The Myth of the Good Guy With a Gun

[waldo]

Which, as I explained to you before, totally discredits the graph, because people are killed with other weapons, and GUN MURDER RATES do not indicate anything except GUN MURDER RATES awlone which completely fails to show the effect of high levels of gun ownership on levels of violence.

GUN MURDER RATES are a malicious attempt at manipulation of data.

again, the comparison is on that very point - gun murder rates! I've been trying to get you to bite on the posts I've put forward that clearly show there is no drop in gun violence... and now you have the gall to suggest the comparison is flawed because you want to posit some "imaginary number/influence" that gun ownership has on gun murder rates/violence... presumably lowering them in your view! I suggest you move off your raised point... you've now made it several times... and attempt to put forward study/data that qualifies your suggestion/claim that gun ownership..... what... lowers gun murder rates... lowers gun related violence??? Again, I've already put forward posts that speak to gun related violence not being reduced/lessened... of course, YOU WON"T TOUCH THOSE POSTS!!! Equally, I've put forward the posts that speak to medical advances and improved emergency/trauma care having an influence on helping to reduce gun related murders... and I've repeated reference to this discussion theme several times in an attempt to "bait out" into discussing it/them... again, of course, YOU WON'T TOUCH THOSE POSTS!!! Talk about, as you say, "a malicious attempt (YOUR'S) at manipulation of data"!

Yeah that is right. In a graph that shows the United States has the worst GUN MURDER RATE it is of course perfectly legitimate to eliminate the nation with a worse GUN MURDER RATE because....well, because their GUN MURDER RATE is worse than that of the USA.

the reason was provided as to why Mexico was excluded; again, drug cartel wars over the last decade+. I mean, Mexico could have been included on the graph... but it certainly would have skewed the graph scale given it's rate is 3-times higher than that of the next highest country, the U.S. Instead of that, the author fully disclosed he chose not to include Mexico on the graph, gave the gun murder rate for Mexico, stated it was 3 times that of the U.S. rate and indicated that it was due to the long-standing drug wars in Mexico. Fully disclosed... which didn't, of course, temper yet another of your grand conspiracy claims on the exclusion of Mexico from the graph! Perhaps instead of posturing your fake outrage at this, why not step-up and explain the legitimacy you believe exists in comparing the Gun Murder Rates of all OECD countries to that of Mexico?

 

[Colpy]

Again, I've already put forward posts that speak to gun related violence not being reduced/lessened... of course, YOU WON"T TOUCH THOSE POSTS!!! Equally, I've put forward the posts that speak to medical advances and improved emergency/trauma care having an influence on helping to reduce gun related murders... and I've repeated reference to this discussion theme several times in an attempt to "bait out" into discussing it/them... again, of course, YOU WON'T TOUCH THOSE POSTS!!! Talk about, as you say, "a malicious attempt (YOUR'S) at manipulation of data"!

I never addressed the issue of GUN RELATED DEATHS because, as I keep telling you, it is irrelevant to the discussion.

the reason was provided as to why Mexico was excluded; again, drug cartel wars over the last decade+. I mean, Mexico could have been included on the graph... but it certainly would have skewed the graph scale given it's rate is 3-times higher than that of the next highest country, the U.S. Instead of that, the author fully disclosed he chose not to include Mexico on the graph, gave the gun murder rate for Mexico, stated it was 3 times that of the U.S. rate and indicated that it was due to the long-standing drug wars in Mexico. Fully disclosed... which didn't, of course, temper yet another of your grand conspiracy claims on the exclusion of Mexico from the graph! Perhaps instead of posturing your fake outrage at this, why not step-up and explain the legitimacy you believe exists in comparing the Gun Murder Rates of all OECD countries to that of Mexico?

So, as I said, the stated reason the worst nation in the OECD for gun related deaths was omitted is because so many people there are killed with guns.

And you think that is perfectly legitimate, and that there is no agenda.

It is actually hilarious that anyone would fall for something so transparent.

 

[DaSleeper]

What waldo does is try and move your goal posts so his ball goes in....but but Colpy.....you just won't let him do it....you baaad!

 

[waldo]

So, then they decide that the proper way to handle the situation, to fulfill their desire to make the USA's right to keep and bear arms look intolerable, it is necessary to dump the use of homicide statistics, and include voluntary deaths while eliminating the comparison with homicides using weapons other than guns..........more manipulation.

And Waldo, you swallow this whole.

