# The fallacy of self defence by gun



## Captain Caveman (May 19, 2022)

I've always stated that needing a gun for self defence was a fallacy, and we all know it is. So what's with the gun nuts running off and copying pasting articles from shady sources?

Well look no further, just simply check with Harvard and the studies -









						Gun Threats and Self-Defense Gun Use
					

1-3. Guns are not used millions of times each year in self-defense We use epidemiological theory to explain why the “false positive” problem for rare events can lead to large overestimates of the i…




					www.hsph.harvard.edu
				




Pardon the pun, Harvard blow holes in the gun nut's self defence argument.

So anyone arming up for the mistaken belief they need to for self defence against others, they're the worst candidate to own a gun.


----------



## marvin martian (May 19, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> I've always stated that needing a gun for self defence was a fallacy



Why do cops carry guns, then?


----------



## Damaged Eagle (May 19, 2022)

So now you're saying we don't have to give forty billion dollars to the Ukraine so they can buy guns for their self defense?

*****SMILE*****


----------



## Confederate Soldier (May 19, 2022)

A study by Harvard can't POSSIBLY have political bias, now couldn't it?


----------



## johngaltshrugged (May 19, 2022)

And I've always said it's better to have a gun & not need it, than need a gun & not have it.
Self defense with a gun worked out pretty well for these folks








						The Latest Crime News Provides Evidence in Favor of Armed Citizens
					

The month of January was replete with highly publicized examples of defensive uses of guns.




					www.dailysignal.com


----------



## Jimmy_Chitwood (May 19, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> I've always stated that needing a gun for self defence was a fallacy, and we all know it is. So what's with the gun nuts running off and copying pasting articles from shady sources?
> 
> Well look no further, just simply check with Harvard and the studies -
> 
> ...




Try and rob my place dawg and we will see who is right homes.


----------



## Captain Caveman (May 19, 2022)

marvin martian said:


> Why do cops carry guns, then?


Ask Harvard.


----------



## marvin martian (May 19, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> So anyone arming up for the mistaken belief they need to for self defence against others, they're the worst candidate to own a gun.



Are you at all bothered by the fact that Hitler used that exact argument to disarm Jews prior to their genocide?


----------



## jbrownson0831 (May 19, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> I've always stated that needing a gun for self defence was a fallacy, and we all know it is. So what's with the gun nuts running off and copying pasting articles from shady sources?
> 
> Well look no further, just simply check with Harvard and the studies -
> 
> ...


Wacko article, wacko reads it, wacko parrots the fake results.


----------



## Captain Caveman (May 19, 2022)

Confederate Soldier said:


> A study by Harvard can't POSSIBLY have political bias, now couldn't it?


That's a Trump tactic when cornered, attack the source, lol.


----------



## Sunsettommy (May 19, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> I've always stated that needing a gun for self defence was a fallacy, and we all know it is. So what's with the gun nuts running off and copying pasting articles from shady sources?
> 
> Well look no further, just simply check with Harvard and the studies -
> 
> ...



Well I am calling Harvard a liar because I used to read in a website that DAILY posted newspaper accounts of self defense in it which was a lot in a years time.

Then there have been several books published showing good evidence that self defense does happen and a quite a few times every year which I have one of in my large library collection.

Harvard just like many leftist organizations lies a lot.


----------



## Captain Caveman (May 19, 2022)

jbrownson0831 said:


> Wacko article, wacko reads it, wacko parrots the fake results.


That's a Trump tactic when cornered, attack the source, lol.


----------



## jbrownson0831 (May 19, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> That's a Trump tactic when cornered, attack the source, lol.


Pretty easy to attack a Dimmer Polly Parrot, dont give it any crackers....awwwk, awwk!!


----------



## Captain Caveman (May 19, 2022)

Sunsettommy said:


> Well I am calling Harvard a liar because I used to read in a website that DAILY posted newspaper accounts of self defense in it which was a lot in a years time.
> 
> Then there have been several books published showing good evidence that self defense does happen and a quite a few times every year which I have one of in my large library collection.
> 
> Harvard just like many leftist organizations lies a lot.


You're welcome to, and you would have to to keep your fallacy true. Unfortunately, there are various studies in that article that conclude the findings. So stamping your feet, sticking fingers in your ears shouting,"Ner ner ner", doesn't dismiss the academic studies and findings.


----------



## jbrownson0831 (May 19, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> You're welcome to, and you would have to to keep your fallacy true. Unfortunately, there are various studies in that article that conclude the findings. So stamping your feet, sticking fingers in your ears shouting,"Ner ner ner", doesn't dismiss the academic studies and findings.


Oooh....Dimmeer "academic" studies.  Well here's a result for you, when I am cornered, I shoot back.


----------



## Captain Caveman (May 19, 2022)

jbrownson0831 said:


> Pretty easy to attack a Dimmer Polly Parrot, dont give it any crackers....awwwk, awwk!!


What's that retarded comment in English? I don't speak butchered American English, so could you up the grade on that one please.


----------



## Captain Caveman (May 19, 2022)

jbrownson0831 said:


> Oooh....Dimmeer "academic" studies.  Well here's a result for you, when I am cornered, I shoot back.


When did you get cornered? Do you know the date and place?


----------



## jbrownson0831 (May 19, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> What's that retarded comment in English? I don't speak butchered American English, so could you up the grade on that one please.


What is hard to understand?  You have nothing but wind blowing through your ears, so you simply repeat, or parrot, back whatever your Gestapo leaders tell you to...just like a Polly Parrot.  Awwwk, Awwwk, Awwwk!


----------



## Confederate Soldier (May 19, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> That's a Trump tactic when cornered, attack the source, lol.




But don't I have a point? 

Harvard's class of 2018 was surveyed about their political viewpoints. 13 percent of the freshmen identified as "somewhat conservative", and 2.6 percent identified as "very conservative".  23% called themselves moderates, and 60% identified as liberal.


----------



## Captain Caveman (May 19, 2022)

jbrownson0831 said:


> What is hard to understand?  You have nothing but wind blowing through your ears, so you simply repeat, or parrot, back whatever your Gestapo leaders tell you to...just like a Polly Parrot.  Awwwk, Awwwk, Awwwk!


Nope, still a retard.


----------



## jbrownson0831 (May 19, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> Nope, still a retard.


Well of course you are......like all your Dimmer brethren.


----------



## Sunsettommy (May 19, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> You're welcome to, and you would have to to keep your fallacy true. Unfortunately, there are various studies in that article that conclude the findings. So stamping your feet, sticking fingers in your ears shouting,"Ner ner ner", doesn't dismiss the academic studies and findings.



Your ignorance is obvious because you haven't read up on this subject like I did which was over several years time to know that this Harvard claims are full of lying shit!

I had several books that covered it and the website I used to read showed many newspaper accounts of self defense in America every day which are real and true.


----------



## Captain Caveman (May 19, 2022)

Confederate Soldier said:


> But don't I have a point?
> 
> Harvard's class of 2018 was surveyed about their political viewpoints. 13 percent of the freshmen identified as "somewhat conservative", and 2.6 percent identified as "very conservative".  23% called themselves moderates, and 60% identified as liberal.


Pick the studies out of the article and link the articles that examines and rebuffs them.


----------



## Donald H (May 19, 2022)

Whatever the truth may be, statistics prove that America got it wrong.

And will undoubtedly continue to get it wrong for the foreseeable future!

Dog help them if the blacks start shooting back at the police!


----------



## Captain Caveman (May 19, 2022)

jbrownson0831 said:


> Well of course you are......like all your Dimmer brethren.


So I'm UK Centre Right, I vote Tory and according to you, I have Dimmer brethren. Sorry for calling you a retard, I actually meant Special Retard.


----------



## Confederate Soldier (May 19, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> Pick the studies out of the article and link the articles that examines and rebuffs them.




If I cared enough to do so, I would, but I don't Pick up an issue of Americas 1st Freedom when you get a chance. Every month, there are many stories that show a life has been saved by the self defense use of a firearm.


----------



## Captain Caveman (May 19, 2022)

Sunsettommy said:


> Your ignorance is obvious because you haven't read up on this subject like I did which was over several years time to know that this Harvard claims are full of lying shit!
> 
> I had several books that covered it and the website I used to read showed many newspaper accounts of self defense in America every day which are real and true.


Rather than go by biased newspaper articles, get off your backside and go find real academic studies.


----------



## Winco (May 19, 2022)

People have every right to carry their handgun on their person.
And then abide by the rules of 'Gun Free Zones'

I just don't see the need to open carry a long gun though.


----------



## Captain Caveman (May 19, 2022)

Confederate Soldier said:


> If I cared enough to do so, I would, but I don't Pick up an issue of Americas 1st Freedom when you get a chance. Every month, there are many stories that show a life has been saved by the self defense use of a firearm.


So let me get this straight, gun nuts scoff at Harvard, then claim all the true facts are in pamphlets from gun nut sources. Hmm, let me think about that one 🤔


----------



## Confederate Soldier (May 19, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> So let me get this straight, gun nuts scoff at Harvard, then claim all the true facts are in pamphlets from gun nut sources. Hmm, let me think about that one 🤔




The largest organization devoted to protecting the constitutional right to keep and bear arms holds more water for me than a bunch of green haired college kids taught to hate anything constitutional, making up studies by selecting data that fits their narrative.


----------



## Captain Caveman (May 19, 2022)

Winco said:


> People have every right to carry their handgun on their person.
> And then abide by the rules of 'Gun Free Zones'
> 
> I just don't see the need to open carry a long gun though.


Correct, reality shows there's no need to carry due to the self defence fallacy, but that would mean gun nuts would lose the argument so they default to Rights. So as they get spanked on the subject, they play the Rights card to bail out of the defeat.


----------



## BlackSand (May 19, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> I've always stated that needing a gun for self defence was a fallacy, and we all know it is. So what's with the gun nuts running off and copying pasting articles from shady sources?
> 
> Well look no further, just simply check with Harvard and the studies -
> 
> ...


.

Congress is currently working on a bold move to actually expand a citizen's Rights.
They have proposed a measure to ensure your Right to keep a can of Fix-A-Flat in your trunk shall not be infringed.

.​


----------



## Sunsettommy (May 19, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> Rather than go by biased newspaper articles, get off your backside and go find real academic studies.



You have yet to cogently defend that lying Harvard claims meanwhile your running ignorance is now so obvious and your stupid bias attack shows you are a close-minded clown.

Here is one source that used CDC stats and more.

CNS News

CDC Study: Use of Firearms for Self-Defense is ‘Important Crime Deterrent’​
By Alissa Tabirian | July 17, 2013

Excerpt:

(CNSNews.com) – “Self-defense can be an important crime deterrent,”says a new report by the Centers for Disease Control (CDC). The $10 million study was commissioned by President Barack Obama as part of 23 executive orders he signed in January.

LINK

===

Let's see if you actually read the link where the self-defense stats are posted.


----------



## toobfreak (May 19, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> I've always stated that needing a gun for self defence was a fallacy, and we all know it is.


The fuck it is.  You don't know anything.



Captain Caveman said:


> Well look no further, just simply check with Harvard and the studies


So you quote a famously leftwing university to get another leftwing view?  Shocking.



Captain Caveman said:


> So anyone arming up for the mistaken belief they need to for self defence against others, they're the worst candidate to own a gun.


Blow it out your ass, corncob.  Who the hell do you think you are deciding what is right and needed by other people?  I could give you a million stories of defensive gun use saving lives.  I'd laugh now if you got mugged or something bad because you were in no position to defend yourself.


----------



## Captain Caveman (May 19, 2022)

toobfreak said:


> I could give you a million stories of defensive gun use saving lives.  *I'd laugh now if you got mugged or something bad because you were in no position to defend yourself.*


Of course you can, you're part of the Gun Nut Religion following your silly brainwashing pamphlets.

*Boom, the fallacy in bold.*

When you got mugged, when was it and how many shots did you fire?


----------



## toobfreak (May 19, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> Of course you can, you're part of the Gun Nut Religion following your silly brainwashing pamphlets.


There are no "pamphlets" you imbecile, other than the ones Harvard is printing for you melonheads to read.


----------



## Sunsettommy (May 19, 2022)

Heritage

*Defensive Gun Uses in the U.S.*

Updated May 9, 2022

Excerpt:

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.

LINK


----------



## marvin martian (May 19, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> Ask Harvard.



That's a Biden tactic when cornered, deflect, lol


----------



## BackAgain (May 19, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> Ask Harvard.


No need. The question itself exposes the flaw in your argument.


----------



## Canon Shooter (May 19, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> I've always stated that needing a gun for self defence was a fallacy, and we all know it is. So what's with the gun nuts running off and copying pasting articles from shady sources?
> 
> Well look no further, just simply check with Harvard and the studies -
> 
> ...



I don't give a flying fuck what some Harvard study says.

I carry a gun every day, and have for a long time. 

I have twice used my firearm to protect me and my loved ones. In one of those instances, thankfully, I didn't have to pull the trigger. In the other instance, though, I did. There were three armed assailants. I shot two of them. The third ran away. One of the two I shot is in prison. The other one is in the ground. He died on the sidewalk.

I think about that, _literally_, every single day. I ended  someone's life. Sure, he was a scumbag, but I ended his life with two .45 rounds to the chest. I remember telling my family that I had killed a man. I remember the look on the face of my daughter, who's been a lifelong democrat. Her anti-gun stance ended the day I told her. My smokin' hot Puerto Rican girlfriend and I would be dead today had I not been armed. Of that I am absolutely certain.

I don;t care how many times a gun has been used in self defense. It doesn't matter an iota to me. All I care about is the two times where I was involved.

Every single fucking day I remind myself: I killed a man. 

That's a heavy weight to carry.

And, given the same circumstances, I wouldn't hesitate to carry that weight again...


----------



## toobfreak (May 19, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> Hmm, let me think about that one



Careful you don't strain something.


----------



## Captain Caveman (May 19, 2022)

marvin martian said:


> That's a Biden tactic when cornered, deflect, lol


Is it, well you would better than me because he's your leader.


----------



## Captain Caveman (May 19, 2022)

Sunsettommy said:


> Heritage
> 
> *Defensive Gun Uses in the U.S.*
> 
> ...


It would be better if you actually read the Harvard link


----------



## marvin martian (May 19, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> So I'm UK Centre Right, I vote Tory and according to you, I have Dimmer brethren. Sorry for calling you a retard, I actually meant Special Retard.



It's pretty sad that virtually _all _the political parties in the UK are anti-civil rights.

That's what happens when you give up your guns and pray to the government.


----------



## Captain Caveman (May 19, 2022)

Canon Shooter said:


> I don't give a flying fuck what some Harvard study says.
> 
> I carry a gun every day, and have for a long time.
> 
> ...


Did you read the Harvard link?


----------



## Sunsettommy (May 19, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> It would be better if you actually read the Harvard link



I have read their shit over the years.

Notice you have not read my link at all.

You are batting ZERO.


----------



## Captain Caveman (May 19, 2022)

marvin martian said:


> It's pretty sad that virtually _all _the political parties in the UK are anti-civil rights.
> 
> That's what *happens when you give up your guns and pray to the government.*


Rinse, wash, repeat. Already had a thread on gun nut tactics. Do try better please.


----------



## Captain Caveman (May 19, 2022)

Sunsettommy said:


> I have read their shit over the years.
> 
> Notice you have not read my link at all.
> 
> You are batting ZERO.


I checked your link but you didn't check Harvard's.


----------



## BackAgain (May 19, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> I've always stated that needing a gun for self defence was a fallacy, and we all know it is. So what's with the gun nuts running off and copying pasting articles from shady sources?
> 
> Well look no further, just simply check with Harvard and the studies -
> 
> ...


“All reported cases of criminal gun use, as well as many of the so-called self-defense gun uses, appear to be socially undesirable.”  WTF? Is there a criminal gun use that *isn’t* “socially undesirable?”  And what constitutes “many?”  How do they define “socially undesirable” when used in the context of self defense?  WTF are they babbling about?


----------



## marvin martian (May 19, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> Rinse, wash, repeat. Already had a thread on gun nut tactics. Do try better please.



The "gun nut tactics" were used by your government on you, dipshit. That's how your government disarmed you, kept all the guns for themselves, and now shits on your civil rights whenever they feel like, while you silently take it like the little bitch you are. And I'm sure you supported it every step of the way. You people are sheep.


----------



## Captain Caveman (May 19, 2022)

Sunsettommy

Harvard link states, "_We use epidemiological theory to explain why the “false positive” problem for rare events can lead to large overestimates of the incidence of rare diseases or rare phenomena such as self-defense gun use.  We then try to validate the claims of many millions of annual self-defense uses against available evidence.  *We find that the claim of many millions of annual self-defense gun uses by American citizens is invalid.*"

You are just listing the debunked claims_


----------



## Captain Caveman (May 19, 2022)

marvin martian said:


> The "gun nut tactics" were used on you, dipshit. That's how your government disarmed you, kept all the guns for themselves, and now shits on your civil rights whenever they feel like, while you silently take it like the little bitch you are. And I'm sure you supported it every step of the way. You people are sheep.


Rinse, wash, repeat.

Try to get back on topic, when gun nuts get spanked, they default to the Rinse, Wash, Repeat shite.


----------



## Captain Caveman (May 19, 2022)

Come on guys, read the Harvard link and stop feeding the self defence fallacy.


----------



## Captain Caveman (May 19, 2022)

Sunsettommy said:


> I have read their shit over the years.
> 
> Notice you have not read my link at all.
> 
> You are batting ZERO.


The Harvard report highlights the fact that you swallowed the crap in your link. You posted your link because you didn't read the Harvard link, that's why you come across as a complete bake.

Do you now comprehend?


----------



## Natural Citizen (May 19, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> I've always stated that needing a gun for self defence was a fallacy, and we all know it is.



I don't recall the word ''need'' any place in the second amendment.


----------



## M14 Shooter (May 19, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> I've always stated that needing a gun for self defense was a fallacy, and we all know it is


The Violence Policy Center - a rabidly anti-gun organization - estimates at least 100,000 defensive gun uses each year.
https://vpc.org/studies/justifiable20.pdf 
Page 6

That's about 10x more often than guns are used to commit murder and 5x more often than guns are used to commit suicide.

Thus:   You speak from ignorance and bigotry.


----------



## Captain Caveman (May 19, 2022)

Natural Citizen said:


> I don't recall the word ''need'' any place in the second amendment.


Then why do gun nuts say they "need" a gun for self defence. So leave them at home locked up


----------



## Captain Caveman (May 19, 2022)

M14 Shooter said:


> The Violence Policy Center - a rabidly anti-gun organization - estimates at least 100,000 defensive gun uses each year.
> https://vpc.org/studies/justifiable20.pdf
> Page 6
> 
> ...


Another bake that hasn't read the Harvard link.


----------



## marvin martian (May 19, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> Rinse, wash, repeat.
> 
> Try to get back on topic, when gun nuts get spanked, they default to the Rinse, Wash, Repeat shite.



It's actually "wash, rinse, repeat", dipshit.

But back to the topic. This is why you're a subject, not a citizen, and your government doesn't recognize your civil rights (because they don't have to). You let them do it.


----------



## Sunsettommy (May 19, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> Sunsettommy
> 
> Harvard link states, "_We use epidemiological theory to explain why the “false positive” problem for rare events can lead to large overestimates of the incidence of rare diseases or rare phenomena such as self-defense gun use.  We then try to validate the claims of many millions of annual self-defense uses against available evidence.  *We find that the claim of many millions of annual self-defense gun uses by American citizens is invalid.*"
> 
> You are just listing the dunked claims_



Meanwhile actual REPORTED self defense reports you ignored is in my link from a CDC study that the OBAMA ADMINSTRATION funded and accepted when completed.

"The Institute of Medicine and the National Research Council released the results of their research through the CDC last month. *Researchers compiled data from previous studies in order to guide future research on gun violence, noting that “almost all national survey estimates indicate that defensive gun uses by victims are at least as common as offensive uses by criminals, with estimates of annual uses ranging from about 500,000 to more than 3 million per year*.”

and,

"According to a National Academies press release, organizations supporting the CDC study have close ties to Obama.

When contacted by CNSNews, the Annie E. Casey Foundation issued a statement reaffirming its support for the study, which “is in keeping with our work to collaborate with public agencies, nonprofit organizations, policymakers and community leaders to make a positive impact on the lives of kids, families and communities.” Patrick Corvington, the foundation’s former senior associate, was nominated by Obama and confirmed in 2010 as CEO of the Corporation for National and Community Service."


----------



## Canon Shooter (May 19, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> Did you read the Harvard link?



I stopped after reading this:

"We use epidemiological theory to explain why the “false positive” problem for rare events can lead to large overestimates of the incidence of rare diseases or rare phenomena such as self-defense gun use.  We then try to validate the claims of many millions of annual self-defense uses against available evidence.  We find that the claim of many millions of annual self-defense gun uses by American citizens is invalid."

The reason I stopped was because it doesn't matter. What matters is not the sum total, but the individual cases.

Also, that so-called "study" is a bunch of horseshit. Consider this:

"We analyzed data from a telephone survey of 5,800 California adolescents aged 12-17 years, which asked questions about gun threats against and self-defense gun use by these young people.  We found that these young people were far more likely to be threatened with a gun than to use a gun in self-defense,"

Well, no shit. Of course people ages 12-17 aren't going to use a gun for self defense. You know why that is? Because people ages 12-17 aren't allowed to own guns.

Also, given your very first sentence in this thread, I knew this was going to be nothing more than anti-gun liberal whining.

I'm alive today because I was armed, and there's not a study in the world which will ever negate that. Are there millions of people like me? 

Goddamn, I hope so...


----------



## Captain Caveman (May 19, 2022)

R


marvin martian said:


> It's actually "wash, rinse, repeat", dipshit.
> 
> But back to the topic. This is why you're a subject, not a citizen, and your government doesn't recognize your civil rights (because they don't have to). You let them do it.


And again, you're just repeating the same old shite.

Back to the topic, millions of the self defence claims were debunked. I bet that that's softened your erection with guns


----------



## M14 Shooter (May 19, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> Another bake that hasn't read the Harvard link.


The Harvard link does nothing to diminish what I said.
At least 100,000 defensive gun uses per year.
FAR more often than murder and suicide.

I know you hate it when the truth does not line up with your preconceptions - but there's nothing I can do about it.


----------



## Sunsettommy (May 19, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> The Harvard report highlights the fact that you swallowed the crap in your link. You posted your link because you didn't read the Harvard link, that's why you come across as a complete bake.
> 
> Do you now comprehend?



I have long known that Hahvad is full of crap and you like to roll in their crap which is why you think and live like a caveman.


----------



## Captain Caveman (May 19, 2022)

Sunsettommy said:


> Meanwhile actual REPORTED self defense reports you ignored is in my link from a CDC study that the OBAMA ADMINSTRATION funded and accepted when completed.
> 
> "The Institute of Medicine and the National Research Council released the results of their research through the CDC last month. *Researchers compiled data from previous studies in order to guide future research on gun violence, noting that “almost all national survey estimates indicate that defensive gun uses by victims are at least as common as offensive uses by criminals, with estimates of annual uses ranging from about 500,000 to more than 3 million per year*.”
> 
> ...


The claims were found to be invalid against the evidence.


----------



## Captain Caveman (May 19, 2022)

M14 Shooter said:


> The Harvard link does nothing to diminish what I said.
> At least 100,000 defensive gun uses per year.
> FAR more often than murder and suicide.
> 
> I know you hate it when the truth does not line up with your preconceptions - but there's nothing I can do about it.


Demonstrate that guns in self defence had valid evidence


----------



## marvin martian (May 19, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> R
> 
> And again, you're just repeating the same old shite.
> 
> Back to the topic, millions of the self defence claims were debunked. I bet that that's softened your erection with guns



They weren't debunked at all, because they weren't examined on an individual basis. I know you're stupid, but surely you aren't _so _stupid you couldn't even discern that simple, 4th grade-level fact, right?


----------



## Captain Caveman (May 19, 2022)

M14 Shooter said:


> The Harvard link does nothing to diminish what I said.
> At least 100,000 defensive gun uses per year.
> FAR more often than murder and suicide.
> 
> I know you hate it when the truth does not line up with your preconceptions - but there's nothing I can do about it.


Again, read the Harvard link, you're still sounding like a right bake.


----------



## M14 Shooter (May 19, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> Demonstrate that guns in self defence had valid evidence


I gave you the link to the data and the conclusion to same - if you had read it, you;d realize it is all right there.

At least 100,000 defensive gun uses per year.
FAR more often than murder and suicide.

I know you hate it when the truth does not line up with your preconceptions - but there's nothing I can do about it.


----------



## Sunsettommy (May 19, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> The claims were found to be invalid against the evidence.



You didn't even read it not only that you post ZERO counterpoints it is clear you are another brain-dead gun hater.


----------



## M14 Shooter (May 19, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> Again, read the Harvard link, you're still sounding like a right bake.


The Harvard link does nothing to diminish what I said.
At least 100,000 defensive gun uses per year.
FAR more often than murder and suicide.


----------



## Captain Caveman (May 19, 2022)

marvin martian said:


> They weren't debunked at all, because they weren't examined on an individual basis. I know you're stupid, but surely you aren't _so _stupid you couldn't even discern that simple, 4th grade-level fact, right?


It's obvious you're down at 4th grade level because the words in the Harvard link shot right over your head.


----------



## Captain Caveman (May 19, 2022)

M14 Shooter said:


> The Harvard link does nothing to diminish what I said.
> At least 100,000 defensive gun uses per year.
> FAR more often than murder and suicide.


I accept your surrender


----------



## M14 Shooter (May 19, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> I accept your surrender


And thus, yours.
When you can show how your "Harvard link" addresses, much less Invalidates. the information I presnted , let us know.

177300 + 123800 / 3 = 100,000 defensive gun uses per year.


----------



## toobfreak (May 19, 2022)




----------



## Sunsettommy (May 19, 2022)

We have an english turd who deliberately avoids a real debate and doesn't make any counterpoints and refuses to believe that some here are well acquainted with the shitty hahvard reputation on gun issues.

Notice the english turd didn't counter Canon Shooters post 61 statements about the hahvard "study" at all.

It is clear we are dealing with an english turd has demonstrated no debate skills at all as the turd ignored two of my links, M14 shooter link and Canon shooters easy expose of the shitty hahvard crap.

The turd doesn't realize gun nuts have been losing the national debate for many years now because they are as full of shit as this english turd is.


----------



## M14 Shooter (May 19, 2022)

Sunsettommy said:


> The turd doesn't realize gun nuts have been losing the national debate for many years now because they are as full of shit as this english turd is.


He's desperate for attention,  so the trolls.
Sad state of affairs.


----------



## Billy_Bob (May 19, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> That's a Trump tactic when cornered, attack the source, lol.


When the author is a known left wing activist... Yep its crap and nothing more than Authoritarian garbage approved by Harvard left wing psychopaths.  Now when we look at this idiots facts, where did he get them? DO you know?  Left wing anti-gun groups.  Confirming that the whole article is GARBAGE and propaganda..


----------



## westwall (May 19, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> I've always stated that needing a gun for self defence was a fallacy, and we all know it is. So what's with the gun nuts running off and copying pasting articles from shady sources?
> 
> Well look no further, just simply check with Harvard and the studies -
> 
> ...





Nice load of horsecrap.


----------



## AZrailwhale (May 19, 2022)

Canon Shooter said:


> I stopped after reading this:
> 
> "We use epidemiological theory to explain why the “false positive” problem for rare events can lead to large overestimates of the incidence of rare diseases or rare phenomena such as self-defense gun use.  We then try to validate the claims of many millions of annual self-defense uses against available evidence.  We find that the claim of many millions of annual self-defense gun uses by American citizens is invalid."
> 
> ...


California also has nearly, if not the, most draconian anti-gun laws in the USA.


----------



## TroglocratsRdumb (May 19, 2022)

We should ban guns in the deep blue states and see what happens.


----------



## Cardinal Carminative (May 19, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> I've always stated that needing a gun for self defence was a fallacy, and we all know it is. So what's with the gun nuts running off and copying pasting articles from shady sources?
> 
> Well look no further, just simply check with Harvard and the studies -
> 
> ...



Sadly this self-image many of the gun advocates have of themselves as "the man who shot Liberty Valence" is a big part of their personalities.  

The ones who come out of the military may very well be prepared to take a human life.  But I always wonder about the "gravy seal" types who amass guns because they are attempting to build out their John Wayne fantasy.  In some ways I fear that is part of the corrosion at the core of the gun debate.  When questioning the validity of having so many guns in our society invariably these folks will suffer some degree of feelings of "persecution".  

People who want fewer guns in society are a threat to them because so much of who and what they are (especially when it comes to their gender and sex-roles) requires these things.

Guns are great for self-defense.  But if you systematically arm a society to its teeth and then amp up the fear of "The Other" it's going to go to a dark place pretty fast.  

I can see, if you live in abject terror of everyone around you, and you lack any sort of means to have an impact on the greater society that guns might appear to be a salvation.


----------



## Rigby5 (May 19, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> I've always stated that needing a gun for self defence was a fallacy, and we all know it is. So what's with the gun nuts running off and copying pasting articles from shady sources?
> 
> Well look no further, just simply check with Harvard and the studies -
> 
> ...



Sorry, but that link was the stupidest and least scientific thing I have ever read.
It is all basically one guy, David Hemenway, and he clearly is an idiot.
He main argument is that if guns were used more to prevent crime, then we should have a lot more criminals with gun shot wounds.
And that is insane, because you almost NEVER have to actually pull the trigger, in order to use a gun defensively.

The most obvious way to know that private gun ownership is a good thing that greatly reduces crime and does not add much in the way or rage crimes, is that police used to not exist to any significant degree, until after 1900, and that greatly reduced crime.  If nothing else, it reduces the thousands a year of unarmed people illegally murdered by police.
Having an armed mercenary police force instead of an armed population, is the worst possible scenario.
Police are mostly ex-military, who have been taught rules of engagement extremely hazardous to anyone else.
Veterans should never be allowed to be in the police.


