info
Google Groups no longer supports new Usenet posts or subscriptions. Historical content remains viewable.
Dismiss
The Myth of the Good Guy With a Gun
86 views
Skip to first unread message
Mohammad
Oct 11, 2015, 9:09:49 PM10/11/15
to
The NRA is wrong: Owning a gun is far more likely to harm you than protect
you.
By Evan DeFilippis and Devin Hughes
Wayne LaPierre of the National Rifle Association issued a passionate call to
arms last year, painting a bleak picture of a dystopian America on the brink
of collapse:
We know, in the world that surrounds us, there are terrorists and home
invaders and drug cartels and car-jackers and knock-out gamers and rapers,
haters, campus killers, airport killers, shopping-mall killers, road-rage
killers, and killers who scheme to destroy our country with massive storms of
violence against our power grids, or vicious waves of chemicals or disease
that could collapse the society that sustains us all.
LaPierre’s central message: Owning a gun is the solution. The world is a scary
place. There are bad guys everywhere threatening you and your family, and the
only thing they’re afraid of is a gun in your hands.
Tragically, a record number of Americans subscribe to some version of this
mythology, with 63 percent (67 percent of men polled and 58 percent of women)
believing that guns truly do make them safer. The public’s confidence in
firearms, however, is woefully misguided: The evidence overwhelmingly shows
that guns leave everybody less safe, including their owners.
A study from October 2013 analyzed data from 27 developed nations to examine
the impact of firearm prevalence on the mortality rate. It found an extremely
strong direct relationship between the number of firearms and firearm deaths.
The paper concludes: “The current study debunks the widely quoted hypothesis
that guns make a nation safer.” This finding is bolstered by several previous
studies that have revealed a significant link between gun ownership and
firearm-related deaths. This international comparison is especially harrowing
for women and children, who die from gun violence in America at far higher
rates than in other countries.
Gun advocates often retreat to an “it could never happen to me” mentality.
Behind such horrifying statistics are numerous heartbreaking tragedies, such
as Zina Daniel, a woman from Illinois who was killed by her abusive
ex-husband, or Caroline Sparks, who was only 2 when her 5-year-old brother
accidentally killed her with his Crickett rifle.
If we examine data from within the United States, the odds aren’t any better
for gun owners. The most recent study examining the relationship between
firearms and homicide rates on a state level, published last April, found a
significant positive relationship between gun ownership and overall homicide
levels. Using data from 1981–2010 and the best firearm ownership proxy to
date, the study found that for every 1 percent increase in gun ownership,
there was a 1.1 percent increase in the firearm homicide rate and a 0.7
percent increase in the total homicide rate. This was after controlling for
factors such as poverty, unemployment, income inequality, alcohol consumption,
and nonhomicide violent crime. Further, the firearm ownership rate had no
statistically significant impact on nonfirearm homicides, meaning there was no
detectable substitution effect. That is, in the absence of guns, would-be
criminals are not switching to knives or some other weapons to carry out
homicide. These results are supported by a host of previous studies that
illustrate that guns increase the rate of homicides.
Sandy Hook family members
Family members who have lost loved ones to gun violence gather with members of
Congress during a press conference on Dec. 10, 2014, in Washington.
Photo by Win McNamee/Getty Images
The evidence against firearm ownership becomes even stronger when suicides and
accidents are included in the analysis—guns make both much more likely and
more fatal. There can be nothing closer to a consensus in the gun debate than
this point. Indeed, every single case-control study ever conducted in the
United States has found that gun ownership is a strong risk factor for
suicide, even after adjusting for aggregate-level measures of suicidality such
as mental illness, alcoholism, poverty, and so on.
One might accept that firearms are dangerous and that they substantially
elevate the risk of homicide, suicide, and fatal accidents, but still believe
that policies regulating gun ownership are ineffective—criminals, after all,
won’t follow them. However, another recent study from May of 2013 analyzed the
impact of state firearm laws on firearm-related fatalities. It found that the
most gun-restrictive states have significantly fewer firearm fatalities than
the states with the least restrictive laws. The results are in line with
previous academic studies tackling the same question.
These findings are further supported by a case study examining the impact of a
2007 Missouri decision to repeal its permit-to-purchase handgun licensing law.
The research concluded that the repeal was associated with a 16 percent
increase in annual murder rates, indicating that state gun control laws have a
significant impact on the homicide rate.
Suppose a criminal has just broken into your house brandishing a firearm. You
need to protect yourself and your family. Wouldn’t anyone feel safer owning a
gun? This is the kind of narrative propagated by gun advocates in defense of
firearm ownership. It preys on our fear. Yet, the annual per capita risk of
death during a home invasion is 0.0000002, which, for all intents and
purposes, is zero.
Despite the astronomical odds against being killed, this fear of home invasion
often drives people like Becca Campbell of Ferguson, Missouri, to gun
ownership. This past November, Campbell was riding home in a car with her
boyfriend after purchasing a gun, preparing for the unrest expected to follow
the grand jury decision about whether to pursue criminal charges against the
policeman who killed Michael Brown. She joked that “we’re ready for Ferguson,”
waving the gun. Distracted, the boyfriend ran into the car ahead of them, and
the gun fired, killing Campbell.
523097351SO00018_GUN_SHOP_N
Steven King helps a woman shop for a handgun for home defense on Nov. 12,
2014, in Bridgeton, Missouri.
Photo by Scott Olson/Getty Images
Moving from state-level analysis to the household or individual, the risks for
gun owners become even more apparent. A recent meta-analysis of 16 studies
examined the relationship between firearms and gun deaths. Gun ownership
doubled the risk of homicide and tripled the risk of suicide. This research is
bolstered by a national survey that found that a gun in the home was far more
likely to be used to threaten a family member or intimate partner than to be
used in self-defense.
Gun advocates may counter that this doesn’t reveal the entire picture. After
all, case studies of these fatal gun incidents can’t capture the benefits that
widespread defensive gun use bestows on society. However, despite the NRA’s
mantra that there are millions of defensive gun uses every year, empirical
data reveals that DGUs are actually extremely rare. Criminal uses of firearms
far outnumber legal defensive uses. The evidence shows that there may be fewer
than even 3,000 DGUs annually. In comparison, there are 30,000 gun deaths
annually, and many more injuries and shattered lives. The costs of gun
ownership unequivocally outweigh the benefits.
In light of the overwhelming evidence that guns are a public health threat,
gun advocates often retreat to an “it could never happen to me” mentality.
This worldview is tragically mistaken. Consider the case of Veronica
Dunnachie. She was, by many gun advocates’ definition, a good gal with a gun.
A strident voice for gun rights, she was an open carry advocate, dedicated to
expanding the unlicensed open carrying of firearms. In Texas, open carry is
currently restricted to long guns; she pushed to include handguns. She
frequently attended rallies and protests organized by Open Carry Tarrant
County (an offshoot of Open Carry Texas). In a domestic dispute on Dec. 10,
she allegedly shot and killed her husband and stepdaughter. Horrified,
Dunnachie called a friend, telling him she “had just done something bad” and,
at his urging, checked herself into a nearby mental health clinic.
Everyone likes to pretend that he or she is more rational, more responsible,
and more immune to the risks that gun ownership poses relative to the average
American. Yet, we know from gun violence statistics that many are simply
misjudging their own competency. Everyone thinks he or she is above average,
but half are mistaken.
Rather than gangbangers and maniacal criminals going on killing sprees, it is
cases like Dunnachie’s that drive gun violence. FBI data reveal that about
twice as many homicides result from arguments than from felonies, and gang
violence is only a small contributor. In a careful study of the relationships
between homicide victims and perpetrators, analyzing data from 1981–2010,
Michael Siegel and his colleagues reveal that for every 1 percent increase in
gun ownership, there is a 0.9 percent increase in nonstranger homicide.
Although stranger homicide does increase slightly as gun ownership rises, the
increase is not statistically significant. This indicates that there is no
deterrence effect from firearm ownership and that a firearm significantly
increases the owner’s chances of killing or being killed by somebody he or she
knows.
Gun advocates may argue that this reality is a consequence of the fact that
there are too few guns; perhaps nonstranger homicides would be lower if
everyone you knew were packing heat. Yet a study examining data from the
National Crime Victimization Survey found that people who used any weapon
other than a gun for defense were less likely to be harmed than those who used
a firearm.
So before you purchase a gun for self-defense, please pause to reflect. Your
weapon is much more likely to end up being used to harm than for good, even if
you’re one of the “good guys.” The odds are not in your favor.
Evan DeFilippis writes on public health and gun violence at the Atlantic,
Huffington Post, Boston Review, and ArmedWithReason. He manages the evaluation
of poverty-reduction projects in Nairobi, Kenya.
Devin Hughes is the founder of Hughes Capital Management, LLC, a registered
investment adviser. He writes on gun control issues at ArmedWithReason.
http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/medical_examiner/2015/01/good_guy_with_a_gun_myth_guns_increase_the_risk_of_homicide_accidents_suicide.single.html
you.
By Evan DeFilippis and Devin Hughes
Wayne LaPierre of the National Rifle Association issued a passionate call to
arms last year, painting a bleak picture of a dystopian America on the brink
of collapse:
We know, in the world that surrounds us, there are terrorists and home
invaders and drug cartels and car-jackers and knock-out gamers and rapers,
haters, campus killers, airport killers, shopping-mall killers, road-rage
killers, and killers who scheme to destroy our country with massive storms of
violence against our power grids, or vicious waves of chemicals or disease
that could collapse the society that sustains us all.
LaPierre’s central message: Owning a gun is the solution. The world is a scary
place. There are bad guys everywhere threatening you and your family, and the
only thing they’re afraid of is a gun in your hands.
Tragically, a record number of Americans subscribe to some version of this
mythology, with 63 percent (67 percent of men polled and 58 percent of women)
believing that guns truly do make them safer. The public’s confidence in
firearms, however, is woefully misguided: The evidence overwhelmingly shows
that guns leave everybody less safe, including their owners.
A study from October 2013 analyzed data from 27 developed nations to examine
the impact of firearm prevalence on the mortality rate. It found an extremely
strong direct relationship between the number of firearms and firearm deaths.
The paper concludes: “The current study debunks the widely quoted hypothesis
that guns make a nation safer.” This finding is bolstered by several previous
studies that have revealed a significant link between gun ownership and
firearm-related deaths. This international comparison is especially harrowing
for women and children, who die from gun violence in America at far higher
rates than in other countries.
Gun advocates often retreat to an “it could never happen to me” mentality.
Behind such horrifying statistics are numerous heartbreaking tragedies, such
as Zina Daniel, a woman from Illinois who was killed by her abusive
ex-husband, or Caroline Sparks, who was only 2 when her 5-year-old brother
accidentally killed her with his Crickett rifle.
If we examine data from within the United States, the odds aren’t any better
for gun owners. The most recent study examining the relationship between
firearms and homicide rates on a state level, published last April, found a
significant positive relationship between gun ownership and overall homicide
levels. Using data from 1981–2010 and the best firearm ownership proxy to
date, the study found that for every 1 percent increase in gun ownership,
there was a 1.1 percent increase in the firearm homicide rate and a 0.7
percent increase in the total homicide rate. This was after controlling for
factors such as poverty, unemployment, income inequality, alcohol consumption,
and nonhomicide violent crime. Further, the firearm ownership rate had no
statistically significant impact on nonfirearm homicides, meaning there was no
detectable substitution effect. That is, in the absence of guns, would-be
criminals are not switching to knives or some other weapons to carry out
homicide. These results are supported by a host of previous studies that
illustrate that guns increase the rate of homicides.
Sandy Hook family members
Family members who have lost loved ones to gun violence gather with members of
Congress during a press conference on Dec. 10, 2014, in Washington.
Photo by Win McNamee/Getty Images
The evidence against firearm ownership becomes even stronger when suicides and
accidents are included in the analysis—guns make both much more likely and
more fatal. There can be nothing closer to a consensus in the gun debate than
this point. Indeed, every single case-control study ever conducted in the
United States has found that gun ownership is a strong risk factor for
suicide, even after adjusting for aggregate-level measures of suicidality such
as mental illness, alcoholism, poverty, and so on.
One might accept that firearms are dangerous and that they substantially
elevate the risk of homicide, suicide, and fatal accidents, but still believe
that policies regulating gun ownership are ineffective—criminals, after all,
won’t follow them. However, another recent study from May of 2013 analyzed the
impact of state firearm laws on firearm-related fatalities. It found that the
most gun-restrictive states have significantly fewer firearm fatalities than
the states with the least restrictive laws. The results are in line with
previous academic studies tackling the same question.
These findings are further supported by a case study examining the impact of a
2007 Missouri decision to repeal its permit-to-purchase handgun licensing law.
The research concluded that the repeal was associated with a 16 percent
increase in annual murder rates, indicating that state gun control laws have a
significant impact on the homicide rate.
Suppose a criminal has just broken into your house brandishing a firearm. You
need to protect yourself and your family. Wouldn’t anyone feel safer owning a
gun? This is the kind of narrative propagated by gun advocates in defense of
firearm ownership. It preys on our fear. Yet, the annual per capita risk of
death during a home invasion is 0.0000002, which, for all intents and
purposes, is zero.
Despite the astronomical odds against being killed, this fear of home invasion
often drives people like Becca Campbell of Ferguson, Missouri, to gun
ownership. This past November, Campbell was riding home in a car with her
boyfriend after purchasing a gun, preparing for the unrest expected to follow
the grand jury decision about whether to pursue criminal charges against the
policeman who killed Michael Brown. She joked that “we’re ready for Ferguson,”
waving the gun. Distracted, the boyfriend ran into the car ahead of them, and
the gun fired, killing Campbell.
523097351SO00018_GUN_SHOP_N
Steven King helps a woman shop for a handgun for home defense on Nov. 12,
2014, in Bridgeton, Missouri.
Photo by Scott Olson/Getty Images
Moving from state-level analysis to the household or individual, the risks for
gun owners become even more apparent. A recent meta-analysis of 16 studies
examined the relationship between firearms and gun deaths. Gun ownership
doubled the risk of homicide and tripled the risk of suicide. This research is
bolstered by a national survey that found that a gun in the home was far more
likely to be used to threaten a family member or intimate partner than to be
used in self-defense.
Gun advocates may counter that this doesn’t reveal the entire picture. After
all, case studies of these fatal gun incidents can’t capture the benefits that
widespread defensive gun use bestows on society. However, despite the NRA’s
mantra that there are millions of defensive gun uses every year, empirical
data reveals that DGUs are actually extremely rare. Criminal uses of firearms
far outnumber legal defensive uses. The evidence shows that there may be fewer
than even 3,000 DGUs annually. In comparison, there are 30,000 gun deaths
annually, and many more injuries and shattered lives. The costs of gun
ownership unequivocally outweigh the benefits.
In light of the overwhelming evidence that guns are a public health threat,
gun advocates often retreat to an “it could never happen to me” mentality.
This worldview is tragically mistaken. Consider the case of Veronica
Dunnachie. She was, by many gun advocates’ definition, a good gal with a gun.
A strident voice for gun rights, she was an open carry advocate, dedicated to
expanding the unlicensed open carrying of firearms. In Texas, open carry is
currently restricted to long guns; she pushed to include handguns. She
frequently attended rallies and protests organized by Open Carry Tarrant
County (an offshoot of Open Carry Texas). In a domestic dispute on Dec. 10,
she allegedly shot and killed her husband and stepdaughter. Horrified,
Dunnachie called a friend, telling him she “had just done something bad” and,
at his urging, checked herself into a nearby mental health clinic.
Everyone likes to pretend that he or she is more rational, more responsible,
and more immune to the risks that gun ownership poses relative to the average
American. Yet, we know from gun violence statistics that many are simply
misjudging their own competency. Everyone thinks he or she is above average,
but half are mistaken.
Rather than gangbangers and maniacal criminals going on killing sprees, it is
cases like Dunnachie’s that drive gun violence. FBI data reveal that about
twice as many homicides result from arguments than from felonies, and gang
violence is only a small contributor. In a careful study of the relationships
between homicide victims and perpetrators, analyzing data from 1981–2010,
Michael Siegel and his colleagues reveal that for every 1 percent increase in
gun ownership, there is a 0.9 percent increase in nonstranger homicide.
Although stranger homicide does increase slightly as gun ownership rises, the
increase is not statistically significant. This indicates that there is no
deterrence effect from firearm ownership and that a firearm significantly
increases the owner’s chances of killing or being killed by somebody he or she
knows.
Gun advocates may argue that this reality is a consequence of the fact that
there are too few guns; perhaps nonstranger homicides would be lower if
everyone you knew were packing heat. Yet a study examining data from the
National Crime Victimization Survey found that people who used any weapon
other than a gun for defense were less likely to be harmed than those who used
a firearm.
So before you purchase a gun for self-defense, please pause to reflect. Your
weapon is much more likely to end up being used to harm than for good, even if
you’re one of the “good guys.” The odds are not in your favor.
Evan DeFilippis writes on public health and gun violence at the Atlantic,
Huffington Post, Boston Review, and ArmedWithReason. He manages the evaluation
of poverty-reduction projects in Nairobi, Kenya.
