RE: Gun facts (Full Version)

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



Message

Kirata -> RE: Gun facts (12/18/2012 2:01:03 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: meatcleaver

Blaming such incidents on mental illness or mental conditions is comforting waffle, nothing else.

Do you plan on arguing why at some point here, or was that a religious pronouncement.

K.



epiphiny43 -> RE: Gun facts (12/18/2012 2:24:53 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: meatcleaver


quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata


quote:

ORIGINAL: meatcleaver

Sticking to the facts. A young male killed 28 (recently updated toll) people because he was able to because he had easy access to guns.

Sticking to the facts, a young psycho killed 28 people because he was fucking psycho. If he hadn't been able to get his hands on a gun, he'd have done something else. I agree that he probably picked guns because they were easily accessible, but I don't believe that he wouldn't have done something even more spectacular if guns hadn't been handy.

K.


Blaming such incidents on mental illness or mental conditions is comforting waffle, nothing else.

And your reason is the Devil? Or Liberal politics? Or lack of prayer in schools? And there is nothing comforting about insanity. "Mental illness" is a uselessly vague and meaningless term as far as understanding each incident, but it well defines that the perpetrator has an alien mind set from the rest of the population.
Guns are certainly not the worst method the insane and the politically determined have to use. Ask the Iraqis where guns are countered by the presence of heavily armed security people everywhere. IEDs work much more effectively and at a much lower personal cost or risk of apprehension where martyrdom isn't highly prized. A few dozen at this market, 50 or so at that, then 75 at a funeral or worship service, and you hardly miss those nasty assault rifles. Something for those looking to armed guards to think on?
If we've learned anything in our recent overseas military adventures, it Should have been that you can counter weapons and materials at great expense, and little result. You have to counter the People to have any real effect. It's like shopping with a 3 yr old in a store with narrow isles. No matter how many things you grab out of their hands, they just keep grabbing stuff.

What particularly irritates me about the microscope the media circus focuses on these tragedies is how well they educate the copycats in bigger and better atrocities. I'm not that thrilled by little monsters getting all the latest urban and asymetrical warfare tactics on the evening news. And elaborate dissections of every mistake the crazy made that lowered the body count. I personally censor all my thoughts here on the rarely mentioned but easily available equipment and weapons, some of which are actually more effective, that I believe will make the front page if various gun bans happen. I'm really afraid we will be looking back at the current gun massacres with longing for the simpler and gentler time. The problem is people wanting to kill large numbers of other people, not the tools they have immediately at hand. There are lethal tools Everywhere.



epiphiny43 -> RE: Gun facts (12/18/2012 2:26:08 AM)




quote:

ORIGINAL: meatcleaver


quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata


quote:

ORIGINAL: meatcleaver

Sticking to the facts. A young male killed 28 (recently updated toll) people because he was able to because he had easy access to guns.

Sticking to the facts, a young psycho killed 28 people because he was fucking psycho. If he hadn't been able to get his hands on a gun, he'd have done something else. I agree that he probably picked guns because they were easily accessible, but I don't believe that he wouldn't have done something even more spectacular if guns hadn't been handy.

K.


Blaming such incidents on mental illness or mental conditions is comforting waffle, nothing else.

And your reason is the Devil? Or Liberal politics? Or lack of prayer in schools? And there is nothing comforting about insanity. "Mental illness" is a uselessly vague and meaningless term as far as understanding each incident, but it well defines that the perpetrator has an alien mind set from the rest of the population. Both a necessary and probably sufficient condition.
Guns are certainly not the worst method the insane and the politically determined have to use. Ask the Iraqis where guns are countered by the presence of heavily armed security people everywhere. IEDs work much more effectively and at a much lower personal cost or risk of apprehension where martyrdom isn't highly prized. A few dozen at this market, 50 or so at that, then 75 at a funeral or worship service, and you hardly miss those nasty assault rifles. Something for those looking to armed guards to think on?
If we've learned anything in our recent overseas military adventures, it Should have been that you can counter weapons and materials at great expense, and little result. You have to counter the People to have any real effect. It's like shopping with a 3 yr old in a store with narrow isles. No matter how many things you grab out of their hands, they just keep grabbing stuff.