I now understand your GW alarmism.

You are simply intellectually incapable of thinking for yourself.

and you're a moron incapable of coherent thought! That graph wasn't from the UNODC... that graph was from an article/an author that leveraged UNODC data... targeting OECD countries and their data. You're so ignorantly encased in your blind zealotry you've repeatedly shown your first inclination is to lash out and insult... instead of actually looking at the data and its source(s). Where do you think that data originates? Did the UN/OECD just make the data up? Here's a thought oh conspiratorial one, why not save yourself some further embarrassment and look at where the data originates.... as in it comes from respective police forces/agencies of the respective countries. Oh wait, perhaps this gives you your next conspiracy hook... one to include police in your Grand Conspiracy.

as for your nonsense over the "U.S. rights to keep and bear arms" I've not read a thing on the UNODC site that remotely speaks to questioning/challenging the policy/laws/rationale/etc., of any countries gun ownership. This is simply you being you... you showcasing your militia-driven mentality that has "them comin' fer your guns"! :mrgreen:

 

[DaSleeper]

He getting maad now....you won't let him win in spite of his goal post moving!

 

[Colpy]

That graph wasn't from the UNODC... that graph was from an article/an author that leveraged UNODC data... targeting OECD countries and their data. :mrgreen:

Funny it says this then huh?

2013 UNODC (United Nations Office on Drugs & Crime): Gun related murder rates in the developed (OECD) world --- 2000-to-2012 --

Of course you never provided a link to the source in your original post, nor have you yet.

Do that, and I'll chew up that idiot and spit him out as well.

Where do you think that data originates? Did the UN/OECD just make the data up? Here's a thought oh conspiratorial one, why not save yourself some further embarrassment and look at where the data originates.... as in it comes from respective police forces/agencies of the respective countries. Oh wait, perhaps this gives you your next conspiracy hook... one to include police in your Grand Conspiracy.

No....they don't have to make it up. They just have to manipulate and massage it until it appears to prove a point that is simply misleading, irrelevant, and a blatant untruth.

 

[waldo]

I never addressed the issue of GUN RELATED DEATHS because, as I keep telling you, it is irrelevant to the discussion.

bullshyte... what you're avoiding are my references that point out gun violence is not down... what you're avoiding are my references that speak to medical advances and improved emergency/trauma care having an impact on gun murders... as in helping to reduce gun murder rates. Again, continue your bluster or actually engage the discussion points you're running away from!

So, as I said, the stated reason the worst nation in the OECD for gun related deaths was omitted is because so many people there are killed with guns.

And you think that is perfectly legitimate, and that there is no agenda.

It is actually hilarious that anyone would fall for something so transparent.

no - again, it wasn't excluded from the article/discussion... in fact, Mexico was highlighted in terms of directly mentioning its rate, mentioning its rate positioning, mentioning what the attribution was behind the rate... and highlighting that it wasn't included... ON THE GRAPH! Of course, this is simply a means for you to bluster and avoid the direct challenge put to you, now put to you several times. Again, step-up and state what legitimacy you believe exists in including the country of Mexico on a graph... to the point of completely skewing the graph scale... just explain what value the Mexican data would inherently include to offer as a representative comparison to all the other countries of the OECD. Continue to bluster... or answer, finally answer, the question/challenge you keep avoiding.

 

[Colpy]

as for your nonsense over the "U.S. rights to keep and bear arms" I've not read a thing on the UNODC site that remotely speaks to questioning/challenging the policy/laws/rationale/etc., of any countries gun ownership. This is simply you being you... you showcasing your militia-driven mentality that has "them comin' fer your guns"! :mrgreen:

Naw....they don't have to state their purpose. It is bloody obvious.

"We eliminate Mexico from the graph because criminals there shoot so many people with guns."

Mexico has very tough gun laws, and low gun ownership.

bullshyte... what you're avoiding are my references that point out gun violence is not down... what you're avoiding are my references that speak to medical advances and improved emergency/trauma care having an impact on gun murders... as in helping to reduce gun murder rates. Again, continue your bluster or actually engage the discussion points you're running away from!

I did address them. Sorry you missed it.

 

[waldo]

Do that, and I'll chew up that idiot and spit him out as well.

you're deluded... as in delusions of grandeur! You clearly don't know much on the subject at all... but hey, you can sure bluster and insult to no end... oh, and you can sure avoid the discussion points that clearly make you uneasy and are most inconvenient to your agenda, to your gun fetish!

