Latest Breaking News

slackmaster

(60,567 posts)

118. Your previous reply dealt with attitudes. A properly done poll measures those objectively.

Mon Feb 27, 2012, 11:11 AM

Feb 2012

When you are confronted with facts that challenge the unfounded fears you present here, you dodge and weave. When challenged to present facts, you present nothing.

While? Your final graph is about background checks. Which have gone up.

Which is strong evidence that lawful sales of new guns have gone up, steadily, over the last 10 years.

Your reasoning is subjective, and well ... "slack."

You haven't presented any reasoning in this thread at all. Only unfounded fears of things that you think MIGHT happen, and you ignore overwhelming evidence from other states, including California, that those things DON'T actually happen when the law is changed to protect legitimate use of force for self-defense. Basic castle doctrine laws similar to the Minnesota bill under discussion here have been in place in most states for decades.

Where's the beef, Brettongarcia?

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

127 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Minnesota's controversial deadly force bill advances [View all] Little Tich Feb 2012 OP

So how do "I feel" right now? Coffee? Tea? Deadly force? Brettongarcia Feb 2012 #1

Look out! That plastic bag being blown down the street might be hiding a terrorist! baldguy Feb 2012 #113

When Florida expanded it's laws there was much wailing and gnashing of teeth. Edweird Feb 2012 #2

Shoot first...ask questions later. 1620rock Feb 2012 #3

A perfect example of the type of hyperbole I am referring to. Edweird Feb 2012 #4

2 kids were shot in my town for trying to steel a can of beer each pasto76 Feb 2012 #49

Not to me. eom boppers Feb 2012 #96

When I hear "Shoot first . . . ask questions later" existentialist Feb 2012 #23

So, you are accusing the policemen of wailing? Kolesar Feb 2012 #13

The Minnesota Chiefs of Police Association does not speak for rank-and-file police officers slackmaster Feb 2012 #30

I didn't ask you...eom Kolesar Feb 2012 #58

Then I'll answer for him Neue Regel Feb 2012 #95

I suppose secondvariety Feb 2012 #14

people getting away with murder. barbtries Feb 2012 #20

Something that hasn't happened in any other state where similar changes in the law have been made slackmaster Feb 2012 #22

If they got away with it, then how would you know? Brettongarcia Feb 2012 #29

You're the one who claimed that there is a problem, i.e. "people getting away with murder" slackmaster Feb 2012 #31

Check web for hundreds of cases where "accidental shooting" passed for a second; then gets exposed Brettongarcia Feb 2012 #43

Statistics for the whole population outweigh any number of anecdotes you can come up with slackmaster Feb 2012 #44

Declines in gun-related deaths attributable to 10 different factors; not just yours Brettongarcia Feb 2012 #48

You mean like how only 331... primavera Feb 2012 #105

I'm glad you were able to figure out how to make WISQARS spit out numbers slackmaster Feb 2012 #107

gerb barbtries Feb 2012 #33

It came to me in a dream last night. A friend of mine who is prone to neologisms uttered it. slackmaster Feb 2012 #45

Neologisms are characteristic of certain forms of mental illness Brettongarcia Feb 2012 #46

Your reply does not follow logically from what I posted, and appears to be a personal attack. slackmaster Feb 2012 #47

LOGIC: You advocate looser shooting regs. Counter: gives persons with bad judgment too much freedom Brettongarcia Feb 2012 #51

it will now. barbtries Feb 2012 #56

Yes, I checked it a few minutes ago. My neologician friend will be amused. slackmaster Feb 2012 #59

Seriously? You're using Florida as an argument FOR such laws? baldguy Feb 2012 #114

Lack of any verifiable resulting harm to public safety is a perfectly good argument for expanded... slackmaster Feb 2012 #123

Sounds Like DallasNE Feb 2012 #5

If you are interested in seeing what the bill actually says... slackmaster Feb 2012 #8