Devin Hughes is the founder of Hughes Capital Management, LLC, a registered
investment adviser. He writes on gun control issues at ArmedWithReason.
http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/medical_examiner/2015/01/good_guy_with_a_gun_myth_guns_increase_the_risk_of_homicide_accidents_suicide.single.html
First Post
Oct 11, 2015, 9:59:17 PM10/11/15
to
On Sun, 11 Oct 2015 21:08:39 -0400, Mohammad <m...@mo-22.net>
X-Newsreader: MesNews/1.08.03.00-gb
`X-ICQ: 543516788 AKA Karen Gordon, Canadian troll, left wing fanatic,
Liar and forger wrote:
AlleyFag from Catonement Fl
<alle...@guns.net>X-Newsreader: MesNews/1.08.03.00-gb
`X-ICQ: 543516788
W <w...@dubya.se>
X-Newsreader: MesNews/1.08.03.00-gb
`X-ICQ: 543516788
Capt. Crunch <cr...@nospam.net>
X-Newsreader: MesNews/1.08.03.00-gb
`X-ICQ: 543516788
Big Hairy Byker <b...@nospam.net>
X-Newsreader: MesNews/1.08.03.00-gb
`X-ICQ: 543516788
Harcort Fenton Mudd <harry...@yahoo.ch>
X-Newsreader: MesNews/1.08.03.00-gb
`X-ICQ: 543516788
White Expert <exp...@gayoldparty.org>
X-Newsreader: MesNews/1.08.03.00-gb
`X-ICQ: 543516788
Mexican Rafael Ted Cruz
<ban...@nospam.net>
X-Newsreader: MesNews/1.08.03.00-gb
`X-ICQ: 543516788
Claude <nob...@nospam.net>
X-Newsreader: MesNews/1.08.03.00-gb
`X-ICQ: 543516788
Meyer Lansky <me...@meyer.net>
X-Newsreader: MesNews/1.08.03.00-gb
`X-ICQ: 543516788
Jean Paul LaPierre <jp...@noskkpam.net>
X-Newsreader: MesNews/1.08.03.00-gb
`X-ICQ: 543516788
AnHillbilly First Post - Another
Southern Bloodsucking Racist <df...@yahoo.ch>
X-Newsreader: MesNews/1.08.03.00-gb
`X-ICQ: 543516788
Harrison Hatt <harry...@nospam.net>
X-Newsreader: MesNews/1.08.03.00-gb
`X-ICQ: 543516788
Bundy Man <bu...@man.net>
X-Newsreader: MesNews/1.08.03.00-gb
X-ICQ: 543516788
If the stupid assed post forging dumbass had anything significant to
say then they wouldn't by forging under other people's nyms and lying
through their yellow Canadian teeth. It must really suck to go
through life being nothing but a worthless lying sack of garbage.
Thus and so, the liberal dirtbag can't make any kind of real argument
or debate so they have nothing left but to forge posts, redirect
follow ups and lie through their teeth.
Just more proof that they aren't even righteous in their own stated
beliefs or they wouldn't be lying and playing childish games on
message boards.
'Merican Jesus <yeud...@yahoo.ch> AKA Roger Ramjet
<roge...@yahoo.ce>AKA Phil The Baptist
<ph...@yahoo.ch> AKA Merican Byker With A Gun <gun...@yahoo.ch>AKA Not
Hartung <tong...@nospam.net> AKA Davud Duke <du...@yahoo.ch> AKA
Senator Jim Inhofe <gayok...@yahoo.ch>AKA Nick Griffin - White
Warrior <War...@yahoo.ch> AKA American Thinker <yeun...@yahoo.ch>
AKA Heartland Son <nobo...@nospam.net>AKA Black Affirmative Action
Grayling High School <can...@yahoo.ch> AKA Heartland Son
<nobo...@nospam.net>AKA Black Affirmative Action
Economist Thomas Sowell <nobo...@nospam.net> AKA John Belushi
<alba...@nospam.net> AKA Claude <nob...@nospam.net> AKA Harold
Covington <har...@yahoo.ch> AKA Betty Rubble meanb...@nospam.net>AKA
Prince Abdul <ab...@yahoo.ch> AKA Col. West <we...@yahoo.ch> AKA
RightWing <ye...@yahoo.ch> AKA Willard Anthony Watts <wa...@yahoo.ch>
AKA White In America <sada...@yahoo.ch> AKA John William Cummings
<ram...@yahoo.ch> AKA The Friends of The GOP <rea...@yahoo.ch> AKA
Pedro Sanchez <pe...@yahoo.us> AKA Ace <a...@yahoo.ch>AKA Senator
Jimmy Inhofe <da...@nospam.net> AKA Robert Milby Jr.
<gay....@yahoo.ch>AKA Geoffery Dorn <geof...@cox.net>AKA
Fung <ye...@yahoo.ch> AKA Brock <br...@yahoo.brok> AKA SniperSniper!
Kill Kill Kill <sni...@nospam.net> AKA Libertarian
Bobby<bo...@yahoo.ch> AKA Drink Lots of Jai Maharaj
<Mah...@Maharaj.ch>AKA Death To ISIS <boko...@yahoo.ch> AKA Timmay
<tim...@southpark.net> AKA Jehtro Tubbs <jtu...@yahoo.se> AKABarry
<ba...@yahoo.ch> AKA Cliven <bu...@yahoo.cs>AKA Giga2
<just...@yahoo.com> AKA Claude <nob...@nospam.net> AKA RightWing
<ye...@yahoo.ch> AKA Lee <l...@general.lee> AKA First--Post
<RightWi...@yahoo.us> AKA Dan Hannigan <Danha...@yahoo.ce> AKA
Byker <by...@oklahomacity.gay> AKA Bill Steele
<rightiw...@gop.net>AKA Mellacon <mella...@yahoo.com> AKA
Think Tank <think...@think.tank> AKA Rudy Canoza
<nobo...@nospam.net> AKA See You In Church
<g...@godnow.god> AKA Cicero_Venatio <Cicero_...@nospam.net> AKA
Senator James Inhofe <ye...@yahoo.ch>AKA That Nigger Next Door
<do...@yahoo.ch> AKA Barack Hussein Obama <y...@yahoo.ch>
AKA Warren Fitzwarren III <l...@yahoo.ch> AKA RightWing <ye...@yahoo.ch>
AKA First-Post AKA <DogD...@DogDiesel.ch> AKA LifsiteNews Report
<christ...@gay.net> AKA Right Wing Heros <he...@yahoo.ch>
AKA Joe Cooper <Coo...@nospam.net> AKA
Republican Marty <bo...@nospam.net> AKA Cicero_Venatio
<Cicero_...@yahoo.me> AKA African American
Negro Black Economist Thomas Sowell <ne...@yahoo.ch> AKA Major
Wolfgang Hochstetter <b...@yahoo.ceh> AKA Danny Glickman
<sa...@yahoo.ch> AKA Charles Whitman - Law Abiding Texas Gun Owner
Until Aug 1 1966 <mah...@yahoo.ch> AKA Garry Gray <gr...@yahoo.ch> AKA
Dr. Jay Maharaj<Dr-Jay...@yahoo.ch> AKA RightWinDogma
<RightW...@gmail.net> AKA Yuri Glasov <yhgl...@ymail.com> AKA No
One <nob...@nospam.net> AKA Bob Milby Jr. <buttf...@yahoo.se> AKA
Erb <e...@erb.net> AKA Tea party <Teapa...@jackbaur.net> AKA
Hllbilly Prophet <sh...@nospam.net>
X-Newsreader: MesNews/1.08.03.00-gb
`X-ICQ: 543516788 AKA Karen Gordon, Canadian troll, left wing fanatic,
Liar and forger wrote:
AlleyFag from Catonement Fl
<alle...@guns.net>X-Newsreader: MesNews/1.08.03.00-gb
`X-ICQ: 543516788
W <w...@dubya.se>
X-Newsreader: MesNews/1.08.03.00-gb
`X-ICQ: 543516788
Capt. Crunch <cr...@nospam.net>
X-Newsreader: MesNews/1.08.03.00-gb
`X-ICQ: 543516788
Big Hairy Byker <b...@nospam.net>
X-Newsreader: MesNews/1.08.03.00-gb
`X-ICQ: 543516788
Harcort Fenton Mudd <harry...@yahoo.ch>
X-Newsreader: MesNews/1.08.03.00-gb
`X-ICQ: 543516788
White Expert <exp...@gayoldparty.org>
X-Newsreader: MesNews/1.08.03.00-gb
`X-ICQ: 543516788
Mexican Rafael Ted Cruz
<ban...@nospam.net>
X-Newsreader: MesNews/1.08.03.00-gb
`X-ICQ: 543516788
Claude <nob...@nospam.net>
X-Newsreader: MesNews/1.08.03.00-gb
`X-ICQ: 543516788
Meyer Lansky <me...@meyer.net>
X-Newsreader: MesNews/1.08.03.00-gb
`X-ICQ: 543516788
Jean Paul LaPierre <jp...@noskkpam.net>
X-Newsreader: MesNews/1.08.03.00-gb
`X-ICQ: 543516788
AnHillbilly First Post - Another
Southern Bloodsucking Racist <df...@yahoo.ch>
X-Newsreader: MesNews/1.08.03.00-gb
`X-ICQ: 543516788
Harrison Hatt <harry...@nospam.net>
X-Newsreader: MesNews/1.08.03.00-gb
`X-ICQ: 543516788
Bundy Man <bu...@man.net>
X-Newsreader: MesNews/1.08.03.00-gb
X-ICQ: 543516788
If the stupid assed post forging dumbass had anything significant to
say then they wouldn't by forging under other people's nyms and lying
through their yellow Canadian teeth. It must really suck to go
through life being nothing but a worthless lying sack of garbage.
Thus and so, the liberal dirtbag can't make any kind of real argument
or debate so they have nothing left but to forge posts, redirect
follow ups and lie through their teeth.
Just more proof that they aren't even righteous in their own stated
beliefs or they wouldn't be lying and playing childish games on
message boards.
'Merican Jesus <yeud...@yahoo.ch> AKA Roger Ramjet
<roge...@yahoo.ce>AKA Phil The Baptist
<ph...@yahoo.ch> AKA Merican Byker With A Gun <gun...@yahoo.ch>AKA Not
Hartung <tong...@nospam.net> AKA Davud Duke <du...@yahoo.ch> AKA
Senator Jim Inhofe <gayok...@yahoo.ch>AKA Nick Griffin - White
Warrior <War...@yahoo.ch> AKA American Thinker <yeun...@yahoo.ch>
AKA Heartland Son <nobo...@nospam.net>AKA Black Affirmative Action
Grayling High School <can...@yahoo.ch> AKA Heartland Son
<nobo...@nospam.net>AKA Black Affirmative Action
Economist Thomas Sowell <nobo...@nospam.net> AKA John Belushi
<alba...@nospam.net> AKA Claude <nob...@nospam.net> AKA Harold
Covington <har...@yahoo.ch> AKA Betty Rubble meanb...@nospam.net>AKA
Prince Abdul <ab...@yahoo.ch> AKA Col. West <we...@yahoo.ch> AKA
RightWing <ye...@yahoo.ch> AKA Willard Anthony Watts <wa...@yahoo.ch>
AKA White In America <sada...@yahoo.ch> AKA John William Cummings
<ram...@yahoo.ch> AKA The Friends of The GOP <rea...@yahoo.ch> AKA
Pedro Sanchez <pe...@yahoo.us> AKA Ace <a...@yahoo.ch>AKA Senator
Jimmy Inhofe <da...@nospam.net> AKA Robert Milby Jr.
<gay....@yahoo.ch>AKA Geoffery Dorn <geof...@cox.net>AKA
Fung <ye...@yahoo.ch> AKA Brock <br...@yahoo.brok> AKA SniperSniper!
Kill Kill Kill <sni...@nospam.net> AKA Libertarian
Bobby<bo...@yahoo.ch> AKA Drink Lots of Jai Maharaj
<Mah...@Maharaj.ch>AKA Death To ISIS <boko...@yahoo.ch> AKA Timmay
<tim...@southpark.net> AKA Jehtro Tubbs <jtu...@yahoo.se> AKABarry
<ba...@yahoo.ch> AKA Cliven <bu...@yahoo.cs>AKA Giga2
<just...@yahoo.com> AKA Claude <nob...@nospam.net> AKA RightWing
<ye...@yahoo.ch> AKA Lee <l...@general.lee> AKA First--Post
<RightWi...@yahoo.us> AKA Dan Hannigan <Danha...@yahoo.ce> AKA
Byker <by...@oklahomacity.gay> AKA Bill Steele
<rightiw...@gop.net>AKA Mellacon <mella...@yahoo.com> AKA
Think Tank <think...@think.tank> AKA Rudy Canoza
<nobo...@nospam.net> AKA See You In Church
<g...@godnow.god> AKA Cicero_Venatio <Cicero_...@nospam.net> AKA
Senator James Inhofe <ye...@yahoo.ch>AKA That Nigger Next Door
<do...@yahoo.ch> AKA Barack Hussein Obama <y...@yahoo.ch>
AKA Warren Fitzwarren III <l...@yahoo.ch> AKA RightWing <ye...@yahoo.ch>
AKA First-Post AKA <DogD...@DogDiesel.ch> AKA LifsiteNews Report
<christ...@gay.net> AKA Right Wing Heros <he...@yahoo.ch>
AKA Joe Cooper <Coo...@nospam.net> AKA
Republican Marty <bo...@nospam.net> AKA Cicero_Venatio
<Cicero_...@yahoo.me> AKA African American
Negro Black Economist Thomas Sowell <ne...@yahoo.ch> AKA Major
Wolfgang Hochstetter <b...@yahoo.ceh> AKA Danny Glickman
<sa...@yahoo.ch> AKA Charles Whitman - Law Abiding Texas Gun Owner
Until Aug 1 1966 <mah...@yahoo.ch> AKA Garry Gray <gr...@yahoo.ch> AKA
Dr. Jay Maharaj<Dr-Jay...@yahoo.ch> AKA RightWinDogma
<RightW...@gmail.net> AKA Yuri Glasov <yhgl...@ymail.com> AKA No
One <nob...@nospam.net> AKA Bob Milby Jr. <buttf...@yahoo.se> AKA
Erb <e...@erb.net> AKA Tea party <Teapa...@jackbaur.net> AKA
Hllbilly Prophet <sh...@nospam.net>
Byker
Oct 11, 2015, 10:13:52 PM10/11/15
to
"Mohammad" wrote in message news:mvf18q$7ho$1...@news.albasani.net...
<snip>
Today's good guy with a gun: http://tinyurl.com/nae8756
<snip>
Today's good guy with a gun: http://tinyurl.com/nae8756
Olrik
Oct 11, 2015, 11:35:51 PM10/11/15
to
--
Olrik
aa #1981
EAC Chief Food Inspector, Bacon Division
Mattb.
Oct 11, 2015, 11:51:49 PM10/11/15
to
On Sun, 11 Oct 2015 23:35:41 -0400, Olrik <olri...@gmail.com> wrote:
>Le 2015-10-11 22:13, Byker a écrit :
>> "Mohammad" wrote in message news:mvf18q$7ho$1...@news.albasani.net...
>> <snip>
>>
>> Today's good guy with a gun: http://tinyurl.com/nae8756
>
>That killer should be in prison.
Why do armed robbers have the right to steal?
>Le 2015-10-11 22:13, Byker a écrit :
>> "Mohammad" wrote in message news:mvf18q$7ho$1...@news.albasani.net...
>> <snip>
>>
>> Today's good guy with a gun: http://tinyurl.com/nae8756
>
>That killer should be in prison.
Olrik
Oct 12, 2015, 12:33:49 AM10/12/15
to
No one can be judge, jury and executioner, which is what you seem to
condone.
Alterego
Oct 12, 2015, 12:35:09 AM10/12/15
to
Mattb. <trdel...@outlook.com> does it again:
> ......crap
Has nothing to do with aus.politics
STOP cross-posting it.
--
your other "me"
> ......crap
Has nothing to do with aus.politics
STOP cross-posting it.
--
your other "me"
Alterego
Oct 12, 2015, 12:36:17 AM10/12/15
to
Alterego
Oct 12, 2015, 12:42:37 AM10/12/15
to
"Byker" <byker@does~troll.net> presented nothing but his hate:
> Today's good guy with a gun: http://tinyurl.com/nhqzyum
Says the confirmed newsgroup Nazi.
FOAD troll.
--
your other "me"
> Today's good guy with a gun: http://tinyurl.com/nhqzyum
Says the confirmed newsgroup Nazi.
FOAD troll.
--
your other "me"
Mattb.
Oct 12, 2015, 12:42:50 AM10/12/15
to
On Mon, 12 Oct 2015 00:33:39 -0400, Olrik <olri...@gmail.com> wrote:
>Le 2015-10-11 23:52, Mattb. a écrit :
>> On Sun, 11 Oct 2015 23:35:41 -0400, Olrik <olri...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Le 2015-10-11 22:13, Byker a écrit :
>>>> "Mohammad" wrote in message news:mvf18q$7ho$1...@news.albasani.net...
>>>> <snip>
>>>>
>>>> Today's good guy with a gun: http://tinyurl.com/nae8756
>>>
>>> That killer should be in prison.
>>
>> Why do armed robbers have the right to steal?
>>
>
>It's not a matter of «rights», it's a matter of justice.
>
>No one can be judge, jury and executioner, which is what you seem to
>condone.
So if a person is using a gun in a robbery you condone that? How
>Le 2015-10-11 23:52, Mattb. a écrit :
>> On Sun, 11 Oct 2015 23:35:41 -0400, Olrik <olri...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Le 2015-10-11 22:13, Byker a écrit :
>>>> "Mohammad" wrote in message news:mvf18q$7ho$1...@news.albasani.net...
