Murder rate drops as Gun sales soar.

[The Rabbi]

I read it. The reason he said that the study was flawed was because he believes the respondenets were lying

Oh that's what he said? Quote that from the article for me, please.

What you really are doing is indicting left wing "professors" and the left wing flock, who won't question anything that their left wing leaders tell them.

What YOU really are doing is continuing to hand waive evidence with no refuting evidence, and making this into a left vs right issue, whereby anyone who doesn't agree with you is some radical liberal with an agenda. It's a peer reviewed scholarly journal.

If you presented any argument, never mind coherent , well thought out and supported, I would drop dead from shock.
Here ya go!

Now, are you going to say this links are biased? Are you going to say that Pakistani kids working in closets are actually PhDs?

Oh I see! So you're saying a specific area of India with access to resources that is legally producing guns is proof that Americans with high school shop experience can illegally produce guns in their basements.

This is the best support you can find? A cherry picked youtube outlier from half way across the world of legal gun production that doesn't even apply to the conversation? So again let's recap: I make a point and support it with evidence that proves the point. You take an unsupported guess and show a youtube video that has little to do with your guess outside of the general topic of conversation. Awesome.

Wow, are you really stupid.
I showed that manufacture of guns does not require sophisticated equipment or tools. Anyone in the Third World can do it. I offer visual proof from two web sites.
And you think that isn't evidence??
What point did you make again? What support did you offer? I didnt see a link.
\
and the area was Pakistan, not India but that just further supports your reputation as weak mind.

 

[SmarterThanHick]

I did quote from it, here it is --- AGAIN.

"Two aspects of the K-G survey combine to create severe misestimation. The first is the likelihood of positive social desirability response, sometimes referred to as personal presentation bias. An individual who purchases a gun for self-defense and then uses it successfully to ward off a criminal is displaying the wisdom of his precautions and his capability in protecting himself, his loved ones, and his property. His action is to be commended and admired."

Basically he is accusing the respondents of lying.

Oh I see. You used your 3rd grade reading comprehension skills to discredit a proven form of leading bias that is widely accepted by expert statisticians as creating the very outcomes he described in his paper. Oh but hey, I'm sure you're more qualified than that Harvard doctorate and all the experts who scrutinized his paper before allowing it to be published.

 

[my2¢]

Table 1--Preliminary Annual UCR

Since the end of the So called assault weapon ban murder rates have dropped steadily each year. Since 2008 as gun sales soared the murder rate dropped almost 10 percent.

According to the gun grabbers more guns equals more crime. Seems they need to explain that to the FBI as it compiles factual data on what is and is not happening in this Country crime wise.

According to the stock market analyst I read, Obama's election and the fear of regulation has been responsible for the soar in gun sales that we've seen since 2008. When Sturm Ruger got over $16 sometime around 6 weeks ago, I sold covered-call options against the shares I owned. With the market retreating these past weeks I was able to buy back those options for a nice little profit.

Guess this is one I should have included in the "How has Obama personally helped you?" discussion somebody posted a few weeks back.

 

[The Rabbi]

I did quote from it, here it is --- AGAIN.

"Two aspects of the K-G survey combine to create severe misestimation. The first is the likelihood of positive social desirability response, sometimes referred to as personal presentation bias. An individual who purchases a gun for self-defense and then uses it successfully to ward off a criminal is displaying the wisdom of his precautions and his capability in protecting himself, his loved ones, and his property. His action is to be commended and admired."

Basically he is accusing the respondents of lying.

Oh I see. You used your 3rd grade reading comprehension skills to discredit a proven form of leading bias that is widely accepted by expert statisticians as creating the very outcomes he described in his paper. Oh but hey, I'm sure you're more qualified than that Harvard doctorate and all the experts who scrutinized his paper before allowing it to be published.

As you yourself admitted, ANY questionnaire could be subject to the same bias. Is every questionnaire flawed and inaccurate then?

 

[CMike]

As we see from obama and professor left wing liar harvard isnt what it's cracked up to be.

 

[CMike]

Anyone can lie in any survey, that doesn't prove that the survey is flawed.

Use your brain for goodness sakes.

 

[SmarterThanHick]

Wow, are you really stupid.
I showed that manufacture of guns does not require sophisticated equipment or tools. Anyone in the Third World can do it. I offer visual proof from two web sites.
And you think that isn't evidence??
What point did you make again? What support did you offer? I didnt see a link.
\
and the area was Pakistan, not India but that just further supports your reputation as weak mind.

