until you actually speak to something definitive you're simply blowing smoke (up your azz)... chief!
The Myth of the Good Guy With a Gun
- Thread starter mentalfloss
- Start date
until you actually speak to something definitive you're simply blowing smoke (up your azz)... chief!
You think calling me that makes you sound clever? I've been called that by people who are officially "developmentally disabled."
I do take back the "silly twat" comment, with apologies, and replace it with "stupid twat."
You should take it back. Silly has been copyrighted 'round these parts.
And by 'copyrighted" I do mean, "done to death".
Why else would you eliminate the countries that are overwhelmingly non-white and poor from your comparison unless it were racist and/or elitist?
Now, seriously, I confess to a little cage-rattling here. The salient fact is that the use of the OECD is simply cherry picking, especially when combined with the consideration of only gun murders. Two cherry-picking factors in a single graph is really outside the Pale.
A POSER! lol Last time I heard that was my punked out 15 year old in 1995 .......too funny.
The use of OECD countries is cherry picking because there is simply no logical excuse to eliminate the majority of the nations of the world from the sample.....except to reach a foregone conclusion, massaging the data to fit the desired result.
sound clever? I'm certainly not going to spell out/key your ridiculously long name... I didn't appreciate you were so uber-sensitive, but as your moniker is the name of a chief, do you imply referring to you as 'chief' is a slight? If so, what would you prefer to be called?
no - stand firm! Be loud and proud of your nonsense claiming the OECD country comparison is "elitist", is "racist"! :mrgreen:
Okay....
Why else would you eliminate the countries that are overwhelmingly non-white and poor from your comparison unless it were racist and/or elitist?
Or
The use of OECD countries is cherry picking because there is simply no logical excuse to eliminate the majority of the nations of the world from the sample.....except to reach a foregone conclusion, massaging the data to fit the desired result.__________________________
Which is it?
again, for the 6th time now: you clearly believe the OECD comparison is not representative to the U.S.... I guess you feel/believe it's not a "fair comparison". In that vein, why can't you, why won't you, present a sampling of non-OECD countries you believe offers a more representative comparison, offers a "fairer" comparison to the U.S.? Why is this just so, so, so, so... difficult for you to respond to? I mean, c'mon... you claim to have been "arguing" this topic for 40 facking years now... it's about time you stepped up, hey? :mrgreen:
It is not a fair comparison for two reasons:
1. the graph considers only gun murders.
2. the graph does not condider any nation not in the OECD.
Here is a representative group of nations to consider:
List of sovereign states - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Exactly as I have been telling you over and over and over.
Reading comprehension....you need help.
oh the shame of the OECD... "elitist" and "racist" in it's refusal to extend its membership to include 3rd-world, war-torn and/or shyte-house countries!
ya, that's right... in speaking to gun related murders, gun related murder data is referenced - go figure. It's presented as a comparison of OECD countries... if you don't like it you could present an alternative... which you haven't done! Again, all you've done is provide links to 2 separate wiki pages... apparently, you leave the rest as an exercise for others to actually do the work you are either unable or unwilling to perform/present.
bull crap! I've asked you, now for the 7th time, to directly name non-OECD countries you believe to provide a more representative comparison, a presumed "fairer" comparison to the U.S.? You continue to, at all distraction/deflection levels, refuse to name countries and detail why you believe them to be more representative than the OECD country comparison. You simply refuse. So now you throw down yet another wiki link!!! Just who do you anticipate will put these wiki pages of yours together to actually present "whatever the hell you think you're talking about"? :mrgreen:
Wow! You are really not good at reading comprehension.
The oecd is not racist and/or elitist, it is simply a ranking.
The use of only the OECD in comparative graphs is racist and/or elitist.
I gotta go do something else now.
Have fun.
point of order, Mr. Speaker!!! Member Colpy, in mega-distraction/deflection mode, has managed to bury the discussion theme that highlighted gun violence has not lessened/reduced... member Colpy has managed to bury the discussion points that speak to medical advances and emergency/trauma care improvements/enhancements contributing to a lowering of the effective murder rate.
cuLater Colpy... real world stuff interferes with CC Forum playtime!
cuLater Colpy... real world stuff interferes with CC Forum playtime!
Looks not.
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Forgetting about the fact that the UN isn't out to get us, how does including every country make for a better argument Colpy?
I am asking this in earnest so please put on your nice voice if you can kthx
Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Forgetting about the fact that the UN isn't out to get us, how does including every country make for a better argument Colpy?
I am asking this in earnest so please put on your nice voice if you can kthx
It is hilarious. I can almost see the thinking of the guys that produced the graph.
First, a graph representing the murder rates world wide:
unfortunately, that makes the United States look positively wonderful, as their murder rate is 25% better than the world average.
Well, heck, we better make it the OECD countries, that will make them the worst:
OOOPS....the US murder rate is 4.5 per 100,000 (2013) Unfortunately for these guys, the rates in two OECD countries are higher....... in Estonia it is 5.0 per 100,000and in Mexico it is 21.5 per 100,000, almost 5 times the US rate.
So how can they make the USA look bad with all its guns?
OH....we'll just count GUN murders.........
Classic cherry-picking.
By the logic used by you guys, Rwanda in 1994 was a relatively peaceful place, the Rwanda genocide did not happen, because the vast majority of those unfortunates were killed with machetes.
It makes a better argument because it eliminates no data.........it therefore can not be biased.
2013 UNODC (United Nations Office on Drugs & Crime): Gun related murder rates in the developed (OECD) world --- 2000-to-2012 --- The U.S. has far more gun-related killings than any other developed country:
OH MY GOD. It is worse than I thought.
lol
I was thinking:
Just a minute, most murders in Mexico are firearms murders........despite their strict gun control.
I went back to look at the graph.
Guess what OECD country is omitted??
MEXICO!!
Gee, I wonder why?
Absolutely beyond belief.
No, these guys don't have an agenda or anything.
lol
In case you do not believe Mexico is a member:
List of OECD Member countries - Ratification of the Convention on the OECD - OECD
They have been since 1994.
It ain't paranoia when they really are out to get you.
Stick around, you'll get educated on what a bunch of lying scum gun controllers really are........
A common misconception is that firearms are illegal in Mexico and that no person may possess them.[3] This belief originates due the general perception that only members of law enforcement, the armed forces, or those in armed security protection are authorized to have them. While it is true that Mexico possesses strict gun laws,[4] where most types and calibers are reserved to military and law enforcement, the acquisition and ownership of certain firearms and ammunition remains a constitutional right to all Mexican citizens and foreign legal residents.[6]
Gun politics in Mexico - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Gun politics in Mexico - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Somehow other people come up with things like "T-Bones," "Tec," or "TB."
I'm not sensitive about it. I've been called "chief" by every racist moron between the mountains and the sea. It shows them as racist morons, and affects me not at all. Though it is amusing to see a standard-issue lefty throwing racial slurs.
And Tecumseh was not a chief. The Kispokotha couldn't be chiefs. Your ignorance is of a piece with your stupidity.
Matching his knowledge of globull warming. waldo still things this is the junior high debating club where whoever has the most c&p posts wins.
Late for your video game?
more... yes, more... taxi drive-by! As I said... your complete contribution to this thread!!! :mrgreen:
yes, you clearly are sensitive to the word... see Shawnee Chief, chief
