meanwhile in tennessee...

[NG1274]

I "support my claim" each and every time one of you gun fetishists try to explain away the latest mass shooting. You'll have to forgive me if I opt not to "explain my position" for the umpteenth time. I get tired of your bad faith questions. I know this is all a parlor game to you and your ilk.

#PewPewPew

As the other side might with the emotional rants with little in the way of facts to substantiate claims.

If by 'explain away' you mean 'crazy people will do crazy things', then I certainly ascribe to that belief. Mass shooters, people that follow the law then decide one day, for whatever reason, to not, will bypass any and every law that you suggest will stop them, as, up to that point, they are following them. You must focus on the people.

 

[Dribble]

Parapraxis?



Let’s see the data. Surely someone has looked into it.

Not in the top 30

https://madison.com/news/national/t...ion_33b57fa7-d832-502d-ad55-aa29609b9a57.html

 

[Dribble]

As the other side might with the emotional rants with little in the way of facts to substantiate claims.

If by 'explain away' you mean 'crazy people will do crazy things', then I certainly ascribe to that belief. Mass shooters, people that follow the law then decide one day, for whatever reason, to not, will bypass any and every law that you suggest will stop them, as, up to that point, they are following them. You must focus on the people.

Except not in other countries...data don't lie

 

[RobDownSouth]

Except not in other countries...data don't lie

Other countries have learned that mass murders are an unacceptable price to pay for inconveniencing gun owners.

The last three mass shooters who had a bad day went out and bought their steel penis substitutes something like less than 24 hours before their killing sprees.

Having large clips helped their body counts too. Still haven't heard a valid argument as to why clips bigger than 6 rounds or so are needed.

The US won WW2 with a standard issue 8 round clip against a professional German army, yet got their asses kicked in the sandbox despite toting a far more lethal M4 with a 30 round clip against a bunch of lightly armed insurgents.

 

[CornusKousa]

Other countries have learned that mass murders are an unacceptable price to pay for inconveniencing gun owners.

The last three mass shooters who had a bad day went out and bought their steel penis substitutes something like less than 24 hours before their killing sprees.

Having large clips helped their body counts too. Still haven't heard a valid argument as to why clips bigger than 6 rounds or so are needed.

The US won WW2 with a standard issue 8 round clip against a professional German army, yet got their asses kicked in the sandbox despite toting a far more lethal M4 with a 30 round clip against a bunch of lightly armed insurgents.

Maybe it's because clips haven't been used in anything designed since WWII...LOL

When did M4's ever use clips???

I think you having been through through US Army basic training and coming out the other side calling box mags "clip" is about as likely as KeithD being one of the handful of people who flew the SR-71.

That's fuckin' shameful, even for a Coast Guard POG much less an Army one.

Why won't liar down south tell us what his MOS was??

Every POG I know is proud to be a POG, as they should be, and every fuckin' one of them knows a box magazine ain't no fuckin' clip.

But Rob wont state his MOS, and Rob calls mags clips...... We know why

Sierra Victor, that's why.

 

[Biggs_Darklighter]

Everybody always points to Chicago but that town has always been violent as fuck. Probably that cold wind. That shit will make you want to murder someone just to crawl inside their body to stay warm like Luke on Hoth.

 

[NG1274]

Except not in other countries...data don't lie

Unsure exactly what you mean:
Are you referring to legislating guns to the point where carry/keep in home is not allowed? I believe England may do it like that, sporting rifles are kept in a club locker or some such.

Certainly, that works much the way it would by banning cars to stop drunk driving. While it may indeed work, the masses that don't violate the law have a problem with that way of doing things.

There is a gun culture in this country, always has been. You won't achieve, in my opinion, any meaningful progress by ignoring or belittling that fact. Stats vary with actual numbers, but over 40% of households own at least one gun seems a common number, with the number of guns somewhat over 400 million.

Legislating that away, without massive conflict, I'd think is highly doubtful.

Look at those crime stats on homicides. Ignoring inner-city gang violence, the idea is to penalize tens of millions for the actions of a very few.

 

[NG1274]

Other countries have learned that mass murders are an unacceptable price to pay for inconveniencing gun owners.

The last three mass shooters who had a bad day went out and bought their steel penis substitutes something like less than 24 hours before their killing sprees.

Having large clips helped their body counts too. Still haven't heard a valid argument as to why clips bigger than 6 rounds or so are needed.

The US won WW2 with a standard issue 8 round clip against a professional German army, yet got their asses kicked in the sandbox despite toting a far more lethal M4 with a 30 round clip against a bunch of lightly armed insurgents.

They also did not have a long-standing gun culture to contend with.

The Colorado nut I think bought his six days before. Atlanta was same day possibly.

Why do the police have magazines that hold over six? Why do the police not still use revolvers?

Trying to lay blame or victory of a war on one singular aspect like that is pointless. Might as well only discuss one type of plane used in air support.

 

[Bud_Spencer]

"For a highly developed and wealthy nation, the United States has an unusually high rate of mass shootings. However, it is a common misconception that it is the worst country globally in terms of mass shooting rates. The truth of the matter is that the United States is number sixty-six on the list of countries in terms of mass shooting rates per capita, but they have had more mass shootings than any other country in terms of overall numbers.