>>>> <snip>
>>>>
>>>> Today's good guy with a gun: http://tinyurl.com/nae8756
>>>
>>> That killer should be in prison.
>>
>> Why do armed robbers have the right to steal?
>>
>
>It's not a matter of «rights», it's a matter of justice.
>
>No one can be judge, jury and executioner, which is what you seem to
>condone.
progressive of you. . How many people do these scum kill a year? Yet
is OK no one should ever defend themselves only criminals have rights.
Personally I'd prefer he just didn't break the law with a gun. If he
hadn't used a gun he most likely would have just got the shit kicked
out of him.
Olrik
Oct 12, 2015, 12:59:07 AM10/12/15
to
Le 2015-10-12 00:43, Mattb. a écrit :
> On Mon, 12 Oct 2015 00:33:39 -0400, Olrik <olri...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Le 2015-10-11 23:52, Mattb. a écrit :
>>> On Sun, 11 Oct 2015 23:35:41 -0400, Olrik <olri...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Le 2015-10-11 22:13, Byker a écrit :
>>>>> "Mohammad" wrote in message news:mvf18q$7ho$1...@news.albasani.net...
>>>>> <snip>
>>>>>
>>>>> Today's good guy with a gun: http://tinyurl.com/nae8756
>>>>
>>>> That killer should be in prison.
>>>
>>> Why do armed robbers have the right to steal?
>>>
>>
>> It's not a matter of «rights», it's a matter of justice.
>>
>> No one can be judge, jury and executioner, which is what you seem to
>> condone.
>
> So if a person is using a gun in a robbery you condone that?
No, I condone killing that criminal on sight.
> On Mon, 12 Oct 2015 00:33:39 -0400, Olrik <olri...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Le 2015-10-11 23:52, Mattb. a écrit :
>>> On Sun, 11 Oct 2015 23:35:41 -0400, Olrik <olri...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Le 2015-10-11 22:13, Byker a écrit :
>>>>> "Mohammad" wrote in message news:mvf18q$7ho$1...@news.albasani.net...
>>>>> <snip>
>>>>>
>>>>> Today's good guy with a gun: http://tinyurl.com/nae8756
>>>>
>>>> That killer should be in prison.
>>>
>>> Why do armed robbers have the right to steal?
>>>
>>
>> It's not a matter of «rights», it's a matter of justice.
>>
>> No one can be judge, jury and executioner, which is what you seem to
>> condone.
>
> So if a person is using a gun in a robbery you condone that?
> How progressive of you. . How many people do these scum kill a year?
> Yet is OK no one should ever defend themselves only criminals have rights.
> Personally I'd prefer he just didn't break the law with a gun.
> If he hadn't used a gun he most likely would have just got the shit kicked
> out of him.
lynching if his skin was a darker shade?
Really?
Mattb.
Oct 12, 2015, 1:14:06 AM10/12/15
to
be shot so the scum get a trial.
> Just a mob beating?
What they have to allow themselves to be robbed. Progressive thinking
there.
> Maybe a
>lynching if his skin was a darker shade?
race. That excuse had gotten old.
>
>Really?
Yes really. Go and do a robbery point a gun at people expect what you
get. Best not to be scum criminal.
Olrik
Oct 12, 2015, 1:21:00 AM10/12/15
to
weren't in a self-defense position. Just call the police. Don't be a
murderer nor an executioner.
Mattb.
Oct 12, 2015, 1:46:05 AM10/12/15
to
victims for their gun control ads.
Call the police? How many died at that college waiting for the
police. Calling the police is about as useful as saying to those poor
people to pray.
Sad so many progressive are pro criminal lately.
Joe Bruno
Oct 12, 2015, 1:53:30 AM10/12/15
to
> date, the study found that for every 1 percent increase in gun ownership,
> there was a 1.1 percent increase in the firearm homicide rate and a 0.7
> percent increase in the total homicide rate. This was after controlling for
> factors such as poverty, unemployment, income inequality, alcohol consumption,
> and nonhomicide violent crime. Further, the firearm ownership rate had no
> statistically significant impact on nonfirearm homicides, meaning there was no
> detectable substitution effect. That is, in the absence of guns, would-be
> criminals are not switching to knives or some other weapons to carry out
> homicide. These results are supported by a host of previous studies that
> illustrate that guns increase the rate of homicides.
> Sandy Hook family members
> Family members who have lost loved ones to gun violence gather with members of
> Congress during a press conference on Dec. 10, 2014, in Washington.
>
> Photo by Win McNamee/Getty Images
>
> The evidence against firearm ownership becomes even stronger when suicides and
> accidents are included in the analysis--guns make both much more likely and
> there was a 1.1 percent increase in the firearm homicide rate and a 0.7
> percent increase in the total homicide rate. This was after controlling for
> factors such as poverty, unemployment, income inequality, alcohol consumption,
> and nonhomicide violent crime. Further, the firearm ownership rate had no
> statistically significant impact on nonfirearm homicides, meaning there was no
> detectable substitution effect. That is, in the absence of guns, would-be
> criminals are not switching to knives or some other weapons to carry out
> homicide. These results are supported by a host of previous studies that
> illustrate that guns increase the rate of homicides.
> Sandy Hook family members
> Family members who have lost loved ones to gun violence gather with members of
> Congress during a press conference on Dec. 10, 2014, in Washington.
>
> Photo by Win McNamee/Getty Images
>
> The evidence against firearm ownership becomes even stronger when suicides and
> more fatal. There can be nothing closer to a consensus in the gun debate than
> this point. Indeed, every single case-control study ever conducted in the
> United States has found that gun ownership is a strong risk factor for
> suicide, even after adjusting for aggregate-level measures of suicidality such
> as mental illness, alcoholism, poverty, and so on.
>
> One might accept that firearms are dangerous and that they substantially
> elevate the risk of homicide, suicide, and fatal accidents, but still believe
> that policies regulating gun ownership are ineffective--criminals, after all,
> this point. Indeed, every single case-control study ever conducted in the
> United States has found that gun ownership is a strong risk factor for
> suicide, even after adjusting for aggregate-level measures of suicidality such
> as mental illness, alcoholism, poverty, and so on.
>
> One might accept that firearms are dangerous and that they substantially
> elevate the risk of homicide, suicide, and fatal accidents, but still believe
> Michael Siegel and his colleagues reveal that for every 1 percent increase in
> gun ownership, there is a 0.9 percent increase in nonstranger homicide.
> Although stranger homicide does increase slightly as gun ownership rises, the
> increase is not statistically significant. This indicates that there is no
> deterrence effect from firearm ownership and that a firearm significantly
> increases the owner's chances of killing or being killed by somebody he or she
> knows.
>
>
> Gun advocates may argue that this reality is a consequence of the fact that
> there are too few guns; perhaps nonstranger homicides would be lower if
> everyone you knew were packing heat. Yet a study examining data from the
> National Crime Victimization Survey found that people who used any weapon
> other than a gun for defense were less likely to be harmed than those who used
> a firearm.
>
> So before you purchase a gun for self-defense, please pause to reflect. Your
> weapon is much more likely to end up being used to harm than for good, even if
> you're one of the "good guys." The odds are not in your favor.
>
> Evan DeFilippis writes on public health and gun violence at the Atlantic,
> Huffington Post, Boston Review, and ArmedWithReason. He manages the evaluation
> of poverty-reduction projects in Nairobi, Kenya.
>
> Devin Hughes is the founder of Hughes Capital Management, LLC, a registered
> investment adviser. He writes on gun control issues at ArmedWithReason.
>
> http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/medical_examiner/2015/01/good_guy_with_a_gun_myth_guns_increase_the_risk_of_homicide_accidents_suicide.single.html
Myth?Twice, my guns have saved me, personally, from harm.
> gun ownership, there is a 0.9 percent increase in nonstranger homicide.
> Although stranger homicide does increase slightly as gun ownership rises, the
> increase is not statistically significant. This indicates that there is no
> deterrence effect from firearm ownership and that a firearm significantly
> increases the owner's chances of killing or being killed by somebody he or she
> knows.
>
>
> Gun advocates may argue that this reality is a consequence of the fact that
> there are too few guns; perhaps nonstranger homicides would be lower if
> everyone you knew were packing heat. Yet a study examining data from the
> National Crime Victimization Survey found that people who used any weapon
> other than a gun for defense were less likely to be harmed than those who used
> a firearm.
>
> So before you purchase a gun for self-defense, please pause to reflect. Your
> weapon is much more likely to end up being used to harm than for good, even if
> you're one of the "good guys." The odds are not in your favor.
>
> Evan DeFilippis writes on public health and gun violence at the Atlantic,
> Huffington Post, Boston Review, and ArmedWithReason. He manages the evaluation
> of poverty-reduction projects in Nairobi, Kenya.
>
> Devin Hughes is the founder of Hughes Capital Management, LLC, a registered
> investment adviser. He writes on gun control issues at ArmedWithReason.
>
> http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/medical_examiner/2015/01/good_guy_with_a_gun_myth_guns_increase_the_risk_of_homicide_accidents_suicide.single.html
Fuck the statistics.
dechucka
Oct 12, 2015, 2:01:29 AM10/12/15
to
Andrew
Oct 12, 2015, 3:12:38 AM10/12/15
to
"Joe Bruno" wrote in message news:18d26905-bc76-4f46...@googlegroups.com...
> Myth?Twice, my guns have saved me, personally,
> from harm. Fuck the statistics.
Historically tyrants first take guns away from
the populace before they enslave the masses.
The 2nd amendment was designed to prevent
this, but times are fast changing.
> Myth?Twice, my guns have saved me, personally,
> from harm. Fuck the statistics.
the populace before they enslave the masses.
The 2nd amendment was designed to prevent
this, but times are fast changing.
Alex W.
Oct 12, 2015, 4:16:22 AM10/12/15
to
"America the country awash in guns" and "America the country where
almost all civilian mass shootings occur"...
As to the specific scenario referred to above, why the hell should I get
involved in a gun battle with an armed robber if the money isn't mine
(such as a bank robbery)? And do I really want to start shooting in
public for the sake of holding on to a watch and a wallet?
burfordTjustice
Oct 12, 2015, 7:06:44 AM10/12/15
to
Jeanne Douglas
Oct 12, 2015, 7:07:50 AM10/12/15
to
In article <mvfd3d$7bs$2...@dont-email.me>, Olrik <olri...@gmail.com>
--
JD
I¹ve officially given up trying to find the bottom
of the barrel that is Republican depravity.--Jidyom
Rosario, Addicting Info
wrote:
> Le 2015-10-11 23:52, Mattb. a écrit :
> > On Sun, 11 Oct 2015 23:35:41 -0400, Olrik <olri...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Le 2015-10-11 22:13, Byker a écrit :
> >>> "Mohammad" wrote in message news:mvf18q$7ho$1...@news.albasani.net...
> >>> <snip>
> >>>
> >>> Today's good guy with a gun: http://tinyurl.com/nae8756
> >>
> >> That killer should be in prison.
> >
> > Why do armed robbers have the right to steal?
> >
>
> It's not a matter of «rights», it's a matter of justice.
>
> No one can be judge, jury and executioner, which is what you seem to
> condone.
And robbery is not a capital crime.
> Le 2015-10-11 23:52, Mattb. a écrit :
> > On Sun, 11 Oct 2015 23:35:41 -0400, Olrik <olri...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Le 2015-10-11 22:13, Byker a écrit :
> >>> "Mohammad" wrote in message news:mvf18q$7ho$1...@news.albasani.net...
> >>> <snip>
> >>>
> >>> Today's good guy with a gun: http://tinyurl.com/nae8756
> >>
> >> That killer should be in prison.
> >
> > Why do armed robbers have the right to steal?
> >
>
> It's not a matter of «rights», it's a matter of justice.
>
> No one can be judge, jury and executioner, which is what you seem to
> condone.
--
JD
I¹ve officially given up trying to find the bottom
of the barrel that is Republican depravity.--Jidyom
Rosario, Addicting Info
nature bats last
Oct 12, 2015, 11:26:11 AM10/12/15
to
On Monday, October 12, 2015 at 12:12:38 AM UTC-7, Andrew wrote:
> "Joe Bruno" wrote in message news:18d26905-bc76-4f46...@googlegroups.com...
>
> > Myth?Twice, my guns have saved me, personally,
> > from harm. Fuck the statistics.
.> Historically tyrants first take guns away from
> "Joe Bruno" wrote in message news:18d26905-bc76-4f46...@googlegroups.com...
>
> > Myth?Twice, my guns have saved me, personally,
> > from harm. Fuck the statistics.
.> the populace before they enslave the masses.
Historically, eh?
How many examples do you have?
Seth
MattB
Oct 12, 2015, 2:23:19 PM10/12/15
to
On Mon, 12 Oct 2015 09:16:17 +0100, "Alex W." <ing...@yahoo.co.uk>
wrote:
Well that would be your choice. Then if he shoots you just because he
doesn't like you looks that is also your problem.
In this instance it would be freedom of choice for all involved. For
the criminal scum for using a weapon in a criminal act and for the man
who thought he was defending himself and others.
What and how would you change it?
BTW the most mass shooting I'd say happen in the middle East. Then
Chicago, Baltimore, Detroit and L.A.
wrote:
doesn't like you looks that is also your problem.
In this instance it would be freedom of choice for all involved. For
the criminal scum for using a weapon in a criminal act and for the man
who thought he was defending himself and others.
What and how would you change it?
BTW the most mass shooting I'd say happen in the middle East. Then
Chicago, Baltimore, Detroit and L.A.
dechucka
Oct 12, 2015, 3:28:06 PM10/12/15
to
"MattB" <trdel...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:baun1bpfonjnouk1f...@4ax.com...
that situation would likely lead to more deaths/injuries.
>
> What and how would you change it?
>
> BTW the most mass shooting I'd say happen in the middle East. Then
> Chicago, Baltimore, Detroit and L.A.
Interesting you need to use a war zone to find a place where civilian mass
> What and how would you change it?
>
> BTW the most mass shooting I'd say happen in the middle East. Then
> Chicago, Baltimore, Detroit and L.A.
shootings are greater then the US
MattB
Oct 12, 2015, 3:55:36 PM10/12/15
to
On Tue, 13 Oct 2015 06:27:50 +1100, "dechucka" <dech...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
Maybe but in the university killing if a person had done the same how
many lives would have been saved?
Each situation is different and as I can't read minds or tell the
future no laws will make things better. Armed robbery already
illegal.
>>
>> What and how would you change it?
>>
>> BTW the most mass shooting I'd say happen in the middle East. Then
>> Chicago, Baltimore, Detroit and L.A.
>
>Interesting you need to use a war zone to find a place where civilian mass
>shootings are greater then the US
Someone here might not. What is going on in South America is
definitely worse than in the USA. Socialism isn't working well down
there. I wonder if we did a study on crime based on they type of city
government what we'd see.
Checked seems that in your area since guns not easy they stab and burn
people.
wrote:
many lives would have been saved?
Each situation is different and as I can't read minds or tell the
future no laws will make things better. Armed robbery already
illegal.
>>
>> What and how would you change it?
>>
>> BTW the most mass shooting I'd say happen in the middle East. Then
>> Chicago, Baltimore, Detroit and L.A.
>
>Interesting you need to use a war zone to find a place where civilian mass
>shootings are greater then the US
definitely worse than in the USA. Socialism isn't working well down
there. I wonder if we did a study on crime based on they type of city
government what we'd see.
Checked seems that in your area since guns not easy they stab and burn
people.
dechucka
Oct 12, 2015, 5:04:03 PM10/12/15
to
snip
>>apart from the fact that unless he is an active shooter pulling a gun in
>>that situation would likely lead to more deaths/injuries.
>
> Maybe but in the university killing if a person had done the same how
> many lives would have been saved?
probably none if you look at the history of DGU against an active shooter
>
> Each situation is different and as I can't read minds or tell the
> future no laws will make things better. Armed robbery already
> illegal.
I used to do the night shif at a servo when I was a Uni, if threatened I was
going to offer to help the bloke carry the stuff to the car.
>
>
>>>
>>> What and how would you change it?
>>>
>>> BTW the most mass shooting I'd say happen in the middle East. Then
>>> Chicago, Baltimore, Detroit and L.A.
>>
>>Interesting you need to use a war zone to find a place where civilian mass
>>shootings are greater then the US
>
> Someone here might not. What is going on in South America is
> definitely worse than in the USA. Socialism isn't working well down
> there. I wonder if we did a study on crime based on they type of city
> government what we'd see.
>
> Checked seems that in your area since guns not easy they stab and burn
> people.
but not at the same rate that they kill in the US. Guess what easy access to
guns is not good for society
>>apart from the fact that unless he is an active shooter pulling a gun in
>>that situation would likely lead to more deaths/injuries.
>
> Maybe but in the university killing if a person had done the same how
> many lives would have been saved?
>
> Each situation is different and as I can't read minds or tell the
> future no laws will make things better. Armed robbery already
> illegal.
going to offer to help the bloke carry the stuff to the car.
>
>
>>>
>>> What and how would you change it?
>>>
>>> BTW the most mass shooting I'd say happen in the middle East. Then
>>> Chicago, Baltimore, Detroit and L.A.
>>
>>Interesting you need to use a war zone to find a place where civilian mass
>>shootings are greater then the US
>
> Someone here might not. What is going on in South America is
> definitely worse than in the USA. Socialism isn't working well down
> there. I wonder if we did a study on crime based on they type of city
> government what we'd see.
