Register now !    Login  
Main Menu
Who's Online
114 user(s) are online (101 user(s) are browsing Message Forum)

Members: 0
Guests: 114

more...




Browsing this Thread:   1 Anonymous Users




(1) 2 »


Re: US/NJ Murder rate at lowest point since the 1950s...but why don't we notice?
#45
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2012/11/10 20:38
Last Login :
2018/2/1 3:02
From JC
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 3071
Offline
Quote:

brewster wrote:
Quote:

JCMan8 wrote:
Pebble, Brewster didn't mention the NRA once when I made that response to you.


Well that simply ain't true, see post #2 where I refer to "out of control gun lobby".

I think I'm done here, all you have to say about why you want guns even though crime is down and "good guys guns" aren't responsible for it is "I don't need to fuckin tell you, it's my constitutional right!" and to cite a leftist media conspiracy to quash stories about grandma shotgunning the rapist. The fact that we have so many more gun deaths than any industrialized country means nothing to you, it worth it to have your guns. You really have nothing more interesting to say.


Do you realize how backwards you look in refusing to acknowledge gun ownership is a fundamental American right? It's not about whether I "want" guns, or the rest of your arguments which are riddled with hyperbole and fear mongering.

That gay marriage decision you love to cite to was also only 5-4, decided by one vote. Do I tell you that you are "smug" in assuming that gay marriage is a fundamental right now? No, because I'd look like an idiot. I don't create arguments stemming from the premise that one must justify gay marriage, or that an advocate simply "wants" it. The decision has been made. I accept that decision and I suggest you grow up and do the same.

More importantly, marriage has ALWAYS been a fundamental right of Americans. The previous SCOTUS decisions you cited simply concerned the scope of it. Is interracial marriage a fundamental right? Is gay marriage a fundamental right? But the SCOTUS gun ruling did not concern the scope of gun ownership being a fundamental right (such as whether it extended to assault rifles), but rather the core concept itself.

Do you know what people against gay marriage are trying now? The same thing that those against slavery did (another example where you were grossly misinformed). They recognize that the constitutional decision has been made and they are calling for a constitutional amendment.

http://www.politico.com/story/2015/06 ... tutional-amendment-119470

So again, grow up and don't pretend that decisions you don't like have no basis, or somehow don't exist. 5-4 or not, the decision is final. And either of our conceptions of how the media is biased are completely irrelevant to this basic fact.

You can take comfort in the fact that our gun laws clearly aren't having much of an impact on our total suicude rate (only #50 worldwide), and that many states like NJ have an extremely rigorous process they put you through in order to own a gun. You said that everyone you know is far more concerned about the activities of legal gun owners rather than criminals, so maybe this will reassure your irrational crew.

Posted on: 2015/10/30 16:55
 Top 


Re: US/NJ Murder rate at lowest point since the 1950s...but why don't we notice?
#44
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/11/6 21:13
Last Login :
2023/7/17 17:42
From Hamilton Park
Group:
Banned
Posts: 5775
Offline
Quote:

JCMan8 wrote:
Pebble, Brewster didn't mention the NRA once when I made that response to you.


Well that simply ain't true, see post #2 where I refer to "out of control gun lobby".

I think I'm done here, all you have to say about why you want guns even though crime is down and "good guys guns" aren't responsible for it is "I don't need to fuckin tell you, it's my constitutional right!" and to cite a leftist media conspiracy to quash stories about grandma shotgunning the rapist. The fact that we have so many more gun deaths than any industrialized country means nothing to you, it worth it to have your guns. You really have nothing more interesting to say.

Posted on: 2015/10/30 15:56
 Top 


Re: US/NJ Murder rate at lowest point since the 1950s...but why don't we notice?
#43
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2013/3/29 21:43
Last Login :
2023/9/5 18:27
From Bergen Hill
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 1980
Offline
Quote:

JCMan8 wrote:
Pebble, Brewster didn't mention the NRA once when I made that response to you. You did. If they tried to prevent gun research, that fact is completely irrelevant to the safety misperceptions we were discussing.

The rest of your post is filled with red herrings and tangential points. You clearly don't comprehend anything that's being written. Please go sit at the kiddie table, I'll give you something shiny to keep you occupied!

I see that your best efforts are simple ad hominems the level of a middle schooler when you're incapable of actually backing up anything you write. I love the irony. Good for you on keeping the course!

Posted on: 2015/10/30 14:55
Dos A Cero
 Top 


Re: US/NJ Murder rate at lowest point since the 1950s...but why don't we notice?
#42
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2012/11/10 20:38
Last Login :
2018/2/1 3:02
From JC
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 3071
Offline
Pebble, Brewster didn't mention the NRA once when I made that response to you. You did. If they tried to prevent gun research, that fact is completely irrelevant to the safety misperceptions we were discussing.

The rest of your post is filled with red herrings and tangential points. You clearly don't comprehend anything that's being written. Please go sit at the kiddie table, I'll give you something shiny to keep you occupied!

Posted on: 2015/10/30 14:48
 Top 


Re: US/NJ Murder rate at lowest point since the 1950s...but why don't we notice?
#41
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2013/3/29 21:43
Last Login :
2023/9/5 18:27
From Bergen Hill
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 1980
Offline
Quote:

JCMan8 wrote:
Pebble, it's just remarkable how you just don't get it, no matter how many times its pointed out to you. The NRA's money spent on research is completely irrelevant to what we were discussing.

I like you choose to use absolutist terms when you have absolutely no idea what you are arguing.

Brewster pointed out that the NRA is part of the problem when it comes guns. The fact that they spend a lot of money preventing research that could inform us on exactly how a gun can impact a home regarding safety is undeniably a fact.

Quote:

JCMan8 wrote:
It's cute that you tried to show you know what "perception" means, but I stated the point very clearly and you still don't understand. Maybe if you read what I wrote 10 times it will sink in.

Your entire post was your perception about newspapers (which you still can?t and won?t name, likely because it is fictitious) and news stories that are clearly biased (again, no evidence to back it up) along with a nice touch of your own fictional ideas of reporters angry at having to even talk to someone that supports gun rights (a laughably stupid narrative).

Please provide actual evidence to back up the claims you made. Otherwise, everything you wrote here is more absurdity.

Here, I?ll provide you some counter evidence to the nonsense about how reporters don?t cover this with even hands: Associated Press http://news.yahoo.com/no-rise-mass-ki ... mpact-huge-185700637.html (since you know nothing about news media, I?ll give you a hint that the AP is about as ?mainstream media? as it gets.)

Quote:

JCMan8 wrote:
People are under the false perception that gun crime is rising when in fact it's plummeted. The NRA has nothing to do with it.

