forgot password register

reset password

register

patrick.net

 

#misc


#housing #investing #politics #random more»
770,830 comments by 11,157 registered users, 5 online now: Bellingham Bill, nyc, PeopleUnited, tovarichpeter, WookieMan
new post
« prev   misc   next »

-2

So, Dems, what exactly are you hoping to get out of this in terms of gun control?

By KimJongUn following x   2017 Oct 3, 10:52am 1,311 views   143 comments   watch   quote     share  

Realistically. (No loony shit, please.)

And what would you be willing to trade for it?

I have a proposal, but I'll hold on to it for now.

UPDATE: Please refrain from virtue signalling in this thread - we have plenty of that in other threads related to LV shooting already.

« First    « Previous     Comments 63 - 102 of 143     Next »     Last »

63 me123   2017 Oct 4, 1:36pm   ↑ like (1)   ↑ dislike (1)     quote        
iwog says
bump stocks, and require background checks and/or registration.


What he had was legal and he had all his background checks.

Next!
64 me123   2017 Oct 4, 1:37pm   ↑ like (1)   ↑ dislike (1)     quote        
bob2356 says
Since 1998 firearms ownership has gone up over 50% yet firearms homicides have decreased 5%.


Do you know the difference between up and down(decreased)?
65 me123   2017 Oct 4, 1:39pm   ↑ like (1)   ↑ dislike (1)     quote        
KimJongUn says
57 messages and still no "wish list". Sigh.


They're not capable of logical thought. What were you expecting, miracles?
66 KimJongUn   2017 Oct 4, 1:39pm   ↑ like (1)   ↑ dislike (1)     quote        
jazz_music says
KimJongUn says
57 messages and still no "wish list". Sigh.


Then that is what they are hoping to get out of this, nothing really. That is an answer.

Actually I gave suggestions and one other commenter gave an answer


Where? All I saw from you is unfocused VS ramblings. And I've acknowledged the only answer I've got earlier in the thread. But I suspect the guy isn't really a Dem....

jazz_music says
but these aren't the flawed arguments you were hoping for.

Thread wasn't much fun for you was it?


It actually turned out much more fun than I hoped for.
67 Quigley   2017 Oct 4, 3:18pm   ↑ like (1)   ↑ dislike (1)     quote        
bob2356 says
From 1993 to 1998 firearms ownership went up 10% and firearms homicides dropped by 50%. Since 1998 firearms ownership has gone up over 50% yet firearms homicides have decreased 5%. Do you have some kind of point because there certainly isn't any correlation to


Sure, I can explain it very neatly. Roe v. Wade in the 70s resulted in mass infanticide of black unborn babies over the concurrent years. The last black generation unaffected by this holocaust matured to young adulthood in the early 90s. After then, a large number of "missing" black youth weren't around to commit a disproportionate number of gun homicides.
68 iwog   2017 Oct 4, 4:00pm   ↑ like (0)   ↑ dislike (0)     quote        
Quigley says
Sure, I can explain it very neatly. Roe v. Wade in the 70s resulted in mass infanticide of black unborn babies over the concurrent years. The last black generation unaffected by this holocaust matured to young adulthood in the early 90s. After then, a large number of "missing" black youth weren't around to commit a disproportionate number of gun homicides.


1. You are butchering (and stealing) the example from Freakenomics which is not racist in the least. Poor violent white trash got abortions too.

2. That doesn't address the graph at all. You are offering an alternative explanation for the steep drop in homicides without acknowledging the nearly straight line data of gun acquisition resulting in a slightly climbing murder rate from 2000 to 2006 and a slightly falling rate after that. Since both data sets are per capita, CLEARLY the increase in guns (and btw the liberalization of gun laws in the south) isn't having the effect you claim it does.
69 bob2356   2017 Oct 4, 5:37pm   ↑ like (0)   ↑ dislike (0)     quote        
Quigley says
bob2356 says
From 1993 to 1998 firearms ownership went up 10% and firearms homicides dropped by 50%. Since 1998 firearms ownership has gone up over 50% yet firearms homicides have decreased 5%. Do you have some kind of point because there certainly isn't any correlation to


Sure, I can explain it very neatly. Roe v. Wade in the 70s resulted in mass infanticide of black unborn babies over the concurrent years. The last black generation unaffected by this holocaust matured to young adulthood in the early 90s. After then, a large number of "missing" black youth weren't around to commit a disproportionate number of gun homicides.


