Gun Control & RKBA

TPaine7

(4,286 posts)

99. That's the problem...

Wed Sep 19, 2012, 09:01 PM

Sep 2012

You don't care about the evidence presented; you casually dismiss it without examination. And you see no problem with doing so in the face of your own statement of what would be a clear principle coming from any honest, decent human being.

You don't care about the national Constitution or the integrity of the American legal system, as you've so clearly expressed. You don't care about the NY Constitution of the integrity of the NY legal system, either. You don't even care about principles of approaching evidence that you yourself propagate. They are time and subject limited to ensure that they suit your purposes, and yours alone.

I wonder if you really care about statistics, or whether you would abandon respect for them as well as soon as they weren't convenient.

I have no grudge against you, but I have a severe, longstanding grudge against BS. I'm attacking the BS; it's not my fault you identify yourself with it.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

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

198 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Ohio: Buckeyes for Concealed Carry President Uses Handgun to Defend Family [View all] rDigital Sep 2012 OP

This sounds like a made up story- why would a white man call another white man "white honky"? kimbutgar Sep 2012 #1

You've never seen white wannabe "gangstas" with racial confusion? MercutioATC Sep 2012 #6

Who uses the word "honky?" nt Confusious Sep 2012 #51

My brother in law. jeepnstein Sep 2012 #114

Well, couldn't you imagine being called a "black honky?" Eleanors38 Sep 2012 #52

made up story or Flashmann Sep 2012 #153

rude baser toter. ileus Sep 2012 #2

Do you have another source for this besides "Students for Concealed Carry - Ohio"? SecularMotion Sep 2012 #3

But yet you have no problem posting articles glacierbay Sep 2012 #4

The police were clearly involved, why don't you call them? rDigital Sep 2012 #5

You say the police were involved SecularMotion Sep 2012 #7

I'm sure there's a police report. We can make that your responsibility to go and fetch it. rDigital Sep 2012 #8

If you can't find a more credible source, you should self-delete the OP SecularMotion Sep 2012 #11

See post #4 nt. glacierbay Sep 2012 #12

Fetch, boy, fetch! rDigital Sep 2012 #13

Funny how he'll post anti gun articles from the VPC, Huffington Post, or the Brady org. glacierbay Sep 2012 #15

Here's the phone number if you'd like to call them Reasonable_Argument Sep 2012 #14

Just from the facts presented Reasonable_Argument Sep 2012 #9

Sounds totally bogus LynnTTT Sep 2012 #10

You and SM seem to have some wish he had escalated the situation... Clames Sep 2012 #16

Self-defense does not include pursuit and capture. GreenStormCloud Sep 2012 #18

Re: The guy with the gun doesn't follow the criminal Trunk Monkey Sep 2012 #81

OSU Students near Westland Mall makes it a suspicious story. bluecoat_fan Sep 2012 #17

Make sure you keep all these posts in mind the next time you consider calling a gun owner... Clames Sep 2012 #22

The story sounds suspicious, not the gun owner. I too own a handgun, but the story sounds made up. bluecoat_fan Sep 2012 #83

More lies bongbong Sep 2012 #19

"lies"? Details, please... friendly_iconoclast Sep 2012 #20

I think the expression he uses is "prove it." nt Eleanors38 Sep 2012 #21

Like many gun hero stories, this appears to be mostly fantasy and bravado. DanTex Sep 2012 #23

No it doesn't. Clames Sep 2012 #24

LOL. No evidence! Sometimes I forget how clueless people in the gungeon are! DanTex Sep 2012 #25

Remove suicides from those numbers Reasonable_Argument Sep 2012 #26

Umm... I think you're getting your NRA talking points mixed up. DanTex Sep 2012 #27

No I was talking about the first link Reasonable_Argument Sep 2012 #28

So was I. DanTex Sep 2012 #29

Really? Reasonable_Argument Sep 2012 #30

Yes, really. DanTex Sep 2012 #31

So then you admit it was included... Reasonable_Argument Sep 2012 #32

It was a survey, it included a lot of things. DanTex Sep 2012 #36

Well then Reasonable_Argument Sep 2012 #41

It seems to me that this is the first statistical study you have ever seen in your life. DanTex Sep 2012 #43

