EPThttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3828709/
"The main predictor variable was the prevalence of household firearm ownership."
If you're seeing this topic then another mass shooting hap…
| Forum Index > General Forum |
Although this thread does not function under the same strict guidelines as the USPMT, it is still a general practice on TL to provide a source with an explanation on why it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion. Failure to do so will result in a mod action. | ||
|
rockslave
Brazil318 Posts
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3828709/ "The main predictor variable was the prevalence of household firearm ownership." | ||
|
Aveng3r
United States2411 Posts
| ||
|
VelJa
France1109 Posts
On November 14 2017 01:28 Aveng3r wrote: I think you may have misunderstood what was said on the last 10 pages here I understand it but I still want to give my thoughts. & a good response will be appreciated  | ||
|
jodljodl
179 Posts
On November 14 2017 01:00 VelJa wrote: Well I read all 10 last page my head hurts Here what I think about whty do us ppl carry guns. American ppl feel fear. Everytime everywhere.just Always. They are always scared that something may happen This is mainly because we educated them like that. & because this is business ofc So they are prepared for everything including buying guns for absolute no reason. "Just in case" > in case of what ? ww3 ? Invasion? x) Same shit with religion. But religion does not use fear but thy use guiltyness. (off topic ) What a bunch of bull... Please, would one US citizen be so kind to tell here truthfully that he/she is not scared all the time? To proof him wrong. Thanks. VeIJa have you ever heard of indulgences and the sell of those by the roman catholic church esp. in medieval ages? Since the purchase of these frees you of the punishment for the sin but not the sin itself, one can argue that the whole thing is based on fear entirely. | ||
|
lestye
United States4208 Posts
The fact someone was able to acquire so much power and so much damage from so far away, with the police not being able to do much says it all, I think. | ||
micronesia
United States24768 Posts
That's not to say there's nothing to be done in light of events like these... just that it's not so simple as to say the event speaks for itself. | ||
|
AxiomBlurr
786 Posts
On November 14 2017 20:52 micronesia wrote: That was circulating the internet shortly after the event, including on TL. I don't think it says it all, though. Events where a well-armed sniper targets a large group of people unrelated to him/her is difficult for law enforcement or others legally carrying firearms to respond to, but they are actually pretty rare and not representative of gun deaths overall. Even if you weight the events according to their death toll, these types of events are small blips in the long run. That's not to say there's nothing to be done in light of events like these... just that it's not so simple as to say the event speaks for itself. Well put Sir. | ||
|
Broetchenholer
Germany1961 Posts
On November 14 2017 20:17 jodljodl wrote: What a bunch of bull... Please, would one US citizen be so kind to tell here truthfully that he/she is not scared all the time? To proof him wrong. Thanks. VeIJa have you ever heard of indulgences and the sell of those by the roman catholic church esp. in medieval ages? Since the purchase of these frees you of the punishment for the sin but not the sin itself, one can argue that the whole thing is based on fear entirely. How would one person giving anecdotal evidence about himself proof him wrong. A lot of American politicians and television has pushed fearmongering to be their main tool and it is no coincidence that after each big shooting gun sales go through the roof. The generalisation hurts his case but to make a case that fear contributes to gun ownership is not oulandish. Not really sure what it has to do with religion except if he specifially meant indulgences, where the church sold the product of a good afterlive by overstating how bad sinners would be tortured in hell if they wouldn't atone by physical gifts to the church. The difference there would be that people bought the indulgence after the sin and here we are talking about buying a product in case a very very unlikely scenario would make it actually semi-viable. The argument of "if there is ever a breakdown of society, i will be able to protect myself and my family with that AR-15". | ||
|
brian
United States9640 Posts
| ||
|
VelJa
France1109 Posts
