It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Has the 2nd ammendment been taken away in Oregon?

page: 9
25
<< 6  7  8    10  11 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 25 2017 @ 08:26 PM
link   
a reply to: SudoNim

You don't even know how many gun murders there are per year in the US? Dude, if you want to engage in a discussion on a subject you should at least know the most basic facts around that subject. It hovers between 8 and 12000 every year. Even if I use 12K, 30% of 55K is still higher. More lives saved than lost. And that's assuming none of those 12K people would've been killed if there was no gun available, which is absurd.




posted on Aug, 25 2017 @ 08:27 PM
link   
a reply to: face23785

Post some of the data then... why is this so hard for you?

Those numbers are ones you just made up... post the data.
It's like me saying 10 DGU's is lower than 56,000,000 gun murders... and then refusing to back it up with sources.

Put up or shut up...



posted on Aug, 25 2017 @ 08:28 PM
link   
a reply to: face23785

Ah so its not 8-9k a year now its 8-12k ... so thats changed.

Get your facts right before you start quoting them.



psssst... still waiting on those surveys regarding Criminals fearing death, you quoted that early but failed to post any source again.
edit on 25-8-2017 by SudoNim because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 25 2017 @ 08:28 PM
link   
a reply to: SudoNim

For the last time, I linked you to it, you're just too lazy or afraid to look at it. WIKIPEDIA HAS SOURCES, AND YOU KNOW THAT, STOP BEING A BABY.



posted on Aug, 25 2017 @ 08:31 PM
link   
a reply to: SudoNim

Yeah that's right, for the sake of argument I'm gonna use the high end of the number you want (12K) vs the low end of the number I'm looking at (55K). There are studies which place it much higher but just to give you a snowball's chance in hell we can use the lowest number attained. And I didn't say they were all lives saved, that's where the 30% comes in. You're not even following the discussion. Different studies place the number of DGUs where the weapon was discharged between 2 and 60%, which is a crazy range. If we use the middle of it and say 30%, and use the lowest estimate of reported DGUs, we get to a number of lives saved higher than the number of gun murders per year. I know that's too complicated for you to follow, but there it is for anyone with the brains to understand simple math.



posted on Aug, 25 2017 @ 08:33 PM
link   
a reply to: face23785

Have you read those sources?

Which source was it that quoted those figures?

From your wikipedia page "source" since you clearly haven't read it...


Firearm self-defense is rare compared with gun crimes



In 1992 offenders armed with handguns committed a record 931,000 violent crimes ... On average in 1987-92 about 83,000 crime victims per year used a firearm to defend themselves



criminal gun use is far more common than self-defense gun use



A 2009 study reported that gun owners were more likely to be shot in an assault than were non-gun owners




These are all from your wikipedia "source" and go against what you've been babbling on about... so please tell me which source at the bottom of your WikiPedia page actually supports your argument or provides the figures which you keep quoting.



posted on Aug, 25 2017 @ 08:37 PM
link   
a reply to: SudoNim

Actually one of those sources says DGU is into the millions which is larger than 930K if you didn't know. The estimates vary widely. Nice try to deflect though. The origin of this argument was lives saved versus lives lost. Lives saved is clearly higher, the math is very simple, you're just ignoring it. I know you're not that stupid, you just have to pretend to be to avoid saying you were wrong.



posted on Aug, 25 2017 @ 08:40 PM
link   

originally posted by: SudoNim
a reply to: kelbtalfenek

Do you not think tourists get targeted in countries that don't have high gun-ownership?

What makes you think they targeted tourists because they wouldn't have a gun rather than they are more likely to leave valuables in the car, accidentally leave it unlocked etc etc


I was speaking historically. When one can identify a tourist as a potential "non gun owner" that becomes a preferred target. Do you not understand that the law denoting license plates for rental vehicles to start with "R" made them a preferable target? That was the entire point of the post.

Or did you not understand that?



posted on Aug, 25 2017 @ 08:41 PM
link   
a reply to: face23785

Ah but the low end im looking at for DGU's is 15, and 15 is lower than 12,000.

