We Know you Ride, But do you Shoot?

[Two50noob]

Re: We know you ride, but do you Shoot?

Apparently 1 in 4 Canadian homes have a firearm. I think the major difference between us an Americans is we don't have the bravado that comes with gun ownership they do. Most of us owners are pretty humble about ownership to outsiders, most of us use our guns for target practice or hunting (not protection as seems to be the reason why most of my American friends own a gun).

I think allot owners in the US and Canada are pretty humble and have their firearms for the same reasons personal enjoyment, hunting. Protection in the states only recently became a top reason their in recent years. I think it has allot more to do with their Toxic political landscape and their continued push into the far right.

That Bravado from my cold dead hands stuff isn't even a majority its just a very loud minority backed by a power full lobby group

 

[FiReSTaRT]

Re: We know you ride, but do you Shoot?

That's completely irrelevant.

It's highly relevant. Goes to prove that law-abiding gun owners are pacifists to the point of rejecting violence even when their lives are in danger.

You can't acknowledge the instances in which having a gun prevented a crime while ignoring the preposterous frequency in which guns are involved in crime in the US.

The frequency isn't all that crazy considering the socio-economic makeup of the country. What's causing the high homicide rate in the US is the great level of economic inequality and sheer number of people who don't see a future working honest jobs, so they turn to a life of violent crime. It happens in countries with much lower firearm ownership rates, but they find other means to kill each other. If you take about 10 countries in the same Gini index neighbourhood as the US, the mean homicide rate will be in the same ballpark as the homicide rate in the US,

I will acknowledge that in some cases a gun will have kept someone from being hurt/robbed/etc. I will also acknowledge that the ridiculous ease in which one can attain a gun (legally and illegally) in the US has a direct correlation to their per capita gun violence rates.

Lol well for every person killed, there were 300 people who defended themselves against a violent attack. I'd say those are pretty good numbers in favour of their high gun ownership rate.

You have to look at the totality of the gun culture down south. You also have to look at it like a religion. Trying to convince them that they don't need guns and guns won't help anything is like trying to convince someone they don't need God and God is only making things worse. It's a pseudo-religious ideology that can't be reason​ed with.

You have to look at their history. They were under the boot heel of British aristocracy. When they started asking for a bit of autonomy, the British cracked down on them and passed draconian gun laws. When they won their independence, they passed the 2nd amendment to make sure that no tyrannical government can disarm the populace ever again. That's the basis for the 2nd amendment and why they feel so strongly about it. An armed man is a citizen, an unarmed man is a subject, a disarmed man is a slave.

The stats are available for anyone to see. They've been posted over and over and over so I'm not going to bother posting any references again.

And you still can't see the facts despite all the available information out there.

 

[caboose56]

Re: We know you ride, but do you Shoot?

It's highly relevant. Goes to prove that law-abiding gun owners are pacifists to the point of rejecting violence even when their lives are in danger.

The frequency isn't all that crazy considering the socio-economic makeup of the country. What's causing the high homicide rate in the US is the great level of economic inequality and sheer number of people who don't see a future working honest jobs, so they turn to a life of violent crime. It happens in countries with much lower firearm ownership rates, but they find other means to kill each other. If you take about 10 countries in the same Gini index neighbourhood as the US, the mean homicide rate will be in the same ballpark as the homicide rate in the US,

Lol well for every person killed, there were 300 people who defended themselves against a violent attack. I'd say those are pretty good numbers in favour of their high gun ownership rate.

You have to look at their history. They were under the boot heel of British aristocracy. When they started asking for a bit of autonomy, the British cracked down on them and passed draconian gun laws. When they won their independence, they passed the 2nd amendment to make sure that no tyrannical government can disarm the populace ever again. That's the basis for the 2nd amendment and why they feel so strongly about it. An armed man is a citizen, an unarmed man is a subject, a disarmed man is a slave.

And you still can't see the facts despite all the available information out there.

I've seen that argument made before (re Gini index) but never any factual evidence to back it up. It seems like some people want to compare the USA to other 2nd and 3rd world countries when comparing crime rates and then say "see, the USA isn't so bad". I'll accept that the economic disparity in the USA could contribute to their crime levels. It's a reasonable theory but I don't think it's possible to find any statistics that can isolate just the economic factors while ignoring gun ownership.

Banning guns in the USA won't work. Confiscating guns won't work. Nothing that comes out of Washington will work.

I grow tired of the hypocrisy of Americans when it comes to guns. If you or they want to protect your right to bear arms that's all fine and dandy but in doing so you have to accept that shootings (like Columbine, Sandy Hook, San Bernadino, Virginia Tech, etc, etc, etc) are going to keep happening. You can't have one without the other, if you want your guns and ease of access to guns then they'll keep happening. Actions have consequences. If you as a normal law abiding citizen want easy access to guns that means the not-so-normal and mentally unstable citizens have easy access too.

What I'd like to see is the pro-gun crowd make the statement "Yes, I acknowledge that the shootings will continue and that is acceptable". It's not until Americans collectively want to stop being the "pathetic alcoholic cousin" of the civilized world that there will be any change. Americans will have to want to change.

Only then will we stop seeing this article on The Onion being posted every few weeks:
http://www.theonion.com/article/no-way-to-prevent-this-says-only-nation-where-this-36131

 

[Snobike Mike]

Re: We know you ride, but do you Shoot?

What I'd like to see is the pro-gun crowd make the statement "Yes, I acknowledge that the shootings will continue and that is acceptable".

Yes I accept that there is evil in the world and no matter how many laws you put in place the criminals won't follow them and as such, not matter what tool is used, and however unacceptable, murders will occur on a daily basis until the end of time. Sanctioning law abiding citizens is not the answer no matter how hard the libtards yell and screen about it.

 

[caboose56]

Re: We know you ride, but do you Shoot?

Yes I accept that there is evil in the world and no matter how many laws you put in place the criminals won't follow them and as such, not matter what tool is used, and however unacceptable, murders will occur on a daily basis until the end of time. Sanctioning law abiding citizens is not the answer no matter how hard the libtards yell and screen about it.

Oh you're so clever.

You've made your peace with mass shootings being a part of American gun culture.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[FiReSTaRT]

Re: We know you ride, but do you Shoot?

I've seen that argument made before (re Gini index) but never any factual evidence to back it up. It seems like some people want to compare the USA to other 2nd and 3rd world countries when comparing crime rates and then say "see, the USA isn't so bad". I'll accept that the economic disparity in the USA could contribute to their crime levels. It's a reasonable theory but I don't think it's possible to find any statistics that can isolate just the economic factors while ignoring gun ownership.

And I just gave you a good one but you chose to ignore it. The US isn't really a first world country. While they are technologically developed, their economic inequality puts them in the same neighbourhood as Nigeria, Uruguay, Ivory Coast, Tunisia, Sierra Leone.. You average out the homicide rates in those countries and you'll get to a higher number than the US homicide rate even though their gun ownership rates are a lot lower. I wouldn't like the idea of visiting any of those countries without some protection.

Banning guns in the USA won't work. Confiscating guns won't work. Nothing that comes out of Washington will work.

Well duh... They wrote their constitution so neither tyrants nor well-meaning idiots will be able to disarm the populace.

I grow tired of the hypocrisy of Americans when it comes to guns. If you or they want to protect your right to bear arms that's all fine and dandy but in doing so you have to accept that shootings (like Columbine, Sandy Hook, San Bernadino, Virginia Tech, etc, etc, etc) are going to keep happening. You can't have one without the other, if you want your guns and ease of access to guns then they'll keep happening. Actions have consequences. If you as a normal law abiding citizen want easy access to guns that means the not-so-normal and mentally unstable citizens have easy access too.

Even if I were to accept this bit of tripe that you posted (and don't forget that those killings happened in gun-free zones where there weren't any law abiding citizens with the right tools to stop the attacks), statistics are quite clear. Gun ownership still saves a lot more lives than those mass killings take. The other issue I have with your argument is that your types claim that the world was a peaceful, hippie, utopia before guns came along. Even during the age of the gun, the worst terrorist attacks on US soil were committed by using other tools. Where there is a will, there is a way.

What I'd like to see is the pro-gun crowd make the statement "Yes, I acknowledge that the shootings will continue and that is acceptable". It's not until Americans collectively want to stop being the "pathetic alcoholic cousin" of the civilized world that there will be any change. Americans will have to want to change.

I will say that precisely because they are the "pathetic alcoholic cousin" of the civilized world. With their high GDP per capita they still have the same level of inequality as a bunch of third-word African nations and South American banana republics. Until they fix that problem, they will deal with a similar level of violence. For now, guns are a tool for law-abiding citizens to defend themselves from violence. If we were talking about seat belts you'd be raising hell about those who drowned or died in fires because they were trapped in the car, while ignoring many more people whose lives were saved by seat belt use.

 

[caboose56]

Re: We know you ride, but do you Shoot?

