MUScoop
MUScoop => The Superbar => Topic started by: NCMUFan on April 18, 2022, 04:02:50 PM
-
https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime/armed-intruder-disguised-as-police-officer-is-shot-killed-by-resident-pa-cops-say/ar-AAWlbUY?ocid=msedgntp&cvid=18ef0839df0b45cfb84aed4e7467bcee
-
Did you think you were posting to Nextdoor?
-
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dykaJjegDEY
-
Toddler fatally shoots 4-year-old sister at Pennsylvania gas station:
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/toddler-fatally-shoots-4-year-old-sister-pennsylvania-gas-station-rcna23130
Illinois mother killed by her 3-year-old son playing with gun in grocery store parking lot:
https://abc7.com/mother-killed-by-child-accidental-shooting-dejah-bennet-toddler-shoots-mom/11651498/
Texas toddler shoots mom, baby sibling in Walmart parking lot:
https://globalnews.ca/news/8493684/toddler-shoots-mother-sibling-texas-walmart/
-
Toddler fatally shoots 4-year-old sister at Pennsylvania gas station:
https://www.nbcnews.com/news/us-news/toddler-fatally-shoots-4-year-old-sister-pennsylvania-gas-station-rcna23130
Illinois mother killed by her 3-year-old son playing with gun in grocery store parking lot:
https://abc7.com/mother-killed-by-child-accidental-shooting-dejah-bennet-toddler-shoots-mom/11651498/
Texas toddler shoots mom, baby sibling in Walmart parking lot:
https://globalnews.ca/news/8493684/toddler-shoots-mother-sibling-texas-walmart/
Your obsession with toddler shootings is creepy AF.
-
Your obsession with toddler shootings is creepy AF.
The fact that toddler shootings exist at all is even spookier.
-
Other dangers with children would be:
Access to lighters and matches (fires)
Around water deeper then themselves (drownings)
Bathtubs filled with water and electric appliances nearby (electrocution)
Abductions
and probably many others
It is very sad when children are just being children but do not understand the dangers.
-
Your obsession with toddler shootings is creepy AF.
And your obsession with 82 is normal?
-
Other dangers with children would be:
Access to lighters and matches (fires)
Around water deeper then themselves (drownings)
Bathtubs filled with water and electric appliances nearby (electrocution)
Abductions
and probably many others
It is very sad when children are just being children but do not understand the dangers.
The main purpose of matches, water, and appliances is NOT to kill people.
-
Like anything, things can be abused.
Ask the good folks in Waukesha.
-
Other dangers with children would be:
Access to lighters and matches (fires)
Around water deeper then themselves (drownings)
Bathtubs filled with water and electric appliances nearby (electrocution)
Abductions
and probably many others
It is very sad when children are just being children but do not understand the dangers. and their adult caretakers do not take proper care of their firearms.
FIFY
The differences with your list and 82's is that other than the matches/lighters, the child is only going to harm itself (which is still tragic). With guns, they can harm themselves and others. My guess is that child/firearm accidents are also more common than fires set by children where someone is significantly harmed, as well as more common than electrocution and I would guess about as common as drownings. These are guesses though so I could be wrong. Also, the main purpose of the items on your list is not to cause harm. The only purpose of a weapon is to cause harm.
Guns in rare instances can deter a crime like a home invasion. They are more likely to result in the death/injury of someone in the house. Most times they result in neither.
-
FIFY
The differences with your list and 82's is that other than the matches/lighters, the child is only going to harm itself (which is still tragic). With guns, they can harm themselves and others. My guess is that child/firearm accidents are also more common than fires set by children where someone is significantly harmed, as well as more common than electrocution and I would guess about as common as drownings. These are guesses though so I could be wrong. Also, the main purpose of the items on your list is not to cause harm. The only purpose of a weapon is to cause harm.
Guns in rare instances can deter a crime like a home invasion. They are more likely to result in the death/injury of someone in the house. Most times they result in neither.
Nah. The only way to stop a bad toddler with a gun is a good toddler with a gun.
-
Moral of the story, people don't follow laws so we need to become a lawless society.
Imagine how terrified some people on here would be to leave their houses if there were no laws.
Heck, you're not safe IN your houses. Breaking and entering? Not a crime. Homicide? Legal! Arson? Have at it!
-
Moral of the story, people don't follow laws so we need to become a lawless society.
Imagine how terrified some people on here would be to leave their houses if there were no laws.
Heck, you're not safe IN your houses. Breaking and entering? Not a crime. Homicide? Legal! Arson? Have at it!
The only solution is The Purge.
-
Nah. The only way to stop a bad toddler with a gun is a good toddler with a gun.
I don't disagree with your general premise, but do you ever get tired of repeating the exact same absurd hyperbole over and over?
-
I predict many participants here will find their ideological rivals to be persuasive and enlightening. Many, if not all, will change their minds and be persuaded by the civil debate and many anecdotes shared.
Truly, an inspiration on these internets.
