Leader

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Law abiding citizen.....

Collapse

300x250 Mobile

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by zap
    ^5

    He won't even see the idiocy in this statement:




    .......I think he's just here to entertain himself....he's the only one who sees that as a result of his babbling
    basic sixth grade math

    Kleck claimed that there were 2.5 million self defense gun uses. According to the NCVS, there were 6 million burglaries in that year. Kleck says that 34% of the 2.5 million were burglaries. Here it goes.

    According to the NCVS, there were 1,300,000 "hot burglaries". follow? Okay, since 41% of american households own guns, we multiply 1,300,000 by .41

    1,300,000*.41= 533,000

    Because only two thirds of the victims were asleep, according to the NCVS (Hemenway 67), we multiply 533,000 by .6666666666666666
    533,000*.6666666666666666666666666666=355,333

    Now, we take 355,333 and divide it by 2.5 million to yield what should be 34%
    But wait!

    355,333/2,500,000=.142133333333333333333333333333.........

    Now we multiply the above result by 100 for the final percent.

    .142133333333333333333333333333.......*100= 14.21% Still think you remember simple math?

    Here: Lets take the difference between Kleck's statistic and reality's, and subtract it.

    It is roughly 20 percent.

    If we multiply 2.5 million by Kleck's 34%, we get 850,000.

    Lets subtract 355,333 from 850,000 to prove Kleck wrong. It equals 494,667

    Nice math

    -tink

    Comment


    • Roflmao

      OH...and don't forget to pat yourself on the back there Tink
      Nice math
      Last edited by zap; 12-04-2005, 07:59 PM.
      An impressionable child in a tumultuous world, and they say I'm at a difficult stage... --Meat Loaf

      Professional Stupidity Recognition Technician

      Comment


      • Originally posted by zap
        Roflmao

        OH...and don't forget to pat yourself on the back there Tink
        is it suddenly a sin to know arithmetic?

        -tink

        Comment


        • Hey Tinkertoy...

          What about the uses of guns for self defense that went "unreported" ?

          Does the math make it any less important for those folks that feel like their lives were saved by the mere prescence of a gun ?
          "The American People will never knowingly adopt Socialism. Under the name of "liberalism" they will adopt every segment of the socialist program,until one day America will be a socialist nation without knowing how it happened."

          Norman Thomas

          Comment


          • Originally posted by Tinkertoys
            On the Columbine topic, the weapons were LEGALLY purchased, according to testimony given to House Judiciary Committee by Robyn Anderson, on january 27, 2000.
            In the months prior to the attacks, Harris and Klebold illegally acquired a TEC-DC9 semi-automatic handgun, a Hi-Point 9 x 19 mm carbine, and two shotguns which they sawed off. - Source

            Originally posted by Tinkertoys
            Guns are not intended to kill people, and are used far more than guns. Statistically speaking, per use, guns kill or injure scores more people than cars.
            Well, yes, guns are intended to kill people- I'm assuming that's a typo.

            According the National Center for Health Statistics, Accidents are 5th leading cause of death last year. I'd tell you where firearms ranked, but it's not even on the list.

            From now on, I challenge everyone in the argument to back up their claims with actual sources- especially you, Tink. I've tried to find evidence to your claims, but I can't. I guess you just make up the facts to fit your argument.

            Originally posted by Tinkertoys
            How many criminals in japan have guns?
            Who needs guns when you have knives?

            Last December, 21-year-old Hiromasa Okamura, stabbed to death seven-year-old Toshiki Nakamura in an elementary-school playground in central Japan.

            Now, would that have happened if the criminal knew for a fact that at least one adult in the immediate area was armed with a handgun?

            Now remember, Tink. Back up your arguements. I did the same.
            You have no right to not be offended.-Neal Boortz

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Tinkertoys
              basic sixth grade math

              According to the NCVS, there were 1,300,000 "hot burglaries".

              two thirds of the victims were asleep, according to the NCVS
              I have read the NCVS from 1993 and cannot find any reference to "hot burglaries" or the 1,300,000 number you allege. Additionally, I cannot find any stats from that report about victims being asleep during the burglaries. Can you help me out and point me to where you found these stats?

