RE: The Wild west in Missouri

RE: The Wild west in Missouri (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

mnottertail -> RE: The Wild west in Missouri (6/12/2012 12:38:47 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: subrob1967 quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail So, Obama is for gun ownership and has brought down crime rates as well. Single handily, tell me, was it before or after he personally led the raid and shot bin Ladin? I think it was after st. wrinklemeat brought down the soviet union and exploded the deficit, and the teabaggers ran up the historic debt. Why? Did you think your guys were doing the stuff?

DomKen -> RE: The Wild west in Missouri (6/12/2012 12:41:35 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: subrob1967 Where did I say that gun sales were the ONLY reason for the decline? And can't there be MORE than one reason for the decline? Plus you kinda missed the aging population is another possible cause part, didn't ya? After all you made it a definitive fact with this statement... quote: Fewer men between 15 and 25 = fewer crimes period ... You may just be wrong yet again, Ken... Just sayin' You're welcome to do the research or go talk to a demographer who studies the subject. No other factor is more predictive of the rate of crime in a society than the size of the cohort of men age 15 to 25.

subrob1967 -> RE: The Wild west in Missouri (6/12/2012 12:42:23 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail Why? Did you think your guys were doing the stuff? Huh? Are we talking about chooming here? Define "the stuff" for us, will ya?

Yachtie -> RE: The Wild west in Missouri (6/12/2012 12:44:09 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: Yachtie quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen Fewer men between 15 and 25 = fewer crimes period. Concealed carry laws do not change that. You know this? Concealed carry laws prevent men from being between 15 and 25? Aww. Come on! RE: CC - 15-25 year olds are probably aware that one they might accost, over the age of 21, might be armed. Also, a reduced 15-25 population does not necessarily equate to lower crime from that same demographic. I know you're not this slow.

subrob1967 -> RE: The Wild west in Missouri (6/12/2012 12:45:29 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen You're welcome to do the research or go talk to a demographer who studies the subject. No other factor is more predictive of the rate of crime in a society than the size of the cohort of men age 15 to 25. In other words, I ain't got shit, but I'm too stubborn to admit I look like a fool... You made the claim that the possibility was indeed a fact, period! Now the onus is on you to prove it, not me.

mnottertail -> RE: The Wild west in Missouri (6/12/2012 12:48:06 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: subrob1967 quote: ORIGINAL: mnottertail Why? Did you think your guys were doing the stuff? Huh? Are we talking about chooming here? Define "the stuff" for us, will ya? Try to stay in the convo, right to bear arms, decreasing crime.

Musicmystery -> RE: The Wild west in Missouri (6/12/2012 12:48:51 PM)
quote: I ain't got shit, but I'm too stubborn to admit I look like a fool. The mirror never lies.

joether -> RE: The Wild west in Missouri (6/12/2012 12:51:40 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: jlf1961 I tend to agree, both men yelling at each other is hardly the way to solve a problem, however, IF I were the unarmed man in this situation, I would have shut up when the gun was drawn. Clearly the old man had a few issues of his own to deal with, since he drew a gun on an unarmed man. Thats how gun nuts deal with problems.... Why behave like an adult, when a gun can do the talking, right? There were alot of problems around this issue BEFORE the gun was put into play. The gun itself apparently did not to help the problem, but instead, created additional problems. Most people do not realize that when they get mad, the front section of the human brain nearly shuts down. Problem is, the back half of the brain (which handles emotions) must compensate for the missing reason and act on conditions (i.e. fight or flight). Which is why they call it 'blind rage', because the brain has been blinded to judgement, reason, and common sense. Again, why didnt the women step in to force cooler heads to prevail? Are women in that state truely objects with no ability to pull their man away before he does something stupid? How could it have been handle? "Wooh! Wooh! Wooh! Hold up there, lets get off the road and talk about this. Your from out of state, right? Yes, that intersection is surprisingly difficult for the locals to understand. I'm sorry, if you felt I did some wrong to you; that was not my intention! How about we just relax and calm down?" And if the guy was STILL angery, offer to buy him and his wife a decent meal at a pub. Locals would know which places have the best food! Get him off the road, sit down in a nice air conditioned resturant and pick up the bill. That's how an adult should handle a situation like this; more so if they are carrying a firearm.

