So...you are driving in downtown Milwaukee...and you turn into a riot, do you want a gun on your hip

[Skull Pilot]

If you have a gun your chances of being killed or injured probably double.

Wrong. Facts and actual statistics don't support you.

Well here's proof. You're wrong as usual.

Carrying a gun increases risk of getting shot and killed


Have a nice day.

Were they legally permitted concealed weapons carriers or were they criminals?

It matters

 

[GaryDog]

If you have a gun your chances of being killed or injured probably double.

Wrong. Facts and actual statistics don't support you.

Well here's proof. You're wrong as usual.

Carrying a gun increases risk of getting shot and killed


Have a nice day.

Were they legally permitted concealed weapons carriers or were they criminals?

It matters

Is there anything in this life you love more than your precious gun? Serious question. I used to think the devoutly religious were the only truly irrational people. But it's becoming clearer and clearer that the religious devotion to guns by second amendment freaks is the pinnacle of irrationality.

 

[Skull Pilot]

If you have a gun your chances of being killed or injured probably double.

Wrong. Facts and actual statistics don't support you.

Well here's proof. You're wrong as usual.

Carrying a gun increases risk of getting shot and killed


Have a nice day.

Were they legally permitted concealed weapons carriers or were they criminals?

It matters

Is there anything in this life you love more than your precious gun? Serious question. I used to think the devoutly religious were the only truly irrational people. But it's becoming clearer and clearer that the religious devotion to guns by second amendment freaks is the pinnacle of irrationality.

WHat's that got to do with my question?

That article just used 670 random shootings in a small 2 state area

Were all of those people carrying legally? The article does not say.
Were all of those people criminals and carrying illegally? The article does not say but it is a very safe bet to say that there was a very well represented group of criminals carrying illegal weapons counted in that so called study

 

[GaryDog]

If you have a gun your chances of being killed or injured probably double.

Wrong. Facts and actual statistics don't support you.

Well here's proof. You're wrong as usual.

Carrying a gun increases risk of getting shot and killed


Have a nice day.

Were they legally permitted concealed weapons carriers or were they criminals?

It matters

Is there anything in this life you love more than your precious gun? Serious question. I used to think the devoutly religious were the only truly irrational people. But it's becoming clearer and clearer that the religious devotion to guns by second amendment freaks is the pinnacle of irrationality.

WHat's that got to do with my question?

That article just used 670 random shootings in a small 2 state area

Were all of those people carrying legally? The article does not say.
Were all of those people criminals and carrying illegally? The article does not say but it is a very safe bet to say that there was a very well represented group of criminals carrying illegal weapons counted in that so called study

More representative than the absurd "CDC Gun Study" that you guys claim is a good-faith attempt by the government to analyze gun violence.

It's not safe to make any of the assumptions you're making, unless you're rabidly opposed to any sort of rational debate. Which you are.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Wrong. Facts and actual statistics don't support you.

Well here's proof. You're wrong as usual.

Carrying a gun increases risk of getting shot and killed


Have a nice day.

Were they legally permitted concealed weapons carriers or were they criminals?

It matters

Is there anything in this life you love more than your precious gun? Serious question. I used to think the devoutly religious were the only truly irrational people. But it's becoming clearer and clearer that the religious devotion to guns by second amendment freaks is the pinnacle of irrationality.

WHat's that got to do with my question?

That article just used 670 random shootings in a small 2 state area

Were all of those people carrying legally? The article does not say.
Were all of those people criminals and carrying illegally? The article does not say but it is a very safe bet to say that there was a very well represented group of criminals carrying illegal weapons counted in that so called study

More representative than the absurd "CDC Gun Study" that you guys claim is a good-faith attempt by the government to analyze gun violence.

It's not safe to make any of the assumptions you're making, unless you're rabidly opposed to any sort of rational debate. Which you are.

I have not made any assumptions I am asking YOU about a stat YOU posted. I have never posted numbers from the CDC study nor have I commented on them.

What are the metrics of the study YOU used?

Did the study include victims under the age of 21? If so then we know all those victims under the age of 21 who were carrying a weapon were doing so illegally.