----------



## Rigby5 (May 19, 2022)

Confederate Soldier said:


> But don't I have a point?
> 
> Harvard's class of 2018 was surveyed about their political viewpoints. 13 percent of the freshmen identified as "somewhat conservative", and 2.6 percent identified as "very conservative".  23% called themselves moderates, and 60% identified as liberal.



I am a liberal, and being a liberal means the belief in the defense of individual liberties.
Which gun control totally contradicts.
No liberal can possibly be in favor of any federal gun control at all.


----------



## Rigby5 (May 19, 2022)

Cardinal Carminative said:


> Sadly this self-image many of the gun advocates have of themselves as "the man who shot Liberty Valence" is a big part of their personalities.
> 
> The ones who come out of the military may very well be prepared to take a human life.  But I always wonder about the "gravy seal" types who amass guns because they are attempting to build out their John Wayne fantasy.  In some ways I fear that is part of the corrosion at the core of the gun debate.  When questioning the validity of having so many guns in our society invariably these folks will suffer some degree of feelings of "persecution".
> 
> ...



That makes no sense at all.
Having personal guns does NOT at all imply anything about taking human life.
The main point of a gun is that it scares criminals away.
It also can be used simply as a noise maker that is going to quickly draw a crowd, in order to deal with a problem.
One can also shoot at extremities so is not lethal.

Those who want fewer guns in society are a threat to everyone because that gives a monopoly in power to a mercenary government, and makes any hope of a democratic republic impossible.
When the Founders wrote of a government by, of, and for the people, they meant that literally.
That means we all have to be armed, and we must NOT instead arm a mercenary force like police or enlisted military.
An armed mercenary force ensures the end of the democratic republic eventually.
It is just a matter of time.


----------



## eagle1462010 (May 19, 2022)




----------



## Rigby5 (May 19, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> You're welcome to, and you would have to to keep your fallacy true. Unfortunately, there are various studies in that article that conclude the findings. So stamping your feet, sticking fingers in your ears shouting,"Ner ner ner", doesn't dismiss the academic studies and findings.



There was nothing remotely academic or scientific in that link.
Over 99% of the times guns are used defensively, there is no report because no one wants to talk to the police if they do not have to.  And if no shot is fired, there is no reason for anyone to have to talk to the police.
No one even wants police to know you even have a gun, because you don't know what sort of crazy or illegal response the police are going to have.


----------



## Rigby5 (May 19, 2022)

Cardinal Carminative said:


> I can see, if you live in abject terror of everyone around you, and you lack any sort of means to have an impact on the greater society that guns might appear to be a salvation.



Any NORMAL person should fear armed mercenary police.
The Founders did not want them, and they did not really exist in any number until around 1900.
They are NOT an appropriate part of any democratic republic.

Having an armed general population is millions of times better and safer than relying on armed mercenaries like police, instead.


----------



## marvin martian (May 19, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> It's obvious you're down at 4th grade level because the words in the Harvard link shot right over your head.



OK, I was wrong. You actually ARE that stupid! LOL


----------



## Cardinal Carminative (May 19, 2022)

Rigby5 said:


> That makes no sense at all.
> Having personal guns does NOT at all imply anything about taking human life.



The usual discussion about guns for self defense.  



Rigby5 said:


> The main point of a gun is that it scares criminals away.



So you think it's rational to assume you won't have to FIRE the gun you wave around to protect yourself?  That sounds like a recipe for disaster.  

It's people who are unprepared for the horror the gun represents who are most likely to do some serious damage with the things.



Rigby5 said:


> It also can be used simply as a noise maker that is going to quickly draw a crowd, in order to deal with a problem.



You sound really dangerous with a gun.  I hope you haven't been able to get one.  




Rigby5 said:


> When the Founders wrote of a government by, of, and for the people, they meant that literally.



No they didn't.  They excluded women and black people.  ANd non-landowners.


----------



## hadit (May 19, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> I've always stated that needing a gun for self defence was a fallacy, and we all know it is. So what's with the gun nuts running off and copying pasting articles from shady sources?
> 
> Well look no further, just simply check with Harvard and the studies -
> 
> ...


When politicians and rich celebrities stop having armed guards surround them wherever they go, I'll start to believe them when they say things like that.


----------



## hadit (May 19, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> Then why do gun nuts say they "need" a gun for self defence. So leave them at home locked up


They don't.


----------



## Canon Shooter (May 19, 2022)

AZrailwhale said:


> California also has nearly, if not the, most draconian anti-gun laws in the USA.



I got the fuck outta' there years ago...


----------



## 2aguy (May 19, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> I've always stated that needing a gun for self defence was a fallacy, and we all know it is. So what's with the gun nuts running off and copying pasting articles from shady sources?
> 
> Well look no further, just simply check with Harvard and the studies -
> 
> ...





Captain Caveman said:


> I've always stated that needing a gun for self defence was a fallacy, and we all know it is. So what's with the gun nuts running off and copying pasting articles from shady sources?
> 
> Well look no further, just simply check with Harvard and the studies -
> 
> ...



The 18 studies by both private and government researchers say David Hemingway is a hack…..


----------



## westwall (May 19, 2022)

2aguy said:


> The 18 studies by both private and government researchers say David Hemingway is a hack…..





Not just a hack, but a fraud.  Isn't he a barrista now?


----------



## 2aguy (May 19, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> I've always stated that needing a gun for self defence was a fallacy, and we all know it is. So what's with the gun nuts running off and copying pasting articles from shady sources?
> 
> Well look no further, just simply check with Harvard and the studies -
> 
> ...




David Hemenway....the author of the study?

guns aren't used in self defense...cause I say so....

That is his argument....

Meanwhile....

A quick guide to the studies and the numbers.....the full lay out of what was studied by each study is in the links....

The name of the group doing the study, the year of the study, the number of defensive gun uses and if police and military defensive gun uses are included.....notice the bill clinton and obama defensive gun use research is highlighted.....

GunCite-Gun Control-How Often Are Guns Used in Self-Defense 

GunCite Frequency of Defensive Gun Use in Previous Surveys

Field...1976....3,052,717 ( no cops, no military)

DMIa 1978...2,141,512 ( no cops, no military)

L.A. TIMES...1994...3,609,68 ( no cops, no military)

Kleck......1994...2.5 million ( no cops, no military)


2021 national firearm survey, Prof. William English, PhD. designed by Deborah Azrael of Harvard T. Chan School of public policy, and  Mathew Miller, Northeastern university.......1.67 million defensive uses annually.

CDC...1996-1998... 1.1 million  averaged over  those years.( no cops, no military)

Obama's CDC....2013....500,000--3million

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


Bordua...1977...1,414,544

DMIb...1978...1,098,409 ( no cops, no military)

Hart...1981...1.797,461 ( no cops, no military)

Mauser...1990...1,487,342 ( no cops,no military)

Gallup...1993...1,621,377 ( no cops, no military)

DEPT. OF JUSTICE...1994...1.5 million ( the bill clinton study)

Journal of Quantitative Criminology--- 989,883 times per year."

(Based on survey data from a 2000 study published in the _Journal of Quantitative Criminology_,[17] U.S. civilians use guns to defend themselves and others from crime at least 989,883 times per year.[18])

Paper: "Measuring Civilian Defensive Firearm Use: A Methodological Experiment." By David McDowall and others. _Journal of Quantitative Criminology_, March 2000. Measuring Civilian Defensive Firearm Use: A Methodological Experiment - Springer


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

Ohio...1982...771,043

Gallup...1991...777,152

Tarrance... 1994... 764,036 (no cops, no military)

Lawerence Southwich Jr. 400,000 fewer violent crimes and at least 800,000 violent crimes deterred..

*2021 national firearms survey..

The survey was designed by Deborah Azrael of the Harvard T.H. Chan School of Public Health, and Matthew Miller of Northeastern University,*
*----
The survey further finds that approximately a third of gun owners (31.1%) have used a firearm to defend themselves or their property, often on more than one occasion, and it estimates that guns are used defensively by firearms owners in approximately 1.67 million incidents per year. Handguns are the most common firearm employed for self-defense (used in 65.9% of defensive incidents), and in most defensive incidents (81.9%) no shot was fired. Approximately a quarter (25.2%) of defensive incidents occurred within the gun owner's home, and approximately half (53.9%) occurred outside their home, but on their property. About one out of ten (9.1%) defensive gun uses occurred in public, and about one out of twenty (4.8%) occurred at work.
2021 National Firearms Survey*


----------



## 2aguy (May 19, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> I've always stated that needing a gun for self defence was a fallacy, and we all know it is. So what's with the gun nuts running off and copying pasting articles from shady sources?
> 
> Well look no further, just simply check with Harvard and the studies -
> 
> ...




And this study?

Harvard University Study Reveals Astonishing Link Between Firearms, Crime and Gun Control

*When Kates and Mauser compared England with the United States, they found “’a negative correlation,’ that is, ‘where firearms are most dense violent crime rates are lowest, and where guns are least dense, violent crime rates are highest.’ There is no consistent significant positive association between gun ownership levels and violence rates.”*
*
In 2004, the U.S. National Academy of Sciences released an evaluation from its review of existing research. After reviewing 253 journal articles, 99 books, 43 government publications and its own original empirical research, it failed to identify any gun control that had reduced violent crime, suicide, or gun accidents, note Kates and Mauser.

“The same conclusion was reached in 2003 by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control,” write Kates and Mauser. “Armed crime, never a problem in England, has now become one. Handguns are banned but the Kingdom has millions of illegal firearms. Criminals have no trouble finding them and exhibit a new willingness to use them. In the decade after 1957, the use of guns in serious crime increased a hundredfold. In the late 1990s, England moved from stringent controls to a complete ban of all handguns and many types of long guns. Hundreds of thousands of guns were confiscated from those owners law-abiding enough to turn them in to authorities.” But crime increased instead of decreasing.
*
*Ignoring these realities, gun control advocates have cited England, as the cradle of our liberties, as “a nation made so peaceful by strict gun control that its police did not even need to carry guns,” write Kates and Mauser. “The United States, it was argued, could attain such a desirable situation by radically reducing gun ownership, preferably by banning and confiscating handguns.”*

Read more at Harvard University Study Reveals Astonishing Link Between Firearms, Crime and Gun Control


----------



## 2aguy (May 19, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> I've always stated that needing a gun for self defence was a fallacy, and we all know it is. So what's with the gun nuts running off and copying pasting articles from shady sources?
> 
> Well look no further, just simply check with Harvard and the studies -
> 
> ...




On previous Hemenway research...

*Hemenway fails to note that the people he surveyed only had to mention “firearms” in their research. They didn’t have to actually conduct empirical work on guns. There were also problems in the recording of his responses. For instance, I was supposedly one of the researchers surveyed. Yet, my responses weren’t recorded. When I emailed Hemenway about this technical problem, my emails were ignored.*









						Survey in gun column was incomplete -- John R. Lott, Jr.
					

David Hemenway’s guest column last Sunday, "Scientists reach consensus on guns," claimed a consensus on gun research based on a survey he conducted. But he conveniently fails to mention that




					madison.com


----------



## 2aguy (May 19, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> I've always stated that needing a gun for self defence was a fallacy, and we all know it is. So what's with the gun nuts running off and copying pasting articles from shady sources?
> 
> Well look no further, just simply check with Harvard and the studies -
> 
> ...




Yeah.....this is crap.......they used left wing judges to tell them that the thugs in their courtrooms used guns for crime.....awesome research......


----------



## 2aguy (May 19, 2022)

Cardinal Carminative said:


> Sadly this self-image many of the gun advocates have of themselves as "the man who shot Liberty Valence" is a big part of their personalities.
> 
> The ones who come out of the military may very well be prepared to take a human life.  But I always wonder about the "gravy seal" types who amass guns because they are attempting to build out their John Wayne fantasy.  In some ways I fear that is part of the corrosion at the core of the gun debate.  When questioning the validity of having so many guns in our society invariably these folks will suffer some degree of feelings of "persecution".
> 
> ...




Except 27 years of actual increasing gun ownership...you know, real world experience...shows you don't have the slightest clue what you are talking about, and your "feelz," about the issue doesn't have any bearing on the truth....

Over  27 years,  from 1993  to the year 2015, we went from 200 million guns in private hands in the 1990s and 4.7 million people carrying guns for self defense in 1997...to close to 400-600 million guns in private hands and over 19.4 million people carrying guns for self defense in 2019 (in 2020 that number is 21.52 million)...guess what happened...

New Concealed Carry Report For 2020: 19.48 Million Permit Holders, 820,000 More Than Last Year despite many states shutting down issuing permits because of the Coronavirus - Crime Prevention Research Center


-- gun murder down 49%

--gun crime down 75%

--violent crime down 72%

Gun Homicide Rate Down 49% Since 1993 Peak; Public Unaware

*Compared with 1993, the peak of U.S. gun homicides, the firearm homicide rate was 49% lower in 2010, and there were fewer deaths, even though the nation’s population grew. The victimization rate for other violent crimes with a firearm—assaults, robberies and sex crimes—was 75% lower in 2011 than in 1993. Violent non-fatal crime victimization overall (with or without a firearm) also is down markedly (72%) over two decades.*


This means that access to guns does not create gun crime........

Why do our democrat party controlled cities have gun crime problems?

*What changed in 2015?*

The democrat party did 3 things...

1) they began a war on the police that forced officers to stop pro active police work, allowing criminals to run wild.

2) they began to release the most violent and dangerous gun offenders over and over again, not matter how many times they had been arrested for gun crimes

3) they used their brown shirts, blm/antifa to burn, loot and murder for 7 months in primarily black neighborhoods while the democrat party mayors ordered the police to stand down and not stop them......in order to hurt Trump during the election.


----------



## 2aguy (May 19, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> I've always stated that needing a gun for self defence was a fallacy, and we all know it is. So what's with the gun nuts running off and copying pasting articles from shady sources?
> 
> Well look no further, just simply check with Harvard and the studies -
> 
> ...




This covers Hemenway and his first attempts to lie about defensive gun use....

*Instead, pro-control critics have focussed their efforts on their claim that, despite the enormous body of evidence indicating otherwise, DGU is actually rare. Thus, they argue, it is of little consequence for gun control policy that DGU is effective, since it is so infrequent. The critics’ discussion of the topic of the frequency of DGU is strident, polemical, and extreme. For example, Philip Cook and his colleagues baldly describe large estimates of DGU frequency as a “mythical number” (1997, p. 463).*

* Likewise, an article by David Hemenway (1997a) was brazenly titled “The Myth of Millions of Annual Self-Defense Gun Uses.” In another article by Hemenway (1997b), his title implicitly took it as given that DGUs are rare, and that surveys indicating the opposite grossly overstate DGU frequency. 

For Hemenway, the only scholarly task that remained was to explain why surveys did this: “Survey Research and Self-Defense Gun Use: An Explanation of Extreme Overestimation.” Finally, McDowall and Wiersema (1994), although well aware of the large number of surveys yielding large DGU estimates, nevertheless flatly concluded, in extremely strong terms, that “armed self -defense is extremely rare” (p. 1884). *
*
This conclusion was based entirely on a single survey, the National Crime Victimization Survey (NCVS), which did not even directly ask respondents about defensive gun use.
*
*These critics do not mainly support the low-DGU thesis by affirmatively presenting relevant empirical evidence indicating few DGUs. The only empirical evidence affirmatively cited in support of the low-DGU thesis is the uniquely low estimates derived from the NCVS. The critics appear in no way embarrassed by the fact that the only national estimate they can cite in support of their theory is a survey that does not even ask respondents the key question––whether they have used a gun for self-protection. Instead, the critics get around the large volume of contrary survey evidence by pronouncing all of it invalid and*



			https://www.saf.org/wp-content/uploads/journals/JFPP11.pdf


----------



## whitehall (May 19, 2022)

The Harvard "epidemiological theory " of self defense? Nuff said.


----------



## 2aguy (May 19, 2022)

Canon Shooter said:


> I stopped after reading this:
> 
> "We use epidemiological theory to explain why the “false positive” problem for rare events can lead to large overestimates of the incidence of rare diseases or rare phenomena such as self-defense gun use.  We then try to validate the claims of many millions of annual self-defense uses against available evidence.  We find that the claim of many millions of annual self-defense gun uses by American citizens is invalid."
> 
> ...




Thank you.

Hemenway is an anti-gun fanatic and he has been using shoddy/fake research for years....


----------



## Wild Bill Kelsoe (May 19, 2022)

_
*5. Firearms are used far more often to intimidate than in self-defense*

Using data from a national random-digit-dial telephone survey conducted under the direction of the Harvard Injury Control Center, we examined the extent and nature of offensive gun use.  We found that firearms are used far more often to frighten and intimidate than they are used in self-defense.  All reported cases of criminal gun use, as well as many of the so-called self-defense gun uses, appear to be socially undesirable._

Proof that I need to keep and bear arms.


----------



## Ringtone (May 19, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> I've always stated that needing a gun for self defence was a fallacy, and we all know it is. So what's with the gun nuts running off and copying pasting articles from shady sources?
> 
> Well look no further, just simply check with Harvard and the studies -
> 
> ...


Aside from your study, how the hell would needing/wanting a gun for self-defense be a fallacy?


----------



## Sunsettommy (May 19, 2022)

David Hamenway is a fraud who published in places where it doesn't meet the research standards as the following shows:

NRA-ILA

Does Anti-Gun Researcher David Hemenway Have Something To Hide?​
FRIDAY, MARCH 24, 2006

Excerpt:

It is common practice among legitimate researchers to give their peers access to data used in their studies, so that other researchers can review both the data and the methodology used in their analysis. Without such "peer review," a study`s findings typically are not assumed to be valid. Many scholarly journals will not even publish an article summarizing the results of a study until the data and methodology have been peer reviewed.

Regrettably, however, medical and public health journals, such as the_ New England Journal of Medicine_ and the_ Journal of the American Medical Association_, routinely publish articles on studies by anti-gun researchers held to a lower degree of scrutiny and academic standards. As civil rights lawyer and firearm issue scholar, Don B. Kates, has explained, since 1979 elements of the American public health community have promoted "gun control" by funding, producing and publishing studies that "prostitute scholarship, systematically inventing, misinterpreting, selecting, or otherwise manipulating data to validate preordained political conclusions."1

LINK

===

The below shows that David Hamenway has a bad habit of avoiding real gun owners in his "surveys" he relies on "experts" to drive his conclusions.

Debunked Harvard Researcher Cites Sociology ‘Experts’ to Claim More Guns Equal More Crime​
Deeply Flawed Anti-gun Study Successfully Refuted​
Defensive Gun Use Is Not a Myth​


----------



## Captain Caveman (May 20, 2022)

M14 Shooter said:


> And thus, yours.
> When you can show how your "Harvard link" addresses, much less Invalidates. the information I presnted , let us know.
> 
> 177300 + 123800 / 3 = 100,000 defensive gun uses per year.
> ...


Demonstrate that guns in self defence had valid evidence

I accept your surrender.


----------



## Captain Caveman (May 20, 2022)

Bloody hell, checked USMB this morning and had 25 mouth frothing alerts to this thread. I won't be checking all that crap. But just after skip reading, people are still replying in a way that highlights the fact they didn't read the link in the OP.


----------



## fncceo (May 20, 2022)

marvin martian said:


> Why do cops carry guns, then?



Because cops that don't, like UK police, are assaulted by members of the public a double the rate of US cops.









						Assaults on police in England and Wales rise above 100 a day during pandemic
					

Officer morale sinks in the 43 forces as attacks rise by 20% during the Covid crisis




					www.theguardian.com


----------



## Captain Caveman (May 20, 2022)

toobfreak said:


> View attachment 646920View attachment 646921View attachment 646922View attachment 646924


If you took the time to read the link in the OP, straight out of the bat, it states -

*1-3. Guns are not used millions of times each year in self-defense*
_
We use epidemiological theory to explain why the “false positive” problem for rare events can lead to large overestimates of the incidence of rare diseases or rare phenomena such as self-defense gun use.  We then try to validate the claims of many millions of annual self-defense uses against available evidence.  We find that the claim of many millions of annual self-defense gun uses by American citizens is invalid._

So you can run off and find the odd newspaper article on self defence, but many of the millions of reported cases were found to be invalid. Do you understand this?

It's probably gun nuts hyping the situation up, but reality and evidence proves otherwise.*
*


----------



## Captain Caveman (May 20, 2022)

fncceo said:


> Because cops that don't, like UK police, are assaulted by members of the public a double the rate of US cops.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


Yes, cops carry pepper spray and tasers in the UK. If there's an armed situation, various police are called in because those ones are trained to use firearms. Guns are controlled very tightly in the UK as opposed to being viewed as a joke in the US, this is why American cops shoot people in the back when they're running away. Everything doesn't need resolved by a gun, yet Americans feel it's the first tool in the box, before they open their mouths.


----------



## 2aguy (May 20, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> If you took the time to read the link in the OP, straight out of the bat, it states -
> 
> *1-3. Guns are not used millions of times each year in self-defense*
> 
> ...




They used left wing judges to tell them that thugs used guns for crime.......this isn't real research you twit......

They can's say there aren't millions of defensive gun uses....cause we don't like guns, ........

I listed 18 studies on guns used for self defense....over decades, conducted by actual researchers from both the government and private sector....you have a known, anti-gun fanatic who has been shown over the years to use fake and shoddy methods....


----------



## 2aguy (May 20, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> Yes, cops carry pepper spray and tasers in the UK. If there's an armed situation, various police are called in because those ones are trained to use firearms. Guns are controlled very tightly in the UK as opposed to being viewed as a joke in the US, this is why American cops shoot people in the back when they're running away. Everything doesn't need resolved by a gun, yet Americans feel it's the first tool in the box, before they open their mouths.




And yet guns are flooding the U.K. and criminals have easy access to them...

Police struggle to stop flood of firearms into UK


Police and border officials are struggling to stop a rising supply of illegal firearms being smuggled into Britain, a senior police chief has warned.

Chief constable Andy Cooke, the national police lead for serious and organised crime, said law enforcement had seen an increased supply of guns over the past year, and feared that it would continue in 2019

The Guardian has learned that the situation is so serious that the National Crime Agency has taken the rare step of using its legal powers to direct every single police force to step up the fight against illegal guns.

The NCA has used tasking powers to direct greater intelligence about firearms to be gathered by all 43 forces in England and Wales.

Another senior law enforcement official said that “new and clean” weapons were now being used in the majority of shootings, as opposed to guns once being so difficult to obtain that they would be “rented out” to be used in multiple crimes.

*Cooke, the Merseyside chief constable, told the Guardian: “We in law enforcement expect the rise in new firearms to continue. We are doing all we can. We are not in a position to stop it anytime soon.*

“Law enforcement is more joined up now than before, but the scale of the problem is such that despite a number of excellent firearms seizures, I expect the rise in supply to be a continuing issue.”

The increasing supply of guns belies problems with UK border security and innovations by organised crime gangs. Smugglers have increasingly found new ways and innovative routes to get guns past border defences.


*Cooke said that the dynamics of the streets of British cities had changed and that criminals were more willing to use guns: “If they bring them in people will buy them. It’s a kudos thing for organised criminals.”

Simon Brough, head of firearms at the NCA, said: “The majority of guns being used are new, clean firearms ... which indicates a relatively fluid supply.”*

He said shotguns were 40% of the total, with an increase in burglaries to try and steal them.

*Handguns are the next biggest category,* most often smuggled in from overseas, with ferry ports such as Dover being a popular entry point into the UK for organised crime groups:

“We’re doing a lot to fight back against it,” Brough said, adding that compared to other European countries, the availability in the UK was relatively lower.
==========

*Powerful automatic guns are being smuggled into Britain for use by organised crime gangs.

The National Crime Agency and police seized weapons in raids on the homes of previously untouchable “Mr Big”s after receiving intelligence from European detectives who broke an encrypted phone network used by drug dealers and gun traffickers.*

Gangs bring rapid‑fire guns to Britain’s streets

Matt Perfect, the crime agency’s firearms threat lead, said that new Skorpion and G9A automatic pistols, which fire at a speed comparable to an AK47 assault rifle, were found.



=====
cotland Yard today said police are seizing more deadly automatic weapons from criminals in London as detectives revealed that an innocent bystander was gunned down with a suspected Skorpion sub-machine gun last month .

Rise in sub-machine guns on London streets

*A former undercover cop who snared members of the Burger Bar Boys has warned violent gangs are in an “arms race” to control the West Midlands’ illegal drugs trade.*
*
Neil Woods, now a campaigner to legalise recreational drugs for rehabilitation benefits, said criminals are willing to use “extreme violence” to gain an upper hand on their competitors.
*
*That includes “importing” illegal firearms from places like the “Balkans” region of south eastern Europe onto the streets of the West Midlands, ready for combat.*

UK Gangs In "Arms Race" Despite Gun Control Laws


----------



## fncceo (May 20, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> Yes, cops carry pepper spray and tasers in the UK.



Cops in the US carry pepper spray and batons, many carry CED (Tasers).  Collectively, everything from OC spray to a firearms are called "options".  An officer uses his training and judgement to select the option most appropriate to the situation and use it.  Frequently, officers working in teams will use different options to play off the strengths of each.

No single option is appropriate in every situation. 

In most circumstances, a firearm's primary function is a deterrent to assaulting a police officer.  Even the guy who is convinced heis a total bad-ass will be hesitant to take on an armed police officer.  While an officer carrying only non-lethal options is a much easier target.


----------



## Blues Man (May 20, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> I've always stated that needing a gun for self defence was a fallacy, and we all know it is. So what's with the gun nuts running off and copying pasting articles from shady sources?
> 
> Well look no further, just simply check with Harvard and the studies -
> 
> ...


It only takes one time.

And people use their guns to protect themselves the fact that more people aren't shot in DGU's is proof of the incredible restraint exhibited by law abiding gun owners.

As the old saying goes 

Better to have it and not need it then to need it and not have it.


----------



## Blues Man (May 20, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> When did you get cornered? Do you know the date and place?


That's right you think violent crime doesn't exist.


----------



## Big Bend Texas (May 20, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> I've always stated that needing a gun for self defence was a fallacy, and we all know it is. So what's with the gun nuts running off and copying pasting articles from shady sources?
> 
> Well look no further, just simply check with Harvard and the studies -
> 
> ...


Shady sources like the CDC that spent 10,000,000.00 studying it and determined that there are anywhere from 500,000-3,000,000 DGU's per year?

One of the worst articles ever done on the subject.

According to interviews with prisoners guns deter upwards of a million crimes each year simply by would be attackers being made aware that a gun is present and/or someone there is willing to use it.

Every day criminals seek the softest targets possible.

Unless a gun is fired and/or reported as being involved to the police it won't even be mentioned in a report absent hard physical evidence such as an obvious gun shot wound or misses found in the dirt or striking property along with pass throughs.


----------



## Big Bend Texas (May 20, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> Pick the studies out of the article and link the articles that examines and rebuffs them.











						NRA-ILA | Armed Citizen®
					

Collection of armed citizens exercising their right to self-defense.




					www.nraila.org
				




Several thousand well documented reports here.


----------



## Big Bend Texas (May 20, 2022)

Donald H said:


> Whatever the truth may be, statistics prove that America got it wrong.
> 
> And will undoubtedly continue to get it wrong for the foreseeable future!
> 
> Dog help them if the blacks start shooting back at the police!


They've been shooting at police for as long as blacks have had access to firearms in the US.

Perhaps you should study up a bit before running your yap.


----------



## eagle1462010 (May 20, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> I've always stated that needing a gun for self defence was a fallacy, and we all know it is. So what's with the gun nuts running off and copying pasting articles from shady sources?
> 
> Well look no further, just simply check with Harvard and the studies -
> 
> ...


Harvard is a left leaning university.  Cherry picking data for Gun grabbing at a later date.

My Mother N Law was living in a high crime area.  We couldn't get her to leave her home.  By GOD I'VE LIVED HERE ALL MY LIFE and I'm not leaving.  They broke down the back door while she was home and she yelled at them..........We were lucky on this one they ran away.  We repaired the back door and said you need to move.  We bought here A GUN.......OMFG.......32 pistol.

Next call........they were trying to break in the front door.........She yelled and shot 2 holes into the front door...........They left.  She still wouldn't leave. 

Next door neighbor..........they broke into the home and shot him to death in his own bed for his prescription drugs........Killed him dead.  Finally she had enough and we moved her out of that neighborhood.  We were ALL ARMED WHEN WE MOVED HER.

Little old granny still alive.  Man next door dead as a door nail.

Screw your study Harvard.


----------



## eagle1462010 (May 20, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> Bloody hell, checked USMB this morning and had 25 mouth frothing alerts to this thread. I won't be checking all that crap. But just after skip reading, people are still replying in a way that highlights the fact they didn't read the link in the OP.


As you ignore evidence I've just read to show how the gun saved lives.  I live in the country.  Crime is low.  Everyone out here OWNS GUNS.........The thieves KNOW THIS.  That is why they don't come here.  Detente .  

Give them your address and DOX YOURSELF..........Tell them you HATE GUNS...........I'm sure it will work out for you.  lmao


----------



## Bob Blaylock (May 20, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> Nope, still a retard.


----------



## Bob Blaylock (May 20, 2022)

Donald H said:


> Whatever the truth may be, statistics prove that America got it wrong.



  You're from Canaduh, a shithole country that was founded in cowering and groveling before the same tyrant against we Americans violently rebelled in order to found our country.

  Your country was wrong from the beginning, and it is still wrong, and it will always be wrong.  History has proven, and will continue to prove, that America is the country that got it right.


----------



## Bob Blaylock (May 20, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> So I'm UK Centre Right,



  You're as much _“Centre Right”_ as Bruce Jenner is a woman.


----------



## Bob Blaylock (May 20, 2022)

marvin martian said:


> It's pretty sad that virtually _all _the political parties in the UK are anti-civil rights.
> 
> That's what happens when you give up your guns and pray to the government.



  What is hilarious is when the British pieces of filth think they have any say or standing to tell us Americans how to run our country.  We fought two bloody wars, specifically to establish that no, they have no such say or standing; that how we Americans run our country is none of the British filth's business.