If you want to sit at the table with the adults then you have to pay better attention. This has zero to do the the claim that ever increasing numbers of guns results in ever decreasing gun homicides.
70 bob2356   2017 Oct 4, 5:39pm   ↑ like (1)   ↑ dislike (1)     quote        
me123 says
bob2356 says
Since 1998 firearms ownership has gone up over 50% yet firearms homicides have decreased 5%.


Do you know the difference between up and down(decreased)?


Yep perfectly. I'm not going to try to explain such a simple concept to you though. You have zero math or numbers skills as proven many, many times. .
71 Booger   2017 Oct 4, 5:49pm   ↑ like (6)   ↑ dislike (6)     quote        
Ban mass shootings!
72 errc   2017 Oct 4, 6:11pm   ↑ like (0)   ↑ dislike (0)     quote        
As an Independent, I’d like to see the #FakeNews media stop with the propaganda. All they ever show is a seemingly endless stream of stories about gun violence. Why don’t they show equal airtime of all the stories where Great Americans defended themselves with their guns?
73 joeyjojojunior   2017 Oct 4, 6:15pm   ↑ like (0)   ↑ dislike (0)     quote        
>errc says
As an Independent, I’d like to see the #FakeNews media stop with the propaganda. All they ever show is a seemingly endless stream of stories about gun violence. Why don’t they show equal airtime of all the stories where Great Americans defended themselves with their guns?


Agreed. When is CNN going to start showing the feel good stories about real Americans shooting bad cops? If that nurse in Utah had only had a gun, the cop wouldn't have dared falsely arrest her.
74 errc   2017 Oct 4, 7:17pm   ↑ like (0)   ↑ dislike (0)     quote        
joeyjojojunior says
>errc says
As an Independent, I’d like to see the #FakeNews media stop with the propaganda. All they ever show is a seemingly endless stream of stories about gun violence. Why don’t they show equal airtime of all the stories where Great Americans defended themselves with their guns?


Agreed. When is CNN going to start showing the feel good stories about real Americans shooting bad cops? If that nurse in Utah had only had a gun, the cop wouldn't have dared falsely arrest her.


There are no bad cops, you Crumb Bumb Lush Creep!

I’m talking about the millions of Great Americans who have all these guns for protection. We never get to hear all the countless stories of them defending themselves with their guns. What gives? Why only an endless stream of instances of people falling victim to gun crimes?
75 me123   2017 Oct 4, 7:25pm   ↑ like (1)   ↑ dislike (1)     quote        
errc says
We never get to hear all the countless stories of them defending themselves with their guns.


Start here:

https://www.americanrifleman.org/the-armed-citizen
76 Quigley   2017 Oct 5, 7:07am   ↑ like (1)   ↑ dislike (1)     quote        
iwog says
Quigley says
Sure, I can explain it very neatly. Roe v. Wade in the 70s resulted in mass infanticide of black unborn babies over the concurrent years. The last black generation unaffected by this holocaust matured to young adulthood in the early 90s. After then, a large number of "missing" black youth weren't around to commit a disproportionate number of gun homicides.


1. You are butchering (and stealing) the example from Freakenomics which is not racist in the least. Poor violent white trash got abortions too.

2. That doesn't address the graph at all. You are offering an alternative explanation for the steep drop in homicides without acknowledging the nearly straight line data of gun acquisition resulting in a slightly climbing murder rate from 2000 to 2006 and a slightly falling rate after that. Since both data sets are per capita, CLEARLY the increase in guns (and btw th...