How many of them were legally issued concealed carry permits?

Those that were not issued a permit were carrying a concealed weapon illegally

Were more there people counted in the study carrying illegally than were carrying legally?

If so then the conclusion could have easily been that you have more of a chance of being shot if you are a criminal.

You quoted the study so I ASSUME you can answer my questions

 

[Dont Taz Me Bro]

You and your gun against an armed mob of 50 guns. Yeah, give them a reason to shoot you!!!

Are the Milwaukee rioters an armed mob of 50 guns?

 

[GaryDog]

Well here's proof. You're wrong as usual.

Carrying a gun increases risk of getting shot and killed


Have a nice day.

Were they legally permitted concealed weapons carriers or were they criminals?

It matters

Is there anything in this life you love more than your precious gun? Serious question. I used to think the devoutly religious were the only truly irrational people. But it's becoming clearer and clearer that the religious devotion to guns by second amendment freaks is the pinnacle of irrationality.

WHat's that got to do with my question?

That article just used 670 random shootings in a small 2 state area

Were all of those people carrying legally? The article does not say.
Were all of those people criminals and carrying illegally? The article does not say but it is a very safe bet to say that there was a very well represented group of criminals carrying illegal weapons counted in that so called study

More representative than the absurd "CDC Gun Study" that you guys claim is a good-faith attempt by the government to analyze gun violence.

It's not safe to make any of the assumptions you're making, unless you're rabidly opposed to any sort of rational debate. Which you are.

I have not made any assumptions I am asking YOU about a stat YOU posted. I have never posted numbers from the CDC study nor have I commented on them.

What are the metrics of the study YOU used?

Did the study include victims under the age of 21? If so then we know all those victims under the age of 21 who were carrying a weapon were doing so illegally.

How many of them were legally issued concealed carry permits?

Those that were not issued a permit were carrying a concealed weapon illegally

Were more there people counted in the study carrying illegally than were carrying legally?

If so then the conclusion could have easily been that you have more of a chance of being shot if you are a criminal.

You quoted the study so I ASSUME you can answer my questions

None of those questions are remotely germain to the thesis of the study. Guns do not make you safer.

 

[Skull Pilot]

Were they legally permitted concealed weapons carriers or were they criminals?

It matters

Is there anything in this life you love more than your precious gun? Serious question. I used to think the devoutly religious were the only truly irrational people. But it's becoming clearer and clearer that the religious devotion to guns by second amendment freaks is the pinnacle of irrationality.

WHat's that got to do with my question?

That article just used 670 random shootings in a small 2 state area

Were all of those people carrying legally? The article does not say.
Were all of those people criminals and carrying illegally? The article does not say but it is a very safe bet to say that there was a very well represented group of criminals carrying illegal weapons counted in that so called study

More representative than the absurd "CDC Gun Study" that you guys claim is a good-faith attempt by the government to analyze gun violence.

It's not safe to make any of the assumptions you're making, unless you're rabidly opposed to any sort of rational debate. Which you are.

I have not made any assumptions I am asking YOU about a stat YOU posted. I have never posted numbers from the CDC study nor have I commented on them.

What are the metrics of the study YOU used?

Did the study include victims under the age of 21? If so then we know all those victims under the age of 21 who were carrying a weapon were doing so illegally.

How many of them were legally issued concealed carry permits?

Those that were not issued a permit were carrying a concealed weapon illegally

Were more there people counted in the study carrying illegally than were carrying legally?

If so then the conclusion could have easily been that you have more of a chance of being shot if you are a criminal.

You quoted the study so I ASSUME you can answer my questions

None of those questions are remotely germain to the thesis of the study. Guns do not make you safer.

Of course they are.

Criminals will be involved in criminal behaviors that no law abiding citizen would be involved in.

A criminal carrying an illegal weapon among other criminals carrying illegal weapons is a hell of a lot more likely to get shot than a legally permitted person carrying a weapon while walking down the street.

The fact that you refuse to answer what are perfectly reasonable questions about the validity of a study YOU are using to make a point then I can only assume that you are one of those IDIOTS who thinks all legal gun owners are somehow responsible for the behavior of criminals

 

[Fair&Balanced]

Were they legally permitted concealed weapons carriers or were they criminals?