I see two things you actually say in that garbage. The first claim is that if "anyone" in the third world can make a gun, then dumb Americans can as well. Your first mistake is thinking that people in the third world are stupid. They may not have wikipedia at their disposal, but between India and Pakistan, there are more Honor Role students than American has total students. So yet again you bring up an unrelated and unsupported claim. You have not shown any proof that Americans with high school education have the resources or skill to build guns, nor that Pakistani gun makers have a hindrance in these attributes compared to America. So once again you take a cherry picked outlier that doesn't actually overlap with the situation we're discussing. The square peg doesn't fit in the round hole. Sorry.

The second failure of yours is a red herring fallacy, where you claim my stance is incorrect because I misinterpreted the source of your unrelated video. It shows your true desperation to prove anything I say wrong, seeing as you can't actually refute the supported evidence I've presented with anything relevant.

As you yourself admitted, ANY questionnaire could be subject to the same bias. Is every questionnaire flawed and inaccurate then?

Where did I admit that? Please quote me. You seem to have severe reading comprehension issues. What I did say was that this particular type of bias is known and proven by scientists and statisticians, and therefore avoided as it produces rejection of publication by any reputable peer reviewed journal. As I also pointed out, a survey that used the same methods and bias your "2.5 million" stat came from "demonstrated" that millions of Americans have seen aliens. I also cited other peer reviewed journal articles that focus only on that form of bias, invalidating it. Once again you provide as counter evidence.... nothing.

Sorry, but peer reviewed scientific journal articles in reputable publications cannot be trumped by your hand waiving, or the unpublished survey of yours that has a bias proven to produce largely erroneous outcomes.

 

[CMike]

The radical left wing liar dishonest professor said that the respondents were lying in that survey.

That can be said in any survey.

Basically, according to the radical left wing liar dishonest professor, he didn't like the results, therefore, the respondents must be lying.

 

[CMike]

It was actually two surveys I quoted.

Guns and Self-Defense by Gary Kleck, Ph.D.

The National Self-Defense Survey indicated that there were 2.5 million incidents of defensive gun use per year in the U.S. during the 1988-1993 period. This is probably a conservative estimate, for two reasons. First, cases of respondents intentionally withholding reports of genuine defensive-gun uses were probably more common than cases of respondents reporting incidents that did not occur or that were not genuinely defensive. Second, the survey covered only adults age 18 and older, thereby excluding all defensive gun uses involving adolescents, the age group most likely to suffer a violent victimization.

The authors concluded that defensive uses of guns are about three to four times as common as criminal uses of guns. The National Self-Defense Survey confirmed the picture of frequent defensive gun use implied by the results of earlier, less sophisticated surveys.

A national survey conducted in 1994 by the Police Foundation and sponsored by the National Institute of Justice almost exactly confirmed the estimates from the National Self-Defense Survey. This survey's person-based estimate was that 1.44% of the adult population had used a gun for protection against a person in the previous year, implying 2.73 million defensive gun users. These results were well within sampling error of the corresponding 1.33% and 2.55 million estimates produced by the National Self-Defense Survey.

 

[SmarterThanHick]

The radical left wing liar dishonest professor said that the respondents were lying in that survey.

That can be said in any survey.

Basically, according to the radical left wing liar dishonest professor, he didn't like the results, therefore, the respondents must be lying.

This too is another red herring association fallacy. The survey you cited used a known form of specific bias which has been proven to dramatically exaggerate conclusions. Therefore you draw the conclusion that all surveys use the same bias? False. Just because your survey was crap doesn't mean they all are.

It was actually two surveys I quoted.

So I ask you for citations of similar credibility via peer reviewed publications in reputable journals, and once again you give me random surveys performed by various groups that have no peer review, disclosure of methods, nor expert statistical check. Hey I just performed a survey on a million Americans that showed 78% of all humans don't have livers. Maybe if I post it to a website you'll be gullible enough to believe that too.

Recap: I present published peer reviewed data with full disclosure of methods and results that has been verified for statistical accuracy and legitimacy by experts in the field. You present things you found googling around on the internet, and believe our sources are somehow equal.

 

[The Rabbi]

Wow, are you really stupid.
I showed that manufacture of guns does not require sophisticated equipment or tools. Anyone in the Third World can do it. I offer visual proof from two web sites.
And you think that isn't evidence??
What point did you make again? What support did you offer? I didnt see a link.
\
and the area was Pakistan, not India but that just further supports your reputation as weak mind.

