# So this guy from Chicago, shows up at a Florida Convenience store showing the clerk he has a gun.  Clerk shows robber his gun.  Yeah for 2nd amend.



## Mikeoxenormous (Sep 27, 2022)

Shotgun-wielding would-be robber claims ‘I’m from Chicago, bro,’ leaves as clerk displays gun
					

Rakim Stephen Tate allegedly walked into a Florida convenience store with a shotgun during an attempted robbery but walked out when a clerk displayed his own weapon, authorities said.




					nypost.com
				





The Marxists so hate people who are free to carry a weapon, just in case crap like this happens in your neighborhood.  I had said many time before, when there isnt anything left to loot in the inner cities, the savages will move on to places that still have stuff to steal.  Problem for those Marxists idiots when you move to a carry state, you might just meet your maker.  Luckily for the thug, he got away from the clerk, but not the police that are respected down here.


----------



## 2aguy (Sep 27, 2022)

Mikeoxenormous said:


> Shotgun-wielding would-be robber claims ‘I’m from Chicago, bro,’ leaves as clerk displays gun
> 
> 
> Rakim Stephen Tate allegedly walked into a Florida convenience store with a shotgun during an attempted robbery but walked out when a clerk displayed his own weapon, authorities said.
> ...



This is why the democrat party sent their shock troops, blm and antifa into black neighborhoods in democrat party controlled cities.......they know that the democrat party gun control laws keep those neighborhoods unarmed, except for the criminals.   They don't send blm and antifa to burn, loot and kill in the suburbs because those people have guns.

The modern gun control laws started in New York when the democrats enacted them to protect the gangs working for the democrat party......

The strange birth of NY’s gun laws

Problem was the gangs worked for Tammany. The Democratic machine used them as_shtarkers_ (sluggers), enforcing discipline at the polls and intimidating the opposition. Gang leaders like Monk Eastman were even employed as informal “sheriffs,” keeping their turf under Tammany control.

The Tammany Tiger needed to rein in the gangs without completely crippling them. Enter Big Tim with the perfect solution: Ostensibly disarm the gangs — and ordinary citizens, too — while still keeping them on the streets.

In fact, he gave the game away during the debate on the bill, which flew through Albany: “I want to make it so the young thugs in my district will get three years for carrying dangerous weapons instead of getting a sentence in the electric chair a year from now.”

*Sullivan knew the gangs would flout the law, but appearances were more important than results. *Young toughs took to sewing the pockets of their coats shut, so that cops couldn’t plant firearms on them, and many gangsters stashed their weapons inside their girlfriends’ “bird cages” — wire-mesh fashion contraptions around which women would wind their hair.

----Ordinary citizens, on the other hand, were disarmed, which solved another problem: *Gangsters had been bitterly complaining to Tammany that their victims sometimes shot back at them.*

So gang violence didn’t drop under the Sullivan Act — and really took off after the passage of Prohibition in 1920. Spectacular gangland rubouts — like the 1932 machine-gunning of “Mad Dog” Coll in a drugstore phone booth on 23rd Street — became the norm.


----------



## Canon Shooter (Sep 27, 2022)

Shocking...


----------



## Likkmee (Sep 27, 2022)

Canon Shooter said:


> Shocking...


Yo muffa. Gimme a cotton of Noopote and a six of 45z


----------



## JoeB131 (Sep 27, 2022)

Mikeoxenormous said:


> The Marxists so hate people who are free to carry a weapon, just in case crap like this happens in your neighborhood. I had said many time before, when there isnt anything left to loot in the inner cities, the savages will move on to places that still have stuff to steal. Problem for those Marxists idiots when you move to a carry state, you might just meet your maker. Luckily for the thug, he got away from the clerk, but not the police that are respected down here.



Or we recognize a gun in the home is 43 times more likely to kill a household member than a criminal...


----------



## Canon Shooter (Sep 27, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Or we recognize a gun in the home is 43 times more likely to kill a household member than a criminal...



And every gun owner must assess his comfort level with that risk.

I'm alive today because I carry a gun. I will never, ever _not _have a gun.

Ever...


----------



## 1srelluc (Sep 27, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Or we recognize a gun in the home is 43 times more likely to kill a household member than a criminal...


Then don't own one if you're skeered someone in your household will use it to pop you in your sleep.


----------



## Hollie (Sep 27, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Or we recognize a gun in the home is 43 times more likely to kill a household member than a criminal...


Or we recognize that leftist policies embolden and encourage criminals. You may choose to pray at the altar of social justice by being a willingly accomplice to crime and choosing to be your own worst enemy. 

Others. Not so much.


----------



## westwall (Sep 27, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Or we recognize a gun in the home is 43 times more likely to kill a household member than a criminal...





Which is lie.  Proven a lie decades ago, yet little liar you trots it out like the good parrot.

DURRRRRR


----------



## Peace (Sep 27, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Or we recognize a gun in the home is 43 times more likely to kill a household member than a criminal...


Yeah, and yet I am more likely to be killed by a distracted driver than by a gun.


----------



## Mikeoxenormous (Sep 27, 2022)

1srelluc said:


> Then don't own one if you're skeered someone in your household will use it to pop you in your sleep.


He should be more worried that his other half might wake his Johnson off, now that Lorena Bobbit started a trend.


Lorena Bobbitt is best known for infamously* cutting off her husband John Wayne Bobbitt ‘s penis* in 1993 before fleeing the scene and throwing his mutilated organ into a field. The incident made global headlines and has been extensively covered in several documentaries and made-for-TV movies.
*Lorena Bobbit Update: Where is She* Now 2020? | Heavy.com​








heavy.com/entertainment/2020/05/lorena-bobbitt-update-today-now/


----------



## Likkmee (Sep 27, 2022)

Canon Shooter said:


> And every gun owner must assess his comfort level with that risk.
> 
> I'm alive today because I carry a gun. I will never, ever _not _have a gun.
> 
> Ever...


I wear a security six stainless in da shower


----------



## TheParser (Sep 27, 2022)

Mikeoxenormous said:


> I had said many time before, when there isnt anything left to loot in the inner cities, the savages will move on to places that still have stuff to steal.


That is the crux of today's problem.

Before the Civil Rights laws of the 1960s, the young gentlemen would limit their crime careers to their own neighborhoods.

Today, however, they are emboldened to enter the nice areas of every city to commit mayhem. 

They know that progressive politicians and prosecutors will not stop them. 

That is why a lot of ordinary folks feel that they need to carry a firearm.


----------



## Blues Man (Sep 27, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Or we recognize a gun in the home is 43 times more likely to kill a household member than a criminal...


43 times zero is what?


----------



## 1srelluc (Sep 27, 2022)

Likkmee said:


> I wear a security six stainless in da shower


Got ya beat.


----------



## Silent Warrior (Sep 27, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Or we recognize a gun in the home is 43 times more likely to kill a household member than a criminal...


Then don't have them in your home, but stop trying to force your opinions on everyone else.


----------



## Mikeoxenormous (Sep 27, 2022)

Silent Warrior said:


> Then don't have them in your home, but stop trying to force your opinions on everyone else.


Joe is a pussy, he used to live in upper Shitcago, until the rabid savages started showing up in his hood.  Then like a good white racist he upped and left....


----------



## Anathema (Sep 27, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Or we recognize a gun in the home is 43 times more likely to kill a household member than a criminal...


I don’t like most of my family members enough for that to bother me… even if it was a real stat (which it isn’t).


----------



## 2aguy (Sep 27, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Or we recognize a gun in the home is 43 times more likely to kill a household member than a criminal...




And that is a lie, you know it is a lie.  The guy who actually did the research and came up with that number retracted it and did the study over....you lying asshat.....

Kellerman who did the study that came up with the 43 times more likely myth, was forced to retract that study and to do the research over when other academics pointed out how flawed his methods were....he then changed the 43 times number to 2.7, but he was still using flawed data to get even that number.....

*Below is the study where he changed the number from 43 to 2.7 and below that is the explanation as to why that number isn't even accurate.*

http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJM199310073291506

*After controlling for these characteristics, we found that keeping a gun in the home was strongly and independently associated with an increased risk of homicide (adjusted odds ratio, 2.7;*

------------

https://crimeresearch.org/wp-conten...ack-of-Public-Health-Research-on-Firearms.pdf

3. The Incredibly Flawed Public Health Research Guns in the Home At a town hall at George Mason University in January 2016, President Obama said, “If you look at the statistics, there's no doubt that there are times where somebody who has a weapon has been able to protect themselves and scare off an intruder or an assailant, but what is more often the case is that they may not have been able to protect themselves, but they end up being the victim of the weapon that they purchased themselves.”25 The primary proponents of this claim are Arthur Kellermann and his many coauthors. A gun, they have argued, is less likely to be used in killing a criminal than it is to be used in killing someone the gun owner knows. In one of the most well-known public health studies on firearms, Kellermann’s “case sample” consists of 444 homicides that occurred in homes. His control group had 388 individuals who lived near the deceased victims and were of the same sex, race, and age range. After learning about the homicide victims and control subjects—whether they owned a gun, had a drug or alcohol problem, etc.—these authors attempted to see if the probability of a homicide correlated with gun ownership. Amazingly these studies assume that if someone died from a gun shot, and a gun was owned in the home, that it was the gun in the home that killed that person. The paper is clearly misleading, as it fails to report that in only 8 of these 444 homicide cases was the gun that had been kept in the home the murder weapon.Moreover, the number of criminals stopped with a gun is much higher than the number killed in defensive gun uses. In fact, the attacker is killed in fewer than 1 out of every 1,000 defensive gun uses. Fix either of these data errors and the results are reversed. To demonstrate, suppose that we use the same statistical method—with a matching control group—to do a study on the efficacy of hospital care. Assume that we collect data just as these authors did, compiling a list of all the people who died in a particular county over the period of a year. Then we ask their relatives whether they had been admitted to the hospital during the previous year. We also put together a control sample consisting of neighbors who are part of the same sex, race, and age group. Then we ask these men and women whether they have been in a hospital during the past year. My bet is that those who spent time in hospitals are much more likely to have died.


Nine Myths Of Gun Control

Myth #6 "A homeowner is 43 times as likely to be killed or kill a family member as an intruder"

To suggest that science has proven that defending oneself or one's family with a gun is dangerous, gun prohibitionists repeat Dr. Kellermann's long discredited claim: "a gun owner is 43 times more likely to kill a family member than an intruder." [17] This fallacy , fabricated using tax dollars, is one of the most misused slogans of the anti-self-defense lobby.

The honest measure of the protective benefits of guns are the lives saved, the injuries prevented, the medical costs saved, and the property protected not Kellermann's burglar or rapist body count.

Only 0.1% (1 in a thousand) of the defensive uses of guns results in the death of the predator. [3]

Any study, such as Kellermann' "43 times" fallacy, that only counts bodies will expectedly underestimate the benefits of gun a thousand fold.

Think for a minute. Would anyone suggest that the only measure of the benefit of law enforcement is the number of people killed by police? Of course not. The honest measure of the benefits of guns are the lives saved, the injuries prevented, the medical costs saved by deaths and injuries averted, and the property protected. 65 lives protected by guns for every life lost to a gun. [2]

*Kellermann recently downgraded his estimate to "2.7 times," [18] but he persisted in discredited methodology. He used a method that cannot distinguish between "cause" and "effect." His method would be like finding more diet drinks in the refrigerators of fat people and then concluding that diet drinks "cause" obesity.*


Also, he studied groups with high rates of violent criminality, alcoholism, drug addiction, abject poverty, and domestic abuse .


From such a poor and violent study group he attempted to generalize his findings to normal homes

*Interestingly, when Dr. Kellermann was interviewed he stated that, if his wife were attacked, he would want her to have a gun for protection.[19] Apparently, Dr. Kellermann doesn't even believe his own studies.


-----
*

Public Health and Gun Control: A Review



Since at least the mid-1980s, Dr. Kellermann (and associates), whose work had been heavily-funded by the CDC, published a series of studies purporting to show that persons who keep guns in the home are more likely to be victims of homicide than those who don¹t.

In a 1986 NEJM paper, Dr. Kellermann and associates, for example, claimed their "scientific research" proved that defending oneself or one¹s family with a firearm in the home is dangerous and counter productive, claiming* "a gun owner is 43 times more likely to kill a family member than an intruder."8

In a critical review and now classic article published in the March 1994 issue of the Journal of the Medical Association of Georgia (JMAG), Dr. Edgar Suter, Chairman of Doctors for Integrity in Policy Research (DIPR), found evidence of "methodologic and conceptual errors," such as prejudicially truncated data and the listing of "the correct methodology which was described but never used by the authors."5 *

Moreover, the gun control researchers failed to consider and underestimated the protective benefits of guns.

Dr. Suter writes: "The true measure of the protective benefits of guns are the lives and medical costs saved, the injuries prevented, and the property protected ‹ not the burglar or rapist body count.

Since only 0.1 - 0.2 percent of defensive uses of guns involve the death of the criminal, any study, such as this, that counts criminal deaths as the only measure of the protective benefits of guns will expectedly underestimate the benefits of firearms by a factor of 500 to 1,000."5

In 1993, in his landmark and much cited NEJM article (and the research, again, heavily funded by the CDC), Dr. Kellermann attempted to show again that guns in the home are a greater risk to the victims than to the assailants.4 Despite valid criticisms by reputable scholars of his previous works (including the 1986 study), Dr. Kellermann ignored the criticisms and again used the same methodology.

*He also used study populations with disproportionately high rates of serious psychosocial dysfunction from three selected state counties, known to be unrepresentative of the general U.S. population.

For example, 

53 percent of the case subjects had a history of a household member being arrested, 

31 percent had a household history of illicit drug use, 32 percent had a household member hit or hurt in a family fight, and 

17 percent had a family member hurt so seriously in a domestic altercation that prompt medical attention was required. 
Moreover, both the case studies and control groups in this analysis had a very high incidence of financial instability.*

In fact, in this study, gun ownership, the supposedly high risk factor for homicide was not one of the most strongly associated factors for being murdered.

*Drinking, illicit drugs, living alone, history of family violence, living in a rented home were all greater individual risk factors for being murdered than a gun in the home. One must conclude there is no basis to apply the conclusions of this study to the general population.*

All of these are factors that, as Dr. Suter pointed out, "would expectedly be associated with higher rates of violence and homicide."5

*It goes without saying, the results of such a study on gun homicides, selecting this sort of unrepresentative population sample, nullify the authors' generalizations, and their preordained, conclusions can not be extrapolated to the general population.*

Moreover, although the 1993 New England Journal of Medicine study purported to show that the homicide victims were killed with a gun ordinarily kept in the home, the fact is that as Kates and associates point out 71.1 percent of the victims were killed by assailants who did not live in the victims¹ household using guns presumably not kept in that home.6
======

Read more: CDC’s Antigun Agenda On Display: So-Called Experts Abuse Our Trust
Under Creative Commons License: Attribution
Follow us: @Ammoland on Twitter | Ammoland on Facebook

In 1993,Dr. Kellermann, who was funded in 1991 by a CDC grant, had to soften the ’43 times’ number to ‘2.7 times.’ He concluded, “Rather than confer protection, guns kept in the home are associated with an increase in the risk of homicide by a family member or intimate acquaintance.” Kellerman thought the 2.7 number would not sound quite so impossible.
These papers, and many others from the medical community, were criticized by researchers who statistically showed that Kellermann’s conclusions were wildly wrong. Kellermann used a technique that depended on matching subjects and controls, except that the subject and control groups did not match. The subject group lived a very high-risk, alcohol and drug-filled lifestyle, while the controls did not.
Kellermann had singled out people who exist at the edges of society. Kellermann did not study normal gun owners, just criminals who had guns, but he exaggerated his findings.


> Because of this confusion, Kellerman helped change American gun politics by injecting unwarranted fear into the gun debate. Too many journalists just read the conclusion of a “scientific” paper, and skip over the rest as too complex for them.


Despite these serious methodological problems, Kellermann’s results are still widely accepted in the public health field.​Public-health advocates appear willing to run with any published study, regardless of how weak its methods, just so long as the findings are congenial to their assumption that guns are dangerous.
Then, in 1996, after Congress requested Kellermann’s original data, which he failed to release, Congress cut funding to the CDC for advocacy research. No funding was cut for medical research, just advocacy research.

CDC’s Antigun Agenda On Display: So-Called Experts Abuse Our Trust


----------



## JoeB131 (Sep 27, 2022)

Holy Shit, you trot out the Kellerman Study, and they all go fucking nuts. 



1srelluc said:


> Then don't own one if you're skeered someone in your household will use it to pop you in your sleep.



No, I'm scared one might shoot up a theater or a shopping mall or a parade because we let crazy people buy guns. 



Hollie said:


> Or we recognize that leftist policies embolden and encourage criminals. You may choose to pray at the altar of social justice by being a willingly accomplice to crime and choosing to be your own worst enemy.



Europe is further to the left than we are and they have NOWHERE near our crime levels.  



westwall said:


> Which is lie. Proven a lie decades ago, yet little liar you trots it out like the good parrot.


Hey, here's how you prove it's a lie.  Actually do the study over again, and see if you come up with a different result.  

You won't.  Kellerman repeated the study in several cities and came up with the same result. 



Peace said:


> Yeah, and yet I am more likely to be killed by a distracted driver than by a gun.



Okay, but here's the thing.  Distracted driving is against the law.  Cops see you with a Cell phone, they'll give you a ticket. 



Silent Warrior said:


> Then don't have them in your home, but stop trying to force your opinions on everyone else.



Funny, you guys don't feel the same way about abortion, gay marriage, drugs...  



Anathema said:


> I don’t like most of my family members enough for that to bother me… even if it was a real stat (which it isn’t).


Why am I not surprised.


----------



## Peace (Sep 27, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Holy Shit, you trot out the Kellerman Study, and they all go fucking nuts.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


And yet the driver doesn’t care.


----------



## JoeB131 (Sep 27, 2022)

2aguy said:


> And that is a lie, you know it is a lie. The guy who actually did the research and came up with that number retracted it and did the study over....you lying asshat.....



You can spooge that all day, but the fact is, guns in the home are more likely to kill someone in the household. 

The problem is you keep trying to pretend we shouldn't count the suicides.


----------



## Anathema (Sep 27, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Why am I not surprised


Why would you be surprised? My guns are useful and don’t drain my resources unnecessarily. The same can’t be said for most of the relatives who live near me.,


----------



## Hollie (Sep 27, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Holy Shit, you trot out the Kellerman Study, and they all go fucking nuts.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Nowhere in Europe is there a government with a Second Amendment. Socialist Europe is far more authoritarian / leftist than the US so you're making nonsensical comparisons.


----------



## JoeB131 (Sep 27, 2022)

Hollie said:


> Nowhere in Europe is there a government with a Second Amendment.



Exactly, they would never do anything that fucking stupid as to word a militia amendment in a way to let every idiot who wants a gun have a gun.  



Hollie said:


> Socialist Europe is far more authoritarian / leftist than the US so you're making nonsensical comparisons.



Is it?  How many people do we have in prison compared to any European Country.
How many Americans are shot dead by their own police compared to European countries?


----------



## themirrorthief (Sep 27, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Or we recognize a gun in the home is 43 times more likely to kill a household member than a criminal...


solution abort your kids so they cant grow up and shoot you...see this democrat logic is working on me


----------



## themirrorthief (Sep 27, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Holy Shit, you trot out the Kellerman Study, and they all go fucking nuts.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


livng in a socialist nation is a crime


----------



## Hollie (Sep 27, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Exactly, they would never do anything that fucking stupid as to word a militia amendment in a way to let every idiot who wants a gun have a gun.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Um, not everyone here in the Great Satan who wants a gun gets a gun. You make these hysterical outbursts, outrageous claims that make no sense.

Perhaps you would prefer the Swedish model where bombings and hand grenade tossing are all the rage.


----------



## JoeB131 (Sep 28, 2022)

Hollie said:


> Um, not everyone here in the Great Satan who wants a gun gets a gun. You make these hysterical outbursts, outrageous claims that make no sense.



Really? Because it seems every time we have a mass shooting, we find out two things. 

1) Everyone in that person's life knew they were nuts.
2) They had absolutely no problem getting a gun.  

Now, I live in Illinois, which the Ammosexuals consistently whine has the "toughest gun laws in the country".  So I recently applied for a FOID card.  Which consisted of me pinky-swearing on line that I didn't have a criminal record or history of mental illness, and paying a whooping $11.00 processing fee. 

Compare that to when I applied for my latest mortgage or got my last job, where they DID do thorough background checks, even though I had gotten mortgages and jobs previously.   They still bothered to check everything and ask questions.  



Hollie said:


> Perhaps you would prefer the Swedish model where bombings and hand grenade tossing are all the rage.





			https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/full/10.1177/00258024211025228
		


Data, including all explosion-related deaths in Sweden from 2000 through 2018, were retrieved from the register of the National Board of Forensic Medicine. Among all 87 cases found, accidental deaths accounted for 62%, suicides for 21%, homicides for 7% and undetermined manner of death for the remaining 10% of cases. 

Wow, so they had a whooping 87 deaths between 2000 and 2018.  

Compared to the 43,000 deaths by gun we have in this country every year.


----------



## Hollie (Sep 28, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Really? Because it seems every time we have a mass shooting, we find out two things.
> 
> 1) Everyone in that person's life knew they were nuts.
> 2) They had absolutely no problem getting a gun.
> ...


So, yes. Your frantic claim that everyone who wants a gun gets a gun is just nonsense.









						Firearms Checks (NICS) | Federal Bureau of Investigation
					

The National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS) conducts background checks on people who want to own a firearm or explosive, as required by law.




					www.fbi.gov
				




"Since launching in 1998, more than 300 million checks have been done, leading to more than 1.5 million denials."



Odd. It appears that Sweden needs an _assault bomb_ ban. That should work well as obviously an _assault bomb_ ban would prevent those radical Swedish housewives from tearing up the city. 



			https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-50339977.amp
		


"Swedish police are dealing with unprecedented levels of attacks, targeting city centre locations too. The bomb squad was called to deal with 97 explosions in the first nine months of this year."











						Bombs and blood feuds: the wave of explosions rocking Sweden’s cities
					

Incidents involving explosives have risen to crisis levels in a country where the crime rate is low




					www.theguardian.com
				




According to data released this month by the Swedish National Council for Crime Prevention, there were 257 crimes involving explosives in the country last year, a 60% rise on 2018. Gangland shootings are also shockingly high, with 320 reported last year, 41 of them fatal. As recently as Tuesday, there were twin explosions in two apartment buildings in a Stockholm suburb. The last blast in Malmö was on 10 January.


----------



## M14 Shooter (Sep 28, 2022)

Hollie said:


> Um, not everyone here in the Great Satan who wants a gun gets a gun. You make these hysterical outbursts, outrageous claims that make no sense.


This is why the board includes an ignore function.


----------



## 2aguy (Sep 28, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> You can spooge that all day, but the fact is, guns in the home are more likely to kill someone in the household.
> 
> The problem is you keep trying to pretend we shouldn't count the suicides.




Yeah...no...if you aren't a criminal, an alcolholic, a drug user or domestic abuser, guns aren't a problem.........

600 million guns in the U.S.

Over 21.5 million AMericans can legally carry guns for self defense

average of about 10,000 gun murders a year when the democrats aren't destroying the local police and then releasing violent gun offenders over and over again, which they have been doing since 2015.....

70-80% of gun murder victims are not normal people...they are criminals, friends and family of criminals.......

We don't have a gun problem in the U.S.....we have a democrat party problem.....


----------



## 2aguy (Sep 28, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Really? Because it seems every time we have a mass shooting, we find out two things.
> 
> 1) Everyone in that person's life knew they were nuts.
> 2) They had absolutely no problem getting a gun.
> ...




They did a federal background check on you, you idiot.....it came back clean.   You guys wanted the Federal Background checks, you got them, so you now want more.........


----------



## Silent Warrior (Sep 28, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Now, I live in Illinois,


Good, now please stay there and don't pollute the rest of the country with your wacked out logic.  Your have been proven wrong on this thread time and again, but just come back spouting nonsense, made up figures and continue with your "I don't care about facts, I know I'm right" attitude.  In Illinois you fit in with the rest of the one trick ponies.


----------



## 2aguy (Sep 29, 2022)

Silent Warrior said:


> Good, now please stay there and don't pollute the rest of the country with your wacked out logic.  Your have been proven wrong on this thread time and again, but just come back spouting nonsense, made up figures and continue with your "I don't care about facts, I know I'm right" attitude.  In Illinois you fit in with the rest of the one trick ponies.



Dont worry, the Blue states will eventually build walls to keep their slaves from leaving…..


----------



## JoeB131 (Sep 29, 2022)

Hollie said:


> So, yes. Your frantic claim that everyone who wants a gun gets a gun is just nonsense.
> 
> 
> "Since launching in 1998, more than 300 million checks have been done, leading to more than 1.5 million denials."


Seriously, you consider that PROGRESS, a 0.5% rejection rate?   

That to me is a system that is much too lax.


----------



## JoeB131 (Sep 29, 2022)

2aguy said:


> They did a federal background check on you, you idiot.....it came back clean. You guys wanted the Federal Background checks, you got them, so you now want more.........



How good of a background check could they have done for $11.00?  

Now, me personally, probably not a good test case. I have no criminal record, honorably discharged from the army, good credit score, I probably wouldn't come up on any flags if you type my name into something. 

That said-  they also didn't ask questions that maybe the should have, like was I recently fired or am I having a mental health crisis or did I have a breakup with a significant other. . 

When I applied for my current job, they talked to all my past employers, ran a credit check, talked to several coworkers, and checked my Facebook and LinkedIn feeds.  

When I applied for my last mortgage, they dissected every part of my financial life.


----------



## JoeB131 (Sep 29, 2022)

2aguy said:


> Yeah...no...if you aren't a criminal, an alcolholic, a drug user or domestic abuser, guns aren't a problem.........



Awesome, so let's do an thorough background check to keep the guns out of the hands of those people. 
Make a Piss Test part of the process. 
Actually inform spouses when their husbands or ex-husbands are about to get a gun and give them veto power.  
Because I seem to remember you screaming bloody murder when some states started enforcing red flag laws and using cases of domestic disturbance as a reason to confiscate guns.


----------



## Batcat (Sep 29, 2022)

Mikeoxenormous said:


> Shotgun-wielding would-be robber claims ‘I’m from Chicago, bro,’ leaves as clerk displays gun
> 
> 
> Rakim Stephen Tate allegedly walked into a Florida convenience store with a shotgun during an attempted robbery but walked out when a clerk displayed his own weapon, authorities said.
> ...


The thug probably thought things work the same in Florida as they do in Chicago. 

Note to criminals. Move out of Florida to one of the big blue cities like New York City, Chicago, LA or San Fransisco. You will find a much better and safer work environment for criminals in such liberal cities than in Florida. Florida is known as _The Gunshine State_ for good reason. 

The rules are different here and Florida is not a sanctuary state for criminals by any means.


----------



## Hollie (Sep 29, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Seriously, you consider that PROGRESS, a 0.5% rejection rate?
> 
> That to me is a system that is much too lax.


Your claim was that everyone who wants a gun gets a gun. That was false. 

What is the rejection rate that would satisfy leftists?


----------



## The Sage of Main Street (Sep 29, 2022)

westwall said:


> Which is lie.  Proven a lie decades ago, yet little liar you trots it out like the good parrot.
> 
> DURRRRRR


*The Silver Screen Slivers Our Brains Into Small, Thin Pieces*

The unilateral disarmers who preach to us in Hollywoodese were hoping to reinforce that scare story by having one of the ghosts in _The Sixth Sense _being a teenager who accidentally kills himself while fooling around with his Dad's gun.


----------



## JoeB131 (Sep 29, 2022)

Hollie said:


> Your claim was that everyone who wants a gun gets a gun. That was false.
> 
> What is the rejection rate that would satisfy leftists?



At least 26%.  That is the percentage of Americans that suffer from some kind of mental illness.


----------



## JoeB131 (Sep 29, 2022)

The Sage of Main Street said:


> *The Silver Screen Slivers Our Brains Into Small, Thin Pieces*
> 
> The unilateral disarmers who preach to us in Hollywoodese were hoping to reinforce that scare story by having one of the ghosts in _The Sixth Sense _being a teenager who accidentally kills himself while fooling around with his Dad's gun.



Actually, quite the contrary, if anything, Hollywood glamorizes guns and has for years. If characters die, it's either nameless goons or people you don't care about.   Let's have shows where the main characters suffer the results of gun violence. 

What I would like to see...  realistic gun violence.  Tom shoots Rosanne when she burns the pot roast.


----------



## westwall (Sep 29, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Actually, quite the contrary, if anything, Hollywood glamorizes guns and has for years. If characters die, it's either nameless goons or people you don't care about.   Let's have shows where the main characters suffer the results of gun violence.
> 
> What I would like to see...  realistic gun violence.  Tom shoots Rosanne when she burns the pot roast.







Most people aren't violent assholes, like you.


----------



## 2aguy (Sep 29, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Awesome, so let's do an thorough background check to keep the guns out of the hands of those people.
> Make a Piss Test part of the process.
> Actually inform spouses when their husbands or ex-husbands are about to get a gun and give them veto power.
> Because I seem to remember you screaming bloody murder when some states started enforcing red flag laws and using cases of domestic disturbance as a reason to confiscate guns.



Nope……how about we do that for voting instead…..or how about we require that for anyone who wants to write a book, news paper article or column?

You don’t jump through hoops for a Right as much as a little fascist like you  would love it


----------



## 2aguy (Sep 29, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Actually, quite the contrary, if anything, Hollywood glamorizes guns and has for years. If characters die, it's either nameless goons or people you don't care about.   Let's have shows where the main characters suffer the results of gun violence.
> 
> What I would like to see...  realistic gun violence.  Tom shoots Rosanne when she burns the pot roast.



That isn’t how it happens doofus….. Tom is a career criminal, a drug addict or alcoholic or has a history of domestic abuse with multiple police encounters…..but the democrat party prosecutors, judges, and politicians keep letting him out of jail and prison over and over again, then complain about normal people who don’t use their guns for any crime.


----------



## JoeB131 (Sep 30, 2022)

2aguy said:


> Nope……how about we do that for voting instead…..or how about we require that for anyone who wants to write a book, news paper article or column?
> 
> You don’t jump through hoops for a Right as much as a little fascist like you  would love it



If you could kill someone doing those things, you might have an argument.   

But I haven't heard of a bunch of parade goers dying because Awake the Rapper read his crazy writings.  

They died because he opened up with them with a military grade weapon he had no business being able to buy.  He wasn't part of a well-regulated militia.


----------



## JoeB131 (Sep 30, 2022)

2aguy said:


> That isn’t how it happens doofus….. Tom is a career criminal, a drug addict or alcoholic or has a history of domestic abuse with multiple police encounters…..but the democrat party prosecutors, judges, and politicians keep letting him out of jail and prison over and over again, then complain about normal people who don’t use their guns for any crime.



We don't have room in the prisons for the domestic batterers, dummy.  

And frankly, gun nuts aren't "normal".


----------



## fncceo (Sep 30, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Or we recognize a gun in the home is 43 times more likely to kill a household member than a criminal...



How does the gun know who is whom?

Artificially intelligent guns?


----------



## JoeB131 (Sep 30, 2022)

fncceo said:


> How does the gun know who is whom?
> 
> Artificially intelligent guns?



Not the point.  

The point is, the Gun Lobby sells stupid people on the notion that a gun in the home is going to protect them from phantom bad guys. 

When in fact, it is more likely to be used during a domestic argument or because their teenager got depressed and killed himself.  

I've known exactly ZERO people who have killed a bad guy with a gun. 

I know of three people who died in the circumstances I mentioned.  One guy in the neighborhood I was growing up shot his wife during an argument, and two people I know had suicides in their families.  One of those was my next door neighbor.


----------



## Hollie (Sep 30, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> At least 26%.  That is the percentage of Americans that suffer from some kind of mental illness.


Email your congressional representative.


----------



## Hollie (Sep 30, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Not the point.
> 
> The point is, the Gun Lobby sells stupid people on the notion that a gun in the home is going to protect them from phantom bad guys.
> 
> ...



An angry, anonymous leftist posts the, "l knew a guy....'', stories.


----------



## JoeB131 (Sep 30, 2022)

Hollie said:


> An angry, anonymous leftist posts the, "l knew a guy....'', stories.



The point is, I never knew the guy who bravely shot the home invader.  

My next door neighbor shot himself, though.  I've told this story before.   He was dealing with some chronic illnesses.  The first time he tried it, he shot out his patio door instead, letting the bullet fly out into the common areas of the condo complex, where it could have hit anyone.  When the police arrived, he lied and said someone shot in at him, before admitting that he shot the bullet "accidently".   The cops did not take his gun.   We can thank the 2AGuys of the world for that.  Wouldn't want to violate his Militia Amendment Rights, even though he wasn't in a militia. 

A few weeks later, he managed to kill himself with that gun.


----------



## fncceo (Sep 30, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> The point is, the Gun Lobby sells stupid people on the notion that a gun in the home is going to protect them from phantom bad guys.



I never bought anything from a "lobby".  I buy guns from the nice gun shop owner in my suburb.

I'm not sure why you would have a problem with lobbies.  Every group or industry who is affected by politics has a lobby.  Automotive makers have a lobby, fast food companies have a lobby, small businesses have a large lobby,  old folks have one of the largest lobbies there is.

Any business that has to deal with political control would be stupid not to have a lobby.


----------



## fncceo (Sep 30, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> My next door neighbor shot himself,



I totally get why.


----------



## Hollie (Sep 30, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> The point is, I never knew the guy who bravely shot the home invader.
> 
> My next door neighbor shot himself, though.  I've told this story before.   He was dealing with some chronic illnesses.  The first time he tried it, he shot out his patio door instead, letting the bullet fly out into the common areas of the condo complex, where it could have hit anyone.  When the police arrived, he lied and said someone shot in at him, before admitting that he shot the bullet "accidently".   The cops did not take his gun.   We can thank the 2AGuys of the world for that.  Wouldn't want to violate his Militia Amendment Rights, even though he wasn't in a militia.
> 
> A few weeks later, he managed to kill himself with that gun.


The point is, I have no way of knowing if any of that is true. Let's be honest. You do have a pattern of behavior that could be described as, how shall we say, "makin' stuff up".


----------



## westwall (Sep 30, 2022)

Hollie said:


> The point is, I have no way of knowing if any of that is true. Let's be honest. You do have a pattern of behavior that could be described as, how shall we say, "makin' stuff up".





Yeah, Joe is more of a liar than Trump ever was.


----------



## 2aguy (Sep 30, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Not the point.
> 
> The point is, the Gun Lobby sells stupid people on the notion that a gun in the home is going to protect them from phantom bad guys.
> 
> ...




If you are the baby momma of a gang member, yes, the illegal gun that he can't buy, own or carry, that he has to protect his drug supply is dangerous to you......you should dump the guy, go to school, get an education, date normal men, and get married........

Guns are not the problem


----------



## The Sage of Main Street (Sep 30, 2022)

Hollie said:


> Email your congressional representative.


*All Republics Go Bananas*

Far more than 26% of our congress critters also suffer from a mental illness, one called megalophobia or "delusions of grandeur."  So it wouldn't do any good to contact those wackadoodles.


----------



## JoeB131 (Sep 30, 2022)

fncceo said:


> I never bought anything from a "lobby". I buy guns from the nice gun shop owner in my suburb.
> 
> I'm not sure why you would have a problem with lobbies. Every group or industry who is affected by politics has a lobby. Automotive makers have a lobby, fast food companies have a lobby, small businesses have a large lobby, old folks have one of the largest lobbies there is.
> 
> Any business that has to deal with political control would be stupid not to have a lobby.



The problem isn't how they deal with government control, it's how they conduct business. 

You see, around the 1970s, hunting fell out of fashion as a hobby.  So the gun industry decided to change their model from sportsmen to "Crazy people" as their prime market.  Dump a shitload of guns into the hands of criminals so that other people will get scared and want them, too.  And of course, send in the NRA to stop even the most sensible attempt to keep guns out of the hands of criminals and crazies get stopped in their tracks. 

So the rest of us have to put up with active shooter drills and militarized cops and security checkpoints...   




Hollie said:


> The point is, I have no way of knowing if any of that is true. Let's be honest. You do have a pattern of behavior that could be described as, how shall we say, "makin' stuff up".



Really?  Name something.. .not an opinion you disagree with, just something I "made up".  thanks.


----------



## JoeB131 (Sep 30, 2022)

2aguy said:


> If you are the baby momma of a gang member, yes, the illegal gun that he can't buy, own or carry, that he has to protect his drug supply is dangerous to you......you should dump the guy, go to school, get an education, date normal men, and get married........
> 
> Guns are not the problem



again, the three people I know who died from gun violence were clean cut white people...   

But you keep pretending that it's just the darkies dying, so that makes it okay.


----------



## 2aguy (Sep 30, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> again, the three people I know who died from gun violence were clean cut white people...
> 
> But you keep pretending that it's just the darkies dying, so that makes it okay.




Funny how you know so many people who kill themselves.....


----------



## 2aguy (Sep 30, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> The problem isn't how they deal with government control, it's how they conduct business.
> 
> You see, around the 1970s, hunting fell out of fashion as a hobby.  So the gun industry decided to change their model from sportsmen to "Crazy people" as their prime market.  Dump a shitload of guns into the hands of criminals so that other people will get scared and want them, too.  And of course, send in the NRA to stop even the most sensible attempt to keep guns out of the hands of criminals and crazies get stopped in their tracks.
> 
> ...




The only people who "dumped" guns to criminals was obama and his minion Holder....who intentionally allowed drug cartels to get American guns.....you doofus.


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 1, 2022)

2aguy said:


> Funny how you know so many people who kill themselves.....



We have 65,000 suicides a year... statistically, I would know of quite a few.  

We all know of someone who died in Vietnam, even though that was a total of some 56,000 people.   We all know of someone who died of Covid.  Statistics, dummy.



2aguy said:


> The only people who "dumped" guns to criminals was obama and his minion Holder....who intentionally allowed drug cartels to get American guns.....you doofus.



Really? Let's look at that.  Chicago had a near total ban on firearms since 1984.   Not that this was entirely effective, the gun stores just set up shop on the borders and sold guns anyway.   

Then you guys ran to SCOTUS and got Heller and McDonald to overturn most gun laws.  Not surprisingly, the gun murder rate shot through the roof shortly after that, from 400 murders a year to 800 murders a year.  

Our cities were not flooded because a handful of guns were tracked during a gun sting operation. 

They were flooded because the gun industry repealed most gun laws, watered down background checks to the point where THESE guys could get guns...


----------



## Hollie (Oct 1, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> We have 65,000 suicides a year... statistically, I would know of quite a few.
> 
> We all know of someone who died in Vietnam, even though that was a total of some 56,000 people.   We all know of someone who died of Covid.  Statistics, dummy.
> 
> ...


Um, the gun industry repealed no laws. The gun industry neither makes nor repeals laws. I read somewhere that congress is the law-making body here in the Great Satan.


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 1, 2022)

Hollie said:


> Um, the gun industry repealed no laws. The gun industry neither makes nor repeals laws. I read somewhere that congress is the law-making body here in the Great Satan.



You mean a Congress that says "How High?" when the gun lobby yells "Jump". 

I'd be all for putting gun laws on a national referendum... but I don't think your side would like that much.


----------



## Hollie (Oct 1, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> You mean a Congress that says "How High?" when the gun lobby yells "Jump".
> 
> I'd be all for putting gun laws on a national referendum... but I don't think your side would like that much.


You mean ''my conspiracy theories sustain me in my alternate reality".

Why make these silly, pointless claims that make you appear to be utterly clueless?

We already have a national referendum on firearms. It's exampled by the explosion in firearm sales as a result of leftist policies.


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 1, 2022)

Hollie said:


> You mean ''my conspiracy theories sustain me in my alternate reality".
> 
> Why make these silly, pointless claims that make you appear to be utterly clueless?
> 
> We already have a national referendum on firearms. It's exampled by the explosion in firearm sales as a result of leftist policies.



Most Americans don't own guns... that explosion is the Ammosexuals buying out of fear, not first time gun buyers.


----------



## 2aguy (Oct 1, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> We have 65,000 suicides a year... statistically, I would know of quite a few.
> 
> We all know of someone who died in Vietnam, even though that was a total of some 56,000 people.   We all know of someone who died of Covid.  Statistics, dummy.
> 
> ...



The gun murder rate had been going down till 2015……that is when the democrat party decided they wanted to wreck local police so they could fill the ranks with more loyal democrats, and in 2015 they decided to keep releasing violent criminals no matter how many felonies they committed….you cant lie about this any more, uninformed Americans have now realized what you assholes have done……….

Normal people with guns don’t use them for crim, so Heller an McDonald had nothing to do with chicagos increasing gun crime, you idiot.


----------



## 2aguy (Oct 1, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Most Americans don't own guns... that explosion is the Ammosexuals buying out of fear, not first time gun buyers.



Wrong, idiot…..women and minorities are where you find new gun buyers, two sectors that had had the lowest gun ownership raes..

The democrat party destruction of local police, and felon release policies have now convinced minorities and women to buy guns


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 1, 2022)

2aguy said:


> The gun murder rate had been going down till 2015……that is when the democrat party decided they wanted to wreck local police so they could fill the ranks with more loyal democrats, and in 2015 they decided to keep releasing violent criminals no matter how many felonies they committed….you cant lie about this any more, uninformed Americans have now realized what you assholes have done……….
> 
> Normal people with guns don’t use them for crim, so Heller an McDonald had nothing to do with chicagos increasing gun crime, you idiot.



Most gun murders are people who know each other. Yes, Heller and McDonald increased the death rate. 

I'm wondering when these local police departments got "wrecked", exactly, because I see the cops engaging in the same bad behavior they've been engaging in for years. 

Can you explain to me how a bully pulling over a black person for a petty traffic violation brings down the murder rate again?


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 1, 2022)

2aguy said:


> Wrong, idiot…..women and minorities are where you find new gun buyers, two sectors that had had the lowest gun ownership rats.
> 
> The democrat party destruction of local police, and felon release policies have now convinced minorities and women to buy guns



Yes, you keep telling yourself that people want into your "tiny" club.


----------



## 2aguy (Oct 1, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Most gun murders are people who know each other. Yes, Heller and McDonald increased the death rate.
> 
> I'm wondering when these local police departments got "wrecked", exactly, because I see the cops engaging in the same bad behavior they've been engaging in for years.
> 
> Can you explain to me how a bully pulling over a black person for a petty traffic violation brings down the murder rate again?



Easy….you can see the exact year from the data….2015.


----------



## 2aguy (Oct 1, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Most gun murders are people who know each other. Yes, Heller and McDonald increased the death rate.
> 
> I'm wondering when these local police departments got "wrecked", exactly, because I see the cops engaging in the same bad behavior they've been engaging in for years.
> 
> Can you explain to me how a bully pulling over a black person for a petty traffic violation brings down the murder rate again?



Yes….gang bangers who know each other….
drug dealers who know each other…..you idiot.


----------



## Hollie (Oct 1, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Most Americans don't own guns... that explosion is the Ammosexuals buying out of fear, not first time gun buyers.


Leftisexuals are funny. 









						FBI Releases Crime Stats, Shows Why Gun Ownership Rises
					

The FBI released the Uniform Crime Report which showed an abrupt rise in crime. It was hardly startling to those reading or watching the news. The report showed a 29 percent jump in murders in 2020. It is reportedly the largest increase since nationwide records began in the 1960s. That’s got gun...




					www.nssf.org
				




Gun sales went from trending along anticipated growth predictions in February 2020 to all-time records a month later. February 2020 saw nearly 1.3 million background checks. It was growth over the same month in 2019 that saw 1.1 million, but nothing close to the 2.3 million background checks in March 2020. That was over one million more than March 2019. The ensuing months all continued to shatter records.

What Changed?​People became concerned for their safety as police were pulled from the streets, prisoners were released over contagion fears and communities were locked down. That reflected in the *surveys* NSSF conducted to understand the fast pace of gun sales. Customers told retailers they were buying firearms for concerns of their own safety. That bore out in the types of firearms that were sold. Handguns topped the list, which have limited application outside self-defense and recreational target shooting.




So, yes. We see a direct correlation connecting firearm sales and leftist pro-criminal policies.


----------



## 2aguy (Oct 1, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Most gun murders are people who know each other. Yes, Heller and McDonald increased the death rate.
> 
> I'm wondering when these local police departments got "wrecked", exactly, because I see the cops engaging in the same bad behavior they've been engaging in for years.
> 
> Can you explain to me how a bully pulling over a black person for a petty traffic violation brings down the murder rate again?



When the police are attacked by the democrat party and now risk their lives, their jobs, their pensions and their freedom even for legitimate arrests, all in the plans of the democrat party to remake the police into a left wing fantasy, they stop doing their jobs, quit or retire……….and the criminals understand that they can do whatever they want


add to that the policy of the democrats of releasing the most violent criminals on no cash bail over and over again, and the police simply don’t care to make arrests anymore.


----------



## Hollie (Oct 1, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Yes, you keep telling yourself that people want into your "tiny" club.


The club is not so tiny. Oddly, the club grew exponentially with leftist pro-criminal policies.









						NICS Gun Sale Data for 2020: Best Year Ever, Over 21 Million Sold :: Guns.com
					

Fueled by an estimated 8.4 million new first-time gun owners, suggested gun sales data climbed nationwide throughout 2020, closing the year out at a record high.




					www.guns.com
				




Fueled by an estimated 8.4 million new first-time gun owners, suggested gun sales data climbed nationwide throughout 2020 and closed the year out at a record high.

The unadjusted number of 39,326,079 checks conducted through the Federal Bureau of Investigation’s National Instant Criminal Background Check System last year is a 40.41 percent jump from the unadjusted FBI NICS figure of 28,007,320 logged in 2019.

When the figures are adjusted — removing data for gun permit checks and rechecks by states which use NICS for that purpose — the latest total stands at 21,083,643, according to the National Shooting Sports Foundation, the trade organization for the U.S. gun industry. This number is a *59.7* percent increase when compared against the 2019 NSSF-adjusted NICS figure of 13,199,172.

This is a new annual record for the 21-year-old NICS system, surpassing the past benchmark of 15,700,471 set in 2016 – when pollsters said Hillary Clinton was headed to the White House *–* by 34.3 percent.





Leftisexuals and their pro-crime / pro-criminal policies were a boon for firearm sales.


----------



## The Sage of Main Street (Oct 1, 2022)

2aguy said:


> Funny how you know so many people who kill themselves.....


*There Goes the Neighborhood*


----------



## The Sage of Main Street (Oct 1, 2022)

2aguy said:


> Yes….gang bangers who know each other….
> drug dealers who know each other…..you idiot.


*A Society Without Vigilantes Has a Death Wish*


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 2, 2022)

2aguy said:


> Easy….you can see the exact year from the data….2015.



Yes, after Heller and McDonald flooded our streets with guns.   Really nothing to do with cops, it wasn't like we started actually holding cops accountable. 



2aguy said:


> Yes….gang bangers who know each other….
> drug dealers who know each other…..you idiot.



Spouses who know each other.
Neighbors who know each other
Relatives who know each other... you idiot.  
Employees who know each other. 

Frankly, there's no point to shooting a stranger.  Strangers rarely do anything to really piss you off.  



2aguy said:


> When the police are attacked by the democrat party and now risk their lives, their jobs, their pensions and their freedom even for legitimate arrests, all in the plans of the democrat party to remake the police into a left wing fantasy, they stop doing their jobs, quit or retire……….and the criminals understand that they can do whatever they want



Really, when did this happen?  Because the few cops who have been held do account were hardly involved in "legitimate arrests".  Let's review, shall we? 

Darren Wilson- Shot a kid 8 times on a shoplifting beef.   Just lost his job. 
Jason van Dyke - Shot a kid 16 times for breaking into a truck.  Only went to jail for 3 years. 
Rusten Sheskey  - Shot Jacob Blake in the back..  Back on the job. 
Brian Encinia - Just forced to quit his job.
Timothy Loehmann - Shot Tamir Rice for playing with a toy.   Lost his job.  Several attempts by other PD's to hire him have been frustrated by people pointing out who he is.
 Derek Chauvin- Actually got a meaningful sentence. 

Wow, so, um, where are the cops being held to account exactly?  



2aguy said:


> add to that the policy of the democrats of releasing the most violent criminals on no cash bail over and over again, and the police simply don’t care to make arrests anymore.



Really not seeing how the cops not arresting people for petty offenses has any effect on the murder rate, dude.  But I can definitely see how adding millions of guns into the system does.    

You remind me of the Polish Scientist who yell "Jump" at a frog after cutting off a leg, and with each leg he cut off, the Frog jumped less distance.  He concluded a frog with no legs is deaf.


----------



## Hollie (Oct 2, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Most Americans don't own guns... that explosion is the Ammosexuals buying out of fear, not first time gun buyers.


Most Americans who legally own guns don't comitt gun crimes.









						Study: the Vast Majority of Gun Crime Isn’t Committed by Lawful Gun Owners | National Review
					

Here’s news that should shock exactly no one — the vast majority of gun crimes are committed by people who did not lawfully purchase their firearms.




					www.nationalreview.com
				




In the study, led by epidemiologist Anthony Fabio of Pittsburgh’s Graduate School of Public Health, researchers partnered with the Pittsburgh Bureau of Police to trace the origins of all 893 firearms that police recovered from crime scenes in the year 2008.

They found that in approximately 8 out of 10 cases, the perpetrator was not a lawful gun owner but rather in illegal possession of a weapon that belonged to someone else.


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 2, 2022)

Hollie said:


> Most Americans who legally own guns don't comitt gun crimes.



So what? 
Most people who fly on airliners don't try to hijack the plane and fly it into a building, but we darn sure are going to vet every last one of them before they get on board. 

(This is the part where you start whining about Founding Fathers and rights).


----------



## Hollie (Oct 2, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> So what?
> Most people who fly on airliners don't try to hijack the plane and fly it into a building, but we darn sure are going to vet every last one of them before they get on board.
> 
> (This is the part where you start whining about Founding Fathers and rights).


Who's we?  ''We'', (the leftist Biden flunkies), are darn sure not vetting every last one of them.









						How TSA Explains Allowing Illegal Immigrants to Fly With You
					

The agency defends allowing illegal immigrants to fly on commercial flights, noting a “notice to appear” in immigration court can be an ID.




					www.dailysignal.com
				




Although they are in the United States without government-recognized documentation after unlawfully crossing the border, the federal government allows groups of illegal immigrants to go through TSA security checkpoints in airports.



This is the part where you start whining about all the things leftists usually whine about.


----------



## Hollie (Oct 2, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Most Americans don't own guns... that explosion is the Ammosexuals buying out of fear, not first time gun buyers.



Your statement is lacking in many aspects. Lots of people are prevented from owning firearms. 






						Are there persons who cannot legally receive or possess firearms and/or ammunition? | Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives
					

Yes, a person who — (1) Has been convicted in any court of a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding 1 year; (2) Is a fugitive from justice; (3) Is an unlawful user of or addicted to any controlled substance; (4) Has been adjudicated as a mental defective or has been committed to a...




					www.atf.gov
				




Are there persons who cannot legally receive or possess firearms and/or ammunition?​
Yes, a person who —
*(1)* Has been convicted in any court of a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding 1 year;
*(2)* Is a fugitive from justice;
*(3)* Is an unlawful user of or addicted to any controlled substance;
*(4)* Has been adjudicated as a mental defective or has been committed to a mental institution;
*(5)* Is an alien illegally or unlawfully in the United States or an alien admitted to the United States under a nonimmigrant visa;
*(6)* Has been discharged from the Armed Forces under dishonorable conditions;
*(7)* Having been a citizen of the United States, has renounced his or her citizenship;
*(8)* Is subject to a court order that restrains the person from harassing, stalking, or threatening an intimate partner or child of such intimate partner issued after a hearing
at which notice was given to the person and at which the person had an opportunity to participate, and includes a finding that the person subject to the order represents a credible threat to the intimate partner or child or the intimate partner OR explicitly prohibits the use, attempted use, or threatened use of force against the partner; or
*(9)* Has been convicted of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence cannot lawfully receive, possess, ship, or transport a firearm or ammunition,is prohibited from shipping, transporting, possessing, or receiving firearms and ammunition.
A person who is under indictment or information for a crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding 1 year cannot lawfully ship, transport, or receive a firearm or ammunition. Such persons may continue to lawfully possess firearms and ammunition obtained prior to the indictment or information, but cannot do so once the conviction becomes final.
[18 U.S.C. 922(g) and (n); 27 CFR 478.32]





This is why its always important to fact check the leftists. They tend to run fast and loose with statements and ''phacts'' that are edited, parsed, altered or just plain nonsense.





This is the part where you want to start whining about ''equity''.


----------



## Hollie (Oct 2, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> So what?
> Most people who fly on airliners don't try to hijack the plane and fly it into a building, but we darn sure are going to vet every last one of them before they get on board.
> 
> (This is the part where you start whining about Founding Fathers and rights).



So what? That was quite a reversal and sidestep where your earlier comment was that: ''we darn sure are going to vet every last one of them before they get on board.''

That was obviously false. Most people who fly on airlines actually _are_ vetted. Not illegal aliens, though. Are you aware there is such a thing as a ''no fly list''?


----------



## 2aguy (Oct 2, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> So what?
> Most people who fly on airliners don't try to hijack the plane and fly it into a building, but we darn sure are going to vet every last one of them before they get on board.
> 
> (This is the part where you start whining about Founding Fathers and rights).




Now you try to hide your lie.....you routinely lie about gun owners shooting their wives over burned dinners when the truth is the majority of domestic violence murder, including gun murder, is by career violent criminals, drug addicts, alcoholics and people with long records of domestic violence and encounters with police......they are not normal people who simply own guns for self defense, sport, collecting and hunting....in fact, the people using guns to commit domestic murder are usually the ones who can't legally buy, own or carry guns because of their criminal backgrounds.