CmdorBlackley -> RE: The Wild west in Missouri (6/12/2012 12:52:41 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: kdsub To me arguing over being cut off is not a reason to be killed. Without the law...and the right to carry in Missouri the old man would have rolled up the window and drove away. But the laws enabled him to use force that was not justified or needed. In my opinion anyway... What if the punk pulled a gun and started shooting... maybe the child would have been killed.... by the way should the child have been exposed to that kind of violence...hell no....One was a punk and the other an old punk. Butch There are people getting injured or killed by road rage...something that needs to be delt with. Still I have an issue with shoting unarmed people

deadonimpact -> RE: The Wild west in Missouri (6/12/2012 1:04:45 PM)
When guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns. That aside, the stand your ground law is for when you feel your life is threatened or endangered. If that old man felt the younger kid was so enraged that he might cause physical harm, then he had the right to draw his weapon and "stand his ground." Despite people's theory, not everyone can be "de-escalated" when enflamed by rage or other such negative emotions. However, I am in the middle ground on this issue. Stand your ground is a good law, and should be supported. On the other hand, I believe that more training in the proper use ( such as how, when, and at what times is it appropriate ) to draw your firearm. A good example,( it is rather impractical for civilians, but a decent model to start with ) is any military on a post within the United States cannot discharge or draw his/her weapon unless he can prove 3 things, Opportunity, Capability, and Intent. In the case of this old man, the kid had opportunity to do bodily harm, he definitely had the ability to do bodily harm, and while enraged ( and people have killed over road rage ) proving that he intended is just too hard in court.

Yachtie -> RE: The Wild west in Missouri (6/12/2012 1:15:18 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: deadonimpact A good example,( it is rather impractical for civilians, but a decent model to start with ) is any military on a post within the United States cannot discharge or draw his/her weapon unless he can prove 3 things, Opportunity, Capability, and Intent. In the case of this old man, the kid had opportunity to do bodily harm, he definitely had the ability to do bodily harm, and while enraged ( and people have killed over road rage ) proving that he intended is just too hard in court. Interesting. I agree on your first two, that he had opportunity and ability. The last, absent any other info, is stated by the first two in that the motorcyclist DID firstly engage.

joether -> RE: The Wild west in Missouri (6/12/2012 1:25:47 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: deadonimpact When guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns. That aside, the stand your ground law is for when you feel your life is threatened or endangered. If that old man felt the younger kid was so enraged that he might cause physical harm, then he had the right to draw his weapon and "stand his ground." Despite people's theory, not everyone can be "de-escalated" when enflamed by rage or other such negative emotions. However, I am in the middle ground on this issue. Stand your ground is a good law, and should be supported. On the other hand, I believe that more training in the proper use ( such as how, when, and at what times is it appropriate ) to draw your firearm. A good example,( it is rather impractical for civilians, but a decent model to start with ) is any military on a post within the United States cannot discharge or draw his/her weapon unless he can prove 3 things, Opportunity, Capability, and Intent. In the case of this old man, the kid had opportunity to do bodily harm, he definitely had the ability to do bodily harm, and while enraged ( and people have killed over road rage ) proving that he intended is just too hard in court. Missouri is NOT a 'Stand Your Ground' state, but a 'Castle Doctorine' state. Stop arguing on something that doesnt even apply to the issue of the thread! Likewise, 'kid' as you call him, is a 49 year old man. The 'grandfather' is 65 years old. Both individuals had opportunity to do bodily harm to the other at any time. Also, we are not talking how 'things are done in the military'. If you actually READ the story, its a pair of CIVILIANS dealing with an issue.

