• Announcements

    • Zapata

      Abbreviated rules   07/28/2017

      Underdawg did an excellent job of explaining the rules.  Here's the simplified version: Don't insinuate Pedo.  Warning and or timeout for a first offense.  PermaFlick for any subsequent offenses Don't out members.  See above for penalties.  Caveat:  if you have ever used your own real name or personal information here on the forums since, like, ever - it doesn't count and you are fair game. If you see spam posts, report it to the mods.  We do not hang out in every thread 24/7 If you see any of the above, report it to the mods by hitting the Report button in the offending post.   We do not take action for foul language, off-subject content, or abusive behavior unless it escalates to persistent stalking.  There may be times that we might warn someone or flick someone for something particularly egregious.  There is no standard, we will know it when we see it.  If you continually report things that do not fall into rules #1 or 2 above, you may very well get a timeout yourself for annoying the Mods with repeated whining.  Use your best judgement. Warnings, timeouts, suspensions and flicks are arbitrary and capricious.  Deal with it.  Welcome to anarchy.   If you are a newbie, there are unwritten rules to adhere to.  They will be explained to you soon enough.  
Sign in to follow this  
dylan winter

I am really impressed with Shooter Jeff and Tom

Recommended Posts

6 minutes ago, LB 15 said:

Fair enough but I don't really want to know. I wear my ignorance of guns like a badge of honor. 

it's like cricket stats or baseball stats - something for douchebags to babble on and argue about, there's no there there with guns.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, LB 15 said:

Fair enough but I don't really want to know. I wear my ignorance of guns like a badge of honor. 

Alongside the rest of your badges for ignorance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, kmacdonald said:

Alongside the rest of your badges for ignorance.

Sorry mate but every time you see the word ignorance there is no need to reply. We are not always talking about you. Anyway how is the job hunting going?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, LB 15 said:

Sorry mate but every time you see the word ignorance there is no need to reply. We are not always talking about you. Anyway how is the job hunting going?

It's not.  I'm retired.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, kmacdonald said:

It's not.  I'm retired.

It is spelled R E T A R D E D mate. Little wonder you are out of work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, LB 15 said:

It is spelled R E T A R D E D mate. Little wonder you are out of work.

You really need to come up with some new material.  You're like a broken record.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, SloopJonB said:

That seems to be the only option the gunnies can see other than the wide open, deadly mess you have now.

I, on the other hand, have a more nuanced view of the situation.

You can look it up.

But you won't.

So please explain it to us backwards folks.

I mean, you do have a solution, right?

So please, tell us all about your solution that will stop things like Vegas, and also stop what goes on in Chicago everyday.

I'm eagerly awaiting your "nuanced" solution (that isn't a ban).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, bpm57 said:

 

So please, tell us all about your solution that will stop things like Vegas, and also stop what goes on in Chicago everyday.

I

There isn't a solution.  It's the new norm and will get worse.  Get used to it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, kmacdonald said:

You really need to come up with some new material.  

 Material as in fabric? No worries this is perfect for you. But I wouldn't wear it to your next Job interview.

RS-gun-shirt1.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, LB 15 said:

 Material as in fabric? No worries this is perfect for you. But I wouldn't wear it to your next Job interview.

RS-gun-shirt1.jpg

You are working really hard for another badge.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
31 minutes ago, bpm57 said:

So please explain it to us backwards folks.

I mean, you do have a solution, right?

So please, tell us all about your solution that will stop things like Vegas, and also stop what goes on in Chicago everyday.

I'm eagerly awaiting your "nuanced" solution (that isn't a ban).

You 'backward folks' might need to understand that 'Solution' and 'Ban' are not mutually exclusive concepts. Am I going to fast for you? Now that you understand that, lets think about what could be banned that would stop things like Vegas... Got it! Ban hotel rooms! Or concerts!

It is no ones right to be at either after all.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, kmacdonald said:

You are working really hard for another badge.

There you go again using words that you have no concept of. 

 Deeply wounding reply in 5...4...3..

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

What's up Ronald, cat got your tounge?  You have no problem replying normaly...

image.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, kmacdonald said:

Thanks dylan.  

I'm not one to speculate but it's possible that the longer the police wait to muster the courage to launch a counteroffensive, the more people get killed.  In the case of LV, they chose to wait until the shooter (or shooters) ran out of ammo or killed themselves.  Reports have it that the police were told to stand down----too dangerous to go in.  Now it's going to take months if not years to do a "full and thorough investigation" to learn the facts----------certainly something the should not take more than hours unless of course the legal team is telling us what happened.

Your media diet needs less junk food and more meat.  Just sayin.

 

3 hours ago, LB 15 said:

If gun owners believe those two objects are the same diameter, this goes some way to explaining why they don't get the issue about dick size.

 

3 hours ago, LB 15 said:

Fair enough but I don't really want to know. I wear my ignorance of guns like a badge of honor. 

In terms you'll understand, then: both dicks are the same diameter, but one's twice as long, and has ten times bigger balls.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, bpm57 said:

So please explain it to us backwards folks.

I mean, you do have a solution, right?