>
> Checked seems that in your area since guns not easy they stab and burn
> people.
guns is not good for society
MattB
Oct 12, 2015, 5:26:23 PM10/12/15
to
On Tue, 13 Oct 2015 08:03:57 +1100, "dechucka" <dech...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
>snip
>
>>>apart from the fact that unless he is an active shooter pulling a gun in
>>>that situation would likely lead to more deaths/injuries.
>>
>> Maybe but in the university killing if a person had done the same how
>> many lives would have been saved?
>
>probably none if you look at the history of DGU against an active shooter
There is that word again "probably" So you don't know. So your
going to tell me what to do on a "probably" during a armed robbery. He
"probably" won't kill anyone. He probable is just a good guy that is
robbing the place.
>
>>
>> Each situation is different and as I can't read minds or tell the
>> future no laws will make things better. Armed robbery already
>> illegal.
>
>I used to do the night shif at a servo when I was a Uni, if threatened I was
>going to offer to help the bloke carry the stuff to the car.
That is what we suggest. Let them take what they want. Thing is
clerks still get shot even after doing everything told. There are no
guarantees no matter what you do.
When a criminal thinks of Gun control here is his reaction
http://netrightdaily.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/Cartoon-Gun-Control-for-Dummies-600.jpg
wrote:
>snip
>
>>>apart from the fact that unless he is an active shooter pulling a gun in
>>>that situation would likely lead to more deaths/injuries.
>>
>> Maybe but in the university killing if a person had done the same how
>> many lives would have been saved?
>
>probably none if you look at the history of DGU against an active shooter
going to tell me what to do on a "probably" during a armed robbery. He
"probably" won't kill anyone. He probable is just a good guy that is
robbing the place.
>
>>
>> Each situation is different and as I can't read minds or tell the
>> future no laws will make things better. Armed robbery already
>> illegal.
>
>I used to do the night shif at a servo when I was a Uni, if threatened I was
>going to offer to help the bloke carry the stuff to the car.
clerks still get shot even after doing everything told. There are no
guarantees no matter what you do.
When a criminal thinks of Gun control here is his reaction
http://netrightdaily.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/01/Cartoon-Gun-Control-for-Dummies-600.jpg
dechucka
Oct 12, 2015, 6:03:05 PM10/12/15
to
news:gc8o1b5mkkefo3ch3...@4ax.com...
>
>>
>>>
>>> Each situation is different and as I can't read minds or tell the
>>> future no laws will make things better. Armed robbery already
>>> illegal.
>>
>>I used to do the night shif at a servo when I was a Uni, if threatened I
>>was
>>going to offer to help the bloke carry the stuff to the car.
>
> That is what we suggest. Let them take what they want. Thing is
> clerks still get shot even after doing everything told. There are no
> guarantees no matter what you do.
Sick country the US, poor bugger got shot because of your gun proliferation.
better kill the bloke on suspision
> On Tue, 13 Oct 2015 08:03:57 +1100, "dechucka" <dech...@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>>snip
>>
>>>>apart from the fact that unless he is an active shooter pulling a gun in
>>>>that situation would likely lead to more deaths/injuries.
>>>
>>> Maybe but in the university killing if a person had done the same how
>>> many lives would have been saved?
>>
>>probably none if you look at the history of DGU against an active shooter
>
> There is that word again "probably" So you don't know. So your
> going to tell me what to do on a "probably" during a armed robbery. He
> "probably" won't kill anyone. He probable is just a good guy that is
> robbing the place.
Of course I say probably as nothing is absolute
> wrote:
>
>>snip
>>
>>>>apart from the fact that unless he is an active shooter pulling a gun in
>>>>that situation would likely lead to more deaths/injuries.
>>>
>>> Maybe but in the university killing if a person had done the same how
>>> many lives would have been saved?
>>
>>probably none if you look at the history of DGU against an active shooter
>
> There is that word again "probably" So you don't know. So your
> going to tell me what to do on a "probably" during a armed robbery. He
> "probably" won't kill anyone. He probable is just a good guy that is
> robbing the place.
>
>>
>>>
>>> Each situation is different and as I can't read minds or tell the
>>> future no laws will make things better. Armed robbery already
>>> illegal.
>>
>>I used to do the night shif at a servo when I was a Uni, if threatened I
>>was
>>going to offer to help the bloke carry the stuff to the car.
>
> That is what we suggest. Let them take what they want. Thing is
> clerks still get shot even after doing everything told. There are no
> guarantees no matter what you do.
better kill the bloke on suspision
Olrik
Oct 13, 2015, 12:23:58 AM10/13/15
to
persons with intent to protect us from evil.
> Be the victims for their gun control ads
> Call the police? How many died at that college waiting for the
> police.
You tell me.
> police.
> Calling the police is about as useful as saying to those poor
> people to pray.
>
> Sad so many progressive are pro criminal lately.
Olrik
Oct 13, 2015, 12:27:41 AM10/13/15
to
Le 2015-10-12 07:07, Jeanne Douglas a écrit :
> In article <mvfd3d$7bs$2...@dont-email.me>, Olrik <olri...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Le 2015-10-11 23:52, Mattb. a écrit :
>>> On Sun, 11 Oct 2015 23:35:41 -0400, Olrik <olri...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Le 2015-10-11 22:13, Byker a écrit :
>>>>> "Mohammad" wrote in message news:mvf18q$7ho$1...@news.albasani.net...
>>>>> <snip>
>>>>>
>>>>> Today's good guy with a gun: http://tinyurl.com/nae8756
>>>>
>>>> That killer should be in prison.
>>>
>>> Why do armed robbers have the right to steal?
>>>
>>
>> It's not a matter of «rights», it's a matter of justice.
>>
>> No one can be judge, jury and executioner, which is what you seem to
>> condone.
>
> And robbery is not a capital crime.
They don't care about that. They just want to kill.
> In article <mvfd3d$7bs$2...@dont-email.me>, Olrik <olri...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Le 2015-10-11 23:52, Mattb. a écrit :
>>> On Sun, 11 Oct 2015 23:35:41 -0400, Olrik <olri...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Le 2015-10-11 22:13, Byker a écrit :
>>>>> "Mohammad" wrote in message news:mvf18q$7ho$1...@news.albasani.net...
>>>>> <snip>
>>>>>
>>>>> Today's good guy with a gun: http://tinyurl.com/nae8756
>>>>
>>>> That killer should be in prison.
>>>
>>> Why do armed robbers have the right to steal?
>>>
>>
>> It's not a matter of «rights», it's a matter of justice.
>>
>> No one can be judge, jury and executioner, which is what you seem to
>> condone.
>
> And robbery is not a capital crime.
Jeanne Douglas
Oct 13, 2015, 6:13:09 AM10/13/15
to
In article <mvi13u$1ii$2...@dont-email.me>, Olrik <olri...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> Le 2015-10-12 07:07, Jeanne Douglas a écrit :
> > In article <mvfd3d$7bs$2...@dont-email.me>, Olrik <olri...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> Le 2015-10-11 23:52, Mattb. a écrit :
> >>> On Sun, 11 Oct 2015 23:35:41 -0400, Olrik <olri...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Le 2015-10-11 22:13, Byker a écrit :
> >>>>> "Mohammad" wrote in message news:mvf18q$7ho$1...@news.albasani.net...
> >>>>> <snip>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Today's good guy with a gun: http://tinyurl.com/nae8756
> >>>>
> >>>> That killer should be in prison.
> >>>
> >>> Why do armed robbers have the right to steal?
> >>>
> >>
> >> It's not a matter of «rights», it's a matter of justice.
> >>
> >> No one can be judge, jury and executioner, which is what you seem to
> >> condone.
> >
> > And robbery is not a capital crime.
>
> They don't care about that. They just want to kill.
I know. They don't have a clue how it changes a person.
> Le 2015-10-12 07:07, Jeanne Douglas a écrit :
> > In article <mvfd3d$7bs$2...@dont-email.me>, Olrik <olri...@gmail.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> >> Le 2015-10-11 23:52, Mattb. a écrit :
> >>> On Sun, 11 Oct 2015 23:35:41 -0400, Olrik <olri...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Le 2015-10-11 22:13, Byker a écrit :
> >>>>> "Mohammad" wrote in message news:mvf18q$7ho$1...@news.albasani.net...
> >>>>> <snip>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Today's good guy with a gun: http://tinyurl.com/nae8756
> >>>>
> >>>> That killer should be in prison.
> >>>
> >>> Why do armed robbers have the right to steal?
> >>>
> >>
> >> It's not a matter of «rights», it's a matter of justice.
> >>
> >> No one can be judge, jury and executioner, which is what you seem to
> >> condone.
> >
> > And robbery is not a capital crime.
>
> They don't care about that. They just want to kill.
Jeanne Douglas
Oct 13, 2015, 6:27:41 AM10/13/15
to
In article <mvi0sv$1ii$1...@dont-email.me>, Olrik <olri...@gmail.com>
Gawd, Mattie's a stupid little bitch, isn't he? His straw men are
stupid. His attempts at passive aggression are stupid.
stupid. His attempts at passive aggression are stupid.
Bert
Oct 13, 2015, 10:25:49 AM10/13/15
to
In news:S_udnUB0kPbdvYHL...@westnet.com.au "dechucka"
--
be...@iphouse.com St. Paul, MN
<dech...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> snip
>
>>>apart from the fact that unless he is an active shooter pulling a gun
>>>in that situation would likely lead to more deaths/injuries.
>>
>> Maybe but in the university killing if a person had done the same how
>> many lives would have been saved?
>
> probably none if you look at the history of DGU against an active
> shooter
So calling in the police was a waste of time?
> snip
>
>>>apart from the fact that unless he is an active shooter pulling a gun
>>>in that situation would likely lead to more deaths/injuries.
>>
>> Maybe but in the university killing if a person had done the same how
>> many lives would have been saved?
>
> probably none if you look at the history of DGU against an active
> shooter
--
be...@iphouse.com St. Paul, MN
MattB
Oct 13, 2015, 3:48:48 PM10/13/15
to
owned.
>
>> Be the victims for their gun control ads
>> Call the police? How many died at that college waiting for the
>> police.
>
>You tell me.
>
>> Calling the police is about as useful as saying to those poor
>> people to pray.
>>
>> Sad so many progressive are pro criminal lately.
>
>I want guns in the fewest people hands as possible : police and criminals.
Where I live most people are armed and we haven't had a murder for a
decade. So is the gun or is it the attitude aka culture of the people
in certain areas?.
MattB
Oct 13, 2015, 3:55:28 PM10/13/15
to
hominem and that is about the only time she responds.
Olrik. For the record I understand what you are saying and in many
areas that would work in others the criminals would just take over.
Chicago, Baltimore, LA, even Portland and Seattle. We need to also
change the culture to where life matters and stop excusing murderers.
dechucka
Oct 13, 2015, 10:00:56 PM10/13/15
to
Olrik
Oct 14, 2015, 12:18:20 AM10/14/15
to
people are armed, and there are lots of murders.
> So is the gun or is it the attitude aka culture of the people
> in certain areas?.
MattB
Oct 14, 2015, 1:05:26 PM10/14/15
to
it was just gun then it would be everywhere..
With high murder cities most are liberal.
Fran Farmer
Oct 14, 2015, 9:03:07 PM10/14/15
to
On 15/10/2015 4:05 AM, MattB wrote:
> With high murder cities most are liberal.
Really?
> With high murder cities most are liberal.
http://politicsthatwork.com/graphs/gun-deaths-by-state
Petzl
Oct 15, 2015, 5:01:39 AM10/15/15
to
Country Australia
% of homicides by firearm 11.5
Number of homicides by firearm 30
Homicide by firearm rate per 100,000 pop 0.14
Rank by rate of ownership 42
Average firearms per 100 people 15
Average total all civilian firearms 3,050,000
Country United States
% of homicides by firearm 60
Number of homicides by firearm 9,146
Homicide by firearm rate per 100,000 pop 2.97
Rank by rate of ownership 1
Average firearms per 100 people 88.8
Average total all civilian firearms 270,000,000
--
Petzl
We are advised to NOT judge ALL Moslems by the actions of a few lunatics, but we are encouraged to judge ALL gun owners by the actions of a few lunatics. Funny how that works.
Fran Farmer
Oct 15, 2015, 6:02:39 AM10/15/15
to
On 15/10/2015 8:01 PM, Petzl wrote:
> On Thu, 15 Oct 2015 12:02:51 +1100, Fran Farmer
> <a...@maybeitwillbeforthcoming.com> wrote:
>
>> On 15/10/2015 4:05 AM, MattB wrote:
>>
>>> With high murder cities most are liberal.
>>
>> Really?
>> http://politicsthatwork.com/graphs/gun-deaths-by-state
>
>
> http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2012/jul/22/gun-homicides-ownership-world-list
Petz do try to learn to follow the thread!! If you do ever manage to do
> On Thu, 15 Oct 2015 12:02:51 +1100, Fran Farmer
> <a...@maybeitwillbeforthcoming.com> wrote:
>
>> On 15/10/2015 4:05 AM, MattB wrote:
>>
>>> With high murder cities most are liberal.
>>
>> Really?
>> http://politicsthatwork.com/graphs/gun-deaths-by-state
>
>
> http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2012/jul/22/gun-homicides-ownership-world-list
that, your reponss may (although that would be unlikely given your usual
form) relate in some way to something someone has written and to which
you post in response.
MattB
Oct 15, 2015, 11:39:06 AM10/15/15
to
harry k
Oct 15, 2015, 12:10:47 PM10/15/15
to
Doesn't have to be a "self defense" position. It is legal to use a gun to end a threat to another person.
Harry K
Harry K
Trevor Wilson
Oct 15, 2015, 3:47:13 PM10/15/15
to
states. There are no customs checks. That means the jurisdiction with
the most lax gun control laws will influence the jurisdictions with the
toughest. That said, even the US jurisdictions with the toughest gun
control laws, are laughably lax compared with Australia's and all the
other Western, developed nations.
--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
MattB
Oct 15, 2015, 4:12:40 PM10/15/15
to
On Fri, 16 Oct 2015 06:46:45 +1100, Trevor Wilson
<tre...@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote:
>On 16/10/2015 2:39 AM, MattB wrote:
>> On Thu, 15 Oct 2015 12:02:51 +1100, Fran Farmer
>> <a...@maybeitwillbeforthcoming.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 15/10/2015 4:05 AM, MattB wrote:
>>>
>>>> With high murder cities most are liberal.
>>>
>>> Really?
>>> http://politicsthatwork.com/graphs/gun-deaths-by-state
>>
>>
>> I said Cities, That link is about States. You need to try again.
>>
>
>**Irrelevant. The US allows free trade and movement of people between
>states. There are no customs checks. That means the jurisdiction with
>the most lax gun control laws will influence the jurisdictions with the
>toughest. That said, even the US jurisdictions with the toughest gun
>control laws, are laughably lax compared with Australia's and all the
>other Western, developed nations.
So because inner city people are idiots without any respect for human
<tre...@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote:
>On 16/10/2015 2:39 AM, MattB wrote:
>> On Thu, 15 Oct 2015 12:02:51 +1100, Fran Farmer
>> <a...@maybeitwillbeforthcoming.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 15/10/2015 4:05 AM, MattB wrote:
>>>
>>>> With high murder cities most are liberal.
>>>
>>> Really?
>>> http://politicsthatwork.com/graphs/gun-deaths-by-state
>>
>>
>> I said Cities, That link is about States. You need to try again.
>>
>
>**Irrelevant. The US allows free trade and movement of people between
>states. There are no customs checks. That means the jurisdiction with
>the most lax gun control laws will influence the jurisdictions with the
>toughest. That said, even the US jurisdictions with the toughest gun
>control laws, are laughably lax compared with Australia's and all the
>other Western, developed nations.
life the rest of us should be punished. I'd rather they just go door
to door in high crime areas and take the guns by force.
Trevor Wilson
Oct 15, 2015, 4:44:37 PM10/15/15
to
and far fewer people get shot to death. Win-win. Bad gun control
legislation (such as that which exists across the entire US) punishes
the entire community. It does so in the following ways:
* Every homicide costs all US taxpayers around US$1 million in police
investigations, coroner's reports, etc.
* Every gunshot injury costs all US taxpayers in hospital and
rehabilitation costs.
* Every gunshot incident costs all US taxpayers in court costs and
incarceration costs for the perps.
* Every gunshot incident costs the community lost productivity.
* Americans live in a constant state of fear.
The entire US public is being punished by those who want unfettered
ownership of guns.
I'd rather they just go door
> to door in high crime areas and take the guns by force.
>
MattB
Oct 15, 2015, 4:50:37 PM10/15/15
to
On Fri, 16 Oct 2015 07:44:05 +1100, Trevor Wilson
Right criminals and owners of illegal weapons. Law abiding people
shouldn't be punished because of a bunch of scum.
shouldn't be punished because of a bunch of scum.
Fran Farmer
Oct 15, 2015, 5:39:04 PM10/15/15
to
On 16/10/2015 2:39 AM, MattB wrote:
You made a loose and sloppy statement about the connection between
'liberal' and where gun murders took place. No cite to support your
claim. That made me curious so I went hunting.
What you said is repeated online in opinion pieces (always 'opinion'
pieces!! That sort of sloppy writing irritates me because it says that
the writer doesn't expect his/her reader to be capable of critical
thinking.).
The ONLY cite I came across, and which clearly mentioned States and not
cities, was pointing out the possibility of the direct opposite
happening to what you and the writers of the opinion pieces were
claiming. IF you can support what you say, then give a cite.
