

    The gun ownership rate has fallen across a broad cross section of households since the early 1970s, according to data from the General Social Survey, a public opinion survey conducted every two years that asks a sample of American adults if they have guns at home, among other questions.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/10/us...vey-shows.html
    So does the third sentence:

    The rate has dropped in cities large and small, in suburbs and rural areas and in all regions of the country.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/10/us...vey-shows.html
    So does the fourth, fifth, sixth, and seventh sentences (but I'm not going to quote them since I'm not allowed).

    Did you even look at this article?


    Quote Originally Posted by Kulindahr View Post
    Absolutely. Four-fifths of violent crime in the US is caused by the misnamed "War on Drugs". That disfunctional set of programs makes all the stuff worth shooting people over. We saw the same thing in Prohibition, where afterward the legal access to a articular mind-altering drug brought about a plunge in violent crime of roughly ninety percent.

    Drugs aren't "a major cause of gun violence" -- the mendaciously-labeled "War on Drugs" is. And those should be left out of the statistics because they skew the situation and make understanding of what the situation really is impossible. Artificially-generated situations always skew the results.
    Kellarmine found that drug use was associated with gun violence (a finding with which you seem to agree).

    You are saying that because drugs are a leading cause of gun violence, we should leave out of the statistics on gun violence anything that is somehow connected to drug use.

    How is it that gun violence connected to drugs is different than gun violence not connected to drugs? If you want to understand gun violence, is it not important to investigate its leading causes?


    Quote Originally Posted by Kulindahr View Post
    Thank you for describing why it's secondary. The primary is deterring suicide.
    Indeed. The primary is deterring suicide - such as making access to guns more difficult.

  16. #166
    Virtus in medio stat JUB Admin opinterph's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Jawja
    Status
    Partnered
    Posts
    21,083
    Blog Entries
    14

    Code of Conduct

    Re: California Shooting: The spin begins

    Quote Originally Posted by Kulindahr View Post
    A people who have been disarmed are no longer a civilized people
    Do you consider citizens of Japan to be an uncivilized people?

  17. #167
    Virtus in medio stat JUB Admin opinterph's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Jawja
    Status
    Partnered
    Posts
    21,083
    Blog Entries
    14

    Code of Conduct

    Re: California Shooting: The spin begins

    Quote Originally Posted by vulgar_newcomer View Post
    the supreme court finally [ruled] on [laws that regulate guns] in 2008
    District of Columbia v. Heller

  18. #168
    Virtus in medio stat JUB Admin opinterph's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Jawja
    Status
    Partnered
    Posts
    21,083
    Blog Entries
    14

    Code of Conduct

    Re: California Shooting: The spin begins

    Quote Originally Posted by vulgar_newcomer View Post
    we have professional police for law enforcement on the homelands.
    “Professional police” are much less likely to respond quickly in emergency situations that take place in rural areas of the country.

  19. #169
    Virtus in medio stat JUB Admin opinterph's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Jawja
    Status
    Partnered
    Posts
    21,083
    Blog Entries
    14

    Code of Conduct

    Re: California Shooting: The spin begins

    Quote Originally Posted by DreamTeam View Post
    English Common Law … shows that the law was designed to protect a group of people, not individual people. The fact that SCOTUS adopted an individual rights view, does not validate their position as one of truth.
    A ruling by SCOTUS does effectively establish current application of US law, regardless of whatever basis may exist with respect to the origins of that law.

  20. #170
    Virtus in medio stat JUB Admin opinterph's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Jawja
    Status
    Partnered
    Posts
    21,083
    Blog Entries
    14

    Code of Conduct

    Re: California Shooting: The spin begins

    Quote Originally Posted by DreamTeam View Post
    Contemporary views are the progressive ones.
    Generally speaking, contemporary views are not characterized by, or restricted to, any particular political ideology.

