Mega-Thread: Gun Control Thread

[rhandric]

but it´s not just 1$, it´s 178 billion dollars, it´s more than half of what is spent on medicaid, in comparison it´s a few other expendures combined

you´re not the business man i get it, money that could be saved or used for better purpose isn´t worth anything

And you're still not answering the real questions: where is all that money going? How is it being spent? What's the actual breakdown per patient/victim, and how much is being used for secondary and tertiary purposes that then get claimed to be related for funding purposes?

[Mayhem]

And you're still not answering the real questions: where is all that money going? How is it being spent? What's the actual breakdown per patient/victim, and how much is being used for secondary and tertiary purposes that then get claimed to be related for funding purposes?

i didn´t come up with that number, that was tinykong, ask him

[Tinykong]

but it´s not just 1$, it´s 178 billion dollars, it´s more than half of what is spent on medicaid, in comparison it´s a few other expendures combined

you´re not the business man i get it, money that could be saved or used for better purpose isn´t worth anything

It's 1%. It's the equivalent of having 100, $1 bills and losing one of them. Or having 100 pennies and losing one.

How much does the firearm industry contribute to the GDP? Sales, employment, etc.

[TZucchini]

I've asked you for a number other than deaths many times, you've never provided one.

You didn't answer the questions. Are medical professionals wrong to all the flu or HIV a public health issue?

You're taking less commission on an account because you want the customer to spend more money.

Glad you're telling my what I'm doing what I'm doing...Mindreader status: Confirmed.

The very purpose of owning a business is to make money. If you wanted to help other people more than yourself, you'd run a charity.

There are many reasons I own a business. Making money is only one of those reasons. It's not even the primary reason. I can make money anywhere. The other benefits are much greater.

By the way, have you ever considered that your wife is working for half pay, perhaps because that's all she's worth? People who work for non-profits that toot their own horn (surprising she married you ) might just be getting paid exactly what they are worth.

When I told you she could earn double, it's because she's been offered double what she currently makes. Fact is, she loves working at a non-profit, and she feels like she's making a difference in her clients lives. To her, that's worth a lot more than money.

[Tinykong]

You didn't answer the questions. Are medical professionals wrong to all the flu or HIV a public health issue?

Sure, it's a public health issue. Notice, you left out the word "serious."

Glad you're telling my what I'm doing what I'm doing...Mindreader status: Confirmed.

There are many reasons I own a business. Making money is only one of those reasons. It's not even the primary reason. I can make money anywhere. The other benefits are much greater.

You own a business, and you give away free money just because?

Is this you?

When I told you she could earn double, it's because she's been offered double what she currently makes. Fact is, she loves working at a non-profit, and she feels like she's making a difference in her clients lives. To her, that's worth a lot more than money.

Anecdotal argument:

Confirmed.

[Mayhem]

It's 1%. It's the equivalent of having 100, $1 bills and losing one of them. Or having 100 pennies and losing one.

How much does the firearm industry contribute to the GDP? Sales, employment, etc.

i don´t know, how much?

[TZucchini]

Sure, it's a public health issue. Notice, you left out the word "serious."

Here is a statement from the National Vaccine Advisory Committee: "Influenza is a significant public health issue."

Are they wrong?

You own a business, and you give away free money just because?

No. Not "just because". It's the right thing to do, and if situations were reversed, it's what I would want someone to do for me.

Anecdotal argument:

What? You're the one that asked about my wife's qualifications. Some people enjoy working for non-profits. Not everyone, and not every business, is purely in it for the money.

[rhandric]

i didn´t come up with that number, that was tinykong, ask him

Nice evasion. And it falls on those who claim that it's a serious issue to justify how that money is spent, not to mention if that amount being quoted is actually being spent on gun related injuries.

[TZucchini]

And you're still not answering the real questions: where is all that money going? How is it being spent? What's the actual breakdown per patient/victim, and how much is being used for secondary and tertiary purposes that then get claimed to be related for funding purposes?

Are you asking for a breakdown of the $174 billion?

[Tinykong]

Here is a statement from the National Vaccine Advisory Committee: "Influenza is a significant public health issue."

Are they wrong?

Again, it's not a matter of right or wrong. It's simply just not a significant issue. Here we have influenza being called serious, and firearms are also serious? What isn't serious? The label is being applied in a self serving manner.

No. Not "just because". It's the right thing to do, and if situations were reversed, it's what I would want someone to do for me.

So, like I said, you're giving it away because you want more business. By treating your customers better, you expect to make up those short term losses with long term volume gains.

It's almost like you're operating a business to make money.

[rhandric]

Are you asking for a breakdown of the $174 billion?

Yes, I am.

[TZucchini]

Again, it's not a matter of right or wrong.

Oh, it's definitely a matter of whether or not they're right or wrong. Answer the question. The NVAC called influenza a significant public health issue. Are they wrong?

If they're wrong, then apparently you know more about vaccines and influenza than they do.

If they're right, then the total number of people killed by firearms is a horrible measurement for whether or not it's a public health issue.

Like I said. You've dug yourself a very peculiar hole. Wouldn't want to be in it.

So, like I said, you're giving it away because you want more business. By treating your customers better, you expect to make up those short term losses with long term volume gains.

