The Orange Mane -  a Denver Broncos Fan Community  

Go Back   The Orange Mane - a Denver Broncos Fan Community > Jibba Jabba > War, Religion and Politics Thread
Register FAQ Members List Calendar Chat Room Mark Forums Read



Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 05-09-2013, 03:31 PM   #201
houghtam
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 6,384
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by BroncoBeavis View Post
Who's going to insure all those guns our government sold to Mexican cartels?

Anyway, a majority of violent crimes in the US are carried out with weapons other than firearms (if any) (knives, blunt objects, etc)

Therefore we'll need knife insurance. Baseball bat insurance. Rope insurance. Lead pipe insurance. Candlestick insurance. Basically the whole weapons list in Clue...
I wasn't aware that accidental gun deaths were classified under "violent crimes". Thanks for educating me.
houghtam is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2013, 03:33 PM   #202
nyuk nyuk
Guest
 

Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by peacepipe View Post
Pointing out the parts of Heller you ignore is not misquoting.
You're misquoting, big time. "Guns can be regulated" specifically mentioned sawed-off shotguns and machine guns - not arbitrarily and vaguely defined "assault weapons," bans of which have been already thrown out due to their being arbitrary and vague (refer to city of Denver). Expect Heller common-use challenges on magazines for common-use defense weapons and common-use home defense rifles.
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2013, 03:43 PM   #203
BroncoBeavis
Guest
 

Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by houghtam View Post
I wasn't aware that accidental gun deaths were classified under "violent crimes". Thanks for educating me.
Better take it up with your people proposing the legislation...

http://maloney.house.gov/issue/gun-safety

Quote:
For too long, gun victims and society at large have borne the brunt of the costs of gun violence. My “Firearm Risk Protection Act” (H.R. 1369) would change that by shifting some of that cost back onto those who own the weapons.
Lolz. "I'd like to kill this mofo. But this gun is uninsured!"
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2013, 03:44 PM   #204
nyuk nyuk
Guest
 

Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by houghtam View Post
The facts also say gun ownership is down since then too.
Oh, brother.

  Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2013, 03:53 PM   #205
houghtam
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 6,384
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nyuk nyuk View Post
Oh, brother.

Oh, brother, indeed.

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/03/10/us...anted=all&_r=0

Quote:
The household gun ownership rate has fallen from an average of 50 percent in the 1970s to 49 percent in the 1980s, 43 percent in the 1990s and 35 percent in the 2000s, according to the survey data, analyzed by The New York Times.

In 2012, the share of American households with guns was 34 percent
More guns are being owned...by an increasingly smaller percentage of the population. Gun owners are hoarding them. And you wonder why we call you nuts.

Don't like that source? Here, you can take it straight from Glenn Beck's mouth...it would be in return for all the oral favors you gun nuts and right wing crazies have given him over the years.

http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013...lly-declining/

Quote:
Despite the high number of guns estimated to be in the U.S., indications are that gun ownership is actually on the decline. The long-running General Social Survey, maintained at the University of Chicago, has been asking about gun ownership since its inception in the 1970s. It has found that the number of people who say they have a gun in their home is at an all time low – hovering around 30 percent, from a high of 50 percent in the 1970s.
Not only is gun ownership down, it's WAY down. Not only is gun ownership among you preppers up, it's WAY WAY WAY up.

And we're the crazy ones.

houghtam is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2013, 04:09 PM   #206
BroncoBeavis
Guest
 

Posts: n/a
Default

Huh, Gun ownership is down. Gun crime is down.

Sounds like a prime time for Gummint Action to rein in this out of control Bill of Rights!
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2013, 06:00 PM   #207
nyuk nyuk
Guest
 

Posts: n/a
Default

Houghtam, how does "I suspect" translate to "unquestioned fact"?

“There are all these claims that gun ownership is going through the roof,” said Daniel Webster, the director of the Johns Hopkins Center for Gun Policy and Research. “But I suspect the increase in gun sales has been limited mostly to current gun owners. The most reputable surveys show a decline over time in the share of households with guns.”

Critics of that survey cite lack of willingness to admit gun ownership to surveyors. If I had someone ask me if I owned a gun, I'd say no. FactCheck's estimate of US gun ownership reflects conservative figures found in the 2007 Small Arms Survey.

Btw, the General Social Survey gets funded in part by the anti-gun Joyce Foundation. Perhaps next you'll give us some high quality Brady crap. Joyce openly admits to funding the survey and they also amazingly link to it on their website. Amazin' stuff, that!

Do you have more left-wing ideologue crap to give us?

I'm sure, Houghtam, that you would embrace a pro-gun survey funded in part by the NRA?

Last edited by nyuk nyuk; 05-09-2013 at 06:10 PM..
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-09-2013, 06:10 PM   #208
houghtam
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 6,384
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nyuk nyuk View Post
Houghtam, how does "I suspect" translate to "unquestioned fact"?

“There are all these claims that gun ownership is going through the roof,” said Daniel Webster, the director of the Johns Hopkins Center for Gun Policy and Research. “But I suspect the increase in gun sales has been limited mostly to current gun owners. The most reputable surveys show a decline over time in the share of households with guns.”

Critics of that survey cite lack of willingness to admit gun ownership to surveyors. If I had someone ask me if I owned a gun, I'd say no. FactCheck's estimate of US gun ownership reflects conservative figures found in the 2007 Small Arms Survey.
Here we go again. Don't like the results? Bash the survey!

How'd that work out for you in the election?

Gun ownership is down. Face it. Fewer and fewer people are buying into the rhetoric, but those who do take it to the extreme.
houghtam is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2013, 12:04 PM   #209
nyuk nyuk
Guest
 

Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by houghtam View Post
Here we go again. Don't like the results? Bash the survey!