"When you don't really understand something..." TPaine7 Sep 2012 #85

LOL. With the way you take things out of context, you ought to work for the Romney campaign. DanTex Sep 2012 #86

Why, are you his recruiter? No thanks I'll stick with Obama, but my condolences on your desperate, TPaine7 Sep 2012 #88

Maybe Ron Paul is more your speed -- one of those "it's unconstitutional" wackos you seem to like. DanTex Sep 2012 #89

Once again, my condolences. TPaine7 Sep 2012 #90

Until you showed up to try and settle some old scores, this was, in fact, a discussion about a DanTex Sep 2012 #92

If you read the paper gejohnston Sep 2012 #93

Why are we talking about this again? DanTex Sep 2012 #94

search me gejohnston Sep 2012 #95

So it is a personal grudge! DanTex Sep 2012 #96

ask him gejohnston Sep 2012 #97

That's the problem... TPaine7 Sep 2012 #99

You have a wild imagination. DanTex Sep 2012 #110

... TPaine7 Sep 2012 #111

LOL. DanTex Sep 2012 #112

Mea Culpa TPaine7 Sep 2012 #98

Just read the link Reasonable_Argument Sep 2012 #35

I said it was controlled for, not excluded. DanTex Sep 2012 #40

Controlled for Reasonable_Argument Sep 2012 #44

No, that's not what controlled for means. DanTex Sep 2012 #45

Well stats was a long time ago but... Reasonable_Argument Sep 2012 #78

For the third time, yes, the study controlled for prior criminal history. DanTex Sep 2012 #79

53.12% of victims had prior arrests. GreenStormCloud Sep 2012 #37

Right, and the effect of criminal history was controlled for statistically. DanTex Sep 2012 #39

How many of the victims had a PA License to Carry Firearm? GreenStormCloud Sep 2012 #65

Rebuttal: GreenStormCloud Sep 2012 #34

They controlled for criminal record, along with a host of other factors. DanTex Sep 2012 #38

Let me guess, the Brady campaign is the only sufficiently unbiased source of information 4th law of robotics Sep 2012 #33

Peer reviewed studies. DanTex Sep 2012 #46

Ha . . .what?!?! 4th law of robotics Sep 2012 #47

Peer-reviewed studies... DanTex Sep 2012 #48

Do you consider FBI crime statistics to be valid? 4th law of robotics Sep 2012 #49

I presented two peer reviewed studies. You? DanTex Sep 2012 #50

If you must ignore the FBI's studies on this then I think we have nothing to discuss 4th law of robotics Sep 2012 #53

FBI doesn't have statistics on this. DanTex Sep 2012 #56

Do you acknowledge the the FBI statistics show crime is dropping? 4th law of robotics Sep 2012 #57

Yes. Do you acknowledge that a gun provides more risk than benefit? DanTex Sep 2012 #58

Excellent. Do you acknowledge that while it was dropping total guns owned 4th law of robotics Sep 2012 #59

You ignored my question. DanTex Sep 2012 #60

You ignored mine multiple times 4th law of robotics Sep 2012 #61

LOL. Well, ignoring the truth doesn't make it go away. DanTex Sep 2012 #62

So we have more guns and less crime 4th law of robotics Sep 2012 #63

LOL. Ignoring me again. I guess when you have no evidence on your side, that's the only play! DanTex Sep 2012 #64

I have real world evidence glacierbay Sep 2012 #66

What you have is anecdotal evidence. DanTex Sep 2012 #67

Wrong. glacierbay Sep 2012 #68

Actually, I'm right. What you have is anecdotal evidence. DanTex Sep 2012 #69

Well glacierbay Sep 2012 #71

Your attempt at an argument here sucks. n/t ellisonz Sep 2012 #125

Yeah, that guy tends to make a lot of noise and then hide when evidence is presented. DanTex Sep 2012 #128

