I heard that some people got shot

User avatar
austrotard
Posts: 8708
Joined: Thu Dec 06, 2012 2:24 am
Location: the austrocity exhibition
Contact:

Re: I heard that some people got shot

Post by austrotard » Wed Oct 07, 2015 1:47 am

Spudnik wrote:I can't figure out why an ex-pat is even commenting on this stuff.
that's funny... I can.
and I find it quite simple.

do we need to see jim jefferies again, class?
49% of americans assume I give a shit about what they think.

User avatar
Upsetter
Posts: 2159
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2009 1:53 pm

Re: I heard that some people got shot

Post by Upsetter » Wed Oct 07, 2015 12:12 pm

I keep seeing anti-gunners post this Jefferies video as if it is some kind of rational argument for gun control in America and it is pretty pathetic at best.

I shouldn’t even need to give a retort as to why this is wrong almost all the way through, but apparently I do because it keeps getting posted with comments about how iron clad it is and how the pro-gun crowd can’t possibly argue against it.

So, with that being said… Let's go.

0:11 - “Don’t get excited because the other people have guns!”
Off to a great start.
Right off the bat, Jim suggests that the people in favor of gun control shouldn’t get too openly excited because the rest of the crowd has guns. Ah, the old crazy gun owner narrative. Suggesting that people with guns are short fused and will pull out their big scary death machines and shoot you the moment you disagree with them.
Facts, however, disagree.
In my state of Texas, the numbers have shown that people who carry guns actually contribute to less than 1% (roughly 0.7% to be more exact) than the states overall crime. Not just gun crime, ALL crime.
Other states with legal concealed carry have reflected this as well.

0:30 - I support the 2nd Amendment, BUT…
The old played out “I support the 2nd Amendment, BUT…” argument. It’s like saying, “I’m not racist or anything, BUT [insert extremely racist tirade here]. Anytime I hear someone say something along the lines of “I support your right to own guns, BUT…” I’m almost always certain that that person actually does not support my right to own guns at all. It’s a cop out.

0:45 - Australia
Jim claims that there have been zero massacres since Australia banned guns after the Port Arthur massacre. ZERO. Wow, that is an impressive number indeed.
BUT… Are you sure about that Jim?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Monash_Un ... y_shooting
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2011_Hectorville_siege
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cairns_child_killings
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Snowtown_murders
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Childers_ ... ostel_fire
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quakers_H ... _home_fire
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cairns_child_killings
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cairns_child_killings
http://www.news.com.au/national/lockhar ... 7053811861
How the hell did all of these tragedies happen? I thought Australia took all the guns away? I thought massacres don’t happen in other countries? I thought it was impossible to commit a massacre without a gun?
Am I missing something here, Jim?

1:15 - Australia is reasonable because they tried gun control, America is ignorant because they refuse to.
I keep hearing people say that we won’t try gun control simply because gun owners are ignorant and love their guns more than human life.
It’s bullshit.
The fact is, WE HAVE TRIED STRICT NATIONAL GUN CONTROL.
Does the year 1994 or the name Clinton ring a bell to anyone? Anyone?
From 1994 - 2004, there were strict national gun control laws in place in America. They included most of the laws that are being proposed now. An “assault weapons” ban. Magazine capacity limits. All of that.
Guess what?
IT WAS A COMPLETE FAILURE.

2:30 - Self Defense / Protection is not a valid reason to want a gun.
I’ll just drop all of these off. These are perfect examples that I found in less than 30 seconds on Google.
http://www.buckeyefirearms.org/churchgo ... an-shotgun
http://www.goupstate.com/article/201203 ... /120329781
http://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiepavli ... y-n2014783
http://controversialtimes.com/news/reme ... asualties/
http://www.breitbart.com/big-government ... es-a-year/
http://www.cnsnews.com/news/article/cdc ... -deterrent
http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/catego ... eoftheday/
http://www.politico.com/magazine/story/ ... YW1BkZRKdE
And the list goes on and on and on… Innocent people use guns every day to defend themselves. Plain and simple.
Fuck off, Jim. What kind of world do you live in that you would need a gun to defend yourself? The real world. It’s an easy answer.

He then goes on to say, “Is that why they’re called ‘assault rifles’?” Well, hoplophobic liberals like to call them that because it’s a buzzword that stirs up an emotional response. I prefer modern sporting rifles. Tell me, Jim. If you can’t defend yourself with an AR-15, then WHY DOES ALMOST EVERY POLICE FORCE IN AMERICA HAVE ONE?

