Jim M

What Does Gun Violence Really Cost?

Recommended Posts

Tom, I honestly do not get your opposition to SYG. Unlike fuckhead ed and fuckleberry jocal, I know you do not believe that SYG is a license to assassinate someone on a whim.

 

I think SYG is an important principle. But I think it is one that is misunderstood and occasionally abused by people. It doesn't mean the law is bad and I think the courts do a pretty good job of sorting out the abuses.

 

To me, SYG and " using force as a last resort" are not mutually exclusive terms. I think for SYG to be effective, it should be a last resort and if you have the opportunity to retreat from the threat - you should take it. IMHO, SYG was a legit response to prosecutor overreach and abuse in cases where people defended themselves outside of their homes and they were then prosecuted for it because the cops and the DA were not there in his/her shoes and were second guessing whether it was a last resort use of force. As you know, if you are accosted at knife or gun point by someone on an open street - in theory there is lots of room to "retreat". But the reality is that you might be putting yourself in more danger by turning your back to the threat and trying to run. Every situation is different and I want the person defending themselves to have the benefit of the doubt as to whether they can retreat or not. That to me, is what SYG is about..... putting the onus on the police and DA to prove that you used force as a first resort. Before SYG, the onus was on the victim to prove that the defense was legal and justified. I don't think that is right. And it often cost people who defended themselves from scumbag rapists and murderers an enormous amount in legal costs and sometimes jail time. As I said, if there is evidence that the "shooting" was not justified - then they can prosecute all they want. But before SYG, the norm seemed to be to prosecute every case of self-defense and the defender had to prove they were innocent. Totally not how its supposed to work.

 

Our previous law said that if you have the opportunity to retreat from the threat - you should take it.

 

Overreach and abuse by prosecutors means the prosecutor, not the law, is bad.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Typical Nanny post. A Violent Crime chart in a Gun Violence discussion.

 

tumblr_m9fbufwsqn1qc882co2_250.gif

So its acceptable to kill people with other tools? hammers, knives, cars, and the other such instruments so long as they aren't firearms?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Those researchers think that "castle doctrine" laws are a recent thing?

 

When they tack that one up over the urinal for review, the peers are going to have a good laugh. SYG laws are recent (and I still don't like them) but the castle doctrine is much, much older and was widespread long before the named research period. I wonder what they were really looking at?

 

The rationale behind castile doctrine was simply extended to the out of doors. Yes, recently, using legislation packaged by ALEC.

Get your head out of the urinal. If you see no castle doctrine association to these newer laws, Stevie Wonder has better vision than you.

 

 

I know what happened. I also know that studying states that have adopted castle doctrine laws since 2000 should take a few seconds at most. However long it takes to determine that there are none.

 

That's why I wonder what they were really studying.

 

I support the castle doctrine because if you're in your home, you have already retreated. I oppose SYG because if retreat is an option it means deadly force is not a last resort. People who oppose both (and confuse the two) simply oppose the human right of self-defense in any circumstance.

 

 

More dancing. More dishonesty. The laws which expanded SYG rights are ALL based on Castle Doctrine logic, expanded to public places.

The public has no right to be in one's home. One retreats to one's home for safety. Traditionally, self defense was guaged by a different standard in the home.

 

ALEC took the principles which fairly apply to one's castle, and applied them to all places. Flag on the play.

 

Traditionally, the law understood deadly force to be justified in self-protection only when an individual reasonably believed that its use was necessary to prevent imminent and unlawful use of deadly force by the aggressor. Much of the tradition also argued that deadly force, outside of one’s immediate home, was not justified if a nondeadly response, such as retreating to a safe place, would suffice.

(...) Florida’s law in particular remade the very nature of self-defense, turning what had been an “affirmative defense” into a presumption of innocence.

(...)

In their thoughtless attempts to undo the wisdom of centuries, extremists in the Florida Legislature went out of their way, if not to legalize murder, at least to decriminalize it.http://religion.blogs.cnn.com/2012/03/28/my-ethics-stand-your-ground-laws-are-invitation-to-kill/>

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What does gun violence cost? In this case, it cost the instigators a life.. .

http://video.foxnews.com/v/4607400110001/breastfeeding-mother-wounded-in-home-invasion-shootout/?intcmp=hplnws#intcmp=latestnews&sp=show-clips

 

You've gotta wonder whether or not less violent crime would be considered if the would-be perpetrators had to consider that their intended victims weren't helpless.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Tom, I honestly do not get your opposition to SYG. Unlike fuckhead ed and fuckleberry jocal, I know you do not believe that SYG is a license to assassinate someone on a whim.

 

I think SYG is an important principle. But I think it is one that is misunderstood and occasionally abused by people. It doesn't mean the law is bad and I think the courts do a pretty good job of sorting out the abuses.

 

To me, SYG and " using force as a last resort" are not mutually exclusive terms. I think for SYG to be effective, it should be a last resort and if you have the opportunity to retreat from the threat - you should take it. IMHO, SYG was a legit response to prosecutor overreach and abuse in cases where people defended themselves outside of their homes and they were then prosecuted for it because the cops and the DA were not there in his/her shoes and were second guessing whether it was a last resort use of force. As you know, if you are accosted at knife or gun point by someone on an open street - in theory there is lots of room to "retreat". But the reality is that you might be putting yourself in more danger by turning your back to the threat and trying to run. Every situation is different and I want the person defending themselves to have the benefit of the doubt as to whether they can retreat or not. That to me, is what SYG is about..... putting the onus on the police and DA to prove that you used force as a first resort. Before SYG, the onus was on the victim to prove that the defense was legal and justified. I don't think that is right. And it often cost people who defended themselves from scumbag rapists and murderers an enormous amount in legal costs and sometimes jail time. As I said, if there is evidence that the "shooting" was not justified - then they can prosecute all they want. But before SYG, the norm seemed to be to prosecute every case of self-defense and the defender had to prove they were innocent. Totally not how its supposed to work.

Our previous law said that if you have the opportunity to retreat from the threat - you should take it.

 

Overreach and abuse by prosecutors means the prosecutor, not the law, is bad.