 

[Colpy]

bullshyte... what you're avoiding are my references that point out gun violence is not down... what you're avoiding are my references that speak to medical advances and improved emergency/trauma care having an impact on gun murders... as in helping to reduce gun murder rates. Again, continue your bluster or actually engage the discussion points you're running away from!



no - again, it wasn't excluded from the article/discussion... in fact, Mexico was highlighted in terms of directly mentioning its rate, mentioning its rate positioning, mentioning what the attribution was behind the rate... and highlighting that it wasn't included... ON THE GRAPH! Of course, this is simply a means for you to bluster and avoid the direct challenge put to you, now put to you several times. Again, step-up and state what legitimacy you believe exists in including the country of Mexico on a graph... to the point of completely skewing the graph scale... just explain what value the Mexican data would inherently include to offer as a representative comparison to all the other countries of the OECD. Continue to bluster... or answer, finally answer, the question/challenge you keep avoiding.

But you only posted the graph.....which is the visual aid people see, and reach conclusions from....indeed the heading claims

The U.S. has far more gun-related killings than any other developed country:

Which, as we have established, is a blatant lie.

 

[Tecumsehsbones]

again, the comparison is on that very point - gun murder rates! I've been trying to get you to bite on the posts I've put forward that clearly show there is no drop in gun violence... and now you have the gall to suggest the comparison is flawed because you want to posit some "imaginary number/influence" that gun ownership has on gun murder rates/violence... presumably lowering them in your view! I suggest you move off your raised point... you've now made it several times... and attempt to put forward study/data that qualifies your suggestion/claim that gun ownership..... what... lowers gun murder rates... lowers gun related violence??? Again, I've already put forward posts that speak to gun related violence not being reduced/lessened... of course, YOU WON"T TOUCH THOSE POSTS!!! Equally, I've put forward the posts that speak to medical advances and improved emergency/trauma care having an influence on helping to reduce gun related murders... and I've repeated reference to this discussion theme several times in an attempt to "bait out" into discussing it/them... again, of course, YOU WON'T TOUCH THOSE POSTS!!! Talk about, as you say, "a malicious attempt (YOUR'S) at manipulation of data"!

 

[Colpy]

you're deluded... as in delusions of grandeur! You clearly don't know much on the subject at all... but hey, you can sure bluster and insult to no end... oh, and you can sure avoid the discussion points that clearly make you uneasy and are most inconvenient to your agenda, to your gun fetish!

Oh I know this subject inside, outside, and upside down.

How many people do you think know there is only one gun store in Mexico, and it is run by the Army?

 

[waldo]

I did address them. Sorry you missed it.

bullshyte! You've avoided them... you've run away from them! Again, you're nothing but a blowhard that can't actually discuss a damn thing without getting into conspiracy themes and overt insult. You're a POSER on the grandest of scales!

I have to run off now... aside from you being a waste of time/attention, I've got some grocery shopping to do... cuLater!

 

[Tecumsehsbones]

bullshyte! You've avoided them... you've run away from them! Again, you're nothing but a blowhard that can't actually discuss a damn thing without getting into conspiracy themes and overt insult. You're a POSER on the grandest of scales!

 

[Colpy]

bullshyte! You've avoided them... you've run away from them! Again, you're nothing but a blowhard that can't actually discuss a damn thing without getting into conspiracy themes and overt insult. You're a POSER on the grandest of scales!

I have to run off now... aside from you being a waste of time/attention, I've got some grocery shopping to do... cuLater!

Enjoy.

bullshyte! You've avoided them... you've run away from them! Again, you're nothing but a blowhard that can't actually discuss a damn thing without getting into conspiracy themes and overt insult. You're a POSER on the grandest of scales!

I have to run off now... aside from you being a waste of time/attention, I've got some grocery shopping to do... cuLater!

Enjoy.



Sorry you missed them. You screamed about them enough, I thought you would remember.

 

[waldo]

How many people do you think know there is only one gun store in Mexico, and it is run by the Army?

you sure can spout off about Mexico not being shown on that graphic, but you absolutely refuse to state why you believe comparing Mexico to other developed (OECD) countries is representative... is a legitimate comparison? You've been asked this same question several times now, yet for all your bluster and nonsense, you just can't seem to find the time to respond - go figure!

