DPChallenge: A Digital Photography Contest You are not logged in. (log in or register
 

DPChallenge Forums >> Rant >> Is this hypocrisy?
Pages:   ...
Showing posts 76 - 100 of 1154, (reverse)
AuthorThread
01/03/2013 02:13:46 PM · #76
I can live with that but I'd like more info on the limits of ammo....what is too much to store?

Originally posted by robs:

Originally posted by kenskid:

Error posting...see other post


Not sure if that same response was for me or not but I tried to suggest two things above that IMO would help..... Baning private sales should cause no issues for proponents of guns, in fact they should be right behind that given responsible ownership (but I suspect not) and the the restriction set at a reasonable level of ammunition should also not cause too much of a problem... maybe with a court request for more so the few legit uses above the limit can be vetted.

Originally posted by robs:


I firmly believe the ONLY possible path is restriction on ammunition.... EVEN Israel has a restriction on how many bullets civilians are allowed to own.

I also believe that private sales of guns need to be ban and all sales be funneled thru a licensed gun dealer so that both side of the txn are from registered owners (it's a pretty small step that MIGHT be possible).
01/03/2013 02:14:14 PM · #77
Originally posted by kenskid:

Ok....so where do the insults fit in? Why not just paste the link to your 'law' after reading my post?


I didn't refute your insults comment and agree insults are unnecessary. It also doesn't make sense to link to a 'law' when the question is "what law should we have?" You can't link to something that doesn't exist yet.

Message edited by author 2013-01-03 14:15:01.
01/03/2013 02:16:10 PM · #78
Seems reasonable.

Originally posted by Ann:

Back to the OP's actual topic...

Originally posted by mike_311:

i dont know. There has always been a correlation to violence on tv and video games and violence in society however no scientific link has ever been established.


Violent crime rates have been dropping consistently since the middle ages, believe it or not (yes, there are studies showing this). There was a bump from the late 60's to the early 90's, but since the early 90's, the violent crime rate has continued it's long term trend downward. The link between violent movies and crime seems specious, since movies are at least as violent now as they were in the 70's and 80's, yet the violent crime rate is dropping.

The bump from the late 60's to the early 90's could be attributed (among other things) to the fact that the baby boomers were young adults at the time. Statistically, most violent crime is committed by people in their 20's, and the baby boom generation is a sizable demographic bubble.
01/03/2013 02:18:04 PM · #79
I meant Scalvert's law not one that exists. I see how it could be confusing.

Originally posted by bhuge:

Originally posted by kenskid:

Ok....so where do the insults fit in? Why not just paste the link to your 'law' after reading my post?


I didn't refute your insults comment and agree insults are unnecessary. It also doesn't make sense to link to a 'law' when the question is "what law should we have?" You can't link to something that doesn't exist yet.
01/03/2013 02:19:41 PM · #80
Originally posted by jagar:

Originally posted by Cory:

Originally posted by jagar:

Just wondering but who on this site has never touched a gun ? I've seen one but never touched one, as I really don't want to kill anything I suppose I probably never will. In any given hour on the TV we are sure to see one though, sometimes I just feel left out :)


A good question.

I've lived my life with firearms, owned dozens, shot hundreds.

I honestly suspect that often the anti-gun folks are just lacking exposure - honestly, it really does seem that propensity to dislike of firearms is directly correlated to lack of experience with firearms.


Don't dislike them as such, just don't need them and I also feel totally safe without them, that's probably because I know I am safer.


Well, to be perfectly fair, I don't need them either, although I do admittedly rather enjoy them...
01/03/2013 02:21:00 PM · #81
Originally posted by Alexkc:

Originally posted by Cory:

honestly, it really does seem that propensity to dislike of firearms is directly correlated to lack of experience with firearms.


IMO this is really offensive...


ROFL.. IMO you are an easily offended pansy. :)
01/03/2013 02:23:17 PM · #82
Originally posted by Cory:

Originally posted by Alexkc:

Originally posted by Cory:

honestly, it really does seem that propensity to dislike of firearms is directly correlated to lack of experience with firearms.


IMO this is really offensive...


ROFL.. IMO you are an easily offended pansy. :)


i'm surprised this hasn't been moved to rant already.
01/03/2013 02:24:26 PM · #83
Originally posted by robs:

Originally posted by Cory:

I honestly suspect that often the anti-gun folks are just lacking exposure - honestly, it really does seem that propensity to dislike of firearms is directly correlated to lack of experience with firearms.