So please, tell us all about your solution that will stop things like Vegas, and also stop what goes on in Chicago everyday.

I'm eagerly awaiting your "nuanced" solution (that isn't a ban).

You can look it up.

But you won't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, kmacdonald said:

There isn't a solution.  It's the new norm and will get worse.  Get used to it.

You finally said something intelligent, if cynical and defeatist.

It's the fate of the USA for at least a couple of more generations.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, LB 15 said:

You 'backward folks' might need to understand that 'Solution' and 'Ban' are not mutually exclusive concepts. Am I going to fast for you? Now that you understand that, lets think about what could be banned that would stop things like Vegas... Got it! Ban hotel rooms! Or concerts!

It is no ones right to be at either after all.

The simplest solution would be to ban stupidity but that ain't happening either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, LB 15 said:

Sloop asks you a technical question and you abuse him for not knowing the answer? Fuck mate that is very Randumb like...

I abused him and his elk (and will continue to do so) when they prove they do not even have the most basic of knowledge of gunz, yet they think they have all the answers to regulate them.  Unlike whoever used the Pirelli z-rating tire analogy - we are not expecting anything even CLOSE to the level of minutiae.  But if you are going to propose to ban or heavily regulate out of existence entire classes of weapons, then you'd better have at least a passing understanding of how they work and why what you're proposing will actually achieve what you think it will. Proposing to ban them because they are "black and scary looking" or because you heard from someone who heard it from someone that .22s are powerful mass murder destructive weapons is not a great basis for legislation.  

Sloopy, jocal & Co. are no better than the idiot parents who refuse to immunize their kids because they heard it causes autism.  They use junk science.  We ridicule them with no issue, so therefore sloops and jocal deserve all the scorn that comes their way.  They mean well, but they are uninformed asshats.  And they are ALMOST as dumb as someone who believes that a tool which is misused to cause harm is the actual "Root Cause" of the incident.  That's like saying that gasoline and matches are the root causes of arson.   :wacko:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Steam Flyer said:

You're full of shit.

The police officers who broke into Peddock's hotel room fully expected a shootout with him, and had the attitude "We'd rather have him shooting at us than down into the crowd." They gave a very good group interview on TV a few days back. They also reviewed the radio log of comms between all the LEOs and 1st responders in the area.

If you didn't have your head up your ass, you'd have at least heard a little bit about it.

I'll never understand why you troglodyte fascist fuck-heads need to lie so much...... I guess the truth probably hurts your widdle self-esteem.................

-DSK

Why did it take 75 minutes after the shooting began before they breached his room????

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, SloopJonB said:

That seems to be the only option the gunnies can see other than the wide open, deadly mess you have now.

I, on the other hand, have a more nuanced view of the situation.

You can look it up.

But you won't.

I also have offered up nuanced solutions to this issue numerous times.  You can look it up.  But you won't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, LB 15 said:

Yeah and that's the bit I don't get with Jeff at the moment. I have had many intelligent (yes and robust) discussions about guns with Jeff over the years and what I admired about him (and Boothy) was that they didn't use the 2A to justify their ownership of guns. They stated that they enjoyed shooting them as a hobby, unlike Len P and Tom who claim they own them to take out the Gov'ment Abrams tank when it comes down their driveways to take them off them. But since the Vegas shooting Jeff has jumped behind the 2A straw curtain. Perhaps even the gun nuts understand the horror that this latest shooting has caused may present a 'real and present danger' to their collections.

LB, that is patently not true.  I have always used the 2A to justify the ownership of guns.  Show me one single post ever where I did not.  And I have consistently said that hunting and other shooting sports were secondary to the right to own guns.  They have nothing to do with the 2A.  The 2A is and always has been about the right to personal defense and defense of the nation against enemies foreign or domestic.  You must have me confused with someone else, because I have always thought that.  I just happen to be one of the more reasonable folks on here about it.  

I do absolutely and PRIMARILY enjoy them as a hobby.  Which is a good thing because it means I'm not having to shoot home invaders or jackbooted gov't thugs on a daily basis.  If I was "enjoying" that aspect of it more, then something would be really wrong society.  But the Vegas shooting has not changed my view or my stance on gunz in the slightest.  Events like this actually harden me even further against "reasonable gun regulations" because its obvious there is no such thing for the grabber side as "reasonable".  It is all based on pure emotion and ignorance.  There are many many of us who would LOVE to strengthen the guns laws to keep asshats like this shooter getting their hands on gunz as well as all the thugs in Chiraq from doing the same.  But no matter how much we attempt to be reasonable and sane about it so as to no infringe on everyone else who isn't out killing people - its never fucking enough!  I have asked numerous times here how expanded background checks, licensing and registration would have stopped this and other mass shootings and I get crickets.  Or you get stupid diversions like "BUT SUICIDE!"  

I would LOVE to have an honest conversation about this topic here one day where both sides actually address the REAL issues and discuss the pros/cons of any proffered solution and its impact on what is actually trying to be achieved vs the infringements on civil liberties.  I would love to have a discussion where we actually address root causes of these problems - Real ones (as opposed to LB style root causes).  

