StarGateWars Forums

Linx?

Dr. House wrote:Linx?

Need the time to hunt them down.

Jack. you cherry picked and example to support your gun nuttery.

Woman struck by bullet inside Bass Pro Shops

Associated Press
05/18/10 8:25 AM PDT


Read more at the San Francisco Examiner: http://www.sfexaminer.com/breaking/woma ... z0qmN6xzED

RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIF. — A man checking in weapons at the Bass Pro Shops store in Rancho Cucamonga accidentally shot a woman shopping nearby.
San Bernardino County sheriff's spokeswoman Tracy Dorsey says the 52-year-old Chino Hills man, whose name wasn't released, brought six guns to test fire Sunday afternoon when the .45-caliber weapon fired.
The bullet traveled 40 yards and struck a female shopper in the left buttock.
Dorsey says the round gave her a minor wound, but didn't penetrate the skin. She was taken to a hospital for treatment and her name wasn't released.
Bass Pro Shop spokesman Larry Whiteley says customers check weapons in at the front desk before going upstairs to the firing range. On Sunday, the weapon fired before the employee examined it.


Read more at the San Francisco Examiner: http://www.sfexaminer.com/breaking/woma ... z0qmN1yyO0

There are a tone more stories involving negligent discharge, this one being the most current i could find.


The facts are;

There have been numerous studies looking into whether or not citizens carrying weapons around reduces crime. The results; it seems to have to effect whatsoever, good or bad.

Throughout history weapons have never been that effective at keeping people in line, there only effective at killing people. That's it. Think about it Jack. Your from texas, now think about what things were like back in the colonial days of the old west..... do you think there was less crime back in those days then there is now. Everyone had a gun back then because they needed it to survive. Did this deter criminals?... ( i await your half assed reply)

If you want to feel safe and carry your boom stick around with you, fine... just don't be so naive as to think your doing me or anyone else a public service. Your not batman, your just doing it to boost your ego; hence my last penis remark.

Also people who want to handle weapons in public better know how to properly handle them, I have met a few brain dead Americans and i don't really trust the lot of yah with the responsibility of carnying a weapon in public. Just saying.

Thriller wrote:Jack. you cherry picked and example to support your gun nuttery.

I just picked one example out of a sea of them. The example I gave is more recent than yours infact.

Thriller wrote:The facts are;

There have been numerous studies looking into whether or not citizens carrying weapons around reduces crime. The results; it seems to have to effect whatsoever, good or bad.

Yeah? If so, then there is no need to oppose open carry.

Thriller wrote:Your from texas, now think about what things were like back in the colonial days of the old west..... do you think there was less crime back in those days then there is now.

Yeah, actually there was less crime. http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/1102438/posts

Thriller wrote:If you want to feel safe and carry your boom stick around with you, fine... just don't be so naive as to think your doing me or anyone else a public service. Your not batman, your just doing it to boost your ego; hence my last penis remark.

Like I said, you don't understand something, so you insult it.

Thriller wrote:Also people who want to handle weapons in public better know how to properly handle them, I have met a few brain dead Americans and i don't really trust the lot of yah with the responsibility of carnying a weapon in public. Just saying.

I believe everyone should be given firearm training not unlike Switzerland.

Oh look jack you found a pro gun article about history... i wounder what if it even tries to be objective?

plz look at actual first hand recorded accounts of some of the stuff that occurred.

The Texas marshals weren't created because you guys thought it would be cool.

Also plz remember, this was a time where you could lynch, rob, rape, and murder without really alot of fear.

Why? well women and blacks had no rights....
Local law enforcement did pretty much whatever they wanted....
And well people were predominantly illiterate and lived in isolated communities.

actual statistics are spotty because if no one reported a crime it didn't get documented. Even if it did get reported what's a lazy or illiterate sheriff going to write about it?.....JACK

You're wrong if you think i oppose open carry numb scull.... I never said that. I do think you should need a license to due so... that would involve a safety test... you might not agree, but i dont want Bubba shooting a whole through someone by "accident"

BUt really I just don't see the point.... if it doesn't do anything to deter crime.... or make you safer.... why do you need to carry it around with you?