              Since you quote NCVS stats I assume that you're aware that there are numerous critics of the accuracy of NCVS data. In fact, the methodology used by the NCVS was changes in 1994 in an attempt to respond to critics.

              Specifically, I believe Kleck provides a logical argument for why the NCVS study is ill equipped to assess defensive gun use. Here is just a portion of his rational:
              "...those who take the NCVS-based estimates seriously have consistently ignored the most pronounced limitations of the NCVS for estimating DGU frequency. The NCVS is a nonanonymous national survey conducted by a branch of the federal government, the U.S. Bureau of the Census. Interviewers identify themselves to Rs as federal government employees, even displaying, in face-to-face contacts, an identification card with a badge. Rs are told that the interviews are being conducted on behalf of the U.S. Department of Justice, the law enforcement branch of the federal government. As a preliminary to asking questions about crime victimization experiences, interviewers establish the address, telephone number, and full names of all occupants, age twelve and over, in each household [Page 155] they contact. [25] In short, it is made very clear to Rs that they are, in effect, speaking to a law enforcement arm of the federal government, whose employees know exactly who the Rs and their family members are, where they live, and how they can be recontacted.

              Even under the best of circumstances, reporting the use of a gun for self- protection would be an extremely sensitive and legally controversial matter for either of two reasons. As with other forms of forceful resistance, the defensive act itself, regardless of the characteristics of any weapon used, might constitute an unlawful assault or at least the R might believe that others, including either legal authorities or the researchers, could regard it that way. Resistance with a gun also involves additional elements of sensitivity. Because guns are legally regulated, a victim's possession of the weapon, either in general or at the time of the DGU, might itself be unlawful, either in fact or in the mind of a crime victim who used one. More likely, lay persons with a limited knowledge of the extremely complicated law of either self-defense or firearms regulation are unlikely to know for sure whether their defensive actions or their gun possession was lawful.

              It is not hard for gun-using victims interviewed in the NCVS to withhold information about their use of a gun, especially since they are never directly asked whether they used a gun for self-protection. They are asked only general questions about whether they did anything to protect themselves. [26] In short, Rs are merely given the opportunity to volunteer the information that they have used a gun defensively. All it takes for an R to conceal a DGU is to simply refrain from mentioning it, i.e., to leave it out of what may be an otherwise accurate and complete account of the crime incident.

              Further, Rs in the NCVS are not even asked the general self-protection question unless they already independently indicated that they had been a victim of a crime. This means that any DGUs associated with crimes the RS did not want to talk about would remain hidden. It has been estimated that the NCVS may catch less than one-twelfth of spousal assaults and one-thirty-third of rapes, [27] thereby missing nearly all DGUs associated with such crimes."
              Gary Kleck & Marc Gertz, Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology (Northwestern), Guns and Violence Symposium, vol. 86, no. 1, 1995: 150

              In a nutshell: how many people from New York City, San Francisco, Washington D.C., and other cities where gun ownership is restricted are going to volunteer to a Federal law enforcement official that they used a gun to defend themselves or their property?
              Phoenix

              "He that would make his own liberty secure, must guard even his enemy from opposition; for if he violates this duty he establishes a precedent that will reach himself." ~Thomas Paine

              Comment


              • [QUOTE=Tinkertoys]
                Originally posted by Centurion44
                I love this argument. Statistically speaking in the US, cars are responsible for far more deaths every year than firearms. So, does that mean we should stop making cars? How come we don't see more anti-car advocates protesting their manufacture? Could it be because they are a necessary piece of a equipment to guarentee their freedom? Well guess what, us warriors feel the same way about guns.

                [CARS (my edit)] are not intended to kill people, and are used far more than guns. Statistically speaking, per use, guns kill or injure scores more people than cars.
                Okay, so you have need for a car, so....we can't possibly ban cars. Even though, statistcally speaking MV deaths are a major problem.