----------



## 2aguy (Oct 2, 2022)

Hollie said:


> Most Americans who legally own guns don't comitt gun crimes.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




People usually ask me why I continue to debate these anti-gun fascists since there is no way to change their minds.....I reply, I am not trying to change their minds, I am honing my discussion points, and trying to present facts, truth and information for the people who tune into the discussion who only get gun information from t.v., movies, and democrat party media sources.........

And....because of people like you, who show me knew information in the debate that I can then use in more discussions....thanks for this, it is great info......


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 3, 2022)

Hollie said:


> Although they are in the United States without government-recognized documentation after unlawfully crossing the border, the federal government allows groups of illegal immigrants to go through TSA security checkpoints in airports.



Did they have bombs, boxcutters, guns on them?  

Nope. 



Hollie said:


> So what? That was quite a reversal and sidestep where your earlier comment was that: ''we darn sure are going to vet every last one of them before they get on board.''
> 
> That was obviously false. Most people who fly on airlines actually _are_ vetted. Not illegal aliens, though. Are you aware there is such a thing as a ''no fly list''?



Not a reversal at all.  We make them go through a rigourous search before they get on that plain, whether they be citizen, immigrant or tourist.  That's the point. 



2aguy said:


> Now you try to hide your lie.....you routinely lie about gun owners shooting their wives over burned dinners when the truth is the majority of domestic violence murder, including gun murder, is by career violent criminals, drug addicts, alcoholics and people with long records of domestic violence and encounters with police......they are not normal people who simply own guns for self defense, sport, collecting and hunting....in fact, the people using guns to commit domestic murder are usually the ones who can't legally buy, own or carry guns because of their criminal backgrounds.



Actually, all three people I knew who had died from gun violence had no criminal records up to that point.    the One murderer I knew was a regular member of the community.  White, middle class.  Used to hang out with his daughter (who developed a very morbid sense of humor after her dad murdered her mom.)  

I'm not sure what a "career" criminal is.    I'm pretty sure no one marks down on their resume or tax form "Criminal".  As pointed out, 80 million Americans have a police record, so it's easy for you Ammosexuals to say, "See, he was a career criminal, because he got busted for pot when he was 19!"  









						JPMorgan, Microsoft and Slack among companies hiring the formerly incarcerated
					

More companies are looking at a huge segment of the U.S. population as a promising source of much-needed workers: Americans with criminal records.




					www.cnbc.com
				






2aguy said:


> People usually ask me why I continue to debate these anti-gun fascists since there is no way to change their minds.....I reply, I am not trying to change their minds, I am honing my discussion points, and trying to present facts, truth and information for the people who tune into the discussion who only get gun information from t.v., movies, and democrat party media sources.........



Really, I thought it was because you get a bit of a chubby talking about guns...


----------



## Hollie (Oct 3, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Did they have bombs, boxcutters, guns on them?
> 
> Nope.


Typical leftist blathering. Leftists care nothing about the law. They want special considerations for themselves. Their precious illegals shouldn't have concerns about US citizens.  The fact is, illegals are not subject to the TSA scrutiny that Americans are so we don't know if it is a matter of time before the leftist open borders policy will allow a terrorist to board.





JoeB131 said:


> Not a reversal at all.  We make them go through a rigourous search before they get on that plain, whether they be citizen, immigrant or tourist.  That's the point.


That was quite a reversal. 









						Biden's First Year: 45K Illegals Flown into U.S., Bypassing Photo ID Rules
					

Biden oversaw the flight transportation of nearly 45,000 illegal aliens, allowing them to bypass photo identification requirements.




					www.breitbart.com
				




President Joe Biden oversaw the flight transportation of nearly 45,000 border crossers and illegal aliens in the first 10 months of his administration, new data reveals, allowing them to bypass photo identification requirements before boarding.

Most shockingly, perhaps, the forms border crossers and illegal aliens are allowed to use as official forms of identification for TSA include arrest warrants, deportation orders, Notices to Appear (NTA) in immigration court, and federal custody booking records.





How great is that? An arrest warrant will still allow illegals to fly. I'm curious as to why illegals have such special privileges?


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 3, 2022)

Hollie said:


> Typical leftist blathering. Leftists care nothing about the law. They want special considerations for themselves. Their precious illegals shouldn't have concerns about US citizens. The fact is, illegals are not subject to the TSA scrutiny that Americans are so we don't know if it is a matter of time before the leftist open borders policy will allow a terrorist to board.



Yeah, we've been hearing this song from you guys from 20 years...   How the whole of the Southwest desert is littered with abandoned Muslim Prayer Rugs...  

And yet to date... not one terrorist attack committed by a terrorist who crossed the border illegally.  All our terrorists either got legitimate visas or were born here.  



Hollie said:


> President Joe Biden oversaw the flight transportation of nearly 45,000 border crossers and illegal aliens in the first 10 months of his administration, new data reveals, allowing them to bypass photo identification requirements before boarding.



Um, yeah, 45,000 border crossers who are entitled to asylum hearings under our laws...


----------



## Hollie (Oct 3, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Yeah, we've been hearing this song from you guys from 20 years...   How the whole of the Southwest desert is littered with abandoned Muslim Prayer Rugs...
> 
> And yet to date... not one terrorist attack committed by a terrorist who crossed the border illegally.  All our terrorists either got legitimate visas or were born here.
> 
> ...


Um, yeah. We've been hearing about the ''illegals have special rights'' from leftists for years. Remember that the Biden politburo tells us ''the border is secure''. That nonsense works for their kowtowing leftist minions but doesn't represent reality. 



Um, yeah. Five million illegals and another million ''got-aways'' all have entitlements, according to leftists.


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 4, 2022)

Hollie said:


> Um, yeah. We've been hearing about the ''illegals have special rights'' from leftists for years. Remember that the Biden politburo tells us ''the border is secure''. That nonsense works for their kowtowing leftist minions but doesn't represent reality.



Or for those of us who don't live in mortal fear a Mexican might move in next door. 



Hollie said:


> Um, yeah. Five million illegals and another million ''got-aways'' all have entitlements, according to leftists.



Um, yeah, it's called the Constitution... which actually has more in it than a badly written militia amendment.


----------



## Hollie (Oct 4, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Or for those of us who don't live in mortal fear a Mexican might move in next door.
> 
> 
> 
> Um, yeah, it's called the Constitution... which actually has more in it than a badly written militia amendment.


Um, yeah. Illegal border crossing is called a Constitutional right. Um, yeah. Why single out Mexicans? You seem to have a case of _Pelosi Syndrome. _The fact is, there are millions of people coming across the border and we know among them are the worst criminal dregs imaginable.


Yes. The Constitution is an abomination in the eyes of self-hating leftists. Perhaps yammering about your self-hate is a waste of time on a discussion board. Convert and do a Jihad.


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 4, 2022)

Hollie said:


> Um, yeah. Illegal border crossing is called a Constitutional right. Um, yeah. Why single out Mexicans? You seem to have a case of _Pelosi Syndrome. _The fact is, there are millions of people coming across the border and we know among them are the worst criminal dregs imaginable.



Actually, statistically, undocumented immigrants are LESS likely to get into trouble for no other reason than they know they can be deported for the same offense that will get a citizen a citation.  

But the constitution applies to everyone, not just citizens. 



Hollie said:


> Yes. The Constitution is an abomination in the eyes of self-hating leftists. Perhaps yammering about your self-hate is a waste of time on a discussion board. Convert and do a Jihad.



No, it was the best thinking of 18th century slave rapists.   They also thought bleeding was a legitimate medical treatment, slavery was nifty, shitting in a chamber pot was sanitary and the Garden of Eden was a real place.  

So let's get a constitution that is the best thinking of people in this century.  Sounds like a plan.


----------



## Hollie (Oct 4, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Actually, statistically, undocumented immigrants are LESS likely to get into trouble for no other reason than they know they can be deported for the same offense that will get a citizen a citation.
> 
> But the constitution applies to everyone, not just citizens.
> 
> ...


Actually, statistically, you’re just making up stuff as you go along. Texas is the only state that records and keeps the immigration status of illegals involved with the criminal justice system.

One state. That’s not statistically significant. But, why would you let facts get in the way of leftist propaganda. 

No, the Constitution does not apply to everyone. Illegal immigrants are not entitled to all the rights a citizen is entitled to. Citizens have rights such as the right to run for office, the right to vote and the right to hold various federal jobs that apply to United States citizens. But, why would you let facts get in the way of leftist propaganda. 

Don’t be shy. Embrace your 19 and 20th century Party of Slavery; the Democrat party. The Party of Slave Rapists was all the rage while it lasted. It really is hilarious to read the bellicose blathering of an AOC groupie lecturing anyone about a new, revised, updated Constitution in the vision of a leftist moron.


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 5, 2022)

Hollie said:


> Actually, statistically, you’re just making up stuff as you go along. Texas is the only state that records and keeps the immigration status of illegals involved with the criminal justice system.
> 
> One state. That’s not statistically significant. But, why would you let facts get in the way of leftist propaganda.



Point stands...  most undocumented immigrants stay out of trouble.  The problem is, they don't report crimes, either, even when they are the victims of crime. 



Hollie said:


> No, the Constitution does not apply to everyone. Illegal immigrants are not entitled to all the rights a citizen is entitled to. Citizens have rights such as the right to run for office, the right to vote and the right to hold various federal jobs that apply to United States citizens. But, why would you let facts get in the way of leftist propaganda.



No, but they are eligible for due process and such, which was my point that flew right over your head. 



Hollie said:


> Don’t be shy. Embrace your 19 and 20th century Party of Slavery; the Democrat party. The Party of Slave Rapists was all the rage while it lasted. It really is hilarious to read the bellicose blathering of an AOC groupie lecturing anyone about a new, revised, updated Constitution in the vision of a leftist moron.



The REpublicans wanted to round up all the blacks and deport them back to Africa at the time, how was that any better?  Oh, wait, that's probably still one of your secret fantasies.


----------



## Hollie (Oct 5, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Point stands...  most undocumented immigrants stay out of trouble.  The problem is, they don't report crimes, either, even when they are the victims of crime.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



“Point stands”…. “because I say so”. That’s a rather typical, craven leftist tactic. Unsupported claims are true “…. because I say so”. 

Um, yeah. Make excuses for the Party of Slavery; the Democrat Party. You folks really do miss those halcyon days of slave labor / raping.


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 5, 2022)

Hollie said:


> “Point stands”…. “because I say so”. That’s a rather typical, craven leftist tactic. Unsupported claims are true “…. because I say so”.
> 
> Um, yeah. Make excuses for the Party of Slavery; the Democrat Party. You folks really do miss those halcyon days of slave labor / raping.



The problem is, the Democrats threw all those people out in the 1960's, and Tricky Dick welcomed them with open arms.


----------



## Hollie (Oct 5, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> The problem is, the Democrats threw all those people out in the 1960's, and Tricky Dick welcomed them with open arms.


Um, no. Your conspiracy theories are laughable.


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 5, 2022)

Hollie said:


> Um, no. Your conspiracy theories are laughable.



Last time I checked, History isn't a conspiracy.


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Oct 5, 2022)

Mikeoxenormous said:


> The Marxists


lol

All three of them.


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Oct 5, 2022)

Mikeoxenormous said:


> Shotgun-wielding would-be robber claims ‘I’m from Chicago, bro,’ leaves as clerk displays gun
> 
> 
> Rakim Stephen Tate allegedly walked into a Florida convenience store with a shotgun during an attempted robbery but walked out when a clerk displayed his own weapon, authorities said.
> ...


The problem is this sort of rightwing racism and hate.


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Oct 5, 2022)

Silent Warrior said:


> Then don't have them in your home, but stop trying to force your opinions on everyone else.


The fact that a gun in the home is more likely to kill the homeowner than an intruder isn’t going to be used to ‘justify’ more gun regulations – that’s a ridiculous lie and slippery slope fallacy contrived by the dishonest right.

And stating these facts isn’t ‘forcing’ anything on anyone.


----------



## Foxfyre (Oct 5, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Or we recognize a gun in the home is 43 times more likely to kill a household member than a criminal...


That statistic is way skewed since most homeowners don't have to shoot the criminals. They generally back off if the homeowner demonstrates he/she is armed. Many times more home invasions are stopped via guns than there are shootings in the home.








						23 Home Invasion Statistics You Should Be Afraid Of
					

Home invasions aren't always violent. 11% of burglars even remove a door or window while the occupants are home. The average loss is around $2,799 per home invasion.




					www.creditdonkey.com


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 6, 2022)

Foxfyre said:


> That statistic is way skewed since most homeowners don't have to shoot the criminals. They generally back off if the homeowner demonstrates he/she is armed. Many times more home invasions are stopped via guns than there are shootings in the home.



Okay, true, this stat doesn't take into account where people didn't shoot the intruder, but it also doesn't take into account all the time a domestic abuser threatened his family with a gun, either.  

The reason why I don't buy into the non-fatal Defensive Gun Use argument is that it indicates way too many criminals - who are desperate enough to be criminals to start with - are easily intimidated by the mere sight of a gun.   It also assumes that all these Ammosexuals out there who fantasize about the day they get to shoot a criminal would have a chance to do so and not do so 99% of the time seems like a bit of a stretch.  The fact that DGU's numbers range from 38K to 2 Million show you that there's no real way to measure them accurately.


----------



## 2aguy (Oct 6, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Okay, true, this stat doesn't take into account where people didn't shoot the intruder, but it also doesn't take into account all the time a domestic abuser threatened his family with a gun, either.
> 
> The reason why I don't buy into the non-fatal Defensive Gun Use argument is that it indicates way too many criminals - who are desperate enough to be criminals to start with - are easily intimidated by the mere sight of a gun.   It also assumes that all these Ammosexuals out there who fantasize about the day they get to shoot a criminal would have a chance to do so and not do so 99% of the time seems like a bit of a stretch.  The fact that DGU's numbers range from 38K to 2 Million show you that there's no real way to measure them accurately.




Yeah......lots of criminals are intimidated by a victim with a gun, cause they don't want to get shot...you idiot.    There are too many other victims who don't have guns that they can rape, rob, murder and torture .........so yes, if you point a gun at most criminals they run away......their job isn't to get shot, their job is to be a criminal...you doofus.


----------



## Hollie (Oct 6, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Okay, true, this stat doesn't take into account where people didn't shoot the intruder, but it also doesn't take into account all the time a domestic abuser threatened his family with a gun, either.
> 
> The reason why I don't buy into the non-fatal Defensive Gun Use argument is that it indicates way too many criminals - who are desperate enough to be criminals to start with - are easily intimidated by the mere sight of a gun.   It also assumes that all these Ammosexuals out there who fantasize about the day they get to shoot a criminal would have a chance to do so and not do so 99% of the time seems like a bit of a stretch.  The fact that DGU's numbers range from 38K to 2 Million show you that there's no real way to measure them accurately.


The reason why I don't buy into the Leftisexual ideology of ''criminals - who are desperate enough to be criminals to start with...'' is because ''desperation'' doesn't cause mass, coordinated theft as we saw during the BLM riots. ''Desperation'' doesn't cause someone to walk into a CVS pharmacy in California and steal a shopping bags worth of merchandise. 

Leftisexuals spend way too much time making excuses for criminals who exploit the weakness and vulnerability of those they steal from, rape, beat and brutalize. Street thugs are not looking for a confrontation. They want an easy victim. A proposed victim with a firearm is not worth the risk. The criminal will move on.


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 6, 2022)

2aguy said:


> Yeah......lots of criminals are intimidated by a victim with a gun, cause they don't want to get shot...you idiot. There are too many other victims who don't have guns that they can rape, rob, murder and torture .........so yes, if you point a gun at most criminals they run away......their job isn't to get shot, their job is to be a criminal...you doofus.



Actually, your whole premise is that criminals are stupid.  They don't confront directly and give you a chance to get your gun.  They either wait until you aren't home or they blitz you before you know what hit you.  



Hollie said:


> The reason why I don't buy into the Leftisexual ideology of ''criminals - who are desperate enough to be criminals to start with...'' is because ''desperation'' doesn't cause mass, coordinated theft as we saw during the BLM riots. ''Desperation'' doesn't cause someone to walk into a CVS pharmacy in California and steal a shopping bags worth of merchandise.



Oh, no, what we saw during the BLM riots was a country that had quite enough and acted out... not that you learned anything from the experience. 



Hollie said:


> Leftisexuals spend way too much time making excuses for criminals who exploit the weakness and vulnerability of those they steal from, rape, beat and brutalize. Street thugs are not looking for a confrontation. They want an easy victim. A proposed victim with a firearm is not worth the risk. The criminal will move on.



again- gun in the home, 43 times more likely to kill a household member than a bad guy.


----------



## Blues Man (Oct 6, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Okay, true, this stat doesn't take into account where people didn't shoot the intruder, but it also doesn't take into account all the time a domestic abuser threatened his family with a gun, either.
> 
> The reason why I don't buy into the non-fatal Defensive Gun Use argument is that it indicates way too many criminals - who are desperate enough to be criminals to start with - are easily intimidated by the mere sight of a gun.   It also assumes that all these Ammosexuals out there who fantasize about the day they get to shoot a criminal would have a chance to do so and not do so 99% of the time seems like a bit of a stretch.  The fact that DGU's numbers range from 38K to 2 Million show you that there's no real way to measure them accurately.


So how many times are people threatened by a gun toting domestic abuser  exactly ?

And you ignore the times a piece of shit criminal is shot and does not die or is shot at but not hit


----------



## Blues Man (Oct 6, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> _*again- gun in the home, 43 times more likely to kill a household member than a bad guy.*_





Debunked BULLSHIT


----------



## Flash (Oct 6, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Or we recognize a gun in the home is 43 times more likely to kill a household member than a criminal


A Negro walking into a store with a firearm is 100% more likely to use it to rob the store and shoot the clerk.


----------



## 2aguy (Oct 6, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Actually, your whole premise is that criminals are stupid.  They don't confront directly and give you a chance to get your gun.  They either wait until you aren't home or they blitz you before you know what hit you.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




You don't know what you are talking about....you are talking out of your ass......

Criminals, when confronted run away...of all the actual criminals attacking people with guns, only about 235 of them are stupid enough each year to press the attack in the face of a gun armed victim....

We learned a lot from the blm/antifa burning, looing and killing in black neighborhoods...we learned that the democrat party is willing to send out their brown shirts, blm/antifa, to loot, burn and kill blacks in black neighborhoods in order to keep them voting for democrats......

And to the lie about 43......

Kellerman who did the study that came up with the 43 times more likely myth, was forced to retract that study and to do the research over when other academics pointed out how flawed his methods were....he then changed the 43 times number to 2.7, but he was still using flawed data to get even that number.....

Below is the study where he changed the number from 43 to 2.7 and below that is the explanation as to why that number isn't even accurate.

http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJM199310073291506

After controlling for these characteristics, we found that keeping a gun in the home was strongly and independently associated with an increased risk of homicide (adjusted odds ratio, 2.7;

------------

https://crimeresearch.org/wp-conten...ack-of-Public-Health-Research-on-Firearms.pdf

3. The Incredibly Flawed Public Health Research Guns in the Home At a town hall at George Mason University in January 2016, President Obama said, “If you look at the statistics, there's no doubt that there are times where somebody who has a weapon has been able to protect themselves and scare off an intruder or an assailant, but what is more often the case is that they may not have been able to protect themselves, but they end up being the victim of the weapon that they purchased themselves.”25 The primary proponents of this claim are Arthur Kellermann and his many coauthors. A gun, they have argued, is less likely to be used in killing a criminal than it is to be used in killing someone the gun owner knows. In one of the most well-known public health studies on firearms, Kellermann’s “case sample” consists of 444 homicides that occurred in homes. His control group had 388 individuals who lived near the deceased victims and were of the same sex, race, and age range. After learning about the homicide victims and control subjects—whether they owned a gun, had a drug or alcohol problem, etc.—these authors attempted to see if the probability of a homicide correlated with gun ownership. Amazingly these studies assume that if someone died from a gun shot, and a gun was owned in the home, that it was the gun in the home that killed that person. The paper is clearly misleading, as it fails to report that in only 8 of these 444 homicide cases was the gun that had been kept in the home the murder weapon.Moreover, the number of criminals stopped with a gun is much higher than the number killed in defensive gun uses. In fact, the attacker is killed in fewer than 1 out of every 1,000 defensive gun uses. Fix either of these data errors and the results are reversed. To demonstrate, suppose that we use the same statistical method—with a matching control group—to do a study on the efficacy of hospital care. Assume that we collect data just as these authors did, compiling a list of all the people who died in a particular county over the period of a year. Then we ask their relatives whether they had been admitted to the hospital during the previous year. We also put together a control sample consisting of neighbors who are part of the same sex, race, and age group. Then we ask these men and women whether they have been in a hospital during the past year. My bet is that those who spent time in hospitals are much more likely to have died.


Nine Myths Of Gun Control

Myth #6 "A homeowner is 43 times as likely to be killed or kill a family member as an intruder"

To suggest that science has proven that defending oneself or one's family with a gun is dangerous, gun prohibitionists repeat Dr. Kellermann's long discredited claim: "a gun owner is 43 times more likely to kill a family member than an intruder." [17] This fallacy , fabricated using tax dollars, is one of the most misused slogans of the anti-self-defense lobby.

The honest measure of the protective benefits of guns are the lives saved, the injuries prevented, the medical costs saved, and the property protected not Kellermann's burglar or rapist body count.

Only 0.1% (1 in a thousand) of the defensive uses of guns results in the death of the predator. [3]

Any study, such as Kellermann' "43 times" fallacy, that only counts bodies will expectedly underestimate the benefits of gun a thousand fold.

Think for a minute. Would anyone suggest that the only measure of the benefit of law enforcement is the number of people killed by police? Of course not. The honest measure of the benefits of guns are the lives saved, the injuries prevented, the medical costs saved by deaths and injuries averted, and the property protected. 65 lives protected by guns for every life lost to a gun. [2]

*Kellermann recently downgraded his estimate to "2.7 times," [18] but he persisted in discredited methodology. He used a method that cannot distinguish between "cause" and "effect." His method would be like finding more diet drinks in the refrigerators of fat people and then concluding that diet drinks "cause" obesity.*


Also, he studied groups with high rates of violent criminality, alcoholism, drug addiction, abject poverty, and domestic abuse .


From such a poor and violent study group he attempted to generalize his findings to normal homes

*Interestingly, when Dr. Kellermann was interviewed he stated that, if his wife were attacked, he would want her to have a gun for protection.[19] Apparently, Dr. Kellermann doesn't even believe his own studies.


-----
*

Public Health and Gun Control: A Review



Since at least the mid-1980s, Dr. Kellermann (and associates), whose work had been heavily-funded by the CDC, published a series of studies purporting to show that persons who keep guns in the home are more likely to be victims of homicide than those who don¹t.

In a 1986 NEJM paper, Dr. Kellermann and associates, for example, claimed their "scientific research" proved that defending oneself or one¹s family with a firearm in the home is dangerous and counter productive, claiming* "a gun owner is 43 times more likely to kill a family member than an intruder."8

In a critical review and now classic article published in the March 1994 issue of the Journal of the Medical Association of Georgia (JMAG), Dr. Edgar Suter, Chairman of Doctors for Integrity in Policy Research (DIPR), found evidence of "methodologic and conceptual errors," such as prejudicially truncated data and the listing of "the correct methodology which was described but never used by the authors."5 *

Moreover, the gun control researchers failed to consider and underestimated the protective benefits of guns.

Dr. Suter writes: "The true measure of the protective benefits of guns are the lives and medical costs saved, the injuries prevented, and the property protected ‹ not the burglar or rapist body count.

Since only 0.1 - 0.2 percent of defensive uses of guns involve the death of the criminal, any study, such as this, that counts criminal deaths as the only measure of the protective benefits of guns will expectedly underestimate the benefits of firearms by a factor of 500 to 1,000."5

In 1993, in his landmark and much cited NEJM article (and the research, again, heavily funded by the CDC), Dr. Kellermann attempted to show again that guns in the home are a greater risk to the victims than to the assailants.4 Despite valid criticisms by reputable scholars of his previous works (including the 1986 study), Dr. Kellermann ignored the criticisms and again used the same methodology.

*He also used study populations with disproportionately high rates of serious psychosocial dysfunction from three selected state counties, known to be unrepresentative of the general U.S. population.

For example, 

53 percent of the case subjects had a history of a household member being arrested, 

31 percent had a household history of illicit drug use, 32 percent had a household member hit or hurt in a family fight, and 

17 percent had a family member hurt so seriously in a domestic altercation that prompt medical attention was required. 
Moreover, both the case studies and control groups in this analysis had a very high incidence of financial instability.*

In fact, in this study, gun ownership, the supposedly high risk factor for homicide was not one of the most strongly associated factors for being murdered.

*Drinking, illicit drugs, living alone, history of family violence, living in a rented home were all greater individual risk factors for being murdered than a gun in the home. One must conclude there is no basis to apply the conclusions of this study to the general population.*

All of these are factors that, as Dr. Suter pointed out, "would expectedly be associated with higher rates of violence and homicide."5

*It goes without saying, the results of such a study on gun homicides, selecting this sort of unrepresentative population sample, nullify the authors' generalizations, and their preordained, conclusions can not be extrapolated to the general population.*

Moreover, although the 1993 New England Journal of Medicine study purported to show that the homicide victims were killed with a gun ordinarily kept in the home, the fact is that as Kates and associates point out 71.1 percent of the victims were killed by assailants who did not live in the victims¹ household using guns presumably not kept in that home.6
======

Read more: CDC’s Antigun Agenda On Display: So-Called Experts Abuse Our Trust
Under Creative Commons License: Attribution
Follow us: @Ammoland on Twitter | Ammoland on Facebook

In 1993,Dr. Kellermann, who was funded in 1991 by a CDC grant, had to soften the ’43 times’ number to ‘2.7 times.’ He concluded, “Rather than confer protection, guns kept in the home are associated with an increase in the risk of homicide by a family member or intimate acquaintance.” Kellerman thought the 2.7 number would not sound quite so impossible.
These papers, and many others from the medical community, were criticized by researchers who statistically showed that Kellermann’s conclusions were wildly wrong. Kellermann used a technique that depended on matching subjects and controls, except that the subject and control groups did not match. The subject group lived a very high-risk, alcohol and drug-filled lifestyle, while the controls did not.
Kellermann had singled out people who exist at the edges of society. Kellermann did not study normal gun owners, just criminals who had guns, but he exaggerated his findings.


> Because of this confusion, Kellerman helped change American gun politics by injecting unwarranted fear into the gun debate. Too many journalists just read the conclusion of a “scientific” paper, and skip over the rest as too complex for them.


Despite these serious methodological problems, Kellermann’s results are still widely accepted in the public health field.​Public-health advocates appear willing to run with any published study, regardless of how weak its methods, just so long as the findings are congenial to their assumption that guns are dangerous.
Then, in 1996, after Congress requested Kellermann’s original data, which he failed to release, Congress cut funding to the CDC for advocacy research. No funding was cut for medical research, just advocacy research.

CDC’s Antigun Agenda On Display: So-Called Experts Abuse Our Trust


----------



## Foxfyre (Oct 6, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Okay, true, this stat doesn't take into account where people didn't shoot the intruder, but it also doesn't take into account all the time a domestic abuser threatened his family with a gun, either.
> 
> The reason why I don't buy into the non-fatal Defensive Gun Use argument is that it indicates way too many criminals - who are desperate enough to be criminals to start with - are easily intimidated by the mere sight of a gun.   It also assumes that all these Ammosexuals out there who fantasize about the day they get to shoot a criminal would have a chance to do so and not do so 99% of the time seems like a bit of a stretch.  The fact that DGU's numbers range from 38K to 2 Million show you that there's no real way to measure them accurately.


Guns don't make criminals. Lack of religious faith, lack of ethics and integrity, lack of respect for others, sense of entitlement, poor parenting, addiction, sociopathy makes criminals. I grew up when literally pretty much every household had guns, many of them loaded. And there were no school shootings. People could leave the keys in the ignition of their cars, their homes unlocked. There weren't accidental shootings. I don't recall any on purpose shootings. As far as domestic violence goes, it happens whether or not there is a gun involved.

But indeed, criminals are going to go after the soft targets less likely to be armed far more than they will risk facing somebody with a weapon who can and will use it.

Blaming the weapon of choice instead of the people using the weapons is a sure way to escalate crime.


----------



## ClaireH (Oct 6, 2022)

2aguy said:


> Wrong, idiot…..women and minorities are where you find new gun buyers, two sectors that had had the lowest gun ownership raes..
> 
> The democrat party destruction of local police, and felon release policies have now convinced minorities and women to buy guns


Exactly. Recently read that there is a huge growing number of black females becoming first time going owners. First time gun owners up in all walks of life.


----------



## ClaireH (Oct 6, 2022)

2aguy said:


> People usually ask me why I continue to debate these anti-gun fascists since there is no way to change their minds.....I reply, I am not trying to change their minds, I am honing my discussion points, and trying to present facts, truth and information for the people who tune into the discussion who only get gun information from t.v., movies, and democrat party media sources.........
> 
> And....because of people like you, who show me knew information in the debate that I can then use in more discussions....thanks for this, it is great info......


Also, keep in mind USMB has a wide number of readers who never even post, and even taking away the bots there are a lot of people who read and never post. Words on a public message board are way more important than any immediate argument, I sometimes forget that. 

Keep up the good fight for truth 2aguy, it matters little what the non-readers have to say about it in the grand scheme of things


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 7, 2022)

Blues Man said:


> So how many times are people threatened by a gun toting domestic abuser exactly ?
> 
> And you ignore the times a piece of shit criminal is shot and does not die or is shot at but not hit



Because they are non-events.  We don't know how many times someone ran away because someone waived his penis compensator at them.  And we don't know how many battered housewives live in terror that their husbands will use that gun to hunt them and the children down if they try to leave.  Because these numbers are largely uncountable. 

We do have very countable numbers in how many people DIE from gunshot wounds. 

We know that only 200 people are killed by guns fired by civilians that are classified as justified. (Ironically, many of them not home invaders, but domestic abusers.) 
We know that 1000 people are shot by the police, but I doubt our police would be so trigger happy if they weren't dealing with a heavily armed public.  British cops only shoot 5 people a year on average.  In Japan, it's considered a bit of a scandal when the police even take their guns out of their holsters. 

We know that we have 19,000 gun homicides and 23,000 gun suicides and 800 gun accidents every year...
We have so many mass shootings you have to rack up an impressive body count to even get the national news to notice.


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 7, 2022)

Foxfyre said:


> Guns don't make criminals. Lack of religious faith, lack of ethics and integrity, lack of respect for others, sense of entitlement, poor parenting, addiction, sociopathy makes criminals. I grew up when literally pretty much every household had guns, many of them loaded. And there were no school shootings. People could leave the keys in the ignition of their cars, their homes unlocked. There weren't accidental shootings. I don't recall any on purpose shootings. As far as domestic violence goes, it happens whether or not there is a gun involved.



Um, check your privilege? 

Just because people didn't talk about the unpleasantness didn't mean it wasn't there. 

No, guns don't make criminals, but they do facilitate crime. 

I grew up in a mostly white neighborhood, but yes, one of my neighbors shot his wife during a domestic argument, then tried to dispose of the body by dismembering it.  (Their daughter hung around our peer group, and she developed quite a morbid sense of humor.)


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 7, 2022)

2aguy said:


> You don't know what you are talking about....you are talking out of your ass......
> 
> Criminals, when confronted run away...of all the actual criminals attacking people with guns, only about 235 of them are stupid enough each year to press the attack in the face of a gun armed victim....



Again, just not credible... you Ammosexuals get on here every day fantasizing about shooting you a criminal (or just some person of color who scared you really bad) and then you are going to have me believe that happy day comes, and you don't shoot?   Come on, it isn't credible.

Reality... crime is actually pretty rare, even with the grinding poverty in this country.   That's why DGU's are rare.   Guns make it easier, though, for that domestic argument over a burnt pot roast to turn into a fatal incident. 



2aguy said:


> And to the lie about 43......
> 
> Kellerman who did the study that came up with the 43 times more likely myth, was forced to retract that study and to do the research over when other academics pointed out how flawed his methods were....he then changed the 43 times number to 2.7, but he was still using flawed data to get even that number.....



Never happened.  He CLARIFIED it point out that most of the 43 were gun suicides, like suicides are less dead than murder victims.  Point is, a gun in the house makes suicide a lot easier.   Something a coworker of mine found out when her angsty teenager used his gun to kill himself.  Something my next door neighbor figured out after a dry run and the cops didn't take away his gun after he fired a round across the parking lot.


----------



## Hollie (Oct 7, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Actually, your whole premise is that criminals are stupid.  They don't confront directly and give you a chance to get your gun.  They either wait until you aren't home or they blitz you before you know what hit you.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Remarkable how the Leftisexuals are flailing their Pom Poms for BLM. It's largely a criminal enterprise and a get-rich-quick scheme but self hating  white Leftisexuals took it as some sort of victory that cities burned and property was destroyed. 

Again - you play with numbers you don't understand.


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 7, 2022)

Hollie said:


> Remarkable how the Leftisexuals are flailing their Pom Poms for BLM. It's largely a criminal enterprise and a get-rich-quick scheme but self hating white Leftisexuals took it as some sort of victory that cities burned and property was destroyed.



Quite the contrary..

I would like to have had us reform the police when BLM was peacefully protesting between Trayvon Martin and George Floyd. 





Sadly, white people only care about things when you threaten to break their stuff.  We saw that in the 1960's when we had race riots, we saw that in 1992 when we had riots after the Rodney King verdict.  

 Shouldn't be that way.  We should have realized we had a problem and addressed it years before any riots broke out.   We didn't.  Then you scratch your big monkey cranium and wonder why they riot. 

I wondered what took so long.  



Hollie said:


> Again - you play with numbers you don't understand.



I understand the numbers just fine... it's your side that was so afraid of the numbers you insisted the CDC stop studying gun violence.


----------



## Blues Man (Oct 7, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Because they are non-events.  We don't know how many times someone ran away because someone waived his penis compensator at them.  And we don't know how many battered housewives live in terror that their husbands will use that gun to hunt them and the children down if they try to leave.  Because these numbers are largely uncountable.
> 
> We do have very countable numbers in how many people DIE from gunshot wounds.
> 
> ...


So you're just making shit up


As usual.

And it has been repeatedly that not all DGUs result in the death  f the piece of shit criminal so the fact that there are only 200 DGU deaths annually proves the restraint of the average law abiding gun owner.


----------



## 2aguy (Oct 7, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Because they are non-events.  We don't know how many times someone ran away because someone waived his penis compensator at them.  And we don't know how many battered housewives live in terror that their husbands will use that gun to hunt them and the children down if they try to leave.  Because these numbers are largely uncountable.
> 
> We do have very countable numbers in how many people DIE from gunshot wounds.
> 
> ...




Shithead.........you know so little about so much and you know it with such conviction....

The gun murder rate is normally about 10,000 a year...but thanks to you and other democrats, you have allowed violent criminals to run free, and then, when captured, you release them over and over again.....

You keep bringing up Japan......you would hate the Japanese Criminal Justice system because they actually hold criminals responsible for their crimes....

You hate American police...but the Japanese police, prosecutors and judges have power you hate...the cops can search you whenever they want for whatever reason they want, including your home, they can arrest and hold you, and the prosecutors can hold you for as long as they want until you confess....and the judges go along with it...

You are insane.


----------



## 2aguy (Oct 7, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Quite the contrary..
> 
> I would like to have had us reform the police when BLM was peacefully protesting between Trayvon Martin and George Floyd.
> 
> ...




Hey, dumb shit......the democrat party unleashed their brown shirts, blm and antifa into black neighborhoods...to loot, burn and murder........because those areas are controlled by the democrat party and their extreme gun control...so your democrats looted, burned and murdered in black neighborhoods for 7 months........you are racists.......


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 7, 2022)

Blues Man said:


> And it has been repeatedly that not all DGUs result in the death f the piece of shit criminal so the fact that there are only 200 DGU deaths annually proves the restraint of the average law abiding gun owner.



A non-lethal DGU is a non-event.... and can safely be ignored  So when we talk about lethal DGU's, that' only 200 a year. 

Seriously no one believes that you ammosexuals finally get a chance to plug you a darkie, and you don't take it.



2aguy said:


> The gun murder rate is normally about 10,000 a year...but thanks to you and other democrats, you have allowed violent criminals to run free, and then, when captured, you release them over and over again.....



Uh, guy, nobody is committing murders because the cops have to justify why they pulled you over for a DWB.  We have murders because your side flooded our streets with guns. 

So how about allowing us to ban guns in communities that want to ban guns, and we'll see how that works.



2aguy said:


> You keep bringing up Japan......you would hate the Japanese Criminal Justice system because they actually hold criminals responsible for their crimes....



Again, let's get real here.

The US locks up 2 million people. 

The  Japanese lock up 45,000 people.



2aguy said:


> You hate American police...but the Japanese police, prosecutors and judges have power you hate...the cops can search you whenever they want for whatever reason they want, including your home, they can arrest and hold you, and the prosecutors can hold you for as long as they want until you confess....and the judges go along with it...
> 
> You are insane.



See above.  If the Japanese are so awful, why do they lock up so few people? 





2aguy said:


> Hey, dumb shit......the democrat party unleashed their brown shirts, blm and antifa into black neighborhoods...to loot, burn and murder........because those areas are controlled by the democrat party and their extreme gun control...so your democrats looted, burned and murdered in black neighborhoods for 7 months........you are racists.......



We don't have extreme gun control anywhere in this country.   Sorry, man making me pay $11.00 to get a FOID card and pinky-swearing I'm not a criminal is hardly gun control. 

Black people didn't riot because BLM or the Democrats told them to, they rioted because they got fed up with police misconduct combined with a heightened level of anxiety due to Covid and Trump's recession.


----------



## 2aguy (Oct 7, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> A non-lethal DGU is a non-event.... and can safely be ignored  So when we talk about lethal DGU's, that' only 200 a year.
> 
> Seriously no one believes that you ammosexuals finally get a chance to plug you a darkie, and you don't take it.
> 
> ...




The Japanese are conformist to the point of being almost drones, and their police, prosecutors and judges can lock people up easily......you hate American police, but applaud the police state of Japan.....you are an idiot.....


----------



## Hollie (Oct 7, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Quite the contrary..
> 
> I would like to have had us reform the police when BLM was peacefully protesting between Trayvon Martin and George Floyd.
> 
> ...



Tell us about peaceful protests.


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 8, 2022)

2aguy said:


> The Japanese are conformist to the point of being almost drones, and their police, prosecutors and judges can lock people up easily......you hate American police, but applaud the police state of Japan.....you are an idiot.....



Wow, you don't know a lot of Japanese people...  they would call you a _baka _for such an idiotic statement.  

The Japanese have low crime rates and prison rates because they do the things we refuse to do. 

They ban private gun ownership.
They have extensive anti-poverty programs.
They treat their mentally ill, they don't let them wander the streets.
They treat addiction as a medical problem and not a criminal one. 

Their police and judges only lock up 47,000 people. 
Our Police and judges lock up nearly 2 million people. 

Someone is getting this right, and it's not us.


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 8, 2022)

Hollie said:


> Tell us about peaceful protests.



Sure. We had peaceful protests from 2010 to 2020.
And fucking white people, being kind of fucking awful, didn't care.  
What, you're taking a knee during the national anthem?  YOU FUCKING TRAITOR, LET'S DESTROY YOUR CAREER!!!
So all those peaceful protests were ignored, the cops kept killing people, and just like that, when another aggravating incident happened, people rioted.


----------



## Blues Man (Oct 8, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> A non-lethal DGU is a non-event.... and can safely be ignored  So when we talk about lethal DGU's, that' only 200 a year.
> 
> Seriously no one believes that you ammosexuals finally get a chance to plug you a darkie, and you don't take it.
> 
> ...


Wrong as usual.

Using a gun to stop a crime without a shot fired is still a DGU


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 8, 2022)

Blues Man said:


> Wrong as usual.
> 
> Using a gun to stop a crime without a shot fired is still a DGU



Well, no, it's threatening a person with a gun who may not even have been intending to commit a crime. 

"Oh, there was a scary black man on the subway, and I pointed my gun at him and he ran away... DGU! DGU!"  

"Yeah, honey, I was riding home and some crazy cracker pulled out a gun and started waiving it around."  

So let's review, shall we.  The way you guys tell it, there is a constant threat of home invasions where you have to worry about being killed by armed invaders... but..









						21 Important Home Invasion Statistics to Consider in 2022
					

The most recent home invasion statistics reveal that the number of burglaries fell by more than 50% over the last 20 years. Read on for more stats!




					comfyliving.net
				




*3. There are around 100 burglaries that result in homicide every year in the United States. *​*Home invasion murders statistics are actually lower than many people believe. In fact, in many cases, burglars are not armed with guns. Protection against home invasion is one of the reasons that people who own guns buy them. *


But wait, there's more.  You think with all the Ammosexuals in Jesusland, you'd have less issues with burglary and home invasion, but...


*8. 44% of break-ins in the US happen in the South.*​*With a burglary rate of 767.8 per 100,000 population, New Mexico had the greatest incidence of break-ins for 2018. Mississippi, Oklahoma, and Louisiana ranked next to New Mexico, with 697.8, 681.1, and 668.1 burglary cases per 100,000, respectively.




*


*21. Only 30% of perpetrators were armed in the case of a home invasion, gun statistics reveal.*​(BJS)

Following the results of the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS) published by the US Bureau of Justice Statistics in 2010, a member of a household was present in about 28% of the committed break-ins between 2003 and 2007.

In 63% of the cases, the household members were faced with an unarmed offender, and around 92% of them were left unharmed. In case you were wondering how many home invasions were stopped by guns, it’s important to note that the majority of home invaders are unarmed themselves. 

While 7% of all home invasions in this period resulted in an injury, killings were very rare. Namely, of the overall burglaries with fatal consequences, only 0.004% were due to household burglaries.


----------



## 2aguy (Oct 8, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Wow, you don't know a lot of Japanese people...  they would call you a _baka _for such an idiotic statement.
> 
> The Japanese have low crime rates and prison rates because they do the things we refuse to do.
> 
> ...




Moron...you hate AMerican police, but praise Japanese police..you are a pathetic asshole....I would love to see you facing Japanese police, prosecutors and judges...you dimwit.....

Japan: Gun Control and People Control

*Japan's low crime rate has almost nothing to do with gun control, and everything to do with people control. Americans, used to their own traditions of freedom, would not accept Japan's system of people controls and gun controls.



Robbery in Japan is about as rare as murder. Japan's annual robbery rate is 1.8 per 100,000 inhabitants; America's is 205.4. Do the gun banners have the argument won when they point to these statistics? No, they don't. *

*A realistic examination of Japanese culture leads to the conclusion that gun control has little, if anything, to do with Japan's low crime rates. *


*Japan's lack of crime is more the result of the very extensive powers of the Japanese police, and the distinctive relation of the Japanese citizenry to authority. Further, none of the reasons which have made gun control succeed in Japan (in terms of disarming citizens) exist in the U.S.

The Japanese criminal justice system bears more heavily on a suspect than any other system in an industrial democratic nation. One American found this out when he was arrested in Okinawa for possessing marijuana: he was interrogated for days without an attorney, and signed a confession written in Japanese that he could not read. He met his lawyer for the first time at his trial, which took 30 minutes.

Unlike in the United States, where the Miranda rule limits coercive police interrogation techniques, **Japanese police and prosecutors may detain a suspect indefinitely until he confesses. (Technically, detentions are only allowed for three days, followed by ten day extensions approved by a judge, but defense attorneys rarely oppose the extension request, for fear of offending the prosecutor.) Bail is denied if it would interfere with interrogation.**
*
*Even after interrogation is completed, pretrial detention may continue on a variety of pretexts, such as preventing the defendant from destroying evidence. Criminal defense lawyers are the only people allowed to visit a detained suspect, and those meetings are strictly limited.

Partly as a result of these coercive practices, and partly as a result of the Japanese sense of shame, the confession rate is 95%.

For those few defendants who dare to go to trial, there is no jury. Since judges almost always defer to the prosecutors' judgment, the trial conviction rate for violent crime is 99.5%.
Of those convicted, 98% receive jail time.

In short, once a Japanese suspect is apprehended, the power of the prosecutor makes it very likely the suspect will go to jail. And the power of the policeman makes it quite likely that a criminal will be apprehended.*

*The police routinely ask "suspicious" characters to show what is in their purse or sack. In effect, the police can search almost anyone, almost anytime, because courts only rarely exclude evidence seized by the police -- even if the police acted illegally.**

The most important element of police power, though, is not authority to search, but authority in the community. Like school teachers, Japanese policemen rate high in public esteem, especially in the countryside. Community leaders and role models, the police are trained in calligraphy and Haiku composition. In police per capita, Japan far outranks all other major democracies.

15,000 koban "police boxes" are located throughout the cities. Citizens go to the 24-hour-a-day boxes not only for street directions, but to complain about day-to-day problems, such as noisy neighbors, or to ask advice on how to raise children. Some of the policemen and their families live in the boxes. Police box officers clear 74.6% of all criminal cases cleared. Police box officers also spend time teaching neighborhood youth judo or calligraphy. The officers even hand- write their own newspapers, with information about crime and accidents, "stories about good deeds by children, and opinions of
residents."

The police box system contrasts sharply with the practice in America. Here, most departments adopt a policy of "stranger policing." To prevent corruption, police are frequently rotated from one neighborhood to another. But as federal judge Charles Silberman writes, "the cure is worse than the disease, for officers develop no sense of identification with their beats, hence no emotional stake in improving the quality of life there."

Thus, the U.S. citizenry does not develop a supportive relationship with the police. One poll showed that 60% of police officers believe "it is difficult to persuade people to give patrolmen the information they need."

The Japanese police do not spend all their time in the koban boxes. As the Japanese government puts it: "Home visit is one of the most important duties of officers assigned to police boxes." Making annual visits to each home in their beat, officers keep track of who lives where, and which family member to contact in case of emergency. The police also check on all gun licensees, to make sure no gun has been stolen or misused, that the gun is securely stored, and that the licensees are emotionally stable.

Gun banners might rejoice at a society where the police keep such a sharp eye on citizens' guns. But the price is that the police keep an eye on everything.

Policemen are apt to tell people reading sexually-oriented magazines to read something more worthwhile. Japan's major official year-end police report includes statistics like "Background and Motives for Girls' Sexual Misconduct." In 1985, the police determined that 37.4% of the girls had been seduced, and the rest had had sex "voluntarily." For the volunteers, 19.6% acted "out of curiosity", while for 18.1%, the motive was "liked particular boy." The year-end police report also includes sections on labor demands, and on anti-nuclear or anti-military demonstrations.*


----------



## 2aguy (Oct 8, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Well, no, it's threatening a person with a gun who may not even have been intending to commit a crime.
> 
> "Oh, there was a scary black man on the subway, and I pointed my gun at him and he ran away... DGU! DGU!"
> 
> ...




Moron....American criminals state they don't invade homes when people are there because they are afraid of home owners with guns...you doofus.....

http://www.davekopel.com/2A/LawRev/LawyersGunsBurglars.htm#FN;F64

*C. In Homes and on the Street*​*Rengert and Wasilchick's book about how burglars work reveals that fear of armed homeowners played a major role in determining burglary targets. Burglars reported that they avoided late-night burglaries because, "That's the way to get shot." [FN63] Some burglars said that they shun burglaries in neighborhoods with people of mostly a different race because, "You'll get shot if you're caught there." [FN64]*


*The most thorough study of burglary patterns was a St. Louis survey of 105 currently active burglars. [FN65] The authors observed, "One of the most serious risks faced by residential burglars is the possibility of being injured or killed by occupants of a target. Many of the offenders we spoke to reported that this was far and away their greatest fear." [FN66] Said one burglar: "I don't think about gettin' caught, I think about gettin' gunned down, shot or somethin'...'cause you get into some people's houses...quick as I come in there, boom, they hit you right there. That's what I think about."
Another burglar explained:*


> *Hey, wouldn't you blow somebody away if someone broke into your house and you don't know them? You hear this noise and they come breakin' in the window tryin' to get into your house, they gon' want to kill you anyway. See, with the police, they gon' say, "Come out with your hands up and don't do nothing foolish!" Okay, you still alive, but you goin' to jail. But you alive. You sneak into somebody's house and they wait til you get in the house and then they shoot you.. . .See what I'm sayin'? You can't explain nothin' to nobody; you layin' down in there dead! [FN67]*


*In contrast, Missouri is one of only nine states which has no provision for citizens to be issued permits to carry handguns for protection. Thus, a criminal in St. Louis faces a very high risk that the target of a home invasion may have a lawful gun for protection, but minimal risk that the target of a street robbery will have a lawful firearm for defense. The same authors who studied active St. Louis burglars conducted another study of active St. Louis armed robbers. [FN68] They found that "ome of the offenders who favored armed robbery over other crimes *355 maintained that the offense was also safer than burglary. . .." [FN69] As one armed robber put it: "My style is, like,  don't have to be up in nobody's house in case they come in; they might have a pistol in the house or something." [FN70]
On the streets, many of the St. Louis robbers "routinely targeted law-abiding citizens," [FN71] who, unlike their counterparts in most American states, were certain not to be carrying a gun for protection. Law-abiding citizens were chosen as robbery victims because, as one robber noted, "You don't want to pick somebody dangerous; they might have a gun themselves." [FN72]
In addition to the St. Louis study, the Wright-Rossi National Institute of Justice surveyed felony prisoners in eleven state prison systems on the impact of victim firearms on burglar behavior. [FN73] In that survey, seventy-four percent of the convicts who had committed a burglary or violent crime agreed, "One reason burglars avoid houses when people are at home is that they fear being shot." *_*[FN74]*_


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 8, 2022)

2aguy said:


> Moron...you hate AMerican police, but praise Japanese police..you are a pathetic asshole....I would love to see you facing Japanese police, prosecutors and judges...you dimwit.....



If American police behaved like Japanese police, most people wouldn't have a problem with them.  

Now, obviously, Japan does not have the issues the US has with Racism because 99% of the population of Japan are ethnic Japanese.  

Japan's biggest crime problem right now are old people committing petty shoplifting because they are lonely and want the police to pay attention to them.  The police usually handle these people with great delicacy and care.  









						Older Japanese women are shoplifting to find community and meaning in jail
					

In Japan, where 27.3% of the population is 65 or older, elderly women are committing petty crimes like shoplifting in order to




					kottke.org


----------



## 2aguy (Oct 8, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> If American police behaved like Japanese police, most people wouldn't have a problem with them.
> 
> Now, obviously, Japan does not have the issues the US has with Racism because 99% of the population of Japan are ethnic Japanese.
> 
> ...




If American police behaved like Japanese police, prosecutors and judges, you gang banger buddies would all be in prison for life....not released the same day with no cash bail..........


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 8, 2022)

2aguy said:


> Moron....American criminals state they don't invade homes when people are there because they are afraid of home owners with guns...you doofus.....



We have 1 million burglaries in this country...  most criminals are smart enough to wait until they know nobody is home to rob it...  

And look, Free Gun!  You didn't think this through at all, did you? 





__





						Gun Theft In America
					

Gun theft is on the rise in the U.S. and it's increasingly becoming an issue where guns are stolen from vehicles. If you travel with firearms, you need to make sure they're locked up when unattended.




					truckvault.com


----------



## Blues Man (Oct 8, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Well, no, it's threatening a person with a gun who may not even have been intending to commit a crime.
> 
> "Oh, there was a scary black man on the subway, and I pointed my gun at him and he ran away... DGU! DGU!"
> 
> ...


Wrong again.

And a 1 in 3 chance of a home invader being armed are not odds I want against me especially since the Supreme Court has ruled that the police have absolutely no legal obligation to come to the aid of anyone.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Oct 8, 2022)

Mikeoxenormous said:


> Shotgun-wielding would-be robber claims ‘I’m from Chicago, bro,’ leaves as clerk displays gun
> 
> 
> Rakim Stephen Tate allegedly walked into a Florida convenience store with a shotgun during an attempted robbery but walked out when a clerk displayed his own weapon, authorities said.
> ...


Another good guy Trump's bad guy with a gun.


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 8, 2022)

2aguy said:


> If American police behaved like Japanese police, prosecutors and judges, you gang banger buddies would all be in prison for life....not released the same day with no cash bail..........



Except the Japanese only lock up 45,000 people 
And we lock up 2 million.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Oct 8, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> We have 1 million burglaries in this country...  most criminals are smart enough to wait until they know nobody is home to rob it...
> 
> And look, Free Gun!  You didn't think this through at all, did you?
> 
> ...


Fuck off


----------



## Blues Man (Oct 8, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> We have 1 million burglaries in this country...  most criminals are smart enough to wait until they know nobody is home to rob it...
> 
> And look, Free Gun!  You didn't think this through at all, did you?
> 
> ...



There you go again blaming law abiding citizens for the crimes committed by others


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 8, 2022)

Blues Man said:


> Wrong again.
> 
> And a 1 in 3 chance of a home invader being armed are not odds I want against me especially since the Supreme Court has ruled that the police have absolutely no legal obligation to come to the aid of anyone.



Here's the thing...  as pointed out, deaths during burglaries are rare, and most "home invasions" are the burglar thought no one was home.


----------



## 2aguy (Oct 8, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> If American police behaved like Japanese police, most people wouldn't have a problem with them.
> 
> Now, obviously, Japan does not have the issues the US has with Racism because 99% of the population of Japan are ethnic Japanese.
> 
> ...




Are you really this fucking stupid?

Japan is one of the most racist, xenophobic countries in the world.....if you are not Japanese, born in Japan, you are a lesser human......


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Oct 8, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Except the Japanese only lock up 45,000 people
> And we lock up 2 million.


Democrat crime bill that Jo authored created those numbers dumbass you support si shut the fuck up about those numbers.


----------



## Blues Man (Oct 8, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Here's the thing...  as pointed out, deaths during burglaries are rare, and most "home invasions" are the burglar thought no one was home.



