^ i stopped reading after the first myth, when their link to guns being confiscated in the US didn't actually describe any guns being confiscated.

5/29/2014 11:59:34 AM

The first couple of these are particularly silly.

Quote :

"No one knows the exact number of guns in America, but it's clear there's no practical way to round them all up (never mind that no one in Washington is proposing this)."

They're not coming for our guns-- they're registering our guns, redefining what qualifies as a prohibited weapon, then turning citizens into felons if they don't turn in their newly-illegal guns. See NY and CT. Not that this is working, but they're trying.

Quote :

"Myth #2: Guns don't kill people—people kill people. Fact-check: People with more guns tend to kill more people—with guns. The states with the highest gun ownership rates have a gun murder rate 114% higher than those with the lowest gun ownership rates. Also, gun death rates tend to be higher in states with higher rates of gun ownership. "

I've never been given an answer to this very basic question: why the insistence on "gun deaths" as the independent variable, rather than "homicides?" Doing the former ignores the possibility of a substitution effect.

Quote :

"Myth #3: An armed society is a polite society. Fact-check: Drivers who carry guns are 44% more likely than unarmed drivers to make obscene gestures at other motorists, and 77% more likely to follow them aggressively. • Among Texans convicted of serious crimes, those with concealed-handgun licenses were sentenced for threatening someone with a firearm 4.8 times more than those without. • In states with Stand Your Ground and other laws making it easier to shoot in self-defense, those policies have been linked to a 7 to 10% increase in homicides."

What an oddly specific collection of studies.

Paint 2: a quick google search shows how strained this argument is: http://www.txdps.state.tx.us/RSD/CHL/Reports/ConvictionRatesReport2012.pdf It looks like concealed carriers are really, really not the problem in TX.
Point 3: I'm not a fan of SYG, but I'd like to see what portion of the increase was justifiable homicides.

Quote :

"Myth #5: Keeping a gun at home makes you safer. Fact-check: Owning a gun has been linked to higher risks of homicide, suicide, and accidental death by gun. • For every time a gun is used in self-defense in the home, there are 7 assaults or murders, 11 suicide attempts, and 4 accidents involving guns in or around a home."

By "For every time a gun is used in self-defense in the home" they mean "justifiable homicides in the home" and are not including defensive gun uses that didn't result in a death. The latter number is very hotly debated, and they've chosen to not even consider it, yet stack it up against assaults, suicide attempts, and nonlethal accidents

[Edited on May 29, 2014 at 1:22 PM. Reason : ]

5/29/2014 1:21:29 PM

there doesn't seem to be a correlation between guns and homicide, there is a correlation between guns and gun deaths

5/29/2014 2:04:06 PM

Quote :

"I've never been given an answer to this very basic question: why the insistence on "gun deaths" as the independent variable, rather than "homicides?" Doing the former ignores the possibility of a substitution effect."

Comparing it to gun deaths shows that there are enough "irresponsible" gun owners that having guns doesn't necessarily increase safety.

Comparing it to all homicides as ^ shows demonstrates that, contrary to the claim of gun nuts, just having guns around doesn't deter or reduce homicides.

Neither statistic is positive for the NRA sympathizers.

5/29/2014 3:29:09 PM

Does anyone deny that having a gun around increases the chance of someone getting shot? This seems like a non-point.

5/29/2014 3:40:17 PM

I've always thought it was a non-point to recognize that it's easier to injure or kill someone or something with a gun than it is with a knife or bat or something, but I've found there are plenty of people who will argue otherwise.

5/29/2014 3:42:11 PM

Quote :

"it's easier to injure or kill someone or something with a gun than it is with a knife or bat or something"

which is exactly why i have a gun beside my bed instead of a knife or bat

5/29/2014 6:47:10 PM

Quote :

"Comparing it to gun deaths shows that there are enough "irresponsible" gun owners that having guns doesn't necessarily increase safety."

How would we even assess a law's impact on overall safety if we only focus on one subdivision of safety?

Quote :

"Comparing it to all homicides as ^ shows demonstrates that, contrary to the claim of gun nuts, just having guns around doesn't deter or reduce homicides."

So those opposing gun control must necessarily think they reduce overall crime? What if I think gun control just doesn't work very well? The chart above certainly lends credence to that argument.

