Gun Control & RKBA

Neon Gods

(222 posts)

59. You're right

Fri Jan 16, 2015, 10:50 PM

Jan 2015

I've spent the last two days counting them, using Gary Kleck's methodology, and the number I came up with is approximately 200,000. Relatively few of the shooters were injured to the extent that they needed medical care or police involvement because they were generally too drunk to do any real damage.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

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

71 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

A psychiatrist Examines The Anti-Gun Mentality [View all] mog75 Jan 2015 OP

I've never heard the first, 3rd or 4th statement from anyone advocating limits on gun ownership. Scuba Jan 2015 #1

They are just mog75 Jan 2015 #2

Oh no, this post is definately in the right place. Scuba Jan 2015 #4

I've never heard that fourth one, but the others are common in various forms. nt NYC_SKP Jan 2015 #3

The second one is said and said because it is the one that is true. Fred Sanders Jan 2015 #5

Link? mog75 Jan 2015 #6

Drink? Fred Sanders Jan 2015 #7

I do drink on special occasions. mog75 Jan 2015 #8

Didn't think so. mog75 Jan 2015 #9

Don't expect that one to answer. GGJohn Jan 2015 #10

I like to think of it as an unofficial block from the thread. beevul Jan 2015 #18

Hmmmm, that's a good way to look at it. GGJohn Jan 2015 #20

Yep, that tends to be how it works Duckhunter935 Jan 2015 #21

Yes, it's like Kryptonite. NaturalHigh Jan 2015 #25

Precisely. N/T beevul Jan 2015 #26

See my reply #1. Scuba Jan 2015 #19

Don't be so fucking lazy. Google three words" flamin lib Jan 2015 #58

I've seen 3 of the 4 at least, here on DU. N/T beevul Jan 2015 #14

utter rot jimmy the one Jan 2015 #11

No mog75 Jan 2015 #13

What about the reputation of the source link, you like the source? Fred Sanders Jan 2015 #16

The gun folks sources always link to rasical right wing and looney organizations and the NRA, it is thier Fred Sanders Jan 2015 #15

Please point out the part that is untrue and/or "rasical". Nuclear Unicorn Jan 2015 #34

lol. My Good Babushka Jan 2015 #27

"mog's link, therefore, is just typical rightwing propagunda" Nuclear Unicorn Jan 2015 #33

What can you say....2A regressives love the thought of a larger victim pool ileus Jan 2015 #12

You support the JPFO? Fred Sanders Jan 2015 #17

Do you support a woman's right to self defense? Nuclear Unicorn Jan 2015 #22

Your question is a humorless take on "When did you stop beating your wife"? Always hilarious. Fred Sanders Jan 2015 #23

No, it's not. It's a straight up "yes" or "no" question. Nuclear Unicorn Jan 2015 #28

Your one trick train wreck of illogic is endlessly amusing. Lots of other folks tell me that also. Fred Sanders Jan 2015 #29

"Lots of other folks tell me that" Argumentum ad populum? Really? friendly_iconoclast Jan 2015 #30

"Your one trick train wreck of illogic is endlessly amusing." Nuclear Unicorn Jan 2015 #31

Truer words were never written in this group. beevul Jan 2015 #35

Just to be clear Neon Gods Jan 2015 #38

And your free speech isn't defined as internet access. So what's your point? Nuclear Unicorn Jan 2015 #39

Because you can support a woman's right to... Neon Gods Jan 2015 #40

So you support a woman's right to self-defense provided she only do so Nuclear Unicorn Jan 2015 #41

What I find truly strange... NaturalHigh Jan 2015 #24

As someone who supports effective gun control... Neon Gods Jan 2015 #32

Are you looking for sympathy from those of us who are incessantly labeled as Nuclear Unicorn Jan 2015 #36

No Neon Gods Jan 2015 #37

It's only a straw man argument if people aren't making that argument. Nuclear Unicorn Jan 2015 #42

Anti-self defense? Neon Gods Jan 2015 #43

In the context of a population of 300 million, how many is "many"? beevul Jan 2015 #44

It depends on your definition of Neon Gods Jan 2015 #45

I was referring to otherwise law abiding citizens getting into shootouts. beevul Jan 2015 #46

How many is too many? Neon Gods Jan 2015 #49

Thats not an answer to "how many". N/T beevul Jan 2015 #57

You're right Neon Gods Jan 2015 #59

did you? gejohnston Jan 2015 #60

Posted without comment Neon Gods Jan 2015 #61

I read it gejohnston Jan 2015 #62

Impasse Neon Gods Jan 2015 #63

The difference is gejohnston Jan 2015 #65

Some folks have a liberal view because... discntnt_irny_srcsm Jan 2015 #67

Sorry, I don't believe in the Easter Bunny either. Neon Gods Jan 2015 #68

I said mainstream criminology gejohnston Jan 2015 #69

"The Politico article is very clear, it makes sense, and it also agrees with pure common sense... friendly_iconoclast Jan 2015 #71

That "piece" bases its conclusion in large part, on an opinion. beevul Jan 2015 #66

If I told you exactly who rejects self defense my post would be hidden. Nuclear Unicorn Jan 2015 #47

Really? Neon Gods Jan 2015 #48

Paul Quander sarisataka Jan 2015 #50

Sigh Neon Gods Jan 2015 #54

Really. It was denounced as vigilantism. Nuclear Unicorn Jan 2015 #52

Defending oneself from harm is Neon Gods Jan 2015 #55

Not really here to argue guns, but... credible psychiatrists don't diagnose "mentalities." enki23 Jan 2015 #51

It's not mentality Politicalboi Jan 2015 #53

How many times have you been shot? Nuclear Unicorn Jan 2015 #56

Maybe he/she doesn't want to wait... Neon Gods Jan 2015 #64

The he/she should confine his/herself to his/her home. Nuclear Unicorn Jan 2015 #70