The Myth of the Good Guy With a Gun

originally posted by: budski

originally posted by: EternalSolace

originally posted by: budski

Some things society needs, some things some people just want.

I'm sure the citizens of Poland needed some firearms in 1939.

I'm sure that if guns hadn't been invented in the first place the people of Poland would have been OK.

So now you're advocating against scientific advancement in order to keep people safe. I guess all those asteroid detecting telescopes are out the window too, since they're a direct result of man's discovery of gunpowder, which begat propulsion, which begat rockets, which birthed the space program, which eventually launched these potentially humanity-saving devices into space.

Or do you WANT us all to die in a horrific meteoric holocaust?

You monster.

originally posted by: budski

originally posted by: EternalSolace

originally posted by: budski

Some things society needs, some things some people just want.

I'm sure the citizens of Poland needed some firearms in 1939.

I'm sure that if guns hadn't been invented in the first place the people of Poland would have been OK.

No,the invding Army would have used swords and spears and still over ran the undersized Polish Army.
Do you even think about what you spout off?

originally posted by: budski

originally posted by: EternalSolace

originally posted by: budski

Some things society needs, some things some people just want.

I'm sure the citizens of Poland needed some firearms in 1939.

I'm sure that if guns hadn't been invented in the first place the people of Poland would have been OK.

LOL, and if nobody ever invented fire, there would never be a need for firemen.
Seriously, you are done here.

originally posted by: ScientificRailgun

originally posted by: budski

originally posted by: EternalSolace

originally posted by: budski

Some things society needs, some things some people just want.

I'm sure the citizens of Poland needed some firearms in 1939.

I'm sure that if guns hadn't been invented in the first place the people of Poland would have been OK.

So now you're advocating against scientific advancement in order to keep people safe. I guess all those asteroid detecting telescopes are out the window too, since they're a direct result of man's discovery of gunpowder, which begat propulsion, which begat rockets, which birthed the space program, which eventually launched these potentially humanity-saving devices into space.

Or do you WANT us all to die in a horrific meteoric holocaust?

Well said.

originally posted by: network dude

originally posted by: budski

originally posted by: CagliostroTheGreat
a reply to: budski

Stupid people allow this to happen. I don't.

Stupid criminals and irresponsible gun owners allow gun deaths to occur. I don't.

guns in huge amounts in society allow it to happen.

No guns, no gun problem.

I submit that in that light, no food=no food poisoning. (WIN!) no doctors=no malpractice (WIN!) no forks=no forks stuck in kids eyes. (WIN!)

You make me smile.

LOL

originally posted by: ScientificRailgun
So now you're advocating against scientific advancement in order to keep people safe.

Sadly, I don't think you are far from the mark.

a reply to: budski

A study from October 2013 analyzed data from 27 developed nations ....

A study that in no way affects me here in the US. Skewing data is popular of late, like the recent IPCC scandal.

The stats here (in the US only) show quite the opposite.

Plenty of "good guys" standing up to the bad guys.

Nice try though.

originally posted by: budski

originally posted by: InconspicuousWhistle
a reply to: budski

It also depends on culture and social conditions.

In Switzerland there is a gun in almost every house yet they had one of the lowest murder rates. At least that's how it was a few years ago.

At last we come to the crux of the issue.

This is the meat of the debate for me, and raises some very interesting questions not least of which is the theory that the US is an inherently violent country, or perhaps more pertinently, it appears to be a violent country

So you admit that the presence of guns themselves are not a factor in the existence of violence. You are admitting, based on your statement above, that it is NOT the factor we should be focusing on to solve our violence problem. You have just undone your entire presence in this discussion.

So what the hell are you even on about? Do you even know the point that you are trying to make?

originally posted by: ScientificRailgun

originally posted by: budski

originally posted by: EternalSolace

originally posted by: budski

Some things society needs, some things some people just want.

I'm sure the citizens of Poland needed some firearms in 1939.

I'm sure that if guns hadn't been invented in the first place the people of Poland would have been OK.

So now you're advocating against scientific advancement in order to keep people safe. I guess all those asteroid detecting telescopes are out the window too, since they're a direct result of man's discovery of gunpowder, which begat propulsion, which begat rockets, which birthed the space program, which eventually launched these potentially humanity-saving devices into space.

Or do you WANT us all to die in a horrific meteoric holocaust?

You monster.

The original use of gunpowder was for fireworks.
They didn't have the chemistry in the earliest forms of gunpowder to make it viable for firing projectiles. That came later.
It says a lot that a quick burning chemical compound (which is what it originally was) has been co-opted by the inventors of guns.

There's also the fact that chemical rockets are hugely inefficient, and that alternative ways of getting into space have been ignored as man focuses on more efficient ways to kill each other.

