liberalpropagandagroup:conorthebarbarian:liberalpropagandagroup:conorthebarbarian:liberalpropagandag

liberalpropagandagroup:conorthebarbarian:liberalpropagandagroup:conorthebarbarian:liberalpropagandagroup:More from the world of gun culture. You can read the article here.-EliEvery 10 days in the U.S. a child dies of heat exhaustion from being left in a car. Are you willing to give up automobiles to prevent accidents or does your veil of liberal arrogance only apply to objects that you don’t use?Try again.It’s interesting that you mention a veil of ignorance while essentially comparing apples to oranges.Comparing unnecessary loss of life to other forms of unnecessary loss of life is illogical?Comparing one problem to another, totally different problem is illogical. Not all problems have the same solution. Your fearless leaders at the LPG are interested in solutions, not stupidity.As you should know, part of the 5 part values system adopted by the LPG, indeed an integral part of our branding decided by your Fearless Leaders at the Liberal Propaganda Group is scientific literacy.Which fearless leaders of mine are you referring to? The people who have unjust say in what goes on in my life are neither fearless, nor leaders. But please go on. As we said, we are referring to your Fearless Leaders at the LPG. Regardless as to your feelings on the matter myself and the other founding parental units at the LPG are both fearless and leaders as the title implies.So, let’s for a moment pretend that the completely ludicrous idea that cars and guns are comparable devices has any validity at all for the sake of argument. You should feel lucky that a human being of any education is entertaining this as the suggestion does not deserve time. However, the nefarious leadership of the gun industry disinformation machine, the NRA, insists on spreading such stupidity so it’s important that we take the time to entertain those not intelligent enough to understand. So, let’s look at gun deaths. It’s more than 1 every 10 days. It’s much more. It’s actually 1 every 16 minutes (Firearm and Injury Center at Penn, which compiles FBI and CDC data.) That’s just deaths, not injuries. So in the time that one child dies locked in a car, roughly 900 people have died at the hand of a gun. Obviously the issue with a death rate 900 times higher is going to be of greater priority.It’s funny that you mention FBI and CDC data. Did you miss the part where murder in the U.S. has dropped by nearly 50% in the past twenty years? 9.5 in 1993 to 4.7 in 2012. Or are you just cherry picking facts?If you read our post we did actually mention the CDC AND FBI data, which our source compiled. Reading skills: they matter.I know you mention the FBI and CDC data. I found it amusing that you’re sticking to gun violence when other preventable causes of death are much higher. Let’s talk about the murder rate, shall we? (Even though this is entirely different from the Gun Death rate as it does not account for Suicides, Accidental Death, etc)There’s info straight from the CDC website. You’re not looking at the whole picture. It appears that you are the one cherry picking. Now, let’s remember that there are many factors involved with any problem. Guns are one of many factors involved in this particular issue. So, what’s going on in the graph? Obviously, Any idiot can see a long term downward trend, but we also know that gun ownership (not the number of guns) is decreasing. (Gallup) Moreover, we see spikes associated with conservatives running the government, which we do know is actually correlated to increased crime. (See our post on that here.) Moreover, you see a sharp decline following the Assault Weapons ban, as well as an increase following its repeal. In fact any idiot can correlate gun control measures as well. Biggest thing going on? Spikes when the Baby Boomers and their kids hit the age where crime is the most common. Shocker shocker. So let’s look at the data like educated adults, not deluded gun nuts who don’t give a flying fuck about science or facts.I agree. Let’s take a look at the data like adults. But first, you need to know that correlation doesn’t equal causation. But you were right, I didn’t give you all the facts so here are some more that don’t follow your narrative at all.1993 Crimes per 100,000 residents - 440.3 aggravated assaults, 1,099.2 burglaries, 41.1 rapes, 606.1 vehicle thefts2012 - 242.3 aggravated assaults,  670.2 burglaries, 26.9 rapes, 229.7 vehicle theftsBut I do see your point about gun homicide being more common than accidental death from hyperthermia. But why are you concentrating on murder via misuse of firearm?Your fearless leaders are concentrating on the entire issue that is gun culture, which of course impacts more than just murder. It’s a major issue, and it’s one that needs to be addressed.So by your logic all of these causes of death should be the focus of your efforts. Heart disease: 597,689Cancer: 574,743Chronic lower respiratory diseases: 138,080Stroke (cerebrovascular diseases): 129,476Accidents (unintentional injuries): 120,859I suppose I should’ve mentioned the rest of the people who die in accidents annually. Silly me, here ya go.Alzheimer’s disease: 83,494Diabetes: 69,071Nephritis, nephrotic syndrome, and nephrosis: 50,476Influenza and Pneumonia: 50,097Intentional self-harm (suicide): 38,364Source: Deaths: Final Data for 2010, table 10 Adobe PDF fileAll of those deserve attention, but not all problems are the same. Obviously Diabetes is totally