It matters

Is there anything in this life you love more than your precious gun? Serious question. I used to think the devoutly religious were the only truly irrational people. But it's becoming clearer and clearer that the religious devotion to guns by second amendment freaks is the pinnacle of irrationality.

WHat's that got to do with my question?

That article just used 670 random shootings in a small 2 state area

Were all of those people carrying legally? The article does not say.
Were all of those people criminals and carrying illegally? The article does not say but it is a very safe bet to say that there was a very well represented group of criminals carrying illegal weapons counted in that so called study

More representative than the absurd "CDC Gun Study" that you guys claim is a good-faith attempt by the government to analyze gun violence.

It's not safe to make any of the assumptions you're making, unless you're rabidly opposed to any sort of rational debate. Which you are.

I have not made any assumptions I am asking YOU about a stat YOU posted. I have never posted numbers from the CDC study nor have I commented on them.

What are the metrics of the study YOU used?

Did the study include victims under the age of 21? If so then we know all those victims under the age of 21 who were carrying a weapon were doing so illegally.

How many of them were legally issued concealed carry permits?

Those that were not issued a permit were carrying a concealed weapon illegally

Were more there people counted in the study carrying illegally than were carrying legally?

If so then the conclusion could have easily been that you have more of a chance of being shot if you are a criminal.

You quoted the study so I ASSUME you can answer my questions

None of those questions are remotely germain to the thesis of the study. Guns do not make you safer.

OF COURSE guns make you safer. we know this by the fact that the Secret Service surrounds the President with men and women armed with GUNS.

 

[GaryDog]

Is there anything in this life you love more than your precious gun? Serious question. I used to think the devoutly religious were the only truly irrational people. But it's becoming clearer and clearer that the religious devotion to guns by second amendment freaks is the pinnacle of irrationality.

WHat's that got to do with my question?

That article just used 670 random shootings in a small 2 state area

Were all of those people carrying legally? The article does not say.
Were all of those people criminals and carrying illegally? The article does not say but it is a very safe bet to say that there was a very well represented group of criminals carrying illegal weapons counted in that so called study

More representative than the absurd "CDC Gun Study" that you guys claim is a good-faith attempt by the government to analyze gun violence.

It's not safe to make any of the assumptions you're making, unless you're rabidly opposed to any sort of rational debate. Which you are.

I have not made any assumptions I am asking YOU about a stat YOU posted. I have never posted numbers from the CDC study nor have I commented on them.

What are the metrics of the study YOU used?

Did the study include victims under the age of 21? If so then we know all those victims under the age of 21 who were carrying a weapon were doing so illegally.

How many of them were legally issued concealed carry permits?

Those that were not issued a permit were carrying a concealed weapon illegally

Were more there people counted in the study carrying illegally than were carrying legally?

If so then the conclusion could have easily been that you have more of a chance of being shot if you are a criminal.

You quoted the study so I ASSUME you can answer my questions

None of those questions are remotely germain to the thesis of the study. Guns do not make you safer.

Of course they are.

Criminals will be involved in criminal behaviors that no law abiding citizen would be involved in.

A criminal carrying an illegal weapon among other criminals carrying illegal weapons is a hell of a lot more likely to get shot than a legally permitted person carrying a weapon while walking down the street.

The fact that you refuse to answer what are perfectly reasonable questions about the validity of a study YOU are using to make a point then I can only assume that you are one of those IDIOTS who thinks all legal gun owners are somehow responsible for the behavior of criminals

I don't know what the study's exact parameters here. Less than 1% of our population is in jail, so is it reasonable to assume that of any given study of 600+ people, most are criminals? Or is it convenient to assume that when you're vouching for the safety of carrying a gun?

I do know it's impossible to shoot yourself with a gun when you don't have one. Do you argue that point? Probably, staking out a sane position on this topic is not something you're good at.

LOL at your kicker paragraph. Stomping your feet and calling me an idiot doesn't invalidate the study, crybaby.

