Notice From My Cold Dead Hands...... (3 Viewers)

[Fairly-Hard]

"Misinformed" except for all of the historical data that backs it up. But we've gone over all of that.

Not much data on an opinion but sure.

 

[Phatguysrule]

Not much data on an opinion but sure.

The historical data backs up the opinion in this case.

 

[Fairly-Hard]

The historical data backs up the opinion in this case.

Alright so let’s put this in place. You are trying to say historical data backs up that privileged white people are who want gun control?
I think you are confused here? Plenty of Blacks, Hispanics and Asian people want gun control.
Don’t take this down a different path. Try to stay on this topic alone. Show me that data please.

 

[Phatguysrule]

Alright so let’s put this in place. You are trying to say historical data backs up that privileged white people are who want gun control?
I think you are confused here? Plenty of Blacks, Hispanics and Asian people want gun control.
Don’t take this down a different path. Try to stay on this topic alone. Show me that data please.

No, that's obviously not what I'm saying. I am saying those policies negatively impact poor and minorities disproportionately more than wealthy whites.

For example,

TULSA RACE MASSACRE.
Believed to be the single worst incident of racial violence in American history, the bloody 1921 outbreak in Tulsa has continued to haunt Oklahomans.

https://www.okhistory.org/publications/enc/entry.php?entry=TU013

Ronald Reagan’s moment of massive historical irony: How armed Black men led to gun control:

When armed Black Panthers showed up at the California State Capitol in 1967, they probably saved thousands of lives

https://www.salon.com/2022/06/08/wh...ed-black-men-meant-immediate-control_partner/

 

[Fairly-Hard]

No, that's obviously not what I'm saying. I am saying those policies negatively impact poor and minorities disproportionately more than wealthy whites.

For example, https://www.okhistory.org/publications/enc/entry.php?entry=TU013

https://www.salon.com/2022/06/08/wh...ed-black-men-meant-immediate-control_partner/

I see. So now we want to talk about Ronnie Reagan about 40 years ago. You said and I quote…”Data”. I knew you’d try to change the narrative and muddy it up a bit.
People like you seem to forget Ronnie was SHOT!
See ya.

 

[Fairly-Hard]

Now people gonna start saying the Brady Bill was a story about a lovely lady…

 

[Phatguysrule]

I see. So now we want to talk about Ronnie Reagan about 40 years ago. You said and I quote…”Data”. I knew you’d try to change the narrative and muddy it up a bit.
People like you seem to forget Ronnie was SHOT!
See ya.

Muddy what up? You don't think those black deaths in Tulsa count as data?

Talk about mudding the water...

The Mulford Act was a 1967 California bill that prohibited public carrying of loaded firearms without a permit.[2] Named after Republican assemblyman Don Mulford, and signed into law by governor of California Ronald Reagan, the bill was crafted with the goal of disarming members of the Black Panther Party who were conducting armed patrols of Oakland neighborhoods, in what would later be termed copwatching.[3][4] They garnered national attention after Black Panthers members, bearing arms, marched upon the California State Capitol to protest the bill.[5][6][self-published source?][7]

Reagan wasn't shot until he was president, in 1981. 14 years after enacting his racist gun control as Governor of California.

You know, you'd think you'd eventually lose faith in your position since you keep needing to be dishonest to prop it up... I certainly would.

 

[Fairly-Hard]

Muddy what up? You don't think those black deaths in Tulsa count as data?

Talk about mudding the water...

Reagan wasn't shot until he was president, in 1981. 14 years after enacting his racist gun control as Governor of California.

You know, you'd think you'd eventually lose faith in your position since you keep needing to be dishonest to prop it up... I certainly would.

So you google up two links. One that is questionable at best dated over 50 years ago that kind of goes along the lines of the original statement that gun control is being imposed by the privileged white man and call that “Data” then have the gall to say I’m being dishonest?
Okay.

 

[Fairly-Hard]

I’m betting there are a few Hispanics in Texas that might care to differ with that position.
Still have not seen one speck of actual data that would support such a claim. But as I said it’s a cool hamburger to flip and it sure shoots like a really really red herring.

 

[Phatguysrule]

So you google up two links. One that is questionable at best dated over 50 years ago that kind of goes along the lines of the original statement that gun control is being imposed by the privileged white man and call that “Data” then have the gall to say I’m being dishonest?
Okay.

Define data:
noun
facts and statistics collected together for reference or analysis.

So according to you, the black deaths at the Tulsa massacre don't count as data.

Is that just because they are black?

The data I've shown dozens of times regarding gun control not working doesn't count as data?

How about all of our expanded gun control here in Oregon? And California? And Washington?

More gun control laws in the last 5 years than in the prior 100 years. And since then drastically increased violent crime and murder rates. Disproportionately of poor and minorities...

It doesn't get any more dishonest than your stance on gun control.

 

[Phatguysrule]

I’m betting there are a few Hispanics in Texas that might care to differ with that position.
Still have not seen one speck of actual data that would support such a claim. But as I said it’s a cool hamburger to flip and it sure shoots like a really really red herring.

Nobody implied anything about how any minority race feels about guns.

Unfortunately, poor and minorities in this country are more easily lead astray than their better educated peers. So don't go patting yourself on your back too hard for convincing poor and minorities to vote against their own best interests.

I understand that's what both parties want, but I much prefer discussions about reality and solving problems rather than pushing some agenda that a political party has convinced me to swallow hook line and sinker.

 

[calvin natt]

Please fuck off republicans who do this over and over.

 

[calvin natt]

 

[Phatguysrule]

View attachment 49750

Assholes. I can't express how much I hate the Republican party...

