What does the science data say about firearms?

[vorlon13]

Is 'bump fire stock' legislation just a feel good thing for the ones proposing it, a moral outrage/provocation to the folks opposing it, legislatively DOA because of the Congressional partisan split AND TOTALLY IRRELEVANT BECAUSE THE 3D MODEL OF THE DEVICE IS ALREADY ON SHAPEWAYS ??

[Brian37]

Is 'bump fire stock' legislation just a feel good thing for the ones proposing it, a moral outrage/provocation to the folks opposing it, legislatively DOA because of the Congressional partisan split AND TOTALLY IRRELEVANT BECAUSE THE 3D MODEL OF THE DEVICE IS ALREADY ON SHAPEWAYS ??

3 D printers, yep that is the other bullshit they use to say, "Loopholes exist so do nothing."

Doesn't matter what the sane say, even when we agree with them. All they want is "sell more and do nothing."

[vorlon13]

I note my post was a question, and if nevertheless interpreted as a statement, the proposal is still fucked with out the final clause.

How about proposing something beyond a mere 'feel good' and with a chance of passing the current fetid congressional septic tank?

[Angrboda]

Unfortunately this is what comes from police reports, ER doctors, and Medical Examiners. And unfortunately this is also what the sane have known for DECADES. Guns may make someone feel safe, but the truth is the likelihood of injury and death, IS NOT from stranger on stranger self defense, but merely having one in the home.

Now, the sane reading this SHOULD spread this story in any social media you use, your local newspapers, TV stations, and your local, state and national officials. 

https://www.scientificamerican.com/artic...nce-shows/

 


I'm sure the "scientificamerican" all jumbled together on a web address is all the prauvanance you need to find that study legit and unquestionable because like in your theology arguements the simly the word "science" and whatever it can be tied to goes without question in your mind..

However in the real world the "scientificamerican" to me reeks of a special intrest group that used key words to tickled the simple minded thoughts and re enforces what they want to hear.

If you wanted a real study why not seek out a legit source and see what they had to say... oh, that's right because the legit sources contradict what you and your left wingnuts have to say.. For instance let look at what a harvard study had to say:
http://www.guns.com/2013/08/30/harvard-s...ent-crime/
Here is what the ACRU says about the study and offers more info:
http://www.theacru.org/harvard_study_gun...roductive/

And these are not even from a pro gun position. there are literally hundreds of studies that show gun ownership to be the total opposite from what your story says it is.

So why isn't your story in the newspapers? because even fake news knows better than to try an publish such a transparent anti gun propaganda POS story.

God, you are an ignorant douchebag.

[Cyberman]

I'm sure the "scientificamerican" all jumbled together on a web address is all the prauvanance you need to find that study legit and unquestionable because like in your theology arguements the simly the word "science" and whatever it can be tied to goes without question in your mind..

Did you just use their domain name being two words as a reason to doubt their legitimacy?

Halt the servers boys, we ain't a legit forum until I register atheist-forums.org!

He's going to lose all shit over penisland.net...

[Minimalist]

prauvanance

What the fuck is that?

[Cyberman]

A region in southern France?

[mlmooney89]

A 'good person' that suddenly becomes a bad guy can make anything deadly. If someone has jumped off the deep end they don't need guns to do it.

Not to mention the 'just in case' thing isn't for a mass shooting by someone holed up out of sight it's for when you are walking back to your car in the dead of night and someone attacks you.

Machine guns certainly make it more effective though. 

And the whole point of an emergency is that you never know what form it will take.

No but I can't stop a man shooting from a hotel across the street... I can stop one trying to assault me. I'm not going to not carry just because I can't stop everyone in every situation. That's like saying just because I can't stop myself from dying in a bad car crash regardless of a seatbelt so I'm just not going to wear one.

[Brian37]

Machine guns certainly make it more effective though. 

And the whole point of an emergency is that you never know what form it will take.

No but I can't stop a man shooting from a hotel across the street... I can stop one trying to assault me. I'm not going to not carry just because I can't stop everyone in every situation. That's like saying just because I can't stop myself from dying in a bad car crash regardless of a seatbelt so I'm just not going to wear one.

Um no, the "seat belt" is a horrible metaphor.

The real prevention isn't forcing everyone to drive a car.

The real prevention is VETTING before someone drives the car.

Yes you should wear a seat belt while driving. But you ALSO take a drivers test FIRST.

