anti gunners do not like "Gunsplaining" because it requires knowing the truth, the facts and reality

[JoeB131]

You lie every time you post and you say you want to be taken serioiusly......

And now....the benefit side of the gun owning equation in dollars...

You can post all the gun nutter spooge you want, but the reality.

33,000 gun deaths.
70,000 gun injuries
400,000 gun related crimes
270 Billion in economic losses each year.

Your fetish is too expensive for the rest of us.

The Fire Department is not given a limit on how much water they can use to save a building, but you want to put a limit on how many bullets a good person can use to stop violent monsters....you guys are such irrational fools it is simply amazing.

Guy, violent monsters aren't the problem. Most gun deaths are suicides, domestic violence and accidents... And until you can tell me a way to keep guns out of the hands of violent monsters to start with, I'm really not keen on the collatoral damage that goes along with your insecurities.

Again- the Europeans have figured this out. The Japanese have figured this out. The Canadians have figured this out.

 

[jon_berzerk]

There is a column in the Washington post this week where the anti gun weenie complains about 2nd Amendment supporters who correct anti gunners when they don't use the correct terminology for guns, or don't actually know what the hell they are talking about in the gun debate.....

No, when you have 17 dead kids shot by a military grade weapon attained by a mentally ill man, there really isn't much more to talk about.

"It wasn't a MACHINE GUN, it was an ASSAULT RIFLE", whines the guy with the tiny er... hands... when someone threatens to take away his gun.

33,000 dead, 70,000 injured, 270 Billion in economic losses... every year.

Not much more to discuss.

The AR-15 is not a military weapon, it has never been used in war. The pump action shotgun...that is a current military weapon, the bolt action rifle, that is a current weapon of war

You lie every time you post and you say you want to be taken serioiusly......

And now....the benefit side of the gun owning equation in dollars...

How much money, how many lives are saved by armed americans...Annual Defensive Gun Use Savings Dwarf Study's "Gun Violence" Costs - The Truth About Guns

Our man Bruce Krafft — whose posts we dearly miss — did the math back in 2012. Here it is:
Our fearless leader suggested that I take a look at the flip side of the anti’s latest attack on our freedoms (a recycled strategy from the Clinton-era Public Health model of gun control): the monetary cost of gun violence.
For example, the Center for American Progress touted the “fact” that the Virginia Tech massacre cost taxpayers $48.2 million (including autopsy costs and a fine against Virginia Tech for failing to get their skates on when the killer started shooting).
It’s one of the antis’ favorite tricks: cost benefit analysis omitting the benefit side of the equation. So what are the financial benefits of firearm ownership to society? Read on . . .
In my post Dennis Henigan on Chardon: Clockwork Edition, I did an analysis of how many lives were saved annually in Defensive Gun Uses (DGUs). I used extremely conservative numbers. Now I am going to use some less conservative ones.
The Kleck-Gertz DGU study estimated that there are between 2.1 and 2.5 million DGUs a year in the U.S. The Ludwig-Cook study came up with 1.46 million. So let’s split the difference and call it 1.88 million DGUs per year.
In the K-G article Armed Resistance to Crime: The Prevalence and Nature of Self-Defense with a Gun, 15.7 percent of people who had a DGU reckoned they almost certainly saved a life. Ignoring the ‘probably’ and ‘might have’ saved a life categories for simplicity, 15.7 percent of 1.88 million gives us 295,160 lives saved annually.
[NB: A number of people have questioned the 15.7 percent stat. Remember: many states regard the mere act of pulling a gun on someone a form of deadly force. In addition, virtually every jurisdiction in the nation requires that an armed self-defender must be in “reasonable fear of imminent death or great bodily harm” before using (or in some places even threatening to use) deadly force.]


How can we get a dollar figure from 1.88 million defensive gun uses per year? Never fear, faithful reader, we can count on the .gov to calculate everything.


According to the AZ state government, in February of 2008 a human life was worth $6.5 million. Going to the Inflation Calculator and punching in the numbers gives us a present value of $6.93 million.