So far, you haven't tried at all. You've just provided another opinion.
I really don't care one way or the other about where US murders are
taking place as there are too many people on the planet anyway IMO. I'm
curious and you didn't bother, and still haven't, to support what you
claim. So far, what you've said tells me less than the cite I gave.
Trevor Wilson
Oct 15, 2015, 6:05:45 PM10/15/15
to
they being punished?
dechucka
Oct 15, 2015, 6:23:44 PM10/15/15
to
news:2b402btqktthunrv0...@4ax.com...
Calm down how are you being punished? What guns would you like to have and
why?
why?
dechucka
Oct 15, 2015, 6:26:49 PM10/15/15
to
"Trevor Wilson" <tre...@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote in message
news:d8am9l...@mid.individual.net...
Petzl
Oct 15, 2015, 9:09:26 PM10/15/15
to
On Thu, 15 Oct 2015 21:02:24 +1100, Fran Farmer
Australia that only allows criminals guns is not far behind!
Particualy in that statistics are not from LEGAL gun owners if illegal
guns comitting homicide what are the Australian figures then?
<a...@maybeitwillbeforthcoming.com> wrote:
>On 15/10/2015 8:01 PM, Petzl wrote:
>> On Thu, 15 Oct 2015 12:02:51 +1100, Fran Farmer
>> <a...@maybeitwillbeforthcoming.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 15/10/2015 4:05 AM, MattB wrote:
>>>
>>>> With high murder cities most are liberal.
>>>
>>> Really?
>>> http://politicsthatwork.com/graphs/gun-deaths-by-state
>>
>>
>> http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2012/jul/22/gun-homicides-ownership-world-list
>
>Petz do try to learn to follow the thread!! If you do ever manage to do
>that, your reponss may (although that would be unlikely given your usual
>form) relate in some way to something someone has written and to which
>you post in response.
Just telling the truth the USA is 28th place in gun homicides
>On 15/10/2015 8:01 PM, Petzl wrote:
>> On Thu, 15 Oct 2015 12:02:51 +1100, Fran Farmer
>> <a...@maybeitwillbeforthcoming.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 15/10/2015 4:05 AM, MattB wrote:
>>>
>>>> With high murder cities most are liberal.
>>>
>>> Really?
>>> http://politicsthatwork.com/graphs/gun-deaths-by-state
>>
>>
>> http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2012/jul/22/gun-homicides-ownership-world-list
>
>Petz do try to learn to follow the thread!! If you do ever manage to do
>that, your reponss may (although that would be unlikely given your usual
>form) relate in some way to something someone has written and to which
>you post in response.
Australia that only allows criminals guns is not far behind!
Particualy in that statistics are not from LEGAL gun owners if illegal
guns comitting homicide what are the Australian figures then?
Cloud Hobbit
Oct 15, 2015, 9:36:40 PM10/15/15
to
On Sunday, October 11, 2015 at 6:09:49 PM UTC-7, Mohammad wrote:
> The NRA is wrong: Owning a gun is far more likely to harm you than protect
> you.
> By Evan DeFilippis and Devin Hughes
>
>
>
> Wayne LaPierre of the National Rifle Association issued a passionate call to
> arms last year, painting a bleak picture of a dystopian America on the brink
> of collapse:
>
> We know, in the world that surrounds us, there are terrorists and home
> invaders and drug cartels and car-jackers and knock-out gamers and rapers,
> haters, campus killers, airport killers, shopping-mall killers, road-rage
> killers, and killers who scheme to destroy our country with massive storms of
> violence against our power grids, or vicious waves of chemicals or disease
> that could collapse the society that sustains us all.
>
> LaPierre's central message: Owning a gun is the solution. The world is a scary
> place. There are bad guys everywhere threatening you and your family, and the
> only thing they're afraid of is a gun in your hands.
>
> Tragically, a record number of Americans subscribe to some version of this
> mythology, with 63 percent (67 percent of men polled and 58 percent of women)
> believing that guns truly do make them safer. The public's confidence in
> firearms, however, is woefully misguided: The evidence overwhelmingly shows
> that guns leave everybody less safe, including their owners.
>
> A study from October 2013 analyzed data from 27 developed nations to examine
> the impact of firearm prevalence on the mortality rate. It found an extremely
> strong direct relationship between the number of firearms and firearm deaths.
> The paper concludes: "The current study debunks the widely quoted hypothesis
> that guns make a nation safer." This finding is bolstered by several previous
> studies that have revealed a significant link between gun ownership and
> firearm-related deaths. This international comparison is especially harrowing
> for women and children, who die from gun violence in America at far higher
> rates than in other countries.
>
> Gun advocates often retreat to an "it could never happen to me" mentality.
>
> Behind such horrifying statistics are numerous heartbreaking tragedies, such
> as Zina Daniel, a woman from Illinois who was killed by her abusive
> ex-husband, or Caroline Sparks, who was only 2 when her 5-year-old brother
> accidentally killed her with his Crickett rifle.
>
> If we examine data from within the United States, the odds aren't any better
> for gun owners. The most recent study examining the relationship between
> firearms and homicide rates on a state level, published last April, found a
> significant positive relationship between gun ownership and overall homicide
> levels. Using data from 1981-2010 and the best firearm ownership proxy to
> date, the study found that for every 1 percent increase in gun ownership,
> there was a 1.1 percent increase in the firearm homicide rate and a 0.7
> percent increase in the total homicide rate. This was after controlling for
> factors such as poverty, unemployment, income inequality, alcohol consumption,
> and nonhomicide violent crime. Further, the firearm ownership rate had no
> statistically significant impact on nonfirearm homicides, meaning there was no
> detectable substitution effect. That is, in the absence of guns, would-be
> criminals are not switching to knives or some other weapons to carry out
> homicide. These results are supported by a host of previous studies that
> illustrate that guns increase the rate of homicides.
> Sandy Hook family members
> Family members who have lost loved ones to gun violence gather with members of
> Congress during a press conference on Dec. 10, 2014, in Washington.
>
> Photo by Win McNamee/Getty Images
>
> The evidence against firearm ownership becomes even stronger when suicides and
> accidents are included in the analysis--guns make both much more likely and
> more fatal. There can be nothing closer to a consensus in the gun debate than
> this point. Indeed, every single case-control study ever conducted in the
> United States has found that gun ownership is a strong risk factor for
> suicide, even after adjusting for aggregate-level measures of suicidality such
> as mental illness, alcoholism, poverty, and so on.
>
> One might accept that firearms are dangerous and that they substantially
> elevate the risk of homicide, suicide, and fatal accidents, but still believe
> that policies regulating gun ownership are ineffective--criminals, after all,
> won't follow them. However, another recent study from May of 2013 analyzed the
> impact of state firearm laws on firearm-related fatalities. It found that the
> most gun-restrictive states have significantly fewer firearm fatalities than
> the states with the least restrictive laws. The results are in line with
> previous academic studies tackling the same question.
>
> These findings are further supported by a case study examining the impact of a
> 2007 Missouri decision to repeal its permit-to-purchase handgun licensing law.
> The research concluded that the repeal was associated with a 16 percent
> increase in annual murder rates, indicating that state gun control laws have a
> significant impact on the homicide rate.
>
> Suppose a criminal has just broken into your house brandishing a firearm. You
> need to protect yourself and your family. Wouldn't anyone feel safer owning a
> gun? This is the kind of narrative propagated by gun advocates in defense of
> firearm ownership. It preys on our fear. Yet, the annual per capita risk of
> death during a home invasion is 0.0000002, which, for all intents and
> purposes, is zero.
>
> Despite the astronomical odds against being killed, this fear of home invasion
> often drives people like Becca Campbell of Ferguson, Missouri, to gun
> ownership. This past November, Campbell was riding home in a car with her
> boyfriend after purchasing a gun, preparing for the unrest expected to follow
> the grand jury decision about whether to pursue criminal charges against the
> policeman who killed Michael Brown. She joked that "we're ready for Ferguson,"
> waving the gun. Distracted, the boyfriend ran into the car ahead of them, and
> the gun fired, killing Campbell.
> 523097351SO00018_GUN_SHOP_N
> Steven King helps a woman shop for a handgun for home defense on Nov. 12,
> 2014, in Bridgeton, Missouri.
>
> Photo by Scott Olson/Getty Images
>
> Moving from state-level analysis to the household or individual, the risks for
> gun owners become even more apparent. A recent meta-analysis of 16 studies
> examined the relationship between firearms and gun deaths. Gun ownership
> doubled the risk of homicide and tripled the risk of suicide. This research is
> bolstered by a national survey that found that a gun in the home was far more
> likely to be used to threaten a family member or intimate partner than to be
> used in self-defense.
>
> Gun advocates may counter that this doesn't reveal the entire picture. After
> all, case studies of these fatal gun incidents can't capture the benefits that
> widespread defensive gun use bestows on society. However, despite the NRA's
> mantra that there are millions of defensive gun uses every year, empirical
> data reveals that DGUs are actually extremely rare. Criminal uses of firearms
> far outnumber legal defensive uses. The evidence shows that there may be fewer
> than even 3,000 DGUs annually. In comparison, there are 30,000 gun deaths
> annually, and many more injuries and shattered lives. The costs of gun
> ownership unequivocally outweigh the benefits.
>
> In light of the overwhelming evidence that guns are a public health threat,
> gun advocates often retreat to an "it could never happen to me" mentality.
> This worldview is tragically mistaken. Consider the case of Veronica
> Dunnachie. She was, by many gun advocates' definition, a good gal with a gun.
> A strident voice for gun rights, she was an open carry advocate, dedicated to
> expanding the unlicensed open carrying of firearms. In Texas, open carry is
> currently restricted to long guns; she pushed to include handguns. She
> frequently attended rallies and protests organized by Open Carry Tarrant
> County (an offshoot of Open Carry Texas). In a domestic dispute on Dec. 10,
> she allegedly shot and killed her husband and stepdaughter. Horrified,
> Dunnachie called a friend, telling him she "had just done something bad" and,
> at his urging, checked herself into a nearby mental health clinic.
>
>
>
>
> Everyone likes to pretend that he or she is more rational, more responsible,
> and more immune to the risks that gun ownership poses relative to the average
> American. Yet, we know from gun violence statistics that many are simply
> misjudging their own competency. Everyone thinks he or she is above average,
> but half are mistaken.
>
> Rather than gangbangers and maniacal criminals going on killing sprees, it is
> cases like Dunnachie's that drive gun violence. FBI data reveal that about
> twice as many homicides result from arguments than from felonies, and gang
> violence is only a small contributor. In a careful study of the relationships
> between homicide victims and perpetrators, analyzing data from 1981-2010,
> Michael Siegel and his colleagues reveal that for every 1 percent increase in
> gun ownership, there is a 0.9 percent increase in nonstranger homicide.
> Although stranger homicide does increase slightly as gun ownership rises, the
> increase is not statistically significant. This indicates that there is no
> deterrence effect from firearm ownership and that a firearm significantly
> increases the owner's chances of killing or being killed by somebody he or she
> knows.
>
>
> Gun advocates may argue that this reality is a consequence of the fact that
> there are too few guns; perhaps nonstranger homicides would be lower if
> everyone you knew were packing heat. Yet a study examining data from the
> National Crime Victimization Survey found that people who used any weapon
> other than a gun for defense were less likely to be harmed than those who used
> a firearm.
>
> So before you purchase a gun for self-defense, please pause to reflect. Your
> weapon is much more likely to end up being used to harm than for good, even if
> you're one of the "good guys." The odds are not in your favor.
>
> Evan DeFilippis writes on public health and gun violence at the Atlantic,
> Huffington Post, Boston Review, and ArmedWithReason. He manages the evaluation
> of poverty-reduction projects in Nairobi, Kenya.
>
> Devin Hughes is the founder of Hughes Capital Management, LLC, a registered
> investment adviser. He writes on gun control issues at ArmedWithReason.
>
> http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/medical_examiner/2015/01/good_guy_with_a_gun_myth_guns_increase_the_risk_of_homicide_accidents_suicide.single.html
Perhaps this research is better than the last time such a claim was made.
Here is a brief bit on their findings for this research: Results
Among the 27 developed countries, there was a significant positive correlation between guns per capita per country and the rate of firearm-related deaths (r = 0.80; P <.0001). In addition, there was a positive correlation (r = 0.52; P = .005) between mental illness burden in a country and firearm-related deaths. However, there was no significant correlation (P = .10) between guns per capita per country and crime rate (r = .33), or between mental illness and crime rate (r = 0.32; P = .11). In a linear regression model with firearm-related deaths as the dependent variable with gun ownership and mental illness as independent covariates, gun ownership was a significant predictor (P <.0001) of firearm-related deaths, whereas mental illness was of borderline significance (P = .05) only.
This is one report, possibly the first to use strict controls and not have a bias. Let's see what peer review says.
> The NRA is wrong: Owning a gun is far more likely to harm you than protect
> you.
> By Evan DeFilippis and Devin Hughes
>
>
>
> Wayne LaPierre of the National Rifle Association issued a passionate call to
> arms last year, painting a bleak picture of a dystopian America on the brink
> of collapse:
>
> We know, in the world that surrounds us, there are terrorists and home
> invaders and drug cartels and car-jackers and knock-out gamers and rapers,
> haters, campus killers, airport killers, shopping-mall killers, road-rage
> killers, and killers who scheme to destroy our country with massive storms of
> violence against our power grids, or vicious waves of chemicals or disease
> that could collapse the society that sustains us all.
>
> LaPierre's central message: Owning a gun is the solution. The world is a scary
> place. There are bad guys everywhere threatening you and your family, and the
> only thing they're afraid of is a gun in your hands.
>
> Tragically, a record number of Americans subscribe to some version of this
> mythology, with 63 percent (67 percent of men polled and 58 percent of women)
> believing that guns truly do make them safer. The public's confidence in
> firearms, however, is woefully misguided: The evidence overwhelmingly shows
> that guns leave everybody less safe, including their owners.
>
> A study from October 2013 analyzed data from 27 developed nations to examine
> the impact of firearm prevalence on the mortality rate. It found an extremely
> strong direct relationship between the number of firearms and firearm deaths.
> The paper concludes: "The current study debunks the widely quoted hypothesis
> that guns make a nation safer." This finding is bolstered by several previous
> studies that have revealed a significant link between gun ownership and
> firearm-related deaths. This international comparison is especially harrowing
> for women and children, who die from gun violence in America at far higher
> rates than in other countries.
>
> Gun advocates often retreat to an "it could never happen to me" mentality.
>
> Behind such horrifying statistics are numerous heartbreaking tragedies, such
> as Zina Daniel, a woman from Illinois who was killed by her abusive
> ex-husband, or Caroline Sparks, who was only 2 when her 5-year-old brother
> accidentally killed her with his Crickett rifle.
>
> If we examine data from within the United States, the odds aren't any better
> for gun owners. The most recent study examining the relationship between
> firearms and homicide rates on a state level, published last April, found a
> significant positive relationship between gun ownership and overall homicide
> levels. Using data from 1981-2010 and the best firearm ownership proxy to
> date, the study found that for every 1 percent increase in gun ownership,
> there was a 1.1 percent increase in the firearm homicide rate and a 0.7
> percent increase in the total homicide rate. This was after controlling for
> factors such as poverty, unemployment, income inequality, alcohol consumption,
> and nonhomicide violent crime. Further, the firearm ownership rate had no
> statistically significant impact on nonfirearm homicides, meaning there was no
> detectable substitution effect. That is, in the absence of guns, would-be
> criminals are not switching to knives or some other weapons to carry out
> homicide. These results are supported by a host of previous studies that
> illustrate that guns increase the rate of homicides.
> Sandy Hook family members
> Family members who have lost loved ones to gun violence gather with members of
> Congress during a press conference on Dec. 10, 2014, in Washington.
>
> Photo by Win McNamee/Getty Images
>
> The evidence against firearm ownership becomes even stronger when suicides and
> accidents are included in the analysis--guns make both much more likely and
> more fatal. There can be nothing closer to a consensus in the gun debate than
> this point. Indeed, every single case-control study ever conducted in the
> United States has found that gun ownership is a strong risk factor for
> suicide, even after adjusting for aggregate-level measures of suicidality such
> as mental illness, alcoholism, poverty, and so on.
>
> One might accept that firearms are dangerous and that they substantially
> elevate the risk of homicide, suicide, and fatal accidents, but still believe
> that policies regulating gun ownership are ineffective--criminals, after all,
> won't follow them. However, another recent study from May of 2013 analyzed the
> impact of state firearm laws on firearm-related fatalities. It found that the
> most gun-restrictive states have significantly fewer firearm fatalities than
> the states with the least restrictive laws. The results are in line with
> previous academic studies tackling the same question.
>
> These findings are further supported by a case study examining the impact of a
> 2007 Missouri decision to repeal its permit-to-purchase handgun licensing law.
> The research concluded that the repeal was associated with a 16 percent
> increase in annual murder rates, indicating that state gun control laws have a
> significant impact on the homicide rate.
>
> Suppose a criminal has just broken into your house brandishing a firearm. You
> need to protect yourself and your family. Wouldn't anyone feel safer owning a
> gun? This is the kind of narrative propagated by gun advocates in defense of
> firearm ownership. It preys on our fear. Yet, the annual per capita risk of
> death during a home invasion is 0.0000002, which, for all intents and
> purposes, is zero.