For the record, I grew up in a country town where almost everyone had guns for livestock, pest control e.t.c. - kids grew up with 22's, that sort of deal. I have packed my own shot gun shells..... To be fair no one I knew had semi-auto, high caliber assault weapons with high capacity magazines, so maybe that rules me out from having an opinion. People using guns for a legitimate purpose just don't need that sort of weapon in my view.

See this is the problem with that line... Do I not understand because I've never shot up a class of kids? It's a nonsense strawman and just a way to diminish the objection from the other side.


Wanna talk about straw man arguments? Let's start with the use of 'need'.. I don't need guns, of any sort... you don't need a car, especially one that can exceed 75mph. Need really isn't what's important.
01/03/2013 02:28:11 PM · #84
Originally posted by kenskid:

I can live with that but I'd like more info on the limits of ammo....what is too much to store?

Limits would need to be worked out with consensus but for example... I get sinus issues in winter and to buy Sudafed 12 hour; I have to give a drivers licence and am limited to a single pack of 24 at a time within some nbr of days.... I cannot afford to keep going to the doctor to get a prescription and they will not give out more then a few at a time in a prescription anyway, so have to jump thru the over the counter hassles.

We limit that because some idiots make drugs from the active ingredient, so I think it's a reasonable stand in for bullets in this conversation.
01/03/2013 02:28:58 PM · #85
Originally posted by mike_311:

Originally posted by Cory:

Originally posted by Alexkc:

Originally posted by Cory:

honestly, it really does seem that propensity to dislike of firearms is directly correlated to lack of experience with firearms.


IMO this is really offensive...


ROFL.. IMO you are an easily offended pansy. :)


i'm surprised this hasn't been moved to rant already.


Hey, I just like giving people what they want - seemed to me he wanted to feel offended, so I obliged. Honestly, I find the easily offended very offensive- grow a hide.
01/03/2013 02:32:52 PM · #86
Originally posted by Cory:

Wanna talk about straw man arguments? Let's start with the use of 'need'.. I don't need guns, of any sort... you don't need a car, especially one that can exceed 75mph. Need really isn't what's important.

There is no public transportation that goes where I "need" to go and it's too far to walk/pedal.... Without a car how would I get there. If your job involved using a gun for say killing animals for food, then I have no issue you having one (with certain checks and licencing and restrictions on use).

There is a speed LIMIT on cars that is enforced - that's a restriction on my use of a car for public safety.... ring a bell at all??
01/03/2013 02:32:56 PM · #87
Originally posted by kenskid:

Ok....so where do the insults fit in? Why not just paste the link to your 'law' after reading my post?

Not an insult, but a quite serious suggestion to educate yourself. A high-school civics course would explain to you WHY the part of your question about a governor or legislature is not applicable, and your second post proved that you lack this particular info. You could probably find such a course online. The rest was not 'a law,' but a list of possible measures that could make a difference. Your added condition of STOPPING school shootings is an example of poisoning the well and black and white thinking that is neither necessary nor required for such measures to be beneficial.
01/03/2013 02:37:58 PM · #88
Originally posted by Art Roflmao:

Originally posted by Yo_Spiff:

Originally posted by Art Roflmao:

why anyone gives a sh*t what "celebrities" think is just another symptom of what is wrong with our society. I value what they say far less than the opinions posted here (even Shannon's!) ;-)

Exactly. The opinions of celebrities means squat to me. But there are people who look up to them and make decisions based on what their favorite actor thinks. As silly as that sounds. And they are highly visible and can get an opinion heard. It got us talking about it, right?

I'd rather hear more talk about fixing THAT, than gun bans.


But the solution to that *is* to ban guns. Do that and gun violence goes away and with that 98% of all Hollywood scripts. No more actors. No more celebrity fans. Problem solved.

Message edited by author 2013-01-03 14:38:33.
01/03/2013 02:40:10 PM · #89
Originally posted by robs:

Originally posted by Cory:

Wanna talk about straw man arguments? Let's start with the use of 'need'.. I don't need guns, of any sort... you don't need a car, especially one that can exceed 75mph. Need really isn't what's important.

There is no public transportation that goes where I "need" to go and it's too far to walk/pedal.... Without a car how would I get there. If your job involved using a gun for say killing animals for food, then I have no issue you having one (with certain checks and licencing and restrictions on use).

There is a speed LIMIT on cars that is enforced - that's a restriction on my use of a car for public safety.... ring a bell at all??