So the fuck what?

I suppose you would just stand there pissing your pants while your home was being cleaned out.


----------



## 2aguy (Oct 8, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Here's the thing...  as pointed out, deaths during burglaries are rare, and most "home invasions" are the burglar thought no one was home.




Yep....because American criminals know that American home owners can have guns, so they try to burgle houses rather than rob them.....you idiot....

http://www.davekopel.com/2A/LawRev/LawyersGunsBurglars.htm#FN;F64

*C. In Homes and on the Street*​*Rengert and Wasilchick's book about how burglars work reveals that fear of armed homeowners played a major role in determining burglary targets. Burglars reported that they avoided late-night burglaries because, "That's the way to get shot." [FN63] Some burglars said that they shun burglaries in neighborhoods with people of mostly a different race because, "You'll get shot if you're caught there." [FN64]


The most thorough study of burglary patterns was a St. Louis survey of 105 currently active burglars. [FN65] The authors observed, "One of the most serious risks faced by residential burglars is the possibility of being injured or killed by occupants of a target. Many of the offenders we spoke to reported that this was far and away their greatest fear." [FN66]Said one burglar: "I don't think about gettin' caught, I think about gettin' gunned down, shot or somethin'...'cause you get into some people's houses...quick as I come in there, boom, they hit you right there. That's what I think about."
Another burglar explained:*


> *Hey, wouldn't you blow somebody away if someone broke into your house and you don't know them? You hear this noise and they come breakin' in the window tryin' to get into your house, they gon' want to kill you anyway. See, with the police, they gon' say, "Come out with your hands up and don't do nothing foolish!" Okay, you still alive, but you goin' to jail. But you alive. You sneak into somebody's house and they wait til you get in the house and then they shoot you.. . .See what I'm sayin'? You can't explain nothin' to nobody; you layin' down in there dead! [FN67]*


*In contrast, Missouri is one of only nine states which has no provision for citizens to be issued permits to carry handguns for protection. Thus, a criminal in St. Louis faces a very high risk that the target of a home invasion may have a lawful gun for protection, but minimal risk that the target of a street robbery will have a lawful firearm for defense. The same authors who studied active St. Louis burglars conducted another study of active St. Louis armed robbers. [FN68] They found that "ome of the offenders who favored armed robbery over other crimes *355 maintained that the offense was also safer than burglary. . .." [FN69] As one armed robber put it: "My style is, like, don't have to be up in nobody's house in case they come in; they might have a pistol in the house or something." [FN70]
On the streets, many of the St. Louis robbers "routinely targeted law-abiding citizens," [FN71] who, unlike their counterparts in most American states, were certain not to be carrying a gun for protection. Law-abiding citizens were chosen as robbery victims because, as one robber noted, "You don't want to pick somebody dangerous; they might have a gun themselves." [FN72]
In addition to the St. Louis study, the Wright-Rossi National Institute of Justice surveyed felony prisoners in eleven state prison systems on the impact of victim firearms on burglar behavior. [FN73] In that survey, seventy-four percent of the convicts who had committed a burglary or violent crime agreed, "One reason burglars avoid houses when people are at home is that they fear being shot." *_*[FN74]*_


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 8, 2022)

Blues Man said:


> Wrong again.
> 
> And a 1 in 3 chance of a home invader being armed are not odds I want against me especially since the Supreme Court has ruled that the police have absolutely no legal obligation to come to the aid of anyone.



Or we could make guns actually harder for criminals to get... that would be a great idea. 

We could even try something as crazy as fixing poverty and addiction and mental illness


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Oct 8, 2022)

2aguy said:


> Are you really this fucking stupid?
> 
> Japan is one of the most racist, xenophobic countries in the world.....if you are not Japanese, born in Japan, you are a lesser human......


Yes he really is that fucking stupid.


----------



## 2aguy (Oct 8, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> We have 1 million burglaries in this country...  most criminals are smart enough to wait until they know nobody is home to rob it...
> 
> And look, Free Gun!  You didn't think this through at all, did you?
> 
> ...




Moron.......we have more burglaries because people have guns, the criminals don't want to get shot, you dumb ass...


----------



## 2aguy (Oct 8, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Or we could make guns actually harder for criminals to get... that would be a great idea.
> 
> We could even try something as crazy as fixing poverty and addiction and mental illness




The democrats don't want to fix any of those things...those are their primary recruiting tools for democrat party voters...


----------



## 2aguy (Oct 8, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Or we could make guns actually harder for criminals to get... that would be a great idea.
> 
> We could even try something as crazy as fixing poverty and addiction and mental illness




How about if you are a criminal caught with a gun, you go to prison for 30 years........that actually works.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Oct 8, 2022)

2aguy said:


> The democrats don't want to fix any of those things...those are their primary recruiting tools for democrat party voters...


The no bail policy Democrats created.


----------



## Blues Man (Oct 8, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Or we could make guns actually harder for criminals to get... that would be a great idea.
> 
> We could even try something as crazy as fixing poverty and addiction and mental illness



Or we could just punish criminals who possess guns illegally.

Our gun violence problem is 100% the fault of the fucking government and NOT the fault of the 100 plus million law abiding gun owners.  Our government refuses to enforce the gun laws we have on the books.

THAT is the problem


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Oct 8, 2022)

2aguy said:


> How about if you are a criminal caught with a gun, you go to prison for 30 years........that actually works.


Yep


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 8, 2022)

Blues Man said:


> So the fuck what?
> 
> I suppose you would just stand there pissing your pants while your home was being cleaned out.



I could think of half a dozen ways I could take on a burglar without resorting to a gun.   But the reality is they would probably run away once they realized someone was home and the cops had been called. 



2aguy said:


> Yep....because American criminals know that American home owners can have guns, so they try to burgle houses rather than rob them.....you idiot....



Actually, burglary statistics are about the same in European countries were guns are banned.   Because you break into a house where someone is home, you are more likely to be identified and prosecuted. 

Now, when I lived in Cicero (Good times), I was robbed while I was out on National Guard maneuvers   The Cicero cops just wrote up a report and that was the end of it. No investigation, no dusting for prints, etc.  

Had I been home, and been able to identify the perps, or if there had been some kind of confrontation they'd have taken it more seriously, I'm sure.   That's why burglars don't break into homes, it increases their chances of being caught.  

Only about 100 people are killed in the course of a burglary each year, and less than 200 homicides are ruled as justified self-defense (most of those domestic, not home invasion).


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Oct 8, 2022)

Blues Man said:


> Or we could just punish criminals who possess guns illegally.
> 
> Our gun violence problem is 100% the fault of the fucking government and NOT the fault of the 100 plus million law abiding gun owners.  Our government refuses to enforce the gun laws we have on the books.
> 
> THAT is the problem








						70% of Those Released on $0 Bail Commit New Crimes | Yolo County District Attorney
					






					yoloda.org


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 8, 2022)

Blues Man said:


> Or we could just punish criminals who possess guns illegally.


We lock up 2 million people. 



Blues Man said:


> Our gun violence problem is 100% the fault of the fucking government and NOT the fault of the 100 plus million law abiding gun owners. Our government refuses to enforce the gun laws we have on the books.


Nope, it's the fault of a gun industry that has made it easy for crooks to get guns, because people like you get all scared and want them, too.


----------



## Blues Man (Oct 8, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> I could think of half a dozen ways I could take on a burglar without resorting to a gun.   But the reality is they would probably run away once they realized someone was home and the cops had been called.


Sure you can Internet Badass that you are


----------



## Blues Man (Oct 8, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> We lock up 2 million people.
> 
> 
> Nope, it's the fault of a gun industry that has made it easy for crooks to get guns, because people like you get all scared and want them, too.


So what?

We have a society that breeds criminals


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (Oct 8, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> We lock up 2 million people.
> 
> 
> Nope, it's the fault of a gun industry that has made it easy for crooks to get guns, because people like you get all scared and want them, too.


Do the crime do the time. 
Why don't you volunteer to work in a correction center?


----------



## 2aguy (Oct 8, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> I could think of half a dozen ways I could take on a burglar without resorting to a gun.   But the reality is they would probably run away once they realized someone was home and the cops had been called.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Wrong, they have far more home invasions in Europe, especially Britain...they know how long it takes the police to arrive if the victims manage to call for help, and they torture their victims for information and fun...you doofus.

Britain......

Burglary victims attacked in their own home once every 30 minutes


*A householder is attacked by a violent burglar every 30 minutes.*

The shocking statistic exposes for the first time the epidemic of terrifying intruder confrontations taking place in Britain.

It will intensify demands for householders to be given greater protection if they use force to protect themselves and their family against a burglar.

In the wake of the case of Munir Hussain, who was jailed and later freed for beating a raider, ministers insisted it was extremely rare for a person to find themselves in trouble with the police for fighting back against a burglar.

*But with householders suffering violence on 23,000 occasions last year, campaigners say the case for a change to the law is growing ever stronger.*

The Tories, who compiled the figures, have given a manifesto commitment to review the law, which currently allows a householder to respond with 'reasonable force'.

Under one option being considered, a burglary victim who took on an intruder could only be prosecuted if they used 'grossly disproportionate force'.

Shadow Home Secretary Chris Grayling said: 'These figures are an alarming indication of the culture of violence that has built up in our society.

'It just goes to show how important it is that we change the law to give proper protection to householders who defend themselves and their families against a violent intruder in their homes.

'The Government promised to change the law, but then didn't. We will.'

The figures emerged in an analysis of official crime statistics. Last year, the number of domestic burglaries recorded by police in England and Wales rose for the first time in six years, from 280,694 in 2007-08 to 284,427.

The British Crime Survey provides more information on the nature of burglaries than those recorded in police crime figures.

*According to the BCS, householders came face-to-face with burglars in 20 per cent of domestic burglaries last year. That translates one every ten minutes. In other cases, either no one was at home or the victim was at home but unaware they were being burgled and did not see the offender.*

*Of the burglaries in which the victim came face-to-face with the intruder, violence was either used or threatened in 59 per cent of crimes.*



Read more: Burglary victims attacked in their own home once every 30 minutes
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook

An Englishman's home is his dungeon

But the trouble is that this kind of burglary - the kind most likely to go "wrong" - is now the norm in Britain. In America, it's called a "hot" burglary - a burglary that takes place when the homeowners are present - or a "home invasion", which is a much more accurate term. Just over 10 per cent of US burglaries are "hot" burglaries, and in my part of the world it's statistically insignificant: there is virtually zero chance of a New Hampshire home being broken into while the family are present.

But in England and Wales it's more than 50 per cent and climbing. Which is hardly surprising given the police's petty, well-publicised pursuit of those citizens who have the impertinence to resist criminals.

*These days, even as he or she is being clobbered, the more thoughtful British subject is usually keeping an eye (the one that hasn't been poked out) on potential liability. Four years ago, Shirley Best, proprietor of the Rolander Fashion emporium, whose clients include Zara Phillips, was ironing some clothes when the proverbial two youths showed up. They pressed the hot iron into her flesh, burning her badly, and then stole her watch. "I was frightened to defend myself," said Miss Best. "I thought if I did anything I would be arrested." There speaks the modern British crime victim.*


----------



## Vagabond63 (Oct 8, 2022)

2aguy said:


> Japan is one of the most racist, xenophobic countries in the world.....if you are not Japanese, born in Japan, you are a lesser human......


The same could equally be said of parts of America.


----------



## Vagabond63 (Oct 8, 2022)

2aguy said:


> Wrong, they have far more home invasions in Europe, especially Britain...they know how long it takes the police to arrive if the victims manage to call for help, and they torture their victims for information and fun...you doofus.
> 
> Britain......
> 
> ...


More complete BS.
Cherry picked articles from unreliable sources (Even Wikipedia doesn't accept the Daily Mail as a valid source) and out of date to boot. From the 2004 article, the total number of burglaries that year was 820,013. This had dropped to 383,912 by 2019 (pre-pandemic) Burglary offences in England and Wales 2022 | Statista
Also BS in both articles is the law on the use of reasonable force. The reality can be found here: Using reasonable force against intruders


----------



## 2aguy (Oct 8, 2022)

Vagabond63 said:


> The same could equally be said of parts of America.



And Britain with your no go zones....


----------



## 2aguy (Oct 8, 2022)

Vagabond63 said:


> More complete BS.
> Cherry picked articles from unreliable sources (Even Wikipedia doesn't accept the Daily Mail as a valid source) and out of date to boot. From the 2004 article, the total number of burglaries that year was 820,013. This had dropped to 383,912 by 2019 (pre-pandemic) Burglary offences in England and Wales 2022 | Statista
> Also BS in both articles is the law on the use of reasonable force. The reality can be found here: Using reasonable force against intruders




Yes......anything that shows you are an idiot is an "unreliable source," even if it is simply reporting on an actual event....you doofus.


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 8, 2022)

Blues Man said:


> So what?
> 
> We have a society that breeds criminals



I agree.. we have grinding poverty, institutionalized racism, easy access to weapons, untreated mental illness and addiction.   All of these things breed criminals, as does a prison industrial complex that creates a recidivist class.  

We should probably do something about those things.  



2aguy said:


> Wrong, they have far more home invasions in Europe, especially Britain...they know how long it takes the police to arrive if the victims manage to call for help, and they torture their victims for information and fun...you doofus.



Number of murders in the UK -  809 in 2018.   Homicide rate of 1.18 per 100,000. 
Number of murders in the US -  24,576 in 2020,  Homicide rate of 7.5 per 100,000.   









						United Kingdom vs United States: Crime Facts and Stats
					

Total crimes, Crime levels, Murder rate per million people, Intentional homicide rate, Murder rate and 62 More Interesting Facts and Stats



					www.nationmaster.com
				




The UK is doing better than us in nearly every metric related to crime.


----------



## 2aguy (Oct 8, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> I agree.. we have grinding poverty, institutionalized racism, easy access to weapons, untreated mental illness and addiction.   All of these things breed criminals, as does a prison industrial complex that creates a recidivist class.
> 
> We should probably do something about those things.
> 
> ...




We were talking home invasions, doofus.....

No, they aren't.   They don't have a political party that is destroying their police and releasing violent criminals...but they are working on those too......


And the murder rate in the U.S. is driven almost exclusively by democrat party controlled cities and the policies of the democrat party.......


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 8, 2022)

2aguy said:


> And Britain with your no go zones....



And this is what happens when you watch too much Fox News.. you think "No Go Zones" are real. 









						‘No-Go Zones’: The Myth That Just Won’t Quit
					






					www.splcenter.org
				




The bottom line — as Fox News was forced to admit in four separate apologies — is that while all pluralistic societies include areas that are more or less comfortable for certain individuals depending on cultural expectations, and all cities have high-crime areas (though these two are not necessarily overlapping), there are not now, nor have there been in living memory, actual Muslim-controlled “no-go zones” anywhere in Europe or the U.S.


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 8, 2022)

2aguy said:


> We were talking home invasions, doofus.....
> 
> No, they aren't. They don't have a political party that is destroying their police and releasing violent criminals...but they are working on those too......
> 
> ...



That's not really true.  Murder rates have increased in the Rural Areas (or as I loving call them, Jesusland) as well. 









						It's Not Just Cities. Violent Crime in Rural Communities Has Inched Up Too. - RELEVANT
					

There is a lot of misunderstanding about the so-called "crime wave" facing American cities in the news media right now, the first one being that there




					relevantmagazine.com
				




But now, a report from the Wall Street Journal says it’s just not that simple. For example, homicide rates in rural America spiked 25 percent according to Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. That’s not far behind the 30 percent increase urban areas saw. In other words, whatever slight bump affected places like Chicago, San Francisco and New York City is happening in the small towns of South Carolina, Montana and Arkansas too.

(I'd link to the OG WSJ article, but Paywall.)  









						The Red State Murder Problem – Third Way
					

Third Way is a center-left think tank that champions modern solutions to the most challenging problems in US public policy, including the economy, climate and energy, national security, social policy, and politics.




					www.thirdway.org
				




We found that murder rates are, on average, 40% higher in the 25 states Donald Trump won in the last presidential election compared to those that voted for Joe Biden. In addition, murder rates in many of these red states dwarf those in blue states like New York, California, and Massachusetts. And finally, many of the states with the worst murder rates—like Mississippi, Kentucky, Alabama, South Carolina, and Arkansas—are ones that few would describe as urban. Only 2 of America’s top 100 cities in population are located in these high murder rate states. And not a single one of the top 10 murder states registers in the top 15 for population density.


----------



## 2aguy (Oct 8, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> And this is what happens when you watch too much Fox News.. you think "No Go Zones" are real.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Yeah....lefty news sources covering up the actual no go zones in these European countries...you doofus......


*Among the Mosques: Author's study of Muslim Britain reveals a no-go area for white people, children 'attacked for being white', parents making families live under Taliban-like rules and women who can't leave home without permission*​
*Author Ed Husain visited places of worship across UK for Among the Mosques*










						Author who visited Muslim mosques across Britain
					

British writer and political advisor Ed Husain, from London, has penned Among The Mosques: A Journey Across Muslim Britain, which will be released next week.




					www.dailymail.co.uk


----------



## 2aguy (Oct 8, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> That's not really true.  Murder rates have increased in the Rural Areas (or as I loving call them, Jesusland) as well.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




That debunked piece of trash......as Toobfreak listed, the top murder cities in this country are all under democrat party control......you shitheads cite that article because it says Red States, while the murders are happening in the Blue Cities in those states.....you lying piece of shit....


From poster, Toobfreak.

 I chose 58 cities as that was the largest number I could fit on a page. I then went through each city one by one to look up the major of every city. Aside from the fact that you can forget finding any pattern of cities in "red" states being the most with the highest crime as the idiot Marc tries to claim, but I went down the list marking all the mayors of the highest crimes cities in America in *BRIGHT RED* who were DEMOCRATS.


Look at what I found:








*Every city above in red is RUN BY A DEMOCRAT!* 

Murder map: Deadliest U.S. cities


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 8, 2022)

2aguy said:


> That debunked piece of trash......as Toobfreak listed, the top murder cities in this country are all under democrat party control......you shitheads cite that article because it says Red States, while the murders are happening in the Blue Cities in those states.....you lying piece of shit....



Um, cities have larger concentrations of people... so of course, they are going to have more murders...  

I see math is one of those challenges on the right wing.  

So why do the red states have higher murder rates than the blue states?  They have more guns and more prisons and more brutal cops...


----------



## 2aguy (Oct 8, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Um, cities have larger concentrations of people... so of course, they are going to have more murders...
> 
> I see math is one of those challenges on the right wing.
> 
> So why do the red states have higher murder rates than the blue states?  They have more guns and more prisons and more brutal cops...




Nope....the democrat party run cities are crap holes, and violent dystopias directly because the democrat party in those cities have destroyed their police, and they began releasing criminals no matter how violent and dangerous they were......and you can't lie about this anymore....uninformed Americans who never used to pay attention to what assholes like you were doing to their cities are now paying attention and seeing what you are doing to their cities....


----------



## Hollie (Oct 8, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Sure. We had peaceful protests from 2010 to 2020.
> And fucking white people, being kind of fucking awful, didn't care.
> What, you're taking a knee during the national anthem?  YOU FUCKING TRAITOR, LET'S DESTROY YOUR CAREER!!!
> So all those peaceful protests were ignored, the cops kept killing people, and just like that, when another aggravating incident happened, people rioted.


Sure. We had peaceful protests where BLM and leftists rioted, you know, peaceful riots where cities burned, businesses and lives were destroyed, because leftist clowns wanted a ''summer of love''.

I think everyone gets it, You're self-loathing and a keyboard social justice warrior. 

How droll.


----------



## Vagabond63 (Oct 8, 2022)

2aguy said:


> And Britain with your no go zones....


Oh please! The Myth of the No-Go Zone


----------



## Vagabond63 (Oct 8, 2022)

2aguy said:


> Yes......anything that shows you are an idiot is an "unreliable source," even if it is simply reporting on an actual event....you doofus.


What "actual event"? The article quoted fake statistics.


----------



## 2aguy (Oct 8, 2022)

Vagabond63 said:


> What "actual event"? The article quoted fake statistics.




Anything you don't like is declared fake.....got it.


----------



## Blues Man (Oct 8, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> I agree.. we have grinding poverty, institutionalized racism, easy access to weapons, untreated mental illness and addiction.   All of these things breed criminals, as does a prison industrial complex that creates a recidivist class.
> 
> We should probably do something about those things.
> 
> ...


You don't know shit about poverty or racism

I was poorer than dirt poor and homeless, born to a mixed race single parent who ended up a junkie and dead when I was 14.

And you can move to the fucking UK where you can get arrested for reading the "wrong" book or for having a fucking pocket knife or for being mean on Facebook and don't you dare protest the king.

Our gun violence problem is what it is because the fucking government refuses to enforce gun laws.


----------



## Hollie (Oct 8, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> And this is what happens when you watch too much Fox News.. you think "No Go Zones" are real.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



That's strange.









						Muslim Author Documents 'No-Go Zones' for White People in Britain
					

A British Muslim author has said that some towns have "no go zones" for white people and that school children are attacked for "being white".




					www.breitbart.com
				




No-Go Zones’ for White People in Britain, Muslim Author Documents​2,376





A British Muslim author has said that certain British towns have “no-go zones” for white people and that school children are attacked by Muslim children for “being white”, in an investigation into mosques in the United Kingdom.

Ed Husain, a professor in the Walsh School of Foreign Service at Georgetown University, warned that many Muslims in Britain are living in “another universe” in which Taliban-esque cultural norms are enforced.


----------



## Hollie (Oct 8, 2022)

Vagabond63 said:


> The same could equally be said of parts of America.


What parts?


----------



## Hollie (Oct 8, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> I agree.. we have grinding poverty, institutionalized racism, easy access to weapons, untreated mental illness and addiction.   All of these things breed criminals, as does a prison industrial complex that creates a recidivist class.
> 
> We should probably do something about those things.
> 
> ...



Actually, the UK is doing far worse. See if you can pay attention.









						United Kingdom Crime Facts & Stats
					

Find out how United Kingdom ranks internationally on Crime. Get the facts and compare to other countries!



					www.nationmaster.com
				




UK total crimes per thousand.  109.96











						United States Crime Facts & Stats
					

Find out how United States ranks internationally on Crime. Get the facts and compare to other countries!



					www.nationmaster.com
				




US total crimes per thousand    41.92


Cheer up, though. With leftist policies that ensure criminals are not charged with crimes they commit, we will be catching up to UK crime figures.


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 9, 2022)

2aguy said:


> Nope....the democrat party run cities are crap holes, and violent dystopias directly because the democrat party in those cities have destroyed their police, and they began releasing criminals no matter how violent and dangerous they were......and you can't lie about this anymore....uninformed Americans who never used to pay attention to what assholes like you were doing to their cities are now paying attention and seeing what you are doing to their cities....



Crime went up across the whole country during Trump Plague/Recession/Riots...  and as much as you guys want to create fake panic about crime, (It's actually STILL much lower than it was in the 1990's), most Americans are kind of horrified you want to turn the Country into "The Republic of Gilead".   So for every white person pissing themselves over "crime", you'll have a woman legitimately concerned she might have to give birth to her rapist's baby.  

You'll still do okay in the midterms due to Gerrymandering and general disinterest, just not as well as you think.  



Hollie said:


> Sure. We had peaceful protests where BLM and leftists rioted, you know, peaceful riots where cities burned, businesses and lives were destroyed, because leftist clowns wanted a ''summer of love''.
> 
> I think everyone gets it, You're self-loathing and a keyboard social justice warrior.



No, we had riots because black people finally got fed up with thug police and a racist president cheering them on.  

I'm a pragmatist.  There are two solutions to our race problems. 

We can fix the problems of poverty, wealth inequality, police misconduct and gun proliferation.  

Or we can live like the Israelis, terrified of our neighbors.  

I like the first option better.


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 9, 2022)

Hollie said:


> That's strange.



That you think Breitbart is a credible source?  Yes, that is strange.  They show you a picture of some scary Muslims praying to a sky pixie that isn't your sky pixie and you pee yourself. 



Hollie said:


> Actually, the UK is doing far worse. See if you can pay attention.



No, they aren't... We have far more murders than they have. .  

Now, some of these stats are misleading.   The US only counts sexual assault if there is penetration.   The UK counts sexual assault if there is any unwanted touching.   The US counts battery as only things resulting in serious injury, while the UK counts any pub brawl as battery... you get the idea.   



Blues Man said:


> You don't know shit about poverty or racism
> 
> I was poorer than dirt poor and homeless, born to a mixed race single parent who ended up a junkie and dead when I was 14.



Hold on, let me break out the violins...  🎻🎻🎻🎻



According to your own story, you had a foster home you ran away from... sounds like most of your problems were self-inflicted. 



Blues Man said:


> And you can move to the fucking UK where you can get arrested for reading the "wrong" book or for having a fucking pocket knife or for being mean on Facebook and don't you dare protest the king.



Except for all these supposed crimes, the UK only lock up 79,000 people compared to the 1.38 million in the US with another 600,000 awaiting trial.  








Blues Man said:


> Our gun violence problem is what it is because the fucking government refuses to enforce gun laws.



No, our gun violence problem is because the gun industry floods the streets with guns, sells guns to people who have no business having them, to create panic.


----------



## Hollie (Oct 9, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Crime went up across the whole country during Trump Plague/Recession/Riots...  and as much as you guys want to create fake panic about crime, (It's actually STILL much lower than it was in the 1990's), most Americans are kind of horrified you want to turn the Country into "The Republic of Gilead".   So for every white person pissing themselves over "crime", you'll have a woman legitimately concerned she might have to give birth to her rapist's baby.
> 
> You'll still do okay in the midterms due to Gerrymandering and general disinterest, just not as well as you think.
> 
> ...



Its just so predictable that self-hating leftists will retreat to the "I blame Trump'' mantra in an attempt to excuse their failures and ineptitudes. Liberals hate US citizens, US citizens who exercise their right, and they despise hard sentencing laws because liberals identify with criminals. Criminals are the darlings of the left because the self-hating left presumes the Great Satan is the root of all evil.

Self-hating leftists rationalize the acts of criminals, the darlings of the left, by screeching ''it’s the law that’s bad'', society is unjust, that the criminal is being unfairly persecuted. Not coincidently, that's exactly the same sort of rationalization that every criminal uses. It’s not surprising then that self-hating leftists will identify with the criminal rather than the victim.


----------



## Hollie (Oct 9, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> That you think Breitbart is a credible source?  Yes, that is strange.  They show you a picture of some scary Muslims praying to a sky pixie that isn't your sky pixie and you pee yourself.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



I think my source left you unable to defend your earlier comments so you retreated to the usual, ''do you think xxxxxxx is a credible source''?

It was predictable that you ran for cover when you used ''NationMaster'' as a source without ever checking the veracity of the data. You realized quickly that what you hoped to convey was contradicted by your own source. You do have this habit of making baseless claims and then when refuted, you retreat to the, ''but... but... but... but what about....'' Take responsibility for what you cut and paste, 

Stop being an accomplice to fraud. 

Do you really think a pie chart from ''prisonpolicy'' is a credible source?


What is the purpose of a graph showing firearm ownership in the US? Is that supposed to convey some frantic leftist talking point?


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 9, 2022)

Hollie said:


> Its just so predictable that self-hating leftists will retreat to the "I blame Trump'' mantra in an attempt to excuse their failures and ineptitudes. Liberals hate US citizens, US citizens who exercise their right, and they despise hard sentencing laws because liberals identify with criminals. Criminals are the darlings of the left because the self-hating left presumes the Great Satan is the root of all evil.



Naw, man, I hate US citizens who let irresponsible people get guns, and we have to mold our entire society around gun-toting maniacs. Children should not have to walk through metal detectors to get to class and do active shooter drills.  We shouldn't have to put up with trigger happy cops who shoot first and ask questions later because they can't tell the difference between a gun and a cell phone.  

Crime is a reflection of our failures... 



Hollie said:


> Self-hating leftists rationalize the acts of criminals, the darlings of the left, by screeching ''it’s the law that’s bad'', society is unjust, that the criminal is being unfairly persecuted. Not coincidently, that's exactly the same sort of rationalization that every criminal uses. It’s not surprising then that self-hating leftists will identify with the criminal rather than the victim.



Actually, the law is bad if you can't enforce it.  So let's look at the premise of the Ammosexuals.   "My gun isn't the problem (unless my wife burns the pot roast!), it's those guns possessed by criminals.  Lock them up!!!" 

But we lock up 2 million people.  Our courts are clogged with people in jail awaiting trial, most of them (big surprise) people of color who couldn't afford bail.  We throw someone in jail for just having a gun, it means we have to let someone else out because we don't have room for them.   Which is why we have 5 million people on  probation or parole,  and 100 million Americans with a police record that limits their job opportunities.  

While "Punishing the darkies" might make you feel good, as a policy, it's counterproductive.  It actually makes things worse.  



Hollie said:


> It was predictable that you ran for cover when you used ''NationMaster'' as a source without ever checking the veracity of the data. You realized quickly that what you hoped to convey was contradicted by your own source. You do have this habit of making baseless claims and then when refuted, you retreat to the, ''but... but... but... but what about....'' Take responsibility for what you cut and paste,



You picked one stat instead of reading through ALL the states, probably because you didn't have the mental bandwidth to process the data.  That's really not impressive.  If you look at ALL the compared stats, the US does worse in nearly every last one of them, particularly the violent crimes. 



Hollie said:


> Do you really think a pie chart from ''prisonpolicy'' is a credible source?



Um, yeah, given that they research the issue, it's very credible.  As opposed to a whacky website like Breitbart that has no one in the UK and just repeats crap from racist groups over there.  



Hollie said:


> What is the purpose of a graph showing firearm ownership in the US? Is that supposed to convey some frantic leftist talking point?



It shows the problem. 

You see, in the past, very few people owned guns.  They didn't need them.   So you had 40 million guns in the hands of some 140 million Americans in 1945.   Most of those were hunting rifles.  

Then this funny thing happened.  First, hunting fell out of favor as a sport.  Turns out that torturing and killing animals isn't actually a sport, it's more a sign of psychopathy.  Who knew?   Second, the gun industry started flooding our streets with guns hoping to gin up enough fear to make more people want to buy them.  

And of course, when a Democrat gets elected, the first thing they blurt out is "Biden is going to take your guns, better rush out and buy more!!!!"  

So we have more guns than people, the gun industry realizes the mentally unstable are their prime market, and you wonder why we have gun violence?


----------



## Blues Man (Oct 9, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> That you think Breitbart is a credible source?  Yes, that is strange.  They show you a picture of some scary Muslims praying to a sky pixie that isn't your sky pixie and you pee yourself.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Yeah because every kid should be grateful and happy to live with an abusive asshole right?


----------



## Hollie (Oct 9, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Naw, man, I hate US citizens who let irresponsible people get guns, and we have to mold our entire society around gun-toting maniacs. Children should not have to walk through metal detectors to get to class and do active shooter drills.  We shouldn't have to put up with trigger happy cops who shoot first and ask questions later because they can't tell the difference between a gun and a cell phone.
> 
> Crime is a reflection of our failures...
> 
> ...



Naw, man. You don't go far left enough. Your personal Jihad to rid the Great Satan of its founding Constitution is pathetically weak. All you're accomplishing with your adoring, pro-criminal identity policies is to rid states of an economic base.
THANK A DEMOCRAT: Businesses Continue to Flee Big Cities Thanks to Lawless Democrats and Rise in Violent Crime

It's important that we realize leftists identify with criminals. Actions of criminals make sense to leftists. Leftists tend to be people who can't conceive of personal responsibility so they fail to see the connection between their giving money to criminal organizations and the violent acts of those criminals. The most blatant example of that dynamic is the Democrat party funding Mexican cartels which brings them billions of dollars annually.  

Leftists think the justice system is corrupt because it holds people accountable. Accountability is difficult for leftists because everything is someone else's fault. Leftists tend to be people who refuse personal responsibility so they fail to see the connection between their giving money to criminal organizations and the violent acts of those organizations. It was leftists who funded and enabled the criminal organization of BLM. Those funds made a few people very rich. So, here again, we have self-hating leftists funding criminal syndicates while taking no responsibility for their actions. 

With leftists, it's always about, ''da man keeps oppressing me''. 


You poor, delicate rose bud.


----------



## 2aguy (Oct 9, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Crime went up across the whole country during Trump Plague/Recession/Riots...  and as much as you guys want to create fake panic about crime, (It's actually STILL much lower than it was in the 1990's), most Americans are kind of horrified you want to turn the Country into "The Republic of Gilead".   So for every white person pissing themselves over "crime", you'll have a woman legitimately concerned she might have to give birth to her rapist's baby.
> 
> You'll still do okay in the midterms due to Gerrymandering and general disinterest, just not as well as you think.
> 
> ...




Yes....when the democrat party decided to use the DOJ to attack local police forces....and the democrat party turned their "Legal Warfare" teams against local police, the message was sent across the country that if you do your job as a police officer...the democrat party will do their best to destroy you and your family...

Message sent, Message recieved, and the police stopped pro-active police work, retired and quit in massive numbers...you dumb ass......the democrats made this a national problem.

You asshats are the ones grooming kids for sex, sterilizing children, chopping off their sex organs...not us....


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 10, 2022)

Blues Man said:


> Yeah because every kid should be grateful and happy to live with an abusive asshole right?


better than living on the street... 



Hollie said:


> It's important that we realize leftists identify with criminals. Actions of criminals make sense to leftists. Leftists tend to be people who can't conceive of personal responsibility so they fail to see the connection between their giving money to criminal organizations and the violent acts of those criminals. The most blatant example of that dynamic is the Democrat party funding Mexican cartels which brings them billions of dollars annually.



That sounds like the voice of a fat happy white person who went to bed last night with a full belly.  It's easy to be "moral" when you aren't desperate.  



Hollie said:


> Leftists think the justice system is corrupt because it holds people accountable. Accountability is difficult for leftists because everything is someone else's fault. Leftists tend to be people who refuse personal responsibility so they fail to see the connection between their giving money to criminal organizations and the violent acts of those organizations. It was leftists who funded and enabled the criminal organization of BLM. Those funds made a few people very rich. So, here again, we have self-hating leftists funding criminal syndicates while taking no responsibility for their actions.



No, I think it's corrupt because it's uneven in it's approach. 

Some poor black kid goes to jail for life and has a permanent record for smoking a little crack, but Rush Limbaugh and Cindy McCain get sweetheart deals and rehab. 

The black lady who lied about her address to get her kid out of a dangerous school gets five years, but Lori McLaughlin pays hundreds of thousands of dollars to steal a working class kid's college admission for her slacker daughter, and she gets 11 days at a Club Fed.  

Some black guy gets years for simple robbery, but Jason Van Dyke pumps 16 rounds into a black kid who was lying on the ground, and only gets three years.  


This is the shit that people are upset about, and frankly, they should be.


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 10, 2022)

2aguy said:


> Yes....when the democrat party decided to use the DOJ to attack local police forces....and the democrat party turned their "Legal Warfare" teams against local police, the message was sent across the country that if you do your job as a police officer...the democrat party will do their best to destroy you and your family...



Shooting an unarmed kid 16 times is "doing your job".  (Van Dyke actually tried to claim this in court.  Probably made the jury hate him even more.) 
Shooting a kid playing with a toy in the park is "Doing your job"?  
Shooting a kid who has his hands up 8 times is doing your job?  

Frankly, my problem with Obama's DOJ is that it didn't do enough.  It didn't file federal charges against Zimmerman or Van Dyke or Wilson or Loehmann...  



2aguy said:


> Message sent, Message recieved, and the police stopped pro-active police work, retired and quit in massive numbers...you dumb ass......the democrats made this a national problem.



Right... so where does it say, "mistreat black people' was part of their job, exactly.  

The problem is, racist cops are a liability... more so now that the settlements for misconduct have gone from 7 figures to 8 figures. 

In 2018, the City of Chicago spent 118 MILLION settling claims of police misconduct.  For that cost, we could have put 170 more cops on the street.


----------



## Hollie (Oct 10, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> better than living on the street...
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Um, yeah, I get it. You're a social justice warrior on a Jihad to make sure everyone knows you're apologizing for your mere existence. Strange, though. It's difficult to tell the difference between you social justice warriors and the most angry racists.


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 10, 2022)

Hollie said:


> Um, yeah, I get it. You're a social justice warrior on a Jihad to make sure everyone knows you're apologizing for your mere existence. Strange, though. It's difficult to tell the difference between you social justice warriors and the most angry racists.



Naw, man, I'm just pointing out the obvious... which you seem to be in denial of.

Crime is a symptom of other societal ills, most of which root from conservative policies...   

Address the root causes, you'll address crime.


----------



## Hollie (Oct 10, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Naw, man, I'm just pointing out the obvious... which you seem to be in denial of.
> 
> Crime is a symptom of other societal ills, most of which root from conservative policies...
> 
> Address the root causes, you'll address crime.



Naw, man. You just repeat slogans your hear on MSNBC. It's fashionable to be a self-hater. Self hating is a societal ill that strongly affects a certain personality type. 

You might consider joining the Kamala Harris "Root Causes", tour. Laugh, giggle and do nothing.


----------



## Blues Man (Oct 10, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> better than living on the street...


No it actually wasn't but you don't know shit about it do you?


----------



## Vagabond63 (Oct 10, 2022)

2aguy said:


> Anything you don't like is declared fake.....got it.


Oh, you mean like every time someone quotes data from Concealed Carry Killers or Violence Policy Centre... got it.
Any time anyone posts something you don't like, you post a torrent of BS cut and paste to try to bury whatever they say... got it.


----------



## Blues Man (Oct 10, 2022)

Vagabond63 said:


> Oh, you mean like every time someone quotes data from Concealed Carry Killers or Violence Policy Centre... got it.
> Any time anyone posts something you don't like, you post a torrent of BS cut and paste to try to bury whatever they say... got it.


Just like you do with sources you don't like.

Pot Kettle Black


----------



## Vagabond63 (Oct 10, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> No, they aren't... We have far more murders than they have. .
> 
> Now, some of these stats are misleading. The US only counts sexual assault if there is penetration. The UK counts sexual assault if there is any unwanted touching. The US counts battery as only things resulting in serious injury, while the UK counts any pub brawl as battery... you get the idea.


I've already debunked his/her/its argument, but like a dog with a bone, he/she/it clings desperately to "Nation master" for some reason.


----------



## Vagabond63 (Oct 10, 2022)

Blues Man said:


> Just like you do with sources you don't like.
> 
> Pot Kettle Black


Really? Care to provide examples?


----------



## Blues Man (Oct 10, 2022)

Vagabond63 said:


> Really? Care to provide examples?


Please how many times have you just dismissed links I have provided because you don't like the source?


----------



## Hollie (Oct 10, 2022)

Vagabond63 said:


> I've already debunked his/her/its argument, but like a dog with a bone, he/she/it clings desperately to "Nation master" for some reason.


You poor, dear. I can understand you're offended at sources that contradict your biases. You somehow missed that Joe B linked to NationMaster in an earlier post but never bothered to check the data. The data contradicted what he attempted to convey.


----------



## 2aguy (Oct 10, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Shooting an unarmed kid 16 times is "doing your job".  (Van Dyke actually tried to claim this in court.  Probably made the jury hate him even more.)
> Shooting a kid playing with a toy in the park is "Doing your job"?
> Shooting a kid who has his hands up 8 times is doing your job?
> 
> ...



Millions of police interactions each year and you harp on the few....you doofus......

The kid with the toy had a toy that looked like a real gun, you lying piece of shit.....

Which kid had their hands up?  You mean the Gentle Giant who violently assaulted the cop and who even witnesses said didn't have his hands up?  You lying doofus.


----------



## 2aguy (Oct 10, 2022)

Vagabond63 said:


> Oh, you mean like every time someone quotes data from Concealed Carry Killers or Violence Policy Centre... got it.
> Any time anyone posts something you don't like, you post a torrent of BS cut and paste to try to bury whatever they say... got it.




I showed why the "Concealed Carry Killers," was crap, as well as the Violence Policy Center...

Like this....

*Violence Policy Center*
*
Donohue and Education Fund Briefs do present anecdotes involving carry permit holders who have killed after becoming angry over insignificant issues ranging from cutting someone off on a highway to texting in a movie theater to playing loud music at a gas station. Another amicus brief, by the Violence Policy Center (VPC), presents more anecdotes. The VPC also cites statistics from its database Concealed Carry Killers.

We haven't fact-checked the VPC database. But Clayton Cramer (coauthor of several law review articles with Kopel) did. Clayton E. Cramer, Violence Policy Center's Concealed Carry Killers: Less Than It Appears (2012). *


*Cramer found numerous instances of VPC incorrectly claiming that a perpetrator had a concealed carry permit, or VPC counting events that had nothing to do with the carry permit, such as a permit-holder committing suicide at home.*
*
Or consider this example from the VPC brief:
*


> *In May 2014, Michael Bowman, who also possessed a valid concealed carry handgun permit, shot and killed police officer Kevin Jordan in Griffon, Georgia. Officer Jordan was working an off-duty security job in uniform at a Waffle House restaurant. Bowman was drunk when he and his girlfriend Officer Jordan attempted to arrest Bowman's girlfriend. Officer Jordan—a father of seven—was on the ground attempting to restrain Bowman's girlfriend when Bowman shot him multiple times in the back. Bowman was convicted of felony murder and sentenced to life in prison without parole.42*


*Footnote 42 cites to the VPC's database. The database in turn cites: Former soldier gets life without parole for murdering police officer, Atlanta Journal-Constitution, Feb. 17, 2017 (article does not mention a permit); Griffin Tragedy; Drunk and armed at 2 a.m., Atlanta Journal-Constitution, June 8, 2014 (we couldn't find this article in the newspaper's archive, or in Westlaw News, although both databases contain many articles on the crime); Funeral next Monday for slain Griffin police officer, Atlanta Journal-Constitution, June 2, 2014 (found at 2014 WLNR 14878704). This last article explains who had the concealed carry permit: officer Kevin Jordan's brother, Raymond Jordan.
*


> *Raymond Jordan was in the parking lot when the gunfire erupted and grabbed his own gun, [police officer Mike] Richardson said. A civilian, he had a permit to carry a gun and was at the restaurant to visit his brother, who often worked there on weekends, police said. Raymond Jordan was not charged Saturday in Bowman's shooting, and police offered no explanation.*


*So in this case, the man with the concealed carry permit was not the criminal; the man with the carry permit was the person who shot the criminal who was attacking the officer.*
*
There definitely are cases of persons with concealed carry permits perpetrating crimes in public places, including homicide. However, the VPC database is not necessarily a reliable guide. The better approach is to look at comprehensive datasets, such a statewide revocation figures, described above.
*
Social science on the right to bear arms
===============


And this.....

Debunking the Myth of "Concealed-Carry Killers"

*Beyond the immediately suspect nature of the Violence Policy Center’s claims, the database erroneously includes many deaths that are not attributable to the misuse of a concealed-carry permit. *


The anti-gun group defines “non-self-defense incident” to include virtually any fatality involving a concealed-carry permit holder, including ones that do not remotely resemble the type of intentional homicide evoked by the Violence Policy Center’s strong claims about public safety. 

*For example, roughly 40% of the deaths (534 of 1,335) are suicides. While tragic, firearm suicides are not what a term like “concealed-carry killer” brings to mind. *


Moreover, analysis of the remaining “non-self-defense” deaths also belies the group’s use of the term. 

*The Violence Policy Center includes many fatalities where the shooter’s concealed-carry permit was irrelevant because he or she did not carry a concealed weapon in public while perpetrating the crime. *

For example, the database includes a Nov. 11, 2008, death where a permit holder fatally shot her husband in their own backyard, and a June 12, 2012, death where the permit holder fatally shot his wife while she slept in their own bedroom. 

Had their respective states never issued a concealed-carry permit to a single person, these shooters still would have been in lawful possession of these firearms inside their own homes. 

*Also of dubious inclusion are at least 10 cases that involve someone other than the permit holder using the permit holder’s firearm, and a number of cases where the individual’s permit either should have been suspended or was actually suspended under state law at the time of the death.  *

Finally, despite the Violence Policy Center’s claim that it only analyzed non-self-defense shootings, in 72 of the 801 homicide deaths included in the database, the shooter’s claim of self-defense is still pending in court.
---

*The Data Paints a Different Picture*
As a result of the report, the Violence Policy Center’s legislative director stated that “concealed-carry killers continue to claim innocent lives at a shocking pace.” 
The only shocking thing about the pace of crimes committed by concealed-carry permit holders is just how slow it is compared with the statistical expectation. 
According to the data, America’s 18 million concealed-carry permit holders accounted for 801 firearm-related homicides over a 15-year span, which amounts to roughly 0.7% of all firearm-related homicides during that time. 
That percentage drops even lower if any of the defendants in the 72 cases still pending in court are determined to have acted in lawful self-defense. 
Since 2007, when the Violence Policy Center started tracking these concealed-carry permit holder deaths, there has been a 304% increase in the number of Americans with a concealed-carry permit. 
At the same time, the national violent crime and homicide rates in 2018 were actually lower than they were in 2007, and substantially lower than their historical highs in the early 1990s, when far fewer Americans had concealed-carry permits.  
---


Similarly, despite the anti-gun group’s claim that concealed-carry permit holders represent a severe danger to law enforcement officers, the data indicates that they are accountable for a disproportionately small number of law enforcement deaths.



The FBI recorded 608 law enforcement officers who were killed in “felonious acts” between 2007 and 2018. According to the Violence Policy Center, 18 concealed-carry permit holders killed 23 law enforcement officers during that time. 
That accounts for roughly 3.7% of law enforcement officer felonious deaths, even though concealed-carry permit holders account for 5.5% of the population. 
Just as with non-law enforcement deaths, many of the cases the Violence Policy Center includes as law enforcement officer deaths involve scenarios where the killer’s status as a permit holder played no role in the crime. 
In fact, by our count, only 10 of the 24 law enforcement officer deaths between 2007 and the time of publication involved permit holders actually carrying concealable firearms in public places. 
For example, the database includes the case of Ryan Schlesinger, who in November 2018 used a rifle from inside his own home to kill an officer in Tucson, Arizona, serving him with an arrest warrant. 
The concealed-carry permit was not only completely irrelevant in that situation—one does not need a concealed-carry permit to lawfully possess a rifle inside one’s home, nor is a rifle a “concealed carry” weapon—but Schlesinger was prohibited under state law from possessing firearms.


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 10, 2022)

Hollie said:


> Naw, man. You just repeat slogans your hear on MSNBC. It's fashionable to be a self-hater. Self hating is a societal ill that strongly affects a certain personality type.
> 
> You might consider joining the Kamala Harris "Root Causes", tour. Laugh, giggle and do nothing.



If nothing is getting done, why are you so upset? 



Blues Man said:


> No it actually wasn't but you don't know shit about it do you?



I know you do go on and on... but I don't care.


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 10, 2022)

2aguy said:


> Millions of police interactions each year and you harp on the few....you doofus......



Just like I don't harp on millions of planes that land safely,  when one crashes.  

Almost good enough isn't good enough in some professions.  



2aguy said:


> The kid with the toy had a toy that looked like a real gun, you lying piece of shit.....



But he was still a kid and it was still a toy.  



2aguy said:


> Which kid had their hands up? You mean the Gentle Giant who violently assaulted the cop and who even witnesses said didn't have his hands up? You lying doofus.



14 Witnesses said he had his hands up...  the DA decided to ignore them.


----------



## Hollie (Oct 10, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> If nothing is getting done, why are you so upset?
> 
> 
> 
> I know you do go on and on... but I don't care.



People _should_ be upset with the failures and ineptitudes of the left. It's not a simple matter of nothing getting done but leftist policies that are intended to be destructive. 

The Democrat party of child grooming, body mutilation, open borders, self-loathing. Hey what could go wrong? Everything.


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 11, 2022)

Hollie said:


> People _should_ be upset with the failures and ineptitudes of the left. It's not a simple matter of nothing getting done but leftist policies that are intended to be destructive.



Actually, Biden has already gotten all the jobs Trump lost back and then some... he's getting inflation under control, investing more in infrastructure.  

Compared to the shit-show that 2020 was, we are living it up pretty good.


----------



## Hollie (Oct 11, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Actually, Biden has already gotten all the jobs Trump lost back and then some... he's getting inflation under control, investing more in infrastructure.
> 
> Compared to the shit-show that 2020 was, we are living it up pretty good.


Actually, what nonsense. Biden has simply exploited the return to work from the lay-offs and business closings that were largely due to horrible policies his administration implemented.

There is hardly a worse series of failures and ineptitudes that could define the Biden politburo.


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 11, 2022)

Hollie said:


> Actually, what nonsense. Biden has simply exploited the return to work from the lay-offs and business closings that were largely due to horrible policies his administration implemented.



Uh, the layoffs happened while Trump was in charge, and a lot of those companies were in no hurry to bring people back.  

Trump is the first president since Hoover to post a net job loss.


----------



## Vagabond63 (Oct 11, 2022)

Blues Man said:


> Please how many times have you just dismissed links I have provided because you don't like the source?


So that's a "no, I can't provide examples". OK.


----------



## Vagabond63 (Oct 11, 2022)

2aguy said:


> I showed why the "Concealed Carry Killers," was crap, as well as the Violence Policy Center...
> 
> Like this....
> 
> ...


...and as if to prove my point, another torrent of out of date cut and paste BS.

Whatever the "pros" and "cons" of the Violence policy centre, they at least try to document as many instances  as they can, from their site,

"As a result, the examples in _Concealed Carry Killers_ are taken primarily from news reports and from the reporting required in a few states. *These examples represent an unknown fraction of similar incidents that routinely occur across the nation."*

"More than just numbers, _Concealed Carry Killers_ provides detailed accounts of lethal incidents involving concealed handgun permit holders. Whenever possible, this includes the names of the killers and victims, the legal status of the cases, and the circumstances of the incidents."

Overall, VPC is far more credible than the so called "studies" that are just glorified telephone polling of small sample populations extrapolated. At least in the VPC website, you can read about each incident and make up your own mind one way or the other.


----------



## Vagabond63 (Oct 11, 2022)

Hollie said:


> I can understand you're offended at sources that contradict your biases.


You're mistaken, you are the one who got offended when I demonstrated that the data in Nation master was out of date and painted an over simplistic picture, basically comparing apples to oranges as JoeB131 also stated.


----------



## Hollie (Oct 11, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Uh, the layoffs happened while Trump was in charge, and a lot of those companies were in no hurry to bring people back.
> 
> Trump is the first president since Hoover to post a net job loss.


Uh, the layoffs happened because of the China virus. 

The Biden leftists have brought nothing but disaster.


----------



## Hollie (Oct 11, 2022)

Vagabond63 said:


> You're mistaken, you are the one who got offended when I demonstrated that the data in Nation master was out of date and painted an over simplistic picture, basically comparing apples to oranges as JoeB131 also stated.


Yet, you failed to offer any countering data. See your daddy, Joe. He can't help you.


----------



## Hollie (Oct 11, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Uh, the layoffs happened while Trump was in charge, and a lot of those companies were in no hurry to bring people back.
> 
> Trump is the first president since Hoover to post a net job loss.


Telling us what we already know, leftist paradises are more dangerous than ever. 

The left's pro-crime policies and infatuation with criminals has turned leftist paradises into virtual law and order-free zones.









						Democrats struggle to find footing on violent crime
					

Fed-up Democrats in San Francisco and Los Angeles, liberal-leaning California cities reeling from COVID-era spikes in homicides and gun violence, may punish their own party at the polls next week over its criminal justice policies.




					www.reuters.com
				





The results are predictable, of course:









						Since COVID, Democrat-Run States Losing Residents to Red Ones, Survey Finds
					

From 2020 to 2021, eight of the 10 states losing the most residents from April 2020 through June 2021 have Democratic leadership.




					www.google.com
				




Since COVID-19 struck the U.S., Americans have moved from state to state in droves, as residents fled Democrat-run states, like California, to Republican ones, like Florida, surveys found.

In 2021, 27.1 million Americans reported living at a different residence than a year earlier, and 29.8 million reported a move in 2020, according to the U.S. Census Bureau.

Eight of the 10 states losing the most residents from April 2020 through June 2021 have Democratic leadership. California ranked second in numeric population decline, with over 260,000 residents reportedly moving from the state.


----------



## Blues Man (Oct 11, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> If nothing is getting done, why are you so upset?
> 
> 
> 
> I know you do go on and on... but I don't care.


No human shit stains like you don't care about anything but their own half assed, bullshit ignorant opinions.


----------



## Blues Man (Oct 11, 2022)

Vagabond63 said:


> So that's a "no, I can't provide examples". OK.


It was some other thread where I posted something from the CPRC and you dismissed it.

Frankly you're not worth the effort to look for it.


----------



## 2aguy (Oct 11, 2022)

Vagabond63 said:


> ...and as if to prove my point, another torrent of out of date cut and paste BS.
> 
> Whatever the "pros" and "cons" of the Violence policy centre, they at least try to document as many instances  as they can, from their site,
> 
> ...




News reports that favor the worst outcomes of gun ownership, since if it bleeds, it leads, and since only the most sensational stories really get into the news while the stories of the victim merely pointing the gun and the criminal runs away are never heard........ and 95% of the American media are left wing anti-gunners....so you have a rabidly anti-gun group, using rabidly anti-gun news sources...yeah....sell that crap to our biden voters....

And the part where they use incidents that don't involve the Concealed Carry status of the gun owner, or document shootings where the Concealed carrier didn't do the freaking shooting?

You are an idiot.


----------



## 2aguy (Oct 11, 2022)

Vagabond63 said:


> ...and as if to prove my point, another torrent of out of date cut and paste BS.
> 
> Whatever the "pros" and "cons" of the Violence policy centre, they at least try to document as many instances  as they can, from their site,
> 
> ...




You missed this post where it details the lies and ommissions of the Violence policy center....