>
> Despite the astronomical odds against being killed, this fear of home invasion
> often drives people like Becca Campbell of Ferguson, Missouri, to gun
> ownership. This past November, Campbell was riding home in a car with her
> boyfriend after purchasing a gun, preparing for the unrest expected to follow
> the grand jury decision about whether to pursue criminal charges against the
> policeman who killed Michael Brown. She joked that "we're ready for Ferguson,"
> waving the gun. Distracted, the boyfriend ran into the car ahead of them, and
> the gun fired, killing Campbell.
> 523097351SO00018_GUN_SHOP_N
> Steven King helps a woman shop for a handgun for home defense on Nov. 12,
> 2014, in Bridgeton, Missouri.
>
> Photo by Scott Olson/Getty Images
>
> Moving from state-level analysis to the household or individual, the risks for
> gun owners become even more apparent. A recent meta-analysis of 16 studies
> examined the relationship between firearms and gun deaths. Gun ownership
> doubled the risk of homicide and tripled the risk of suicide. This research is
> bolstered by a national survey that found that a gun in the home was far more
> likely to be used to threaten a family member or intimate partner than to be
> used in self-defense.
>
> Gun advocates may counter that this doesn't reveal the entire picture. After
> all, case studies of these fatal gun incidents can't capture the benefits that
> widespread defensive gun use bestows on society. However, despite the NRA's
> mantra that there are millions of defensive gun uses every year, empirical
> data reveals that DGUs are actually extremely rare. Criminal uses of firearms
> far outnumber legal defensive uses. The evidence shows that there may be fewer
> than even 3,000 DGUs annually. In comparison, there are 30,000 gun deaths
> annually, and many more injuries and shattered lives. The costs of gun
> ownership unequivocally outweigh the benefits.
>
> In light of the overwhelming evidence that guns are a public health threat,
> gun advocates often retreat to an "it could never happen to me" mentality.
> This worldview is tragically mistaken. Consider the case of Veronica
> Dunnachie. She was, by many gun advocates' definition, a good gal with a gun.
> A strident voice for gun rights, she was an open carry advocate, dedicated to
> expanding the unlicensed open carrying of firearms. In Texas, open carry is
> currently restricted to long guns; she pushed to include handguns. She
> frequently attended rallies and protests organized by Open Carry Tarrant
> County (an offshoot of Open Carry Texas). In a domestic dispute on Dec. 10,
> she allegedly shot and killed her husband and stepdaughter. Horrified,
> Dunnachie called a friend, telling him she "had just done something bad" and,
> at his urging, checked herself into a nearby mental health clinic.
>
>
>
>
> Everyone likes to pretend that he or she is more rational, more responsible,
> and more immune to the risks that gun ownership poses relative to the average
> American. Yet, we know from gun violence statistics that many are simply
> misjudging their own competency. Everyone thinks he or she is above average,
> but half are mistaken.
>
> Rather than gangbangers and maniacal criminals going on killing sprees, it is
> cases like Dunnachie's that drive gun violence. FBI data reveal that about
> twice as many homicides result from arguments than from felonies, and gang
> violence is only a small contributor. In a careful study of the relationships
> between homicide victims and perpetrators, analyzing data from 1981-2010,
> Michael Siegel and his colleagues reveal that for every 1 percent increase in
> gun ownership, there is a 0.9 percent increase in nonstranger homicide.
> Although stranger homicide does increase slightly as gun ownership rises, the
> increase is not statistically significant. This indicates that there is no
> deterrence effect from firearm ownership and that a firearm significantly
> increases the owner's chances of killing or being killed by somebody he or she
> knows.
>
>
> Gun advocates may argue that this reality is a consequence of the fact that
> there are too few guns; perhaps nonstranger homicides would be lower if
> everyone you knew were packing heat. Yet a study examining data from the
> National Crime Victimization Survey found that people who used any weapon
> other than a gun for defense were less likely to be harmed than those who used
> a firearm.
>
> So before you purchase a gun for self-defense, please pause to reflect. Your
> weapon is much more likely to end up being used to harm than for good, even if
> you're one of the "good guys." The odds are not in your favor.
>
> Evan DeFilippis writes on public health and gun violence at the Atlantic,
> Huffington Post, Boston Review, and ArmedWithReason. He manages the evaluation
> of poverty-reduction projects in Nairobi, Kenya.
>
> Devin Hughes is the founder of Hughes Capital Management, LLC, a registered
> investment adviser. He writes on gun control issues at ArmedWithReason.
>
> http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/medical_examiner/2015/01/good_guy_with_a_gun_myth_guns_increase_the_risk_of_homicide_accidents_suicide.single.html
Perhaps this research is better than the last time such a claim was made.
Here is a brief bit on their findings for this research: Results
Among the 27 developed countries, there was a significant positive correlation between guns per capita per country and the rate of firearm-related deaths (r = 0.80; P <.0001). In addition, there was a positive correlation (r = 0.52; P = .005) between mental illness burden in a country and firearm-related deaths. However, there was no significant correlation (P = .10) between guns per capita per country and crime rate (r = .33), or between mental illness and crime rate (r = 0.32; P = .11). In a linear regression model with firearm-related deaths as the dependent variable with gun ownership and mental illness as independent covariates, gun ownership was a significant predictor (P <.0001) of firearm-related deaths, whereas mental illness was of borderline significance (P = .05) only.
This is one report, possibly the first to use strict controls and not have a bias. Let's see what peer review says.
Cloud Hobbit
Oct 15, 2015, 9:39:22 PM10/15/15
to
On Sunday, October 11, 2015 at 8:35:51 PM UTC-7, Olrik wrote:
> Le 2015-10-11 22:13, Byker a écrit :
> > "Mohammad" wrote in message news:mvf18q$7ho$1...@news.albasani.net...
> > <snip>
> >
> > Today's good guy with a gun: http://tinyurl.com/nae8756
>
> That killer should be in prison.
>
WHY?
> Le 2015-10-11 22:13, Byker a écrit :
> > "Mohammad" wrote in message news:mvf18q$7ho$1...@news.albasani.net...
> > <snip>
> >
> > Today's good guy with a gun: http://tinyurl.com/nae8756
>
> That killer should be in prison.
>
Cloud Hobbit
Oct 15, 2015, 9:46:25 PM10/15/15
to
On Sunday, October 11, 2015 at 9:33:49 PM UTC-7, Olrik wrote:
> Le 2015-10-11 23:52, Mattb. a écrit :
> Le 2015-10-11 23:52, Mattb. a écrit :
> > On Sun, 11 Oct 2015 23:35:41 -0400, Olrik <olri...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Le 2015-10-11 22:13, Byker a écrit :
> >>> "Mohammad" wrote in message news:mvf18q$7ho$1...@news.albasani.net...
> >>> <snip>
> >>>
> >>> Today's good guy with a gun: http://tinyurl.com/nae8756
> >>
> >> That killer should be in prison.
> >
> >
> >> Le 2015-10-11 22:13, Byker a écrit :
> >>> "Mohammad" wrote in message news:mvf18q$7ho$1...@news.albasani.net...
> >>> <snip>
> >>>
> >>> Today's good guy with a gun: http://tinyurl.com/nae8756
> >>
> >> That killer should be in prison.
> >
> > Why do armed robbers have the right to steal?
> >
>
> It's not a matter of «rights», it's a matter of justice.
>
> No one can be judge, jury and executioner, which is what you seem to
> condone.
>
You can be if it means you die if you don't make all those choices, and make them fast.
> >
>
> It's not a matter of «rights», it's a matter of justice.
>
> No one can be judge, jury and executioner, which is what you seem to
> condone.
>
In my mind if someone comes into any business with a firearm in his hand, that person is asking to be given something they do not deserve and did not earn, and they are ready to kill to get it. If they are not ready for the possibility that someone else may have a legal gun and shoot them instead, then they should have stayed home and checked the want ads.
Cloud Hobbit
Oct 15, 2015, 9:48:31 PM10/15/15
to
On Sunday, October 11, 2015 at 10:21:00 PM UTC-7, Olrik wrote:
> Le 2015-10-12 01:14, Mattb. a écrit :
> > On Mon, 12 Oct 2015 00:58:56 -0400, Olrik <olri...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Le 2015-10-12 00:43, Mattb. a écrit :
> Le 2015-10-12 01:14, Mattb. a écrit :
> > On Mon, 12 Oct 2015 00:58:56 -0400, Olrik <olri...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> Le 2015-10-12 00:43, Mattb. a écrit :
> >>> On Mon, 12 Oct 2015 00:33:39 -0400, Olrik <olri...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> Le 2015-10-11 23:52, Mattb. a écrit :
> >>>>> On Sun, 11 Oct 2015 23:35:41 -0400, Olrik <olri...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> Le 2015-10-11 22:13, Byker a écrit :
> >>>>>>> "Mohammad" wrote in message news:mvf18q$7ho$1...@news.albasani.net...
> >>>>>>> <snip>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Today's good guy with a gun: http://tinyurl.com/nae8756
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> That killer should be in prison.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Why do armed robbers have the right to steal?
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> It's not a matter of «rights», it's a matter of justice.
> >>>>
> >>>> No one can be judge, jury and executioner, which is what you seem to
> >>>> condone.
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>> Le 2015-10-11 23:52, Mattb. a écrit :
> >>>>> On Sun, 11 Oct 2015 23:35:41 -0400, Olrik <olri...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> Le 2015-10-11 22:13, Byker a écrit :
> >>>>>>> "Mohammad" wrote in message news:mvf18q$7ho$1...@news.albasani.net...
> >>>>>>> <snip>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Today's good guy with a gun: http://tinyurl.com/nae8756
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> That killer should be in prison.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Why do armed robbers have the right to steal?
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> It's not a matter of «rights», it's a matter of justice.
> >>>>
> >>>> No one can be judge, jury and executioner, which is what you seem to
> >>>> condone.
> >>>
> --
> Olrik
> aa #1981
> EAC Chief Food Inspector, Bacon Division
I'd rather make sure that no innocents get shot.
> Olrik
> aa #1981
> EAC Chief Food Inspector, Bacon Division
Cloud Hobbit
Oct 15, 2015, 9:50:04 PM10/15/15
to
On Monday, October 12, 2015 at 12:12:38 AM UTC-7, Andrew wrote:
> "Joe Bruno" wrote in message news:18d26905-bc76-4f46...@googlegroups.com...
>
> > Myth?Twice, my guns have saved me, personally,
> > from harm. Fuck the statistics.
>
> Historically tyrants first take guns away from
> the populace before they enslave the masses.
>
> The 2nd amendment was designed to prevent
> this, but times are fast changing.
First the guns, then they fuck with the money.
> "Joe Bruno" wrote in message news:18d26905-bc76-4f46...@googlegroups.com...
>
> > Myth?Twice, my guns have saved me, personally,
> > from harm. Fuck the statistics.
>
> Historically tyrants first take guns away from
> the populace before they enslave the masses.
>
> The 2nd amendment was designed to prevent
> this, but times are fast changing.
First the guns, then they fuck with the money.
Fran Farmer
Oct 15, 2015, 10:16:11 PM10/15/15
to
On 16/10/2015 12:09 PM, Petzl wrote:
> On Thu, 15 Oct 2015 21:02:24 +1100, Fran Farmer
> <a...@maybeitwillbeforthcoming.com> wrote:
>
>> On 15/10/2015 8:01 PM, Petzl wrote:
>>> On Thu, 15 Oct 2015 12:02:51 +1100, Fran Farmer
>>> <a...@maybeitwillbeforthcoming.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 15/10/2015 4:05 AM, MattB wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> With high murder cities most are liberal.
>>>>
>>>> Really?
>>>> http://politicsthatwork.com/graphs/gun-deaths-by-state
>>>
>>>
>>> http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2012/jul/22/gun-homicides-ownership-world-list
>>
>> Petz do try to learn to follow the thread!! If you do ever manage to do
>> that, your reponss may (although that would be unlikely given your usual
>> form) relate in some way to something someone has written and to which
>> you post in response.
>
> Just telling the truth the USA is 28th place in gun homicides
That has nothing at all to do with my post. If you want to make a
> On Thu, 15 Oct 2015 21:02:24 +1100, Fran Farmer
> <a...@maybeitwillbeforthcoming.com> wrote:
>
>> On 15/10/2015 8:01 PM, Petzl wrote:
>>> On Thu, 15 Oct 2015 12:02:51 +1100, Fran Farmer
>>> <a...@maybeitwillbeforthcoming.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 15/10/2015 4:05 AM, MattB wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> With high murder cities most are liberal.
>>>>
>>>> Really?
>>>> http://politicsthatwork.com/graphs/gun-deaths-by-state
>>>
>>>
>>> http://www.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2012/jul/22/gun-homicides-ownership-world-list
>>
>> Petz do try to learn to follow the thread!! If you do ever manage to do
>> that, your reponss may (although that would be unlikely given your usual
>> form) relate in some way to something someone has written and to which
>> you post in response.
>
> Just telling the truth the USA is 28th place in gun homicides
point, post in the thread in a spot where you have some chance of
looking like you understand what has been said and tha tyou are
following the thread.
> Australia that only allows criminals guns is not far behind!
MattB
Oct 15, 2015, 10:51:32 PM10/15/15
to
On Fri, 16 Oct 2015 08:38:46 +1100, Fran Farmer
Baltimore, Ferguson, St Louis, Detroit, L.A. and the like. Look at
murders in those cities for say last month? Look at the spike in the
rates in Portland, Ore and Seattle for the last year.
Evidence is there and easy to see. Unless you have a agenda and are
biased.
Then you can look at this.
http://www.neighborhoodscout.com/top-lists/highest-murder-rate-cities/
This article shows the cities where it is raising murder rates that is
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/01/us/murder-rates-rising-sharply-in-many-us-cities.html
The evidence is there if you just look.
>What you said is repeated online in opinion pieces (always 'opinion'
>pieces!! That sort of sloppy writing irritates me because it says that
>the writer doesn't expect his/her reader to be capable of critical
>thinking.).
>
>The ONLY cite I came across, and which clearly mentioned States and not
>cities, was pointing out the possibility of the direct opposite
>happening to what you and the writers of the opinion pieces were
>claiming. IF you can support what you say, then give a cite.
>
>So far, you haven't tried at all. You've just provided another opinion.
> I really don't care one way or the other about where US murders are
>taking place as there are too many people on the planet anyway IMO. I'm
>curious and you didn't bother, and still haven't, to support what you
>claim. So far, what you've said tells me less than the cite I gave.
Was it Gary or Wy that tried to use this same thing of substituting
State for City.
Personally I like the Harvard Study.
http://www.law.harvard.edu/students/orgs/jlpp/Vol30_No2_KatesMauseronline.pdf
I'm just saying the main problem isn't the guns it is the culture of
the inner cites and much of the youth of America. Gangs IMO are a
result of a liberal education.
Most people here are armed and we have little to no crime and haven't
had a murder in a decade. Most the people are Democrats also. So why
is that if guns are the main problem?
<a...@maybeitwillbeforthcoming.com> wrote:
>On 16/10/2015 2:39 AM, MattB wrote:
>> On Thu, 15 Oct 2015 12:02:51 +1100, Fran Farmer
>> <a...@maybeitwillbeforthcoming.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 15/10/2015 4:05 AM, MattB wrote:
>>>
>>>> With high murder cities most are liberal.
>>>
>>> Really?
>>> http://politicsthatwork.com/graphs/gun-deaths-by-state
>>
>>
>> I said Cities, That link is about States. You need to try again.
>
>You obviously missed the point.
>
>You made a loose and sloppy statement about the connection between
>'liberal' and where gun murders took place. No cite to support your
>claim. That made me curious so I went hunting.
Lets see try looking at murder rates of cities like East Chicago,
>On 16/10/2015 2:39 AM, MattB wrote:
>> On Thu, 15 Oct 2015 12:02:51 +1100, Fran Farmer
>> <a...@maybeitwillbeforthcoming.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On 15/10/2015 4:05 AM, MattB wrote:
>>>
>>>> With high murder cities most are liberal.
>>>
>>> Really?
>>> http://politicsthatwork.com/graphs/gun-deaths-by-state
>>
>>
>> I said Cities, That link is about States. You need to try again.
>
>You obviously missed the point.
>
>You made a loose and sloppy statement about the connection between
>'liberal' and where gun murders took place. No cite to support your
>claim. That made me curious so I went hunting.
Baltimore, Ferguson, St Louis, Detroit, L.A. and the like. Look at
murders in those cities for say last month? Look at the spike in the
rates in Portland, Ore and Seattle for the last year.
Evidence is there and easy to see. Unless you have a agenda and are
biased.
Then you can look at this.
http://www.neighborhoodscout.com/top-lists/highest-murder-rate-cities/
This article shows the cities where it is raising murder rates that is
http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/01/us/murder-rates-rising-sharply-in-many-us-cities.html
The evidence is there if you just look.
>What you said is repeated online in opinion pieces (always 'opinion'
>pieces!! That sort of sloppy writing irritates me because it says that
>the writer doesn't expect his/her reader to be capable of critical
>thinking.).
>
>The ONLY cite I came across, and which clearly mentioned States and not
>cities, was pointing out the possibility of the direct opposite
>happening to what you and the writers of the opinion pieces were
>claiming. IF you can support what you say, then give a cite.
>
>So far, you haven't tried at all. You've just provided another opinion.
> I really don't care one way or the other about where US murders are
>taking place as there are too many people on the planet anyway IMO. I'm
>curious and you didn't bother, and still haven't, to support what you
>claim. So far, what you've said tells me less than the cite I gave.
State for City.
