Guest viewing limit reached
  • You have reached the maximum number of guest views allowed
  • Please register below to remove this limitation

Donald Trump running for president

JudoJosh said:
yea!!!!.. well except the data actually shows the exact opposite...

And before the, I thought you unsubbed comment, I did but since De__eB quoted my post it popped up on my notification pane so against my better judgement I allowed my cursor to wander back in.

Anywho, I just skimmed some of the recent post and this one caught my eye. I have a feeling (a pretty confident one too) about where you stand on the prevalence of guns but if you claim to be one who values evidence, then you are in for an upset because the actual data we have on this, albeit rather limited but data nonetheless, paints a picture you might not be happy with.

Sorry for your gun lots
Click to expand...

Where is the data? Actually I have data stating everywhere but the US that has gone down in homicide rates has nothing to do with gun control. The US has a different issue that isn't guns which is obvious.
 
ax1 said:
Presidents job is not to rule like a dictator and install policy at the stroke of his pen.

Maybe if he didnt support the idea of instantly criminalizing good people from having guns on them people and simply do his job which is to enforce the very Constitution he took oath to people can do a better job at defending themselves and family.
Click to expand...

What good people has he proposed instantly criminalizing?

Why is it that none of you throwing up these red herring arguments against the president's proposals can make any specific claims for specific ways in which people will be criminals or have their rights infringed?
 
De__eB said:
No, I don't know that, in fact police forces are some of the most likely adopters of the technology, because they result in significant officer safety improvements if the officers firearm cannot be wrested away and used against him.
Click to expand...
Invalid Link Removed
For police, Pasco believes the biggest weakness with electronic guns is reliability. Sensors and fingerprint readers need to work even when covered in sweat, dirt, or blood -- and once the weapon is picked up and ready to be fired, it needs to work no matter the situation.

“In a combat situation, a shooting situation, there’s real confusion and chaos. It’s not like TV,” Pasco said. “Often times they’re very close quarters. We want a police officer to be able to take any gun, his partner’s gun, a criminal’s gun, any gun, and use that gun to his advantage. If he is in a scuffle, and he gets a criminal’s weapon and it’s useless to him, we’ve got a safety problem.”

The very nature of combat doesn’t leave room for second-guessing, said Pasco, whose organization represents more than 325,000 law enforcement officers. In police regulations, he said, firearms themselves are the last resort in any conflict -- and if worse comes to worst, a gunshot has to be a guarantee, not a gamble.

“It can’t just work 95 percent of the time,” Pasco said. “You’re not going to pick up a gun to shoot it unless you mean business. And if you mean business, that’s when you absolutely don’t need it to fail you.”
 
ax1 said:
Id have to look at the stats. I bet (not claiming for now) many of these cities if gun crime was reduced by gun regulation, Id have to see if lacked people with guns to begin with due to already strong regulation, lack of education and propaganda. Then I wanna see the general crime trends after stronger gun regulation including non-gun related such as break ins, etc....
Click to expand...

there is quite a bit of papers that have looked into this and have show 2 things quite well. 1) rates of firearm ownership are consistently and reliably correlated with homicide rates and 2) stronger gun laws/more extensive background checks in fact due reduce the probability of criminals obtaining and using guns in homicides

You can say it doesnt make sense intuitively because of your beliefs of how things "should" be, but reality doesn't always align with what we hope it does

or you can play the, this is all a gubbernemt ploy to put us infema camps and steal our children to make into slaves for George Soros or whatever
 
CJNator said:
As much as the Constitution "helps" or is a good argument against gun control I look at the moral aspect of regulations generally. The idea of regulations is to regulate the free market to help people but in reality its regulating our freedom in a way. People can claim its to help us all they want but reality it only limits our freedom for "security".
Click to expand...

I feel the same way and addressed that when someone asked me a Constitutional question short time ago. I did refer to my opinion first as to not subdue to statist doctrine. Part of the doctrine just happens to be in line with what I feel is a just cause in defense of individual liberty.
 
youngandfree said:
Invalid Link Removed
For police, Pasco believes the biggest weakness with electronic guns is reliability. Sensors and fingerprint readers need to work even when covered in sweat, dirt, or blood -- and once the weapon is picked up and ready to be fired, it needs to work no matter the situation.

“In a combat situation, a shooting situation, there’s real confusion and chaos. It’s not like TV,” Pasco said. “Often times they’re very close quarters. We want a police officer to be able to take any gun, his partner’s gun, a criminal’s gun, any gun, and use that gun to his advantage. If he is in a scuffle, and he gets a criminal’s weapon and it’s useless to him, we’ve got a safety problem.”