 

 

Yeah, well tough shit. Given that they couldn't get rid of all the liberal DAs who were trying to fuck with citizens who were legally defending themselves - I think a law to tie their hands more is justified. I would apply your same logic to SYG. If some abuse it, it's the people who are bad - not the law.

 

 

But the law says that if you have the opportunity to retreat, you don't have to take it. I thought we agreed that if you have the opportunity to retreat from the threat - you should take it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The same car at the Burger King Scramble which offered a loaded weapon also offered an "opportunity to retreat." Instead of that choice, Tom you said you were a One Limit Shootah against an unarmed fellow employee.

 

The Badgeless Avenger Posted Today, 08:18 AM

How many attacks are we supposed to endure...? My limit is one.

 

The same car which offered a gun at The Plebe's Revenge Shootout also offered escape on wheels.

Instead of retreat Tom, you supported the gunfire which resulted in both cases, without discussing retreat.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

You do know that when you shoot and kill parasitic criminal scum balls, that you remove their ability to continue to be criminal scum balls?

 

I honestly can't see the down side to that. But sadly you do, you piece of shit pussified abettor you.......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Aren't you the guy who breezes through FFL background checks, and boasts about it?

Let's invite your chummy FFL background checker onto this thread.

Do they support vigilante idiots? Let's find out.

You can't have it both ways.

 

***Boothy and gun vengeance, the 2015 collection

http://forums.sailinganarchy.com/index.php?showtopic=167901&p=5057792

Quote

R Booze Posted 17 September 2014 - 02:08 PM

Post 262 USA vs England thread

Here's where all your shit goes right out the window---and that if the 'murder rate' has gone up lately, that tells me that more bad guys are getting their cumupence and being killed.

I for one see absolutely nothing wrong with that. At all....

<http://forums.sailin...=3#entry4680823>

R Booze, on 04 Feb 2015 - 14:52, said:

Getting rid of America's bad guys, in any manner, is a GOOD thing JokeAwf. You should relish & savor the very moment every-fuking-time that one of them meets an early demise. .... <http://forums.sailin...=2#entry4837580>

'R Booth', on 20 Dec 2012 - 18:59, said

If you had killed a bad guy, then you would have done America a big favor.....

<http://forums.sailin...Key]=date&st=50>

R Booze Posted 27 July 2014 - 02:24 PM

This is a most fuktabulous ruling----one which will immediately begin to save lives rather than ending the lives too soon of law abiding citizens. I hope to fuk that DC's criminal element takes note and changes their current game plan on preying on the innocent.

(Ah hell, who am I kidding. Would love to see about three dozen pussified, chicken shit gang members meet an early demise)......

http://forums.sailinganarchy.com/index.php?showtopic=69325&p=4625625

R Booze Posted 29 October 2013 - 04:30 AM

I don't normally approve of shooting bad guys in the back, but this fuk-stik seems to have deserved a rather large exit wound out the front of his shirt. And good on the husband for not interupting the local cops during their donut break.

Win-win.....

http://forums.sailinganarchy.com/index.php?showtopic=142774&p=4367582

#707

R Booze Posted Today, 11:38 AM

Every rapist in the world deserves to be shot deader-than-fuck. On the spot. If you think otherwise, then you're more of a pussified, criminal abetting imbecile than I previously thought...

<http://forums.sailinganarchy.com/index.php?showtopic=167978&page=8#entry5066002>

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

We'll see. Boothy said I would self-destruct by August 2015. Then he said by Thanksgiving 2015.

See you boys on Thursday. Try to have some substantive content by then, okay?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What was this discussion of self-murders doing in the Democrat Lies About Guns thread?

 

 

 

Tell us all about gun carnage, NGS. "The non-fatal gun injury rate has shown a remarkable annual rise, from 14.11 per 100,000 in 2001 to 19.68 in 2013, an increase of nearly 40 percent." (Source here is Mike the Gun Guy)

 

 

NGS, on 28 Nov 2015 - 09:10 AM, said:

snapback.png

One of us has authored scientific papers...

 

One of us is trained in the methods of science...

 

For a person "trained in the methods of science," your posts, inevitably, lack hard figures. Such as these:

 

Yr Tot Deaths Injuries Total Shot

2000 28,663 75,685 104,348

2001 29,573 63,012 92,585

2002 30,242 58,841 89,083

2003 30,136 65,834 95,970

2004 29,569 64,389 93,958

2005 30,694 69,825 100,519

2006 30,896 71,417 102,313

2007 31,224 69,863 101,087

2008 31,593 78,622 110,215

http://www.vpc.org/studies/wmmw2013.pdf

'09-'13 Gun Deaths Injuries Gun Casualties

2009 31,347 66,789 21.68/100K 98,136

2010 31,67219 73,505 23.7 105,177

2011 32,16318 73,833 23.97 105,996

2012 31,326 10.18 81,396 25.87 112,722

2013 33,383 84,258 26.81 110,700

http://webappa.cdc.gov/cgi-bin/broker.exe>

 

 


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Tom Ray Posted 26 November 2015 - 05:04 PM

Happy Thanksgiving to you too! I helped my cousin's kid teach a 13 year old girl to shoot a rifle.

http://forums.sailinganarchy.com/index.php?showtopic=168970&p=5141747

 

Tom, this is a serious question. As a gun instructor (and a self-righteous libertarian), did you inform the kid that if he or she is ever extremely bummed out, he is free to shoot himself with that rifle?

 

If not, why not?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What was this discussion of self-murders doing in the Democrat Lies About Guns thread?

 

(snipped: figures showing a pattern of increased gun carnage in the USA)

 

 

More dishonesty. That discussion was about increased gun injuries.

http://forums.sailinganarchy.com/index.php?showtopic=168970&p=5143461

 

 

The CDC figures show a HUGE increase in gun injuries since 2001. This is from Jeffie this morning:

Non-fatal Assault Injuries w/ a Gun:

2001 = 14.11

2013 = 19.78

40% increase

http://www.cdc.gov/i...qars/fatal.html

 

This thread, before being hijacked, was about the increased cost of gun violence. That cost is not just medical fees (@ $229 billion/yr.), but involves the human psychology of associates of the victims who don't survive. Among the gunshot survivors and their loved ones, the cost applies to lost income capability, lost function of body parts, damaged psyches, nightmares, chronic distrust, etc.