Furthermore, US Bureau of Justice Statistics show that guns are the safest and most effective means of defense. Using a gun for protection results in fewer injuries to the defender than using any other means of defense and is safer than not resisting at all. The myth that “guns are only used for killing and the myth that "guns are dangerous when used for protection melt when exposed to scientific examination and data. The myths persist because they are repeated so frequently and dogmatically that few think to question the myths by examining the mountains of data available.

2:50 - Having a gun in your house means you are more likely to kill yourself with it because, “sometimes we all get sad.”
Sure, if you’re suicidal.
Gun bans result in lower gun suicide rates, but a compensatory increase in suicide from other accessible and lethal means of suicide (hanging, leaping, auto exhaust, etc.). The net result of gun bans, however, has shown reduction in total suicide rates. People who are intent in killing themselves find the means to do so. Are other means of suicide so much more politically correct that we should focus on measures that decrease gun suicide, but do nothing to reduce total suicide deaths? Seems pretty stupid.

3:15 - “Protection? I had a break-in in Manchester, England where I was tied up. I had my head cut. They threatened to rape my girlfriend. They came in through the window with a machete and a hammer…“
I find it cute that Jim says no one needs a gun to defend themselves and then presents a real world example of why someone would need a gun to defend themselves.

He then says he wasn’t wearing his holster at the time and suggests that you would be crazy to have a gun ready while at home.
It’s called being vigilant, Jim. It is actually very common for most concealed carriers to wear a holster even at home and all the way up until the moment they go to bed. Why? Because shit happens, Jim. But you know that now.

3:50 - “None of you give a shit about home security…”
No? I guess the numerous self defense, home defense, and home security courses that are being taught across the country every day and the fact there is an entire product market geared specifically towards home security just simply don’t exist.
https://www.google.com/?gws_rd=ssl#q=home+security
https://www.google.com/?gws_rd=ssl#q=ho ... nse+course
I’m starting to think Jim might not have any idea of what he is talking about.

4:15 - Most people breaking in to your house just want your TV
Maybe. Maybe not. I would rather be safe than sorry. What gambles you take with your life is up to you.
I would like to take a moment to remind everyone that home invasions went up in Australia after guns were banned. Maybe because the crooks knew their victims would be unarmed? Nah. Couldn’t have anything to do with that.

4:30 - If you have a gun readily available, you’re irresponsible. If you have it in a safe, it’s useless for protection.
Actually, wrong again Jim.
Not everyone has children. Only my wife and I live in my house. We don’t have children. Our dogs don’t know how to use guns. We both know how to check a gun to see if it’s loaded and we both know that our handguns are loaded at all times. Therefore, it is possible to have a gun readily available and still be responsible.
When we have friends with children over, we unload our handguns, depress the trigger to un-cock, and then keep a loaded magazine in the gun with an empty chamber. We then put our guns in high up places that children cannot get to. A child does not have the strength to rack the slide of a handgun. Without racking the slide, a round cannot be chambered and the trigger cannot be reset. Meaning, there is absolutely no way the gun can be fired. Once again, another example of having a readily available firearm while still doing so responsibly.
But maybe you prefer a safe. Makes your gun useless, right.
Wrong.
There are many handgun safes that can be opened quickly with the swipe of a fingerprint. They keep children away from your gun, can be stored right by your bed, and offer quick access to your gun in a home defense scenario. Many even have mounts so you can lock them to your bed or floor so that they cannot be stolen.
The Liberty HDX-250 Smart Vault is just one example of many.
http://www.cabelas.com/catalog/product. ... t104369580

6:00 - Teachers cannot be trusted with guns.
Jim, there are already several states in America that allow teachers to concealed carry on school grounds and it’s been working out just fine for them for years now.
https://www.google.com/?gws_rd=ssl#q=te ... aled+carry
Furthermore, armed security guards in schools is also already a school. Both my middle school and high school had two each. Worked out just fine.
Jim then asserts than an armed guard will not risk his life to stop a shooting because guards are paid poorly.
Oh. Wait…
https://www.google.com/?gws_rd=ssl#q=sc ... rmed+guard
Turns out Jim is wrong again.

8:00 - You’re mad at me because I’m making good points.
I think I’ve proven otherwise so far, actually.