different than gun culture and needs to be approached differently. News flash: the government is the largest employer in the US. It can multitask. Shocking, I know. But more than one problem can be dealt with at the same time. You missed the point I was making about that but it was somewhat subtle, so i’ll give you that. The reason why I pointed out all of those other forms of death were due to the fact that you’ve adopted a “holier than thou” position. You even argued mathematically do justify it. So I pointed out that there are more substantial causes of death. Your response was merely “Meh, the gov’t can handle that.” In other words, you labeling “gun toters” as not caring is bullshit. However, both death rates are 100% preventable. So, yes, of course, we need legislation that protects children from cars as well as that which protects them at school, where a gun owner may just mow them down, or from homes where gun toters put their perverse obsession with firearms above the safety and security of their loved ones.I’m sorry I couldn’t break it to you more gently, but legislation doesn’t actually save anyone from anything except for maybe the free market that you have so much disdain for. Well thank God you’ve never been in a car wreck and had a seatbelt save your life.A product invented by a private inventor. Something that revolutionary will spread due to its efficiency. And thank God you’ve never not been effected by asbestos. You sure about that? Private contractors came to inspect the building I work in for asbestos, and they all refused to go back inside once they saw the readings. Oh by the way, it’s a federal building.Also give some thanks to the fact that you’ve never needed a stop sign to stop someone from ramming into your car. Damn traffic laws obstructing justice and not saving your life ever. People didn’t hit me because they were responsible enough to know how to operate their vehicles safely. When someone stops at a stop sign, he/she does so because they don’t want to get into a wreck. Give credit where credit is due. More on the economy in this post. And that’s where we stop entertaining your idea. These are real world problems, and they require real solutions. People are dying. It’s time the toters took that seriously.OH NO HOW DARE I ASK FOR REAL SOLUTIONS! IT’S SO DAMN OFFENSIVE I CAN’T EVEN STAND IT.Translation: He exposed a logical fallacy I used so now I have to justify it!It’s interesting that you complain about that when you intentionally divide posts to respond. If it’s a long post (which this was not), that make sense, but provide a link to it unaltered. This is a tactic that people who either can’t follow an argument or can’t make a point without interrupting use as it breaks up the OP’s wording in an intentional attempt to make their argument appear more sporadic. If a liberal uses this, shame on them too.Talks about me complaining. Complains when I break up posts. Then breaks up posts himself. Did you lost this?Do tell of the “real world” solutions that prevent people from harming one another. The fact of the matter is that gun laws have been relaxed in every state since the 90’s and the murder rate has dropped dramatically. Not to mention that the number of weapons in circulation (300,000,000) continues to rise. So your narrative that gun control is the answer is bullshit and the facts show the opposite. The number of Weapons have increased, but the number of people who own them has decreased. (Gallup). It’s the rate at which they are owned, not the number of them that exist that correlates to crime. One crazy with 50 guns is no different than one crazy with one. We have fewer crazies, therefore, we have fewer problems. In fact, there is a 1% decrease in the murder rate correlated to every 1% decrease in gun ownership. The goal is to decrease gun ownership. Myriad of sources on that here. Quite frankly gun confiscation is a real world solution.The CRIME rate has been going down. Refer to the numbers I listed above. And I listed crimes that usually don’t involve guns. Awww, that doesn’t suite your agenda, does it?Now, obviously we need child protection laws, and murder needs to be illegal. But the car is not the danger for that child, the parent is. If a safety feature could realistically be employed to prevent this kind of injury, that would be a good idea to regulate and require. However, a car is necessary to our economy, and to the health and safety of the public as a whole. It has a very utilitarian purpose so it’s not practical to ban cars.You know that. I know that. We all fucking know that. It is practical to devote more police time to protecting children and it is worth our while to explore safety features.Here’s the thing. You don’t get to decide what should or shouldn’t be necessary for prosperity in the economy. Consumers and businesses do. Well, actually, that’s not the case. But what would I know? I only have a small army of employees as well as an education in accounting (specialization in international finance and additional certification in corporate finance and capital markets) and economics (specialization in public finance and monetary theory). Oh, that’s right, I know a fucking lot on that matter.Argument from authority (also known as appeal to authority) is a fallacy of defective induction, where it is argued that a statement is correct because the statement is made by a person or source that is commonly regarded as authoritative. The most general structure of this argument is:Neither