As you lot are so fond of saying: FAIL.

originally posted by: budski

LaPierre’s central message: Owning a gun is the solution. The world is a scary place. There are bad guys everywhere threatening you and your family, and the only thing they’re afraid of is a gun in your hands.

Tragically, a record number of Americans subscribe to some version of this mythology, with 63 percent (67 percent of men polled and 58 percent of women) believing that guns truly do make them safer. The public’s confidence in firearms, however, is woefully misguided: The evidence overwhelmingly shows that guns leave everybody less safe, including their owners.

A study from October 2013 analyzed data from 27 developed nations to examine the impact of firearm prevalence on the mortality rate. It found an extremely strong direct relationship between the number of firearms and firearm deaths. The paper concludes: “The current study debunks the widely quoted hypothesis that guns make a nation safer.” This finding is bolstered by several previous studies that have revealed a significant link between gun ownership and firearm-related deaths. This international comparison is especially harrowing for women and children, who die from gun violence in America at far higher rates than in other countries.

Source

This is perhaps the most definitive piece I have read (including sources) about guns, and the relationship between gun ownership and violence.
This part is particularly relevant as I hear so many bang on about "responsible" gun ownership.

Everyone likes to pretend that he or she is more rational, more responsible, and more immune to the risks that gun ownership poses relative to the average American. Yet, we know from gun violence statistics that many are simply misjudging their own competency. Everyone thinks he or she is above average, but half are mistaken.

There are multiple sources and good statistical evidence that to me trumps any anecdotal evidence that is the usual battle cry of the gun enthusiast.

Put quite simply, the evidence overwhelmingly shows that more guns = more deaths from guns,

I think if you just actually research the issue from an anthropological aspect its not as polarizing for either side.

For instance missionaries bringing flashlights to indigenous tribes created night time raiding and slaughters that hadn't previously happened. The death toals were much higher when people could not defend themselves and were advanced upon while sleeping.

In the US by nearly all studies FBI, crime journals etc between 900,000 and 1.4 million us homes run off potentially life threatening crime. In the north east the where gun control was enacted harsher the murders simply moved to beating and stabbings. In fact Massachusetts has the highest number of stabbing homicides in the country. All info available on the FBI website.

Its not guns and 1million good guys defend themselves with guns a year. The problem in income inequality and poverty. The major crime statistics for gun murders are from illegal inner city gang violence with illegal firearms. To me the problem seems to be the US government doesn't do enough to stop violent crime and create a real path for upward mobility by failing with education and job training.

Why are we talking about guns? Oh yeah its election season. The US is not a homogenized nation like anywhere else. Its a melting pot of different backgrounds and beliefs and anthropologically speaking you will always have higher violent crime when the culture doesn't agree with each other.

originally posted by: budski

originally posted by: ScientificRailgun

originally posted by: budski

originally posted by: EternalSolace

originally posted by: budski

Some things society needs, some things some people just want.

I'm sure the citizens of Poland needed some firearms in 1939.

I'm sure that if guns hadn't been invented in the first place the people of Poland would have been OK.

So now you're advocating against scientific advancement in order to keep people safe. I guess all those asteroid detecting telescopes are out the window too, since they're a direct result of man's discovery of gunpowder, which begat propulsion, which begat rockets, which birthed the space program, which eventually launched these potentially humanity-saving devices into space.

Or do you WANT us all to die in a horrific meteoric holocaust?

You monster.

The original use of gunpowder was for fireworks.
They didn't have the chemistry in the earliest forms of gunpowder to make it viable for firing projectiles. That came later.
It says a lot that a quick burning chemical compound (which is what it originally was) has been co-opted by the inventors of guns.

There's also the fact that chemical rockets are hugely inefficient, and that alternative ways of getting into space have been ignored as man focuses on more efficient ways to kill each other.

As you lot are so fond of saying: FAIL.

The original use of gunpowder was for immortality. It didn't work.

originally posted by: budski

originally posted by: ScientificRailgun

originally posted by: budski

originally posted by: EternalSolace

originally posted by: budski

Some things society needs, some things some people just want.

I'm sure the citizens of Poland needed some firearms in 1939.

I'm sure that if guns hadn't been invented in the first place the people of Poland would have been OK.

So now you're advocating against scientific advancement in order to keep people safe. I guess all those asteroid detecting telescopes are out the window too, since they're a direct result of man's discovery of gunpowder, which begat propulsion, which begat rockets, which birthed the space program, which eventually launched these potentially humanity-saving devices into space.

Or do you WANT us all to die in a horrific meteoric holocaust?

You monster.