Ahh, there is a speed limit, as there are many laws on the use of guns. The thing is, if you argue that only people who need guns should have them, then you should be consistent and argue that only professional drivers need cars(I'm sure you can hire a driver if you really need to go somewhere).. plus, its very clear that only racecar drivers need cars that go faster than 75mph.. either that, or you can just admit that freedom and liberty are actually needs that are as important as any other need...
01/03/2013 02:41:34 PM · #90
Originally posted by yanko:



But the solution to that *is* to ban guns. Do that and gun violence goes away and with that 98% of all Hollywood scripts. No more actors. No more celebrity fans. Problem solved.


oh no, you mean... they might have to come up with something original??? nah, they will just start using frickin laser beams.
01/03/2013 02:44:06 PM · #91
Originally posted by mike_311:

Originally posted by yanko:



But the solution to that *is* to ban guns. Do that and gun violence goes away and with that 98% of all Hollywood scripts. No more actors. No more celebrity fans. Problem solved.


oh no, you mean... they might have to come up with something original??? nah, they will just start using frickin laser beams.


And they could mount them on cats!

Message edited by author 2013-01-03 14:46:27.
01/03/2013 02:45:45 PM · #92
Originally posted by Cory:

Originally posted by robs:

Originally posted by Cory:

Wanna talk about straw man arguments? Let's start with the use of 'need'.. I don't need guns, of any sort... you don't need a car, especially one that can exceed 75mph. Need really isn't what's important.

There is no public transportation that goes where I "need" to go and it's too far to walk/pedal.... Without a car how would I get there. If your job involved using a gun for say killing animals for food, then I have no issue you having one (with certain checks and licencing and restrictions on use).

There is a speed LIMIT on cars that is enforced - that's a restriction on my use of a car for public safety.... ring a bell at all??


Ahh, there is a speed limit, as there are many laws on the use of guns. The thing is, if you argue that only people who need guns should have them, then you should be consistent and argue that only professional drivers need cars(I'm sure you can hire a driver if you really need to go somewhere).. plus, its very clear that only racecar drivers need cars that go faster than 75mph.. either that, or you can just admit that freedom and liberty are actually needs that are as important as any other need...


if the speed limit is set too fast and people start crashing and dying, they lower the limit. why cant the same be done for the gun laws?
01/03/2013 02:46:18 PM · #93
Originally posted by yanko:


And they could mount them on cats!


and sharks!
01/03/2013 02:48:19 PM · #94
Originally posted by yanko:

But the solution to that *is* to ban guns. Do that and gun violence goes away and with that 98% of all Hollywood scripts. No more actors. No more celebrity fans. Problem solved.

Theater follows society, not the other way around (and generally with a pretty big lag time). You rarely see cigarettes on the big screen anymore. The purported connection between violence in the media and real world is a silly excuse. Remember all those slashers emulating Kill Bill? Yeah, me neither. We've had violence and murder in entertainment since before Roman Gladiators and Shakespeare, and I'll wager it's more ubiquitous in Japanese media than here (even in animation).
01/03/2013 02:58:40 PM · #95
Originally posted by Cory:

Originally posted by Alexkc:

Originally posted by Cory:

honestly, it really does seem that propensity to dislike of firearms is directly correlated to lack of experience with firearms.


IMO this is really offensive...


ROFL.. IMO you are an easily offended pansy. :)


I don't need to use a weapon to know that it's built to kill someone... am I a super clever guy?
01/03/2013 02:59:59 PM · #96
cory, i have air rifles and my parents have double barrel over and under shotguns on their farm and i shoot clay pigeon, i shot target for a club, ive fired 357 (pre dunblaine but was locked in safe at gun club) magnums etc, we have to have a firearms license to have a shotgun or an air rifle over 12 lbs/foot.

this requires applying to the police, having your property inspected your shooting location inspected your history examined and character witness testimonials, we have to have a metal gun locker with a separate ammunition store and these have to be fitted to external walls and very secure,

i actually really like guns, but believe they should be with the military/police or accessible at licensed ranges where they can be used.

i dont see the need to have a gun at home not locked up or to have a non sporting weapon such as a pistol or semi automatic at home. if you like to range shoot keep them locked at the gun range, if you hunt have bolt action rifles there no need for a 30 shot clip while out hunting or a 12 clip 9mm

the paranoia about needing it to defend your property etc its only property get yourself and family out even though the amount of aggravated burglaries is very low, more guns = more gun deaths

oops bit big that heres the link to it instead linky

Message edited by author 2013-01-03 15:01:54.
01/03/2013 03:00:01 PM · #97
Originally posted by Cory:

...only racecar drivers need cars that go faster than 75mph..