The NRA has spent a lot of money on campaigns that create the mythological gun owner with the carry permit saving the day:
"The only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun," declared the NRA's Wayne LaPierre in a press conference a week after Newtown, the same day bells tolled at the National Cathedral and the devastated town mourned its 28 dead. ? Mother Jones (only used because it has a direct quote from the NRA) (http://www.motherjones.com/politics/2 ... 2/nra-mass-shootings-myth)

Of course, despite the fact that NRA is trumpeting this, the facts belie his point.
RawStory http://www.rawstory.com/2015/10/armed ... dnt-attack-oregon-killer/
Slate http://www.slate.com/articles/health_ ... de_accidents_suicide.html

Quote:

JCMan8 wrote:
And since you clearly don't understand any of my post, for anyone else reading, the "victory" comes in the form of continued (and rising) strong support for gun ownership in the face of factors discussed previously which ultimately seek to dismantle the Second Amendment. And for what it's worth, other than an outright ban, you can't get much more restrictive than NJ's gun laws. Gun control advocates should be happy.

Using one of your links:
Quote:
The July survey also found that Americans strongly support a variety of specific gun control measures, including expanded background checks (85%), laws to prevent people with mental illness from purchasing guns (79%) and creation of a federal database to track all gun sales (70%). A smaller majority (57%) support a ban on assault-style weapons.


Seems to me that the public is asking for more gun restrictions while also saying that owning a gun is fine. It isn?t your absolutist rhetoric of everyone is fighting back. The reality is far grayer.

Posted on: 2015/10/30 13:57
Dos A Cero
 Top 


Re: US/NJ Murder rate at lowest point since the 1950s...but why don't we notice?
#40
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2012/11/10 20:38
Last Login :
2018/2/1 3:02
From JC
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 3071
Offline
Your graph proves my point. By my statement, I meant compare the ratio of gun owners per capita to total gun violence. Because your underlying premise is more gun ownership = more gun violence.

The Swiss and Fins own FAR more guns as a % of total population compared to many other countries. And this influx in guns has barely budged the Fin total gun violence rate compared to countries where residents own far fewer guns, as per your graph.

And your graph shows Chile as being the only other country somewhat comparable to the United States in gun murder. In fact, Chile is #2 in gun murder in the world. Where does Chile fall in guns per capita in the world? Oh, that's right, not even the top 50.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Number_of_guns_per_capita_by_country

Posted on: 2015/10/30 3:29
 Top 


Re: US/NJ Murder rate at lowest point since the 1950s...but why don't we notice?
#39
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/11/6 21:13
Last Login :
2023/7/17 17:42
From Hamilton Park
Group:
Banned
Posts: 5775
Offline
Quote:

JCMan8 wrote:
Since you are fixated on wanting to ban all guns, I invite you to take this approach. Our Constitution very clearly makes gun ownership a fundamental American right, more clear than what it said about slavery. Change the Constitution so it no longer provides for this. Granted, it is extremely difficult to obtain a Constitutional amendment and for good reason. But it's happened before and if you feel so strongly about the subject, I suggest focusing your efforts there.

Pretty smug about something decided by one vote. Clearly not as "clear" as you would like to make out.

Quote:

As for your graph, it demonstrates that these efforts to ban guns would have been far more appropriate in 1991 than today. I could post traffic death statistics and try to use that as an argument to ban cars, but that would be silly. Freedom to travel is a fundamental right just like the right to own a gun is. And for the record, you make the error of assuming that gun ownership = gun violence. Finland and Switzerland have some of the highest rates of gun ownership in the world, but have comparatively extremely low rates of gun violence.


Actually, the Swiss have a much higher gun violence rate than that of Europe in general, and Finland is above average

https://img.washingtonpost.com/wp-apps ... -OECD-UN-data3.jpg&w=1484

Posted on: 2015/10/30 3:07
 Top 


Re: US/NJ Murder rate at lowest point since the 1950s...but why don't we notice?
#38
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2012/11/10 20:38
Last Login :
2018/2/1 3:02
From JC
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 3071
Offline
Quote:
Brewster wrote:

As for perceptions, we disagree. Most people I know aren't afraid of criminals with guns, but of gun owning citizens who lose their tempers or minds.


This is just a sign of the company you keep. It is not reflective of the populace as a whole. In fact, the people I know are far more afraid of criminals with guns than citizens who have passed the stringent (NJ) requirements to legally own a gun. I'd say my contemporaries are far more rational, though neither of our groups truly reflects public opinion.

And yes, gun ownership being a fundamental constitutional right is at the core of what I'm saying. Your arguments about "Why do people want to own personal defense firearms if not because they are afraid of being the victims of crime?" would have been appropriate if they were made in the late 1700s when the Constitution was being formed. Too late, that ship has sailed, and it was just in 2008 and 2010 when the SCOTUS reaffirmed the meaning of the Second Amendment.

You are right that people can no longer be property here. Do you know why that is? And why they were allowed to be property to begin with?

Well, just like the Second Amendment, the Constitution used to allow for slavery (although this was implicit, and far less clear than the Second Amendment). Gradually public opinion shifted. And then do you know what happened? The Thirteenth Amendment was passed, which changed the Constitution and banned slavery.

Since you are fixated on wanting to ban all guns, I invite you to take this approach. Our Constitution very clearly makes gun ownership a fundamental American right, more clear than what it said about slavery. Change the Constitution so it no longer provides for this. Granted, it is extremely difficult to obtain a Constitutional amendment and for good reason. But it's happened before and if you feel so strongly about the subject, I suggest focusing your efforts there.

As for your graph, it demonstrates that these efforts to ban guns would have been far more appropriate in 1991 than today. All of the "how could you be OK with this?" arguments would have had more force back then.

Also, I could post traffic death statistics and try to use that as an argument to ban cars. People are dying, how could you be OK with this? Trains, buses, and bikes are perfectly fine!! But that would be silly. Accidents will happen. Sometimes people will even take their car and use it to intentionally murder others. Doesn't mean we ban cars. And car ownership is not a fundamental constitutional right like gun ownership is.

And for the record, you make the error of assuming that gun ownership = gun violence. Finland and Switzerland have some of the highest rates of gun ownership in the world, but have comparatively extremely low rates of gun violence.

Posted on: 2015/10/30 2:52
 Top 


Re: US/NJ Murder rate at lowest point since the 1950s...but why don't we notice?
#37
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2010/8/17 1:45
Last Login :
2020/8/26 13:40
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 3141
Offline
Crime rate is down even though we still have our guns. Pretty fu*king stupid discussion. The earth is still orbiting the sun too because we have our guns. ffs.

Posted on: 2015/10/30 2:43
 Top 


Re: US/NJ Murder rate at lowest point since the 1950s...but why don't we notice?
#36
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/11/6 21:13
Last Login :
2023/7/17 17:42
From Hamilton Park
Group:
Banned
Posts: 5775
Offline
So the "fundamental constitutional right" is the ultimate argument? Refer back to the list of Scotus decisions that Americans now view as violations of fundamental human rights. Things change. People can no longer be property here, and people can marry whatever legal age human they wish to of whatever color or sex.

As for perceptions, we disagree. Most people I know aren't afraid of criminals with guns, but of gun owning citizens who lose their tempers or minds. Americans are far more likely to die from gun violence as citizens of other civilized countries. Why are you OK with that? You think It's OK as long as it's less than it was?