Personally I like the Harvard Study.
http://www.law.harvard.edu/students/orgs/jlpp/Vol30_No2_KatesMauseronline.pdf
I'm just saying the main problem isn't the guns it is the culture of
the inner cites and much of the youth of America. Gangs IMO are a
result of a liberal education.
Most people here are armed and we have little to no crime and haven't
had a murder in a decade. Most the people are Democrats also. So why
is that if guns are the main problem?
MattB
Oct 15, 2015, 10:54:28 PM10/15/15
to
On Fri, 16 Oct 2015 09:05:18 +1100, Trevor Wilson
Lets see maybe we have to have our current rights changed because of a
bunch of lowlife scumbags.
Wonder what percentage of the murders are directly linked to gang
violence in the USA?
bunch of lowlife scumbags.
Wonder what percentage of the murders are directly linked to gang
violence in the USA?
MattB
Oct 15, 2015, 10:55:36 PM10/15/15
to
On Fri, 16 Oct 2015 09:23:34 +1100, "dechucka" <dech...@hotmail.com>
wrote:
All the ones I bought legally. What you suggesting confiscation is
possible?
wrote:
possible?
Trevor Wilson
Oct 15, 2015, 11:59:26 PM10/15/15
to
>
> Wonder what percentage of the murders are directly linked to gang
> violence in the USA?
gang violence in Australia, Germany, the UK, France, etc?
Answer my question now please.
Olrik
Oct 16, 2015, 12:07:45 AM10/16/15
to
MattB
Oct 16, 2015, 12:26:37 AM10/16/15
to
On Fri, 16 Oct 2015 14:58:56 +1100, Trevor Wilson
OK My bad but how will you enforce these laws without restricting the
current rights of the law abiding citizens?
problem. France it might be terrorist problem.
and control and California even wants to confiscate certain items
legal today. I believe the long term goal is to is confiscation.
Now if they want expanded background checks I would agree to that as
long as they don't use it to start a federal registry. Never trust a
liberal is my motto.
current rights of the law abiding citizens?
>
>>
>> Wonder what percentage of the murders are directly linked to gang
>> violence in the USA?
>
>**No idea. I wonder what percentage of murders are directly linked to
>gang violence in Australia, Germany, the UK, France, etc?
I'd say most maybe. When I was in England seems they had a gang
>>
>> Wonder what percentage of the murders are directly linked to gang
>> violence in the USA?
>
>**No idea. I wonder what percentage of murders are directly linked to
>gang violence in Australia, Germany, the UK, France, etc?
problem. France it might be terrorist problem.
>
>Answer my question now please.
If you are talking on the above. The Gun grabbers they want to limit
>Answer my question now please.
and control and California even wants to confiscate certain items
legal today. I believe the long term goal is to is confiscation.
Now if they want expanded background checks I would agree to that as
long as they don't use it to start a federal registry. Never trust a
liberal is my motto.
Jeanne Douglas
Oct 16, 2015, 1:07:12 AM10/16/15
to
In article <d9f18ded-1aab-4b21...@googlegroups.com>,
Because he murdered someone.
--
JD
I¹ve officially given up trying to find the bottom
of the barrel that is Republican depravity.--Jidyom
Rosario, Addicting Info
--
JD
I¹ve officially given up trying to find the bottom
of the barrel that is Republican depravity.--Jidyom
Rosario, Addicting Info
Mr. RagunCajun
Oct 16, 2015, 1:15:44 AM10/16/15
to
On Thu, 15 Oct 2015 22:07:09 -0700, Jeanne Douglas
<hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
>In article <d9f18ded-1aab-4b21...@googlegroups.com>,
> Cloud Hobbit <youngbl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Sunday, October 11, 2015 at 8:35:51 PM UTC-7, Olrik wrote:
>> > Le 2015-10-11 22:13, Byker a écrit :
>> > > "Mohammad" wrote in message news:mvf18q$7ho$1...@news.albasani.net...
>> > > <snip>
>> > >
>> > > Today's good guy with a gun: http://tinyurl.com/nae8756
>> >
>> > That killer should be in prison.
>> >
>> WHY?
>
>Because he murdered someone.
Yet another example of Jeanne's Femdumb.
<hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
>In article <d9f18ded-1aab-4b21...@googlegroups.com>,
> Cloud Hobbit <youngbl...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> On Sunday, October 11, 2015 at 8:35:51 PM UTC-7, Olrik wrote:
>> > Le 2015-10-11 22:13, Byker a écrit :
>> > > "Mohammad" wrote in message news:mvf18q$7ho$1...@news.albasani.net...
>> > > <snip>
>> > >
>> > > Today's good guy with a gun: http://tinyurl.com/nae8756
>> >
>> > That killer should be in prison.
>> >
>> WHY?
>
>Because he murdered someone.
Trevor Wilson
Oct 16, 2015, 1:45:00 AM10/16/15
to
crims. 95% of all legal gun owners are happy. The other 5% are fuckwits.
My unanswered questions remain. Please answer them.
>>
>>>
>>> Wonder what percentage of the murders are directly linked to gang
>>> violence in the USA?
>>
>> **No idea. I wonder what percentage of murders are directly linked to
>> gang violence in Australia, Germany, the UK, France, etc?
>
> I'd say most maybe. When I was in England seems they had a gang
> problem. France it might be terrorist problem.
>>
>> Answer my question now please.
>
> If you are talking on the above. The Gun grabbers they want to limit
> and control and California even wants to confiscate certain items
> legal today. I believe the long term goal is to is confiscation.
unnecessary for civilians to own.
>
> Now if they want expanded background checks I would agree to that as
> long as they don't use it to start a federal registry. Never trust a
> liberal is my motto.
>
trustworthy than some drunk, drug addicted, uneducated yokel with a gun?
Malcolm McMahon
Oct 16, 2015, 5:11:35 AM10/16/15
to
Virtue does not improve your aim. In fact being a civilised person generally means that you exercise deliberative thought before pulling the trigger. That delays you a vital couple of seconds.
Cops are trained to improve their non-reasoned decision making in these circumstance and still they shoot the wrong people sometimes. Without such training if you shoot fast, then there's every chance of making a mistake. If you shoot slow then odds are you shoot too late.
Bishop Don Kool - A National Treasure
Oct 16, 2015, 10:52:11 AM10/16/15
to
--
Try God!
Don
See you in church.
Raymond
Oct 16, 2015, 4:01:57 PM10/16/15
to
In article <mvr2qr$t4m$4...@dont-email.me>
She needs a good slapping with a ding dong to knock some sense
into her.
into her.
dechucka
Oct 16, 2015, 4:03:41 PM10/16/15
to
news:lnp02b1vsha45aati...@4ax.com...
Try again and type slowly
Bishop Don Kool - A National Treasure
Oct 16, 2015, 5:25:05 PM10/16/15
to
RightWing Bob
Oct 16, 2015, 7:29:59 PM10/16/15
to
MattB explained :
with gun control too. But still the NRA gunhuggers claim that it's because
gun ownership has risen in the USA. They'd have more cause / causation
credibility if they credited the invention of the nicotine patch in 1992 with
crime stats lowering. Or maybe Canada has substantially lower homocide rates
over all (including gun crime) because Americans aren't allowed to wander
around with their guns! Or maybe it's just because Americans don't know how
to handle firearms ownership in a safe manner.
> If you are talking on the above. The Gun grabbers they want to limit
> and control and California even wants to confiscate certain items
> legal today. I believe the long term goal is to is confiscation.
>
> Now if they want expanded background checks I would agree to that as
> long as they don't use it to start a federal registry. Never trust a
> liberal is my motto.
Crime has dropped substantially since 1993, not only in the USA but in nations
> and control and California even wants to confiscate certain items
> legal today. I believe the long term goal is to is confiscation.
>
> Now if they want expanded background checks I would agree to that as
> long as they don't use it to start a federal registry. Never trust a
> liberal is my motto.
with gun control too. But still the NRA gunhuggers claim that it's because
gun ownership has risen in the USA. They'd have more cause / causation
credibility if they credited the invention of the nicotine patch in 1992 with
crime stats lowering. Or maybe Canada has substantially lower homocide rates
over all (including gun crime) because Americans aren't allowed to wander
around with their guns! Or maybe it's just because Americans don't know how
to handle firearms ownership in a safe manner.
Lady Veteran
Oct 16, 2015, 9:47:48 PM10/16/15
to
LV
--
I rode a tank, held a General's rank
When the blitzkrieg raged and the bodies stank.
-Rolling Stones-Sympathy for the Devil
----------------------------------------------
If you are an idiot, I am your worst nightmare. My
goal is to let the world see who you really are after
showing you to the world with your virtual pants pulled
down to expose your stupidity and lack of manhood. If
you are a racist, fat-basher, bible thumper or a member
of the teabircher Teapotty, you would do well to avoid me at
all costs.
Jeanne Douglas
Oct 16, 2015, 10:33:06 PM10/16/15
to
In article <h5a32bt5pml7uuvhf...@4ax.com>,
Lady Veteran <arm...@bigfoot.com> wrote:
> On Fri, 16 Oct 2015 21:57:17 +0200 (CEST), "Raymond"
> <raym...@google.com> wrote:
>
> >In article <mvr2qr$t4m$4...@dont-email.me>
> >Bishop Don Kool - A National Treasure <old...@comcast.net> wrote:
> >>
> >> On 10/16/2015 1:15 AM, Mr. RagunCajun wrote:
> >> > On Thu, 15 Oct 2015 22:07:09 -0700, Jeanne Douglas
> >> > <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> In article <d9f18ded-1aab-4b21...@googlegroups.com>,
> >> >> Cloud Hobbit <youngbl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >>> On Sunday, October 11, 2015 at 8:35:51 PM UTC-7, Olrik wrote:
> >> >>>> Le 2015-10-11 22:13, Byker a écrit :
> >> >>>>> "Mohammad" wrote in message news:mvf18q$7ho$1...@news.albasani.net...
> >> >>>>> <snip>
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> Today's good guy with a gun: http://tinyurl.com/nae8756
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> That killer should be in prison.
> >> >>>>
> >> >>> WHY?
> >> >>
> >> >> Because he murdered someone.
> >> >
> >> > Yet another example of Jeanne's Femdumb.
> >> >
> >> Fat Jeanne just needs a man to explain things to her.
> >
> >She needs a good slapping with a ding dong to knock some sense
> >into her.
>
> Needs a man? When you find one you let her know.
What do I need a man for?
> On Fri, 16 Oct 2015 21:57:17 +0200 (CEST), "Raymond"
> <raym...@google.com> wrote:
>
> >In article <mvr2qr$t4m$4...@dont-email.me>
> >Bishop Don Kool - A National Treasure <old...@comcast.net> wrote:
> >>
> >> On 10/16/2015 1:15 AM, Mr. RagunCajun wrote:
> >> > On Thu, 15 Oct 2015 22:07:09 -0700, Jeanne Douglas
> >> > <hlwd...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> >> In article <d9f18ded-1aab-4b21...@googlegroups.com>,
> >> >> Cloud Hobbit <youngbl...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >>> On Sunday, October 11, 2015 at 8:35:51 PM UTC-7, Olrik wrote:
> >> >>>> Le 2015-10-11 22:13, Byker a écrit :
> >> >>>>> "Mohammad" wrote in message news:mvf18q$7ho$1...@news.albasani.net...
> >> >>>>> <snip>
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>> Today's good guy with a gun: http://tinyurl.com/nae8756
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>> That killer should be in prison.
> >> >>>>
> >> >>> WHY?
> >> >>
> >> >> Because he murdered someone.
> >> >
> >> > Yet another example of Jeanne's Femdumb.
> >> >
> >> Fat Jeanne just needs a man to explain things to her.
> >
> >She needs a good slapping with a ding dong to knock some sense
> >into her.
>
> Needs a man? When you find one you let her know.
Mr. RagunCajun
Oct 17, 2015, 1:42:09 AM10/17/15
to
On Fri, 16 Oct 2015 19:33:03 -0700, Jeanne Douglas
To counter your femDUMB Jeanne.
Topaz
Oct 17, 2015, 5:46:13 AM10/17/15
to
Since the USA government did 911, is disarming the citizens really a
good idea?
CIA insider tells 911 truth. Time to re-examine your World-view,
America!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rnbMjAN7Bws
The sudden, complete, straight down at near free-fall speed collapse
of steel framed WTC building 7, which was not touched by the planes,
is the SMOKING GUN of the 9/11 conspiracy. The building's few small
fires and superficial debris damage could not account for this
collapse, which had all the earmarks of controlled demolition by
explosives. Videos clearly show this. Such demolitions take many days
or weeks to set up - not the few hours between the plane "attacks" and
the collapse. The explosives therefore had to be put in place
BEFOREHAND. This lends credibility to the use of previously placed
explosives to bring down the towers as well, which like the badly
damaged and fire-gutted Deutchbank building would probably have
remained standing.
Propaganda shills, disinformationists, and those in psychological
denial still insist the collapse of WTC 7 could not be what it
obviously was, and they employ often ludicrous rationalizations and
fabrications, elaborate lies, and infantile ad-hominem attacks to
defend their indefensible position. The REAL terrorists are desperate
to cover up their mass-murderous crime of the century - the permitting
if not perpetration of, and subsequent political and economic
exploitation of the fully preventable 9/11 disaster.
Could Bin Laden have somehow totally incapacitated NORAD - the world's
most sophisticated aerospace defense system - on that horrible
morning? I don't think so!
There is evidence of an INSIDE JOB even more clear and indisputable
than the explosive demolition collapse of building 7 and the standing
down of NORAD. Many very small HUMAN BODY FRAGMENTS have been found on
the roofs of nearby buildings. These were too far away to be from
jumpers from the towers. If the towers simply collapsed from damage
and fire alone, what blew these bodies to smithereens and sent the
fragments flying for considerable distances? The plane impacts did not
have the explosive brisance (shattering force) necessary to do this -
only HIGH EXPLOSIVES can blow bodies to tiny bits and throw them such
distances.
So - who can credibly account for these body fragments, other than
their being the result of high explosives being detonated in the
towers?
The following article proves, using the inviolate laws of physics, the
falsity of the government's propaganda explanation for the World Trade
Center building collapses:
SIMPLE PHYSICS EXPOSES THE BIG 9/11 LIE - GOVERNMENT BUILDING COLLAPSE
EXPLANATION FAILS REALITY CHECK
On September 11, 2001, the world watched in horror as the World Trade
Center (WTC) Twin Towers collapsed, killing thousands of innocent
people. Videos of the collapses were replayed ad nauseam on TV for
days. About 5 hours after the towers fell, WTC building 7 also
collapsed suddenly, completely, and straight down at near free-fall
speed. This steel-framed building was not touched by the planes that
struck the towers, and had sustained relatively minor debris damage
and small fires. Nearby buildings far more heavily damaged remained
standing.
In June 2005, in an apparent response to an article by Morgan
Reynolds, former CIA Director and current Secretary of Defense Robert
Gates stated, "The American people know what they saw with their own
eyes on September11, 2001. To suggest any kind of government
conspiracy in the events of that day goes beyond the pale."
We will prove here, with scientific rigor, that it's the government's
tale that's "beyond the pale!"
Did most of the American people really understand the unprecedented
phenomena they had witnessed? Could a lack of knowledge of physics,
and the emotional shock of this mass-murderous "terrorist attack" have
stymied objective thinking and led to the blind acceptance of
authoritarian assertions?
The government and the media TOLD US what we saw. The government told
us that we had witnessed a "gravitational" collapse; what is now
referred to as a "pancake collapse". According to the government
claims, the plane crashes and subsequent kerosene (like lamp oil - jet
fuel is NOT exotic) fires heated the UL-certified structural steel to
the point where it was significantly weakened, which is very difficult
to believe, never mind repeat in an experiment. Even with massive
fires that incinerate everything else, the steel frames of such
buildings generally remain standing.
According to the "pancake theory", this purported (all physical
evidence was quickly and illegally destroyed) weakening supposedly
caused part of the tower to collapse downward onto the rest of the
tower, which, we've been repeatedly told, somehow resulted in a chain
reaction of the lower floors sequentially, one at a time, yielding to
the weight falling from above.
There are some problems with that theory - it does not fit the
observed facts
* It cannot account for the total failure of the immense vertical
steel core columns - as if they were there one moment and gone the
next.
* The collapse times were near free-fall, far too rapid to be due to
gravity
alone.
This "collapse" was not without far more physical resistance than from
the air alone. It proceeded through all the lower stories of the
tower. Those undamaged floors below the plane impact zone offered
resistance thousands of times greater than that of air. Those lower
stories, and the central steel core columns, had successfully
supported the mass of the tower for 30 years despite hurricane-force
winds and tremors. Air cannot do that.
Can anyone possibly imagine undamaged lower floors getting out of the
way of the upper floors as gracefully and relatively without friction
as air would? Can anyone possibly imagine the lower stories slowing
the fall of the upper floors less than would, say, a parachute?
What is certain, beyond any shadow of a doubt, is that the towers
could not have collapsed gravitationally, through their intact lower
stories, as rapidly as was observed on 9/11. Not even close. This is
shown to be physically impossible!
So WHERE DID ALL THAT ADDITIONAL DESTRUCTIVE ENERGY COME FROM?
Conclusions
In order for the towers to have collapsed "gravitationally" in the
observed duration, as we've been told over and over again, one or more
of the following zany-sounding conditions must have been met
* The undamaged structure below the impact zone offered zero
resistance to the collapse.
* The glass and concrete spontaneously disintegrated without any
expenditure of energy.
