Firearms and Freedom

Not going to go through your posting in detail, but as a driveby note this:
1) All those graphs and illustrations correlate geography and demographics with gun violence better than they do gun laws. This would be especially clear if the homicide data were not graphed by State, which is immediately misleading.
2) The rating of the gun laws is subjective - it's not actually a bit more difficult to buy a gun in Minnesota than it is in South Dakota, for example, concealed carry permits are "shall issue" with minimal fees or requirements in Minnesota, and so forth. So the Slate gun law ratings that are one entire axis appear to be - how to put it - subjective. And the scale they are plotted on is wholly imaginary. This affects the appearance of the graph.
3) Most of the gun laws they are ascribing effectiveness to are recent, but the comparative gun violence rankings have not changed much for decades. Absent a mechanism, that invalidates the correlation (what has actually been graphed would then be more likely a correlation between lack of gun ownership or violence and willingness to pass gun ownership restrictions)
4) Since gun violence rates have been generally falling ever since about twelve years after leaded gasoline was banned in the US, pretty much everywhere, what we would need as evidence of US gun restriction effectiveness would be a visible break in the trend line after passage. But they don't even consider time.
5) Gun access is not graphed - so any connection between gun prevalence/access and gun violence is not reliably visible in those graphs.
6) And so forth.

So, as mentioned, these numbers and so forth are fine as far as they go, but they don't say what you want them to say.

And it's not just me - a couple of these points I am making are also found in, for example, the third link there, which also includes this factoid:

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

they are.
they also want my unicorn... but i have her hidden

and?

posting a study from a university who can't access the relevant information because it isn't there is like...?

if you had all the information we wouldn't be having this conversation
you would be king of the US

1- i would also ask (and ask for proof of) their intent. if it was intentional. if it was accidental. if it was negligent homicide. if it was caused by another person. facts are important in that kind of case, just like all cases

2- that is also a bad analogy ... you see, you do not have the right to drive a car in the US. it is a privilege, and that is why it is licensed by the state. you have the right to freedom of movement, access to public roads, access to public areas, and more... but driving is a privilege, not a right at all

but yes, i do advocate for the removal of a license for mowing down people because the law specifically states that it is illegal, thus a weapon
however, i don't advocate for the removal of the license because the car was a tool...
i would advocate the removal of the license because of the intent, nature of the crime (if any) and the individual culpability in said crime

yes, and there are strict laws that govern gun use and ownership too (actual application of said laws depends upon the prosecutors office etc)

hospitals also have strict laws and regulatory mechanisms, just like guns... in fact, far, far stricter than guns

as for your fallacy link: if it aint to relevant statistics from the above links (last post), then it is a biased interpretation

period

if you want, i can include them... of course, you would also have to include the cultural foods they use to feed with too, as it is common and always relevant , so...

sure
except that the science in said facts and figures (and in your links, etc) are also severely lacking in a lot of detail and information that i know isn't collected...

go ahead, read the links i left and learn what is collected where... even within a state the data collected is not the same depending on the org collecting the data, so again, if you would read the source material you would understand what the problem is

not moving any goal post
haven't changed the argument at all, in fact

reported crime
don't forget that important qualifier to your point
and don't forget my point that crime is a part of the culture - so there is a lot of "crime" that is technically a crime (by law) that isn't a crime (by culture) or reported as such, like beating the heck out of a stalker

but that is still not important because the culture is completely different... which is the point!
comparing subaru to Bud-K again

wait... you want to argue about taking away the 2nd amendment but you can't take 2 minutes to actually read what it is or it's basic history and why it was put in the constitution?
really?

i expected a little better considering you are digging up irrelevant biased sites to prove your point while forgetting the major points i made about the fact that the bulk of the relevant data is either not there, not divided up or reported at all, different, not standardized or just plain not reported to the national statistics database

yeah... read my lines directly above this quote

you mean like the UCR?
https://www.fbi.gov/stats-services/crimestats/

yeah... if only i had thought of that
oh wait... i linked it above
nevermind


lets look at something important on that very page though

did you know that the UCR submissions differed from the local databases?
that is why it says "The data user is, therefore, cautioned against comparing statistical data of individual agencies"... because the local agancies will be using a different method, reporting, statistical analysis and more... likely with more data to differentiate crimes and concentrate on "hot spots" or local problems due to special needs, etc...

now do you see the problem?
now do you get what i am saying about not having all the information?

EDIT
important note and qualifier: when researching national statistics, you must, absolutely must, have and use multiple databases to cover all the potential issues and problems that may be reported incorrectly, falsely, not reported in all databases or simply just misfiled etc.

not all databases will have all the info either, and no single database can be definitive or the single source of information because of reporting practices and things like HIPA which may not even be covered even with the NIH or CDC databases.