What do you make of the following data showing firearm murders stopped falling along with crime 15 years ago? (sorry I can't find more recent firearm data, maybe if the NRA hadn't gotten a law passed preventing the CDC from researching gun violence we'd have more)

Reported violent crime rate in the United States from 1990 to 2014
Resized Image


Resized Image

Posted on: 2015/10/30 2:31
 Top 


Re: US/NJ Murder rate at lowest point since the 1950s...but why don't we notice?
#35
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2012/11/10 20:38
Last Login :
2018/2/1 3:02
From JC
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 3071
Offline
Quote:

brewster wrote:
You want to harp on the fallen crime rate, but lets get back to the OP, to whom I responded that people don't know crime is down because the gun interests keep fanning the fires of fear to justify themselves.



Here we go. Finally, the actual source of the disagreement.

You take for granted "people don't know crime is down because the gun interests keep fanning the fires of fear to justify themselves."

I take for granted people don't know crime is down because the gun control interests (advocacy groups, many sympathetic members of the media, and opportunistic politicians) want to fan the flames of fear of gun violence. To create the sense of urgency that SOMETHING MUST BE DONE!! Which will involve the type of total gun ban that I've sussed out you admit you would desire.

I think many people who are not totally on the gun control side would agree that my explanation is far more plausible.

Quote:
"Why do people want to own personal defense firearms if not because they are afraid of being the victims of crime?"


Sorry, not how it works. People don't have to justify their exercise of a fundamental constitutional right. What people choose to do to protect their homes is none of your concern. Also, there are many, many examples where the personal defense firearms that homeowners keep have successfully prevented rapes, burglaries, and probable murders. Predictably, our media likes to sweep those under the rug, but if you search you'll find them. You will also find examples of accidental shootings. But again, the choice isn't up to you. It's up to the homeowner, as their fundamental constitutional right.

Posted on: 2015/10/30 0:49
 Top 


Re: US/NJ Murder rate at lowest point since the 1950s...but why don't we notice?
#34
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2012/11/10 20:38
Last Login :
2018/2/1 3:02
From JC
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 3071
Offline
Quote:

Mouse wrote:
I am in favor of reasonable gun restrictions. However, I think it is useful to look at actual figures, including murders by type of gun.

I did this. I found what I perceive to be a credible source of information: the FBI Uniform Crime Reports.

FBI Uniform Crime

My first impression is that the numbers are lower than I expected. Although we often hear about gun violence, the absolute numbers are telling.

In Alabama, there was ONE gun murder in 2014. I went back and looked at 2013 and the number was ?two.? Surprising. On the other hand, there was no state with zero handgun murders, which is also distressing.

The majority of gun violence is clustered in certain states, with California leading the way in number of handgun murders (753 in 2014).

Although we often hear about the horrors of military style assault weapons, the numbers of deaths via these types of firearms is also relatively low. The biggest category of murder by gun (by far) is handguns.

One problem with solving the gun issue is knowing which part of the problem to address. After looking at these numbers I would forget about trying to restrict assault weapons (for now) and keep the focus squarely on handguns.

Although the Supreme Court ruled on the second amendment, it doesn?t mean they were right (or righteous). The ruling was not unanimous, and there was reasoned dissent. The Constitution was written a long time ago, and we should not fear adjusting it to modern conditions (see: slavery).

Also, let?s dispel this myth that the NRA and the politicians who take their money ?represent? the will of voters. This is pure hogwash. The NRA was highjacked by radicals back in 1979.

Radicals convert NRA

What was previously a fairly sensible, bipartisan group that focused on safety and marksmanship was transformed into a political lobbying group that today wields big power due to money and their ability to scare people.

The only way forward is for all parties to be honest about the facts and what will be needed to reduce gun violence.
One idea I like is using gun taxes to pay for better mental health programs.

Another idea is to regulate the ownership of handguns like we now regulate truck driving licenses. Truck drivers are now required to get a ?physical? from a doctor certifying their fitness to drive. We are not stopping anyone from driving a truck, unless they present a danger (to themselves or others).


I agree with the first part of your post.

Regarding the NRA, please explain how it is a "myth" and "hogwash" they represent the will of their 5+ million members. Your link showed that they became more radical, but do you seriously think the NRA is forcing people to join? Do you realize that many of their members live in rural areas? Do you realize that these members are voters too? And do you realize that Congressmen who go against the will of their voters can get voted out?

Yeah, they do wield big power due to money. Predominantly money that comes out of the hands of individual voters, because this is the will of their members. And given the liberal extremists who seek to ban all guns, I'm not too upset with their current agenda.

" The NRA has said that less than 5% of its funding comes from the firearms industry, with the majority coming from small donors.[150]"

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/National_Rifle_Association#Finances

So unless you think they exert some evil power that compels people to donate, I'm not sure what you are trying to say.

Quote:
The only way forward is for all parties to be honest about the facts and what will be needed to reduce gun violence.


I agree with this, of course. But it will never happen. Good luck getting all (two) parties to be honest on any issue at all. Hell, even in this thread, we had Brewster trying to capitalize Sandy Hook and invoke emotional hysteria as a means to the total gun ban he seeks.

Quote:
Another idea is to regulate the ownership of handguns like we now regulate truck driving licenses.


Sounds nice on paper but it is a horrible idea and the NRA will always fight tooth and nail against it. The reason is it will inevitably involve the creation of a list that contains all gun owners and their addresses. Making it quite easy for the police, in the future, to know exactly where to visit and how many guns to confiscate.

No, I don't think Obama has any such plans on doing so. But who knows what could happen in the future? If there's a President Trump, maybe some "progressives" might see how things can change in ways you don't expect. Considering one purpose of the Second Amendment is to protect the populace against a tyrannical government, the government cannot have this power.

With that said, there already is an extensive application process in some states to get guns. I am fine with more stringent mental health checks and mandated gun safety classes before you are allowed to have a gun. The key is these lists are not maintained in one place, by the federal government. That is what cannot be allowed to happen.

Posted on: 2015/10/30 0:42

Edited by JCMan8 on 2015/10/30 0:58:41
 Top 


Re: US/NJ Murder rate at lowest point since the 1950s...but why don't we notice?
#33
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/11/6 21:13
Last Login :
2023/7/17 17:42
From Hamilton Park
Group:
Banned
Posts: 5775
Offline
Quote:

My assumption was based on the fact that you called out sensationalist media yet didn't recognize you were engaging in the exact same behavior. You aren't an idiot, so the assumption is you were misinformed. If you would be honest with me, I'd bet my suspicion was right and you had no idea about the facts I posted.

The reality is that, like most gun control advocates, you've yet to offer a single specific of what should be done to reduce the school shootings. Since you held up Australia as a great example, a country that banned all guns, my assumption is the only thing that would ultimately make you happy is a complete dismantling of our Second Amendment. After all, under your rejected interpretation, it only applies to militias.

I could go on and talk about how difficult it would be to create a fanciful law that would have actually stopped these shootings, and that criminals don't follow the law anyway so you're only making things more difficult for law abiding citizens, but I know you'll respond with more talking points and we'll continue to waste each other's time.