  21. #171
    JUB Addict T-Rexx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    4,620

    Code of Conduct

    Re: California Shooting: The spin begins

    Quote Originally Posted by Kulindahr View Post
    It's Kellerman's position. He once claimed that someone was something like forty times as likely to be killed with his own weapon than to defend himself with it.
    I am not aware of any such claim by Kellarmine.

    Please cite your source for this.


    Quote Originally Posted by Kulindahr View Post
    He's since reduced that substantially, but even with the lower figure, we have to ask "Where are the bodies?" That's just an internal-check question of the sort taught to college science students in any course where there's lab work or statistics involved: check the implications of your work!
    You keep asking this nonsensical question "where are the bodies?"

    I asked you to explain how you calculate the "millions" of people who "should" be getting killed, and you have been unable to do that.


    Quote Originally Posted by Kulindahr View Post
    And Kellerman's figures aren't relevant anyway: he only studied situation where someone was killed.
    How is it that death to the gun owner is not relevant for gun ownership?


    Quote Originally Posted by Kulindahr View Post
    Self-defense doesn't mean someone was killed; hopefully it means no one was!
    No one is claiming that.


    Quote Originally Posted by Kulindahr View Post
    The NRA self-defense instructor for the course I took hammered into us that killing the attacker was a form of failure, because ideally you want to give him to the cops (I know, that's contrary to the La Pierre line, that a dead bad guy saves the taxpayers money).
    I'm just curious here.

    You once told us that you were taught always to shoot twice, to make sure your victim was killed.

    Which is it?


    Quote Originally Posted by Kulindahr View Post
    So he deliberately limited his scope of study to exclude the majority of defensive uses -- which makes his work worthless except in some narrow academic way.
    Yeah, of course Kellarmine only looked at certain aspects of gun violence.

    He did not come close to addressing the entire issue, because that would not be possible in one paper or even in one book.

    You reject what he did find because he did not investigate even more. That does not make sense. You further think that people like Kellarmine ought not to be permitted to do the studies that you are faulting them for not doing.

    My head spins.

  22. #172
    Virtus in medio stat JUB Admin opinterph's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Jawja
    Status
    Partnered
    Posts
    21,083
    Blog Entries
    14

    Code of Conduct

    Re: California Shooting: The spin begins

    Quote Originally Posted by T-Rexx View Post
    gun sales are up … because … no number of guns is enough
    I think there is a better explanation. I suggest examining the pattern of sales over time.

  23. #173
    Bammer's Papa
    Kulindahr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    on the foggy, damp, redneck Oregon coast
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Bisexual
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    101,365
    Blog Entries
    78

    Code of Conduct

    Re: California Shooting: The spin begins

    Quote Originally Posted by T-Rexx View Post
    And I doubt that the NEJM is offended that you think them dishonest because they published a study with conclusions you don't like.
    Are you ever going to stop making shit up?

    You've become worse than Springer ever was, with this constant stream of fantasies about what's in my head.

    Quote Originally Posted by T-Rexx View Post
    It was a study of homicides (and, for that matter, only homicides in homes).

    No. Kellarmine was a study of homicides. He was not trying to look at defensive uses of firearms. However, because he was recording events in these households, he did encounter a handful of cases of forced entry into gun-owning homes and non-gun-owning homes, on which he commented.
    Since, as you admit, he didn't study it, then his comments are irrelevant.

    Quote Originally Posted by T-Rexx View Post
    Have you ever read a scientific study in your life that includes raw data? I can't imagine that any journal would print such a monstrosity. Every paper would require a separate volume, and would be completely unreadable.

    I appreciate that guns are a religion to you, Kuli, but you are posting absolute nonsense here!
    Again you make stuff up. Plainly you're either so gone into your fantasy you can't tell the difference, or you're refusing to read what I say -- and either way you're completely unaware of the fact that if an author won't share his raw data, the work is discredited.

    Quote Originally Posted by T-Rexx View Post
    So, you're claiming the NRA did not lobby Congress to stop the CDC from studying guns?