Made in the U.S.A.: The Role of American Guns in Mexican Violence

As many as 120,000 people in Mexico have been murdered since 2006, many from a bullet to the back of the head. Most of these killings are committed not with assault rifles, but rather pistols and revolvers. Many are perpetrated by hit-men tied to narco-cartels, but some occur in confrontations with soldiers and police. What's more, the majority of guns causing mayhem on Mexico's streets are made in the United States.

Yet in spite of tough gun laws in Mexico, the proportion of killings committed with firearms skyrocketed from around 20 percent in the mid-1990s to 50 percent in the past few years. What explains the sudden rise in gun violence?

A big part of the problem resides not in Mexico, but in the U.S. In an economic study conducted by the University of San Diego's Trans-Border Institute and the Brazil-based Igarapé Institute, we estimated the volume of firearms annually trafficked across the US-Mexico border. Drawing on data from the Bureau for Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, we hypothesized that if the volume of the trade was significant, it would contribute to the total demand for firearms (and retailers) near the U.S.-Mexico border.

We conservatively estimate that about 2.2 percent of total demand for U.S.-sold firearms originated south of the border between 2010 and 2012. These weapons are often bought in the U.S. through "straw man" purchases, who acquire arms on behalf of others with the intention of being trafficked to Mexico. This translates into at least $127 million dollars in revenue for gun retailers and weapons manufacturers who are literally making a killing. More importantly, it is the equivalent of an annual average of 252,000 guns crossing the border, far above previous estimates based on seizure data. In other words, the roughly 37,000 guns seized at the border by U.S. and Mexican authorities in 2009 probably represents less than 15 per cent of total traffic.


​

yup... for some unknown reason(s)... you believe a conspiracy is in play to exclude Mexico from the graphic! For some unknown reason(s) you really, really, really want Mexico to be shown on that graphic. Yup... for some unknown reason(s) you actually believe including Mexico in a comparison with other developed countries would be a representative accounting! A representative accounting of something....... something, other than drug cartel influences, something other than the illegal flood of U.S. guns to Mexico... something??? If only you would respond... with your own "something"! :mrgreen:

apparently... U R Mad/Upset... bout sumthin! :mrgreen: But hey, with this significant contribution of yours, at least you can feel a part of this thread discussion!

Enjoy.



Enjoy.



Sorry you missed them. You screamed about them enough, I thought you would remember.

how did I miss you replying to the posts and references that highlighted the influence of medical advances and improved emergency/trauma care helping to contribute to a reduction in the number of persons killed by guns? How did I miss that? I mean, I kept baiting you to respond to the topic... to those related posts. Just how did I miss your replies??? Of course... you didn't respond... you absolutely refused to acknowledge the fact that your coveted murder rate figure could actually be influenced by something, by anything, OTHER THAN MORE GOOD GUY'S WITH GUNS!!! :mrgreen:

how did I miss you replying to those posts and references that highlighted, with stats, that gun related violence has not lessened, has not been reduced? How did I miss that? I mean, I kept baiting you to respond to the topic... to those related posts. Just how did I miss your replies??? Of course... you didn't respond... you didn't attempt to challenge/dispute those references and related stats. I mean, you didn't even respond to suggest the increased rate of gun related violence would be even higher... if not for all those GOOD GUYS WITH GUNS!!!

lets recap on one of your main bluster points: you categorically dismiss the legitimate/representative OECD comparison of gun related murder rates between developed countries. In spite of my repeated requests for you to state what other non-OECD countries you'd like to include in a comparison, the best you can do is throw-down a number of wiki page links and offer a thundering "ta da"! Of course, one would have to cobble together your multiple links/pages of "wiki data" to even presume to discuss your bluster... something you've certainly NOT DONE... something you've certainly NOT PRESENTED! Yes, through all your bluster you've not presented a data summation to even support your own bluster! Apparently, to you, throwing multiple data links down... and presuming "someone" will put them all together for you, that qualifies as "Colpy Bluster Support"! :mrgreen:

 

[Tecumsehsbones]

Still mad. Need to learn to let go, waldo.

 

[Colpy]

you sure can spout off about Mexico not being shown on that graphic, but you absolutely refuse to state why you believe comparing Mexico to other developed (OECD) countries is representative... is a legitimate comparison? You've been asked this same question several times now, yet for all your bluster and nonsense, you just can't seem to find the time to respond - go figure!

Ahhh because Mexico is an OECD country, and to eliminate it from the graph when it is the only country with a much higher rate of gun death than the USA, and then claim on the graph The U.S. has far more gun-related killings than any other developed country: obviously proves the entire article, graph and all is BS, a lie, and a manipulation.