5/29/2014 8:20:52 PM

We've never really had a national gun control policy, so there's no basis for saying gun control doesn't work. You can argue that based on the fact automatic weapons and grenades aren't everywhere that gun control does in fact work. You can compare the us to other countries, and reasonably conclude that gun control is a component of reduced violent crime. You can look at statistics on the city level of before/after gun control policies, and see that they have an effect. And we know, pretty conclusively, that reducing guns reduces gun deaths (a metric you apparently don't like for some reason).

What we also do know is that broadly banning a specific gun subclass is worthless. But we don't know much else, because we have never really tried any serious policies on the national level. Gun laws have gotten more relaxed over the years. The NRA likes to talk about mental health, but fights legislation to restrict gun ownership for nutters.

It's pretty clear that the NRA and other gun nuts are well resigned to pay the costs of gun violence and mass shootings for the freedom to have relatively little gun regulations.

The reality is that it's our choice as a society to allow these mass shootings and other gun deaths, and this choice was pushed through via the pro-gun lobbies.

5/30/2014 1:56:02 AM

^^ explain how that chart shows that gun control doesn't work, because you can't make that conclusion from that chart. Even the chart relating number of guns to gun deaths can't really be used to make a point about gun control other than showing that more guns do in fact cause more gun deaths

5/30/2014 6:38:00 AM

Quote :

" You can compare the us to other countries, and reasonably conclude that gun control is a component of reduced violent crime. You can look at statistics on the city level of before/after gun control policies, and see that they have an effect."

Which countries? UK and AUS are the ones I often see cited.

UK:



AUS:



Look at those precipitous drops!

Quote :

"And we know, pretty conclusively, that reducing guns reduces gun deaths (a metric you apparently don't like for some reason)."

Because it ignores the possibility of a substitution or deterrent effect. Are you so confident that these effects don't exist that you'd prefer not to even take into account the possibility that they exist? Wow. Much science.

Quote :

"explain how that chart shows that gun control doesn't work, because you can't make that conclusion from that chart. Even the chart relating number of guns to gun deaths can't really be used to make a point about gun control other than showing that more guns do in fact cause more gun deaths"

Fair enough. Gun control doesn't necessarily equate to less guns. I'd say it serves as a decent proxy when debating guns, though.

Here's a scatterplot of states' Brady scores and their overall homicide rates:



Biased source, but it's just these sets of data put into excel:

http://www.bradycampaign.org/2013-state-scorecard

http://www.ucrdatatool.gov/index.cfm

5/30/2014 8:54:52 AM

[Edited on May 30, 2014 at 9:35 AM. Reason : dbl post]

5/30/2014 9:34:33 AM

Quote :

"Gun control doesn't necessarily equate to less guns. I'd say it serves as a decent proxy when debating guns, though. "

That's what I was trying to say, you can't even really make a conclusion about gun control from the guns vs. gun deaths chart. The only thing you can really conclude is that there appears to be a correlation between the prevalence of guns and number of gun deaths, which isn't surprising, and that isn't a direct comment on gun control because of what you posted. And you certainly can't make a conclusion about gun control one way or another from the second chart that I posted.

5/30/2014 9:35:06 AM

Oh right. Sure.

Although when gun control advocates like moron say things like "we've never really had a national gun control policy," I get the feeling that that their ultimate vision for gun control is "less/no guns, period."

5/30/2014 5:06:09 PM

Quote :

"Does anyone deny that having a gun around increases the chance of someone getting shot? This seems like a non-point."

Maybe, maybe not, but the real question is does it increase that chance to a significant enough degree to warrant any concern.

Also, regarding the Mother Jones bullshit "myth destruction," easily the most disgusting of their arguments was #4.
This should thoroughly eviscerate that one, and show just how deceptive and dishonest MJ is, to the point that literally no one should ever take them seriously again. I'm talking "I'd believe the cigarette industry about the health effects of smoking before I'd believe anything that comes out of Mother Jones" here. In short, they pulled a bunch of mass shootings that took place in areas where weapons were banned. They then chose their definition of a "mass shooting" to be one where 4 or more people were killed; yet, if a civilian stopped an incident before 4 people were killed, it wouldn't fit their definition. With these convenient restrictions, they then declared, astonished, that no citizens had ever stopped a mass shooting by firing back.

And people wonder why pro-gun-advocates aren't willing to sit down and talk about solutions, when bullshit like this is used as talking points and a call for action.