Until that happens, I'm tempted to just say "FUCK YOU, 2nd AMENDMENT!" and leave it at that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Americans need their guns. The British King could decide to invade and occupy at any time. That was the purpose of the 2nd Amendment, for citizens to form a "well-regulated militia" in case the Poms came back for another go.

These strange ritual slaughters are becoming so commonplace that people are no longer shocked. The new awful normal. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, Happy said:

Americans need their guns. The British King could decide to invade and occupy at any time. That was the purpose of the 2nd Amendment, for citizens to form a "well-regulated militia" in case the Poms came back for another go.

These strange ritual slaughters are becoming so commonplace that people are no longer shocked. The new awful normal. 

good phrase

it is a "ritual slaughter" of the innocents which is enacted several times a day throughout the USA

worth while to keep the paper gods of the immovable constitution happy

Mound_72_sacrifice_ceremony_HRoe_2013.jp

 

us brits have got by fine without a constitution written when muzzle loading hunting guns were the height of technology.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Shootist Jeff said:

But no matter how much we attempt to be reasonable and sane about it so as to no infringe on everyone else who isn't out killing people - its never fucking enough!  I have asked numerous times here how expanded background checks, licensing and registration would have stopped this STRAW MAN ALERT and other mass shootings and I get crickets.

The goal is to minimize or lessen the gun mayhem. Not to stop it, which is a childish and useless suggestion.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 hours ago, Shootist Jeff said:

Sloopy, jocal & Co. are no better than the idiot parents who refuse to immunize their kids because they heard it causes autism.  They use junk science. 

Any suggestion that I use junk science is a blatant lie. The research that I found and presented here in 2013 is now a staple before the Supreme Court. Jeff, you cannot offer peer reviewed studies to support your idea that guns fight crime. RTC laws increase crime in the new RTC states.

Quote

2017. Stanford Law School Professor John Donohue found that states that adopted right-to-carry laws have experienced a 13 to 15 percent increase in violent crime in the 10 years after enacting those laws.

http://news.stanford.edu/2017/06/21/violent-crime-increases-right-carry-states/

These reports went straight to the NAS. They are formal, peer-reviewed followups to the NAS's rejection of John R. Lott in 2004.

Quote

 2014. (Donohue ii) Right-to-carry gun laws linked to increase in violent crime, Stanford research shows

http://www.nber.org/papers/w18294

Now, Donohue and his colleagues have shown that extending the data yet another decade (1999-2010) provides the most convincing evidence to date that right-to-carry laws are associated with an increase in violent crime.

 

"The totality of the evidence based on educated judgments about the best statistical models suggests that right-to-carry laws are associated with substantially higher rates" of aggravated assault, rape, robbery and murder, said Donohue.

The strongest evidence was for aggravated assault, with data suggesting that right-to-carry (RTC) laws increase this crime by an estimated 8 percent – and this may actually be understated, according to the researchers.

Quote

Overall, the most consistent, albeit not uniform, finding to emerge from both the state and county panel data models conducted over the entire period with and without state trends and using three different specifications is that aggravated assault rises when RTC laws are adopted. If one narrows the focus to the most complete data (state data over the entire 1977-2010 period) or the period from 1999-2010 (thereby removing the confounding influence of the crack cocaine epidemic) and looks at the dummy and spline models using our preferred specification, then there is always evidence within the four estimates for each of the seven crime categories that RTC laws are associated with higher rates of crime. In six of the seven crime categories, the finding that RTC laws increase crime is statistically significant at the .05 level, and for robbery, it is statistically significant at the .10 level. It will be worth exploring whether other methodological approaches and/or additional years of data will confirm the results of this panel-data analysis.

 

Junk science is defined when a research formula doesn't apply across the board. John R. Lott's 1996 formula was appkied to the new data from new RTC states. Even Lott's formula )one of four used) confirmed that violent crime had in creased in the double digits. CC laws increase crime, according to real scientific work.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, jocal505 said:

CC laws increase crime, according to real scientific work.

Utter and complete BULL SHIT!  

concealed-carry-laws-versus-crime-rate.p

 

CONCEALED-CARRY-Concealed-Carry-Licensee

crpc_graph.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, SloopJonB said:

You finally said something intelligent, if cynical and defeatist.

It's the fate of the USA for at least a couple of more generations.

Yep.  Hunting and fishing in the US is steadily declining.  Future generations will not see the need for guns except for protection since to police have failed so miserably at.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, kmacdonald said:

Yep.  Hunting and fishing in the US is steadily declining.  Future generations will not see the need for guns except for protection since to police have failed so miserably at.

The Subprime Court has confirmed multiple times the police have no obligation to protect us. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, Autonomous said:

The Subprime Court has confirmed multiple times the police have no obligation to protect us. 

I assume they also confirmed our right to protect ourselves then---------and allow the means to do so.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, Autonomous said:

The Subprime Court has confirmed multiple times the police have no obligation to protect us. 

When seconds count, the po-leece are only minutes away.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, kmacdonald said:

I assume they also confirmed our right to protect ourselves then---------and allow the means to do so.