 

Let's set aside the shameful games you are playing about gun suicides for a moment. Do you grasp the enormity of the damage in play here, Tom? If so, can you demonstrate that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Tom Ray Posted 26 November 2015 - 05:04 PM

Happy Thanksgiving to you too! I helped my cousin's kid teach a 13 year old girl to shoot a rifle.

http://forums.sailinganarchy.com/index.php?showtopic=168970&p=5141747

 

Tom, this is a serious question. As a gun instructor (and a self-righteous libertarian), did you inform the kid that if he or she is ever extremely bummed out, he is free to shoot himself with that rifle?

 

If not, why not?

 

 

No, she seemed happy and did not appear to me to need self-murdering. It just didn't come up.

 

OK, serious answer: that's a discussion for her parents, not for me. Just because I have an opinion doesn't mean I share it widely. Pretty much just here.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good. We're grownups here.

 

But included in 20,000 gun suicides/yr in the USA is an epidemic of many suicidal children. Their judgement, experience, and decisionmaking are still being formed. You seem to be giving carte blanche to their untimely deaths, with no apparent remorse.

 

Additionally, MOST adults are acting impulsively in suicide attempts, according to the experts. You seem to be giving carte blanche to them as well. It's deadly...and repulsive, IMO.

 

You say you don't encourage suicide, but have asked "what is taking so long" in the case of one suicide (which has been proposed by others, not the individual). It's over the top, and despicable IMO. Be careful out there while pushing guns, okay? Thanks.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good. We're grownups here.

 

But included in 20,000 gun suicides/yr in the USA is an epidemic of many suicidal children. Their judgement, experience, and decisionmaking are still being formed. You seem to be giving carte blanche to their untimely deaths, with no apparent remorse.

 

Additionally, MOST adults are acting impulsively in suicide attempts, according to the experts. You seem to be giving carte blanche to them as well. It's deadly...and repulsive, IMO.

 

You say you don't encourage suicide, but have asked "what is taking so long" in the case of one suicide (which has been proposed by others, not the individual). It's over the top, and despicable IMO. Be careful out there while pushing guns, okay? Thanks.

 

Minors are a special case because unless they have been emancipated, they don't fully own their own bodies yet. My argument about self-ownership can't apply to those who don't own themselves.

 

Adults are free to act impulsively and do stupid things. Otherwise, there would be no recreational boat market and life would not be worth living.

 

You are an adult and are free to act impulsively and even to shoot yourself.

 

Crap, I assisted in your impending suicide again. Sorry!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Good. We're grownups here.

 

But included in 20,000 gun suicides/yr in the USA is an epidemic of many suicidal children. Their judgement, experience, and decisionmaking are still being formed. You seem to be giving carte blanche to their untimely deaths, with no apparent remorse.

 

Additionally, MOST adults are acting impulsively in suicide attempts, according to the experts. You seem to be giving carte blanche to them as well. It's deadly...and repulsive, IMO.

 

You say you don't encourage suicide, but have asked "what is taking so long" in the case of one suicide (which has been proposed by others, not the individual). It's over the top, and despicable IMO. Be careful out there while pushing guns, okay? Thanks.

What is the point of the above rambling?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is the 'Cost of gun violence' thread. Where the woman in the story saved a certain state tons of money buy disposing of a despicable piece of shit parasitic scum ball forever for just seventeen cents. JokeAwf should show his appreciation for this great American by buying her a new house and sending her kid to college.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yep, I was just thinking how many gigoshit have been burned on this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is the 'Cost of gun violence' thread. Where the woman in the story saved a certain state tons of money buy disposing of a despicable piece of shit parasitic scum ball forever for just seventeen cents. JokeAwf should show his appreciation for this great American by buying her a new house and sending her kid to college.....

 

A civilized society doesn't function like that. Even Native Americans grasped that in the 1830's in the PNW--they adopted impartial hearing situations to review violence and theft. The hearings included an appeal process. You need to pop into this century, mi amigo.

 

In the meantime, society needs to be protected from your elk. Shannon Watts will be your nanny until you get up to speed, mate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

This is the 'Cost of gun violence' thread. Where the woman in the story saved a certain state tons of money buy disposing of a despicable piece of shit parasitic scum ball forever for just seventeen cents. JokeAwf should show his appreciation for this great American by buying her a new house and sending her kid to college.....

A civilized society doesn't function like that. Even Native Americans grasped that in the 1830's in the PNW--they adopted impartial hearing situations to review violence and theft. The hearings included an appeal process. You need to pop into this century, mi amigo.

 

In the meantime, society needs to be protected from your elk. Shannon Watts will be your nanny until you get up to speed, mate.

I agree a civilized person doesn't try to rob others by threat or use of force (potentially deadly or not). After the incident Booze posted the world is more civilized. At least we agree on this one thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

This is the 'Cost of gun violence' thread. Where the woman in the story saved a certain state tons of money buy disposing of a despicable piece of shit parasitic scum ball forever for just seventeen cents. JokeAwf should show his appreciation for this great American by buying her a new house and sending her kid to college.....

 

A civilized society doesn't function like that. Even Native Americans grasped that in the 1830's in the PNW--they adopted impartial hearing situations to review violence and theft. The hearings included an appeal process. You need to pop into this century, mi amigo.

 

In the meantime, society needs to be protected from your elk. Shannon Watts will be your nanny until you get up to speed, mate.

 

So when some scumbag pulls a gun and demands your money you'll just drop to your knees and offer a BJ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think he'd do WITHOUT a gun pointed at him....:lol:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Hey jo, you want some hard figures? Here you go. Let's break down those numbers a bit more, shall we? Your "facts" don't even begin to tell the whole story. Using your 2001-2013 time frame, the breakdowns tell a bit different story.