5/31/2014 4:29:05 PM

NRA Issues Amazing Statement Admitting Bringing AR-15s To Chipotle Is Dumb
http://talkingpointsmemo.com/muckraker/nra-open-carry-texas-weird-statement

Quote :

"In a remarkably frank statement issued on Friday, the National Rifle Association said that gun activists in Texas had "crossed the line from enthusiasm to downright foolishness" with their demonstrations at fast food restaurants."

Quote :

""As a result of these hijinx, two popular fast food outlets have recently requested patrons to keep guns off the premises," the unsigned statement said. "To state the obvious, that's counterproductive for the gun owning community." In denouncing the demonstrations, the NRA said that using guns "to draw attention to yourself in public not only defies common sense, it shows a lack of consideration and manners.""

Quote :

"Let's not mince words, not only is it rare, it's downright weird and certainly not a practical way to go normally about your business while being prepared to defend yourself. To those who are not acquainted with the dubious practice of using public displays of firearms as a means to draw attention to oneself or one's cause, it can be downright scary. It makes folks who might normally be perfectly open-minded about firearms feel uncomfortable and question the motives of pro-gun advocates."

time for the gun nuts to boycott the NRA for being a liberal Obama mouthpiece

6/3/2014 12:43:01 PM

I applaud the NRA for that statement. Needed to be said and I hope the dumbshits who worship the NRA follow these statements.

Posing for fucking selfies in a damn fast food restaurant with an AR.

6/3/2014 12:46:19 PM

^Photographs and social media exposure are critical to any effective protest, and also serves to re-normalize the practice in broader society. The widespread release of videos showing open carry confrontations with police has already mellowed police response in the past few years, from threats of arrest and violence to simple and polite "courtesy checks". Still unconstitutional, but notable progress by brave individuals.

The demonstrators open carry long guns in Texas because open carry of pistols is already prohibited. The long guns are are critical to demonstrate the idiocy of Texas' already restrictive and unconstitutional gun laws.

The NRA's ignorance on this matter is surprising, but their monetary bottom line is already being affected. As the money talks, the NRA will apologize in due course.
http://www.cbsnews.com/news/texas-open-carry-gun-groups-threaten-to-leave-nra/

[Edited on June 3, 2014 at 1:18 PM. Reason : .]

6/3/2014 1:14:56 PM

open carry events with pistols are also stupid

6/3/2014 1:16:35 PM

The ultimate goal is to no longer need "events" to establish basic rights.

Sitting at a lunch counter should also not be a big deal.

6/3/2014 1:19:43 PM

that may be there goal (really their goal is to feel cool while hanging out with their cool macho guns), but the point is that its counterproductive towards that goal since it will only encourage more restrictions on carrying

i was active in open carry events until the tea party took over, they are ridiculous now and try to go over the top whenever they can

6/3/2014 1:22:45 PM

The black panthers should organize and start open carrying in Texas again, then they'll remember why they banned it in the first place.

As a bystander, there's no real way to tell if someone brandishing a gun is a mass shooter or just an "honest" person. Either way, seems like the most prudent thing to do is to call the police, and leave the situation. I'm not sure what people waving guns around expect otherwise.

6/3/2014 1:27:23 PM

Quote :

"time for the gun nuts to boycott the NRA for being a liberal Obama mouthpiece "

Nice attempt at sarcasm, but most gun nuts believe exactly what the NRA said in that statement. I also think its bad for hippies to poop on cop cars, but we can both agree that not all hippies poop on cop cars.

[Edited on June 3, 2014 at 1:43 PM. Reason : *also]

6/3/2014 1:29:39 PM

the gun nuts will not agree with the NRA statement, there will be backlash (although most will continue to support their corporate overlord regardless so they can keep getting their free gun insurance)

6/3/2014 1:33:57 PM

Those uppity boys sitting at lunch counters just made whites hate them more for causing trouble. Really set back the cause they were fighting for. Everyone knows that the way to get effective social change and cement basic human rights is to just hide in your homes at all times and quietly continue sending your monthly dues to the NAACP in Washington.


The NRA will always be ignored, but the Bundy standoff proved that the federal government WILL back down and surrender to the demands of even a modest group of armed citizens. The precedent has been set.


[Edited on June 3, 2014 at 1:41 PM. Reason : .]

6/3/2014 1:36:23 PM

LOL@brandishing your gun brazenly in public as a "basic human right".