I suffer from depression, but since our current laws would not vet me or prevent me from buying a firearm, I could go out right now, buy one, then pop myself. Fortunately I am very self aware, but lots of people are not.

All these distractions coming from the right, not you, but from the right, cause us to get caught up in details that miss the elephant in the room.

If everyone agrees, and both the right and left agree, nobody wants them in the wrong hands, then VETTING is the easiest way to prevent them from getting in the wrong hands.

Now, I am old enough to remember when cigarettes were sold on the isle, not behind the counter, but in the isle. Despite even back then the law being 18 I bought them because the adult and or the clerk didn't give a fuck. Now they are behind the counter and if the employee gets caught, they can lose their job, and or the store lose it's tobacco license.

Point being, with rights come responsibility, and not giving a shit after the sale isn't working. "Not my fault".

Yet if a underage kid drinks at a bar then kills someone driving, the bar can be held responsible.

We cannot and should not sell firearms to the mentally ill, or any type of disturbed person out for revenge. But, some people wrongfully think that vetting is a presumption of guilt. I am 51 and sometimes even at my age, I still get carded when buying beer. I don't assume the clerk is going to deny me, but they are simply doing their job.

I am not accusing you personally of anything. I am simply tired of the climate that no record at time of buy means nothing bad happens after the legal buy. Most firearm injuries and deaths, ARE NOT due to theft then assault. Most firearm injuries and deaths are after a legal buy. This nut in Vegas bought 30 firearms in 1 year and had no record and was LEGAL. The Va Tech shooter too. The Newton killer got his mothers LEGALLY purchased firearm.

I really am not trying to go after anyone's rights, I am simply saying how we are doing things isn't working. 

The elephant in the room is our flooded market and ease of access.

[mlmooney89]

No but I can't stop a man shooting from a hotel across the street... I can stop one trying to assault me. I'm not going to not carry just because I can't stop everyone in every situation. That's like saying just because I can't stop myself from dying in a bad car crash regardless of a seatbelt so I'm just not going to wear one.

Um no, the "seat belt" is a horrible metaphor.

The real prevention isn't forcing everyone to drive a car.

The real prevention is VETTING before someone drives the car.

Yes you should wear a seat belt while driving. But you ALSO take a drivers test FIRST.

I suffer from depression, but since our current laws would not vet me or prevent me from buying a firearm, I could go out right now, buy one, then pop myself. Fortunately I am very self aware, but lots of people are not.

All these distractions coming from the right, not you, but from the right, cause us to get caught up in details that miss the elephant in the room.

If everyone agrees, and both the right and left agree, nobody wants them in the wrong hands, then VETTING is the easiest way to prevent them from getting in the wrong hands.

Now, I am old enough to remember when cigarettes were sold on the isle, not behind the counter, but in the isle. Despite even back then the law being 18 I bought them because the adult and or the clerk didn't give a fuck. Now they are behind the counter and if the employee gets caught, they can lose their job, and or the store lose it's tobacco license.

Point being, with rights come responsibility, and not giving a shit after the sale isn't working. "Not my fault".

Yet if a underage kid drinks at a bar then kills someone driving, the bar can be held responsible.

We cannot and should not sell firearms to the mentally ill, or any type of disturbed person out for revenge. But, some people wrongfully think that vetting is a presumption of guilt. I am 51 and sometimes even at my age, I still get carded when buying beer. I don't assume the clerk is going to deny me, but they are simply doing their job.

I am not accusing you personally of anything. I am simply tired of the climate that no record at time of buy means nothing bad happens after the legal buy. Most firearm injuries and deaths, ARE NOT due to theft then assault. Most firearm injuries and deaths are after a legal buy. This nut in Vegas bought 30 firearms in 1 year and had no record and was LEGAL. The Va Tech shooter too. The Newton killer got his mothers LEGALLY purchased firearm.

I really am not trying to go after anyone's rights, I am simply saying how we are doing things isn't working. 

The elephant in the room is our flooded market and ease of access.

Um it fits just fine. The logic being of WHY I'm carrying a gun/wearing a seatbelt not how I can access these things. He said that carrying doesn't stop a gun man up high which implied 'why carry at all?'. I responded because not all situations are unable to be helped. This goes hand in hand with the seatbelt because why wear something protective every time you get in the car if it won't save you every time? Because of the times it CAN help you.