1. Glad to see you also read books. Then you agree with the authors? This explains the drop-off in violent crime?

2. No one factor can explain the graph. I think the increase in gun sales can be explained by one main factor: Leftist campaigning for enhanced gun control. The more people hear that they maybe can't have something soon, the more people rush out to get it before they can't anymore. Gun shops love it when Leftists go on another legislative push for "gun control." And of course, Obama was the best gun salesman of the millennia.
77 anonymous   2017 Oct 5, 9:33am   ↑ like (1)   ↑ dislike (1)     quote        
bob2356 says
From 1993 to 1998 firearms ownership went up 10% and firearms homicides dropped by 50%. Since 1998 firearms ownership has gone up over 50% yet firearms homicides have decreased 5%. Do you have some kind of point because there certainly isn't any correlation to be seen here.


You seem to be having issues with percentages. Also, why did you not post this other chart from that page?

http://www.aei.org/publication/chart-of-the-day-more-guns-less-gun-violence-between-1993-and-2013/
It shows homicide rates went down -49%, not the -5% like you stated.
78 joeyjojojunior   2017 Oct 5, 9:37am   ↑ like (0)   ↑ dislike (0)     quote        
anonymous says
You seem to be having issues with percentages. Also, why did you not post this other chart from that page?


Actually, you seem to be having trouble with dates. 1993 is different than 1998.
79 HEY YOU   2017 Oct 5, 9:38am   ↑ like (0)   ↑ dislike (0)     quote        
Republicans banning bump stocks.
80 bob2356   2017 Oct 5, 1:16pm   ↑ like (0)   ↑ dislike (0)     quote        
anonymous says
bob2356 says
From 1993 to 1998 firearms ownership went up 10% and firearms homicides dropped by 50%. Since 1998 firearms ownership has gone up over 50% yet firearms homicides have decreased 5%. Do you have some kind of point because there certainly isn't any correlation to be seen here.


You seem to be having issues with percentages. Also, why did you not post this other chart from that page?

http://www.aei.org/publication/chart-of-the-day-more-guns-less-gun-violence-between-1993-and-2013/
It shows homicide rates went down -49%, not the -5% like you stated.


Ah yes CIC math again. Not only can you not do numbers you can't even do dates. That is the chart I posted and the percentages are clear. There is no correlation between firearms ownership and firearms homicides. The firearms homicide rate has barely moved in 20 years while ownership has skyrocketed. Why doesn't the chart go back another 20 years? Firearm ownership didn't go up much in those 20 years but firearms homicides dropped a lot. It's only if you look at a couple very specific dates and fudge the numbers around that you get the results claimed.

I'm not having any trouble at all with percentages. You are having your usual problem with the concept of changes in the rate of change.

Very odd. The AEI chart doesn't jive at all with the Bureau of ATF manufacturing chart. Anyone want to defend where AEI gets their numbers from? The numbers don't even match the source (congressional research service) they claim as their basis. Having 357 million guns for 315 million people isn't 1.45 guns per person it's 1.1. CIC works for AEI now I guess. Something is very fishy with this chart..



81 me123   2017 Oct 5, 1:52pm   ↑ like (2)   ↑ dislike (2)     quote        
The bottom line, bobby, is that your whole narrative of "more guns = more homicides" is just crap. Your own charts prove it. Unfortunately, you want to play semantics with percentages, but sadly, it doesn't change the big false narrative.
82 bob2356   2017 Oct 5, 3:04pm   ↑ like (0)   ↑ dislike (0)     quote        
me123 says
The bottom line, bobby, is that your whole narrative of "more guns = more homicides" is just crap. Your own charts prove it. Unfortunately, you want to play semantics with percentages, but sadly, it doesn't change the big false narrative.


Where did I say that? Making shit up as usual. The only false narrative is your favorite chart that claims increased gun ownership correlates to reduced gun homicides. The percentages don't work, not that you have a clue what percentages are. What semantics? Gun homicides have gone down 5.5% in 20 years while ownership has gone up 40%. Right from the chart you posted. It's only if you start with a statistical aberration in the early 90's that the claim of correlation can be made.

You have me confused with someone else. I'm not in favor of gun control. Never said a word in favor of gun control. If people want to spend their money on guns then more power to them, provided they are reasonably sane. I used to own and shoot but don't have time or interest any more. The only control I would like is for everyone to have a back round check for all sales, especially private sales, and all sales to be recorded in a federal data base. If the track disappears with you and the gun is used for a crime then you go to jail.