And hey look I can back up that 12,000 figure with sources, data and graphs.

ichef-1.bbci.co.uk...

Now you show me your statistics for DGU's and how you worked out how many lives were saved. I'll then also add in the other gun related crimes/deaths and suicides.



posted on Aug, 25 2017 @ 08:42 PM
link   
a reply to: face23785

What math? You are just making up numbers and comparing them?

How hard would it be to provide some sources for your numbers? Yes one of those sources stated over a million DGU's... and it was debunked the same as the 930k one.

Maybe you should read some of what you are trying to debate.



posted on Aug, 25 2017 @ 08:43 PM
link   



posted on Aug, 25 2017 @ 08:43 PM
link   
a reply to: SudoNim

When you have to pretend Wikipedia articles don't have sources you're losing badly. You've been referencing sources from the article I gave you with much higher numbers than that, so I know you saw them. Stop being a spoiled child and acknowledge the math. No one is disputing the gun murder numbers, although you didn't know what they were apparently until I told you. All of a sudden you believed me when I gave a higher number, so we know where your mindset is. If the number helps your argument, it's believable.



posted on Aug, 25 2017 @ 08:45 PM
link   
a reply to: SudoNim

Oh ok, so obviously every time a gun is used defensively the criminal dies? You know that's not true, which makes what you just posted a completely dishonest attempt to mislead people. Nice try though.



posted on Aug, 25 2017 @ 08:46 PM
link   
a reply to: SudoNim

I didn't make anything up, they're all in the stuff you've been quoting, so I know you saw them. Keep your fingers in your ears screaming, maybe they'll go away.



posted on Aug, 25 2017 @ 08:47 PM
link   
a reply to: kelbtalfenek

How is that speaking historically?


When one can identify a tourist as a potential "non gun owner" that becomes a preferred target.


That's just your opinion, which I disagree with. It may be a factor for a small few but generally I think the tourist label itself is the bigger lure since even in countries that don't have high gun-ownership tourists are still heavily targeted over locals.


Do you not understand that the law denoting license plates for rental vehicles to start with "R" made them a preferable target?


Do you not understand that leaping from this to gun-ownership is not factual... its your opinion.



posted on Aug, 25 2017 @ 08:47 PM
link   
a reply to: SudoNim

So you can link a graph with a source at the bottom but I can't link an article with the source at the bottom?

Interesting. Carry on with your mismatched debating.



posted on Aug, 25 2017 @ 08:48 PM
link   

originally posted by: face23785
a reply to: SudoNim

When you have to pretend Wikipedia articles don't have sources you're losing badly. You've been referencing sources from the article I gave you with much higher numbers than that, so I know you saw them. Stop being a spoiled child and acknowledge the math. No one is disputing the gun murder numbers, although you didn't know what they were apparently until I told you. All of a sudden you believed me when I gave a higher number, so we know where your mindset is. If the number helps your argument, it's believable.


Oh it has sources...and most of them disprove your point.

I'm asking you to show me which ones you are quoting your figures from.

Something you seem unable to do.



posted on Aug, 25 2017 @ 08:49 PM
link   
a reply to: face23785

And obviously every time a gun is used offensively the victim dies?
Oh you know thats not true but you still only compared to gun homicides and not injuries, crimes or suicides.

Thanks for the falling for this trap...



posted on Aug, 25 2017 @ 08:50 PM
link   
a reply to: face23785

You are arguing with someone who's first reply was



Ahahaaha


What did you expect?



posted on Aug, 25 2017 @ 08:51 PM
link   
a reply to: SudoNim

You know that's not what I'm arguing, I've stated that plainly several times already, nice lying though. So now you're linking to material with sources at the bottom even though you told me that's not good enough, lying, and pretending Wikipedia doesn't have sources. These are your debate tactics.

We were discussing the number of people murdered by guns in the US versus the number of lives saved in defensive gun uses in the US. Eye on the ball, son.




top topics



 
25
<< 6  7  8    10  11 >>

log in

join