9:30 - Let’s shit on the Constitution / You can change the 2nd Amendment.
Holy shit. Jim finally said something true. Color me impressed. With a national 2/3 vote, yes you could change or even get rid of the 2nd Amendment.
Until that happens, you’re not doing anything more than just being a crybaby because you can’t get your way.

10:10 - Prohibition didn’t work.
It’s cute that the first example that Jim provides for changing the Constitution is that we changed it by ending the prohibition of alcohol. Almost as if prohibition DOESN’T FUCKING WORK.
Does anyone see the irony in this? He’s bitching about the prohibition of one item to somehow try to support the prohibition of another item. Cute indeed.

10:30 - GUN OWNERS = SLAVE OWNERS
Ah, the old “gun owners are racist” suggestion.
Oh, Jim. This is just getting sad at this point.
I will say this. It is common knowledge that gun control has deep roots in racism and was originally used to keep free blacks from getting firearms.
But I’m sure Jim doesn’t want to talk about that.

11:30 - The majority of gun owners who are actually responsible SHOULD be punished because of the actions of a few gun owners who are irresponsible.
Fuck you, Jim.
While we’re at it, let’s ban alcohol and car keys because some people drive home drunk and kill people. Let’s ban pools because sometimes people drown. Let’s ban food because sometimes people get fat and die.
Fuck off with that.
He then goes on to say that he loves doing drugs, but drugs are illegal because some people do stupid things when they are high and they have fucked it up for the majority of people that like drugs.
This is funny comparison to me for two reasons.
One. Although drugs are illegal, Jim doesn’t seem to have any problems getting them illegally. Which leads me to…
Two. Prohibition doesn’t fucking work. When you ban something, it simply creates an illegal black market and makes that item even more dangerous to obtain.
What the fuck makes you think guns are somehow different, Jim?

13:00 - Banning guns will keep guns out of the hands of criminals. It worked in England and Australia.
Yet criminals in England and Australia keep turning up with guns.
Do I really need to say anything more?
Even here in America, places with heavy gun restrictions such as Detroit, Chicago, Los Angeles, Stockton, New York, New Jersey, St. Louis, and on and on and… have heavy gun crime.
If banning guns will keep guns out of the hands of criminals, HOW THE FUCK DO ALL OF THESE CRIMINALS KEEP TURNING UP IN THESE AREAS WITH GUNS???
Maybe it’s not working?

14:15 - American mass shooters can’t get there guns from the black market.
First of all, yes they could have. Secondly, many of their guns were obtained perfectly legally even after jumping through all of the gun control hoops.
Gun control DID. NOT. STOP. THEM.

14:45 - Guns won’t help you if you have to fight against the government.
That’s your opinion. Myself and the founding fathers disagree.
What we do know is that, historically, countries who forced their citizens to hand in their guns found it much easier to turn tyrannical and roll over those same citizens afterwards.

So, in closing Jim…
https://www.reddit.com/r/progun/comment ... all_wrong/

Lots of embedded hypertext links, some of which are good info. Formatting this is all the more effort Im willing to give mr jefferies.

User avatar
yard4sale
Posts: 1698
Joined: Wed May 28, 2014 4:12 pm

Re: I heard that some people got shot

Post by yard4sale » Wed Oct 07, 2015 1:56 pm

This is scary. 2 detectives, 3 shots. 1 actually hit the guy:
Seconds later, the officers "both felt they had a good target," Douglas County District Attorney Rick Wesenberg said. Two of their bullets hit a wall but a third struck Harper-Mercer on the right side.
I'm sure by "good target" they meant a wall behind him but these are trained detectives, not your average gun carrier. If they only had a %33 hit rate what would the normal guy do?
You can't go back and you can't stand still
If the thunder don't get you then the lightning will

User avatar
austrotard
Posts: 8708
Joined: Thu Dec 06, 2012 2:24 am
Location: the austrocity exhibition
Contact:

Re: I heard that some people got shot

Post by austrotard » Wed Oct 07, 2015 6:58 pm

research jim jefferies.
49% of americans assume I give a shit about what they think.

User avatar
canook
Posts: 941
Joined: Sat Mar 05, 2011 5:14 pm
Location: Further

Re: I heard that some people got shot

Post by canook » Wed Oct 07, 2015 7:19 pm

This:

Stephen Benson first learned during Navy SEAL training that carrying a gun would be more likely to expose him to gun violence.

That lesson directly contradicts the message promoted by the National Rifle Association and increasingly cited by gun owners as their motivation for buying a firearm, reported The Nation.

