Posts: 7,011
Threads: 441
Joined: Sep 2014
10-08-2017, 07:55 AM
(This post was last modified: 10-08-2017, 07:59 AM by Wonky3. Edited 1 time in total.)
And EXCERPT: (Link at end of post)
GUN VIOLENCE
No easy solution
I used to think gun control was the answer. My research told me otherwise.
By Leah Libresco Special to The Washington Post
Before
I started researching gun deaths, guncontrol policy used to frustrate me. I wished the National Rifle Association would stop blocking common-senseguncontrol reforms such as banning assault weapons, restricting silencers, shrinking magazine sizes and all the other measures that could make guns less deadly.
Then, my colleagues and I at FiveThirtyEight spent three months analyzing all 33,000 lives ended by guns each year in the United States, and I wound up frustrated in a whole new way.
We looked at what interventions might have saved those people, and the case for the policies I’d lobbied for crumbled when I examined the evidence. The best ideas left standing were narrowly tailored interventions to protect subtypes of potential victims, not broad attempts to limit the lethality of guns.
I researched the strictly tight-ened gun laws in Britain and Australia and concluded that they didn’t prove much about what America’s policy shouldbe. Neither nation experienced drops in mass shootings or other gun relatedcrime that could be attributed to their buybacks and bans. Mass shootings were too rare in Australia for their absence after the buyback program to be clear evidence of progress. And in both Australia and Britain, the gun restrictions had an ambigu-ous effect on other gunrelatedcrimes or deaths.
http://medfordmailtribune.or.newsmemory....FZVBxTXlo=
EDIT: Okay...I give up. . This link from the MT just sends us back to the front page. I used the "link feature" in the menu options here...still does not work. Anyone know how to fix this. Anyway, this is on the Opinion page of todays (Sun 10/8 MT).
Posts: 4,926
Threads: 34
Joined: Nov 2013
(10-08-2017, 07:55 AM)Wonky3 Wrote: And EXCERPT: (Link at end of post)
GUN VIOLENCE
No easy solution
I used to think gun control was the answer. My research told me otherwise.
By Leah Libresco Special to The Washington Post
Before
I started researching gun deaths, guncontrol policy used to frustrate me. I wished the National Rifle Association would stop blocking common-senseguncontrol reforms such as banning assault weapons, restricting silencers, shrinking magazine sizes and all the other measures that could make guns less deadly.
Then, my colleagues and I at FiveThirtyEight spent three months analyzing all 33,000 lives ended by guns each year in the United States, and I wound up frustrated in a whole new way.
We looked at what interventions might have saved those people, and the case for the policies I’d lobbied for crumbled when I examined the evidence. The best ideas left standing were narrowly tailored interventions to protect subtypes of potential victims, not broad attempts to limit the lethality of guns.
I researched the strictly tight-ened gun laws in Britain and Australia and concluded that they didn’t prove much about what America’s policy shouldbe. Neither nation experienced drops in mass shootings or other gun relatedcrime that could be attributed to their buybacks and bans. Mass shootings were too rare in Australia for their absence after the buyback program to be clear evidence of progress. And in both Australia and Britain, the gun restrictions had an ambigu-ous effect on other gunrelatedcrimes or deaths.
http://medfordmailtribune.or.newsmemory....FZVBxTXlo=
EDIT: Okay...I give up. . This link from the MT just sends us back to the front page. I used the "link feature" in the menu options here...still does not work. Anyone know how to fix this. Anyway, this is on the Opinion page of todays (Sun 10/8 MT).
The link works. It just doesn't link to what you wanted. I think that's on the MT end of things not what your doing. Congratulations.
Posts: 7,011
Threads: 441
Joined: Sep 2014
(10-08-2017, 08:05 AM)Cuzz Wrote: (10-08-2017, 07:55 AM)Wonky3 Wrote: And EXCERPT: (Link at end of post)
GUN VIOLENCE
No easy solution
I used to think gun control was the answer. My research told me otherwise.
By Leah Libresco Special to The Washington Post
Before
I started researching gun deaths, guncontrol policy used to frustrate me. I wished the National Rifle Association would stop blocking common-senseguncontrol reforms such as banning assault weapons, restricting silencers, shrinking magazine sizes and all the other measures that could make guns less deadly.
