|
various cheeses posted:Isn't that based off the debunked Kellerman study? People need to stop espousing this as truth. That study used "protection" as only cases where a gun was used to kill an intruder, not scare away or even injure, and also cherry picked the hell out of participants no it's based on FBI UCR data https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/u...andhomicidemain there's more than just the kellerman study to deny the validity of
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2015 20:55
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 27, 2024 03:29 |
|
|
I bet you dress yourself, slave-grabber.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2015 20:57
|
|
|
various cheeses posted:Isn't that based off the debunked Kellerman study? People need to stop espousing this as truth. That study used "protection" as only cases where a gun was used to kill an intruder, not scare away or even injure, and also cherry picked the hell out of participants. I'm sure that there are many 'debunkings' of the Kellerman study by people whose only qualification was a deep and abiding belief that such heresy couldn't possibly be true, but if you have a legitimate debunking I'd be happy to review it. You can guess, of course, that I'm going to treat only peer-reviewed or other sources, and not, say, guncite.com as a legitimate debunking. What actually appears to have happened is various gun nuts came up with flawed debunkings they just pass around as proof that it's nonsense. I mean, one "debunking" I found pointed out that half of the people studied didn't even have a gun in their house!!!!!!! and doesn't appear to have ever considered where the data for homicides in gun-free houses that was used as a control came from.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2015 20:57
|
|
|
when you get into an argument with and need to murder your wife, remember that the police are five minutes away
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2015 20:58
|
|
|
various cheeses posted:Nah that poo poo is played out. Let's all agree to no car analogies. It's almost like you don't have an argument!
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2015 21:00
|
|
|
Doccers posted:Also Renting is 4 times more likely to cause you to die than owning a gun is according to this study. there are many things that can increase your risk of being murdered the issue is none of the other ones pretend they lower your risk of being murdered
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2015 21:00
|
|
|
it turns out if you slather yourself in meat and blood and jump into a tiger pit you are way more likely to die than if you have a gun in your house, a statistic that is definitely relevant outside of talking to people who believe the meat trick makes you immortal
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2015 21:02
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:it turns out if you slather yourself in meat and blood and jump into a tiger pit you are way more likely to die than if you have a gun in your house, a statistic that is definitely relevant outside of talking to people who believe the meat trick makes you immortal Sorry, turns out there only is one problem at a time. Sorry you've been mislead by communists.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2015 21:04
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:it turns out if you slather yourself in meat and blood and jump into a tiger pit you are way more likely to die than if you have a gun in your house, a statistic that is definitely relevant outside of talking to people who believe the meat trick makes you immortal excuse me, but ulillillia retracted and censored the meat trick because it was unwise and dangerous to do
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2015 21:05
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:I'm sure that there are many 'debunkings' of the Kellerman study by people whose only qualification was a deep and abiding belief that such heresy couldn't possibly be true, but if you have a legitimate debunking I'd be happy to review it. You can guess, of course, that I'm going to treat only peer-reviewed or other sources, and not, say, guncite.com as a legitimate debunking. It's been debunked by multiple criminologists, also of course some random gun websites are going to be the ones posting it. Everyone else is already declaring it fact and thumping on it like some baptist minister on a bible. Just chill out man.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2015 21:08
|
|
|
Waiting periods are a non-starter for me. As an American, I demand instant gratification. I've got a silencer on order and it will be months before ATF approval finishes processing. I will buy new guns in the interim so that the wait is more tolerable.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2015 21:08
|
|
|
ikanreed posted:Counterpoint: guns are also for killing animals, which seems kinda like a legitimate reason to allow a few of them. Everyone says guns are banned it the UK but you are allowed to have them for hunting. Schools have rifle ranges too. IMO its the gun "culture" which is really hosed up.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2015 21:12
|
|
|
When does the mating season for guns start?