But according to joke-al, only indoors.  Our well regulated militia is only allowed to assemble indoors as well.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Shootist Jeff said:

Utter and complete BULL SHIT!  

concealed-carry-laws-versus-crime-rate.p

 

CONCEALED-CARRY-Concealed-Carry-Licensee

crpc_graph.jpg

You know crime and murder rates fell in states without concealed carry too, right :rolleyes: There is no correlation.

Also note the homies battling it out in Baltimore are almost 100% guaranteed to be going after armed victims. You can have 50 guns strapped to every inch of your body, but it does you no good when the guys from the other corner open fire without warning and drive off before the surviving members of your crew return fire.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, kent_island_sailor said:

 

Also note the homies battling it out in Baltimore are almost 100% guaranteed to be going after armed victims. You can have 50 guns strapped to every inch of your body, but it does you no good when the guys from the other corner open fire without warning and drive off before the surviving members of your crew return fire.

Don't we encourage that element to shoot each other?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 hours ago, Shootist Jeff said:

I abused him and his elk (and will continue to do so) when they prove they do not even have the most basic of knowledge of gunz, yet they think they have all the answers to regulate them.  Unlike whoever used the Pirelli z-rating tire analogy - we are not expecting anything even CLOSE to the level of minutiae.  But if you are going to propose to ban or heavily regulate out of existence entire classes of weapons, then you'd better have at least a passing understanding of how they work and why what you're proposing will actually achieve what you think it will. Proposing to ban them because they are "black and scary looking" or because you heard from someone who heard it from someone that .22s are powerful mass murder destructive weapons is not a great basis for legislation.  

Sloopy, jocal & Co. are no better than the idiot parents who refuse to immunize their kids because they heard it causes autism.  They use junk science.  We ridicule them with no issue, so therefore sloops and jocal deserve all the scorn that comes their way.  They mean well, but they are uninformed asshats.  And they are ALMOST as dumb as someone who believes that a tool which is misused to cause harm is the actual "Root Cause" of the incident.  That's like saying that gasoline and matches are the root causes of arson.   :wacko:

Up until now I regarded you as a bit of a fanatic but generally fairly sane.

With that diatribe you have demonstrated that you are just another lunatic asshole gun nut.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Shootist Jeff said:

I also have offered up nuanced solutions to this issue numerous times.  You can look it up.  But you won't.

No, you have offered up trite "leave my guns alone and fix those other people" gun fanatic bullshit and lies.

That's all that you and you elk have.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
23 minutes ago, kent_island_sailor said:

You know crime and murder rates fell in states without concealed carry too, right :rolleyes: There is no correlation.

 

Yes, and that proves my point.  Jocal claims crime and homicide went UP with CCW laws.  They did the opposite.  I never claimed either causation or correlation.  But it is a fact that regardless of the REASONS crime and murder went down, they did not GO UP with CC laws.  

Joke-al fibs yet again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, SloopJonB said:

No, you have offered up trite "leave my guns alone and fix those other people" gun fanatic bullshit and lies.

That's all that you and you elk have.

You could actually look it up.  But you won't.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, SloopJonB said:

You could think and speak for yourself

But you won't.

I have and I've written it down here.  I have proposed some specific gun legislation in addition to people legislation.  You could look it up.  But you won't.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
26 minutes ago, Shootist Jeff said:

I have and I've written it down here.  I have proposed some specific gun legislation in addition to people legislation.  You could look it up.  But you won't.  

I don't need to - I read it all at the time.

It was all just more meaningless "tool" nut drivel.

Reading your "specific gun legislation" is no different than reading the same thing from Tommy Gun.

"Look a squirrel" and/or "Fuck you - 2A".

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, SloopJonB said:

You could think and speak for yourself

But you won't.

Sloop, do you really think the main difference between Canadian and American gun attitudes is that "Canadians don't generally fondle and worship their guns"?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It was a throwaway line but there's a kernel of truth in it.

We don't have a mass "Gun Culture" the way the USA does. Here it's generally only the true enthusiasts who shoot or own weapons. That's the big benefit of our bureaucratic restrictions - it makes it more trouble than it's worth for the dilettantes and impulse buyers while still permitting the true enthusiasts, hunters & hobbyists to own weapons, reloading equipment etc. Gun ownership here is about 1/3 of the USA and is primarily long guns.

The principal result or benefit is a gun death rate that is a small fraction of that in the USA. In fact it is almost an order of magnitude lower.

 

There are an estimated 270 million firearms in the U.S., according to the independent research project called ‘Small Arms Survey.’ That’s 89 firearms per 100 residents, making the U.S. the No. 1 country for gun ownership.

Canada, on the other hand, ranks 13th on the study’s list, with 9.95 million firearms — or 31 per 100 residents.

Canada has a far lower rate of firearm homicides than its neighbour to the south.

According to a report by the Center for Disease Control and Prevention, roughly 11,000 homicides were committed using firearms in the U.S. in 2011. Statistics Canada reports in the same year Canada had 158 homicides committed using firearms.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Bloody Chum said:

So, would you say that those in Canada that go to great lengths to shoot are gun nuts?