The original use of gunpowder was for fireworks.
They didn't have the chemistry in the earliest forms of gunpowder to make it viable for firing projectiles. That came later.
It says a lot that a quick burning chemical compound (which is what it originally was) has been co-opted by the inventors of guns.

There's also the fact that chemical rockets are hugely inefficient, and that alternative ways of getting into space have been ignored as man focuses on more efficient ways to kill each other.

As you lot are so fond of saying: FAIL.

You have inside knowledge of a method of orbital insertion that's more efficient than chemical rockets?! Why are you here talking about guns when you should be at NASA or the ESA as head of development on this new, revolutionary, and more efficient rocket design! Go, man! Save humanity!

originally posted by: ScientificRailgun

originally posted by: budski

originally posted by: ScientificRailgun

originally posted by: budski

originally posted by: EternalSolace

originally posted by: budski

Some things society needs, some things some people just want.

I'm sure the citizens of Poland needed some firearms in 1939.

I'm sure that if guns hadn't been invented in the first place the people of Poland would have been OK.

So now you're advocating against scientific advancement in order to keep people safe. I guess all those asteroid detecting telescopes are out the window too, since they're a direct result of man's discovery of gunpowder, which begat propulsion, which begat rockets, which birthed the space program, which eventually launched these potentially humanity-saving devices into space.

Or do you WANT us all to die in a horrific meteoric holocaust?

You monster.

The original use of gunpowder was for fireworks.
They didn't have the chemistry in the earliest forms of gunpowder to make it viable for firing projectiles. That came later.
It says a lot that a quick burning chemical compound (which is what it originally was) has been co-opted by the inventors of guns.

There's also the fact that chemical rockets are hugely inefficient, and that alternative ways of getting into space have been ignored as man focuses on more efficient ways to kill each other.

As you lot are so fond of saying: FAIL.

You have inside knowledge of a method of orbital insertion that's more efficient than chemical rockets?! Why are you here talking about guns when you should be at NASA or the ESA as head of development on this new, revolutionary, and more efficient rocket design! Go, man! Save humanity!

There are many alternatives that we could have been actively pursuing were it not for the obsession with weapons.

You know it, I know it, but being facetious makes you feel clever.
I'm pleased for you.
Carry on.

originally posted by: ScientificRailgun

originally posted by: budski

originally posted by: ScientificRailgun

originally posted by: budski

originally posted by: EternalSolace

originally posted by: budski

Some things society needs, some things some people just want.

I'm sure the citizens of Poland needed some firearms in 1939.

I'm sure that if guns hadn't been invented in the first place the people of Poland would have been OK.

So now you're advocating against scientific advancement in order to keep people safe. I guess all those asteroid detecting telescopes are out the window too, since they're a direct result of man's discovery of gunpowder, which begat propulsion, which begat rockets, which birthed the space program, which eventually launched these potentially humanity-saving devices into space.

Or do you WANT us all to die in a horrific meteoric holocaust?

You monster.

The original use of gunpowder was for fireworks.
They didn't have the chemistry in the earliest forms of gunpowder to make it viable for firing projectiles. That came later.
It says a lot that a quick burning chemical compound (which is what it originally was) has been co-opted by the inventors of guns.

There's also the fact that chemical rockets are hugely inefficient, and that alternative ways of getting into space have been ignored as man focuses on more efficient ways to kill each other.

As you lot are so fond of saying: FAIL.

You have inside knowledge of a method of orbital insertion that's more efficient than chemical rockets?! Why are you here talking about guns when you should be at NASA or the ESA as head of development on this new, revolutionary, and more efficient rocket design! Go, man! Save humanity!

Again...well said.

originally posted by: budski

originally posted by: ScientificRailgun

originally posted by: budski

originally posted by: ScientificRailgun

originally posted by: budski

originally posted by: EternalSolace

originally posted by: budski

Some things society needs, some things some people just want.

I'm sure the citizens of Poland needed some firearms in 1939.

I'm sure that if guns hadn't been invented in the first place the people of Poland would have been OK.

So now you're advocating against scientific advancement in order to keep people safe. I guess all those asteroid detecting telescopes are out the window too, since they're a direct result of man's discovery of gunpowder, which begat propulsion, which begat rockets, which birthed the space program, which eventually launched these potentially humanity-saving devices into space.

Or do you WANT us all to die in a horrific meteoric holocaust?

You monster.

The original use of gunpowder was for fireworks.
They didn't have the chemistry in the earliest forms of gunpowder to make it viable for firing projectiles. That came later.
It says a lot that a quick burning chemical compound (which is what it originally was) has been co-opted by the inventors of guns.