The very nature of combat doesn’t leave room for second-guessing, said Pasco, whose organization represents more than 325,000 law enforcement officers. In police regulations, he said, firearms themselves are the last resort in any conflict -- and if worse comes to worst, a gunshot has to be a guarantee, not a gamble.

“It can’t just work 95 percent of the time,” Pasco said. “You’re not going to pick up a gun to shoot it unless you mean business. And if you mean business, that’s when you absolutely don’t need it to fail you.”
Click to expand...


And sure enough, the technology will not be adopted until it works 100% of the time.

If it didn't work 100% of the time, nobody would buy it, and therefore gun manufacturers wouldn't sell it.
 
JudoJosh said:
there is quite a bit of papers that have looked into this and have show 2 things quite well. 1) rates of firearm ownership are consistently and reliably correlated with homicide rates and 2) stronger gun laws/more extensive background checks in fact due reduce the probability of criminals obtaining and using guns in homicides

You can say it doesnt make sense intuitively because of your beliefs of how things "should" be, but reality doesn't always align with what we hope it does

or you can play the, this is all a gubbernemt ploy to put us infema camps and steal our children to make into slaves for George Soros or whatever
Click to expand...

The issue is there are other factors I address along with freedom of gun ownership...that is economy, ending war on drugs, protecting our borders and having a tighter immigration policy, strong economy and proper currency, strong education on gun use, better medical care, etc.....

I am not blind to a 1 answer solution to the issues we have of today.
 
CJNator said:
Where is the data? Actually I have data stating everywhere but the US that has gone down in homicide rates has nothing to do with gun control. The US has a different issue that isn't guns which is obvious.
Click to expand...

no, the data is pretty clear that the homicide rate (along with both crime in general and violent crime) in the US has been steadily decreasing over time. You have data that says the US hasn't decreased? That would be odd
 
De__eB said:
And sure enough, the technology will not be adopted until it works 100% of the time.

If it didn't work 100% of the time, nobody would buy it, and therefore gun manufacturers wouldn't sell it.
Click to expand...

Like the Obamacare website?
 
JudoJosh said:
Exactly. Roughly 40% of guns purchased and used in crimes are purchased via private transaction. If only the president would pass a policy focusing on private transactions and leave gun store ones aloe..... like say he can pass an executive order that requires background checks to be done on private transactions. This would have a pretty negligible effect on guns purchased through traditional legal channels (gun stores) and would target a significant percent of the demo that the criminals do get their guns from.. but nooooo.. obummer is too busy hitler-ing to care
Click to expand...
Invalid Link Removed

Nothing I've seen says 40% of guns USED IN CRIMES were purchased privately. 40% of guns purchased through private sales don't indicate or correlate to crime guns.
 
ax1 said:
The issue is there are other factors I address along with freedom of gun ownership...that is economy, ending war on drugs, protecting our borders and having a tighter immigration policy, strong economy and proper currency, strong education on gun use, better medical care, etc.....

I am not blind to a 1 answer solution to the issues we have of today.
Click to expand...

I actually think a stronger middle class would solve a lot of problems and would do a hell of a lot more to help crime, violence, etc then gun laws would, but that isn't to say gun laws wouldnt help or have any positive impac either, especially since the evidence says it more then likely will, I just think addressing economic inequality would have more of a impact, and across a wide range of issues
 
ax1 said:
The issue is there are other factors I address along with freedom of gun ownership...that is economy
Click to expand...

What about the economy?

ending war on drugs
Click to expand...

Agree with you here.

protecting our borders and having a tighter immigration policy
Click to expand...

What if I told you that every single shred of economic evidence clearly and overwhelmingly supports that notion that open borders and open migration are perhaps the single most effective economic stimulus that any government on the planet could institute?

strong economy and proper currency
Click to expand...

What do you mean proper currency?

strong education on gun use
Click to expand...

Via regulations dictating firearms proficiency and crisis response training in those who want to carry firearms? I would be a big supporter of that, lets make it happen!

better medical care, etc.....
Click to expand...

Via either complete removal of profit incentive from the health care system or complete buy-in to profit incentive from the health care system, I agree lets make it happen!
 
JudoJosh said:
no, the data is pretty clear that the homicide rate (along with both crime in general and violent crime) in the US has been steadily decreasing over time. You have data that says the US hasn't decreased? That would be odd
Click to expand...