A: Not true, as you may need to pass or perform legitimate emergency maneuvers on a highway.
B: The ability of cars to exceed 75mph is a consequence of engines with desirable acceleration and towing capacity, and top speeds are a selling point even if never attained.

The American Trucking Association has been calling for legally mandated speed governors on semis for years.
01/03/2013 03:00:06 PM · #98
All your posts to me have been cop outs. Don't worry about my education and answer a question ... What new gun law can be passed or what CONSTITUTIONAL Amendment can be put forward that will LOWER the instances of school shootings?

Please don't give me a link on how we amend the Constitution or any other cop out.

Originally posted by scalvert:

Originally posted by kenskid:

Ok....so where do the insults fit in? Why not just paste the link to your 'law' after reading my post?

Not an insult, but a quite serious suggestion to educate yourself. A high-school civics course would explain to you WHY the part of your question about a governor or legislature is not applicable, and your second post proved that you lack this particular info. You could probably find such a course online. The rest was not 'a law,' but a list of possible measures that could make a difference. Your added condition of STOPPING school shootings is an example of poisoning the well and black and white thinking that is neither necessary nor required for such measures to be beneficial.
01/03/2013 03:05:37 PM · #99
Originally posted by kenskid:

All your posts to me have been cop outs. Don't worry about my education and answer a question...

I already answered your question, which you quoted as 'Shannon's law.' Go back and read.
01/03/2013 03:08:41 PM · #100
from harvard paper summaries //www.hsph.harvard.edu/research/hicrc/firearms-research/guns-and-death/index.html

1. Where there are more guns there is more homicide (literature review).

Our review of the academic literature found that a broad array of evidence indicates that gun availability is a risk factor for homicide, both in the United States and across high-income countries. Case-control studies, ecological time-series and cross-sectional studies indicate that in homes, cities, states and regions in the US, where there are more guns, both men and women are at higher risk for homicide, particularly firearm homicide.

Hepburn, Lisa; Hemenway, David. Firearm availability and homicide: A review of the literature. Aggression and Violent Behavior: A Review Journal. 2004; 9:417-40.

2. Across high-income nations, more guns = more homicide.

We analyzed the relationship between homicide and gun availability using data from 26 developed countries from the early 1990s. We found that across developed countries, where guns are more available, there are more homicides. These results often hold even when the United States is excluded.

Hemenway, David; Miller, Matthew. Firearm availability and homicide rates across 26 high income countries. Journal of Trauma. 2000; 49:985-88.

3. Across states, more guns = more homicide

Using a validated proxy for firearm ownership, we analyzed the relationship between firearm availability and homicide across 50 states over a ten year period (1988-1997).

After controlling for poverty and urbanization, for every age group, people in states with many guns have elevated rates of homicide, particularly firearm homicide.

Miller, Matthew; Azrael, Deborah; Hemenway, David. Household firearm ownership levels and homicide rates across U.S. regions and states, 1988-1997. American Journal of Public Health. 2002: 92:1988-1993.

4. Across states, more guns = more homicide (2)

Using survey data on rates of household gun ownership, we examined the association between gun availability and homicide across states, 2001-2003. We found that states with higher levels of household gun ownership had higher rates of firearm homicide and overall homicide. This relationship held for both genders and all age groups, after accounting for rates of aggravated assault, robbery, unemployment, urbanization, alcohol consumption, and resource deprivation (e.g., poverty). There was no association between gun prevalence and non-firearm homicide.

Miller, Matthew; Azrael, Deborah; Hemenway, David. State-level homicide victimization rates in the U.S. in relation to survey measures of household firearm ownership, 2001-2003. Social Science and Medicine. 2007; 64:656-64.
Pages:   ...
Current Server Time: 01/27/2021 09:55:22 AM

Please log in or register to post to the forums.


Home - Challenges - Community - League - Photos - Cameras - Lenses - Learn - Prints! - Help - Terms of Use - Privacy - Top ^
DPChallenge, and website content and design, Copyright © 2001-2021 Challenging Technologies, LLC.
All digital photo copyrights belong to the photographers and may not be used without permission.
Proudly hosted by Sargasso Networks. Current Server Time: 01/27/2021 09:55:22 AM EST.