What I'm in favor of is keeping guns out of the hands of criminals. The people pipe lining guns to criminals should be in jail. Period. Any reason you and the NRA are so opposed to doing that? Feeling guilty about something maybe? Who have you sold guns to?
83 me123   2017 Oct 5, 3:33pm   ↑ like (2)   ↑ dislike (2)     quote        
bob2356 says
What I'm in favor of is keeping guns out of the hands of criminals.


How many of the criminals in Chicago are buying their guns legally with background checks?

bob2356 says
The people pipe lining guns to criminals should be in jail.


Is this really a problem, what "percentage" of criminals buy their guns this way?
84 me123   2017 Oct 5, 3:37pm   ↑ like (1)   ↑ dislike (1)     quote        
bob2356 says
What semantics? Gun homicides have gone down 5.5% in 20 years while ownership has gone up 40%.


me123 says
Unfortunately, you want to play semantics with percentages, but sadly, it doesn't change the big false narrative.


I'll try again, if as you claim, more guns = more homicides, then the lines in the chart would be running parallel, are they?

This really isn't a difficult concept for you is it?
88 TwoScoopsMcGee   2017 Oct 6, 6:57pm   ↑ like (0)   ↑ dislike (0)     quote        
bob2356 says
From 1993 to 1998 firearms ownership went up 10% and firearms homicides dropped by 50%. Since 1998 firearms ownership has gone up over 50% yet firearms homicides have decreased 5%. Do you have some kind of point because there certainly isn't any correlation to be seen here.



Uh, I was going to respond
me123 says
The bottom line, bobby, is that your whole narrative of "more guns = more homicides" is just crap. Your own charts prove it. Unfortunately, you want to play semantics with percentages, but sadly, it doesn't change the big false narrative.


But it was already done.

At the very, very least, it suggests More Guns != More Homicide.

There are countries with far fewer firearms in private hands per capita that have a far higher homicide rate than the USA.
89 anonymous   2017 Oct 6, 7:49pm   ↑ like (0)   ↑ dislike (0)     quote        
That’s funny
Booger says
90 TwoScoopsMcGee   2017 Oct 6, 8:29pm   ↑ like (1)   ↑ dislike (1)     quote        


US Population 1993: 260M
US Population 2015: 320M


Per capita, the civilian gun stock has roughly doubled since 1968, from one gun per every two persons to one gun per person.
:
https://fas.org/sgp/crs/misc/RL32842.pdf Page 14.

So: ~ 25-30% Larger Population, more Guns per capita, yet the Homicide Rate - AND the Firearm Homicide Rate - got cut just about in half.
91 me123   2017 Oct 6, 9:39pm   ↑ like (2)   ↑ dislike (2)     quote        
TwoScoopsMcGee says
So: ~ 25-30% Larger Population, more Guns per capita, yet the Homicide Rate - AND the Firearm Homicide Rate - got cut just about in half.


Ya know, you're really going to make bobby and dan cry (or go all out on personal attack and call you a liar).
93 bob2356   2017 Oct 7, 6:39am   ↑ like (1)   ↑ dislike (1)     quote        
me123 says
TwoScoopsMcGee says
So: ~ 25-30% Larger Population, more Guns per capita, yet the Homicide Rate - AND the Firearm Homicide Rate - got cut just about in half.


Ya know, you're really going to make bobby and dan cry (or go all out on personal attack and call you a liar).


God I love right wingnut math. Looks like thunderlips has been taking math lessons from cic. Perfect.

The population size is irrelevant to the per capita rate dumbasses.

Why doesn't this table match up to CICs chart? The numbers are different even though it's supposed to be from the same source. OMG if we start at 1998 The murder rate only drops 20%. Start in 1999 and it only drops 5%.

Why was the magic year 1993 chosen by the wingnut/gun nut crowd I wonder? Let's look at a little bigger time frame say 1960 on.



http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/uscrime.htm

Well look at that. The murder rate tripled while the number of guns was going up up up 1960 to 1993. But but but how can that be? The murder rate only goes down when the number of guns goes up. I will be waiting for an explanation from our 2 resident math geniuses on this. Not that anyone will ever see it.

