Now that Michigan Rec is legal...

Norby Grown said:
https://money.cnn.com/interactive/news/handgun-homicides/

Remember this is only homicides. Of all the gun deaths in the US 66+% is suicide. 10+% is by police. leaving homicide at only 25% of the actual death by gun #'s. Which is where you get less than 3% of deaths by gun associated with rifles, which includes shotguns, muzzleloader, "assault rifles" and bolt action rifles and all other semi auto rifles.
And as for being a scrub for using a semi auto for hunting, I can see you don't hunt or have something against hunters? There is nothing wrong with using a semi auto for hunting. My remington shotgun which was left to me by my dad is semi auto.
And semi autos being able to be made "close" to weapons of war legally is BS. If you are talking about bump stocks, they could be used on my wifes .22 ruger just as easily as an ar or ak. And Ar's and AK's aren't a very hi powered rifle. 1 shotgun slug will do much more damage than 3-4 rounds of an AK or AR. You people who know nothing about guns are the ones who think they should all be lumped in without regards to lethality. Which is why in NYS. a .22lr can be considered an "assault rifle".

Handguns were used in 19 times as many murders than rifles were in 2016, according to the Uniform Crime Reporting data. Handguns killed nine times as many persons as rifles, shotguns, and other guns did combined. The type of firearm used was unknown for about 28 percent of all firearm murders. https://www.dailysignal.com/2018/02/22/fact-check-are-most-gun-crimes-committed-with-handguns/

Your standard M&P 9mm pistol comes with a 17rnd clip. That's why handguns are favored by criminals. Because they are concealable. If you are walking to a target you want to be able to get there without notice. An AR or AK is really hard to conceal. In NYS gov. Cuomo made it legal to have a 10rnd clip but if you load more than 7 rnds in it, it is a felony. I don't think someone who is intent on killing people would worry about that but people are getting felony convictions for loading more than 7 rnds who are only trying to protect themselves. All BS spread and initiated by Dems against the will of the people. It's only giving criminals the upper hand because they don't care and can get what they want. But dems have you thinking that gun laws are going to actually do anything about this.
And Russia has more homicides than the US and all semi autos are illegal. And London had more homicides by knives this year than NYC did with guns and knives per capita. Violence isn't because of the availability of guns it's because of cultural reasons, because of the way society is structured.
Click to expand...

I stopped reading after the first couple sentences. You can’t find any real statistics that back your claim so you try to spin real numbers with bullshit math that somehow magically gets you to 3% gun deaths by rifle...that doesn’t check out in even the slightest...and neither does your 97% of gun deaths are caused by pistols. You should go back to high school and take math over again. Sorry but debating with people who just make shit up out of thin air is not my style. Save your breath with the rest of your dumbass NRA talking points. I’m not listening. People stupid enough to say shit like “But dems have you thinking that gun laws are going to actually do anything about this.” aren’t worth talking to. We only have EVERY COUNTRY with gun laws in the WORLD as examples. Our country is one of the only ones who allow citizens to own firearms...and subsequently we have high rates of gun violence. Countries that ban guns have next to 0...0 Only an absolute moron will try and dispute that. Which i’m Sure you will against all of the statistics.
 
I can see you are a lost cause and I'm wasting my time. Have a nice day. I'm saying that your efforts should be to mandate a pistol permit course with training and enhanced background checks. Does that sound like NRA talk to you. Merely trying to put the laws where they will do the best work. The Safe act of NYS is useless. I'm against taking away "assault rifles" that is all. I am for criminal background checks on all sales. The NRA is useless, they stand in the way of good laws and don't protect people of color nor MJ patients. You're way off on you perception of me as being an NRA shill. But I can see where you stand and it's not with the data. A problem that is hard to solve is beyond your ability to look at statistics and decide a good course of action.
And notice why Russia is never included in your violence studies, because they already banned all semi automatic weapons and their death rate is higher than the US.
You're whole problem is that you don't understand statistics. You'd rather listen to and spew the same rhetoric your dem leaders feed you.
 
lol Russia does not even break down homicides by cause in their statistics. So all you could possibly draw from that is Russia has more murders. You certainly can’t prove they were by firearm since that data isn’t available. But your a 2A gun nut who will believe anything that supports his argument. It’s pathetic really how badly you have drank the kool-aid.
 
I didn't say russia had more GUN murders, I said they had more violence and deaths even though they have banned all semi autos. I check the stats, you're the one who has drank the kool aid. My views are middle of the road, I believe in better control over certain guns, mandatory background checks, banning bump stocks and a few other things gun nuts and the NRA don't stand behind. That's middle of the road. And I've looked at a lot of statistics. I started showing them to you and you gave up trying to understand the problem and started calling me a gun nut, strait out of the liberal playbook.
If you were able to understand statistics and the variables involved you'd think similarly to me in how to reduce gun deaths and violence.
 
Norby Grown said:
And notice why Russia is never included in your violence studies, because they already banned all semi automatic weapons and their death rate is higher than the US.
Click to expand...

Norby Grown said:
I didn't say russia had more GUN murders, I said they had more violence and deaths even though they have banned all semi autos.
Click to expand...

This is you in a nutshell and why I won’t debate you seriously anymore. You imply something and then later pretend that’s not what you were trying to say. You know we were talking about GUN violence. Don’t play stupid after I point out that your statistic means nothing to our conversation. Or pretend you meant something else. It’s pathetic and the hallmark of a total loser.
 
If you want clarification on something ask. I'm talking about violence and had brought in knives, bats and fists earlier in the conversation, trying to show people kill each other even when tehre aren't guns involved. Solving the violence problem doesn't have to do with guns. Sorry you don't get it. It's complicated stuff and I've done research. Sorry if this is all over your head but calling me a loser doesn't help anything, just shows you have to resort to something else since you can't deal with statistics and variables to solve problems.
 
You know you just look more and more pathetic when you get caught making up statistics and passing off bullshit information and then try to justify by saying that others just don’t understand. No, we understand perfectly, you thought you were being clever, got caught, look stupid and now want to talk your way out of it. Too bad.
 
did you miss the part where I said I dont debate idiots who make up statistics? I lost what little respect I had for you with your dishonest bullshit. I already destroyed your argument by showing how irrelevant it is to what we were talking about. You’re not going to get any serious responses from me anymore. You can cry about it all you want or you can fuck off. Up to you.
 
FrostyTheDruid said:
Too far left? I don’t think you understand the difference between left and right political spectrums there buddy. The founding fathers would have been considered by today’s standards far left or progressive.

https://www.vocabulary.com/dictionary/progressive

As for the 18th amendment, while you are looking up the difference between the right and left political spectrums, google the phrase “when did conservatives become Republicans”...that may shed some light on your questions about the 18th amendment... ;)

The controlled substances act was thanks to the Nixon administration. Whom, if memory serves was....oh right...a Republican. Darn pesky facts.
Click to expand...

Genius alcohol prohibition was clearly bore out of the Progressive Era in US politics (1890-1920)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progressive_Era

Furthermore the Controlled Substance Act (1970) was promoted, written and passed by an unquestionably Democrat controlled Congress (50s-80s). Nixon didn't sign that progressive bullshit because he was a Republican, but rather a lawyer IMHO https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progressive_Era
1280px-Combined--Control_of_the_U.S._House_of_Representatives_-_Control_of_the_U.S._Senate.png


The Democrat's revisionist history doesn't fly in reality, no matter how much disinformation you perpetuate or consume. The history of your beloved Democrats is clear if you only care to open your eyes. It should not be hard considering the cost and outcome of Detroit's strict loyalty to the Democratic party no?
 
TheMan13 said:
Genius alcohol prohibition was clearly bore out of the Progressive Era in US politics (1890-1920)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progressive_Era

Furthermore the Controlled Substance Act (1970) was promoted, written and passed by an unquestionably Democrat controlled Congress (50s-80s). Nixon didn't sign that progressive bullshit because he was a Republican, but rather a lawyer IMHO https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progressive_Era
1280px-Combined--Control_of_the_U.S._House_of_Representatives_-_Control_of_the_U.S._Senate.png


The Democrat's revisionist history doesn't fly in reality, no matter how much disinformation you perpetuate or consume. The history of your beloved Democrats is clear if you only care to open your eyes. It should not be hard considering the cost and outcome of Detroit's strict loyalty to the Democratic party no?
Click to expand...


You are really dumb.

A: just because it happened during that era does not mean it was “bore out” of that era or, to put it better bore out of Progressive policy. Did some progressives support prohibition. Yes. The religious idiots did. Was it created by progressives? Of course fucking not...

B: the fact you think Nixon was against the drug war is hilarious. You have to be the most uninformed pothead on the planet. I suggest you educate your stupid self.

http://www.drugpolicy.org/issues/brief-history-drug-war

In June 1971, President Nixon declared a “war on drugs.” He dramatically increased the size and presence of federal drug control agencies, and pushed through measures such as mandatory sentencing and no-knock warrants.

A top Nixon aide, John Ehrlichman, later admitted: “You want to know what this was really all about. The Nixon campaign in 1968, and the Nixon White House after that, had two enemies: the antiwar left and black people. You understand what I’m saying. We knew we couldn’t make it illegal to be either against the war or black, but by getting the public to associate the hippies with marijuana and blacks with heroin, and then criminalizing both heavily, we could disrupt those communities. We could arrest their leaders, raid their homes, break up their meetings, and vilify them night after night on the evening news. Did we know we were lying about the drugs? Of course we did.”Nixon temporarily placed marijuana in Schedule One, the most restrictive category of drugs, pending review by a commission he appointed led by Republican Pennsylvania Governor Raymond Shafer.

In 1972, the commission unanimously recommended decriminalizing the possession and distribution of marijuana for personal use. Nixon ignored the report and rejected its recommendations.


Who’s the revisionist now?
 
Last edited:
Toss this up there with your little chart showing who had the majority in Congress when this bill was passed. What do you know, supported by Republicans in a way higher percentage and opposed by Democrats in a higher percentage. As usual...
 

Attachments

  • 8F3E18CB-26AD-49F7-9C2B-A37A208746C8.jpeg
    8F3E18CB-26AD-49F7-9C2B-A37A208746C8.jpeg
    191.2 KB · Views: 3
Try this one more time. This is from the FBI stats.
The FBI's Supplemental Homicide
Reports show that 57% of all murders
in 1993 were committed with hand-
guns, 3% with rifles, 5% with shotguns,
and 5% with firearms where the type
was unknown.
These are murders, not suicides or cop shootings. and 3% of all murders were committed with a RIFLE, of which "assault rifles" are a subset. Most if not all suicides and cop shootings are with handguns. So out of all deaths by firearm about 3% or less are committed with rifles, of which "assault rifles" are a subset as are semi auto rifles. If you stop reading when I give you the citations you ask for you'll never get it, which is what youu want just so you can hurl insults at me. Which is why I stopped replying to you until you insulted me again, for no reason.
I can't find the original site I got the exact stats from about 2 years ago so I tried to present logic and stats from other sites but you don't want to do the hard mental work of looking at what I cited so you can learn. You even said it yourself that you stopped reading because it was too hard for you!
 
This is about Michigan becoming recreational legal, its not about who packs what gun, who owns what gun, and who is right or wrong.
 
Norby Grown said:
Try this one more time. This is from the FBI stats.
The FBI's Supplemental Homicide
Reports show that 57% of all murders
in 1993 were committed with hand-
guns, 3% with rifles, 5% with shotguns,
and 5% with firearms where the type
was unknown.
These are murders, not suicides or cop shootings. and 3% of all murders were committed with a RIFLE, of which "assault rifles" are a subset. Most if not all suicides and cop shootings are with handguns. So out of all deaths by firearm about 3% or less are committed with rifles, of which "assault rifles" are a subset as are semi auto rifles. If you stop reading when I give you the citations you ask for you'll never get it, which is what youu want just so you can hurl insults at me. Which is why I stopped replying to you until you insulted me again, for no reason.
I can't find the original site I got the exact stats from about 2 years ago so I tried to present logic and stats from other sites but you don't want to do the hard mental work of looking at what I cited so you can learn. You even said it yourself that you stopped reading because it was too hard for you!
Click to expand...

This clown is still trying to drudge up 30 yr old statistics to do his bad math, spin and prove a bullshit point? Get a life dude...:lol::lol::lol:

You can’t even cite a legit source? You’re a clown. Going straight to my ignore list now.
 
DemonTrich said:
This is about Michigan becoming recreational legal, its not about who packs what gun, who owns what gun, and who is right or wrong.
Click to expand...
I stopped but this guy doesn't like it when he can understand data and goes to name calling. Even after I stopped he continued with the insults.
And the data is from legit sites, FBI and others. And it's 25 years ago, not 30. He can't even add and subtract, I can see why data scares him and he only listens to the rebuttals given to him by party lines.
And I dislike both parties the same, I'm an independent, not a republican nor in the NRA so he doesn't know how to respond because all republicans or dems paint the "opposition" as the other side.
Go ahead, ignore me like you ignore the truth, it suits you.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top