Mega-Thread: Gun Control Thread

[TITAN308]

I've probably linked from there before. Not because I believe it's some definitive source on "mass shooting" statistics, but I do believe they do a decent job.

But let's look at the article from the beloved "thetruthaboutguns". Their quote:



What? That's now what they did at all. The owner of shootingtracker is also a contributor to /r/propagandaposters, which is a subreddit for "propaganda collectors, enthusiasts, or anyone fascinated by propaganda as an insight into history, sociology, perspective, and manipulation."

The owner never admitted that their "creations are deceitful", and never used his website as an example of his "propaganda work". That's an outright lie, and anyone that can bother reading would know it. The irony here being that "thetruthaboutguns" has just deliberately engaged in propaganda.

Are you saying that "In his acceptance speech he points to his prized website as an example of the fine propaganda work that he’s been engaged in" never happened? Honest question. If so, do you have a link to this acceptance speech?

Also did you read the follow up article which details what records they keep?

- pellet guns are recorded as mass shooting instruments
- many entries have no citations
- some entries link to completely irrelevant subject matter

Edit: Is this the speech in question?

Hey everyone, glad to be on board! If any of you know me its probably from /r/GunsAreCool , a sub that mocks the absurdity of American gun culture. I’ve helped mod there for a couple years now, I’m the one who owns our website www.shootingtracker.com a nice bit of work we’ve been able to get used on-air on MSNBC and CNN, in print at Mother Jones and Reuters, and cited in peer reviewed academic journals like the American Journal of Public Health among other places. I’m fairly heavily involved in politics, most recently being brought in to work with Everytown in the last election here in Oregon, helping Chuck Riley topple an incumbent in SD-15 for the express purpose of getting a stalled Universal Background Check bill on to the governor’s desk, a bill that was signed into law last week.

My fascination with propaganda began some years ago when I was studying journalism at Berkeley (fight on you Bears!) and continues unabated. The way it distills a message down to its basest form, and focuses its all on getting that message across and grabbing attention is what draws me in so much.

Dunno man, in plain English seems pretty clear to me, but I could be wrong.

And do you disagree with the TTAG author stating this:

Deliberately including kids using (or abusing) airsoft guns along with actual “mass shootings” is prima facie agitprop. It’s a deliberate and calculated attempt to confuse the voting public in order to push a political agenda, which is basically the definition of propaganda.

Is he wrong in this assessment?

- - - Updated - - -

oh no i love this sig i was actually goingto go with a sr9 or CZ but i held the sig and that was my first mistake because i was $1000 poorer the feel sold me and i love shooting it

Sig pricing is beyond silly to me. Another reason I went with a CZ Scorpion EVO instead of a Sig MPX.

[TZucchini]

Are you saying that "In his acceptance speech he points to his prized website as an example of the fine propaganda work that he’s been engaged in" never happened? Honest question. If so, do you have a link to this acceptance speech?

He uses his website as a credential. He doesn't use it as "an example of the fine propaganda work he's been engaged in". Claiming that he does is deliberately misleading, and is in turn a piece of propaganda.

The link is in the article. Read it for yourself. It's clear as day.

Also did you read the follow up article which details what records they keep?

- pellet guns are recorded as mass shooting instruments
- many entries have no citations
- some entries link to completely irrelevant subject matter

Yes. Looks like there a bit of sloppy work. A few bad examples, some dead links (not surprising at all). Information can change after stories are reported initially. Numbers of injuries or fatalities can change. But again, I'm not carrying water for that website. It does a decent job compiling information. It's quite possible that they've missed many incidents of "mass shootings" as well.

- - - Updated - - -

Dunno man, in plain English seems pretty clear to me, but I could be wrong.=

What? Where does he say that his website is an example of his propaganda work? He doesn't. Not even close.

[TITAN308]

Here is my problem with your argument. In the same speech he goes on to say:

My fascination with propaganda began some years ago when I was studying journalism at Berkeley (fight on you Bears!) and continues unabated. The way it distills a message down to its basest form, and focuses its all on getting that message across and grabbing attention is what draws me in so much.

Had this not been present I could agree with you. Why would he even bring up fascination with propaganda unless he meant to imply that is what his creations, his work, are? I think you are grasping at straws on this one. Honestly.

