Gun Control & RKBA

gejohnston

(17,502 posts)

61. bullshit

Sat Mar 24, 2012, 04:56 PM

Mar 2012

It is distribution. The gangs are probably involved in distribution. If there were no consumers, there would be no money to buy the guns and ammo (of course, if drugs were legal they would just go to court like civilized people. Assuming they become civilized themselves.)

If you stumble across a pot grove in a national park, what are your chances of walking out alive? These people are not Utopian hippies.

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=103866520

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

118 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Kleck actually making some sense on lenient gun laws [View all] Starboard Tack Mar 2012 OP

Time to throw Gary Kleck under the bus... ellisonz Mar 2012 #1

Good shot. Hoyt Mar 2012 #4

Ummm, why? eqfan592 Mar 2012 #9

Had anyone here claimed this, then you'd have a great comeback. X_Digger Mar 2012 #2

You're joking right Starboard Tack Mar 2012 #12

When have I ever used that as a justification?!? Stop trying to put your fingers in my mouth, eh? X_Digger Mar 2012 #16

Ah, yes, the unlikely possibility that you may have to defend yourself. Starboard Tack Mar 2012 #21

Defending myself from violent attack. X_Digger Mar 2012 #22

Thanks for proving my point once again Starboard Tack Mar 2012 #27

Do you deny that those people saved themselves with guns? X_Digger Mar 2012 #29

Not at all Starboard Tack Mar 2012 #33

So it was a safety device to them, correct? n/t X_Digger Mar 2012 #35

It was a killing tool for society Starboard Tack Mar 2012 #42

Can't admit that the device they used to save themselves was a safety device? X_Digger Mar 2012 #45

Amazing. I think the same about you. Starboard Tack Mar 2012 #46

Your moral whip is past it's sell-by date. X_Digger Mar 2012 #47

Is that all you've got? Starboard Tack Mar 2012 #49

You really want to re-hash the same conversation we've had ten times? X_Digger Mar 2012 #50

I have never said that about handguns and you know it. Starboard Tack Mar 2012 #53

If you were being pragmatic.. X_Digger Mar 2012 #54

See you can't help but divert to personal attacks. Starboard Tack Mar 2012 #58

"pointing out stupidity" -- is just what I did. X_Digger Mar 2012 #59

"They saved themselves by taking other lives." Simo 1939_1940 Mar 2012 #97

Kleck has made a lot of sense for a very long time. This isn't news. NT Simo 1939_1940 Mar 2012 #3

Well it's news to me. Starboard Tack Mar 2012 #13

And of course you can't intelligently explain *why* he's a fool...... Simo 1939_1940 Mar 2012 #36

he has said this several times gejohnston Mar 2012 #5

I don't care about gun laws affecting crime rates. Starboard Tack Mar 2012 #11

he was talking about violent crime gejohnston Mar 2012 #24

I've read enough of it thanks. Starboard Tack Mar 2012 #25

about property, I agree to a point gejohnston Mar 2012 #32

Bit of a stretch Starboard Tack Mar 2012 #43

car jacking is not about theft gejohnston Mar 2012 #52

Hey, I'm a big fan of the Joe Pickett series by CJ Box Starboard Tack Mar 2012 #55

I did not say they were unarmed gejohnston Mar 2012 #57

I think you're way off the mark there. Starboard Tack Mar 2012 #60

bullshit gejohnston Mar 2012 #61

And, once again, how are you going to remove guns from the criminals. Full list please! Logical Mar 2012 #65

I'm not the one providing them Starboard Tack Mar 2012 #66

I love your idea. It is just not practical...... Logical Mar 2012 #67

I'm not talking about felons carrying guns Starboard Tack Mar 2012 #69

The only ones who will honor your rules are the non-criminals. n-t Logical Mar 2012 #73

us guys? gejohnston Mar 2012 #68

That's good. Starboard Tack Mar 2012 #70

really? gejohnston Mar 2012 #72

How many sides of a point would you like to argue in the same thread? Oneka Mar 2012 #74

Apparently, you have a comprehension problem? Starboard Tack Mar 2012 #78

My comprehension skillls work just fine Oneka Mar 2012 #94

It's not the first incident of cognitive dissonance with this particular poster. X_Digger Mar 2012 #100

So Kleck is basically stating... Clames Mar 2012 #6

so you are basically stating iverglas Mar 2012 #101

Agreed. mvccd1000 Mar 2012 #7

This post should be placed at the top of the main Gun Group page, in a nice frame or something. n/t NewMoonTherian Mar 2012 #8

So your gun is not concealed, I assume. Starboard Tack Mar 2012 #10

This old fart has his snub nosed .38 in his pants pocket ... spin Mar 2012 #14

Damned if you do, damned if you don't Starboard Tack Mar 2012 #15

The smartest approach is to stay out of strange neighborhoods late at night ... spin Mar 2012 #17

I couldn't agree more. Starboard Tack Mar 2012 #18

Hope you don't blow your nuts off one day! ellisonz Mar 2012 #102

"the honesty of open carry" rl6214 Mar 2012 #75

Correct me if I am wrong sarisataka Mar 2012 #19

You are correct Starboard Tack Mar 2012 #20

Lies, damned lies and... sarisataka Mar 2012 #23

I don't wonder how many Londoners regretted UK gun laws Starboard Tack Mar 2012 #26

I will differ sarisataka Mar 2012 #30

I don't buy the DGU numbers at all Starboard Tack Mar 2012 #31

total nonsense gejohnston Mar 2012 #34

Stopping imaginary aggression with aggression is not defensive Starboard Tack Mar 2012 #41

totally irrational rl6214 Mar 2012 #76

Irrational? Moi? That's funny. Starboard Tack Mar 2012 #80

Real vs. imaginary aggression. Straw Man Mar 2012 #98

Still spouting the party line I see Starboard Tack Mar 2012 #108

Still spouting something else, I see. Straw Man Mar 2012 #116

It's his own creation, thank god, stupid as it is. n/t X_Digger Mar 2012 #77

Offense vs defense sarisataka Mar 2012 #38

Where I come from, brandishing is a criminal offense, as it should be. Starboard Tack Mar 2012 #48

Perhaps I missunderstood sarisataka Mar 2012 #56

"offensive" is a matter of intent and not an absolute. PavePusher Mar 2012 #62

to clarify sarisataka Mar 2012 #64

Of course. You are correct. Starboard Tack Mar 2012 #71

Even Joyce funded gejohnston Mar 2012 #28

so-called "criminologist"? gejohnston Mar 2012 #37

This message was self-deleted by its author friendly_iconoclast Mar 2012 #39

It's obvious Kleck's not much of a criminologist- after all, he says things ST doesn't like. friendly_iconoclast Mar 2012 #40

You call 2.5 million DGU's science? Starboard Tack Mar 2012 #44

the NRA never paid him gejohnston Mar 2012 #51

So your own sociologist... ellisonz Mar 2012 #103

Actually gejohnston Mar 2012 #104

Maybe you should take a hint... ellisonz Mar 2012 #105

I do gejohnston Mar 2012 #106

IIRC 2.5M was only the upper limit of his estimate. PavePusher Mar 2012 #63

Honestly, if he'd said 500,000 I'd think the same. Kleck's survey is a joke. Starboard Tack Mar 2012 #79

then all phone surveys are bullshit gejohnston Mar 2012 #81

Many phone surveys are bullshit. Starboard Tack Mar 2012 #82

or more likely gejohnston Mar 2012 #83

I reject bad science. Starboard Tack Mar 2012 #84

In other words gejohnston Mar 2012 #85

Here's highly respected "criminologist" Marvin Wolfgang (RIP) Simo 1939_1940 Mar 2012 #91

"I seriously doubt if there are 10,000 legitimate DGU's a year." PavePusher Mar 2012 #95

I know! And I don't buy any of them. Starboard Tack Mar 2012 #96

"That's like doing a survey in an insane asylum and asking if anyone's seen Jesus of late." Simo 1939_1940 Mar 2012 #90

IIRC again, most of the pro-restrictionists base their claims upon studies... PavePusher Mar 2012 #93

And recall that the survey was taken when crime was at it's peak, so ST Simo 1939_1940 Mar 2012 #86

Let the record show that this member is willing to libel a liberal Democrat. Simo 1939_1940 Mar 2012 #87

I actually corrected that Starboard Tack Mar 2012 #88

".....the poll itself is so flawed." Simo 1939_1940 Mar 2012 #89

Kindly point to exactly where you retracted. NT Simo 1939_1940 Mar 2012 #92

So by virtue of the fact that you're not disclosing where you "corrected" your libelous Simo 1939_1940 Mar 2012 #99

They made efforts, but it made no difference Starboard Tack Mar 2012 #107

You continue to display your ignorance re. defensive gun use. Simo 1939_1940 Mar 2012 #109

You just don't get it do you? Starboard Tack Mar 2012 #110

So which is it? Is it a DGU only when someone's shot? X_Digger Mar 2012 #111

Oh right! Starboard Tack Mar 2012 #112

You let us know when your "DGU" research is done, mkay? n/t X_Digger Mar 2012 #113

OK Starboard Tack Mar 2012 #115

What is Defensive Gun Use? Starboard Tack Mar 2012 #114

here are a couple obvious examples of each gejohnston Mar 2012 #117

LOL All are good. All are inside the home. Starboard Tack Mar 2012 #118