Just know that knee jerk reactions to "do something!" tend to be the worst type of laws.


I have no idea on what you base the accusation that I didn't know about the crime rate. From my post #5: "even though murder and all crime is at a historic low, the media and gun industry still has people worked up and terrified that some stranger is going to be breaking into their home to do violence to their family."

And yes, I'd like to see far fewer guns all over this country, however unlikely that is to pass. Every other industrialized nation, and many others, somehow function and keeps their citizens safe without one gun per capita. You want to harp on the fallen crime rate, but lets get back to the OP, to whom I responded that people don't know crime is down because the gun interests keep fanning the fires of fear to justify themselves.

Why do people want to own personal defense firearms if not because they are afraid of being the victims of crime? The crime they're unlikely to experience statistically? Crime may be down but our gun death rate remains enormously too high. We've spent trillions and shattered nations in response to far fewer deaths.

Mouse, you should check those stats. Wiki says there were 135 gun murders in AL in 2010.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_viol ... he_United_States_by_state

I think I found where you got your info, something is fishy in their dataset, I don't think Alabamans suddenly found Jesus and all decided to get along:
Alabama Handgun Homicides
2013: 1
2012: 1
2010: 112
2009: 196
2008: 241
2007: 262
2006: 226
2005: 206
2004: 137
2003: 185
2002: 168
2001: 199
2000: 129
1999: 11
1998: 169
1997: 251
1996: 265
1995: 309

Posted on: 2015/10/30 0:18
 Top 


Re: US/NJ Murder rate at lowest point since the 1950s...but why don't we notice?
#32
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/12/14 21:47
Last Login :
2020/8/16 20:23
From not downtown
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 308
Offline
I am in favor of reasonable gun restrictions. However, I think it is useful to look at actual figures, including murders by type of gun.

I did this. I found what I perceive to be a credible source of information: the FBI Uniform Crime Reports.

FBI Uniform Crime

My first impression is that the numbers are lower than I expected. Although we often hear about gun violence, the absolute numbers are telling.

In Alabama, there was ONE gun murder in 2014. I went back and looked at 2013 and the number was ?two.? Surprising. On the other hand, there was no state with zero handgun murders, which is also distressing.

The majority of gun violence is clustered in certain states, with California leading the way in number of handgun murders (753 in 2014).

Although we often hear about the horrors of military style assault weapons, the numbers of deaths via these types of firearms is also relatively low. The biggest category of murder by gun (by far) is handguns.

One problem with solving the gun issue is knowing which part of the problem to address. After looking at these numbers I would forget about trying to restrict assault weapons (for now) and keep the focus squarely on handguns.

Although the Supreme Court ruled on the second amendment, it doesn?t mean they were right (or righteous). The ruling was not unanimous, and there was reasoned dissent. The Constitution was written a long time ago, and we should not fear adjusting it to modern conditions (see: slavery).

Also, let?s dispel this myth that the NRA and the politicians who take their money ?represent? the will of voters. This is pure hogwash. The NRA was highjacked by radicals back in 1979.

Radicals convert NRA

What was previously a fairly sensible, bipartisan group that focused on safety and marksmanship was transformed into a political lobbying group that today wields big power due to money and their ability to scare people.

The only way forward is for all parties to be honest about the facts and what will be needed to reduce gun violence.
One idea I like is using gun taxes to pay for better mental health programs.

Another idea is to regulate the ownership of handguns like we now regulate truck driving licenses. Truck drivers are now required to get a ?physical? from a doctor certifying their fitness to drive. We are not stopping anyone from driving a truck, unless they present a danger (to themselves or others).

Posted on: 2015/10/30 0:06
I cook with wine, sometimes I even add it to the food.
W. C. Fields
 Top 


Re: US/NJ Murder rate at lowest point since the 1950s...but why don't we notice?
#31
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2012/11/10 20:38
Last Login :
2018/2/1 3:02
From JC
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 3071
Offline
Quote:

brewster wrote:
Quote:

JCMan8 wrote:
And Brewster, I don't like liars. I don't appreciate when you make the unsubstianiated claim that "small children being massacred" is a "regular occurrence" and then try to dance around what you said. Especially after you had just called out others for being "sensationalist."

If that doesn't make you a liar it makes you a hypocrite (at least for this issue, because I generally think you are one of the better posters here) and you should just own up to what I suspect: you are woefully uninformed based on the echo chambers you frequent so you thought you had solid grounds for your claim. You had no idea that gun violence was actually down 60% since 1993, and thought that massacres of small children were far more frequent than they actually are. But rather than man up and admit your mistake, you double down, as if you are fooling anyone. And to be clear, the issue was never whether I am "ok" with small children being killed. It's about whether your original claim shows you to be lying at worst, or extremely hypocritical at best, given your immediately preceding comments.

And regarding SCOTUS, it's funny how you trot out a demonstrably false/rejected interpretation of the Second Amendment, treat it as if it's fact, and only mention you disagree with them after I post the truth. Do you always completely ignore the facts you don't like and push what is, at best, a minority opinion, and pretend it is truth?


I find it curious your assumption that I frequent some "echo chamber". I read the Times and listen to NPR, no blogs but for occasionally Dan Carlin's. he's hardly a raging Liberal and most of his posters are very conservative. If that's an echo chamber so be it. Whatever.

You want to focus on the literal veracity of my statement and ignore the reality of a steady occurrence of mass shooting both in and out of schools and colleges. Again, whatever.

You want to hold up a SCOTUS interpretation of the Constitution as "ultimate truth" rather than a political artifact. In that case I've got a long list of reprehensible decisions like Dred Scott for you. Even as recently as Bowers v. Hardwick (1986) it held that it was constitutional to criminalize homosexual sex. So my interpretation (and that of 4 Justices) may have been rejected, but it is not provably false, any more than the above rejected notions about human rights.


My assumption was based on the fact that you called out sensationalist media yet didn't recognize you were engaging in the exact same behavior. You aren't an idiot, so the assumption is you were misinformed. If you would be honest with me, I'd bet my suspicion was right and you had no idea about the facts I posted.

The reality is that, like most gun control advocates, you've yet to offer a single specific of what should be done to reduce the school shootings. Since you held up Australia as a great example, a country that banned all guns, my assumption is the only thing that would ultimately make you happy is a complete dismantling of our Second Amendment. After all, under your rejected interpretation, it only applies to militias.

I could go on and talk about how difficult it would be to create a fanciful law that would have actually stopped these shootings, and that criminals don't follow the law anyway so you're only making things more difficult for law abiding citizens, but I know you'll respond with more talking points and we'll continue to waste each other's time.

Just know that knee jerk reactions to "do something!" tend to be the worst type of laws.

Posted on: 2015/10/29 22:49
 Top 


Re: US/NJ Murder rate at lowest point since the 1950s...but why don't we notice?
#30
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2012/11/10 20:38
Last Login :
2018/2/1 3:02
From JC
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 3071
Offline
Pebble, it's just remarkable how you just don't get it, no matter how many times its pointed out to you. The NRA's money spent on research is completely irrelevant to what we were discussing.