No. As I've explained, that's not at all why I'm taking less commission. The customers don't even know I'm doing it.

It's almost like you're operating a business to make money.

I could make money anywhere. I operate a business because I love the freedom it gives me. I like being able to give my employees a stable job, so they can take care of their families. I like not answering to anyone, or having to ask for time off. These things are much more valuable than money.

- - - Updated - - -

Yes, I am.

Here ya go.

[Tinykong]

Oh, it's definitely a matter of whether or not they're right or wrong. Answer the question. The NVAC called influenza a significant public health issue. Are they wrong?

If they're wrong, then apparently you know more about vaccines and influenza than they do.

If they're right, then the total number of people killed by firearms is a horrible measurement for whether or not it's a public health issue.

Like I said. You've dug yourself a very peculiar hole. Wouldn't want to be in it.

You've misrepresented the argument so many time, you don't even remember what it was about.

Or maybe you've stroked yourself so many times about carefully choosing words that you're in a daze? Either way, what you're blathering about here isn't, and never was, being argued.

No. As I've explained, that's not at all why I'm taking less commission. The customers don't even know I'm doing it.

Riiiiight.

I could make money anywhere. I operate a business because I love the freedom it gives me. I like being able to give my employees a stable job, so they can take care of their families. I like not answering to anyone, or having to ask for time off. These things are much more valuable than money.

Because having a lot of money wouldn't give you all these things as well? Derp.

I don't question why you own a business, I question the honesty of the reasons why you claim to be operating it.

[Mayhem]

Nice evasion. And it falls on those who claim that it's a serious issue to justify how that money is spent, not to mention if that amount being quoted is actually being spent on gun related injuries.

how should i know that if i didn´t post those numbers? i have no idea where he got them from, i´ve asked, but he refused to answer

[Tinykong]

how should i know that if i didn´t post those numbers? i have no idea where he got them from, i´ve asked, but he refused to answer

It took less than 5 seconds to google "$174 billion firearms"

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/2012-1...-violence.html

Stop being lazy as if it's some sort of indication of your position being superior, it's pathetic. If you won't keep up with the thread, at least put in a modicum of effort and pretend to be an informed member of the discussion.

[TZucchini]

You've misrepresented the argument so many time, you don't even remember what it was about.

Or maybe you've stroked yourself so many times about carefully choosing words that you're in a daze? Either way, what you're blathering about here isn't, and never was, being argued.

A failure to answer a direct question. Seems to be your M.O.

Let me refresh your memory. Try to follow along.

You're arguing that firearm violence isn't a significant public health issue because it only effects .01 % of the population. I'm arguing that the measuring stick your using to determine "significance" is flawed. I then presented you with Influenza, which often kills far fewer people than firearm violence, but is still considered a significant public health issue by major health organizations.

So you can either admit those organizations are wrong about the flu, or that you're wrong about firearm violence (I wonder which option he'll choose!).

[Tinykong]

A failure to answer a direct question. Seems to be your M.O.

Let me refresh your memory. Try to follow along.

You're arguing that firearm violence isn't a significant public health issue because it only effects .01 % of the population. I'm arguing that the measuring stick your using to determine "significance" is flawed. I then presented you with Influenza, which often kills far fewer people than firearm violence, but is still considered a significant public health issue by major health organizations.

So you can either admit those organizations are wrong about the flu, or that you're wrong about firearm violence (I wonder which option he'll choose!).

This is where you're stuck.

I don't consider it a significant public health issue, despite the self serving declarations of health organizations. Is it a public health issue? Sure. It is significant/serious? Nope. Anything less than 1% can't remotely be serious, unless you deal in hyperbole and self service.

So, you're asking me to concede to your appeal to authority, or admit my original position is wrong?

[Ghostpanther]

you can´t work on two or three issues at a time, or probably they don´t face that much of a headwind because of responses like the one tiny did "it´s not significant" because 1% of the gdp is worthless anyway

Huh? It is called having your priorities in proper order. Death's from smoking shortens the life of around 443,000 lives per year in the US. Another 300,000 lives prematurely ending are thought to be from obesity. Now compare those to the number of premature death's due to gun inflicted injuries and we will see the gun death numbers pale in comparison.

Overall Tiny is correct in that gun death issues are not even in the top 5 of the major issues facing this country and in comparison to the others is insignificant. Not to say gun death's are not a health concern. But it is blown out of proportion too often. Measures should be taken to help reduce the gun deaths and have been done. And the great majority of gun owners are not opposed to reasonable laws.

[TZucchini]

This is where you're stuck.

OK good. So my original statement was correct:

"Apparently you know more about vaccines and influenza than they do."

[Tinykong]

OK good. So my original statement was correct:

"Apparently you know more about vaccines and influenza than they do."

Wrong again.

I merely don't agree with their (I know this is going to sting, try to hold on) self serving position that these things are "significant." But, please, continue belaboring your strawman about how I disagree with firearm violence or influenza being a public health problem, I know how much of a boner you get calling people science deniers.

We're talking about a country of 330+ million people. If we label something that effects 0.1% (or less) of the population as being "significant" then suddenly everything is significant.