 

[flacaltenn]

Moderation Message:

If you are IN the CDZ --- follow the damn rules. There should be NO personal comments or derision of ANY kind.
People are gonna warned, banned and tossed out CDZ threads. There is a 3 strike law in the CDZ. 3 offenses in there and you are deported permanently from participating.

Take it seriously. This thread moved because the "debate" is largely opinion and personal values.

 

[Skull Pilot]

WHat's that got to do with my question?

That article just used 670 random shootings in a small 2 state area

Were all of those people carrying legally? The article does not say.
Were all of those people criminals and carrying illegally? The article does not say but it is a very safe bet to say that there was a very well represented group of criminals carrying illegal weapons counted in that so called study

More representative than the absurd "CDC Gun Study" that you guys claim is a good-faith attempt by the government to analyze gun violence.

It's not safe to make any of the assumptions you're making, unless you're rabidly opposed to any sort of rational debate. Which you are.

I have not made any assumptions I am asking YOU about a stat YOU posted. I have never posted numbers from the CDC study nor have I commented on them.

What are the metrics of the study YOU used?

Did the study include victims under the age of 21? If so then we know all those victims under the age of 21 who were carrying a weapon were doing so illegally.

How many of them were legally issued concealed carry permits?

Those that were not issued a permit were carrying a concealed weapon illegally

Were more there people counted in the study carrying illegally than were carrying legally?

If so then the conclusion could have easily been that you have more of a chance of being shot if you are a criminal.

You quoted the study so I ASSUME you can answer my questions

None of those questions are remotely germain to the thesis of the study. Guns do not make you safer.

Of course they are.

Criminals will be involved in criminal behaviors that no law abiding citizen would be involved in.

A criminal carrying an illegal weapon among other criminals carrying illegal weapons is a hell of a lot more likely to get shot than a legally permitted person carrying a weapon while walking down the street.

The fact that you refuse to answer what are perfectly reasonable questions about the validity of a study YOU are using to make a point then I can only assume that you are one of those IDIOTS who thinks all legal gun owners are somehow responsible for the behavior of criminals

I don't know what the study's exact parameters here. Less than 1% of our population is in jail, so is it reasonable to assume that of any given study of 600+ people, most are criminals? Or is it convenient to assume that when you're vouching for the safety of carrying a gun?

I do know it's impossible to shoot yourself with a gun when you don't have one. Do you argue that point? Probably, staking out a sane position on this topic is not something you're good at.

LOL at your kicker paragraph. Stomping your feet and calling me an idiot doesn't invalidate the study, crybaby.

YOU don't even know if the study you posted is valid
I ask you questions to clarify the study's metrics and you refuse to answer them and you refuse to even bother to find out the answers.

Why is that? Maybe it's because those mere 670 incidences in the study were all just criminals committing criminal acts and have absolutely nothing to do with legally permitted concealed weapons carriers.

And I don't stomp my feet and calling you an idiot is an insult to idiots the world over

 

[2aguy]

If you have a gun your chances of being killed or injured probably double.

Wrong. Facts and actual statistics don't support you.

Well here's proof. You're wrong as usual.

Carrying a gun increases risk of getting shot and killed


Have a nice day.

And you are wrong......since the 1990s carrying a gun has increased to he point we now have 14.5 million people actually carrying guns for self defense.....and our accidental gun death and our gun murder rate went down not up.........

You are wrong....the facts show you are wrong ....

WISQARS Leading Causes of Death Reports
2014........

so, out of 357,000,000 million guns in private hands...there was a grand total of 586 accidental gun deaths.....

and

accidental poisoning deaths......42,032

accidental car deaths.................33,736

accidental falling deaths..............31,959

accidental drowning deaths..........3,406

accidental machinery deaths............605

Accidental gun deaths.......................586

 

[2aguy]

You and your gun against an armed mob of 50 guns. Yeah, give them a reason to shoot you!!!

There was a guy in a car driving through Ferguson during the riot.........the mobbed his car and he drew his pistol..they saw it and took off....

So you are wrong....he didn't fire a shot either....

This guy had a gun and accidentally shot himself. The anecdote score is 1-1, hence the problem with your stupid anecdotal evidence.

