Which movie to you think will sell more guns?

[Clownburner 0]

Quote

Quote

While there's always a few die-hard psychos in the world . . .

Yeah, let's talk about that for a minute. Considering his history, what was Hinckley doing with a gun?

He was attempting murder. He bought the gun in Dallas, from a pawn shop. Since then, mandatory background checks have been put in place in all 50 states (at least for handguns) and even most gun enthusiasts would tell you that a background check is a smart idea.

Interestingly, even without those laws, it took the ATF exactly 16 minutes to trace the exact place he purchased the gun, which implies that the system to document such things was working reasonably well even in 1981.

But do you think if he was unable to buy a gun legally, that he would not have committed this crime at all, or do you think he would have found another way to get a gun, such as stealing it, and done it anyway?

Even the secret service will tell you it's almost impossible to stop a single-minded person bent on killing who has no regard for their own life. I refer to those people as 'die-hard psychos' and fortunately they represent an infinitesimal fraction of the population.

7CP#1 | BTR#2 | Payaso en fuego Rodriguez
"I want hot chicks in my boobies!"- McBeth

[Kennedy 0]

Quote

Quote

I'm sure you have proof of your supposition, showing that it's due to the presence of the firearm and not just that the person is a scumbag.

Well, it is 12 times more likely to be fatal according to the American Bar Association Special Committee on Gun Violence.

While not scientific proof, it is statistically accurate. I'd call an entire order of magnitude and then some . . . rather significant.

Ah ah ah.... Not so fast there PQ. That says that domestic assaults involving firearms are more likely to be deadly than non-firearm domestic assaults. Not surprising, really.

However, it does not say that domestic assaults that occur when there is a firearm in the house are 12 times more likely to be fatal. Important difference, no?

witty subliminal message
Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards.
1*

[billvon 3,118]

>However, it does not say that domestic assaults that occur when there
>is a firearm in the house are 12 times more likely to be fatal. Important
>difference, no?

True. However, I am sure that you will agree that it is much more likely that a firearm be used when one is available than when one is not available.

[quade 4]

Quote

Ah ah ah.... Not so fast there PQ. That says that domestic assaults involving firearms are more likely to be deadly than non-firearm domestic assaults. Not surprising, really.

However, it does not say that domestic assaults that occur when there is a firearm in the house are 12 times more likely to be fatal. Important difference, no?

Huh?

If you're the victim, do you wanna spend the night in the hospital or the morgue?

Edited to add;

Ok, I think I now understand your question.

The statistics show what they show, if a gun is available, the victim is 12 times more likely to die.

Unless you want to say something absurd like . . . "Gun owners are actually prone to MORE violence but in this one case they show more restraint. They beat their spouces FAR more than 12 times the national average but only use the gun at the same rate as other weapons."

Is that what you think the numbers imply? That just don't make no sense at all.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Quote

Almost 80 million gun owners DIDN'T commit crimes today.

What number is that? Members of the NRA? Some figure provided by the NRA?

Absolutely nobody knows how many guns there are in the US let alone gun owners.

True, it's an estimate based on several government studies/surveys. While not scientific proof, it is considered statistically accurate.

Regardless of the exact numbers, feel free to try and disprove my assertion about the crimes NOT being committed.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[Kennedy 0]

Quote

The statistics show what they show, if a gun is available, the victim is 12 times more likely to die.

No, they actually don't show that at all. They talk about when a gun is USED, not when a gun is merely PRESENT.

Quote

Firearm-associated family and intimate assaults are 12 times more likely to be fatal than those not associated with firearms.

Honestly, do you think these are first time assaults? that these people haven't had dozens of domestic assaults in the past? Think about it. The gun is when one side decideds to end the situation, permanently.

On that note, ho many of those one in twelve are the battered spouse turning a firearm on their abuser? Who ever said that all shooting deaths are an illegal or immoral thing? (other than gun controllers)

witty subliminal message
Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards.
1*

[azdiver 0]

guns have one function they are not leathermans or swiss army knives, they shoot bullets(or shot for those that will get technical) no gun has ever murder someone , pulled a robbery,or any other crime, they have to be used by someone , and at the risk of restating an old debate, guns were desinged to be used to kill. gun control is in the users hands not the gun, and guns dont kill people, people kill people.

light travels faster than sound, that's why some people appear to be bright until you hear them speak

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Quote

Almost 80 million gun owners DIDN'T commit crimes today.

What number is that? Members of the NRA? Some figure provided by the NRA?

Absolutely nobody knows how many guns there are in the US let alone gun owners.

If you're going to challenge simple estimates like gun ownership, which are easy to establish in the ballpark, yet decide that a single quote saying guns are 12x worse and presume that an order of magnitude claim means so of it must be true...well I hope you read the NRA magazine when you send in that promised subscription.

