• A Mathematical Model Of Gun Control
    608 replies, posted
[QUOTE=NoDachi;41663017]its a single hospital. [editline]31st July 2013[/editline] I'm sure there are, but that isn't what academic assertions are all about. It was more about gun culture, rather than end user requirements.[/QUOTE] And that's one hospital, not every hospital. It's still different everwhere and the chances are still extremely low.
[QUOTE=dogmachines;41663044]Not to mention the people that buy guns to hunt, or for competition shooting, or to go down to the range with a group of friends. Most people don't spend $700+ on an AR-15 because it makes them feel manly.[/QUOTE] People can hunt to feel manly, enter competitions to feel potent and go down the range for male bonding.
[QUOTE=NoDachi;41663058]People can hunt to feel manly, enter competitions to feel potent and go down the range for male bonding.[/QUOTE] Hunting and competing are some of the oldest hobbies in the book and "male bonding" is just like, y'know, spending time with your friends. You can put masculine sounding words on things and it doesn't make it any worse than it really is.
[QUOTE=NoDachi;41663058]People can hunt to feel manly, enter competitions to feel potent and go down the range for male bonding.[/QUOTE] They can also buy a gun to stick their dick in it, that doesn't mean that's what fuels gun culture. I'm curious how "male bonding" is a response to feeling impotent. Same goes for hunting to feel manly. I can see how the triumph of a successful hunt can leave you feeling good, but the same could be said for anything that presents a challenge.
[QUOTE=Protocol7;41663077]Hunting and competing are some of the oldest hobbies in the book [/QUOTE] Yeah.
[QUOTE=NoDachi;41663058]People can hunt to feel manly, enter competitions to feel potent and go down the range for male bonding.[/QUOTE] [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Epinephrine[/url] [url]http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Endorphins[/url] [B]Breaking news[/B], doing something you find fun and entertaining makes you feel awesome. This was previously unheard of.
[QUOTE=NoDachi;41663175]Yeah.[/QUOTE] Well they didn't have guns back in 25 BCE so I can't say I see the point you're making.
Please get different avatars you two this thread is difficult to follow.
[QUOTE=NoDachi;41663058]People can hunt to feel manly, enter competitions to feel potent and go down the range for male bonding.[/QUOTE] Or they hunt to feed their family, compete to stay active and hone their skills, and go to the range to prepare for both of the above, or to practice with their carry pistol. All you've been saying these last few pages is "American gun culture is based around jealous men with small dicks overcompensating," and it really makes you look like one hell of an ignorant douche, especially since you're basing it off one or two ads and a bunch of gangbangers in LA. If America was as irresponsible and jealous as you seem to be trying to say it is then the country would have destroyed itself years ago because everyone with a gun would have just started shooting it at everything, and every "jealous, impotent" man would have shot anyone with a bigger gun than his.
[QUOTE=scout1;41663248]Please get different avatars you two this thread is difficult to follow.[/QUOTE] The one that shakes it's head is pro gun, the 2 frame loop is anti-gun. There's also a giant title on one.
[QUOTE=DaCommie1;41663251]Or they hunt to feed their family, compete to stay active and hone their skills, and go to the range to prepare for both of the above, or to practice with their carry pistol. All you've been saying these last few pages is "American gun culture is based around jealous men with small dicks overcompensating," and it really makes you look like one hell of an ignorant douche, especially since you're basing it off one or two ads and a bunch of gangbangers in LA. If America was as irresponsible and jealous as you seem to be trying to say it is then the country would have destroyed itself years ago because everyone with a gun would have just started shooting it at everything, and every "jealous, impotent" man would have shot anyone with a bigger gun than his.[/QUOTE] exaggerate more
There is a middle-ground between allowing basically anyone to buy, own and shoot guns and banning them all together. Hunters are probably going to be the [I]least[/I] dangerous gun-owners considering guns are a part of their very proffession and I don't know how it works in the US but I can imagine you're not allowed to just go out in the woods anytime of the year and hunt without permit - so hunters are probably very dedicated, educated and safe gun-owners.