There's also the fact that chemical rockets are hugely inefficient, and that alternative ways of getting into space have been ignored as man focuses on more efficient ways to kill each other.

As you lot are so fond of saying: FAIL.

You have inside knowledge of a method of orbital insertion that's more efficient than chemical rockets?! Why are you here talking about guns when you should be at NASA or the ESA as head of development on this new, revolutionary, and more efficient rocket design! Go, man! Save humanity!

There are many alternatives that we could have been actively pursuing were it not for the obsession with weapons.

You know it, I know it, but being facetious makes you feel clever.
I'm pleased for you.
Carry on.

So, you suppose that NO scientific endeavors are going on or have been going on to find an alternative to chemical rockets?
Who is being facetious here???

a reply to: budski

Where are you from dude?.

originally posted by: budski

originally posted by: ScientificRailgun

originally posted by: budski

originally posted by: ScientificRailgun

originally posted by: budski

originally posted by: EternalSolace

originally posted by: budski

Some things society needs, some things some people just want.

I'm sure the citizens of Poland needed some firearms in 1939.

I'm sure that if guns hadn't been invented in the first place the people of Poland would have been OK.

So now you're advocating against scientific advancement in order to keep people safe. I guess all those asteroid detecting telescopes are out the window too, since they're a direct result of man's discovery of gunpowder, which begat propulsion, which begat rockets, which birthed the space program, which eventually launched these potentially humanity-saving devices into space.

Or do you WANT us all to die in a horrific meteoric holocaust?

You monster.

The original use of gunpowder was for fireworks.
They didn't have the chemistry in the earliest forms of gunpowder to make it viable for firing projectiles. That came later.
It says a lot that a quick burning chemical compound (which is what it originally was) has been co-opted by the inventors of guns.

There's also the fact that chemical rockets are hugely inefficient, and that alternative ways of getting into space have been ignored as man focuses on more efficient ways to kill each other.

As you lot are so fond of saying: FAIL.

You have inside knowledge of a method of orbital insertion that's more efficient than chemical rockets?! Why are you here talking about guns when you should be at NASA or the ESA as head of development on this new, revolutionary, and more efficient rocket design! Go, man! Save humanity!

There are many alternatives that we could have been actively pursuing were it not for the obsession with weapons.

You know it, I know it, but being facetious makes you feel clever.
I'm pleased for you.
Carry on.

There is research going on around the world on more efficient rocket designs. There have been several attempts at lowering the cost of sending material into orbit. Between Mass Drivers, Space Elevators, Magnetic propulsion (personal favorite), heck even the Orion project. Oops, that last one is nuclear so that's out. Can't have things that go boom in your perfect world.

originally posted by: butcherguy

originally posted by: budski

originally posted by: ScientificRailgun

originally posted by: budski

originally posted by: ScientificRailgun

originally posted by: budski

originally posted by: EternalSolace

originally posted by: budski

Some things society needs, some things some people just want.

I'm sure the citizens of Poland needed some firearms in 1939.

I'm sure that if guns hadn't been invented in the first place the people of Poland would have been OK.

So now you're advocating against scientific advancement in order to keep people safe. I guess all those asteroid detecting telescopes are out the window too, since they're a direct result of man's discovery of gunpowder, which begat propulsion, which begat rockets, which birthed the space program, which eventually launched these potentially humanity-saving devices into space.

Or do you WANT us all to die in a horrific meteoric holocaust?

You monster.

The original use of gunpowder was for fireworks.
They didn't have the chemistry in the earliest forms of gunpowder to make it viable for firing projectiles. That came later.
It says a lot that a quick burning chemical compound (which is what it originally was) has been co-opted by the inventors of guns.

There's also the fact that chemical rockets are hugely inefficient, and that alternative ways of getting into space have been ignored as man focuses on more efficient ways to kill each other.

As you lot are so fond of saying: FAIL.

You have inside knowledge of a method of orbital insertion that's more efficient than chemical rockets?! Why are you here talking about guns when you should be at NASA or the ESA as head of development on this new, revolutionary, and more efficient rocket design! Go, man! Save humanity!

There are many alternatives that we could have been actively pursuing were it not for the obsession with weapons.

You know it, I know it, but being facetious makes you feel clever.
I'm pleased for you.
Carry on.

So, you suppose that NO scientific endeavors are going on or have been going on to find an alternative to chemical rockets?
Who is being facetious here???

You are.
Are you trying to tell me that those same scientific endeavours would not be more advanced if the US had not spent hundreds of billions on procurement for a new plane that barely works?

Have a word with yourself.

a reply to: budski

I just wanted to thank you for the pure essence of lulz you have excreted for us all here. I've been getting quite a kick out of your unadulterated idiocy.