    Who did it, then?
    That has nothing to do with what I said.

    Quote Originally Posted by T-Rexx View Post
    No, the CDC said those claims deserved to be investigated.
    That's not what the plain words say.

    Quote Originally Posted by T-Rexx View Post
    The article does not say what I claimed?!? The very first sentence of the article states what I claimed:

    So does the second sentence:

    So does the third sentence:

    So does the fourth, fifth, sixth, and seventh sentences (but I'm not going to quote them since I'm not allowed).

    Did you even look at this article?
    Evidently you didn't read it, or can't -- none of those sentences say what you're claiming; in fact they don't even mention it! They're talking about percentages. Your claim was that gun ownership is decreasing -- the article doesn't say that at all.

    Quote Originally Posted by T-Rexx View Post
    Kellarmine found that drug use was associated with gun violence (a finding with which you seem to agree).

    You are saying that because drugs are a leading cause of gun violence, we should leave out of the statistics on gun violence anything that is somehow connected to drug use.
    Okay, you're just flat out lying now. Or maybe you actually can't read English -- but it's one of those. Right on the screen in front of you are my words saying exactly the opposite of what you assert here.

    I can't carry on a conversation with someone who lies about what I've said.

    Quote Originally Posted by T-Rexx View Post
    How is it that gun violence connected to drugs is different than gun violence not connected to drugs? If you want to understand gun violence, is it not important to investigate its leading causes?
    Again: it isn't related to drugs, it's artificially induced by government policy. It's no different than if the government decided to randomly pay people for killing other people. That's not a rational, sensible "cause", it's an artificial introduction of an extraneous factor.

    Quote Originally Posted by T-Rexx View Post
    Indeed. The primary is deterring suicide - such as making access to guns more difficult.
    That's secondary again. It's like addressing whether people have functioning parachutes, when the idea should be to stop crazies from throwing them out of the plane in the first place.

    Until you stop making crap up and lying about what I've said, there's no point in continuing this.

    "Thirty-one* states allow all qualified citizens to carry concealed weapons. In those states, homosexuals should embark on organized efforts to become comfortable with guns, learn to use them safely and carry them. They should set up Pink Pistols task forces, sponsor shooting courses and help homosexuals get licensed to carry. And they should do it in a way that gets as much publicity as possible. "

    --Jonathan Rauch, Salon Magazine, March 13, 2000

    *the number is now forty

  24. #174
    Bammer's Papa
    Kulindahr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    on the foggy, damp, redneck Oregon coast
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Bisexual
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    101,365
    Blog Entries
    78

    Code of Conduct

    Re: California Shooting: The spin begins

    Quote Originally Posted by opinterph View Post
    Do you consider citizens of Japan to be an uncivilized people?
    Ultimately, yes. They've allowed themselves to be rendered sheep to be done with as the government wills.

    Or, really, the people who've bought the government they can afford.

    "Thirty-one* states allow all qualified citizens to carry concealed weapons. In those states, homosexuals should embark on organized efforts to become comfortable with guns, learn to use them safely and carry them. They should set up Pink Pistols task forces, sponsor shooting courses and help homosexuals get licensed to carry. And they should do it in a way that gets as much publicity as possible. "

    --Jonathan Rauch, Salon Magazine, March 13, 2000

    *the number is now forty

  25. #175
    Bammer's Papa
    Kulindahr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    on the foggy, damp, redneck Oregon coast
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Bisexual
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    101,365
    Blog Entries
    78

    Code of Conduct

    Re: California Shooting: The spin begins

    Quote Originally Posted by opinterph View Post
    “Professional police” are much less likely to respond quickly in emergency situations that take place in rural areas of the country.
    The book Dial 911 and Die sets that out rather crudely but effectively.

    Even in cities, the police cannot reach you faster than the criminal already facing you. Besides that, they have no responsibility to do so -- according to the federal courts, repeatedly, the police have no obligation to protect any individuals whatsoever unless specifically assigned to do so.