[QUOTE=NoDachi;41664062]exaggerate more[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=NoDachi;41642954]Its funny because that firearm is statistically more likely to be used on your family than to protect them. But sure, ignore that for the sake of your hero fantasy.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=NoDachi;41646647]You live in a fantasy world where suddenly the criminal world is going to turn it into fallout using homemade weapons and ammunition. That simply isn't the case.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=NoDachi;41658739]but recreational shooting is just a pastiche of actual shooting.[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=NoDachi;41661107]Its bad only because it supports a culture and industry that is detrimental to society. [/QUOTE] [QUOTE=NoDachi;41661956]muh masculinity[/QUOTE] [QUOTE=NoDachi;41662245]Well it practically is fueled by perceived male impotence and/or fear.[/QUOTE] With these snippets, you have demonstrated the following: Gun owners are rabid morons with small dicks driven into owning a firearm because they are insecure about their masculinity and take solace in the fact they have the capability to easily kill another man, which they frequently fantasize over. Also crime that can result in your death doesn't exist and your stupid for trying to prevent it because, no-one but the regional government should be trusted with these devices, as they are far too dangerous to be in civilian hands. [editline]31st July 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=MrJazzy;41664154]There is a middle-ground between allowing basically anyone to buy, own and shoot guns and banning them all together. Hunters are probably going to be the [I]least[/I] dangerous gun-owners considering guns are a part of their very proffession and I don't know how it works in the US but I can imagine you're not allowed to just go out in the woods anytime of the year and hunt without permit - so hunters are probably very dedicated, educated and safe gun-owners.[/QUOTE] First off, hunters are some of the most flip-floppy asinine individuals you will ever have the displeasure of encountering in the U.S. Also whats so bad about your neighbor owning a semi-auto AR 15? By your logic if he is safe with it it should be of no concern.
[QUOTE=dogmachines;41663316]The one that shakes it's head is pro gun, the 2 frame loop is anti-gun. There's also a giant title on one.[/QUOTE] Hey, uhhh. Just saying, NoDachi doesn't seem to be against the eradication of guns entirely, more the restrictions and removal of guns in the home and on the streets for "defence" reasons. As he's said, he's been target shooting in the past. In the UK we have a total ban on handguns and most rifles, you can buy shotguns and certain rifles still, but you need a better reason than "defence", you need to be vouched for by numerous people (preferably with influence), a totally clean record and a well built, properly secure gun safe that separates ammo and weapon completely. We can still get guns, in a limited sense, for hunting and target shooting, but we implement a strict gun control for personal defence and home storage because you don't need that shit, and surprise surprise! we don't get many people killed on our streets with guns! Yeah, the gangs of London and other big cities have access to them, but they get found out quite quickly and removed from circulation. Just because someone is arguing in favour of gun control doesn't mean they want to remove all the guns ever and burn the users in a furnace. That's a massive logical fallacy.
[QUOTE=hexpunK;41664264]Just because someone is arguing in favour of gun control doesn't mean they want to remove all the guns ever and burn the users in a furnace. That's a massive logical fallacy.[/QUOTE] Yeah, and so is saying stuff like "muh masculinity," "you live in a fantasy world," "your hero fantasy," et cetera.
[QUOTE=NoDachi;41662370]Are we really reducing to anecdotal evidence? Surely the amount of people who are killed and injured every year due to celebratory gunfire proves that there is a substantial amount of owners who are not professional.[/QUOTE] you say that right after you used your opinion of a single manufacturers advertising campaign as evidence against the entire "gun culture" even though I an other people have told you that we own small caliber pistols and a few rounds of ammo for the sole purpose of defense.
[QUOTE=Protocol7;41664450]Yeah, and so is saying stuff like "muh masculinity," "you live in a fantasy world," "your hero fantasy," et cetera.[/QUOTE] What? Saying guns aren't a phallic power-giving object is wrong now? The manufacturers seem to agree with these mindsets ("Your man card!", various other hero fantasty perpetrators).
[QUOTE=hexpunK;41664530]What? Saying guns aren't a phallic power-giving object is wrong now? The manufacturers seem to agree with these mindsets ("Your man card!", various other hero fantasty perpetrators).[/QUOTE] *a single manufacturers advertising team ftfy when in doubt, generalize. I think I should say right now that I don;t give two shits about assault weapons and whether or not I can get one. Honestly no one could use them to defend their home against an attacker, they are pretty much useless for everything but war. That said I should be allowed to own a pistol, for the purpose of defense
[QUOTE=frozensoda;41664557]*a single manufacturers advertising team ftfy when in doubt, generalize.[/QUOTE] A single manufacturer (lmao, it's more than just the manufacturers, it's the retailers too) and an entire group of people in the gun culture who believe that when "thu gubment" comes for their guns they will be able to fight them off? Okay, yeah, you were totally right!
[QUOTE=hexpunK;41664589]A single manufacturer (lmao, it's more than just the manufacturers, it's the retailers too) and an entire group of people in the gun culture who believe that when "thu gubment" comes for their guns they will be able to fight them off? Okay, yeah, you were totally right![/QUOTE] and you know this because of all the time you have spent in america? or becuase of all the unbiased news that you watch? or do you know this because that's what everyone says it's funny how everyone here disagreeing with my ability to defend myself either lives in another country that doesn't compare, or lives in a rich area. If I took my idea of what someone from each European country is simply from their worst companies ads, how would I see you?
[QUOTE=hexpunK;41664530]What? Saying guns aren't a phallic power-giving object is wrong now? The manufacturers seem to agree with these mindsets ("Your man card!", various other hero fantasty perpetrators).[/QUOTE] The ad campaign of a single company doesn't reflect the actual behavior or mantra most gun owners have. Also if guns are so phallic and masculine, then why are more women purchasing guns? [url]http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/04/09/more-and-more-women-are-buying-guns-heres-why/[/url] What your doing now is called generalizing. Normally that's deemed bad and uninformed.
[QUOTE=hexpunK;41664589]A single manufacturer (lmao, it's more than just the manufacturers, it's the retailers too) and an entire group of people in the gun culture who believe that when "thu gubment" comes for their guns they will be able to fight them off? Okay, yeah, you were totally right![/QUOTE] so me and other level headed people should do what you say because you don't like a completely unrelated group of people? hmm... that sounds familiar.
[QUOTE=snapshot32;41664627]The ad campaign of a single company doesn't reflect the actual behavior or mantra most gun owners have. Also if guns are so phallic and masculine, then why are more women purchasing guns? [url]http://www.theblaze.com/stories/2013/04/09/more-and-more-women-are-buying-guns-heres-why/[/url] What your doing now is called generalizing. Normally that's deemed bad and uninformed.[/QUOTE] Women purchasing something doesn't stop it being a masculine penis thing. It just means women are buying it. Also did you really link to the blaze? A publication founded by Glenn fucking Beck? [editline]31st July 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=frozensoda;41664671]so me and other level headed people should do what you say because you don't like a completely unrelated group of people? hmm... that sounds familiar.[/QUOTE] No, you and other level headed people should do what careful research and statistics back up. But it's really hard to get these statistics when you've got pro-gun lobbyists trying to interfere because it hurts their business and shitnuggets like the NRA pumping money into your politicians to avoid any real gun legislation.
[QUOTE=hexpunK;41664678]Women purchasing something doesn't stop it being a masculine penis thing. It just means women are buying it. Also did you really link to the blaze? A publication founded by Glenn fucking Beck? [editline]31st July 2013[/editline] No, you and other level headed people should do what careful research and statistics back up. But it's really hard to get these statistics when you've got pro-gun lobbyists trying to interfere because it hurts their business and shitnuggets like the NRA pumping money into your politicians to avoid any real gun legislation.[/QUOTE] Careful research and statistics don't stop someone from kicking my door in, a pistol does.
[QUOTE=hexpunK;41664678]Women purchasing something doesn't stop it being a masculine penis thing. It just means women are buying it. Also did you really link to the blaze? A publication founded by Glenn fucking Beck?[/QUOTE] I'm sorry, but that's exactly what that means. For an object to be labeled a phallic and masculine then that means a disproportionate amount of men to women must back that object. Your argument is moot. Also it was the first link on google, would you like me to link to a different site? [url]http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/11/us/rising-voice-of-gun-ownership-is-female.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0[/url] [url]http://www.inquisitr.com/519514/more-women-are-buying-and-using-guns/[/url]
I think you are all just arguing to prove your masculinity therefore your points are invalid! /Sarcasm
[QUOTE=snapshot32;41664734]I'm sorry, but that's exactly what that means. For an object to be labeled a phallic and masculine then that means a disproportionate amount of men to women must back that object. Your argument is moot. Also it was the first link on google, would you like me to link to a different site? [url]http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/11/us/rising-voice-of-gun-ownership-is-female.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0[/url] [url]http://www.inquisitr.com/519514/more-women-are-buying-and-using-guns/[/url][/QUOTE] Or perhaps out society is pushing women into behaving more masculine because that is what we deem as a position of power? And now we enter the territory of feminism, we should back out ASAP. It's not safe there. But thank you for finding a source not founded by a massive tool.
[QUOTE=hexpunK;41664589]A single manufacturer (lmao, it's more than just the manufacturers, it's the retailers too) and an entire group of people in the gun culture who believe that when "thu gubment" comes for their guns they will be able to fight them off? Okay, yeah, you were totally right![/QUOTE] When talking about fallacies it's probably not in your best interest to fly straight into a strawman.
[QUOTE=hexpunK;41664752]Or perhaps out society is pushing women into behaving more masculine because that is what we deem as a position of power?[/QUOTE] Or maybe, just maybe, those ladies just want to defend themselves. Or poke holes in some paper. Or hunt. Or whatever.
[QUOTE=frozensoda;41664726]Careful research and statistics don't stop someone from kicking my door in, a pistol does.[/QUOTE] Research and statistics can bring us into a society where you won't need a pistol to save your ass. [editline]31st July 2013[/editline] [QUOTE=Protocol7;41664756]When talking about fallacies it's probably not in your best interest to fly straight into a strawman.[/QUOTE] The "strawman" in there does exist, but as pointed out, most people view them as fucking maniacs because they are just that.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.