Machine gun fire into Las Vegas crowd at Route 91 music Festival

  • Thread starter Thread starter Roseeurekacross
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
starshiptrooper said:
It is evidence of nothing.
Click to expand...
Oh sure. Say it is nothing. Research is so sciency and silly. I expect the more avid gun enthusiasts and arms dealers to dismiss everything with a wave of the hand. I will stick with being pro-life.
 
Says the guy who refuses to acknowledge what the UCR clearly states.
 
Impressive, you allegedly put numbers into boxes. That makes you more of an expert how exactly?
 
josie_L said:
From the article/ study:
Click to expand...
:roll_eyes: Really. :roll_eyes:
Snopes put to rest some of hte claims made by people quoting the article, it further exposes the actual professions of the authors, the nature of the not-so-scholarly journal, and the criticism of the study by scholars of some distinction.

You quote some of the article; the quotes don’t address much of anything. Thanks for playing.
 
Theo520 said:
I’m not doing google for you now, but yes that is the claim by proponents of the 2nd, that the most common usage is simply to make the other party aware you are armed.

Police numbers alone would probably prove my point, where they draw their weapon but don’t fire.
Click to expand...
Heresay . And as I have said, the other party might just take that gun off you. We cannot compare Police and Civilians. We all know police are going to shoot. That’s a given.

Training .
 
Japan has a uniform culture … not much dissent there … well, there is, but it’s mostly a monoculture.

By contrast, the USA has cultures from 200 “countries”. A lot of culture clash.

You add in some southern Italians and some Irish and some South Americans and some people from the hundreds of tribes in Africa … they do have tribal cultures … and you get quite a volatile mix. Maybe add some refugees from Russia … Marxists who came here prior to the U.S. Civil War [now, that is quite a contradiction … a civil war] … the War of Southern Secession … the War between the States … and you really get a volatile mix.

And then there is the later Marxists … who came here after the Russian Revolution … importing the word according to Lenin and Stalin.

And then you have the adherents of Sharia.

Tremendous culture clash … with histories of violence.
 
Last edited:
Theo520 said:
Police numbers alone would probably prove my point, where they draw their weapon but don’t fire.
Click to expand...
With that gun on their hip, they’re still pretty intimidating. They don’t have to draw it to impress me.
 
It’s called getting them illegally/black market. So no, your argument fails. Moreover, the stats you are looking for have already been provided by the sources I’ve quoted, i.e., I’ve been doing my research else I would not say what I have been saying.
 
dvdjs said:
40.png
josie_L:
he pdf article from Harvard Law
Click to expand...
From Harvard Law?:roll_eyes:
Click to expand...
Because I’m sure you didn’t know what I meant to say, i.e., I only stated that the article is from the Journal of Harvard law, a few times now, so are you pretending ignorance or just being mean?
 
Last edited:
And who is the person who investigated and/or supposedly researched this study for Snopes, i.e., what are her credentials? Is she a criminologist, statistician, constitutional lawyer, professor, like the individuals for whom I sourced from?
 
Last edited:
josie_L said:
And who is the person who investigated and/or supposedly researched this study for Snopes, i.e., what are her credentials? Is she a criminologist, statistician, constitutional lawyer, professor, like the individuals for whom I sourced from?
Click to expand...
Why does that matter, no one is claiming that the pertinent facts require any specialized expertise, not has anyone made a dubious claim about that person’s credentials.
 
In the interest of full disclosure you might give the correct title of the publication, and note that it is a student publication, not a scholarly journal.
 
dvdjs said:
40.png
josie_L:
And who is the person who investigated and/or supposedly researched this study for Snopes, i.e., what are her credentials? Is she a criminologist, statistician, constitutional lawyer, professor, like the individuals for whom I sourced from?
Click to expand...
Why does that matter, no one is claiming that the pertinent facts require any specialized expertise, not has anyone made a dubious claim about that person’s credentials.
Click to expand...
And we know they are facts, because she said so??? I have already stated the academic/expert sources I’ve used to back up my argument, and you in return give me an author of whom I know nothing about.
 
Last edited:
josie_L said:
have already stated the academic/expert sources I’ve used to back up my argument
Click to expand...
Actually, you have not responded to the arguments at all. You just quote from the “paper” and neglect the arguments about their credibility and their methods.
 
I gave you what I myself read from the article, i.e., that it could be found in the Journal of Harvard law in pdf format, and that it was written by two criminologists. If you wanted to know more then look up the article and read it.
 
Last edited:
Yes. You did not respond to the criticism of the methods by a criminologist of distinction, nor the misrepresentation of the journal, nor the misrepresentation of the credentials of the authors.
 
And I won’t respond. Not until you can tell me why I should believe her “fact” checking to that of three criminologists and a statistician, one of whom wrote in the Washington Post just recently, i.e., who fact checked her sources? I noted that Hemenway is used often to repudiate anything that might support gun supporters, and the author at Snopes is no different.

Moreover, none of this is to say that there is a positive correlation/causation between more guns and higher rates of crime.
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top