Also note, not all databases will cover all places for all years either, so you must be very methodical to unsure your comparisons include all the same info, relevant areas, dates times and crimes as well as conform to the same criteria which may or may not be included in the information which will also require research and public arrest records and necessitate checking facts.

almost forgot... you should also use the Census information collected for population and other factors etc

(see the problem now?)

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Only an American (Iceaura) could say this:-
"I don't think a citizen is - or should be - required to demonstrate "proficiency" [with a gun] to an agent of the government before being allowed to exercise any Constitutional right,..."

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Arizona also beats Massachusetts in deaths by knives, and "other weapons" by over 2:1., and also leads in deaths by fists.
Arizona also has a lower average IQ than Mass, and is lower in reading scores.

Look to your variables.

https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/u..._20_murder_by_state_types_of_weapons_2013.xls

 

Maybe, the Arizona legislators are a tad less arrogant.
Freedom ain't free, and it does come with some risks.
Would you rather live your life in a cage all safe and warm, or risk freedom?

 

nope. sorry... they did it with their culture, not laws. if the gun laws were effectively enforced, no Yakuza would own a gun. Most Yakuza are well known to the law enforcement and they also know how to spot the ones who aren't known (as noted in the documentary). Plus, one of the more telling indicators (again, as noted in the documentary) is their markings (tats) though that is changing slowly. even the gov't knows that simple monitoring of the private bath house would finger most Yakuza (because it is illegal to bathe in a public house with tat's - again, noted in the documentary)

so, as i stated: you're comparing Spaghetti to Methodist and extrapolating fork from it

please note that i provided you with the only sources of those "facts and figures" that are available for the US statistics
also note that the databases themselves tell you that not all data is reported... shall i remind you of that again?
lets see for ourself

https://www.fbi.gov/stats-services/crimestats/
so, the UCR doesn't collect all the data... (there are other differences too if you read the fine print - which you didn't, apparently)

https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/nibrs/2011/resources/a-guide-to-understanding-nibrs
So NIBRS is the most recent detailed report, but you can see that it has changed and also doesn't include all the data
it is one of the reporting methods the UCR is based upon
also note the implementation dates, changes etc, which, again, indicate that not all data from past statistics has the same level of accuracy or reliability as current reports, etc
(read the fine print)

point is: as i keep trying to tell you - just because you see numbers doesn't mean it is a fully accurate representation of the situation becuase there is a lot of changes made in the NIBRS/UCR as well as other databases as we try to refine the data to insure a more clear picture of reality
any older stats will be misleading (check your stats on those articles linked - check all dates, etc)

no. that you can believe what you want as long as you have a means to justify your personal belief
you believe that gun control works because you don't understand the cultural impacts or other factors in places like Japan
again, it's like comparing a Maserati to a unicycle and saying "the unicycle has a tire and with a professional user corners far more sharply and able than a Maserati, therefore the Maserati is worthless as a means of transportation"

it is the only true reporting source for statistics on gun crime or reporting in the US... which, as noted on their own sites, is also limited
but don't let that fine print bother you with details

with a touch of sarcasm, mind you... thought that unicorn comment might have supported that
but you may be referring to the comment about the reasons for the 2nd... that is simply fact. it is there to protect against Tyranny just as much to insure your fundamental right to protection.

yes, when you learn about the reporting methods, flaws and you don't just ignore the actual problem with just grabbing random sections and comparing them without study... like your post above

read those quotes you gave... like this:

now re-read what i wrote about not having all the data and the quotes like

[emphasis mine - capt] https://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/nibrs/2011/resources/a-guide-to-understanding-nibrs

so, reporting during 1993 - 2001 is not as accurate as the newly mandated 2011 stats
hmm.... i wonder where i read that already?

but apparently that isn't important to you because you want to strongly believe that guns are bad... so you post any biased reporting that supports your own conclusions, even when the reporting sites themselves tell you things like this

this means, by definition, that it isn't mandatory, correct?
think on that for a second! what can that mean? can it mean that not all agencies actually report their data and information?
... but lets continue with more

now why would they say that, i wonder?
maybe because...

you mean, you can't just quote random sections or statistics on the site and have an accurate representation of the facts?
wow... where did i read that on this thread?
Oh! right! i've been saying that to you above!

what i think i should have said is "The data user is, therefore, cautioned against comparing statistical data of individual agencies."
Oh, wait... i quoted it from the statistics database site that is providing the numbers for your above stats! wow...

get it yet?

now, just for your information, i would like to know the truth. but as i pointed out, you can't get a realistic image of what is going on when the data is either not there to see or it is not mandatory for all reporting agencies. that makes a big difference in what is seen... would you start a database on star formation but completely ignore and leave out all super-massive stars because there just aren't enough to make a difference? Would you leave out observed phenomenon from the Helio-seismology studies on our sun because they're not representative of every star in the universe because our star is not the same as every star?