So figuring that the average DGU saves one half of a person’s life—as “gun violence” predominantly affects younger demographics—that gives us $3.465 million per half life.

Putting this all together, we find that the monetary benefit of guns (by way of DGUs) is roughly $1.02 trillion per year. That’s trillion. With a ‘T’.

I was going to go on and calculate the costs of incarceration ($50K/year) saved by people killing 1527 criminals annually, and then look at the lifetime cost to society of an average criminal (something in excess of $1 million). But all of that would be a drop in the bucket compared to the $1,000,000,000,000 ($1T) annual benefit of gun ownership.


When compared to the (inflation adjusted from 2002) $127.5 billion ‘cost’ of gun violence calculated by by our Ludwig-Cook buddies, guns save a little more than eight times what they “cost.”

Which, I might add, is completely irrelevant since “the freedom to own and carry the weapon of your choice is a natural, fundamental, and inalienable human, individual, civil, and Constitutional right — subject neither to the democratic process nor to arguments grounded in social utility.”

So even taking Motherboard’s own total and multiplying it by 100, the benefits to society of civilian gun ownership dwarf the associated costs.

=========

another leftist willfully ignorant poster

take it for what it is

 

[PredFan]

There is a column in the Washington post this week where the anti gun weenie complains about 2nd Amendment supporters who correct anti gunners when they don't use the correct terminology for guns, or don't actually know what the hell they are talking about in the gun debate.....

No, when you have 17 dead kids shot by a military grade weapon attained by a mentally ill man, there really isn't much more to talk about.

"It wasn't a MACHINE GUN, it was an ASSAULT RIFLE", whines the guy with the tiny er... hands... when someone threatens to take away his gun.

33,000 dead, 70,000 injured, 270 Billion in economic losses... every year.

Not much more to discuss.

1. It’s not a military grade weapon. It falls far short of that. That’s why no military on earth uses it.

2. The tiny hand belong to the people who are scared and get triggered by them mention of guns.

3. All those people dead, all those people injured and the gun didn’t kill any of them.

You cannot be more wrong about every position you hold. An you are willfully stupid. There’s nothing more to talk about.

 

[Skull Pilot]

I was in the Army and I fired a number of weapons from small arms all the way to heavy machine guns. There are no firearms at my local gun shop for sale that can be considered a "military grade weapon". My personal AR-15 is not a "military grade weapon"..

The Ar-15 fires the same rounds and has the same range as the M16. Yes, it is military grade.

So my mini 30 that fires a 6.8 which is a larger round than the M16 with the same range and accuracy must be mega military grade

So what does that make my rifle chambered for 7.62 Nato an ultra mega military grade weapon ?

They're not but my Remington 870 shotgun is actually a military grade weapon

 

[boedicca]

The Prog Default Position on anything Normal People Prefer:

 

[PredFan]

I was in the Army and I fired a number of weapons from small arms all the way to heavy machine guns. There are no firearms at my local gun shop for sale that can be considered a "military grade weapon". My personal AR-15 is not a "military grade weapon"..

The Ar-15 fires the same rounds and has the same range as the M16. Yes, it is military grade.

You again show your stupidity. The round does not make it a military grade. No military on earth uses the AR 15. It falls far short of that.

Learn somwthong before you try to take people’s rights away idiot.

 

[PredFan]

You lie every time you post and you say you want to be taken serioiusly......

And now....the benefit side of the gun owning equation in dollars...

You can post all the gun nutter spooge you want, but the reality.

33,000 gun deaths.
70,000 gun injuries
400,000 gun related crimes
270 Billion in economic losses each year.

Your fetish is too expensive for the rest of us.

The Fire Department is not given a limit on how much water they can use to save a building, but you want to put a limit on how many bullets a good person can use to stop violent monsters....you guys are such irrational fools it is simply amazing.