Then, my colleagues and I at FiveThirtyEight spent three months analyzing all 33,000 lives ended by guns each year in the United States, and I wound up frustrated in a whole new way.
We looked at what interventions might have saved those people, and the case for the policies I’d lobbied for crumbled when I examined the evidence. The best ideas left standing were narrowly tailored interventions to protect subtypes of potential victims, not broad attempts to limit the lethality of guns.
I researched the strictly tight-ened gun laws in Britain and Australia and concluded that they didn’t prove much about what America’s policy shouldbe. Neither nation experienced drops in mass shootings or other gun relatedcrime that could be attributed to their buybacks and bans. Mass shootings were too rare in Australia for their absence after the buyback program to be clear evidence of progress. And in both Australia and Britain, the gun restrictions had an ambigu-ous effect on other gunrelatedcrimes or deaths.
http://medfordmailtribune.or.newsmemory....FZVBxTXlo=
EDIT: Okay...I give up. . This link from the MT just sends us back to the front page. I used the "link feature" in the menu options here...still does not work. Anyone know how to fix this. Anyway, this is on the Opinion page of todays (Sun 10/8 MT).
The link works. It just doesn't link to what you wanted. I think that's on the MT end of things not what your doing. Congratulations.
Yeah, but at one time the link would go directly to the article I had highlighted and copied and pasted.
Whatever. We get what we get I guess.
Anyway, I thought it was an interesting read and good take on this ongoing discussion.
Posts: 18,298
Threads: 867
Joined: Mar 2011
Maybe a change in our social structure is needed. So people don't feel the need to go out and kill.
Posts: 7,011
Threads: 441
Joined: Sep 2014
(10-08-2017, 09:27 AM)chuck white Wrote: Maybe a change in our social structure is needed. So people don't feel the need to go out and kill.
Why Chucky, you are being cute!
...or are you?
Are you hitting on my remarks about the need for social changes (even here at the good old RVF, or have you seen the light and come home to Jesus?
Whatever the tone of our post, I will continue to think it's a fact, no matter what your intent was.
TVguy recently posted some examples of the breakdown in our social attitudes and I (for one) believe they are responsible for the changes we have seen. Maybe not what motivates mass killers to "go postal", but negative changes in the social interactions of our people.
Freedom and responsibility need to be firmly linked.
Posts: 18,298
Threads: 867
Joined: Mar 2011
(10-08-2017, 09:53 AM)Wonky3 Wrote: (10-08-2017, 09:27 AM)chuck white Wrote: Maybe a change in our social structure is needed. So people don't feel the need to go out and kill.
Why Chucky, you are being cute!
...or are you?
Are you hitting on my remarks about the need for social changes (even here at the good old RVF, or have you seen the light and come home to Jesus?
Whatever the tone of our post, I will continue to think it's a fact, no matter what your intent was.
TVguy recently posted some examples of the breakdown in our social attitudes and I (for one) believe they are responsible for the changes we have seen. Maybe not what motivates mass killers to "go postal", but negative changes in the social interactions of our people.
Freedom and responsibility need to be firmly linked.
Freedom, firearms and responsibility need to be firmly linked.
Lets not exclude Larry.
Posts: 7,011
Threads: 441
Joined: Sep 2014
(10-08-2017, 12:42 PM)chuck white Wrote: (10-08-2017, 09:53 AM)Wonky3 Wrote: (10-08-2017, 09:27 AM)chuck white Wrote: Maybe a change in our social structure is needed. So people don't feel the need to go out and kill.
Why Chucky, you are being cute!
...or are you?
Are you hitting on my remarks about the need for social changes (even here at the good old RVF, or have you seen the light and come home to Jesus?
Whatever the tone of our post, I will continue to think it's a fact, no matter what your intent was.
TVguy recently posted some examples of the breakdown in our social attitudes and I (for one) believe they are responsible for the changes we have seen. Maybe not what motivates mass killers to "go postal", but negative changes in the social interactions of our people.
Freedom and responsibility need to be firmly linked.