CmdorBlackley -> RE: The Wild west in Missouri (6/12/2012 1:30:19 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Yachtie Nothing happens overnight. Incidents like this might, perhaps, in time, evolve into a more polite society. You are right, studies seem to show that the decline has been going for some 30 years plus

CmdorBlackley -> RE: The Wild west in Missouri (6/12/2012 1:37:57 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Yachtie quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen Fewer men between 15 and 25 = fewer crimes period. Concealed carry laws do not change that. You know this? Well there is a theory that since the US is getting older, the post war baby boom as it were, we have fewer younger people in that age were crime is higher 15 - 25.

deadonimpact -> RE: The Wild west in Missouri (6/12/2012 1:41:01 PM)
[/quote] Missouri is NOT a 'Stand Your Ground' state, but a 'Castle Doctorine' state. Stop arguing on something that doesnt even apply to the issue of the thread! Likewise, 'kid' as you call him, is a 49 year old man. The 'grandfather' is 65 years old. Both individuals had opportunity to do bodily harm to the other at any time. Also, we are not talking how 'things are done in the military'. If you actually READ the story, its a pair of CIVILIANS dealing with an issue. [/quote] If you would actually READ my post, I made a point to say that it would not be practical for civilians, but I was a good model to develop off of to shape the stand your ground and castle doctrines alike, as getting rid of them is ludicrous. If you are going to bash an idea before you even attempt to understand it, then try to apply the idea you just bashed without knowing what is about, you only looking like a fool. As the defender, its not your responsibility to care about bodily harm. Of course you can, you are the one with the gun. Its about proving the circumstances that justify you drawing it. If I were you I would probably go out and learn humility, understanding and patience. You seem to be getting enraged by people who are not agreeing with you, rather than calmly understanding there point of view, accepting they have a different one, and logically doing one of two things, 1) Calming accepting you were wrong and taking up a new point of view 2) Using an academic and experienced based reply, point out the flaws and offering practical solutions, politely. As for this subject, I am done. It tends to lead to too many arguments with trolls. I said my piece, and anyone is welcome to it. I just ask you actually read it instead of gloss over it. Good day to you all. Mis-quoting and misleading to further your opinions is not an excuse to misrepresent me.

DomKen -> RE: The Wild west in Missouri (6/12/2012 3:23:22 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Yachtie quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen quote: ORIGINAL: Yachtie quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen Fewer men between 15 and 25 = fewer crimes period. Concealed carry laws do not change that. You know this? Concealed carry laws prevent men from being between 15 and 25? Aww. Come on! RE: CC - 15-25 year olds are probably aware that one they might accost, over the age of 21, might be armed. Also, a reduced 15-25 population does not necessarily equate to lower crime from that same demographic. I know you're not this slow. These are the simple facts for the too slow: Men commit the overwhelming majority of crimes People age 15 to 25 commit the overwhelming majority of crimes therefore the size of the cohort of men ages 15 to 25 is the single best predictor of crime rates. Any time the crime rate is going up, don't forget to adjust raw numbers for change in the size of the population, the size of the cohort is increasing and any time the crime rate is going down the cohort is decreasing. As to concealed carry laws affecting crime rates, I'll simply point out that states with very broad CCP laws, Texas and Florida, are amongst the most violent in the nation. One thing I've learned from decades of keeping an eye on studies on crime and punishment is that criminals are not deterred by things like capital punishment or conceled carry.

kdsub -> RE: The Wild west in Missouri (6/12/2012 3:37:43 PM)
quote: When guns are outlawed, only outlaws will have guns. That aside, the stand your ground law is for when you feel your life is threatened or endangered. If that old man felt the younger kid was so enraged that he might cause physical harm, then he had the right to draw his weapon and "stand his ground." Despite people's theory, not everyone can be "de-escalated" when enflamed by rage or other such negative emotions. The guy was unarmed on foot... the grandfather was in his car....running...all he had to do was drive away... Is that not better than shooting someone? With forethought...before there was even a confrontation he armed himself...not after or during. There was no justification for the shooting...by using a weapon he put is grand daughter more at risk then just rolling up the window and leaving. Butch