That's one interpretation 4th law of robotics Sep 2012 #130

LOL. The "creationist" charge by the guy who's intent on ignoring the scientific evidence. DanTex Sep 2012 #131

You refuse to acknowledge 4th law of robotics Sep 2012 #134

What are you talking about? DanTex Sep 2012 #140

You like that phrase 4th law of robotics Sep 2012 #161

I suppose the irony is that given his username... ellisonz Sep 2012 #138

Yes, I agree, it is a low-education level demographic. DanTex Sep 2012 #141

It's clear neither of you read those studies 4th law of robotics Sep 2012 #162

LOL. "pointing out issues" DanTex Sep 2012 #165

This is getting sad 4th law of robotics Sep 2012 #166

You have yet to make a single cogent critique of any of the studies. DanTex Sep 2012 #168

Actually I've made several 4th law of robotics Sep 2012 #170

Wrong again. DanTex Sep 2012 #172

You forgot your smiley 4th law of robotics Sep 2012 #174

And you forgot to make a cogent point. DanTex Sep 2012 #176

"cogent point" 4th law of robotics Sep 2012 #179

Looks like you've completely given up on substance. Not too surprising. DanTex Sep 2012 #181

"scientifically illiterate" 4th law of robotics Sep 2012 #183

Still dodging! Anytime you want to talk substance, I'll be here! DanTex Sep 2012 #186

Not really 4th law of robotics Sep 2012 #129

Like I pointed out last time you made that silly argument... DanTex Sep 2012 #132

As has been pointed out to you before 4th law of robotics Sep 2012 #133

LOL. "the studies you cite are always flawed" DanTex Sep 2012 #137

. . . . 4th law of robotics Sep 2012 #160

LOL. This is getting good! DanTex Sep 2012 #164

So your reponse to every valid criticism is either 4th law of robotics Sep 2012 #167

LOL. Dodge. Thanks for playing! DanTex Sep 2012 #169

We have another poster that 4th law of robotics Sep 2012 #171

Dodge again. Have you read up on proxy variables yet? DanTex Sep 2012 #173

Pro-tip 4th law of robotics Sep 2012 #175

Dodge yet again. DanTex Sep 2012 #177

"dodge" 4th law of robotics Sep 2012 #178

Still dodging. Whatever you do, make sure you don't try and make a substantive point! DanTex Sep 2012 #180

"fall apart" 4th law of robotics Sep 2012 #182

Still dodging! Still waiting for you to respond about those proxy variables! DanTex Sep 2012 #184

"melted down" 4th law of robotics Sep 2012 #187

Still dodging! Proxy variables, peer reviewed studies. Any of that ring a bell? DanTex Sep 2012 #188

This message was self-deleted by its author DanTex Sep 2012 #184

Correlation, not causation. n/t ellisonz Sep 2012 #136

You provided garbage. Clames Sep 2012 #74

LOL. Keep that head in buried in that sand! DanTex Sep 2012 #82

"Peer Reviewed" garbage is still garbage. Everyone has an axe to grind, especially those in your rDigital Sep 2012 #84

Post removed Post removed Sep 2012 #108

LOL. Now that was truly funny! A gun fanatic claiming to understand science!!! DanTex Sep 2012 #109

I did answer your question. You just don't read very well. Clames Sep 2012 #117

So what's the answer? You deny science across the board? DanTex Sep 2012 #118

I deny your brand of opinion-based science. I quite enjoy the fact-based science though. Clames Sep 2012 #119

Lordy. It just keeps getting worse... DanTex Sep 2012 #120

Getting worse is your understanding of basic mathematics. Clames Sep 2012 #121

Those with a fear of instruments have more of a theological view on gun control than logical. rDigital Sep 2012 #122

Funny you bring up "theological view" when you are the one denying the empirical evidence. DanTex Sep 2012 #124

Well that's just like your opinion, man. You're peer-reviewed tripe is "peer reviewed" by people rDigital Sep 2012 #126