6/3/2014 1:39:11 PM

smc is a troll

[Edited on June 3, 2014 at 1:43 PM. Reason : always, in every section]

6/3/2014 1:42:46 PM

Quote :

"As a bystander, there's no real way to tell if someone brandishing a gun is a mass shooter or just an "honest" person. Either way, seems like the most prudent thing to do is to call the police, and leave the situation. I'm not sure what people waving guns around expect otherwise."

Generally speaking, the guy shooting at people fleeing for their lives or cowering in fear is the mass shooter. The guy sitting at the lunch counter having his tortilla wrapped heart attack may not be an "honest" person, but they're also very unlikely to be a mass shooter.

That isn't to say I don't think what these guys have been doing is largely counter productive. I have a right to carry my weed eater in public and restaurants too, that doesn't mean I'm not a weirdo for showing up at chipotle with one strapped to my back and getting other people to do the same. The process of normalizing open gun carry is done by being normal while carrying a gun. Big meetings at places which have not volunteered to be part of your political statement (or at the least is not a big meeting place) is not, by definition, normal.

6/3/2014 1:44:02 PM

^^no doubt. he's a real person though, isn't he? i think he was in that tww tunnel picture.

[Edited on June 3, 2014 at 1:44 PM. Reason : ]

6/3/2014 1:44:41 PM

So you forfeit the debate. Very good.

6/3/2014 1:45:25 PM

^^yeah, just making sure that no one made the mistake of taking any time to respond to him

6/3/2014 1:46:21 PM

Quote :

" Big meetings at places which have not volunteered to be part of your political statement..."

Poor, poor Woolworth's.

6/3/2014 2:01:30 PM

Quote :

"re-normalize the practice in broader society"

When was walking into a restaurant with a rifle at low ready ever a normal practice? Tell me you wouldn't have drawn had you walked into Chipotle and saw this shithead's finger hovering over the trigger of his tacticool SKS:






[Edited on June 3, 2014 at 7:15 PM. Reason : ]

6/3/2014 7:12:35 PM

Quote :

"As a bystander, there's no real way to tell if someone brandishing a gun is a mass shooter or just an "honest" person."

so, uhh, how is that different if the gun is concealed?

that said:

Quote :

"open carry events with pistols are also stupid"

...for all of the reasons listed in that NRA statement. I'm not big on OC, other than it's useful when out in the sticks with guns to be able to carry them around like any other implement as needed. That said, I think it should be allowed, and if you have a reason to do it, then do so judiciously. Waltzing around a fucking Starbucks or Chipotle with guns displayed just for the sake of making a scene makes you a fucking asshole and an idiot.

6/3/2014 7:47:07 PM

Quote :

"so, uhh, how is that different if the gun is concealed?"

Point was that these guys look like the bad guys they allege they're out to "protect" people against. Especially in stand your ground states, seem like it wouldn't take much for someone to "accidentally" shoot one of these nuts and get away with it.

6/3/2014 8:03:00 PM

i expect that 99% of them keep the rifles slung the whole time. stupid, still, but not a threatening posture.

i wasn't even discerning between a slung rifle vs an openly holstered pistol, either.

6/3/2014 8:21:44 PM

I am all for legalizing open carry here in Texas but those clowns going around into restaurants with rifles slung over their backs are a bunch of fucking mouth breathers who are doing nothing positive for gun rights and need to go back to playing call of duty in their parents basement.

6/3/2014 10:38:38 PM

LOL:

Quote :

""The truth is, an alert went out that referred to this type of behavior as 'weird' or somehow not normal, and that was a mistake. It shouldn’t have happened," said Chris Cox, who is in charge of the NRA Institute for Legislative Action. "

http://www.wfaa.com/news/local/NRA-clarifies-open-carry-criticism-261766121.html


NRA now saying they didn't mean to say that.

Let's see how many people saying things like this:

Quote :

" but most gun nuts believe exactly what the NRA said in that statement. "

Change their tune...

So now do most gun nuts disagree with the NRA...?

haha

6/4/2014 2:05:43 AM

I'm still singing the same tune. Don't poop on cop cars. Don't bring AR-15's and AK-47's in an f'ing fast food restaurant.

Unless you're protesting for $15/hr.

6/4/2014 7:35:10 AM

Some of you idiots would call me a gun night, but I can sure as hell tell you that I wouldn't go shopping or out to eat with a long gun slung over my shoulder, much less pose for pictures like those two clowns. Hell, I don't think I'd OC with a pistol either; other than right time & place.

