Open Carry March on Washington DC July 4th

[Edlichbury]

I don't think you can infer "A-OK" from "Better than dying".

As the David Dingwall quote goes...

"I'm entitled to my entitlements."

And I'm entitled to not worry about the safety of myself on account of your "rights."

[Occupied Deutschland]

That they think violating rights is A-OK.

Killing another person doesn't violate their rights?

Violating people's rights does.

Whether that be killing them, beating them with a nightstick or sticking a finger up their ass to make sure they aren't smuggling things just because they looked Mexican.

[Edlichbury]

http://takingnote.blogs.nytimes.com/201 ... e-gun-use/

And the NRA isn't? The defensive stat implies that nearly 1% of Americans use guns defensively each year, which borders on the impossible. Furthermore, from same source,

"The V.P.C. also found that in 2010 “there were only 230 justifiable homicides involving a private citizen using a firearm” reported to the F.B.I.’s Uniform Crime Reporting Program. Compare that with the number of criminal gun homicides in the same year: 8,275. "

I trust stats from the FBI far more than the NRA.

And I trust studies and polls from news organizations and sociologists more than the VPC or the NRA.

Besides, I quite specifically mentioned defensive gun uses. Justifiable homocide is just one aspect of those.

Still value government stats. If you would have actually read the quote, you might have seen that their stats were derived from data compiled by the Bureau of Justice Statistics.

I really don't think any "study" or "poll" would match that stats by the people who are specifically hired by the government to track them.

[The UK in Exile]

http://takingnote.blogs.nytimes.com/201 ... e-gun-use/

And the NRA isn't? The defensive stat implies that nearly 1% of Americans use guns defensively each year, which borders on the impossible. Furthermore, from same source,

"The V.P.C. also found that in 2010 “there were only 230 justifiable homicides involving a private citizen using a firearm” reported to the F.B.I.’s Uniform Crime Reporting Program. Compare that with the number of criminal gun homicides in the same year: 8,275. "

I trust stats from the FBI far more than the NRA.

And I trust studies and polls from news organizations and sociologists more than the VPC or the NRA.

Besides, I quite specifically mentioned defensive gun uses. Justifiable homocide is just one aspect of those.

Until the Second Amendment is treated as normal constitutional law, this web site will always be under construction...

yeah, they sound like reasonable people.

[Olivaero]

Killing another person doesn't violate their rights?

Violating people's rights does.

Whether that be killing them, beating them with a nightstick or sticking a finger up their ass to make sure they aren't smuggling things just because they looked Mexican.

Those things aren't all equal though... I'd much rather have a strangers finger up my ass than being killed.

[Edlichbury]

Killing another person doesn't violate their rights?

Violating people's rights does.

Whether that be killing them, beating them with a nightstick or sticking a finger up their ass to make sure they aren't smuggling things just because they looked Mexican.

Death still is a definitive end to all rights. You cannot do anything from a grave.

[Occupied Deutschland]

That they think violating rights is A-OK.

I don't think you can infer "A-OK" from "Better than dying".

Why not?

Oh sure it sounds better to say you're only patting down all these black people and searching all the Muslims boarding airplanes in the name of safety, but it doesn't change what that reasoning is.

[The UK in Exile]

I don't think you can infer "A-OK" from "Better than dying".

Why not?

Oh sure it sounds better to say you're only patting down all these black people and searching all the Muslims boarding airplanes in the name of safety, but it doesn't change what that reasoning is.

that people crashing planes or blowing them up is bad?

[Occupied Deutschland]

And I trust studies and polls from news organizations and sociologists more than the VPC or the NRA.

Besides, I quite specifically mentioned defensive gun uses. Justifiable homocide is just one aspect of those.

Until the Second Amendment is treated as normal constitutional law, this web site will always be under construction...

yeah, they sound like reasonable people.

When the site has no interaction with the poll or the survey being used, I fail to see your point.

[The Steel Magnolia]

As the David Dingwall quote goes...

"I'm entitled to my entitlements."

And I'm entitled to not worry about the safety of myself on account of your "rights."

You really aren't.

[Occupied Deutschland]

Why not?

Oh sure it sounds better to say you're only patting down all these black people and searching all the Muslims boarding airplanes in the name of safety, but it doesn't change what that reasoning is.

that people crashing planes or blowing them up is bad?

That it's fine to violate these people's rights in the name of safety.

[Dooom35796821595]

that people crashing planes or blowing them up is bad?