                Okay, no one needs a motorcycle. Statistcally speaking, motorcycle deaths and major injuries are high. Let's ban them.

                Or, lets make a Federal motorcycle helmet law. Statistcally speaking that will stop the alledged high costs for head injuries due to motorcycle crashes.

                But, wait a minute. Statistcally speaking, there are many more head truama cases in car crashes than in motorcycle crashes. So let's make a federal vehicle helmet law- if you're in or on a vehicle- put on the helmet. Think of all the lives we'll save.

                Thousands of people have AIDS. Let's round them all up and kill them before they pass it on. Stop that deadly disease from spreading any further. Or, let's just outlaw homosexual acts. After all, statistcally speaking it can be shown there is a huge coorlation between that type of behavior and the spread of AIDS.

                Let's outlaw hydrdermic needles. Statistcally speaking, there is a high rate of deaths do to the use of illegal drugs. If we outlaw the needles, they can't shoot up.

                Alcohol causes a whole lot of serious injuries and deaths. Statistcally speaking, we can save thousands of people if we ban alcohol.

                Statistcally speaking, thousands of children die every year from drowning. Many drown in buckets. Lets ban everything that will hold enough water to drown in.

                Islamic fundamentalists kill hundreds of thousands of people each year. Statistcally speaking, we could save many lives if we ban the Islamic faith.

                I could go on and on. Don't argue statistics. It's a known fact to most people that statistics can be twisted to say just about anything the gatherer wishes. The day someone does a nation wide survey on guns (and talks to EVERY person) is the day I'll lend any credence to the report. I always find it humorous when I read a statistcal report and really look at the pool of respondents used to create the statistics. Most times, it's obviously set-up to achieve some predetermined result.
                "Blaming the prince of the fools should not blind anyone to the vast confederacy of fools that made him their prince" - Unknown Author
                ______________________________________________

                "That government is best which governs the least, because its people discipline themselves." - Thomas Jefferson
                ______________________________________________

                “There are two ways to conquer and enslave a nation. One is by the sword. The other is by debt.” - John Adams

                Comment


                • I didn't think I'd have time to put this together, but I did, so....

                  Tink- you aren't serious when you quote studies done by
                  "Blaming the prince of the fools should not blind anyone to the vast confederacy of fools that made him their prince" - Unknown Author
                  ______________________________________________

                  "That government is best which governs the least, because its people discipline themselves." - Thomas Jefferson
                  ______________________________________________

                  “There are two ways to conquer and enslave a nation. One is by the sword. The other is by debt.” - John Adams

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Watchman
                    Hey Tinkertoy...

                    What about the uses of guns for self defense that went "unreported" ?

                    Does the math make it any less important for those folks that feel like their lives were saved by the mere prescence of a gun ?

                    Now, question, why would someone not report it, to the amount of over three quarters of all crimes being unreported?

                    Feelings and reality are different.

                    -tink

                    Comment


                    • By they way, It is Harvard Injury Control Research Center.

                      -tink

                      Comment


                      • First off, using a gun in self-defense shouldn

                        Comment


                        • [QUOTE=FNA209]
                          Originally posted by Tinkertoys

                          Okay, so you have need for a car, so....we can't possibly ban cars. Even though, statistcally speaking MV deaths are a major problem.

                          Okay, no one needs a motorcycle. Statistcally speaking, motorcycle deaths and major injuries are high. Let's ban them.

                          Or, lets make a Federal motorcycle helmet law. Statistcally speaking that will stop the alledged high costs for head injuries due to motorcycle crashes.

                          But, wait a minute. Statistcally speaking, there are many more head truama cases in car crashes than in motorcycle crashes. So let's make a federal vehicle helmet law- if you're in or on a vehicle- put on the helmet. Think of all the lives we'll save.

                          According to William Lunt, M.D., car crash trauma cases are almost exclusively far less deadly than motorcycle trauma.

                          Thousands of people have AIDS. Let's round them all up and kill them before they pass it on. Stop that deadly disease from spreading any further. Or, let's just outlaw homosexual acts. After all, statistcally speaking it can be shown there is a huge coorlation between that type of behavior and the spread of AIDS.

                          Actually, AIDS is JUST as easily spread through heteorsexual and homosexual acts. Now, it is roughly fifty fifty.

                          Let's outlaw hydrdermic needles. Statistcally speaking, there is a high rate of deaths do to the use of illegal drugs. If we outlaw the needles, they can't shoot up.

                          The idea is to restrict gun manufacture and retail.

                          Alcohol causes a whole lot of serious injuries and deaths. Statistcally speaking, we can save thousands of people if we ban alcohol.

                          Or if we allowed full stem cell research, but God says it's evil, right?

                          Statistcally speaking, thousands of children die every year from drowning. Many drown in buckets. Lets ban everything that will hold enough water to drown in.

                          "In 1996, nearly 1,000 children ages 14 and under drowned. Children ages 4 and under accounted for nearly half of these deaths." Thousands? Try one thousand. And that was a very bad year for drownings. http://aquaticisf.org/facts.htm


                          Islamic fundamentalists kill hundreds of thousands of people each year. Statistcally speaking, we could save many lives if we ban the Islamic faith.

                          I somehow doubt the number approaches hundreds of thousands. But your banning ideas show low comprehension. K. Fiske, PhD.

                          I could go on and on. Don't argue statistics. It's a known fact to most people that statistics can be twisted to say just about anything the gatherer wishes. The day someone does a nation wide survey on guns (and talks to EVERY person) is the day I'll lend any credence to the report. I always find it humorous when I read a statistcal report and really look at the pool of respondents used to create the statistics. Most times, it's obviously set-up to achieve some predetermined result.

                          The NCVS is taken from actually committed crimes. If you dislike statistics, why believe Kleck?

                          -tink

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by Phoenix
                            I have read the NCVS from 1993 and cannot find any reference to "hot burglaries" or the 1,300,000 number you allege. Additionally, I cannot find any stats from that report about victims being asleep during the burglaries. Can you help me out and point me to where you found these stats?

                            Since you quote NCVS stats I assume that you're aware that there are numerous critics of the accuracy of NCVS data. In fact, the methodology used by the NCVS was changes in 1994 in an attempt to respond to critics.

                            Specifically, I believe Kleck provides a logical argument for why the NCVS study is ill equipped to assess defensive gun use. Here is just a portion of his rational:
                            "...those who take the NCVS-based estimates seriously have consistently ignored the most pronounced limitations of the NCVS for estimating DGU frequency. The NCVS is a nonanonymous national survey conducted by a branch of the federal government, the U.S. Bureau of the Census. Interviewers identify themselves to Rs as federal government employees, even displaying, in face-to-face contacts, an identification card with a badge. Rs are told that the interviews are being conducted on behalf of the U.S. Department of Justice, the law enforcement branch of the federal government. As a preliminary to asking questions about crime victimization experiences, interviewers establish the address, telephone number, and full names of all occupants, age twelve and over, in each household [Page 155] they contact. [25] In short, it is made very clear to Rs that they are, in effect, speaking to a law enforcement arm of the federal government, whose employees know exactly who the Rs and their family members are, where they live, and how they can be recontacted.

                            Even under the best of circumstances, reporting the use of a gun for self- protection would be an extremely sensitive and legally controversial matter for either of two reasons. As with other forms of forceful resistance, the defensive act itself, regardless of the characteristics of any weapon used, might constitute an unlawful assault or at least the R might believe that others, including either legal authorities or the researchers, could regard it that way. Resistance with a gun also involves additional elements of sensitivity. Because guns are legally regulated, a victim's possession of the weapon, either in general or at the time of the DGU, might itself be unlawful, either in fact or in the mind of a crime victim who used one. More likely, lay persons with a limited knowledge of the extremely complicated law of either self-defense or firearms regulation are unlikely to know for sure whether their defensive actions or their gun possession was lawful.

                            It is not hard for gun-using victims interviewed in the NCVS to withhold information about their use of a gun, especially since they are never directly asked whether they used a gun for self-protection. They are asked only general questions about whether they did anything to protect themselves. [26] In short, Rs are merely given the opportunity to volunteer the information that they have used a gun defensively. All it takes for an R to conceal a DGU is to simply refrain from mentioning it, i.e., to leave it out of what may be an otherwise accurate and complete account of the crime incident.

                            Further, Rs in the NCVS are not even asked the general self-protection question unless they already independently indicated that they had been a victim of a crime. This means that any DGUs associated with crimes the RS did not want to talk about would remain hidden. It has been estimated that the NCVS may catch less than one-twelfth of spousal assaults and one-thirty-third of rapes, [27] thereby missing nearly all DGUs associated with such crimes."
                            Gary Kleck & Marc Gertz, Journal of Criminal Law and Criminology (Northwestern), Guns and Violence Symposium, vol. 86, no. 1, 1995: 150

                            In a nutshell: how many people from New York City, San Francisco, Washington D.C., and other cities where gun ownership is restricted are going to volunteer to a Federal law enforcement official that they used a gun to defend themselves or their property?
                            I actually talked to the Bureau: The NCVS has does NOT ask about the legality of anything, and conceivably, never will. Admitting to owning, carrying, or using a gun admits nothing. An auto accident is not automatically your fault if you were the driver, is it? And by the way, the interviewers are NOT sworn law enforcement officers. And on the sexual crimes, according to Psychology Today, the major portion of sexual crimes are reported.

                            -tink

                            Comment


                            • "hot" burglaries are not mentioned in the NCVS, you are correct, Phoenix. It is a term used to describe burglaries while an occupant was in the house etc. It is simply much easier to say "hot" burglary than: burglaries while an occupant was in the house, business, etc.

                              -tink

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Centurion44
                                In the months prior to the attacks, Harris and Klebold illegally acquired a TEC-DC9 semi-automatic handgun, a Hi-Point 9 x 19 mm carbine, and two shotguns which they sawed off. - Source

                                You can post anything on Wikipedia, and if you truly examine the purchase, you will find it was not illegal. A girlfriend purchased the weapons.

                                Well, yes, guns are intended to kill people- I'm assuming that's a typo. No, its not. Cars are NOT INTENDED to kill people. So stop pretending they are by saying they kill more people than guns. The average american household uses a car for four+ hours a day. this is not even remotely true for guns

                                According the National Center for Health Statistics, Accidents are 5th leading cause of death last year. I'd tell you where firearms ranked, but it's not even on the list.

                                From now on, I challenge everyone in the argument to back up their claims with actual sources- especially you, Tink. I've tried to find evidence to your claims, but I can't. I guess you just make up the facts to fit your argument.


                                Who needs guns when you have knives?

                                Last December, 21-year-old Hiromasa Okamura, stabbed to death seven-year-old Toshiki Nakamura in an elementary-school playground in central Japan.

                                Now, would that have happened if the criminal knew for a fact that at least one adult in the immediate area was armed with a handgun? yes, probably. According to Fiske, who I have cited before, a person that crazed usually, and almost exclusively, is NOT deterred by things such as weapon possession. The man, apparently, was thinking irrationally, why would he suddenly be rational? Are you a psychologist with a PhD?

                                Now remember, Tink. Back up your arguements. I did the same.
                                Knives do not kill over thirty thousand people a year.

                                -tink

                                Comment

                                MR300x250 Tablet

                                Collapse

                                What's Going On

                                Collapse

                                There are currently 4579 users online. 314 members and 4265 guests.

                                Most users ever online was 158,966 at 04:57 AM on 01-16-2021.

                                Welcome Ad

                                Collapse
                                Working...
                                X