  I find myself, lately, very tempted to think that we need to have a third war to make this point much more forcefully than we did the two previous times; perhaps a war that ends with us taking over the UK, making it an American colony, and oppressing the British the same way that they once tried to oppress us.


----------



## Blues Man (May 20, 2022)

eagle1462010 said:


> Harvard is a left leaning university.  Cherry picking data for Gun grabbing at a later date.
> 
> My Mother N Law was living in a high crime area.  We couldn't get her to leave her home.  By GOD I'VE LIVED HERE ALL MY LIFE and I'm not leaving.  They broke down the back door while she was home and she yelled at them..........We were lucky on this one they ran away.  We repaired the back door and said you need to move.  We bought here A GUN.......OMFG.......32 pistol.
> 
> ...


WHat this monarch lover doesn't understand is that it doesn't matter how many times people use guns in self defense and it never did.

The right to keep and bear is not predicated on need and it never was.

What I do know no matter what any of these studies show is that even on the extreme low end of the range of estimates there are more DGUs than there are people murdered every year


----------



## Blues Man (May 20, 2022)

Bob Blaylock said:


> You're as much _“Centre Right”_ as Bruce Jenner is a woman.


Center right in the UK is nothing like center right in the US.

I always wonder why these people who grovel in front of a fucking monarch are always whining about what we do here in our own country


----------



## eagle1462010 (May 20, 2022)

Blues Man said:


> WHat this monarch lover doesn't understand is that it doesn't matter how many times people use guns in self defense and it never did.
> 
> The right to keep and bear is not predicated on need and it never was.
> 
> What I do know no matter what any of these studies show is that even on the extreme low end of the range of estimates there are more DGUs than there are people murdered every year


Which part of shall not be infringed don't you understand.  All of your rants are meaningless to me and a vast number of gun owners in this country.  We have more guns and ammo than any standing army on earth.

Come and take them.............


----------



## Blues Man (May 20, 2022)

eagle1462010 said:


> Which part of shall not be infringed don't you understand.  All of your rants are meaningless to me and a vast number of gun owners in this country.  We have more guns and ammo than any standing army on earth.
> 
> Come and take them.............


My rants?

Care to quote any of them.

You might want to actually read what I wrote.  Maybe if you follow the text with your finger and move your lips as you read you might actually understand what I said.


----------



## eagle1462010 (May 20, 2022)

Blues Man said:


> My rants?
> 
> Care to quote any of them.
> 
> You might want to actually read what I wrote.  Maybe if you follow the text with your finger and move your lips as you read you might actually understand what I said.


I'll go back and look then.  Right now I'm in Shotgun mode shooting everything in my path.

ok


----------



## eagle1462010 (May 20, 2022)

Blues Man said:


> WHat this monarch lover doesn't understand is that it doesn't matter how many times people use guns in self defense and it never did.
> 
> The right to keep and bear is not predicated on need and it never was.
> 
> What I do know no matter what any of these studies show is that even on the extreme low end of the range of estimates there are more DGUs than there are people murdered every year


My apologies DGU's went right by me on that post.


----------



## martybegan (May 20, 2022)

johngaltshrugged said:


> And I've always said it's better to have a gun & not need it, than need a gun & not have it.
> Self defense with a gun worked out pretty well for these folks
> 
> 
> ...



Same thing with fire extinguishers.


----------



## Blues Man (May 20, 2022)

martybegan said:


> Same thing with fire extinguishers.


Exactly.

A gun is akin to an insurance policy.

You hope to hell you never have to use it but you're glad you have it if you do.

And besides that a gun is the cheapest insurance policy you can buy.


----------



## eagle1462010 (May 20, 2022)

Blues Man said:


> Exactly.
> 
> A gun is akin to an insurance policy.
> 
> ...


So is Wasp and hornet spray.  



			https://askinglot.com/does-wasp-spray-cause-blindness#:~:text=Simply%20so%2C%20can%20wasp%20spray%20blind%20you%3F%20The,they%20get%20to%20the%20hospital%20for%20an%20antidote.
		


The *wasp spray*, they told her, *can* shoot up to twenty feet away and is a lot more accurate, while with the pepper *spray*, they have to get too close to *you* and could overpower *you*. The *wasp spray* temporarily blinds an attacker until they get to the hospital for an antidote.


----------



## Blues Man (May 20, 2022)

eagle1462010 said:


> So is Wasp and hornet spray.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I never thought of using wasp spray.  It's 100% legal and easy to get too.

Thanks


----------



## eagle1462010 (May 20, 2022)

Blues Man said:


> I never thought of using wasp spray.  It's 100% legal and easy to get too.
> 
> Thanks


20 foot range.  They are blind.  A PKP fire extinguisher is the same..........About the same range and will stop a fire very quick


This will also bling you and if you have a grease fire in your kitchen it will put it out.

Make sure the cap is tight........lol.........the charge can blow the lid off and kill you though.


----------



## SavannahMann (May 20, 2022)

marvin martian said:


> Why do cops carry guns, then?



Well. How do cops get killed by bad guys if they have guns?


----------



## Blues Man (May 20, 2022)

SavannahMann said:


> Well. How do cops get killed by bad guys if they have guns?


You don't know that criminals don't obey gun laws ?


----------



## M14 Shooter (May 20, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> Demonstrate that guns in self defence had valid evidence


The VPC is a rabidly anti-gun organization.
Unlike you, they would not lie.


----------



## M14 Shooter (May 20, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> If you took the time to read the link in the OP, straight out of the bat, it states -
> *1-3. Guns are not used millions of times each year in self-defense*


Nope.
But, at least 100,000 times per year, in about 1% of all violent confrontations (as per your Harvard study)
10x more often than to murder.
5x more often than to commit suicide.


----------



## Captain Caveman (May 20, 2022)

M14 Shooter said:


> Nope.
> But, at least 100,000 times per year, in about 1% of all violent confrontations (as per your Harvard study)
> 10x more often than to murder.
> 5x more often than to commit suicide.


Demonstrate that guns in self defence had valid evidence.

Thank you for confirming your surrender.


----------



## Captain Caveman (May 20, 2022)

Blues Man said:


> You don't know that criminals don't obey gun laws ?


That's what makes them a criminal you retard


----------



## Donald H (May 20, 2022)

Bob Blaylock said:


> You're from Canaduh, a shithole country that was founded in cowering and groveling before the same tyrant against we Americans violently rebelled in order to found our country.
> 
> Your country was wrong from the beginning, and it is still wrong, and it will always be wrong.  History has proven, and will continue to prove, that America is the country that got it right.


Please don't bomb Canada too. 
Ya'all need a civil war to defuse all that hate and racism.


----------



## BlackSand (May 20, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> Demonstrate that guns in self defence had valid evidence.


.

Come at me bro, and an adequate demonstration will follow ...   

.​


----------



## Donald H (May 20, 2022)

Big Bend Texas said:


> They've been shooting at police for as long as blacks have had access to firearms in the US.
> 
> Perhaps you should study up a bit before running your yap.


That's the norm for the US. This is an escalation of violence and racism due to Trump. It's going to be a good show put on in your election. One side is going to steal another election for sure!


----------



## Captain Caveman (May 20, 2022)

BlackSand said:


> .
> 
> Come at me bro, and an adequate demonstration will follow ...
> 
> .​


I accept your surrender

(PS - I was told round here that you follow through by getting your private parts out. Whatever floats your boat, perv)


----------



## Blues Man (May 20, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> That's what makes them a criminal you retard


Thank you for saying that gun laws don't do shit to stop criminals.


----------



## Blues Man (May 20, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> Demonstrate that guns in self defence had valid evidence.
> 
> Thank you for confirming your surrender.








						CDC Study: Use of Firearms for Self-Defense is ‘Important Crime Deterrent’
					

President Obama signs executive order for CDC gun violence study. (AP photo)(CNSNews.com) – “Self-defense can be an important crime deterrent,”says a new report by the Centers for Disease Control (CDC).




					www.cnsnews.com
				




Studies that directly assessed the effect of actual defensive uses of guns (i.e., incidents in which a gun was ‘used’ by the crime victim in the sense of attacking or threatening an offender) have found consistently lower injury rates among gun-using crime victims compared with victims who used other self-protective strategies,” the CDC study, entitled “Priorities For Research to Reduce the Threat of Firearm-Related Violence,” states.

The Institute of Medicine and the National Research Council released the results of their research through the CDC last month. Researchers compiled data from previous studies in order to guide future research on gun violence, noting that “almost all national survey estimates indicate that defensive gun uses by victims are at least as common as offensive uses by criminals, with estimates of annual uses ranging from about 500,000 to more than 3 million per year.”


----------



## Captain Caveman (May 20, 2022)

Blues Man said:


> Thank you for saying that gun laws don't do shit to stop criminals.


Car laws don't stop you from running over someone, your retardism is increasing 

Laws reduce, they do not stop, bake.


----------



## Captain Caveman (May 20, 2022)

Blues Man said:


> CDC Study: Use of Firearms for Self-Defense is ‘Important Crime Deterrent’
> 
> 
> President Obama signs executive order for CDC gun violence study. (AP photo)(CNSNews.com) – “Self-defense can be an important crime deterrent,”says a new report by the Centers for Disease Control (CDC).
> ...


I accept your surrender as well


----------



## Blues Man (May 20, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> Car laws don't stop you from running over someone, your retardism is increasing
> 
> Laws reduce, they do not stop, bake.


They don't reduce.

The murder rate in the UK before the first round of gun laws was passed in the 60's was about the same as it is today.

So your gun laws didn't reduce the murder rate.

The murder rate in the US is almost exactly what it was in the 1950's before those evil AR 15 rifles were commonplace





__





						List of countries by intentional homicide rate by decade - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org


----------



## Blues Man (May 20, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> I accept your surrender as well


You didn;t read the link.


----------



## Captain Caveman (May 20, 2022)

M14 Shooter said:


> The VPC is a rabidly anti-gun organization.
> Unlike you, they would not lie.


What is your degree in?


----------



## M14 Shooter (May 20, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> Demonstrate that guns in self defence had valid evidence.


You missed the part where your "Harvard study" confirm the VPC numbers.


----------



## Captain Caveman (May 20, 2022)

Blues Man said:


> You didn;t read the link.


If you get confused by, "I accept your surrender", and, "Thank you for confirming your surrender", it's just a silly game that M14 thinks that it puts him above others. But I find odd bods interesting so I'm busy studying his illness.


----------



## M14 Shooter (May 20, 2022)

Donald H said:


> This is an escalation of violence and racism due to Trump


This where where I ask you to demonstrate your claim to be true, and you respond by tucking your tail and running away.
As you always do.


----------



## Captain Caveman (May 20, 2022)

M14 Shooter said:


> You missed the part where your "Harvard study" confirm the VPC numbers.


I didn't miss anything in my link, your surrender is noted again.


----------



## Blues Man (May 20, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> If you get confused by, "I accept your surrender", and, "Thank you for confirming your surrender", it's just a silly game that M14 thinks that it puts him above others. But I find odd bods interesting so I'm busy studying his illness.


So you admit you didn;t read the link


----------



## Captain Caveman (May 20, 2022)

M14 Shooter said:


> This where where I ask you to demonstrate your claim to be true, and you respond by tucking your tail and running away.
> As you always do.


Do you accept his surrender


----------



## Captain Caveman (May 20, 2022)

Blues Man said:


> So you admit you didn;t read the link


No, but I accept your surrender


----------



## M14 Shooter (May 20, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> What is your degree in?


I said:
_The VPC is a rabidly anti-gun organization.
Unlike you, they would not lie.    _ 
I'll give you another chance to present a meaningful response.


----------



## Captain Caveman (May 20, 2022)

M14 Shooter said:


> I said:
> _The VPC is a rabidly anti-gun organization.
> Unlike you, they would not lie.    _
> I'll give you another chance to present a meaningful response.


What is your degree in? Is it in the engineering field?


----------



## M14 Shooter (May 20, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> I didn't miss anything in my link, your surrender is noted again.


You did.
Apparently you didn't actuallty rread it.
It confirms  the VPC numbers.


----------



## M14 Shooter (May 20, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> What is your degree in? Is it in the engineering field?


When you can present a meaningful response to my post, let me know.
Until then, I continue accept your surrender.


----------



## Captain Caveman (May 20, 2022)

M14 Shooter said:


> You did.
> Apparently you didn't actuallty rread it.
> It confirms  the VPC numbers.


And your surrender is noted too. Thank you.


----------



## Captain Caveman (May 20, 2022)

M14 Shooter said:


> When you can present a meaningful response to my post, let me know.
> Until then, I continue accept your surrender.


I reckon it's in some kind of engineering area, you're displaying the traits of those type of people.


----------



## SavannahMann (May 20, 2022)

Blues Man said:


> You don't know that criminals don't obey gun laws ?



The argument is the mere presence of a gun deters criminals. Yet fifty plus cops a year are shot and killed. 62 last year as one example. 

Yet for civilians if they have a gun they are somehow instantly safer.


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (May 20, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> So what's with the gun nuts running off and copying pasting articles from shady sources?


That's what dishonest conservatives do.


----------



## M14 Shooter (May 20, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> And your surrender is noted too. Thank you.


I'm sorry you do not like the fact your Harvard study confirmed the VPC numbers, which indicate that firearms are used in self-defense 10x more often than murder and 5x more often than suicide, but there's nothing I can do about it.
You hate the truth., and I continue to accept your surrender.


----------



## M14 Shooter (May 20, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> I reckon it's in some kind of engineering area, you're displaying the traits of those type of people.


When you can present a meaningful response to my post, let me know.
Until then, I continue accept your surrender.


----------



## M14 Shooter (May 20, 2022)

SavannahMann said:


> The argument is the mere presence of a gun deters criminals.


The mere presence of a gun - sometimes- deters criminals.
There.  Fixed it for you.


----------



## Captain Caveman (May 20, 2022)

Do you know what M14 Shooter , which is the safest type of road in the UK?

We have motorways where the max speed limit is 70mph. Then "A" roads are 60mph. When in town, you drop down to 30mph and 40mph.

Actually, the safest roads are Motorways, more deaths occur in the 30 to 40 zones. But do you know what? If you lived here with your gun nut mentality, you would argue against stats and reality to claim Motorways are the most dangerous.

So by all means stick up for guns, but reality is kicking you in the face. Your degree makes you aloof to reality, seen this before when I had to sack that guy, and your personalities are a mirror image.


----------



## Captain Caveman (May 20, 2022)

M14 Shooter said:


> When you can present a meaningful response to my post, let me know.
> Until then, I continue accept your surrender.


Thank you, nailed it. And not only that, you are in a job that requires a qualification below what you achieved. That moves on that you have a below average EIQ, hence where you are at.


----------



## 2aguy (May 20, 2022)

SavannahMann said:


> The argument is the mere presence of a gun deters criminals. Yet fifty plus cops a year are shot and killed. 62 last year as one example.
> 
> Yet for civilians if they have a gun they are somehow instantly safer.



You don't have to guess...they asked criminals......you doofus.  

Also, cops have to actively engage and capture criminals, civilians do not.....when a civilian shows or draws a gun, the majority of criminals leave to find an unarmed victim....when the criminal is really stupid, they get shot, wounded and sometimes killed...but civilians are not looking to push the confrontation, which is why so many defensive gun uses do not result in shots fired....you moron.....

For example...no shots fired....

*The Flagler County Sheriff’s Office released video of the incident, which shows 50-year old Rafael Vincent Rivera holding a knife in his hand as he argues with a couple over being cut off in traffic. The motorcyclist has on a pair of brass knuckles, but isn’t seen threatening Rivera in any way. Instead, as the three jaw and cuss one another, Rivera “stepped aggressively toward the victim and began slashing his knife at him”, according to the sheriff’s accoun

Only then did the victim draw his lawfully carried firearm and once again demanded that Rivera back away.

One deputies arrived and reviewed the footage as well as talking to witnesses, Rivera was taken into custody, and not for the first time. According to the sheriff’s post on Facebook, the 50-year old has four previous stints in the Flagler County jail on felony and misdemeanor theft and trespassing charges, though this appears to be his first arrest for a violent crime. Rivera is now facing charges of aggravated assault with a deadly weapon, and the sheriff says it all could have been avoided if Rivera had simply kept himself under control.
---
It sounds like the sheriff believes the motorcyclist would have been justified in shooting Rivera to protect himself and his wife, but I’m glad that Rivera at least had the sense to back down once he realized he’d brought a knife to a gunfight.*









						Sheriff praises concealed carry holder in road rage incident
					

The concealed carry holder was able to de-escalate the situation after another motorist pulled a knife on him.




					bearingarms.com


----------



## M14 Shooter (May 20, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> Do you know what M14 Shooter , which is the safest type of road in the UK?


Irrelevant to the issue at hand, and indicative of your desperation to hold on to a discussion you know you have lost.
Thus, I again accept your surrender.


----------



## 2aguy (May 20, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> Thank you, nailed it. And not only that, you are in a job that requires a qualification below what you achieved. That moves on that you have a below average EIQ, hence where you are at.




Moron....see post #174 for a very typical defensive gun use.....


----------



## M14 Shooter (May 20, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> Thank you, nailed it. And not only that, you are in a job that requires a qualification below what you achieved. That moves on that you have a below average EIQ, hence where you are at.


When you can present a meaningful response to my post, let me know.
Until then, I continue accept your surrender.


----------



## Blues Man (May 20, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> No, but I accept your surrender


it was never offered.


----------



## Captain Caveman (May 20, 2022)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> That's what dishonest conservatives do.


Being dishonest is not attached to political stances, dishonesty lives on both sides of the fence, it's up to us peasants to accept that or live in cloud cuckoo land.

I'm UK centre Right, always voted Tory (at General Election level), but I was brought up to be sensible with guns, rather than having the Right to be dangerous with them. I don't normally vote for local elections but I did this time for the Green candidate because he was the only one to get off his backside and visit the peasants.


----------



## Captain Caveman (May 20, 2022)

Blues Man said:


> it was never offered.


It was displayed and accepted. Thank you, no need to concede more.


----------



## Blues Man (May 20, 2022)

SavannahMann said:


> The argument is the mere presence of a gun deters criminals. Yet fifty plus cops a year are shot and killed. 62 last year as one example.
> 
> Yet for civilians if they have a gun they are somehow instantly safer.


So tell me how many cops do you think would be shot if we disarmed them all?

More or less?

And no one is instantly anything.  Guns are not magic just like gun laws are not magic.  We have gun laws that both state and federal governments refuse to enforce

A gun can make a person more safe or less safe.  it all depends on the person and it is that person's choice not yours.


----------



## Blues Man (May 20, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> It was displayed and accepted. Thank you, no need to concede more.


Keep making shit up if it makes you feel better.


----------



## Captain Caveman (May 20, 2022)

M14 Shooter said:


> When you can present a meaningful response to my post, let me know.
> Until then, I continue accept your surrender.


Nailed it. And not only that, you are in a job that requires a qualification below what you achieved. That moves on that you have a below average EIQ, hence where you are at.

Your surrender and replies are very serendipity


----------



## Captain Caveman (May 20, 2022)

Blues Man said:


> So tell me how many cops do you think would be shot if we disarmed them all?
> 
> More or less?
> 
> ...


You wouldn't disarm all the cops. Certain officers would be properly trained in firearm use and these officers would be requested to appropriate situations. Just like in the UK.

But I suppose America have a lot of idiots with guns.


----------



## M14 Shooter (May 20, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> Nailed it. And not only that, you are in a job ...


When you can present a meaningful response to my post, let me know.
Until then, I continue accept your surrender.


----------



## M14 Shooter (May 20, 2022)

Blues Man said:


> Keep making shit up if it makes you feel better.


He is desperate for attention, and subconsciously believes he is only worthy of abuse.
That's why insulting people he disagrees with makes him feel good.


----------



## Captain Caveman (May 20, 2022)

2aguy said:


> Moron....see post #174 for a very typical defensive gun use.....


What, the post where the Sheriff believes". Probably another encounter covered by the Harvard findings that it would fail reality and evidence. But thanks retard for your surrender.


----------



## Captain Caveman (May 20, 2022)

M14 Shooter said:


> When you can present a meaningful response to my post, let me know.
> Until then, I continue accept your surrender.


----------



## Captain Caveman (May 20, 2022)

Blues Man said:


> Keep making shit up if it makes you feel better.


Your conceding continues.


----------



## Captain Caveman (May 20, 2022)

Blimey, didn't realise how many gun nuts were so passionate to debunk gun reality. You gun nuts have it bad, but, there are parallels with guns as others can be with their religion.


----------



## M14 Shooter (May 20, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


>


I see you are uanble to present a meaningful response to my post, let me know.
Thus, I accept your surrender.


----------



## M14 Shooter (May 20, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> Blimey, didn't realise how many gun nuts were so passionate to debunk gun reality.


-You- proved guns in the US are 10x more likely to be used for self-defense than murder, and 5x more likelt than for suicide.
And you hate yourself for it.
Well done.


----------



## Captain Caveman (May 20, 2022)

M14 Shooter said:


> The mere presence of a gun - sometimes- deters criminals.
> There.  Fixed it for you.


SavannahMann  accepts your surrender.


----------



## Captain Caveman (May 20, 2022)

M14 Shooter said:


> -You- proved guns in the US are 10x more likely to be used for self-defense than murder, and 5x more likelt than for suicide.
> And you hate yourself for it.
> Well done.


Thank you for your surrender


----------



## MarathonMike (May 20, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> I've always stated that needing a gun for self defence was a fallacy, and we all know it is. So what's with the gun nuts running off and copying pasting articles from shady sources?
> 
> Well look no further, just simply check with Harvard and the studies -
> 
> ...


You might want to find a less biased source than the Mecca of Libtardian Propaganda aka Harvard.


----------



## Captain Caveman (May 20, 2022)

MarathonMike said:


> You might want to find a less biased source than the Mecca of Libtardian Propaganda aka Harvard.


Read about the overestimation of self defence if you wish -



			https://www.jstor.org/stable/1144020
		


Then get back to me.


----------



## M14 Shooter (May 20, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> Thank you for your surrender


I'm sorry yoy don't like the fact you proved guns in the US are 10x more likely to be used for self-defense than murder, and 5x more likely than for suicide.
But you did.
Your surrender, accepted.


----------



## M14 Shooter (May 20, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> Read about the overestimation of self defence if you wish -


The VPC didn't overestimate their 100k/year figure - in fact, it was confirmed by your "Harvard study".
So, again, thank you for proving guns are 10x more likely to be used in self-0defense than murder, and 5x more likely than suicide.


----------



## BlackSand (May 20, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> I accept your surrender
> 
> (PS - I was told round here that you follow through by getting your private parts out. Whatever floats your boat, perv)


.

I surrendered nothing ... You offered nothing and got nothing in return.
Whatever you have been told amounts to nothing more than empty rhetoric.

.​


----------



## Blues Man (May 20, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> You wouldn't disarm all the cops. Certain officers would be properly trained in firearm use and these officers would be requested to appropriate situations. Just like in the UK.
> 
> But I suppose America have a lot of idiots with guns.


ALL officers are currently trained very well in the use of firearms.

I don't want cops with less training on the streets


----------



## Captain Caveman (May 20, 2022)

BlackSand said:


> .
> 
> I surrendered nothing ... You offered nothing and got nothing in return.
> Whatever you have been told amounts to nothing more than empty rhetoric.
> ...


Direct that to M14


----------



## Captain Caveman (May 20, 2022)

Blues Man said:


> ALL officers are currently trained very well in the use of firearms.
> 
> I don't want cops with less training on the streets


No they're not, you have instances where people are running in the opposite direction and get shot by cops. You obviously ignore your news.

You have cops with less training, because they're not adequately trained in the first place.


----------



## marvin martian (May 20, 2022)

Bob Blaylock said:


> What is hilarious is when the British pieces of filth think they have any say or standing to tell us Americans how to run our country.  We fought two bloody wars, specifically to establish that no, they have no such say or standing; that how we Americans run our country is none of the British filth's business.
> 
> I find myself, lately, very tempted to think that we need to have a third war to make this point much more forcefully than we did the two previous times; perhaps a war that ends with us taking over the UK, making it an American colony, and oppressing the British the same way that they once tried to oppress us.



Not a bad idea, except the UK is useless as a colony. They have no natural resources to speak of, and they're largely uneducated, fat, lazy, government parasites. They've destroyed whatever legitimacy they once had by opening their country to the dregs of the middle east and Africa, and turning it into a shitty welfare state.

The best use of it would be to put a wall around the whole thing and ship all the left-wingers there.


----------



## Captain Caveman (May 20, 2022)

marvin martian said:


> Not a bad idea, except the UK is useless as a colony. They have no natural resources to speak of, and they're largely uneducated, fat, lazy, government parasites. They've destroyed whatever legitimacy they once had by opening their country to the dregs of the middle east and Africa, and turning it into a shitty welfare state.
> 
> The best use of it would be to put a wall around the whole thing and ship all the left-wingers there.


You're a gun nut, so you live in an immutable position with them. That is your achilleas heal and the world pitys you.


----------



## BlackSand (May 20, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> Direct that to M14


.

Here's a test you can conduct that will prove firearms can provide defense capabilities ...
Load the firearm, make sure there is a round in the chamber, release the safety if applicable, 
cock the firearm if applicable, look down the barrel and pull the trigger.

If you are still able to type, you need to buy a better firearm ... 


.​


----------



## C_Clayton_Jones (May 21, 2022)

2aguy said:


> David Hemenway....the author of the study?
> 
> guns aren't used in self defense...cause I say so....
> 
> ...


“Victims use guns in less than 1% of contact crimes, and women never use guns to protect themselves against sexual assault (in more than 300 cases). Victims using a gun were no less likely to be injured after taking protective action than victims using other forms of protective action. Compared to other protective actions, the National Crime Victimization Surveys provide little evidence that self-defense gun use is uniquely beneficial in reducing the likelihood of injury or property loss.

This article helps provide accurate information concerning self-defense gun use. It shows that many of the claims about the benefits of gun ownership are largely myths.” _ibid_

The lie that dishonest conservatives attempt to propagate is that because of these facts, efforts will be made to ‘ban’ or ‘confiscate’ guns – when in fact no one seeks to ‘ban’ or ‘confiscate’ guns.

Conservatives make the mistake of attempting to ‘justify’ gun ownership with claims of ‘self-defense,’ where the research clearly demonstrates no such ‘justification’ exists.

Citizens have the right to carry firearms, even when used less than 1% of time in self-defense.


----------



## Captain Caveman (May 21, 2022)

Gun ownership and firearm-related deaths - PubMed 

*Conclusion: *_The number of guns per capita per country was a strong and independent predictor of firearm-related death in a given country, whereas the predictive power of the mental illness burden was of borderline significance in a multivariable model. Regardless of exact cause and effect, however, the current study debunks the widely quoted hypothesis that guns make a nation safer._


----------



## Blues Man (May 21, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> No they're not, you have instances where people are running in the opposite direction and get shot by cops. You obviously ignore your news.
> 
> You have cops with less training, because they're not adequately trained in the first place.


Very rare incidences


----------



## Cellblock2429 (May 21, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> I've always stated that needing a gun for self defence was a fallacy, and we all know it is. So what's with the gun nuts running off and copying pasting articles from shady sources?
> 
> Well look no further, just simply check with Harvard and the studies -
> 
> ...


/——-/ Why do personal security guards for liberal democrats carry guns?


----------



## Blues Man (May 21, 2022)

Cellblock2429 said:


> /——-/ Why do personal security guards for liberal democrats carry guns?


His beloved bag of bones Queen has armed guards


----------



## Captain Caveman (May 21, 2022)

Cellblock2429 said:


> /——-/ Why do personal security guards for liberal democrats carry guns?


For the self defence fallacy


----------



## Captain Caveman (May 21, 2022)

Blues Man said:


> Very rare incidences


Just like the self defence stats.


----------



## 2aguy (May 21, 2022)

C_Clayton_Jones said:


> “Victims use guns in less than 1% of contact crimes, and women never use guns to protect themselves against sexual assault (in more than 300 cases). Victims using a gun were no less likely to be injured after taking protective action than victims using other forms of protective action. Compared to other protective actions, the National Crime Victimization Surveys provide little evidence that self-defense gun use is uniquely beneficial in reducing the likelihood of injury or property loss.
> 
> This article helps provide accurate information concerning self-defense gun use. It shows that many of the claims about the benefits of gun ownership are largely myths.” _ibid_
> 
> ...



The national crime victimizzation survey couldn’t count actual rape stats correctly and never even asks about defensive gun uses….

….but still gets around 87,000 defensive gun uses a year reported through their survey.


There are 18 studies that specifically ask about defensive gun use…..the study from the Centers For Disease Control puts the number at 1.1 million while the Dept. of Justice study puts it at 1.5 milion

And those are just two

In 2013 Obama ordered the CDC to review all gun related research….the 10 milion dollars spent on that project found defensive gun use between 500-3 million times a year…

So I just pointed out 3 out of the 18 actual studies……how do you claim there aren’t any?


----------



## 2aguy (May 21, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> Gun ownership and firearm-related deaths - PubMed
> 
> *Conclusion: *_The number of guns per capita per country was a strong and independent predictor of firearm-related death in a given country, whereas the predictive power of the mental illness burden was of borderline significance in a multivariable model. Regardless of exact cause and effect, however, the current study debunks the widely quoted hypothesis that guns make a nation safer._



I gave you the Harvard study that states the exact opposite…


----------



## Blues Man (May 21, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> Just like the self defence stats.


REally?

The lowest end of the estimates for DGUs is still in the hundreds of thousands annually

How many cops shoot a person in the back annually?


----------



## 2aguy (May 21, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> Gun ownership and firearm-related deaths - PubMed
> 
> *Conclusion: *_The number of guns per capita per country was a strong and independent predictor of firearm-related death in a given country, whereas the predictive power of the mental illness burden was of borderline significance in a multivariable model. Regardless of exact cause and effect, however, the current study debunks the widely quoted hypothesis that guns make a nation safer._




From Harvard....the study you don't want to talk about...

Hey...they even talk about Britain..........

ccording to a study in the Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy, which cites the Centers for Disease Control, the U.S. National Academy of Sciences and the United Nations International Study on Firearms Regulation, the more guns a nation has, the less criminal activity.​-----
When Kates and Mauser compared England with the United States, they found “’a negative correlation,’ that is, ‘where firearms are most dense violent crime rates are lowest, and where guns are least dense, violent crime rates are highest.’ There is no consistent significant positive association between gun ownership levels and violence rates.”
-----
In 2004, the U.S. National Academy of Sciences released an evaluation from its review of existing research. After reviewing 253 journal articles, 99 books, 43 government publications and its own original empirical research, it failed to identify any gun control that had reduced violent crime, suicide, or gun accidents, note Kates and Mauser.

“The same conclusion was reached in 2003 by the U.S. Centers for Disease Control,” write Kates and Mauser. “Armed crime, never a problem in England, has now become one. Handguns are banned but the Kingdom has millions of illegal firearms. Criminals have no trouble finding them and exhibit a new willingness to use them. In the decade after 1957, the use of guns in serious crime increased a hundredfold. In the late 1990s, England moved from stringent controls to a complete ban of all handguns and many types of long guns. Hundreds of thousands of guns were confiscated from those owners law-abiding enough to turn them in to authorities.” But crime increased instead of decreasing.









						Harvard University Study Reveals Astonishing Link Between Firearms, Crime and Gun Control
					

According to a study in the Harvard Journal of Law & Public Policy, which cites the Centers for Disease Control, the U.S. National Academy of Sciences and the United Nations International Study on Firearms Regulation,  the more guns a nation has, the less criminal activity.




					www.beliefnet.com


----------



## Captain Caveman (May 21, 2022)

2aguy said:


> From Harvard....the study you don't want to talk about...
> 
> Hey...they even talk about Britain..........
> 
> ...


Well, this is the problem with weird sites posting "proposed studies". If you look at your source and the details, then check it out on why it lacks info and goes against all the studies, the article appears in a publication. It does not appear to be a peer-reviewed journal, or one that is searching for truth as opposed to presenting a certain world view. The paper itself is not a scientific article, but a polemic, making the claim that gun availability does not affect homicide or suicide.  It does this by ignoring most of the scientific literature, and by making too many incorrect and illogical claims.

So I suggest to do proper research and stop falling for the gun fallacy.


----------



## WinterBorn (May 21, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> I've always stated that needing a gun for self defence was a fallacy, and we all know it is. So what's with the gun nuts running off and copying pasting articles from shady sources?
> 
> Well look no further, just simply check with Harvard and the studies -
> 
> ...



They blew holes in nothing.

I am a 62 year old man.   I'm still in decent shape.  But if I am attacked by 2 or 3 young men, I am going to lose.   Should my life be in the hands of young thugs who have already demonstrated they do not care for my safety?

If I am out and see a violent crime being committed, I will be the good citizen and help.   But just like I will not drown trying to save someone from drowning, I will not just add to the victim's list but being unarmed.

When I used to work on the road, I would stop and help a stranded motorist.   I would do that because I felt confident I could do so without dying.


----------



## Captain Caveman (May 21, 2022)

WinterBorn said:


> They blew holes in nothing.
> 
> I am a 62 year old man.   I'm still in decent shape.  But if I am attacked by 2 or 3 young men, I am going to lose.   Should my life be in the hands of young thugs who have already demonstrated they do not care for my safety?
> 
> ...


Blimey, when did you get attacked


----------



## Mac-7 (May 21, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> No they're not, you have instances where people are running in the opposite direction and get shot by cops. You obviously ignore your news.
> 
> You have cops with less training, because they're not adequately trained in the first place.


Like the man said, when seconds count the cops are only minutes away


Not heard on this recording is the exchange that prompted the headline

The wife shot the intruder

But instead of running away he just kept coming

What do I do now she asks?

Shoot ‘em again the husband shouts!

Which she did


----------



## WinterBorn (May 21, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> Blimey, when did you get attacked



Blimey, can you read?   Did I say I had been attacked?   Or did I describe a hypothetical situation?   And, not a far-fetched one, at that.


----------



## Captain Caveman (May 22, 2022)

WinterBorn said:


> Blimey, can you read?   Did I say I had been attacked?   Or did I describe a hypothetical situation?   And, not a far-fetched one, at that.


So you're just part of the self defence fallacy.

I'm surprised to don't carry a parachute when you take the airline.


----------



## Blues Man (May 22, 2022)

Mac-7 said:


> Like the man said, when seconds count the cops are only minutes away
> 
> 
> Not heard on this recording is the exchange that prompted the headline
> ...


If the cops show up at all.

The Supreme Court has ruled that the police have absolutely no legal obligation to come to the aid of any citizen


----------



## Blues Man (May 22, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> So you're just part of the self defence fallacy.
> 
> I'm surprised to don't carry a parachute when you take the airline.


I have already told you that I got jumped but you still deny that violent crime exists


----------



## Captain Caveman (May 22, 2022)

Blues Man said:


> I have already told you that I got jumped but you still deny that violent crime exists


Please link to my post on the entire forum where I've claimed violent crime doesn't exist


----------



## Blues Man (May 22, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> Please link to my post on the entire forum where I've claimed violent crime doesn't exist


No one needs a gun for self defense.  You have said this too many times to count

Why is it you believe no one needs a gun for self defense?


----------



## Captain Caveman (May 22, 2022)

Blues Man said:


> No one needs a gun for self defense.  You have said this too many times to count
> 
> Why is it you believe no one needs a gun for self defense?


See, you were lying and talking shit. Correct, you don't need a gun for self defence.

Please link to my post where I've said crime, from trivial to violent, doesn't exist? You can't because you are a lying arsehole and you haven't got the brain power to COMPREHEND the Harvard study.

The first part of the study is stating that millions of instances were claimed by alleged victims that they needed a gun for the self defence incident. The studies states, "We find that the claim of many millions of annual self-defense gun uses by American citizens is invalid". The study, nor I, don't claim that crime, trivial or violent, doesn't exist.

So stop your lying mouth.


----------



## Blues Man (May 22, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> See, you were lying and talking shit. Correct, you don't need a gun for self defence.
> 
> Please link to my post where I've said crime, from trivial to violent, doesn't exist? You can't because you are a lying arsehole and you haven't got the brain power to COMPREHEND the Harvard study.
> 
> ...


Piss off

There are very real reasons to own a gun for self defense.  The main reason is that violent crime exists and it only takes one time for a violent crime to result in a catastrophic end.

So anyone with half a brain knows that when you say no one needs a gun for self defense you are denying that violent crime can and does occur on a daily basis.


----------



## Captain Caveman (May 22, 2022)

Blues Man said:


> Piss off
> 
> There are very real reasons to own a gun for self defense.  The main reason is that violent crime exists and it only takes one time for a violent crime to result in a catastrophic end.
> 
> So anyone with half a brain knows that when you say no one needs a gun for self defense you are denying that violent crime can and does occur on a daily basis.


The reason to own a gun for self defence is to fulfill that fallacy, the fallacy that the study highlights. You have less than half a brain, and you lie to back your retarded stance.


----------



## Blues Man (May 22, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> The reason to own a gun for self defence is to fulfill that fallacy, the fallacy that the study highlights. You have less than half a brain, and you lie to back your retarded stance.


There is no fallacy.

You are denying that violent crime exists by saying no one ever has to worry about defending themselves









						Crime Clock
					





					ucr.fbi.gov
				




From the link.

Since there are 3,155,760 seconds in a year and one violent crime occurs every 26 seconds that means there are 121,375 violent crimes per year in the US

That means at least 121,375 people will have a need to defend themselves from violent criminals.  This of course does not count the attempted violent crimes that were thwarted by a person and even the most conservative estimates put that number in the hundreds of thousands annually.


----------



## Crick (May 22, 2022)

marvin martian said:


> Are you at all bothered by the fact that Hitler used that exact argument to disarm Jews prior to their genocide?


"A fringe theory, the Nazi gun control argument, posits that gun regulation led to the disarmament of German Jews, in turn substantively contributing to the rise of the Nazis and the Holocaust; fact-checkers have described this theory as "false" or "debunked"".[2][3][4][5]





__





						Disarmament of the German Jews - Wikipedia
					






					en.wikipedia.org
				




Uwe Dietrich Adam: _Judenpolitik im Dritten Reich._
"Fact-checking Ben Carson's claim that gun control laws allowed the Nazis to carry out Holocaust". _@politifact_. Retrieved 31 January 2019.
"Florida lawmaker mangles Nazi gun control history". _@politifact_. Retrieved 31 January 2019.
"Facebook post claiming guns could have prevented the Holocaust met with backlash". _The Washington Post_. 2018.
"Shot down: the myths distorting the US gun debate". _Channel 4 News_. 12 February 2013. Retrieved 31 January 2019.
Halbrook 2001
Dennis Brian: _Einstein - Sein Leben_.
Joachim Steindorf: _Kurzkommentar zum Waffenrecht_, Verlag C.H. Beck 1999.
Susanne Heim (publ.): Die Verfolgung und Ermordung der europäischen Juden durch das nationalsozialistische Deutschland 1933-1945. Band 2: Deutsches Reich 1938 - August 1939. München 2009, ISBN 978-3-486-58523-0, S. 452.
Steinweis, Alan (October 14, 2015). "Ben Carson Is Wrong on Guns and the Holocaust". The New York Times. Retrieved 2016-03-15


----------



## Briss (May 22, 2022)

There are millions of home invasions every year.  Why would anyone want to prevent anyone from protecting themselves from a home invader?


----------



## WinterBorn (May 22, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> So you're just part of the self defence fallacy.
> 
> I'm surprised to don't carry a parachute when you take the airline.



Fallacy?    I mentioned 3 basic scenarios.   Which one do you propose is the fallacy>

No, I don't take a parachute on a plane.    But I do wear my seatbelt.   I have fire extinguishers in my home and vehicles.


----------



## Captain Caveman (May 22, 2022)

Blues Man said:


> There is no fallacy.
> 
> You are denying that violent crime exists by saying no one ever has to worry about defending themselves
> 
> ...


What a stupid dickhead you are. Crime exists. The need to carry a gun for self defence is proven to be a fallacy.


----------



## Captain Caveman (May 22, 2022)

WinterBorn said:


> Fallacy?    I mentioned 3 basic scenarios.   Which one do you propose is the fallacy>
> 
> No, I don't take a parachute on a plane.    But I do wear my seatbelt.   I have fire extinguishers in my home and vehicles.


You should take a parachute on a plane, the fallacy is they crash all the time. But as you observe, planes don't crash all the time.

Gun nuts claimed they needed their gun to save their life in a crime. These were studied against the evidence etc.. and millions were debunked. So just like there's no need to take a parachute on a plane, there's no need to have a gun for self defence. I'm not saying planes don't crash and crime doesn't happen, the likes of brain dead Blues Man believes you do, and I'm surprised that prat doesn't wear a motor cycle helmet whilst driving a car.

So the need of a parachute cos planes crash all the time, that you need a gun for self defence, and a helmet in a car to save your head in a crash are all fallacies. But when the person is so retarded over guns, they hate being brought into the world of reality.


----------



## WinterBorn (May 22, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> You should take a parachute on a plane, the fallacy is they crash all the time. But as you observe, planes don't crash all the time.
> 
> Gun nuts claimed they needed their gun to save their life in a crime. These were studied against the evidence etc.. and millions were debunked. So just like there's no need to take a parachute on a plane, there's no need to have a gun for self defence. I'm not saying planes don't crash and crime doesn't happen, the likes of brain dead Blues Man believes you do, and I'm surprised that prat doesn't wear a motor cycle helmet whilst driving a car.
> 
> So the need of a parachute cos planes crash all the time, that you need a gun for self defence, and a helmet in a car to save your head in a crash are all fallacies. But when the person is so retarded over guns, they hate being brought into the world of reality.



If crime happens, then why do you propose to take away our means to defense and of stopping some crimes.


----------



## WinterBorn (May 22, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> You should take a parachute on a plane, the fallacy is they crash all the time. But as you observe, planes don't crash all the time.
> 
> *Gun nuts claimed they needed their gun to save their life in a crime.* These were studied against the evidence etc.. and millions were debunked. So just like there's no need to take a parachute on a plane, there's no need to have a gun for self defence. I'm not saying planes don't crash and crime doesn't happen, the likes of brain dead Blues Man believes you do, and I'm surprised that prat doesn't wear a motor cycle helmet whilst driving a car.
> 
> So the need of a parachute cos planes crash all the time, that you need a gun for self defence, and a helmet in a car to save your head in a crash are all fallacies. But when the person is so retarded over guns, they hate being brought into the world of reality.



When you call everyone who has a carry gun a "gun nut", you are arguing like the religious fundamentalists.   I have several guns.  I also have a permit to carry.   I am not a gun nut.  I am a shooter, a collector and a hunter.   But I am not a "gun nut".


----------



## 2aguy (May 22, 2022)

Crick said:


> "A fringe theory, the Nazi gun control argument, posits that gun regulation led to the disarmament of German Jews, in turn substantively contributing to the rise of the Nazis and the Holocaust; fact-checkers have described this theory as "false" or "debunked"".[2][3][4][5]
> 
> 
> 
> ...




Moron.....you idiots keep trying to use this argument.........and every time you don't actually read the links...you just parrot whatever anti-gun asshole you read on the internet...

The German government began gun registration in the 1920s, as well as gun confiscation.....when the National Socialists came to power in the 1830s, they used those lists to disarm Jews and their political enemies.....

You are the idiot.....you don't know the actual history...

Did you even read your own links?

From Link 2 in your post...

*German gun laws*

As the Nazi Party rose to power in Germany, it inherited a 1928 gun registration law that had replaced a total ban on gun ownership imposed on a defeated Germany after World War I. The 1928 law created a permit system to own and sell firearms and ammunition.

---

*The regulations to implement this law, rather than the law itself, did impose new limits on one group: Jews.
------*
*On Nov. 11, 1938, the German minister of the interior issued "Regulations Against Jews Possession of Weapons." Not only were Jews forbidden to own guns and ammunition, they couldn’t own "truncheons or stabbing weapons."*
*
In addition to the restrictions, Ellerbrock said the Nazis had already been raiding Jewish homes and seizing weapons.
*
*"The gun policy of the Nazis can hardly be compared to the democratic procedures of gun regulations by law," Ellerbrock told us. "It was a kind of special administrative practice (Sonderrecht), which treated people in different ways according to their political opinion or according to ‘racial identity’ in Nazi terms."

The power of a police state*

*In short, Nazi-era Germany imposed greater gun restrictions for Jews (and other perceived enemies) at the same time it loosened gun restrictions for other groups.*

*








						PolitiFact - Fact-checking Ben Carson's claim that gun control laws allowed the Nazis to carry out Holocaust
					

Republican Ben Carson has been criticized for suggesting that gun control enabled the rise of the Nazis and led to the e




					www.politifact.com
				



*


----------



## 2aguy (May 22, 2022)

Crick said:


> "A fringe theory, the Nazi gun control argument, posits that gun regulation led to the disarmament of German Jews, in turn substantively contributing to the rise of the Nazis and the Holocaust; fact-checkers have described this theory as "false" or "debunked"".[2][3][4][5]
> 
> 
> 
> ...




A source that isn't stupid....

*In 1931, Weimar authorities discovered plans for a Nazi takeover in which Jews would be denied food and persons refusing to surrender their guns within 24 hours would be executed. They were written by Werner Best, a future Gestapo official. In reaction to such threats, the government authorized the registration of all firearms and the confiscation thereof, if required for “public safety.” The interior minister warned that the records must not fall into the hands of any extremist group.*
*

In 1933, the ultimate extremist group, led by Adolf Hitler, seized power and used the records to identify, disarm, and attack political opponents and Jews. Constitutional rights were suspended, and mass searches for and seizures of guns and dissident publications ensued. Police revoked gun licenses of Social Democrats and others who were not “politically reliable.”

During the five years of repression that followed, society was “cleansed” by the National Socialist regime. Undesirables were placed in camps where labor made them “free,” and normal rights of citizenship were taken from Jews. The Gestapo banned independent gun clubs and arrested their leaders. Gestapo counsel Werner Best issued a directive to the police forbidding issuance of firearm permits to Jews.


In 1938, Hitler signed a new Gun Control Act. Now that many “enemies of the state” had been removed from society, some restrictions could be slightly liberalized, especially for Nazi Party members. But Jews were prohibited from working in the firearms industry, and .22 caliber hollow-point ammunition was banned.
*
*The time had come to launch a decisive blow to the Jewish community, to render it defenseless so that its “ill-gotten” property could be redistributed as an entitlement to the German “Volk.” The German Jews were ordered to surrender all their weapons, and the police had the records on all who had registered them. Even those who gave up their weapons voluntarily were turned over to the Gestapo.*









						How the Nazis Used Gun Control | National Review
					

The perennial gun-control debate in America did not begin here. The same arguments for and against were made in the 1920s in the chaos of Germany’s Weimar Republic, which opted for gun registration…



					www.nationalreview.com


----------



## Captain Caveman (May 22, 2022)

WinterBorn said:


> If crime happens, then why do you propose to take away our means to defense and of stopping some crimes.


Thank you for your false dilemma. If you feel your only means to defence is purely just a gun, a dog has a higher IQ than you.


----------



## Captain Caveman (May 22, 2022)

WinterBorn said:


> When you call everyone who has a carry gun a "gun nut", you are arguing like the religious fundamentalists.   I have several guns.  I also have a permit to carry.   I am not a gun nut.  I am a shooter, a collector and a hunter.   But I am not a "gun nut".


A gun nut is a person who's religion is guns.

Have a conversation with a religious person about the Bible and God, they defend on blind faith. Have a conversation with a gun nut, they defend on blind faith. Reality and evidence proves that your gun obsession to self defence is based on pure fallacy.


----------



## Briss (May 22, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> Thank you for your false dilemma. If you feel your only means to defence is purely just a gun, a dog has a higher IQ than you.


So, in the event of a home invasion, what do you suggest?  A knife?  Clubs?  Talk them out of it?


----------



## Captain Caveman (May 22, 2022)

Briss said:


> So, in the event of a home invasion, what do you suggest?  A knife fight?  Clubs?


What did you do when your home was invaded


----------



## Briss (May 22, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> What did you do when your home was invaded


I'm asking you what you suggest people do when they are confronted by a home invader.

So, what do you suggest?

Prayer?


----------



## Captain Caveman (May 22, 2022)

Briss said:


> I'm asking you what you suggest people do when they are confronted with a home invader.
> 
> So, what do you suggest?


I'll tell them to telephone Briss for the handy tips he/she used when his/her house was invaded.

What do TV programmes suggest? Window and door locks? A dog? Neighborhood Watch scheme? CCTV with lights that come on when they pick movement up? A spy hole in the door? A panic button? A house alarm? Pepper spray? Stronger front door? A rolling pin?

Personally, I have two little dogs that bark at the slightest sound and a Ring door bell.


----------



## WinterBorn (May 22, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> Thank you for your false dilemma. If you feel your only means to defence is purely just a gun, a dog has a higher IQ than you.



Why?  Because you say it is so?    I choose an easily concealed tool that evens the odds in a fight and can be seen.

FYI, the FBI estimates there are over 100,000 uses of firearms that stop crimes every year.  

Often, the criminal seeing the gun prevents the crime.   Hence the claim that a gun in the house is more likely to kill someone in the household than a criminal.   Most defensive uses of a gun do not result in any death.

Oh, and I originally mentioned being attacked by more than one person, when all are significantly younger than I am.   What other means of self defense do you suggest?   Taking karate?   Calling the police?


----------



## WinterBorn (May 22, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> A gun nut is a person who's religion is guns.
> 
> Have a conversation with a religious person about the Bible and God, they defend on blind faith. Have a conversation with a gun nut, they defend on blind faith. Reality and evidence proves that your gun obsession to self defence is based on pure fallacy.



I have been a shooter and a fan of the history of firearms since I was 8 or 9.    No religious implications for them at all.   They are merely a tool.


----------



## Briss (May 22, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> I'll tell them to telephone Briss for the handy tips he/she used when his/her house was invaded.
> 
> What do TV programmes suggest? Window and door locks? A dog? Neighborhood Watch scheme? CCTV with lights that come on when they pick movement up? A spy hole in the door? A panic button? A house alarm? Pepper spray? Stronger front door? A rolling pin?
> 
> Personally, I have two little dogs that bark at the slightest sound and a Ring door bell. victims of home invasions


So, what you're saying is that the victims of home invasions are responsible for what happens to them because a home invader or burglar shouldn't have been able to breach their home barrier in the first place.  So, if your home is not invader-proof, you shouldn't be able to defend yourself effectively when the barrier is breached.

Is that about it?


----------



## Blues Man (May 23, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> What a stupid dickhead you are. Crime exists. The need to carry a gun for self defence is proven to be a fallacy.


No it isn't.

The need is there as I have shown with actual numbers provided by the FBI.


----------



## Blues Man (May 23, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> Thank you for your false dilemma. If you feel your only means to defence is purely just a gun, a dog has a higher IQ than you.


A gun is the single most effective tool for self defense.

PERIOD


----------



## BlackSand (May 23, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> What did you do when your home was invaded


.

As a matter of self-defense, my home hasn't been invaded ... And it could have something to do with the sign that reads:
_"If you can read the sign, you are in range."

._​


----------



## miketx (May 23, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> I've always stated that needing a gun for self defence was a fallacy, and we all know it is. So what's with the gun nuts running off and copying pasting articles from shady sources?
> 
> Well look no further, just simply check with Harvard and the studies -
> 
> ...


Simply put, you are a liar.


----------



## miketx (May 23, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> What's that retarded comment in English? I don't speak butchered American English, so could you up the grade on that one please.


You do speak commie well.


----------



## 2aguy (May 23, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> A gun nut is a person who's religion is guns.
> 
> Have a conversation with a religious person about the Bible and God, they defend on blind faith. Have a conversation with a gun nut, they defend on blind faith. Reality and evidence proves that your gun obsession to self defence is based on pure fallacy.




The only group whose religion is guns are the Mandalorians....you dumb ass.....


----------



## miketx (May 23, 2022)

2aguy said:


> The only group whose religion is guns are the Mandalorians....you dumb ass.....


That loon is as crazy as the day is long.


----------



## Captain Caveman (May 23, 2022)

Briss said:


> So, what you're saying is that the victims of home invasions are responsible for what happens to them because a home invader or burglar shouldn't have been able to breach their home barrier in the first place.  So, if your home is not invader-proof, you shouldn't be able to defend yourself effectively when the barrier is breached.
> 
> Is that about it?


So you're out shopping and your house is burgled. How did you gun help you?

Watched a crime programme on TV where burglars were interviewed. They often knock on your door, and if you answer, they have an excuse, like, "Does Kevin live here?". When you say know, they claim they must have the wrong house/street and bid you good day. If there's no answer, you could then be burgled. But all the burglars were put off by CTV and a barking dog.

I hope you're not stupid enough not to have any home security.


----------



## M14 Shooter (May 23, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> Gun ownership and firearm-related deaths - PubMed
> *Conclusion: *_The number of guns per capita per country was a strong and independent predictor of firearm-related death in a given country, whereas the predictive power of the mental illness burden was of borderline significance in a multivariable model. Regardless of exact cause and effect, however, the current study debunks the widely quoted hypothesis that guns make a nation safer._


This is where I ask you to demonstrate the necessary relationship between gun ownership rates and gun violence rates.
You will respond by tucking your tail and running away.


----------



## M14 Shooter (May 23, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> Just like the self defence stats.


And yet, 10x more often than guns are used to commit murder, and 5x more often than suicide.
Your claimed fallacy, disproven..


----------



## miketx (May 23, 2022)

The clown is just a liar.


----------



## Captain Caveman (May 23, 2022)

WinterBorn said:


> Why?  Because you say it is so?    I choose an easily concealed tool that evens the odds in a fight and can be seen.
> 
> FYI, the FBI estimates there are over 100,000 uses of firearms that stop crimes every year.
> 
> ...


So when did the home invaders run off because they saw your gun?


----------



## miketx (May 23, 2022)

Briss said:


> So, in the event of a home invasion, what do you suggest?  A knife?  Clubs?  Talk them out of it?


He would take care of them another way.


----------



## WinterBorn (May 23, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> So when did the home invaders run off because they saw your gun?



Home invaders are not the only criminals preying on the weak.   I have stopped a mugging.    No police report.

And, as I said before, the FBI reports that guns are used to stop a crime 100,000 times per year or more.


----------



## AZrailwhale (May 23, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> I'll tell them to telephone Briss for the handy tips he/she used when his/her house was invaded.
> 
> What do TV programmes suggest? Window and door locks? A dog? Neighborhood Watch scheme? CCTV with lights that come on when they pick movement up? A spy hole in the door? A panic button? A house alarm? Pepper spray? Stronger front door? A rolling pin?
> 
> Personally, I have two little dogs that bark at the slightest sound and a Ring door bell.


Neither of which are going to stop someone who intends to do you harm.  Little dogs can be kicked to death with little or no danger to the kickers.  Ring doorbell cameras only records who comes to your front door unless you have them on every door and window of the house.  All the cameras will do is identify when your assailants arrived and left unless they were stupid enough to not wear masks.


----------



## Captain Caveman (May 23, 2022)

WinterBorn said:


> Home invaders are not the only criminals preying on the weak.   I have stopped a mugging.    No police report.
> 
> And, as I said before, the FBI reports that guns are used to stop a crime 100,000 times per year or more.


Same here, I went over to intervene and the guy ran off. My weapon where two hands.

FBI report is fantastic, but unless it was scientifically produced, not bias involved, evidence scrutinised etc.. it remains hearsay. Do you have a link to the report, need to see if it's been peer reviewed etc .


----------



## Captain Caveman (May 23, 2022)

AZrailwhale said:


> Neither of which are going to stop someone who intends to do you harm.  Little dogs can be kicked to death with little or no danger to the kickers.  Ring doorbell cameras only records who comes to your front door unless you have them on every door and window of the house.  All the cameras will do is identify when your assailants arrived and left unless they were stupid enough to not wear masks.



Well, all the interviewed burglars claim otherwise to your opinion.


----------



## Captain Caveman (May 23, 2022)

2aguy said:


> The only group whose religion is guns are the Mandalorians....you dumb ass.....


You're a perfect example of a gun nut, your religion is guns. Your belief in guns is based on blind faith and no matter how much reality and evidence is thrown at you, you still believe in the fallacies surrounding guns.


----------



## miketx (May 23, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> Well, all the interviewed burglars claim otherwise to your opinion.


Lol, criminals are notorious liars, like you.


----------



## Dante Reawakened (May 23, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> I've always stated that needing a gun for self defence was a fallacy, and we all know it is. So what's with the gun nuts running off and copying pasting articles from shady sources?
> 
> Well look no further, just simply check with Harvard and the studies -
> 
> ...


I’ve been a gun toting liberal. I believe it’s more complicated. Guns for personal safety? Depends on the context. It’s situational.  I’d have to read the studies , but know the arguments from most sides.


----------



## Captain Caveman (May 23, 2022)

butchyboy said:


> Lol, criminals are notorious liars, like you.


Many gun nuts are retarded, like you.


----------



## M14 Shooter (May 23, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> Many gun nuts are retarded, like you.


Sadly, as you have shown over and over and over - this -is- the best you can do.


----------



## Dagosa (May 23, 2022)

marvin martian said:


> Why do cops carry guns, then?


Maybe you should ask a cop. You’ll get a real answer. Cops like military people choose to put themselves in harms way to enforce laws. You  really had to make that silly comparison ?


----------



## Briss (May 23, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> So you're out shopping and your house is burgled. How did you gun help you?


No.  Let's say you're not out shopping and are at home when the home invader invades, and he forces his way in despite you being present.

What is your advice to the victim should they be confronted with such a situation?


----------



## 2aguy (May 23, 2022)

WinterBorn said:


> Home invaders are not the only criminals preying on the weak.   I have stopped a mugging.    No police report.
> 
> And, as I said before, the FBI reports that guns are used to stop a crime 100,000 times per year or more.



And the FBI only catches those where an actual police report is made….the other researchers catch all the rest.


----------



## 2aguy (May 23, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> You're a perfect example of a gun nut, your religion is guns. Your belief in guns is based on blind faith and no matter how much reality and evidence is thrown at you, you still believe in the fallacies surrounding guns.



Actually, that is you….no matter how much research we show you, you reject it….out of ignorance, stubbornness and fear.


----------



## miketx (May 23, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> Many gun nuts are retarded, like you.


Come take them.


----------



## WinterBorn (May 23, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> Same here, I went over to intervene and the guy ran off. My weapon where two hands.
> 
> FBI report is fantastic, but unless it was scientifically produced, not bias involved, evidence scrutinised etc.. it remains hearsay. Do you have a link to the report, need to see if it's been peer reviewed etc .



You were lucky.   And, as any LEO would tell you, foolish.   The guys involved in my event were not going anywhere until they saw I was armed.   Then I wasn't just more prey.


----------



## P@triot (May 23, 2022)

Crick said:


> "Fact-checking Ben Carson's claim that gun control laws allowed the Nazis to carry out Holocaust". _*@politifact*_*.* Retrieved 31 January 2019.
> "Florida lawmaker mangles Nazi gun control history". _*@politifact*_*.* Retrieved 31 January 2019.


Bwahahaha!! PolitiFact?!? _Really_?


> PolitiFact is owned by the Poynter Institute, *a left-wing organization funded in part by George Soros*. The primary purpose of Poynter and PolitiFact is to malign conservatives


GTFO here, clown. Anybody who turns to PolitiFact is either intentionally posting disinformation or extremely ignorant. Either way, that person has 0 credibility.








						PolitiFact Is to 'Fact' What Pravda Was to Truth, Credibility
					

One of the self-proclaimed fact-checkers, PolitiFact, declared my hate crime hoax claim "false," but it offered no refutation of what I said.




					www.dailysignal.com


----------



## P@triot (May 23, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> Same here, I went over to intervene and the guy ran off. *My weapon where two hands*.


I'll take "*Things That Never Happened for $500, Alex*".

(The fact that you actually said "_where_ two hands" is deliciously ironic )


----------



## Blues Man (May 23, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> So you're out shopping and your house is burgled. How did you gun help you?
> 
> Watched a crime programme on TV where burglars were interviewed. They often knock on your door, and if you answer, they have an excuse, like, "Does Kevin live here?". When you say know, they claim they must have the wrong house/street and bid you good day. If there's no answer, you could then be burgled. But all the burglars were put off by CTV and a barking dog.
> 
> I hope you're not stupid enough not to have any home security.


Wow are you that fucking stupid?

If your house is burglarized when you are not there then your life was never in danger.

If you're home an a couple people force their way in you better have a fucking gun.

Just ask Dr Petit form CT.

A doctor living in an affluent town decided to take a nap on his couch with his wife and 2 teenaged daughters upstairs. 

He did not have a gun and he was beaten and left for dead while his daughters and wife were raped tied up and burned to death in the fire the home invaders started.

I bet he wished he had a fucking gun


----------



## Blues Man (May 23, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> So when did the home invaders run off because they saw your gun?


I know 2 people who use a gun to stop criminals.

One was the owner of a restaurant I worked at.  Some piece of shit pulled a knife on one of the waitresses and demanded money.  My boss walked out of the back with a shotgun and put it against the head of the asshole who pissed his pants on the spot.  Just like you would do

The other was my neighbor who pulled a pistol on some piece of shit breaking into his cars


----------



## BlackSand (May 23, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> So you're out shopping and your house is burgled. How did you gun help you?


.

That's the same nonsense the Harvard study you posted is based on.
They counted crimes that had nothing to do with self-defense or a firearm.

They counted the number of arsons and petty theft that didn't even involve a firearm or another individual
as a means to come up with a number they could pretend supported the conclusion they decided on before ever doing a study.

Lies, Damn Lies, and Statistics

.​


----------



## Captain Caveman (May 24, 2022)

BlackSand said:


> .
> 
> That's the same nonsense the Harvard study you posted is based on.
> They counted crimes that had nothing to do with self-defense or a firearm.
> ...


Did you know, 65% of burglaries occur between 6am and 6pm, and most of those are between 10am and 3pm because most houses are empty during those times.

So tell me again, when your house is burgled and you're at work, how did your gun save you?


----------



## Captain Caveman (May 24, 2022)

Blues Man said:


> I know 2 people who use a gun to stop criminals.
> 
> One was the owner of a restaurant I worked at.  Some piece of shit pulled a knife on one of the waitresses and demanded money.  My boss walked out of the back with a shotgun and put it against the head of the asshole who pissed his pants on the spot.  Just like you would do
> 
> The other was my neighbor who pulled a pistol on some piece of shit breaking into his cars


So my question is, when did the home invaders run off because they saw your gun?


----------



## westwall (May 24, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> If you took the time to read the link in the OP, straight out of the bat, it states -
> 
> *1-3. Guns are not used millions of times each year in self-defense*
> _
> ...





The OP begins with a lie.

Epic fail is the result.


----------



## Captain Caveman (May 24, 2022)

I tell you what, you gun nuts have certainly worked through the list of fallacies.


----------



## westwall (May 24, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> I tell you what, you gun nuts have certainly worked through the list of fallacies.





Your whole thread is a logical fallacy that begins with an outright lie.

DURRRRRR


----------



## Captain Caveman (May 24, 2022)

westwall said:


> Your whole thread is a logical fallacy that begins with an outright lie.
> 
> DURRRRRR


Your input to the thread is as much use as tits on a fish.


----------



## westwall (May 24, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> Your input to the thread is as much use as tits on a fish.





Good.  Piss off to merry old england.


----------



## Captain Caveman (May 24, 2022)

westwall said:


> Good.  Piss off to merry old england.


I was going to ask you to piss off, go find a thread on Lego or sand castles.


----------



## westwall (May 24, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> I was going to ask you to piss off, go find a thread on Lego or sand castles.
> [England.
> 
> 
> Nah, I would rather annoy you.


----------



## Captain Caveman (May 24, 2022)

westwall , please provide a peer reviewed study that supports your fallacy millions of self defence incidents were saved by a gun.

Studies have to be non biased and undertaken in a strict scientific way. So it has to be neural, objective, and rational.

So that's you fucked, you won't find anything like that on your NRA comics


----------



## Abatis (May 24, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> I've always stated that needing a gun for self defence was a fallacy, and we all know it is. So what's with the gun nuts running off and copying pasting articles from shady sources?
> 
> Well look no further, just simply check with Harvard and the studies -



You have the balls to call out "shady studies" and then post an *author* selected collection of his 18 - 25 year old papers, all written by one anti-gun activist who is the Director of the Harvard Injury Control Research Center and the Harvard Youth Violence Prevention Center and is a Senior Soros Justice Fellow?



Captain Caveman said:


> Pardon the pun, Harvard blow holes in the gun nut's self defence argument.



Even if we were to accept Mr. Hemenway's selected bibliography as unbiased, broad-based research and a scholarly representation of defensive gun use, (it's not) it is a snapshot of the situation in the mid-90's to early 2000's.

Are you really arguing the atmosphere of armed self-defense hasn't changed since then, given the expansion of jurisdictions that have liberalized citizen carriage of guns for self-defense?

1997:








What's next for you?

How about a discussion of current internet security and identity theft threats, citing papers from 1997-2004?

.


----------



## westwall (May 24, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> westwall , please provide a peer reviewed study that supports your fallacy millions of self defence incidents were saved by a gun.
> 
> Studies have to be non biased and undertaken in a strict scientific way. So it has to be neural, objective, and rational.
> 
> So that's you fucked, you won't find anything like that on your NRA comics





There have been dozens posted.  Even the Uniform Crime Reports from the FBI refute your crap.

Those too have been posted.

You are intellectually dishonest and a liar.


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (May 24, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> I've always stated that needing a gun for self defence was a fallacy, and we all know it is. So what's with the gun nuts running off and copying pasting articles from shady sources?
> 
> Well look no further, just simply check with Harvard and the studies -
> 
> ...


🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕
And if you didn't understand go fuck yourself you worthless foreign piece of shit. Come and take'em


----------



## BlackSand (May 24, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> Did you know, 65% of burglaries occur between 6am and 6pm, and most of those are between 10am and 3pm because most houses are empty during those times.
> 
> So tell me again, when your house is burgled and you're at work, how did your gun save you?


.

Which would have nothing at all to do with whether or not a firearm would provide self-defense capabilities ... Try to stay on topic.

.​


----------



## Blues Man (May 24, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> So my question is, when did the home invaders run off because they saw your gun?


Where did I ever say my home was invaded?

I gave you 2 examples I witnessed of a person using a gun to stop crimes.


----------



## Captain Caveman (May 24, 2022)

westwall said:


> There have been dozens posted.  Even the Uniform Crime Reports from the FBI refute your crap.
> 
> Those too have been posted.
> 
> *You are *intellectually *dishonest and a liar.*


You've just been dishonest and lied.

Provide the link to a peer review study.


----------



## Captain Caveman (May 24, 2022)

bigrebnc1775 said:


> 🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕🖕
> And if you didn't understand go fuck yourself you worthless foreign piece of shit. Come and take'em


Oh shut up you silly boy.


----------



## Captain Caveman (May 24, 2022)

BlackSand said:


> .
> 
> Which would have nothing at all to do with whether or not a firearm would provide self-defense capabilities ... Try to stay on topic.
> 
> .​


It's on topic. You feel you need a gun for self defence, one fallacy you guys patter is that you need it against home invaders. So people are wanting to steal from your house when you're at work. So please explain how your gun saved you when your home was invaded when you were at work? Or do people only want to break into you house when you're at home??

Please engage both brain cells this time.


----------



## BlackSand (May 24, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> It's on topic. You feel you need a gun for self defence, one fallacy you guys patter is that you need it against home invaders. So people are wanting to steal from your house when you're at work. So please explain how your gun saved you when your home was invaded when you were at work? Or do people only want to break into you house when you're at home??
> 
> Please engage both brain cells this time.


.

Petty theft, arson and burglary are Property Crimes ... Not Assault Crimes.
They have nothing to do with self-defense ... Which is something the nitwits at Harvard who produced the study you posted failed to realize as well.

.​


----------



## Captain Caveman (May 24, 2022)

Abatis said:


> You have the balls to call out "shady studies" and then post an *author* selected collection of his 18 - 25 year old papers, all written by one anti-gun activist who is the Director of the Harvard Injury Control Research Center and the Harvard Youth Violence Prevention Center and is a Senior Soros Justice Fellow?
> 
> 
> 
> ...


The age of the studies are irrelevant. If you require more, check this link -






						The psychology of guns: risk, fear, and motivated reasoning - Humanities and Social Sciences Communications
					

The gun debate in America is often framed as a stand-off between two immutable positions with little potential to move ahead with meaningful legislative reform. Attempts to resolve this impasse have been thwarted by thinking about gun ownership attitudes as based on rational choice economics...




					www.nature.com
				




You will find a wealth of studies outlining the negative effects of guns, "_more than 30 years of public health research supports thinking of guns as statistically more of a personal hazard than a benefit"._

Many studies, scientific based and peer reviewed, all draw the same conclusions, the Harvard ones being no different.

Keep on reading and you find that gun nuts suffer from the cognitive biases and motivated reasoning problems.


----------



## Blues Man (May 24, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> It's on topic. You feel you need a gun for self defence, one fallacy you guys patter is that you need it against home invaders. So people are wanting to steal from your house when you're at work. So please explain how your gun saved you when your home was invaded when you were at work? Or do people only want to break into you house when you're at home??
> 
> Please engage both brain cells this time.


What you are too thick in the head to realize is that it only takes one time one just one occurrence of a violent crime to change your life forever.

When I got jumped and mugged when I was 18 I received severe injuries that still affect me today.

I have permanent vision impairment in my left eye and I still get crushing headaches on a pretty regular basis.
I had to have my spleen removed so I have been more susceptible to illnesses.

In fact the Dr told me that my hypothermia from being left unconscious in the middle of winter after my coat and shoes were stolen that I could just as easily have died before I made it to the ER.

So maybe you should just stfu about shit you know nothing about.


----------



## Mac-7 (May 24, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> I've always stated that needing a gun for self defence was a fallacy, and we all know it is. So what's with the gun nuts running off and copying pasting articles from shady sources?
> 
> Well look no further, just simply check with Harvard and the studies -
> 
> ...


Relying on a gun for self defense is a better option than calling 911 when a street thug is waving a knife at you


----------



## Blues Man (May 24, 2022)

Mac-7 said:


> Relying on a gun for self defense is a better option than calling 911 when a street thug is waving a knife at you


That and the fact that the Supreme Court has ruled that police have absolutely no legal obligation to come to anyone's aid.  So why would any sane person rely on the police for protection?


----------



## Mac-7 (May 24, 2022)

Blues Man said:


> That and the fact that the Supreme Court has ruled that police have absolutely no legal obligation to come to anyone's aid.  So why would any sane person rely on the police for protection?


Libs have this naive hope that it will never happen to them


----------



## Captain Caveman (May 24, 2022)

Mac-7 said:


> Relying on a gun for self defense is a better option than calling 911 when a street thug is waving a knife at you


More fallacies.


----------



## Captain Caveman (May 24, 2022)

Blues Man said:


> What you are too thick in the head to realize is that it only takes one time one just one occurrence of a violent crime to change your life forever.
> 
> When I got jumped and mugged when I was 18 I received severe injuries that still affect me today.
> 
> ...


Shut up kid, the topic is above your pea size brain and you're still spouting more fallacies.


----------



## Blues Man (May 24, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> Shut up kid, the topic is above your pea size brain and you're still spouting more fallacies.


My injuries aren't a fallacy, Dipshit.

Violent crime and the need for good people to protect themselves from the fucking animals in this world are not fallacies.

You being to fucking stupid to realize that isn't a fallacy either,


----------



## Captain Caveman (May 24, 2022)

Blues Man said:


> My injuries aren't a fallacy, Dipshit.
> 
> Violent crime and the need for good people to protect themselves from the fucking animals in this world are not fallacies.
> 
> You being to fucking stupid to realize that isn't a fallacy either,


"_how emotions can hijack rational-decision-making processes to the point of being the dominant influence on risk assessments. Research has shown that “perceived risk judgments”—estimates of the likelihood that something bad will happen—are especially hampered by emotion_"

You're just an emotional wreck with your perceived possible hourly violence occurrences.


----------



## 2aguy (May 24, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> I've always stated that needing a gun for self defence was a fallacy, and we all know it is. So what's with the gun nuts running off and copying pasting articles from shady sources?
> 
> Well look no further, just simply check with Harvard and the studies -
> 
> ...



Tell us that this lady is a myth…..

69 year old woman defends herself against a criminal….a real stupid criminal who decides advancing on an armed woman was a good idea….

*he odds of a 69-year old woman being able to fight off an intruder half her age are pretty slim, but give that older woman a gun for self-defense and all of a sudden her chances of survival look a lot better.*
*————-*
*but Morrison says she was determined to protect herself.
*


> *“Something wasn’t right with the man,” she said, adding that he didn’t say a word. “He had a blank look on his face.”
> She said she thought her fiance was outside, so the door to the house was unlocked.
> Morrison said the stranger stepped inside so she asked him who he was and what he wanted, but he did not respond.
> “I said, ‘I’m getting my damn gun.’ So I went to my bedroom and got my gun and I went out the back door and I came to the fence and he sees me and he starts toward me,” Morrison said. “I fired a shot above him, then said, ‘Back off, dude. I’ll shoot you.’ And he kept coming toward me, so I shot him.”
> ...











						Home intruders no match for well armed women
					

Intruders in Florida and Wyoming got a surprise reception from the women inside their homes.




					bearingarms.com


----------



## Briss (May 24, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> "_how emotions can hijack rational-decision-making processes to the point of being the dominant influence on risk assessments. Research has shown that “perceived risk judgments”—estimates of the likelihood that something bad will happen—are especially hampered by emotion_"
> 
> You're just an emotional wreck with your perceived possible hourly violence occurrences.


I find that getting people to answer a questions allows them to see the faultiness of their thinking.  So, let's start with your dismissal of the victims of home invasion.  On average, how many home invasions are there every year?


----------



## Dayton3 (May 24, 2022)

marvin martian said:


> Are you at all bothered by the fact that Hitler used that exact argument to disarm Jews prior to their genocide?



I so wish people on both sides would not go running to use Hitler or Nazis as an example.


----------



## 2aguy (May 24, 2022)

Dayton3 said:


> I so wish people on both sides would not go running to use Hitler or Nazis as an example.



Why?  They are a known example of gun control….using gun registration lists to disarm their intended victims……

The registration lists and gun bans implemented by the German government using the same exact arguments anti-gun fanatics are using today…….

You don’t want to hear about the most relevant example of government gun banning and confiscation…….


----------



## BasicHumanUnit (May 24, 2022)

The Conservative Right STILL doesn't get it.
THEY ARE FUCKING WITH YOUR HEADS and you're responding by letting your heads explode rather than do anything about it.   
They don't give a flying fuck about your safety or saving lives...NONE.  NADA.
They want you helpless against their God (Big iron-fisted government control) period.

All the rest is just fucking with your minds and you morons keep arguing with them as if it means something rather than doing a damn thing meaningful.
I'll bet NONE of the self proclaimed "2A defenders" on this forum have sent a single DIME to help GOA fight lawsuits or ever contacted a representative..
Pathetic.

The Gun Policy Coalition that fights for 2A rights recently stated that out of 2 MILLION urgent requests sent out to members FOR urgent HELP CONTACTING REPRESENTATIVES IN CONGRESS , less than 50,000 had responded.
THAT'S LESS THAN 1%  !!!!

This is how I know for absolutely 100% CERTAIN, they WILL get all the guns.

What's that BL ?


BrokeLoser said:


> Easy now...I side with Conservatives, I vote with Conservatives BUT they are the most nutless, spinless, big mouth pieces of shit that ever were. Come on man...they didn’t have the balls to keep heterosexual white Christians cool in a nation founded, built, run and funded by heterosexual white Christians. The Left has owned their sackless asses for decades....Sad but true.


----------



## Dayton3 (May 24, 2022)

2aguy said:


> Why?  They are a known example of gun control….using gun registration lists to disarm their intended victims……
> 
> The registration lists and gun bans implemented by the German government using the same exact arguments anti-gun fanatics are using today…….
> 
> You don’t want to hear about the most relevant example of government gun banning and confiscation…….



It is a shameless attempt to be inflammatory.     Because no matter how you exaggerate the modern American gun grabbers are not Nazis or even aspirational ones.


----------



## Mac-7 (May 24, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> More fallacies.


Its no fallacy

You can wave your cell phone at them and shout “*THE COPS ARE ON THEIR WAY*” before they take it away from you

But they will have plenty of time to kill you if they so choose


----------



## M14 Shooter (May 24, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> Did you know, 65% of burglaries occur between 6am and 6pm, and most of those are between 10am and 3pm because most houses are empty during those times.


According to the US DOJ:

An estimated 3.7 million household burglaries occurred each
year on average from 2003 to 2007. *In about 28% of these
burglaries, a household member was present during the burglary.*
In 7% of all household burglaries, a household member
experienced some form of violent victimization


			https://bjs.ojp.gov/content/pub/ascii/vdhb.txt


----------



## bigrebnc1775 (May 24, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> Oh shut up you silly boy.


A boy sticks his nose in matters that does not concern them.


----------



## 2aguy (May 24, 2022)

Dayton3 said:


> It is a shameless attempt to be inflammatory.     Because no matter how you exaggerate the modern American gun grabbers are not Nazis or even aspirational ones.




Look...in the 1920s they said the same thing about the government calling for registration and confiscation of guns........the government isn't crazy, they just want to reduce crime and keep people safe....15 years later the socialists used the lists from the 20s to confiscate guns.....Germany had courts, the rule of law, modern political processes, universities, the sciences and philosophy..........and 15 years later they murdered 15 million people......

So sell that silliness about not using actual examples to defend this Right to biden voters......


----------



## 2aguy (May 24, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> Did you know, 65% of burglaries occur between 6am and 6pm, and most of those are between 10am and 3pm because most houses are empty during those times.
> 
> So tell me again, when your house is burgled and you're at work, how did your gun save you?




Do you understand that in Britain....because they don't have guns.....burglaries more often happen when people are home?  Did you know that?  

Why?  So that they can torture the people in the home to find out where they keep the good stuff.....

*America...*

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]__



*Britain...*

According to my research, which has been published in the Journal of Law and Economics and elsewhere, such laws make it more difficult for people to defend themselves and their families successfully. As a result, criminals became more emboldened to invade people’s homes. There have been 300 more total murders and 4,000 more rapes occurring each year in states with these laws. Burglaries are also dramatically higher.



*If you want to see the importance of deterrence, consider so-called hot burglaries, where residents are at home when criminals strike. The United Kingdom not only has twice the burglary rate as the United States, but 59% of break-ins there are hot burglaries. By contrast, the U.S. has a hot burglary rate of 13%. *


Consistent with this, surveys of convicted burglars in the two countries indicate that American criminals spend about twice as much time casing a home before they break in. The reason: They want to ensure that no one is home because it prevents them from getting shot. Similarly, American burglars frequently comment that they avoid late-night break-ins because ‘‘that’s the way to get shot.” These are concerns that British burglars don’t share, given that nation’s strict gun laws.

In the same vein, it’s not surprising that crime rises when governments prevent people from defending themselves. Indeed, every place in the world that has banned guns has seen an increase in murders.



At Real Clear Politics: Why Gun Storage Laws Would Do More Harm Than Good_


----------



## 2aguy (May 24, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> Did you know, 65% of burglaries occur between 6am and 6pm, and most of those are between 10am and 3pm because most houses are empty during those times.
> 
> So tell me again, when your house is burgled and you're at work, how did your gun save you?




Burglaries in the United Kingdom.....

Wealthy retired couple tortured by burglars who forced wife to walk on broken glass in £20,000 raid


*wealthy couple were tortured by "Swat team" burglars who forced the wife to walk on broken glass before breaking one of her toes with a sledgehammer while stealing £20,000 of gold and jewels.

Professional burglars John McCarthy, 35, and Richard Leslie, 37, were branded "every householder's worst nightmare" after playing leading roles in the gang that terrorised the vulnerable pensioners for four hours during a night-time raid.

--------

During their ordeal, the couple, aged in their 70s, were bound with tape, beaten, threatened and locked in a utility room.
*
*The burglars hit the 77-year-old man with a chair and forced his 75-year-old wife to walk barefoot on glass, having discarded her slippers.**

One of the burglars threatened to cut off the wife's fingers and ear with a pair of shears if gold, cash and Rolex watches were not produced.

She also needed extensive dental treatment because of the beating to her face. Her husband was stuck with pins "many times" to extort more valuables, the court heard.

During the attack, one of the armed intruders boasted: "This is what we do for a living."

They made off with Chinese ornaments in 24 carat gold, jewellery, silver commemorative coins featuring Winston Churchill and Margaret Thatcher, gold bars, a custom-made Seiko watch as well as thousands of pounds and Hong Kong dollars in cash.
============

An Englishman's home is his dungeon

Various reassuring types, from police spokesmen to the Economist, described the stabbing of the Moncktons as a "burglary gone wrong". If only more burglaries could go right, they imply, this sort of thing wouldn't happen.
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.

Waterboarded by a gang of robbers in her £7m home: Masked intruders torture grandmother, 73, for three hours to make her open a safe

*
*That led to a terrifying three-hour ordeal in which the attackers used waterboarding – a form of torture in which the victim is made to feel they are about to be drowned.*


*The men took underwear from Mrs Jansen’s bedroom and forced it into her mouth before dragging her into the en-suite bathroom. They pulled her head back over the bath and covered her face with a towel they kept flooded with water from the shower head.
‘They did this to me three times but I just couldn’t open the safe,’ she said. ‘I kept telling them it was empty but they didn’t believe me.’
Mrs Jansen, who lives on a private estate in Weybridge, Surrey, told the Mail: ‘I was absolutely terrified, I thought they were going to kill me.*

‘They asked me if I had any grandchildren, I told them I had ten and they said “We are going to kill you, do you think your grandchildren will miss you?”

*‘I was consumed by fear. It was sheer hell and all I can remember is praying.’
Her six-bedroomed house had been broken into  several weeks before the attack last Friday and Surrey Police believe the raiders had located the two safes at that point.


Read more: Waterboarded by a gang of robbers in her £7m home: Masked intruders torture grandmother, 73, for three hours to make her open a safe
Follow us: @MailOnline on Twitter | DailyMail on Facebook*


----------



## Dayton3 (May 24, 2022)

2aguy said:


> Look...in the 1920s they said the same thing about the government calling for registration and confiscation of guns........the government isn't crazy, they just want to reduce crime and kbreep people safe....15 years later the socialists used the lists from the 20s to confiscate guns.....Germany had courts, the rule of law, modern political processes, universities, the sciences and philosophy..........and 15 years later they murdered 15 million people......
> 
> So sell that silliness about not using actual examples to defend this Right to biden voters......



You should know that I am neither a Biden supporter nor a supporter of gun control laws. 

But I still don't like seeing Nazis brought into debates.

and for your information,  German in the 1920s and 30s did NOT have what we would call "modern political processes".   They were at best a sick and troubled country.


----------



## toobfreak (May 24, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> I've always stated that needing a gun for self defence was a fallacy



Sure, Caveman.  And I can prove you a liar and a fool in 5 seconds by laying a loaded gun on the table besides you then coming at you and your family with a machete.  You'd pick that gun up so fast without a second thought and shoot me in self-defense so fast to save yourself your head would spin.


----------



## Blues Man (May 24, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> "_how emotions can hijack rational-decision-making processes to the point of being the dominant influence on risk assessments. Research has shown that “perceived risk judgments”—estimates of the likelihood that something bad will happen—are especially hampered by emotion_"
> 
> You're just an emotional wreck with your perceived possible hourly violence occurrences.


I don't imagine anything.

I don't have to because unlike you I know that violent crime exists and that every violent crime has a victim.

I violent crime in the US every 26 seconds.


----------



## Cardinal Carminative (May 24, 2022)

Well at least today's shooter in Texas was able to defend himself against 14 little kids.  And his grandmother.

I hope our local 2A Fetishists are busy with thotz-n-prayerz.


----------



## Briss (May 24, 2022)

Cardinal Carminative said:


> Well at least today's shooter in Texas was able to defend himself against 14 little kids.  And his grandmother.
> 
> I hope our local 2A Fetishists are busy with thotz-n-prayerz.


Noone here was involved . . .

Ya know, alcohol is involved in a lot of deaths.  What do ya say we ban that shyt and stop all the deaths?  Noone needs a drink.


----------



## Cardinal Carminative (May 24, 2022)

Briss said:


> Noone here was involved . . .
> 
> Ya know, alcohol is involved in a lot of deaths.  What do ya say we ban that shyt and stop all the deaths?  Noone needs a drink.



Forgot to mention cars.  Yawn.


----------



## Briss (May 24, 2022)

Cardinal Carminative said:


> Forgot to mention cars.  Yawn.


Nope!  Gotta have cars.  Noone needs alcohol.  So, why not get rid of that killer?


----------



## 2aguy (May 24, 2022)

Cardinal Carminative said:


> Well at least today's shooter in Texas was able to defend himself against 14 little kids.  And his grandmother.
> 
> I hope our local 2A Fetishists are busy with thotz-n-prayerz.




When you can tell us how the owners of the other 600 million guns, the 20 million people who can legally carry guns in public for self defense, had anything to do with the shooter....then we can talk..


----------



## justoffal (May 24, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> I've always stated that needing a gun for self defence was a fallacy, and we all know it is. So what's with the gun nuts running off and copying pasting articles from shady sources?
> 
> Well look no further, just simply check with Harvard and the studies -
> 
> ...


We won't mind if you don't carry.


----------



## justoffal (May 24, 2022)

2aguy said:


> When you can tell us how the owners of the other 600 million guns, the 20 million people who can legally carry guns in public for self defense, had anything to do with the shooter....then we can talk..


He is welcome to "not carry one"
We do not care.

Jo


----------



## Abatis (May 25, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> The age of the studies are irrelevant.



Of course it's relevant when the numbers of legal defensive incidents is directly related to the degree that legal carry is recognized.  Today there are tens of millions more people carrying then when those studies examined the incidents of defensive gun use.

Are the numbers reported for DGU's in the mid-'90's, (which those 'studies" of your OP were based on) representative of how many incidents there are of defensive gun uses *TODAY*?

How many murder victims in the very high murder rate mid-'90's, would have lived if they were able carry then and defend themselves?

Can you link any "study" that answers those two questions?




Captain Caveman said:


> If you require more, check this link -
> 
> 
> 
> ...



That link does not speak to or support the premise presented in your OP pertaining to the number of defensive gun uses.



Captain Caveman said:


> You will find a wealth of studies outlining the negative effects of guns, "_more than 30 years of public health research supports thinking of guns as statistically more of a personal hazard than a benefit"._



Again, not the premise of thread or the evidence presented in the OP (that the reported numbers of defensive gun uses does not justify the desire of law abiding citizens to carry a gun for self defense).



Captain Caveman said:


> Many studies, scientific based and peer reviewed, all draw the same conclusions, the Harvard ones being no different.



The Harvard studies are cultivated and published by a rabid anti-gunner.



Captain Caveman said:


> Keep on reading and you find that gun nuts suffer from the cognitive biases and motivated reasoning problems.



And yet you don't see that the "studies" cited are not available to the gen-pop for review and the public (even governmental) data sources are _interpreted_ rather than reported (e.g., NCVS).

You are the one who is accepting the opinion of a rabid anti-gunner and his self-serving (and self-referential) citations to papers he both authored and directed their composition and inclusion in various Harvard academic publications.

Sounds like an incestuous relationship that does not foster or encourage unbiased research or scholarship.


----------



## Captain Caveman (May 25, 2022)

Briss said:


> No.  Let's say you're not out shopping and are at home when the home invader invades, and he forces his way in despite you being present.
> 
> What is your advice to the victim should they be confronted with such a situation?


Carrying on your theoretical, the victims dog scared the invader away


----------



## Captain Caveman (May 25, 2022)

toobfreak said:


> Sure, Caveman.  And I can prove you a liar and a fool in 5 seconds by laying a loaded gun on the table besides you then coming at you and your family with a machete.  You'd pick that gun up so fast without a second thought and shoot me in self-defense so fast to save yourself your head would spin.


55 years later, still waiting for the machete attack.

When did you get attacked by a machete?

(you guys are idiots)


----------



## Captain Caveman (May 25, 2022)

Mac-7 said:


> Relying on a gun for self defense is a better option than calling 911 when a street thug is waving a knife at you


That happens daily to me


----------



## justoffal (May 25, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> Carrying on your theoretical, the victims dog scared the invader away


My dog's name is Python 50 cal.
His bite tends to turn heads into clouds of lingering pink mist.

JO


----------



## Mac-7 (May 25, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> That happens daily to me


It only has to happen once

Do you think this woman regrets having a gun?


----------



## Captain Caveman (May 25, 2022)

justoffal said:


> My dog's name is Python 50 cal.
> His bite tends to turn heads into clouds of lingering pink mist.
> 
> JO



Put Python 50 cal in your knickers and pull the trigger


----------



## justoffal (May 25, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> Put Python 50 cal in your knickers and pull the trigger


Dude....it's not that kind of an Aphrodisiac.....
But it will cut a four inch diameter tree down so it makes for a great landscaping tool also.

JO


----------



## justoffal (May 25, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> 55 years later, still waiting for the machete attack.
> 
> When did you get attacked by a machete?
> 
> (you guys are idiots)


I'm not waiting for it....I intend to blast it into the nether regions when it comes though.

JO


----------



## justoffal (May 25, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> Did you know, 65% of burglaries occur between 6am and 6pm, and most of those are between 10am and 3pm because most houses are empty during those times.
> 
> So tell me again, when your house is burgled and you're at work, how did your gun save you?


Idiot.... if the householder is not there he can't be killed by the Intruder...so saving or not saving is not the issue. The use of the weapon is for the protection of the person not the home. You can't " KILL"  a home but you can " KILL" a person.  When was the last time you took a cognitive reasoning test?

JO


----------



## Captain Caveman (May 25, 2022)

justoffal said:


> I'm not waiting for it....I intend to blast it into the nether regions when it comes though.
> 
> JO


Oh well, keep dreaming for that day

CC


----------



## Captain Caveman (May 25, 2022)

justoffal said:


> Idiot.... if the householder is not there he can't be killed by the Intruder...so saving or not saving is not the issue. The use of the weapon is for the protection of the person not the home. You can't " KILL"  a home but you can " KILL" a person.  When was the last time you took a cognitive reasoning test?
> 
> JO


But a main point in owning a gun is for self defence was against burglary, and as you've just pointed out, it's a fallacy because most people are at work etc..

CC


----------



## Circe (May 25, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> So anyone arming up for the mistaken belief they need to for self defence against others, they're the worst candidate to own a gun.


That would be me. And I've practiced.

So you could attack me on the supposition that I must be incompetent because I have guns, but I'm just going to say, it would be a bad decision.


----------



## Cardinal Carminative (May 25, 2022)

Circe said:


> That would be me. And I've practiced.
> 
> So you could attack me on the supposition that I must be incompetent because I have guns, but I'm just going to say, it would be a bad decision.



I actually would like to ask a question:  are you actually prepared to take a human life?  I ask that because everyone can _imagine_ themselves protecting their home against evildoers by wielding a gun, but my understanding is that it is exceptionally hard to kill a person and that people are often  haunted for years after the fact, even if it was perfectly legitimate.  Police officers, most of whom will never kill a person, are offered mental healthcare afterwards.  And they are prepped every day to think about the possibility.

You say you've practiced.  That's good.  But not on living things, not on people, right?

I get that guns are an incredibly useful tool for self defense, and I would never say someone is out of their right to defend themselves by all means necessary, but I'm quite curious if people who "plan" for that type of defense have taken into account how hard it sounds like it is to actually kill a person.

Studies show that guns in the home are far, far, far more likely to be used against the people in that home than they are defending that home.  Increased rates of homicide and suicide by the guns that were initially intended to be used for self-defense.  

Are we really acting rationally when we go all in for more guns?


----------



## Captain Caveman (May 25, 2022)

Circe said:


> That would be me. And I've practiced.
> 
> So you could attack me on the supposition that I must be incompetent because I have guns, but I'm just going to say, it would be a bad decision.


But I wouldn't attack anyone. What makes you believe I would attack you? Do you go about your life watching out for danger, do you sleep with a gun under your pillow? Why are you so pessimistic about crime? 

I suggest you see a doctor.


----------



## Circe (May 25, 2022)

Cardinal Carminative said:


> I actually would like to ask a question:  are you actually prepared to take a human life?  I ask that because everyone can _imagine_ themselves protecting their home against evildoers by wielding a gun, but my understanding is that it is exceptionally hard to kill a person and that people are often  haunted for years after the fact, even if it was perfectly legitimate.  Police officers, most of whom will never kill a person, are offered mental healthcare afterwards.  And they are prepped every day to think about the possibility.
> 
> You say you've practiced.  That's good.  But not on living things, not on people, right?
> 
> ...


Ha. Of course on living things, and trust me, no one in this country is more dangerous than a farm wife. We have serious PRACTICE. 

Yes, I read a lot of thrillers and there are characters who have a lot of upset about killing someone even though they seriously needed killing. I can't relate to that at all, frankly. There are some women I know who seem rather soft about killing anything or anyone, but that's not me, fortunately.

I think we are acting rationally when we get guns for self-defense, because blacks in particular and too many others are running wild on crime and drugs now; our society has degenerated catastrophically. If they take away my guns, anyone can come from the bad areas of the county and just rape and kill me and steal anything they want anytime they want, and that's exactly what they WOULD do. We are sitting ducks if we can't defend ourselves against this fall of civilization we are now going through.


----------



## Cardinal Carminative (May 25, 2022)

Circe said:


> Ha. Of course on living things, and trust me, no one in this country is more dangerous than a farm wife. We have serious PRACTICE.



Well, I should have limited it to people.  Most of us have hunted and had no problem afterwards.



Circe said:


> Yes, I read a lot of thrillers and there are characters who have a lot of upset about killing someone even though they seriously needed killing. I can't relate to that at all, frankly.



How do you know how you will react?  



Circe said:


> There are some women I know who seem rather soft about killing anything or anyone, but that's not me, fortunately.



Well, I hope you never have to find out how brave you REALLY are.


Circe said:


> I think we are acting rationally when we get guns for self-defense, because blacks in particular and too many others are running wild on crime



Oooooohkay.  I'll just back away slowly from the rancid bigot.


----------



## Circe (May 25, 2022)

CC --- you were doing pretty well with civil conversation there, till the last bit.


----------



## Cardinal Carminative (May 25, 2022)

Circe said:


> CC --- you were doing pretty well with civil conversation there, till the last bit.


As were you.  I don’t make time for racists.  I’m really sorry.


----------



## Bootney Lee Farnsworth (May 25, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> I've always stated that needing a gun for self defence was a fallacy, and we all know it is. So what's with the gun nuts running off and copying pasting articles from shady sources?
> 
> Well look no further, just simply check with Harvard and the studies -
> 
> ...


Can somebody please tell the military to get rid of their guns?


----------



## Abatis (May 26, 2022)

Cardinal Carminative said:


> Oooooohkay.  I'll just back away slowly from the rancid bigot.





Cardinal Carminative said:


> As were you.  I don’t make time for racists.  I’m really sorry.



It's neither bigoted nor racist to notice the particularly disproportionate racial crime statistics . . .  I would argue it could be considered racist to purposefully ignore it . . .   To what end does disavowing just noting, let alone the actual examination of the racial disparity serve?  Are Black deaths to be invisible and inconsequential 99% of the time and a compelling public crisis when politically expeditious, entirely depending on the circumstances?


----------



## Captain Caveman (May 26, 2022)

Bootney Lee Farnsworth said:


> Can somebody please tell the military to get rid of their guns?


What an idiot.


----------



## Bootney Lee Farnsworth (May 26, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> What an idiot.


Yes, you are.


----------



## Captain Caveman (May 26, 2022)

Bootney Lee Farnsworth said:


> Yes, you are.


You are a plonker of the highest order. TAF.


----------



## 2aguy (May 26, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> But a main point in owning a gun is for self defence was against burglary, and as you've just pointed out, it's a fallacy because most people are at work etc..
> 
> CC



Americans used their legal guns to stop 4 active shooters last year…..

Read more: New FBI Report Shows Armed Citizens STOP Mass Shootings 
Under Creative Commons License: Attribution
Follow us: @Ammoland on Twitter | Ammoland on Facebook

*newly-released FBI report on “active shooter incidents” in 2021 [embeded below] revealed four of those killers were stopped by armed private citizens*









						New FBI Report Shows Armed Citizens STOP Mass Shootings
					

A newly-released FBI report on “active shooter incidents” in 2021 revealed ...killers were stopped by armed private citizens!




					www.ammoland.com


----------



## skye (May 26, 2022)

Fallacy of self defense???  Fallacy???????????????? I don't think so!





Enough said.... sometimes a photo says a thousand words.


----------



## P@triot (Aug 20, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> I've always stated that needing a gun for self *defence* was a fallacy, and we all know it is. So what's with the gun nuts running off and copying pasting articles from shady sources?
> 
> Well look no further, just simply check with Harvard and the studies -
> 
> ...


The good news: despite their fascist propaganda, Harvard did manage to at least spell “defense” properly.

The bad news: you’re so damn illiterate, you failed to read and copy it


----------



## P@triot (Aug 20, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> Rather than go by biased newspaper articles, get off your backside and go find real *academic studies*.


No thanks. I prefer *reality* over idealistic _theory_. From yesterday, ignorant fascist clown:








						Mom in shower when her kids start screaming about intruder. She grabs her gun, faces him down, and fatally shoots him when he won't stop advancing.
					

A Milwaukee mother said she fatally shot a man who broke into her home Monday morning and that she did so in order to defend herself and her two children,  	WTMJ-TV reported.                                     Image source: WTMJ-TV video screenshotWhat are the details? 	The mother, who asked...




					www.theblaze.com


----------



## P@triot (Aug 20, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> So anyone arming up for the mistaken belief they need to for self defence against others, they're the worst candidate to own a gun.


The fallacy of Captain Caveman ignorance of consuming propaganda _proven_:








						Intruder emerges from woods, jumps over gate, repeatedly kicks door after family retreats inside home. Then homeowner grabs gun and ends threat.
					

A Virginia homeowner fatally shot a man who jumped a gate at his residence and tried to kick in a door after the family retreated inside Monday afternoon. What are the details? 	“The family had spotted the individual coming out of the woods behind the home, and the family had gone inside the...




					www.theblaze.com


----------



## P@triot (Aug 20, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> So anyone arming up for the mistaken belief they need to for self defence against others, they're the worst candidate to own a gun.


The fallacy of Captain Caveman ignorance of consuming propaganda _proven_:








						Amazon delivery driver shoots man charging at him with knife. Cops say it was self-defense — but driver says Amazon deactivated him.
					

An Amazon delivery driver — who police said shot a knife-wielding man in self-defense over the weekend and isn't facing any charges for pulling the trigger — told  	WXIX-TV that Amazon deactivated him as a driver. What are the details? 	The station said Gino Grove — a married father of three —...




					www.theblaze.com


----------



## P@triot (Aug 20, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> So anyone arming up for the mistaken belief they need to for self defence against others, they're the worst candidate to own a gun.


The fallacy of Captain Caveman ignorance of consuming propaganda _proven_:








						'He shot my arm off': 80-year-old shotgun-wielding store owner prevents armed robbery
					

On Sunday, July 31, at 2:45 a.m. in Norco, California, four male suspects wearing facial coverings and hoods pulled up to the Norco Market & Liquor store in a black BMV X3 SUV. One of the suspects entered the establishment brandishing a rifle. CBS Los Angeles reports that 80-year-old store owner...




					www.theblaze.com


----------



## P@triot (Aug 20, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> So anyone arming up for the mistaken belief they need to for self defence against others, they're the worst candidate to own a gun.


The fallacy of Captain Caveman ignorance of consuming propaganda _proven_:








						12 Examples of Defensive Gun Use Show Power of Second Amendment
					

Millions more Americans now understand that the right to keep and bear arms offers the most meaningful defense of their inalienable rights.




					www.dailysignal.com


----------



## P@triot (Aug 20, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> So anyone arming up for the mistaken belief they need to for self defence against others, they're the worst candidate to own a gun.


The fallacy of Captain Caveman ignorance of consuming propaganda _proven_:








						Multiple people approach vehicle in possible carjacking attempt in middle of night. But victim has a gun — and one alleged assailant pays with his life.
					

An alleged robbery attempt in Indianapolis — possibly a carjacking attempt — ended with the victim shooting dead one of the alleged assailants early Wednesday morning. What are the details? 	Two people were in a car in front of their home when multiple individuals approached the vehicle, the...




					www.theblaze.com


----------



## P@triot (Aug 20, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> So anyone arming up for the mistaken belief they need to for self defence against others, they're the worst candidate to own a gun.


The fallacy of Captain Caveman ignorance of consuming propaganda _proven._ Literally thousands of instances of self-defen*s*e every fucking year. Thousands.








						Woman with concealed carry license shoots at crooks who pointed gun at her, tried to steal her car in Chicago — and 13-year-old male with crooks is shot
					

A woman with a concealed carry license shot at a group of males who pointed a gun at her as they attempted to steal her car in Chicago last week — and a 13-year-old male who was with the would-be thieves was shot, police told WBBM-TV.What are the details?Four to five males were trying to break...




					www.theblaze.com


----------



## P@triot (Aug 20, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> So anyone arming up for the mistaken belief they need to for self defence against others, they're the worst candidate to own a gun.


The fallacy of Captain Caveman ignorance of consuming propaganda _proven._ Literally thousands of instances of self-defen*s*e every fucking year. Thousands.








						Knife-wielding robber attacks Texas store clerk. But clerk has a gun, and she fights back — shooting her attacker multiple times.
					

A Texas store clerk fought back against a robber who attacked her with a knife last week, shooting the suspect multiple times and landing him in the hospital. What are the details? 	Beaumont Police got a call about a robbery in progress at the Everest Food Mart in the 2800 block of Eastex...




					www.theblaze.com


----------



## P@triot (Aug 20, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> So anyone arming up for the mistaken belief they need to for self defence against others, they're the worst candidate to own a gun.


The fallacy of Captain Caveman ignorance of consuming propaganda _proven._ Literally thousands of instances of self-defen*s*e every fucking year. Thousands.








						Break-in suspect shot by 93-year-old homeowner late last month dies; homeowner said crooks kicked in his door, attacked him
					

Officials said a break-in suspect  	shot by a 93-year-old southern California homeowner late last month has died, KABC-TV reported. What are the details? 	Joseph A. Ortega, 33, was shot shortly after midnight June 29 after he and several others reportedly broke into a home on Eucalyptus Avenue...




					www.theblaze.com


----------



## P@triot (Aug 20, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> So anyone arming up for the mistaken belief they need to for self defence against others, they're the worst candidate to own a gun.


The fallacy of Captain Caveman ignorance of consuming propaganda _proven._ Literally thousands of instances of self-defen*s*e every fucking year. Thousands.








						Armed citizen thwarts shooter who opened fire inside crowded mall food court: 'Quick action and heroism'
					

Police say an armed "good Samaritan" stepped in and stopped an active shooter who terrorized an Indiana mall south of Indianapolis on Sunday.What happened?Law enforcement said a man entered the Greenwood Park Mall early Sunday evening armed with a rifle and several magazines of ammunition. He...




					www.theblaze.com


----------



## P@triot (Aug 20, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> So anyone arming up for the mistaken belief they need to for self defence against others, they're the worst candidate to own a gun.


The fallacy of Captain Caveman ignorance of consuming propaganda _proven._ Literally thousands of instances of self-defen*s*e every fucking year. Thousands.








						Video: It's all smiles before crooks invade home; seconds later it's all backsides as they run for their lives from homeowner firing 'AK-47-style gun' at them
					

Law enforcement officials have released video of last week's thwarted home invasion in Pensacola, Florida, which features suspects running for their lives after the homeowner began firing an AK-47-style gun at them.  	The Escambia County sheriff's office said two of the suspects have been...




					www.theblaze.com


----------



## P@triot (Aug 20, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> So anyone arming up for the mistaken belief they need to for self defence against others, they're the worst candidate to own a gun.


The fallacy of Captain Caveman ignorance of consuming propaganda _proven._ Literally thousands of instances of self-defen*s*e every fucking year. Thousands.








						Texas dad shoots two teens as they try to enter his family's car — which is carrying two infants in rear seat
					

A Texas dad shot two teenagers who tried to enter his family's car in northwest Harris County while two infants were in the rear seat, KTRK-TV reported.What are the details?Investigators said the family had just pulled up to their home in the 6800 block of Feather Creek Drive when a pair of...




					www.theblaze.com


----------



## P@triot (Aug 20, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> So anyone arming up for the mistaken belief they need to for self defence against others, they're the worst candidate to own a gun.


The fallacy of Captain Caveman ignorance of consuming propaganda _proven._ Literally thousands of instances of self-defen*s*e every fucking year. Thousands.








						Three armed crooks bust into residence, and homeowner drops his handgun. But victim retrieves AK-47-style weapon, starts firing, and crooks run for their lives.
					

A homeowner in Pensacola, Florida, won't be charged after firing an AK-47-style weapon at three accused home invaders, WKRG-TV reported.What are the details?The homeowner was alone his Pinestead Road residence at 11:42 p.m. Thursday when three men — one armed with a gun — pushed their way...




					www.theblaze.com


----------



## P@triot (Aug 20, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> So anyone arming up for the mistaken belief they need to for self defence against others, they're the worst candidate to own a gun.


The fallacy of Captain Caveman ignorance of consuming propaganda _proven._ Literally thousands of instances of self-defen*s*e every fucking year. Thousands.








						Armed Philly carjacker pulls 59-year-old man from vehicle. But victim — an off-duty corrections officer — turns the tables, fires multiple times at crook.
					

An armed carjacker picked the wrong motorist to steal from Monday night in Philadelphia, as the victim — a 59-year-old off-duty corrections officer — opened fire at the bad guy, with bloody results.What are the details?The victim told responding officers he'd departed a friend's house along East...




					www.theblaze.com


----------



## P@triot (Aug 20, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> So anyone arming up for the mistaken belief they need to for self defence against others, they're the worst candidate to own a gun.


The fallacy of Captain Caveman ignorance of consuming propaganda _proven._ Literally thousands of instances of self-defen*s*e every fucking year. Thousands.








						Two teens — 15 and 16 — force their way into home, physically attack resident. But victim is armed with handgun and shoots intruders dead.
					

The resident of a Connecticut home fatally shot a pair of male teenagers — 15 and 16 — who forced their way into the East Hartford residence last week and physically attacked the resident, police told WTIC-TV. What are the details? 	Police said the unnamed teens were shot in the living room, the...




					www.theblaze.com


----------



## P@triot (Aug 20, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> So anyone arming up for the mistaken belief they need to for self defence against others, they're the worst candidate to own a gun.


The fallacy of Captain Caveman ignorance of consuming propaganda _proven._ Literally thousands of instances of self-defen*s*e every fucking year. Thousands.








						'It was me or him': Gun owner stands his ground when man allegedly tries to break into home, pulls firearm
					

A Detroit homeowner fatally shot an armed man who allegedly tried to break into his residence early Tuesday morning.What are the details?Maiso Jackson awoke around 4:30 am on Tuesday to a man pounding on his door. According to Jackson, who spoke with WJBK-TV, the man was "talking about how...




					www.theblaze.com


----------



## P@triot (Aug 20, 2022)

This guy was unarmed. And now he’s *dead*. Reality says that every single citizen should be armed for their own self-defense and it doesn’t care about propaganda from Harvard or the _ignorance_ of Captain Caveman.




__





						Cab driver 'beaten to death by passengers as they tried to rob him'
					





					www.msn.com


----------



## Cellblock2429 (Aug 20, 2022)

P@triot said:


> The good news: despite their fascist propaganda, Harvard did manage to at least spell “defense” properly.
> 
> The bad news: you’re so damn illiterate, you failed to read and copy it


/-----/ This is de fence


----------



## miketx (Aug 20, 2022)

P@triot said:


> The good news: despite their fascist propaganda, Harvard did manage to at least spell “defense” properly.
> 
> The bad news: you’re so damn illiterate, you failed to read and copy it


I wonder why they allow pos like him to post trolling topics like this? All the bastard is doing is flame bait trolling.


----------



## hadit (Aug 20, 2022)

P@triot said:


> No thanks. I prefer *reality* over idealistic _theory_. From yesterday, ignorant fascist clown:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


You weren't supposed to notice that.


----------



## Blues Man (Aug 20, 2022)

The reality of life is that the one thing that is most likely to be the most danger to your life and wellbeing are other people.  Not the weather, not starvation, not earthquakes etc.

And the single best tool in the world for defending yourself from the most likely source of danger to your life and well being is a firearm.

Period.


----------



## Captain Caveman (Aug 20, 2022)

P@triot said:


> The good news: despite their fascist propaganda, Harvard did manage to at least spell “defense” properly.
> 
> The bad news: you’re so damn illiterate, you failed to read and copy it


Americans are lazy ****s when it comes to the English language, that's why they have a butchered version and you're too retarded to grasp English.

The irony is, you think the English are illiterate with English, laugh my fucking cock off.

I apologise on the behalf of imbeciles, you're a brain dead imbecile.


----------



## Captain Caveman (Aug 20, 2022)

P@triot said:


> No thanks. I prefer *reality* over idealistic _theory_. From yesterday, ignorant fascist clown:
> 
> 
> 
> ...


You haven't a clue of reality.


----------



## miketx (Aug 20, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> Americans are lazy ****s when it comes to the English language, that's why they have a butchered version and you're too retarded to grasp English.
> 
> The irony is, you think the English are illiterate with English, laugh my fucking cock off.
> 
> I apologise on the behalf of imbeciles, you're a brain dead imbecile.


Come take the guns.


----------



## miketx (Aug 20, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> The Harvard link went over your head, probably because you're the offspring of an inbred family.


Family attack reported.


----------



## Captain Caveman (Aug 20, 2022)

P@triot said:


> This guy was unarmed. And now he’s *dead*. Reality says that every single citizen should be armed for their own self-defense and it doesn’t care about propaganda from Harvard or the _ignorance_ of Captain Caveman.
> 
> 
> 
> ...


I've come to to the conclusion you are a deluded gun nut as well, always strutting about with a loaded gun, your enemies are coming to get you, your government are about to go tyrannical etc.. 

You need to shock everyone and try saying something intelligent. I've had nothing but umpteen retarded alerts off you. You are thick as fuck and spout the usual dribble that gun nuts are programmed to dribble.


----------



## Captain Caveman (Aug 20, 2022)

miketx said:


> Come take the guns.


Oh God, another repeated gun nut statement. I don't want to because they're up your arse.


----------



## westwall (Aug 20, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> The Harvard link went over your head, probably because you're the offspring of an inbred family.






The harvard link is an example of a very poorly run survey.  Not a "study".  But I am a scientist, and you very clearly are not.  The facts are quite plain, the American public use firearms every single day to prevent violent crime.  The UK is even more violent than the USA.  Only gun violence levels are less, but they are RAPIDLY increasing.  Even with all of the gun laws that you so love, the facts are that gun violence rates are skyrocketing in the UK.


----------



## westwall (Aug 20, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> I've come to to the conclusion you are a deluded gun nut as well, always strutting about with a loaded gun, your enemies are coming to get you, your government are about to go tyrannical etc..
> 
> You need to shock everyone and try saying something intelligent. I've had nothing but umpteen retarded alerts off you. You are thick as fuck and spout the usual dribble that gun nuts are programmed to dribble.






I have come to the conclusion that you are a deluded anti gun silly person.  You rely on emotion, and false studies, to support your infantile belief system.


----------



## miketx (Aug 20, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> Oh God, another repeated gun nut statement. I don't want to because they're up your arse.


Come take them.


----------



## westwall (Aug 20, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> The Harvard link went over your head, probably because you're the offspring of an inbred family.






You know, when you rely on infantile family attacks you probably should rethink your debate style.


----------



## miketx (Aug 20, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> I've come to to the conclusion you are a deluded gun nut as well, always strutting about with a loaded gun, your enemies are coming to get you, your government are about to go tyrannical etc..
> 
> You need to shock everyone and try saying something intelligent. I've had nothing but umpteen retarded alerts off you. You are thick as fuck and spout the usual dribble that gun nuts are programmed to dribble.


Come get them.


----------



## Captain Caveman (Aug 20, 2022)

westwall said:


> I have come to the conclusion that you are a deluded anti gun silly person.  You rely on emotion, and false studies, to support your infantile belief system.


Well, I'm away shooting Clays with my lads soon. We enjoy guns in the UK, but much much more safely. A concept you Septic Yanks struggle with. That's why you guys shoot everything that moves.


----------



## Captain Caveman (Aug 20, 2022)

miketx said:


> Come get them.


Mature up you dickhead.


----------



## westwall (Aug 20, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> Well, I'm away shooting Clays with my lads soon. We enjoy guns in the UK, but much much more safely. A concept you Septic Yanks struggle with. That's why you guys shoot everything that moves.






Good for you.  I will be taking my machine guns out for some fun myself soon as well.  You shoot your shotguns, and I will shoot whatever the hell I want.  When I want, where I want.


----------



## Captain Caveman (Aug 20, 2022)

westwall said:


> Good for you.  I will be taking my machine guns out for some fun myself soon as well.  You shoot your shotguns, and I will shoot whatever the hell I want.  When I want, where I want.


Good for you too. That's why you enjoy high gun crime.

You probably feel the need to be armed to the teeth with guns when shopping because of all the retards armed to the teeth in public.


----------



## Captain Caveman (Aug 20, 2022)

westwall in the UK, we take boxing gloves in a boxing match. You guys would take a gun if you could.


----------



## westwall (Aug 20, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> Good for you too. That's why you enjoy high gun crime.
> 
> You probably feel the need to be armed to the teeth with guns when shopping because of all the retards armed to the teeth in public.






My guns commit no crime.  The same as yours don't.  Guns don't commit crime.  Guns are tools.  They are no better or worse than the person who uses them.  

An armed society, is a polite society.  A lesson you would be wise to learn.


----------



## BackAgain (Aug 20, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> I've always stated that needing a gun for self defence was a fallacy, and we all know it is. So what's with the gun nuts running off and copying pasting articles from shady sources?
> 
> Well look no further, just simply check with Harvard and the studies -
> 
> ...


We *don’t* all “know” it’s a fallacy. And it certainly isn’t. But keep flailing.


----------



## westwall (Aug 20, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> westwall in the UK, we take boxing gloves in a boxing match. You guys would take a gun if you could.





No, as usual you resort to infantile emotional arguments.  If I want to fence you, I will let you choose which weapon you wish to use, and then I will defeat you at will.  I am a tad too old for boxing these days, but when I was young I enjoyed a good boxing match.  Boxing is about BOXING.

You, like a retard, continually ascribe violent fantasies to people who have none.  Why is that?  Are you too stupid to come up with a legitimate argument, or are you just so intellectually dishonest that you will use whatever lie comes to mind (not that you apparently have much of one) in an effort to score a point?


----------



## Captain Caveman (Aug 20, 2022)

westwall said:


> My guns commit no crime.  The same as yours don't.  Guns don't commit crime.  Guns are tools.  They are no better or worse than the person who uses them.
> 
> An armed society, is a polite society.  A lesson you would be wise to learn.


But this is the thing, you need to know who's got the fucking gun. You can't expect to have every Tom Dick and Harry to get a gun and fuck all happens. Why doesn't that sink in? Stupidity?


----------



## BackAgain (Aug 20, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> But this is the thing, you need to know who's got the fucking gun. You can't expect to have every Tom Dick and Harry to get a gun and fuck all happens. Why doesn't that sink in? Stupidity?


Maybe it’s the way you misuse words?

Take a course in clear communication. It would really help you.


----------



## miketx (Aug 20, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> Mature up you dickhead.


Come get them. All you do is run your mouth.


----------



## Captain Caveman (Aug 20, 2022)

BackAgain said:


> Maybe it’s the way you misuse words?
> 
> Take a course in clear communication. It would really help you.


Sorry, I speak English, I'll dumb it down for Americans 

"But the thing is, you need to check if the person applying for a gun is suitable to own a gun. You can't expect everyone to have access to a weapon regardless and not suffer many incidents. Why does that not compend? Is it down to stupidity or not understanding the fully picture of firearms?"

Did that sink in second time round? We probably speak too fast in the UK for you


----------



## miketx (Aug 20, 2022)

20 pages worth of trolling by this pos. Why is that allowed?


----------



## Captain Caveman (Aug 20, 2022)

miketx said:


> 20 pages worth of trolling by this pos. Why is that allowed?


You're the fucking troll. You just come onto the board and give fucking shit loads of emojis. Put me on ignore and jump off a fucking cliff. You're even claiming troll on another thread about someone else. So it's clear you're the troll.

You did 10 in the last few hours, if that, so I reciprocate the same shit. So fuck off with a capital F.


----------



## miketx (Aug 20, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> You're the fucking troll. You just come onto the board and give fucking shit loads of emojis. Put me on ignore and jump off a fucking cliff. You're even claiming troll on another thread about someone else. So it's clear you're the troll.


Come get them troll.


----------



## Captain Caveman (Aug 20, 2022)

miketx said:


> Come get them troll.


See. Fucking knob jockey. You would shit yourself anyone landing on your doorstep.


----------



## miketx (Aug 20, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> See. Fucking knob jockey. You would shit yourself anyone landing on your doorstep.


Then come get them.


----------



## Captain Caveman (Aug 20, 2022)

miketx said:


> Then come get them.


I have enough air rifles and pea shooters. Plus, I don't want your bowels giving out, pussy.


----------



## miketx (Aug 20, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> I have enough air rifles and pea shooters. Plus, I don't want your bowels giving out, pussy.


No, that's not why. It's because you are all talk and no action. In others words, another leftist coward.

Besides coward, I don't have any air rifles. I have real ones.


----------



## BackAgain (Aug 20, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> Sorry, I speak English, I'll dumb it down for Americans



You write babble. And you can’t dumb anything down. It’s already your starting point. 


Captain Caveman said:


> "But the thing is, you need to check if the person applying for a gun is suitable to own a gun. You can't expect everyone to have access to a weapon regardless and not suffer many incidents. Why does that not compend? Is it down to stupidity or not understanding the fully picture of firearms?"


I see you’re almost there. Keep struggling with composition. Get a teacher maybe to tutor you. Meanwhile, of course, you’re wrong. I certainly can expect everyone (at least after the age of majority) to have access to a gun. And that does *not* necessarily entail having to suffer many “incidents.”

Your argument (albeit not well stated) appears to come down to a proposition that says: “guns can cause harm, so guns should be very regulated.”  Your  argument  is illogical.  Maybe take a course in basic logic. It would help you a whole lot. 



Captain Caveman said:


> Did that sink in second time round? We probably speak too fast in the UK for you


You technically aren’t “speaking,” you silly twit. Don’t you know the meaning of ANY words?  You are “typing,” in your pathetic effort to communicate. 

So, now, let’s see if anything can penetrate your insufferably thick skull. 

Can you articulate why it is a crappy logical proposition you’ve offered?  (Probably not.)

Step one:  do you agree with how I rephrased your apparent “argument?”  Again, it seems to be, “*guns can cause harm, so guns should be very regulated.*”  I don’t want to out words in your “mouth” so to speak. So you can alter that to suit your purposes. 

Step two: Then, identify what that Ill-formed syllogism is missing. 

Step three:  rectify it. 

If you need any help with proper spelling, correct grammar or with rudimentary logic, just remember that there are lots of us here to help. Just ask. 👍


----------



## Captain Caveman (Aug 20, 2022)

miketx said:


> No, that's not why. It's because you are all talk and no action. In others words, another leftist coward.
> 
> Besides coward, I don't have any air rifles. I have real ones.


We have as well, you yellow backed yank


----------



## miketx (Aug 20, 2022)

BackAgain said:


> You write babble. And you can’t dumb anything down. It’s already your starting point.
> 
> I see you’re almost there. Keep struggling with composition. Get a teacher maybe to tutor you. Meanwhile, of course, you’re wrong. I certainly can expect everyone (at least after the age of majority) to have access to a gun. And that does *not* necessarily entail having to suffer many “incidents.”
> 
> ...


I think it would do him good to jump off a cliff.


----------



## miketx (Aug 20, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> We have as well, you yellow backed yank


Lol, you don't have anything ya coward.


----------



## miketx (Aug 20, 2022)

Lmao! This two bit troll is posting on my profile that he's a conservative! You cant make this level of stupid up.


----------



## Captain Caveman (Aug 20, 2022)

BackAgain said:


> You write babble. And you can’t dumb anything down. It’s already your starting point.
> 
> I see you’re almost there. Keep struggling with composition. Get a teacher maybe to tutor you. Meanwhile, of course, you’re wrong. I certainly can expect everyone (at least after the age of majority) to have access to a gun. And that does *not* necessarily entail having to suffer many “incidents.”
> 
> ...


No, you guys have a lazy butchered version of English. It's retarded. We have a licence and licensed. You have have licence for everything. We can have defense and defence. You're stuck with defense.

You can't pronounce Stalictites, Worcestershire sauce, basil and oregano correctly. You're even stuck in the 1800's spelling of Aluminium. And you don't even know "Tom Dick and Harry"?? Are you seriously that dumb?

And you expect Brits to ask you for help? I like your irony because I ain't dumbing down to your level.

Most Americans can't grasp sarcasm and you haven't a clue about idioms. So when it comes to English, you seriously need to go fuck yourself because I've lost count the number of times I've had to school you lot.


----------



## Captain Caveman (Aug 20, 2022)

miketx said:


> Lmao! This two bit troll is posting on my profile that he's a conservative! You cant make this level of stupid up.


Voted Tory all my life, and UKIP when Farage was there . And you voted for Biden, yellow back coward. Take your testicles out of your boyfriend's handbag you fucking puff.


----------



## westwall (Aug 20, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> But this is the thing, you need to know who's got the fucking gun. You can't expect to have every Tom Dick and Harry to get a gun and fuck all happens. Why doesn't that sink in? Stupidity?






No I don't, you ignorant clod.  I assume everyone is armed.  I am.  I also treat everyone with respect.  We don't get a lot of road rage incidents in my state because if you do something stupid, and dangerous, you are going to get your ass shot to pieces.  Thus, people mind their manners.


DURRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR


----------



## westwall (Aug 20, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> We have as well, you yellow backed yank






Locked up at the gun club.

DURRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR


----------



## miketx (Aug 20, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> you guys have a lazy butchered version of English.


You know what else we have? Your surrender to General Washington at Yorktown. That was the first time you cowards tried to disarm us? Not gonna be a second, is there coward?


----------



## westwall (Aug 20, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> Voted Tory all my life, and UKIP when Farage was there . And you voted for Biden, yellow back coward. Take your testicles out of your boyfriend's handbag you fucking puff.






Yup London is so peaceable.


----------



## Captain Caveman (Aug 20, 2022)

westwall said:


> No I don't, you ignorant clod.  I assume everyone is armed.  I am.  I also treat everyone with respect.  We don't get a lot of road rage incidents in my state because if you do something stupid, and dangerous, you are going to get your ass shot to pieces.  Thus, people mind their manners.
> 
> 
> DURRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR


You need something between your lugs to process the concept of safe gun control/regulations. Hence why American gun nuts scream 2nd Amendment. Suffice to say, you will NEVER EVER grasp the concept. In the UK, we too can go and use guns, or should I say, those that have clean records and of sound mind.

You guys allow the majority to have guns and feel stupid enough to say gun control doesn't work in Sweden because of a once in a decade gun incident. And you suffer dreadful gun stats.

The day the 2nd is scrapped, the fucking better for you guys.


----------



## miketx (Aug 20, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> Voted Tory all my life, and UKIP when Farage was there . And you voted for Biden, yellow back coward. Take your testicles out of your boyfriend's handbag you fucking puff.


Lol, desperation and delusion on display.


----------



## Captain Caveman (Aug 20, 2022)

miketx said:


> You know what else we have? Your surrender to General Washington at Yorktown. That was the first time you cowards tried to disarm us? Not gonna be a second, is there coward?


Ask the French to save your ass again, coward.


----------



## miketx (Aug 20, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> You need something between your lugs to process the concept of safe gun control/regulations. Hence why American gun nuts scream 2nd Amendment. Suffice to say, you will NEVER EVER grasp the concept. In the UK, we too can go and use guns, or should I say, those that have clean records and of sound mind.
> 
> You guys allow the majority to have guns and feel stupid enough to say gun control doesn't work in Sweden because of a once in a decade gun incident. And you suffer dreadful gun stats.
> 
> The day the 2nd is scrapped, the fucking better for you guys.


Come get them.


----------



## miketx (Aug 20, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> Ask the French to save your ass again, coward.


Stop flapping your money maker and come get them!


----------



## Captain Caveman (Aug 20, 2022)

miketx said:


> Lol, desperation and delusion on display.


No desperation on my part, just thick c**" on your part. You're American, so you're binary; black v white, guns v no guns, chalk v cheese. 

When someone doesn't conform to your ignorance, it's like shouting racist, bigot, fascist etc.. So you shout liar because of your retarded beliefs, nothing more nothing less.


----------



## miketx (Aug 20, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> No desperation on my part, just thick c**" on your part. You're American, so you're binary; black v white, guns v no guns, chalk v cheese.
> 
> When someone doesn't conform to your ignorance, it's like shouting racist, bigot, fascist etc.. So you shout liar because of your retarded beliefs, nothing more nothing less.


Come get them sissy.


----------



## BackAgain (Aug 20, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> No, you guys have a lazy butchered version of English.


Silly British twit. We perfected it for you. You’re welcome.


Captain Caveman said:


> It's retarded.



No. *You* are retarded. See the distinction? (Probably not.)


Captain Caveman said:


> We have a licence and licensed. You *have have* licence for everything.



I doubt you could pass a test for a driver’s license. But we don’t “have have” a license for everything. Jeez. You were telling us about your mastery of English? 🤣


Captain Caveman said:


> We can have defense and defence. You're stuck with defense.


Yep. The proper spelling. It’s hard to educate you silly Brit twits.


Captain Caveman said:


> You can't pronounce Stalictites, Worcestershire sauce, basil and oregano correctly. You're even stuck in the 1800's spelling of Aluminium.


You enjoy engaging in the fallacy of making universal statements in order to engage strawman arguments. But your pettiness aside, at least we know how to pronounce aluminum. 😎


Captain Caveman said:


> And you don't even know "Tom Dick and Harry"?? Are you seriously that dumb?


See?  We had never discussed the old phrase about Tom, Dick and Harry.  So, of course, you create a strawman. And despite the odds, the strawman usually beats _you_. You are obviously that dumb. No question.


Captain Caveman said:


> And you expect Brits to ask you for help?



I wasn’t addressing most Brits, kid. I was replying only to you.


Captain Caveman said:


> I like your irony because I ain't dumbing down to your level.


You could never rise to my level. 😎


Captain Caveman said:


> Most Americans can't grasp sarcasm and you haven't a clue about idioms.


I find that’s usually true of *you*, not of Brits or Americans.


Captain Caveman said:


> So when it comes to English, you seriously need to go fuck yourself because I've lost count the number of times I've had to school you lot.


Sure. You can’t count all the way to zero.

Now *back on the “topic”* of this moronic thread.

If a masked and heavily armed criminal gains entry into your house one night and threatens your loved ones with violence, would it be reasonable to (a) call the local police and await their arrival, hoping no harm comes to your loved ones or you while you wait OR (b) pull out your own handy semi-automatic handgun and shoot the intruder before he can harm anyone else?

See my point, you silly Limey half-wit? 

It’s *not* a “fallacy” to contend that the possession of a gun for self defense is a proper and useful thing.


----------



## Captain Caveman (Aug 20, 2022)

miketx said:


> Come get them sissy.


Lol


----------



## Captain Caveman (Aug 20, 2022)

BackAgain said:


> Silly British twit. We perfected it for you. You’re welcome.
> 
> 
> No. *You* are retarded. See the distinction? (Probably not.)
> ...


Pronounce stalactites


----------



## toobfreak (Aug 20, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> The fallacy of self defence by gun​



What opinion about self-defense can possibly matter from someone who cannot even SPELL self-defense?


----------



## BackAgain (Aug 20, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> Pronounce stalactites


You do realize that this is an internet message board and not a telephone, don’t you?


----------



## westwall (Aug 20, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> You need something between your lugs to process the concept of safe gun control/regulations. Hence why American gun nuts scream 2nd Amendment. Suffice to say, you will NEVER EVER grasp the concept. In the UK, we too can go and use guns, or should I say, those that have clean records and of sound mind.
> 
> You guys allow the majority to have guns and feel stupid enough to say gun control doesn't work in Sweden because of a once in a decade gun incident. And you suffer dreadful gun stats.
> 
> The day the 2nd is scrapped, the fucking better for you guys.







We grasp the concept that WE are not subjects.  You are.  You are beholden to the bureaucrats who rule your lives.  We aren't.  We are still fundamentally free.  You aren't.  You are not allowed to defend yourself from attack.  If you do, you go to prison.

In other words, peasant, you exist for the benefit of the State.

I don't.  I exist for the benefit of me and my family, and I don't need permission to do the things that I like to do.


----------



## Captain Caveman (Aug 20, 2022)

westwall said:


> We grasp the concept that WE are not subjects.  You are.  You are beholden to the bureaucrats who rule your lives.  We aren't.  We are still fundamentally free.  You aren't.  You are not allowed to defend yourself from attack.  If you do, you go to prison.
> 
> In other words, peasant, you exist for the benefit of the State.
> 
> I don't.  I exist for the benefit of me and my family, and I don't need permission to do the things that I like to do.


I think we've all grasped you have a 7 second memory of a goldfish. Been over the British Civil War a thousand times where the monarchy signed power over to parliament, so no one are subjects of the monarchy. Why doesn't that stay in your thick skull? DNA problems? Solid bone from the neck up? In breeding? Lobotomy?

Please explain why this doesn't seem to enter your skull because it's baffling?

Do you retain the ability to tie shoelaces? Does your parents still wipe your arse? Because you've got me fucking beat on this one?

My only conclusion is that you're a mental patient because I don't know why it flies through your lugs?


----------



## BackAgain (Aug 20, 2022)

It absolutely should offend the sensibilities of all British people that they are referred to as “subjects” of “the Crown.”  

Putting aside the fact that “the Crown” has lost its initial meaning, the more serious issue is the concept of being a “subject” of any government. Even the silly British people who are still irked that the American colonists threw off the yoke well over two hundred years ago should have enough self respect to at least adopt the American concept of citizenship. 

We created our republic to serve us. We aren’t here to serve “the crown.” Silly Brits should have enough sense to reject the subservient notion of “being a subject” of “the Crown,” too.


----------



## Captain Caveman (Aug 20, 2022)

Do Americans find it macho that they reset their brains to the same old rhetoric to Brits? Are you all related to Biden. Is Biden secretly your father?

Are you all happy slapping one another, whooping like apes in a forest? What's up with you childish yanks?

All this shit on subjects, teeth, banned guns?? 

I was hoping to be on a forum with adults, not fucking retards that crawled out of the abortion bucket. So can you all just belt the fuck up, you're fucking embarrassing the planet.


----------



## Captain Caveman (Aug 20, 2022)

BackAgain said:


> It absolutely should offend the sensibilities of all British people that they are referred to as “subjects” of “the Crown.”
> 
> Putting aside the fact that “the Crown” has lost its initial meaning, the more serious issue is the concept of being a “subject” of any government. Even the silly British people who are still irked that the American colonists threw off the yoke well over two hundred years ago should have enough self respect to at least adopt the American concept of citizenship.
> 
> We created our republic to serve us. We aren’t here to serve “the crown.” Silly Brits should have enough sense to reject the subservient notion of “being a subject” of “the Crown,” too.


We're only offended by ignorance displayed by Yanks. So we kinda get offended quite a lot.

Does your brain grasp the UK monarchy, or are you retarded too?


----------



## westwall (Aug 20, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> I think we've all grasped you have a 7 second memory of a goldfish. Been over the British Civil War a thousand times where the monarchy signed power over to parliament, so no one are subjects of the monarchy. Why doesn't that stay in your thick skull? DNA problems? Solid bone from the neck up? In breeding? Lobotomy?
> 
> Please explain why this doesn't seem to enter your skull because it's baffling?
> 
> ...







The Monarch retains the ultimate Right to dissolve Parliament.  DURRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR

The Crown retains ultimate control of the country.  The Monarchy chooses to let the idiots bureaucrats run the country so long as they don't screw it up too bad.  If they cross a line, the Boot comes down.

Silly clod.


----------



## Captain Caveman (Aug 20, 2022)

miketx said:


> Stop flapping your money maker and come get them!


You couldn't even win independence, the French had to save your ass. And it wasn't over guns. So I suggest you get back to school and start again because it's clear you were asleep or your teacher filled you with shit, the same stuff that you're spewing.

And a Brit had to school you on American Independence. What a let down you are for the American forefathers, they would be greatly disappointed with you.


----------



## BackAgain (Aug 20, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> We're only offended by ignorance displayed by Yanks. So we kinda get offended quite a lot.
> 
> Does your brain grasp the UK monarchy, or are you retarded too?


You’re easily offended. Another trait of being a Brit. Thank God you blokes had Churchill to help save you from you own pansy nature when it mattered. 

Makes sense. He was part American after all. 

The monarchy, by the way is merely a titular thing these days.  It shouldn’t even exist as an expensive national prop. But you folks are so twitty, you still refer to yourselves as subjects. Lol. 

Spare us your pontifications. Brits aren’t especially impressive anymore. You certainly aren’t. 👍


----------



## Captain Caveman (Aug 20, 2022)

westwall said:


> The Monarch retains the ultimate Right to dissolve Parliament.  DURRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
> 
> The Crown retains ultimate control of the country.  The Monarchy chooses to let the idiots bureaucrats run the country so long as they don't screw it up too bad.  If they cross a line, the Boot comes down.
> 
> Silly clod.


Tell me, when has the Queen dissolved parliament when she wanted to? I've set my stopwatch.

Remember clod, the UK Monarchy is Constitutional, so it rubber stamps parliament's decisions.

Stopwatch is running, come on goldfish guy


----------



## Captain Caveman (Aug 20, 2022)

BackAgain said:


> You’re easily offended. Another trait of being a Brit. Thank God you blokes had Churchill to help save you from you own pansy nature when it mattered.
> 
> Makes sense. He was part American after all.
> 
> ...


You still don't grasp the concept. You view it as offended, we just got annoyed at others ignorance, hence why we keep correcting you fools. Does that compute with you??


----------



## westwall (Aug 20, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> Tell me, when has the Queen dissolved parliament when she wanted to? I've set my stopwatch.
> 
> Remember clod, the UK Monarchy is Constitutional, so it rubber stamps parliament's decisions.
> 
> Stopwatch is running, come on goldfish guy






That isn't the issue.  The issue is SHE HAS THE POWER TO DO SO.


DURRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR


But nice try to move the goal posts.  You must be one of those jackoffs that attack people at football games.  What do they call you clods?


----------



## westwall (Aug 20, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> You still don't grasp the concept. You view it as offended, we just got annoyed at others ignorance, hence why we keep correcting you fools. Does that compute with you??






Just imagine how offended we get when you demonstrate your profound ignorance in matters here.


----------



## Captain Caveman (Aug 20, 2022)

westwall said:


> That isn't the issue.  The issue is SHE HAS THE POWER TO DO SO.
> 
> 
> DURRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
> ...


Tell me, what does Constitutional Monarchy mean?

What is the Commons, The Lord's, and Privy Council?

When was the British civil war and what happened?

What is the Crown Estate and where do the profits go?

How much does it cost to pay for the Monarchy, what revenue do they bring in and what value is placed on the Monarchy brand?

What does non codified constitution mean?

Now, I've told you the answers to all these questions, yet you keep coming out with ignorant shit. *Are you doing that on purpose, or are yanks truly thick as pig shit?*


----------



## Leo123 (Aug 20, 2022)

I found this funny in the Harvard study

*"8. Criminals who are shot are typically the victims of crime"*


----------



## westwall (Aug 20, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> Tell me, what does Constitutional Monarchy mean?
> 
> What is the Commons, The Lord's, and Privy Council?
> 
> ...






None of that matters one tot thanks to ROYAL PREROGATIVE.

Go ahead.  Look it up.


----------



## miketx (Aug 20, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> You couldn't even win independence, the French had to save your ass. And it wasn't over guns. So I suggest you get back to school and start again because it's clear you were asleep or your teacher filled you with shit, the same stuff that you're spewing.
> 
> And a Brit had to school you on American Independence. What a let down you are for the American forefathers, they would be greatly disappointed with you.



The butthurt is spewing all over this troll.  You gonna start stabbing old ladies in London?


----------



## westwall (Aug 20, 2022)

Leo123 said:


> I found this funny in the Harvard study
> 
> *"8. Criminals who are shot are typically the victims of crime"*






It should have read "Criminals who are shot are committing a crime"  but it is Harvard.  Their standards have fallen to new lows.


----------



## miketx (Aug 20, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> Pronounce stalactites


Pronounce you girls lost the war.  Then we had to save you in two world wars! You people are so ignorant that during the the revolutionary war, where we stomped you, you even helped us by putting targets on your uniforms. What wankers.





Had it on the back too! What royal incompetence! You bloody woofter sod. Bugger off, pillock. You grotty wanking oik artless base-court apple-john.


----------



## Captain Caveman (Aug 20, 2022)

westwall said:


> None of that matters one tot thanks to ROYAL PREROGATIVE.
> 
> Go ahead.  Look it up.


There's no UK education in you whatsoever.


----------



## westwall (Aug 20, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> There's no UK education in you whatsoever.






Tony Benn tried to remove the Royal Prerogative back in 2009 IIRC, but he failed.  So, yet again, you fail.


----------



## Captain Caveman (Aug 20, 2022)

miketx said:


> Pronounce you girls lost the war.  Then we had to save you in two world wars! You people are so ignorant that during the the revolutionary war, where we stomped you, you even helped us by putting targets on your uniforms. What wankers.
> 
> View attachment 685176
> 
> Had it on the back too! What royal incompetence! You bloody woofter sod. Bugger off, pillock. You grotty wanking oik artless base-court apple-john.








You haven't been outside the US, hence why you're thick as fuck and gullible to what your teachers told you.

When I was in Paris, I noticed a statue, so I took a photo and it's inscription. When I got home, I researched it. Wasn't really interested in American history but this statue highlighted the fact that the American colonies were getting their arses beat by the British. Apparently the conies disliked British taxation, no mention of guns in the independence war whatsoever.

So further reading said the French joined in to help the colonies, and with the Brits investing in other parts of the world, pulled out of the war on America.

Now that's what I found out. But if you read what yanks post, they say, "We whipped the British, you tried to take our guns". So why the lies? Are you embarrassed, was the war not macho enough, are you gullible at school? There must be a reason why a Yank's take on history doesn't actually match true history?

Are you retarded on your own history or are you expecting others not to know history?

Yet you try to come across aloof to others? Why? Are you compensating for a tiny dick? Do you need to force macho? Is it an American cultural thing to be a dick?

What's up with you? I couldn't give two hoots about 1776 but you guys fucking go on about it a lot but spout shite about it. Just sort yourself out and dick down a bit.


----------



## miketx (Aug 20, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> View attachment 685178View attachment 685180
> 
> You haven't been outside the US, hence why you're thick as fuck and gullible to what your teachers told you.
> 
> ...


Lol, poofter sod boi starts lying faster than ever!


----------



## westwall (Aug 20, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> View attachment 685178View attachment 685180
> 
> You haven't been outside the US, hence why you're thick as fuck and gullible to what your teachers told you.
> 
> ...






What is funny is you point out that the Colonists needed help from the French, and they did, but what you ignore is the British used troops from all over the world to fight against the Americans.  You had the largest Empire in the world at the time......

AND YOU STILL LOST!

Put that in your pipe and smoke it.


----------



## Captain Caveman (Aug 20, 2022)

miketx said:


> Lol, poofter sod boi starts lying faster than ever!


You've been spanked on your own history.


----------



## Captain Caveman (Aug 20, 2022)

westwall said:


> What is funny is you point out that the Colonists needed help from the French, and they did, but what you ignore is the British used troops from all over the world to fight against the Americans.  You had the largest Empire in the world at the time......
> 
> AND YOU STILL LOST!
> 
> Put that in your pipe and smoke it.


When I find the history link, I will send it to you. Then you can pop it in your pipe, Mr. Obsessed American.


----------



## westwall (Aug 20, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> When I find the history link, I will send it to you. Then you can pop it in your pipe, Mr. Obsessed American.






What link do you need?  I am posting from my memory.  I thought you were educated?  Guess that was a lie too.  The Hessians were among the most represented troops fighting against the Americans.  Where are they from?

Oh, yeah.  GERMANY.

DURRRRRRR

C'mon mr. smarty pants.  I expected better than that from you.  

So, you have colonials, and you have the might of the British Empire, India, Canada, and all of the other regions controlled by the Brits.


AND YOU STILL LOST.


----------



## miketx (Aug 20, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> You've been spanked on your own history.


You were spanked by George Washington.


----------



## miketx (Aug 20, 2022)

The troll must be getting his media enema about now.


----------



## the other mike (Aug 20, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> I've always stated that needing a gun for self defence was a fallacy, and we all know it is. So what's with the gun nuts running off and copying pasting articles from shady sources?
> 
> Well look no further, just simply check with Harvard and the studies -
> 
> ...


Fuck Harvard. 
No offense.


----------



## AZrailwhale (Aug 20, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> You couldn't even win independence, the French had to save your ass. And it wasn't over guns. So I suggest you get back to school and start again because it's clear you were asleep or your teacher filled you with shit, the same stuff that you're spewing.
> 
> And a Brit had to school you on American Independence. What a let down you are for the American forefathers, they would be greatly disappointed with you.





Captain Caveman said:


> You couldn't even win independence, the French had to save your ass. And it wasn't over guns. So I suggest you get back to school and start again because it's clear you were asleep or your teacher filled you with shit, the same stuff that you're spewing.
> 
> And a Brit had to school you on American Independence. What a let down you are for the American forefathers, they would be greatly disappointed with you.


Yeah we needed help against the largest empire in the world.  You needed help against two pissant countries like Germany and Italy.  Germany tied up most of your navy with what the USN would call a large task force.  The Italians tied up the rest with no fuel oil and trapped in the Med. Rommel kicked your asses until FDR supplied  an endless supply of the most modern tank of 1942, trucks, fuel oil, food, avgas, merchant and warships and repair facilities to fix your damaged ships.  WWI gutted your country and empire and WWII finished the job.  You spend your budget on social programs while depending on the USA for defense.


----------



## BackAgain (Aug 20, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> You still don't grasp the concept. You view it as offended, we just got annoyed at others ignorance, hence why we keep correcting you fools. Does that compute with you??


Nothing you blather on about computes for anyone with a brain cell. So of course, you couldn’t understand. I enjoy your displays of arrogance and ignorance, though. 

Helpful hint for you my Brit Twit: I don’t ascribe to all Brits your boundless petty arrogance and low level intellect. 👍

But at least you can’t stick to the stupid topic. You couldn’t even address my refutation of your own dopey position. 😂


----------



## BackAgain (Aug 20, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> View attachment 685178View attachment 685180
> 
> You haven't been outside the US, hence why you're thick as fuck and gullible to what your teachers told you.
> 
> ...


That’s quite a lengthy post from a Brit twit over things he doesn’t care about. 

Fucker can’t even correctly spell “shit.”


----------



## BackAgain (Aug 20, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> No, you guys have a lazy butchered version of English. It's retarded. We have a licence and licensed. You have have licence for everything. We can have defense and defence. You're stuck with defense.
> 
> You can't pronounce Stalictites, Worcestershire sauce, basil and oregano correctly. You're even stuck in the 1800's spelling of Aluminium. And you don't even know "Tom Dick and Harry"?? Are you seriously that dumb?
> 
> ...


You dare to criticize the perfection of your silly language?  You’re ignorant. 

Morons like you cannot defend even the silent k in “knight.”  Silly k nig it.


----------



## BackAgain (Aug 20, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> Do Americans find it macho that they reset their brains to the same old rhetoric to Brits? Are you all related to Biden. Is Biden secretly your father?
> 
> Are you all happy slapping one another, whooping like apes in a forest? What's up with you childish yanks?
> 
> ...


That’s it. 

By popular acclaim the twit Brit, Corporal Caveman, gets the award for “douchiest post of  summer 2022  at USMB.”





 Congrats, boy.


----------



## Stryder50 (Aug 21, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> That's a Trump tactic when cornered, attack the source, lol.


Learned from the Left whom have practiced such often for decades.


----------



## Stryder50 (Aug 21, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> So I'm UK Centre Right, I vote Tory and according to you, I have Dimmer brethren. Sorry for calling you a retard, I actually meant Special Retard.


UK Centre Right tends to be USA middle~moderate; ...---... at best.


----------



## Stryder50 (Aug 21, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> I've always stated that needing a gun for self defence was a fallacy, and we all know it is. So what's with the gun nuts running off and copying pasting articles from shady sources?
> 
> Well look no further, just simply check with Harvard and the studies -
> 
> ...


OMG!

Why do you anti-gun nuts have no brains compounded by stupidity with a dose of lying ???

Many of us whom are armed with firearms in public aren't doing such just to respond to threats of violence from guns/firearms only.  We carry/pack to protect from any form of violent threat~assault.

The worst candidates for owning a gun are;
1) Criminals, especially those whom engage in violence and assault.
2) Felons, whom due to their conviction for crimes are prohibited to possess firearms.
3) Idiots like you whom likely don't know which end to hold on to or how to use.

Hopefully you will get your wish and be a fatal victim of criminal violence, due to using your brains and wits for defense.  You will be no great loss to the species or gene pool.


----------



## Vagabond63 (Aug 21, 2022)

Stryder50 said:


> We carry/pack to protect from any form of violent threat~assault.


Wow, you must be so terrified every time you go out of your houses. Either that, or you completely lack any situational awareness in your daily lives.


----------



## Vagabond63 (Aug 21, 2022)

Stryder50 said:


> 3) Idiots like you whom likely don't know which end to hold on to or how to use.


Sadly America is full of idiots who don't know which end to hold on to or how to use, yet can still get guns with ease.


----------



## basquebromance (Aug 21, 2022)

me and my buddies just "hangin' out"!


----------



## Delldude (Aug 21, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> I've always stated that needing a gun for self defence was a fallacy, and we all know it is. So what's with the gun nuts running off and copying pasting articles from shady sources?
> 
> Well look no further, just simply check with Harvard and the studies -
> 
> ...


Go to NYC and stroll the streets at night and get back to us, if you survive.


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 21, 2022)

Vagabond63 said:


> Sadly America is full of idiots who don't know which end to hold on to or how to use, yet can still get guns with ease.




This.....


----------



## Stryder50 (Aug 22, 2022)

Vagabond63 said:


> Wow, you must be so terrified every time you go out of your houses. Either that, or you completely lack any situational awareness in your daily lives.


Wow, the UK education system really fails in teaching you twits how to read or comprehend the written word.  Also a major fail in teaching logic.

Most times and places there is no reason to be terrified, but once in a while there may be the unexpected.  I've seen too many altercations where if one party is outnumbered, and knocked to the ground, the head kicking and stomping starts. Yet there is no move to outlaw Doc Martins or other heavy boots/footwear.

In my younger years I studied some of the martial arts, and also did fencing. While I might rather carry a rapier or katana, such open carry usually isn't lawful, and they don't have the reach of a pistol if there is a distant threat.

Your snark about my skills at situational awareness show you don't know or understand that concept.  More on that in a moment.

While about 99.999% of the time most of us have peaceful lives, there can occur a threatening situation and usually it is sudden and unexpected. Like when your vehicle gets a flat tire or someone pulls their vehicle suddenly in front of you and their is no way to avoid a collision. Both the sort of situations that I've experienced a few times in my 70+ years on this planet.

And it's that 70+ years that means I no longer have the speed, dexterity, agility, or strength of my 20-30s to engage in kungfu with some punk, let alone 2 or 3 or more.  And about nine times out of ten, just displaying that you are armed is enough to have potential threats back off and retreat.

So once again I need to relate what is a classic example for consideration.

It was about ten years ago and my oldest son was living in South Tacoma area while finishing college on his GI Bill (he is a combat vet, served in Baghdad, Iraq a few years earlier).  That evening, he, his wife, and their almost one year old daughter were heading home and pulled into a 7-11 store to get her a pack of cigs.  As he came out of the store heading to get into his vehicle, there was a pimp-mobile parked beside his, on the driver's side, and the "dis-advantaged black youth" in the passenger seat opened his door, blocking my son's path.

So maybe this guy is anxious to get out of the vehicle, but he remains sitting and starts some useless banter with my son, which gradually edges towards potential hostile dialogue.  My son is trying to politely respond and hint that he'd like to get into his vehicle.  Meanwhile the few clusters of other "dis-advantaged black youths" that have been hanging about in the parking lot start moving closer to this "event".

What the youths in the pimp-mobile didn't know was my son was fingering the pepper-spray in his jacket pocket with left hand, while his right hand was a second away from drawing his pistol.  After a minute or so of this delaying chatter, his wife, noticing the potential course events are heading towards and seeing the mob moving in behind my son, her husband, and sitting in the passenger seat of their Escalade, draws her pistol from her purse, holds it up in front of her in a ready to use (and see ~ display) position, and shouts out through the open driver side window, something to the effect:
"Shut the fuck up and let him get into our car!"

Suddenly the door holder becomes much more civil, and pulls his door closed. The crowds start moving back away from the potential "show". My son is able to get into his vehicle and leave.  Nothing here to make a substance of police report and hence just one of several such similar situations likely to happen across the USA, daily, but not reported or recorded.

Now tell us how such a similar situation would play out over there in the UK, where you aren't allowed to be armed, if you were in my son's place. I'm sure you can spin some unrealistic fictional and distorted version where mighty 'you' beat off the crowd and get away.

Footnote here; per Ancestry.com my son is one quarter Nigerian.  However, what "off white" coloring he has, plus other features, tend to make him look slightly Hispanic.


----------



## Stryder50 (Aug 22, 2022)

Vagabond63 said:


> Sadly America is full of idiots who don't know which end to hold on to or how to use, yet can still get guns with ease.


Even more sadly, you don't know squat about America or it's citizens, nor about our gun regulations for legal acquisition and ownership.
And likely your the sort whom would shoot himself, or an innocent bystander if you ever did get your hands on a firearm.


----------



## Captain Caveman (Aug 22, 2022)

Vagabond63 said:


> Wow, you must be so terrified every time you go out of your houses. Either that, or you completely lack any situational awareness in your daily lives.


They couldn't live on the UK, their nappies couldn't hold all the shit when venturing out of their house without a gun.

Your last sentence can be condensed to, "Fucking pussies".

Have to get in the daily phrase, 2nd Amendment.


----------



## Captain Caveman (Aug 22, 2022)

Stryder50 said:


> Wow, the UK education system really fails in teaching you twits how to read or comprehend the written word.  Also a major fail in teaching logic.
> 
> Most times and places there is no reason to be terrified, but once in a while there may be the unexpected.  I've seen too many altercations where if one party is outnumbered, and knocked to the ground, the head kicking and stomping starts. Yet there is no move to outlaw Doc Martins or other heavy boots/footwear.
> 
> ...


Sniff sniff. Sniff sniff. Can you smell that? What a load of bullshit. You hide behind a gun to compensate, and you struggle in the outside world. That's how your education system raises you, filling your minds with bullshit.


----------



## westwall (Aug 22, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> Sniff sniff. Sniff sniff. Can you smell that? What a load of bullshit. You hide behind a gun to compensate, and you struggle in the outside world. That's how your education system raises you, filling your minds with bullshit.




No, we don't.  We don't need to compensate.  We are hapoy with our lives.  We just make sure no violent jackass interferes.


----------



## P@triot (Aug 22, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> Americans are lazy ****s when it comes to the English language, that's why they have a butchered version and you're too retarded to grasp English.
> 
> The irony is, you think the English are illiterate with English, laugh my fucking cock off.
> 
> I apologise on the behalf of imbeciles, you're a brain dead imbecile.


So now the low-IQ imbecile plays the “I’m not American card”.

Uh…then what the _fuck_ are you doing here then?!? This is a *U.S.* message board. Your foreign ass doesn’t get to have a voice in _our_ country. 🖕


----------



## P@triot (Aug 22, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> Sniff sniff. Sniff sniff. Can you smell that? What a load of bullshit. You hide behind a gun to compensate, and you struggle in the outside world. That's how your education system raises you, filling your minds with bullshit.


Sniffle…Sniffle…Sniffle. Can you _hear_ that? That’s a foreign pussy *crying* like a small child because he’s afraid of an inanimate object and upset that he can’t prevent Americans from owning that inanimate object.

Cry some more, foreign little pussy.


----------



## P@triot (Aug 22, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> You hide behind a gun to compensate, and you struggle in the outside world.


I’ve got $100 that’s says this tool has a Ukraine flag in his social media profiles and cries for the international community to “arm” Ukraine.


----------



## P@triot (Aug 22, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> Americans are lazy ****s when it comes to the English language


Must not be too “lazy” - our untrained farmers _easily_ defeated the absolute best soldiers your sorry ass nation had to offer


----------



## P@triot (Aug 22, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> You haven't a clue of reality.


I just bent you over with facts - over and over and over. I *proved* your entire post was 100% bullshit.

Every single day in the United States, an armed citizen prevents a crime by a thug like you.


----------



## Vagabond63 (Aug 23, 2022)

2aguy said:


> This.....


Yes, I am serious.


----------



## Vagabond63 (Aug 23, 2022)

Stryder50 said:


> Wow, the UK education system really fails in teaching you twits how to read or comprehend the written word.


Hello, we haven't met. Ah, yes. I apologise. My use of the word "you" was meant to be plural, as in Americans in general, not yourself in particular. I failed to make that clear.


Stryder50 said:


> Now tell us how such a similar situation would play out over there in the UK, where you aren't allowed to be armed, if you were in my son's place. I'm sure you can spin some unrealistic fictional and distorted version where mighty 'you' beat off the crowd and get away.


I can as it happens. Back in the late 1970's early 80's I was a bit of a party animal at weekends, and would often chose to walk/stagger home in the early hours from the city centre to where I lived in the suburbs, about 3 miles or so; the walk helped to sober me up. Well, one night on one of my walks home as I neared my house, I  noticed there were three men walking behind me a fair distance away. I thought nothing of it at first, but decided to cross the road and take a small detour. When they immediately mirrored my actions and began to close the distance between us, it triggered alarm bells in my head, so I increased my pace and crossed the road again. This time one of them followed me while the other two remained on the other side of the road. Now, I have had a few street fights in my time and knew I'd have a reasonable chance against one opponent, but three would be pushing my luck to breaking point so as I neared home I suddenly broke into a run and ran around a corner and into a narrow, dark, dead end alleyway. I hid in the shadows as they ran by and waited. I chose  this spot to make a stand because 1) they'd have to come at me one at a time from the front increasing my odds and 2) as the alleyway was an obvious dead end, I gambled that they'd never think I'd be that stupid. Well after a while they came back and discussed where I had gone, eventually deciding to "hunt" elsewhere.  My gamble paid off, no guns or any other weapons were used or needed.


Stryder50 said:


> Even more sadly, you don't know squat about America or it's citizens, nor about our gun regulations for legal acquisition and ownership.
> And likely your the sort whom would shoot himself, or an innocent bystander if you ever did get your hands on a firearm.


As I said, we've not met. Before the 1996 hand gun ban, I was a member of two gun clubs, and owned three hand guns. In my time in both civilian life and the military, I've fired every calibre of gun and rifle from .22 to .50cal. I won't count the tank guns, mortars or  ATGWs I've fired as they aren't really relevent.
Oh, and until 2aguy started cropping up on the Europe forum here preaching his mantra about how our gun control laws don't work, I wasn't in the least bit interested in your gun laws or lack of them. So you can thank 2aguy for my continuing presence and contributions here.


----------



## Vagabond63 (Aug 23, 2022)

P@triot said:


> Must not be too “lazy” - our untrained farmers _easily_ defeated the absolute best soldiers your sorry ass nation had to offer


*cough* Baron von Steuben *cough*


----------



## Captain Caveman (Aug 23, 2022)

westwall said:


> No, we don't.  We don't need to compensate.  We are hapoy with our lives.  We just make sure no violent jackass interferes.


You hide behind guns because of your tiny dicks. Hence the macho crap you guys come out with.

"Der, come and, der, talk me guns, der".


----------



## BackAgain (Aug 23, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> You hide behind guns because of your tiny dicks. Hence the macho crap you guys come out with.
> 
> "Der, come and, der, *talk* me guns, der".



Talk? The Brit twit ^ is in full babble mode — again.


----------



## Captain Caveman (Aug 23, 2022)

Stryder50 said:


> Even more sadly, you don't know squat about America or it's citizens, nor about our gun regulations for legal acquisition and ownership.
> And likely your the sort whom would shoot himself, or an innocent bystander if you ever did get your hands on a firearm.


I know more than you think cupcake. Some Brits do have relatives in the US, and some Brits do visit and speak to them. You guys don't venture outside America.


----------



## Captain Caveman (Aug 23, 2022)

BackAgain said:


> Talk? The Brit twit ^ is in full babble mode — again.


^^ Another retard hiding behind a gun, ^ in shit talk mode - again.


----------



## BackAgain (Aug 23, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> ^^ Another retard hiding behind a gun, ^ in shit talk mode - again.


I’m not armed, pussy. I’m not hiding at all. I’m just calling you out as being the obvious retard shit talker you are. 

Look. Don’t cry. I do make fun of you. That’s true. But I mean, it’s not like you don’t deserve to be ridiculed. Everything about you is ridiculous. 👍


----------



## BlackSand (Aug 23, 2022)

Vagabond63 said:


> *cough* Baron von Steuben *cough*


.

He was dead by the Battle of New Orleans ... *cough-cough*
And the Choctaw Indians, and Militia, helped us beat the living tar out of experience British Regulars in that fight.

.​


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 24, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> You hide behind guns because of your tiny dicks. Hence the macho crap you guys come out with.
> 
> "Der, come and, der, talk me guns, der".




What is it with you guys and your fixation on the penis?   We talk about guns....you guys start to sweat, shake, and you think about the penis.........you really need to get help...your psycho sexual focus is off....guns are not penises...they are not sex toys....get help before you hurt yourself....


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 24, 2022)

Vagabond63 said:


> *cough* Baron von Steuben *cough*




"Cough" World War 1.....World War 2....."Cough" you know, when the United States, and Americans with lots of guns saved your sorry asses....remember that?


----------



## Captain Caveman (Aug 24, 2022)

2aguy said:


> What is it with you guys and your fixation on the penis?   We talk about guns....you guys start to sweat, shake, and you think about the penis.........you really need to get help...your psycho sexual focus is off....guns are not penises...they are not sex toys....get help before you hurt yourself....


Because you need to compensate. Other Western countries get on with their lives, you guys it's "*Mouth froth* 2nd amendment*mouth froth* come take my guns *mouth froth* 2nd amendment". That's every hour, day in and day out 24/7.

So the planet can only assume it's because you're compensating for tiny dicks because it's a stance a tiny dick person takes. So yours is an inney.


----------



## westwall (Aug 24, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> Because you need to compensate. Other Western countries get on with their lives, you guys it's "*Mouth froth* 2nd amendment*mouth froth* come take my guns *mouth froth* 2nd amendment". That's every hour, day in and day out 24/7.
> 
> So the planet can only assume it's because you're compensating for tiny dicks because it's a stance a tiny dick person takes. So yours is an inney.






You are the one who needs to compensate.  You are emasculated, so you demand everyone else be likewise emasculated.


----------



## Captain Caveman (Aug 24, 2022)

westwall said:


> You are the one who needs to compensate.  You are emasculated, so you demand everyone else be likewise emasculated.


No, the planet just demands gun nuts should just be normal and not gun nutty


----------



## Captain Caveman (Aug 24, 2022)

westwall
List of Royal Prerogatives -

1) Sack the PM if he/she doesn't resign after defeat
2) erm
3) erm
4) erm
5) erm
6) erm
7) erm
8) erm
9) erm
19) erm

YOU'RE SUBJECTS BECAUSE OF THE ROYAL PREROGATIVES 

(shake head, poor American)


----------



## westwall (Aug 24, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> westwall
> List of Royal Prerogatives -
> 
> 1) Sack the PM if he/she doesn't resign after defeat
> ...







Try again, silly boy.....

• Powers relating to the legislature, e.g. - the summoning and proroguing of parliament; the granting of royal assent to bills; legislating by Order in Council (such as for overseas territories) or by letters patent; creating schemes for conferring benefits upon citizens where Parliament appropriates the necessary finance.

• Powers relating to the judicial system, e.g. - various functions carried out through the Attorney General and the Lord Advocate; pardoning of convicted offenders or remitting or reducing sentences;

• Powers relating to foreign affairs, e.g. – the power to acquire additional territory; the making of treaties (although Parliament has had a veto over treaty-making powers in some circumstances since 201022), the declaration of war and the making of peace; restraining aliens from entering the UK and the issue of passports.

• Powers relating to the armed forces e.g. – the Sovereign is commander in chief of the armed forces of the Crown and the control, organisation and disposition of the armed forces are within the prerogative.

• Appointments and honours, e.g. – appointment of ministers, judges and many other holders of public office; creation of peers and conferring of honours and decorations.

• Immunities and privileges, e.g. – statutes do not bind the Crown unless expressly stated (usually by the formulation “this Act binds the Crown” or similar)

• The prerogative in times of emergency, e.g. – requisitioning of ships or seizure of neutral property in a time of war.

• Miscellaneous prerogatives - various other historic powers relating to such things as royal charters, mining precious metals, coinage, franchises for markets, treasure trove, printing, guardianship of infants.
*
This should not be considered an exhaustive list.*


			https://researchbriefings.files.parliament.uk/documents/SN03861/SN03861.pdf
		

* 



DURRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR*


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 24, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> Because you need to compensate. Other Western countries get on with their lives, you guys it's "*Mouth froth* 2nd amendment*mouth froth* come take my guns *mouth froth* 2nd amendment". That's every hour, day in and day out 24/7.
> 
> So the planet can only assume it's because you're compensating for tiny dicks because it's a stance a tiny dick person takes. So yours is an inney.




Yeah........it's called 15 million innocent men, women and children murdered by the governments of Europe in just 12 years......more people murdered than all of the people murdered with guns in  the 246 years of our countries history.....and the majority of those gun murders were not innocent people......unlike you guys who murdered primarily innocent people.....they are criminals engaged in crime.....

You guys murdered all of those people, while under the control of the socialists.....and you just want to forget it ever happened....

Then, add in the 25 million people murdered by the communists in Russia, the 70 million people murdered by the communists in China, the 1/3 of the population of Cambodia murdered by the communists......all around the world...people murdered by their governments...

And you guys just pretend it never happened.......

You are the ones who are insane, not us.....we know it happened....we know it could happen again.....you are willing to trust that it won't happen again.....that makes you a fool.


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 24, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> Because you need to compensate. Other Western countries get on with their lives, you guys it's "*Mouth froth* 2nd amendment*mouth froth* come take my guns *mouth froth* 2nd amendment". That's every hour, day in and day out 24/7.
> 
> So the planet can only assume it's because you're compensating for tiny dicks because it's a stance a tiny dick person takes. So yours is an inney.




Can you explain to us how it is that the Holocaust, and the other millions of people murdered by the European socialists have no meaning for you?   It happened.....those millions were murdered.....hundreds of million more murdered by their government around the world....and yet you have no fear of it ever happening again....

Can you explain that?


----------



## Stryder50 (Aug 25, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> I've always stated that needing a gun for self defence was a fallacy, and we all know it is. So what's with the gun nuts running off and copying pasting articles from shady sources?
> 
> Well look no further, just simply check with Harvard and the studies -
> 
> ...


It's known as having a bias in the facts collected and interpreted.
Countering study,, EXCERPTS;
CDC Admission: Guns Used Far More Often in Self-Defense Than Crime
...
Firearms are used for defensive purposes between 500,000 and 3 million times every single year in the United States. 

In comparison, firearms were used to commit violent crime 300,000 times as of 2008. 

So objectively and rationally, gun prohibitions are a good idea, right? 

If your reflexive reaction to reading that data is that it must rely upon exaggerated estimates by pro-Second Amendment activists, guess again.  The source of that data is none other than a study commissioned by the Center for Disease Control (CDC) following an instruction from President Barack Obama in January 2013 "to research the causes and prevention of gun violence." 

In other words, even accepting the minimum estimate of defensive gun uses in the U.S. each year from a source hardly inclined toward Second Amendment advocacy, that number still dwarfs the number of instances in which guns are used to commit violent crime.  "Almost all national survey estimates indicate that defensive gun uses by victims are at least as common as offensive uses by criminals," the report summarized. 
...
Recently, Florida State University researcher Gary Kleck uncovered CDC estimates conducted in 1996, 1997 and 1998.  And as reported in _Reason_ magazine, those estimates confirmed Kleck's own research determining that firearms are used for defensive purposes approximately 2.5 million times per year, unbeknownst by the public: 

_The CDC essentially confirmed Kleck's results.  But Kleck didn't know about that until now, because the CDC never reported what it found.  Kleck's new paper - "What Do CDC's Surveys Say About the Frequency of Defensive Gun Uses?" - finds that the agency had asked about DGUs in its Behavioral Risk Factor Surveillance System in 1996, 1997, and 1998.  Those polls, Kleck writes, "are high-quality telephone surveys of enormous probability samples of U.S. adults, asking about a wide range of health-related topics.  Those that addressed DGUs asked more people about this topic than any other surveys conducted before or since...  The final adjusted prevalence of 1.24% therefore implies that in an average year during 1996-1998, 2.46 million U.S. adults used a gun for self-defense.  _

Not that a disparity one way or the other would be determinative regarding the Second Amendment, which protects the natural, individual right to keep and bear arms regardless of statistical estimates. 
...
The worldwide average murder rate across all nations stands at approximately 11 per 100,000 people.  The U.S., which claims the world's highest gun possession rate and obviously protects that right via the Second Amendment, falls far below that average at approximately 4 per 100,000. 

While gun control advocates elevate European nations as some sort of gun-banning, violence-free utopia, their murder rates actually stand fairly close to the U.S. at 2 or 3 per 100,000. 

And notably, Switzerland claims the world's second-highest gun possession rate, yet suffers an extremely low murder rate. 

Meanwhile, nations that follow domestic gun controllers' prohibitionist and even confiscatory agenda actually suffer murder rates far above the worldwide average.  For instance, gun-banning Mexico suffers a murder rate of approximately 24 per 100,000.  Similarly, Brazil endures a murder rate of 26 per 100,000, and Russia stands at 14 per 100,000. 

Accordingly, even completely repealing the Second Amendment and prohibiting gun possession wouldn't translate to a miniscule murder rate, as global experience shows. 

And as the federal government's own data spanning two decades show, doing so would prevent law-abiding citizens from protecting themselves, other people or property far more often than it would prevent crime. 
...








						CDC Admission:  Guns Used Far More Often in Self-Defense Than Crime
					

Firearms are used for defensive purposes between 500,000 and 3 million times every single year in the United States. In comparison, firearms were used to commit violent crime 300,000 times as of 2008. If your reflexive reaction to reading that data is that it must rely upon exaggerated estimates...




					www.cfif.org
				



~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Similar evidence, articles, links to follow. Might be a few days as yard-n-garden and other chores take priority for next few days.


----------



## Vagabond63 (Aug 26, 2022)

BlackSand said:


> .
> 
> He was dead by the Battle of New Orleans ... *cough-cough*
> And the Choctaw Indians, and Militia, helped us beat the living tar out of experience British Regulars in that fight.
> ...


Yes, a frontal assault against a strongly fortified position covered by heavy artillery, tends to end badly for an attacker, especially when badly led. Still, as I recall, the militia ran away there as well. As for the Choctaw Indians, whatever happened to them?


----------



## Vagabond63 (Aug 26, 2022)

2aguy said:


> Can you explain to us how it is that the Holocaust, and the other millions of people murdered by the European socialists have no meaning for you?   It happened.....those millions were murdered.....hundreds of million more murdered by their government around the world....and yet you have no fear of it ever happening again....
> 
> Can you explain that?


Nothing to explain. Didn't one of your Generals once say "war is hell"? We learned that if you allow extreme right or left wing authoritarian regimes to develop, shit happens. Unfortunately we can't always stop them evolving, and you've come very close with Trump recently. What we learned is to not allow national rivalries to escalate by creating a more united Europe where we could settle our differences by diplomacy, at least until Putin paid for Trump and Johnson to get elected.

But that's war and there has never been any instance of civilians armed with handguns ever stopping an authoritarian regime by themselves. You are comparing chalk to cheese, as usual.


----------



## Vagabond63 (Aug 26, 2022)

Stryder50 said:


> It's known as having a bias in the facts collected and interpreted.
> Countering study,, EXCERPTS;
> CDC Admission: Guns Used Far More Often in Self-Defense Than Crime
> ...
> ...


Have you actually read what the CDC comissioned report actually says, as opposed to the BS spin article you quote?


----------



## Vagabond63 (Aug 26, 2022)

2aguy said:


> "Cough" World War 1.....World War 2....."Cough" you know, when the United States, and Americans with lots of guns saved your sorry asses....remember that?


Ah, yes that old myth. 
WW1? Thanks for providing fresh cannon fodder for German Artillery and machine guns, but that's about all, Britain and France provided the guns and equipment. The main effect of American involvement in WW1 was on the morale of the German government who had already shot their bolt in 1918 and were on their last legs in any event. American manpower enabled a more decisive allied victory, so again, thanks for that. Oh, French and Belgian farmers are still digging up dud American made shells in their fields.
WW2? Well were it not for Hitler invading the USSR, things may have turned out differently. The main US effort was in the Pacific, but thanks again for all the men and equipment we needed to hang on to about half of Western Europe, when you shafted us over Eastern Europe at Yalta.


----------



## Bootney Lee Farnsworth (Aug 26, 2022)

This thread


We citizens will keep our guns and get more.

You peasants/subjects beg your loafwards for crumbs and merciful protection. 

Deal?


----------



## BlackSand (Aug 26, 2022)

Vagabond63 said:


> Yes, a frontal assault against a strongly fortified position covered by heavy artillery, tends to end badly for an attacker, especially when badly led. Still, as I recall, the militia ran away there as well. As for the Choctaw Indians, whatever happened to them?


.

It was an untrained militia, some military, and a bunch of Native Americans fighting thousands of experienced British regulars ...
With 5000 more British Regulars offshore that turned tail and ran.

They slaughtered them and a battlefield reporter at the time described the field as a carpet of red and dead bodies.
It took us 45 minutes to whip the ever-living tar out of the British, they never actually made it to New Orleans ...
Although they did shell a church and injure a nun from the port ... And the Choctaw Indians run several casinos in the region today.

_"They ran through briars, and they ran through bramble, and they ran through the places where the rabbits wouldn't go ...
They ran so fast that hounds couldn't catch them, down the Mississippi to the Gulf of Mexico."_

The only running we were doing was chasing your ass out of the State and into the Gulf of Mexico,
where your buddies on the ships were leaving your ass ...  

Don't take it so hard ... The same thing happened when the Union tried.
They got chased across the river into Vicksburg, Mississippi before they got a chance to slow down and win a fight.
Stay out of Louisiana ... It's the best option, because we are some tenacious folks.

.​


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 26, 2022)

Vagabond63 said:


> Ah, yes that old myth.
> WW1? Thanks for providing fresh cannon fodder for German Artillery and machine guns, but that's about all, Britain and France provided the guns and equipment. The main effect of American involvement in WW1 was on the morale of the German government who had already shot their bolt in 1918 and were on their last legs in any event. American manpower enabled a more decisive allied victory, so again, thanks for that. Oh, French and Belgian farmers are still digging up dud American made shells in their fields.
> WW2? Well were it not for Hitler invading the USSR, things may have turned out differently. The main US effort was in the Pacific, but thanks again for all the men and equipment we needed to hang on to about half of Western Europe, when you shafted us over Eastern Europe at Yalta.




Yeah.....you didn't get it done till our troops arrived.....you are welcome....Americans with guns saved your asses, twice.....and you still didn't learn your lesson....

Nope.....without America, Russia would have been defeated, and Germany would have consolidated its hold on Europe, then pounded your country into paste....


----------



## 2aguy (Aug 26, 2022)

Vagabond63 said:


> Nothing to explain. Didn't one of your Generals once say "war is hell"? We learned that if you allow extreme right or left wing authoritarian regimes to develop, shit happens. Unfortunately we can't always stop them evolving, and you've come very close with Trump recently. What we learned is to not allow national rivalries to escalate by creating a more united Europe where we could settle our differences by diplomacy, at least until Putin paid for Trump and Johnson to get elected.
> 
> But that's war and there has never been any instance of civilians armed with handguns ever stopping an authoritarian regime by themselves. You are comparing chalk to cheese, as usual.




You guys didn't learn anything.......American troops on the ground have kept you from butchering each other again, and has...until biden, the leftists, from invading west .....

You fools......you look at Trump and you can't see that he was the exact opposite........you like biden, who is enacting fascism left and right and with democrats over here, you guys are on your own.....something you can't afford since you put all of your money into keeping your people in the basement playing X-box.....living off the dole...


----------



## badbob85037 (Aug 26, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> I've always stated that needing a gun for self defence was a fallacy, and we all know it is. So what's with the gun nuts running off and copying pasting articles from shady sources?
> 
> Well look no further, just simply check with Harvard and the studies -
> 
> ...


Why don't you tell that to one of those fags in the Florida night club when all that stood in the way of him and a mad shooter was a bathroom stall door . Or one of those teachers in Texas. I see you are the type of guy who's home is invaded you will not make any aggressive move as they beat the  fuck out of you knowing they will tier soon and move on to another family member Probably the type of guy that joins neighborhood watch so you can show up and watch.  WHAT KIND OF IDIOT WOULDN'T PROTECT HIS FAMILY? An idiot like you.   Beyond pathetic!


----------



## P@triot (Aug 28, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> You hide behind guns because of your tiny dicks.


  The moment the fascist cannot make a case for why they want totalitarian control over everyone, they cry “tiny dicks”  

Listen flaming homo, your creepy _obsession_ with other men’s penises aside, I’d rather have 100 firearms than worry about what queer beta-males such as yourself are thinking about my equipment


----------



## P@triot (Aug 28, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> You hide behind guns because of your tiny dicks.


He ☝️ hides behind “tiny dicks” because he’s afraid of inanimate objects and cannot explain his desire for fascist totalitarian _control_ over everyone.


----------



## Bootney Lee Farnsworth (Aug 28, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> You hide behind guns because of your tiny dicks. Hence the macho crap you guys come out with.
> 
> "Der, come and, der, talk me guns, der".


I'll use my gun to kill you. You use your "big dick." Let's see who lives.


----------



## yidnar (Aug 28, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> Because you need to compensate. Other Western countries get on with their lives, you guys it's "*Mouth froth* 2nd amendment*mouth froth* come take my guns *mouth froth* 2nd amendment". That's every hour, day in and day out 24/7.
> 
> So the planet can only assume it's because you're compensating for tiny dicks because it's a stance a tiny dick person takes. So yours is an inney.


----------



## themirrorthief (Aug 28, 2022)

jbrownson0831 said:


> What is hard to understand?  You have nothing but wind blowing through your ears, so you simply repeat, or parrot, back whatever your Gestapo leaders tell you to...just like a Polly Parrot.  Awwwk, Awwwk, Awwwk!


I never had sex with that woman...Ms Lewinsky  awk awk awk


----------



## BackAgain (Aug 28, 2022)

Notice the author of the OP of this inane thread cannot counter the obvious rebuttal. An armed schmuck breaks into your home. How is your ability to draw your own gun in self defense a “fallacy?”

Don’t worry. The original poster will never bother to even try to offer a coherent rejoinder.


----------



## P@triot (Aug 28, 2022)

BackAgain said:


> Don’t worry. The original poster will never bother to even try to offer a coherent rejoinder.


I fucking obliterated him with news articles from actual instances of what you just outlined. His response? To start talking about everyone’s penis 🤮


----------



## BackAgain (Aug 28, 2022)

P@triot said:


> I fucking obliterated him with news articles from actual instances of what you just outlined. His response? To start talking about everyone’s penis 🤮


Over compensation for a teeny weeny peny?


----------



## Oldestyle (Aug 28, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> I've always stated that needing a gun for self defence was a fallacy, and we all know it is. So what's with the gun nuts running off and copying pasting articles from shady sources?
> 
> Well look no further, just simply check with Harvard and the studies -
> 
> ...


Here's the thing that blows a huge hole in that Harvard study, Caveman!  It's almost impossible to calculate how many violent crimes are prevented by just the possibility that "victims" might have a gun!  Criminals will almost always target the weak.  If they know that their target isn't allowed to have a weapon then they know that they're free to target them with impunity!  If they're not sure...if they think that victim might be armed...they may not even attempt an assault!


----------



## AZrailwhale (Aug 28, 2022)

Vagabond63 said:


> *cough* Baron von Steuben *cough*


Baron Von Steuben only trained Washington’s troops.  There were several other armies as well as numerous militia outfits like Francis Marion’s that gave the British and Prussians hell without a lick  of formal training.


----------



## ThunderKiss1965 (Aug 29, 2022)

Captain Caveman said:


> I've always stated that needing a gun for self defence was a fallacy, and we all know it is. So what's with the gun nuts running off and copying pasting articles from shady sources?
> 
> Well look no further, just simply check with Harvard and the studies -
> 
> ...


The quote below is from the author named in the study David Hemenway. It's shows a biased opinion on firearms and negates any conclusions he made.
​"Instead of it being the mark of a real man that you can shoot somebody at 50 feet and kill them with a gun, the mark of a real man is that you would never do anything like that. . . . The gun is a great equalizer because it makes wimps as dangerous as people who really have skill and bravery and so I’d like to have this notion that anyone using a gun is a wuss. They aren’t anybody to be looked up to. They’re somebody to look down at because they couldn’t defend themselves or couldn’t protect others without using a gun."


----------



## Vagabond63 (Aug 30, 2022)

ThunderKiss1965 said:


> It's shows a biased opinion on firearms and negates any conclusions he made.


Did he say this before he made the study or were his comments an opinion he came to after the study? "Pro-gun" studies can equally be accused of bias


----------



## Vagabond63 (Aug 30, 2022)

AZrailwhale said:


> Baron Von Steuben only trained Washington’s troops.  There were several other armies as well as numerous militia outfits like Francis Marion’s that gave the British and Prussians hell without a lick  of formal training.


Ah, yes, Mel Gibson's "Patriot", more terrorist than freedom fighter. "But when he wasn't forging the land of the free, it seems that Marion was slaughtering Indians for fun and regularly raping his female slaves."  Mel Gibson's latest hero: a rapist who hunted Indians for fun

Oh, BTW Prussia was "neutral" at the time.


----------



## westwall (Sep 7, 2022)




----------