*Violence Policy Center

Donohue and Education Fund Briefs do present anecdotes involving carry permit holders who have killed after becoming angry over insignificant issues ranging from cutting someone off on a highway to texting in a movie theater to playing loud music at a gas station. Another amicus brief, by the Violence Policy Center (VPC), presents more anecdotes. The VPC also cites statistics from its database Concealed Carry Killers.

We haven't fact-checked the VPC database. But Clayton Cramer (coauthor of several law review articles with Kopel) did. Clayton E. Cramer, Violence Policy Center's Concealed Carry Killers: Less Than It Appears (2012). *


*Cramer found numerous instances of VPC incorrectly claiming that a perpetrator had a concealed carry permit, or VPC counting events that had nothing to do with the carry permit, such as a permit-holder committing suicide at home.*
*
Or consider this example from the VPC brief:*



> *In May 2014, Michael Bowman, who also possessed a valid concealed carry handgun permit, shot and killed police officer Kevin Jordan in Griffon, Georgia. Officer Jordan was working an off-duty security job in uniform at a Waffle House restaurant. Bowman was drunk when he and his girlfriend Officer Jordan attempted to arrest Bowman's girlfriend. Officer Jordan—a father of seven—was on the ground attempting to restrain Bowman's girlfriend when Bowman shot him multiple times in the back. Bowman was convicted of felony murder and sentenced to life in prison without parole.42*


*Footnote 42 cites to the VPC's database. The database in turn cites: Former soldier gets life without parole for murdering police officer, Atlanta Journal-Constitution, Feb. 17, 2017 (article does not mention a permit); Griffin Tragedy; Drunk and armed at 2 a.m., Atlanta Journal-Constitution, June 8, 2014 (we couldn't find this article in the newspaper's archive, or in Westlaw News, although both databases contain many articles on the crime); Funeral next Monday for slain Griffin police officer, Atlanta Journal-Constitution, June 2, 2014 (found at 2014 WLNR 14878704). This last article explains who had the concealed carry permit: officer Kevin Jordan's brother, Raymond Jordan.*



> *Raymond Jordan was in the parking lot when the gunfire erupted and grabbed his own gun, [police officer Mike] Richardson said. A civilian, he had a permit to carry a gun and was at the restaurant to visit his brother, who often worked there on weekends, police said. Raymond Jordan was not charged Saturday in Bowman's shooting, and police offered no explanation.*


*So in this case, the man with the concealed carry permit was not the criminal; the man with the carry permit was the person who shot the criminal who was attacking the officer.*
*
There definitely are cases of persons with concealed carry permits perpetrating crimes in public places, including homicide. However, the VPC database is not necessarily a reliable guide. The better approach is to look at comprehensive datasets, such a statewide revocation figures, described above.*

Social science on the right to bear arms
===============


And this.....

Debunking the Myth of "Concealed-Carry Killers"

*Beyond the immediately suspect nature of the Violence Policy Center’s claims, the database erroneously includes many deaths that are not attributable to the misuse of a concealed-carry permit. *


The anti-gun group defines “non-self-defense incident” to include virtually any fatality involving a concealed-carry permit holder, including ones that do not remotely resemble the type of intentional homicide evoked by the Violence Policy Center’s strong claims about public safety. 

*For example, roughly 40% of the deaths (534 of 1,335) are suicides. While tragic, firearm suicides are not what a term like “concealed-carry killer” brings to mind. *


Moreover, analysis of the remaining “non-self-defense” deaths also belies the group’s use of the term. 

*The Violence Policy Center includes many fatalities where the shooter’s concealed-carry permit was irrelevant because he or she did not carry a concealed weapon in public while perpetrating the crime. *

For example, the database includes a Nov. 11, 2008, death where a permit holder fatally shot her husband in their own backyard, and a June 12, 2012, death where the permit holder fatally shot his wife while she slept in their own bedroom.

Had their respective states never issued a concealed-carry permit to a single person, these shooters still would have been in lawful possession of these firearms inside their own homes. 

*Also of dubious inclusion are at least 10 cases that involve someone other than the permit holder using the permit holder’s firearm, and a number of cases where the individual’s permit either should have been suspended or was actually suspended under state law at the time of the death.  *

Finally, despite the Violence Policy Center’s claim that it only analyzed non-self-defense shootings, in 72 of the 801 homicide deaths included in the database, the shooter’s claim of self-defense is still pending in court.
---

*The Data Paints a Different Picture*
As a result of the report, the Violence Policy Center’s legislative director stated that “concealed-carry killers continue to claim innocent lives at a shocking pace.”
The only shocking thing about the pace of crimes committed by concealed-carry permit holders is just how slow it is compared with the statistical expectation.
According to the data, America’s 18 million concealed-carry permit holders accounted for 801 firearm-related homicides over a 15-year span, which amounts to roughly 0.7% of all firearm-related homicides during that time.
That percentage drops even lower if any of the defendants in the 72 cases still pending in court are determined to have acted in lawful self-defense.
Since 2007, when the Violence Policy Center started tracking these concealed-carry permit holder deaths, there has been a 304% increase in the number of Americans with a concealed-carry permit.
At the same time, the national violent crime and homicide rates in 2018 were actually lower than they were in 2007, and substantially lower than their historical highs in the early 1990s, when far fewer Americans had concealed-carry permits.
---


*Similarly, despite the anti-gun group’s claim that concealed-carry permit holders represent a severe danger to law enforcement officers, the data indicates that they are accountable for a disproportionately small number of law enforcement deaths.*



The FBI recorded 608 law enforcement officers who were killed in “felonious acts” between 2007 and 2018. According to the Violence Policy Center, 18 concealed-carry permit holders killed 23 law enforcement officers during that time.
That accounts for roughly 3.7% of law enforcement officer felonious deaths, even though concealed-carry permit holders account for 5.5% of the population.
Just as with non-law enforcement deaths, many of the cases the Violence Policy Center includes as law enforcement officer deaths involve scenarios where the killer’s status as a permit holder played no role in the crime.
In fact, by our count, only 10 of the 24 law enforcement officer deaths between 2007 and the time of publication involved permit holders actually carrying concealable firearms in public places.
For example, the database includes the case of Ryan Schlesinger, who in November 2018 used a rifle from inside his own home to kill an officer in Tucson, Arizona, serving him with an arrest warrant.
The concealed-carry permit was not only completely irrelevant in that situation—one does not need a concealed-carry permit to lawfully possess a rifle inside one’s home, nor is a rifle a “concealed carry” weapon—but Schlesinger was prohibited under state law from possessing firearms.

*That is the source you are using.....you are an idiot... *


----------



## Vagabond63 (Oct 11, 2022)

2aguy said:


> You missed this post where it details the lies and ommissions of the Violence policy center....
> 
> *Violence Policy Center
> 
> ...


Repeating your usual torrent of out of date cut and paste BS, doesn't stop it being out of date cut and paste BS. Furthermore, it's not a source I use, I merely wanted to demonstrate what happens when anyone mentions Concealed Carry Killers or the VPC, the inevitable torrent of pro-gun Right wing sources that you regurgitate. Thank you for making my point.


----------



## Vagabond63 (Oct 11, 2022)

2aguy said:


> 95% of the American media are left wing anti-gunners....so you have a rabidly anti-gun group, using rabidly anti-gun news sources...


Prove it.


----------



## westwall (Oct 11, 2022)

Vagabond63 said:


> Prove it.





He just did.  Moron.


----------



## Vagabond63 (Oct 11, 2022)

Blues Man said:


> It was some other thread where I posted something from the CPRC and you dismissed it.
> 
> Frankly you're not worth the effort to look for it.


So you admit you can't provide examples, and then resort to childish insults, OK. Uh, when did the Cancer prevention Research Centre ever figure in any "discussion" we ever had?


----------



## westwall (Oct 11, 2022)

Vagabond63 said:


> So you admit you can't provide examples, and then resort to childish insults, OK. Uh, when did the Cancer prevention Research Centre ever figure in any "discussion" we ever had?
> [/QUCali.
> 
> No, he HAS provided them.  But you twats ignore evidence so we don't waste our valuable time on turds, like you.


----------



## Vagabond63 (Oct 11, 2022)

westwall said:


> He just did.  Moron.


No he didn't. I asked him to prove that "95% of the American media are left wing anti-gunners...." Do keep up.


----------



## westwall (Oct 11, 2022)

Vagabond63 said:


> No he didn't. I asked him to prove that "95% of the American media are left wing anti-gunners...." Do keep up.




And that is obvious as hell.  Campaign donations prove it.

DURRRRRR


----------



## Vagabond63 (Oct 11, 2022)

No he hasn't, do pay attention.


----------



## Vagabond63 (Oct 11, 2022)

westwall said:


> And that is obvious as hell.  Campaign donations prove it.
> 
> DURRRRRR


Fine, provide links that prove your assertion, it's not obvious, just because you think it is.


----------



## M14 Shooter (Oct 11, 2022)

Vagabond63 said:


> Fine, provide links that prove your assertion, it's not obvious, just because you think it is.


^^^
Irony so thick, a continental engineer can't cut it.


----------



## westwall (Oct 11, 2022)

Vagabond63 said:


> Fine, provide links that prove your assertion, it's not obvious, just because you think it is.




They are already posted on the forum. 

Go fetch


----------



## Vagabond63 (Oct 11, 2022)

westwall said:


> They are already posted on the forum.
> 
> Go fetch


So you can't then, fair enough. Thanks for admitting it.


----------



## Blues Man (Oct 11, 2022)

Vagabond63 said:


> So you admit you can't provide examples, and then resort to childish insults, OK. Uh, when did the Cancer prevention Research Centre ever figure in any "discussion" we ever had?


I didn't say I couldn't I said you ain't worth the effort of digging though threads to find it and it was the Crime Prevention Research Center


----------



## Vagabond63 (Oct 11, 2022)

Blues Man said:


> I didn't say I couldn't I said you ain't worth the effort of digging though threads to find it


Still an admission you can't provide examples. Thanks for playing.


----------



## Blues Man (Oct 11, 2022)

Vagabond63 said:


> Still an admission you can't provide examples. Thanks for playing.


Wrong again I can You are not worth the effort


----------



## 2aguy (Oct 11, 2022)

Vagabond63 said:


> Repeating your usual torrent of out of date cut and paste BS, doesn't stop it being out of date cut and paste BS. Furthermore, it's not a source I use, I merely wanted to demonstrate what happens when anyone mentions Concealed Carry Killers or the VPC, the inevitable torrent of pro-gun Right wing sources that you regurgitate. Thank you for making my point.




You obviously missed it so I had to repeat it.......try having someone read it to you....slowly, maybe a 5 year old relative.....they will understand it far better than you do.


----------



## 2aguy (Oct 11, 2022)

Vagabond63 said:


> Prove it.




Moron....

And in this article.....the idiots claiming to be independent are democrats trying to pretend to be objective....



			https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/the-fix/wp/2014/05/06/just-7-percent-of-journalists-are-republicans-thats-far-less-than-even-a-decade-ago/
		


Also.....

*Brat based his claim on the results of a Center for Public Integrity analysis, which found that more than 96 percent of the donations from journalists to either Clinton or Trump between January 2015 and August 2016 went to Clinton.[4]*

*Ballotpedia reviewed three other analyses of contributions from donors identified as journalists and found that a majority of the donors or a majority of the donations (depending on the study) benefited Democrats or liberal causes.[6][7][8]*









__





						Fact check/Do 97 percent of journalist donations go to Democrats
					






					ballotpedia.org


----------



## westwall (Oct 11, 2022)

Vagabond63 said:


> So you can't then, fair enough. Thanks for admitting it.





No, I admit that YOU are a worthless piece of shit gasbag.  And i won't waste time reposting stuff that you have already seen.

Go play your infantile games elsewhere.


----------



## westwall (Oct 11, 2022)

2aguy said:


> Moron....
> 
> And in this article.....the idiots claiming to be independent are democrats trying to pretend to be objective....
> 
> ...






Don't waste your time on the troll.  I have an AI program that deals with assholes like him.


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 12, 2022)

Hollie said:


> Uh, the layoffs happened because of the China virus.
> 
> The Biden leftists have brought nothing but disaster.



Uh, really?   Unemployment is low, we aren't at war with anyone directly, Covid deaths have largely declined to the point of being negliable.  We aren't seeing riots in the streets, and crime is even down from where it was in 2020.  



Hollie said:


> Telling us what we already know, leftist paradises are more dangerous than ever.
> 
> The left's pro-crime policies and infatuation with criminals has turned leftist paradises into virtual law and order-free zones.



You need to stop watching Fox News.  



Hollie said:


> Since COVID-19 struck the U.S., Americans have moved from state to state in droves, as residents fled Democrat-run states, like California, to Republican ones, like Florida, surveys found.



Not really.  



Hollie said:


> In 2021, 27.1 million Americans reported living at a different residence than a year earlier, and 29.8 million reported a move in 2020, according to the U.S. Census Bureau.



Uh, you do realize that would include people moving within the same state, right?   I mean, I would qualify as "living at a different residence" in 2021, even though I moved all of 4.6 miles 



Hollie said:


> Eight of the 10 states losing the most residents from April 2020 through June 2021 have Democratic leadership. California ranked second in numeric population decline, with over 260,000 residents reportedly moving from the state.



Uh, yeah, that just means those red states will turn blue... careful what you wish for.


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 12, 2022)

2aguy said:


> News reports that favor the worst outcomes of gun ownership, since if it bleeds, it leads, and since only the most sensational stories really get into the news while the stories of the victim merely pointing the gun and the criminal runs away are never heard........ and 95% of the American media are left wing anti-gunners....so you have a rabidly anti-gun group, using rabidly anti-gun news sources...yeah....sell that crap to our biden voters....
> 
> And the part where they use incidents that don't involve the Concealed Carry status of the gun owner, or document shootings where the Concealed carrier didn't do the freaking shooting?



Because it's fairly unlikely that 'I saw a gun and I ran away" happens all that often. 

I mean, I'm sure that a lot of rednecks wave guns at minorities who are minding their own business, but the ones who actually wave one at a person who had criminal intent is pretty rare.

Only 200 gun homicides a year are classified as "justified self-defense" by civilians, and a pretty good chunk of those are probably someone shooting a domestic batterer. 

What is fairly unbelievable is that you Ammosexuals who spend every day fantasizing about that day you can shoot you a darky ... I mean a "criminal"..  and that happy day comes and you don't do it.


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 12, 2022)

2aguy said:


> Brat based his claim on the results of a Center for Public Integrity analysis, which found that more than 96 percent of the donations from journalists to either Clinton or Trump between January 2015 and August 2016 went to Clinton.[4]



Um, yeah...because most journalists realized Trump was a malignant narcissist... they had covered him for years.  

And he turned out to be a bigger disaster than anyone could have predicted.  

I remember in March 2020, predicting that Covid would be Trump's Katrina...  But Trump's handling of Covid actually made Bush's handling of Katrina look good by comparison.


----------



## Hollie (Oct 12, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Uh, really?   Unemployment is low, we aren't at war with anyone directly, Covid deaths have largely declined to the point of being negliable.  We aren't seeing riots in the streets, and crime is even down from where it was in 2020.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Uh, really? Inflation is at 40 year highs, people's investments are being destroyed, 401k's are tanking, gas prices are climbing but hey, unemployment is low. You were the guy rearranging deck chairs on the sinking Titanic, right?

Odd you think that democrat crime is down when democrat crime is among the top three issues that concerns voters going into the mid term elections.

You need to stop watching MSNBC.

Uh, obviously you're in denial about both individuals and businesses leaving leftist Hell holes.









						Illinois Dem 'Shocked' After Another Manufacturer Leaves Democrat-Run State for Texas
					

Democratic Illinois senator Tammy Duckworth on Tuesday said she was "shocked" after the world's largest construction-equipment manufacturer announced it would move its headquarters out of her state to Texas.




					www.google.com
				




Caterpillar, a Chicago area-based company with more than $50 billion in annual revenue, announced it will set up its new headquarters outside Dallas, saying the move is "in the best strategic interest of the company."

The manufacturer's move marks the second time in recent weeks that a major corporation announced it would move its headquarters out of the Democrat-governed state. Last month, Boeing said it would move its headquarters from Chicago to Arlington, Va.



Take a guess why corporations are leaving leftist Hell holes










						Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz says more stores to close for security reasons
					

Starbucks had already closed five Seattle stores. CEO Howard Schultz said in a video posted to Twitter that more store closures are coming across the country.




					www.google.com
				




In a video posted on Twitter, Schultz said Starbucks is closing stores that are “not unprofitable” due to an uptick in safety-related problems including crime, homelessness and drug use in bathrooms. The company earlier announced plans to close 16 locations because of security issues.




Crime is down? Not according to business people. Maybe you're just parrotting the slogans of the leftist politburo mouthpieces.



Uh, those red states will turn blue? Are you endorsing policies of failure. Ineptitude, crime and corruption that defines so many leftist Hell holes? You seem to endorse the Plague Theory that follows leftism wherever it finds a place to fester... kinda' like a debilitating disease.


----------



## Hollie (Oct 12, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Um, yeah...because most journalists realized Trump was a malignant narcissist... they had covered him for years.
> 
> And he turned out to be a bigger disaster than anyone could have predicted.
> 
> I remember in March 2020, predicting that Covid would be Trump's Katrina...  But Trump's handling of Covid actually made Bush's handling of Katrina look good by comparison.


"Most journalists"? 

I wasn't aware "most journalists" were experts in personality disorders. Could you identify those "most journalists" who hold degrees in the biological sciences or earned degrees in psychology?

Um. Odd. I've found that that fact-addled tend to be those who use sweeping generalizations while knowing no facts.


----------



## Hollie (Oct 12, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> You need to stop watching Fox News



Fox News? I saw this on Fox News.

Maybe you need to organize a boycott of Fox News. If it's on Fox News it can't be real so send an email to Nina Jankowicz. She's looking for a job. Maybe a job at Fox News?










						Chicago crime frustrations mount against State's Attorney Kim Foxx as 'mass exodus' continues: source
					

Four Cook County Assistant States Attorneys have resigned from Kimberly Foxx's office over the past two weeks, a source familiar with the matter told Fox News Digital.




					www.foxnews.com
				




Chicago crime frustrations mount against State's Attorney Kim Foxx as 'mass exodus' continues: source​
Four Cook County Assistant State's Attorneys (ASAs) recently resigned from Foxx's Felony Review Unit — three of whom quit on the same day — all within the past two weeks, a source familiar with the matter told Fox News Digital.

The four felony ASAs, who normally worked out of the Cook County Criminal Court Building on 26th Street and California Avenue, were being asked to volunteer their time covering traffic court in a Bridgeview, Illinois, courthouse due to staffing issues at the Bridgeview location, the source said.

The resignations come about three months after a 25-year veteran Illinois prosecutor took aim at Foxx's policies in a public resignation letter published in July.

More than 235 people have resigned from Foxx's office since July 2021, according to The Chicago Tribune.





Um, strange. You insist crime is not a problem.


----------



## 2aguy (Oct 12, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Um, yeah...because most journalists realized Trump was a malignant narcissist... they had covered him for years.
> 
> And he turned out to be a bigger disaster than anyone could have predicted.
> 
> I remember in March 2020, predicting that Covid would be Trump's Katrina...  But Trump's handling of Covid actually made Bush's handling of Katrina look good by comparison.




No...the democrat party governors who destroyed their own states economies to hurt Trump is what hurt the country......they also murdered senior citizens in their nursing homes instead of using the Ships that Trump gave them for the sick.......they should be in jail.


----------



## Vagabond63 (Oct 12, 2022)

Blues Man said:


> Wrong again I can You are not worth the effort


Translation: " I really can't, so I'll just be pathetically dismissive and hope he goes away"


----------



## 2aguy (Oct 12, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Because it's fairly unlikely that 'I saw a gun and I ran away" happens all that often.
> 
> I mean, I'm sure that a lot of rednecks wave guns at minorities who are minding their own business, but the ones who actually wave one at a person who had criminal intent is pretty rare.
> 
> ...



You realize you are the one referring to black Americans as darkies.....and you do so very easily.  Your racism really needs to be addressed, by the same professional you should see about your sexual fetishes.....


----------



## Vagabond63 (Oct 12, 2022)

2aguy said:


> Moron....
> 
> And in this article.....the idiots claiming to be independent are democrats trying to pretend to be objective....
> 
> ...


You really ought to read through your sources before posting "headlines. Both articles you site refute your argument. Try again.


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 12, 2022)

Hollie said:


> Uh, really? Inflation is at 40 year highs, people's investments are being destroyed, 401k's are tanking, gas prices are climbing but hey, unemployment is low. You were the guy rearranging deck chairs on the sinking Titanic, right?



Meh, I don't spend life worrying about the assholes on Wall Street,  but I'm not a Stockholm Syndrome Republican like you are. 



Hollie said:


> Odd you think that democrat crime is down when democrat crime is among the top three issues that concerns voters going into the mid term elections.



I'm sure they are concerned, with all the hysterical news coverage...  but crime is actually down...  



Hollie said:


> Caterpillar, a Chicago area-based company with more than $50 billion in annual revenue, announced it will set up its new headquarters outside Dallas, saying the move is "in the best strategic interest of the company."


Caterpillar has been pulling out of Illinois for the last 20 years.... where have you been?


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 12, 2022)

2aguy said:


> No...the democrat party governors who destroyed their own states economies to hurt Trump is what hurt the country......they also murdered senior citizens in their nursing homes instead of using the Ships that Trump gave them for the sick.......they should be in jail.



Uh, that ship only had 400 beds...  NY had 10,000 new cases a day...   with only 22,000 hospital beds in the whole state. 

But if I were sick, I'd rather be in a Nursing home where they have been taking care of me for year that some drafty-ass ship.  



2aguy said:


> You realize you are the one referring to black Americans as darkies.....and you do so very easily. Your racism really needs to be addressed, by the same professional you should see about your sexual fetishes.....



Nope, I'm not the one arming myself because black people scare me and you have shortcomings...  

Your need to fondle your gun shows your insecurities...


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 12, 2022)

Hollie said:


> Chicago crime frustrations mount against State's Attorney Kim Foxx as 'mass exodus' continues: source​
> Four Cook County Assistant State's Attorneys (ASAs) recently resigned from Foxx's Felony Review Unit — three of whom quit on the same day — all within the past two weeks, a source familiar with the matter told Fox News Digital.





Hollie said:


> More than 235 people have resigned from Foxx's office since July 2021, according to The Chicago Tribune.



Yup, the old corrupt machine politicians are leaving, and frankly, no one is going to miss them. 

You see, you have to understand how Foxx got elected to start with.   Her predecessor was a kind of useless creature named Anita Alvarez.    We had a case in Chicago were a police officer shot a teenager 16 times, and the Mayor's office, Alvarez and the CPD all conspired to cover it up for nearly a year.    The only ones who showed any integrity was the coroner's office, that screamed this was a lie to press. 

Well, when the Video of the shooting was finally made public, there was public outrage at Alvarez for not pressing charges.   The state had to appoint a special prosecutor to take care of the case because she simply couldn't be trusted.  

Now, because I am not a partisan robot, I have some criticism of Foxx. (I live in Cook County, but not in Chicago).  But there's a reason why she got voted in...  and a reason why she got retained despite the Machine's best attempt to dislodge her.


----------



## Hollie (Oct 12, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Meh, I don't spend life worrying about the assholes on Wall Street,  but I'm not a Stockholm Syndrome Republican like you are.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


You may be someone who feeds off the teet of the working class by collecting government welfare benefits but there's another population of working adults who are investing for their futures. Some of us have a work ethic and see the benefits of working and saving. Leftists see hard work and dedication as an affront to their political ideology of sameness, laziness and waiting for a government handout.

The intentional trashing of the economy due to democrat polices is a designed and coordinated effort. How generous of you welfare recipients to applaud the degradation of people's net worth as they see the years of hard work and savings being drained away.

Fortunately I'm not a laggard and layabout like you.


Why would you care about Caterpillar leaving the socialist/ welfare paradise of Illinois? The state can fall further into decay as jobs disappear, as the working, tax paying middle class disappears. You will still get your government handout, right?


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 12, 2022)

Hollie said:


> You may be someone who feeds off the teet of the working class by collecting government welfare benefits but there's another population of working adults who are investing for their futures. Some of us have a work ethic and see the benefits of working and saving. Leftists see hard work and dedication as an affront to their political ideology of sameness, laziness and waiting for a government handout.



Nope.
I have a full time job.
And I run a side business
And a rental property. 
I often work 80 hours a week.  

I probably don't need to at this point.  I'm more than comfortable, but want to sock away a little more money before I retire in five years.  

None of which has anything to do with the fact that I see a criminal justice system that is broken, and racially unfair. 

But let's get real, we spend FAR more on white , middle class "entitlements" than we do paying the poor just enough money so they don't riot unless they are really provoked.  



Hollie said:


> The intentional trashing of the economy due to democrat polices is a designed and coordinated effort. How generous of you welfare recipients to applaud the degradation of people's net worth as they see the years of hard work and savings being drained away.



I think you are a little confused... the people who are screwing the working class aren't the poor... it's the people on wall street who make the decision to move your plant or make the stock market drop 700 points because we got good news on the economy.  

The rich WANT a recession. They want to pay the wage slaves less and force them to trudge back to the office even if they are more productive working from home.  




Hollie said:


> Why would you care about Caterpillar leaving the socialist/ welfare paradise of Illinois? The state can fall further into decay as jobs disappear, as the working, tax paying middle class disappears. You will still get your government handout, right?



Here's the thing...  Every company I have worked for since 2000 has been a supplier for Caterpillar...  And every year, they outsource jobs to subcontractors or close down plants to break their union contracts.  

And if they can cheat their workers or their suppliers, they will.    So there's only so much sucking up you can do to them when they move a few office jobs down to Jesusland to get people who won't complain about shitty working conditions.


----------



## Hollie (Oct 12, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Nope.
> I have a full time job.
> And I run a side business
> And a rental property.
> ...


Isn't it great being an anonymous poster, (poser), on a message board? You can be a welfare recipient who laughs off inflation, crime, etc., while claiming to work for a living.


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 12, 2022)

Hollie said:


> Isn't it great being an anonymous poster, (poser), on a message board? You can be a welfare recipient who laughs off inflation, crime, etc., while claiming to work for a living.



Sure, I can. 

Crime doesn't effect me. 
I didn't buy a big gas guzzler, so gas prices don't effect me that much. 
The billionaires losing money on the Dow doesn't effect me...  we never should have given people that much power. 

Again, I realize that Conservatism is a form of Stockholm syndrome, where you identify with your abusers... but you really need to realize who your enemies are.


----------



## Hollie (Oct 12, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Sure, I can.
> 
> Crime doesn't effect me.
> I didn't buy a big gas guzzler, so gas prices don't effect me that much.
> ...


That makes no sense. At least you're predictable.

If you were paying attention, you would know that crime and inflation are among the top concerns of voting Americans. 

Do you feel safe standing in line for your government welfare check?


----------



## Hollie (Oct 12, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Yup, the old corrupt machine politicians are leaving, and frankly, no one is going to miss them.
> 
> You see, you have to understand how Foxx got elected to start with.   Her predecessor was a kind of useless creature named Anita Alvarez.    We had a case in Chicago were a police officer shot a teenager 16 times, and the Mayor's office, Alvarez and the CPD all conspired to cover it up for nearly a year.    The only ones who showed any integrity was the coroner's office, that screamed this was a lie to press.
> 
> ...


What corrupt machine politicians are leaving?

You wonderful keftists breed corrupt machine politicians.









						Chicago Is Once Again The Most Corrupt City In The US, According To New Study
					

The year 2019 "was a highly explosive year, during which some of the most important political corruption in the history of Chicago and Illinois was exposed," the report states.




					blockclubchicago.org
				




Chicago Is Once Again The Most Corrupt City In The US, According To New Study​The year 2019 "was a highly explosive year, during which some of the most important political corruption in the history of Chicago and Illinois was exposed," the report states.




Leftism. It's not just an adventure, it's a communicable disease.


----------



## Blues Man (Oct 13, 2022)

Vagabond63 said:


> Translation: " I really can't, so I'll just be pathetically dismissive and hope he goes away"





Vagabond63 said:


> Saw John Lott and the CPRC and stopped reading.


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 13, 2022)

Hollie said:


> That makes no sense. At least you're predictable.
> 
> If you were paying attention, you would know that crime and inflation are among the top concerns of voting Americans.



Um, sure.  So is abortion.  So is Republican craziness.  

The only reason your party is going to do "well" in the midterms is that you've used redistricting to pick up seats you wouldn't have been competitive in otherwise.  The senate is likely to be a wash, and no major governorships are in play. 




Hollie said:


> Do you feel safe standing in line for your government welfare check?



Wouldn't know.   I get my paycheck every 2 weeks Direct Deposit.  I get most of my payments for my side business through Zelle now, along with payments on my rental property. 

(Not that I ever wanted a rental property.  I moved on the promise that a condo-deconversion was going to happen last year... I'm still waiting.)  

This will be the first year I hit I will hit six figures in gross income.  (Although it will be lower in net income when figuring in the expenses of property and side business) 



Hollie said:


> What corrupt machine politicians are leaving?
> 
> You wonderful keftists breed corrupt machine politicians.



From 2019.  That's why Lightfoot got elected... people were tired of the corruption.


----------



## Hollie (Oct 13, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Um, sure.  So is abortion.  So is Republican craziness.
> 
> The only reason your party is going to do "well" in the midterms is that you've used redistricting to pick up seats you wouldn't have been competitive in otherwise.  The senate is likely to be a wash, and no major governorships are in play.
> 
> ...


You're way too attached to conspiracy theories. I'm afraid that corruption and sleaze has become a hallmark of the dem / leftist party.

The reason Republicans and Independents will do well in the mid terms has everything to do with the retrograde, anti-american policies of the left. The dem /leftist party is now controlled by woke, self-hating ideologues with a true pathology. They see themselves as separate and distinct from the rest of society and as the ruling class that must act on its behalf.

The dems / left have become just a cabal of coffeehouse communists, lead by ethically challenged and morally bankrupt hacks.


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 13, 2022)

Hollie said:


> The reason Republicans and Independents will do well in the mid terms has everything to do with the retrograde, anti-american policies of the left. The dem /leftist party is now controlled by woke, self-hating ideologues with a true pathology. They see themselves as separate and distinct from the rest of society and as the ruling class that must act on its behalf.



You keep telling yourself that... because frankly, it was the same kind of shit you said in 2012 and 1996, when your side got major schellackings because you couldn't tamp down the crazy.  

The ironic things is, Republicans of back then seem relatively sane compared to the cult of Trump.


----------



## Jarlaxle (Oct 18, 2022)

Hollie said:


> Your claim was that everyone who wants a gun gets a gun. That was false.
> 
> What is the rejection rate that would satisfy leftists?



98% for Joey. He wants guns limited to the rich, the well-connected, police, and criminals.



JoeB131 said:


> At least 26%.  That is the percentage of Americans that suffer from some kind of mental illness.



I wonder what a shrink might find were he to analyze you...beyond delusions of adequacy.



JoeB131 said:


> The point is, I never knew the guy who bravely shot the home invader.
> (bullshit removed)



Joey, you are so full of shit it bubbles out your ears.


----------



## M14 Shooter (Oct 18, 2022)

Jarlaxle said:


> Joey, you are so full of shit...


...How full of shit is he?!?!?
That to get relief from the smell,. your boyfriend dunks his head in _______


----------



## Jarlaxle (Oct 18, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> again, the three people I know who died from gun violence were clean cut white people...
> 
> But you keep pretending that it's just the darkies dying, so that makes it okay.



You're lying again, kid.



JoeB131 said:


> Yes, you keep telling yourself that people want into your "tiny" club.



It's not news. I understand that you will keep lying about it, but anyone who cares about facts (that is: not you) can find out the truth easily.



JoeB131 said:


> Actually, statistically, undocumented immigrants are LESS likely to get into trouble for no other reason than they know they can be deported for the same offense that will get a citizen a citation.



Bullshit. Offhand, the illegal opiate trade in eastern Massachusetts is run-entirely-by illegal aliens, almost all from the Dominican Republic. Illegal aliens are, in many cases, effectively above the law, and they know it.


----------



## Vagabond63 (Oct 19, 2022)

Oh, John Lott. These links neatly sum up why I stopped reading.





						John Lott
					

John Richard Lott Jr. (1958–) is an economist known mainly for his "research" claiming to prove that less restrictive gun laws reduce crime. He originally attracted public attention with a study he co-authored with fellow economist David Mustard that was published in the Journal of Legal Studies...




					rationalwiki.org
				











						UNETHICAL BEHAVIOR: John Lott’s Missing Survey on Defensive Gun Use - GVPedia
					

FACT: Jon Wiener, a historian at the University of California, Irvine, concluded his analysis of Lott with “The conclusion seemed obvious: Lott had never done the national survey."




					www.gvpedia.org


----------



## 2aguy (Oct 19, 2022)

Vagabond63 said:


> Oh, John Lott. These links neatly sum up why I stopped reading.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



You doofus...Here is Lott defending himself from you anti-gun fascists...


*Last fall, Northwestern University law professor James Lindgren volunteered to investigate the claimed existence of Lott's 1997 telephone survey of 2,424 people. "I thought it would be exceedingly simple to establish" that the research had been done, Lindgren wrote in his report. 


Unfortunately, Malkin fails to mention that Lindgren is not an unbiased observer since I had written a journal article in Journal of Law & Politics critiquing some of his work months before he "volunteered to investigate" these claims.
It was not simple. Lott claims to have lost all of his data due to a computer crash. *



*2) As to the “claim” that I lost my data in a computer crash on July 3, 1997, I have offered Malkin the statements from nine academics (statements attached), four of whom I was co-authoring papers with at the time and who remember quite vividly also losing the data that we had on various projects. David Mustard at the University of Georgia spent considerable time during 1997 helping me replace gun crime data. Other academics worked with me to replace data on our other projects. Just so it is clear, this computer crash basically cost me all my data on all my projects up to that point in time, including all the data and word files for my book, More Guns, Less Crime, and numerous papers that were under review at journals. The next couple of years were hell trying to replace things and the data for this survey which ended up being one sentence in the book, was not of particular importance. However, all the data was replaced, including not only the large county level data, the state level data, as well as the survey data, when the survey was redone.
He financed the survey himself and kept no financial records. *



** Unlike many academics, I have never asked for government support for my research. Nothing different or unusual was done in this case. While we still have the tax forms that we filed that show we made large expenditures on research assistants that year, my wife keeps our financial documents for the three years required by the IRS. I have provided my tax records from that year to several professors. Among them is a tax expert, Professor Joe Olson, at Hamline University in Minnesota, and he can verify this information. I have checked with the bank that we had an account with, but they only keep records five years back. Since wild claims have been made about the costs of the survey, some notion of its scope would be useful. The survey was structured so that over 90 percent of those questioned would only have to answer three short questions and those were usually completed in under 30 seconds. Less than one percent of those surveyed would actually answer as many as seven questions and even in that case the survey only took about two minutes. The appendix in The Bias Against Guns provides a description of the survey when it was replicated.
He has forgotten the names of the students who allegedly helped with the survey and who supposedly dialed thousands of survey respondents long-distance from their own dorm rooms using survey software Lott can't identify or produce. 



* I have hired lots of student RAs over the years. Since I have been at AEI in the last couple of years I have had around 25 people work for me on various projects. The students in question worked for me during the very beginning of 1997. While I can usually reconstruct who has worked for me, it requires that I have that material written down. The information on these students was lost in the hard disk crash and given that I had lost data for other projects such as three revise-and-resubmits that I had at the Journal of Political Economy it was not a particularly high priority. 

I don’t have the original CD with telephone numbers from across the country that was used to obtain telephone numbers, but I have kept one that I obtained later in 1997 when I was considering redoing the survey and I still have that available.

Assuming the survey data was lost in a computer crash, it is still remarkable that Lott could not produce a single, contemporaneous scrap of paper proving the survey's existence, such as the research protocol or survey instrument. 



3) I have statements from two people who took the survey and other confirmatory evidence. As to the written material, being asked for written material six years after the survey is a long time. After the survey was done, the material was kept on my computer. In addition, I have moved three times (Chicago to Yale to Pennsylvania to AEI) as well as changed offices at Chicago and Yale since the summer of 1997. Yet, besides the statements from the academics who can verify the hard disk crash as well as the statement of those who participated in the survey, I do have statements David Mustard, who I had talked to numerous times about doing the survey with me during 1996 and who remembers after that us talking about the survey after it was completed. He is “fairly confident” that those conversations took place during 1997. John Whitley and Geoff Huck also have some recollections. Russell Roberts, now a professor at George Mason, was someone else that I talked to about the survey, but he simply can’t remember one way of the other. I didn’t talk to people other than co-authors about the survey and the research that I was doing on guns generally. This is because of the often great hostility to my gun work and also because I didn’t want to give those who disliked me a heads-up on what I was doing. I did have the questions from the survey and they were reused in the replicated survey in 2002.
After Lindgren's report was published, a Minnesota gun rights activist named David Gross came forward, claiming he was surveyed in 1997. Some have said that Gross's account proves that the survey was done. I think skepticism is warranted. 



4) David Gross is the only person who Malkin mentions and she doubts his statements. Gross, a former city prosecutor, does have strong feelings on guns, but that is one reason why he remembers talking to me about the survey when I gave a talk in Minnesota a couple of years after the survey. There was no other gun survey on the questions that I asked during 1997. And another survey that was given close in time, during the beginning of 1996, was dramatically different from mine (e.g., the 1996 survey was done by a polling firm (not by students), was very long with at least 32 open ended questions (not something that could be done in a few minutes), involved Harvard (not Chicago), did not ask about brandishing, etc.). What Gross remembers indicates that it could only have been my survey.

Malkin also selectively quotes Lindgren. Lindgren told the Washington Times that, “I interviewed [Mr. Gross] at length and found him credible.” Mr. Gross has also responded to later statements made by Lindgren.



I have also had a second person who participated interviewed by Jeff Parker, the former associate dean at the George Mason University Law School. Parker interviewed both James Hamilton as well as Hamilton's sister, who claims that James told her about the interview when it occurred, and he can verify this information.

Lindgren claimed that Gross had instead answered a quite different survey done by Hemenway at Harvard, but when Hemenway finally released the data from both his 1996 and 1999 surveys and the age and other information about Gross and Hamilton do not match any subject interviewed in either survey.*

*Lott now admits he used a fake persona, "Mary Rosh," to post voluminous defenses of his work over the Internet. *



** When Julian Sanchez asked about the similarities between my writings and those posted under this Internet chat room pseudonym during this past January I did admit it immediately. (Sanchez had put up a post on his blog site asking for help in identifying someone who was cutting and pasting many of my responses from other places in chat room discussions. Because a dynamic IP address was being used, Sanchez could only identify the posting as coming from someone in southeastern Pennsylvania. When I found that he was asking for help in identifying the poster I admitted that I was using the pseudonym.) I had originally used my own name in chat rooms but switched after receiving threatening and obnoxious telephone calls from other Internet posters. Ninety some percent of the posters in the chatroom were pretty clearly using pseudonyms. The fictitious name was from a family e-mail account we had set up for our children based on their names (see latter discussion), on a couple of occasions I used the female persona implied by the name in the chat rooms to try to get people to think about how people who are smaller and weaker physically can defend themselves. Virtually all the posting were on factual issues involving guns and the empirical debates surrounding them. All that information was completely accurate.
"Rosh" gushed that Lott was "the best professor that I ever had." 



*This was a family email account and I was not the only person who posted using this account.
She/he also penned an effusive review of "More Guns, Less Crime" on Amazon.com: "It was very interesting reading and Lott writes very well." (Lott claims that one of his sons posted the review in "Rosh's" name.) 



*The e-mail account was set up by my wife for my four sons (Maxim, Ryan, Roger, and Sherwin in birth order) and involves the first two letters of each of their names in order of their birth. Maxim wrote several reviews on Amazon.com using that e-mail account and signed in using maryrosh@aol.com, not “Mary Rosh.” His posting included not only a review of my book, but also reviews of computer games such as Caesars III. *


_*For whatever it is worth, a recent glich at Amazon.com revealed that it is quite common practice for authors to actually write positive anonymous reviews of their own books. The New York Times story on this revelation was actually quite sympathetic, which contrasts with the attack that the New York Times had on me when it also incorrectly claimed that I had written the review of my book.*_






						Response to Malkin's Op-ed
					

On this site I will post most statements regarding my work and gun control. Also included is a list of my op-eds, and information on The Bias Against Guns, my new book.



					johnrlott.tripod.com
				





Now.....for vagabond's response to my pointing out the truth about John Lott.....

*Here is 2aguy's Copy/Paste.....*

Thank, the British accent was all mine......


----------



## 2aguy (Oct 19, 2022)

Vagabond63 said:


> Oh, John Lott. These links neatly sum up why I stopped reading.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




I enjoy your rabid, anti-gun, fascist sources to attack John Lott.......


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 20, 2022)

2aguy said:


> I enjoy your rabid, anti-gun, fascist sources to attack John Lott.......



John Lott is an ammosexual porn star.


----------



## 2aguy (Oct 20, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> John Lott is an ammosexual porn star.



There it is….your sexual dysfunction….showing itself again…..get help.


----------



## Vagabond63 (Oct 20, 2022)

2aguy said:


> Here is Lott defending himself from you anti-gun fascists...


Yes, how *convenient* he apparently never bothered to back up his data...
*sigh* I'll say it again as it never seems to penetrate,* I am not anti gun* I am merely against anyone being able to get a gun without proper training and education, and there being proper safeguards in place to prevent mentally ill people from obtaining them.


----------



## Vagabond63 (Oct 20, 2022)

2aguy said:


> Now.....for vagabond's response to my pointing out the truth about John Lott.....
> 
> *Here is 2aguy's Copy/Paste.....*
> 
> Thank, the British accent was all mine......



Why thank you! Saves me the bother, although your use of the word "truth" there is a bit subjective. Anyway, I'll just repost the sources I cited, wouldn't want them to be "lost" in your torrent of so called "truth"









						UNETHICAL BEHAVIOR: John Lott’s Missing Survey on Defensive Gun Use - GVPedia
					

FACT: Jon Wiener, a historian at the University of California, Irvine, concluded his analysis of Lott with “The conclusion seemed obvious: Lott had never done the national survey."




					www.gvpedia.org
				









						John Lott
					

John Richard Lott Jr. (1958–) is an economist known mainly for his "research" claiming to prove that less restrictive gun laws reduce crime. He originally attracted public attention with a study he co-authored with fellow economist David Mustard that was published in the Journal of Legal Studies...




					rationalwiki.org


----------



## KissMy (Oct 20, 2022)

The Black Chicago Shotgun Carrier didn't threaten with his gun or say he was there to rob the store. He could not be legally arrested or prosecuted if Florida allowed open carry.


----------



## Hollie (Oct 20, 2022)

Vagabond63 said:


> Yes, how *convenient* he apparently never bothered to back up his data...
> *sigh* I'll say it again as it never seems to penetrate,* I am not anti gun* I am merely against anyone being able to get a gun without proper training and education, and there being proper safeguards in place to prevent mentally ill people from obtaining them.



Well, similarly, shouldn’t you folks be required to attend a proper training course before cutting into your crumpets?






						Knife Crime - Wales Safer Communities
					






					safercommunities.wales
				




What is Knife Crime?​Knife crime is any crime that involves a knife. Some people mistakenly think by carrying a knife then it will provide protection. But statistics show that if you carry a knife or weapon then you are more likely to end up being hurt. The basic laws on knives state that it’s illegal to:


sell a knife to anyone under 18, unless it has a folding blade 3 inches long (7.62 cm) or less
carry a knife in public without good reason, unless it has a folding blade with a cutting edge 3 inches long or less
carry, buy or sell any type of banned knife
use any knife in a threatening way (even a legal knife)
Any sharp instrument that is used in a threatening way (e.g. a screwdriver) is also an offensive weapon. Find out more here.




Seems odd that you have knife crime when there are…. you know…. laws against knife crime.


----------



## 2aguy (Oct 20, 2022)

Hollie said:


> Well, similarly, shouldn’t you folks be required to attend a proper training course before cutting into your crumpets?
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Their criminals are changing up to guns now as well.......when you have the drug trade to protect, knives won't do the job....


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 20, 2022)

2aguy said:


> There it is….your sexual dysfunction….showing itself again…..get help.



No dysfunction at all... I'm not the one with the obsession with guns.


----------



## 2aguy (Oct 20, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> No dysfunction at all... I'm not the one with the obsession with guns.




You seem to have a deranged fixation on guns as sex objects.........


----------



## Vagabond63 (Oct 20, 2022)

2aguy said:


> You seem to have a deranged fixation on guns as sex objects.........


Interesting article on that very subject...








						Firearms and the Phallus: Using Guns to Reclaim Masculinity — COLUMBIA POLITICAL REVIEW
					

The United States is a hotbed of both gun violence and toxic masculinity, ranked 28th in the world for gun violence and 42nd for gender equality (which may seem to be an average ranking but Saudi Arabia, a country where women were only given the right to drive one year ago, is ranked   50th  .) Furt




					www.cpreview.org


----------



## M14 Shooter (Oct 20, 2022)

2aguy said:


> You seem to have a deranged fixation on guns as sex objects.........


Evert time you talk about guns, he thinks of your John-Thomas.


----------



## 2aguy (Oct 20, 2022)

Vagabond63 said:


> Interesting article on that very subject...
> 
> 
> 
> ...




And there you go....joining the ranks of the idiots who see dicks when we talk about gun self defense.....


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 20, 2022)

2aguy said:


> You seem to have a deranged fixation on guns as sex objects.........



Honestly, I've never seen a man love a woman the way you love guns.


----------



## 2aguy (Oct 20, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Honestly, I've never seen a man love a woman the way you love guns.




Yeah......too bad for your penis dreams I am not a "gun guy."  I am a self defense guy, I want innocent people to be able to protect themselves from criminals and people like you........guns just happen to be the best tool for self defense.


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 21, 2022)

2aguy said:


> Yeah......too bad for your penis dreams I am not a "gun guy." I am a self defense guy, I want innocent people to be able to protect themselves from criminals and people like you........guns just happen to be the best tool for self defense.



A gun in the home is 43 times more likely to kill a home owner than a bad guy, mostly because you Ammosexuals are more interested in building the gun culture than promoting gun safety and keeping guns out of the hands of the wrong people. 

If guns made us safer, the US wouldn't have the highest murder rate in the Industrialized World.


----------



## 2aguy (Oct 21, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> A gun in the home is 43 times more likely to kill a home owner than a bad guy, mostly because you Ammosexuals are more interested in building the gun culture than promoting gun safety and keeping guns out of the hands of the wrong people.
> 
> If guns made us safer, the US wouldn't have the highest murder rate in the Industrialized World.




And you lie again......

Kellerman who did the study that came up with the 43 times more likely myth, was forced to retract that study and to do the research over when other academics pointed out how flawed his methods were....he then changed the 43 times number to 2.7, but he was still using flawed data to get even that number.....

Below is the study where he changed the number from 43 to 2.7 and below that is the explanation as to why that number isn't even accurate.

http://www.nejm.org/doi/full/10.1056/NEJM199310073291506

After controlling for these characteristics, we found that keeping a gun in the home was strongly and independently associated with an increased risk of homicide (adjusted odds ratio, 2.7;

------------

https://crimeresearch.org/wp-conten...ack-of-Public-Health-Research-on-Firearms.pdf

3. The Incredibly Flawed Public Health Research Guns in the Home At a town hall at George Mason University in January 2016, President Obama said, “If you look at the statistics, there's no doubt that there are times where somebody who has a weapon has been able to protect themselves and scare off an intruder or an assailant, but what is more often the case is that they may not have been able to protect themselves, but they end up being the victim of the weapon that they purchased themselves.”25 The primary proponents of this claim are Arthur Kellermann and his many coauthors. A gun, they have argued, is less likely to be used in killing a criminal than it is to be used in killing someone the gun owner knows. In one of the most well-known public health studies on firearms, Kellermann’s “case sample” consists of 444 homicides that occurred in homes. His control group had 388 individuals who lived near the deceased victims and were of the same sex, race, and age range. After learning about the homicide victims and control subjects—whether they owned a gun, had a drug or alcohol problem, etc.—these authors attempted to see if the probability of a homicide correlated with gun ownership. Amazingly these studies assume that if someone died from a gun shot, and a gun was owned in the home, that it was the gun in the home that killed that person. The paper is clearly misleading, as it fails to report that in only 8 of these 444 homicide cases was the gun that had been kept in the home the murder weapon.Moreover, the number of criminals stopped with a gun is much higher than the number killed in defensive gun uses. In fact, the attacker is killed in fewer than 1 out of every 1,000 defensive gun uses. Fix either of these data errors and the results are reversed. To demonstrate, suppose that we use the same statistical method—with a matching control group—to do a study on the efficacy of hospital care. Assume that we collect data just as these authors did, compiling a list of all the people who died in a particular county over the period of a year. Then we ask their relatives whether they had been admitted to the hospital during the previous year. We also put together a control sample consisting of neighbors who are part of the same sex, race, and age group. Then we ask these men and women whether they have been in a hospital during the past year. My bet is that those who spent time in hospitals are much more likely to have died.


Nine Myths Of Gun Control

Myth #6 "A homeowner is 43 times as likely to be killed or kill a family member as an intruder"

To suggest that science has proven that defending oneself or one's family with a gun is dangerous, gun prohibitionists repeat Dr. Kellermann's long discredited claim: "a gun owner is 43 times more likely to kill a family member than an intruder." [17] This fallacy , fabricated using tax dollars, is one of the most misused slogans of the anti-self-defense lobby.

The honest measure of the protective benefits of guns are the lives saved, the injuries prevented, the medical costs saved, and the property protected not Kellermann's burglar or rapist body count.

Only 0.1% (1 in a thousand) of the defensive uses of guns results in the death of the predator. [3]

Any study, such as Kellermann' "43 times" fallacy, that only counts bodies will expectedly underestimate the benefits of gun a thousand fold.

Think for a minute. Would anyone suggest that the only measure of the benefit of law enforcement is the number of people killed by police? Of course not. The honest measure of the benefits of guns are the lives saved, the injuries prevented, the medical costs saved by deaths and injuries averted, and the property protected. 65 lives protected by guns for every life lost to a gun. [2]

*Kellermann recently downgraded his estimate to "2.7 times," [18] but he persisted in discredited methodology. He used a method that cannot distinguish between "cause" and "effect." His method would be like finding more diet drinks in the refrigerators of fat people and then concluding that diet drinks "cause" obesity.*


Also, he studied groups with high rates of violent criminality, alcoholism, drug addiction, abject poverty, and domestic abuse .


From such a poor and violent study group he attempted to generalize his findings to normal homes

*Interestingly, when Dr. Kellermann was interviewed he stated that, if his wife were attacked, he would want her to have a gun for protection.[19] Apparently, Dr. Kellermann doesn't even believe his own studies.


-----
*

Public Health and Gun Control: A Review



Since at least the mid-1980s, Dr. Kellermann (and associates), whose work had been heavily-funded by the CDC, published a series of studies purporting to show that persons who keep guns in the home are more likely to be victims of homicide than those who don¹t.

In a 1986 NEJM paper, Dr. Kellermann and associates, for example, claimed their "scientific research" proved that defending oneself or one¹s family with a firearm in the home is dangerous and counter productive, claiming* "a gun owner is 43 times more likely to kill a family member than an intruder."8

In a critical review and now classic article published in the March 1994 issue of the Journal of the Medical Association of Georgia (JMAG), Dr. Edgar Suter, Chairman of Doctors for Integrity in Policy Research (DIPR), found evidence of "methodologic and conceptual errors," such as prejudicially truncated data and the listing of "the correct methodology which was described but never used by the authors."5 *

Moreover, the gun control researchers failed to consider and underestimated the protective benefits of guns.

Dr. Suter writes: "The true measure of the protective benefits of guns are the lives and medical costs saved, the injuries prevented, and the property protected ‹ not the burglar or rapist body count.

Since only 0.1 - 0.2 percent of defensive uses of guns involve the death of the criminal, any study, such as this, that counts criminal deaths as the only measure of the protective benefits of guns will expectedly underestimate the benefits of firearms by a factor of 500 to 1,000."5

In 1993, in his landmark and much cited NEJM article (and the research, again, heavily funded by the CDC), Dr. Kellermann attempted to show again that guns in the home are a greater risk to the victims than to the assailants.4 Despite valid criticisms by reputable scholars of his previous works (including the 1986 study), Dr. Kellermann ignored the criticisms and again used the same methodology.

*He also used study populations with disproportionately high rates of serious psychosocial dysfunction from three selected state counties, known to be unrepresentative of the general U.S. population.

For example, 

53 percent of the case subjects had a history of a household member being arrested, 

31 percent had a household history of illicit drug use, 32 percent had a household member hit or hurt in a family fight, and 

17 percent had a family member hurt so seriously in a domestic altercation that prompt medical attention was required. 
Moreover, both the case studies and control groups in this analysis had a very high incidence of financial instability.*

In fact, in this study, gun ownership, the supposedly high risk factor for homicide was not one of the most strongly associated factors for being murdered.

*Drinking, illicit drugs, living alone, history of family violence, living in a rented home were all greater individual risk factors for being murdered than a gun in the home. One must conclude there is no basis to apply the conclusions of this study to the general population.*

All of these are factors that, as Dr. Suter pointed out, "would expectedly be associated with higher rates of violence and homicide."5

*It goes without saying, the results of such a study on gun homicides, selecting this sort of unrepresentative population sample, nullify the authors' generalizations, and their preordained, conclusions can not be extrapolated to the general population.*

Moreover, although the 1993 New England Journal of Medicine study purported to show that the homicide victims were killed with a gun ordinarily kept in the home, the fact is that as Kates and associates point out 71.1 percent of the victims were killed by assailants who did not live in the victims¹ household using guns presumably not kept in that home.6
======

Read more: CDC’s Antigun Agenda On Display: So-Called Experts Abuse Our Trust
Under Creative Commons License: Attribution
Follow us: @Ammoland on Twitter | Ammoland on Facebook

In 1993,Dr. Kellermann, who was funded in 1991 by a CDC grant, had to soften the ’43 times’ number to ‘2.7 times.’ He concluded, “Rather than confer protection, guns kept in the home are associated with an increase in the risk of homicide by a family member or intimate acquaintance.” Kellerman thought the 2.7 number would not sound quite so impossible.
These papers, and many others from the medical community, were criticized by researchers who statistically showed that Kellermann’s conclusions were wildly wrong. Kellermann used a technique that depended on matching subjects and controls, except that the subject and control groups did not match. The subject group lived a very high-risk, alcohol and drug-filled lifestyle, while the controls did not.