consumers nor firms decide what’s valuable to the economy, they simply react to it. Economists, like myself, study the nature of that market and understand what has value and do get to talk about what is valuable and what is not. Translation: I should decide what’s best for people based on an arbitrary criteria that I set for myself.Guns, which kill far more people, have no purpose. They aren’t utilitarian, they aren’t useful for self defense (in fact they make you less likely to survive attack.)First of all, what’s useful or not useful is completely subjective. And the link you provided didn’t work but every pseudo-study I’ve seen plugs criminals with guns into the mix of murder victims. And the data that I’ve seen indicates that a very high percentage of murder “victims” had criminal backgrounds.Well, there was no link there There is one later, and it works, but there isn’t one here. Why are you stuck on murder when we are talking about an issue that certainly includes murder but that is not limited to it? Why am I stuck on murder? Geez, you got me with that one. I dunno, I suppose because the loss of human life is a tragedy whether the circumstances are gun shot wounds or blunt force with a tire iron. Moreover, you don’t get to justify murders or pretend that some don’t count because you don’t like the facts.You’re the one who keeps separating gun murder from other forms of murder. As if to suggest it were somehow more immoral. Self-awareness, you should try it some time.  I’d like to see your qualifications to dispute any studies that you are referring to as well as the studies. Guns don’t have a legitimate purpose. It’s not subjective. It’s a fact. Translation: I’ve invested my ego and emotions into my position and can’t handle it when someone challenges that. There you go again with labeling something as immoral through what you view as its intended purpose. By your logic, Zyklon-B wasn’t as bad as gun violence simply because it was intended to be used as a pesticide. If guns are so useless for defense then why do police and military use them? Don’t worry, I’ll wait. They are an aggressive weapon, not  defensive weapon.“Aggressive weapon?” Firearms weren’t forged in Mt Doom by Sauron.Weapons of war have a place, but not with citizens. I’m so glad you mentioned that. Would you care to explain why police need “weapons of war?” Who are they at war with. If you had read any of the information on the link we provided in the next paragraph, you’d know that gun use among civilians for “self defense” is associated with a higher rate of injury than other methods of “self defense” and increases the likelihood of the “victim” being shot. I already told you the link didn’t work You’re a quick one, aren’t you? Would you also care to explain why concealed carry holders are three times less likely to commit violent crime than police officers?http://www.gunfacts.info/gun-control-myths/concealed-carry/See the myriad of resources that we have provided here. The only purpose of a weapon is to end a life. Period.Why thank you Dick Tracy. The point of self-defense is to eliminate a threat. Killing the threat is one way of doing that in case you didn’t know.Wrong. Remember, there are 300,000,000 guns, and 300,000,000 people in the U.S. Why is the murder rate falling if firearms can only be used to kill?As I previously explained, the rate of gun ownership is going down and there are multiple factors associated with the decrease. Another reason not the divide posts: you can respond more succinctly and don’t have to look like your are intentionally compensating for your lack of substance by making your responses seem more detailed. More examples of how correlation doesn’t equal causation.Moreover, they aren’t a human right.The right to self-preservation and property rights cover guns. Sorry to disappoint. Just kidding, I’m not sorry.These’s something very wrong with that statement. If guns aren’t a human right, then why is okay for government (ran by people in case you didn’t know) to possess guns, nukes, tanks, etc.? Philosophical consistency isn’t your strong suite I guess. A government is not a person and a person is not the government. I’m a Marine, and also a human being. It’s ironic that you claim that an organization ran by people is somehow different based on artificial boundaries arbitrarily set by the masses.  Don’t compare the two as they are different. If we are talking about philosophical consistency, are you then opposed to restrictions making it illegal for a citizen to own nuclear weaponry.If so, why? Weapons of war are a human right in your mind, are they not?A nuclear weapon is merely a construct of certain rare elements. The idea of anyone handling those materials bothers me, but to suggest that government can handle them better than a private organization is ludicrous. Right now the Japanese government is doing a piss poor job of handling the radiation that’s leaking into the water. I’d provide you with a link but it’s easy to find. What;s classified as a weapon of war is completely subjective. “A war is nothing more than a violent conflict between to wills.” <—–USMC Doctrine “Warfighting." It’s interesting how you attempted to deflect when I brought up government having weapons. This is a photo of Japanese Americans in an internment camp in WWII. Americans tend to be very arrogant and assume that government atrocities can’t happen here. I assure you they can. And no, this isn’t an appeal to emotion. However, over 100,000,000 people