Guy, violent monsters aren't the problem. Most gun deaths are suicides, domestic violence and accidents... And until you can tell me a way to keep guns out of the hands of violent monsters to start with, I'm really not keen on the collatoral damage that goes along with your insecurities.

Again- the Europeans have figured this out. The Japanese have figured this out. The Canadians have figured this out.

Number of people killed by guns= 0
Number of people killed by other people= all of the ones in our post plus 10 times that many.

You stupid dolt.

 

[PredFan]

The willful and unashamed stupidity from the left is only matched by their stubborn and senseless refusal to learn.

Now they simply write articles blaming us for pointing their ignorance out.

 

[MikeK]

I have no problem with magazines that hold 10 shells, anything more is overkill and also if you can't defend yourself with 10 bullets you are a bad shot.

That would depend on attending circumstances.

If you have a magazine-fed weapon I would think it's better to have a 30-round magazine and never need it than to need one and not have it.

 

[cnm]

Gunsplained. Sweet.

 

[cnm]

what do I talk about?

The lack of firearm homicides in countries with effective gun control, while ignoring or excusing the excessive rate of firearms homicide in the US.

 

[cnm]

You again show your stupidity. The round does not make it a military grade. No military on earth uses the AR 15. It falls far short of that.

Woo hoo. Gunsplained again. You just know 17 kids in Florida realise, posthumously, their sacrifice was worth it. Accurate nomenclature is worth any amount of lives.

 

[August West]

You again show your stupidity. The round does not make it a military grade. No military on earth uses the AR 15. It falls far short of that.

Woo hoo. Gunsplained again. You just know 17 kids in Florida realise, posthumously, their sacrifice was worth it. Accurate nomenclature is worth any amount of lives.

BODY COUNTS DON`T MATTER to these people.

 

[2aguy]

what do I talk about?

The lack of firearm homicides in countries with effective gun control, while ignoring or excusing the excessive rate of firearms homicide in the US.

No......Britain has increasing gun crime after they banned and confiscated guns. Australia has increasing gun crime after they banned and confiscated guns.

Our crime rates, after more and more Americans are buying, owning and carrying guns are going down, not up.....

We went from 200 million guns in private hands in the 1990s and 4.7 million people carrying guns for self defense in 1997...to close to 400-600 million guns in private hands and over 16.3 million people carrying guns for self defense in 2017...guess what happened...
-- gun murder down 49%

--gun crime down 75%

--violent crime down 72%

Gun Homicide Rate Down 49% Since 1993 Peak; Public Unaware

Compared with 1993, the peak of U.S. gun homicides, the firearm homicide rate was 49% lower in 2010, and there were fewer deaths, even though the nation’s population grew. The victimization rate for other violent crimes with a firearm—assaults, robberies and sex crimes—was 75% lower in 2011 than in 1993. Violent non-fatal crime victimization overall (with or without a firearm) also is down markedly (72%) over two decades.

 

[2aguy]

You again show your stupidity. The round does not make it a military grade. No military on earth uses the AR 15. It falls far short of that.

Woo hoo. Gunsplained again. You just know 17 kids in Florida realise, posthumously, their sacrifice was worth it. Accurate nomenclature is worth any amount of lives.

BODY COUNTS DON`T MATTER to these people.

No.....body counts don't matter to you if the victims are black....as long as they show up every two years to vote your democrat politicians more power......

You are the guys who don't want to put armed guards in schools or to arm the staff......and you guys created the democrat gun free zones that draw these shooters....and we know gun free zones draw these guys because they keep telling us they do....

 

[2aguy]

You again show your stupidity. The round does not make it a military grade. No military on earth uses the AR 15. It falls far short of that.

Woo hoo. Gunsplained again. You just know 17 kids in Florida realise, posthumously, their sacrifice was worth it. Accurate nomenclature is worth any amount of lives.

BODY COUNTS DON`T MATTER to these people.

Body counts do matter to us, you doofus....and we know that the faster you get someone with a gun to confront these killers the more lives you save....you guys want the police to stop them after these killers have 5-7 minutes in your democrat gun free zone.......killing unarmed kids and adults.......that is on you, not us.

 

[Yousaidwhat]

There is a column in the Washington post this week where the anti gun weenie complains about 2nd Amendment supporters who correct anti gunners when they don't use the correct terminology for guns, or don't actually know what the hell they are talking about in the gun debate.....

The author is trying to shame gun Rights supporters into being quiet by labeling this "gunsplaining,"as if actually talking about actual guns and the truth about the issues is a problem...

If You're Trying To Ban Guns, The Least You Can Do Is Learn The Basics

Can anyone imagine a major newspaper running an op-ed justifying public ignorance on public policy? Actually, not merely justifying the ignorance, but rather arguing that facts only help smother discourse rather than enhance it. It’s improbable. Then again, this is the gun debate. And one side benefits from policy illiteracy.

The Washington Post ran an op-ed by former Gawker writer Adam Weinstein arguing that Second Amendment advocates use “jargon” to bully gun-control supporters. “While debating the merits of various gun control proposals,” he contends, “Second Amendment enthusiasts often diminish, or outright dismiss their views if they use imprecise firearms terminology.”
-------
How dare Second Amendment advocates expect that those passionately arguing to limit their constitutional rights might have some rudimentary knowledge of the devices they want to ban? To point out the constant glaring technical and policy “faux pas” of gun controllers is to engage in “gunsplaining,” a bad-faith argument akin to intimidation.

“If you don’t know what the ‘AR’ in AR-15 stands for, you don’t get to talk” explains the sarcastic subhead. If you don’t know what the “AR” in AR-15 stands you still get to talk. But if you want to ban or confiscate AR-15s and you haven’t taken the time to learn what the AR stands for, then gun owners have every right to call you out.

Weinstein bemoans the unfairness of gun controllers “being forced to sweat the finest taxonomic distinctions between our nation’s unlimited variety of lethal weapons.” This statement is illustrative of the emotionalism and hyperbole of the debate (the notion that there’s an “unlimited variety” of firearms is absurd) but also, at the same time, it’s an exaggeration of the Second Amendment advocate’s expectations.
----

Then again, much of gun-control policy isdriven by the mechanics of a firearm. So while not knowing what a “barrel shroud” is should not prevent anyone from pondering gun policy (well, unless you’re a politician who goes on TV to advocate the banning of barrel shrouds without knowing what they are) but failing to understand the distinction between a semi-automatic and automatic weapon tells us you’re either dishonest, unserious or unprepared for the debate.

Anybody that is this obsessed with an inanimate object needs psychological evaluation. I hope the authorities actually do watch sites like this one. You are the text book example of someone who is likely to shoot up a school.


Any parent near you should make sure the local police know who you are.

It appears there are a few posters here who represent the "authorities" that you wish to watch this site.

It also appears that those "authorities" laugh and mock those like you who wish to have other posters rights removed, at your insistence.

I suggest you contact your local "authorities" and inform them of the posters on this site that you think are likely to shoot up a school.

I'm sure they will also laugh at you and mock you. Not in your presense of course.

 

[PredFan]

You again show your stupidity. The round does not make it a military grade. No military on earth uses the AR 15. It falls far short of that.

Woo hoo. Gunsplained again. You just know 17 kids in Florida realise, posthumously, their sacrifice was worth it. Accurate nomenclature is worth any amount of lives.

Deflection noted, loser. Just a piece of friendly advice, don't stay stupid your whole life.

 

[PredFan]

You again show your stupidity. The round does not make it a military grade. No military on earth uses the AR 15. It falls far short of that.

Woo hoo. Gunsplained again. You just know 17 kids in Florida realise, posthumously, their sacrifice was worth it. Accurate nomenclature is worth any amount of lives.

BODY COUNTS DON`T MATTER to these people.

2nd deflection noted from another loser.

 

[cnm]

Body counts do matter to us, you doofus

Yes. You need more school kids to lay down their lives.