It's cute that you tried to show you know what "perception" means, but I stated the point very clearly and you still don't understand. Maybe if you read what I wrote 10 times it will sink in.

People are under the false perception that gun crime is rising when in fact it's plummeted. The NRA has nothing to do with it.

And since you clearly don't understand any of my post, for anyone else reading, the "victory" comes in the form of continued (and rising) strong support for gun ownership in the face of factors discussed previously which ultimately seek to dismantle the Second Amendment. And for what it's worth, other than an outright ban, you can't get much more restrictive than NJ's gun laws. Gun control advocates should be happy.

Posted on: 2015/10/29 22:35
 Top 


Re: US/NJ Murder rate at lowest point since the 1950s...but why don't we notice?
#29
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/11/6 21:13
Last Login :
2023/7/17 17:42
From Hamilton Park
Group:
Banned
Posts: 5775
Offline
Quote:

JCMan8 wrote:
And Brewster, I don't like liars. I don't appreciate when you make the unsubstianiated claim that "small children being massacred" is a "regular occurrence" and then try to dance around what you said. Especially after you had just called out others for being "sensationalist."

If that doesn't make you a liar it makes you a hypocrite (at least for this issue, because I generally think you are one of the better posters here) and you should just own up to what I suspect: you are woefully uninformed based on the echo chambers you frequent so you thought you had solid grounds for your claim. You had no idea that gun violence was actually down 60% since 1993, and thought that massacres of small children were far more frequent than they actually are. But rather than man up and admit your mistake, you double down, as if you are fooling anyone. And to be clear, the issue was never whether I am "ok" with small children being killed. It's about whether your original claim shows you to be lying at worst, or extremely hypocritical at best, given your immediately preceding comments.

And regarding SCOTUS, it's funny how you trot out a demonstrably false/rejected interpretation of the Second Amendment, treat it as if it's fact, and only mention you disagree with them after I post the truth. Do you always completely ignore the facts you don't like and push what is, at best, a minority opinion, and pretend it is truth?


I find it curious your assumption that I frequent some "echo chamber". I read the Times and listen to NPR, no blogs but for occasionally Dan Carlin's. he's hardly a raging Liberal and most of his posters are very conservative. If that's an echo chamber so be it. Whatever.

You want to focus on the literal veracity of my statement and ignore the reality of a steady occurrence of mass shooting both in and out of schools and colleges. Again, whatever.

You want to hold up a SCOTUS interpretation of the Constitution as "ultimate truth" rather than a political artifact. In that case I've got a long list of reprehensible decisions like Dred Scott for you. Even as recently as Bowers v. Hardwick (1986) it held that it was constitutional to criminalize homosexual sex. So my interpretation (and that of 4 Justices) may have been rejected, but it is not provably false, any more than the above rejected notions about human rights.

Posted on: 2015/10/29 20:03
 Top 


Re: US/NJ Murder rate at lowest point since the 1950s...but why don't we notice?
#28
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2013/3/29 21:43
Last Login :
2023/9/5 18:27
From Bergen Hill
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 1980
Offline
Quote:

JCMan8 wrote:
Pebble, you miss the point yet again. The point is that American adults feel gun crime is on the rise despite the fact that gun violence is down 60% in recent times. You immediately started talking about the NRA. As if the NRA promotes a disinformation campaign that gun violence is on the rise!

I talk about the NRA?s money spent on preventing research.

Quote:

JCMan8 wrote:
And your only "proof" is your own perception that every generation thinks things used to be better. That's not proof of anything lol. Now I actually read the news and I can tell you that every time there's a shooting, the media makes a huge deal about it. And they are clearly one sided in that they choose to focus the spotlight on local residents who call out for more gun control. They do this to push their agenda.

?I actually read the news and I can tell you that every time there's a shooting, the media makes a huge deal about it? is your own perception. I find it ironic that you mock my perception saying that I use it as proof of anything (something I haven?t done) and claim that yours is better.

Again, this is perception: ?And they are clearly one sided in that they choose to focus the spotlight on local residents who call out for more gun control.?

Again, this is perception: ?They do this to push their agenda.?

Quote:

JCMan8 wrote:
We know it's a blatant double standard because when a shooting happens and the media does not like what the residents have to say, all of a sudden the national media is not very interested. The Oregon college shooting is a great example. Many local residents were interviewed, and the clear consensus was that they DID NOT WANT any more gun control regulations as a result. Think there was any kind of spotlight on that? Sure, there was no choice but to publish the remarks, but they received the equivalent of being buried on page 22 of the paper.

Here?s a furthering of your perception: ?We know it's a blatant double standard because when a shooting happens and the media does not like what the residents have to say, all of a sudden the national media is not very interested.?

Here is your perception about the unfolding of events regarding coverage without actually providing the links to the stories: ?The Oregon college shooting is a great example. Many local residents were interviewed, and the clear consensus was that they DID NOT WANT any more gun control regulations as a result. Think there was any kind of spotlight on that? Sure, there was no choice but to publish the remarks, but they received the equivalent of being buried on page 22 of the paper.?

Who, specifically, ?DID NOT WANT? any more gun regulations? Which ?paper? buried these people on page 22?

Lastly, how is there only one media outlet on the planet that exists in such a way as to push this clearly biased agenda!?!?!?!1111 (Note my sarcasm here at how you use a specific perception to push your personal biases.)

Quote:

JCMan8 wrote:
And it doesn't matter if you think many NRA members "don't always know where all the money goes." What kind of remark is that? What we care about are the facts. And the facts are that the "evil" NRA represents the will of over 5 million people. If you're not one for democracy, there are plenty of other countries you can move to.

I never called the NRA evil. In fact, I think you?re the only one who has done that. The NRA is an organization that uses money to lobby for things they believe to be in the best interests of its members. Not all members agree with it 100% and not all members know where the money goes. These are facts.

If you truly believe that every member knows where every penny goes then you must believe every person voting knows where every candidate stands on every issue. That?s an absurd proposition.

I have no idea what your comment about democracy is about. It fits no narrative nor level of conversation.

Quote:

JCMan8 wrote:
So like I've said, despite the best efforts of our media and the gun control lobby, the American people continue to reject their message. You make the mistake of assuming that because popular opinion trends one way, this means they simply aren't hearing an opposing message. To the contrary, we are bombarded with it, but reject it.

So because of what you?ve written based on your own person perspective, void of actual facts, you get to claim victory.

Congratulations??

Posted on: 2015/10/29 18:59
Dos A Cero
 Top 


Re: US/NJ Murder rate at lowest point since the 1950s...but why don't we notice?
#27
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2012/11/10 20:38
Last Login :
2018/2/1 3:02
From JC
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 3071
Offline
And Brewster, I don't like liars. I don't appreciate when you make the unsubstianiated claim that "small children being massacred" is a "regular occurrence" and then try to dance around what you said. Especially after you had just called out others for being "sensationalist."

