The fallacy of self defence by gun

[jbrownson0831]

Nope, still a retard.

Well of course you are......like all your Dimmer brethren.

 

[Sunsettommy]

You're welcome to, and you would have to to keep your fallacy true. Unfortunately, there are various studies in that article that conclude the findings. So stamping your feet, sticking fingers in your ears shouting,"Ner ner ner", doesn't dismiss the academic studies and findings.

Your ignorance is obvious because you haven't read up on this subject like I did which was over several years time to know that this Harvard claims are full of lying shit!

I had several books that covered it and the website I used to read showed many newspaper accounts of self defense in America every day which are real and true.

 

[Captain Caveman]

But don't I have a point?

Harvard's class of 2018 was surveyed about their political viewpoints. 13 percent of the freshmen identified as "somewhat conservative", and 2.6 percent identified as "very conservative". 23% called themselves moderates, and 60% identified as liberal.

Pick the studies out of the article and link the articles that examines and rebuffs them.

 

[Donald H]

Whatever the truth may be, statistics prove that America got it wrong.

And will undoubtedly continue to get it wrong for the foreseeable future!

Dog help them if the blacks start shooting back at the police!

 

[Captain Caveman]

Well of course you are......like all your Dimmer brethren.

So I'm UK Centre Right, I vote Tory and according to you, I have Dimmer brethren. Sorry for calling you a retard, I actually meant Special Retard.

 

[Confederate Soldier]

Pick the studies out of the article and link the articles that examines and rebuffs them.

If I cared enough to do so, I would, but I don't Pick up an issue of Americas 1st Freedom when you get a chance. Every month, there are many stories that show a life has been saved by the self defense use of a firearm.

 

[Captain Caveman]

Your ignorance is obvious because you haven't read up on this subject like I did which was over several years time to know that this Harvard claims are full of lying shit!

I had several books that covered it and the website I used to read showed many newspaper accounts of self defense in America every day which are real and true.

Rather than go by biased newspaper articles, get off your backside and go find real academic studies.

 

[Winco]

People have every right to carry their handgun on their person.
And then abide by the rules of 'Gun Free Zones'

I just don't see the need to open carry a long gun though.

 

[Captain Caveman]

If I cared enough to do so, I would, but I don't Pick up an issue of Americas 1st Freedom when you get a chance. Every month, there are many stories that show a life has been saved by the self defense use of a firearm.

So let me get this straight, gun nuts scoff at Harvard, then claim all the true facts are in pamphlets from gun nut sources. Hmm, let me think about that one

 

[Confederate Soldier]

So let me get this straight, gun nuts scoff at Harvard, then claim all the true facts are in pamphlets from gun nut sources. Hmm, let me think about that one

The largest organization devoted to protecting the constitutional right to keep and bear arms holds more water for me than a bunch of green haired college kids taught to hate anything constitutional, making up studies by selecting data that fits their narrative.

 

[Captain Caveman]

People have every right to carry their handgun on their person.
And then abide by the rules of 'Gun Free Zones'

I just don't see the need to open carry a long gun though.

Correct, reality shows there's no need to carry due to the self defence fallacy, but that would mean gun nuts would lose the argument so they default to Rights. So as they get spanked on the subject, they play the Rights card to bail out of the defeat.

 

[BlackSand]

I've always stated that needing a gun for self defence was a fallacy, and we all know it is. So what's with the gun nuts running off and copying pasting articles from shady sources?

Well look no further, just simply check with Harvard and the studies -

Gun Threats and Self-Defense Gun Use

1-3. Guns are not used millions of times each year in self-defense We use epidemiological theory to explain why the “false positive” problem for rare events can lead to large overestimates of the i…

www.hsph.harvard.edu

Pardon the pun, Harvard blow holes in the gun nut's self defence argument.

So anyone arming up for the mistaken belief they need to for self defence against others, they're the worst candidate to own a gun..

.

Congress is currently working on a bold move to actually expand a citizen's Rights.
They have proposed a measure to ensure your Right to keep a can of Fix-A-Flat in your trunk shall not be infringed.

.​

 

[Sunsettommy]

Rather than go by biased newspaper articles, get off your backside and go find real academic studies.

You have yet to cogently defend that lying Harvard claims meanwhile your running ignorance is now so obvious and your stupid bias attack shows you are a close-minded clown.

Here is one source that used CDC stats and more.

CNS News

CDC Study: Use of Firearms for Self-Defense is ‘Important Crime Deterrent’​

By Alissa Tabirian | July 17, 2013

Excerpt:

(CNSNews.com) – “Self-defense can be an important crime deterrent,”says a new report by the Centers for Disease Control (CDC). The $10 million study was commissioned by President Barack Obama as part of 23 executive orders he signed in January.

LINK

===

Let's see if you actually read the link where the self-defense stats are posted.

 

[toobfreak]

I've always stated that needing a gun for self defence was a fallacy, and we all know it is.

The fuck it is. You don't know anything.

Well look no further, just simply check with Harvard and the studies

So you quote a famously leftwing university to get another leftwing view? Shocking.

So anyone arming up for the mistaken belief they need to for self defence against others, they're the worst candidate to own a gun.

Blow it out your ass, corncob. Who the hell do you think you are deciding what is right and needed by other people? I could give you a million stories of defensive gun use saving lives. I'd laugh now if you got mugged or something bad because you were in no position to defend yourself.

 

[Captain Caveman]

I could give you a million stories of defensive gun use saving lives. I'd laugh now if you got mugged or something bad because you were in no position to defend yourself.

Of course you can, you're part of the Gun Nut Religion following your silly brainwashing pamphlets.

Boom, the fallacy in bold.

When you got mugged, when was it and how many shots did you fire?

 

[toobfreak]

Of course you can, you're part of the Gun Nut Religion following your silly brainwashing pamphlets.

There are no "pamphlets" you imbecile, other than the ones Harvard is printing for you melonheads to read.

 

[Sunsettommy]

Heritage

Defensive Gun Uses in the U.S.

Updated May 9, 2022

Excerpt:

All of the law-abiding citizens featured in this database successfully defended their liberties, lives, or livelihoods with the lawful use of a firearm. These cases are not based on hearsay, but on verifiable reports found through public sources.

LINK

 

[marvin martian]

Ask Harvard.

That's a Biden tactic when cornered, deflect, lol

 

[BackAgain]

Ask Harvard.

No need. The question itself exposes the flaw in your argument.

 

[Canon Shooter]

I've always stated that needing a gun for self defence was a fallacy, and we all know it is. So what's with the gun nuts running off and copying pasting articles from shady sources?

Well look no further, just simply check with Harvard and the studies -

Gun Threats and Self-Defense Gun Use

1-3. Guns are not used millions of times each year in self-defense We use epidemiological theory to explain why the “false positive” problem for rare events can lead to large overestimates of the i…

www.hsph.harvard.edu

Pardon the pun, Harvard blow holes in the gun nut's self defence argument.

So anyone arming up for the mistaken belief they need to for self defence against others, they're the worst candidate to own a gun.

I don't give a flying fuck what some Harvard study says.

I carry a gun every day, and have for a long time.

I have twice used my firearm to protect me and my loved ones. In one of those instances, thankfully, I didn't have to pull the trigger. In the other instance, though, I did. There were three armed assailants. I shot two of them. The third ran away. One of the two I shot is in prison. The other one is in the ground. He died on the sidewalk.

I think about that, literally, every single day. I ended someone's life. Sure, he was a scumbag, but I ended his life with two .45 rounds to the chest. I remember telling my family that I had killed a man. I remember the look on the face of my daughter, who's been a lifelong democrat. Her anti-gun stance ended the day I told her. My smokin' hot Puerto Rican girlfriend and I would be dead today had I not been armed. Of that I am absolutely certain.

I don;t care how many times a gun has been used in self defense. It doesn't matter an iota to me. All I care about is the two times where I was involved.

Every single fucking day I remind myself: I killed a man.

That's a heavy weight to carry.

And, given the same circumstances, I wouldn't hesitate to carry that weight again...