LOL. Russia? Again? DanTex Sep 2012 #127

Cool numbers, bro. rDigital Sep 2012 #135

Dodge. LOL. What happened to "Russia" and "deaths per gun". DanTex Sep 2012 #139

Nice try. rDigital Sep 2012 #142

"Russia is an incredibly valid point, that's beyond dispute." LOL! DanTex Sep 2012 #143

So many characters to say so little. Ignore the inconvenient truths, keep your head in the sand. rDigital Sep 2012 #144

Dodge. LOL. Always a good time! DanTex Sep 2012 #145

Because keeping people from killing themselves is really a possibility and by extension a valid rDigital Sep 2012 #146

Get back to me after you've read some of the scientific evidence. DanTex Sep 2012 #147

I'm not arguing with the numbers of that site. I'm saying that suicide isn't a valid gun control rDigital Sep 2012 #148

I don't really care what you think is a valid argument. DanTex Sep 2012 #150

this airplane? gejohnston Sep 2012 #151

you screech "you uneducated oaf" but don't explain gejohnston Sep 2012 #149

Hey, you said "uneducated oaf", not me. But since you mention... DanTex Sep 2012 #152

yes you did, just not that exact term gejohnston Sep 2012 #155

Well, if the shoe fits... DanTex Sep 2012 #156

read my edit, gejohnston Sep 2012 #157

Wow, you really don't get it. DanTex Sep 2012 #158

I get it very well gejohnston Sep 2012 #159

Umm.... DanTex Sep 2012 #163

not quite gejohnston Sep 2012 #189

Yes, and the assault rates are similar to ours. Not nearly as far out of line as homicide. DanTex Sep 2012 #190

over generalization gejohnston Sep 2012 #192

Not necessarily. DanTex Sep 2012 #193

how many of their robberies are guns used gejohnston Sep 2012 #194

Don't know about gun robberies in Canada. I've seen 40% for the percent of Canada's murders by gun DanTex Sep 2012 #195

what increase of murders in Canada? gejohnston Sep 2012 #196

I meant increase relative to UK, Germany, France, etc. DanTex Sep 2012 #197

In Australia gejohnston Sep 2012 #198

LOL. You have zero evidence of cherry picking. DanTex Sep 2012 #123

Probably the only reason that this report made the news ... spin Sep 2012 #54

I don't know if it actually made the news. The link in the OP is to Buckeyes for Concealed Carry. DanTex Sep 2012 #70

Will you at least admit ... spin Sep 2012 #72

Of course. DanTex Sep 2012 #73

I can see some points we agree on. ... spin Sep 2012 #75

�white honky.�� Botany Sep 2012 #42

Something's wrong brush Sep 2012 #55

I call bullshit TrogL Sep 2012 #76

many CCW stories end without gunshots and 911 calls trouble.smith Sep 2012 #77

Am I evil if I say Trunk Monkey Sep 2012 #80

Nope not at all... ileus Sep 2012 #87

I contacted Mike and there have been some updates made to the story. nt rDigital Sep 2012 #91

well, what are the Updates? Tuesday Afternoon Sep 2012 #100

The uPdates have been added on to the original link. : ) nt rDigital Sep 2012 #101

This message was self-deleted by its author Tuesday Afternoon Sep 2012 #104

This is all we really need to know about it... jeepnstein Sep 2012 #116

They are at the link in the OP. I include them as they answer questions raised on this thread: friendly_iconoclast Sep 2012 #103

thanks, I will delete my reply because it is now redundant. Tuesday Afternoon Sep 2012 #105

Did you ask him about his politics? SecularMotion Sep 2012 #115

This message was self-deleted by its author Dash87 Sep 2012 #102

This story sounds like complete and utter bullshit. MotherPetrie Sep 2012 #106

Well then, do the research necessary to debunk it. friendly_iconoclast Sep 2012 #107

I thought it was BS until the attacker answered his cell phone. jeepnstein Sep 2012 #113

Like you always say. Prove it! upaloopa Sep 2012 #154

This message was self-deleted by its author AnotherMcIntosh Sep 2012 #191