Data clearly shows legal gun ownership is at record highs also.
 
Dma378 said:
A true lack of understanding of science and chemistry. Hardly worth it. I'll keep it simple, because God wanted to. And because now he wants it to be the way it is now. And it's all part of his plan. Was and always will be. We are safe. Fuk it.
Click to expand...

When global warming takes hold it will be Hell on earth. Unquenchable fire that burns forever and ever. Only those redeemed by the blood of Jesus will be safe in Heaven.
 
De__eB said:
What good people has he proposed instantly criminalizing?

Why is it that none of you throwing up these red herring arguments against the president's proposals can make any specific claims for specific ways in which people will be criminals or have their rights infringed?
Click to expand...

People on SS disability are targeted in a broad and vague definition, including those having a fiduciary, for physical and not mental reasons.
 
De__eB said:
I'm not sure what that has to do with this?

You think police would accept firearms they did not believe would work?
Click to expand...

Things go wrong, its not like cops would necessarily expect it not to work when they choose to take it...its common place with tech, cars, passenger jets and everything. You dont get a good sense of reliability until a larger real sample is put into play.

This stuff is always questionable and as youngnfree posted the link, cops have their own opinions as well.
 
Invalid Link Removed
2016-01-08 21.43.02.png


It's pretty clear, the VA declares people incompetent to handle their VA benefits if they have a fiduciary FOR PHYSICAL or mental reasons. There's no distinction between the two, but having your legs blown off doesn't make you mentally unstable.
 
JudoJosh said:
no, the data is pretty clear that the homicide rate (along with both crime in general and violent crime) in the US has been steadily decreasing over time. You have data that says the US hasn't decreased? That would be odd
Click to expand...

No I have that all over except the US, the US has a different problem which still shows how there is no firearms and homicide have no correlations.
 
ax1 said:
I feel the same way and addressed that when someone asked me a Constitutional question short time ago. I did refer to my opinion first as to not subdue to statist doctrine. Part of the doctrine just happens to be in line with what I feel is a just cause in defense of individual liberty.
Click to expand...

Its does the same for me too, I like to stem away from the Constitution so I'm not seen as a Constitutionalist lol.
 
De__eB said:
What about the economy?
Click to expand...

I would start with auditing and phasing out the Federal Reserve and then reverting to the only Constitutional currency which is the gold and silver standard.

I would then abolish the 16th Amendment and let people own all the fruits of their labor.

Abolishing SS, Medicare, all socialist policies.

I would probably look into implementing Austrian Economics model which Im attracted to.

De__eB said:
What if I told you that every single shred of economic evidence clearly and overwhelmingly supports that notion that open borders and open migration are perhaps the single most effective economic stimulus that any government on the planet could institute?
Click to expand...

I dont think people should be able to come across back and forth at will. When I meant closed border, I do not mean close off legal immigration.

We can implement background checks for foreigners and offer ID's of some types to labor workers. Of course welcome students and educated people who can contribute to America and its companies, medical field, etc....

De__eB said:
Via regulations dictating firearms proficiency and crisis response training in those who want to carry firearms? I would be a big supporter of that, lets make it happen!
!
Click to expand...

Not through regulations, but rather getting the Federal Government out of the education system and localizing education or home school. I would promote gun education so that would be a fight to convince people which at the moment is a long road ahead.

Besides that which is a far stretch and unlikely, I can compromise into a system of licensing perhaps such as driving a car if it enhances people's liberties to carry a gun.

De__eB said:
Via either complete removal of profit incentive from the health care system or complete buy-in to profit incentive from the health care system, I agree lets make it happen!
Click to expand...

I would no way eliminate profit incentives for doctors, only encourage it. I would eliminate bureaucracy profit involved with medicine such as insurance companies, and simply make insurance companies their own intended purpose which is buying a package of protection based on cost vs. risk.

This is a deep issue, there is alot of work that can be done here to reduce costs and award doctors (not taxing them is already there in my previous statement.)
 
youngandfree said:
Invalid Link Removed

Nothing I've seen says 40% of guns USED IN CRIMES were purchased privately. 40% of guns purchased through private sales don't indicate or correlate to crime guns.
Click to expand...

you are batting 0 for 2 today with posting links that actually relate to the point you are trying to make

try this one instead Invalid Link Removed but you are right, 40% was off. The actual number was 37% of criminals got their weapon via private transaction (11% retail shop, 40% black market or stealing it)
 
JudoJosh said:
I actually think a stronger middle class would solve a lot of problems and would do a hell of a lot more to help crime, violence, etc then gun laws would, but that isn't to say gun laws wouldnt help or have any positive impac either, especially since the evidence says it more then likely will, I just think addressing economic inequality would have more of a impact, and across a wide range of issues
Click to expand...