Oh my more fun facts. At this point 3% of the people own over 50% of the guns. https://qz.com/1095899/gun-ownership-in-america-in-three-charts/ The number of households with guns has been dropping steadily since the magic 1993 date. But but but I was told murders went down because lots of people were buying guns to protect themselves. Bullshit. The big spike in gun ownership rate is actually a small number of people buying lots and lots of guns. Again an explanation from the calculus twins would be nice, but not going to happen.



The gun industry rakes in billions while saps like cic and thunderlips defend and promote them for free. If you look around the poker table and can't find the sucker it's you.
94 TwoScoopsMcGee   2017 Oct 7, 10:37am   ↑ like (1)   ↑ dislike (1)     quote        
bob2356 says
The population size is irrelevant to the per capita rate dumbasses.


hahahahahah.

Not only did the population increase, the guns per capita in private hands increased as well.

The Gun Ownership by household contradicts manufacturer reported arms sales. However, there are more divorced female households today than before, that generally don't have firearms like married people that used to be far more common.

bob2356 says
Well look at that. The murder rate tripled while the number of guns was going up up up 1960 to 1993. But but but how can that be? The murder rate only goes down when the number of guns goes up. I will be waiting for an explanation from our 2 resident math geniuses on this. Not that anyone will ever see it.

God Bob, you're a math denialist.

Gun Ownership began exploding in the 80s in reaction the Baby-Boomer crime wave. Since the early 90s, the homicide rate has been tanking while the number of civilian firearms sold continues to grow.

Starting in the 90s, concealed firearms laws expanded, by the end of the 90s, the Assault Weapons Ban expired and was not renewed. In the late 2000s gun sales hit all-time records, there was even a .22LR shortage not long ago.

There's absolutely no doubt that the US has the most civilian firearms in the World, and that guns per capita has expanded over the past 40 years, and much of it over the past 25 years as gun laws become more permissive and SCOTUS trims excessive anti-2A laws, like in DC. And yet, our homicide is half of what it was 25 years ago.

We're #1 in the world by far for firearms ownership but nowhere near #1 in homicide.
95 TwoScoopsMcGee   2017 Oct 7, 10:40am   ↑ like (1)   ↑ dislike (1)     quote        
bob2356 says
Why was the magic year 1993 chosen by the wingnut/gun nut crowd I wonder? Let's look at a little bigger time frame say 1960 on.


Why isn't the magic years of the 2000s chosen by gun control advocates? Is it because guns became even more plentiful, Concealed Carry laws even more permissive and widespread, yet homicides collapsed?
96 bob2356   2017 Oct 7, 11:26am   ↑ like (0)   ↑ dislike (0)     quote        
TwoScoopsMcGee says
bob2356 says
The population size is irrelevant to the per capita rate dumbasses.


hahahahahah.

Not only did the population increase, the guns per capita in private hands increased as well.

The Gun Ownership by household contradicts manufacturer reported arms sales. However, there are more divorced female households today than before, that generally don't have firearms like married people that used to be far more common.


Like I said the population increase is irrelevant to the per capita number. It's not a hard concept to grasp. Get another math lesson from CIC and I'm sure you will have it. Math concept that is beyond you number 2 is that the number of households can decrease while the guns per capita increases. It means fewer people are buying guns but buying more of them. This stuff really isn't hard. What is it about rate changes that is simply impossible for you and CIC to grasp.
97 bob2356   2017 Oct 7, 11:33am   ↑ like (0)   ↑ dislike (0)     quote        
TwoScoopsMcGee says
Gun Ownership began exploding in the 80s in reaction the Baby-Boomer crime wave. Since the early 90s, the homicide rate has been tanking while the number of civilian firearms sold continues to grow.

Starting in the 90s, concealed firearms laws expanded, by the end of the 90s, the Assault Weapons Ban expired and was not renewed. In the late 2000s gun sales hit all-time records, there was even a .22LR shortage not long ago.

There's absolutely no doubt that the US has the most civilian firearms in the World, and that guns per capita has expanded over the past 40 years, and much of it over the past 25 years as gun laws become more permissive and SCOTUS trims excessive anti-2A laws, like in DC. And yet, our homicide is half of what it was 25 years ago.

We're #1 in the world by far for firearms ownership but nowhere near #1 in homicide.