    If I'd had to depend on police, then kids who were my responsibility would have gotten molested. If I'd had to depend on police, I'd have ended up in an emergency room or morgue.

    "Thirty-one* states allow all qualified citizens to carry concealed weapons. In those states, homosexuals should embark on organized efforts to become comfortable with guns, learn to use them safely and carry them. They should set up Pink Pistols task forces, sponsor shooting courses and help homosexuals get licensed to carry. And they should do it in a way that gets as much publicity as possible. "

    --Jonathan Rauch, Salon Magazine, March 13, 2000

    *the number is now forty

  26. #176
    Bammer's Papa
    Kulindahr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    on the foggy, damp, redneck Oregon coast
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Bisexual
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    101,365
    Blog Entries
    78

    Code of Conduct

    Re: California Shooting: The spin begins

    Quote Originally Posted by T-Rexx View Post
    I am not aware of any such claim by Kellarmine.

    Please cite your source for this.
    You posted the bloody thing yourself!

    Quote Originally Posted by T-Rexx View Post
    I'm just curious here.

    You once told us that you were taught always to shoot twice, to make sure your victim was killed.

    Which is it?
    Yet another lie about what I've said.

    For those who may be getting their minds muddled by T-Rexx' stream here, what I have said is what is taught in every NRA course and police academy: you shoot to stop the threat; you do NOT shoot "to kill".


    I'm done. I'm tired of having to try to answer your fantasies, lies, and misrepresentations of what I've said. You've shown you don't even know the content of what you're citing. It's plain you're no more interested in actual discussion than our worst right-wingers.

    "Thirty-one* states allow all qualified citizens to carry concealed weapons. In those states, homosexuals should embark on organized efforts to become comfortable with guns, learn to use them safely and carry them. They should set up Pink Pistols task forces, sponsor shooting courses and help homosexuals get licensed to carry. And they should do it in a way that gets as much publicity as possible. "

    --Jonathan Rauch, Salon Magazine, March 13, 2000

    *the number is now forty

  27. #177
    Bammer's Papa
    Kulindahr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    on the foggy, damp, redneck Oregon coast
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Bisexual
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    101,365
    Blog Entries
    78

    Code of Conduct

    Re: California Shooting: The spin begins

    Quote Originally Posted by opinterph View Post
    I think there is a better explanation. I suggest examining the pattern of sales over time.
    Pointless response: he's not interested in the actuality, only in the mantras. He isn't interested in scholarship, or in telling the truth about what others have posted. He writes as though he has a telepathic connection that allows him to proclaim the "real" motives for gun ownership -- which means he's saying that gun owners are liars.

    Along with the CDC, when it doesn't match his agenda.

    "Thirty-one* states allow all qualified citizens to carry concealed weapons. In those states, homosexuals should embark on organized efforts to become comfortable with guns, learn to use them safely and carry them. They should set up Pink Pistols task forces, sponsor shooting courses and help homosexuals get licensed to carry. And they should do it in a way that gets as much publicity as possible. "

    --Jonathan Rauch, Salon Magazine, March 13, 2000

    *the number is now forty

  28. #178
    FEAR THE LIBERAL DETENTE! TX-Beau's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Austin
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Open Relationship
    Posts
    8,061

    Code of Conduct

    Re: California Shooting: The spin begins

    Quote Originally Posted by Kulindahr View Post
    That does seem to be the Constitution's view: the people are the militia, and the Congress is to provide for the discipline of the militia.

    Here's an idea: Democrats should offer to vote for the National Right-to-Carry Reciprocity Bill, but as part of a new Militia Act that would require safe and secure storage and authorize mental health personnel who have concluded that a patient is a danger to report such to the NICS to be flagged. If a firearm was not safely stored, then a person who left one lying about and someone used it for a crime could be prosecuted as an accessory. In addition, free mental health care would be provided for anyone feeling suicidal or doomed.