Thriller wrote:You're wrong if you think i oppose open carry numb scull.... I never said that. I do think you should need a license to due so... that would involve a safety test... you might not agree, but i dont want Bubba shooting a whole through someone by "accident"

Dr. House wrote:I believe everyone should be given firearm training not unlike Switzerland.

I would not at be against changing the current CHL license in Texas to include open carry as well.

Thriller wrote:But really I just don't see the point.... if it doesn't do anything to deter crime.... or make you safer.... why do you need to carry it around with you?

I disagree, I believe that it does deter crime and makes you safer. It just wont make you invincible or stop all crime completely. It's just a tool, not a magical amulet.

As for the need. Why do I have to need it to carry it? I mean, the same can be said about a lot of things. Why play SGW? You don't need to play, it wont make you smarter or healthier, so why play?

You want me to post more studies, showing how it has no impact on crime? It doesnt jack.
I only posted an entire book taking in to acount numerouse studies, that is free for you to read. FREE!!

but here is another good one.
It's alot more technical but comes to the same conclusion
http://rds.homeoffice.gov.uk/rds/pdfs06/hosb0206.pdf

YOu know what the most common crime a civi weapon is used in, for defence or deterance?.... If you guessed domestic violence, your right. Mostly it involves shooting your cheating husband/wife to getting it from the drawer to settle a heated argument...

So if you want to continue thinking its makes you safer, thats fine. Just know that your beleif is in the same category of throwing salt over your shoulder or being fearful of black cats.


Also; A weapon does not= Sgw

SGW is played for fun... while guns are only good for killing things...

are you saying you want to carry your gun around just for fun?
You have alot of fun killing things....?

Personally I think that you are always going to have some people that can't or wont act right. This has nothing to do with the availability of lethal weapons. If people were to carry openly there is the deterrent factor to think of, But I don't really think that it would change things all that much. I know people who have always carried and never got into trouble then there are fools that shouldn't be trusted with a blunt stick.

Thriller wrote:You want me to post more studies, showing how it has no impact on crime? It doesnt jack.
I only posted an entire book taking in to acount numerouse studies, that is free for you to read. FREE!!

Here, read my book.

Thriller wrote:YOu know what the most common crime a civi weapon is used in, for defence or deterance?.... If you guessed domestic violence, your right. Mostly it involves shooting your cheating husband/wife to getting it from the drawer to settle a heated argument...

1. Of the 43 deaths reported in that flawed study, 37 (86%) were suicides. Other
   deaths involved criminal activity between the family members (drug deals gone bad).
2. Of the remaining deaths, the deceased family members include felons, drug
   dealers, violent spouses committing assault, and other criminals.
3. Only 0.1% (1 in a thousand) of the defensive uses of guns results in the death of the
   predator.150 This means you are much more likely to prevent a crime without bloodshed
   than hurt a family member.

[spoiler=Sources]1. Protection or Peril? An Analysis of Firearm-Related Deaths in the Home author, Arther Kellerman admits that his study did "not include cases in which burglars or intruders are wounded or frightened away by the use or display of a firearm." He also admitted his study did not look at situations in which intruders "purposely avoided a home known to be armed." This is a classic case of a “study” conducted to achieve a desired result. In his critique of this “study”, Gary Kleck notes that the estimation of gun ownership rates was “inaccurate”, and that the total population came from a non-random selection of only two cities.
2. Ibid
3. Point Blank: Guns and Violence in America, Gary Kleck, New York: Aldine de Gruyter, 1991[/spoiler]

Thriller wrote:So if you want to continue thinking its makes you safer, thats fine. Just know that your beleif is in the same category of throwing salt over your shoulder or being fearful of black cats.

1. Every year, people in the United States use guns to defend themselves against criminals an estimated 2,500,000 times – more than 6,500 people a day, or once every 13 seconds.
2. Of these instances, 15.6% of the people using firearms defensively stated that
   they "almost certainly" saved their lives by doing so.
3. Firearms are used 60 times more often to protect lives than to take lives.
4. The rate of defensive gun use is six times that of criminal gun use.
5. After the implementation of Canada's 1977 gun controls prohibiting handgun
   possession for protection, the “breaking and entering” crime rate rose 25%, surpassing
   the American rate.
6. “...most criminals are more worried about meeting an armed victim than they are
   about running into the police.”
7. You are far more likely to survive a violent assault if you defend yourself with a
   gun. In episodes where a robbery victim was injured, the injury/defense rates were:
   
   • Resisting with a gun 6%
   • Did nothing at all 25%
   • Resisted with a knife 40%
   • Non-violent resistance 45%
8. When a woman was armed with a gun or knife, only 3% of rape attacks are
   completed, compared to 32% when the woman was unarmed.
9. Arthur Kellerman, a researcher whose work is often cited by gun control groups
   said “If you've got to resist, your chances of being hurt are less the more lethal your
   weapon. If that were my wife, would I want her to have a .38 Special in her hand?
   Yeah.”
10. 60% of convicted felons admitted that they avoided committing crimes when they
    knew the victim was armed. 40% of convicted felons admitted that they avoided
    committing crimes when they thought the victim might be armed.172
11. Felons report that they avoid entering houses where people are at home because
    they fear being shot.
12. 59% of the burglaries in Britain, which has tough gun control laws, are “hot
    burglaries” which are burglaries committed while the home is occupied by the
    owner/renter. By contrast, the U.S., with more lenient gun control laws, has a “hot
    burglary” rate of only 13%.
13. 66% of police chiefs believe that citizens carrying concealed firearms reduce rates
    of violent crime.
14. In 1976, Washington, D.C. enacted one of the most restrictive gun control laws in the nation.
    The city's murder rate rose 134 percent through 1996 while the national murder rate has dropped 2%.

[spoiler=Sources]1. Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology, Fall 1995
2. Ibid
3. Ibid
4. Crime statistics: Bureau of Justice Statistics - National Crime Victimization Survey (2005). DGU
statistics: Targeting Guns, Kleck (average of 15 major surveys where DGUs were reported)
5. Residential Burglary: A Comparison of the United States, Canada and England and Wales, Pat
Mayhew , Nattional Institute. of Justice., Wash., D.C., 1987
6. Armed and Considered Dangerous: A Survey of Felons and Their Firearms, Wright and Rossi, 1986
7. British Home Office – not a “pro-gun” organization by any means
8. Law Enforcement Assistance Administration, Rape Victimization in 26 American Cities, U.S.
Department of Justice, 1979
9. Gun Crazy, S.F. Examiner, April 3, 1994
10. Armed and Considered Dangerous: A Survey of Felons and Their Firearms, James Wright and Peter
Rossi, Aldine, 1986
11. Ibid
12a. A “hot burglary” is when the burglar enters a home while the residents are there
12b. Dr. Gary Kleck, Criminologist, Florida State University (1997) and Kopel (1992 and 1999)
13. National Association of Chiefs of Police, 17th Annual National Survey of Police Chiefs & Sheriffs,
2005
14. Dr. Gary Kleck, University of Florida using FBI Uniform Crime Statistics, 1997[/spoiler]

Thriller wrote:Also; A weapon does not= Sgw

SGW is played for fun... while guns are only good for killing things...

SGW is about as fun as stepping on Legos barefoot.

Thriller wrote:are you saying you want to carry your gun around just for fun?

Do you also enjoy stepping on Legos barefoot?

Thriller wrote:You have alot of fun killing things....?

Oh yes, because ya know, everytime you carry a gun you automatically kill something.

Really jack...

I'm not sure where you dug up all those non sequitur facts from completely different sources, from completely different periods of time. That may seem like overwhelming evidence but there is no continuity and no context provided. I have actually had to do first hand research and no what a pile of unintelligent garbage that was.