And I just gave you a good one but you chose to ignore it. The US isn't really a first world country. While they are technologically developed, their economic inequality puts them in the same neighbourhood as Nigeria, Uruguay, Ivory Coast, Tunisia, Sierra Leone.. You average out the homicide rates in those countries and you'll get to a higher number than the US homicide rate even though their gun ownership rates are a lot lower. I wouldn't like the idea of visiting any of those countries without some protection.



Well duh... They wrote their constitution so neither tyrants nor well-meaning idiots will be able to disarm the populace.



Even if I were to accept this bit of tripe that you posted (and don't forget that those killings happened in gun-free zones where there weren't any law abiding citizens with the right tools to stop the attacks), statistics are quite clear. Gun ownership still saves a lot more lives than those mass killings take. The other issue I have with your argument is that your types claim that the world was a peaceful, hippie, utopia before guns came along. Even during the age of the gun, the worst terrorist attacks on US soil were committed by using other tools. Where there is a will, there is a way.



I will say that precisely because they are the "pathetic alcoholic cousin" of the civilized world. With their high GDP per capita they still have the same level of inequality as a bunch of third-word African nations and South American banana republics. Until they fix that problem, they will deal with a similar level of violence. For now, guns are a tool for law-abiding citizens to defend themselves from violence. If we were talking about seat belts you'd be raising hell about those who drowned or died in fires because they were trapped in the car, while ignoring many more people whose lives were saved by seat belt use.

You threw out some numbers without any references to substantiate your claim. Show us the source data for your claim that guns save more lives than they take.

I also never made any claim about the world being any type of utopia before or without guns. Are you going to start calling me names to win the argument?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[Two50noob]

Re: We know you ride, but do you Shoot?

What I'd like to see is the pro-gun crowd make the statement "Yes, I acknowledge that the shootings will continue and that is acceptable". It's not until Americans collectively want to stop being the "pathetic alcoholic cousin" of the civilized world that there will be any change. Americans will have to want to change.

Wanting someone to say that murder is acceptable seems to be your projecting your own perception idea that pro-gun folks and dangerous. I don't consider myself pro-gun anymore than i am pro hammer. I'm a gun owner. Its not an acceptable situation. but what I will say is this.

Giving Citizens access to firearms will inevitably lead to some accidental deaths and some murders with said legal firearms background checks and licensing checks will not prevent this but reasonable restriction on who can own a firearm will only prevent those with the most obvious issues from obtaining them. Criminals will always be able to obtain them and quite frankly the police forces in this country have been asleep at the wheel on this. The RCMP spends more time and money on trying to police licensed gun owners in ways that don't actively contribute a net increase in safety than actually going after the majority of the people responsible for gun crime the only reason i can assume this is because real police work is too hard. Not to mention their increasing demands for surveillance.

That said in a society that allows a population hold firearms there is a number of things that can be done to prevent the amount of misuse Strong social welfare programs, education actively trying to discourage the spread of hate speech, better access to healthcare and IMO a reduction of political partisanship and better police enforcement of the flow of illegal guns. A focus on reform over punishment in criminal matters would also help to see an overall net reduction in violent crime

Its not so much the amount of guns or the types of guns in the states thats the problem as they cant be the cause of the issue, easy almost unfettered access across the states is defiantly a major contributing factor tho (however at this point it might be to late to do much) the shootings in the states and a sign of sick society and one that seems to be getting worse.

 

[FiReSTaRT]

Re: We know you ride, but do you Shoot?

You threw out some numbers without any references to substantiate your claim. Show us the source data for your claim that guns save more lives than they take.

Gini indexes can be easily looked up, so you can take a look at who's in the ballpark of 41 (which is the value of the US index of economic inequality). As for the defensive gun use, there are basically two sources:
Constitutionalists use Kleck and Gertz which estimate between 1,000,000 and 2,500,000 (the high figure is estimated based on 850,000-1,000,000 reported uses on an annual basis and then they assumed that at least as many go unreported)
Gun-grabbers use the NCVS, with 100,000 reported defensive gun uses

In an earlier post, I explained the main difference between the NCVS figures and the Kleck/Getz figures - NCVS figure of 100,000 defensive gun uses only covers the cases where the assailant was wounded or killed, while Kleck/Getz also included cases where the prospective victim took out the gun and convinced the criminal to find another victim either verbally or with a warning shot, without causing any injuries.

 

[caboose56]

Gini indexes can be easily looked up, so you can take a look at who's in the ballpark of 41 (which is the value of the US index of economic inequality). As for the defensive gun use, there are basically two sources:
Constitutionalists use Kleck and Gertz which estimate between 1,000,000 and 2,500,000 (the high figure is estimated based on 850,000-1,000,000 reported uses on an annual basis and then they assumed that at least as many go unreported)
Gun-grabbers use the NCVS, with 100,000 reported defensive gun uses

In an earlier post, I explained the main difference between the NCVS figures and the Kleck/Getz figures - NCVS figure of 100,000 defensive gun uses only covers the cases where the assailant was wounded or killed, while Kleck/Getz also included cases where the prospective victim took out the gun and convinced the criminal to find another victim either verbally or with a warning shot, without causing any injuries.

It didn't take me long to see that for every supporter of the Kleck & Getz research paper there is also a critic.

https://stat.duke.edu/~dalene/chance/chanceweb/103.myth0.pdf

Their numbers are just as valid (or invalid) as the NCVS study.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[mmmnaked]

Re: We know you ride, but do you Shoot?

100,000 isn't enough?

 

[mmmnaked]

Re: We know you ride, but do you Shoot?

Address the cause of violence?

Nah, too much work. Be PC, blame guns.

 

[mmmnaked]

Re: We know you ride, but do you Shoot?

And the reason why quoting "USA gun violence" stats is retarded...

I see a number of nice places on that map that a large population of Canadians would be safer moving to.

 

[Snobike Mike]

Re: We know you ride, but do you Shoot?

Oh you're so clever.

You've made your peace with mass shootings being a part of American gun culture.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Nice grave dancing to push your agenda.

 

[caboose56]

Re: We know you ride, but do you Shoot?

I have an agenda?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[mmmnaked]

Re: We know you ride, but do you Shoot?

Not your agenda but definitely the skewed agenda of the American left. Millionaire presidential hopefuls posturing about guns while poverty defines their culture and levels of violence. They don't HAVE a gun problem, they have a poor young minorities problem. But that **** is hard to address and nobody REALLY cares... Those with means simply move to better parts of town. Think the rich white folks in Chicago North give a damn about 'black lives' in the violent southern area of the city? That's why they misdirect attention to the 'gun problem'.. Its easy to talk about and completely unfixable.

 

[Two50noob]

Re: We know you ride, but do you Shoot?

Not your agenda but definitely the skewed agenda of the American left. Millionaire presidential hopefuls posturing about guns while poverty defines their culture and levels of violence. They don't HAVE a gun problem, they have a poor young minorities problem. But that **** is hard to address and nobody REALLY cares... Those with means simply move to better parts of town. Think the rich white folks in Chicago North give a damn about 'black lives' in the violent southern area of the city? That's why they misdirect attention to the 'gun problem'.. Its easy to talk about and completely unfixable.

While the gun crime (violent crime in general) is defiantly directly related to poverty and other socioeconomic factors that make up the majority of day to day gun crime. Mass shootings are a more likely to be committed by white males.

But in a sense you are correct that fixing social issues would have the best effect on violent crime. its not unfixable at all violent crime even in the states is on a whole trending down. We live currently by all measurable standard in the most peaceful time relative to global population.

 

[mmmnaked]

Re: We know you ride, but do you Shoot?

While the gun crime (violent crime in general) is defiantly directly related to poverty and other socioeconomic factors that make up the majority of day to day gun crime. Mass shootings are a more likely to be committed by white males.

But in a sense you are correct that fixing social issues would have the best effect on violent crime. its not unfixable at all violent crime even in the states is on a whole trending down. We live currently by all measurable standard in the most peaceful time relative to global population.

Mass shooting (REAL mass shootings, not Hillary ones) are a drop in the bucket of the 10-15,000 homicides every year down there. They make the news because it sells ads, otherwise its statistically insignificant.

 

[Snobike Mike]

Re: We know you ride, but do you Shoot?

While the gun crime (violent crime in general) is defiantly directly related to poverty and other socioeconomic factors that make up the majority of day to day gun crime. Mass shootings are a more likely to be committed by white males.

Not in San Bernardino they weren't..............

 

[Macs]

Re: We know you ride, but do you Shoot?

*sigh* I just wanted to talk about my new .357 mag and whether or not to use my Model 94 as a truck gun

I guess I'll come back later

Apparently 1 in 4 Canadian homes have a firearm. I think the major difference between us an Americans is we don't have the bravado that comes with gun ownership they do. Most of us owners are pretty humble about ownership to outsiders, most of us use our guns for target practice or hunting (not protection as seems to be the reason why most of my American friends own a gun).

I agree with this. Guns are fun. I have no criminal record and I am mentally stable. I think I should be able to have safe, legal fun with my guns and be left alone.