Made in the U.S.A.: The Role of American Guns in Mexican Violence

As many as 120,000 people in Mexico have been murdered since 2006, many from a bullet to the back of the head. Most of these killings are committed not with assault rifles, but rather pistols and revolvers. Many are perpetrated by hit-men tied to narco-cartels, but some occur in confrontations with soldiers and police. What's more, the majority of guns causing mayhem on Mexico's streets are made in the United States.

Yet in spite of tough gun laws in Mexico, the proportion of killings committed with firearms skyrocketed from around 20 percent in the mid-1990s to 50 percent in the past few years. What explains the sudden rise in gun violence?

A big part of the problem resides not in Mexico, but in the U.S. In an economic study conducted by the University of San Diego's Trans-Border Institute and the Brazil-based Igarapé Institute, we estimated the volume of firearms annually trafficked across the US-Mexico border. Drawing on data from the Bureau for Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives, we hypothesized that if the volume of the trade was significant, it would contribute to the total demand for firearms (and retailers) near the U.S.-Mexico border.

We conservatively estimate that about 2.2 percent of total demand for U.S.-sold firearms originated south of the border between 2010 and 2012. These weapons are often bought in the U.S. through "straw man" purchases, who acquire arms on behalf of others with the intention of being trafficked to Mexico. This translates into at least $127 million dollars in revenue for gun retailers and weapons manufacturers who are literally making a killing. More importantly, it is the equivalent of an annual average of 252,000 guns crossing the border, far above previous estimates based on seizure data. In other words, the roughly 37,000 guns seized at the border by U.S. and Mexican authorities in 2009 probably represents less than 15 per cent of total traffic.


​

Does that include the guns gifted to the Mexican cartels by Eric Holder?

And they are in error claiming that they know the vast majority of the guns come from the United States. Actually, the only guns traced are those that are submitted to the USA for tracing, a miniscule portion of those seized.....and yes, they would largely submit only those they think originated there. Submitting (for instance) full auto Kalishnikovs made in eastern Europe (a favourite of the drug cartels) to the USA to be traced would be a complete waste of time.

Counting Mexico’s Guns

All that said, yes a significant portion of the guns come from the USA. Obviously.

What in the world does that have to do with the subject at hand?

Nothing, of course. You are setting up a straw man, as you have completely lost the debate over the United Nations graph

yup... for some unknown reason(s)... you believe a conspiracy is in play to exclude Mexico from the graphic! For some unknown reason(s) you really, really, really want Mexico to be shown on that graphic. Yup... for some unknown reason(s) you actually believe including Mexico in a comparison with other developed countries would be a representative accounting! A representative accounting of something....... something, other than drug cartel influences, something other than the illegal flood of U.S. guns to Mexico... something??? If only you would respond... with your own "something"! :mrgreen:

Is Mexico an OECD member?

Is this statement a part of the graph?

The U.S. has far more gun-related killings than any other developed country:

Can you figure it out? It isn't difficult........I'm sure you can do it, if you focus........

lets recap on one of your main bluster points: you categorically dismiss the legitimate/representative OECD comparison of gun related murder rates between developed countries. :mrgreen:

Because it is obviously illegitimate, as the author eliminated the only example that did not agree with his foregone conclusion.

You are not doing a good job of convincing me you are capable of analysing data..........

You certainly have an aptitude for believing fudged data.

yIn spite of my repeated requests for you to state what other non-OECD countries you'd like to include in a comparison,

Over and over and over and over I have told you and argued for and provided a list of countries that should be included.

Try to focus:

All of them. Every country.

You see, what you can't grasp is I actually am capable of doing my own math. I don't need anyone to tell me what to believe, I can look at the evidence and do my own analysis.

You should try it sometime, instead of referencing crap like fudged UN graphs.

For which, btw, you don't even submit a link......

Not that one was required to blow the piece out of the water.

 

[DaSleeper]

Is there anyone besides Flossy or Bluebyrd that believes anything that Waldo AKA (Machu Picchu) posts....??

 

[Cannuck]

Is there anyone besides Flossy or Bluebyrd that believes anything that Waldo AKA (Machu Picchu) posts....??

I think ideologues like Waldo and Colpy are equally right and equally wrong. Neither one can get passed their agenda but, of course, you know all about that sort of thing.