What particularly irritates me about the microscope the media circus focuses on these tragedies is how well they educate the copycats in bigger and better atrocities. I'm not that thrilled by little monsters getting all the latest urban and asymetrical warfare tactics on the evening news. And elaborate dissections of every mistake the crazy made that lowered the body count. I personally censor all my thoughts here on the rarely mentioned but easily available equipment and weapons, some of which are actually more effective, that I believe will make the front page if various gun bans happen. I'm really afraid we will be looking back at the current gun massacres with longing for the simpler and gentler time. The problem is people wanting to kill large numbers of other people, not the tools they have immediately at hand. There are lethal tools Everywhere.




Aswad -> RE: Gun facts (12/18/2012 3:59:41 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: SimplyMichael

We imported Swedish 1896 Mausers by the 10s of thousands. 6.5 is both accurate and lethal. I have a 1914? Westinghouse built Negant made for Czar Nicholas that was used in the Russian invasion of Finland then captured by the Finns, rebuilt at a government armory (Sako) and held in war reserve for decades.


Yeah, there's a bunch of 98k's and Krag's here from the occupation, with some history.

The later M98 productions are still available in the old 8x57, too.

IWYW,
— Aswad.



deathtothepixies -> RE: Gun facts (12/18/2012 4:13:06 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata


quote:

ORIGINAL: meatcleaver

Sticking to the facts. A young male killed 28 (recently updated toll) people because he was able to because he had easy access to guns.

Sticking to the facts, a young psycho killed 28 people because he was fucking psycho. If he hadn't been able to get his hands on a gun, he'd have done something else. I agree that he probably picked guns because they were easily accessible, but I don't believe that he wouldn't have done something even more spectacular if guns hadn't been handy.

K.


so you are saying that giving this young psycho easy access to multiple weapons actually lowered the number of people killed?

your thoughts on the more spectacular things he might have got up to without all those guns lying around for him?

unbelievable



Aswad -> RE: Gun facts (12/18/2012 4:22:14 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: adx

yea not everyone feels safe enough to carry cash around.


My old man carried $80.000 in cash at one point.

Never a question of safety, really.

That's nice about Norway.

IWYW,
— Aswad.



fucktoyprincess -> RE: Gun facts (12/18/2012 12:33:58 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: jlf1961


quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata


quote:

ORIGINAL: fucktoyprincess

You are ignoring the facts. More guns equals more homicides. You asked for facts. You've got them.

I trimmed off the insults in order to focus on the fact that those are not facts.

Some countries with restrictive gun laws have high homicide rates, others have low homicide rates; some countries with liberal gun laws have high homicide rates, others have low homicide rates. The determining factors in violent crime are cultural and economic.

K.


Finally, some truth to the problem.

Not that anyone will listen, but thanks.


From today's NYT the Harvard School of Public Health using data from 26 developed countries have shown that wherever there are more firearms, there are more homicides. In the case of the United States, exponentially more: the American murder rate is roughly 15 times that of other wealthy countries, which have much tougher laws controlling private ownership of guns.

Here is a link to those studies:

http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/research/hicrc/firearms-research/

These studies were also referenced in my first post on this thread, so I will copy it here again. The facts are here for anyone who cares to read and understand them.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2012/07/23/six-facts-about-guns-violence-and-gun-control/



meatcleaver -> RE: Gun facts (12/18/2012 1:57:57 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Kirata


quote:

ORIGINAL: meatcleaver

Blaming such incidents on mental illness or mental conditions is comforting waffle, nothing else.

Do you plan on arguing why at some point here, or was that a religious pronouncement.

K.


Since most psychiatrists can't diagnose mental illness unless someone is put under their noses and they are told they have a patient who needs diagnosing and to assign them a mental condition, sort of puts psychiatry in the pseudo-science spectrum. The fact is, psychiatrists are like economists, they have 20-20 vision in hindsight, blind when it comes to foresight. The fact that a couple of mass killers had seen psychiatrists who could see nothing untoward tells us something. Labelling someone nuts in hindsight is merely convenient, if madness was so obvious, if it existed at all in a killer, is a comforting convenience that allows us to think such acts are carried out by nutters or evil people but never ordinary folk. OK, its extreme but Nazi Germany proved ordinary folk can do horrific things without being mentally ill. In fact many psychological experiments have illustrated so called ordinary sane people are capable of doing horrific things to their fellow humans, being totally compos mentis and aware of what thyey were doing and why.



kiwisub12 -> RE: Gun facts (12/18/2012 2:02:38 PM)

If you really want to look at what easy access to guns does to the murder rate - look at the homicide rate with guns per capita between New Zealand and the USA. Its hard to argue with those numbers.