But stay tunned cause my reply will demonstrate to you the proper way of combining research to support a position

The firs set of facts, ya know, these[spoiler]

Dr. House wrote:

1. Of the 43 deaths reported in that flawed study, 37 (86%) were suicides. Other
   deaths involved criminal activity between the family members (drug deals gone bad).
2. Of the remaining deaths, the deceased family members include felons, drug
   dealers, violent spouses committing assault, and other criminals.
3. Only 0.1% (1 in a thousand) of the defensive uses of guns results in the death of the
   predator.150 This means you are much more likely to prevent a crime without bloodshed
   than hurt a family member.

[spoiler=Sources]1. Protection or Peril? An Analysis of Firearm-Related Deaths in the Home author, Arther Kellerman admits that his study did "not include cases in which burglars or intruders are wounded or frightened away by the use or display of a firearm." He also admitted his study did not look at situations in which intruders "purposely avoided a home known to be armed." This is a classic case of a “study” conducted to achieve a desired result. In his critique of this “study”, Gary Kleck notes that the estimation of gun ownership rates was “inaccurate”, and that the total population came from a non-random selection of only two cities.
2. Ibid
3. Point Blank: Guns and Violence in America, Gary Kleck, New York: Aldine de Gruyter, 1991[/spoiler]

[/spoiler]
Are talking about the study you quoted, you know, the part where you claim that the majority of guns are used to kill a family member? That would be from the book, Protection or Peril? An Analysis of Firearm-Related Deaths in the Home.

Thriller wrote:no context provided.

The context is the quoted parts of your post that the facts follow.

Thriller wrote:I have actually had to do first hand research and no what a pile of unintelligent garbage that was.

the majority of guns are not used to kill family members

I said the number one case for which a weapon is used in self defense dummy.
See you took what i said out of context just like in the rest of your post.

Did you even read the other link? no? thought so
That part you picked out was just a small part of a much larger data set.. You can't nitpick what you want and then leave out the rest jack.


All of those "facts" you stated, our out of context.

THERE IS NO
I repeat NO, evidence to suggest open carry leads to less or more crime.. the data is inconclusive.. You would know that if you could see the forest for the giant gun in front of your face.

After the implementation of Canada's 1977 gun controls prohibiting handgun
possession for protection, the “breaking and entering” crime rate rose 25%, surpassing
the American rate.

These two things are not related to one another... Correlation not equal causation jack.... I

But i'll do a full outlined post for you, so you can see the difference between Proof by verbosity and logical inferences of source material.

Ps. Why do you have only one source from the last decade and all other are pre 2000? Why are they all non sequiturs, wth is Ibid?

Thriller wrote:the majority of guns are not used to kill family members

I said the number one case for which a weapon is used in self defense dummy.
See you took what i said out of context just like in the rest of your post.

But you also said.

Thriller wrote:Mostly it involves shooting your cheating husband/wife to getting it from the drawer to settle a heated argument...

Which most certainly is not justifiable self defense in any state, which is a hard enough claim to make anyway. Just ask this guy.

Thriller wrote:Did you even read the other link? no? thought so

Actually, I have read it.

Thriller wrote:That part you picked out was just a small part of a much larger data set.. You can't nitpick what you want and then leave out the rest jack.

You mean like what you have done when you quoted that seriously flawed study and then twisted it to say something that it didn't?

Thriller wrote:Ps. Why do you have only one source from the last decade and all other are pre 2000?

Because those studies were only conducted in the 90s, when the big Brady debates were going on. Since then there has been no motive to conduct such studies.

Thriller wrote:wth is Ibid?

An abbreviation for ibidem, a Latin word meaning “in the same place.” It is used in footnotes and bibliographies to refer to a source cited in a previous entry.

lol flawed study.

I didn't misinterpret anything, the most common issue of domestic violence is infedelity. yah noob

Thriller wrote:lol flawed study.

I didn't misinterpret anything, the most common issue of domestic violence is infedelity. yah noob

How old are you, Thriller? Thirteen? Do you even know what you're arguing?