"That finding rings true when all countries around the world are taken into consideration. Looking at the United States alongside all the countries in Europe alone, the United States has the twelfth highest mass shooting rate. A few European countries with a higher mass shooting rate per capita than the United States include Russia, Norway, France, Switzerland, and Finland...

"The Crime Prevention Research Center looked at the death rates that resulted from mass shootings between the years 2009 and 2015. Here are the average death rates, in millions, per country, between 2009 and 2015. The countries are already listed in order of the highest death rates to the lowest median death rates.

Norway 1.888
Serbia 0.381
France 0.347
Macedonia 0.337
Albania 0.206
Slovakia 0.185
Switzerland 0.142
Finland 0.132
Belgium 0.128
The Czech Republic 0.123
The United States of America 0.089
Austria 0.068
The Netherlands 0.051
Canada 0.032
England 0.027
Germany 0.023
Russia 0.012
Italy 0.009

https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/mass-shootings-by-country

 

[Wrong Element]

Multiple victims in a Knoxville high school shooting incident.


If only they hadn't been such blue state wimps.

 

[Fuzzy1975]

"For a highly developed and wealthy nation, the United States has an unusually high rate of mass shootings. However, it is a common misconception that it is the worst country globally in terms of mass shooting rates. The truth of the matter is that the United States is number sixty-six on the list of countries in terms of mass shooting rates per capita, but they have had more mass shootings than any other country in terms of overall numbers.

"That finding rings true when all countries around the world are taken into consideration. Looking at the United States alongside all the countries in Europe alone, the United States has the twelfth highest mass shooting rate. A few European countries with a higher mass shooting rate per capita than the United States include Russia, Norway, France, Switzerland, and Finland...

"The Crime Prevention Research Center looked at the death rates that resulted from mass shootings between the years 2009 and 2015. Here are the average death rates, in millions, per country, between 2009 and 2015. The countries are already listed in order of the highest death rates to the lowest median death rates.

Norway 1.888
Serbia 0.381
France 0.347
Macedonia 0.337
Albania 0.206
Slovakia 0.185
Switzerland 0.142
Finland 0.132
Belgium 0.128
The Czech Republic 0.123
The United States of America 0.089
Austria 0.068
The Netherlands 0.051
Canada 0.032
England 0.027
Germany 0.023
Russia 0.012
Italy 0.009

https://worldpopulationreview.com/country-rankings/mass-shootings-by-country

A per capita study is not a true reflection of the reality, why not post the total number of deaths per country?

The reason, well lets see, a small country like Norway, with 5.9 million, only needs two deaths to lead the way. Yet a country like the USA with 329 million people, and had 19,379 deaths can very easily trail the ranks of many other countries in a per capita study.

Why did you choose to use this particular study?

Maybe if you chose this link I would give credence to what you posted:

https://www.npr.org/sections/goatsa...o-other-countries-in-deaths-from-gun-violence

But you didn't.


Why?

We

Know

Why

 

[Fuzzy1975]

Unsure exactly what you mean:
Are you referring to legislating guns to the point where carry/keep in home is not allowed? I believe England may do it like that, sporting rifles are kept in a club locker or some such.

Canada has firearm laws, and low rates of firearm related incidents.

I myself have a total combination of 14 rifles/shotguns.

Yet when you look at the laws surrounding firearm ownership in Canada, they are not any more overtly intrusive than gaining a licence to drive a vehicle. ( they actually started laws way back in 1892 so maybe that is why Canadians don't get all uppity over them)

Even the restrictions on firearms are not much different than with automobiles. We have some sane laws regarding the type of vehicles that can legally be driven on our roadways, and we have sensible sane laws that dictate the types of operational firearms that may be owned by the general public.

You can't own functional automatic weapons, ( as well as some that are semi automatic) nor any type of weapon that has the ability to fire a projectile greater than 20mm in diameter. There are some limitations on magazine capacity, and other devises such as silencers, or bump stocks.

Yet overall, I have never found myself "limited" in my use or enjoyment of hunting, or target practice.

As for needing firearms for home defence...lol I don't even lock my doors, nor take keys out of my vehicles. But then again Canada is not a country that wraps itself in a blanket of fears.

( and yes in Canada you can own a tank...just thought I would throw that in here)

 

[Fuzzy1975]

They also did not have a long-standing gun culture to contend with.

And until you do decide to deal with that "culture" be prepared for more of the same.

Remember if you are not trying to end these senseless killings, then you are part of the problem!!

(you is bolded for a reason)

 

[Bud_Spencer]

Why did you choose to use this particular study?

Maybe if you chose this link I would give credence to what you posted

It should. Normalizing to per capita is a way to compare different populations while removing the population size as a factor. It's not only legitimate to do, it's absolutely necessary to make an honest analysis.

 

[phrodeau]

A per capita study is not a true reflection of the reality, why not post the total number of deaths per country?