In New Zealand, you cannot own a handgun. You can own a hunting rifle, and have to keep the magazine separate from the rifle.

Heck, forget about the homicides, look at the number of kids killed by guns in each country.

and to be clear, i enjoy going out to the gun range and firing at a target - but if one kid didn't die or get maimed because of banning guns, i'd give up the privilige of firing a gun.



Aswad -> RE: Gun facts (12/18/2012 3:16:56 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: fucktoyprincess

From today's NYT the Harvard School of Public Health using data from 26 developed countries have shown that wherever there are more firearms, there are more homicides.


Or, rather, wherever the proxies for gun ownership are present, there are more gun related homicides, but the same correlation did not exist for overall homicide rate. The chosen proxies didn't hold true for at least five of the countries in their sample, yet those five weren't excluded, and most of the countries they sampled have accurate figures available to replace the proxy figures, yet they preferred using the proxies. Additionally, they fail to make a comparison with subsets, or even the most obvious subset (i.e. excluding the USA, as the outlier in the set; Kuwait, as unrepresentative of industrialized, developed nations; and Northern Ireland, as being in a low grade civil war isn't exactly a normal condition). There is no factor analysis, and though they include some marginal controls, there's no discussion about renormalizing for any covariation.

An inadequate study to support your conclusion, and indeed they claim no correlation for overall homicide rate, which seems odd, given what was mentioned about the UK and Australia in another thread, where there was a clear correlation, suggesting that the study actually weighs against gun control as an automatically transposable solution, or that what was presented on the other thread is counterfactual. (Or, perhaps I'm simply reading this wrong; I'll admit I didn't bother running their numbers myself, I just skimmed through the study.)

quote:

In the case of the United States, exponentially more: the American murder rate is roughly 15 times that of other wealthy countries, which have much tougher laws controlling private ownership of guns.


Which is one of the reasons I would be curious to know what the factors are.

IWYW,
— Aswad.



Aswad -> RE: Gun facts (12/18/2012 3:21:29 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: meatcleaver

Since most psychiatrists can't diagnose mental illness unless someone is put under their noses and they are told they have a patient who needs diagnosing and to assign them a mental condition, sort of puts psychiatry in the pseudo-science spectrum. The fact is, psychiatrists are like economists, they have 20-20 vision in hindsight, blind when it comes to foresight.


Uh, no... you have little comprehension of the field.

Yes, they work beyond the evidence, but there's also a fair bit of underlying science, and the field of labor deals with a different problem domain than the science, with public perception having no relation to either.

IWYW,
— Aswad.



meatcleaver -> RE: Gun facts (12/18/2012 3:33:05 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Aswad

quote:

ORIGINAL: meatcleaver

Since most psychiatrists can't diagnose mental illness unless someone is put under their noses and they are told they have a patient who needs diagnosing and to assign them a mental condition, sort of puts psychiatry in the pseudo-science spectrum. The fact is, psychiatrists are like economists, they have 20-20 vision in hindsight, blind when it comes to foresight.


Uh, no... you have little comprehension of the field.

Yes, they work beyond the evidence, but there's also a fair bit of underlying science, and the field of labor deals with a different problem domain than the science, with public perception having no relation to either.

IWYW,
— Aswad.



My first job was in mental health 30 years ago, I wasn't in it long before I decided to become an artist but I still have a several friends in the field, two who are phychaitrists and in private they are pretty scathing about the level of knowledge in their profession and how little is based on science and how neuro-science is making their whole profession question the intellectual foundations psychiatry is built on.



Powergamz1 -> RE: Gun facts (12/18/2012 3:37:14 PM)

That claim is impossible to believe. Psychiatrists are MDs, and the fact that you don't grasp that, or understand that neuro-science is part of the medical field, renders your opinions about either useless.

Is this heading towrd some Scientology meltdown/rant?
quote:

ORIGINAL: meatcleaver

quote:

ORIGINAL: Aswad

quote:

ORIGINAL: meatcleaver

Since most psychiatrists can't diagnose mental illness unless someone is put under their noses and they are told they have a patient who needs diagnosing and to assign them a mental condition, sort of puts psychiatry in the pseudo-science spectrum. The fact is, psychiatrists are like economists, they have 20-20 vision in hindsight, blind when it comes to foresight.


Uh, no... you have little comprehension of the field.

Yes, they work beyond the evidence, but there's also a fair bit of underlying science, and the field of labor deals with a different problem domain than the science, with public perception having no relation to either.