*Kellermann had singled out people who exist at the edges of society. Kellermann did not study normal gun owners, just criminals who had guns, but he exaggerated his findings.*




> Because of this confusion, Kellerman helped change American gun politics by injecting unwarranted fear into the gun debate. Too many journalists just read the conclusion of a “scientific” paper, and skip over the rest as too complex for them.


Despite these serious methodological problems, Kellermann’s results are still widely accepted in the public health field.​Public-health advocates appear willing to run with any published study, regardless of how weak its methods, just so long as the findings are congenial to their assumption that guns are dangerous.
Then, in 1996, after Congress requested Kellermann’s original data, which he failed to release, Congress cut funding to the CDC for advocacy research. No funding was cut for medical research, just advocacy research.

CDC’s Antigun Agenda On Display: So-Called Experts Abuse Our Trust


----------



## 2aguy (Oct 21, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> A gun in the home is 43 times more likely to kill a home owner than a bad guy, mostly because you Ammosexuals are more interested in building the gun culture than promoting gun safety and keeping guns out of the hands of the wrong people.
> 
> If guns made us safer, the US wouldn't have the highest murder rate in the Industrialized World.




We have a high murder rate because our criminals are more willing to commit murder in their crimes.  You don't have to shoot someone in a robbery, rape, beating....but they do.....it is a choice they make.

Meanwhile, the other 350 million Americans, the owners of 600 million guns and over 21.5 million Americans who can legally carry guns murder no one with their guns...

we have a criminal problem, not a gun owner problem...

The political party you support, the democrat party, the racist political party......is the source of our crime problem in this country...they are destroying local police at the same time they are finding new ways to release the most dangerous and violent criminals out of our jails and prisons.....

The truth....

*Of the approximately 145,000 people in federal prisons and 1,040,000 people in state prisons, less than 3.5 percent are incarcerated for a conviction related to drug possession. Even when one expands the scope beyond mere possession to all other types of drug offenses (many of which are associated with violent cartels and gangs), the proportion rises only to 18 percent.

America’s incarceration “problem” relates directly to its violent-crime problem. The nation’s incarceration rate—roughly 639 per 100,000 people—is four to six times that of its high-income peers in Europe and Asia. Without context, that statistic is alarming, but when we consider that America’s homicide rate is 7.5 times higher than those same peer nations, our incarceration rate seems more justified.*

*Even the claim that people imprisoned for “nonviolent” crimes are distinct from the rest of the criminal population is suspect. A 2021 Bureau of Justice Statistics report found that people released from prison for drug crimes were actually more likely to be re-arrested for a violent offense than people released for homicide or sexual assault.*









						The Myth of the Nonviolent Drug Offender | City Journal
					

Criminal-justice reformers should stop deluding themselves and the public that “mass decarceration” will be anything other than a bloodbath.




					www.city-journal.org


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 21, 2022)

2aguy said:


> And you lie again......
> 
> Kellerman who did the study



Blah, blah, blah... no one cares.    So the gist of your argument is that the people who were killed by guns in their own homes should have never had guns to start with. 

I agree.  They shouldn't have.   If you are depressed, if you are prone to violence, if you have a substance abuse problem or a history of mental illness, you should in no way, shape of form be able to get a gun.  

One of us wants to make it harder for these people to get guns.
And one of us wants to make it easier.


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 21, 2022)

2aguy said:


> We have a high murder rate because our criminals are more willing to commit murder in their crimes. You don't have to shoot someone in a robbery, rape, beating....but they do.....it is a choice they make.



No, we have a high murder rate because Guns are easy to get.  

Again, you remind me of the Polish Scientist who cuts off all a frog's legs, shouts JUMP and when the Frog doesn't move, concludes a frog with no legs is deaf.


----------



## Blues Man (Oct 21, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> A gun in the home is 43 times more likely to kill a home owner than a bad guy, mostly because you Ammosexuals are more interested in building the gun culture than promoting gun safety and keeping guns out of the hands of the wrong people.
> 
> If guns made us safer, the US wouldn't have the highest murder rate in the Industrialized World.


No matter how many times you repeat that debunked BULLSHIT it will never be true


----------



## Blues Man (Oct 21, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> No, we have a high murder rate because Guns are easy to get.
> 
> Again, you remind me of the Polish Scientist who cuts off all a frog's legs, shouts JUMP and when the Frog doesn't move, concludes a frog with no legs is deaf.


We have the gun crime we do because both federal and state governments have utterly refused to enforce the law.


----------



## 2aguy (Oct 21, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> No, we have a high murder rate because Guns are easy to get.
> 
> Again, you remind me of the Polish Scientist who cuts off all a frog's legs, shouts JUMP and when the Frog doesn't move, concludes a frog with no legs is deaf.




No...our criminals are more willing to murder.   They have guns in Britain, at least the criminals do, as they do across Europe, they just shoot to wound or intimidate...they haven't reached the point where they murder everything they see.....Sweden is the exception...they are experiencing more and more gun murder.


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 21, 2022)

Blues Man said:


> We have the gun crime we do because both federal and state governments have utterly refused to enforce the law.



Nope, we have gun problem because the gun industry has no ethics because they have no accountability. 

Let the victims of gun violence sue the gun industry and you'd be amazed how fast they clean up their act.  



2aguy said:


> No...our criminals are more willing to murder. They have guns in Britain, at least the criminals do, as they do across Europe, they just shoot to wound or intimidate...they haven't reached the point where they murder everything they see.....Sweden is the exception...they are experiencing more and more gun murder.



Okay, Sweden. 

Sweden had 48 gun homicides in 2020.  

The US had 19384 in 2020. 

Um...  yeah, I think we have the bigger problem.


----------



## Blues Man (Oct 22, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Nope, we have gun problem because the gun industry has no ethics because they have no accountability.
> 
> Let the victims of gun violence sue the gun industry and you'd be amazed how fast they clean up their act.
> 
> ...


you're wrong as usual

When the city of Richmond VA decided to enforce gun laws there was a statistically significant reduction in murders, gun crimes and crime in general


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 22, 2022)

Blues Man said:


> you're wrong as usual
> 
> When the city of Richmond VA decided to enforce gun laws there was a statistically significant reduction in murders, gun crimes and crime in general



Richmond VA has a population of 223,000.     Chicago has suburbs that are bigger.  

We don't have prison space to lock people up now, much less throwing in millions of "Having a gun while black" charges that you want to put out there.


----------



## Vagabond63 (Oct 22, 2022)

2aguy said:


> Yeah......too bad for your penis dreams I am not a "gun guy."  I am a self defense guy, I want innocent people to be able to protect themselves from criminals and people like you........guns just happen to be the best tool for self defense.


Except when this happens...








						Police: Delivery driver killed in shootout with carjacking suspects, teen suspect hospitalized
					

A Philadelphia delivery driver was shot and killed during an attempted carjacking that turned into a shootout in the city’s Fairmount neighborhood Thursday night, authorieis say.




					www.fox29.com


----------



## Vagabond63 (Oct 22, 2022)

Or this...








						VIDEO: Two women accused of shooting guns out of car window on New Orleans interstate
					

Police are seeking assistance in locating two suspects in connection with illegally firing guns on the interstate Sunday night (Oct. 16).




					www.fox8live.com


----------



## Vagabond63 (Oct 22, 2022)

2aguy said:


> And there you go....joining the ranks of the idiots who see dicks when we talk about gun self defense.....


Except you don't. You fearmonger in order to scare people into buying guns that they will probably never use. Just out of curiosity, which Firearms  manufacturer do you work for?


----------



## Vagabond63 (Oct 22, 2022)

2aguy said:


> They have guns in Britain, at least the criminals do, as they do across Europe, they just shoot to wound or intimidate...


So do normal law abiding UK citizens, 565,929 as of 2021. Illegal guns are mainly used by drugs gangs to intimidate each other or for self-defence from other gangs. Very, very rarely do innocents get caught up in shootings. I've a greater chance of being struck by lightning in the UK than being shot.


----------



## Vagabond63 (Oct 22, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> A gun in the home is 43 times more likely to kill a home owner than a bad guy, mostly because you Ammosexuals are more interested in building the gun culture than promoting gun safety and keeping guns out of the hands of the wrong people.
> 
> If guns made us safer, the US wouldn't have the highest murder rate in the Industrialized World.


Here's an example.








						New details revealed in double homicide in West Peoria
					

At a bond hearing in Peoria, a prosecutor revealed the circumstances that led to a double homicide in West Peoria.



					eu.pjstar.com


----------



## Blues Man (Oct 22, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Richmond VA has a population of 223,000.     Chicago has suburbs that are bigger.
> 
> We don't have prison space to lock people up now, much less throwing in millions of "Having a gun while black" charges that you want to put out there.


So what?

before operation exile Richmond had one of the highest murder rates in the country.

And as I have told you countless times already we lock up the wrong people and when we finally get federal marijuana decriminalization we will no longer have more people in jail on simple drug possession offenses outnumbering those convicted of violent crimes


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 22, 2022)

Blues Man said:


> So what?
> 
> before operation exile Richmond had one of the highest murder rates in the country.



The average homicide rate in the US is 6 deaths per 100,000 people annually. 
Richmond's homicide rate was 47 per 100K in 2004, but the "amazing" progress you talk about got it down to 15, which is still 2.5 times the national and state average. 
It is currently 22, creeping back up over recent years.  





__





						Richmond VA Murder/Homicide Rate 1999-2018
					

Interactive chart of the Richmond, Virginia murder rate (i.e. the number of homicides per 100,000 population) from 1999 to 2018.




					www.macrotrends.net
				









By comparison, Chicago's homicide rate is 18.4 per 100,000.  

So this vaunted program of "Let's hassle the darkies" and you STILL haven't really improved things all that much.  




Blues Man said:


> And as I have told you countless times already we lock up the wrong people and when we finally get federal marijuana decriminalization we will no longer have more people in jail on simple drug possession offenses outnumbering those convicted of violent crimes



We lock up too many people.  Swapping out who we lock up, with our current racist justice system, just means we will stop locking up people of color for having pot and start locking them up for having guns...  

Meanwhile white people will keep getting treated kindly by the system.


----------



## Blues Man (Oct 22, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> The average homicide rate in the US is 6 deaths per 100,000 people annually.
> Richmond's homicide rate was 47 per 100K in 2004, but the "amazing" progress you talk about got it down to 15, which is still 2.5 times the national and state average.
> It is currently 22, creeping back up over recent years.
> 
> ...


Again so what?

You talk like you think murder rates are homogenous across all towns cities and states and we all know that is not the case.

The vast majority of murders occur in very small very well defined areas of mostly poor inner city neighborhoods.  In fact these areas are so well defined that the murder rate in just a few square blocks of one city can be 4 or 5 times higher than another few square blocks a couple miles away.

Everyone but you knows this.


----------



## Polishprince (Oct 22, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> The average homicide rate in the US is 6 deaths per 100,000 people annually.
> Richmond's homicide rate was 47 per 100K in 2004, but the "amazing" progress you talk about got it down to 15, which is still 2.5 times the national and state average.
> It is currently 22, creeping back up over recent years.
> 
> ...




Actually, in foreign countries like Mexico, El Salvador and Congo, they have extreme gun control.  And murder rates through the roof.

Thinking that Draconian style Gun Confiscation policies will remedy a damn thing is sort of stupid ass.

As far as white people being treated "kindly"by the DOJ, that's also a crock of shit.  Just this week, a first time offender and a white senior citizen was convicted of a non-violent offense and given hard time.  Not only that, libs have been rooting for this senior, Stephen Bannon , to be sodomized in the joint.


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 22, 2022)

Blues Man said:


> Again so what?
> 
> You talk like you think murder rates are homogenous across all towns cities and states and we all know that is not the case.
> 
> ...



Oh, well, it's just the darkies shooting each other so that makes it "Okay".  



Polishprince said:


> Actually, in foreign countries like Mexico, El Salvador and Congo, they have extreme gun control. And murder rates through the roof.



These countries barely have functioning governments.    Why do you want to compare us to third world countries instead of first world countries? 



Polishprince said:


> As far as white people being treated "kindly"by the DOJ, that's also a crock of shit. Just this week, a first time offender and a white senior citizen was convicted of a non-violent offense and given hard time. Not only that, libs have been rooting for this senior, Stephen Bannon , to be sodomized in the joint.



You mean a guy who was involved in outright fraud and treason.    Yeah, I hope he gets sodomized. 

Doesn't take away from the fact that black people are more likely to get prison for the same thing a white person gets probation for.


----------



## Mac-7 (Oct 22, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> You can spooge that all day, *but the fact is, guns in the home are more likely to kill someone in the household.*
> 
> The problem is you keep trying to pretend we shouldn't count the suicides.


Thanks to suicide

But in lib countries where guns are banned people still manage yo kill themselves some other way


----------



## 2aguy (Oct 22, 2022)

Vagabond63 said:


> So do normal law abiding UK citizens, 565,929 as of 2021. Illegal guns are mainly used by drugs gangs to intimidate each other or for self-defence from other gangs. Very, very rarely do innocents get caught up in shootings. I've a greater chance of being struck by lightning in the UK than being shot.




Yes....and in America it is the same....criminals primarily murder other criminals, and then their friends and family get caught up in the violence.....you are also seeing more of this in Britain and across Europe as your drug gangs become less concerned about collateral damage...

*Nine-year-old Olivia was shot in her home in Dovecot, Liverpool, on Monday, August 22, when a gunman chased convicted burglar Joseph Nee into her home. *

*Thomas Cashman, 34, has been charged with her murder and appeared in court earlier this week.*









						Public told 'do your duty' to ensure justice is done for Olivia
					

"There is a duty on us all to actually ensure that justice is done."




					www.liverpoolecho.co.uk
				




You are really dumb if you think drug gangs in Britain aren't going to get worse and worse as you attack your own police with leftist drivel, and start to get soft on crime....


----------



## 2aguy (Oct 22, 2022)

Vagabond63 said:


> Except when this happens...
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Yes....criminals are going to hurt innocent people...but in the U.S. we can and do fight back....according to the Centers for Disease control this happens about 1.1 million times a year....according to our Department of Justice it happens 1.5 million times a year....rapes, robberies, murders, beatings, stabbings and mass public shootings...stopped by armed citizens.....

Meanwhile, in Europe....your woman are raped without the ability to protect themselves....when your criminals decide to kill, your people are defenseless....

And, again, if you think British criminals are going to stay the same as your crime rates go up.....you are really delusional....


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 22, 2022)

2aguy said:


> Yes....criminals are going to hurt innocent people...but in the U.S. we can and do fight back....according to the Centers for Disease control this happens about 1.1 million times a year....according to our Department of Justice it happens 1.5 million times a year....rapes, robberies, murders, beatings, stabbings and mass public shootings...stopped by armed citizens.....



Those numbers are horseshit. 

We only have 200 self-defense homicides with guns a year.  

No one believes that there are 1,000,000 life threatening incidents a year, but only 200 times does the bad guy get taken out on a slab.  

The FBI pegs the number at 45,000, and even that is generous.


----------



## Polishprince (Oct 22, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> You mean a guy who was involved in outright fraud and treason.    Yeah, I hope he gets sodomized.
> 
> Doesn't take away from the fact that black people are more likely to get prison for the same thing a white person gets probation for.




The fellow wasn't convicted of either fraud or treason.

He was convicted of ignoring a subpoena- hardly a Class A felony of any sort. More equivalent to ripping a mattress tag as opposed to treason.

When a black guy, Holder, did the same thing he wasn't even tried for the crime- much less sodomized in the joint.


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 22, 2022)

Polishprince said:


> The fellow wasn't convicted of either fraud or treason.
> 
> He was convicted of ignoring a subpoena- hardly a Class A felony of any sort. More equivalent to ripping a mattress tag as opposed to treason.
> 
> When a black guy, Holder, did the same thing he wasn't even tried for the crime- much less sodomized in the joint.



Get back to me when you actually understand the case against Bannon


----------



## 2aguy (Oct 22, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Those numbers are horseshit.
> 
> We only have 200 self-defense homicides with guns a year.
> 
> ...




Those numbers come from actual research, and you lie about the rest.


----------



## 2aguy (Oct 22, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Get back to me when you actually understand the case against Bannon




He was a friend to Trump and worked for him...therefore the democrat party decided to persecute him....while eric holder, who also defied a subpoena to go to congress walked away free...........


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 22, 2022)

2aguy said:


> He was a friend to Trump and worked for him...therefore the democrat party decided to persecute him....while eric holder, who also defied a subpoena to go to congress walked away free...........



Eric Holder was arguing a legitimate separation of powers issue. 
Bannon was a private citizen who instigated and participated in a riot. 



2aguy said:


> Those numbers come from actual research, and you lie about the rest.



The research is bullshit.  Unless you can show me 1 million sworn statements about DGU's, they are bullshit.


----------



## 2aguy (Oct 22, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Eric Holder was arguing a legitimate separation of powers issue.
> Bannon was a private citizen who instigated and participated in a riot.
> 
> 
> ...




No....he wasn't.   Eric Holder sold guns to drug cartels and Congress wanted to know what obama and he were doing.......


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 22, 2022)

2aguy said:


> No....he wasn't. Eric Holder sold guns to drug cartels and Congress wanted to know what obama and he were doing.......



You mean they tracked 2000 guns out of the 250,000 the gun industry ships across the border every year?   
You seem to miss the point. The point was to identify the sellers, not to get the guns.  

Confidential sources, names of investigators, operational details... these are all confidential matters, so this WAS a legitimate separation of powers issue.


----------



## 2aguy (Oct 22, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> You mean they tracked 2000 guns out of the 250,000 the gun industry ships across the border every year?
> You seem to miss the point. The point was to identify the sellers, not to get the guns.
> 
> Confidential sources, names of investigators, operational details... these are all confidential matters, so this WAS a legitimate separation of powers issue.




No...they intentionally allowed known cartel members to buy guns in America, and didn't track the buyers.....allowing the guns to disappear into the Mexican wilderness.........so they would end up in crime scenes in Mexico, allowing obama and holder to restart the gun control push.......

They allowed guns to get into the hands of Mexican criminals....to push gun control.


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 22, 2022)

2aguy said:


> No...they intentionally allowed known cartel members to buy guns in America, and didn't track the buyers.....allowing the guns to disappear into the Mexican wilderness.........so they would end up in crime scenes in Mexico, allowing obama and holder to restart the gun control push.......



Not sure how that works, exactly... 

Crazy people mow down preschoolers and we won't fix the gun laws in this country.    You think any American gives a shit what happens in Mexico.  

I mean, you are getting into Dale Smith level crazy here.


----------



## 2aguy (Oct 22, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Not sure how that works, exactly...
> 
> Crazy people mow down preschoolers and we won't fix the gun laws in this country.    You think any American gives a shit what happens in Mexico.
> 
> I mean, you are getting into Dale Smith level crazy here.




It worked exactly like this..

Gun Store to Holder's ATF.....we don't want to sell these guns to these guys, we know they are criminals ......

Holder's ATF....sell the guns or we will pull your license....

that is how it worked, you doofus.


----------



## 2aguy (Oct 22, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Not sure how that works, exactly...
> 
> Crazy people mow down preschoolers and we won't fix the gun laws in this country.    You think any American gives a shit what happens in Mexico.
> 
> I mean, you are getting into Dale Smith level crazy here.




Moron......

*In the fall of 2009, ATF agents installed a secret phone line and hidden cameras in a ceiling panel and wall at Andre Howard’s Lone Wolf gun store. They gave him one basic instruction: Sell guns to every illegal purchaser who walks through the door.*
*
For 15 months, Howard did as he was told. To customers with phony IDs or wads of cash he normally would have turned away, he sold pistols, rifles and semiautomatics. He was assured by the ATF that they would follow the guns, and that the surveillance would lead the agents to the violent Mexican drug cartels on the Southwest border.

When Howard heard nothing about any arrests, he questioned the agents. Keep selling, they told him. So hundreds of thousands of dollars more in weapons, including .50-caliber sniper rifles, walked out of the front door of his store in a Glendale, Ariz., strip mall.
------

In Glendale, after two decades in business, Howard is thinking about closing his Lone Wolf gun store. He also has second thoughts about helping law enforcement.
*
*“Was I betrayed?” he said. “Absolutely yes.”*









						Gun store owner had misgivings about ATF sting
					

When federal agents with Operation Fast and Furious told Andre Howard to sell weapons to illegal purchasers, he complied, but he feared someone would get hurt. Then a border agent was shot.




					www.latimes.com


----------



## Blues Man (Oct 23, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Oh, well, it's just the darkies shooting each other so that makes it "Okay".
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Again with your racist bullshit.

These are the facts

And the one thing you are right about is that the powers that be don;t give a shit if young male minorities kill each other.

And you don't either since you don;t want to enfiorce the gun laws we have


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 23, 2022)

2aguy said:


> It worked exactly like this..
> 
> Gun Store to Holder's ATF.....we don't want to sell these guns to these guys, we know they are criminals ......
> 
> ...



Not really.    The gun stores sell 250,000 guns that cross the border every year...  The only reason they balked was because the ATF was "watching".  



Blues Man said:


> Again with your racist bullshit.
> 
> These are the facts
> 
> ...



The problem is that it won't solve the problem.  It will just mean a lot of black kids will end up in the grinder of the  Prison Industrial Complex while white kids get good lawyers and please.   

There is simply no problem where "Lock more people Up' is the right answer.  EVER!


----------



## Hellokitty (Oct 23, 2022)

I'm not a gun person, but IMO it's un-American to not support a good guy with a gun.


----------



## 2aguy (Oct 23, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Not really.    The gun stores sell 250,000 guns that cross the border every year...  The only reason they balked was because the ATF was "watching".
> 
> 
> 
> ...




wrong...liar.   The ATF under obama needed to get guns sold to the cartels.....they needed it to push new gun control since the democrats didn't want to touch the issue since they lost congress on the issue in 1994....

The ATF forced those gun stores to sell those guns to known criminals...you moron.


----------



## Blues Man (Oct 23, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Not really.    The gun stores sell 250,000 guns that cross the border every year...  The only reason they balked was because the ATF was "watching".
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Wrong again

The take rights away from everyone bullshit because a few people commit crimes isn't the answer EVER


----------



## Hollie (Oct 23, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Not really.    The gun stores sell 250,000 guns that cross the border every year...  The only reason they balked was because the ATF was "watching".
> 
> 
> 
> ...


The ''Prison Industrial Complex". 

Wow. We're in a time warp. It's the mid 1960's and the hippies are making a come-back.


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 23, 2022)

2aguy said:


> wrong...liar. The ATF under obama needed to get guns sold to the cartels.....



Now you are getting into Dale Smith level crazy.


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 23, 2022)

Blues Man said:


> Wrong again
> 
> The take rights away from everyone bullshit because a few people commit crimes isn't the answer EVER



Gun ownership isn't a right. It's a privilege. 



Hollie said:


> The ''Prison Industrial Complex".
> 
> Wow. We're in a time warp. It's the mid 1960's and the hippies are making a come-back.



You don't have to be a hippy to see the downsides of mass institutional incarcerations, which is why every other industrialized democratic country avoids this sort of thing. 

We lock up 2 million people.
We have another 7 million on probation or parole.
100 million Americans have a police record. 

Do you feel any safer?  I don't.


----------



## Vagabond63 (Oct 24, 2022)

2aguy said:


> Yes....criminals are going to hurt innocent people...but in the U.S. we can and do fight back....according to the Centers for Disease control this happens about 1.1 million times a year....according to our Department of Justice it happens 1.5 million times a year....rapes, robberies, murders, beatings, stabbings and mass public shootings...stopped by armed citizens.....
> 
> Meanwhile, in Europe....your woman are raped without the ability to protect themselves....when your criminals decide to kill, your people are defenseless....
> 
> And, again, if you think British criminals are going to stay the same as your crime rates go up.....you are really delusional....


----------



## Vagabond63 (Oct 24, 2022)

2aguy said:


> Yes....and in America it is the same....criminals primarily murder other criminals, and then their friends and family get caught up in the violence.....you are also seeing more of this in Britain and across Europe as your drug gangs become less concerned about collateral damage...
> 
> *Nine-year-old Olivia was shot in her home in Dovecot, Liverpool, on Monday, August 22, when a gunman chased convicted burglar Joseph Nee into her home.
> 
> ...


You can thank a decade or more of Right wing Conservative "governments" for cutting Police funding here. But that's beside the point, even if we were all armed to the teeth, we couldn't stop such tragedies as Olivia's. You are just fearmongering with your BS as usual.


----------



## Blues Man (Oct 24, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Gun ownership isn't a right. It's a privilege.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Not according to the Constitution.

ANd I do not feel unsafe because I am not afraid of the world like you are.

And how many times do you need to be told we lock up the wrong people.  More people are in prison for minor drug possession and property crimes than violent crimes


----------



## 2aguy (Oct 24, 2022)

Vagabond63 said:


> You can thank a decade or more of Right wing Conservative "governments" for cutting Police funding here. But that's beside the point, even if we were all armed to the teeth, we couldn't stop such tragedies as Olivia's. You are just fearmongering with your BS as usual.




No, you can thank leftists and their out of control spending in Britain.........you guys spend and spend and then think you will never run out of other people's money....


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 24, 2022)

Blues Man said:


> Not according to the Constitution.
> 
> ANd I do not feel unsafe because I am not afraid of the world like you are.
> 
> And how many times do you need to be told we lock up the wrong people. More people are in prison for minor drug possession and property crimes than violent crimes



We lock up too many people. 
We give them no job prospects when they get out.
Then we wonder why they turn to crime.


----------



## Bob Blaylock (Oct 24, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Gun ownership isn't a right. It's a privilege.



  The Constitution of the United States, the highest law in this nation, explicitly says otherwise.


----------



## Blues Man (Oct 24, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> We lock up too many people.
> We give them no job prospects when they get out.
> Then we wonder why they turn to crime.


We lock up the wrong people and feel free to hire all the excons you want


----------



## 2aguy (Oct 24, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> We lock up too many people.
> We give them no job prospects when they get out.
> Then we wonder why they turn to crime.




Too many of our people have been destroyed by the democrat party and its policies....creating generational poverty, fatherlessness which then creates more and more violent criminals...you are the problem, you and your slave rapist political party.


----------



## Batcat (Oct 24, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Not the point.
> 
> The point is, the Gun Lobby sells stupid people on the notion that a gun in the home is going to protect them from phantom bad guys.
> 
> ...


The fact that you know zero bad guys who were killed with a gun proves nothing.

In the first place often a gun itself is enough to scare away a bad guy without even being fired.

The burglar alarm in my home was sounding so my daughter walked into the kitchen to find a guy halfway through the sliding glass door he was forcing open.

She pointed the large caliber revolver she had with her at him and he wisely decided to run.

She called the police and they responded quickly but never caught the guy.


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 24, 2022)

Bob Blaylock said:


> The Constitution of the United States, the highest law in this nation, explicitly says otherwise.



It specifically mentions militias and it doesn't mention guns at all. 



Batcat said:


> The fact that you know zero bad guys who were killed with a gun proves nothing.
> 
> In the first place often a gun itself is enough to scare away a bad guy without even being fired.



Your boring "I know a guy" story aside...  the fact is, the few number of ACTUAL incidents are dwarfed by the number of murders, suicides, accidents, and injuries guns cause. 



2aguy said:


> Too many of our people have been destroyed by the democrat party and its policies....creating generational poverty, fatherlessness which then creates more and more violent criminals...you are the problem, you and your slave rapist political party.



Bullshit, guy.   France has a out of wedlock birth rate of almost 70%, and they have NOWHERE NEAR our crime rates.  

You also work on the assumption the OOW birth rate has anything to do with government relief programs, or that out of wedlock means fatherless, and neither of these are really true, either.


----------



## Batcat (Oct 24, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Your boring "I know a guy" story aside...  the fact is, the few number of ACTUAL incidents are dwarfed by the number of murders, suicides, accidents, and injuries guns cause.
> 
> .


A high percentage if not the majority of self defense uses of firearms do not involve anyone being shot. Consequently they are not reported for the statistics that are used for crime. 

My daughter for example called the cops about the intruder but since she never fired the revolver what chances do you think that incident was ever used in statistics? 









						How Often Are Guns Used in Self Defense? | Stats
					

A 2021 survey2 estimated that guns are used 1.67 million times per year in self defense in the United States.




					americangunfacts.com
				




_Guns used in self defense stats often try to measure the duck that didn’t quack. In other words, there may not be a police report or any other record when no crime was committed or reported. Most of the time a gun is used to prevent a crime, there is no record.

As a result, data on defensive use of force and averted crimes due to the presence of a defensive gun are controversial, contentious, and range widely. Defensive gun use (DGU) statistics generally rely on self-reporting, interviews, police, and media reports which are then extrapolated to the national population using a variety of statistical methods which produce contradictory and often wildly inconsistent estimates._

***snip***

_
How Guns Were Used – Were Shots Fired?​No shots were fired in 81.9% of those defensive use cases. 50.9% of the time, displaying the firearm was sufficient to scare off the attacker; 31% of the time, simply telling someone they were armed prevented the attack from taking place. Only 18.1% of the time was firing the gun required to defend their life._










						Data Visualization | Defensive Gun Uses in the U.S. | The Heritage Foundation
					

According to almost every major study on the issue, Americans use their firearms defensively between 500,000 and 3 million times each year. From @HeritageDataViz




					datavisualizations.heritage.org
				




_
All of the law-abiding citizens featured in this database successfully defended their liberties, lives, or livelihoods with the lawful use of a firearm. These cases are not based on hearsay, but on verifiable reports found through public sources.

*According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, almost every major study on defensive gun use has found that Americans use their firearms defensively between 500,000 and 3 million times each year. There’s good reason to believe that most defensive gun uses are never reported to law enforcement, much less picked up by local or national media outlets.* …emphasis added

This database, therefore, is not intended to be comprehensive. Instead, it highlights just a fraction of the incredible number of times Americans relied on the Second Amendment—not the government getting there in time—to protect their inalienable rights. Despite the limitations on data, these confirmed cases of defensive gun use help prove that the “good guy with a gun” is not a myth, but an integral part of American society._


----------



## Woodznutz (Oct 24, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Or we recognize a gun in the home is 43 times more likely to kill a household member than a criminal...


Suicide. The ultimate freedom of choice. 

Regarding accidental shootings, "You can't fix stupid."


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 25, 2022)

Batcat said:


> A high percentage if not the majority of self defense uses of firearms do not involve anyone being shot. Consequently they are not reported for the statistics that are used for crime.
> 
> My daughter for example called the cops about the intruder but since she never fired the revolver what chances do you think that incident was ever used in statistics?



Actually, probably pretty good.  They had to report the call and the incident. 

But let's look at it another way.  If you have an encounter between a gun owner and a crook where the crook saw a gun and moved on, did that really "prevent" a crime? Did the Criminal Find Jesus that day and   walked the straight an narrow.  Nope.  He just moved on to an easier target, like a home he was sure no one was home at.  So no crimes are actually prevented if you haven't either killed or wounded the bad guy.


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 25, 2022)

Okay, let's look at your bullshit stats. 



Batcat said:


> No shots were fired in 81.9% of those defensive use cases. 50.9% of the time, displaying the firearm was sufficient to scare off the attacker; 31% of the time, simply telling someone they were armed prevented the attack from taking place. Only 18.1% of the time was firing the gun required to defend their life.



So if the 200 fatalities are in the 18% where shots were fired, then the number of non-shot fired incidents are the other 82%   That means you've had only about 1000 DGU, not 3 million. 



Batcat said:


> *According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, almost every major study on defensive gun use has found that Americans use their firearms defensively between 500,000 and 3 million times each year. There’s good reason to believe that most defensive gun uses are never reported to law enforcement, much less picked up by local or national media outlets.* …emphasis added



Um, yeah, the CDC isn't allowed to study guns since Kellerman found a gun in the home is more dangerous to the people living in the home.  

All the CDC did was compile all the bullshit reports the NRA has paid for for Ammosexual clowns like Lott.


----------



## Hollie (Oct 25, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Gun ownership isn't a right. It's a privilege.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



Well, yes, SJW’s are incensed that criminals are held liable and responsible for their crimes. Let’s see how the leftist social justice experiment works when criminals are held to even lesser standards.









						America's 'most dangerous' law? Illinois candidate warns of 'anarchy' after criminal justice overhaul
					

Orland Park Mayor and congressional candidate for Illinois’ 6th district Keith Pekau says the SAFE-T Act could create potential 'anarchy' in the state.




					www.foxnews.com
				




The Illinois Safety, Accountability, Fairness and Equity-Today (SAFE-T) Act changes multiple parts of Illinois' justice system with provisions like ending cash bail; limiting how flights determine whether defendants are flight risks; and allows defendants under electronic monitoring to leave home for 48 hours before they can be charged with escape.



Sounds like a SJW’s little slice of leftist heaven. 



The party has already started.









						Chicago shootings: 9 juveniles among 51 shot, 10 fatally, in weekend violence, police say
					

Nine juveniles are among at least 51 people shot, 10 fatally, in Chicago so far this weekend, police said.




					abc7chicago.com
				









“Gun ownership isn't a right. It's a privilege.”

That’s odd. Is there a new, modified SJW revision to the Constitution I’m not aware of?

Maybe you’ve fallen down and bumped your head again having one of those Biden moments?


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 25, 2022)

Hollie said:


> Well, yes, SJW’s are incensed that criminals are held liable and responsible for their crimes. Let’s see how the leftist social justice experiment works when criminals are held to even lesser standards.



Let's get real, Crime rose to record highs under Trump.  

You guys keep trying to pretend 2020 didn't happen. 



Hollie said:


> The Illinois Safety, Accountability, Fairness and Equity-Today (SAFE-T) Act changes multiple parts of Illinois' justice system with provisions like ending cash bail; limiting how flights determine whether defendants are flight risks; and allows defendants under electronic monitoring to leave home for 48 hours before they can be charged with escape.



Here's the thing... I actually had a discussion with a Police Officer on Saturday, who admitted most of what is being said about the SAFE-T Act is bullshit. 

The part of the law states that if a prosecutor can't prove a defendant is an immediate danger or a flight risk, then you have to give him release until his trial.   What we had before was the criminalization of poverty... Poor people of color staying in jail for the same petty offenses that white people can get bail for.   And it was ridiculous.  



Hollie said:


> Gun ownership isn't a right. It's a privilege.”
> 
> That’s odd. Is there a new, modified SJW revision to the Constitution I’m not aware of?
> 
> Maybe you’ve fallen down and bumped your head again having one of those Biden moments?



Not at all.  For most our history, the courts have ruled that the second amendment is about MILITIAS, not gun ownership.   Only after Heller did we have the insanity that we have now.  

Even the NRA supported sensible gun laws at one point.


----------



## Hollie (Oct 25, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Let's get real, Crime rose to record highs under Trump.
> 
> You guys keep trying to pretend 2020 didn't happen.
> 
> ...





Yes, let’s get real. Your TDS is a real syndrome. The leftist answer to crime ridden Illinois is to provide criminals with greater allowances for committing crimes. That seems like an obvious disaster waiting to happen but in the SJW mind, upside down is the norm.


----------



## Bob Blaylock (Oct 25, 2022)

Hollie said:


> Yes, let’s get real. Your TDS is a real syndrome. The leftist answer to crime ridden Illinois is to provide criminals with greater allowances for committing crimes. That seems like an obvious disaster waiting to happen but in the SJW mind, upside down is the norm.



  As I have pointed out repeatedly, everything that Incel Joe ever says about crime and justice makes perfect sense, only if you assume that it is on the side of criminals, and against the side of human beings.  Every policy position that it has ever stated favors criminals, and favors their right to prey on human beings with impunity.

  Its approach to _“solving”_ crime does not comes from a position of desiring there to be less crime, but of desiring there to be more crime.

  It really doesn't have much to do with TDS; those are the positions that it has been taking since long before anyone knew that Trump would ever be a credible Presidential candidate.


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 25, 2022)

Bob Blaylock said:


> As I have pointed out repeatedly, everything that  ever says about crime and justice makes perfect sense, only if you assume that it is on the side of criminals, and against the side of human beings.  Every policy position that it has ever stated favors criminals, and favors their right to prey on human beings with impunity.
> 
> Its approach to _“solving”_ crime does not comes from a position of desiring there to be less crime, but of desiring there to be more crime.
> 
> It really doesn't have much to do with TDS; those are the positions that it has been taking since long before anyone knew that Trump would ever be a credible Presidential candidate.



Again, I love the racist distinctions you guys make that poor people are "subhuman"... I'd say "Check your privilege", but never mind. 

One more time, if Guns and Prisons make us safer, we should have the LOWEST crime rates in the industrialized world, not the highest.


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 25, 2022)

Hollie said:


> Yes, let’s get real. Your TDS is a real syndrome. The leftist answer to crime ridden Illinois is to provide criminals with greater allowances for committing crimes. That seems like an obvious disaster waiting to happen but in the SJW mind, upside down is the norm.



Uh, first, Illinois as a state doesn't have the highest crime rates. 

In fact, the states with the highest crime rates are as follows.  Six of them are Red States and 2 of them are Purple states.  Only Washington and Oregon could be considered Blue states. 


New Mexico - 6,462.03 per 100,000 people
Louisiana - 6,408.22 per 100,000 people
Colorado - 6,090.76 per 100,000 people
South Carolina - 5,972.84 per 100,000 people
Arkansas - 5,898.75 per 100,000 people
Oklahoma - 5,869.82 per 100,000 people
Washington - 5,758.57 per 100,000 people
Tennessee - 5,658.30 per 100,000 people
Oregon - 5,609.89 per 100,000 people
Missouri - 5,604.78 per 100,000 people
Secondly, the bail provisions in the SAFE-T act ONLY apply to people who have not been convicted, merely accused, of a crime.   It is ridiculous for someone to spend years in jail for a minor property crime because they couldn't afford bail and the courts are so backed up.  

Shit, I've been involved in a civil matter for a property I am trying to sell, and that's been tied up in court for 11 months.  

Now, there is a simple solution.  Appoint more judges, get these cases moving, and get them resolved.


----------



## Bob Blaylock (Oct 25, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Again, I love the racist distinctions you guys make that poor people are "subhuman"... I'd say "Check your privilege", but never mind.



  I never said that, either.  *CRIMINALS* are subhuman.  They make a willful choice to forfeit their humanity, by choosing to behave like subhuman criminal shit instead of behaving like human beings.

  It has nothing to do with race.

  It has nothing to do with social status.

  It has nothing to do with economic status.

  It has nothing to do with _“priviledge”_.

  It has *everything* to do with the content of one's moral and ethical character.

  Of course you wouldn't understand, because you have no moral or ethical character.  You're a sociopathic piece of shit, no better than those whose side you take against human beings.


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 25, 2022)

Bob Blaylock said:


> I never said that, either. *CRIMINALS* are subhuman. They make a willful choice to forfeit their humanity, by choosing to behave like subhuman criminal shit instead of behaving like human beings.





Bob Blaylock said:


> It has *everything* to do with the content of one's moral and ethical character.
> 
> Of course you wouldn't understand, because you have no moral or ethical character. You're a sociopathic piece of shit, no better than those whose side you take against human beings.



Tell me something, Mormon Bob, have you ever gone to bed hungry?
Have you ever had to make a choice between paying the rent and buying food? 

It's very easy to be "moral" when you have a full belly and a warm place to sleep.


----------



## Bob Blaylock (Oct 25, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> It's very easy to be "moral" when you have a full belly and a warm place to sleep.



  Knowing and caring about the distinction between right and wrong, between good and evil, between reason and madness, helps, too.


----------



## Hollie (Oct 25, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Uh, first, Illinois as a state doesn't have the highest crime rates.
> 
> In fact, the states with the highest crime rates are as follows.  Six of them are Red States and 2 of them are Purple states.  Only Washington and Oregon could be considered Blue states.
> 
> ...


First, you hope to ignore the looming disaster of the The Illinois Safety, Accountability, Fairness and Equity-Today (SAFE-T). You hope to sidestep that with the, _"but... but... but... hey look over there, they're worse than we are"._

Not much of an argument but when innocent people become the victims of your criminal heroes, you can remind us all privilege belongs to the criminals.


----------



## Hollie (Oct 25, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Tell me something, Mormon Bob, have you ever gone to bed hungry?
> Have you ever had to make a choice between paying the rent and buying food?
> 
> It's very easy to be "moral" when you have a full belly and a warm place to sleep.


Feel free to open your house / apartment to a violent felon. Give them a spare room. The SJW's are always accusing others of privilege but they're the last people on earth to do anything more than assert their entitlement to privilege.


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 25, 2022)

Bob Blaylock said:


> Knowing and caring about the distinction between right and wrong, between good and evil, between reason and madness, helps, too.


Again, a morality of a full belly.   



Hollie said:


> Feel free to open your house / apartment to a violent felon. Give them a spare room. The SJW's are always accusing others of privilege but they're the last people on earth to do anything more than assert their entitlement to privilege.



The poor don't want charity, they want opportunity.   Sorry you can't see that.


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 25, 2022)

Hollie said:


> First, you hope to ignore the looming disaster of the The Illinois Safety, Accountability, Fairness and Equity-Today (SAFE-T). You hope to sidestep that with the, _"but... but... but... hey look over there, they're worse than we are"._
> 
> Not much of an argument but when innocent people become the victims of your criminal heroes, you can remind us all privilege belongs to the criminals.



Actually,  I live here.  Most of the bullshit about the SAFE-T act are exactly that... bullshit.


----------



## 2aguy (Oct 25, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Uh, first, Illinois as a state doesn't have the highest crime rates.
> 
> In fact, the states with the highest crime rates are as follows.  Six of them are Red States and 2 of them are Purple states.  Only Washington and Oregon could be considered Blue states.
> 
> ...




Yeah....you guys play the state vs. city game to hide the truth......blue cities in those red states drive their violent crime rates, you lying doofus.


From poster, Toobfreak.

 I chose 58 cities as that was the largest number I could fit on a page. I then went through each city one by one to look up the major of every city. Aside from the fact that you can forget finding any pattern of cities in "red" states being the most with the highest crime as the idiot Marc tries to claim, but I went down the list marking all the mayors of the highest crimes cities in America in *BRIGHT RED* who were DEMOCRATS.


Look at what I found:








*Every city above in red is RUN BY A DEMOCRAT!* 

Murder map: Deadliest U.S. cities


----------



## 2aguy (Oct 25, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Actually,  I live here.  Most of the bullshit about the SAFE-T act are exactly that... bullshit.




No, I live here too, the Un-Safe act is going to flood the streets with gang bangers and other criminals.


----------



## Blues Man (Oct 25, 2022)

Woodznutz said:


> Suicide. The ultimate freedom of choice.
> 
> Regarding accidental shootings, "You can't fix stupid."


School shootings aren't a gun issue it a societal issue.

We have become a society that promotes the unhealthy and often violent expressions of fear anxiety not to mention a host of other mental problems


----------



## Bob Blaylock (Oct 25, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> The poor don't want charity, they want opportunity. Sorry you can't see that.



  What have you done to help the poor, either by giving simple charity, or helping to give them opportunities?


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 25, 2022)

2aguy said:


> Yeah....you guys play the state vs. city game to hide the truth......blue cities in those red states drive their violent crime rates, you lying doofus.



Hollie is the one who brought up Illinois, not Chicago... 

Of course, Cities are going to have high crime rates, because they have higher concentrations of people. 



Bob Blaylock said:


> What have you done to help the poor, either by giving simple charity, or helping to give them opportunities?



I pay my taxes.  I have helped hundreds of people find better paying jobs by preparing them for job searches.


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 25, 2022)

2aguy said:


> No, I live here too, the Un-Safe act is going to flood the streets with gang bangers and other criminals.



Then the prosecutors should make the case for remand. 

I'm not any safer because someone who committed a non-violent property crime is in a cell that should hold a violent offender because he couldn't afford bail and the violent offender could.


----------



## 2aguy (Oct 25, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Then the prosecutors should make the case for remand.
> 
> I'm not any safer because someone who committed a non-violent property crime is in a cell that should hold a violent offender because he couldn't afford bail and the violent offender could.



Yeah, that’s not the category they are going to release on no bail… violent criminals will get released because they can’t be  held……. People are saying this is the gang banger get out of jail bill


----------



## Hollie (Oct 25, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Again, a morality of a full belly.
> 
> 
> 
> The poor don't want charity, they want opportunity.   Sorry you can't see that.


Do your part. Open your house / apartment to violent felons and the poor. Let them get started on the road to wealth and prosperity. 

Odd how leftists claim to be supporters of the poor and the criminal class but they always bugger of when it's time to implement their policies. 

Those of The Party of Slavery haven't changed since the 19th century. They want an oppressed lower class.


----------



## Bob Blaylock (Oct 25, 2022)

Hollie said:


> Odd how leftists claim to be supporters of the poor and the criminal class but they always bugger of when it's time to implement their policies.



  They think they can claim credit for _“charity”_, not based on giving any of whatever is rightfully theirs to give, but on what they can get government to steal from others.


----------



## Pellinore (Oct 25, 2022)

I have a question.

If we have a massive number of uncounted, crime-deterring, defensive gun uses out there every year, protecting our people from crime, why aren't our crime rates lower than they are?

It stands to reason that even if their numbers can't be counted, we should be able to see their effect on the rate of crime, if there is any.


----------



## Hollie (Oct 25, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Actually,  I live here.  Most of the bullshit about the SAFE-T act are exactly that... bullshit.


Gee, whiz. Why am I not convinced that your, “…because I say so”, argument is anything but nonsense? 

Let’s see. Who do I need to listen to, a sitting Mayor or an anonymous, far left poster on a message board. Decisions, decisions.

Yeah. Ending cash bail and leftist prosecutors who coddle criminals. That’s worked out so well in leftist Hellholes.


----------



## 2aguy (Oct 25, 2022)

Pellinore said:


> I have a question.
> 
> If we have a massive number of uncounted, crime-deterring, defensive gun uses out there every year, protecting our people from crime, why aren't our crime rates lower than they are?
> 
> It stands to reason that even if their numbers can't be counted, we should be able to see their effect on the rate of crime, if there is any.




Because the criminal simply moves on to the next victim...an unarmed victim.

And there is an effect....


Here.... a list of research papers on the topic...

UPDATE: Do Right-to-carry laws reduce violent crime?



> _Crime, Deterrence, and Right-to-Carry Concealed Handguns, John R. Lott, Jr. and David B. Mustard, Journal of Legal Studies, 1997_
> _The Effect of Concealed Weapons Laws: An Extreme Bound Analysis by William Alan Bartley and Mark A Cohen, published in Economic Inquiry, April 1998_ (Copy available here)
> The Concealed‐Handgun Debate, John R. Lott, Jr., Journal of Legal Studies, January 1998
> _Criminal Deterrence, Geographic Spillovers, and Right-to-Carry Concealed Handguns by Stephen Bronars and John R. Lott, Jr., American Economic Review, May 1998_
> ...


A detailed discussion of the National Research Council report is *available here*. We have reservations for many research papers on both sides of this debate, so inclusion here doesn’t mean that we think that the estimates were done correctly, but to give you information on the number of peer-reviewed academic papers that find a benefit from right-to-carry laws.
For the data errors in the one published paper by Aneja, Donohue, and Zhang that claims to find a bad effect from right-to-carry laws on aggravated assaults see this paper (the authors published an Erratum acknowledging errors in their piece here).
In addition, Aneja, Donohue, and Zhang have retracted their original claim that the my research could not be replicated. Their argument was that Aneja, Donohue, and Zhang could not replicate the replication work done by the National Research Council that had replicated my research. In an Erratum note published in October 2012 they concede: “Subsequent to the publication of this article, members of the NRC panel demonstrated to the authors that the results in question were replicable if the authors used the data and statistical models described in Chapter 6 of the NRC (2004) report.”
UPDATED: Another recent paper by Charles D. Phillips, Obioma Nwaiwu, Szu-hsuan Lin, Rachel Edwards, Sara Imanpour, and Robert Ohsfeldt in the Journal of Criminology is discussed here.
The Siegel et al paper in the American Journal of Public Health, “Easiness of Legal Access to Concealed Firearm Permits and Homicide Rates in the United States” is *discussed here*.
Another unpublished paper by Donohue is discussed here and here.
For those interested in seeing our debate with _Scientific American_ over whether some of the studies listed below should be included in our list, please see the discussion available here.


*And this.....*

Journal of the American College of Surgeons

Results​During the study period, all states moved to adopt some form of concealed-carry legislation, with a trend toward less restrictive legislation. After adjusting for state and year, there was no significant association between shifts from restrictive to nonrestrictive carry legislation on violent crime and public health indicators. Adjusting further for poverty and unemployment did not significantly influence the results.
Conclusions​This study demonstrated no statistically significant association between the liberalization of state level firearm carry legislation over the last 30 years and the rates of homicides or other violent crime. Policy efforts aimed at injury prevention and the reduction of firearm-related violence should likely investigate other targets for potential intervention.
Landmark Study Finds Concealed Carry Does NOT Increase Violent Crime - The Truth About Guns

On October 22, Doctors for Responsible Gun Ownership (DRGO) presented new concealed carry-related research to the Congress of the American College of Surgeons. The key takeaway from this research is that relaxing concealed carry laws has no effect on violent crime rates.

This paper, which was well received and is now available online (paywalled),is an important step toward clarifying contradictory findings in the existing research literature. Past research focused largely on concealed carriers as a group or on the number of concealed carry licenses among the population. However, increased interest in concealed carry is very possibly a _response_ to rising crime rates, not a cause. For this reason, this DGRO-affiliated study measured the effects (or lack thereof) of _legislation only, _not the number of permits issued or the number of gun owners in the population.

Using data from a 30-year period (1986-2015), during which many U.S. states changed their concealed carry policies in favor of greater leniency, the researchers designed a Carry Restriction Scale that incorporated “no carry,” “may issue,” “shall issue,” and “unrestricted carry.” This allowed the leniency of concealed carry legislation to be meaningfully understood as a variable in their statistical analysis. Then, for good measure, they created a second, binary variable that also measured restrictiveness of concealed carry laws.

For each state and year during that 30-year period, the researchers amassed data on 14 different variables, including the Carry Restriction Scale variable. Among those, they included not only data on various violent crimes (rape, aggravated assault, homicide, etc.) but also data on unemployment and poverty rates, which are known to influence crime. Thanks to this dynamic approach, they were able to actually isolate the variable they were interested in.


*Finally, applying a regression analysis that involved over 21,420 discrete data points and two different measures of concealed carry leniency, the researchers confidently confirmed their hypothesis: There is no association between state-level concealed carry laws and the rate of ANY violent crime.
*
The study...
Journal of the American College of Surgeons

Results​During the study period, all states moved to adopt some form of concealed-carry legislation, with a trend toward less restrictive legislation. After adjusting for state and year, there was no significant association between shifts from restrictive to nonrestrictive carry legislation on violent crime and public health indicators. Adjusting further for poverty and unemployment did not significantly influence the results.
Conclusions​This study demonstrated no statistically significant association between the liberalization of state level firearm carry legislation over the last 30 years and the rates of homicides or other violent crime. Policy efforts aimed at injury prevention and the reduction of firearm-related violence should likely investigate other targets for potential intervention.


----------



## 2aguy (Oct 25, 2022)

Pellinore said:


> I have a question.
> 
> If we have a massive number of uncounted, crime-deterring, defensive gun uses out there every year, protecting our people from crime, why aren't our crime rates lower than they are?
> 
> It stands to reason that even if their numbers can't be counted, we should be able to see their effect on the rate of crime, if there is any.




And here, some of those papers with quotes...

In December 2008, a Memphis, TN newspaper published a searchable online database of names, zip codes, and ages of Tennessee handgun carry permit holders. We use detailed crime and handgun carry permit data for the city of Memphis to estimate the impact of publicity about the database on burglaries. We find that burglaries increased in zip codes with fewer gun permits, and decreased in those with more gun permits, after the database was publicized.

https://www.nber.org/system/files/working_papers/w29940/w29940.pdf
==============

Social science on the right to bear arms

Lott amicus to New York case...

https://www.supremecourt.gov/Docket...144549202_Amicus brief SWD 7.19.2021 2300.pdf


https://www.jstor.org/stable/1229604

1977-2000
1.5%-2.3% reductions in murder rate
2-3 billion dollars benefit in first 5 years.


Wilson....

Appendix A Dissent--James Q. Wilson | Firearms and Violence: A Critical Review |The National Academies Press

Lott argued that murder rates decline after the adoption of RTC laws even after allowing for the effect of other variables that affect crime rates. The committee has confirmed this finding as is evident in its Tables 6-1, 6-2, 6-5 (first row), 6-6 (first row), and 6-7 (first two rows). This confirmation includes both the original data period (1977-1992) used by Lott and data that run through 2000. In view of the confirmation of the findings that shall-issue laws drive down the murder rate, it is hard for me to understand why these claims are called “fragile.”
-----
In addition, with only a few exceptions, the studies cited in Chapter 6, including those by Lott’s critics, do not show that the passage of RTC laws drives the crime rates up (as might be the case if one supposed that newly armed people went about looking for someone to shoot). The direct evidence that such shooting sprees occur is nonexistent. The indirect evidence, as found in papers by Black and Nagin and Ayres and Donohue [cited in Chapter 6], is controversial. Indeed, the Ayres and Donohue paper shows that there was a “statistically significant downward shift in the trend” of the murder rate (Chapter 6, page 135). This suggests to me that for people interested in RTC laws, the best evidence we have is that they impose no costs but may confer benefits. That conclusion might be very useful to authorities who contemplate the enactment of RTC laws.
----
In sum, I find that the evidence presented by Lott and his supporters suggests that RTC laws do in fact help drive down the murder rate, though their effect on other crimes is ambiguous.