The reason, well lets see, a small country like Norway, with 5.9 million, only needs two deaths to lead the way. Yet a country like the USA with 329 million people, and had 19,379 deaths can very easily trail the ranks of many other countries in a per capita study.

Why did you choose to use this particular study?

Maybe if you chose this link I would give credence to what you posted:

https://www.npr.org/sections/goatsa...o-other-countries-in-deaths-from-gun-violence

But you didn't.


Why?

We

Know

Why

Both links are to per capita rankings. The difference is that one is of only mass shootings, and the other is general gun violence.

 

[bodysong]

The Associated Press ✓
Twitter › AP

A student at a Tennessee high school opened fire on officers,
who shot back and killed him, authorities say. An officer was
shot at least once in the upper leg and was taken into surgery.

25 minutes ago

 

[Fuzzy1975]

It should. Normalizing ( normalising) to per capita is a way to compare different populations while removing the population size as a factor. It's not only legitimate to do, it's absolutely necessary to make an honest analysis.

Per capita only works if the countries study share the same statistical data points.

Comparing Norway, to the US on a per capita basis is a false equivalency on any scale.

Why not just come out and say you are part of the problem of gun violence in the US, instead of sticking your head in the sand, and claiming everything is fine.

*points* "oh look Norway is way more violent and has more gun related deaths than the US"....

I'd actually have a bit more respect for your posting if you did.

 

[Fuzzy1975]

Both links are to per capita rankings. The difference is that one is of only mass shootings, and the other is general gun violence.

Somebody read the link...why am I not surprised by who didn't.

 

[CornusKousa]

Comparing Norway, to the US on a per capita basis is a false equivalency on any scale.

Awww Fuzzy doesn't like facts that shit on his fee fees.

 

[Bud_Spencer]

Per capita only works if the countries study share the same statistical data points.

Comparing Norway, to the US on a per capita basis is a false equivalency on any scale.

Why not just come out and say you are part of the problem of gun violence in the US, instead of sticking your head in the sand, and claiming everything is fine.

*points* "oh look Norway is way more violent and has more gun related deaths than the US"....

I'd actually have a bit more respect for your posting if you did.

So, according to you, we have to find another multiracial, industrialized society of 330 million people to compare the US to. Do I get you right?

Your first sentence is gibberish. 100% pure bullshit.

 

[phrodeau]

So, according to you, we have to find another multiracial, industrialized society of 330 million people to compare the US to. Do I get you right?

Your first sentence is gibberish. 100% pure bullshit.

There’s the European Union. 450 million people, about 1,000 gun-related homicides per year.

 

[Fuzzy1975]

So, according to you, we have to find another multiracial, industrialized society of 330 million people to compare the US to. Do I get you right?

Your first sentence is gibberish. 100% pure bullshit.

Again..Why not just come out and say you are part of the problem of gun violence in the US, instead of sticking your head in the sand, and claiming everything is fine.

There is no reason to give you any pretence of respect for your posting in this thread.

You are a firm believer that everything is fine in the US, and it is the fault of other countries, that their numbers of of citizens who die from firearm related incidents are so much lower than in the US.

With any luck, you will find yourself on the wrong end of that violence some time.

Just deserts, anyone?

 

[Bud_Spencer]

There’s the European Union. 450 million people, about 1,000 gun-related homicides per year.

If you will notice, most of the mass-killing champions are in the EU. And that is the topic at hand.

 

[Bud_Spencer]

Again..Why not just come out and say you are part of the problem of gun violence in the US, instead of sticking your head in the sand, and claiming everything is fine.

There is no reason to give you any pretence of respect for your posting in this thread.

You are a firm believer that everything is fine in the US, and it is the fault of other countries, that their numbers of of citizens who die from firearm related incidents are so much lower than in the US.

With any luck, you will find yourself on the wrong end of that violence some time.

Just deserts, anyone?

A. Because I'm not part of the problem. I've never put a bullet into anything more animated than a paper target.

B. It's culture. Read, "The Samurai, the Mountie and the Cowboy" by David Kopel. He takes a look at oither nations' gun laws and analyzes whether they do what they aim to and whether they'd work here. Hint: They won't.

C. Just keep hoping. But being 6-4" and a former NCAA football and rugby player, I'm not that juicy a target. Plus, I carry most times.

 

[phrodeau]

If you will notice, most of the mass-killing champions are in the EU. And that is the topic at hand.

https://www.gvpedia.org/gun-myths/europe-and-us/

Researcher John Lott repeatedly claims that the United States and Europe have similar per capita rates of public mass shootings.

Based on Lott’s own data, the US has twice the rate of mass shootings compared to Europe, contradicting Lott’s own claim.

The calculation for the per capita rate of shootings for the U.S., European Union, and Europe as a whole is straight forward: take the number of incidents and divide that by the population. Using Lott’s own spreadsheet (with some slight rounding for populations):
US shooting rate: 25 incidents/323 million = .078 per million
EU shooting rate: 19 incidents/508 million = .038 per million
Europe shooting rate: 24 incidents/743 million = .032 per million

These are old statistics, from 2009 to 2015. Got any new ones?