 

[Fairly-Hard]

Please fuck off republicans who do this over and over.

On this we totally agree. It's a bad look for sure.

 

[Fairly-Hard]

I just don't get it? I try. I really do?

 

[Phatguysrule]

https://www.macrotrends.net/cities/us/or/portland/murder-homicide-rate-statistics

Oregon passed universal background checks in 2015, including for private party transactions. Thereby drastically increasing the time, expense, and complexity of making such transactions legally. As well as red flag laws.

The following years saw the highest homicide rates of the decade for Portland and Oregon.

And it's only gotten worse since.

And that was prior to covid-19, prior to drug decriminalization, prior to all of the excuses given.

And police take 80 minutes to respond to even reports of guns threatening schools.
https://www.kgw.com/article/news/in...hool/283-7f21612b-ad0b-4a3b-983c-930ca7b40f97

 

[Fairly-Hard]

https://www.macrotrends.net/cities/us/or/portland/murder-homicide-rate-statistics

Oregon passed universal background checks in 2015, including for private party transactions. Thereby drastically increasing the time, expense, and complexity of making such transactions legally. As well as red flag laws.

The following years saw the highest homicide rates of the decade for Portland and Oregon.

And it's only gotten worse since.

And that was prior to covid-19, prior to drug decriminalization, prior to all of the excuses given.

And police take 80 minutes to respond to even school shootings.

View attachment 49859

Well? Your own graph says different but i guess that's to be expected? 2018 has Oregon at 1.96 and only one year in the prior 20 years was lower? Just in 2014 the rate in Portland was 4.22 but you say and i quote-

The following years saw the highest homicide rates of the decade for Portland and Oregon.

Your facts prove you are wrong AGAIN!

 

[Phatguysrule]

Well? Your own graph says different but i guess that's to be expected? 2018 has Oregon at 1.96 and only one year in the prior 20 years was lower? Just in 2014 the rate in Portland was 4.22 but you say and i quote-


Your facts prove you are wrong AGAIN!

Dude, the following 3 years were the highest 3 year stretch of the decade. Yes, the nature of the very low rates means you get peaks and valleys, but 2014 was an obvious outlier to every other year in the decade. A single weekend can skew numbers that much.

What you can't argue is that these numbers support the idea that gun control reduced violent crime and murder rates. Nobody claimed gun control increases violent crime and murder rates.

 

[PtldPlatypus]

Dude, the following 3 years were the highest 3 year stretch of the decade. Yes, the nature of the very low rates means you get peaks and valleys, but 2014 was an obvious outlier to every other year in the decade. A single weekend can skew numbers that much.

What you can't argue is that these numbers support the idea that gun control reduced violent crime and murder rates. Nobody claimed gun control increases violent crime and murder rates.

I don't have a dog in this fight, but it looks to me like 2013 and 2016 are even more "outliers" to other years in the decade than 2014 was. From 2009-2018, the mean is 3.357, and the standard deviation is about 0.655. 2014's 4.22 is 1.3 std dev above the mean, while the 2013 and 2016 values of 2.18 and 2.3 are 1.8 and 1.6 std devs below the mean, respectively.

 

[Lanny]

let’s arm the teachers it’ll go swimmingly

Idiot. Why am I not surprised it happened in Florida.

 

[barfo]

What you can't argue is that these numbers support the idea that gun control reduced violent crime and murder rates.

But similarly, you can't argue that they don't.

Violent crime and murder rates might have increased even more without gun control. We have no way of knowing. There are many more variables involved here than just gun control vs no gun control.

barfo

 

[Phatguysrule]

But similarly, you can't argue that they don't.

Violent crime and murder rates might have increased even more without gun control. We have no way of knowing. There are many more variables involved here than just gun control vs no gun control.

barfo

There is no evidence to support the idea that they do. Thereby, no reason to support laws which have limited to no benefit, IMO.

 

[Lanny]

There is no evidence to support the idea that they do. Thereby, no reason to support laws which have limited to no benefit, IMO.

No evidence except from every single advanced country except the United States.

 

[Lanny]

No evidence except from every single advanced country except the United States.

Every year we have tens of thousands of gun murders while Norway had two in the year looked at.

 

[barfo]

There is no evidence to support the idea that they do. Thereby, no reason to support laws which have limited to no benefit, IMO.

Not expecting you to support laws that you believe have no benefit. Just saying the 'no evidence' argument works for either side here. Most public policy positions can't be rigorously proven to be correct/incorrect.

barfo

 

[SlyPokerDog]

 

[Phatguysrule]

Not expecting you to support laws that you believe have no benefit. Just saying the 'no evidence' argument works for either side here. Most public policy positions can't be rigorously proven to be correct/incorrect.

barfo

If a policy can't be proven to be beneficial it's a waste of time and effort, and an undue encroachment on personal freedoms.

This negatively impacts the efforts of evidence based policy by robbing it of funding and political capital.

 

[Phatguysrule]

Every year we have tens of thousands of gun murders while Norway had two in the year looked at.

Norway has among the most guns per capita in the world.

What Norway does that the US doesn't is encourage responsible gun ownership and education, and has far better gini coefficient by offering everybody access the healthcare, education, and a generous social safety net.

 

[Phatguysrule]

No evidence except from every single advanced country except the United States.

Every one of those countries has a far better gini coefficient than the US, as I mentioned in the other post.

None of those countries have shown more effective gun control than the US has accomplished by not using gun control.

At least, that I have found. I posted australian and UK numbers compared to US, and the US was as good or better. Than their pre and post gun control numbers.

If you have other countries who have shown larger drops post gun control I'd love to see them.