Testing for the Effects of Concealed Weapons Laws: Specification Errors and Robustness* | The Journal of Law and Economics: Vol 44, No S2

Abstract​In 1997, John Lott and David Mustard published an important paper in which they found that right‐to‐carry concealed weapons laws reduce violent crime. Although Lott and Mustard appear to do all possible variations of the analysis, a closer reading reveals that the study might suffer from several possibly important errors. I reestimate the model and check for incorrect functional form, omitted variables, and possible second‐order bias in the _t_‐ratios. Lott and Mustard's basic conclusions are generally robust with respect to these potential econometric problems. Overall, right‐to‐carry concealed weapons laws tend to reduce violent crime. The effect on property crime is more uncertain. I find evidence that these laws also reduce burglary.

Do Right to Carry Laws Increase Violent Crime? A Comment on Donohue, Aneja, and Weber · Econ Journal Watch : shall-issue, gun control

Nevertheless, when we use the synthetic control model, we find that the claim that RTC laws increase either murder or violent crime is not supported. We find states where crime increased after the implementation of the RTC law, and we find more states in which crime decreased after the law.

Mustard, D. 2001. The impact of gun laws on police deaths. The Journal of Law & Economics, 44(S2): 635-657..

After enactment of the right-to-carry laws, states exhibit a reduced likelihood of having a felonious police death rate and slightly lower rates of police deaths.
-------
Allowing law-abiding citizens to carry concealed weapons does not endanger the lives of officers and may help reduce their risk of being killed.

https://www.researchgate.net/public...ountable_Crimes-Only_a_Count_Analysis_Can_Say
 We find that the effects of such laws vary across crime categories, U.S. states, and time and that such laws appear to have statistically significant deterrent effects on the numbers of reported murders, rapes, and robberies. Copyright 2001 by the University of Chicago.

EconPapers: Testing for the Effects of Concealed Weapons Laws: Specification Errors and Robustness
 Overall, right-to-carry concealed weapons laws tend to reduce violent crime. The effect on property crime is more uncertain. I find evidence that these laws also reduce burglary. Copyright 2001 by the University of Chicago.

The Debate on Shall-Issue Laws · Econ Journal Watch : shall-issue, crime, handguns, concealed weapons
Our analysis, as well as Ayres and Donohue’s when projected beyond a five-year span, indicates that shall-issue laws decrease crime and the costs of crime. Purists in statistical analysis object with some cause to some of methods employed both by Ayres and Donohue and by us. But our paper upgrades Ayres and Donohue, so, until the next study comes along, our paper should neutralize Ayres and Donohue’s “more guns, more crime” conclusion.
The Impact of Right-to-Carry Laws on Crime: An Exercise in Replication
his paper reports a replication of their basic findings and some corresponding robustness checks, which reveal a serious omitted variable problem. Once corrected for omitted variables, the most robust result, confirmed using both county and state data, is that RTC laws significantly reduce murder. There is no robust, consistent evidence that RTC laws have any significant effect on other violent crimes, including assault. There is some weak evidence that RTC laws increase robbery and assault while decreasing rape. Given that the victim costs of murder and rape are much higher than the costs of robbery and assault, the evidence shows that RTC laws are socially beneficial.


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 25, 2022)

2aguy said:


> Yeah, that’s not the category they are going to release on no bail… violent criminals will get released because they can’t be held……. People are saying this is the gang banger get out of jail bill





Bob Blaylock said:


> They think they can claim credit for _“charity”_, not based on giving any of whatever is rightfully theirs to give, but on what they can get government to steal from others.



I pay my fair share in taxes, and that gives me a say...    The ironic thing is that as a resident of IL, I'm paying more in taxes than are being sent back to my state... as opposed to red states where theyare getting more back from the government than they pay in.  

But to take your logic a bit further, I supposed that I shouldn't be in favor of their being a road unless I'm willing to go out there and build it myself.  



Hollie said:


> Do your part. Open your house / apartment to violent felons and the poor. Let them get started on the road to wealth and prosperity.
> 
> Odd how leftists claim to be supporters of the poor and the criminal class but they always bugger of when it's time to implement their policies.
> 
> Those of The Party of Slavery haven't changed since the 19th century. They want an oppressed lower class.



Feeding them and giving them shelter and medical care is "oppressing" them?   What an odd bit of thinking.


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 25, 2022)

2aguy said:


> Because the criminal simply moves on to the next victim...an unarmed victim.
> 
> And there is an effect....



So DGU's that don't involve laying a suspect out have NO EFFECT on crime..

But the proliferation of guns does.  

Hmmm... think you just defeated your own argument.


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 25, 2022)

Hollie said:


> Gee, whiz. Why am I not convinced that your, “…because I say so”, argument is anything but nonsense?
> 
> Let’s see. Who do I need to listen to, a sitting Mayor or an anonymous, far left poster on a message board. Decisions, decisions.
> 
> Yeah. Ending cash bail and leftist prosecutors who coddle criminals. That’s worked out so well in leftist Hellholes.



Not that you are a logical thinker, but why have bail at all?  Either someone is so dangerous they shouldn't be out on the street, or they aren't. 

If you are arguing that someone who can come up with $1000 bond to get a $10,000 bail isn't that dangerous, then you'd have no problem letting them out completely.  

The people who hate the SAFE-T act are all the bails bondsmen who profit off the system...   

But then again, it's just part of a prison-industrial complex that makes crime worse.


----------



## Batcat (Oct 25, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Okay, let's look at your bullshit stats.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


There is no real way to estimate the number of DGUs when you have no statistics on the number of those instances where the mere display of a firearm ended the event. 

You might find out how reality works if you ever manage to disarm the honest citizens. Of course the criminals would keep their weapons because they don’t follow laws. It doesn’t take a crystal ball to predict skyrocketing cirme and home invasions. 

Our nation would likely end up like Mexico which has strict gun laws and drug cartels armed with fully automatic firearms and other military weapons. The liberals in our nation would love to have gun laws like Mexico. 









						Answers to Common Questions About Gun Laws in Mexico - Two Expats Mexico
					

I get a lot of questions related to the gun laws in Mexico so I decided to do a post answering the most common ones....




					qroo.us
				












						Mexico's Jalisco drug cartel pose with military-grade weapons in terrifying video
					

FOOTAGE has emerged showing dozens of uniformed gunmen posing in Mexico with military-grade weapons near armoured pickup trucks emblazoned with the initials of the Jalisco drug cartel. The country&…




					www.thesun.co.uk
				












						Mexican cartels and their weapons
					

People ask why the Mexican Marines don't apply the same arial assaults on the Sinaloa Cartel in Culiacán. The answer is simple.




					sofrep.com
				






			https://www.news.com.au/world/north-america/ideal-killers-young-beautiful-reckless-female-death-squad/news-story/13ed8a9475c03d2e8010085a16091cd9


----------



## Batcat (Oct 25, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Actually, probably pretty good.  They had to report the call and the incident.
> 
> But let's look at it another way.  If you have an encounter between a gun owner and a crook where the crook saw a gun and moved on, did that really "prevent" a crime? Did the Criminal Find Jesus that day and   walked the straight an narrow.  Nope.  He just moved on to an easier target, like a home he was sure no one was home at.  So no crimes are actually prevented if you haven't either killed or wounded the bad guy.


Yes, the gun did prevent a crime at the store with the armed clerk. It could have also prevented the clerk being shot by the bad guy. 

Using your argument there are no DGUs if the bad guy flees when he sees his victim is armed. Nobody was killed or wounded.


----------



## Batcat (Oct 25, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Okay, let's look at your bullshit stats.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Those “bullshit” reports may well have been accurate. Just because they don’t prove your argument does not mean they are wrong.


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 26, 2022)

Batcat said:


> There is no real way to estimate the number of DGUs when you have no statistics on the number of those instances where the mere display of a firearm ended the event.



Exactly my point.  Was that a real criminal attempt, or was it just a scary black man some redneck waved a gun at and called it a DGU?  The point is there IS no Data, just a lot of bullshit estimates commissioned by the NRA and other gun groups, who of course, are going to find what they want. 

And they will be about as credible as those oldy time surveys of Doctors who said smoking was healthy.  



Batcat said:


> You might find out how reality works if you ever manage to disarm the honest citizens. Of course the criminals would keep their weapons because they don’t follow laws. It doesn’t take a crystal ball to predict skyrocketing cirme and home invasions.



Actually, we ALREADY know how that works by disarming citizens.  We can look at Japan, which has almost no gun homicides (and very few of any other kind) because private citizens haven't been allowed to own guns since the Meiji Reformation.  We can look at the UK, which has a very low murder rate.  We can even look at Canada, which has some private gun ownership, but it's regulated.  They have very few murders. 



Batcat said:


> Our nation would likely end up like Mexico which has strict gun laws and drug cartels armed with fully automatic firearms and other military weapons. The liberals in our nation would love to have gun laws like Mexico.



Well, no, we'd want ones that are actually enforced.   The problem with Mexico is that we have a shitload of gun shops on the Mexican border, and 250,000 US guns are smuggled in every year.  



Batcat said:


> Yes, the gun did prevent a crime at the store with the armed clerk. It could have also prevented the clerk being shot by the bad guy.
> 
> Using your argument there are no DGUs if the bad guy flees when he sees his victim is armed. Nobody was killed or wounded.



Yup, that's exactly my argument.   You see, if neither the clerk or the robber are armed, you have no incident. 



Batcat said:


> Those “bullshit” reports may well have been accurate. Just because they don’t prove your argument does not mean they are wrong.



Actually, here's how I know they aren't terribly accurate.  

Every fucking day, I read from Ammosexuals like 2AGuy and yourself all your wank fantasies about wanting to shoot bad guys.  You all treat guys like Zimmerman and Rittenhouse like national heroes when they stumbled into incidents where they shot people without any good reason, but were acquitted due to white privilege. 

But according to the FBI, only 200 people are killed in "Self-Defense" homicides by civilians with guns.  And many of those are domestic battery, not robberies.  

So if you accept the 1 million DGU number as accurate, then you'd have to believe that 999,800 of those times, an ammosexual with a gun finally gets that happy day when he can plug him a darkie, and he doesn't do it.  


Nope, it's laughable.


----------



## Hollie (Oct 26, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Not that you are a logical thinker, but why have bail at all?  Either someone is so dangerous they shouldn't be out on the street, or they aren't.
> 
> If you are arguing that someone who can come up with $1000 bond to get a $10,000 bail isn't that dangerous, then you'd have no problem letting them out completely.
> 
> ...


Not that you understand some basic concepts of civil society, a person's need to feel safe from crime or the primary function of elected government is to provide for its citizens but how did you miss the leftist Hellhole disasters of cashless bail and leftist prosecutors who enable criminals?


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 26, 2022)

Hollie said:


> Not that you understand some basic concepts of civil society, a person's need to feel safe from crime or the primary function of elected government is to provide for its citizens but how did you miss the leftist Hellhole disasters of cashless bail and leftist prosecutors who enable criminals?



The Japanese and Europeans have more civil societies than we do.   And they do it without locking up millions of people.   In fact, none of those countries lock up more than 100,000 people.  The biggest problem Japanese cops have these days is lonely elderly people shoplifting so the cops will pay attention to them.

But here's what those European countries (and Japan) do that we don't.

They make sure the mentally ill and addicted get treatment.
They don't let average citizens own guns, either banning them outright (Japan and the UK), or limiting gun ownership to highly vetted owners (Germany and Canada).
They have substantial poverty relief programs and put the emphasis on maintaining workers protections.
They invest in affordable housing.  

But we let an addicted person live in a tent with no food and easy access to guns and then wonder why we have a crime problem.


----------



## Vagabond63 (Oct 26, 2022)

2aguy said:


> No, you can thank leftists and their out of control spending in Britain.........you guys spend and spend and then think you will never run out of other people's money....


Conservative governments in the UK have been responsible for far more spending than any Labour government. Nice try, but fail as usual.


----------



## Blues Man (Oct 26, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Again, I love the racist distinctions you guys make that poor people are "subhuman"... I'd say "Check your privilege", but never mind.
> 
> One more time, if Guns and Prisons make us safer, we should have the LOWEST crime rates in the industrialized world, not the highest.


Says the racist fuck who calls minoroties "Darkies"


----------



## Blues Man (Oct 26, 2022)

Pellinore said:


> I have a question.
> 
> If we have a massive number of uncounted, crime-deterring, defensive gun uses out there every year, protecting our people from crime, why aren't our crime rates lower than they are?
> 
> It stands to reason that even if their numbers can't be counted, we should be able to see their effect on the rate of crime, if there is any.


Irrelevant

For one many DGU's never get reported because a crime was stopped before it was committed therefore those crimes would never be counted anyway

Secondly it isn't any gun owners responsibility to protect the public and since SCOTUS has ruled that no police officer or police force has any legal obligation to come to the aid of the public it seems the cops aren't there to protect the public either.

Knowing that the police have no obligation to come to your aid the questions why don;t you own guns?

I have a gun for self defense not to protect the public.  I'm not a cop, don;t want to be a cop.


----------



## Bob Blaylock (Oct 26, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Again, I love the racist distinctions you guys make that poor people are "subhuman"...



  Nobody here, other than you, has said any such thing.

  And poverty is not a race, so even if anyone did say that, it wouldn't be racist.


----------



## Hollie (Oct 26, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> The Japanese and Europeans have more civil societies than we do.   And they do it without locking up millions of people.   In fact, none of those countries lock up more than 100,000 people.  The biggest problem Japanese cops have these days is lonely elderly people shoplifting so the cops will pay attention to them.
> 
> But here's what those European countries (and Japan) do that we don't.
> 
> ...


You don't understand the terms you use. To claim "the Japanese and Europeans have more civil societies than we do", is rather naive and just an attempt to evade from the results of leftism.

It's understandable that you despise Constitutional freedoms and protections afforded by the Founding documents. That's a pattern of behavior typical among the far left. The left has this need to coddle criminals and make victims of crimes endorsed by leftist policies their overriding concern. The result has been crime waves and the brutalization of the citizenry. 

So here we are again, with the leftist politburo mouthpiece whining about homelessness, the drug addicted living on the streets when the most blatant examples of that occur in leftist paradises.


----------



## Vagabond63 (Oct 26, 2022)

Pellinore said:


> I have a question.
> 
> If we have a massive number of uncounted, crime-deterring, defensive gun uses out there every year, protecting our people from crime, why aren't our crime rates lower than they are?
> 
> It stands to reason that even if their numbers can't be counted, we should be able to see their effect on the rate of crime, if there is any.


Good question. The fact that 2aguy created a torrent of cut and paste John Lott articles means you struck a nerve.


----------



## 2aguy (Oct 26, 2022)

Vagabond63 said:


> Conservative governments in the UK have been responsible for far more spending than any Labour government. Nice try, but fail as usual.




Trying to keep your social welfare state going takes a lot of money........too bad for you the leftists here are destroying our country, we won't be able to pay for your national defense, technological advances and medical miracles anymore...you will have to staff your own military and suffer with inferior technology and medicine going forward.......


----------



## Batcat (Oct 26, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Exactly my point.  Was that a real criminal attempt, or was it just a scary black man some redneck waved a gun at and called it a DGU?  The point is there IS no Data, just a lot of bullshit estimates commissioned by the NRA and other gun groups, who of course, are going to find what they want.
> 
> And they will be about as credible as those oldy time surveys of Doctors who said smoking was healthy.
> 
> ...


You seem to think people like me who legally carry a concealed firearm are racist and want to kill black people.

I don’t care in the least what the skin color of a person is who attacks me with the intention of putting me in the hospital for an extended period of time or six feet under. Nor do I hope to kill my attacker.

I will use lethal force to stop such an attack and will call for medical aid if I do shoot my attacker. Hopefully my attacker will run away like so many other attackers do.

The last thing I ever hope to do is to shoot someone even if it is a totally legitimate shooting. There are often bankrupting legal expenses and lawsuits plus often the person who shoots an attacker can suffer psychological damage.

As far as the Zimmerman case it has always been my contention that he made a serious mistake when he left his vehicle to pursue Trayvon Martin. At the most I would have called the police to report a suspicious character and drove on.

The difference between nations like Japan and our nation is they don’t have more firearms than people. The criminals here are well armed already and if you seriously believe the criminals are going to voluntarily turn in their firearms, you must have paid a fortune to be brainwashed in a liberal college. You must believe that as you posted, “ Yup, that's exactly my argument.   You see, if neither the clerk or the robber are armed, you have no incident.”

Take guns away from honest citizens and chances are the clerk would not have a gun but the bad guy surely would.


----------



## 2aguy (Oct 26, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> So DGU's that don't involve laying a suspect out have NO EFFECT on crime..
> 
> But the proliferation of guns does.
> 
> Hmmm... think you just defeated your own argument.



The research shows, moron, that after a while criminals switch from crime where they can get shot by victims and move into crimes without having to face a human being…

In the gap, they simply try to rob unarmed people like you….


----------



## Jarlaxle (Oct 27, 2022)

Blues Man said:


> No matter how many times you repeat that debunked BULLSHIT it will never be true



He is a disciple of Goebbels: Joey favors The Big Lie. He simply keeps repeating it...eventually, it becomes accepted as fact.



Blues Man said:


> you're wrong as usual
> 
> When the city of Richmond VA decided to enforce gun laws there was a statistically significant reduction in murders, gun crimes and crime in general



Joey has no interest in that. The contrary: he WANTS a high body count.


----------



## Jarlaxle (Oct 27, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Let's get real, Crime rose to record highs under Trump.



That's a lie. 



> Not at all.  For most our history, the courts have ruled that the second amendment is about MILITIAS, not gun ownership.   Only after Heller did we have the insanity that we have now.
> 
> Even the NRA supported sensible gun laws at one point.
> 
> View attachment 715208


Yes...and then the Fudds were tossed out on their ears.

Though I'm glad to see you admit you find armed black men scary. It's nice you're FINALLY admitting it.


----------



## Jarlaxle (Oct 27, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> The Japanese and Europeans have more civil societies than we do.   And they do it without locking up millions of people.   In fact, none of those countries lock up more than 100,000 people.  The biggest problem Japanese cops have these days is lonely elderly people shoplifting so the cops will pay attention to them.
> 
> But here's what those European countries (and Japan) do that we don't.
> 
> ...


You're NOT this stupid. It is not possible.


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 27, 2022)

Three idiots for the price of one. 



Blues Man said:


> Says the racist fuck who calls minoroties "Darkies"



I'm not the one who put a Racist Game Show Host in the White House because he promised to crack down on people of color... that would be your side. 



Bob Blaylock said:


> Nobody here, other than you, has said any such thing.
> 
> And poverty is not a race, so even if anyone did say that, it wouldn't be racist.



Actually, you say it all the time about "those people".  You see some black kids stealing a bag of chips, and you scream about how they all need to be murdered for it.  Oh, yeah, and you belong to a racist cult that calls dark skin a curse from God and didn't admit black people as members until 1978.  



Hollie said:


> You don't understand the terms you use. To claim "the Japanese and Europeans have more civil societies than we do", is rather naive and just an attempt to evade from the results of leftism.



No, it's a statement of fact that can be backed up with facts and figures.   They have less murder, less crime, less poverty, less addiction. The Japanese government has to publish pamphlets on how not to get murdered in America because the Japanese have no concept of crime like we have. 




Hollie said:


> It's understandable that you despise Constitutional freedoms and protections afforded by the Founding documents. That's a pattern of behavior typical among the far left. The left has this need to coddle criminals and make victims of crimes endorsed by leftist policies their overriding concern. The result has been crime waves and the brutalization of the citizenry.



Really?  It seems to me that the Founding Slave Rapists only wrote one amendment about "arms", but wrote FIVE about protecting the rights of people accused of crimes.  So it seems if anyone was coddling criminals, it was your beloved Founders.   

4th Amendment - Protection against unlawful searches and seizures
5th Amendment - Protection against self-incrimination
6th Amendment - Right to Speedy Trial and due process
7th Amendment - Right to an unbiased Jury.
8th Amendment - Protection from Cruel and unusual punishment 

Of course, this being America, there's the unwritten caveat of "Just for White People".  



Hollie said:


> So here we are again, with the leftist politburo mouthpiece whining about homelessness, the drug addicted living on the streets when the most blatant examples of that occur in leftist paradises.



That's because rich white people in the suburbs dump their addicts into rehab, and when they get fed up with them, dump them in the cities. 

Oh, but wait, we do have homelessness in the suburbs.









						Homeless in the Suburbs - Parenting
					

This is the new economic reality: families just like yours sleeping on couches and in shelters. A Parenting special report. Eleven-year-old Devin Bodiford’s eyes blink open in the back room of a suburban Denver church. The clock reads 5 a.m. when his mother whispers that it’s time to get up. His...




					www.parenting.com


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 27, 2022)

Jarlaxle said:


> Yes...and then the Fudds were tossed out on their ears.
> 
> Though I'm glad to see you admit you find armed black men scary. It's nice you're FINALLY admitting it.



Ditchweed, are you ever capable of following a conversation?


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 27, 2022)

Batcat said:


> You seem to think people like me who legally carry a concealed firearm are racist and want to kill black people.



Um, yup, pretty much.  11 years of reading murder wank fantasies here from ammosexuals have convinced me of that.  The way you guys cheered for Zimmerman and Rittenhouse for living your dream.  



Batcat said:


> As far as the Zimmerman case it has always been my contention that he made a serious mistake when he left his vehicle to pursue Trayvon Martin. At the most I would have called the police to report a suspicious character and drove on.



But he went out and murdered an unarmed kid buying candy, and you guys made him into a national hero. 



Batcat said:


> The difference between nations like Japan and our nation is they don’t have more firearms than people. The criminals here are well armed already and if you seriously believe the criminals are going to voluntarily turn in their firearms, you must have paid a fortune to be brainwashed in a liberal college. You must believe that as you posted, “ Yup, that's exactly my argument. You see, if neither the clerk or the robber are armed, you have no incident.”



No, I don't expect the criminals to voluntarily turn in their firearms.
I expect their firearms to be confiscated and then they can't get new ones because the gun store that sells them one can be sued out of existence. 

The Gun Industry has been flooding our streets with guns because they WANT people like you to be scared and want a gun, too.


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 27, 2022)

2aguy said:


> The research shows, moron, that after a while criminals switch from crime where they can get shot by victims and move into crimes without having to face a human being…
> 
> In the gap, they simply try to rob unarmed people like you….



Research shows DGU's rarely happen, because most home invaders wait until no one is home to break in. Breaking in when someone is home has a higher penalty and more risk, gun or not.

Again,... only 200 justified homicides with guns every year.   DGU's are RARE. 









						How Often Are Guns Used for Self-Defense?
					

Fact-checking the 'good guys with guns' maxim.




					www.thetrace.org
				




Ignoring quacks like Kleck and Lott,  the facts are these.  

_The NCVS identifies far fewer instances of defensive gun use. According to the most recent firearms violence report, published in April, 2 percent of victims of nonfatal violent crime — that includes rape, sexual assault, robbery, and aggravated assault — and 1 percent of property crime victims use guns in self-defense. According to the survey, firearms were used defensively in 166,900 nonfatal violent crimes between 2014 and 2018, which works out to an average of 33,380 per year. Over the same period, defensive gun use was reported in 183,300 property crimes, or an average of 36,660 per year. 

Taken together, that’s 70,040 instances of defensive gun use per year.




_


----------



## Hollie (Oct 27, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Three idiots for the price of one.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Well, yes. That pesky Constitution is a real impediment to the socialist / authoritarian desires of the left. The Party of Slavery, the Democrat Party, has become even more dangerous since their precious rights to oppress and intimidate have been stripped away.


----------



## Bob Blaylock (Oct 27, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> I'm not the one who put a Racist Game Show Host in the White House because he promised to crack down on people of color... that would be your side.





JoeB131 said:


> Actually, you say it all the time about "those people". You see some black kids stealing a bag of chips, and you scream about how they all need to be murdered for it. Oh, yeah, and you belong to a racist cult that calls dark skin a curse from God and didn't admit black people as members until 1978.



  That's just your own insane delusions speaking; your own racism projected at others.

  It is you who keeps equating race to criminality, and not anyone else whom you persist in falsely accusing of _“racism”_.  It is you who, on the basis of your own racism, keeps insisting that any efforts to protect human beings from the predations of subhuman criminal shit are acting out of _“racism”_.


----------



## Blues Man (Oct 27, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Three idiots for the price of one.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


You have no clue who I voted for or didn't vote for just add it to the long list of things you have no clue about.


----------



## Woodznutz (Oct 27, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Actually, probably pretty good.  They had to report the call and the incident.
> 
> But let's look at it another way.  If you have an encounter between a gun owner and a crook where the crook saw a gun and moved on, did that really "prevent" a crime? Did the Criminal Find Jesus that day and   walked the straight an narrow.  Nope.  He just moved on to an easier target, like a home he was sure no one was home at.  So no crimes are actually prevented if you haven't either killed or wounded the bad guy.


It may not have prevented "a" crime, but it did prevent "that" crime.


----------



## Woodznutz (Oct 27, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Let's get real, Crime rose to record highs under Trump.
> 
> You guys keep trying to pretend 2020 didn't happen.
> 
> ...


The militia is made up of an armed citizenry, the arms being kept 'at the ready' in the possession of the citizens. In the regular military, or the National Guard, the weapons are locked up in an armory.


----------



## hadit (Oct 27, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> You can spooge that all day, but the fact is, guns in the home are more likely to kill someone in the household.


You keep saying that, but then the research doesn't really support it, does it? Here's one to consider, a dog in the home is more likely to bite or kill a member of the household than it is to bite or kill an intruder. Bad dog.


JoeB131 said:


> The problem is you keep trying to pretend we shouldn't count the suicides.


You know what's funny? I live in an area where I KNOW people are carrying, and I've never even seen one on someone out in public, much less been harmed by one. Of course, there is that gang of feral guns that hang out on the street corner, smoking cigarettes, drinking beer and whistling at girls, but no one really worries about them.


----------



## hadit (Oct 27, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Actually, probably pretty good.  They had to report the call and the incident.
> 
> But let's look at it another way.  If you have an encounter between a gun owner and a crook where the crook saw a gun and moved on, did that really "prevent" a crime? Did the Criminal Find Jesus that day and   walked the straight an narrow.  Nope.  He just moved on to an easier target, like a home he was sure no one was home at.  So no crimes are actually prevented if you haven't either killed or wounded the bad guy.


You just made the opposing case. A criminal wants an easy target. That's why gun free zones are magnets for them. They don't walk into police stations and start shooting, they don't walk into a bar in Texas and start shooting, they don't walk into an army base and start shooting. No, they go into a school and start shooting, they go into a shopping mall and start shooting. They wait until houses are empty before breaking in. Guns do deter criminals, at least the smarter ones.

Tell us, what happened when you put that sign up in your front yard saying your house is a gun free zone? Oh, you didn't put up such a sign? Why not?


----------



## hadit (Oct 27, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Let's get real, Crime rose to record highs under Trump.
> 
> You guys keep trying to pretend 2020 didn't happen.


We're well aware of the summer of riots. Many cities burned, people were injured and killed, and insurrectionist group took over several city blocks and declared themselves free of US dominion. We remember. You were just off by a year.


----------



## Woodznutz (Oct 27, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Research shows DGU's rarely happen, because most home invaders wait until no one is home to break in. Breaking in when someone is home has a higher penalty and more risk, gun or not.
> 
> Again,... only 200 justified homicides with guns every year.   DGU's are RARE.
> 
> ...


That just shows that more people should own guns for self-defense.


----------



## Woodznutz (Oct 27, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Three idiots for the price of one.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


These problems are more associated with human nature than with politics. People in America just aren't prepared for life in the real world.


----------



## Batcat (Oct 27, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Um, yup, pretty much.  11 years of reading murder wank fantasies here from ammosexuals have convinced me of that.  The way you guys cheered for Zimmerman and Rittenhouse for living your dream.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


My opinion often differs from other conservatives. As I said Zimmerman should have stayed in his vehicle. He was not a cop. Martin posed no threat to Zimmerman in his vehicle.

There currently are more firearms in our nation than people. People are smart enough to cache their weapons once confiscation begins. People have been burying firearms and ammo in PVC pipes ever since Handgun Control Inc. appeared on the scene. I remember reading instructions on how to do so back in the 1970s. You can even buy gun burial tubes on the internet today. Just do a Google search.  

So you expect firearms will be confiscated from criminals. Please explain why that is not happening today.

I have talked to a number of police who have told me they have ABSOLUTELY NO INTEREST in confiscating firearms from honest citizens. It’s hard enough to take them away from violent criminals.

Perhaps you will volunteer to join the gun confiscation squads and go house to house taking away firearms.


----------



## hadit (Oct 27, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Um, yup, pretty much.  11 years of reading murder wank fantasies here from ammosexuals have convinced me of that.  The way you guys cheered for Zimmerman and Rittenhouse for living your dream.


Oh, good grief, are you STILL claiming all that nonsense? You would think reality would have sunk in by now, but here we are.


JoeB131 said:


> But he went out and murdered an unarmed kid buying candy, and you guys made him into a national hero.


Hardly.


JoeB131 said:


> No, I don't expect the criminals to voluntarily turn in their firearms.
> I expect their firearms to be confiscated and then they can't get new ones because the gun store that sells them one can be sued out of existence.
> 
> The Gun Industry has been flooding our streets with guns because they WANT people like you to be scared and want a gun, too.


Criminals generally don't buy guns at a gun store. Background checks, remember?


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 27, 2022)

Bob Blaylock said:


> It is you who keeps equating race to criminality, and not anyone else whom you persist in falsely accusing of _“racism”_. It is you who, on the basis of your own racism, keeps insisting that any efforts to protect human beings from the predations of subhuman criminal shit are acting out of _“racism”_.



Not at all.  

White people get probation
Black people get prison.

This is America...  There's a reason why blacks make up 13% of the population and 38.4% of the prison population. 



Batcat said:


> There currently are more firearms in our nation than people. People are smart enough to cache their weapons once confiscation begins. People have been burying firearms and ammo in PVC pipes ever since Handgun Control Inc. appeared on the scene. I remember reading instructions on how to do so back in the 1970s. You can even buy gun burial tubes on the internet today. Just do a Google search.



I'm not that worried about the gun nut who is burying his guns.   Still gets those guns out of circulation. 



hadit said:


> We're well aware of the summer of riots. Many cities burned, people were injured and killed, and insurrectionist group took over several city blocks and declared themselves free of US dominion. We remember. You were just off by a year.



Only 50 deaths were linked to the BLM demonstrations... most of them cops killing protesters. 

The murder rate shot up from 18,913 in 2019 to 24,576 in 2020.  That had little to do with BLM riots and more that people who had tenuous relationships to start with were brought to a crisis point.


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 27, 2022)

Hollie said:


> Well, yes. That pesky Constitution is a real impediment to the socialist / authoritarian desires of the left. The Party of Slavery, the Democrat Party, has become even more dangerous since their precious rights to oppress and intimidate have been stripped away.



Are you capable of rational thought, or do you just rant whatever you heard on Hate Radio like you had an original idea?


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 27, 2022)

hadit said:


> Criminals generally don't buy guns at a gun store. Background checks, remember?



Funny thing.  Every time we have a mass shooting, we find out that person had no problem passing a background check, even if they have a history of crime or mental illness. 

Every. Fucking. Time.


----------



## hadit (Oct 27, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Funny thing.  Every time we have a mass shooting, we find out that person had no problem passing a background check, even if they have a history of crime or mental illness.
> 
> Every. Fucking. Time.


Mental illness, yes they are very ill. That's not illegal though and doesn't show up on a background check. 

Now, since you made the claim, it's on you to give us the cases where a shooter WITH a criminal record bought his guns at a gun shop and passed the background check. You said it happened every time, so you should have no problem finding them. Unless, of course, you're just making stuff up that sounds good. Not like it's the first time for that either.


----------



## Hollie (Oct 27, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Are you capable of rational thought, or do you just rant whatever you heard on Hate Radio like you had an original idea?


That was a rather cowardly retreat.


----------



## Hollie (Oct 27, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Funny thing.  Every time we have a mass shooting, we find out that person had no problem passing a background check, even if they have a history of crime or mental illness.
> 
> Every. Fucking. Time.


The Sandy Hook Elementary School shooter stole a rifle from his parent.

Remarkable how ignorant and dishonest you are.


Every. Fucking. Time.


----------



## Pellinore (Oct 28, 2022)

Blues Man said:


> Irrelevant
> 
> For one many DGU's never get reported because a crime was stopped before it was committed therefore those crimes would never be counted anyway
> 
> ...


Thank you for answering.

The problem with your argument is that "It keeps them from occurring" is the dictionary definition of "preventing."

Put it this way: Assuming defensive gun use prevents, say, a million incidents from becoming crimes, per year.  (I'm making that number up, for illustration.)  That means that if there was no defensive gun use, there would be one million more crimes on our books.  That means that the presence of guns, of which we have a LOT, saves us one million crimes.

Which would be great, except that we already have higher crime rates, violent crime rates, firearm crime rates, and violent firearm crime rates than any other developed nation, by far.  The "defensive gun use" argument is then saying that, if not for them, our crime rates would be *even higher*.  

Why would our developed nation have crime rates be inexplicably in the stratosphere, if not for the most obvious and prominent difference between the US and every other nation—the gazillion guns?


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 28, 2022)

hadit said:


> Mental illness, yes they are very ill. That's not illegal though and doesn't show up on a background check.
> 
> Now, since you made the claim, it's on you to give us the cases where a shooter WITH a criminal record bought his guns at a gun shop and passed the background check. You said it happened every time, so you should have no problem finding them. Unless, of course, you're just making stuff up that sounds good. Not like it's the first time for that either.



Sure.  

The DC Snipers. 
The guy who shot up the factory in Aurora. 

Obviously, you don't understand the concept of "or".  



Hollie said:


> The Sandy Hook Elementary School shooter stole a rifle from his parent.
> 
> Remarkable how ignorant and dishonest you are.



You mean the parent who took him to the range, let him play first person shooter games all day, and stockpiled enough guns to fight off the Zombie Apocalypse?  Oh, yeah, and she was a batshit crazy prepper who believed she needed to stockpile guns and food for the coming end of the world.


----------



## Hollie (Oct 28, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Sure.
> 
> The DC Snipers.
> The guy who shot up the factory in Aurora.
> ...


You mean the kid who never passed a background check which you insist "Every time we have a mass shooting, we find out that person had no problem passing a background check''.

There are others, of course, but this is just another instance of your frantic claims being totally fraudulent and another instance of your failed attempt to sidestep your false claims.


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 28, 2022)

Hollie said:


> You mean the kid who never passed a background check which you insist "Every time we have a mass shooting, we find out that person had no problem passing a background check''.
> 
> There are others, of course, but this is just another instance of your frantic claims being totally fraudulent and another instance of your failed attempt to sidestep your false claims.



His mother never should have passed a background check because she was nuts... but she was still able to get enough guns to fight off the Zombies.
Unfortunately, the Zombie she should have been worried about was the one she lived with.


----------



## Hollie (Oct 28, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> His mother never should have passed a background check because she was nuts... but she was still able to get enough guns to fight off the Zombies.
> Unfortunately, the Zombie she should have been worried about was the one she lived with.
> 
> View attachment 716846



You have no facts to support your nonsensical, "she was nuts", comment. 

This is just another unsubstantiated, emotional outburst where you write hysterical claims with no basis in fact. 

What's really nuts is watching your hysterical rants, void of anything demonstrable, being taken apart by facts but that doesn't slow you down with your dishonest diatribes.


----------



## hadit (Oct 28, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Sure.
> 
> The DC Snipers.
> The guy who shot up the factory in Aurora.
> ...


Oh, I clearly understand the concept of "or". I also understand the concept of guilt by association. Toss two unrelated things together, and if one is true, the other one is also assumed to be true.

Now, to brass tacks. What is your source that claims the DC snipers had felony arrests and passed a background check to buy their gun? The same for the Aurora shooter. Remember, if they don't have a conviction in their background, they're going to pass the check, thus nullifying your complaint. Your complain is only valid if these shooters passed the check with a conviction on their record. If you can't produce it, have the integrity to admit you just made it up because it sounded good.


----------



## M14 Shooter (Oct 28, 2022)

hadit said:


> Now, to brass tacks. What is your source that claims the DC snipers had felony arrests and passed a background check to buy their gun? The same for the Aurora shooter. Remember, if they don't have a conviction in their background, they're going to pass the check, thus nullifying your complaint. Your complain is only valid if these shooters passed the check with a conviction on their record. If you can't produce it, have the integrity to admit you just made it up because it sounded good.



You expect Joe to be honest!!!


----------



## hadit (Oct 28, 2022)

M14 Shooter said:


> You expect Joe to be honest!!!


No, I expect him to dance, dodge and dissemble, attempting to insult me as he does. Then I will drive home the fact that he's dishonest and doesn't have the integrity to admit what he's doing.


----------



## Pellinore (Oct 28, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Funny thing.  Every time we have a mass shooting, we find out that person had no problem passing a background check, even if they have a history of crime or mental illness.
> 
> Every. Fucking. Time.


The 19-year-old who just shot up the high school in St. Louis tried to buy through a dealer, failed the background check, so he went and bought privately, with no problems at all.  









						Police: St. Louis shooter legally bought rifle from private seller after earlier sale blocked
					

The gunman who killed two people at a St. Louis high school earlier this week legally bought the rifle he used from a private seller after his earlier effort to purchase a firearm was blo…




					thehill.com
				



(The Hill: Least Biased, Mostly Factual.)


----------



## Blues Man (Oct 28, 2022)

Pellinore said:


> Thank you for answering.
> 
> The problem with your argument is that "It keeps them from occurring" is the dictionary definition of "preventing."
> 
> ...




It doesn't matter if civilian gun ownership reduces crime or not.

If you want to confine this to murder rates we can.

The murder rate in the UK today is about the same as it was in 1950 despite passing draconian gun laws in the 60's and subsequently banning civilians from owning hand guns and almost all centerfire rifle calibers.

The murder rate in the US today is about what it was in 1950 despite the institution of background checks, a 10 year assault weapons ban, the passing of literally thousands of gun laws and more people than ever not only owning firearms but also having concealed carry permits.

Gun laws do not equal lower murder rates.


----------



## M14 Shooter (Oct 28, 2022)

Pellinore said:


> The 19-year-old who just shot up the high school in St. Louis tried to buy through a dealer, failed the background check, so he went and bought privately, with no problems at all.


Thus, the fallacy of background checks.


----------



## Pellinore (Oct 28, 2022)

M14 Shooter said:


> Thus, the fallacy of background checks.


Except that, in this case, it *worked*.  It prevented a person who had bad intent from buying a firearm.  What didn't work is the private seller who happily sold him the gun he otherwise couldn't have gotten. 

I am actually finding this case notable because it counters the common criticism of background checks that says they aim at the wrong target.  I've seen a lot of people (here and elsewhere) say that few or none of these high-profile mass shootings would have been prevented by a background check, or by closing the so-called "gun show loophole."  Well, here's one that would have.


----------



## M14 Shooter (Oct 28, 2022)

Pellinore said:


> Except that, in this case, it *worked*.  It prevented a person who had bad intent from buying a firearm.


And yet, he shot up a school , so....  no.


Pellinore said:


> What didn't work is the private seller who happily sold him the gun he otherwise couldn't have gotten.


Why do you think a law will prevent this?


> or by closing the so-called "gun show loophole."


It is impossible to legally avoid the background checks specified by federal law - and thus, there is no loophole.


----------



## Pellinore (Oct 28, 2022)

M14 Shooter said:


> And yet, he shot up a school , so....  no.
> 
> Why do you think a law will prevent this?
> 
> It is impossible to legally avoid the background checks specified by federal law - and thus, there is no loophole.



The "gun show loophole" refers to the fact that private sellers don't have to conduct federal background checks.  The article mentions that clearly.  

This guy tried to buy a semi-automatic rifle at a dealer, but the background check successfully prevented the sale.  He then went to a private seller and legally bought his gun there, because there is no law that requires a federal background check on private sales.  

So there's your answer: A law requiring the same federal background check on the private sale, would have prevented that sale.


----------



## M14 Shooter (Oct 28, 2022)

Pellinore said:


> The "gun show loophole" refers to the fact that private sellers don't have to conduct federal background checks.  The article mentions that clearly.


Right.  That's not a loophole; characterizing it as such is a lie.


Pellinore said:


> So there's your answer: A law requiring the same federal background check on the private sale, would have prevented that sale.


Why do you think such a law would have prevent this sale?


----------



## 2aguy (Oct 28, 2022)

Pellinore said:


> The "gun show loophole" refers to the fact that private sellers don't have to conduct federal background checks.  The article mentions that clearly.
> 
> This guy tried to buy a semi-automatic rifle at a dealer, but the background check successfully prevented the sale.  He then went to a private seller and legally bought his gun there, because there is no law that requires a federal background check on private sales.
> 
> So there's your answer: A law requiring the same federal background check on the private sale, would have prevented that sale.




That's not a loophole.  Selling your private property is not selling as a gun store....

Nope....he would have simply gotten the gun from criminals.....they don't do background checks for any of their guns...you doofus.


----------



## hadit (Oct 28, 2022)

Blues Man said:


> It doesn't matter if civilian gun ownership reduces crime or not.
> 
> If you want to confine this to murder rates we can.
> 
> ...


And that proves my point, which is that the US has had guns readily available for hundreds of years now, and only lately has there been a problem with mass shooters, school shooters, etc. What changed? It's not the guns.


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 28, 2022)

Hollie said:


> You have no facts to support your nonsensical, "she was nuts", comment.





hadit said:


> Now, to brass tacks. What is your source that claims the DC snipers had felony arrests and passed a background check to buy their gun?


New rule... I am not going to look stuff up that you are too lazy to look up yourself.  




hadit said:


> Your complain is only valid if these shooters passed the check with a conviction on their record. If you can't produce it, have the integrity to admit you just made it up because it sounded good.



But that's the point, they SHOULDN'T have passed a background check.  But the background check system is so weak, it's a joke. 

Everyone whines about how IL has the toughest gun laws... Yeah, tough.  $11.00 for a FOID card.


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 28, 2022)

2aguy said:


> That's not a loophole. Selling your private property is not selling as a gun store....
> 
> Nope....he would have simply gotten the gun from criminals.....they don't do background checks for any of their guns...you doofus.


But that's the point.  If I were to sell my car, even in a private sale, then I would have to transfer title, get it registered with a license plate, etc.  

But you can just hand over a gun for some quick cash.


----------



## hadit (Oct 28, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> New rule... I am not going to look stuff up that you are too lazy to look up yourself.


Strike 1. I predicted you were going to dance and dodge, and you did. No, YOU made the claim, YOU specifically cited them as an example of shooters who passed background checks they shouldn't have and bought a gun. It's therefore on YOU do back it up. You know, I actually did do a little research on that one, and there was no easily found evidence that they passed any background check, so, if you want to maintain any semblance of credibility, produce the proof or admit you have none and made it all up.


JoeB131 said:


> But that's the point, they SHOULDN'T have passed a background check.  But the background check system is so weak, it's a joke.
> 
> Everyone whines about how IL has the toughest gun laws... Yeah, tough.  $11.00 for a FOID card.


Strike 2. More dancing and dodging. Your complaint is only valid if these shooters passed a background check with a conviction on their record. If you can't produce it, have the integrity to admit you just made it up because it sounded good.


----------



## Hollie (Oct 28, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> New rule... I am not going to look stuff up that you are too lazy to look up yourself.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


New rule. You will continue to spam the thread with nonsensical, unsupported, emotional outbursts. 

Same as the old rule.


----------



## Pellinore (Oct 28, 2022)

M14 Shooter said:


> Right.  That's not a loophole; characterizing it as such is a lie.


That's fine.  It's what people call it, but common-use political terms aren't always accurate like that.  



M14 Shooter said:


> Why do you think such a law would have prevent this sale?


It's true, the sale could have been illegal, but you may have seen in the article that the guy's mother then called the police to come take the gun.  She said he was presenting a danger, but the police couldn't take it because Missouri has no red flag laws.  If the gun was illegally purchased, though, they would have had cause and taken it away.  No gun, no shooting.

A federal background check for private purchases would have prevented this shooting.


----------



## Batcat (Oct 28, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> .I'm not that worried about the gun nut who is burying his guns.   Still gets those guns out of circulation.
> 
> 
> 
> .


And when the time is ripe to overthrow the totalitarian government the firearms and ammo will come out of the ground to arm the rebels and end the oppression.


----------



## 2aguy (Oct 28, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> But that's the point.  If I were to sell my car, even in a private sale, then I would have to transfer title, get it registered with a license plate, etc.
> 
> But you can just hand over a gun for some quick cash.




Yep...because it is private property.....and yet criminals are not doing this...they are going to known straw buyers, people who are knowingly selling guns to criminals in the first place...so background checks wouldn't stop them.

Registration for cars is not the same as for guns....at this point you guys are not trying to ban and confiscate cars...you plan to, it just isn't your priority.   You want gun registration because you know your cousins in Germany used registration lists to take guns away from Jews and their political enemies......


----------



## 2aguy (Oct 28, 2022)

Pellinore said:


> That's fine.  It's what people call it, but common-use political terms aren't always accurate like that.
> 
> 
> It's true, the sale could have been illegal, but you may have seen in the article that the guy's mother then called the police to come take the gun.  She said he was presenting a danger, but the police couldn't take it because Missouri has no red flag laws.  If the gun was illegally purchased, though, they would have had cause and taken it away.  No gun, no shooting.
> ...




Red Flag laws aren't needed.  Most states already have laws that allow you to commit people for mental health issues.

A federal background check already failed to stop him......at the gun store.....if you had background checks on private sales, you would need to have gun registration ...... otherwise you wouldn't know who possessed which guns when, and you wouldn't know if a background check had been done......this is why anti-gun fascists want universal background checks....they want gun registration...that is the only reason they want it.   Criminals get guns from straw buyers, people who knowingly sell to criminals using their own clean police records, so a background check won't stop them.   We can already arrest the straw buyers and we can already arrest the criminals.   You have one guy who used a gun for a shooting who went to a private buyer...

To put this in perspective....

Mass Public Shootings in 2020....

6

Total killed.....

43

Number of gun murders in 2020....

19,348

So you want to force the owners of 600 million legal guns to register their guns...for later confiscation by leftists..for a total of 43 people murdered by 6 people out of over 350 million people....

The other 19,000 gun murders occur because criminals get their guns by stealing them, or using straw buyers.....straw buyers who are a lot of the time their girlfriends, mothers, grandmothers, baby mommas.....who are forced to buy the guns under threat of violence or for money.....

Sorry....you don't understand the issue.....and background checks on private sales are only desired in order to demand gun registration.......


----------



## 2aguy (Oct 28, 2022)

Pellinore said:


> That's fine.  It's what people call it, but common-use political terms aren't always accurate like that.
> 
> 
> It's true, the sale could have been illegal, but you may have seen in the article that the guy's mother then called the police to come take the gun.  She said he was presenting a danger, but the police couldn't take it because Missouri has no red flag laws.  If the gun was illegally purchased, though, they would have had cause and taken it away.  No gun, no shooting.
> ...




Another thing...had he been blocked in a private sale, he would have simply murdered the private seller and taken his gun...you know, like the Sandy Hook shooter did...or he would have found someone who was a straw buyer who would have sold him the gun anyway.......

The only reason anti-gun fascists want universal background checks is to then demand gun registration...something they need for when they get the power to ban and confiscate guns....they know this from the experience of France, Britain, German, New Zealand, Australia, Canada, and a few states in the U.S......first they demanded gun registration...just to know who had the guns, then years later used those lists to confiscate those guns........

So nope.....no universal background checks....


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 29, 2022)

hadit said:


> Strike 1. I predicted you were going to dance and dodge, and you did. No, YOU made the claim,



Uh, guy, here's why I don't post links.  

Because when I do, you guys pretend you didn't see them, or you claim they are from a biased source.    Then you go on and keep making the same claims over and over again. 

The point is, EVERY mass shooter is able to get a gun, despite either histories of mental illness or criminal records that SHOULD disqualify them if we actually performed meaningful background checks. 

It's why every time there is a mass shooter, we find out EVERYONE in their lives knew they were nuts... and they were able to get guns anyway. 



hadit said:


> More dancing and dodging. Your complaint is only valid if these shooters passed a background check with a conviction on their record. If you can't produce it, have the integrity to admit you just made it up because it sounded good.



Established fact... the two cases I cited involved guys who were legally barred from buying guns.  You can add to that the Texas Church shooter, who was given a bad conduct discharge from the Air Force from domestic battery.   

Look it up yourself.


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 29, 2022)

2aguy said:


> Yep...because it is private property.....and yet criminals are not doing this...they are going to known straw buyers, people who are knowingly selling guns to criminals in the first place...so background checks wouldn't stop them.



But the point is, the gun stores are KNOWINGLY selling to straw buyers... which they can get away with because there is little to no regulation or accountability.  

Allow gun violence victims to sue, you'd be amazed how fast they clean up their act. 



2aguy said:


> Registration for cars is not the same as for guns....at this point you guys are not trying to ban and confiscate cars...you plan to, it just isn't your priority. You want gun registration because you know your cousins in Germany used registration lists to take guns away from Jews and their political enemies......



Nobody is trying to ban of confiscate guns. 

Nazi Germany had WIDESPREAD gun ownership.  The Nazis repealed Weimer-era gun laws.  Gun ownership was seen as a sign of Aryan Manliness.  (Sound familiar?)  The fact is, when the Nazis came for the Jews, most Germans were perfectly okay with that, because 500 years of blatant anti-Semitism made that acceptable. 

The point is, cars have a potential for harm, even when operated without ill intent.  That's why they make you go to court for every minor fender-bender.


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 29, 2022)

2aguy said:


> Another thing...had he been blocked in a private sale, he would have simply murdered the private seller and taken his gun...you know, like the Sandy Hook shooter did...or he would have found someone who was a straw buyer who would have sold him the gun anyway.......



Lanza didn't murder his mom to get her guns.  She gave him easy access to the guns any time he wanted them. 

He murdered her because she was going to put his retard ass into a home because she couldn't deal with him anymore.


----------



## Hollie (Oct 29, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> But the point is, the gun stores are KNOWINGLY selling to straw buyers... which they can get away with because there is little to no regulation or accountability.
> 
> Allow gun violence victims to sue, you'd be amazed how fast they clean up their act.
> 
> ...


But the point is, you can't support your statement that, ''gun stores are KNOWINGLY selling to straw buyers''. 

I actually did the research, (because I know your comments are largely invented, unsupported emotional outbursts), and I found only three instances of charges being brought. 

There are 133,716 FFLs in the US.


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 29, 2022)

Hollie said:


> But the point is, you can't support your statement that, ''gun stores are KNOWINGLY selling to straw buyers''.
> 
> I actually did the research, (because I know your comments are largely invented, unsupported emotional outbursts), and I found only three instances of charges being brought.
> 
> There are 133,716 FFLs in the US.



Which just proves the laws aren't being enforced in any meaningful way. 









						Their Guns Fueled Chicago Crime. When They Broke the Law, The ATF Went Easy.
					

A report from the Chicago mayor’s office named gun stores whose wares consistently wound up in city crimes. ATF records show the agency was lenient.




					www.thetrace.org
				




_Over the last two decades, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives let some of the Midwest’s most notorious gun sellers off the hook for serious violations of federal law, including selling to straw purchasers, transferring guns without background checks, and doctoring sales records.

The Trace and USA TODAY obtained ATF inspection records for 13 gun dealers singled out by the city of Chicago as suppliers of a disproportionate number of guns used in city crimes. The records show the agency found more than 120 violations of the federal Gun Control Act of 1968 at these stores. Only one store passed its inspection with no violations.

snip

That investigation found that between 2015 and 2017, the ATF regularly downgraded penalties for lawbreaking retailers across the U.S. The review of more than 2,000 gun dealers showed that many had brazenly flouted federal laws, selling weapons to convicted felons and domestic abusers, lying to inspectors, and falsifying ledgers to hide their misconduct. When the ATF discovered these violations, it often issued warnings, sometimes repeatedly, and allowed stores to stay open. 

In four agency inspections at Blythe’s Sports Shop in Griffith, Indiana, between 2000 and 2009, the ATF issued warnings to owner Rodger Blythe for violations that included selling to underage customers and to someone who identified themself as a convicted felon, failing to notify the ATF of multiple sales, and failing to properly record firearm transfers. 

In a 2011 inspection, investigators found that the store had “aided the making of false statements” on federally mandated purchasing forms and sold to a person buying weapons on behalf of someone else — a federal crime known as “straw purchasing.”

According to ATF guidelines, Blythe’s 2011 violations, alongside his history of previous warnings, warranted the revocation of his license to sell guns. Instead, inspectors chose to warn Blythe again._


----------



## 2aguy (Oct 29, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Lanza didn't murder his mom to get her guns.  She gave him easy access to the guns any time he wanted them.
> 
> He murdered her because she was going to put his retard ass into a home because she couldn't deal with him anymore.




Moron, he murdered her then took her guns, you idiot.


----------



## 2aguy (Oct 29, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Which just proves the laws aren't being enforced in any meaningful way.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Violations?  You mean they mispelled words...you idiot.  And there you are, your government failed...you god, "Government," keeps failing, yet you blame normal gun owning Americans....for the failure of your God.....

You need to go after your government and leave normal gun owners alone...we have all the gun laws we need to arrest and lock up straw buyers...but your government keeps letting them go...you slave owning political party, the democrat party, keeps releasing the most violent, dangerous gun felons over and over again, and keeps releasing the straw buyers supplying them...and you still vote for them.....