Freedom, firearms and responsibility need to be firmly linked.
Lets not exclude Larry. Not to worry. Larry knows ALL about firearm responsibility, values freedom, and is a responsible citizen.
That said, we don't agree on much.
Posts: 41,856
Threads: 560
Joined: Mar 2009
Hey Wonky. When I have trouble posting a link to something that is in the MMT I just copy and paste the headline. Google it and find it somewhere else.
Here is the same article from the Washington post....
Posts: 7,011
Threads: 441
Joined: Sep 2014
(10-08-2017, 03:43 PM)tvguy Wrote: Hey Wonky. When I have trouble posting a link to something that is in the MMT I just copy and paste the headline. Google it and find it somewhere else.
Here is the same article from the Washington post....
Thanks: Good tip.
Posts: 4,015
Threads: 153
Joined: Jun 2010
http://www.foxnews.com/us/2017/10/16/dan...cates.html
It looks to me like the people who are comfortable with guns aren't the dangerous ones. I wonder if the irony is totally lost on some, when you threaten to kill someone because YOU are so against violence??
Posts: 41,856
Threads: 560
Joined: Mar 2009
(10-16-2017, 08:36 AM)Hugo Wrote: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2017/10/16/dan...cates.html
It looks to me like the people who are comfortable with guns aren't the dangerous ones. I wonder if the irony is totally lost on some, when you threaten to kill someone because YOU are so against violence??
Yeah right because all the people who want to ban guns or have more restrictions are violent.
And no gun owners would EVER threaten violence against anyone
My God don't be such a Fox news tool.
Posts: 4,926
Threads: 34
Joined: Nov 2013
(10-16-2017, 03:01 PM)tvguy Wrote: (10-16-2017, 08:36 AM)Hugo Wrote: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2017/10/16/dan...cates.html
It looks to me like the people who are comfortable with guns aren't the dangerous ones. I wonder if the irony is totally lost on some, when you threaten to kill someone because YOU are so against violence??
Yeah right because all the people who want to ban guns or have more restrictions are violent.
And no gun owners would EVER threaten violence against anyone
My God don't be such a Fox news tool.
too late.
Posts: 518
Threads: 50
Joined: Jul 2017
(10-16-2017, 05:52 PM)Cuzz Wrote: (10-16-2017, 03:01 PM)tvguy Wrote: (10-16-2017, 08:36 AM)Hugo Wrote: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2017/10/16/dan...cates.html
It looks to me like the people who are comfortable with guns aren't the dangerous ones. I wonder if the irony is totally lost on some, when you threaten to kill someone because YOU are so against violence??
Yeah right because all the people who want to ban guns or have more restrictions are violent.
And no gun owners would EVER threaten violence against anyone
My God don't be such a Fox news tool.
too late.
Posts: 7,011
Threads: 441
Joined: Sep 2014
(10-16-2017, 06:31 PM)GCG Wrote: (10-16-2017, 05:52 PM)Cuzz Wrote: (10-16-2017, 03:01 PM)tvguy Wrote: (10-16-2017, 08:36 AM)Hugo Wrote: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2017/10/16/dan...cates.html
It looks to me like the people who are comfortable with guns aren't the dangerous ones. I wonder if the irony is totally lost on some, when you threaten to kill someone because YOU are so against violence??
Yeah right because all the people who want to ban guns or have more restrictions are violent.
And no gun owners would EVER threaten violence against anyone
My God don't be such a Fox news tool.
too late.
Yea, but doesn't Hugo have a valid point? Gun owners have been getting vicious threats including death, from some nut jobs who don't want ANYONE to own a gun. That's violence, at least implied.
Posts: 5,103
Threads: 262
Joined: May 2013
10-17-2017, 03:05 PM
(This post was last modified: 10-17-2017, 03:06 PM by SFLiberal. Edited 1 time in total.)