“It’s insane,” Benson said, recalling how his military training exposed the lie behind the most persistent pro-gun argument.

“We put on our issue .45s, and our instructor said, ‘Gentlemen, the first and most important thing you’ve done by putting on that weapon is you’ve increased your chances of being in a gunfight by 100 percent,’” he said. “That’s a lesson that a lot of people don’t get. More guns means more gunfights — and the idea that in a chaotic, pressurized, terrifying situation, they’re going to do the right thing is ridiculous.”

Benson and other combat veterans spoke to The Nation’s Joshua Holland in hopes of confronting the “lies” peddled by the NRA and their corporate masters.

“I think there’s this fantasy world of gunplay in the movies, but it doesn’t really happen that way,” said retired Army Sgt. Rafael Noboa y Rivera. “When I heard gunfire [in Iraq], I didn’t immediately pick up my rifle and react. I first tried to ascertain where the shooting was coming from, where I was in relation to the gunfire and how far away it was. I think most untrained people are either going to freeze up, or just whip out their gun and start firing in that circumstance.”

The NRA’s chief spokesman, Wayne LaPierre, infamously claimed following the Sandy Hook child massacre that “the only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun” — but Rivera and other combat vets say that’s ridiculous.

“I think they would absolutely panic,” Rivera told The Nation. [Editor’s note: Rivera served as Raw Story’s associate publisher in 2013.]

The essential lie embedded in LaPierre’s claim — which many gun owners have swallowed whole — is that intentions make any difference whatsoever in a gun battle.

“In chaotic situations, the first thing you know is that the sh*t has hit the fan and you don’t know where the fan is,” said Benson, who served three combat tours in Vietnam later trained elite troops.

“Unless it’s constantly drilled into you, it’s very hard to maintain discipline in those situations,” he told The Nation. “You’re immediately hit with a massive thump of adrenaline. Your mouth begins to taste like copper. You can hear the blood moving in your system. You can even experience a kind of time-warp — and the problem with that kind of state is that conscious thought shuts down because you’ve been taken over by your nervous system, and your nervous system is saying, ‘Holy sh*t, things just got really bad.’”

Many civilian gun owners understand this, and some are taking increasingly popular weekend-long tactical training courses.

But experts say that’s just not enough to teach gun owners when to shoot and when to hold their fire, how to overcome tunnel vision, and how to determine which combatants are “good guys.”

“The notion that you have a seal of approval just because you’re not a criminal — that you walk into a gun store and you’re ready for game day — is ridiculous,” said David Chipman, an agent and former SWAT team member with the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, Firearms and Explosives.

Those concerns stopped combat veteran John Parker, who holds a concealed carry permit, from using his weapon to confront a gunman who killed nine people last week at an Oregon community college.

“We could have opened ourselves up to be potential targets ourselves, and not knowing where SWAT was, their response time, they wouldn’t know who we were, and if we had our guns ready to shoot, they could think that we were bad guys,” said Parker, who took shelter with other students in a classroom.

Chipman, the former ATF agent, told The Nation he underwent tactical training at least four times a year in each of the 25 years he worked for the federal agency, and he underwent monthly tactical training as a SWAT team member.

He pointed out that highly trained and specially equipped Secret Service agents had never fired their guns to defend a president from assassination, but instead used their bodies to tackle or stop assailants.

That’s basically what Republican presidential candidate Ben Carson suggested Tuesday, when he criticized victims and bystanders in the Oregon shooting.

“Not only would I probably not cooperate with [the gunman], I would not just stand there and let him shoot me,” Carson said. “I would say, ‘Hey guys, everybody attack him. He may shoot me, but he can’t get us all.’”

However, the retired brain surgeon’s suggestion assumes a roomful of random bystanders would have even one person who was able to overcome their biological instincts to place themselves in harm’s way.

Most people, without extensive training intended to override their survival instincts, tend to “freeze up or not know what to do, and to have difficulty performing actions correctly,” said Dr. Pete Blair, director of the Advanced Law Enforcement Rapid Response Training Center.

Those attempts by improperly trained civilians become even more dangerous when guns are introduced — as recent cases in Michigan, where a woman opened fire on suspected shoplifters, and Texas, where a passerby accidentally shot the carjacking victim he was trying to help.

“Despite what we see on TV, the presence of a firearm is a greater risk, especially in the hands of an untrained person,” Chipman told The Nation. “Someone can always say, ‘If your mother is being raped by 5 people, wouldn’t you want her to have a gun?’ Well, okay, if you put it that way, I’d say yes — but that’s not a likely scenario.”