That is on you...not normal gun owners.


----------



## Hollie (Oct 29, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Which just proves the laws aren't being enforced in any meaningful way.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Lawlessness and incompetence in the Lori Lightfoot enclave of, "hey, I need a pay raise''. 

Golly, gee. Someone alert The Trace.


----------



## Blues Man (Oct 29, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Uh, guy, here's why I don't post links.
> 
> Because when I do, you guys pretend you didn't see them, or you claim they are from a biased source.    Then you go on and keep making the same claims over and over again.
> 
> ...


You don't post links because you like to make shit up


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (Oct 29, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Funny thing.  Every time we have a mass shooting, we find out that person had no problem passing a background check, even if they have a history of crime or mental illness.
> 
> Every. Fucking. Time.


Every time we have a mass shooting, we get nothing but lies and demagoguery from the right.

Conservatives lie about guns being ‘banned’; conservatives lie about guns being ‘confiscated.’

Every time we have a mass shooting conservatives circle the wagons with slippery slope fallacies and lies, refusing to consider solutions to address the problem of gun crime and violence having nothing to do with the regulation of firearms, such as UBCs.


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 29, 2022)

2aguy said:


> Violations? You mean they mispelled words...you idiot. And there you are, your government failed...you god, "Government," keeps failing, yet you blame normal gun owning Americans....for the failure of your God.....



Let us have the gun laws we want... and then we can talk about failure.  The problem is, you ammosexuals have neutered the ATF and then you complain when they don't do their jobs. 

These gun dealers should have had their licenses pulled and their inventories confiscated. Period.  Full fucking stop.  



2aguy said:


> You need to go after your government and leave normal gun owners alone...we have all the gun laws we need to arrest and lock up straw buyers...but your government keeps letting them go...you slave owning political party, the democrat party, keeps releasing the most violent, dangerous gun felons over and over again, and keeps releasing the straw buyers supplying them...and you still vote for them.....



It's not the straw buyers that are the problem, it's the gun stores.  We don't have prison space for the straw buyers, and prisons should ONLY be for people who are dangerous. 

Prisons don't solve the problem, it just makes them worse.


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 29, 2022)

Hollie said:


> Lawlessness and incompetence in the Lori Lightfoot enclave of, "hey, I need a pay raise''.
> 
> Golly, gee. Someone alert The Trace.



Not sure how it's Lightfoot's fault that some gun store in Indiana keeps selling guns to crooks from Chicago.


----------



## Pellinore (Oct 29, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Uh, guy, here's why I don't post links.
> 
> Because when I do, you guys pretend you didn't see them, or you claim they are from a biased source.    Then you go on and keep making the same claims over and over again.



I can completely support this.  I can (and have, and have seen many others) post incontrovertible links about whatever-the-subject, from the world's foremost experts or the direct source, only to have it brushed aside as you said, or (if they have no response) simply ignored.  Then, people who have more spare time than I do post link after link from dubious (at best) sources, then claim it was "proven."  Why would I spend my days off tracing down links and providing sources for nothing?

I still do, sometimes, of course, but I limit myself to reliable, least-biased sources, and I've started adding a media bias check to them when I do.  It probably won't help, but what can I say.  I live in hope.


----------



## Hollie (Oct 29, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Not sure how it's Lightfoot's fault that some gun store in Indiana keeps selling guns to crooks from Chicago.


I don't see your silly conspiracy theories as being helpful. Criminals with Firearms are a protected class in so many of the leftist run cities. And yes, why would we hold a leftist hack responsible for anything? What is her job?

It's just a game that leftisexuals play. They will enable criminals, enable criminals with illegal Firearms and make allowances for dozens of people being shot in a single weekend so they can whine and moan about ''we need more gun laws''. More gun laws only serve as an attempt to disarm law abiding people. Nothing is being done in the large, leftist run cities to stop criminals with guns. That's not the plan.


----------



## 2aguy (Oct 29, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Let us have the gun laws we want... and then we can talk about failure.  The problem is, you ammosexuals have neutered the ATF and then you complain when they don't do their jobs.
> 
> These gun dealers should have had their licenses pulled and their inventories confiscated. Period.  Full fucking stop.
> 
> ...




You lying asshole.......straw buyers can already be arrested......lying on the gun form for the mandated Federal Background check is already a felony....and you can be arrested.....

The ATF can arrest these people all day long.....

Straw buyers and theft are the way criminals get their illegal guns and background checks don't stop either one....


----------



## 2aguy (Oct 29, 2022)

Pellinore said:


> I can completely support this.  I can (and have, and have seen many others) post incontrovertible links about whatever-the-subject, from the world's foremost experts or the direct source, only to have it brushed aside as you said, or (if they have no response) simply ignored.  Then, people who have more spare time than I do post link after link from dubious (at best) sources, then claim it was "proven."  Why would I spend my days off tracing down links and providing sources for nothing?
> 
> I still do, sometimes, of course, but I limit myself to reliable, least-biased sources, and I've started adding a media bias check to them when I do.  It probably won't help, but what can I say.  I live in hope.




And that is a bunch of bullshit.....you guys post from sources that we discredit, easily, with facts and truth, then you whine and moan that it isn't fair that we countered your fake sources with facts and truth....


----------



## 2aguy (Oct 29, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Not sure how it's Lightfoot's fault that some gun store in Indiana keeps selling guns to crooks from Chicago.




She is releasing the worst gun offenders over and over again........the police catch them, she releases them.....and then files charges against the cops...you doofus.


----------



## hadit (Oct 29, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Uh, guy, here's why I don't post links.
> 
> Because when I do, you guys pretend you didn't see them, or you claim they are from a biased source.    Then you go on and keep making the same claims over and over again.
> 
> ...


Strike 3.

Here's the bottom line. I don't do those things you so conveniently ascribe to me as an excuse to run away. Therefore, you have no good reason to not post links, and quite frankly, that's a stupid reason to not support your position, and basically you're admitting that you won't post them because you don't have them. See, if you had simply complained that people were able to get a gun even though they were mentally ill, there's no arguing because it's true, mental illness is not well treated, and sick people do get guns. That's not what you did, however. You went way beyond that and stated that shooters PASSED BACKGROUND CHECKS when they should not have. That's where you went wrong, because you should be able to back that up, and should have had the integrity to admit that you couldn't prove it. Now, because you CAN'T back it up, you're backtracking. First, you say in essence, "Well, I'm not going to prove it to you because you'll just ignore it anyway, I'm taking my ball and going home". You know, ignoring evidence sounds a lot like what you do when you continue to post things that have been debunked years ago. Next, you want to move the goalposts. Instead of insisting that criminals can buy guns because they can pass background checks even with felony convictions in their past, you just want to complain that they can get guns. Not happening, because you made a statement and when called out on it won't back it up.

Believe me when I say that this will come up again when you want to make emotional claims that sound good but aren't true. If you want me to believe the DC snipers passed background checks to buy their guns, post the evidence that they did. Don't try vague obfuscation that they were barred from buying guns but somehow got them, don't try to claim people should have known they were killers and sold them guns anyway, prove that they passed background checks with felonies on their records.


----------



## Jarlaxle (Oct 29, 2022)

hadit said:


> Oh, good grief, are you STILL claiming all that nonsense? You would think reality would have sunk in by now, but here we are.



Of course he is. Being a disciple of Goebbels, Joey repeats The Big Lie dozens of times.



Hollie said:


> You mean the kid who never passed a background check which you insist "Every time we have a mass shooting, we find out that person had no problem passing a background check''.
> 
> There are others, of course, but this is just another instance of your frantic claims being totally fraudulent and another instance of your failed attempt to sidestep your false claims.



He doesn't even bother...he just keeps repeating The Big Lie.


----------



## Jarlaxle (Oct 29, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Uh, guy, here's why I don't post links.
> 
> Because when I do, you guys pretend you didn't see them, or you claim they are from a biased source.    Then you go on and keep making the same claims over and over again.



This, class, is a PERFECT example of Joey projecting his own shortcomings on others.



> Established fact... the two cases I cited involved guys who were legally barred from buying guns.  You can add to that the Texas Church shooter, who was given a bad conduct discharge from the Air Force from domestic battery.
> 
> Look it up yourself.



You mean the guy who SHOULD have been prohibited, but the Air Force didn't bother to REPORT anything? That guy?



JoeB131 said:


> The point is, cars have a potential for harm, even when operated without ill intent.  That's why they make you go to court for every minor fender-bender.


 Bullshit.


----------



## ThunderKiss1965 (Oct 29, 2022)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> Every time we have a mass shooting, we get nothing but lies and demagoguery from the right.
> 
> Conservatives lie about guns being ‘banned’; conservatives lie about guns being ‘confiscated.’
> 
> Every time we have a mass shooting conservatives circle the wagons with slippery slope fallacies and lies, refusing to consider solutions to address the problem of gun crime and violence having nothing to do with the regulation of firearms, such as UBCs.


Gun free zones are dangerous.


----------



## westwall (Oct 29, 2022)

ThunderKiss1965 said:


> Gun free zones are dangerous.





Gun free zones are deadly to the inhabitants.


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 30, 2022)

Pellinore said:


> I can completely support this. I can (and have, and have seen many others) post incontrovertible links about whatever-the-subject, from the world's foremost experts or the direct source, only to have it brushed aside as you said, or (if they have no response) simply ignored. Then, people who have more spare time than I do post link after link from dubious (at best) sources, then claim it was "proven." Why would I spend my days off tracing down links and providing sources for nothing?
> 
> I still do, sometimes, of course, but I limit myself to reliable, least-biased sources, and I've started adding a media bias check to them when I do. It probably won't help, but what can I say. I live in hope.



My rule is that I post a link if I find something interesting.  

I don't bother when a nitwit tells me "Prove the sky is blue", because that's just meant to bog down a debate making me prove every point, and frankly, why bother.  

Not that I think the religious fanatics and the gun fetishists can be reasoned with.   It's pretty clear they can't.


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 30, 2022)

2aguy said:


> You lying asshole.......straw buyers can already be arrested......lying on the gun form for the mandated Federal Background check is already a felony....and you can be arrested.....
> 
> The ATF can arrest these people all day long.....
> 
> Straw buyers and theft are the way criminals get their illegal guns and background checks don't stop either one....



We lock up 2 million people.  We don't have room to lock someone up for filling out a form wrong. 
We have to let old murderers out now because we don't have room for the new murderers.  
We currently spend 90 BILLION on the prison industrial complex and another 120 Billion on police.   Where is that money going to come from to arrest people who "filled out the form wrong after the gun store told them to."  



2aguy said:


> And that is a bunch of bullshit.....you guys post from sources that we discredit, easily, with facts and truth, then you whine and moan that it isn't fair that we countered your fake sources with facts and truth....



Guy, posts from Ammosexual Website claiming things like 'John Lott proved there were 5 million DGU's after he did a phone survey of 5000 people" are absurd on their face. 



hadit said:


> Here's the bottom line. I don't do those things you so conveniently ascribe to me as an excuse to run away. Therefore, you have no good reason to not post links, and quite frankly, that's a stupid reason to not support your position, and basically you're admitting that you won't post them because you don't have them.



I don't post links because you never read them.  I have never seen a right winger respond to a link with, "Wow, I didn't know that."  Nope, they invariably post "FAKE NEWS", or they pretend they didn't see it and go back to making the same idiotic claims.   



Jarlaxle said:


> You mean the guy who SHOULD have been prohibited, but the Air Force didn't bother to REPORT anything? That guy?



Again, shouldn't be the Air Force's job.   

When I applied for my mortgage last year, the bank did not simply check my FICO score.   (Which was 803, btw).   Even though I had been doing business with that bank for 22 years, they did a THOROUGH check of not only me, but the property I was looking to buy, that I had secured a buyer for my previous property, all my sources of income, the status of a vacation property I co-own with five other people, etc.  They had even asked about a line of credit I got with a furniture store.  (Since I was moving into a new place, I wasn't going to bring the same crappy furniture I had in my home since 2004 with me.)   


When I applied for my current job, they just didn't trust what was on my resume.  They did a financial background check.  They talked to several of my previous employers.  They talked to several former co-workers.   A question came up on my start date on a certain job (I was a contractor for several months before I was hired full time). But they did a thorough check. 

When I applied for a FOID Card, they charged me $11.00 and made me pinky-swear that I wasn't mentally ill or a criminal.  That's it.  And people like 2TinyGuy will SCREAM that FOID Cards are a violation of his constitutional rights. 

So imagine this.  When a person applies to buy a gun, they actually do an investigation.  Someone CALLS the Air Force about Devin Patrick Kelley, and finds out about his bad conduct discharge.  Someone calls Anschutz's Student Mental Health Services and finds out about James "Joker" Holmes mental illness issues.  


Oh, incidentally, the Air Force had to pay this church 230 MILLION dollars because some enlisted man failed to enter this fool's name into the database. 

The gun store that sold him the guns, not so much.


----------



## Hollie (Oct 30, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> We lock up 2 million people.  We don't have room to lock someone up for filling out a form wrong.
> We have to let old murderers out now because we don't have room for the new murderers.
> We currently spend 90 BILLION on the prison industrial complex and another 120 Billion on police.   Where is that money going to come from to arrest people who "filled out the form wrong after the gun store told them to."
> 
> ...


This is funny stuff. Yeah, its strange the left didn't lock up Hunter Biden for his lies on a firearm purchase application. 

When you say 'we' let murderers out of prison to make way for the new ones, you really mean 'we leftists'. Let's be honest, it is leftists with the criminal promoting agenda that is the source of murderers being let loose on the public while leftist DA's and prosecutors are not bothering to bring charges for myriad crimes. 









						‘We Will Not Prosecute’: Left-Wing Prosecutors, Many Backed By Soros Cash, Implement Soft-On-Crime Policies Across America
					

Left-wing prosecutors have implemented soft-on-crime approaches to criminal justice across America, in some instances making it a matter of policy not to prosecute specific crimes.




					dailycaller.com
				




Left-wing prosecutors overseeing Boston, Chicago, Dallas, Philadelphia and San Francisco have embraced soft-on-crime approaches, a Daily Caller News Foundation review found.
Several top district attorneys vowed not to prosecute specific crimes as a matter of policy.
Multiple analyses have shown left-wing prosecutors dropping or diverting more charges than their predecessors. 
Super PACs backed by billionaire George Soros are major funders for several left-wing prosecutors taking soft-on-crime approaches*. *
Guy*, *leftisexual slogans stolen from 1960's hippies such as the ''prison industrial complex'' serve what purpose?


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 30, 2022)

Hollie said:


> This is funny stuff. Yeah, its strange the left didn't lock up Hunter Biden for his lies on a firearm purchase application.



Well, probably because he didn't lie.  The question on that form is so badly worded that you'd literally have to be doing a line of coke on the form while filling it out to be lying. 

Again, we don't have the prison space to lock up people for not filling out forms properly.  



Hollie said:


> When you say 'we' let murderers out of prison to make way for the new ones, you really mean 'we leftists'. Let's be honest, it is leftists with the criminal promoting agenda that is the source of murderers being let loose on the public while leftist DA's and prosecutors are not bothering to bring charges for myriad crimes.



Uh, no, it's actually been right wing judges who had demanded we reduce the prison population.  Brown v. Plata required California to release 30,000 prisoners to keep their prison capacity at 130% (it had been at 200%) 



Hollie said:


> Left-wing prosecutors overseeing Boston, Chicago, Dallas, Philadelphia and San Francisco have embraced soft-on-crime approaches, a Daily Caller News Foundation review found.



The Daily Caller?  Really?  



Hollie said:


> Guy*, *leftisexual slogans stolen from 1960's hippies such as the ''prison industrial complex'' serve what purpose?



It accurately describes what happened in this country.  We made prison a for-profit industry.  We created the bullshit "War on Drugs" to put millions of people in prison, and companies made obscene profits off prison labor, prison services, etc.   







Hollie said:


> Several top district attorneys vowed not to prosecute specific crimes as a matter of policy.
> Multiple analyses have shown left-wing prosecutors dropping or diverting more charges than their predecessors.


Which is sensible.  Penalizing poverty is not a solution.   Now, if you send rich white kids to the same prisons you send poor black kids to, then we MIGHT have something to talk about. 



Hollie said:


> Super PACs backed by billionaire George Soros are major funders for several left-wing prosecutors taking soft-on-crime approaches*.*



Ooooh, George Soros...  The quintessential bogeyman of the right.


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 30, 2022)

2aguy said:


> She is releasing the worst gun offenders over and over again........the police catch them, she releases them.....and then files charges against the cops...you doofus.



Last time I checked, Lightfoot doesn't have any say on who is locked up. 
Now, you'd have a better argument if it were Kim Foxx... but Foxx has the same problem Alverez had.. no where to lock people up.


----------



## Hollie (Oct 30, 2022)

Well, Hunter Biden did lie. So did you. Here's a link to form 4473 which, BTW, you would have executed had you actually applied for a firearm permit.






						ATF Form 4473 - Firearms Transaction Record Revisions | Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives
					

Important Notice to All Federal Firearms Licensees ATF Form 4473, Firearms Transaction Record (Form 4473) has been revised. This page highlights the significant changes to the form. It is highly suggested that you review the entire revised form and all persons using this form must certify that...




					www.atf.gov
				




There's nothing on the form so''badly worded'' that would confuse a thinking human.


----------



## Hollie (Oct 30, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Well, probably because he didn't lie.  The question on that form is so badly worded that you'd literally have to be doing a line of coke on the form while filling it out to be lying.
> 
> Again, we don't have the prison space to lock up people for not filling out forms properly.
> 
> ...


I see your employing your usual tactic of denying the facts supplied to you.

Denial and deceit? Well, leftisexual, so I guess conspiracy theories serve your purpose.

An unattributed, unsourced graph? Really?


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 30, 2022)

Hollie said:


> Well, Hunter Biden did lie. So did you. Here's a link to form 4473 which, BTW, you would have executed had you actually applied for a firearm permit.



This is the current revised form... What was the form back then?  

21e is the item in question... 

*Are you an unlawful user of, or addicted to, marijuana or any depressant, stimulant, narcotic drug, or any other controlled substance?*

Again, the way that is phrased, only would apply if you were using THAT DAY, not "EVER".  It uses PRESENT TENSE, not PAST TENSE.   So unless he was snorting coke on the form, he could honestly answer yes, if he was in serious denial of how bad his addiction problem was (as most addicts are.)


----------



## Hollie (Oct 30, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> This is the current revised form... What was the form back then?
> 
> 21e is the item in question...
> 
> ...



Again, had you actually applied for and filled out form 4473 you would have known that the questions are not confusing or ambiguous.

I get it. You want to defend the lowllfe and liar that is Hunter Biden by claiming your, and his, cognitive skills are lacking. 

This is why we have form 4473. It's one measure to weed out those who should not own Firearms.


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 30, 2022)

Hollie said:


> Again, had you actually applied for and filled out form 4473 you would have known that the questions are not confusing or ambiguous.
> 
> I get it. You want to defend the lowllfe and liar that is Hunter Biden by claiming your, and his, cognitive skills are lacking.
> 
> This is why we have form 4473. It's one measure to weed out those who should not own Firearms.



21e seems pretty ambiguous to me. 

*Are you an unlawful user of, or addicted to, marijuana or any depressant, stimulant, narcotic drug, or any other controlled substance?*

Okay, here's the problem.   "Are you" not "have you ever been".   I once smoked a joint in 1996.  (I gagged on it, because I don't even smoke cigarettes).  Am I disqualified under question 21e or not?  I would think not, because it was 26 years ago, and I never used it again.   And marijuana isn't illegal in my state anymore, although it was then. 

In the case of Hunter, I have no idea how serious his drug use was, no matter how many fake crack pipes the Russians photoshopped into his selfies. 

So he might have honestly thought, "Hey, I'm not using right now, haven't used in some time."


----------



## Hollie (Oct 30, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> 21e seems pretty ambiguous to me.
> 
> *Are you an unlawful user of, or addicted to, marijuana or any depressant, stimulant, narcotic drug, or any other controlled substance?*
> 
> ...


I'm not surprised a simple, declarative statement leaves you completely befuddled.


----------



## hadit (Oct 30, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> My rule is that I post a link if I find something interesting.
> 
> I don't bother when a nitwit tells me "Prove the sky is blue", because that's just meant to bog down a debate making me prove every point, and frankly, why bother.
> 
> Not that I think the religious fanatics and the gun fetishists can be reasoned with.   It's pretty clear they can't.


Ah, but you didn't say the sky is blue, you said the DC snipers passed background checks they should have failed and legally bought guns they should not have been allowed to buy. That's a very specific claim, and one you should easily be able to back up, if you could. The fact that you started ducking, dodging and weaving (then moving the goal posts) when I pressed you to back up that claim tells me that you either can't back it up or you know whatever source told you that is simply not believable. You already have a reputation for making things up and dodging when pressed on them and you're only making it worse. Unless you can back it up, this will join the cloud of other emotion-laden, disproven and debunked claims you've made on here and your already miniscule credibility will take yet another massive hit.


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 30, 2022)

hadit said:


> Ah, but you didn't say the sky is blue, you said the DC snipers passed background checks they should have failed and legally bought guns they should not have been allowed to buy.



Exactly.   That is the case.  They were not allowed to buy guns (Because Mohammed was a felon and Malvo was a minor).  

That's why a jury found the gun store and the gun maker liable for millions of dollars.  









						Johnson v. Bull's Eye | Brady
					

Brady is uniting Americans against gun violence. We invite everyone who wants to end our epidemic of gun violence to take action, not sides.



					www.bradyunited.org


----------



## Hollie (Oct 30, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Exactly.   That is the case.  They were not allowed to buy guns (Because Mohammed was a felon and Malvo was a minor).
> 
> That's why a jury found the gun store and the gun maker liable for millions of dollars.
> 
> ...


Sorry to throw some facts at you but this wasn't a win for the anti-gun fetishists. The gun store, Bulls Eye, had violations of federal law. Like any other retailer, violation of federal law carries consequences.

The jury did not find either the gun store or the rifle manufacturer liable for ''millions of dollars''. There was a pre-trial settlement that identified monetary damages.

You might want to allow others to pre-screen / fact check your posts because you spend a lot of time making up your own version of invented history.


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 31, 2022)

Hollie said:


> Sorry to throw some facts at you but this wasn't a win for the anti-gun fetishists. The gun store, Bulls Eye, had violations of federal law. Like any other retailer, violation of federal law carries consequences.
> 
> The jury did not find either the gun store or the rifle manufacturer liable for ''millions of dollars''. There was a pre-trial settlement that identified monetary damages.
> 
> You might want to allow others to pre-screen / fact check your posts because you spend a lot of time making up your own version of invented history.



Did you actually read the article? 

Here, I'll give you the GOOD Part. 

_*After the trial court held that the dealer and manufacturer could be held liable for the shootings, the parties agreed to a settlement in a pre-trial mediation session: Bull’s Eye would pay $2 million to the families, and Bushmaster would pay $568,000 out of its insurance policy.*


_Um, yeah, that's "millions" of dollars, as in more than one.  The response of the Gun INdustry was to run off to Congress and insist on getting legal protections from lawsuits in the future.

You know, instead of changing their business practices.


----------



## Hollie (Oct 31, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Did you actually read the article?
> 
> Here, I'll give you the GOOD Part.
> 
> ...


Did you read what you wrote?

Here, let me help you. You wrote, ''That's why a jury found the gun store and the gun maker liable for millions of dollars.''



Did you read whet you cut and pasted? 

Here, let me help you. You cut and pasted, ''_*After the trial court held that the dealer and manufacturer could be held liable for the shootings, the parties agreed to a settlement in a pre-trial mediation session: Bull’s Eye would pay $2 million to the families, and Bushmaster would pay $568,000 out of its insurance policy''*_


You tend to be lacking in cognitive skills so I'm happy to assist. The jury did not assign liability for millions of dollars. 

Read what you cut and pasted. It will help you concentrate. 

''After the trial court held that the dealer and manufacturer could be held liable for the shootings, the parties agreed to a settlement in a pre-trial mediation session....''

That should be clear enough even for you. Try actually learning some facts... and stop making up your own.


----------



## hadit (Oct 31, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Exactly.   That is the case.  They were not allowed to buy guns (Because Mohammed was a felon and Malvo was a minor).
> 
> That's why a jury found the gun store and the gun maker liable for millions of dollars.
> 
> ...


I read that article, and nowhere did it indicate that the felons PASSED BACKGROUND CHECKS. That's what you claimed, remember?


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 31, 2022)

Hollie said:


> Did you read what you wrote?
> 
> Here, let me help you. You wrote, ''That's why a jury found the gun store and the gun maker liable for millions of dollars.''
> 
> ...



I know you are trying here.... but a jury is part of a court, and they were found liable.  You think anyone gives away 2.5MM because they had a good day in court?


----------



## JoeB131 (Oct 31, 2022)

hadit said:


> I read that article, and nowhere did it indicate that the felons PASSED BACKGROUND CHECKS. That's what you claimed, remember?



Not really.  I said they were ineligible to buy guns, and were able to buy them anyway.... 

Of course, we don't know what happened because Bulls Eye didn't have any record of the sale even though that's REQUIRED.   So we don't know if they sold them the guns under the table, or they punched it in and the name didn't come up, or they shredded the records after they found out who they sold it to. 

Bull's eye tried to claim the guns were stolen, but that was just laughable. .


----------



## Hollie (Oct 31, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> I know you are trying here.... but a jury is part of a court, and they were found liable.  You think anyone gives away 2.5MM because they had a good day in court?


I see the boat anchor of a false claim you made is tied to your ankle. 

The jury made no assessment of monetary damages. 

From the link, ''''After the trial court held that the dealer and manufacturer could be held liable for the shootings, the parties agreed to a settlement in a pre-trial mediation session....''

 You didn't understand the part about the parties agreeing to a settlement. 

The jury did not assess monetary damages. 

How is it you're so completely befuddled?


----------



## Bob Blaylock (Oct 31, 2022)

Hollie said:


> How is it you're so completely *befuddled*?



  You seem to have misspelled _“dishonest”_.


----------



## JoeB131 (Nov 1, 2022)

Hollie said:


> From the link, ''''After the trial court held that the dealer and manufacturer could be held liable for the shootings, the parties agreed to a settlement in a pre-trial mediation session....''
> 
> You didn't understand the part about the parties agreeing to a settlement.



I understood it perfectly well... the court found them liable, and they QUICKLY rushed off to get a settlement before Jury could hit them with an even higher penalty.   Probably because their behavior was so egregious - letting weapons get out of their store and not having any records.  

Then the gun industry rushed off to Congress and begged them for immunity from civil lawsuits.  

If you allowed the victims of gun violence to sue the gun industry, you would be AMAZED how fast the gun industry would clean up their act.


----------



## hadit (Nov 1, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Not really.  I said they were ineligible to buy guns, and were able to buy them anyway....
> 
> Of course, we don't know what happened because Bulls Eye didn't have any record of the sale even though that's REQUIRED.   So we don't know if they sold them the guns under the table, or they punched it in and the name didn't come up, or they shredded the records after they found out who they sold it to.
> 
> Bull's eye tried to claim the guns were stolen, but that was just laughable. .


That is factually incorrect. Go back and check the thread (I did). I said give us examples where people passed background checks with felonies on their records and bought guns. You said, "Sure, the DC snipers". Now you're trying to move the goal posts because you know you can't support your original claim. You specifically said they passed background checks they should not have been able to, and none of your subsequent claims support it. 

You guys wanted background checks for anyone buying a gun from a store and now you're claiming they don't work. Which is it?


----------



## JoeB131 (Nov 1, 2022)

hadit said:


> That is factually incorrect. Go back and check the thread (I did). I said give us examples where people passed background checks with felonies on their records and bought guns. You said, "Sure, the DC snipers".



The gun store paid 2 million dollars because the snipers bought a gun there despite being prohibited.  

They work just fine when enforced... the problem is they aren't being enforced.  There are no consequences for breaking a law, there's no point in having a law.  So when you rush back to Congress and get a law passed immunizing you from civil liability, what is your incentive to obey the law?


----------



## Hollie (Nov 1, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> The gun store paid 2 million dollars because the snipers bought a gun there despite being prohibited.
> 
> They work just fine when enforced... the problem is they aren't being enforced.  There are no consequences for breaking a law, there's no point in having a law.  So when you rush back to Congress and get a law passed immunizing you from civil liability, what is your incentive to obey the law?


Well sure. Removing penalties for criminal behavior enables criminals. 

That's a program that leftists don't understand. 









						Scores of Chicago violent crime suspects previously released on no bail in 2020
					

More than 30 individuals in Chicago accused of crimes ranging from murder, attempted murder, or violent firearm-related crimes were free on bail when they were initially charged last year.




					www.washingtonexaminer.com
				




More than 30 individuals in Chicago accused of crimes ranging from murder, attempted murder, or violent firearm-related crimes were free on bail when they were initially charged last year.




There seems to be a syndrone of cognitive impairment that afflicts leftists.


----------



## Bob Blaylock (Nov 1, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> They work just fine when enforced... the problem is they aren't being enforced. There are no consequences for breaking a law, there's no point in having a law.



  You never seem to think that about common criminals.


----------



## JoeB131 (Nov 2, 2022)

Hollie said:


> Well sure. Removing penalties for criminal behavior enables criminals.
> 
> That's a program that leftists don't understand.



We lock up 2 million people.  If putting people in jail prevented crimes, then we'd have the lowest crime rates in the industrialized world, not the highest. 



Hollie said:


> More than 30 individuals in Chicago accused of crimes ranging from murder, attempted murder, or violent firearm-related crimes were free on bail when they were initially charged last year.



Just 30? That doesn't sound like a particularly big number in a city that has thousands of crimes a year.


----------



## JoeB131 (Nov 2, 2022)

Bob Blaylock said:


> You never seem to think that about common criminals.



Common criminals have nothing to lose... this is what you don't seem to get. 

I'm not going to kill my ex-boss (as much as that would improve the world) because I have too much to lose.  I have property, wealth, affluence, a nice girlfriend.  I'd lose all of that if I went to jail.  

But if you are poor, living on the street, have no job prospects, frankly threatening someone with jail time isn't that much of a threat. This is the cycle we need to break.  

People like you and HolierThanThou sleep in your warm beds with full stomachs and have no idea what real hardship is like.  And frankly, neither do I.  

If they made you live on the street for a year, you'd probably turn into a real psychopath because you can barely contain your rage in a comfortable life.


----------



## Hollie (Nov 2, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> We lock up 2 million people.  If putting people in jail prevented crimes, then we'd have the lowest crime rates in the industrialized world, not the highest.
> 
> 
> 
> Just 30? That doesn't sound like a particularly big number in a city that has thousands of crimes a year.


The leftists have the brilliant solution of enabling criminals which, much their surprise, caused crime rates to explode. It was a brilliant idea that caused business to leave and Firearms sales to set new records as people sought to defend themselves. 

Yeah, just 30 people dead. Not a big deal. It's the cost of doing leftism.


----------



## JoeB131 (Nov 2, 2022)

Hollie said:


> The leftists have the brilliant solution of enabling criminals which, much their surprise, caused crime rates to explode. It was a brilliant idea that caused business to leave and Firearms sales to set new records as people sought to defend themselves.
> 
> Yeah, just 30 people dead. Not a big deal. It's the cost of doing leftism.



We have 19,500 gun murders a year, and you guys are fine with that. 
As opposed to most other industrialized countries, which have less than 300. 

Let's look at those gun murders in those other industrialized nations.  We'll just stick to the G-7 nations.  

Japan - 1  in 2017.   1? 
United Kingdom - 32 
Germany  - 82
Italy  - 110
France - 92
Canada -249

Incidentally, crime rates have hardly "exploded".  It went from a high of 758/100K Under Bush the Elder to a low of 361/100K under Obama.  It went up to a 10 year high under Trump, who is truly the master of fucking up everything.


----------



## 2aguy (Nov 2, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> We have 19,500 gun murders a year, and you guys are fine with that.
> As opposed to most other industrialized countries, which have less than 300.
> 
> Let's look at those gun murders in those other industrialized nations.  We'll just stick to the G-7 nations.
> ...




The Europeans murdered 15 million people in 6 years.

The Japanese murdered 3 million people in 6 years.

These are not combat deaths, these were civilians rounded up and murdered.

In the U.S. we have had 2,460,000 gun murders in the entire 246 year history of our country.

Government is the biggest murderer around, far worse than our 246 year history of gun murder......so telling us to follow the example of Europe and Japan is just stupid....you simply like government doing all the murder


----------



## JoeB131 (Nov 2, 2022)

2aguy said:


> The Europeans murdered 15 million people in 6 years.
> 
> The Japanese murdered 3 million people in 6 years.



Um, yeah, those are called wars. 

Funny, you never want to talk about the 3 million Vietnamese or 1 million Iraqis we managed to kill.


----------



## JoeB131 (Nov 2, 2022)

2aguy said:


> In the U.S. we have had 2,460,000 gun murders in the entire 246 year history of our country.
> 
> Government is the biggest murderer around, far worse than our 246 year history of gun murder......so telling us to follow the example of Europe and Japan is just stupid....you simply like government doing all the murder



Yeah, only if you don't count the genocide of Native Americans, I guess.   

When Hitler came up with the idea for Concentration Camps, he took inspiration from Native American Reservations.  

If the government decides it wants to start murdering people, there isn't going to be a whole lot anyone can do about that.. and it's no excuse for sharing my streets with gun toting maniacs  like you.


----------



## 2aguy (Nov 2, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Yeah, only if you don't count the genocide of Native Americans, I guess.
> 
> When Hitler came up with the idea for Concentration Camps, he took inspiration from Native American Reservations.
> 
> If the government decides it wants to start murdering people, there isn't going to be a whole lot anyone can do about that.. and it's no excuse for sharing my streets with gun toting maniacs  like you.




There was no genocide, and as the poster caveman pointed out, most of the disease deaths of indians happened in the 1600s...you idiot


----------



## JoeB131 (Nov 2, 2022)

2aguy said:


> There was no genocide, and as the poster caveman pointed out, most of the disease deaths of indians happened in the 1600s...you idiot



Wow... some random poster?  

Yes, what we did to Native Americans was a genocide.  Their cultures were completely destroyed.


----------



## Bob Blaylock (Nov 2, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> If the government decides it wants to start murdering people, there isn't going to be a whole lot anyone can do about that.. and it's no excuse for sharing my streets with gun toting maniacs like you.



  Has it ever occurred to you that many sane, decent people would really rather not share the streets with sociopathic criminal filth such as yourself?

  Based on your body of work here on this forum, I think it would be a very reasonable think to assume, that you are a far great threat to most people's safety and well-being, than the average gun owner.  I do not know what crimes you may have actually committed, but you never cease to take the side of criminals against the side of human beings.  Why would you do that, unless you have strong criminal inclinations yourself?


----------



## 2aguy (Nov 2, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Wow... some random poster?
> 
> Yes, what we did to Native Americans was a genocide.  Their cultures were completely destroyed.




Nope....he cited facts...you twit.

Just one example....

*Between 1492 and 1600, 90% of the indigenous populations in the Americas had died.*









						European colonizers killed so many indigenous Americans that the planet cooled down, a group of researchers concluded
					

The diseases brought to North America by Columbus and other colonizers killed 90% of indigenous populations, sparking a global cooling.




					www.businessinsider.com


----------



## JoeB131 (Nov 2, 2022)

Bob Blaylock said:


> Has it ever occurred to you that many sane, decent people would really rather not share the streets with sociopathic criminal filth such as yourself?
> 
> Based on your body of work here on this forum, I think it would be a very reasonable think to assume, that you are a far great threat to most people's safety and well-being, than the average gun owner. I do not know what crimes you may have actually committed, but you never cease to take the side of criminals against the side of human beings. Why would you do that, unless you have strong criminal inclinations yourself?



I'm not the one who wants to murder women for having abortions, buddy.  That would be you.


----------



## JoeB131 (Nov 2, 2022)

2aguy said:


> Nope....he cited facts...you twit.
> 
> Just one example....
> 
> ...



Wow, you just cited an article that called what we did to Native Americans "Genocide".


----------



## Hollie (Nov 2, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> We have 19,500 gun murders a year, and you guys are fine with that.
> As opposed to most other industrialized countries, which have less than 300.
> 
> Let's look at those gun murders in those other industrialized nations.  We'll just stick to the G-7 nations.
> ...



Why not address the leftist policies that enable criminals?

Do any of the countries noted in your post dump career criminals on the streets and enable their crimes with policies that don’t impose consequences?


----------



## Hollie (Nov 2, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> We lock up 2 million people.  If putting people in jail prevented crimes, then we'd have the lowest crime rates in the industrialized world, not the highest.
> 
> 
> 
> Just 30? That doesn't sound like a particularly big number in a city that has thousands of crimes a year.



Leftists have a solution to career criminals: Enable them.









						10 career criminals racked up nearly 500 arrests since NY bail reform began
					

Stunning statistics compiled by the NYPD show that the city’s alleged “worst of the worst” repeat offenders have been busted a total of 485 times.




					nypost.com


----------



## hadit (Nov 2, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> The gun store paid 2 million dollars because the snipers bought a gun there despite being prohibited.
> 
> They work just fine when enforced... the problem is they aren't being enforced.  There are no consequences for breaking a law, there's no point in having a law.  So when you rush back to Congress and get a law passed immunizing you from civil liability, what is your incentive to obey the law?


And yet another easily predicted dodge. You just can't bring yourself to admit you were just making it up because it sounds good, can you? You stated that they passed a background check they should have failed and can't prove it. Just admit it.

Your complaint that store owners weren't doing their job isn't addressed by passing more laws which will in turn be ignored by those determined to, wait for it, break the law.


----------



## Bob Blaylock (Nov 2, 2022)

hadit said:


> And yet another easily predicted dodge.



  Like this one?


----------



## JoeB131 (Nov 3, 2022)

Hollie said:


> Why not address the leftist policies that enable criminals?
> 
> Do any of the countries noted in your post dump career criminals on the streets and enable their crimes with policies that don’t impose consequences?



Well, let's look at that one. 
Except for Japan, most of the other G-7 countries have ended capital punishment.









						Capital punishment by country - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org
				




While we lock up 2 million people thanks to Reagan's War on Drugs, and the Prison-Industrial Complex, the European countries lock up the following numbers of people. 

Japan -  47,064
United Kingdom - 83,000
Germany - 58,000
Italy - 53,000
France - 62,000
Canada -38,000



			Incarceration Rates by Country 2022
		


So, um, no, despite people who get a woody at the thought of locking up poor people of color, prisons don't make us safer.   They make things worse. 



hadit said:


> And yet another easily predicted dodge. You just can't bring yourself to admit you were just making it up because it sounds good, can you? You stated that they passed a background check they should have failed and can't prove it. Just admit it.



They should not have passed a background check. 
They went into a gun store and bought guns anyway.
A court found that the gun store AND the gun maker were liable for failure to keep guns out of their hands. 
The Gun industry ran off to Congress to get special protections from liability laws rather than, you know, cleaning up their act. 

Because getting guns to criminals is part of their fear-based business model.


----------



## Hollie (Nov 3, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Well, let's look at that one.
> Except for Japan, most of the other G-7 countries have ended capital punishment.
> 
> 
> ...


So which of the countries in your listing refuse to bring charges for felony crimes and instead turn career criminals loose on the streets?









						REPORT: Chicago Prosecutor Dismissed Thousands Of Felony Cases Including Gun Crimes Cases | The Daily Wire
					






					www.dailywire.com
				




According to the Tribune, Foxx’s office has dismissed “thousands” of felony cases, including gun cases, sex assault cases, attacks on police officers, and even homicides. In all, “25,183 people had their felony cases dismissed” per the Trib.


“[T]he Tribune found that Foxx’s higher rates of dropped cases included people accused of murder, shooting another person, sex crimes, and attacks on police officers — as well as serious drug offenses that for decades have driven much of Chicago’s street violence,” the outlet said.


----------



## JoeB131 (Nov 4, 2022)

Hollie said:


> So which of the countries in your listing refuse to bring charges for felony crimes and instead turn career criminals loose on the streets?



Are you fucking dense?  When Japan only locks up 49,000 people, they clearly aren't locking up people for petty "felonies".  



Hollie said:


> Foxx’s office has dismissed “thousands” of felony cases, including gun cases, sex assault cases, attacks on police officers, and even homicides. In all, “25,183 people had their felony cases dismissed” per the Trib.



Uh, let's get real.   Her predecessor, Anita Alvarez, dismissed 19% of cases.   Foxx dismissed 29% of cases.    It's not that big of a jump.  Most of the cases she dismissed are petty crimes.  



Hollie said:


> “[T]he Tribune found that Foxx’s higher rates of dropped cases included people accused of murder, shooting another person, sex crimes, and attacks on police officers — as well as serious drug offenses that for decades have driven much of Chicago’s street violence,” the outlet said.



Yes, cases are dropped when there is insufficient evidence.  Hello.  









						The Kim Foxx Effect: How Prosecutions Have Changed in Cook County
					

The state’s attorney promised to transform the office. Data shows she’s dismissed thousands of felonies that would have been pursued in the past.




					www.themarshallproject.org
				




Our analysis of this data provides the first detailed look at the more than 35,000 cases that flow through Foxx’s office every year. We found that since she took office she *turned away more than 5,000 cases* that would have been pursued by previous State’s Attorney Anita Alvarez, mostly by declining to prosecute low-level shoplifting and drug offenses and by diverting more cases to alternative treatment programs.


----------



## Hollie (Nov 4, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Are you fucking dense?  When Japan only locks up 49,000 people, they clearly aren't locking up people for petty "felonies".
> 
> 
> 
> ...


The "angry leftist" thing is so cute. You have this odd notion that crime in Japan has some direct correlation with crime in the US. You simply make the ignorant comment, "hey, look over there.They jail fewer people". I could a'splain you the differences but that nonsense comparison is one of your favorites. 










						Kim Foxx defends record after surge in crime
					

Kim Foxx disputed the perception she is soft on crime.




					www.google.com
				




Just the typical pattern of leftist hacks coddling criminals.... Hello. Hello


----------



## Bob Blaylock (Nov 4, 2022)

Hollie said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > Are you fucking dense? When Japan only locks up 49,000 people, they clearly aren't locking up people for petty "felonies".
> ...



  An obvious assumption that Incel Joe is making, is that Japanese lock up fewer criminals because they have a different standard of how bad a criminal needs to be to be locked up.

  It probably hasn't occurred to him that culturally, Japanese people might just be less inclined to be criminals in the first place; that here in America, we have some cultural issues that are producing more criminals—cultural issues that come from social polices that Incel Joe vigorously promotes and supports.


----------



## hadit (Nov 4, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> They should not have passed a background check.
> They went into a gun store and bought guns anyway.
> A court found that the gun store AND the gun maker were liable for failure to keep guns out of their hands.
> The Gun industry ran off to Congress to get special protections from liability laws rather than, you know, cleaning up their act.
> ...


You should just give it up right now because you made a statement you knew you couldn't back up, and you made it because it sounded good and you thought it would help your emotional (not factual and logical) rant. Now, tell us why you think they shouldn't have passed a background check. Remember, the check only looks to see if you have prior convictions for certain types of crimes, it doesn't look to see if you're going to become a murder. So, either the store didn't run a check, it ran the check, they failed it and the store ignored the failure (why bother doing one if that's the case?) or they didn't have anything in their records that would have made them fail it. Those are the only options. You first said they passed the check (and did not present any evidence), now you say they should not have passed one (present evidence the store even ran one on them).

Your last sentence puts you completely in the wild-eyed conspiracy nut corner, but you probably think you're being perfectly sensible when you claim a company is deliberately putting weapons in the hands of criminals. You should know better, governments do that kind of stuff.


----------



## JoeB131 (Nov 4, 2022)

Hollie said:


> The "angry leftist" thing is so cute. You have this odd notion that crime in Japan has some direct correlation with crime in the US. You simply make the ignorant comment, "hey, look over there.They jail fewer people". I could a'splain you the differences but that nonsense comparison is one of your favorites.



No, what I see... and try to follow me here... is that other countries handle crime differently and get a very different result.

The definition of insanity is continuing to do the same thing and get a different result.

So what are the Europeans and Japanese doing differently.

1) They don't let average citizens own guns.
2) they don't make prison a for-profit industry that has to be constantly fed additional unwilling bodies.  They actually reserve prison for people who belong there.
3) They don't allow grinding poverty. They have comprehensive social programs.
4) They treat addiction as a medical issue, not a criminal one.
5) They don't allow their mentally ill to live on the streets, they make sure they get treatment. 

I would say that of all the G-7 countries, Japan is the most different culturally, to be sure.  But Canada is probably the closest, and frankly, they do all of the above and get pretty close to the same good results the Japanese get.  



hadit said:


> You should just give it up right now because you made a statement you knew you couldn't back up,


I backed it up with several sources AND cited a lawsuit where the gun industry was held liable for giving the snipers guns. 



hadit said:


> Your last sentence puts you completely in the wild-eyed conspiracy nut corner, but you probably think you're being perfectly sensible when you claim a company is deliberately putting weapons in the hands of criminals. You should know better, governments do that kind of stuff.



It's not a conspiracy if they are doing it in the open.


----------



## JoeB131 (Nov 4, 2022)

Bob Blaylock said:


> An obvious assumption that joe is making, is that Japanese lock up fewer criminals because they have a different standard of how bad a criminal needs to be to be locked up.
> 
> It probably hasn't occurred to him that culturally, Japanese people might just be less inclined to be criminals in the first place; that here in America, we have some cultural issues that are producing more criminals—cultural issues that come from social polices that joe vigorously promotes and supports.



See the above post, for what the Japanese do differently. 

The question you have to ask yourself is WHY the Japanese are less inclined to "be criminals".   It isn't for the reason you wingnuts say.  According to you guys, it's violent video games and not enough Jesus in your life is why we have crime.   Except the Japanese consume more violent videogames than we do, and they don't believe in Jesus.  

Now, true, the Japanese have VERY FEW murders, so they don't have a lot of murderers to lock up.  That's what happens when you don't let every idiot who wants a gun have one. 

But they also don't have a lot of thieves... because they don't allow the kind of grinding poverty we have.  Unemployment in Japan never gets above 5%.  

But let's leave Japan alone for a second.   let's pick an easier one- Canada!   

Where they have very few gun murders, and have to lock up very few people.   

Heck, I've been to Canada bunch of times... you almost forget it's not America if it weren't for the Maple Leaf flags.


----------



## hadit (Nov 4, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> I backed it up with several sources AND cited a lawsuit where the gun industry was held liable for giving the snipers guns.


No, you did NOT back up your assertion that they passed background checks that they should have failed. Here's what you did. You made the statement, got called out on it, then you moved the goal posts by making a DIFFERENT statement and backed THAT one up. Big difference and big fallacy. For once, just admit that you don't have ANY evidence that they walked into the gun store WITH prior felony convictions on their records, passed the background check and legally bought guns. You just don't have it. In fact, you're making a big deal out of them buying ILLEGAL guns, which would mean the background check probably was never run. The only way you are correct is if they bought the guns after passing the background check, which is what you claimed.


JoeB131 said:


> It's not a conspiracy if they are doing it in the open.


Oh, I'm sure you believe it like I said, and you're now confirming it.


----------



## JoeB131 (Nov 4, 2022)

hadit said:


> No, you did NOT back up your assertion that they passed background checks that they should have failed.



Nope. Totally backed it up.  They shouldn't have been allowed to buy guns. They were allowed to buy guns.   
The store couldn't prove the sale was legit and paid out 2 million dollars to the families of the people they killed. 



hadit said:


> Oh, I'm sure you believe it like I said, and you're now confirming it.



You really can't draw any other conclusion.   Most companies go out of their way to keep their products from being misused.  For instance, when real-life Walter Whites started turning allergy medicine into meth, the companies that made it put all sorts of new controls on them. 

The gun industry has fought every gun law put on the books, and the ones they can't get struck down in court they subvert in other ways. 

Why?
Because if we had gun laws like Germany or Canada, where they restrict who can get them, only a very select group would actually want them. 

The gun industry is built on fear... and you manufacture fear by arming criminals.


----------



## Hollie (Nov 4, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> No, what I see... and try to follow me here... is that other countries handle crime differently and get a very different result.
> 
> The definition of insanity is continuing to do the same thing and get a different result.
> 
> ...



If the definition of insanity is continuing to do the same thing and get a different result, you should pass that on to your leftist heroes. 

Not surprisingly, homelessness has increased substantially under Braindead Biden and leftist governors. 

This is where you will want to use your stereotypical, _I blame Trump™ _mantra but as we know, that’s just mindless scapegoating by the left. 









						Bidenvilles: America’s New Emblem of Decay
					

In French, a “bidonville” is a shantytown. A “bidon” is a large container, like the giant yellow vegetable oil bottles used to carry drinking water in developing countries. I’ve seen plenty of shantytowns in cities from India to Togo; they are an unfortunate consequence of rapid urbanization...




					www.heritage.org
				




1. Mayors in cities such as San Francisco and the District pour money into supporting the outdoor lifestyle of thousands of seriously unwell people.

2. The numbers of newly arrived and needy illegal aliens are rising all over the country. Some end up on the streets, compounding already dire problems of homelessness.

3.The way to avoid more taxpayer-funded sheltering of homeless foreigners who are here illegally is simple: Start enforcing the law.


----------



## JoeB131 (Nov 4, 2022)

Hollie said:


> If the definition of insanity is continuing to do the same thing and get a different result, you should pass that on to your leftist heroes.
> 
> Not surprisingly, homelessness has increased substantially under Braindead Biden and leftist governors.



Uh, the tent cities started appearing long before Biden or Trump. 









						Groundbreaking New Study Finds No Correlation between Growth of Homeless Encampments and Increase of Crime - Invisible People
					

Homeless encampments are not the answer to the growing homeless crisis. Neither are forceful sweeps that often incite violence against them.




					invisiblepeople.tv
				




_The United States Interagency Council on Homelessness__ acknowledges that increasing tent cities started even before the pandemic and is driven mainly by economic hardship. Interestingly enough, when mainstream media cameras turn in the direction of such encampments, rarely do they report on economic hardships. They do not reflect on the racism and classism fueling the housing crisis and ultimately forcing people onto the streets. Instead, the reporting almost always deals with a different, less desirable tent city struggle – crime.

The idea that homeless encampments cause crime has been the general assumption. The grainy footage retrieved from the media has been perceived as evidence. But now, in the wake of a groundbreaking research project, everything America believes about homeless encampments is being debunked._


----------



## Bob Blaylock (Nov 4, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> See the above post, for what the Japanese do differently.



  See post 125.


----------



## JoeB131 (Nov 4, 2022)

Hollie said:


> 1. Mayors in cities such as San Francisco and the District pour money into supporting the outdoor lifestyle of thousands of seriously unwell people.
> 
> 2. The numbers of newly arrived and needy illegal aliens are rising all over the country. Some end up on the streets, compounding already dire problems of homelessness.
> 
> 3.The way to avoid more taxpayer-funded sheltering of homeless foreigners who are here illegally is simple: Start enforcing the law.



Wow, wrong all the time.

The reason why we have a homeless problem is the government stopped building affordable housing.  Now some of this was sensible... the high rise public housing projects were a blight on the cities... 

But they didn't come up with a sensible alternative.   Instead, they just gave out vouchers, and found a lot of rental property owners aren't too keen on section 8 housing.

For instance, I recently was part of a Condo-deconversion.   The problem is that because this condo association didn't have a owner occupancy rule like most condos have, 56% of the units were rentals.   (about 130 of 230 units)  About 30 of those are Section 8 tenants, but most people didn't want them.  

And it is expected the new owners of the property are probably going to get rid of them at the first opportunity.   

We are short about 7 million low-cost rental units in this country, this is why we have a homeless problem.  









						The Rental Housing Crisis Is a Supply Problem That Needs Supply Solutions
					

Policymakers must prioritize improving housing access and affordability for low-income households through immediate and long-term investments.




					www.americanprogress.org
				




*Housing insecurity in the United States long predates the COVID-19 pandemic. *Current challenges most recently appeared in the wake of the Great Recession, which lasted from 2007 to 2009, as demand for housing increased while the supply of new housing units plummeted. People were squeezed out of the housing market, adding upward pressure on demand for rental properties. Those with deeper pockets—higher incomes and more wealth—can afford higher rents if they do not buy, leaving lower-income renters to fight over an insufficient pool of available rental housing.

*In January 2019, the United States had a shortage of 7 million affordable homes for low-income renters,1 resulting in only 37 affordable rental homes for every 100 low-income renter households*.2 Due to these market pressures, the most economically vulnerable suffered the highest housing precarity. As a result, millions of Americans have experienced eviction, homelessness, and housing insecurity, each of which leads to financial insecurity, toxic stress, poor health outcomes,3 poor academic achievement for children,4 food insecurity,5 and other negative outcomes.


----------



## JoeB131 (Nov 4, 2022)

Bob Blaylock said:


> See post 125.



Your concession is duly noted...   I mean, not that I really thought you could come up with a compelling counter-argument.


----------



## Bob Blaylock (Nov 4, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> But let's leave Japan alone for a second. let's pick an easier one- Canada!



  Canaduh has about a tenth of our population, spread out over a larger area.

  It also has a degenerate culture that is founded on cowering and groveling before the same horrendous tyrant against which we violently rebelled in order to found our nation, The  legacy of their shameful and cowardly origin still shows in their culture to this very day.  To try to compare the two is a foul insult against any true American.  Fuck you very much for even trying to make that comparison.


----------



## JoeB131 (Nov 4, 2022)

Bob Blaylock said:


> Canaduh has about a tenth of our population, spread out over a larger area.
> 
> It also has a degenerate culture that is founded on cowering and groveling before the same horrendous tyrant against which we violently rebelled in order to found our nation, The legacy of their shameful and cowardly origin still shows in their culture to this very day. To try to compare the two is a foul insult against any true American. Fuck you very much for even trying to make that comparison.



Uh, guy, our rebellion was a bunch of rich people who keep wanting to own slaves...  there was nothing noble about the American Revolution.  