 

Using the same rates per 100K: http://www.cdc.gov/injury/wisqars/fatal.html

 

Non-fatal Assault Injuries w/ a Gun:

2001 = 14.11

2013 = 19.78

40% increase

 

Non-fatal Injuries Assaults ALL:

2001 = 623

2013 = 520

17% decrease

 

Non-fatal Suicide attempt with a Gun:

2001 = 1.14

2013 = 1.27

11% increase

 

Non-fatal Suicide attempt ALL:

2001 = 113

2013 = 156

38% Increase

 

Homicide deaths - GUN:

2001 = 3.98

2013 = 3.55

10.8% Decease

 

Homicide deaths - ALL

2001 = 7.13

2013 = 5.10

28.4% Decrease

 

Suicide Deaths - GUN:

2001 = 5.92

2013 = 6.70

13.1% increase

 

Suicide Deaths - ALL:

2001 = 10.75

2013 = 13.02

21.1% Increase

 

So.... some conclusions to draw from those numbers above:

  1. Homicide rates have gone down while suicide rates have gone up.
  2. Both suicide injuries and death from other sources have increased more than suicide injuries and deaths from guns
  3. There are probably an increasing number of injuries from guns rather than deaths because of better medical care - i.e. more people are saved than would have been possible in the past when presenting with a GSW.
  4. More people are choosing a means other than a gun to attempt suicide
  5. Suicides and homicides are not the same thing and should not be lumped together in stats
  6. Jocal is a babbling idiot

 

 

And you can also conclude that JB is loose with the truth, leaving out the most most telling stat.

 

Rate of All Gun Deaths per 100,000 People

2001: 10.38 (29,573)

2013: 10.64 (33,636)

13.7% increase in dead people from guns.

 

Nice work selfish cherry-picking prick.

 

 

 

Why do these self-murder stats keep getting included in Democrat Lies About Guns?

 

I agree that it's generally true that conflating self-murders with violent crimes is a Democrat gungrabby trick that is dishonest, but we have this thread for discussion of that particular aspect of Democrat dishonesty about guns.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Japan is way ahead of you, both in terms of denying guns to people and in terms of self-murderizing themselves.

 

How does that happen if denying guns to people is some kind of magical solution?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Why not look at a whole bunch of countries that all have far fewer guns? If your magical solution works, the evidence should be there.

 

But we did. And it's not.

 

Suicide-deaths-per-100000-trend.jpg

 

Must be the guns.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Yawn ... couldn't even be bothered finding an image for it.

 

Got any other countries that have a before and after on radical gun law changes?

You could try Googly-pooing Mexico, Brazil, El Savador, Russia, Somalia and 83.72% of Africa for starters....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Correlation, but surely not causation. Right fellas?

 

guns%20per%20capita.jpg

 

gun%20homicides%20per%20capita.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Is the gun ownership rate really the problem? I didn't know black people owned guns at a much higher rate than whites. I thought it was the other way around. And yet...

 

 

 

 

The problems with black guns and white guns lay out differently.

But both results are catastrophic. Interesting.

.black%20gun%20deaths%20in%20the%20USA_zp

 

 

That low gun ownership rate must be extremely dangerous. If it's the problem.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

We can never get anywhere as long as people are being dishonest, like lumping suicides and justified self defense or police shootings with homicides. Keep lying and nobody will trust you even when you tell the truth.

Thus sayeth the Rev. We are blessed by these 21,000 gun suicides each year.

These gun suicides are not gun violence. These deaths are beneficial, they are a given, they were meant to be, shit happens, gun suicides are not to be counted.

 

Rev. Hollow Point has spoken.

 

 

 

What about the other 20,000 or so self-murders? Are those plastic bag or rope violence? Poison violence? Are they beneficial? Meant to be? Should they be counted? And if so, why do you never mention them?

 

 

Suicide-deaths-per-100000-trend.jpg

 

Must be the guns.

 

But what about the suffocation violence and the poison violence?

 

 

 

All suicides
  • Number of deaths: 41,149
  • Deaths per 100,000 population: 13.0
  • Cause of death rank: 10
Firearm suicides
  • Number of deaths: 21,175
  • Deaths per 100,000 population: 6.7
Suffocation suicides
  • Number of deaths: 10,062
  • Deaths per 100,000 population: 3.2
Poisoning suicides
  • Number of deaths: 6,637
  • Deaths per 100,000 population: 2.1

 

They add up to 16k people, far more than are killed by the type of gun violence that is inflicted by others. Almost as many as self-inflicted "violence" using guns.

 

We obviously need plastic bag control just to start. How much financial responsibility should plastic bag manufacturers take? Or do people usually use ropes? Are we going after the rope moguls for being merchants of death?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

The term 'gun related deaths' is just fucking stupid. And you know that....

 

Speaking for myself. Rick, no, I don't know that.

 

Our high rates of "gun related deaths" are related to our gun reliance and high rates of gun ownership.

The number one recommendation to reduce suicide, for example, is to have no guns in the home.

Same suggestion for gun mishaps with teens. Same suggestion for reducing femicide.

 

 

 

So we must own guns at about the same rate as they do in countries that self-murderize at the same rate, right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

The term 'gun related deaths' is just fucking stupid. And you know that....

 

Speaking for myself. Rick, no, I don't know that.

 

Our high rates of "gun related deaths" are related to our gun reliance and high rates of gun ownership.

The number one recommendation to reduce suicide, for example, is to have no guns in the home.

Same suggestion for gun mishaps with teens. Same suggestion for reducing femicide.

 

 

So we must own guns at about the same rate as they do in countries that self-murderize at the same rate, right?

 

 

Dammit Tom - I asked you politely not to quote the pedantic troll - but since you did, will refute his assertion by suggesting that "our high rates of "gun related deaths"" are more likely assigned to the high rate of young persons who care nothing for their lives or anyone else's than to "gun reliance" and "high rates of gun ownership".

 

Calhoun - you want a good thing, but, your approach to achieving it is simply wrong, and is having an effect opposite that which you desire. (unless I miss my guess and you really do enjoy being the object of scorn and ridicule)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

-What you say you want, Guy, is effective, proven policy to manage guns better. But I've never heard you plead for the research to set that up.