Show me where gun ownership exploded in the 80's. It's not in any of the charts anyone has posted. The charts show a nice steady climb. Lie number 1.
Show me where the assault ban made any difference in gun ownership rates. Lie number 2.

Let's summarize here. Guns sales and ownership rates have climbed steadily since the 40's. From the 60's to 1993 murder rates tripled. From 1993 to 2015 murder rates dropped by 50%. In your pink sky world that represent a correlation between gun ownership rates and murder rates. HaHaHaHaHa.
98 bob2356   2017 Oct 7, 11:43am   ↑ like (0)   ↑ dislike (0)     quote        
TwoScoopsMcGee says
bob2356 says
Why was the magic year 1993 chosen by the wingnut/gun nut crowd I wonder? Let's look at a little bigger time frame say 1960 on.


Why isn't the magic years of the 2000s chosen by gun control advocates? Is it because guns became even more plentiful, Concealed Carry laws even more permissive and widespread, yet homicides collapsed?


Murder rates went for 3.6 to 3.4 in the 2000's. A 5% decrease. This is your idea of collapsed? HaHaHaHa times 2. Go ahead, provide any evidence of any kind correlating concealed carry permits with the homicide rates. Grasping for anything at this point aren't you?

I don't favor gun control. Find anywhere I've posted in favor of gun control I just don't favor bullshit in defence of gun ownership. The only gun control I want is tracking of exactly were guns go from legal owner to a criminal. Then put the person who sold a gun to a criminal in jail. Why would any responsible gun owner (like CIC alleges he is) be opposed to that.? Any reason at that you can think of? Why would you oppose it?

Don't even bother to post the tired bullshit that criminals steal guns. It would just prove once again you have no credibility of any kind.
99 TwoScoopsMcGee   2017 Oct 7, 1:01pm   ↑ like (2)   ↑ dislike (2)     quote        
BOOM.

.

That's growth. Here's the estimated number:


Tracking sales using Federal Background Checks:


How's that Homicide Rate doin' in comparison? In must be exploding with all these arms sales.


What would really be beneficial is if we could fix 60% of Homicides that are caused by 13% of the population, by getting that 13% closer to the homicide rate of the other 87%

Here's Gallup's Poll of Households... in contrast to the other one favored by the anti-2A Fake News:


No big moves here.

How is the Authoritarian Left doing convincing people guns are the problem?
100 me123   2017 Oct 7, 1:18pm   ↑ like (2)   ↑ dislike (2)     quote        
TwoScoopsMcGee says
The Gun Ownership by household contradicts manufacturer reported arms sales.


Exactly, bobby thinks his chart of ownership is accurate, like people tell Gallup when they call how many guns they own.
101 TwoScoopsMcGee   2017 Oct 7, 1:20pm   ↑ like (2)   ↑ dislike (2)     quote        
Notice no Leftie has dared offer an opinion on HOW to effectively ban firearms, because they know short of warantless house-to-house searches, they really don't have any feasible solution.

And those most likely to voluntarily cooperate are also the least likely to have committed violent crime with those arms.

Don't expect the Jamals, Leroys, and Shaquans who commit 57% of the homicides in the US, to be lining up at 6AM the freezing Chicago morning of January 2nd of the year the law is effective to turn in their mostly stolen or black market .25 Autos and .38 Snub-Noses at the local Chicago PD Station.
102 me123   2017 Oct 7, 1:23pm   ↑ like (3)   ↑ dislike (3)     quote        
bob2356 says
From 1993 to 2015 murder rates dropped by 50%. In your pink sky world that represent a correlation between gun ownership rates and murder rates.


Bobby, are you really this clueless or do you only see one side of the coin? Murder rates dropped by 50% while guns sales continued to grow. The Obama years were the best years of sales, while homiceds continued to go down.

Do we need to find a second grader to explain that concept to you?

« First    « Previous     Comments 63 - 102 of 143     Next »     Last »

users   about   suggestions   source code   contact  
topics   best comments   comment jail  
10 reasons it's a terrible time to buy  
8 groups who lie about the housing market  
37 bogus arguments about housing  
get a free bumper sticker:

top   bottom   home