On November 14 2017 20:17 jodljodl wrote: What a bunch of bull... Please, would one US citizen be so kind to tell here truthfully that he/she is not scared all the time? To proof him wrong. Thanks. VeIJa have you ever heard of indulgences and the sell of those by the roman catholic church esp. in medieval ages? Since the purchase of these frees you of the punishment for the sin but not the sin itself, one can argue that the whole thing is based on fear entirely. My response to jodjodl I'm not saying you all feel fear all the time, I'm just saying that this is always a part of your education & way to live. Not a judgement, but more a fact ? No I don't, and for 2 reason : - all who's connected to any religion is bullshit (for me). For religion you need to replace fear by guiltiness. "ex: if you don't do blablabla yoou'll be a bad citizen, if you don't do blablabla you are not a good person & you'll die alone in hell etc" - "medieval age" > move on dude | ||
|
Xiphias
Norway2223 Posts
Another part of such laws should be the ability to take away a gun from a citizen as soon as something happens which should indicate that such a citizen should no longer be trusted with a gun, such as domestic abuse etc. | ||
|
mcpon14
14 Posts
| ||
|
urmomdresslikafloozy
191 Posts
| ||
|
mcpon14
14 Posts
I'm talking about any of the various conspiracy theories associated with that, lol? | ||
|
nothingmuch
448 Posts
On November 14 2017 20:52 micronesia wrote: That was circulating the internet shortly after the event, including on TL. I don't think it says it all, though. Events where a well-armed sniper targets a large group of people unrelated to him/her is difficult for law enforcement or others legally carrying firearms to respond to, but they are actually pretty rare and not representative of gun deaths overall. Even if you weight the events according to their death toll, these types of events are small blips in the long run. That's not to say there's nothing to be done in light of events like these... just that it's not so simple as to say the event speaks for itself. So you're suggesting a discussion about which kind of gun deaths are acceptable? Or just (not) preventable by everyone having access to guns? I don't see how that logic works with the overwhelming number of gun related deaths in comparison to nations with stricter gun laws. | ||
|
GreenHorizons
United States23893 Posts
On December 03 2017 19:27 mcpon14 wrote: What do people think of the theory that Stephen Paddock was actually a CIA or FBI operative, lol? I'm talking about any of the various conspiracy theories associated with that, lol? The things that get me are the creepy fed at the press conferences seeming to force the police to hold their tongue. The police saying they found what looked like preparations for an absurd escape (I read that as some Mission Impossible/SF type repelling system) that makes more sense if he wasn't alone in the room. There's also practically 0 tape of him going into his room (which there definitely would be), or tape of him firing into the hallway or the security person or any of the story we've been told. All that meaning I'm skeptical of the official explanation rather than putting forth an alternative one, similar to (but less supported by professionals in the field than) skepticism of the official story surrounding the WTC building 7 | ||
|
micronesia
United States24768 Posts
On December 03 2017 19:41 nothingmuch wrote: No, that's not suggested. So you're suggesting a discussion about which kind of gun deaths are acceptable? Or just (not) preventable by everyone having access to guns? I don't see how that logic works with the overwhelming number of gun related deaths in comparison to nations with stricter gun laws. What I was actually doing was taking a bit of issue with the statement "The fact someone was able to acquire so much power and so much damage from so far away, with the police not being able to do much says it all, I think." It does not say it all. | ||
|
urmomdresslikafloozy
191 Posts
On December 03 2017 20:11 GreenHorizons wrote: The things that get me are the creepy fed at the press conferences seeming to force the police to hold their tongue. The police saying they found what looked like preparations for an absurd escape (I read that as some Mission Impossible/SF type repelling system) that makes more sense if he wasn't alone in the room. There's also practically 0 tape of him going into his room (which there definitely would be), or tape of him firing into the hallway or the security person or any of the story we've been told. All that meaning I'm skeptical of the official explanation rather than putting forth an alternative one, similar to (but less supported by professionals in the field than) skepticism of the official story surrounding the WTC building 7 Attorney Mark Geragos believes their is a cover up. Nobody has a cohesive story that doesn't contradict itself. The security guy interview on Ellen was also very strange. The guard was supposedly shot but looked fine didnt walk with a limp or anything. | ||
|
farvacola
United States18856 Posts
| ||
|
urmomdresslikafloozy
191 Posts
On December 04 2017 02:53 farvacola wrote: Nothing says "hard hitting investigative journalism" like a piece by Adam Carolla lol His buddy Jimmy Kimmel is busy going after Roy Moore Gun Control and universal healthcare so thats the way it goes. | ||
| ||