That it's fine to violate these people's rights in the name of safety.

It is.

[Occupied Deutschland]

And I trust studies and polls from news organizations and sociologists more than the VPC or the NRA.

Besides, I quite specifically mentioned defensive gun uses. Justifiable homocide is just one aspect of those.

Still value government stats. If you would have actually read the quote, you might have seen that their stats were derived from data compiled by the Bureau of Justice Statistics.

I really don't think any "study" or "poll" would match that stats by the people who are specifically hired by the government to track them.

That report is likely completely spot on.

For justifiable homicides.

It's a good thing I'm not talking about justifiable homicides then. Otherwise would I be red in the face.

[Occupied Deutschland]

That it's fine to violate these people's rights in the name of safety.

It is.

Racist.

[Genivaria]

Bigger undertakings will have bigger unintended consequences.

If we're discussing scale alone, scale increases the consequences. By observing the consequences in other countries, we can prepare accordingly. Weak and defeatist.

Bigger undertakings take longer amounts of time, more funding, and invite more opposition (look at Healthcare, for example).

No shit. They also have bigger returns.

Bigger undertakings are more difficult to undertake.

Pick one.

Defeatist. Why do you think we landed on the moon before the Russians? Because difficulty is not an obstacle for determination; only possibility.

"We choose to go to the moon. We choose to go to the moon in this decade and do the other things, not because they are easy, but because they are hard, because that goal will serve to organize and measure the best of our energies and skills, because that challenge is one that we are willing to accept, one we are unwilling to postpone, and one which we intend to win, and the others, too".---JFK

[The UK in Exile]

that people crashing planes or blowing them up is bad?

That it's fine to violate these people's rights in the name of safety.

Ah, so people crashing planes or blowing them up is bad, but making people pass thorough metal detectors is equally bad..

[Ifreann]

I don't think you can infer "A-OK" from "Better than dying".

Why not?

Because they're very different things.

[Dooom35796821595]

It is.

Racist.

No, its ok to violate EVERYONES lesser rights to ensure there safety.

[Edlichbury]

yeah, they sound like reasonable people.

When the site has no interaction with the poll or the survey being used, I fail to see your point.

Want more on the study?
http://vacps.org/public-policy/the-cont ... s-of-kleck (Kleck's methodology was flawed)
http://www.oneutah.org/2009/11/national ... stortions/
http://mediamatters.org/blog/2013/02/26 ... emi/192799
http://www.bmsg.org/pdfs/myths.pdf

[Occupied Deutschland]

Racist.

No, its ok to violate EVERYONES lesser rights to ensure there safety.

You'll notice that's not what I referenced.

Edit: I mean, I have problems with that as well. But I was particularly referencing here ONLY patting down black people and searching Muslims in the name of safety.

[Edlichbury]

Still value government stats. If you would have actually read the quote, you might have seen that their stats were derived from data compiled by the Bureau of Justice Statistics.

I really don't think any "study" or "poll" would match that stats by the people who are specifically hired by the government to track them.

That report is likely completely spot on.

For justifiable homicides.

It's a good thing I'm not talking about justifiable homicides then. Otherwise would I be red in the face.

Nowhere in the original quote did it say that it just covered homicides. The first quote mentioned a different number than the one you were preoccupied on.

Two different numbers, one looking at all uses, not just homicides.

[Edlichbury]

No, its ok to violate EVERYONES lesser rights to ensure there safety.

You'll notice that's not what I referenced.

Edit: I mean, I have problems with that as well. But I was particularly referencing here ONLY patting down black people and searching Muslims in the name of safety.

Racial profiling is wrong. Allowing people to die in the name of "civil rights" and "Freedom" is still wrong.

[Dooom35796821595]

No, its ok to violate EVERYONES lesser rights to ensure there safety.

You'll notice that's not what I referenced.

Edit: I mean, I have problems with that as well. But I was particularly referencing here ONLY patting down black people and searching Muslims in the name of safety.

And I realized you mistook me as a raciest, and clarified the issue.

[Occupied Deutschland]

You'll notice that's not what I referenced.

Edit: I mean, I have problems with that as well. But I was particularly referencing here ONLY patting down black people and searching Muslims in the name of safety.

Racial profiling is wrong. Allowing people to die in the name of "civil rights" and "Freedom" is still wrong.

So you have the same reasoning as those advocating racial profiling.

Good for you.

[Ifreann]

This thread just cannot stay on topic...