Yup, that would be a major improvement for sure. Poverty is sad.
 
De__eB said:
What good people has he proposed instantly criminalizing?

Why is it that none of you throwing up these red herring arguments against the president's proposals can make any specific claims for specific ways in which people will be criminals or have their rights infringed?
Click to expand...

I included what he continues to support. If I feel like my life is in danger (and I have had people after me with guns when young) and I want to carry a gun, although Im only looking for self defense Im instantly a criminal. Of course, I would never do that, I often am more fearful of governmental consequences than my own life.
 
ax1 said:
I included what he continues to support. If I feel like my life is in danger (and I have had people after me with guns when young) and I want to carry a gun, although Im only looking for self defense Im instantly a criminal. Of course, I would never do that, I often am more fearful of governmental consequences than my own life.
Click to expand...

carrying a gun automatically makes you a criminal and this is the result of the executive order Obama proposed?
 
JudoJosh said:
carrying a gun automatically makes you a criminal and this is the result of the executive order Obama proposed?
Click to expand...

No, I will try to clarify my opinion. He isnt standing up for my right to bear arms. Being an Executive who has sworn in to protect my 2nd Amendment, I put partial blame on his continued support for these policies implemented at various places around the country. Its not fair he is only after reducing criminal gun use, he should also encourage good people to have guns (not that I support any executive orders in the first place :))
 
I gotta hit the sack people, wake up early and train!

It was awesome having a couple more bright minds in here with different views that mine, makes these threads so much entertaining, and educational!

Feel free to reply, Ill be back. Goodnight.
 
JudoJosh said:
you are batting 0 for 2 today with posting links that actually relate to the point you are trying to make

try this one instead Invalid Link Removed but you are right, 40% was off. The actual number was 37% of criminals got their weapon via private transaction (11% retail shop, 40% black market or stealing it)
Click to expand...

I guess data that's 11 years old is still relevant today?
 
Oh.. so if NY passes a law the forbids firearm carry then it is Obama fault.. and if Obama attempts to pass a federal law mandating what states are allowed to do then he is evil big government trying to tell the states what to do and overstepping what the federal government is allowed to do..

so pretty much, everything is obama fault. Gotcha
 
JudoJosh said:
Oh.. so if NY passes a law the forbids firearm carry then it is Obama fault.. and if Obama attempts to pass a federal law mandating what states are allowed to do then he is evil big government trying to tell the states what to do and overstepping what the federal government is allowed to do..

so pretty much, everything is obama fault. Gotcha
Click to expand...

My last post since I just caught it, lol

The federal governments primary role (in my opinion) is to step into the states when the states are violating their Constitutional requirements.

As I stated, I put partial blame on Obama for not standing up for my unalienable rights. He has no intent on standing up for the 2nd Amendment for good people other than showing he wants to preserve the status quo. As president, I am highly disappointed in him for many reasons, and I did vote for him back in '08 (took me 6 months to realize he lied about most of his campaign promises and then it was over for me with him.)
 
brandy taylor or Christy marks?


please, someone say both!!!!
 
youngandfree said:
Why does the federal government always have to pay for it?
Click to expand...

LMAO!!!

On a board where the most common objection to scientific research being presented as evidence is a conflict of funding, you are actually saying we need less NIH funded research... that was a good one
 
The number of firearm-related homicides in 2013 -- the CDC’s most recent data -- was 11,208 (so about 309,988,792 guns were just milling about that year, not killing anybody).

That means about 0.000036 homicides were committed per gun in the United States in 2013. For those of you who don’t like doing math, that’s less than four homicides per 100,000 guns.
 
lol.. oh man. I see you are really gonna try and pretend to science again in this thread. I guess you didn't learn from last time when you tried to link random articles about climate change in this thread
 
ok...here is my take on Obama. perception=reality for many people, myself included.
I perceive Obama to be:
anti-Christian
anti-guns
anti-military
anti-traditional American values
anti-white males
pro-islam
pro-affirmative action
pro-black militantism
pro-minority and women and gay rights over those of white heterosexual males


I am sure I forgot some, but this is just a broad overview of how I perceive obama
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top