What you want is inaction, while we fix the human condition. You are a nay sayer, basically.

 

 

You guys want to tell lies back and forth, such as

--guns don't kill people,

--AW's are just another semi-automatic,

--more guns, less crime,

---20,000 gun suicides per year don't count,

--the second amendment is intrinsic, absolute, and beneficial.

 

And I enjoy debunking your elk. On a website where "anarchy" is about straight shooting, that is, telling it like it is.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

-What you say you want, Guy, is effective, proven policy to manage guns better. But I've never heard you plead for the research to set that up.

What you want is inaction, while we fix the human condition. You are a nay sayer, basically.

 

 

You guys want to tell lies back and forth, such as

--guns don't kill people,

--AW's are just another semi-automatic,

--more guns, less crime,

---20,000 gun suicides per year don't count,

--the second amendment is intrinsic, absolute, and beneficial.

 

And I enjoy debunking your elk. On a website where "anarchy" is about straight shooting, that is, telling it like it is.

 

Here are the self-murders that don't count. The ones you never mention.

 

Suffocation suicides

  • Number of deaths: 10,062
  • Deaths per 100,000 population: 3.2
Poisoning suicides
  • Number of deaths: 6,637
  • Deaths per 100,000 population: 2.1

 

 

The ones in countries in the chart above, where gun ownership rates are very low but self-murder rates are higher than ours, don't seem to count either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

-What you say you want, Guy, is effective, proven policy to manage guns better. But I've never heard you plead for the research to set that up.

What you want is inaction, while we fix the human condition. You are a nay sayer, basically.

 

 

You guys want to tell lies back and forth, such as

--guns don't kill people,

--AW's are just another semi-automatic,

--more guns, less crime,

---20,000 gun suicides per year don't count,

--the second amendment is intrinsic, absolute, and beneficial.

 

And I enjoy debunking your elk. On a website where "anarchy" is about straight shooting, that is, telling it like it is.

Here are the self-murders that don't count. The ones you never mention.

Suffocation suicides

  • Number of deaths: 10,062
  • Deaths per 100,000 population: 3.2
Poisoning suicides
  • Number of deaths: 6,637
  • Deaths per 100,000 population: 2.1

The ones in countries in the chart above, where gun ownership rates are very low but self-murder rates are higher than ours, don't seem to count either.

Got a link for that Tom? I suspect it's largely a cultural thing, like Japan for instance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

-What you say you want, Guy, is effective, proven policy to manage guns better. But I've never heard you plead for the research to set that up.

What you want is inaction, while we fix the human condition. You are a nay sayer, basically.

 

 

You guys want to tell lies back and forth, such as

--guns don't kill people,

--AW's are just another semi-automatic,

--more guns, less crime,

---20,000 gun suicides per year don't count,

--the second amendment is intrinsic, absolute, and beneficial.

 

And I enjoy debunking your elk. On a website where "anarchy" is about straight shooting, that is, telling it like it is.

 

Here are the self-murders that don't count. The ones you never mention.

 

Suffocation suicides

  • Number of deaths: 10,062
  • Deaths per 100,000 population: 3.2
Poisoning suicides
  • Number of deaths: 6,637
  • Deaths per 100,000 population: 2.1

 

 

The ones in countries in the chart above, where gun ownership rates are very low but self-murder rates are higher than ours, don't seem to count either.

 

 

Pretty vague statement. Your presentation is very, very shaky.

Name the countries. Do they compare well to the broad makeup of the USA?

 

You are cherry picking, to peddle a rash of gun suicides.

 

By the way, how do you explain the teen gun suicide problem in the USA?

Tom, Merry Christmas, from me.

Here's a present for you. If you read up on this subject, you wouldn't have to sound so damn stupid

as you peddle gun suicides from your cardboard soapbox.

 

 

 

 

.

 

 

Note: This writer grew up on a farm in Oklahoma. The farm had a rifle and a shotgun, and he used them, just like everyone else in OK.

He is a former gunowner, and is against wholesale gun confiscation. He is a valedictorian, an ecomomist, and a scientist who examines the gun violence quagmire. He may be the best organizer of gun studies in the Gun Violence Prevention community today.

I am proud to present an examination of gun suicide, by Evan DePhillippis. He is my elk.

 

 

 

 

 

 

SUICIDE

A 2009 meta-analysis

A 2007 paper

A 2006 paper

A 2000 paper by Ludwig and Cook estimated whether declines in suicides over the period 1985-1997 were associated with the passage of the Brady Handgun Violence Prevention Act. The study found that the legislation produced a significant reduction in suicide rates among persons aged 55 or older, suggesting that suicidal impulses in older individuals were attenuated by the imposition of the five day waiting period.

 

Note also that the largest study done to assess mental health trends in the United States found that there was no significant changes in suicidal tendencies between 1990 and 2000. The number of suicides occurring during that period, however, did increase. The only explanation for this incongruity is that suicide attempts became increasingly more ‘successful’ as the years progressed, and the most accepted explanation for why this is the case is due to increase access to firearms.

 

Furthermore, the best empirical evidence on suicides suggests that most attempts occur during temporary bouts of mental illness. One in four teens who survive a suicide attempt say that they thought of suicide just five minutes before the attempt.

--The presence of a gun increases the likelihood that a suicide will be ‘successful’, which is why gun regulation consistently decreases suicide rates.

--The imposition of waiting periods or barriers to the acquisition of a gun allows for the resolution of transient suicidal impulses, decreasing the overall suicide rate.

--This is further validated by a 2012 study, which shows that the majority of suicide attempts were impulsive and that restricting access to highly lethal methods of suicides (like guns) saves lives.

 

In the case of suicides, then, the evidence is clear that guns do kill people.

 

Pasted from <http://www.armedwithreason.com/debunking-the-guns-dont-kill-people-people-kill-people-myth/#comment-9803>

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The whole world is watching, Rick. As this develops, your problem will become the reality that a civilized majority does care.

