Democrats revealing the Assault Weapons Ban today.

[myp]

Almost everyone knows this magazine count nonsense wont change reality nor will politically driven studies, it's gonna take a look in the mirror. And this nation seems to be unable to do that.

Everyone does not know that and does not accept that. Nor should you without the appropriate facts- and those facts will surface more easily when you have controlled studies and statistical analysis of the data in scientific studies.

Also, and I repeat myself, Federal funding does not mean the studies are politically driven...

 

[clax]

Myp.....the fact that many observers are calling for 'scientific studies' is a political hurdle....that the citizenry must consider an obstacle if it is to get to the bottom of these issues. Almost everyone knows this magazine count nonsense wont change reality nor will politically driven studies, it's gonna take a look in the mirror. And this nation seems to be unable to do that.

You are 100% correct, it isn't how many bullets in a magazine that makes a person kill others, it even isn't the law that forbids you and I to have such magazines. It is a far deeper problem, that is very complex.

What it comes down to is the denial of our general violent nature as Americans. Not all of us but certainly many of our people are in a violent subculture.

Its ugly, and unpleasant and to fix such problems, which are absolutely fixable, out requires us to get our hands dirty, and to look into the subcultures that are violent, find out why and correct it.

Any gun ban is simply politicians tossing table scraps at the loudest voices and the most uneducated.

I have first hand experience with the subcultures I am referring to. I tried to be an activists for the betterment of such people. But many are uneducated and fear outsiders. Of I could get some more folks with no motivation (other than bettering the conditions) perhaps I could get some thing done. But most folks want to look away and pretend a gun ban fixes everything.

 

[clax]

And what was Sandy Hook done with? And even your point here might be greater regulation is needed for handguns, I don't know- the data available is still very incomplete hence why I think we need more studies.

Sandy hook was an isolated indent, 27 victims of one shooter is a statistical zero.

More people are killed in one day by people not using AR 15s

Sandy hook is the exception.

 

[clax]

And what was Sandy Hook done with? And even your point here might be greater regulation is needed for handguns, I don't know- the data available is still very incomplete hence why I think we need more studies.

Out of the 16000 homicides from last year what makes the 26 in Connecticut so special?

I don't really get your response

 

[misterveritis]

Human Nature and Wisdom

Proof? Or is it just more intuitive know-it-allism?

And regardless of what you say, when you see all these drugs, etc. that had some foundation in basic research funded by Federal dollars, it becomes quite clear that that research does seem to do good. Again, attack the methodology if it is bad, not the funders.

It is human nature to fund the things you believe will strengthen your argument. No one gets a hundred million dollar grant to prove there is nothing to see here.

Way more good would come from government taking fewer dollars out of the private sector to fund its pet projects. Federal dollars always come with federal strings.

 

[misterveritis]

Why not be all three?

Much rather be uncertain than ignorant. I don't find it all that miserable anyway.

You can be all three.

You get to choose for you. I get to choose for me. When you choose a path of uncertainty, ignorance and misery for you I may be surprised but it is your choice to make.

I prefer the path that leads to wisdom. It is not an easy path but it is a rewarding one.

 

[misterveritis]

Assault Hammers?

Exactly. The bulk of gun crimes and suicides with a handgun. No study is needed, and we have many Universities currently engaged in such studies.

The problem isn't scientific as much as an issue of national morality

On a radio show this morning a guest made the claim that more people were killed with assault hammers last year than with "military-style assault rifles". Maybe we need sensible assault hammer control. You know, a national hammer registry, stronger background checks for people who want to buy a hammer, the threat of incremental hammer bans and confiscations (especially for the "military-style assault hammers").

 

[misterveritis]

Out of the 16000 homicides from last year what makes the 26 in Connecticut so special?

I don't really get your response

They were cute white kinds in a liberal neighborhood.

 

[misterveritis]

Maybe we should do absolutely nothing.
Crime rates and murder rates are declining.

The US is Europe now. We will collapse. It is just a matter of timing at this point. The coming economic collapse and the wars that may follow are far more important issues than chatting with gun grabbers.

