New study, more guns = LESS safe

[TerryMathews]

http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2014/02/140215122532.htm


You will have to wait for your next issue.

How can we judge if the study is well-founded or not if no one can read it?

 

[theeedude]

The kind of science where you exclude data which doesn't support your hypothesis? Yeah, that does sound like your kind of science.

No, that's your sort of science. Where you exclude control data.

Webster and colleagues found that the spike in murders in Missouri following the PTP law repeal only occurred for murders in Missouri committed with a firearm and was widespread across the state's counties. Following the change in Missouri's gun laws, none of the states bordering Missouri experienced significant increases in murder rates and the U.S. murder rate actually declined by over five percent. The researchers also analyzed annual data from death certificates through 2010 compiled by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, and determined that the repeal of Missouri's PTP law was associated with a twenty-three percent increase in firearm homicides rates.

 

[Moonbeam]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Moonbeam
No greater attempt to distort reality could be made, I think, than the attempt by conservatives to assert the reality of the bubble they self create and live in. If you want to see conformity in action, watch the Republicans vote in mass to shut down the government of the United States. The whole purpose and thrust of my attacks on the conservative brain defect is to show that it is dangerous as it exists among modern conservatives. To be a threat to ones own nation while thinking otherwise, is definitely a brain defect, regardless of what you might want to call it. I am describing something that is real and visible, except to the folk so infected, and to anybody but them it is a defective way of seeing the world. You will just have to get used to the idea that normal minds can see you are defective in your thinking. Sorry about that, but it's your actual condition, not that of the rational rest of us.

Is your brain so defective that you couldn't read and respond to my post? All you did was regurgitate your points again. That's not a debate or discussion, it's a lecture and the last time I checked your name wasn't Moonie, Ph.D

I bolded the part of my post that responds the absurd claim you made. Who is it that can't read? Right, you. The right maintains conformity of voting by threatening primary attacks of wayward Republican voters. It's all there to see if you have the stomach for honesty which you don't.

 

[theeedude]

How can we judge if the study is well-founded or not if no one can read it?

You can wait until you read it to judge it. But I don't think there is doubt that there is a study.

 

[Druidx]

A quick check shows similar anti-gun opinions from Prof Webster dating back over a decade. So no big surprise he cherry picked some stats that are opposite the larger US stats.

 

[TerryMathews]

This is your comment supporting a post that attacked me for having no content, and even when content was provided?

No, I did not. I attacked you for not addressing any of the points I made. Those statements are NOT equivalent.

 

[rudeguy]

You can wait until you read it to judge it. But I don't think there is doubt that there is a study.

 

[BoberFett]

No, that's your sort of science. Where you exclude control data.

Missouri didn't experience an increase either. Look at the trend.

Here, I even put it in a pretty chart for the mentally challenged. I included actual numbers (from the list above) and sliding 3 year and 5 year averages.

Uh oh! Looks like senseamp fails again! The trend was on the way up long before 2008, and there's no increase in the trend once the law was passed. In fact, the averages seem to show the murder rate trend heading down.

 

[TerryMathews]

I bolded the part of my post that responds the absurd claim you made. Who is it that can't read? Right, you. The right maintains conformity of voting by threatening primary attacks of wayward Republican voters. It's all there to see if you have the stomach for honesty which you don't.

And again, I stated that conformity is a government establishment issue and not a conservative:liberal issue. Could you please highlight in your post where you addressed that? My brain defect is evidently making me overlook it.

You completely skipped over the conformity that the Democratic party enforces with the same tactics.

 

[TerryMathews]

You can wait until you read it to judge it. But I don't think there is doubt that there is a study.

There is, however, doubt on whether its a well-founded study.

 

[Moonbeam]

I can see you are getting angry, but as you once told me we can only be made to feel by others what we already feel, so please thank me for it.

That said, you already tried to hijack the thread and look rather silly trying to turn that back over on me for simply calling you on it. Nobody else appears to be buying it, either. You are so damaged

Your opinion, which you lack the dignity to keep to yourself, is that I hijacked the thread in your mind because it is weak and easily distracted by opinions you do not like. You shit on my opinion rather than addressing the content, all the while claiming that I did the hijacking and then arrogantly still insist is my fault. I expressed the idea that guns are not the issue, asshole, and if you don't like it shove it up your ass or argue against what I say, not how what I say affects your victim mental state. And stop your petty shitting in this thread, you fucking immature bully. Nobody stuck you in the ass. You did it to yourself. You are so mentally immature you can't stand the fact that there is somebody who posts with whom you disagree. Well fuck you. I state my opinions and I argue them logically. Try to man up and do the same, you coward. If you believe that guns are the issue, argue it. Don't make your fucking worthless posts about me.

 

[Doppel]

Your opinion, which you lack the dignity to keep to yourself, is that I hijacked the thread in your mind because it is weak and easily distracted by opinions you do not like. You shit on my opinion rather than addressing the content, all the while claiming that I did the hijacking and then arrogantly still insist is my fault. I expressed the idea that guns are not the issue, asshole, and if you don't like it shove it up your ass or argue against what I say, not how what I say affects your victim mental state. And stop your petty shitting in this thread, you fucking immature bully. Nobody stuck you in the ass. You did it to yourself. You are so mentally immature you can't stand the fact that there is somebody who posts with whom you disagree. Well fuck you. I state my opinions and I argue them logically. Try to man up and do the same, you coward. If you believe that guns are the issue, argue it. Don't make your fucking worthless posts about me.

You must carry with you a lifetime of self-hatred to speak to another as you have. What you feel was already within you; I simply functioned as a mirror that you could see it clearly. Your first post spoke of conservative brain defect immediately without so much as a thought on this particular study, so your puerile ranting is particularly sad as a failed mask of your thread hijack. As a child might you tantrum because you can't form your words properly.