If that doesn't make you a liar it makes you a hypocrite (at least for this issue, because I generally think you are one of the better posters here) and you should just own up to what I suspect: you are woefully uninformed based on the echo chambers you frequent so you thought you had solid grounds for your claim. You had no idea that gun violence was actually down 60% since 1993, and thought that massacres of small children were far more frequent than they actually are. But rather than man up and admit your mistake, you double down, as if you are fooling anyone. And to be clear, the issue was never whether I am "ok" with small children being killed. It's about whether your original claim shows you to be lying at worst, or extremely hypocritical at best, given your immediately preceding comments.

And regarding SCOTUS, it's funny how you trot out a demonstrably false/rejected interpretation of the Second Amendment, treat it as if it's fact, and only mention you disagree with them after I post the truth. Do you always completely ignore the facts you don't like and push what is, at best, a minority opinion, and pretend it is truth?

Posted on: 2015/10/29 18:12
 Top 


Re: US/NJ Murder rate at lowest point since the 1950s...but why don't we notice?
#26
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2012/11/10 20:38
Last Login :
2018/2/1 3:02
From JC
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 3071
Offline
Pebble, you miss the point yet again. The point is that American adults feel gun crime is on the rise despite the fact that gun violence is down 60% in recent times. You immediately started talking about the NRA. As if the NRA promotes a disinformation campaign that gun violence is on the rise!

And your only "proof" is your own perception that every generation thinks things used to be better. That's not proof of anything lol. Now I actually read the news and I can tell you that every time there's a shooting, the media makes a huge deal about it. And they are clearly one sided in that they choose to focus the spotlight on local residents who call out for more gun control. They do this to push their agenda.

We know it's a blatant double standard because when a shooting happens and the media does not like what the residents have to say, all of a sudden the national media is not very interested. The Oregon college shooting is a great example. Many local residents were interviewed, and the clear consensus was that they DID NOT WANT any more gun control regulations as a result. Think there was any kind of spotlight on that? Sure, there was no choice but to publish the remarks, but they received the equivalent of being buried on page 22 of the paper.

And it doesn't matter if you think many NRA members "don't always know where all the money goes." What kind of remark is that? What we care about are the facts. And the facts are that the "evil" NRA represents the will of over 5 million people. If you're not one for democracy, there are plenty of other countries you can move to.

So like I've said, despite the best efforts of our media and the gun control lobby, the American people continue to reject their message. You make the mistake of assuming that because popular opinion trends one way, this means they simply aren't hearing an opposing message. To the contrary, we are bombarded with it, but reject it.

Posted on: 2015/10/29 18:04
 Top 


Re: US/NJ Murder rate at lowest point since the 1950s...but why don't we notice?
#25
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2013/3/29 21:43
Last Login :
2023/9/5 18:27
From Bergen Hill
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 1980
Offline
Quote:

JCMan8 wrote:
Pebble, you didn't "disprove" a thing. Are you aware of what "perception" means? I suggest looking it up.

In fact I proved my point, which we all know anyway based on the OP, by linking to one of the Pew articles. Despite gun violence declining by 60% since 1993, American adults feel that gun crime is on the rise. People like Brewster directly contribute to this false perception.

And it's funny how you and the other gun grabbers seem to see the NRA as this evil, monolethical entity. Are you aware that they represent the will of over 5 million people? These millions of people all pay dues because the NRA represents their views. Otherwise they'd stop paying. That's where a lot of this money comes from. The rest comes from advertising and contributions. Barely anything comes from the firearms industry itself.

You know why Congress bends over for the NRA? Not because of some evil power they wield, but because these Congressmen are acutely aware that the NRA represents the view of their constituents, and the voters will vote them out of office if they try to trample on the Second Amendment. It is as close to democracy in action as we get in America.

Oh, and you are sadly mistaken if you actually believe "there is only one side truly spending a ton of money on this issue." Ever heard of Bloomberg or the Brady Campaign? Now the gun lobby does spend more than the gun grabbers. But as I explained, thus money comes from the pockets of millions of Americans who actually understand the meaning of our Second Amendment. Not the NRA's fault that people don't believe the deception and lies pushed by the other side, such as Brewster's shameless claim that "massacres of small children" are a "regular occurrence," and the graphs he posted which were riddled with lies.

I'm not a "gun grabber." In fact I've stated here previously how I've won state competitions in marksmanship.

You obviously didn't read the article on how the NRA is causing the defunding of research which could quantify the impact ownership has.

As for the argument regarding donation? well, I pay for an AMA membership for the benefits they provide motorcycle riders. They have a lobbying arm to represent the interests of motorcycle riders. I can?t say that I?ve looked into how the money is spent and I would be willing to wager that many members of the NRA don?t always know where all the money goes.

Additionally, if you believe Congress responds to anything other than money, I?ve a bridge to see you?

The rest of what you wrote is your perception. Despite your attempts at using it as some sort of hammer, you fail to provide factual information to back up the argument. You have no actual evidence of a grand conspiracy yet continue to claim ?the media? is in on some gambit to grab guns. You have even pointed out that the ?gun grabbers? spend less money than the NRA on lobbying. Hence, who do you think gets the message out more? On top of that, I?ve provided links showing that gun laws have become increasingly lax over the years. Despite this fact, there is the constant reframe that Obama wants to take your guns (if you need evidence, only look at your incessant need to look at those that want regulations as ?gun grabbers?).

Posted on: 2015/10/29 17:44
Dos A Cero
 Top 


Re: US/NJ Murder rate at lowest point since the 1950s...but why don't we notice?
#24
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2012/1/11 18:21
Last Login :
2019/12/26 15:30
From GV Bayside Park
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 5356
Offline
Quote:
Murder is at the lowest point it has been in this country and state since the 50s and most crime catagories the lowest since the 60s. So why aren't more people aware of this?


Most people on here are afraid of their shadows. I am more likely to be robbed, mugged, or killed in NYC than I am in Greenville but most intelligent people know this.

Posted on: 2015/10/29 17:44
 Top 


Re: US/NJ Murder rate at lowest point since the 1950s...but why don't we notice?
#23
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/11/6 21:13
Last Login :
2023/7/17 17:42
From Hamilton Park
Group:
Banned
Posts: 5775
Offline
Quote:

JCMan8 wrote:
Brewster, nice rhetorical trick of putting your responses in red, as if you are the teacher correcting a student. Doesn't work but nice try.

It's cleaner than all these quote boxes and the color was random but whatever. Guess you saw a lot of red ink at school and it's a sore spot.
Quote:

I'll again point out your massive hypocrisy in accusing the media of being "sensationalist" (which I don't disagree) yet turning around and doing the exact same thing yourself with your lie about "massacres of small children" being a "regular occurrence." I'm still waiting for you to back this up.

Rather than spew out links from clearly biased sources pushing a political agenda, I chose to post objective links. Pew research is quite objective. A shame you couldn't do the same.

