tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post6224163425038894214..comments2024-02-05T03:41:13.688+01:00Comments on Mikeb302000: Lawful Florida Gun Owner Commits MurderAnonymoushttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09806175370305006933noreply@blogger.comBlogger60125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-87404795012862980072012-12-02T15:51:29.534+01:002012-12-02T15:51:29.534+01:00Mikeb, you counter evidence with speculation. The...Mikeb, you counter evidence with speculation. The data regardling license holders who screw up could be wrong, but wondering if they are doesn't make it so.Greg Camphttp://gregorycamp.wordpress.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-12258956607205520122012-12-02T12:30:35.565+01:002012-12-02T12:30:35.565+01:00I've given a reasonable explanation. The repo...I've given a reasonable explanation. The reporting is faulty. Why do you find that so difficult to accept. What all of a sudden you believe the government agencies involved in producing those statistics are completely on the ball? Are they so different from the ATF or the IRS?<br /><br />Plus, I don't think it's accurate to say it's time comsuming and expensive. It's not. In some states it's literally nothing.<br /><br />And don't forget my other argument that many so-called DGUs are false. When you add that possibility into the mix, you're incredibly low percentage isn't so low anymore.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09806175370305006933noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-42222785680022191842012-12-01T20:09:21.978+01:002012-12-01T20:09:21.978+01:00Making you an orc, I take it.Making you an orc, I take it.Greg Camphttp://gregorycamp.wordpress.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-28787388566348867392012-12-01T20:01:37.102+01:002012-12-01T20:01:37.102+01:00mikeb302000:
Just think; if this had been one of ...mikeb302000:<br /><br />Just think; if this had been one of the hundreds of posts that you've put up in which the shooting was an accident, you would be lucky to get more than one comment (if that). Just for shits and grins, it would have been interesting to see what sort of response you'd have gotten if the OP was something like.<br /><br />"Teen-ager shot by man, accidentally, while man is showing handgun to teeen.".<br /><br />My guess? it would be ignored. But this here post is like a big ol' red,white and blue bullseye for teh gunzloonz. They can't <br />resist its pull.<br /><br />---<br /><br />And that is a silly mis-observation also.<br /><br />1. We never doubt that gun accidents occur. Just that they are rare and best prevented via education than legislation.<br /><br />2. This post is long because of side discussions having little to do with the original topic.<br /><br />Why do you have to try to be such a tool?Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01606648012499886227noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-22935370798564778742012-12-01T19:59:25.653+01:002012-12-01T19:59:25.653+01:00"This study: http://www.txchia.org/sturdevant..."This study: http://www.txchia.org/sturdevant.pdf was written by this fella http://www.mideng.com/people/WILLIAM_E.htm"<br /><br />Wow, you are a truly silly. Don't just call the author into question, tell me what is wrong with the data gathering or conclusions.<br /><br />There is no extrapolation taking place. No surveys. The data is not a subjective determination like "Was an incident a legitimate defensive gun use?" "Was it racially motivated?" "Was a life or property protected?" There are no variables to account for.<br /><br />No, this is quantifiable data regarding the existence of a valid CHL holder for Texas citizens convicted of crime.<br /><br />We can argue all day about what the study may or may not indicate. But the 'study' is merely a simple compilation of data. Unless you have doubts about the honesty of the Texas DPS, you have no leg to stand on to question the data itself.<br /><br />Again (I seem to have to repeat myself for you), you can argue what it means - but the numbers are solid.<br /><br />And because it is a simple compilation of existing data, it can and has been been easily repeated. Here is one that was pretty easy to find:<br />http://www.texaschlforum.com/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=17975&hilit=conviction+rate<br /><br />So please, tell me how the data doesn't mean what it seems to mean. Here is an example of doing just that:<br />http://mikeb302000.blogspot.com/2012/12/the-fallacy-of-criminals-get-guns-from.html<br /><br />I didn't doubt the data in the silly study Laci offered up. I merely showed how the data does not support the argument that Laci thinks it supports. The study offers no proof of a lack of protective benefits from citizens carrying guns.<br /><br />I would welcome a similar rebuttal to this simple collection of data.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01606648012499886227noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-17301007618103366852012-12-01T19:58:26.122+01:002012-12-01T19:58:26.122+01:00This comment has been removed by the author.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01606648012499886227noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-66368531378189456092012-12-01T19:52:05.478+01:002012-12-01T19:52:05.478+01:00This comment has been removed by the author.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01606648012499886227noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-1660004840460877442012-12-01T18:59:27.617+01:002012-12-01T18:59:27.617+01:00Oh, Greggie, dear:
I am Soooooooooooooooooooo sor...Oh, Greggie, dear:<br /><br />I am Soooooooooooooooooooo sorry. It appears that I've mistaken your silly hat for Gandalf's. I think the mistake is probably a natural one as both of you pull shit out of thin air to make your story work.<br /><br />Actually, now that I think about it your hat looks more like one of these guys: <br /><br />http://www.barnorama.com/animals-wearing-hats/<br /><br />the difference being that they were forced to wear those silly looking chapeaus.democommiehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08714733977927594559noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-32348227085121814612012-12-01T18:42:36.099+01:002012-12-01T18:42:36.099+01:00mikeb302000:
Just think; if this had been one of ...mikeb302000:<br /><br />Just think; if this had been one of the hundreds of posts that you've put up in which the shooting was an accident, you would be lucky to get more than one comment (if that). Just for shits and grins, it would have been interesting to see what sort of response you'd have gotten if the OP was something like.<br /><br />"Teen-ager shot by man, accidentally, while man is showing handgun to teeen.".<br /><br />My guess? it would be ignored. But this here post is like a big ol' red,white and blue bullseye for teh gunzloonz. They can't <br />resist its pull.<br /><br />Frailbrained Libertyguy:<br /><br />This study: <br /><br />http://www.txchia.org/sturdevant.pdf<br /><br />was written by this fella<br /><br />http://www.mideng.com/people/WILLIAM_E.htm<br /><br />, yes?<br /><br />Self-published from the looks of it. No peer review. Not accepted, afaia, by any gummint agency. IOW, John Lott's specialty. A lot of hand waving and number crunching with no indication that it has wider acceptance than amongst those who are ALREADY convinced of their lack of bias and moral rectitude. I like this one, in particular that shows his "study" on the same page as two by John Lott who is a notorious liar--well, we are known, to some extent, by the company we keep.<br /><br />If there are some links that don't show up when his name or the study are googled--links which track to someone whose primary (only?) degree is in chemical engineering, let us know.<br /><br />In the meantime, if I had to describe your efforts thus far in this area, the word, "FAIL" comes immediately to mind.democommiehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08714733977927594559noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-41448021442732185742012-12-01T17:38:54.807+01:002012-12-01T17:38:54.807+01:00That's where you misunderstand. I am not sayi...That's where you misunderstand. I am not saying that a certain part of the process filters out the 'unfit' because they are somehow flagged in the background check or can't hit the target or another part of the process. It's not rigorous because the milestones are difficult causing people to flunk out.<br /><br />I am saying the intentionality of the entire process self-filters people. Each step is not hard, but the process is costly and time consuming. Those who commit the time and resources to get through it tend to be law-abiding. It is a key distinction.<br /><br />Even if you don't believe it, you have not been able to give a reasonable explanation to explain the disparity. Again, you are essentially sticking you head in the sand unless you can come up with a plausible explanation for these numbers.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01606648012499886227noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-85785944785692869972012-12-01T11:30:23.973+01:002012-12-01T11:30:23.973+01:00I'm not convinced. The classes and training re...I'm not convinced. The classes and training requirements, which are more in Texas than in most places, are less than you guys do already. You make it sound like more than it is. It's next to nothing. <br /><br />Concealed carry permit holders, just like other gun owners, and just like everybody else, suffer from all kinds of problems. You know my contention in the Famous 10%. And you also know that I low-balled it. You guys have your fair share of rageaholics, drug and alcohol problems, and the stereotypical irresponsible gun nuts. There's no way that those "stringent" requirements to get the permit have filtered out the problem guys to the point of being 13 times safer. No way.