Some, but gun nuttery has little to do with the hobby or the ownership of weapons - it's the fanatical political attitudes.

As I have pointed out numerous times, I have owned guns - the first .22 at age 12 - and I occasionally shoot clays and pistols at an indoor range. I'm a pretty good shot too.

That makes me a bit of an enthusiast I would say but it's utterly meaningless to the nutters - to them I'm just a mindlessly ignorant, lefty gun grabber.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

BChum - a few stats to show the difference between our countries gun problems.

Since 1689 there have been a total of 429 people killed in mass shootings here.

In my lifetime there have been 160.

In this millennium there have been 43.

Vegas alone outdid us for this entire century to date.

That is the difference that strict gun controls make.

Meanwhile I can still buy guns and go shooting anytime I want - with some pre-planning and bureaucracy beforehand since I don't currently own any guns.

Or I can just go to the range and take my pick from several dozen handguns and long guns.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, SloopJonB said:

BChum - a few stats to show the difference between our countries gun problems.

Since 1689 there have been a total of 429 people killed in mass shootings here.

In my lifetime there have been 160.

In this millennium there have been 43.

Vegas alone outdid us for this entire century to date.

That is the difference that strict gun controls make.

Meanwhile I can still buy guns and go shooting anytime I want - with some pre-planning and bureaucracy beforehand since I don't currently own any guns.

Or I can just go to the range and take my pick from several dozen handguns and long guns.

Hell Sloop, I didn't even know there were 429 people in Canada! I looked it up though and there are a few more than that. But I think there is something missing from your equation… it's actually the rate of firearm homicide that you're looking for not the total because of our population difference, get it?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Bloody Chum said:

Hell Sloop, I didn't even know there were 429 people in Canada! I looked it up though and there are a few more than that. But I think there is something missing from your equation… You still lecture this whole poster rlooked it up though and there are a few more. But I think there is something missing from your equation… it's actually the rate of firearm homicide that you're looking for not the toll because of our population difference, get it?

Sorry, no - try again without stuttering please.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_massacres_in_Canada

As to rate of gun homicide - like everything else, just take 10% of the U.S. anything and you'll be pretty close.

That would give you less than 5000 mass shooting deaths since shortly after the Pilgrims landed.

I haven't looked it up but I'm confident that you have exceeded that number.

In fact you've probably exceeded that number in the last 5 or 6 years.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

O/K, we'll do it your way,

Canada's rate of gun homicide is 0.30 per 100,000 population

USA rate of gun homicide is 3.60 per 100,000 population.

For the mathematically challenged here, that is essentially an order of magnitude difference. Actually greater than an order of magnitude but lets not sweat the small stuff - chalk it up to collateral damage.

Freely available weapons sure make you a lot safer than in lefty countries that restrict firearms don't they?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, SloopJonB said:

O/K, we'll do it your way,

Canada's rate of gun homicide is 0.30 per 100,000 population

USA rate of gun homicide is 3.60 per 100,000 population.

For the mathematically challenged here, that is essentially an order of magnitude difference. Actually greater than an order of magnitude but lets not sweat the small stuff - chalk it up to collateral damage.

Thanks Sloop, if we're looking for answers, we have to start with the right questions. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, kent_island_sailor said:

You know crime and murder rates fell in states without concealed carry too, right :rolleyes: There is no correlation.

Cite this, buster.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The only real question here is why the USA allows fanatics to control the dialogue on so many topics.

You have essentially uncontrolled access to firearms.

You have 10 times the population so there is 10 times the number of deaths

You have a rate of gun homicides 10 times here.

Hence you have essentially 100 times the number of gun homicides as here (10 X 10 = 100)

Pretty simple math. Gun enthusiasts can understand it, Gun nuts are unable to.

That is the fundamental difference between them you were asking about earlier.

 

In reality the nutters completely understand it - they just don't give a shit. They are fanatical, not stupid - all the firearms deaths are just collateral damage to them. Far more important that they have unfettered access to their toys. I mean a few dozen or a few hundred dead kids every year are just the cost of freedom, Right?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Bloody Chum said:

That leads me back to another question, do you think there is a difference between the gun attitudes here in the US and those in Canada?

Asked and answered.

We don't have a "Gun Culture" whereas you do.

That's where my "worship and fondle" comment grew from.

It's also why you are essentially fucked on this subject for a few more generations at least so you better get used to 5 figure gun deaths every year and more & more mass shootings because nothing is going to change for a long time. Well, it'll change but only by getting worse.

Maybe your grandchildren will smarten up but I personally think it'll be longer than that.

P.S. a "Throwaway Line" is an idle smart remark, not to be taken literally.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Shootist Jeff said:
4 hours ago, kmacdonald said:

I assume they also confirmed our right to protect ourselves then---------and allow the means to do so.

 

KMcD, don't assume too much. Self defense rights have been limited by the state since the dawn of civilization.

Quote

But according to joke-al, only indoors.  Our well regulated militia is only allowed to assemble indoors as well.

Not about me.