Of the "153 school shootings" documented on the "Everytown for Gun Safety Support Fund" which you linked, how many constitute "massacres of small children?" Go ahead, I'll wait. Show me that you aren't being a massive hypocrite and in fact these massacres are a regular occurrence.

So, we can add "not small" children to the list of shooting deaths you're OK with? It's actually not easy to find sources that separate out stats for small children, because most people don't believe any children being shot at school is OK. Sure, perhaps there may have been less elementary kids shot, but given "an average of more than three a month ? since the deadly 2012 attack at Sandy Hook Elementary School"At least 44 school shootings since Newtown ? new analysis school shootings are certainly a regular occurrence.
Quote:

And it's not surprising that you don't know how to read the Second Amendment. Hint, there is more to it than a "well regulated militia." Second hint, a couple of years ago, our United States Supreme Court read the same Second Amendment to strike down Washington DC's handgun ban. In fact, here is a quote from them:

"The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/District ... lumbia_v._Heller#Decision

I'm sure the echo chambers you frequent didn't explain this to you, so you're welcome for the free constitutional lesson.

Obviously I disagree with the SCOTUS majority on this one, as did 4 of the 9 justices. I'll bet there's some very recent decisions by the court that you disagree with. To me it clearly says the people should have guns as part of a well regulated militia, not "just because". Otherwise the 1st part of the sentence has no effect whatsoever and is meaningless. Funny how the "Originalists" who savor every word managed to pitch those words overboard when it suited them.
Quote:

Oh, and given your penchant for regurgitating slop from your echo chambers, I feel obligated to point out that the graphics you post contain outright lies and cannot be trusted. That snazzy bar graph you posted which claimed that the United States had the highest rate of "deaths/100,000 population" by far, is simply lying. Look at the gigantic red bar for suicides in America, and compare it to the imperceptible red bar in Japan. This means that our suicide rate must be far higher than Japan's right?

Funny thing though, when you go to suicide.org (and not vox.com, Bradycampaign.org, or whichever source of misinformation you use to spread lies), you'll see that not only is our suicide rate per 100,000 people comparable to Japan's, Japan is actually far higher.

http://www.suicide.org/international-suicide-statistics.html

As in, more than double ours. And while your graph represents that the US has the highest suicide rate of every country listed, in reality, we are around #40-50 globally. Now that I see where you get your information, it's no wonder you spread the distortions and outright lies that I've called you out on.

That's a lot of words wasted. You're like a terrier thrashing a rag and not realising it's not a rat. We were discussing gun deaths and the graphics caption, which unfortunately didn't link with it, explicitly says it's GUN deaths, not all deaths.
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/artic ... g-killed-car-crashes.html

Posted on: 2015/10/29 17:40
 Top 


Re: US/NJ Murder rate at lowest point since the 1950s...but why don't we notice?
#22
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2008/4/2 11:56
Last Login :
2018/10/5 14:16
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 756
Offline
Quote:

JerseyCityNj wrote:
Murder is at the lowest point it has been in this country and state since the 50s and most crime catagories the lowest since the 60s. So why aren't more people aware of this?


Perhaps if we choose our fears irrationally, we can potentially remedy them irrationally as well. Fear of murder? Get a gun. Fear of terrorism? Vote for conservative extremists. Fear of sexuality? Burn a witch.

On the other hand, protecting ourselves against dangers we?re quite likely to face, such as cardiovascular disease?not only are there eye-opening, rational, quantifiable metrics involved, it tends to require a lot of work and sacrifice. Screw that, just get those damned immigrants out of here!

Posted on: 2015/10/29 17:27
 Top 


Re: US/NJ Murder rate at lowest point since the 1950s...but why don't we notice?
#21
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2012/11/10 20:38
Last Login :
2018/2/1 3:02
From JC
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 3071
Offline
Pebble, you didn't "disprove" a thing. Are you aware of what "perception" means? I suggest looking it up.

In fact I proved my point, which we all know anyway based on the OP, by linking to one of the Pew articles. Despite gun violence declining by 60% since 1993, American adults feel that gun crime is on the rise. People like Brewster directly contribute to this false perception.

And it's funny how you and the other gun grabbers seem to see the NRA as this evil, monolethical entity. Are you aware that they represent the will of over 5 million people? These millions of people all pay dues because the NRA represents their views. Otherwise they'd stop paying. That's where a lot of this money comes from. The rest comes from advertising and contributions. Barely anything comes from the firearms industry itself.

You know why Congress bends over for the NRA? Not because of some evil power they wield, but because these Congressmen are acutely aware that the NRA represents the view of their constituents, and the voters will vote them out of office if they try to trample on the Second Amendment. It is as close to democracy in action as we get in America.

Oh, and you are sadly mistaken if you actually believe "there is only one side truly spending a ton of money on this issue." Ever heard of Bloomberg or the Brady Campaign? Now the gun lobby does spend more than the gun grabbers. But as I explained, thus money comes from the pockets of millions of Americans who actually understand the meaning of our Second Amendment. Not the NRA's fault that people don't believe the deception and lies pushed by the other side, such as Brewster's shameless claim that "massacres of small children" are a "regular occurrence," and the graphs he posted which were riddled with lies.


Posted on: 2015/10/29 17:15
 Top 


Re: US/NJ Murder rate at lowest point since the 1950s...but why don't we notice?
#20
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2013/3/29 21:43
Last Login :
2023/9/5 18:27
From Bergen Hill
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 1980
Offline
Quote:

JCMan8 wrote:
And for Pebble, my dimwitted friend, I never said that the gun control lobby is "somehow in charge and control of things." I said that it is because of their efforts, and that of most of our media, that people have the false perception that things are currently incredibly dangerous, when in reality we are the safest we've ever been. The fact you cited that only 26% of Americans want to ban handguns simply shows how the majority of people have rejected and continue to reject this deceptive propaganda.

This is exactly what I disproved. You are continuing to argue some theory of ?the media? and ?gun control lobby? conspiring in the corner to promote propaganda. The reality is that simply isn?t true. As one of the links directly pointed out, the NRA has lobbied and continued to lobby in greater efforts to prevent adequate unbiased governmental studies regarding the impacts of guns on the home. The fact that public perception on gun ownership has risen and is favorable denotes that there is only one side truly spending a ton of money on this issue. As brilliant as you believe yourself to be, I don?t see how you miss this very proven fact.

What you should be doing is asking yourself why the NRA spends so much money to prevent research.

Personally, I?d like that research to begin. I?d like for information, regardless of the result, to come out.

In the end, the only real answer to the question is the continuation of the theory that ?things were better in my day.?

It used to be heard how people could leave their front doors unlocked. Well, that?s never been true in cities. It ceased being true in suburbs when more people moved in and construction came up increasing the density. In short, nothing changed but the population size.

Posted on: 2015/10/29 14:15
Dos A Cero
 Top 


Re: US/NJ Murder rate at lowest point since the 1950s...but why don't we notice?
#19
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2012/11/10 20:38
Last Login :
2018/2/1 3:02
From JC
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 3071
Offline
Brewster, nice rhetorical trick of putting your responses in red, as if you are the teacher correcting a student. Doesn't work but nice try.