I looked at it; the new law just gives lots more room for accidents. Brettongarcia Feb 2012 #32

It appears to me that although you read it, you have failed to understand it slackmaster Feb 2012 #37

See my remarks above Brettongarcia Feb 2012 #52

"Reasonable Belief" Is The Threshold DallasNE Feb 2012 #62

For some people my examples would qualify as self-defense. Oneka Feb 2012 #66

Why hasn't the blood been flowing on the streets of Florida... spin Feb 2012 #94

Is "he looked big, Black and scary" considered "threat" enough McCamy Taylor Feb 2012 #6

You will find the answers to all of your questions starting at line 4.26 at the link I am providing slackmaster Feb 2012 #9

It's now open season on human beings! Yeeahhhhh! Brettongarcia Feb 2012 #12

Does she commit a lot of felonies? Gore1FL Feb 2012 #16

Problem? The subjective element: you can shoot someone "reasonably believed" is committing a crime Brettongarcia Feb 2012 #36

I hope you get the chance to serve on a trial jury some time, especially a criminal case slackmaster Feb 2012 #38

But now? As of these laws? Those rules are looser Brettongarcia Feb 2012 #40

The proposed rules for Minnesota are no "looser" than long-standing California law slackmaster Feb 2012 #41

"Reasonably believed" has a standard definition in these cases. ManiacJoe Feb 2012 #78

Too bad it doesn't specify something like "and no other alternatives were available". DebJ Feb 2012 #80

DebJ, I believe that people who own deadly weapons should be trained in legal and moral aspects... slackmaster Feb 2012 #115

We've had essentially the same law in California for several decades slackmaster Feb 2012 #24

The problem is, now there enough slack to encourage hasty, bad judgement Brettongarcia Feb 2012 #39

If that was the case, more fatal accidental shootings would show up in statistics. They don't. slackmaster Feb 2012 #42

There are 10 different factors to acccount for lower accidental shootings; yours is only one Brettongarcia Feb 2012 #50

Your replies in this thread are consistently devoid of verifiable facts, Brettongarcia slackmaster Feb 2012 #110

The first graphs, are about what people WANT. No real stats at all, about what probably WORKS Brettongarcia Feb 2012 #116

Your previous reply dealt with attitudes. A properly done poll measures those objectively. slackmaster Feb 2012 #118

Open season on human beings?? really??? Oneka Feb 2012 #67

See my example above; of the mother-in law without a key, breaking in. Mistaken for an intruder Brettongarcia Feb 2012 #70

agreed Oneka Feb 2012 #74

GOOD POINT in bill's favor, to be sure: current system makes self-defense a crime, at first? Brettongarcia Feb 2012 #83

Thank you for your condolence Oneka Feb 2012 #92

Could you provide a link to any relevant news coverage of your violent tragedies? Brettongarcia Feb 2012 #100

without Oneka Feb 2012 #102

You are all missing the point. You are using examples in a house. Thor_MN Apr 2012 #125

Oh. My. GAWD! They want to make Minnesota's laws on self defense similar to those in... slackmaster Feb 2012 #7

Oh, really? DFW Feb 2012 #10

Another solution in search of a problem.n/t. Scruffy1 Feb 2012 #11

No. it doesn't mean that at all. Gore1FL Feb 2012 #18

This message was self-deleted by its author Tesha Feb 2012 #21

A very similar law has been in effect for several decades here in California slackmaster Feb 2012 #25

If a lawyer could convince a jury that was reasonable assumption on his client's behalf Gore1FL Feb 2012 #28

do we see this happening now? Oneka Feb 2012 #57

This message was self-deleted by its author Tesha Feb 2012 #64

Did you lose your "loophole"? n/t Oneka Feb 2012 #68

"Preventing" Is The Language Of Self-Defense DallasNE Feb 2012 #65

New ballgame, Same as the old ballgame? Oneka Feb 2012 #69

Both are blank checks: 1) "Reasonable," AND 2) "prevent.' Though ... Brettongarcia Feb 2012 #71