What our country became later is much to be proud of, but there is still much work to be done. 

So here's a crazy idea.  How about we have the Blue States become part of Canada, and the red states can become the Republic of Gilead?


----------



## 2aguy (Nov 4, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Are you fucking dense?  When Japan only locks up 49,000 people, they clearly aren't locking up people for petty "felonies".
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Moron.....

You hate American police....yet you defend the Japanese police and criminal justice system..........a system that gives cops, prosecutors and judges powers that our cops don't have and what you lie about them having......

Japan: Gun Control and People Control

*Japan's low crime rate has almost nothing to do with gun control, and everything to do with people control. Americans, used to their own traditions of freedom, would not accept Japan's system of people controls and gun controls.*
*


Robbery in Japan is about as rare as murder. Japan's annual robbery rate is 1.8 per 100,000 inhabitants; America's is 205.4. Do the gun banners have the argument won when they point to these statistics? No, they don't. A realistic examination of Japanese culture leads to the conclusion that gun control has little, if anything, to do with Japan's low crime rates. Japan's lack of crime is more the result of the very extensive powers of the Japanese police, and the distinctive relation of the Japanese citizenry to authority. Further, none of the reasons which have made gun control succeed in Japan (in terms of disarming citizens) exist in the U.S.
*
*The Japanese criminal justice system bears more heavily on a suspect than any other system in an industrial democratic nation. One American found this out when he was arrested in Okinawa for possessing marijuana: he was interrogated for days without an attorney, and signed a confession written in Japanese that he could not read. He met his lawyer for the first time at his trial, which took 30 minutes.

Unlike in the United States, where the Miranda rule limits coercive police interrogation techniques, Japanese police and prosecutors may detain a suspect indefinitely until he confesses. (Technically, detentions are only allowed for three days, followed by ten day extensions approved by a judge, but defense attorneys rarely oppose the extension request, for fear of offending the prosecutor.) Bail is denied if it would interfere with interrogation.

Even after interrogation is completed, pretrial detention may continue on a variety of pretexts, such as preventing the defendant from destroying evidence. Criminal defense lawyers are the only people allowed to visit a detained suspect, and those meetings are strictly limited.

Partly as a result of these coercive practices, and partly as a result of the Japanese sense of shame, the confession rate is 95%.

For those few defendants who dare to go to trial, there is no jury. Since judges almost always defer to the prosecutors' judgment, the trial conviction rate for violent crime is 99.5%.
Of those convicted, 98% receive jail time.

In short, once a Japanese suspect is apprehended, the power of the prosecutor makes it very likely the suspect will go to jail. And the power of the policeman makes it quite likely that a criminal will be apprehended.

The police routinely ask "suspicious" characters to show what is in their purse or sack. In effect, the police can search almost anyone, almost anytime, because courts only rarely exclude evidence seized by the police -- even if the police acted illegally.

The most important element of police power, though, is not authority to search, but authority in the community. Like school teachers, Japanese policemen rate high in public esteem, especially in the countryside. Community leaders and role models, the police are trained in calligraphy and Haiku composition. In police per capita, Japan far outranks all other major democracies.

15,000 koban "police boxes" are located throughout the cities. Citizens go to the 24-hour-a-day boxes not only for street directions, but to complain about day-to-day problems, such as noisy neighbors, or to ask advice on how to raise children. Some of the policemen and their families live in the boxes. Police box officers clear 74.6% of all criminal cases cleared. Police box officers also spend time teaching neighborhood youth judo or calligraphy. The officers even hand- write their own newspapers, with information about crime and accidents, "stories about good deeds by children, and opinions of
residents."

The police box system contrasts sharply with the practice in America. Here, most departments adopt a policy of "stranger policing." To prevent corruption, police are frequently rotated from one neighborhood to another. But as federal judge Charles Silberman writes, "the cure is worse than the disease, for officers develop no sense of identification with their beats, hence no emotional stake in improving the quality of life there."

Thus, the U.S. citizenry does not develop a supportive relationship with the police. One poll showed that 60% of police officers believe "it is difficult to persuade people to give patrolmen the information they need."

The Japanese police do not spend all their time in the koban boxes. As the Japanese government puts it: "Home visit is one of the most important duties of officers assigned to police boxes." Making annual visits to each home in their beat, officers keep track of who lives where, and which family member to contact in case of emergency. The police also check on all gun licensees, to make sure no gun has been stolen or misused, that the gun is securely stored, and that the licensees are emotionally stable.

Gun banners might rejoice at a society where the police keep such a sharp eye on citizens' guns. But the price is that the police keep an eye on everything.

Policemen are apt to tell people reading sexually-oriented magazines to read something more worthwhile. Japan's major official year-end police report includes statistics like "Background and Motives for Girls' Sexual Misconduct." In 1985, the police determined that 37.4% of the girls had been seduced, and the rest had had sex "voluntarily." For the volunteers, 19.6% acted "out of curiosity", while for 18.1%, the motive was "liked particular boy." The year-end police report also includes sections on labor demands, and on anti-nuclear or anti-military demonstrations.*


----------



## 2aguy (Nov 4, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Are you fucking dense?  When Japan only locks up 49,000 people, they clearly aren't locking up people for petty "felonies".
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Imagine, you idiot....if our cops could search anyone, anywhere, at anytime, for any reason.......think the gang bangers would carry illegal guns?

Imagine if the criminals in democrat party controlled cities could be held until they confess...to something......and the judge would okay the coerced confession..........you doofus.

Imagine proscutors could simply hold suspects until they confess.....and judges don't stop them....

You are an idiot.....

*Unlike in the United States, where the Miranda rule limits coercive police interrogation techniques, Japanese police and prosecutors may detain a suspect indefinitely until he confesses. (Technically, detentions are only allowed for three days, followed by ten day extensions approved by a judge, but defense attorneys rarely oppose the extension request, for fear of offending the prosecutor.) Bail is denied if it would interfere with interrogation.

Even after interrogation is completed, pretrial detention may continue on a variety of pretexts, such as preventing the defendant from destroying evidence. Criminal defense lawyers are the only people allowed to visit a detained suspect, and those meetings are strictly limited.

Partly as a result of these coercive practices, and partly as a result of the Japanese sense of shame, the confession rate is 95%.

For those few defendants who dare to go to trial, there is no jury. Since judges almost always defer to the prosecutors' judgment, the trial conviction rate for violent crime is 99.5%.
Of those convicted, 98% receive jail time.

In short, once a Japanese suspect is apprehended, the power of the prosecutor makes it very likely the suspect will go to jail. And the power of the policeman makes it quite likely that a criminal will be apprehended.

The police routinely ask "suspicious" characters to show what is in their purse or sack. In effect, the police can search almost anyone, almost anytime, because courts only rarely exclude evidence seized by the police -- even if the police acted illegally.

The most important element of police power, though, is not authority to search, but authority in the community. Like school teachers, Japanese policemen rate high in public esteem, especially in the countryside. Community leaders and role models, the police are trained in calligraphy and Haiku composition. In police per capita, Japan far outranks all other major democracies.*


----------



## hadit (Nov 4, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Nope. Totally backed it up.  They shouldn't have been allowed to buy guns. They were allowed to buy guns.
> The store couldn't prove the sale was legit and paid out 2 million dollars to the families of the people they killed.


You have shown nothing that proves they even had the background checks run on them, much less that they passed, even more that they passed with prior felonies. You proved nothing except for your own strawman.


JoeB131 said:


> You really can't draw any other conclusion.   Most companies go out of their way to keep their products from being misused.  For instance, when real-life Walter Whites started turning allergy medicine into meth, the companies that made it put all sorts of new controls on them.
> 
> The gun industry has fought every gun law put on the books, and the ones they can't get struck down in court they subvert in other ways.
> 
> ...


You certainly believe it, but it's nonsense.


----------



## Hollie (Nov 5, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Wow, wrong all the time.
> 
> The reason why we have a homeless problem is the government stopped building affordable housing.  Now some of this was sensible... the high rise public housing projects were a blight on the cities...
> 
> ...



What a shame you can't rely on the government to do everything for you.


----------



## JoeB131 (Nov 5, 2022)

2aguy said:


> Moron.....
> 
> You hate American police....yet you defend the Japanese police and criminal justice system..........a system that gives cops, prosecutors and judges powers that our cops don't have and what you lie about them having......



The Japanese Police don't shoot 1000 people every year.  In fact, Japanese cops rarely pull their guns from their holsters. 

They only lock up 47,000 people compared to our 2 million.  

It seems that if Japanese police and prosecutors were as bad as you say, they'd have worse number in these metric, not better ones. 



hadit said:


> You have shown nothing that proves they even had the background checks



No, because the gun store lost the 'records' of the sale.  Just like they lost records of hundreds of other sales...  Hmmm... it almost seems like they ran a background check, and then did a sale off the books because they knew they couldn't file the paperwork.  

Which is why they paid out 2 million before the NRA bullied congress into granting immunity to gun dealers.


----------



## 2aguy (Nov 5, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> The Japanese Police don't shoot 1000 people every year.  In fact, Japanese cops rarely pull their guns from their holsters.
> 
> They only lock up 47,000 people compared to our 2 million.
> 
> ...



You hate our cops but love Japanese cops?   That is why you ate an idiot…….lets give our coos, prosecutors and judges the same powers as Japenese cops, prosecutors and judges as a starting point and then well see how you like it as they reduce crime in democrat party controlled cities …….you will shriek more than Ned Beatty in “Deliverance.”


----------



## 2aguy (Nov 5, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> The Japanese Police don't shoot 1000 people every year.  In fact, Japanese cops rarely pull their guns from their holsters.
> 
> They only lock up 47,000 people compared to our 2 million.
> 
> ...



You lying doofus….you have to make up stories to push your fantasy about these gun stores.


----------



## JoeB131 (Nov 5, 2022)

2aguy said:


> You hate our cops but love Japanese cops?



Japanese cops aren't assholes like our cops...  
Obviously, we are dealing with a VERY different culture, which is why I also discussed Canada, which also follows the kind of policies I want, and have much, much better results in the important metrics (Murder rates, number of people incarcerated, etc.)  





2aguy said:


> That is why you ate an idiot…….lets give our coos, prosecutors and judges the same powers as Japenese cops, prosecutors and judges as a starting point and then well see how you like it as they reduce crime in democrat party controlled cities …….you will shriek more than Ned Beatty in “Deliverance.”



Sure. I can go with that.. as long as we also ban private gun ownership, get rid of the Prison-industrial complex (for profit prisons), and instill widespread social welfare programs with cradle to grave benefits.   

The thing is, Japanese cops are effective not because people are terrified of them, but because they've earned the respect of their communities.  They don't go home to their little enclaves, they live in the communtities they serve.  




2aguy said:


> You lying doofus….you have to make up stories to push your fantasy about these gun stores.



I don't have to make anything up.  The point was, that they tracked down the sniper's guns to Bull's Eye Shooting Supplies in Tacoma Washington, which could provide a record of the gun they sold to Mohammed.


----------



## 2aguy (Nov 5, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Japanese cops aren't assholes like our cops...
> Obviously, we are dealing with a VERY different culture, which is why I also discussed Canada, which also follows the kind of policies I want, and have much, much better results in the important metrics (Murder rates, number of people incarcerated, etc.)
> 
> 
> ...



What a lame response……….Japanese cops can do just,about anything they want to you and you cant say shit about it because the prosecutors and judges back up the cops…..and you respond with that lame shit?

Japanes cops are effective because 


1) they have massive powers of search and arrest, and when they arrest you, you are going to be convicted and sent to prison

2) after the cops arrest you prosecutors can hold you till you confess without giving you access to a lawyer…..

3) judges dont care and back up the cops and prosecutors….

you are an idiot.

If our cops could do what japanese cops do and our prosecutors could hold suspects indefinitley until they confessed and judges sentenced criminals to years of hard prisin time, we would have a lot less crime too


----------



## JoeB131 (Nov 5, 2022)

2aguy said:


> What a lame response……….Japanese cops can do just,about anything they want to you and you cant say shit about it because the prosecutors and judges back up the cops…..and you respond with that lame shit?



If that were true, then why do the Japanese only lock up 47,000 people compared to our 2 million? 

It would seem that if Japan is this anti-justice dystopia, then they would have a lot more prisoners.  



2aguy said:


> If our cops could do what japanese cops do and our prosecutors could hold suspects indefinitley until they confessed and judges sentenced criminals to years of hard prisin time, we would have a lot less crime too



Uh, guy, we hold people indefinitely  now, if they are poor.  That's what all the screaming about the SAFE-T Act is about... cops and prosecutors actually have to justify why they are holding poor people.


----------



## Hollie (Nov 5, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> If that were true, then why do the Japanese only lock up 47,000 people compared to our 2 million?
> 
> It would seem that if Japan is this anti-justice dystopia, then they would have a lot more prisoners.
> 
> ...


As you did, dishonestly so, elsewhere, you compare numbers in Japan vs. the US when we have approxx three times the population of Japan. 

I wouldn't be so quick to flail your Pom Poms for the dangerous safe-t (criminal enabling program) as law enforcement is already sounding the alarms. 










						Illinois SAFE-T Act: Former Chicago-area police chief, prosecutor sound alarm over fast-tracked safety law
					

Critics of the Illinois SAFE-T Act, which aims to overhaul the state's criminal justice system, argue that the law will not improve public safety and may be unconstitutional.




					www.foxnews.com


----------



## hadit (Nov 5, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> No, because the gun store lost the 'records' of the sale.  Just like they lost records of hundreds of other sales...  Hmmm... it almost seems like they ran a background check, and then did a sale off the books because they knew they couldn't file the paperwork.
> 
> Which is why they paid out 2 million before the NRA bullied congress into granting immunity to gun dealers.


And we're right back where we started, with you making claims that you can't back up. Do you not realize that, if they ran the background check, it's going to be recorded whether they file anything or not? You're just reaching to come up with plausible scenarios that allow you to claim you weren't just making it all up, but you were, and you floundering now doesn't help you at all.

You claimed the DC snipers passed a background check that allowed them to buy guns. Even YOU should have realized that was stupid, because if they passed the check, the store wouldn't be liable for selling them the guns, because the sale would have been legal and the store owner would have been hiding behind it. The bottom line is, you made a claim that you can't back up, and everything you've been saying since then just strengthens the case that you are wrong. Just admit you made an emotional statement that sounded good at the time.


----------



## JoeB131 (Nov 5, 2022)

hadit said:


> And we're right back where we started,



yes, we are....  I state the sky is blue, you say, "Well sometimes the sky is gray"... whatever, dude.   Point was, these two shitheads never, ever should have gotten a gun.  Instead, they got a gun because our system of screening gun purchases is so lax.  



Hollie said:


> As you did, dishonestly so, elsewhere, you compare numbers in Japan vs. the US when we have approxx three times the population of Japan.



Which really still doesn't help the issues.

Japan has so few gun homicides that you could increase it by 1000 and it STILL wouldn't get near our numbers.

For prisoners...  they have 1/3rd our population and 1/42nd our number of prisoners. 

Heck, even fucking China has less prisoners than we do... a Communist dictatorship with five times as many people and a fuzzy grasp on human rights. 



Hollie said:


> I wouldn't be so quick to flail your Pom Poms for the dangerous safe-t (criminal enabling program) as law enforcement is already sounding the alarms.



The fact that law enforcement hates it make it great.   Tells me it's fixing the problem.


----------



## 2aguy (Nov 5, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> If that were true, then why do the Japanese only lock up 47,000 people compared to our 2 million?
> 
> It would seem that if Japan is this anti-justice dystopia, then they would have a lot more prisoners.
> 
> ...



The Japanese people are culturally more compliant and law abiding....they have not had their families destroyed by decades of democrat party policies.....for hundreds of years their culture created a submissive society......

They allow their police, prosecutors and judges to treat them like that.....

Again....you hate our police, and they don't have anywhere near the power of Japanese police....and their criminal justice system is the thing you bitch about over and over again here, and we don't even have what they have.......our people actually have Rights...theirs do not...


----------



## 2aguy (Nov 5, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> yes, we are....  I state the sky is blue, you say, "Well sometimes the sky is gray"... whatever, dude.   Point was, these two shitheads never, ever should have gotten a gun.  Instead, they got a gun because our system of screening gun purchases is so lax.
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Moron...you could give every Japanese citizen a gun and they wouldn't shoot each other with them.....even their Yakuza stopped shooting each other after they made the tiniest gun offense a real, 15 year sentence.....

They stopped gun crime by locking up gun criminals for a minimum of 15 years for simple possession of a gun, and life in prison for firing the weapon, let alone actually hitting someone...you doofus.

A comparison.....how Japan actually treats criminals with funs vs. how democrats here in the U.S. treat criminals with multiple felonies....

Japan’s gun control laws so strict the Yakuza turn to toy pistols



*Ryo Fujiwara, long-time writer on yakuza affairs and author of the book, The Three Yamaguchi-Gumi, says that the punishment for using a gun in a gang war or in a crime is now so heavy that most yakuza avoid their use at all – unless it is for an assassination.*

*“In a hit, whoever fires the gun, or is made to take responsibility for firing the gun, has to pretty much be willing to go to jail for the rest of their life. That’s a big decision. The repercussions are big, too. No one wants to claim responsibility for such acts – the gang office might actually get shut-down.”



The gang typically also has to support the family of the hit-man while he is in prison, which is also a financial burden for the organization.*





*Japan’s Firearms and Swords Control Laws make it a crime to illegally possess a gun, with a punishment of jail time of up to 10 years.*



*Illegal possession more than one gun, the penalty goes up to 15 years in prison. If you own a gun and matching ammunition, that’s another charge and a heavier penalty. The most severe penalty is for the act of discharging a gun in a train, on a bus, or most public spaces, which can result in a life sentence.*



*-----

A low-ranking member of the Kobe-Yamaguchi-gumi put it this way: “All of the smart guys got rid of their guns a long-time ago. The penalties are way too high. You get life in prison if you just fire a gun. That’s not fun.”



--A police officer in Osaka’s Organized Crime Control Division, speaking on background noted, “In the de facto world of law enforcement, when a yakuza fires a gun, we’re almost always going to charge them with attempted murder—which is a very heavy crime and serious time in ‘the pig-house’ (jail). Guns kill people, so if you use one, intent to kill is right there. Toy guns? Not so much.”

He added, “Unless you’re an old gangster and wanting to stay in jail until you die because you got nowhere else to go, you don’t use a gun. The crime isn’t worth the time in jail.”*





*In the U.S....how democrats deal with actual gun criminals....*



*Davis was originally arrested and charged with carrying a concealed weapon without a license in Detroit, and the judge assigned to his case ordered that Davis wear a GPS monitoring device as a condition of his bond.



 There’s nothing unusual about that, but what’s raising eyebrows, particularly among local police, is what happened after prosecutors repeatedly told the judge that Davis was violating the terms of his bond, including allegedly taking part in a drive-by shooting.

-----





So, by the time Davis appeared before the judge in late May, he’d already had five alleged bond violations and two arrests for separate incidents, including the drive-by shooting. 





The judge could have ordered Davis’ bond revoked and remanded him into custody until his trial, but instead Hathaway took a much different approach: continuing his bond but ordering the removal of the GPS monitoring device that had alerted authorities to his alleged lawbreaking.

----

As you might have guessed, that didn’t stop Davis’ alleged criminal activity. About a month later police, who were now paying attention to Davis’ social media feeds, watched on Instagram as Davis held a gun and allegedly threatened violence against other individuals.



http://[URL='https://bearingarms.co...e-study-in-not-enforcing-existing-laws-n60124[/URL]



The two illegal alien mass public shooters given 15,000 dollars bond...



Brietbart....



On Wednesday, as Breitbart News reported, the Richmond Police Department announced the arrests of Guatemalan nationals 52-year-old illegal alien Julio Alvardo Dubon and 38-year-old illegal alien Rolman Balacarcel Ac for allegedly plotting a mass shooting at the city’s July 4th celebration.

---*

The American citizen who thwarted the mass shooting plot called police after he heard a man discussing a plan to “shoot up” Richmond’s annual Fourth of July celebration.



That is when police raided Dubon’s residence to find two rifles, a handgun, and 223 rounds of ammunition. Dubon was subsequently charged with being in possession of a firearm as an alien to the U.S.

---

Dubon has been booked into the Richmond City Jail on a $15,000 bail. Though police said Ac was also booked, his records do not appear in the city jail’s records.

*

Illegal Aliens Plotted July 4th Mass Shooting, Thwarted by 'Hero Citizen'*

*

https://www.powerlineblog.com/archives/2022/07/4th-of-july-shootout-averted.php*


----------



## hadit (Nov 5, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> yes, we are....  I state the sky is blue, you say, "Well sometimes the sky is gray"... whatever, dude.   Point was, these two shitheads never, ever should have gotten a gun.  Instead, they got a gun because our system of screening gun purchases is so lax.


Again, wrong. 

You: "The sky in Kenosha at 3:00 pm yesterday was a brilliant sapphire blue". 
Me: I check the weather records for yesterday in Kenosha and find that they were socked in with rain all day. I say, "You are wrong". 
You:, "No, I'm not wrong. The sky should always be blue. The meteorologist is lying". 
Me: "Prove that the sky in Kenosha at 3:00 pm yesterday was a brilliant sapphire blue".
You: "The meteorologist didn't actually look at the sky".
Me: "And here we go again".

You made a specific claim that is either true or not. You didn't know it to be true but can't admit that. That's the bottom line. And the system isn't lax, sometimes the people involved in the system are lax, and that will ALWAYS be the case. You can lock it down to the point a kid gets hauled out of school because he ate his Pop-Tart into the shape of an "L" and pointed it at another kid, but criminals are still going to get guns and you're still going to complain restrictions aren't tight enough. Here's reality, the genie is out of the bottle and criminals are ALWAYS going to get guns. You just want to prevent non-criminals from getting them.


----------



## JoeB131 (Nov 5, 2022)

2aguy said:


> The Japanese people are culturally more compliant and law abiding....they have not had their families destroyed by decades of democrat party policies.....for hundreds of years their culture created a submissive society......



Uh, no, guy, the Japanese don't have to deal with the wealth disparity and lack of social programs that destroy crime.  If we REALLY had Democratic policies, we be more like Japan and Europe.  Who do you think set uptheir systems after World War II?  Yup, it was all the New Dealers who found they could get stuff done when they didn't have to deal with Republicans and Southern Conservatives. 



2aguy said:


> Again....you hate our police, and they don't have anywhere near the power of Japanese police....and their criminal justice system is the thing you bitch about over and over again here, and we don't even have what they have.......our people actually have Rights...theirs do not...



The Japanese have just as many rights as we have....  But funny, with all this power, their cops rarely shoot people.  Not sure how that is, if they had unlimited power, you'd think they'd be shooting anyone who looked at them funny. 

It's not the power that police have that's the issue, it's the way that it is abused.  

America cops shoot 1000 people a year.  And yes, some of that is people like Chauvin or Van Dyke or Loehman who never should have been given a badge or a gun.  But a lot of it cops who get trigger happy because you never know who is going to whip out a gun and start shooting.  

Japanese cops CAN be more restrained, because they know most people they stop for traffic violations or petty theft aren't going to whip out a gun.  



2aguy said:


> Moron...you could give every Japanese citizen a gun and they wouldn't shoot each other with them.....even their Yakuza stopped shooting each other after they made the tiniest gun offense a real, 15 year sentence.....



Moron, organized crime rarely shoot each other in this country.    Shooting people usually brings unwanted federal attention.  Which is why the last big mafia war was in the 1990's.


----------



## JoeB131 (Nov 5, 2022)

hadit said:


> You made a specific claim that is either true or not. You didn't know it to be true but can't admit that.



Wow, you spent a lot of time writing nothing.  

WE KNOW what happened.  There was a court finding and everything.  The gun store sold guns to guys who had no business owning guns.  Because they know usually, the enforcement is so lax, they don't have to worry about checking the registry.


----------



## hadit (Nov 5, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Wow, you spent a lot of time writing nothing.
> 
> WE KNOW what happened.  There was a court finding and everything.  The gun store sold guns to guys who had no business owning guns.  Because they know usually, the enforcement is so lax, they don't have to worry about checking the registry.


I spent the time necessary to totally shred any and all defenses you threw into the air, hoping against hope something would provide you cover. You still can't just admit you made it up.


----------



## Hollie (Nov 5, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Uh, no, guy, the Japanese don't have to deal with the wealth disparity and lack of social programs that destroy crime.  If we REALLY had Democratic policies, we be more like Japan and Europe.  Who do you think set uptheir systems after World War II?  Yup, it was all the New Dealers who found they could get stuff done when they didn't have to deal with Republicans and Southern Conservatives.
> 
> 
> 
> ...



It's hilarious when ideologues rattle on about their socialist / democratic totalitarian utopias with slogans such as ''if we REALLY had Democratic policies, we be more like Japan and Europe.''

Just remember that Chairman Bungling Joe and Politburo Nancy have the vision for REAL democratic authoritarianism which will make your lives better with all the failed policies they're pimping now.  But this time.... this time, it will be that REAL utopia.


I'm afraid the little Mussolini wannabes always try to make the case that if we click the heels on our ruby red slippers together, we too can be a part of that happy-fun socialist / authoritarian wonderland. Ya' just gotta believe.


----------



## JoeB131 (Nov 6, 2022)

hadit said:


> spent the time necessary to totally shred any and all defenses



You mean you engaged in a lot of semantics to try to distract from two people who had no business buying a gun being able to walk into a gun store and buy a gun.  

Which they then murdered 17 people with. 

And the gun store paid out 2 million dollars.


----------



## JoeB131 (Nov 6, 2022)

Hollie said:


> It's hilarious when ideologues rattle on about their socialist / democratic totalitarian utopias with slogans such as ''if we REALLY had Democratic policies, we be more like Japan and Europe.''
> 
> Just remember that Chairman Bungling Joe and Politburo Nancy have the vision for REAL democratic authoritarianism which will make your lives better with all the failed policies they're pimping now. But this time.... this time, it will be that REAL utopia.



Except we had that utopia after WWII.  33% of the workforce was unionized. People made decent wages, the rich paid their fair share, government had enough money to do both social programs and massive infrastructure.  We even started to make real progress on Race Relations. 

And then Republicans, starting with Tricky Dick, proceeded to fuck it up by playing on the irrational fears of straight white people.  

So not surprisingly, we saw THIS happen.


----------



## Hollie (Nov 6, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Except we had that utopia after WWII.  33% of the workforce was unionized. People made decent wages, the rich paid their fair share, government had enough money to do both social programs and massive infrastructure.  We even started to make real progress on Race Relations.
> 
> And then Republicans, starting with Tricky Dick, proceeded to fuck it up by playing on the irrational fears of straight white people.
> 
> ...



That graph is the usual, phony misrepresentation one would expect from a leftist hack.

Among your many other failures you failed to identify the Democrats; Lyndon Johnson, Carter, Clinton and Obummer who were the politburo mouthpieces during the timeframe represented on your silly graph.

I couldn't help but notice the source you dug up, ''the rise and consequences of inequality''. Was that something actually authored by Joy Reid?


----------



## JoeB131 (Nov 6, 2022)

Hollie said:


> That graph is the usual, phony misrepresentation one would expect from a leftist hack.
> 
> Among your many other failures you failed to identify the Democrats; *Lyndon Johnson*, Carter, Clinton and Obummer who were the politburo mouthpieces during the timeframe represented on your silly graph.



Um, the chart starts at 1970.  LBJ stopped being president in 1969.   So in the 52 years of the Decline, Republicans were in charge for 32 of them.  

But it's not so much the time as it is the policy, particularly the policy of Reagan to back the investor class over the working class and bust the unions in the 1980's.


----------



## Hollie (Nov 6, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Um, the chart starts at 1970.  LBJ stopped being president in 1969.   So in the 52 years of the Decline, Republicans were in charge for 32 of them.
> 
> But it's not so much the time as it is the policy, particularly the policy of Reagan to back the investor class over the working class and bust the unions in the 1980's.


Um, policies of presidents don't just stop the moment a calendar date changes. 

You know that. The leftisr mantra of ''I Blame Trump'' continues today. 

As the brain dead left promotes it, every failure, pratfall, disaster and ineptitude of Biden and the dems is met with, ''I Blame Trump''.


----------



## Bob Blaylock (Nov 6, 2022)

Hollie said:


> Um, policies of presidents don't just stop the moment a calendar date changes.
> You know that. The leftisr mantra of ''I Blame Trump'' continues today.
> As the brain dead left promotes it, every failure, pratfall, disaster and ineptitude of Biden and the dems is met with, ''I Blame Trump''.



  It's not the first time we've seen this.

  Don't forget that throughout his entire two terms, Obama persisted in blaming his predecessor for nearly all of his own failures as President.

  And after that, he tried to claim credit for most of the accomplishments of his successor.


----------



## hadit (Nov 6, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> You mean you engaged in a lot of semantics to try to distract from two people who had no business buying a gun being able to walk into a gun store and buy a gun.
> 
> Which they then murdered 17 people with.
> 
> And the gun store paid out 2 million dollars.


Uh, no. You made the claim that they passed a background check and should not have. That wasn't me, that was you. Then you started the semantics game to desperately try to distract from that reality.


----------



## JoeB131 (Nov 7, 2022)

Hollie said:


> Um, policies of presidents don't just stop the moment a calendar date changes.
> 
> You know that. The leftisr mantra of ''I Blame Trump'' continues today.
> 
> As the brain dead left promotes it, every failure, pratfall, disaster and ineptitude of Biden and the dems is met with, ''I Blame Trump''.



Because you can draw a straight line from every problem we have to something Trump did.   Inflation?  Trump's refusal to raise interest rates to keep unemployment low, even when the country is facing a labor shortage.  Further complicating that was his immigration policies that made it harder for companies to recruit off-shore talent.  (A young lady I worked with from India had to jump through all sorts of hoops to get here and then stay here.) 

Combine that with his half-ass Covid response, and his unncessary trade war with China, and the 8 Trillion in new debt he ran up, and you can see how inflation happened. 

NOW- What did LBJ do specifically to undermine the Middle Class?   Really, nothing.  in fact, he was the last in a long line of Presidents who strengthened the middle class by taking the side of the working man over the investor class.  That is what changed with Tricky Dick.


----------



## JoeB131 (Nov 7, 2022)

Bob Blaylock said:


> It's not the first time we've seen this.
> 
> Don't forget that throughout his entire two terms, Obama persisted in blaming his predecessor for nearly all of his own failures as President.
> 
> And after that, he tried to claim credit for most of the accomplishments of his successor



Um, under Obama, Unemployment went from 10% to 4.7%.   Frankly, every economic metric improved under Obama. 

Trump, on the other hand, was the first president since Hoover to post a net jobs loss.  

If Obama were a white Republican, you'd be putting him on Mount Rushmore.


----------



## Hollie (Nov 7, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Because you can draw a straight line from every problem we have to something Trump did.   Inflation?  Trump's refusal to raise interest rates to keep unemployment low, even when the country is facing a labor shortage.  Further complicating that was his immigration policies that made it harder for companies to recruit off-shore talent.  (A young lady I worked with from India had to jump through all sorts of hoops to get here and then stay here.)
> 
> Combine that with his half-ass Covid response, and his unncessary trade war with China, and the 8 Trillion in new debt he ran up, and you can see how inflation happened.
> 
> NOW- What did LBJ do specifically to undermine the Middle Class?   Really, nothing.  in fact, he was the last in a long line of Presidents who strengthened the middle class by taking the side of the working man over the investor class.  That is what changed with Tricky Dick.



I think your TDS is getting even more debilitating. 

There was a strong, vibrant economy under president Trump. It took less than two years for the dems to push the economy into recession. 

As is typical, leftist policy, you simply make up numbers. Debt increased by $7.2 trillion during Trump’s time in office. A substantial portion of that was connected to the Wuhan virus.  Debt incressed by $8.1 trillion during the eight years of former President Obama and Vice President Biden.

So, we have the leftist narrative again as a total fraud. 









						Joe Biden is the king of debt and deficits
					

Imagine someone close to you has a drinking problem. Night after night, he goes out to the bars on wild binges, chugging down 10 to 12 beers a night. But then, in a supreme effort to reform himself, the drunkard cuts his consumption down to a six-pack every night.




					www.washingtonexaminer.com
				




Biden has _already_ added just shy of an extra $900 billion to the federal credit in 2020 and 2021. If Biden had simply done nothing and spent his afternoons playing Scrabble with first lady Jill Biden in the Oval Office, our national debt burden would be much lower.

Instead, Biden swooped into office, and even though Trump, in his final weeks, with Congress, enacted a $1 trillion COVID-19 relief bill that hadn’t even been spent yet, Biden called for his $1.9 trillion American Rescue Plan. That was merely a massive bailout of blue states that had kept their businesses locked down for nearly a year.

Then came another $1 trillion for the scam “infrastructure bill,” which was really the Green New Deal in disguise. It then was followed by a $600 billion corporate welfare bill for microchip manufacturers. Some Republican lawmakers voted for both measures. But it was Democrats only supporting the Biden administration’s efforts to bail out student loan borrowers to the tune of $500 billion.


----------



## JoeB131 (Nov 7, 2022)

Hollie said:


> I think your TDS is getting even more debilitating.
> 
> There was a strong, vibrant economy under president Trump. It took less than two years for the dems to push the economy into recession.



Really? 14% unemployment is vibrant by you?   Trump was the first president since Herbert Hoover to post a net jobs loss.  

Biden, on the other hand, has created 8 million jobs in less than two years.  



Hollie said:


> Biden has _already_ added just shy of an extra $900 billion to the federal credit in *2020 and 2021*. If Biden had simply done nothing and spent his afternoons playing Scrabble with first lady Jill Biden in the Oval Office, our national debt burden would be much lower.



 Biden wasn't president in 2020.  

I'm not sure why you keep pretending he was.


----------



## Hollie (Nov 7, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Really? 14% unemployment is vibrant by you?   Trump was the first president since Herbert Hoover to post a net jobs loss.
> 
> Biden, on the other hand, has created 8 million jobs in less than two years.
> 
> ...



I'm fine with fact checking leftists because they tend to be dishonest.









						Trump's average unemployment rate is the lowest in recorded history
					

President Trump starts off 2020 having presided over a lower average unemployment rate than any president at a comparable point in office in recorded history.




					www.washingtonexaminer.com
				




President Trump starts off 2020 having presided over a lower average unemployment rate than any president at a comparable point in office in recorded history.

On Friday, the Bureau of Labor Statistics reported that the unemployment rate held steady at a historically low 3.5% in December. Since February 2017, Trump's first full month in office, the monthly unemployment rate has averaged 3.9%. No prior president has averaged less than 4% over the first 35 months of his presidency. The closest was Dwight Eisenhower, when the rate averaged 4.3% between February 1953 and December 1955.





Biden on the other hand has crashed the economy with recession and historic debt levels. 






						Biden Has Increased Debt $33,521 Per Income Tax Payer
					

Biden's plan for the debt is to continue increasing it by more than $1 trillion per year.




					cnsnews.com
				




President Joe Biden has been in office a little more than 21 months, but during that brief period he has managed to increase the federal debt by more than $3.4 trillion.

On Jan. 20, 2021, the day Biden was inaugurated, the total federal debt was $27,751,896,236,414.77, according to the Treasury.

On Oct. 31, 2022, the latest day for which the numbers have been published, the total federal debt was $31,238,301,149,359.52.

That equals an increase of $3,486,404,912,944.75.


----------



## JoeB131 (Nov 7, 2022)

Hollie said:


> I'm fine with fact checking leftists because they tend to be dishonest.



Really, so let's get this straight.  Your source was from JANUARY 2020.   You know, months before Unemployment jumped to 15% and Trump got the dubious distinction of being the first president to lose jobs since Herbert Hoover.  



Hollie said:


> President Joe Biden has been in office a little more than 21 months, but during that brief period he has managed to increase the federal debt by more than $3.4 trillion.



You mean compared to the 8 Trillion Trump ran up?


----------



## Hollie (Nov 7, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Really, so let's get this straight.  Your source was from JANUARY 2020.   You know, months before Unemployment jumped to 15% and Trump got the dubious distinction of being the first president to lose jobs since Herbert Hoover.
> 
> 
> 
> You mean compared to the 8 Trillion Trump ran up?


Really, let’s get this straight. Unemployment surged as a result of the Wuhan virus. The Trump presidency was an economic success. 









						It's official: The Covid recession lasted just two months, the shortest in U.S. history
					

The Covid-19 recession is in the books as the shortest in U.S. history, the National Bureau of Economic Research said Monday.




					www.cnbc.com
				




The Covid-19 recession ended in April 2020, the National Bureau of Economic Research said Monday.
Biden inherited a rapidly recovering economy and this was occurring before the vaccines and rollout which Biden also inherited.

You mean you don’t want to address the Biden / dem recession. Remarkable how in two years of Biden / dems, they managed to completely tank the economy.


----------



## Bob Blaylock (Nov 7, 2022)

Hollie said:


> Really, let’s get this straight. Unemployment surged as a result of the Wuhan virus.



  No, it most certainly did not.

  It happened because of unprecedented corruption and abuses of power on the part of government.  The virus was only an excuse, not the cause.


----------



## Hollie (Nov 8, 2022)

Bob Blaylock said:


> No, it most certainly did not.
> 
> It happened because of unprecedented corruption and abuses of power on the part of government.  The virus was only an excuse, not the cause.


I definitely agree about the abuses of power. There were no better examples of Democrat mini-tyrants than the various governors, Fauci, Weingarten, Walensky and enablers in the Biden administration who conspired to destroy this country.


----------



## JoeB131 (Nov 8, 2022)

Hollie said:


> Really, let’s get this straight. Unemployment surged as a result of the Wuhan virus. The Trump presidency was an economic success.



Okay, the virus that Trump lied about how serious it was, told people it would be over by Easter, continually undermined efforts to contain it, etc.   That's why unemployment surged, because Trump mishandled the virus. 



Hollie said:


> Biden inherited a rapidly recovering economy and this was occurring before the vaccines and rollout which Biden also inherited.



Except it wasn't rapidly recovering.   December 2020 posted a net jobs loss as employers were still firing people to balance their books.  

Unemployment was at 6% when Trump sleazed his way out of office.  



Bob Blaylock said:


> No, it most certainly did not.
> 
> It happened because of unprecedented corruption and abuses of power on the part of government. The virus was only an excuse, not the cause.



I love how you guys pretend someone else was in charge of government in 2020.


----------



## Bob Blaylock (Nov 8, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Bob Blaylock said:
> 
> 
> > Hollie said:
> ...



  This nation is not a dictatorship.  At least it's not supposed to be.

  As much as you want to blame Donald Trump, it was corrupt Democraps, mostly governors, who were responsible for nearly all of the abuses, perpetrated using the fake _“pandemic”_ as an excuse, that trashed our economy, destroyed our freedoms, and in several other ways causes serious harm to us, as individuals and as a society.

  Your side totally owns this, all of it.


----------



## JoeB131 (Nov 8, 2022)

Bob Blaylock said:


> This nation is not a dictatorship. At least it's not supposed to be.



No, but I do expect my leaders to take appropriate actions. 

I could just imagine you during WWII.  "What, they want to ration gasoline and sugar?  And they want us to use blackout curtains to the Axis U-boats can't guide by coastal lights? And they are doing recycling drives?"  





Bob Blaylock said:


> As much as you want to blame Donald Trump, it was corrupt Democraps, mostly governors, who were responsible for nearly all of the abuses, perpetrated using the fake _“pandemic”_ as an excuse, that trashed our economy, destroyed our freedoms, and in several other ways causes serious harm to us, as individuals and as a society.



Quite the contrary, the governors had to pick up the slack because Trump failed so badly and didn't provide national leadership.  I would argue if he had taken the kind of leadership he should have, he probably would have won a second term.   But being a malignant narcissist that he is, he couldn't conceive of why Covid was bad until he caught it.


----------



## Bob Blaylock (Nov 8, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Quite the contrary, the governors had to pick up the slack because Trump failed so badly and didn't provide national leadership. I would argue if he had taken the kind of leadership he should have, he probably would have won a second term. But being a malignant narcissist that he is, he couldn't conceive of why Covid was bad until he caught it.



  So, your argument is that state and local Democraps *HAD* to engage in outrageous, unjustifiable, and illegal abuses of power, because the federal government wasn't doing so to your satisfaction.

  And you wonder why nobody on this forum takes you seriously.


----------



## JoeB131 (Nov 9, 2022)

Bob Blaylock said:


> So, your argument is that state and local Democraps *HAD* to engage in outrageous, unjustifiable, and illegal abuses of power, because the federal government wasn't doing so to your satisfaction.



Yes, when you have 4000 people dying a day, that's major league incomptence. 

We have had a total of 1 million covid deaths because we turned disease control into cultural issue.  

Japan had 43,000 covid deaths because they took this seriously.


----------



## Hollie (Nov 9, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Yes, when you have 4000 people dying a day, that's major league incomptence.
> 
> We have had a total of 1 million covid deaths because we turned disease control into cultural issue.
> 
> Japan had 43,000 covid deaths because they took this seriously.



You can attribute the deaths and Covid cultural issue to leftist incompetence.


----------



## JoeB131 (Nov 9, 2022)

Hollie said:


> You can attribute the deaths and Covid cultural issue to leftist incompetence.



You can, if you ignore objective reality.

Trump threw out the Pandemic response plan.
He disbanded the Pandemic Response team. 
He ignored warnings as early as December that Covid was an issue in China. 
He mocked mask wearing and held mass spreader events. 

Covid was worse in the US than any other country, and you can attribute that completely to Trump's lack of leadership.


----------



## Jarlaxle (Nov 10, 2022)

2aguy said:


> The Europeans murdered 15 million people in 6 years.
> 
> The Japanese murdered 3 million people in 6 years.
> 
> ...



Joey salivates at the thought of having people he does not like rounded up and killed.



Bob Blaylock said:


> Has it ever occurred to you that many sane, decent people would really rather not share the streets with sociopathic criminal filth such as yourself?
> 
> Based on your body of work here on this forum, I think it would be a very reasonable think to assume, that you are a far great threat to most people's safety and well-being, than the average gun owner.  I do not know what crimes you may have actually committed, but you never cease to take the side of criminals against the side of human beings.  Why would you do that, unless you have strong criminal inclinations yourself?



He wants people he doesn't like killed.


----------



## Hollie (Nov 10, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> You can, if you ignore objective reality.
> 
> Trump threw out the Pandemic response plan.
> He disbanded the Pandemic Response team.
> ...



 Biden, had no Covid response plan. He did everything wrong. That's what he does. Under his direction, the CDC was controlled by the  teachers union which extorted billions of dollars from the taxpayers. 

Covid was deadly in the US because of democrats. It was Trump who made vaccines possible. It was democrats who stated they would refuse the vaccine if directed by Trump. 

Mask wearing is frequently mocked because the cloth masks pimped by democrats are useless.


----------



## Jarlaxle (Nov 10, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Are you fucking dense?  When Japan only locks up 49,000 people, they clearly aren't locking up people for petty "felonies".



It's almost like Japan has a completely different culture! It's almost like Japanese people have a multi-century cultural history of near-unquestioning obedience to authority.



> Uh, let's get real.   Her predecessor, Anita Alvarez, dismissed 19% of cases.   Foxx dismissed 29% of cases.    It's not that big of a jump.  Most of the cases she dismissed are petty crimes.



I get that you aren't too bright, but 19% to 29% is a big jump. (It's 52%.)



hadit said:


> You should just give it up right now because you made a statement you knew you couldn't back up, and you made it because it sounded good and you thought it would help your emotional (not factual and logical) rant. Now, tell us why you think they shouldn't have passed a background check. Remember, the check only looks to see if you have prior convictions for certain types of crimes, it doesn't look to see if you're going to become a murder. So, either the store didn't run a check, it ran the check, they failed it and the store ignored the failure (why bother doing one if that's the case?) or they didn't have anything in their records that would have made them fail it. Those are the only options. You first said they passed the check (and did not present any evidence), now you say they should not have passed one (present evidence the store even ran one on them).
> 
> Your last sentence puts you completely in the wild-eyed conspiracy nut corner, but you probably think you're being perfectly sensible when you claim a company is deliberately putting weapons in the hands of criminals. You should know better, governments do that kind of stuff.



Joey does not care. Joey is a disciple of Goebbels, and favors The Big Lie. He just keeps repeating it until it is accepted as fact.


----------



## Jarlaxle (Nov 10, 2022)

hadit said:


> I spent the time necessary to totally shred any and all defenses you threw into the air, hoping against hope something would provide you cover. You still can't just admit you made it up.



That's normal for Joey: he flames, trolls, lies, yells, and screams. When called on it, he doubles down and filibusters until people get sick of replying to the same tired old shit for the thirtieth time. That's why he spends every waking moment on this site, making 36 posts *per day, every day, 365 days a year, for ELEVEN YEARS!* His entire life is trolling this site.



hadit said:


> Uh, no. You made the claim that they passed a background check and should not have. That wasn't me, that was you. Then you started the semantics game to desperately try to distract from that reality.



Normal. Joey is as predictable-and as useful-as a broken clock.



Hollie said:


> You can attribute the deaths and Covid cultural issue to leftist incompetence.



And the fact that the official death numbers are as real as a three-dollar bill.


----------



## JoeB131 (Nov 10, 2022)

Hollie said:


> Biden, had no Covid response plan. He did everything wrong. That's what he does. Under his direction, the CDC was controlled by the teachers union which extorted billions of dollars from the taxpayers.



Biden had a great plan, and he had to argue with the flat earthers every step of the way to implement it. 



Hollie said:


> Covid was deadly in the US because of democrats. It was Trump who made vaccines possible. It was democrats who stated they would refuse the vaccine if directed by Trump.


Covid was deadly because Trump let it spread, while other nations did a pretty good job of containing it.  

Trump's distribution plan for the vaccines other people developed was a complete failure, which is why Biden had to revamp it.


----------



## JoeB131 (Nov 10, 2022)

Jarlaxle said:


> It's almost like Japan has a completely different culture! It's almost like Japanese people have a multi-century cultural history of near-unquestioning obedience to authority.



You mean they did the sensible thing, and didn't let a disease run rampant to please a man-child in the white house.  

I'm not sure what kind of idiot thinks the ability to spread a deadly disease constitutes freedom.  Normally, I'd consider that "Natural Selection", but not enough of you died. 



Jarlaxle said:


> I get that you aren't too bright, but 19% to 29% is a big jump. (It's 52%.)


Not really.  Point was both them dismissed a lot of cases...


----------



## Jarlaxle (Nov 11, 2022)

It's a fucking chest cold. It is not ebola. It is not smallpox. It is not zombie plague. Covid is a bad cold. Yes, for people with serious health problems, it can be fatal...but so can just about anything for someone with serious health problems. You didn't miss a paycheck, so you don't care how many people's lives were ruined by the shutdowns. I know eight people DEAD from the shutdowns, and several others financially ruined.


----------



## JoeB131 (Nov 11, 2022)

Jarlaxle said:


> It's a fucking chest cold. It is not ebola. It is not smallpox. It is not zombie plague. Covid is a bad cold. Yes, for people with serious health problems, it can be fatal...but so can just about anything for someone with serious health problems. You didn't miss a paycheck, so you don't care how many people's lives were ruined by the shutdowns. I know eight people DEAD from the shutdowns, and several others financially ruined.



I actually was off work for 13 weeks during TRUMP RECESSION, because of Covid.   Fortunately, I had some income from my side business, and because I knew Trump was going to fuck up the economy eventually (as he did), I spent most of the previous three years getting my economic house in order - paying down all my credit cards and getting rid of other big loans, so I was only carrying my mortgage with a decent amount of money in the bank.  

Yes, Covid can be bad if you have other issues, but most Americans do, because we are generally an unhealthy people.


----------



## Hollie (Nov 11, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Biden had a great plan, and he had to argue with the flat earthers every step of the way to implement it.
> 
> 
> Covid was deadly because Trump let it spread, while other nations did a pretty good job of containing it.
> ...


Biden did have a great plan or at least his handlers did.

He furthered the spread of the Wuhan virus which Trump had a plan to manage,, recession, inflation, national debt, crashing 401k’s, poverty, homelessness… the list of Biden / dem failures goes on. 

The dems have a new plan. Fetterman for President in ‘24.


----------



## JoeB131 (Nov 11, 2022)

Hollie said:


> Biden did have a great plan or at least his handlers did.
> 
> He furthered the spread of the Wuhan virus which Trump had a plan to manage,, recession, inflation, national debt, crashing 401k’s, poverty, homelessness… the list of Biden / dem failures goes on.


Wow, you live in your own reality. 

We were losing 4000 people a day when Trump left.  

Oh, Dow up 1200 yesterday...  

I mean, you guys offered a plate of fear, and the voters rejected it.


----------



## Hollie (Nov 11, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Wow, you live in your own reality.
> 
> We were losing 4000 people a day when Trump left.
> 
> ...


Yeah. It took time to learn about the Wuhan virus. It took time for Trump to have pharmaceutical companies ramp up vaccine research and produce those vaccines. Covid deaths under Biden eventually dropped because of nothing he did. It Was Trump who made the vaccines happen. 

In 2021 alone:








						More Americans have died of COVID in 2021 than 2020: Johns Hopkins
					

More Americans have died from COVID-19 during the first nine months of the year than during the first nine months of the pandemic under Donald Trump’s presidency, according to data from Johns Hopkins University.




					www.google.com
				



More Americans died from COVID-19 during the first nine months of the year than during the first nine months of the pandemic under Donald Trump’s presidency, according to data from Johns Hopkins University.


Good day for the markets yesterday. The financial markets see Republicans in the house as a sign of hope. There will be a shorter leash on how much damage the dems can do.


----------



## JoeB131 (Nov 11, 2022)

Hollie said:


> Yeah. It took time to learn about the Wuhan virus. It took time for Trump to have pharmaceutical companies ramp up vaccine research and produce those vaccines. Covid deaths under Biden eventually dropped because of nothing he did. It Was Trump who made the vaccines happen.



America knew what it was up against by March 2020... and Trump did..nothing.  Most of what he did was counterproductive, like telling people to drink bleach and take horse antibiotics. 

Trump had nothing to do with vaccines, that was an international effort.


----------



## Jarlaxle (Nov 11, 2022)

Every word of that is a lie.


----------



## JoeB131 (Nov 11, 2022)

Jarlaxle said:


> Every word of that is a lie.


Congrats, you just got put on ignore.. Just simply because I get a little bored with reading your twaddle and downvotes...   It's not like you ever add anything to a conversation.


----------



## Hollie (Nov 11, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> America knew what it was up against by March 2020... and Trump did..nothing.  Most of what he did was counterproductive, like telling people to drink bleach and take horse antibiotics.
> 
> Trump had nothing to do with vaccines, that was an international effort.


So, yes. You agree that even with the benefit of remarkable efforts by Trump to bring the vaccines into use and even with the advances in science to understand the processes of transmission and infection, the dems still were successful in mismanagement and incompetence  by allowing hundreds of thousands of deaths and literally holding back American children from their education.


----------



## Hollie (Nov 11, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> America knew what it was up against by March 2020... and Trump did..nothing.  Most of what he did was counterproductive, like telling people to drink bleach and take horse antibiotics.
> 
> Trump had nothing to do with vaccines, that was an international effort.


Actually, Covid vaccines were overwhelming as Trump- led, US effort. 

Read this before your next coma. 






						Science | AAAS
					






					www.science.org
				




Conventional wisdom is that a vaccine for COVID-19 is at least 1 year away, but the organizers of a U.S. government push called Operation Warp Speed have little use for conventional wisdom. The project, vaguely described to date but likely to be formally announced by the White House in the coming days, will pick a diverse set of vaccine candidates and pour essentially limitless resources into unprecedented comparative studies in animals, fast-tracked human trials, and manufacturing. Eschewing international cooperation—and any vaccine candidates from China—it hopes to have 300 million doses by January 2021 of a proven product, reserved for Americans.


----------



## JoeB131 (Nov 11, 2022)

Hollie said:


> So, yes. You agree that even with the benefit of remarkable efforts by Trump to bring the vaccines into use and even with the advances in science to understand the processes of transmission and infection, the dems still were successful in mismanagement and incompetence by allowing hundreds of thousands of deaths and literally holding back American children from their education.



Not really. 

Other people developed the vaccines.
The main obstacle to their effectiveness are people like Mormon Bob who scream about how dangerous they were.  
Covid never, ever, should have been a culture war issue, but you guys made it one.


----------



## Hollie (Nov 11, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Not really.
> 
> Other people developed the vaccines.
> The main obstacle to their effectiveness are people like Mormon Bob who scream about how dangerous they were.
> Covid never, ever, should have been a culture war issue, but you guys made it one.



Yes, really. Let's take two examples: Moderna and Pfizer. Both are US based pharmaceuticals. 

The main problem faced by leftists is their profunnd ignorance and willingness to announce such on a public message board.


----------



## JoeB131 (Nov 11, 2022)

Hollie said:


> Yes, really. Let's take two examples: Moderna and Pfizer. Both are US based pharmaceuticals.


With facilities all over the world, working on this project.   that's the point.


----------



## Hollie (Nov 11, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> With facilities all over the world, working on this project.   that's the point.


With a Michael Jackson moonwalk in a failed effort to salvage your bogus claim... that's the point.


----------



## Jarlaxle (Nov 12, 2022)

JoeB131 said:


> Congrats, you just got put on ignore.. Just simply because I get a little bored with reading your twaddle and downvotes...   It's not like you ever add anything to a conversation.


You just lied again.


----------



## Bob Blaylock (Nov 12, 2022)

Jarlaxle said:


> JoeB131 said:
> 
> 
> > Jarlaxle said:
> ...



  Am I understanding you correctly?

  Do you seriously mean to suggest that Incel Joe would ever be untruthful with any of us?  Seriously?

  Please be careful with such accusations, or else I may too quickly be forced to use up my day's allocation of sarcasm, and then have none left for the rest of the day for other matters that call for it.


----------