were killed as a result of overreaching government that they could not resist. Americans aren’t genetically or intellectually superior to anyone, and it can just as easily happen here without the means to fight.No, the US Constitution is not an authoritative document on human rights. I don’t deny that the Constitution as a legal document protects gun toters and their ilk, but it was written by slave owners. There’s going to be some shit in there that’s flat out wrong. It’s funny that you mention that. I’ve never encountered a liberal who disliked any other part of the Bill of Rights besides the Second Amendment. Would you be willing to scrap the entire thing, or do you actually care about the other rights that it was supposed to secure for you?Now, I certainly support the repeal of the second amendment - or its graduated irrelevance through the natural breath of the living document - so that the US can actually tackle this problem. I absolutely support the wholesale confiscation and destruction of a device that has absolutely no purpose in a civilian’s hands.What purpose does it have in the hands of a jack booted government thug? I’m curious as to how working for the state (an institution of violence) somehow qualifies you to operate these weapons.  There is simply no good reason to have one, and the ownership of one is an inherently irresponsible activity.Once again, why are you okay with government having weapons? I’ve got access to machine guns, yet you’d deny me the ability to have my pistol in my apartment based on how you feel about it?Remember me mentioning philosophical consistency? I’m still waiting for it. Allow me to put things into perspective for you. You’re saying that because gun violence is wrong, you’re willing to ignite a war to confiscate them? Do you also fight infections by sharing needles?Never said anything about igniting a war.Doesn’t matter. You can live in a war of intentions all you want but America is a country awash with arms, and has a history of armed insurrection.  If you think the dipshits at the NRA are capable of organizing anything other than a conference, you are wrong.This may be hard for you to hear, but the overwhelming majority of gun owners aren’t in the NRA.While I do, admittedly, enjoy the idea of federal police blowing the brains out of any toter who resisted confiscation (our gene pool would look a lot better), that’s wrong. Gun toters, though annoying, are people do. Just very, very stupid ones. Translation: I enjoy the idea of violence towards political opponents, but I’d feel bad if it happened.World of intentions once again. So you’re not okay with using violence  to confiscate guns but you still want to confiscate guns? Clearly making them illegal will work just like it did with drugs. Oh wait….There’s one thing that I’m going to share with you that not a lot of people such as yourself are aware of. There’s gun control in Afghanistan. That’s right, every household is allowed one AK for defense. So you honestly believe it’s plausible to confiscate weapons from 300,000,000 Americans? Despite the fact that Afghanistan has hundreds of thousands of U.S. troops to enforce gun control over the past 13 years to no avail? Good luck with that argument. If that day ever comes, I hope you’re in charge of logistics. I won’t be worried. Actually guns and the public display thereof are legal with permit in Afghanistan. I don’t call over 100k voluntary weapons surrenders a failure for the third world. We;re not winning in Afghanistan by a long shot. It’s a failure.Moreover, there’s a difference between the United States and the third world in terms of how easy it is to implement certain policies. Moreover, 300,000,000 Americans don’t own guns. We’ve discussed that. Facts: They Matter.That was a very poor attempt at deflecting my point about the world’s most powerful military failing to enforce gun control. Facts. They matter. Even the ones that don’t support your rhetoric.That’s one life saved every 16 minutes, not that the toters care.-EliNow I don’t mean to come of as arguing from authority, and I’m by no means an expert. But my dealings with local peoples of different countries is just a little bit more extensive than yours. I’ve lived in the UK, I could go off about how their murder rate is on the decline overall and is 1/5 that of the US. But I don’t because it’s not relevant experience. Neither is Afghanistan. You’re just trying to make yourself look better because you have nothing of substance to say. Comparing human casualties across the world and examining the circumstances of all of them is irrelevant because of imaginary lines drawn on a map? Um, no.-Sgt USMCThat’s cute and all that you were in the military but it’s unnecessary information. I will, however, say that I am sorry for the deprivation of your and other federal employees’ benefits at the hands of the right wing and the uneducated citizens who voted them in. I am a taxpayer. You are my employee by proxy, and I am truly sorry that conservatives have ruined that for you as an employee. And sorry about the noise, it’s just your argument crumbling.Delusions: the right wing can’t live without them. I’ve gone through the trouble of bolding my posts to make them separate as the respondent has so rudely decided to divide the text. -EliAnd I’m not a right winger by the way.A dragged out debate still riddled with psueo-studies and logical fallacies. Nice  You’re dismissed. You may now lick your emotional wounds. -- source link

More pics about