RE: Another "successful" carry story

RE: Another "successful" carry story (Full Version)

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

Message

BamaD -> RE: Another "successful" carry story (1/23/2015 11:51:56 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery But that's not what's happening. A good study would rock! But they want to block all studies. Why? Guess. And yet again, agreed on the outlawed part. Why do you keep going back to it? But pulling the gun off the market is banning/outlawing as well. Let the consumer decide. Run an education campaign -- fine. But no. This is an industry protecting maneuver for the few sold to the faithful kool-aid drinkers. Because as long as those laws exist not trying to keep them off the market is suicide for the manufacturers. Even though the last CDC hit piece has had its lies exposed for years many gun grabbers still swear by it as gospel. Guns kill a million kids a year makes a much better headline than proving that it is BS. Nobody said they can't do all the studies they want, just that the government can't pay for them. Do you see the difference? If they are mandatory they won't improve. Repeal those stupid laws and there will be great advances in smart gun technology.

Musicmystery -> RE: Another "successful" carry story (1/23/2015 11:56:20 AM)
Sure -- the government can do only the studies the NRA approves. Very clear. And very anti-accurate data collection. Suppressing manufacture and market also suppresses improvement and is in fact anti-2nd-Amendment. Yes, so are the anti-competition laws, which has now been repeated multiple times. They remain, however, separate issues, and the NRA is in fact suppressing the product, not just the law. Of course I see the difference. But I also see the agenda. And the hypocrisy.

mnottertail -> RE: Another "successful" carry story (1/23/2015 12:00:20 PM)
The NRA hit pieces have had their lies exposed by events for years and years. There are no credible citations of any CDC 'hit piece' anywhere.

BamaD -> RE: Another "successful" carry story (1/23/2015 12:04:18 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery Sure -- the government can do only the studies the NRA approves. Very clear. And very anti-accurate data collection. Suppressing manufacture and market also suppresses improvement and is in fact anti-2nd-Amendment. Yes, so are the anti-competition laws, which has now been repeated multiple times. They remain, however, separate issues, and the NRA is in fact suppressing the product, not just the law. Of course I see the difference. But I also see the agenda. And the hypocrisy. You do realize that it also prohibits studies that would be pro gun, of course in the hype that is ignored. No the anti-competition laws are not a separate issue, they are the problem. Fine you don't like them but you can't seem to understand that they are what is standing in the way of progress. Much easier to demonize anyone who is pro gun.

Musicmystery -> RE: Another "successful" carry story (1/23/2015 12:10:14 PM)
Exactly. The NRA blocks studies that aren't going to "prove" their desired outcomes. The laws may well be the problem, but the NRA's "solution" is two pronged, and one of those prongs is decidedly anti-2nd-Amendment and anti-free-market. I understand perfectly that the NRA wants to scapegoat the laws to block the manufacture of guns that threaten their core oligarchy. And nothing in any of that "demonizes anyone who is pro gun." It's because you simply fall back on bullshit like that you're clearly marked as defensive knee jerk. You also continue to ignore Ron's point.

BamaD -> RE: Another "successful" carry story (1/23/2015 12:18:24 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery Exactly. The NRA blocks studies that aren't going to "prove" their desired outcomes. The laws may well be the problem, but the NRA's "solution" is two pronged, and one of those prongs is decidedly anti-2nd-Amendment and anti-free-market. I understand perfectly that the NRA wants to scapegoat the laws to block the manufacture of guns that threaten their core oligarchy. And nothing in any of that "demonizes anyone who is pro gun." It's because you simply fall back on bullshit like that you're clearly marked as defensive knee jerk. You also continue to ignore Ron's point. It is not scapegoating it is a fact that if one company puts one smart gun on the market with the current laws it will destroy all of them. The studies ban also stops studies that would prove the NRA position, if, and only if, they are paid for by the government. Your refusal to accept this is what constitutes demonizing. You can't or won't see that anybody can do any study they want, as long as it isn't paid for by the government. Bloomberg recently did one that was a gross distortion of reality on school violence. It was instantly refuted but gun grabbers still treat it two as gospel.

Musicmystery -> RE: Another "successful" carry story (1/23/2015 12:24:02 PM)
So now the NRA is a government fiscal watchdog? Where is that in their charter? [8\|] One company with one smart gun destroys them? Talk about paranoia. So why is that destruction so certain? Are the current guns so fragile that consumers will flock to the new ones? Isn't that the very heart of anti-competition? And anti-2nd-Amendment, keeping these guns out of the hands of citizens? People on different sides of an issue are going to do their play "studies." They do on every issue. But the NRA goes one step further -- they suppress the other studies, especially anything coming from what little we have of at least nominally open agencies. They have an agenda, not a protection role. It's an industry group. You keep ignoring Ron's point -- and as a dealer himself, Ron's hardly "anti-gun."