It works like this. Jeffie quotes Heller. Heller quotes CATO. CATO quotes Joyce Malcolm, who insists that Old English Law is the shit.

But in Colonial times the law of the land cited the provisions of  Statute of Northampton: riding armed into a public place was a misdemeanor; concealing arms and intending to use them in public were felonies. Weapons use was allowed in self defense within one's home.

Mustered militias and their exercises were granted exceptions (e.g. those made by Hamilton in Boston). The firing of guns for militia purposes, under color of the militia, was restricted at certain times and in certain places.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Shootist Jeff said:

Yes, and that proves my point.  Jocal claims crime and homicide went UP with CCW laws.  They did the opposite.  I never claimed either causation or correlation.  But it is a fact that regardless of the REASONS crime and murder went down, they did not GO UP with CC laws.  

Joke-al fibs yet again.

Your source is Guncite, a gun forum. Here is mine for the second time today, John Donohue III, a person who has commuicated with, and been responsible to, the NAS about this since 2003. This work is presented in federal district court, but Guncite isn't.

Quote

More guns, more crime: New research debunks a central thesis of the gun rights movement

“There is not even the slightest hint in the data that RTC laws reduce overall violent crime,” Donohue stated in the paper. To put the significance of a 15-percent increase in violent crime in perspective, the paper notes that “the average RTC state would have to double its prison population to counteract the RTC-induced increase in violent crime.”

(...) Another comfort was the increased rates of incarceration and hiring of law enforcement personnel Donohue noticed among RTC states. “This suggested that RTC states were not simply experiencing higher crime because they decided to lock up fewer criminals and hire fewer police,” Donohue said. “The relatively greater increases in incarceration and police in RTC states implies that, if anything, our synthetic controls estimates may be understating the increase in violent crime, which was pretty persuasive to me.”

(...)  Moreover, one can incur all of the costs of buying and carrying a gun, only to find that a criminal attack is too sudden to effectively employ the gun defensively.  Donohue cites a 2013 report from the National Crime Victimization Survey that showed in 99.2 percent of the violent attacks in the United States, no gun is ever used defensively – despite the nearly 300 million guns in circulation in the country today.

For most Americans, said Donohue, carrying a gun to avoid a criminal attack is similar to thinking that having a weekly brain scan will save your life, without considering the potential hazardous effects.

“If we gave 300 million people a brain scan, we would save a certain number of lives,” Donohue said. “But you wouldn’t want to advocate that treatment without considering how many lives would be lost by exposing so many to radiation damage.  One needs to consider both the costs and benefits of any treatment or policy.  If the net effect of more gun carrying is that violent crime is elevated, then RTC laws seem much less appealing. This paper may have an impact in making people think differently about these issues.”

http://news.stanford.edu/2017/06/21/violent-crime-increases-right-carry-states/

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Jeffie must be really worried about new laws growing out of Vegas - he used to be fairly rational, if a bit over enthusiastic but of late he has become as loony as Tommy Gun.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
24 minutes ago, jocal505 said:

Your source is Guncite, a gun forum.

No fuckknuckle, the source of those charts is the FBI and the TX DPS. Dispute those facts. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
47 minutes ago, SloopJonB said:

 

In reality the nutters completely understand it - they just don't give a shit. They are fanatical, not stupid - all the firearms deaths are just collateral damage to them. Far more important that they have unfettered access to their toys. I mean a few dozen or a few hundred dead kids every year are just the cost of freedom, Right?

+1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, jocal505 said:

Cite this, buster.

Might want to re-read that post, I think you missed what he was saying.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, SloopJonB said:

Asked and answered.

We don't have a "Gun Culture" whereas you do.

That's where my "worship and fondle" comment grew from.

It's also why you are essentially fucked on this subject for a few more generations at least so you better get used to 5 figure gun deaths every year and more & more mass shootings because nothing is going to change for a long time. Well, it'll change but only by getting worse.

Maybe your grandchildren will smarten up but I personally think it'll be longer than that.

P.S. a "Throwaway Line" is an idle smart remark, not to be taken literally.

Ok, I thought you were serious about the comment that Americans worship and fondle firearms at a higher rate than do Canadians.

Don't worry about my grandkids Sloop, they will be fine. They'll have good genes. ;)

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Shootist Jeff said:

Utter and complete BULL SHIT!  

concealed-carry-laws-versus-crime-rate.p

 

CONCEALED-CARRY-Concealed-Carry-Licensee

crpc_graph.jpg

Graphs Jeff? How very randumb of you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Shootist Jeff said:

I abused him and his elk (and will continue to do so) when they prove they do not even have the most basic of knowledge of gunz, yet they think they have all the answers to regulate them.  Unlike whoever used the Pirelli z-rating tire analogy - we are not expecting anything even CLOSE to the level of minutiae.  But if you are going to propose to ban or heavily regulate out of existence entire classes of weapons, then you'd better have at least a passing understanding of how they work and why what you're proposing will actually achieve what you think it will. Proposing to ban them because they are "black and scary looking" or because you heard from someone who heard it from someone that .22s are powerful mass murder destructive weapons is not a great basis for legislation.  