 

Gun extremists, driven by the GOA mentality, have had a good run since their start in 1974, but a majority of gunowners now disagree with the dangerous positions of the NRA, The post-Heller gun mayhem is becoming more apparent.

By some accounts, 72% of NRA members support background checks on private sales.

Many understand that waiting periods, securing guns, and just discouraging gun reliance could offset gun suicides.

 

 

Suicider Boi Posted Today, 07:12 AM

No. One. Cares.....

 

With 20,000 gun suicide funerals a year, many impacted Americans care quite a bit.

I got it that you don't give a hoot, trust me. That is a big part of the problem here.

Too bad you can't get ahead of this thing. somehow. Merry Christmas.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Gun suicide is a public health issue. The Pediatricians are formally on record: they want doctors to educate about the empirical knowledge of gun danger.



Actually, while Tom and Jeff insist these gun deaths are not gun violence, while Tom hijacks a thread to marginalize 20,000 gun suicide deaths per year, gun suicide is in the crosshairs of medical science. And we find the NRA meddling in the medical -profession.



Yes, curiously, the NRA's Docs vs Glocks has silenced the doctors in Florida, and this week a redneck court there has backed them up...for the third time. Take a look at it. The ruling does not read well, IMO.



And by even making the ruling, this court is adamantly defying a third enbanc review request, circumventing a full review of the Eleventh Circuit.



Physicians Lose Again in Docs v. Glocks Case


The majority opinion suggests that popular reverence among gunowners for the Second Amendment makes it more equal than the First Amendment rights of the medical professionals.


It said that a practitioner's right of free speech was secondary to an individual's right to same.


Quote


Professional speech—i.e., the type of speech that occurs when a doctor is counseling a patient one-on-one—was entitled to a lesser degree of review, it said.



It gets curiouser: first insisting on a "strict scrutiny standard", these judges did not really apply such a standard


This ruling demonstrates strained judicial activism to push southern firearms values.


As mentioned, three times now this three-man court has blocked a full review by the Eleventh Circuit court (by issuing its


own pro-gun rulings instead of presenting the matter to all nine members of the court.)



Pasted from <http://forums.sailinganarchy.com/index.php?showtopic=165145&page=7#entry5171792>


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pretty vague statement. Your presentation is very, very shaky.

Name the countries. Do they compare well to the broad makeup of the USA?

 

 

OK.

 

Suicide-deaths-per-100000-trend.jpg

 

The countries are Japan, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Sweden, and Switzerland.

 

I don't really know much about Japanese or New Zealand broads, but the other countries have some pretty hot ones. I'd say they have a superior broad makeup to the US.

 

Hot women can certainly deter suicide but I though we were talking about how the gun ownership rate affects suicide rates. So how do those countries compare to our gun ownership rate?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Gun suicide is a public health issue. The Pediatricians are formally on record: they want doctors to educate about the empirical knowledge of gun danger.

Actually, while Tom and Jeff insist these gun deaths are not gun violence, while Tom hijacks a thread to marginalize 20,000 gun suicide deaths per year, gun suicide is in the crosshairs of medical science. And we find the NRA meddling in the medical -profession.

Yes, curiously, the NRA's Docs vs Glocks has silenced the doctors in Florida, and this week a redneck court there has backed them up...for the third time. Take a look at it. The ruling does not read well, IMO.

And by even making the ruling, this court is adamantly defying a third enbanc review request, circumventing a full review of the Eleventh Circuit.

Physicians Lose Again in Docs v. Glocks Case

The majority opinion suggests that popular reverence among gunowners for the Second Amendment makes it more equal than the First Amendment rights of the medical professionals.

It said that a practitioner's right of free speech was secondary to an individual's right to same.

Quote

Professional speech—i.e., the type of speech that occurs when a doctor is counseling a patient one-on-one—was entitled to a lesser degree of review, it said.

It gets curiouser: first insisting on a "strict scrutiny standard", these judges did not really apply such a standard

This ruling demonstrates strained judicial activism to push southern firearms values.

As mentioned, three times now this three-man court has blocked a full review by the Eleventh Circuit court (by issuing its

own pro-gun rulings instead of presenting the matter to all nine members of the court.)

Pasted from <http://forums.sailinganarchy.com/index.php?showtopic=165145&page=7#entry5171792>

 

 

Any doctor (pediatrician or otherwise) who thinks like this is shortsighted or stupid.

 

Much like our bodies which possess an immune system designed to protect our health and well being, societies contain defenses to protect them from harm, from threats within and without. It is best to view the 2A is an integral part of the immune system of our democracy and manifestation of the more fundamental natural right of self defense. Self-defense = immunity.

 

"No free man shall ever be debarred the use of arms." - Thomas Jefferson, Virginia Constitution, Draft 1, 1776. "I prefer dangerous freedom over peaceful slavery...

 

When one's immune system is compromised, the body is at risk of disease. With a strong immune system, the body is protected against harm.

 

On the other hand, there are specific diseases which attack our immune system, the most notorious one being AIDS which by attacking T-lymphocytes compromises our specific immunity making the body vulnerable to a host of pathogenic organisms.

 

Continuing with this analogy, it is not unreasonable to view people like you as another form of autoimmune disease (like AIDS) which would compromise the innate defense of our society, notably a specific form of defense established at the birth of our nation, the right to bear arms.

 

As a physician, gun owner and NRA member, I take the health and wellbeing of the individual, the family and nation very seriously, and I never want to see them compromised.

 

glock-assult-rifle.jpg

 

This doctor will never become a willing victim of ISIS or Jocal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not one time have had a doctor mention guns during an office visit. Never had one mention anything of the like during my kids office visits. Why would they if it had nothing to do with the reason for the visit?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

So sick of this shit. Amend the Constitution or shut the fuck up.

 

Double down on the fucking cowards who kill themselves. "Gun Violence" is a "trigger warning"....we are in our "safe space".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please take out of stats suicides by gun, or acknowledge that there might be a mental health issue, or simply blame the gun for my worthless life.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not one time have had a doctor mention guns during an office visit. Never had one mention anything of the like during my kids office visits. Why would they if it had nothing to do with the reason for the visit?