[Edited on June 4, 2014 at 11:55 AM. Reason : .]

6/4/2014 11:54:53 AM

Well, I was about ready to give some credit to the NRA for calling these people out, but of course, now they're back-pedaling. Anyway, I'm glad to see the members on here supporting their original statement.

6/4/2014 4:20:10 PM

Quote :

"Poor, poor Woolworth's."

The difference between Woolworth's and Chipotle is that Woolworth's was actually engaged in the discrimination being protested. Chipotle is not.

Quote :

"Tell me you wouldn't have drawn had you walked into Chipotle and saw this shithead's finger hovering over the trigger of his tacticool SKS:"

No. I mean let's put aside the obvious statement that the person in question was not actively threatening life and limb, the fact is if you walk into a building and see shit about to go down, the safest thing to do is to get the fuck out of dodge. The next thing to do would be helping others get to safety. Walking into a situation blind, and pulling a gun is a good way to get yourself or someone else shot and a real good way to get yourself arrested.

Quote :

"Especially in stand your ground states, seem like it wouldn't take much for someone to "accidentally" shoot one of these nuts and get away with it."

Sure it would. Stand your ground does not change the criteria you need to meet in order to meet force with deadly force. The only thing SYG changes is whether you have a duty to retreat before meeting that force. If you walked into a Chipotle and saw these guys standing around and shot one of them, you'd go to jail just as easily in a SYG state as a non SYG state. What makes SYG states different is that if these guys actually were the deadly animals you think they are, and started shooting, you'd be legally allowed to shoot back, even if you had a clear and safe escape route.

The way to normalize open carry (and gun carry in particular) is to be normal while carrying. Sure if these guys are on their way home from the range or a hunting trip and stop for a bite to eat, that's one thing. But they're blatantly and stupidly drawing attention to themselves and setting up large meetings and photo ops. That is the very opposite of normal.

6/5/2014 10:50:58 AM

6/5/2014 12:33:40 PM

Quote :

"Sure it would. Stand your ground does not change the criteria you need to meet in order to meet force with deadly force. The only thing SYG changes is whether you have a duty to retreat before meeting that force. If you walked into a Chipotle and saw these guys standing around and shot one of them, you'd go to jail just as easily in a SYG state as a non SYG state. What makes SYG states different is that if these guys actually were the deadly animals you think they are, and started shooting, you'd be legally allowed to shoot back, even if you had a clear and safe escape route."

This is not accurate. You can always shoot back. SYG allows you to shoot first if you claim you feel threatened.

6/5/2014 1:38:27 PM

^ no

6/5/2014 3:07:15 PM

If you could go ahead and cite the SYG statute that changes the requirements for using deadly force from "reasonably believe the force is necessary to stop or prevent imminent grave bodily harm or death" or words to that effect and replace them with "feels threatened" that would be great.

6/5/2014 3:08:58 PM

http://www.cnn.com/2014/06/06/justice/seattle-campus-shooting/index.html?hpt=hp_t1

Quote :

"Mary Jones' daughter attends Seattle Pacific but was unharmed. Still, she wonders how safe colleges will be without laws regulating access to guns. "Where are the controls to keep our children from purchasing a handgun or any other kind of weapon? And does that take government controls to keep that from happening? I don't know," she told KOMO. "There has to be a greater understanding of what that weapon can do and the pain it can inflict on another person's life.""

What a stupid statement. The suspect is 26, not exactly a kid. Plus there are laws keeping guns out of kids hands and banning guns from campus.

I guess the shooter didn't see the "No Guns Allowed on Campus" sign.

6/6/2014 8:45:38 AM

Another crap gun control law:

http://bearingarms.com/colorado-town-becomes-first-state-mandate-gun-ownership/

Even unenforced, these laws are just as bad as the laws that prevent people from owning guns. Giving the state the authority to tell you you must have a gun is giving them the authority to tell you you may not have a gun.

6/6/2014 10:49:45 AM

^^maybe if we would have had just a few more signs, this could have been prevented.

6/6/2014 11:02:19 AM

these idiots are doing open carry protests in Target stores now in the baby aisles to "stick it to" the MomsDemandAction group and someone left a loaded gun in a toy aisle.

6/6/2014 11:22:47 AM