“The question is: If you see someone running out of a gas station with a gun in their hand, do you want an untrained person jumping out and opening fire?” the former ATF agent said. “For me, the answer is clearly ‘no.’”

User avatar
Upsetter
Posts: 2159
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2009 1:53 pm

Re: I heard that some people got shot

Post by Upsetter » Thu Oct 08, 2015 11:53 am

yard4sale wrote:This is scary. 2 detectives, 3 shots. 1 actually hit the guy:
Seconds later, the officers "both felt they had a good target," Douglas County District Attorney Rick Wesenberg said. Two of their bullets hit a wall but a third struck Harper-Mercer on the right side.
I'm sure by "good target" they meant a wall behind him but these are trained detectives, not your average gun carrier. If they only had a %33 hit rate what would the normal guy do?
Lol...shouldnt this be in police bullshit up a flight? Ill do ya one better....
A gun-toting Brooklyn bandit dodged more than 80 police bullets early Friday in a wild street shootout that began with a botched armed robbery and ended with his arrest, officials said.
http://www.nydailynews.com/new-york/nyc ... -1.2348489

Cops are mucks, they train less often than I do and in no more "tactical", meaning meant to improve your "tactics" under stress, a situation than I do. Im aiming for navy seal type training, which is why I train with an ex-navy seal.

User avatar
Adams
Posts: 2232
Joined: Fri Nov 18, 2005 1:01 am
Location: above ground

Re: I heard that some people got shot

Post by Adams » Thu Oct 08, 2015 12:27 pm

austrotard wrote:research jim jefferies.
Fuck off - I like guns.
If you need a reason to drink, you have a problem. . .

"I just think it's funny that the one constant in this place over the past five years is that it was a cool place right up until the next person joined." nemo

When life gives you limes, it's Gods way of telling you that you're an idiot. spudnik

Wholetmygoatsout
Posts: 858
Joined: Sat Jan 16, 2010 12:59 pm
Location: Off the right hand side

Re: I heard that some people got shot

Post by Wholetmygoatsout » Thu Oct 08, 2015 2:09 pm

Two things I've learnt from this debate;

On average the wait time for someone diagnosed with a mental illness is 74 weeks before they get any treatment.
It is easier to get a gun legally than it is to get a drivers license.

Seems like a couple of good places to start.
"..I made my living on here drawing dicks for the last 4+ years". RFA

"Sometimes you are the dog, sometimes you are the tree". Mario Gotze

User avatar
Bobwhite
Posts: 5010
Joined: Thu May 08, 2008 4:48 pm
Location: Marine on St. Croix, MN
Contact:

Re: I heard that some people got shot

Post by Bobwhite » Fri Oct 09, 2015 8:47 am

Wholetmygoatsout wrote:Two things I've learnt from this debate;

On average the wait time for someone diagnosed with a mental illness is 74 weeks before they get any treatment.
It is easier to get a gun legally than it is to get a drivers license.

Seems like a couple of good places to start.
Does this mean I can register to vote with a gun?
"Why in the fuck did I miss this place? It's like missing a raging case of the clap."

"Make it matter, fuckos." jhnnythndr

" Herre jävlar vilka fiskar!!" P-A

"I'm no saint though, nor a judge. Rock that shit good and hard, and on your way out, wipe your dick on the curtains." - Kyner

User avatar
austrotard
Posts: 8708
Joined: Thu Dec 06, 2012 2:24 am
Location: the austrocity exhibition
Contact:

Re: I heard that some people got shot

Post by austrotard » Fri Oct 09, 2015 9:14 am

"voting is your right, dude."
49% of americans assume I give a shit about what they think.

User avatar
Cary
Posts: 932
Joined: Tue May 26, 2009 5:22 pm

Re: I heard that some people got shot

Post by Cary » Fri Oct 09, 2015 11:09 am

Hey another one. but it don't really count, only one dead and three hurt. Plus it looks like it was frat guys....
Utah is great, it's just too bad it's in Utah...
-CE

User avatar
fallen513
Posts: 3138
Joined: Thu Oct 20, 2011 1:12 pm

Re: I heard that some people got shot

Post by fallen513 » Sun Oct 11, 2015 12:31 am

So what's the solution?
____________________________________________________________________________________
I love flyfishing so much I want it to die. -thalweg

Isn't it TIME?

Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Redchaser and 61 guests