    All pursuant to having a more "regulated" (i.e. responsible and disciplined) militia.

    There is absolutely no constitutional bar to regulating firearms. It's only idiots and zealots, historical revisionists, and the people who sell guns who insist regulation is prohibition.
    ATTACK OF THE LIBERAL ELITE

  29. #179
    Virtus in medio stat JUB Admin opinterph's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Jawja
    Status
    Partnered
    Posts
    21,083
    Blog Entries
    14

    Code of Conduct

    Re: California Shooting: The spin begins

    Quote Originally Posted by Kulindahr View Post
    America dearly holds to the notion that we have to win.
    Americans are generally less interested in cooperation than competition. They often correlate self-esteem with winning and success. [Link]


    Quote Originally Posted by T-Rexx View Post
    America has a culture that teaches that threatening and harming others and forcing them to bend to your will by physical force is a desirable and honorable means of solving problems.
    If your statement is correct and two persons are experiencing “a problem” (disagreement or conflict); does it follow that the person who initiates threats and harm is considered the more “desirable and honorable” of the two?

  30. #180
    JUB Addict hotatlboi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Atlanta
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    7,773

    Code of Conduct

    Re: California Shooting: The spin begins

    I support background checks but honestly I'm so over the outrage on gun crime. It's a shame when anyone is killed but statistically you are far less likely to be killed by a gun in the USA today than you were in the 80s or 90s. Violent crime with guns has dropped significantly in the last few decades.

    http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2013/...ublic-unaware/
    http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/fv9311.pdf

  31. #181
    Virtus in medio stat JUB Admin opinterph's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    Jawja
    Status
    Partnered
    Posts
    21,083
    Blog Entries
    14

    Code of Conduct

    Re: California Shooting: The spin begins

    Quote Originally Posted by Kulindahr View Post
    in the American mind, retreating means losing.
    Quote Originally Posted by Kulindahr View Post
    the Founding Fathers … had a phrase … meaning that a citizen was expected to retreat from violence until his back was "against the wall".
    Taking the above two statements together, is it fair to conclude that the Founding Fathers expected citizens of that time period to voluntarily lose, unless they were in a situation with their back against the wall?

  32. #182
    Bammer's Papa
    Kulindahr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    on the foggy, damp, redneck Oregon coast
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Bisexual
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    101,365
    Blog Entries
    78

    Code of Conduct

    Re: California Shooting: The spin begins

    Quote Originally Posted by TX-Beau View Post
    There is absolutely no constitutional bar to regulating firearms. It's only idiots and zealots, historical revisionists, and the people who sell guns who insist regulation is prohibition.
    There doesn't have to be a "bar", there has to be an authorization. There isn't one.

    "Thirty-one* states allow all qualified citizens to carry concealed weapons. In those states, homosexuals should embark on organized efforts to become comfortable with guns, learn to use them safely and carry them. They should set up Pink Pistols task forces, sponsor shooting courses and help homosexuals get licensed to carry. And they should do it in a way that gets as much publicity as possible. "

    --Jonathan Rauch, Salon Magazine, March 13, 2000

    *the number is now forty

  33. #183
    Bammer's Papa
    Kulindahr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    on the foggy, damp, redneck Oregon coast
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Bisexual
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    101,365
    Blog Entries
    78

    Code of Conduct

    Re: California Shooting: The spin begins

    Quote Originally Posted by hotatlboi View Post
    I support background checks but honestly I'm so over the outrage on gun crime. It's a shame when anyone is killed but statistically you are far less likely to be killed by a gun in the USA today than you were in the 80s or 90s. Violent crime with guns has dropped significantly in the last few decades.

    http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2013/...ublic-unaware/
    http://www.bjs.gov/content/pub/pdf/fv9311.pdf
    Right.

    But it's still Congress' job to provide for the discipline of the militia. They have not done so, and because of that people die.