That said, the OP deserves better than to see you so undress your frustrations as you have, so I will speak to the thread itself:
-------

Matt has found good data with his link. It would seem we need to conclude, if this study is accurate--and it might be--that although Missouri saw a decline of more than 60 murders--a significant one for a state of its size--gun murders still went up by 60, and so murders of other kinds have comparatively plummeted.

 

[TerryMathews]

Matt has found good data with his link. It would seem we need to conclude, if this study is accurate--and it might be--that although Missouri saw a decline of more than 60 murders--a significant one for a state of its size--gun murders still went up by 60, and so murders of other kinds have comparatively plummeted.

Which begs the question, is the type of weapon used a significant factor?

 

[BoberFett]

Thats suchs a dishonset statemnet you folks use over and over and over and over. Ever heard of a car? Gun shows? Driving somewhere to get something? Cities don't reside in vacuums.

But states do? In the world of an idiot, gun laws in a city can't affect murder rates, but gun laws in a state can.

 

[JEDIYoda]

Same thing would happen if you left a suitcase bomb in your wheelchair. I guess we should make those legal too?

depends...a suitcase bomb is already loaded and set to go off....again put together by a human which lead to intent....
The gun on the other hand was never loaded...bad analogy on your part...

 

[JEDIYoda]

so can well all agree that it does not matter the quantity of guns available....

what matter is the person who is going to purchase or steal the gun and their intent?

 

[JEDIYoda]

There can be and never will be any rational reason for gun control!!

 

[s0me0nesmind1]

I know what all you gun advocates will say to try to tear down this study by a Johns Hopkins researcher, but I'd rather hear from people who are concerned by this.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-26222578

Nice Scarecrow logic there good sir....

Logic of this study: More guns in the hands of criminals = more crime (HOLY SHIT WHO WUDDA THOUGHT I KNOW RITE? WHY HAVENT WE DONE ANYTHING? :whiste


Logic of this OP: More guns in the hands of ANYTHING OR ANYONE WILL CAUSE MORE TRIGGERS TO GO OFF AIMED AT THE LIVES OF INNOCENT BABIES AND WOMEN FROM CRAZY WIFE BEATING MEN.


Go figure. I'm completely shocked at this study.

 

[Zargon]

Repealing police vetting to purchase guns = more guns going to criminals = less safe.

this is where we point out that correlation != causation btw


and nice job boberfett.......pwnage on him cherrypicking data hardcore

 

[Thebobo]

ok it goes like this.....

by Donald K. Martin

Yesterday I placed my shotgun on the front porch, gave it six shells, and .....

By Captain Obvious

Yesterday I placed my Nuclear Weapon, and noticing it had no legs, placed it in a wheelchair to help it get around. I left it alone and went about my business.

While I was gone, the mailman delivered my mail, the boy across the street picked up my yard, a girl walked her dog down the street, and quite a few cars stopped at the stop sign near my house.

After 10 hours, I checked on the Nuclear Weapon. It was still sitting in the wheelchair. It had not rolled outside and It had not killed anyone in spite of many opportunities that had been presented.

Can you imagine how surprised I was with all the hype about how dangerous Nuclear Weapons are and how they kill people? Either the media is wrong and the killing is by people misusing Nuclear Weapon or I'm in possession of the laziest Nuclear Weapon in the world.

/yawn

 

[Zaap]

Same thing would happen if you left a suitcase bomb in your wheelchair. I guess we should make those legal too?

Suitcases are legal, dummy. Those also don't actually kill people. (Nor does anything you can put in one all by itself.)

 

[Anarchist420]

i dont trust the State to have more of a monopoly on firearm use than it already does. also, people will get angry and start throwing punches and daggers and shit if we dont have firearms. i mean, does anyone really think that people just wouldnt get angry and violent if the State has stolen more arms than it already has?

It's harder to kill someone with a machete or butcher knife (common weapons in the UK), but it doesn't mean they aren't trying, and that's the issue.

Agreed.

 

[rommelrommel]

Let's see, I've got people telling me their studies show gun ownership reduces crime over here, and people saying it increases crime over here... who to believe? hmmm, who to believe...

Oh wait, I remember, I don't give a fuck who is right because it's a freedom guaranteed by our bill of rights. Period.

I have a study that says letting blacks and women vote has ruined the world

No, that's your sort of science. Where you exclude control data.

Control data... like the data from the state for the preceding and following years in the same state that suggest that it was a statistical blip?

Or the data from other juristictions in which gun laws changed and no such change was observed?

 

[MagickMan]

I just asked one moron not to fuck up somebody else's thread. You have an ignore button and it would be a great honor for me if somebody as emotionally out of control and obsessional as you are were to use it. You are the person who went off the rails and you know how to fix it. You stamp your feel like a childish brat demanding that others help you. Grow the fuck up, you imbecile and put me on ignore. Stop shitting in other people's threads. They don't need an self appointed emotionally disturbed bully like you to protect them.
Put me on ignore, you twit, or shut the fuck up.

Lordy, lordy, directly from the mouth of the (self-)righteous. :awe: Cry more, you deranged hypocrite.

 

[theeedude]

Missouri didn't experience an increase either. Look at the trend.

Here, I even put it in a pretty chart for the mentally challenged. I included actual numbers (from the list above) and sliding 3 year and 5 year averages.

Uh oh! Looks like senseamp fails again! The trend was on the way up long before 2008, and there's no increase in the trend once the law was passed. In fact, the averages seem to show the murder rate trend heading down.

This is exactly the sort of asinine understanding of science I expect from a Republican. Again, completely ignoring control data from states that didn't pass the law that Missouri did.