DomKen -> RE: The Wild west in Missouri (6/12/2012 3:38:48 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: subrob1967 quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen You're welcome to do the research or go talk to a demographer who studies the subject. No other factor is more predictive of the rate of crime in a society than the size of the cohort of men age 15 to 25. In other words, I ain't got shit, but I'm too stubborn to admit I look like a fool... You made the claim that the possibility was indeed a fact, period! Now the onus is on you to prove it, not me. Actually any moron who can google can find the facts. But since you apparently cannot: http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.2307/1147518?uid=3739832&uid=2129&uid=2&uid=70&uid=4&uid=3739256&sid=56254521773 http://www.springerlink.com/content/k1v20hw324631270/ http://aspe.hhs.gov/hsp/09/vulnerableyouth/6/index.pdf http://bjc.oxfordjournals.org/content/44/3/401.abstract http://www.jstor.org/discover/10.1086/210136?uid=3739832&uid=2129&uid=2&uid=70&uid=4&uid=3739256&sid=56254521773

Yachtie -> RE: The Wild west in Missouri (6/12/2012 3:39:36 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen As to concealed carry laws affecting crime rates[/link], I'll simply point out that states with very broad CCP laws, Texas and Florida, are amongst the most violent in the nation. One thing I've learned from decades of keeping an eye on studies on crime and punishment is that criminals are not deterred by things like capital punishment or conceled carry. A statewide analysis of the Florida data (see Appendix II.), reveals that the researchers missed the downward trend in murder/manslaughter rates since the Florida concealed-carry law was enacted. The wide disparities in the with-gun homicide rates given in the study seem very unusual at first glance, and this is the result of the fact that the study is calculating its percent increases in absolute terms (4 going up to 7) rather than per 100,000 population, as is necessary for any realistic assessment. The question of the direction of causality's arrow is critically important to consider. Does increased homicide lead to more people obtaining permits to carry, or does increasing the availability of permits to carry increase the homicide rate? The Maryland study's researchers seem to want to argue the latter, but they have thus far offered no evidence that CCW permit holders are doing the killing! edit: added info, just fyi

DomKen -> RE: The Wild west in Missouri (6/12/2012 4:01:36 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Yachtie quote: ORIGINAL: DomKen As to concealed carry laws affecting crime rates[/link], I'll simply point out that states with very broad CCP laws, Texas and Florida, are amongst the most violent in the nation. One thing I've learned from decades of keeping an eye on studies on crime and punishment is that criminals are not deterred by things like capital punishment or conceled carry. A statewide analysis of the Florida data (see Appendix II.), reveals that the researchers missed the downward trend in murder/manslaughter rates since the Florida concealed-carry law was enacted. The wide disparities in the with-gun homicide rates given in the study seem very unusual at first glance, and this is the result of the fact that the study is calculating its percent increases in absolute terms (4 going up to 7) rather than per 100,000 population, as is necessary for any realistic assessment. The question of the direction of causality's arrow is critically important to consider. Does increased homicide lead to more people obtaining permits to carry, or does increasing the availability of permits to carry increase the homicide rate? The Maryland study's researchers seem to want to argue the latter, but they have thus far offered no evidence that CCW permit holders are doing the killing! Florida crime rates 1960 to 2010 http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/flcrime.htm The CCP law was passed in Florida in 1997. Taking the violent crime rate (per 1000) since then 1998 - 9.39 1999 - 8.54 2000 - 8.12 2001 - 7.98 Now the national numbers http://www.disastercenter.com/crime/uscrime.htm 1998 - 5.6 1999 - 5.23 2000 - 5.07 2001 - 5.05 So Florida was more violent than the nation before CCW and remained so afterwards. rates of decline in violent crimes are comparable and can be attributed to other factors since CCP is not national. Concealed carry is not a significant deterrent. BTW freeper link? you didn't mean for that to be taken seriously right?

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 4 5 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

0.0625