    That has to change.

    "Thirty-one* states allow all qualified citizens to carry concealed weapons. In those states, homosexuals should embark on organized efforts to become comfortable with guns, learn to use them safely and carry them. They should set up Pink Pistols task forces, sponsor shooting courses and help homosexuals get licensed to carry. And they should do it in a way that gets as much publicity as possible. "

    --Jonathan Rauch, Salon Magazine, March 13, 2000

    *the number is now forty

  34. #184
    Bammer's Papa
    Kulindahr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    on the foggy, damp, redneck Oregon coast
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Bisexual
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    101,365
    Blog Entries
    78

    Code of Conduct

    Re: California Shooting: The spin begins

    Quote Originally Posted by opinterph View Post
    Taking the above two statements together, is it fair to conclude that the Founding Fathers expected citizens of that time period to voluntarily lose, unless they were in a situation with their back against the wall?
    The more I read about the period, the less I see any sign that they had that "winning" concept. Working together as a community was more a sign of success to them.

    But in today's term, yes: they would expect us to "lose" rather than just shoot. They had far more compassion than we do.

    To today's Americans there's an inconsistency there: they were perfectly aware that the right to keep and bear arms meant there would be people who misused them. They were willing to accept that, in order to preserve liberty, but in their view that went along with a duty to "go to the wall" before threatening someone else. I don't see that as inconsistent: bearing arms for self-defense was meant to preserve life, and so was retreat.



    edit: in other words, "Stand Your Ground" is inconsistent with the philosophy underlying the Second Amendment.
    Last edited by Kulindahr; June 11th, 2014 at 09:51 PM.

    "Thirty-one* states allow all qualified citizens to carry concealed weapons. In those states, homosexuals should embark on organized efforts to become comfortable with guns, learn to use them safely and carry them. They should set up Pink Pistols task forces, sponsor shooting courses and help homosexuals get licensed to carry. And they should do it in a way that gets as much publicity as possible. "

    --Jonathan Rauch, Salon Magazine, March 13, 2000

    *the number is now forty

  35. #185
    FEAR THE LIBERAL DETENTE! TX-Beau's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Location
    Austin
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Open Relationship
    Posts
    8,061

    Code of Conduct

    Re: California Shooting: The spin begins

    Quote Originally Posted by Kulindahr View Post
    There doesn't have to be a "bar", there has to be an authorization. There isn't one.
    Bullshit. There is no NO CONSTITUTIONAL BAR to regulation, and only zealots and fools think that regulation is prohibition. Period.
    ATTACK OF THE LIBERAL ELITE

  36. #186
    JUB Addict T-Rexx's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    4,620

    Code of Conduct

    Re: California Shooting: The spin begins

    Quote Originally Posted by Kulindahr View Post
    You posted the bloody thing yourself!
    I posted Kellermann's paper.

    Where did he claim the 40x greater likelyhood of killing oneself with a gun, which you claim in Post #161?


    Quote Originally Posted by Kulindahr View Post
    Yet another lie about what I've said.

    For those who may be getting their minds muddled by T-Rexx' stream here, what I have said is what is taught in every NRA course and police academy: you shoot to stop the threat; you do NOT shoot "to kill".
    It's called Double tap. It is taught by some militaries and police forces, and is part of the NRA's home defense course.

    I seem to recall you describing being taught this technique, although you did not refer to it by the name "double tap."


    Quote Originally Posted by Kulindahr View Post
    I'm done. I'm tired of having to try to answer your fantasies, lies, and misrepresentations of what I've said. You've shown you don't even know the content of what you're citing. It's plain you're no more interested in actual discussion than our worst right-wingers.
    I have posted nothing but facts. I have cited Kellarmann, several publications from the Harvard Injury Control Research Center (Firearms Division), the National Crime Victimization Survey, the John Hopkins Center for Gun Policy Research, and forty years of General Social Surveys carried out by the University of Chicago.