MercTech -> RE: Another "successful" carry story (1/23/2015 12:31:02 PM)
Just some links on gun violence studies.... from tertiary sources. Opposition to CDC being allocated additional money to study gun violence (They originally wanted 12 million a year for six years to study. Many considered that amount a boondoggle) http://www.propublica.org/article/republicans-say-no-to-cdc-gun-violence-research But, they got 10 million to study the problem ad a few months later the CDC does give a report .... http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/crime/item/15941-cdc-study-ordered-by-obama-contradicts-white-house-anti-gun-narrative http://www.gunsandammo.com/politics/cdc-gun-research-backfires-on-obama/ http://news.investors.com/ibd-editorials/082113-668335-cdc-gun-violence-study-goes-against-media-narrative.htm http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm6230a1.htm

BamaD -> RE: Another "successful" carry story (1/23/2015 12:49:38 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: MercTech Just some links on gun violence studies.... from tertiary sources. Opposition to CDC being allocated additional money to study gun violence (They originally wanted 12 million a year for six years to study. Many considered that amount a boondoggle) http://www.propublica.org/article/republicans-say-no-to-cdc-gun-violence-research But, they got 10 million to study the problem ad a few months later the CDC does give a report .... http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/crime/item/15941-cdc-study-ordered-by-obama-contradicts-white-house-anti-gun-narrative http://www.gunsandammo.com/politics/cdc-gun-research-backfires-on-obama/ http://news.investors.com/ibd-editorials/082113-668335-cdc-gun-violence-study-goes-against-media-narrative.htm http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm6230a1.htm Thank you for the update. It would seem that the charge that anyone, NRA included has blocked any studies is.......inaccurate, perhaps based on bad information.

Musicmystery -> RE: Another "successful" carry story (1/23/2015 12:52:01 PM)
...or just not as good at it as they'd like to be.

lovmuffin -> RE: Another "successful" carry story (1/23/2015 1:00:00 PM)
Good point, I found the same or similar links but didn't want to mention the fact that some CDC studies in recent years supports the pro gun side of the equation. Muse is confused enough without bringing up more facts. CDC studies in the past, going back into the 1990's have been full of crap.

BamaD -> RE: Another "successful" carry story (1/23/2015 1:03:18 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: lovmuffin Good point, I found the same or similar links but didn't want to mention the fact that some CDC studies in recent years supports the pro gun side of the equation. Muse is confused enough without bringing up more facts. CDC studies in the past, going back into the 1990's have been full of crap. Particularly in the 90's they showed an extreme anti gun bias. This seriously damaged their credibility.

lovmuffin -> RE: Another "successful" carry story (1/23/2015 1:08:14 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: BamaD quote: ORIGINAL: MercTech Just some links on gun violence studies.... from tertiary sources. Opposition to CDC being allocated additional money to study gun violence (They originally wanted 12 million a year for six years to study. Many considered that amount a boondoggle) http://www.propublica.org/article/republicans-say-no-to-cdc-gun-violence-research But, they got 10 million to study the problem ad a few months later the CDC does give a report .... http://www.thenewamerican.com/usnews/crime/item/15941-cdc-study-ordered-by-obama-contradicts-white-house-anti-gun-narrative http://www.gunsandammo.com/politics/cdc-gun-research-backfires-on-obama/ http://news.investors.com/ibd-editorials/082113-668335-cdc-gun-violence-study-goes-against-media-narrative.htm http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr/preview/mmwrhtml/mm6230a1.htm Thank you for the update. It would seem that the charge that anyone, NRA included has blocked any studies is.......inaccurate, perhaps based on bad information. The NRA did in fact try to get the funding cut for the studies and were initially successful. In retrospect I suppose you could say it was pointless. No matter, the new mantra is now the NRA only represents firearm manufacturers. [sm=Groaner.gif]

luckyd0g -> RE: Another "successful" carry story (1/23/2015 5:49:32 PM)
Are you expecting MM to be dealing with reality???? I thought you were smarter than that.

lovmuffin -> RE: Another "successful" carry story (1/23/2015 7:27:07 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: luckyd0g Are you expecting MM to be dealing with reality???? I thought you were smarter than that. No I didn't expect him to and yes I'm smarter than that. That's why I didn't bring it up [8D]

Musicmystery -> RE: Another "successful" carry story (1/23/2015 8:41:13 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: lovmuffin The NRA did in fact try to get the funding cut for the studies and were initially successful. In retrospect I suppose you could say it was pointless. You could indeed.

lovmuffin -> RE: Another "successful" carry story (1/23/2015 10:02:37 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery quote: ORIGINAL: lovmuffin The NRA did in fact try to get the funding cut for the studies and were initially successful. In retrospect I suppose you could say it was pointless. You could indeed. But the studies and the NRA opposition to their funding has nothing to do with gun safety or gun safeties which means it was pointless for you to bring up the CDC[8D]

Musicmystery -> RE: Another "successful" carry story (1/23/2015 11:31:51 PM)
Gosh. What do you suppose they were studying then, and why?

lovmuffin -> RE: Another "successful" carry story (1/24/2015 12:18:13 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Musicmystery Gosh. What do you suppose they were studying then, and why? They were compiling gun violence statistics and trying to make hay out of them, initially to bolster the anti gun agenda. I guess in the long run it didn't work out so well[8D]

Musicmystery -> RE: Another "successful" carry story (1/24/2015 7:02:50 AM)
Actually, they wanted to see what was going on other than anecdotally, so they could take appropriate action, including whether to take action. It's how working from data works.

Page: << < prev 27 28 [29] 30 31 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2025

Terms of Service

5.859375E-02