Posts: 41,856
Threads: 560
Joined: Mar 2009
(10-17-2017, 02:23 PM)Wonky3 Wrote: (10-16-2017, 06:31 PM)GCG Wrote: (10-16-2017, 05:52 PM)Cuzz Wrote: (10-16-2017, 03:01 PM)tvguy Wrote: (10-16-2017, 08:36 AM)Hugo Wrote: http://www.foxnews.com/us/2017/10/16/dan...cates.html
It looks to me like the people who are comfortable with guns aren't the dangerous ones. I wonder if the irony is totally lost on some, when you threaten to kill someone because YOU are so against violence??
Yeah right because all the people who want to ban guns or have more restrictions are violent.
And no gun owners would EVER threaten violence against anyone
My God don't be such a Fox news tool.
too late.
Yea, but doesn't Hugo have a valid point? Gun owners have been getting vicious threats including death, from some nut jobs who don't want ANYONE to own a gun. That's violence, at least implied.
Yea, but doesn't Hugo have a valid point?
Hell no
It looks to me like the people who are comfortable with guns aren't the dangerous ones.
That's no valid point. That's absurd.
Anti gun people sure as hell don't have the market cornered on violence. Besides it's an assumption to conclude anti gun people would not use violence. IMO they are against mass murdering like 500 plus people being shot.
Or mowing down toddlers OR slaughtering elderly people at church.
Who's to say these people simply see nothing wrong with violence if they think it would stop the killings I mentioned above?
Posts: 7,011
Threads: 441
Joined: Sep 2014
(10-17-2017, 03:21 PM)tvguy Wrote: (10-17-2017, 02:23 PM)Wonky3 Wrote: (10-16-2017, 06:31 PM)GCG Wrote: (10-16-2017, 05:52 PM)Cuzz Wrote: (10-16-2017, 03:01 PM)tvguy Wrote: Yeah right because all the people who want to ban guns or have more restrictions are violent.
And no gun owners would EVER threaten violence against anyone
My God don't be such a Fox news tool.
too late.
Yea, but doesn't Hugo have a valid point? Gun owners have been getting vicious threats including death, from some nut jobs who don't want ANYONE to own a gun. That's violence, at least implied.
Yea, but doesn't Hugo have a valid point?
Hell no
It looks to me like the people who are comfortable with guns aren't the dangerous ones.
That's no valid point. That's absurd.
Anti gun people sure as hell don't have the market cornered on violence. Besides it's an assumption to conclude anti gun people would not use violence. IMO they are against mass murdering like 500 plus people being shot.
Or mowing down toddlers OR slaughtering elderly people at church.
Who's to say these people simply see nothing wrong with violence if they think it would stop the killings I mentioned above?
Killing the people who kill people?
Posts: 41,856
Threads: 560
Joined: Mar 2009
Posts: 41,856
Threads: 560
Joined: Mar 2009
(10-17-2017, 03:25 PM)Wonky3 Wrote: (10-17-2017, 03:21 PM)tvguy Wrote: (10-17-2017, 02:23 PM)Wonky3 Wrote: (10-16-2017, 06:31 PM)GCG Wrote: (10-16-2017, 05:52 PM)Cuzz Wrote: too late.
Yea, but doesn't Hugo have a valid point? Gun owners have been getting vicious threats including death, from some nut jobs who don't want ANYONE to own a gun. That's violence, at least implied.
Yea, but doesn't Hugo have a valid point?
Hell no
It looks to me like the people who are comfortable with guns aren't the dangerous ones.
That's no valid point. That's absurd.
Anti gun people sure as hell don't have the market cornered on violence. Besides it's an assumption to conclude anti gun people would not use violence. IMO they are against mass murdering like 500 plus people being shot.
Or mowing down toddlers OR slaughtering elderly people at church.
Who's to say these people simply see nothing wrong with violence if they think it would stop the killings I mentioned above?
Killing the people who kill people? I don't know how to explain this any better.
Hugo is making the conclusion that all those who are against guns are non violent.
But I'm saying why assume that? Who's to say these people don't mind using violence IF in their mind it stops mass shootings?
Posts: 14,339
Threads: 709
Joined: Jan 2011
(10-17-2017, 03:05 PM)SFLiberal Wrote: Maybe it is time to regulate knives.
FBI: 2016 Over Four Times More People Stabbed to Death Than Killed with Rifles of Any Kind
Fucking broken record.
|