I'll again point out your massive hypocrisy in accusing the media of being "sensationalist" (which I don't disagree) yet turning around and doing the exact same thing yourself with your lie about "massacres of small children" being a "regular occurrence." I'm still waiting for you to back this up.

Rather than spew out links from clearly biased sources pushing a political agenda, I chose to post objective links. Pew research is quite objective. A shame you couldn't do the same.

Of the "153 school shootings" documented on the "Everytown for Gun Safety Support Fund" which you linked, how many constitute "massacres of small children?" Go ahead, I'll wait. Show me that you aren't being a massive hypocrite and in fact these massacres are a regular occurrence.

And it's not surprising that you don't know how to read the Second Amendment. Hint, there is more to it than a "well regulated militia." Second hint, a couple of years ago, our United States Supreme Court read the same Second Amendment to strike down Washington DC's handgun ban. In fact, here is a quote from them:

"The Second Amendment protects an individual right to possess a firearm unconnected with service in a militia, and to use that arm for traditionally lawful purposes, such as self-defense within the home."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/District ... lumbia_v._Heller#Decision

I'm sure the echo chambers you frequent didn't explain this to you, so you're welcome for the free constitutional lesson.

Oh, and given your penchant for regurgitating slop from your echo chambers, I feel obligated to point out that the graphics you post contain outright lies and cannot be trusted. That snazzy bar graph you posted which claimed that the United States had the highest rate of "deaths/100,000 population" by far, is simply lying. Look at the gigantic red bar for suicides in America, and compare it to the imperceptible red bar in Japan. This means that our suicide rate must be far higher than Japan's right?

Funny thing though, when you go to suicide.org (and not vox.com, Bradycampaign.org, or whichever source of misinformation you use to spread lies), you'll see that not only is our suicide rate per 100,000 people comparable to Japan's, Japan is actually far higher.

http://www.suicide.org/international-suicide-statistics.html

As in, more than double ours. And while your graph represents that the US has the highest suicide rate of every country listed, in reality, we are around #40-50 globally. Now that I see where you get your information, it's no wonder you spread the distortions and outright lies that I've called you out on.

Posted on: 2015/10/29 4:43

Edited by JCMan8 on 2015/10/29 5:06:13
 Top 


Re: US/NJ Murder rate at lowest point since the 1950s...but why don't we notice?
#18
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/11/6 21:13
Last Login :
2023/7/17 17:42
From Hamilton Park
Group:
Banned
Posts: 5775
Offline
Quote:

JCMan8 wrote:
Brewster, if you are not disputing the fact that gun violence is WAY down, why did you claim that "massacres of small children" are a "regular occurrence" under the current gun laws? I notice you keep shifting the goalposts when your original posts (which all seemed to imply that gun violence had certainly not lowered) were utterly debunked.

Because they are a regular occurrence.
Since 2013, there have been at least 153 school shootings in America ? an average of nearly one a week.

Australia is an island. They were able to ban guns because it's practical to do so on an island, not here.

Stupid argument. Our guns do not come from outside the US, in fact we are a major exporter.

Further, the critical point you have not addressed once, is that neither Australia nor these other countries have established gun ownership as a fundamental right, enshrined at the very beginning of our constitution. So it's disingenuous to point to Australia as a fair comparison.

We read the 2nd amendment differently, I see words about a "well regulated militia"

It is because gun ownership is such a fundamental American right that I downplay suicude deaths. I don't advocate restricting fundamental constitutional rights unless there is rock solid reasoning. And being in the midst of a 60% decrease in gun violence certainly doesn't cut it. Nor would an average person consider a suicude to be "gun violence." If you don't believe me, go ahead and ask random people.

Remind me, which gun deaths are the ones you don't downplay?
So far suicides, and shootings by dogs and toddlers are just fine.


And quite frankly, given your political orientation on this issue, your wife's anecdotal evidence is not very persuasive to me. I suspect many of these individuals would simply have found another way of committing the act.

My wife doesn't guess what suicidal people would do in the absence of guns, she knows, she sees these people when they are court mandated to her clinic after failing to end themselves with pills, blades, gravity etc.

See teh graphic, you would think people in DC and NJ would have the most reason to want to kill themselves.

Resized Image



Posted on: 2015/10/29 3:53

Edited by brewster on 2015/10/29 4:09:34
Edited by brewster on 2015/10/29 4:11:00
 Top 


Re: US/NJ Murder rate at lowest point since the 1950s...but why don't we notice?
#17
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2012/11/10 20:38
Last Login :
2018/2/1 3:02
From JC
Group:
Registered Users
Posts: 3071
Offline
Brewster, if you are not disputing the fact that gun violence is WAY down, why did you claim that "massacres of small children" are a "regular occurrence" under the current gun laws? I notice you keep shifting the goalposts when your original posts (which all seemed to imply that gun violence had certainly not lowered) were utterly debunked.

Australia is an island. They were able to ban guns because it's practical to do so on an island, not here.

Further, the critical point you have not addressed once, is that neither Australia nor these other countries have established gun ownership as a fundamental right, enshrined at the very beginning of our constitution. So it's disingenuous to point to Australia as a fair comparison.

It is because gun ownership is such a fundamental American right that I downplay suicude deaths. I don't advocate restricting fundamental constitutional rights unless there is rock solid reasoning. And being in the midst of a 60% decrease in gun violence certainly doesn't cut it. Nor would an average person consider a suicude to be "gun violence." If you don't believe me, go ahead and ask random people.

And quite frankly, given your political orientation on this issue, your wife's anecdotal evidence is not very persuasive to me. I suspect many of these individuals would simply have found another way of committing the act.

Posted on: 2015/10/29 2:42
 Top 


Re: US/NJ Murder rate at lowest point since the 1950s...but why don't we notice?
#16
Home away from home
Home away from home


Hide User information
Joined:
2004/11/6 21:13
Last Login :
2023/7/17 17:42
From Hamilton Park
Group:
Banned
Posts: 5775
Offline
No one is disputing gun violence is down, mostly to the decline of the crack epidemic. But since that includes NYC where gun control is probably the strictest in the nation, you can't claim the high rate of gun ownership is responsible. And going from appalling to shocking isn't something to crow about.

Even compared to Australia, the nation we arguably have the most cultural and historic similarity with, we come off pretty badly at 10x the rate of gun violence. A rate 1/5 our stimulated them to create strict controls. Sane Aussies, insane Yanks.

Resized Image


And you seem to poo-poo suicide deaths. Why? Try telling that to the parents of children who shoot themselves. They're dead too. My wife has been a social worker for 2 decades, and has found it clear that it's not nearly as easy to end yourself without access to a gun.

Posted on: 2015/10/29 2:32
 Top 




(1) 2 »




[Advanced Search]





Login
Username:

Password:

Remember me



Lost Password?

Register now!



LicenseInformation | AboutUs | PrivacyPolicy | Faq | Contact


JERSEY CITY LIST - News & Reviews - Jersey City, NJ - Copyright 2004 - 2017