statistics are great and can tell a story... but only when you have the necessary data to actually make an informed decision
otherwise you're pissing into a fan and telling yourself that it's rain

see what i just wrote about that and the actual disclaimers on the databases where the stat's come from, please
thanks

EDIT
also note, the cultural aspect in the US differs from place to place and it is not homogeneous

in the US there are varying degree's of how strictly or if at all a (any) cultural aspect will be adhered to by said followers, unlike a nation or society of xenophobic strict adherents of a mostly homogeneous culture like, say... Japan.

those simple considerations can alter the stat's in areas by a great amount at times. imagine comparing Chinatown to, say, South Miami ... telling point WRT culture and aspects talked about above

 

You are comparing apples and oranges.
This country is much more warlike than down under.
From the top to the bottom and back up again.
How many troops did Australia put in Iraq, or Afghanistan?
How many bombs have you dropped on other countries recently?

How can you expect the USA to be like Australia? I assure you that we do not expect you to be like us.
Australia is a quiet little back water while we are riding a wild river to a storm filled ocean.
And, damn the piddling tourist dollars, I ain't selling my rights for a string of glass beads.

 

ROTFLMFAO
i don't care who you are...now that is funny!
... considering the history of the US and all

LOL

 

I fail to see how restating this aspect of the problem serves any useful purpose at this point.

 

So,
What you really want is to change this countries policies and culture?
Really, what I want to.
I want a commander in chief who will order the troops back home, and have the balls to take on the mic.

Is the "commander in chief" really in charge?
Or is he a well compensated prisoner of the Military Industrial Complex(mic)?

 

Likewise my childhood, which was passed amid a plethora of firearms and no such gun laws at all.

Too bad about the Scandinavians, Irish, Russians, Germans, Brits, Mexicans, Indonesians, every single country-ans in South and Central America, and so forth. But happy happy Chinese, Cambodians, Burmese, Saudi Arabians, Tibetans, and the like. Law and order is always best for children.

Or maybe scratch the Indonesians - usually machetes and the like, not guns, iirc.

Your studies still do not say what you want them to say.

Exactly.

Take that under consideration. It's important. I doubt that all non-Americans are in fact that universally benighted, but apparently many are. We wish them luck - it is possible to be lucky, in this world, even in one's government.

Keep in mind that the American government is not as nice as some - for example, we had slavery in this country, seriously, until about 1965, and so forth. We don't trust our government for very good reason.

 

I am lost for words.
What is that real big word starting with "h" that would describe what we have here?
Well make it a capital "H".

Alex

 

first of all, the NRA doesn't battle against all regulations to purchase a gun, otherwise there wouldn't be existing laws that require background checks etc...

secondly, as the NRA own the trademark and copyright for Eddie Eagle GunSafe® program, they have the legal right to control the public distribution of said image - you know, like the college teams owning the mascots... so that argument is pure unadulterated horse-hockey as it is no different than any other controlled owned image, trademarked or copyright object

as the Eagle is well known and known to be associated with an entire organization (NRA), then it stands to reason they want to protect the image of said organization

so, are you going to petition the NFL, NBA or all the colleges of the world for their similar protection of copyright or trademarked material?

considering your above argument, that is the only thing you can do without being a .... how was it put....

yeah... good point... so, are you both going to argue against the NBA, etc????

after all, if you don't that would make you the "capital "H" " yourself, right?

so are you going to also advocate for the banning of cars?
the problem isn't going to be mediated with more laws that aren't enforced... we already have good laws that work, they're just not enforced (as i keep trying to point out)

the problem isn't the tool, it's the user. (IOW- fund and correct the violence problem, not the tool which can be used to mitigate said violence)

If you're going to go after the tool rather than the core problem, then here are more suggestions:
Trains can be lethal to pedestrians, users as well as innocent bystanders...
Screwdrivers and Hammers have been proven to be lethal...
Hospitals are implicated in far, far more deaths yearly by malpractice alone...
Swimming pools (or any body of water) can be lethal...
any hard blunt object is a weapon and can be used lethally (so can flexible objects, come to think of it)
Water has been implicated in most drownings, and is also known to be consumed by 100% of all criminals, convicted or otherwise...
Flying can be lethal considering the implications of in-air problems...

but that's not all...lets stop other problems with the same tactic! using your logic, we should ban:
writing utensils for spelling errors
eating or cooking utensils for obesity
cars for drunk driving
prisons for incarcerating people and holding them against their will
cops for the death of criminals caught i the act of felonious or other dangerous potentially lethal activity
firefighters for always mysteriously showing up at every fire
Doctors and medical professionals for the high death rates surrounding their "practice"

[sarc/hyperbole intended]

 

Of course it is clear it is a matter of protection of image trade mark etc I understand that but it just seems foolish.

You seem to have a complex problem and all I can offer is my hope that somehow things improve whatever that may mean.

Alex