-
I predict many participants here will find their ideological rivals to be persuasive and enlightening. Many, if not all, will change their minds and be persuaded by the civil debate and many anecdotes shared.
Truly, an inspiration on these internets.
+1
-
I predict many participants here will find their ideological rivals to be persuasive and enlightening. Many, if not all, will change their minds and be persuaded by the civil debate and many anecdotes shared.
Truly, an inspiration on these internets.
I don't know about you, but I never decide any personal ideological position until Ive heard anonymous internet posters wax poetically. Only then can I truly feel justified in my beliefs.
-
I don't disagree with your general premise, but do you ever get tired of repeating the exact same absurd hyperbole over and over?
Probably no more so that 4never, roqqet, etc.
-
Probably no more so that 4never, roqqet, etc.
I wasn't talking about general topics or points. I meant the specific "More toddlers with guns, FREEDOM" "The only solution is everyone needs a gun, AMERICA!". Like literal parroting of the same sentence, with maybe a slight differentiation.
Rocket posts the same premise, but in some always shifting multi paragraph eye rolling diatribe.
One you can play Scoop Bingo with on a weekly basis. The other gives you a migraine.
-
FIFY
The differences with your list and 82's is that other than the matches/lighters, the child is only going to harm itself (which is still tragic). With guns, they can harm themselves and others. My guess is that child/firearm accidents are also more common than fires set by children where someone is significantly harmed, as well as more common than electrocution and I would guess about as common as drownings. These are guesses though so I could be wrong. Also, the main purpose of the items on your list is not to cause harm. The only purpose of a weapon is to cause harm.
Guns in rare instances can deter a crime like a home invasion. They are more likely to result in the death/injury of someone in the house. Most times they result in neither.
This keeps coming up and it made me curious. This is from the CDC...
Although definitions of defensive gun use vary, it is generally defined as the use of a firearm to protect and defend one’s self, family, others, and/or property against crime or victimization.
Estimates of defensive gun use vary depending on the questions asked, populations studied, timeframe, and other factors related to the design of studies. The report Priorities for Research to Reduce the Threat of Firearm-Related Violence external icon indicates a range of 60,000 to 2.5 million defensive gun uses each year.
The CDC (for 2019 so a bit old -- these numbers have likely gone up) cites about 16K non-suicide deaths from firearms.
https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/firearms/fastfact.html
-
I wasn't talking about general topics or points. I meant the specific "More toddlers with guns, FREEDOM" "The only solution is everyone needs a gun, AMERICA!". Like literal parroting of the same sentence, with maybe a slight differentiation.
Rocket posts the same premise, but in some always shifting multi paragraph eye rolling diatribe.
One you can play Scoop Bingo with on a weekly basis. The other gives you a migraine.
Which is which?
-
I don't disagree with your general premise, but do you ever get tired of repeating the exact same absurd hyperbole over and over?
I think he's trying to be funny.
-
This keeps coming up and it made me curious. This is from the CDC...
The CDC (for 2019 so a bit old -- these numbers have likely gone up) cites about 16K non-suicide deaths from firearms.
https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/firearms/fastfact.html
So it's not from the CDC. The CDC links to a 2013 study and interestingly, when you click on the link on the CDC website, this is what comes up:
"Links with this icon indicate that you are leaving the CDC website.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) cannot attest to the accuracy of a non-federal website.
Linking to a non-federal website does not constitute an endorsement by CDC or any of its employees of the sponsors or the information and products presented on the website.
You will be subject to the destination website's privacy policy when you follow the link.
CDC is not responsible for Section 508 compliance (accessibility) on other federal or private website."
I tried to read the linked study but it's behind a paywall. I'd need to understand what the study is defining as "defensive gun use" before make a judgement. I'd be very surprised to learn that there were 60,000-2.5 million incidents a year where a crime was occurring and then stopped because someone brandished a firearm. That's a rate of 164.38 to 6,849.32 incidents a day. At the higher rate, that means virtually every gun owner in the US should be experiencing a crime that they stop with their firearm every few years.
Also keep in mind that I said death/injury, not non-suicide death. So you have to include all of the suicides and non-fatal injuries as well.
-
Moral of the story, people don't follow laws so we need to become a lawless society.
Yes indeed, the Wisdom of Ziggy. Who could be against such flawless logic?
-
Yes indeed, the Wisdom of Ziggy. Who could be against such flawless logic?
Liar. I never said that we don't need laws. I said that criminals don't give 2 chits about the law. That's why they are criminals.
I'm surprised someone as smart as you can't understand that simple distinction.
🐷🐷
-
Liar. I never said that we don't need laws. I said that criminals don't give 2 chits about the law. That's why they are criminals.
And that's relevant because?
I mean we have laws against embezzlement even though embezzlers don't give 2 chits about the law. Same with murderers, drunk drivers, peeping toms, arsonists, etc.
-
I don't disagree with your general premise, but do you ever get tired of repeating the exact same absurd hyperbole over and over?
Thanks, Officer. I'll take your constructive criticism to heart. Heck, I already did pre-emptively with a new one: "Guns good ... books bad!"
Of course, saying that I only repeat "the exact same absurd hyperbole over and over" is, in itself, hyperbole.
And I happen to think that when threads are created to extol the wonders of guns, a little absurd hyperbole is in order. Actually, a lot of absurd hyperbole is in order.
-
Drugs don't kill people, people kill people. Why would we ban heroin, cocaine, meth, etc.?
-
Drugs don't kill people, people kill people. Why would we ban heroin, cocaine, meth, etc.?
Have you been to Oregon?
-
Thanks, Officer. I'll take your constructive criticism to heart. Heck, I already did pre-emptively with a new one: "Guns good ... books bad!"
Of course, saying that I only repeat "the exact same absurd hyperbole over and over" is, in itself, hyperbole.
And I happen to think that when threads are created to extol the wonders of guns, a little absurd hyperbole is in order. Actually, a lot of absurd hyperbole is in order.
Ok Mike. At least you're honest about it...as an "independent" 8-)
-
Liar. I never said that we don't need laws. I said that criminals don't give 2 chits about the law. That's why they are criminals.
I'm surprised someone as smart as you can't understand that simple distinction.
🐷🐷
Nope. You said we don't need gun laws because criminals ignore them. Sorry you are dumb.
-
Nope. You said we don't need gun laws because criminals ignore them. Sorry you are dumb.
Wrong. 🐷🐷
-
This keeps coming up and it made me curious. This is from the CDC...
The CDC (for 2019 so a bit old -- these numbers have likely gone up) cites about 16K non-suicide deaths from firearms.
https://www.cdc.gov/violenceprevention/firearms/fastfact.html
That figure you cite was based on a faulty analysis of 1990 data that concluded that more than 200,000 people a year are shot in self-defense. Problem is, that's more than twice as many people that are either treated for or killed by gunshot wounds every year. Thus, according to the findings, there are at a bare minimum 100,000 criminals shot every year who somehow don't need treatment for their injuries or are also trauma surgeons who treat themselves.
Seems sketch.
-
as an "independent" 8-)
Here in N.C., we're officially called "Unaffiliated."
-
Dumb...
Quote from: ZiggysFryBoy on February 05, 2022, 02:50:49 PM
Ah, so we are back to the part where you think the criminals are going to follow the tougher gun laws.
Criminals.
Don't.
Care.
About.
Laws.
They are criminals.
Dumber...
Dumbass. The law abiding gun owners would have their firearms locked and inaccessible per NYC regulations.
Once again:
Criminals don't care about laws. They are criminals.
Dumbest!
Wrong. 🐷🐷
-
That figure you cite was based on a faulty analysis of 1990 data that concluded that more than 200,000 people a year are shot in self-defense. Problem is, that's more than twice as many people that are either treated for or killed by gunshot wounds every year. Thus, according to the findings, there are at a bare minimum 100,000 criminals shot every year who somehow don't need treatment for their injuries or are also trauma surgeons who treat themselves.
Seems sketch.
Well, the data I linked was on the CDC website, so not exactly like an NRA number. The 2 million number certainly seems outlandish, but the low number seems more than plausible to me, but I'm no expert.
Here is another source, from NPR, citing the Washington Post, so again, not what I would call gun advocates saying that around 100k uses is "reasonable"
https://www.npr.org/2018/04/13/602143823/how-often-do-people-use-guns-in-self-defense
The Post notes that "a more reasonable estimate" of self-defense gun uses equals about 100,000 annually, according to the NCVS data.
That may also be "sketch" but seems like a reasonable reliable source.
-
So it's not from the CDC. The CDC links to a 2013 study and interestingly, when you click on the link on the CDC website, this is what comes up:
"Links with this icon indicate that you are leaving the CDC website.
The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) cannot attest to the accuracy of a non-federal website.
Linking to a non-federal website does not constitute an endorsement by CDC or any of its employees of the sponsors or the information and products presented on the website.
You will be subject to the destination website's privacy policy when you follow the link.
CDC is not responsible for Section 508 compliance (accessibility) on other federal or private website."
I tried to read the linked study but it's behind a paywall. I'd need to understand what the study is defining as "defensive gun use" before make a judgement. I'd be very surprised to learn that there were 60,000-2.5 million incidents a year where a crime was occurring and then stopped because someone brandished a firearm. That's a rate of 164.38 to 6,849.32 incidents a day. At the higher rate, that means virtually every gun owner in the US should be experiencing a crime that they stop with their firearm every few years.
Also keep in mind that I said death/injury, not non-suicide death. So you have to include all of the suicides and non-fatal injuries as well.
Certainly fair enough. I wasn't trying to undermine anything you said, I was just curious and thought I would add it here.
-
Here in N.C., we're officially called "Unaffiliated."
It always boggles my mind that there is such a thing as official party registration in the first place. Guess that's just because it's not a thing in WI so it seems weird to put a party registration on the books with the gov't.