    Your only "source" is a letter from the CDC to president Obama in 2013, in which you have mischaracterized a review of the literature as agreement with the findings of that literature. Indeed, you insist that the letter indicates the CDC supports Gary Kleck's claim of ~2.5 million defensive gun incidents per year, which almost nobody - especially at CDC - takes seriously!

    You have claimed (post #161) Kellarmann reported a 40x risk of killing oneself with a gun, which is not true. You have claimed (post #61) that it is not true that pocket knives and cars are not designed to kill you (well, okay, maybe GM cars are designed to kill you). You claimed (post #63) that the NRA did not try to prevent Florida pediatricians from discussing guns with their patients, which is demonstrably false. You keep saying that tens of thousands to millions of people should be getting killed every year by guns - a claim which deserves explanation - but you refuse to explain that calculation. You claim every scientific study is a "lie," and that it is dishonest of me to quote the scientific literature. You fault the medical community for not studying gun violence enough, even as you agree with the NRA that the medical community should be prohibited from studying gun violence! You reject the National Crime Victimization Survey, but you champion a 20 yr. old telephone survey that almost nobody in the industry takes seriously. (Astoundingly to me, you weren't even aware that the data you were throwing about came from that phone survey!) You claimed (post #159) that serial surveys that show that the number of households with guns in America have been declining for 40 years do not show a decline in the number of households with guns in America! You claim Kellermann's study is not valid because he did not include his raw data, something which is never done in any scientific paper! You claim Kellermann's data on homicides is not valid because he did not also study defensive gun use (post #173). You claim (post #159) that all gun violence related to drug use should be left out of gun violence statistics, because it is somehow unfair. You claim (post #159) that the NEJM is "dishonest" for publishing Kellermann's study.

    Yeah, I know. You will claim that everything in this post is a lie, even though it is painstakingly documented. You will claim that all my sources are lies, even though they are peer-reviewed studies by respected people in the field (all the peers are in on the conspiracy). You will deny everything that disagrees with your certainty that guns make people safe, but you will accept everything which reinforces that notion.
    Last edited by T-Rexx; June 11th, 2014 at 10:56 PM.

  37. #187
    Bammer's Papa
    Kulindahr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    on the foggy, damp, redneck Oregon coast
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Bisexual
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    101,365
    Blog Entries
    78

    Code of Conduct

    Re: California Shooting: The spin begins

    ^
    I count at least a dozen lies about what I've said. I quit at that point.

    "Thirty-one* states allow all qualified citizens to carry concealed weapons. In those states, homosexuals should embark on organized efforts to become comfortable with guns, learn to use them safely and carry them. They should set up Pink Pistols task forces, sponsor shooting courses and help homosexuals get licensed to carry. And they should do it in a way that gets as much publicity as possible. "

    --Jonathan Rauch, Salon Magazine, March 13, 2000

    *the number is now forty

  38. #188
    JUB Addict hotatlboi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    Atlanta
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    7,773

    Code of Conduct

    Re: California Shooting: The spin begins

    Research has shown that households with guns are more likely to have accidental deaths as a result of the gun than they are to have a burglary that is successfully defended against with the gun. I seriously doubt 40x more likely is the correct number, but that general conclusion has been found in multiple studies.

  39. #189
    Bammer's Papa
    Kulindahr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    on the foggy, damp, redneck Oregon coast
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Bisexual
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    101,365
    Blog Entries
    78

    Code of Conduct

    Re: California Shooting: The spin begins

    Quote Originally Posted by hotatlboi View Post
    Research has shown that households with guns are more likely to have accidental deaths as a result of the gun than they are to have a burglary that is successfully defended against with the gun. I seriously doubt 40x more likely is the correct number, but that general conclusion has been found in multiple studies.
    The 40-ish number came from Kellerman, here:

    (June 12, 1986), "Protection or peril? An analysis of firearm-related deaths in the home.", New England Journal of Medicine

