The Myth of the Good Guy With a Gun
- Thread starter mentalfloss
- Start date
dance petros, dance! Gee, that didn't take your degenerate self anytime at all to spew forward. Well done.
guys, guys... let's **** all over this thread. Do your best... countdown to drywall: 10, 9, 8....
I agree that this isn't indicative of a trend (though that much has been shown with pubmed).
I was just posting as an additional highlight.
It wasn't an insult. You're amazingly stupid. (That was an insult. True, but insulting.)
That's not true at all Tecumseh.
The truth is that people gang up on him (and you, and me) because this forum has more members with an opposing view.
The truth is that people gang up on him (and you, and me) because this forum has more members with an opposing view.
hey lil' chief... in your world of self-selective, self-serving insult definition, what non-insulting intent does your statement, "Blow it out your barracks bag", convey?
What's not true? My assertion that dil. . . uh. . . waldo is stupid?
That doesn't negate the assertion.
The guy is clearly not dumb and in fact makes more of an effort than his detractors to look for evidence to back up any claims.
no - members "gang up" because they can... because this forum has little to no effective moderation. Because this forum's moderators would sooner coddle the clubhouseBROs than actually moderate per the forum rules... and send the purposeful shyte-disturbers packing. Apparently, real meaningful discussion is less important than playing to the infantile/insulting posting that permeates this forum.
No, you're describing yourself. Dil. . . damn!. . . WALdo is a true believer, and his propensity to look for evidence is precisely that: he reaches a conclusion then looks for evidence to back it up, as opposed to reviewing the evidence and reasoning to a conclusion.
That says "stupid" to me. He's also mindlessly belligerent. So I respond in kind. He chose the mode.
do you really presume to simply equate "gun violence"... "number of shootings", to... murder/homicide rates? Even if you purposely cherry-pick those rates in isolation of all other gun violence related injury/crime, medical advances (if nothing else) speak to an influence on those death rates....... In Medical Triumph, Homicides Fall Despite Soaring Gun ViolenceThe number of U.S. homicides has been falling for two decades, but America has become no less violent.
Crime experts who attribute the drop in killings to better policing or an aging population fail to square the image of a more tranquil nation with this statistic: The reported number of people treated for gunshot attacks from 2001 to 2011 has grown by nearly half.
"Did everybody become a lousy shot all of a sudden? No," said Jim Pasco, executive director of the National Fraternal Order of Police, a union that represents about 330,000 officers. "The potential for a victim to survive a wound is greater than it was 15 years ago."
In other words, more people in the U.S. are getting shot, but doctors have gotten better at patching them up. Improved medical care doesn't account for the entire decline in homicides but experts say it is a major factor.
Emergency-room physicians who treat victims of gunshot and knife attacks say more people survive because of the spread of hospital trauma centers—which specialize in treating severe injuries—the increased use of helicopters to ferry patients, better training of first-responders and lessons gleaned from the battlefields of Iraq and Afghanistan.
"Our experience is we are saving many more people we didn't save even 10 years ago," said C. William Schwab, director of the Firearm and Injury Center at the University of Pennsylvania and the professor of surgery at the Hospital of the University of Pennsylvania.
Speaking of Cherry Picking..........
You use stats from 4 years, after I gave stats from 40 years?
And you actually believe that in 4 years the US rate of assault with guns and knives rose 30%?
And in those four years medical advances were so dramatic that despite a 30% rise in lethal assaults, the murder rate fell by 25%?
(2006: 6.1 per 100,000, 2010: 4.8 per 100,000)............which means the survival rate went up by about 50%.
In four years.
Bullshyte.
Somebody is playing with the numbers.
Oh yeah. Found this.
United States Crime Rates 1960 - 2013
As I thought, your figures are completely whacked. Look at the number of violent crimes and aggravated assault. Despite a rising population, the numbers have dropped every year since 2001.
Give the guy a break.
He actually posted some credible stats already.
How about we look at those instead of going after character.
Edit: Good response Colpy.
Let's take it from there.
I simply asked you to provide a definition of a term you used and asked you to cite/substantiate your claim. There was no belligerence... no "tone", no "mode"... it was simply a request; one you took extreme exception to. Clearly, the following just reeks of your claimed belligerence! :mrgreen:
Stupid isn't a question of character. Plenty of stupid people are of excellent character, and plenty of smart ones I wouldn't eat a meal with.
I don't view your posts in isolation. You're a waste of my time and the world's oxygen. Hence I see no reason to honour your requests.
Look at Colpy's stats and maybe unlike Waldo you have the guts to admit when you're wrong?
the graph is an isolated 4 years... the article speaks to data over a decade. And you continue to miss the key point made; again, you improperly attempted to equate "gun violence" to the number of gun murders/homicide. Notwithstanding you completely ignore the thrust of the article that speaks to medical advances significantly impacting (as in lowering) gun deaths. Talk about YOUR Cherry Picking!
Look at Colpy's stats and maybe unlike Waldo you have the guts to admit when you're wrong?
Thanks for the edit while I was posting my rant
degenerate you are! Go **** yourself, *******!
I will take solace in the fact you couldn't... can't... substantiate your statement/claim.