I guess your claim is that the dozens of gun owners here actually own millions of guns each. All those DROS forms that are supposed to be destroyed but often aren't are actually fabricated.

---
As for movies, this sort of theme of taking care of yourself predates Charles Bronson (Death Wish), goes back to countless westerns (Shane) in the 50s and 60s, and likely to the beginning of American cinema.

I'm fairly sure that the lessons of 9/11 (the Feds can't protest you against everything) sold more guns than any movie of late. Gun control legislation also leads to a easily documented increase in guns sales as people beat the enactment. (If it weren't for California Democrats, I might not own any weapons yet)

I hope movies aren't selling guns because just about everything they say is bullshit, and stuff you've fallen for hook, line, and sinker. Why did Hinckley succeed? Because he was crazy and not worried about getting caught or killed. Criminals, otoh, are mostly rational and interested in self preservation. They know that a shot victim is still often quite capable of firing back.

[juanesky 0]

Quote

Quote

Almost 80 million gun owners DIDN'T commit crimes today.

What number is that? Members of the NRA? Some figure provided by the NRA?

Absolutely nobody knows how many guns there are in the US let alone gun owners.

Speaking of which, when are you joining the NRA?, for insulting John in the other thread?

"According to some of the conservatives here, it sounds like it's fine to beat your wide - as long as she had it coming." -Billvon

[Kennedy 0]

Quote

Quote

However, it does not say that domestic assaults that occur when there is a firearm in the house are 12 times more likely to be fatal. Important difference, no?

True. However, I am sure that you will agree that it is much more likely that a firearm be used when one is available than when one is not available.

Well, the only firearm related domestic I've ever personally dealt with was when drunkard A got pissed at crackhead B, they had a knock down drag out brawl (no one calls the police), then after drunkard A gets his ass handed to him by crackhead B, he goes down the street to gangbanger C's house, steals borrows or buys a gun, goes back, and shoots crackhead B, but doesn't manage to kill her.

To put it in more common terms, no, I don't think a firearm in the house means a firearm will be used (at least not in the first eighty or ninety assaults).

witty subliminal message
Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards.
1*

[quade 4]

Quote

Speaking of which, when are you joining the NRA?, for insulting John in the other thread?

The challenge was for John, not you other two that tried to come to his rescue. As if he actually needed it, but it was very chivalrous of you to lay down your cloak in the mud for him.

Besides which, if John actually thought it was a real honest to goodness personal attack and not just something he could use to deflect criticism, then I'm nearly certain he would have attempted to contact Sangiro by now, tell him all about it, and if Sangiro thought it was a valid complaint I'd be reprimanded just like anyone else.

To date, this has not happened.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[quade 4]

Quote

If you're going to challenge simple estimates like gun ownership, which are easy to establish in the ballpark . . .

Back it up with a fact and you might have something. Show me those "simple estimates like gun ownership" in the US. I think we can toss around numbers all flippin' day on this one and you're not going to find all that much agreement.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[kelpdiver 2]

Quote

Quote

If you're going to challenge simple estimates like gun ownership, which are easy to establish in the ballpark . . .

Back it up with a fact and you might have something. Show me those "simple estimates like gun ownership" in the US. I think we can toss around numbers all flippin' day on this one and you're not going to find all that much agreement.

It's about as silly as claiming we can't tell how many blacks (or any other ethnic group) there are in the country.

If it makes you feel good to play such games, good for you. Actually, I enjoy mind games, too. Since you made the claim that the fact that there are 80M gun owners in America is false, show your counterproof. It should be good for laughs.

[rushmc 23]

Quote

Quote

Without armed people around him he would have been dead. What kind of odds are those?

How do you figure that?

No Rambo came to the rescue. Marshal Dillion didn't shoot the gun out of Hinckley's hand. No shots where fired back at Hinckley.

Hinckley fired six shots in three seconds and then immediately gave up when he ran out of bullets.

It was Hinckley's incompetence at firing the weapon that saved the President.

True, I think I missed this one

"America will never be destroyed from the outside,
if we falter and lose our freedoms,
it will be because we destroyed ourselves."
Abraham Lincoln

[JohnRich 4]

Quote

The challenge was for John, not you other two that tried to come to his rescue. As if he actually needed it, but it was very chivalrous of you to lay down your cloak in the mud for him.

Besides which, if John actually thought it was a real honest to goodness personal attack and not just something he could use to deflect criticism, then I'm nearly certain he would have attempted to contact Sangiro by now, tell him all about it, and if Sangiro thought it was a valid complaint I'd be reprimanded just like anyone else.

To date, this has not happened.

That's a false assumption.

There are always several different ways to handle any particular personal insult.

In this case, I prefered to just let everyone see what you're really like, rather than to have the offending messages removed from sight. That does more damage to your public image and reputation, then a private reprimand from billvon.

By the way, how do you like my new thumbnail photo?

Oh, and you still haven't told us which NRA magazine you want to receive with your membership.

[JohnRich 4]

Quote

Back it up with a fact and you might have something. Show me those "simple estimates like gun ownership" in the US. I think we can toss around numbers all flippin' day on this one and you're not going to find all that much agreement.

I've seen that 80 million number in a lot of different sources, from places like government studies, the BATF, and even Gallup polls. It's a generally accepted figure by numerous statistical sources.

If you don't like that number, then tell us how many gun owners that you think there are in America.

[JohnRich 4]

Quote

This is where The Brave One takes it one step further.

I'd like to think that by the end of the movie the audience will come away thinking that maybe arming everyone on the planet isn't such a great idea, but . . . I have the feeling that, because of the way human nature works, most will say "See? That's exactly why we should all be armed!"

I've seen the movie previews in the theatre, and it looks interestingly pro-gun for self-defense.

But Jodie Foster has come out in some interview statements saying that she's against general gun ownership.

So I'm suspicious that this movie, in the end, will have some kind of anti-gun conclusion to it.

[quade 4]

Quote

By the way, how do you like my new thumbnail photo?

Jimmy Buffett would be proud?

Quote

Oh, and you still haven't told us which NRA magazine you want to receive with your membership.

That's because you've failed to provide evidence of a personal attack.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[quade 4]

Quote

If you don't like that number, then tell us how many gun owners that you think there are in America.

John, how can I possibly do that when there is NO concensus.

Check out this web page and see if you can find the actual number of gun owners on it.

I dunno, they might be trying to cover something up or they're biased or whatever, but I think if they had any accurate estimate, they'd list it.

This page says 44 million in 1994.

I will admit that I see the 80 million number quoted a lot on blogs and crap mostly in that joke being repeated over and over . . . I'll give you that, but I've never seen anything to substantiate it. (The Dr. stats are supposed from HHS, but it says nothing about the gun stats.)

Anyway, check out this page and I think you'll see where I get my notion that it's an unknowable number. BTW, it's a JR friendly site! Pro gun!

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[mnealtx 0]

*sigh*

Ok, Paul... I'll make it easy on you, and rephrase my statement so that you can rebut:

UNTOLD MILLIONS of American gun owners didn't commit a crime yesterday...

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[quade 4]

Quote

*sigh*

Ok, Paul... I'll make it easy on you, and rephrase my statement so that you can rebut:

UNTOLD MILLIONS of American gun owners didn't commit a crime yesterday...

I can't refute that, however, you can't refute this statment either, "A number of gun owners yesterday, killed their spouces with guns."

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[quade 4]

Quote

So I'm suspicious that this movie, in the end, will have some kind of anti-gun conclusion to it.

Considering Foster's history, I wouldn't be surprized.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

Quote

*sigh*

Ok, Paul... I'll make it easy on you, and rephrase my statement so that you can rebut:

UNTOLD MILLIONS of American gun owners didn't commit a crime yesterday...

I can't refute that, however, you can't refute this statment either, "A number of gun owners yesterday, killed their spouces with guns."

"A number of people with kitchens killed their spouses with carving knives yesterday"

"A number of baseball fans killed their spouses with baseball bats yesterday"

"A number double-dutch enthusiasts strangled their spouses with jump ropes yesterday"

I submit the fact that they were murdered is more important than the TOOL that was used by the murderer...

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706

[billvon 3,118]

>"A number double-dutch enthusiasts strangled their spouses with jump
>ropes yesterday"

I will be most impressed if you can come up with a _single_ example of a double-dutch enthusiast strangling their spouse with a jumprope yesterday!

>I submit the fact that they were murdered is more important than the
>TOOL that was used by the murderer...

Yep. But the tool is a part of the murder, and the way the tool operates plays into how likely it will be used for a murder. You can't push a button on a jumprope and end someone's life.

[mnealtx 0]

Quote

>"A number double-dutch enthusiasts strangled their spouses with jump
>ropes yesterday"

I will be most impressed if you can come up with a _single_ example of a double-dutch enthusiast strangling their spouse with a jumprope yesterday!

OK, ya got me on that one!!

Quote

>I submit the fact that they were murdered is more important than the
>TOOL that was used by the murderer...

Yep. But the tool is a part of the murder, and the way the tool operates plays into how likely it will be used for a murder. You can't push a button on a jumprope and end someone's life.

True, you can't - but it still takes a person with evil intent to 'push that button'...and that is my point. Evil people will do evil regardless of the tool employed...it's the use to which the tool is put, not the tool itself.

Mike
I love you, Shannon and Jim.
POPS 9708 , SCR 14706