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2015 21:12
|
|
|
various cheeses posted:It's been debunked by multiple criminologists, also of course some random gun websites are going to be the ones posting it. Everyone else is already declaring it fact and thumping on it like some baptist minister on a bible. Just chill out man. Of course only a few sites are reporting it who just happen to have a vested financial interest in 'debunking' it EVERYONE ELSE IS IN THE TANK AND BRAINWASHED
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2015 21:13
|
|
|
various cheeses posted:It's been debunked by multiple criminologists, also of course some random gun websites are going to be the ones posting it. Everyone else is already declaring it fact and thumping on it like some baptist minister on a bible. Just chill out man. I'm sure you can find the actual multiple criminologists then, instead of an assurance from a gun site they exist. I mean the thing is, I'm sure you believe what you're posting. But I'm equally sure that you believe it because you've heard it from other gun 'enthusiasts' and want it to be true so you just accepted it was. If the study is actually flawed you can find legitimate people posting that, I just don't feel like debunking a bunch of amateur hour gun articles writing for a credulous internal audience.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2015 21:15
|
|
|
Tatum Girlparts posted:Of course only a few sites are reporting it who just happen to have a vested financial interest in 'debunking' it EVERYONE ELSE IS IN THE TANK AND BRAINWASHED I view this as more an ideological vested interest. I mean, you're a smart gun enthusiast who defines yourself by your intelligent purchase of a small arsenal to protect your family against the horde of looters the nra told you descended on New York during the blackout that could come to your town one day too, one of the great things about you. You're sure as gently caress not going to give some study that tells you that you're ignorantly placing all their lives at risk the time of day
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2015 21:18
|
|
|
pointsofdata posted:Everyone says guns are banned it the UK but you are allowed to have them for hunting. Silencers are also considered polite over there. Hell, NZ has even less restriction on them than the UK. Tatum Girlparts posted:Of course only a few sites are reporting it who just happen to have a vested financial interest in 'debunking' it EVERYONE ELSE IS IN THE TANK AND BRAINWASHED I'm just saying it's not some huge loving gotcha on gun ownership. There's a lot wrong with the study that maybe means you shouldn't take it as fact.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2015 21:19
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:I'm sure you can find the actual multiple criminologists then, instead of an assurance from a gun site they exist. I'm pretty sure Kleck(the guy who did the "Guns stop as many crimes as there are people in the US every decade" bullshit self-reported study) has done something to refute most more sane studies of gun violence. He's a real criminologist, and until he did that self-report study and become a hero to the gun-nut crowd, was a sane, respected one.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2015 21:19
|
|
|
look i'm just asking questions about climate science here, there are plenty of scientists* who agree with my critiques* on why global warming is not happening
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2015 21:21
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:I'm sure that there are many 'debunkings' of the Kellerman study by people whose only qualification was a deep and abiding belief that such heresy couldn't possibly be true, but if you have a legitimate debunking I'd be happy to review it. You can guess, of course, that I'm going to treat only peer-reviewed or other sources, and not, say, guncite.com as a legitimate debunking. I mean have you read any of the Kellerman study? I don't have access to the full text on hand anymore but it doesn't account for whether the weapon used in the shooting was the weapon kept in the house and fails to account for a million confounding variables that by his own numbers show a much higher correlation then having a gun in the house. You don't need a criminologist to know its a poo poo study, you just need to read it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2015 21:21
|
|
|
I have always wanted Jokers pistol from Batman. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hasipuR7-as
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2015 21:21
|
|
|
also, not that i have anything to hide, but i made it a federal law you can't study climate science anymore
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2015 21:21
|
|
|
various cheeses posted:Silencers are also considered polite over there. Hell, NZ has even less restriction on them than the UK. Then why don't you loving post the god drat papers or talks from the relevant professionals instead of just assuring us that they exist.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2015 21:22
|
|
|
pointsofdata posted:Everyone says slaves are banned it the UK but you are allowed to have them for hunting.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2015 21:23
|
|
|
Jarmak posted:I mean have you read any of the Kellerman study? I don't have access to the full text on hand anymore but it doesn't account for whether the weapon used in the shooting was the weapon kept in the house and fails to account for a million confounding variables that by his own numbers show a much higher correlation then having a gun in the house. You don't need a criminologist to know its a poo poo study, you just need to read it. wow it's fortunate for second amendment defenders that the kellerman study, the only academic analysis of gun violence ever in the history of the united states, was so thoroughly debunked. question solved!
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2015 21:23
|
|
|
Jarmak posted:I mean have you read any of the Kellerman study? I don't have access to the full text on hand anymore but it doesn't account for whether the weapon used in the shooting was the weapon kept in the house and fails to account for a million confounding variables that by his own numbers show a much higher correlation then having a gun in the house. You don't need a criminologist to know its a poo poo study, you just need to read it. you're repeating an obviously spurious criticism of the study (like say, having illegal drugs in the house probably has a higher correlation but nobody claims the drugs will protect you), and what sounds to me like an equally spurious criticism (if you having a gun in the house makes it more likely that you get shot by the intruder that is not helping your case!) so I'm going to go with that you are just repeating the amateur hour criticisms that i found doing a quick google check
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2015 21:24
|
|
|
ikanreed posted:I'm pretty sure Kleck(the guy who did the "Guns stop as many crimes as there are people in the US every decade" bullshit self-reported study) has done something to refute most more sane studies of gun violence. He's a real criminologist, and until he did that self-report study and become a hero to the gun-nut crowd, was a sane, respected one. well we know for sure that firearms stopped 21,175 bad guys with guns in 2013 which is roughly double the number of homicides by firearm that year
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2015 21:25
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:I'm sure you can find the actual multiple criminologists then, instead of an assurance from a gun site they exist. What exactly is wrong with the guncite article? I glanced at it briefly on my phone and they appear to have a lot of citations. There's some studies claiming millions of defensive gun uses each year in the USA, but they're probably on the other end of the dumb poo poo spectrum. It would be nice if there was some actual neutral studies worked on by both sides, but pretty much everything wants to push an agenda. I'd trust a gun control study funded by Bloomberg about as much as I'd trust a global warming study done by Exxon.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2015 21:29
|
|
|
Snowman Crossing posted:I voted straight Democrat for the first decade of my voting history. Then a few years ago I took up recreational shooting on a whim. lmao I thought this was a fakepost until the end, what a piece of poo poo
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2015 21:30
|
|
|
evilweasel posted:you're repeating an obviously spurious criticism of the study (like say, having illegal drugs in the house probably has a higher correlation but nobody claims the drugs will protect you), and what sounds to me like an equally spurious criticism (if you having a gun in the house makes it more likely that you get shot by the intruder that is not helping your case!) so I'm going to go with that you are just repeating the amateur hour criticisms that i found doing a quick google check What? Those aren't amateur hour criticisms at all? Do you not understand what a confounding variable is?