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09806175370305006933noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-26278058152052402242012-12-01T00:13:55.883+01:002012-12-01T00:13:55.883+01:00Mike, I would love your feedback on my observation...Mike, I would love your feedback on my observations above ...Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01606648012499886227noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-13469786227113791742012-11-30T15:01:11.172+01:002012-11-30T15:01:11.172+01:00" if Laci's were stripped of curses, insu..." if Laci's were stripped of curses, insults, and rage, there'd be little left."<br /><br />True. You'd be left with a small balding man in a skirt.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-3812038639563923862012-11-29T21:57:38.612+01:002012-11-29T21:57:38.612+01:00Seriously Mike? Listen, it's not that complic...Seriously Mike? Listen, it's not that complicated:<br /><br />These are conviction numbers. There is a ton of paperwork that goes into play before someone is convicted of crime. There might be some small (insignificant) degree of error in paperwork - but there is no way the CHL status is not recorded. These numbers are not wrong.<br /><br />As far as explaining it - it's what we have been saying all along. Getting a CHL in most states like Texas is a process; paying fees for the class and fees for the licence, 10 hour class, background check, waiting at least a month after application. This is not something that the criminally inclined tend to do. It's just not.<br /><br />By and large, people who take the time to go through the process tend to be law abiding. They are not the gun-happy hotheads you imagine them to be. They just want the option to protect themselves and their family.<br /><br />It is a very intentional process and most of us go through a period of introspection before we ever start it. We ask ourselves questions: Do I want this responsibility? Would I be able to pull the trigger if I needed to? How can I carry safely given my job, or my kids, my active lifestyle?<br /><br />Then, going through the process introduces you to more of the gun culture. The class stresses deescalation. You form groups with people on the same journey and learn more about safe handling, good holsters, concealed clothing, safer ammo (including hollow-points). The further you go, the more learn, the safer (and more law abiding) you become.<br /><br />Are there exceptions? Of course there are. About 25 out of 100,000 in Texas. But those are the exceptions. The numbers bear it out and really cannot be denied.<br /><br />This is actually one area where I separate from many in the gun-culture. I like licensing for public carry. I like the intentionality it forces. (I like it for other reasons too which I won't go into here.)Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01606648012499886227noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-10347258428209029342012-11-29T21:38:25.391+01:002012-11-29T21:38:25.391+01:00So just because you think guns are icky, we should...So just because you think guns are icky, we should overturn our legal system and presume that anyone you want is guilty? No, thanks, I'll keep things as they are.Greg Camphttp://gregorycamp.wordpress.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-29771513394645497602012-11-29T18:44:35.239+01:002012-11-29T18:44:35.239+01:00And the same is the case when something sounds too...And the same is the case when something sounds too bad to be true.<br /><br />Criminals aren't going to take the risk of going through the system to get a carry license. They just break the law on their way to break other laws. You're worried about good people snapping, but that's rare.Greg Camphttp://gregorycamp.wordpress.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-68075675660653295852012-11-29T18:40:41.517+01:002012-11-29T18:40:41.517+01:00Mikeb, do you have any evidence that a records sea...Mikeb, do you have any evidence that a records search isn't standard procedure? I would imagine that cops look for outstanding warrants, check for criminal records, and so forth. The carry license data is available to the police. In many states, it's tied in to DMV records. Just because news agencies don't check doesn't mean that law enforcement isn't looking. You're making this up because you need it to be true.Greg Camphttp://gregorycamp.wordpress.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-15268195249591458392012-11-29T18:37:12.564+01:002012-11-29T18:37:12.564+01:00When the bad guy is dead and there is no video sur...When the bad guy is dead and there is no video surveillance, what evidence is really needed to support the murdering gun owners claim that he reasonably felt threatened? Not much, that's what.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09806175370305006933noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-90868238365025843672012-11-29T18:34:48.382+01:002012-11-29T18:34:48.382+01:00I suggested a possible explanation for your truly ...I suggested a possible explanation for your truly incredible "proof." The reporting is poorly done. In many cases, no one is asking the criminal if he happens to have a CCW permit. Who gives a shit when someone is caught doing a violent crime. They have other priorities at that point. And all you guys who take advantage of that low percentage are fine with it.