Dems want Laws changed after Rittenhouse shootings. Are vigilantes the answer? (Poll)

[j-mac]

I've linked the Kellerman study dozens of times... I don't need to do it again.

Ah, but you do….we already know you lie, so post it, or you’re lying again.

 

[surada]

With Democrats' all-out attempt to wipe out the police, destroy the Justice system, protect and cater to rapiststs / murderers/ thieves / etc... and choose the side of these people instead of standing up for and protecting law-abiding citizens, those citizens have little choice but to protect themselves.

Anyone remember the hierarchy of personal human needs from grade school? Safety and security are high in the list and one of the basic protections / services liberal Democrats are supposed to provide through government but have abandoned.

THEY are creating the need for 'vigilantes' through extreme failure to do their jobs.

That's why there was a curfew so the police could shoot vandals, arsonists and looters.

 

[westwall]

When did this happen.


You see, usually, when you have a study that you aren't sure bout, you do another study.

Instead, Kellerman did his study, repeated in several other cities and got the same result, and the Gun Lobby's response was to run to Congress and tell them to stop the CDC from doing gun studies!!!

It would be like if the CDC determined that smoking causes cancer, and Big Tobacco rushed to Congress to get the CDC to stop studying cancer!

See, smoking doesn't cause cancer, that's been proven false. No, really!

It happened TWO decades ago you lying twerp.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

I've linked the Kellerman study dozens of times... I don't need to do it again.

A lie does not become truth no matter how many times you refer back to it.

 

[Soupnazi630]

Duly noted you couldn't refute my point, Mormon Bob.

Hey, I bet Joseph Smith would have loved him some Gun Control.


View attachment 640288

It was refuted debunked and disproven you lied

 

[jc456]

That gun in your house is 43 times more likely to kill a household member than a bad guy.

show your data.

 

[jc456]

I've linked the Kellerman study dozens of times... I don't need to do it again.

where is it then? What thread, what post number?

 

[jc456]

I've linked the Kellerman study dozens of times... I don't need to do it again.

Actually, it was called the Kellerman Study, and it found that in Seattle Washington, for every case of an intruder being killed by a homeowner, there were 39 suicides, 3 accidents and 1 domestic murder. Kellerman moved his study to other cities and got similar results.

Arthur Kellermann - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

NOw, all that said, I don't think Government should take away anyone's guns unless they've proven themselves irresponsible. i just don't buy into the myth that your gun makes you safe from the bands of roving barbarians some of you think are rampaging across the landscape.

your post from 2011, from Wikipedia, really? That is your link? hahahahaahahahahahahaha

This fker has over 200 posts with Kellermann in it since 2011. And this is all he has ever presented. Wikipedia. It isn't data, it is a name association of who he is. nothing about the data. JoeB is a fraud.

 

[JoeB131]

It happened TWO decades ago you lying twerp.

So, not sure what your point is here. Kellerman did his study in the 1990's. The reaction of the gun industry was to rush to Congress and cry that it was unfair the CDC was studying gun violence and cutting funding.

it was almost like they were afraid of what the studies would say.

A lie does not become truth no matter how many times you refer back to it.

Opinions aren't lies, Bob... even when they aren't approved by your cult.

It was refuted debunked and disproven you lied

By who?

 

[jc456]

So, not sure what your point is here. Kellerman did his study in the 1990's. The reaction of the gun industry was to rush to Congress and cry that it was unfair the CDC was studying gun violence and cutting funding.

it was almost like they were afraid of what the studies would say.



Opinions aren't lies, Bob... even when they aren't approved by your cult.



By who?

And you never provided any link to his data. Wikipedia! Hahaha haha

 

[westwall]

So, not sure what your point is here. Kellerman did his study in the 1990's. The reaction of the gun industry was to rush to Congress and cry that it was unfair the CDC was studying gun violence and cutting funding.

it was almost like they were afraid of what the studies would say.



Opinions aren't lies, Bob... even when they aren't approved by your cult.



By who?