 

What doctors want to discuss, and what the numbers say they need to discuss, should be left up to doctors (not the NRA).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bullshit. That's like paying my electrician to find a short....then having him hit me with questions of my past substance abuse.

 

Utterly. Fuking. Stupid.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Bullshit. That's like paying my electrician to find a short....then having him hit me with questions of my past substance abuse.

 

Utterly. Fuking. Stupid.....

Maybe he found one of your coke spoons in the outlet and wanted to know how it got there?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Not one time have had a doctor mention guns during an office visit. Never had one mention anything of the like during my kids office visits. Why would they if it had nothing to do with the reason for the visit?

What doctors want to discuss, and what the numbers say they need to discuss, should be left up to doctors (not the NRA).

Why would a doctor talk about guns to someone complaining of fever and a sore throat?

 

Why would a doctor talk about guns to a patient that wasn't being treated for a gun related issue?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Any parent who doesn't know they need a car seat for their kid needs to go to jail.....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Any parent who doesn't know they need a car seat for their kid needs to go to jail.....

You didn't answer my question.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

You Know Less Than You Think About Guns

 

Detailing the "social science" research on guns and what it does, doesn't, and can't prove.

 

Oh boy, jocal's not going to like this. Not one bit. Expect a deluge of cunt-n-pastes by him any moment now. His computer HD is probably starting to smoke a little at the overload he is putting on it......

 

This jocal chap really has you rattled.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

You Know Less Than You Think About Guns

 

Detailing the "social science" research on guns and what it does, doesn't, and can't prove.

 

Oh boy, jocal's not going to like this. Not one bit. Expect a deluge of cunt-n-pastes by him any moment now. His computer HD is probably starting to smoke a little at the overload he is putting on it......

 

This jocal chap really has you rattled.

 

 

 

Rattled? More like an irritating pebble in your shoe - if you don't stop and shake it out now, you know it'll cause a blister.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Should doctors ask parents if they have a car seat for the child?

If they thought they may not and wanted to give them one it wouldn't hurt. Other than that its none of their business.

 

Any reason a plumber should lecture about guns or ask about car seats during a job?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

You Know Less Than You Think About Guns

 

Detailing the "social science" research on guns and what it does, doesn't, and can't prove.

Oh boy, jocal's not going to like this. Not one bit. Expect a deluge of cunt-n-pastes by him any moment now. His computer HD is probably starting to smoke a little at the overload he is putting on it......

How many hours to put together his post?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

gallery_6160_1047_30894.jpg

 

There are at least two things factually wrong with that cartoon. Bet you can't guess what they are.

 

Thanks for reposting my cartoon.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

gallery_6160_1047_30894.jpg

 

There are at least two things factually wrong with that cartoon. Bet you can't guess what they are.

 

Thanks for reposting my cartoon.

 

 

You're welcome. Can you guess what the two factual errors are?

 

Edit: never mind, its obvious you're an assclown who has no interest in a serious discussion. So I will answer my own question. The two factual errors are:

 

1. Rifles are not "common" murder weapons. In fact rifles are very UNcommon. Less than 2% of all homicides in the US are committed with rifles of any type, much less the AR-15 in the picture. Hands and feet kill more people than rifles. Baseball bats and other blunt objects kill even more. People used knives to kill 5x more often than rifles. FBI murder weapon stats here

 

2. AR-15s have a many alternate uses beyond murder. You've already stipulated that hunting is a legitimate alternate use for the bolt action rifle - so hunting must be OK right? Here you go.....

 

800px-243_WSSM_Olympic_Arms_AR15.jpg

 

Screen-Shot-2013-02-12-at-5.24.26-PM.png

IMG_11584.JPG

 

but even aside from hunting, both of those rifles have a legitimate 2nd Amendment use that has nothing to do with hunting or sports.

 

Thanks for letting me dispel you of your childish cartoonish myths. Oh and you're welcome.....

 

Ya I hear you. Riffles are a lot less commonly used in murders than some those other things like the wood chipper. And the multi round semi-automatic rifle is an important hunting tool especially for those retards that never took the time to learn to aim.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

A multi round semi-automatic is an important hunting tool especially for those retards that never took the time to learn to aim.

 

Another hoplophobe exposing their ignorance and idiocy.

 

Professional shooters are required to use semi auto rifles in Australia, if it's good enough for the professionals then surely it's good enough for amateur hunters.

The Australian government says double tapping them with a .308 semi auto is the most humane method to kill feral pests.

 

Page 11​

Humane shooting operations

The shooting technique that will be used for this program is endorsed by the Australian government as the most humane method for reducing the numbers of pest animals.This technique involves shooting the animals using the 'double tap'method, which requires that two shots be fired at the heart and lungs in rapid succession.This results in a quick death,with minimal stress and suffering

 

Page 15 Firearm-

.308 (7.62mm) calibre rifle such as the Springfield M14 and M1A,L1A1 SLR

http://www.territorystories.nt.gov.au/bitstream/handle/10070/212930/Feral_Animal_Control_Manual.pdf?sequence=1

 

 

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Roughly 32000 deaths by gun per year in the US.

About the same number of deaths by car.

 

About 2/3rds of the gun deaths are suicide.

 

Really it's about time we drastically changed US lives. Everyone should live in a padded room provided by the govt with no sharp corners. Leaving the room will require govt approval. Food provided by a slot in the wall, delivered by specially trained govt workers only. Govt teleprompter at least 12 feet off the floor for monitoring and indoctro-tainment.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This contribution to Self-Murder Anarchy somehow got lost on its way to this thread.

 

 

800px-List_of_countries_by_firearm-relat

 

Take a look at who's company your in..you guys are doing something wrong

 


Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Did you guys actually read the article and it's conclusion?...

 

"Clinton is wrong that gun manufacturers have no liability for their products, but she's right that they have unique protections from lawsuits that most other businesses — and particularly consumer product-makers — do not."