<br /><br />Does "13 times less likely" sound possible to you? What could possible explain it? The requirements for qualifying are next to nothing. Why would they be THAT much better behaved?Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09806175370305006933noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-22767708391951075232012-11-29T18:29:02.624+01:002012-11-29T18:29:02.624+01:00I think the data is based upon improper reporting....I think the data is based upon improper reporting. When something sounds too good to be true, it probably is.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09806175370305006933noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-91549744028520459012012-11-29T16:36:11.992+01:002012-11-29T16:36:11.992+01:00Democommie,
1. Hobbits don't wear hats, if I...Democommie,<br /><br />1. Hobbits don't wear hats, if I recall correctly. They wear cloaks with hoods (!), but not hats, as a general rule.<br /><br />2. When you're ready to prove that I've told a lie, I'll be available. I've been waiting for around a year now.Greg Camphttp://gregorycamp.wordpress.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-17246339768181773602012-11-29T16:30:45.569+01:002012-11-29T16:30:45.569+01:00But Frail Liberty, when the facts don't suppor...But Frail Liberty, when the facts don't support Mikeb's pet narrative, he disposes of the facts.Greg Camphttp://gregorycamp.wordpress.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-76692415485808305882012-11-29T16:28:36.033+01:002012-11-29T16:28:36.033+01:00Proof of training and running a background check d...Proof of training and running a background check does show the qualification of the applicant. To exercise this one right, we go through a lot more qualification than anyone else trying to exercise any other right.<br /><br />But that's not the evidence that we're not out committing crimes. The evidence is what Frail Liberty has shown you, what Texas Colt carry showed you, and what I've shown you many times in the past. You guess and whimper about how no one is checking, but that's only because you want the number of people who commit crimes while having a carry license to be much higher. The evidence is lacking for your desired narrative, so you deny the facts.Greg Camphttp://gregorycamp.wordpress.com/noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-45496004690437752192012-11-29T15:13:58.023+01:002012-11-29T15:13:58.023+01:00Yes. How many times have we heard Japete say &quo...Yes. How many times have we heard Japete say "all you have to do is say you felt threatened"? We have consistently said from the beginning that the evidence has to support that claim. The police wouldn't be allowed to make an arrest under her interpretation. And this the the exact scenario that she, and so many others of you (I am looking dog gone's way), have used to spread gross misrepresentations of what the law protects. Guy gets mad, pulls out gun, blows away black kid in a hoodie, claims he "felt threatened", gets away scot free on Stabd Your Ground law. Is that not the exact narrative we have heard countless times over the last year? For all we know this guy read that crap and believed it.TShttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04667036856347626234noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-6314891743204395487.post-5729307663469937372012-11-29T13:48:46.859+01:002012-11-29T13:48:46.859+01:00"Okay, so, it's good for the paunchy whit..."Okay, so, it's good for the paunchy white guy to throw down on a carload of people because they were mean to him--or, much worse, disrespectful--blasting away indiscriminately. Otoh, if those black-o-perp teens HAD a gun--that would be wrong. Ummm, care to show me the chain of logic on that sort of thinking. It seems that Dunn was the "aggressor" who sought confrontation. By your standards the kid, if he had a gun, should have just blasted Dunn to hell and told the cops he felt "threatened". Or, do you maybe have two different standards to apply in these cases?"<br /><br />Sorry, I missed one of your incoherent rants.<br /><br />There are no different standards here. Just like the GZ/TM incident, it all depends upon who was being the aggressor. In this case, if it was Dunn, than he committed murder. The only thing wrong with the 'black-o-perp teen' (as you like to call them) having the gun in that case would be if Florida has an age restriction.<br /><br />Sorry to disappoint you, but you won't tend to find different standards coming from me. It's all about the facts. I just advise waiting until we actually have them before slamming the gavel down - that's all. Call me silly.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01606648012499886227noreply@blogger.com