Every legit criminologist out there has shown that kellerman did a shit study.

https://firearmsandliberty.com/papers-shade/StatisticalMisgivingsandLies.PDF

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Opinions aren't lies, Bob... even when they aren't approved by your cult.

You've been presenting the bullshit Kellerman claims as fact, even though they have been proven over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over to be factually false.

And you now claiming that it's an “opinion”? Not that it matters.

If I offer an “opinion” that two plus two equals ten, then it is still just as much bullshit as if I claim it as a fact.

 

[JoeB131]

Every legit criminologist out there has shown that kellerman did a shit study.

Legit criminologists don't right for blogs like firearms and liberty.

The sticking point that the Gun Fetishists have is that Kellerman included suicides to get to his 43 times number. Um... yeah. A gun in the house was used in a suicide. If a gun wasn't in the house, maybe a suicide wouldn't have happened. Maybe an attempt would have been made, but the person would have been saved and gotten the help they needed. That's the point...

You've been presenting the bullshit Kellerman claims as fact

Because it is a fact. No one has really ever discredited his work.

I doubt either of you idiots ever read Kellerman's study.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

Because it is a fact. No one has really ever discredited his work.

No need to. He totally discredited himself, and any claim that he might ever make, when he counted, in the original form of his study, guns brought into homes by invading criminals, with the intent of using them against the rightful occupants of those homes, as “a gun in the house”. That's just the most blatant and outrageous of many instances of outright dishonesty in his work, and by itself, more than enough to completely discredit him and any claim that he might ever try to make on any subject.

 

[JoeB131]

No need to. He totally discredited himself, and any claim that he might ever make, when he counted, in the original form of his study, guns brought into homes by invading criminals, with the intent of using them against the rightful occupants of those homes, as “a gun in the house”. That's just the most blatant and outrageous of many instances of outright dishonesty in his work, and by itself, more than enough to completely discredit him and any claim that he might ever try to make on any subject.

Except he didn't do that... he merely studied guns in the house.

And big surprise... guns in the house were 43 times more likely to kill a household member than an intruder.

 

[Soupnazi630]

Except he didn't do that... he merely studied guns in the house.

And big surprise... guns in the house were 43 times more likely to kill a household member than an intruder.

He did do that and his work is massively discredited and his conclusions fiction

 

[Bob Blaylock]

And big surprise... guns in the house were 43 times more likely to kill a household member than an intruder.

It rather stands to reason that if some subhuman criminal piece of shit breaks into your home, and happens to be carrying a gun, that that “gun” in the home is much more likely to be used against you than to be used to defend you.

 

[Bob Blaylock]

And big surprise... guns in the house were 43 times more likely to kill a household member than an intruder.

And it also stands to reason that when a creature that is solidly established as always, without ever an exception, taking the side of subhuman criminal shit against the side of human beings, pontificates on any alleged solution to reduce the impact of crime on human beings, that that creature is full of shit.

If anything that you've ever proposed actually had the expected effect of making human beings safer from criminals, then you would be staunchly opposed to it. Your body of work on this forum proves this beyond any reasonable doubt.

 

[JoeB131]

It rather stands to reason that if some subhuman criminal piece of shit breaks into your home, and happens to be carrying a gun, that that “gun” in the home is much more likely to be used against you than to be used to defend you.

Wow, Bob, you just made a good case about why guns shouldn't be so readily available... Good job.

And it also stands to reason that when a creature that is solidly established as always, without ever an exception, taking the side of subhuman criminal shit against the side of human beings, pontificates on any alleged solution to reduce the impact of crime on human beings, that that creature is full of shit.

If anything that you've ever proposed actually had the expected effect of making human beings safer from criminals, then you would be staunchly opposed to it. Your body of work on this forum proves this beyond any reasonable doubt.

Here's the thing, Bob. Countries that have meaningful gun control have NOWHERE NEAR our murder rates. Japan, the UK, Germany, France. If you make guns hard to get, people don't go around committing crimes with them.

If gun proliferation and prisons and capital punishment worked, you might have a good argument for your desired polices...

But they don't. In fact, they make matters worse.

the rest of the world has figured this out.