My point is. Oneka Feb 2012 #79

Hope you are right Brettongarcia Feb 2012 #81

This is secondvariety Feb 2012 #84

Defensive gun uses may increase with Oneka Feb 2012 #89

So Why Have A New Law? DallasNE Feb 2012 #88

There are other provisions in the law Oneka Feb 2012 #90

I Still Don't Buy It DallasNE Feb 2012 #97

So if my mother-in-law breaks into my house without her key, and I shoot her; her folks can't sue? Brettongarcia Feb 2012 #98

but Oneka Feb 2012 #104

The point would be that indeed, complicted scenarios - and abuses - can multiply with this law. Brettongarcia Feb 2012 #117

The kind of law proposed for MN has been in place in California for several decades slackmaster Feb 2012 #119

This has happened Oneka Feb 2012 #120

You would absolutely be justified Doctor_J Feb 2012 #55

So if an SUV or pick up; greiner3 Feb 2012 #15

If you believe that to be a societal standard. Gore1FL Feb 2012 #17

So the actual decision is up to stupid people. Great. saras Feb 2012 #54

I don't believe that would pass the "good faith" test slackmaster Feb 2012 #26

you just FEEL it? barbtries Feb 2012 #19

No, that is not even close to what the bill says slackmaster Feb 2012 #27

that's what the woman in the OP was quoted as saying. barbtries Feb 2012 #34

Good news. Fortran Feb 2012 #35

Gun Nuts fascisthunter Feb 2012 #53

Hoffman is like Bachmann's dumber sister... spedtr90 Feb 2012 #60

This is a Republican bill. Next, they'll move on to banning abortions... Comrade Grumpy Feb 2012 #61

So is it safe to assume Oneka Feb 2012 #63

But now every man takes the law into his own hands. Trigger-happy men. Brettongarcia Feb 2012 #72

Taking the law Oneka Feb 2012 #77

How about your right, not to be shot at by every damn-fool, that mistakenly said you weredangerous? Brettongarcia Feb 2012 #82

If this law passes. Oneka Feb 2012 #87

So I could pick a violent argument with someone in my home 'n shoot 'em dead. And everythings good? Brettongarcia Feb 2012 #99

Picking a fight takes you out of the realm for arguing that you acted in self-defense slackmaster Feb 2012 #111

See reply above Brettongarcia Feb 2012 #121

111 was a response to your reply above. I've read all of your others. None of them refute 111. slackmaster Feb 2012 #122

I have given up freedom gladly in the past Doctor_J Feb 2012 #108

Yes, this bill will be cheered loudly in the gungeon Doctor_J Feb 2012 #85

cheered loudly Oneka Feb 2012 #93

Five years since Florida enacted "stand-your-ground" law, justifiable homicides are up brentspeak Feb 2012 #73

Taking law into their own hands, many gun-happy folks are killing innocent people Brettongarcia Feb 2012 #75

Hopefully Bubba got prosecuted,, N/t Oneka Feb 2012 #91

Yup, Bubba is getting prosecuted. But? Too late for dead victim Brettongarcia Feb 2012 #101

Sadly for this deceased young man Oneka Feb 2012 #103

Here's the part that the gun nuts just refuse to confront Doctor_J Feb 2012 #106

Just to insert some facts into the conversation, ManiacJoe Feb 2012 #76

Spam deleted by uppityperson (MIR Team) sfghrtjr Feb 2012 #86

good luck to our friends getting this signed. ileus Feb 2012 #109

A similar law has worked out very well for us here in California for several decades slackmaster Feb 2012 #112

It's harmless? Now flash ahead to just March 2012 - and Travon Martin Brettongarcia Apr 2012 #124

"Castle doctrine" is not the same as "stand your ground"... -..__... Apr 2012 #126

Not quite. Thanks to "Stand Your Ground" Thor_MN Apr 2012 #127