I see two things you actually say in that garbage. The first claim is that if "anyone" in the third world can make a gun, then dumb Americans can as well. Your first mistake is thinking that people in the third world are stupid. They may not have wikipedia at their disposal, but between India and Pakistan, there are more Honor Role students than American has total students. So yet again you bring up an unrelated and unsupported claim. You have not shown any proof that Americans with high school education have the resources or skill to build guns, nor that Pakistani gun makers have a hindrance in these attributes compared to America. So once again you take a cherry picked outlier that doesn't actually overlap with the situation we're discussing. The square peg doesn't fit in the round hole. Sorry.

The second failure of yours is a red herring fallacy, where you claim my stance is incorrect because I misinterpreted the source of your unrelated video. It shows your true desperation to prove anything I say wrong, seeing as you can't actually refute the supported evidence I've presented with anything relevant.

I didnt see any honor role students in the Pakistan video.
You are grasping at straws and showing that you are more interested in scoring points than arriving at the truth.
The truth is that guns are not complex to manufacture. Nor do they require expensive tools. Since I have a Class 07 Manufacturers license I think I have some grounds to say this.
What were you qualifications again?
I didnt deny your stance is correct because you made a factual mistake. Your stance is incorrect because it is contrary to the facts. That you made a factual mistake only shows you can't read any more than you can make an argument.

 

[SmarterThanHick]

I didnt see any honor role students in the Pakistan video.

Correct. You have no clue what the intelligence of those people are. Your insinuation that they must be below average intelligence because they are in a developing country is just another one of your unfounded guesses. You know absolutely NOTHING about those people, yet you're trying to argue that they are equivalent to Americans which high school shop experience. Laughable.

The truth is that guns are not complex to manufacture. Nor do they require expensive tools. Since I have a Class 07 Manufacturers license I think I have some grounds to say this.

Ah and here the personal bias comes spewing forth like a volcano of crap from an pressurized sewer. You have a manufacturers license, so therefore anyone can do it! And therefore alls guns are good. This is all the "evidence" a man of your nature needs, isn't it?

So tell me, where do you purchase your potassium nitrate? No one is saying it's impossible to manufacture guns. After all, we have millions of them in America. You seem to continually miss that point. The point is that you have yet to provide a single scrap of evidence that would suggest significant manufacturing would take place in America if gun manufacturing was made illegal. To "prove" your point, you've pointed to the legal production of guns in India, you've made unsupported guesses that people with shop experience can do it easily, and you've even gone so far as to waive your own manufacturer license around. But none of these things, not a single one, suggests that significant manufacturing would take place in America if it was otherwise made illegal.

Just curious: how many home-made guns do you believe are produced in America each year currently? Take a best-guess for me. No need to even look it up or start using evidence now.

 

[The Rabbi]

Wow.
What will it take to shut you the fuck up? I've tried logic. I've tried facts. I've tried footage. None of it has worked so far.
Can you agree that the people in the video are not smarter than the average American? Can you agree that they probably do not have access to advanced machine tools? And yet they churn out guns in an unregulated environment.
And btw, you still have not grasped the idea that this is Pakistan, not India. This is despite my pointing it out twice.
You also ignored the other link on weapons of Chechnya. These are also made in a basement somewhere by people without much in the way of resources.

How many are made each year? I would say conservatively several thousand. There aren't more because the penalties to do so are high and guns are currently pretty available.

 

[CMike]

The radical left wing liar dishonest professor said that the respondents were lying in that survey.

That can be said in any survey.

Basically, according to the radical left wing liar dishonest professor, he didn't like the results, therefore, the respondents must be lying.

This too is another red herring association fallacy. The survey you cited used a known form of specific bias which has been proven to dramatically exaggerate conclusions. Therefore you draw the conclusion that all surveys use the same bias? False. Just because your survey was crap doesn't mean they all are.

It was actually two surveys I quoted.

So I ask you for citations of similar credibility via peer reviewed publications in reputable journals, and once again you give me random surveys performed by various groups that have no peer review, disclosure of methods, nor expert statistical check. Hey I just performed a survey on a million Americans that showed 78% of all humans don't have livers. Maybe if I post it to a website you'll be gullible enough to believe that too.

Recap: I present published peer reviewed data with full disclosure of methods and results that has been verified for statistical accuracy and legitimacy by experts in the field. You present things you found googling around on the internet, and believe our sources are somehow equal.

What bias? They were asked a question and gave an answer. It was either yes or no.

That the radical left wingers don't like the answers and the results has nothing to do with the methodology of the survey or the results.