Again.......14.5 million people now carry guns for self defense..........since the 1990s.....more people carrying guns, fewer people getting accidentally shot.......you are wrong again....

Non fatal gun injury stats from 1993......

Nonfatal and Fatal Firearm-Related Injuries -- United States, 1993-1997
1993... 104,390
1994... 89,744
1995... 84,322
1996... 69,649
1997... 64,207
Surveillance for Fatal and Nonfatal Firearm-Related Injuries --- United States, 1993--1998
1998... 79,384
WISQARS Nonfatal Injury Reports

CDC non fatal gun accident.....

2001.... 17,696

2002... 17,579

2003... 18,941

2004... 16,555

2005... 15,388

2006... 14,678

2007... 15,698

2008... 17,215

2009... 18,610

2010... 14,161

2011... 14,675

2012... 17,362

2013... 16,864

2014..... 15,928

 

[2aguy]

If you have a gun your chances of being killed or injured probably double.

Wrong. Facts and actual statistics don't support you.

Well here's proof. You're wrong as usual.

Carrying a gun increases risk of getting shot and killed


Have a nice day.

and actual information from the FBI also shows you are wrong....

Murder by firearm….

Federal Bureau of Investigation - Uniform Crime Reports - 2000

gun murder rate 1997 -2000


1997..... 10,729
1998..... 9,257
1999..... 8,480
2000..... 8,493
2001..... 8,719
2002... 9,369
2003.... 9,638
2004..... 9,385
2005.... 10,158
2006.... 10,225
2007 10,129
2008-- 9,528
2009-- 9,199
2010- 8,874
2011-- 8,653
2012-- 8,897
2013-- 8,454
2014-- 8,124

 

[2aguy]

If you have a gun your chances of being killed or injured probably double.

Wrong. Facts and actual statistics don't support you.

Well here's proof. You're wrong as usual.

Carrying a gun increases risk of getting shot and killed


Have a nice day.

I see what they did there....the study you linked to is not accurate......Why, You ask? They don't address wether the person carrying the gun was doing so legally, or wether they had a past history of crime and violence........

90% of all murder including gun murder is committed by criminals with long histories of violence and criminal behavior, and felonies....often multiple felonies.......so to conveniently ignore wether the person getting shot is a criminal or a law abiding gun owner is a lie..........a lie with the veneer of science......

70-80% of gun shooting victims are also criminals.....

There in nothing that you believe about guns that is based in facts or the truth.....

 

[2aguy]

If you have a gun your chances of being killed or injured probably double.

Wrong. Facts and actual statistics don't support you.

Well here's proof. You're wrong as usual.

Carrying a gun increases risk of getting shot and killed


Have a nice day.

I gave you hard numbers from the CDC and the FBI...you gave me a study that doesn't even include wether the subject is a criminal or not.........

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

So......there was a shooting by a black police officers against a career criminal with a stolen gun......the black police officer shot the black criminal.....and the neighborhood had a riot.

Now....say you are with your family driving somewhere and you end up in the middle of this riot.......

Would you prefer to be in the riot with a gun on your hip........or would you prefer to be completely unarmed?

A gun? More like five or six so I dont have to pause and reload.

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

So......there was a shooting by a black police officers against a career criminal with a stolen gun......the black police officer shot the black criminal.....and the neighborhood had a riot.

Now....say you are with your family driving somewhere and you end up in the middle of this riot.......

Would you prefer to be in the riot with a gun on your hip........or would you prefer to be completely unarmed?

If I drove into a riot in downtown Milwaukee, I would prefer to have a GPS to get me out and keep me out. If I had a gun, I would probably end up shooting myself or doing something else equally stupid.

No surprise there....

 

[HereWeGoAgain]

I'm not against gun ownership and I like sports shooting, but seriously I would be even more afraid if I had a gun, I would think they would shoot me easier because they would see me more as danger, and they all have guns too. I dont think I could get away with a gun in a riot, that wouldnt save me I think. Id look for other strategies like playing dead (lol) or escaping. To have a gun and shoot at them would mean they would kill me with certainity.

Nah,they're cowards at heart.
Start sending lead downrange and they'll scatter like cockroaches when the lights come on.