IWYW,
— Aswad.



My first job was in mental health 30 years ago, I wasn't in it long before I decided to become an artist but I still have a several friends in the field, two who are phychaitrists and in private they are pretty scathing about the level of knowledge in their profession and how little is based on science and how neuro-science is making their whole profession question the intellectual foundations psychiatry is built on.




jlf1961 -> RE: Gun facts (12/18/2012 3:40:01 PM)

Since when does the wealth of the country determine murder rate?

The US ranks 12th for gun related deaths per capita.

Jamaica is 2nd, and that country has some of the strictest gun laws in the world.

Israel, some of the loosest gun control laws in the world does not even make the top twenty,

So what you are trying to say is that among civilized countries the United States leads the world in homicide rates.



meatcleaver -> RE: Gun facts (12/18/2012 3:51:47 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Powergamz1

That claim is impossible to believe. Psychiatrists are MDs, and the fact that you don't grasp that, or understand that neuro-science is part of the medical field, renders your opinions about either useless.



Are you for real? Psychiatry is behind the curve when it comes to neuro-science. Even neuro-scientists haven't yet grasped the implications of their research so I don't know how someone who is a practicing psychiatrist is supposed to fully understand the implications of advanced neuro-science research.

Apart from that, how the brain works is different to how different brains react to different experinces or being exposed to different enviroments.

Think about it before you let your reflex reply.



Powergamz1 -> RE: Gun facts (12/18/2012 4:03:40 PM)

Strawman, I never said that a psychiatrist must fully understand any and all advanced research, I said that your claim that they can't understand *any* current neuro-science is irrational.
Your failure to have an honest discussion, and instead play your standard specious internet debate games won't alter that reality one bit. Life goes on without you.
quote:

ORIGINAL: meatcleaver

quote:

ORIGINAL: Powergamz1

That claim is impossible to believe. Psychiatrists are MDs, and the fact that you don't grasp that, or understand that neuro-science is part of the medical field, renders your opinions about either useless.



Are you for real? Psychiatry is behind the curve when it comes to neuro-science. Even neuro-scientists haven't yet grasped the implications of their research so I don't know how someone who is a practicing psychiatrist is supposed to fully understand the implications of advanced neuro-science research.

Apart from that, how the brain works is different to how different brains react to different experinces or being exposed to different enviroments.

Think about it before you let your reflex reply.




meatcleaver -> RE: Gun facts (12/18/2012 4:06:59 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Powergamz1

Strawman, I never said what you just claimed I said. Moving the goal posts, the topic isn't that a psychiatrist must fully understand any advanced research, it is debunking your laughable claim that they can't understand *any* of it.
Your failure to have an honest discussion, and instead play those specious internet debate game tricks won't alter the reality one bit.


I never misquoted you, you should take some sedatives and stop rambling and articulate your arguments if you think you are not being fully understood.

My reply should be self evident to any person with a functioning brain.

Oh. What I said is easily verified if you google. you don't need a friend in psychiatry to know it.



Rule -> RE: Gun facts (12/18/2012 4:20:50 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Powergamz1
That claim is impossible to believe. Psychiatrists are MDs, and the fact that you don't grasp that, or understand that neuro-science is part of the medical field, renders your opinions about either useless.
quote:

ORIGINAL: meatcleaver
My first job was in mental health 30 years ago, I wasn't in it long before I decided to become an artist but I still have a several friends in the field, two who are phychaitrists and in private they are pretty scathing about the level of knowledge in their profession and how little is based on science and how neuro-science is making their whole profession question the intellectual foundations psychiatry is built on.


I kinda side with Meatcleaver on this. Admittedly psychology has been recognized as a science since about 1990 and admittedly some psychologists are sharp birds - I am up for a psychological diagnosis myself in the near future and I know these people can look right through someone - but much of psychology in my opinion is still in the stone age. The preferred method used by psychiatrists on patients appears to be to put them on medication for life; which in my opinion makes them an addictive-drugs dealer rather than a medic.



tazzygirl -> RE: Gun facts (12/18/2012 4:26:29 PM)

You are forgetting about Wilhelm Wundt



adx -> RE: Gun facts (12/18/2012 6:10:35 PM)

its scary how some are so willing to give away our rights.



Page: <<   < prev  4 5 [6] 7 8   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Collarchat.com © 2025
Terms of Service Privacy Policy Spam Policy
4.711914E-02