When they come just shoot them.

Now back to the issues that matter.

 

[clax]

Maybe we should do absolutely nothing.
Crime rates and murder rates are declining.

The US is Europe now. We will collapse. It is just a matter of timing at this point. The coming economic collapse and the wars that may follow are far more important issues than chatting with gun grabbers.

When they come just shoot them.

Now back to the issues that matter.

But, you see in the stewed minds of some people this president can do no wrong. It seems like the press is the towns folk in the story of the emperor and his new clothes, the traitor and chief is the emperor, just who might the Taylor be?

 

[myp]

It is human nature to fund the things you believe will strengthen your argument. No one gets a hundred million dollar grant to prove there is nothing to see here.

Scientists don't go into experiments with goal of fudging data to their preference... When they do, they basically ruin their reputation and are done for good. Also, this doesn't make sense considering what if you don't have a position.

 

[myp]

You get to choose for you. I get to choose for me. When you choose a path of uncertainty, ignorance and misery for you I may be surprised but it is your choice to make.

If you want the truth, that uncertainty is what it often is. You don't jump to conclusions. And it isn't miserable if you don't have a problem with uncertainty. In fact, it can be quite enlightening instead of having your head stuck in a little bubble you made to protect yourself in which you don't look at any newly emerged facts, you don't think critically, and pretend you know how everything works intuitively.

 

[Stonewall]

And what was Sandy Hook done with? And even your point here might be greater regulation is needed for handguns, I don't know- the data available is still very incomplete hence why I think we need more studies.

The data available is total and complete and repetitive. You aren't addressing social issues and therefore, I don't think able to understand the actual problems.

 

[Stonewall]

Also, and I repeat myself, Federal funding does not mean the studies are politically driven...

No one ever said that, you're in denial that federal studies can be political, that much is wholesale obvious.

 

[Stonewall]

Out of the 16000 homicides from last year what makes the 26 in Connecticut so special?

I don't really get your response

This is exactly what I addressed earlier. Why is it with tens of thousands of gun deaths each year.....many hundreds of them children......and yet when Newton Conn occurs we suddenly need a federal study, money thrown at the problem, and new gun laws?

Poppycock.

 

[tecoyah]

This is exactly what I addressed earlier. Why is it with tens of thousands of gun deaths each year.....many hundreds of them children......and yet when Newton Conn occurs we suddenly need a federal study, money thrown at the problem, and new gun laws?

Poppycock.

Likely...because emotions were stirred, horror instilled, and the American people decided they had had too much.

 

[misterveritis]

The Golden Rule.

Scientists don't go into experiments with goal of fudging data to their preference... When they do, they basically ruin their reputation and are done for good. Also, this doesn't make sense considering what if you don't have a position.

Scientists do not get funded by the regulatory agencies unless they are going to study and issue reports the government wants. Can you imagine BATF spending a few tens of missions of dollars to study the defensive use of arms by citizens?

No. But you can imagine a study of gun violence.

If you choose not to understand this fundamental Golden Rule (He who has the gold makes the rules) you will not understand anything.

 

[Stonewall]

Likely...because emotions were stirred, horror instilled, and the American people decided they had had too much.

Oh, so emotions weren't stirred nor was horror instilled at what everyone knew was going on in inner city America for decades? interesting.

 

[tecoyah]

Oh, so emotions weren't stirred nor was horror instilled at what everyone knew was going on in inner city America for decades? interesting.

I find it likely many were horrified and emotional on an individual basis...I did not state otherwise. However, it seems this incident has reached a national level of emotion...as stated.

 

[clax]

Oh, so emotions weren't stirred nor was horror instilled at what everyone knew was going on in inner city America for decades? interesting.

Emotions are never a valid reason to strip rights away.

To me a far greater tragedy is the loss of the rights of three hundred million people due to media caterwalling.

We shouldn't fear guns, if they call them assault weapons or ultra mega death weapons. But then again I don't allow wool to be pulled over my eyes