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2015 21:31
|
|
|
various cheeses posted:What exactly is wrong with the guncite article? I glanced at it briefly on my phone and they appear to have a lot of citations. There's some studies claiming millions of defensive gun uses each year in the USA, but they're probably on the other end of the dumb poo poo spectrum. It would be nice if there was some actual neutral studies worked on by both sides, but pretty much everything wants to push an agenda. I'd trust a gun control study funded by Bloomberg about as much as I'd trust a global warming study done by Exxon. yes, it is unfortunate that politicians continue to politicize tragedies such as "twenty five dead seven year olds" so we can calmly and rationally discuss events, like men
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2015 21:31
|
|
|
Popular Thug Drink posted:yes, it is unfortunate that politicians continue to politicize tragedies such as "twenty five dead seven year olds" so we can calmly and rationally discuss events, like men See also 9/11 and the Patriot Act.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2015 21:32
|
|
|
Jarmak posted:Do you not understand what a confounding variable is? i do not, please explain it to me
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2015 21:32
|
|
|
various cheeses posted:What exactly is wrong with the guncite article? I glanced at it briefly on my phone and they appear to have a lot of citations. There's some studies claiming millions of defensive gun uses each year in the USA, but they're probably on the other end of the dumb poo poo spectrum. It would be nice if there was some actual neutral studies worked on by both sides, but pretty much everything wants to push an agenda. I'd trust a gun control study funded by Bloomberg about as much as I'd trust a global warming study done by Exxon. It was not subjected to peer review nor published in a place that would require the author to know what they are talking about and place their reputation on the line to a degree with their critique. Legitimate scientists love to tear apart their collegues when they make mathmatical errors or other errors in their studies. If he did, there would be scientists doing it - not a respected scientist* (has a doctorate in biology) talking about how jet fuel can't melt steel beams.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2015 21:33
|
|
|
various cheeses posted:Silencers are also considered polite over there. Hell, NZ has even less restriction on them than the UK. They're called suppressors you ignorant slut. 
Who What Now fucked around with this message at 21:44 on Oct 12, 2015 |
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2015 21:34
|
|
|
various cheeses posted:See also 9/11 and the Patriot Act. i know, i dont even know why i bother if people cannot look at a pile of children's bodies in a clinical manner, like my hero sherlock holmes, and coolly tick through the facts at play such as there was no way to prevent a man from entering an elementary school and murdering entire roomfuls of children in seconds. it's these kind of irrational hysterics that give responsible gun owners a bad name and unduly punish the just
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2015 21:34
|
|
|
Jarmak posted:What? Those aren't amateur hour criticisms at all? Do you not understand what a confounding variable is? given that you made two criticisms i could evaluate on the merits, and one unsubstantiated claim he ignored confounding variables, once it became obvious the two criticisms that you elaborated on enough to test were self-evidently wrong why would i believe the one that you just assured me was there given that you were 0/2 on tested claims?
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2015 21:35
|
|
|
Why, I think I'll just 3d print a gun. It's so much easier waiting 50 hours for a cheap plastic piece of crap that will explode and kill me than deal with a 2 hour background check. Checkmate feds.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2015 21:39
|
|
|
Popular Thug Drink posted:stiffer background checks and longer waiting periods would be good, because it would dissuade people from purchasing firearms explicitly to kill themselves with, whereas recreational shooters and gun collecters would continue to have high suicide rates, and anyone sufficiently motivated could always just go to a gun range and kill themselves there This is what it's come to, encouraging unsafe range behavior
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2015 21:42
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 27, 2024 03:29 |
|
|
Who What Now posted:Their called suppressors you ignorant slut. Maaaaaaaan I don't give a poo poo anymore. Silencers rolls off the tongue easier.
|
|
#
?
Oct 12, 2015 21:44
|
|