How'd that work out for you in the election?

Gun ownership is down. Face it. Fewer and fewer people are buying into the rhetoric, but those who do take it to the extreme.
Because you accept stuff by the NRA, right? There is no "rhetoric" behind gun ownership. It's a basic American right and tradition.

Do you honestly think an anti-gun lobby is going to release a survey with results they don't like? Seriously? Perhaps next you'll tell us to take Brady Center seriously?

At least my gun source was a non-partisan fact check group; you give us gun grabbers and spike the football. Difficulty in weighing sources much?
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2013, 12:10 PM   #210
houghtam
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 6,384
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nyuk nyuk View Post
Because you accept stuff by the NRA, right? There is no "rhetoric" behind gun ownership. It's a basic American right and tradition.

Do you honestly think an anti-gun lobby is going to release a survey with results they don't like? Seriously? Perhaps next you'll tell us to take Brady Center seriously?

At least my gun source was a non-partisan fact check group; you give us gun grabbers and spike the football. Difficulty in weighing sources much?
1) The "rhetoric" to which I'm referring is the sentiment the NRA actively foments which claims the government is coming to take away your guns and leads to gun nuts doing what gun nuts do, which is adding another 10 guns to their 100 gun collection "just in case". Nice try though.

2) Do some fact checking on "FactCheck"....they consistently change the meaning of the word "fact".
houghtam is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2013, 12:22 PM   #211
nyuk nyuk
Guest
 

Posts: n/a
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by houghtam View Post
1) The "rhetoric" to which I'm referring is the sentiment the NRA actively foments which claims the government is coming to take away your guns and leads to gun nuts doing what gun nuts do, which is adding another 10 guns to their 100 gun collection "just in case". Nice try though.

2) Do some fact checking on "FactCheck"....they consistently change the meaning of the word "fact".
If you're going to slam FactCheck, then present something. I'm not doing your work for you, like I already did with the Joyce Foundation.

Liberals always grossly exaggerate the powers and reach of the NRA, as if it were some all-encompassing bogeyman. Have you ever read a magazine of theirs, a press release? Anything? They go along with things like background checks which angers gun rights purists. The NRA doesn't even lift a finger to litigate bad gun laws nearly as often as they should.
  Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2013, 12:59 PM   #212
houghtam
Ring of Famer
 

Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 6,384
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by nyuk nyuk View Post
If you're going to slam FactCheck, then present something. I'm not doing your work for you, like I already did with the Joyce Foundation.

Liberals always grossly exaggerate the powers and reach of the NRA, as if it were some all-encompassing bogeyman. Have you ever read a magazine of theirs, a press release? Anything? They go along with things like background checks which angers gun rights purists. The NRA doesn't even lift a finger to litigate bad gun laws nearly as often as they should.
My bad, it was actually PolitiFact I was thinking of.

However, on the FactCheck site, it's just a long list of statements and opinions...no conclusion is drawn, and the data doesn't really point one way or the other.

Quote:
Moody, of William & Mary, makes a more general argument in favor of more guns tempering crime.

“We are awash in guns in the United States,” Moody said. “There are more every year and yet crime seems to be going down and down and down and down.”

It’s true that gun ownership is up. The Small Arms Survey, a project of the Graduate Institute of International and Development Studies in Geneva, estimated in 2007 that there were 270 million civilian-owned firearms in the U.S. In 2001, there were an estimated 230 million. So there are more guns, but are there more gun owners?

Nobody knows for sure, Hemenway said. Gun owners do not need to register simply to purchase a gun. And so, researchers are left to rely on surveys. According to yearly data from the General Social Survey, the number of households with guns is declining.

Moody doesn’t buy that. He thinks it’s a cultural issue. People today are simply more likely to tell survey-takers they do not own a gun, he said, because it is less socially acceptable. Hemenway counters that the seemingly incongruous statistics — more guns, but fewer households reporting that they have a gun — is simply a reflection of fewer gun owners purchasing more guns.

Gun manufacturing has increased in recent years, most dramatically since Obama was elected. Figures from the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives show the total firearms produced in the U.S. (minus exports) at 3.5 million in 1998. That figure fluctuated, reaching 3.7 million in 2007. Then, it jumped drastically, rising 64 percent from 2007 to 2011, topping 6.1 million that year.

Background-check numbers show a similar trend. They went from 11 million background checks in 2007 to 16.8 million in 2012, with December’s numbers not yet part of that tally, according to the FBI. Background checks are not an indication of sales, however, as they’re not always required, for instance for personal sales at gun shows in some states, and one purchaser can buy more than one firearm.
There you have Carlisle Moody, an economics professor who analyzes criminal justice from an economic perspective, disagreeing with David Hemenway, Professor of Health Policy at Harvard, Director of the Harvard Injury Control Research Center and Harvard Youth Violence Prevention Center.

The details offered by both are far from conclusive, and are only opinions, not "facts". It all goes on who you believe.
houghtam is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 05-10-2013, 01:10 PM   #213
cutthemdown
A verbis ad verbera
 
cutthemdown's Avatar
 

Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 37,267
Default

Right now my friend who lives up in Humbold county says neighbors are getting together to go house to house to help check on people. There is a killer loose and the police up there just can't get to everyone. You can't even get to his place without a 4 wheel drive. He is glad to have his AK. I thought we would never need our guns liberals? you know police are always going to be there right?
cutthemdown is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes



Forum Jump


All times are GMT -7. The time now is 03:57 PM.


Denver Broncos