* The massive vertical steel core columns simply vanished, as if by
magic.
None of these laws-of-physics-violating, and thus impossible,
conditions can be accounted for by the official government theory of
9/11, nor by any of the subsequent analyses and arguments designed to
prop up this official myth of 9/11.
The Bottom Line
It is utterly impossible for a gravitational collapse to proceed so
destructively through a path of such great resistance in anywhere near
free-fall time. This fact debunks the preposterous contention that the
WTC collapses can be blamed solely upon damage resulting from the
plane impacts.
The unnaturally short durations of the top-down collapses reveal that
the towers did not disintegrate because they were coming down, but
rather they came down because something else was causing them to
disintegrate.
So, to the extent that people accept the ridiculous "pancake collapse"
story, former CIA Director and current Secretary of Defense Gates'
other premise, that people know what they saw, is also false. It is
left to you to decide if his conclusion, which was based upon clearly
incorrect presumptions, is also flawed.
The collapse of WTC building 7, which was NOT hit by any plane, also
collapsed within a second of free-fall time later that same day.
http://www.911truth.org/article.php?story=20060118104223192
No steel-frame building, before or after the WTC buildings, has ever
collapsed due to fire. But explosives can effectively sever steel
columns
Understanding the full truth of 9/11 seems to require two separate
awakenings.
The first, awakening to the fraudulence of the "official 9/11 story,"
is a pretty simple brain function and only requires a little study,
logic or curiosity. We can help a lot with that part here and it's a
major purpose of this site.
The second step, however, consciously confronting the implications of
that knowledge--and what it says about our media, politics and
economic system today--is by far the harder awakening and requires an
enormous exercise of nerve and heart. (As the Chinese say, "You cannot
wake up a man who is pretending to sleep.") In other words, this part
of the journey depends more on character than on maps and evidence so
we can't help you much here, except to point out inspiring heroes and
heroines who have courageously faced that truth, spoken out, and
survived...
www.tomatobubble.com www.ihr.org http://nationalvanguard.org
http://national-socialist-worldview.blogspot.com
duke
Oct 17, 2015, 9:58:45 AM10/17/15
to
the dukester, American-American
*****
"The Mass is the most perfect form of Prayer."
Pope Paul VI
*****
Bishop Don Kool - A National Treasure
Oct 17, 2015, 11:38:21 AM10/17/15
to
Street
Oct 17, 2015, 1:10:14 PM10/17/15
to
On Sat, 17 Oct 2015 11:38:11 -0400, Bishop Don Kool - A National
You're such a jerk.
dechucka
Oct 17, 2015, 5:14:15 PM10/17/15
to
"duke" <duckg...@cox.net> wrote in message
news:20l42b548gpbo1a51...@4ax.com...
dechucka
Oct 17, 2015, 6:12:52 PM10/17/15
to
"dechucka" <dech...@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:U6WdnSeHeO--J7_L...@westnet.com.au...
Bishop Don Kool - A National Treasure
Oct 17, 2015, 8:05:39 PM10/17/15
to
Street
Oct 18, 2015, 10:20:50 AM10/18/15
to
On Sat, 17 Oct 2015 20:05:28 -0400, Bishop Don Kool - A National
Realism is that Jeanne could have as many men as she wanted. And
references to her physical morphology are irrelevant and not even the
least bit effective as an insult.
references to her physical morphology are irrelevant and not even the
least bit effective as an insult.
Republic Of Dumbfuckistan
Oct 18, 2015, 4:39:11 PM10/18/15
to
Fran Farmer <a...@maybeitwillbeforthcoming.com> wrote:
>I am NOT a criminal and I have guns as do most of our neighbours.
Behold the IQ of the typical Christian Republican NRA terrorist asshole.
----
The Skeptic Tank: http://www.SkepticTank.Org/
>I am NOT a criminal and I have guns as do most of our neighbours.
Behold the IQ of the typical Christian Republican NRA terrorist asshole.
----
The Skeptic Tank: http://www.SkepticTank.Org/
Republic Of Dumbfuckistan
Oct 18, 2015, 4:43:29 PM10/18/15
to
MattB <trdel...@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Fri, 16 Oct 2015 08:38:46 +1100, Fran Farmer
><a...@maybeitwillbeforthcoming.com> wrote:
>>You made a loose and sloppy statement about the connection between
>>'liberal' and where gun murders took place. No cite to support your
>>claim. That made me curious so I went hunting.
>Lets see try looking at murder rates of cities like East Chicago,
>Baltimore, Ferguson, St Louis, Detroit, L.A. and the like.
You are trying to reason with a Christian Republican NRA asshole. You
*know* that's not possible, these filthy cunts are incapable of reason.
>On Fri, 16 Oct 2015 08:38:46 +1100, Fran Farmer
><a...@maybeitwillbeforthcoming.com> wrote:
>>You made a loose and sloppy statement about the connection between
>>'liberal' and where gun murders took place. No cite to support your
>>claim. That made me curious so I went hunting.
>Lets see try looking at murder rates of cities like East Chicago,
>Baltimore, Ferguson, St Louis, Detroit, L.A. and the like.
You are trying to reason with a Christian Republican NRA asshole. You
*know* that's not possible, these filthy cunts are incapable of reason.
duke
Oct 18, 2015, 5:24:18 PM10/18/15
to
Bishop Don Kool - A National Treasure
Oct 18, 2015, 7:36:35 PM10/18/15
to
Fran Farmer
Oct 18, 2015, 9:31:37 PM10/18/15
to
On 19/10/2015 7:40 AM, Republic Of Dumbfuckistan wrote:
> Fran Farmer <a...@maybeitwillbeforthcoming.com> wrote:
>
>> I am NOT a criminal and I have guns as do most of our neighbours.
>
> Behold the IQ of the typical Christian Republican NRA terrorist asshole.
:-)) You poor diddums. You can't read headers? Or are you just
> Fran Farmer <a...@maybeitwillbeforthcoming.com> wrote:
>
>> I am NOT a criminal and I have guns as do most of our neighbours.
>
> Behold the IQ of the typical Christian Republican NRA terrorist asshole.
culturally and geographically challenged?
Petzl
Oct 18, 2015, 9:50:51 PM10/18/15
to
On Sun, 18 Oct 2015 20:40:22 GMT, no...@none.com (Republic Of
Dumbfuckistan) wrote:
>Fran Farmer <a...@maybeitwillbeforthcoming.com> wrote:
>
>>I am NOT a criminal and I have guns as do most of our neighbours.
>
>Behold the IQ of the typical Christian Republican NRA terrorist asshole.
>
What's your Islamic sympathizer IQ Fran Farmer?
Dumbfuckistan) wrote:
>Fran Farmer <a...@maybeitwillbeforthcoming.com> wrote:
>
>>I am NOT a criminal and I have guns as do most of our neighbours.
>
>Behold the IQ of the typical Christian Republican NRA terrorist asshole.
>
I also have guns not all legal!
--
Petzl
We are advised to NOT judge ALL Moslems by the actions of a few lunatics, but we are encouraged to judge ALL gun owners by the actions of a few lunatics. Funny how that works.
Fran Farmer
Oct 18, 2015, 9:52:51 PM10/18/15
to
On 16/10/2015 3:26 PM, MattB wrote:
> On Fri, 16 Oct 2015 14:58:56 +1100, Trevor Wilson
> <tre...@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote:
>
>> On 16/10/2015 1:54 PM, MattB wrote:
>>> On Fri, 16 Oct 2015 09:05:18 +1100, Trevor Wilson
of thinking and expressing yourself.
>>> Wonder what percentage of the murders are directly linked to gang
>>> violence in the USA?
>>
>> **No idea. I wonder what percentage of murders are directly linked to
>> gang violence in Australia, Germany, the UK, France, etc?
>
> I'd say most maybe.
Based on what evidence? The ONLY attempted murder and murders I know of
through contacts or because of reading the court proceedings closely had
nothing whatsoever to do with any gang activities. Each one was
motivated by personal animosity.
When I was in England seems they had a gang
> problem. France it might be terrorist problem.
>>
changed then law abiding people abide by the law.
> I believe the long term goal is to is confiscation.
>
> Now if they want expanded background checks I would agree to that as
> long as they don't use it to start a federal registry. Never trust a
> liberal is my motto.
I prefer not to trust a paranoid person who can't provide any proof
beyond speculative outpourings.
> On Fri, 16 Oct 2015 14:58:56 +1100, Trevor Wilson
> <tre...@SPAMBLOCKrageaudio.com.au> wrote:
>
>> On 16/10/2015 1:54 PM, MattB wrote:
>>> On Fri, 16 Oct 2015 09:05:18 +1100, Trevor Wilson
>>>> **Who said that law abiding people should be punished? In what way/s are
>>>> they being punished?
>>>
>>>
>>> Lets see maybe we have to have our current rights changed because of a
>>> bunch of lowlife scumbags.
>>
>> **Read and answer my question.
>
> OK My bad but how will you enforce these laws without restricting the
> current rights of the law abiding citizens?
What laws are you talking about? You seem to have the most muddied way
>>>> they being punished?
>>>
>>>
>>> Lets see maybe we have to have our current rights changed because of a
>>> bunch of lowlife scumbags.
>>
>> **Read and answer my question.
>
> OK My bad but how will you enforce these laws without restricting the
> current rights of the law abiding citizens?
of thinking and expressing yourself.
>>> Wonder what percentage of the murders are directly linked to gang
>>> violence in the USA?
>>
>> **No idea. I wonder what percentage of murders are directly linked to
>> gang violence in Australia, Germany, the UK, France, etc?
>
> I'd say most maybe.
through contacts or because of reading the court proceedings closely had
nothing whatsoever to do with any gang activities. Each one was
motivated by personal animosity.
When I was in England seems they had a gang
> problem. France it might be terrorist problem.
>>
>> Answer my question now please.
>
>
> If you are talking on the above. The Gun grabbers they want to limit
> and control and California even wants to confiscate certain items
> legal today.
So? Any "gun grabbing" would involve changing the law. Once the law is
> and control and California even wants to confiscate certain items
> legal today.
changed then law abiding people abide by the law.
> I believe the long term goal is to is confiscation.
>
> Now if they want expanded background checks I would agree to that as
> long as they don't use it to start a federal registry. Never trust a
> liberal is my motto.
beyond speculative outpourings.
Fran Farmer
Oct 18, 2015, 10:03:16 PM10/18/15
to
trying to say that the "gun grabbers" (whoever they may be) are trying
to "punish" law abiding people like him by "taking" (or "confiscating")
his legally bought weapons.
He's hard to follow because he has difficulty defining who or what or
why he's ranting on in the gun grabbing, punishing, law abiding vs gang
and scum and liberals and high murder cites and don't even get him
started furrin countries where gangs and terrorists roam...........
Fran Farmer
Oct 18, 2015, 10:04:25 PM10/18/15
to
Petzl
Oct 18, 2015, 10:05:28 PM10/18/15
to
On Sun, 18 Oct 2015 16:24:17 -0500, duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>>
>>obviously as the is a print based group
>
>Probably not as you can't spell either.
>
>the dukester, American-American
>
Aparently our Australian lefties think it requres a IQ to own a gun!
>>
>>obviously as the is a print based group
>
>Probably not as you can't spell either.
>
>the dukester, American-American
>
>*****
>"The Mass is the most perfect form of Prayer."
>Pope Paul VI
>*****
“There is no sweeter sound on earth than the Muslim call to prayer”
which, to 98 per cent of Americans, is a sound akin to scraping your
fingers up a blackboard.
https://youtu.be/tsnZi-Kn4pU
Australian free press states
"OBAMA TAKES THE U.S. FROM THE PENTHOUSE TO THE SHITHOUSE IN TWO SHORT
TERMS"
--
Petzl
If we fail to be precise in how we describe our enemy and its ideology, it will defeat us.
Islam is of course synonymous with terrorism
There are more Australian Muslims fighting with al Qaeda linked
groups than there are in the Australian Defence Force fighting against them!
.
Major majority of the worlds refugees are created by Islam since the
days of Mohammad. Mainly because Islam is actually a violent political
process, not a religion at all.
Islamic conquests have always been by infiltration (Trojan Horse:
Al-Hijra, The Islamic Doctrine of Immigration). This is how Islam
grows, a violent political process using , terrorist attack from
within, eventually followed by surprise attack, followed by killing
for killings sake.
Once Moslems have foothold maintaining rule is held by continued
carnage and ruthlessness.
Until it's recognized Islam is the problem nothing will change!
How Islam began and still violently grows
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ERou_Q5l9Gw
Fran Farmer
Oct 18, 2015, 10:12:29 PM10/18/15
to
remarks about Donkeys because you can't spell
Fran Farmer
Oct 18, 2015, 10:14:10 PM10/18/15
to
On 19/10/2015 1:05 PM, Petzl wrote:
> On Sun, 18 Oct 2015 16:24:17 -0500, duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>
>>>
>>> obviously as the is a print based group
>>
>> Probably not as you can't spell either.
>>
>> the dukester, American-American
>>
> Aparently our Australian lefties think it requres a IQ to own a gun!
Petz, your capacity to read for comprehension never improves.
> On Sun, 18 Oct 2015 16:24:17 -0500, duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>
>>>
>>> obviously as the is a print based group
>>
>> Probably not as you can't spell either.
>>
>> the dukester, American-American
>>
> Aparently our Australian lefties think it requres a IQ to own a gun!
Fran Farmer
Oct 18, 2015, 11:30:51 PM10/18/15
to
On 19/10/2015 12:50 PM, Petzl wrote:
> On Sun, 18 Oct 2015 20:40:22 GMT, no...@none.com (Republic Of
> Dumbfuckistan) wrote:
>
>> Fran Farmer <a...@maybeitwillbeforthcoming.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I am NOT a criminal and I have guns as do most of our neighbours.
>>
>> Behold the IQ of the typical Christian Republican NRA terrorist asshole.
>>
> What's your Islamic sympathizer IQ Fran Farmer?
How's that strawman of yours that you keep feeding and raising as if
> On Sun, 18 Oct 2015 20:40:22 GMT, no...@none.com (Republic Of
> Dumbfuckistan) wrote:
>
>> Fran Farmer <a...@maybeitwillbeforthcoming.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I am NOT a criminal and I have guns as do most of our neighbours.
>>
>> Behold the IQ of the typical Christian Republican NRA terrorist asshole.
>>
> What's your Islamic sympathizer IQ Fran Farmer?
it's a real child?
> I also have guns not all legal!
society and our way of life, that does not surprise me at all.
You are a criminal loser.
Mattb.
Oct 18, 2015, 11:52:30 PM10/18/15
to
On Mon, 19 Oct 2015 13:03:08 +1100, Fran Farmer
Well you don't have evidence I'm wrong.
>
>He's hard to follow because he has difficulty defining who or what or
>why he's ranting on in the gun grabbing, punishing, law abiding vs gang
>and scum and liberals and high murder cites and don't even get him
>started furrin countries where gangs and terrorists roam...........
Well you are wrong and have shown no evidence. Just your opinion.
>He's hard to follow because he has difficulty defining who or what or
>why he's ranting on in the gun grabbing, punishing, law abiding vs gang
>and scum and liberals and high murder cites and don't even get him
>started furrin countries where gangs and terrorists roam...........
Mattb.
Oct 18, 2015, 11:55:37 PM10/18/15
to
On Mon, 19 Oct 2015 13:05:15 +1100, Petzl <pet...@gmail.com> wrote:
>On Sun, 18 Oct 2015 16:24:17 -0500, duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>
>>>
>>>obviously as the is a print based group
>>
>>Probably not as you can't spell either.
>>
>>the dukester, American-American
>>
>Aparently our Australian lefties think it requres a IQ to own a gun!
You must have a different type of left there. What we have in the
>On Sun, 18 Oct 2015 16:24:17 -0500, duke <duckg...@cox.net> wrote:
>
>>>
>>>obviously as the is a print based group
>>
>>Probably not as you can't spell either.
>>
>>the dukester, American-American
>>
>Aparently our Australian lefties think it requres a IQ to own a gun!
USA does the majority of the crime and scream they are owed freebies.
Luckily not all Democrats are liberals.
Trevor Wilson
Oct 19, 2015, 12:09:18 AM10/19/15
to
On 19/10/2015 12:52 PM, Fran Farmer wrote:
>
> I prefer not to trust a paranoid person who can't provide any proof
> beyond speculative outpourings.
**Well said. 'MattB' seems to make insane statements and then scurry
>
> I prefer not to trust a paranoid person who can't provide any proof
> beyond speculative outpourings.
away when asked to argue his case with some logic.
--
Trevor Wilson
www.rageaudio.com.au
---
This email has been checked for viruses by Avast antivirus software.
https://www.avast.com/antivirus
Trevor Wilson
Oct 19, 2015, 12:15:58 AM10/19/15
to
your logic is impossible to follow. To top it off, you present zero
evidence to support your insane rantings. You need to try MUCH harder.
Just pretend, for a moment, that the people you are presently attempting
to communicate with, are likely a couple of dozen IQ points above yours.
>>
>> He's hard to follow because he has difficulty defining who or what or
>> why he's ranting on in the gun grabbing, punishing, law abiding vs gang
>> and scum and liberals and high murder cites and don't even get him
>> started furrin countries where gangs and terrorists roam...........
>
>
> Well you are wrong and have shown no evidence. Just your opinion.
>
think, before you type, then read it back to see:
1) If it makes sense.
2) Contains sufficient logic in order to convince the other party.
It is loading more messages.
0 new messages