Sloopy, jocal & Co. are no better than the idiot parents who refuse to immunize their kids because they heard it causes autism.  They use junk science.  We ridicule them with no issue, so therefore sloops and jocal deserve all the scorn that comes their way.  They mean well, but they are uninformed asshats.  And they are ALMOST as dumb as someone who believes that a tool which is misused to cause harm is the actual "Root Cause" of the incident.  That's like saying that gasoline and matches are the root causes of arson.   :wacko:

Ok Jeff well here is what I know about guns. If you point them at someone and pull the trigger there is a possibility that person might die. Regardless of how black and scary they might or might not be. 

Could you, as an expert witness, comment on and correct anything about this statement that is incorrect. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One change I have noticed since I was an NRA member around 1977 or so is the change in emphasis in the "gun culture" from sporting uses of firearms to shooting people. Not that the typical gun magazine or website encourages murder - far from it - but they seem to love guns that either are or look like military weapons and REALLY bang on and on about either shooting intruders, some kind of Mad-Max prepper vs. prepper war, or the ever popular revolt against the government FEMA troops :rolleyes:

This makes me think about retrievers and venison:

shotgun.jpg

wingmastere-1024x175.jpg

This kind of thing - the mindset certainly  is different. I *know* I could kill a person just as dead with the above as what is below, but the whole culture is different. Kind of like how a lowered  MG with SCCA decals, a roll bar, and a 6 point harness is probably slower than a modern minivan, but the mood is sure different when driving it.

gp-61973.jpg

l1_pistols_sw_mp_1522p_22lr_tactical_pis

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
19 hours ago, LB 15 said:

Fair enough but I don't really want to know. I wear my ignorance of guns like a badge of honor. 

Isn't that a bit like people offering blanket opinions in a sailing thread when they don't sail?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 hours ago, dylan winter said:

us brits have got by fine without a constitution written when muzzle loading hunting guns were the height of technology.

No Dylan, you used to be allowed to own and even carry pistols in the UK. To bad your government decided in 1937 that firearms were not suitable for self defense.

And now it is this:

https://www.askthe.police.uk/content/Q85.htm

https://www.askthe.police.uk/content/Q589.htm

The right to bear arms in self defense was part of British common law for hundreds of years, but now it is carry a rape whistle to protect yourself. And if you do get in a situation, make sure you don't hurt your attacker.

Nice try on the muzzleloader angle. Since the only means of communicating was by talking (face to face), letter (handwritten, through the mail), or in newpapers/pamphlets (manual typeset) - does that mean "freedom of speech" only applies to those methods?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, SloopJonB said:

O/K, we'll do it your way,

Canada's rate of gun homicide is 0.30 per 100,000 population

USA rate of gun homicide is 3.60 per 100,000 population.

For the mathematically challenged here, that is essentially an order of magnitude difference. Actually greater than an order of magnitude but lets not sweat the small stuff - chalk it up to collateral damage.

Freely available weapons sure make you a lot safer than in lefty countries that restrict firearms don't they?

You don't think there might be other issues that affect the rates, do you?

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Shootist Jeff said:

And I have consistently said that hunting and other shooting sports were secondary to the right to own guns.  

I do absolutely and PRIMARILY enjoy them as a hobby. 

 

But the Vegas shooting has not changed my view or my stance on gunz in the slightest. 

Events like this actually harden me even further against "reasonable gun regulations". 

 

There are many many of us who would LOVE to strengthen the guns laws to keep asshats like this shooter getting their hands on gunz 

 I would love to have a discussion where we actually address root causes of these problems - Real ones 

 

Jaysaz Mate, most people at least use separate posts to contradict themselves, little own doing it 4 times in the one post. This makes it much easier to point it out your staggering hypocrisy, so thank you for your consideration. 

Sport shooting is secondary to you exercising your right to own guns but primarily why you own them. Check.

The Vegas shooting hasn't changed your view on gun regulation, apart from causing you to change your view on gun regulation. Check.

Mass shootings cause your opposition to strengthening gun laws to increase, yet you would love to strengthen gun laws. Check.

You want to strengthen gun laws to stop mass shooting despite guns not being the cause of mass shooting. Check.

Again thanks Jeff. You saved me a a bit of work there.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
44 minutes ago, kent_island_sailor said:

One change I have noticed since I was an NRA member around 1977 or so is the change in emphasis in the "gun culture" from sporting uses of firearms to shooting people. Not that the typical gun magazine or website encourages murder - far from it - but they seem to love guns that either are or look like military weapons and REALLY bang on and on about either shooting intruders, some kind of Mad-Max prepper vs. prepper war, or the ever popular revolt against the government FEMA troops :rolleyes:

This makes me think about retrievers and venison:

shotgun.jpg

wingmastere-1024x175.jpg

This kind of thing - the mindset certainly  is different. I *know* I could kill a person just as dead with the above as what is below, but the whole culture is different. Kind of like how a lowered  MG with SCCA decals, a roll bar, and a 6 point harness is probably slower than a modern minivan, but the mood is sure different when driving it.

gp-61973.jpg

l1_pistols_sw_mp_1522p_22lr_tactical_pis

The top one is still very popular in the UK for robbing post offices and banks. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
33 minutes ago, mad said:

Isn't that a bit like people offering blanket opinions in a sailing thread when they don't sail?