[TZucchini]

Is he wrong in this assessment?

Again, we don't know why it was included. Maybe the information changed. Maybe they feel it fits the definition. I personally don't.

But regardless, TTAG is deliberately misleading its readers. The author never said what they're claiming.

[Roxinius]

Sig pricing is beyond silly to me. Another reason I went with a CZ Scorpion EVO instead of a Sig MPX.

i was hesitant because of the price but i wouldnt go back and buy anything else for my first gun its like a guitar they have t feel right or no matter how much you pay you're stuck with something that's next to useless for you

[TZucchini]

Had this not been present I could agree with you. Why would he even bring up fascination with propaganda unless he meant to imply that is what his creations are? I think you are grasping at straws on this one. Honestly.

Are you serious? So you can't be fascinated with propaganda unless you're also actively engaging in it? Unless you're also creating it? This is ridiculous.

[TITAN308]

Are you serious? So you can't be fascinated with propaganda unless you're also actively engaging in it? Unless you're also creating it? This is ridiculous.

Well, what proof do you have that it isn't propaganda? Because you personally don't see the connection present in two paragraphs right next to each other?

I guess in this case everyone will have to read the info and make their own decision.

I honestly have no idea what I could say to possibly even get you to reconsider your stance.

[TZucchini]

Well, what proof do you have that it isn't propaganda?

That's not how this works. You don't prove negatives, you prove positives.

"This is propaganda" requires proof. There is absolutely no proof. The author never states it.

When TTAG's says "In his acceptance speech he points to his prized website as an example of the fine propaganda work that he’s been engaged in", it's an outright lie. The author never says that. He uses his website as an introduction point and as credentials. He NEVER states that it's a piece of propaganda.

Absolutely ridiculous position you've taken.

[TITAN308]

Absolutely ridiculous position you've taken.

Funny, I feel the same about you. (your position rather)

[TwoNineMarine]

Can't say I'm too sorry for the one shot in this story. If someone wanted to kill me, and my child, and I have weapon to defend me and my child with, then too bad for the one trying.

Absolutely. She must have been terrified. I'm glad she was able to defend her kid and herself.

How come the intruder didn't have a gun? If he did he could've stopped some crime before he decided to break in.

Lol. Oh Furitrix. You make me chuckle.

thats actually amazing

i only fired a gun twice and i almost became deaf lol

yall people got some strong ears

Depends on the weapon. But it can definitely rock the ol ear drums lol

I made the mistake of mistiming covering my ears when my howitzer went off. Bad mistake lol

I have no idea how an intelligent person could come to that conclusion at all. You have a real victim mentality.

A lot of people on here do.

Not to mention being in love with criminals and putting their rights above the innocents.

But we can't know any of this, therefore unless he actually killed her we can't reasonably say he would've done it and thus she killed an innocent person who might've just wandered into the wrong house, saw a knife lying on the ground, picked it up because that is dangerous with children in the house, stumbled and accidentally broke through the door and then was shot by a raving mad gun owner.

Oh God.

Please be joking. Lol

What if he chased her out the back door because she was slower and louder trying to manage her kids? What if killing her was the actual purpose for having broken in? Sigh. Some people aren't fit for real world risk analysis.

- - - Updated - - -



That is actually more like an emotionally rooted and simplistic bit of supposition.

The criminal sympathizers on here are terrible. Absolutely terrible.

Not to mention those who advocate running from your own home vs defending yourself and your child.

Have people always been that....special?

Certain people would see that changed.

Certain people place the "rights" of criminals over those of their victims.

They really do.

How people don't see that amazes me.

This is from nearly 4 years ago (Jan 2012). It's not new.

It's admirable that she wanted to protect her kid, but can we stop dredging up old news items and dressing them as recent to support whatever view of the gun control debate you favor?

Tell that to the anti gun crowd who bring up 10+ year old studies...

See, what I get from this is that a stupid person has children and fire arms...

Lol.

How dare she have a weapon to protect her child.

THE HORROR!

[Ghostpanther]

Well, what proof do you have that it isn't propaganda? Because you personally don't see the connection present in two paragraphs right next to each other?

I guess in this case everyone will have to read the info and make their own decision.

I honestly have no idea what I could say to possibly even get you to reconsider your stance.

Nothing will more than likely. People in general have a tendency to look thru colored glasses. Esp. those who are trying support a political agenda. "They can not see what they do not want to see" is a common trait.

[Tinykong]

Nothing will more than likely. People in general have a tendency to look thru colored glasses. Esp. those who are trying support a political agenda. "They can not see what they do not want to see" is a common trait.

We're talking about the guy who believes a study in a peer reviewed journal is beyond reproach.

As long as it supports his opinions. If they don't, well, it's because the research is corrupt.

[Ghostpanther]

http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/crime/...DtE?li=BBieTUX I know some more details are needed to say for sure this was justified, but I am surprised this made MSN news. This type of shooting happens more than some know but does not make national news for the most part.

[TZucchini]

Just in:

US Appeals Court upholds ban on semi-automatic assault weapons and large‐capacity magazines.

Because the prohibitions are substantially related to the important governmental interests of public safety and crime reduction, they pass constitutional muster.

[Tinykong]

US Appeals Court upholds ban on semi-automatic assault weapons and large‐capacity magazines.

So, you can drive ~500 miles in your car and commit various crimes along the way just by the contents of your vehicle which are legal in some places, and not in others.

"High Ho, High Ho, off to the Supreme Court we go."

[TZucchini]

This type of shooting happens more than some know but does not make national news for the most part.

Happens more than some know? The firing of a firearm in self defense is incredibly rare.

- - - Updated - - -

So, you can drive ~500 miles in your car and commit various crimes along the way just by the contents of your vehicle which are legal in some places, and not in others.

If someone feels the need to carry their legally obtained firearm across state borders, then they should comply with the legal requirements regarding said firearm in each jurisdiction.

[Tinykong]

If someone feels the need to carry their legally obtained firearm across state borders, then they should comply with the legal requirements regarding said firearm in each jurisdiction.

The laws are too complex, confusing and changing.

We need Federal laws. What those laws are is a point of debate, but having laws that vary hugely between neighboring states is poor policy.

- - - Updated - - -

Also, how do I transport my legal firearms from West Virginia to my house in Maine?

The entire process is preposterous. If we're going to make ownership a crime, it needs to be at the Federal level.

[TZucchini]

The laws are too complex, confusing and changing.

They're really not that difficult to understand, and they're readily available online for review.

As the baseline, transport the firearm in a locked case, unloaded, in the truck of your vehicle, separate from ammunition. It's not that hard.

- - - Updated - - -

The entire process is preposterous. If we're going to make ownership a crime, it needs to be at the Federal level.

Sure. Let's enact more firearm laws at the Federal level. Won't hear me complaining.

[TITAN308]

They're really not that difficult to understand, and they're readily available online for review.

This statement is disingenuous.

Having to review firearms laws for a cross country trip is not reasonable. While there is a federal law for protections while traveling via highway, you do have to exit the highway to get gas, or rest for example.

We have uniform laws for everything else, but guns.

I mean how many articles would you like me to link about places like New Jersey arresting otherwise law abiding citizens? People who have done literally nothing wrong, but become felons when they cross a state line.

Also getting national firearms laws isn't a problem on a federal level, its shit hole places like New York, New Jersey, and California standing in the way (examples). They want the rest of the country to conform to THEIR laws and won't budge otherwise even though they are the minority.

Example: California bans the ownership of any rifles that use a 50 caliber sized cartridge (like the Barrett line) even though a rifle of this nature has never been used in a crime in the entire United States as far as I am aware. Having mere possession of one is a felony.

[Tinykong]

They're really not that difficult to understand, and they're readily available online for review.

This is either woefully naive, or just plain ignorant. Have you tried finding laws from state to state? It took me ~3 hours to locate some tenant/landlord laws in my county, and it required a trip to town hall.

s the baseline, transport the firearm in a locked case, unloaded, in the truck of your vehicle, separate from ammunition. It's not that hard.

Depending on the firearm, this is a crime. There was a guy here in Maryland who was charged with it. Ultimately the case was dismissed, but it's still a crime.

Sure. Let's enact more firearm laws at the Federal level. Won't hear me complaining.

Laws controlling the models you can own need to be at the Federal level.