    "Thirty-one* states allow all qualified citizens to carry concealed weapons. In those states, homosexuals should embark on organized efforts to become comfortable with guns, learn to use them safely and carry them. They should set up Pink Pistols task forces, sponsor shooting courses and help homosexuals get licensed to carry. And they should do it in a way that gets as much publicity as possible. "

    --Jonathan Rauch, Salon Magazine, March 13, 2000

    *the number is now forty

  40. #190
    JUB Addict chrisrobin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Gay
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    8,021

    Code of Conduct

    Re: California Shooting: The spin begins

    .
    POINT OF ORDER:

    There have been (est.) 74 school shootings since the New Town massacre. Where's the outrage? Where are the "right to lifers" now? (other than being sucked off by members of the NRA)

    Why should anyone have to know anything? - Sheldon Cooper

  41. #191
    auribus teneo lupum Stardreamer's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Location
    Over the Hedge and Under the Hill
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Bisexual
    Status
    Married
    Posts
    3,095

    Code of Conduct

    Re: California Shooting: The spin begins

    Quote Originally Posted by chrisrobin View Post
    .
    POINT OF ORDER:

    There have been (est.) 74 school shootings since the New Town massacre. Where's the outrage? Where are the "right to lifers" now? (other than being sucked off by members of the NRA)
    More like 10, the 74 number was arrived at by using a very loose definition of 'school shooting' to include criminal activity and suicides that just happened to have occurred on or near a school campus (to include large college campuses) but were not aimed at the school population. Politifact labeled the claim "Mostly False".

    Edit: and to clarify, any school shootings at all is tragic but it serves no purpose to pad the numbers.
    Last edited by Stardreamer; June 15th, 2014 at 08:34 PM.
    Under democracy one party always devotes its chief energies to trying to prove that the other party is unfit to rule - and both commonly succeed, and are right. H. L. Mencken US editor (1880 - 1956)

  42. #192
    Bammer's Papa
    Kulindahr's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    on the foggy, damp, redneck Oregon coast
    Gender
    Male
    Orientation
    Bisexual
    Status
    Single
    Posts
    101,365
    Blog Entries
    78

    Code of Conduct

    Re: California Shooting: The spin begins

    Quote Originally Posted by Stardreamer View Post
    More like 10, the 74 number was arrived at by using a very loose definition of 'school shooting' to include criminal activity and suicides that just happened to have occurred on or near a school campus (to include large college campuses) but were not aimed at the school population. Politifact labeled the claim "Mostly False".

    Edit: and to clarify, any school shootings at all is tragic but it serves no purpose to pad the numbers.
    Yeah, that's one that was justly pounced on by Chris Cox at the NRA.

    It's the same way they get a big "children killed" number -- by counting people up to 21 including in criminal activity.

    "Thirty-one* states allow all qualified citizens to carry concealed weapons. In those states, homosexuals should embark on organized efforts to become comfortable with guns, learn to use them safely and carry them. They should set up Pink Pistols task forces, sponsor shooting courses and help homosexuals get licensed to carry. And they should do it in a way that gets as much publicity as possible. "

    --Jonathan Rauch, Salon Magazine, March 13, 2000

    *the number is now forty

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Terms of Service | Privacy Policy | About JustUsBoys.com | Site Map | RSS | Webmasters | Advertise | Link to JUB | Report A Bug on this Page

Visit our sister sites: Broke Straight Boys | CollegeDudes.com | CollegeBoyPhysicals.com | RocketTube
All models appearing on JustUsBoys.com were over 18 at the time of photography. The records for sexually explicit images required by U.S. 2257 are kept by the
individual producers of the images. The location of the records is available by clicking the Custodian of Records link at the bottom of each gallery page.
© 2012 JustUsBoys.com. The JustUsBoys.com name and logo are registered trademarks. Labeled with ICRA and RTA. Member of ASACP and The Free Speech Coalition.