It might, unless of course sailing boats started killing on average 36 people every day in the US and that cunt used one to kill 58 people peacefully watching a music concert.

Do you ever read the sailing forums? Dosen't seem to stop about half the people posting on them.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Shootist Jeff said:

Why did it take 75 minutes after the shooting began before they breached his room????

Not everyone is as big a bad ass as you mate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 minutes ago, mad said:

The top one is still very popular in the UK for robbing post offices and banks. 

Same here. But on a different topic how about all that money wasted on cancer research? What is the point of it if it only saves some lives?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, LB 15 said:

It might, unless of course sailing boats started killing on average 36 people every day in the US and that cunt used one to kill 58 people peacefully watching a music concert.

Do you ever read the sailing forums? Dosen't seem to stop about half the people posting on them.

 

But in this particular case, an all out ban and or buyback are not a feasible solution. Neither will not work, most of the guns will end being hidden and it won't stop the bad guys using illegal imports for there own purposes. 

Some more registration as Jeff has suggested would be a start, its going to take a few generations for any real impact to be seen.

Good point on the sailing forums though  

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, LB 15 said:

Same here. But on a different topic how about all that money wasted on cancer research? What is the point of it if it only saves some lives?

Well it's seems that the incremental improvements made by it year on year are proving good results, so I'd say it's a good thing. 

Good thing they didn't stop in a knee jerk reaction after the first decade. 

Knee jerk reactions are rarely a good idea. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, LB 15 said:

Same here. But on a different topic how about all that money wasted on cancer research? What is the point of it if it only saves some lives?

Something about finding a cure for cancer death I assume LB. 

Go easy on me mate, I've been hurt before.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, mad said:

But in this particular case, an all out ban and or buyback are not a feasible solution. Neither will not work, most of the guns will end being hidden and it won't stop the bad guys using illegal imports for there own purposes. 

Huh? What has this got to do with non gun nuts right to comment on gun laws? Not sure if you gunnies love deflection or just have very short attention spans. I will give you the benefit of the doubt and phrase my point again. If sailboats killed thousands of non-sailors ever year, should other non sailors be allowed to voice their opinion?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
22 minutes ago, mad said:

Well it's seems that the incremental improvements made by it year on year are proving good results, so I'd say it's a good thing. 

Good thing they didn't stop in a knee jerk reaction after the first decade. 

Knee jerk reactions are rarely a good idea. 

Fuck you are right! This is just a knee jerk reaction. No one ever thought guns were a problem before Las Vegas.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Bloody Chum said:

Go easy on me mate, I've been hurt before.

True but those self inflicted wounds in your feet are rarely fatal.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 minutes ago, LB 15 said:

Huh? What has this got to do with non gun nuts right to comment on gun laws? Not sure if you gunnies love deflection or just have very short attention spans. I will give you the benefit of the doubt and phrase my point again. If sailboats killed thousands of non-sailors ever year, should other non sailors be allowed to voice their opinion?

People can voice all they want, constructive or not. But non-constructive and knee jerk reactions without understanding the subject are still a waste of time. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, mad said:

People can voice all they want, constructive or not. But non-constructive and knee jerk reactions without understanding the subject are still a waste of time. 

Not always.  The perception is as bad as the fact.  It's good to hear the full range of perceptions.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, kent_island_sailor said:

shotgun.jpg

wingmastere-1024x175.jpg

This kind of thing - the mindset certainly  is different. I *know* I could kill a person just as dead with the above as what is below, but the whole culture is different. Kind of like how a lowered  MG with SCCA decals, a roll bar, and a 6 point harness is probably slower than a modern minivan, but the mood is sure different when driving it.

gp-61973.jpg

l1_pistols_sw_mp_1522p_22lr_tactical_pis

Tacti-cool - otherwise know as the Rambo Effect.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, bpm57 said:

You don't think there might be other issues that affect the rates, do you?

Oh, of course - American Exceptionalism causes your rate to be an order of magnitude higher than ours.

Anything but the differences in gun controls. :rolleyes:

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 hours ago, frenchie said:

In terms you'll understand, then: both dicks are the same diameter, but one's twice as long, and has ten times bigger balls.

 

You posted this photo and stated both have the same diameter.

22_vs_223_caliber_bullet.jpg

Try bashing each of these up your arse and get back to me on your understanding of diameter.

Image result for thin dildosImage result for huge dildos

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Once again LB - the BULLETS are the same diameter - the CARTRIDGES aren't.

Even an ignorant fuckwit gun grabber like me can grasp that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, SloopJonB said:

Once again LB - the BULLETS are the same diameter - the CARTRIDGES aren't.

Even an ignorant fuckwit gun grabber like me can grasp that.

Jeebus - just put him on ignore. Shit posting trolls are a waste of electrons and brain cells.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites