2aguy
Diamond Member
- Jul 19, 2014
- 112,241
- 52,463
- Thread starter
- #141
I dont know if that number is correct but the logic is pure lib
Punish good people for the actions of the ctiminals
It doesn't matter how they take it. That's not what was being discussed. Nobody has the right to use physical violence unless they were attacked which Martin wasn't. Everything is on the 911 call.
Zimmerman chased after Martin for about 10 seconds or so. Zimmerman admitted he lost Martin because he outran him so quickly. Martin hid between the houses and Zimmerman continued his call with the police dispatcher for another minute. While walking back to his truck, Martin seen he was off the phone and violently attacked him.
So where is it written how many were law abiding citizens that legally owned their firearm they murdered with?
That's a good question. You see, Kellerman did this study where he found a gun in the home was 43 times more likely to kill a household member than a bad guy, and the response by the NRA was to demand that the CDC never do a gun study again.
If you are desperate enough to risk jail and commit a crime, you aren't going to be easily deterred by Marvin Milqtoast pointing a gun at you.Because the only way to control crime is with a strong enough deterrent; death is the ultimate deterrent, that's why. The mere sight of a gun pointed at you is enough to stop just about anything illegal that you're doing. Criminals may be stupid, but they know that anybody getting involved in their actions has the legal authority to use that deadly weapon. They shoot or kill you, they're going to prison. You shoot or kill them, the police call your gun in, check your license, and you go home and have a bologna sandwich.
The reason they don't break into an occupied home is because they don't know if you have a gun or not.
No, the reason why they don't break into an occuppied home is that they don't want to be identified.
The Europeans and Japanese don't have guns, they have lower burglary rates than we have.
You lie....you are insane....
That's a good question. You see, Kellerman did this study where he found a gun in the home was 43 times more likely to kill a household member than a bad guy, and the response by the NRA was to demand that the CDC never do a gun study again.
Moron...actual researchers looked at his study and said it was wrong.....he then did it over.....and came up with the number 2.7 but his underlying mistakes were still in the work....you idiot.....we have shown you this over and over again....
The CDC was not banned from doing gun research, you idiot...I have listed the gun research they did after the 90s....you moron........
This is some gun research from the CEC in 2006....
Violence-Related Firearm Deaths Among Residents of Metropolitan Areas and Cities --- United States, 2006--2007
And this one....2003
Source of Firearms Used by Students in School-Associated Violent Deaths --- United States, 1992--1999
And this one....
http://www.thecommunityguide.org/violence/viol-AJPM-evrev-firearms-law.pdf
And this one....2001
Surveillance for Fatal and Nonfatal Firearm-Related Injuries --- United States, 1993--1998
And this one....2013
Firearm Homicides and Suicides in Major Metropolitan Areas — United States, 2006–2007 and 2009–2010
And this one...2014
Indoor Firing Ranges and Elevated Blood Lead Levels — United States, 2002–2013
And this one....
Rates of Homicide, Suicide, and Firearm-Related Death Among Children -- 26 Industrialized Countries
==================
The Deleware study of 2015...
When Gun Violence Felt Like a Disease, a City in Delaware Turned to the C.D.C. (Published 2015)
When epidemiologists from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention came to this city, they were not here to track an outbreak of meningitis or study the effectiveness of a particular vaccine.
They were here to examine gun violence.
This city of about 70,000 had a 45 percent jump in shootings from 2011 to 2013, and the violence has remained stubbornly high; 25 shooting deaths have been reported this year, slightly more than last year, according to the mayor’s office
.-------
The final report, which has been submitted to the state, reached a conclusion that many here said they already knew: that there are certain patterns in the lives of many who commit gun violence.
“The majority of individuals involved in urban firearm violence are young men with substantial violence involvement preceding the more serious offense of a firearm crime,” the report said. “Our findings suggest that integrating data systems could help these individuals better receive the early, comprehensive help that they need to prevent violence involvement.”
Researchers analyzed data on 569 people charged with firearm crimes from 2009 to May 21, 2014, and looked for certain risk factors in their lives, such as whether they had been unemployed, had received help from assistance programs, had been possible victims of child abuse, or had been shot or stabbed. The idea was to show that linking such data could create a better understanding of who might need help before becoming involved in violence.
------------------
Why Congress stopped gun control activism at the CDC
I was one of three medical doctors who testified before the House’s Labor, Health, Human Services, and Education Appropriations Subcommittee on March 6, 1996 about the CDC’s misdeeds. (Note: This testimony and related events are described in my three-part documented historical series). Here is what we showed the committee:
- Dr. Arthur Kellermann’s1993 New England Journal of Medicine article that launched his career as a rock star gun control advocate and gave rise to the much-repeated “three times” fallacy. His research was supported by two CDC grants.
In summary, the CDC funded a flawed study of crime-prone inner city residents who had been murdered in their homes. The authors then tried to equate this wildly unrepresentative group with typical American gun owners. The committee members were not amused.
- The Winter 1993 CDC official publication, Public Health Policy for Preventing Violence, coauthored by CDC official Dr. Mark Rosenberg. This taxpayer-funded gun control polemic offered two strategies for preventing firearm injuries—“restrictive licensing (for example, only police, military, guards, and so on)” and “prohibit gun ownership.”
- The brazen public comments of top CDC officials, made at a time when gun prohibitionists were much more candid about their political goals.
But his successor Dr. Mark Rosenberg was quoted in the Washington Post as wanting his agency to create a public perception of firearms as “dirty, deadly—and banned.” (William Raspberry, “Sick People With Guns,” Washington Post, October 19, 1994.
- CDC Grant #R49/CCR903697-06 to the Trauma Foundation, a San Francisco gun control advocacy group, supporting a newsletter that frankly advocated gun control.