 

These unique protections, like not making gun trace evidence available, might just seem a little anti social in the face of a glaring problem with gun deaths (8x the 1st world AVERAGE).

 

Doncha think?

 

I decided to take this reply to the self-murder thread because our "gun deaths" are mostly suicides and our suicide rate is pretty normal for the first world, the only world that counts.

 

The gun industry has faced novel lawsuits blaming manufacturers for criminal, reckless, and unintended uses of guns, so yes, so unique provisions were made in our laws to counter that unique attack.

 

Not sure what you mean about "gun trace evidence" being unavailable. It's available. And how would making it even more available help to put our suicide rate below the "world that matters" normal rate?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not sure what you mean about "gun trace evidence" being unavailable. It's available. And how would making it even more available help to put our suicide rate below the "world that matters" normal rate?

 

 

You are a liar. THE ATF'S GUN TRACE DATA IS NO LONGER AVAILABLE TO STATE AND LOCAL AUTHORITIES.

 

 

  • The Tiahrt Amendment restricts access of state and local law enforcement authority to gun trace data, hindering municipal police departments' ability to track down sellers of illegal guns, to investigate gun trafficking patterns, and to make connections between individual gun-related crimes.[14]
  • The Tiahrt Amendment requires that NICS background check records be destroyed within 24 hours, and this makes it harder for law enforcement authorities to catch law-breaking gun dealers who falsify their records.
  • The Tiahrt Amendment denies the ATF the authority to require dealer inventory checks to detect lost and stolen guns. Under current rules, the ATF can conduct a warrantless search of any licensed gun dealer once per year.[17]

--NICS background check records are still destroyed within 24 hours:

--ATF still does not have the power to require dealer inventory checks to detect lost and stolen guns:

--State and local authorities are still restricted from using trace data to fully investigate corrupt gun dealers and traffickers.

Tiahart: Industry pressure hides gun traces, protects dealers from public scrutiny

By James V. Grimaldi and Sari Horwitz Washington Post Staff Writers

Sunday, October 24, 2010; 6:00 AM

Under the law, investigators cannot reveal federal firearms tracing information that shows how often a dealer sells guns that end up seized in crimes. The law effectively shields retailers from lawsuits, academic study and public scrutiny. It also keeps the spotlight off the relationship between rogue gun dealers and the black market in firearms.

...

Such information used to be available under a simple Freedom of Information Act request. But seven years ago, under pressure from the gun lobby, Congress blacked out the information by passing the so-called Tiahrt amendment, named for Rep. Todd Tiahrt (R-Kan.). The law removed from the public record a government database that traces guns recovered in crimes back to the dealers.

"It was extraordinary, and the most offensive thing you can think of," said Chuck Wexler, director of the Police Executive Research Forum, a nonprofit group for police chiefs. "The tracing data, which is now secret, helped us see the big picture of where guns are coming from."

...

For years, the ATF had been releasing tracing data that was at least a year old. A Freedom of Information Act lawsuit pushed for contemporaneous data, but the ATF balked because it felt that the release of real-time trace data could threaten investigations. The standoff landed in the Supreme Court.

In February 2003, before oral arguments, the NRA persuaded Rep. George R. Nethercutt (R-Wash.) to add a provision codifying the time delay into a 544-page omnibus spending bill. In a dramatic move, the high court canceled arguments. The case eventually was tossed out.

Next, the gun lobby moved to take the trace data out of public circulation altogether. In July 2003, Tiahrt introduced his amendment, saying, "I wanted to make sure I was fulfilling the needs of my friends who are firearms dealers."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/10/23/AR2010102302996_2.html?sid=ST2010102304311>

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Did you guys actually read the article and it's conclusion?...

 

"Clinton is wrong that gun manufacturers have no liability for their products, but she's right that they have unique protections from lawsuits that most other businesses — and particularly consumer product-makers — do not."

 

These unique protections, like not making gun trace evidence available, might just seem a little anti social in the face of a glaring problem with gun deaths (8x the 1st world AVERAGE).

 

Doncha think?

 

I decided to take this reply to the self-murder thread because our "gun deaths" are mostly suicides and our suicide rate is pretty normal for the first world, the only world that counts.

 

The gun industry has faced novel lawsuits blaming manufacturers for criminal, reckless, and unintended uses of guns, so yes, so unique provisions were made in our laws to counter that unique attack.

 

Not sure what you mean about "gun trace evidence" being unavailable. It's available. And how would making it even more available help to put our suicide rate below the "world that matters" normal rate?

 

 

True.. suicides are 61% of gun deaths in the USA. Compared to Australia you have 25% more suicides with a higher incidence of guns involved. The trouble with taking suicide out of the picture is that it makes the statistics on gun related deaths look worse. ie Suicide is your friend Tom as it softens the impact of the stats on homicide.

 

But we've all seen the first world comparison graphs where the USA is a ridiculous outlier on gun homicides. However Tom's (funny) comment about countries `that count' is quite perverse.

 

Those countries that "don't count" often have political instability and high gun death rates and are arms manufacturers' very good customers. America is the biggest exporter of small arms.Those struggling third world countries descend into chaos and social dysfunction so the shareholders of these companies can afford their next superyacht or French villa.

 

Well done Tom, the manufacturer of your loved guns is quietly sowing anarchy in lawless third world countries. You are right! They quite obviously don't count.

 

There is a reason why arms manufacturers are depicted as bad guys in movies.

 

There is also a reason why there is always a struggle for non proliferation of arms treaties world wide. It's the corruption of arms manufacturers that you so obviously celebrate. No wonder your domestic laws protect these companies. Good on yer Tom.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Complain about lawless countries and do nothing about it except complain about Americans...a feel good stance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Complain about lawless countries and do nothing about it except complain about Americans...a feel good stance.

No... I complained about arms manufacturers of which America has about 31% of the worldwide market.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jokeawf, your wife might not have been raped had you or a good guy with a gun been there to prevent it. How does that make you feel?

 

You again?

Thus we see NGS degrade himself, stalking from thread to thread with a hurtful narrative of rape, in a pattern.

This is an odd series of posts for a scientist, or for a quality person.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites