Results 1 to 18 of 18

Thread: This article pissed me off

  1. #1
    Regular Member bebop4one's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    142

    This article pissed me off

    http://news.yahoo.com/gun-debate-pri...BSh2EACjfQtDMD

    A few select quotes for your enjoyment:

    "I have seen it in the nativist camp, where these grizzled old white extremists try to provoke their enemies with guns on their hips, itching to blast someone."

    or

    "Acting like a deadly threat is imminent, walking around stores jerking your head around ... 'on a swivel,' planning your tactical movement from the gas pump to the cash register IS paranoid behavior, unless you live in Fallujah"

    The article appears to try and present an unbias look at the rise of gun owners in America, but it seems to be leaning a little too far to the left for my taste.
    "I have a very strict gun control policy: if there's a gun around, I want to be in control of it."
    - Clint Eastwood

  2. #2
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Location
    Puyallup, Washington, United States
    Posts
    50
    Hmmm. "One of 555 examples" vs "between 8 million and 11 million citizens carrying concealed guns in public". Goodness, if my math serves me correct, that's a whopping 0.0069% to 0.0050%. I wish I has those kind of odds walking down Third between James and Yesler on getting robbed, mugged, shot, killed, etc.

    First read the "ARGUMENTS FOR CONCEALED CARRY". Packed full of statistics, facts, and numbers.
    - National Crime Victimization Survey reports that Americans used guns in self-defense 338,700 times over five years ending in 2011.

    - In a Reuters/Ipsos poll last spring, 75 percent favored concealed carry by eligible citizens.

    - The number of incidents in which concealed-gun carriers kill innocent people is a fraction of 1 percent of all gun-related homicides.

    - In North Carolina, one of only a handful of states that reveals the identities of permit holders, 200 of the 240,000 concealed carriers (.08 percent) committed felonies of all types, including eight shooting deaths, in the five-year period ending in 2011. This compares with about 2.5 percent of voting-age Americans who have a felony rap sheet, according to The Sentencing Project.

    - Surprisingly to some, 91 percent of 15,000 police officers polled recently by the PoliceOne organization also said they support citizens' ability to carry concealed weapons.

    Just to site a few.

    Then read the "ARGUMENTS AGAINST".

    - "Just because you're a law-abiding citizen today doesn't mean you're going to be one tomorrow." - Assumption. Guilty until proven Innocent?

    - "In a lot of these cases," - What cases?

    - For some gun-control advocates, the trend toward concealed carry also raises troubling undercurrents of race and class. They cite words often seen on pro-gun Internet forums – the "good guy" versus "the thug," a term that commentators from the blogosphere to the sidelines of the NFL (Seattle Seahawks cornerback Richard Sherman) are calling the "new N-word." - BECAUSE EVERYTHING ON THE INTERNET IS REAL!

    - Gun-control advocates consequently see the gun-carry movement as populated at least in part by white men who feel politically unempowered and who may be inclined to indulge in displays of extra muscle and power over their fellow citizens. - RACISTS! Lol, Politically underpowered, hmm? Because gun ownership is always politically motivated.

    -"Acting like every situation involves a critical threat is goofy.... Don't confuse life with movies." - But don't dare bring up the proportion of those with a politically anti-gun position that have committed mass murders.

    When it comes down to the nitty gritty, the anti-gun groups have one and one only tactic in convincing others of their misguided opinions; "ad hominem". And boy, do they love to use it.
    Last edited by Alsherry; 02-05-2014 at 12:58 AM.

  3. #3
    Regular Member bebop4one's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2013
    Location
    Seattle
    Posts
    142
    Quote Originally Posted by Alsherry View Post
    Hmmm. "One of 555 examples" vs "between 8 million and 11 million citizens carrying concealed guns in public". Goodness, if my math serves me correct, that's a whopping 0.0069% to 0.0050%. I wish I has those kind of odds walking down Third between James and Yesler on getting robbed, mugged, shot, killed, etc.

    First read the "ARGUMENTS FOR CONCEALED CARRY". Packed full of statistics, facts, and numbers.
    - National Crime Victimization Survey reports that Americans used guns in self-defense 338,700 times over five years ending in 2011.

    - In a Reuters/Ipsos poll last spring, 75 percent favored concealed carry by eligible citizens.

    - The number of incidents in which concealed-gun carriers kill innocent people is a fraction of 1 percent of all gun-related homicides.

    - In North Carolina, one of only a handful of states that reveals the identities of permit holders, 200 of the 240,000 concealed carriers (.08 percent) committed felonies of all types, including eight shooting deaths, in the five-year period ending in 2011. This compares with about 2.5 percent of voting-age Americans who have a felony rap sheet, according to The Sentencing Project.

    - Surprisingly to some, 91 percent of 15,000 police officers polled recently by the PoliceOne organization also said they support citizens' ability to carry concealed weapons.

    Just to site a few.

    Then read the "ARGUMENTS AGAINST".

    - "Just because you're a law-abiding citizen today doesn't mean you're going to be one tomorrow." - Assumption.

    - "In a lot of these cases," - What cases?

    - For some gun-control advocates, the trend toward concealed carry also raises troubling undercurrents of race and class. They cite words often seen on pro-gun Internet forums – the "good guy" versus "the thug," a term that commentators from the blogosphere to the sidelines of the NFL (Seattle Seahawks cornerback Richard Sherman) are calling the "new N-word." - BECAUSE EVERYTHING ON THE INTERNET IS REAL!

    - Gun-control advocates consequently see the gun-carry movement as populated at least in part by white men who feel politically unempowered and who may be inclined to indulge in displays of extra muscle and power over their fellow citizens. - RACISTS! Lol, Politically underpowered, hmm? Because gun ownership is always politically motivated.

    -"Acting like every situation involves a critical threat is goofy.... Don't confuse life with movies." - But don't dare bring up the proportion of those with a politically anti-gun position that have committed mass murders.

    When it comes down to the nitty gritty, the anti-gun groups have one and one only tactic in convincing others of their misguided opinions; "ad hominem". And boy, do they love to use it.
    Bravo! Well stated!
    "I have a very strict gun control policy: if there's a gun around, I want to be in control of it."
    - Clint Eastwood

  4. #4
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    N47º 12’ x W122º 10’
    Posts
    1,762
    "Acting like a deadly threat is imminent, walking around stores jerking your head around ... 'on a swivel,' planning your tactical movement from the gas pump to the cash register IS paranoid behavior, unless you live in Fallujah"

    That is pretty funny.

  5. #5
    Regular Member Freedom1Man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Greater Eastside Washington
    Posts
    4,690

    Social lounge

    This should not be state limited and should be moved to the Social lounge or General Discussion.

    Thank you for the head's up on the article though.
    Provision for free medical attendance and nursing, for clothing, for food, for housing, for the education of children, and a hundred other matters, might with equal propriety be proposed as tending to relieve the employee of mental strain and worry. --- These matters obviously lie outside the orbit of congressional power. (Railroad Retirement Board v Alton Railroad)

  6. #6
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Thru Death's Door in Wisconsin
    Posts
    13,155

    This article pissed me off. As was intended. Divide and conquer polarization.

    Y'all can't see it as rank trollery by the controllers?

    Don't feed a troll, any troll, a luser poster, a phobic mammy, or a trollish enterprise.
    I am responsible for my writing, not your understanding of it.

  7. #7
    Regular Member Difdi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Seattle, Washington, USA
    Posts
    996
    Quote Originally Posted by Alsherry View Post
    - "Just because you're a law-abiding citizen today doesn't mean you're going to be one tomorrow." - Assumption.
    Exactly. Every criminal was a law-abiding citizen until they stopped being one. I wonder, do they realize that they are arguing at least as strongly against the concept of innocent until proven guilty as they are against ownership of firearms?

  8. #8
    Regular Member Whitney's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Poulsbo, Kitsap County, Washington, USA
    Posts
    449

    If the shoe fits

    Quote Originally Posted by Difdi View Post
    Exactly. Every criminal was a law-abiding citizen until they stopped being one. I wonder, do they realize that they are arguing at least as strongly against the concept of innocent until proven guilty as they are against ownership of firearms?
    For thinkers.....
    "Well your equipped to be a prostitue but does that make you one?"
    "Just because you are a law abiding citizen today doent mean your going to be one tomorrow."

    ~Whitney
    The problem with America is stupidity.
    I'm not saying there should be capital punishment for stupidity, but why don't we just take the safety labels off of everything and let the problem solve itself?

  9. #9
    Regular Member Freedom1Man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Greater Eastside Washington
    Posts
    4,690
    Quote Originally Posted by Whitney View Post
    For thinkers.....
    "Well your equipped to be a prostitue but does that make you one?"
    "Just because you are a law abiding citizen today doent mean your going to be one tomorrow."

    ~Whitney
    Or a rapist.
    Provision for free medical attendance and nursing, for clothing, for food, for housing, for the education of children, and a hundred other matters, might with equal propriety be proposed as tending to relieve the employee of mental strain and worry. --- These matters obviously lie outside the orbit of congressional power. (Railroad Retirement Board v Alton Railroad)

  10. #10
    Campaign Veteran marshaul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    Fairfax County, Virginia
    Posts
    11,487
    Quick observation:

    This article is replete with ad hominem attacks and guilt-by-association.

    For instance, the identification of open carry activists with "nativism".

    Sorry to break the narrative, but a good many OCers are hardcore libertarians, and a good many of them either favor open borders, or are otherwise sufficiently in favor of an open society to render the term "nativist" meaningless.

    This makes it clear that the article is, in fact, extremely biased, although subtly so (at least at first glance).
    Last edited by marshaul; 02-06-2014 at 12:19 PM.

  11. #11
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    Quote Originally Posted by marshaul View Post
    Quick observation:

    This article is replete with ad hominem attacks and guilt-by-association.

    For instance, the identification of open carry activists with "nativism".

    Sorry to break the narrative, but a good many OCers are hardcore libertarians, and a good many of them either favor open borders, or are otherwise sufficiently in favor of an open society to render the term "nativist" meaningless.

    This makes it clear that the article is, in fact, extremely biased, although subtly so (at least at first glance).
    +1 typical fallacy arguments when lacking logic.

    You against government welfare= you must want women and children to starve.

    You don't like unconstitutional wars= you must want us to be invaded.

    You don't like unconstitutional proactive policing= you must hate safety.

    etc...
    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

  12. #12
    Regular Member OC for ME's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    White Oak Plantation
    Posts
    12,273
    Quote Originally Posted by sudden valley gunner View Post
    +1 typical fallacy arguments when lacking logic.

    You against government welfare= you must want women and children to starve.

    You don't like unconstitutional wars= you must want us to be invaded.

    You don't like unconstitutional proactive policing= you must hate safety.

    etc...
    Some appeals to emotion tossed in their too.

    You for government welfare= you want women and children to be wards of the state.

    You like unconstitutional wars= you must want us to not be invaded.

    You like unconstitutional proactive policing= you must hate liberty.
    Just sayin.

  13. #13
    Regular Member sudden valley gunner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Whatcom County
    Posts
    17,338
    Quote Originally Posted by OC for ME View Post
    Some appeals to emotion tossed in their too.

    Just sayin.
    Yep when they lack logic use fallacies or resort to demagoguery.
    I am not anti Cop I am just pro Citizen.

    U.S. v. Minker, 350 US 179, at page 187
    "Because of what appears to be a lawful command on the surface, many citizens, because
    of their respect for what only appears to be a law, are cunningly coerced into waiving their
    rights, due to ignorance." (Paraphrased)

  14. #14
    Regular Member EMNofSeattle's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    S. Kitsap, Washington state
    Posts
    3,763
    Quote Originally Posted by deanf View Post
    "Acting like a deadly threat is imminent, walking around stores jerking your head around ... 'on a swivel,' planning your tactical movement from the gas pump to the cash register IS paranoid behavior, unless you live in Fallujah"

    That is pretty funny.
    Here's the thread they pulled it from...

    http://concealedcarryforum.com/forum...TOPIC_ID=37576

    it seems "hiker" didn't get to good a reaction to his rant .......
    they love our milk and honey, but they preach about some other way of living, when they're running down my country man they're walkin' on the fightin side of me

    NRA Member

  15. #15
    Regular Member Freedom1Man's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2012
    Location
    Greater Eastside Washington
    Posts
    4,690
    Quote Originally Posted by sudden valley gunner View Post

    You against government welfare= you must want women and children to starve.

    You don't like unconstitutional wars= you must want us to be invaded.

    You don't like unconstitutional proactive policing= you must hate safety.

    etc...
    That is so true, how did you know, are a mind-reader or something?

    I hate safety so much that I take mine into my own hands.
    Provision for free medical attendance and nursing, for clothing, for food, for housing, for the education of children, and a hundred other matters, might with equal propriety be proposed as tending to relieve the employee of mental strain and worry. --- These matters obviously lie outside the orbit of congressional power. (Railroad Retirement Board v Alton Railroad)

  16. #16
    Regular Member Difdi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Seattle, Washington, USA
    Posts
    996
    Quote Originally Posted by Freedom1Man View Post
    I hate safety so much that I take mine into my own hands.
    Personally, I'd rather be safe than be told that I should feel safe.

  17. #17
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Kent, Washington, USA
    Posts
    398
    Quote Originally Posted by bebop4one View Post
    "I have seen it in the nativist camp, where these grizzled old white extremists try to provoke their enemies with guns on their hips, itching to blast someone."
    You left out the best part on that one:

    "There is a certain psychology at work with some who carry openly or concealed," writes columnist Stephen Lemons, in the Phoenix New Times newspaper. "I have seen it in the nativist camp, where these grizzled old white extremists try to provoke their enemies with guns on their hips, itching to blast someone."
    Isn't it convenient how you can yellow up your discussion with juicy stuff like that without YOU having to actually write one yellow word yourself? Heck, you can even disavow it in the very next paragraph...

    While that may be harsh, even some concealed-carry proponents see a strain of disturbing behavior among some carriers.
    ...while still getting all the benefit of it in increased views and juicy secondary quotes on websites like, oh say, Opencarry.org.

    Admittedly this is piece is a "Debate" piece, giving it some added leeway, but even that appears to just be a convenient excuse to present a biased argument by presenting the pro-2A arguments as weakly as possible while presenting the anti-2A arguments as strongly and as yellow as possible.

  18. #18
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2013
    Location
    Thru Death's Door in Wisconsin
    Posts
    13,155
    Quote Originally Posted by arentol View Post
    You left out the best part on that one: [ ... ]
    Isn't it convenient how you can yellow up your discussion with juicy stuff like that without YOU having to actually write one yellow word yourself? Heck, you can even disavow it in the very next paragraph... [ ... ] ...while still getting all the benefit of it in increased views and juicy secondary quotes on websites like, oh say, Opencarry.org. Admittedly this is piece is a "Debate" piece, giving it some added leeway, but even that appears to just be a convenient excuse to present a biased argument by presenting the pro-2A arguments as weakly as possible while presenting the anti-2A arguments as strongly and as yellow as possible.
    Touché
    I am responsible for my writing, not your understanding of it.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •