SuperiorMuscle.com - Bodybuilding Forums
Register Members Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read

Go Back   SuperiorMuscle.com - Bodybuilding Forums > Superior Discussion Section > General Chat
Reload this Page Texas Church Shooting

General Chat Off-Topic Discussion


Like Tree18Likes

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 11-05-17, 07:15 PM
Texas Church Shooting
  #1
 
Bouncer's Avatar
 
Administrator
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: California
Likes: 9749
They are saying it was a citizen with a gun who chased and possibly killed the suspect before police arrived.

As sad as this was, if this shooting had happened in a place where nobody was legally allowed to own guns besides the police it's very possible more innocent people could have died. They are saying the suspect dropped his gun and ran as soon as he was shot at by a citizen.

The suspect had multiple weapons in his car so I'm sure he was planning on driving to a mall or some other place filled with people and doing the same thing he did at the church.

Horrible tragedy but as they say, don't fuck with Texas.
is Online   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-17, 12:58 AM
  #2
 
Bouncer's Avatar
 
Administrator
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: California
Likes: 9749
The Texas church massacre could have been worse if not for one man - CNN
is Online   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-17, 08:13 AM
  #3
 
lipripper's Avatar
 
Superior Admiral
Join Date: May 2011
Location: SE GA
Age: 54
Likes: 1912
Wonder if this sick fuck was wanting to copy cat vegas. Sick fucks in this world.
is Online   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-17, 08:24 AM
  #4
 
Bouncer's Avatar
 
Administrator
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: California
Likes: 9749
Quote:
Originally Posted by lipripper View Post
Wonder if this sick fuck was wanting to copy cat vegas. Sick fucks in this world.
They are saying he drove 40 miles to the church his in laws attend but they weren't there.

I will say 1 anti gun thing rip. this guy was dishonorably discharged, spent 12 months in confinement, had previous family abuse charges towards his child and wife yet he was still able to get his guns legally in Texas. If you have that kind of record you should not be able to buy firearms legally.
is Online   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-17, 09:05 AM
  #5
 
Bouncer's Avatar
 
Administrator
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: California
Likes: 9749
So the guy was denied permission to carry in public but was allowed to purchase weapons. what a stupid fucken law. you got a guy with a clear history of problems and they say "no you can't carry a weapon in public but sure you can buy an AR-15 no problem". texas needs to look itself in the mirror and ask itself why they would allow this POS to obtain weapons legally.
is Online   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-17, 09:18 AM
  #6
 
lipripper's Avatar
 
Superior Admiral
Join Date: May 2011
Location: SE GA
Age: 54
Likes: 1912
A lot of places have a clause that if you have a domestic violence conviction its considered like a felony and you cant have a firearm.
rado likes this.
is Online   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-17, 09:30 AM
  #7
 
Bouncer's Avatar
 
Administrator
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: California
Likes: 9749
Quote:
Originally Posted by lipripper View Post
A lot of places have a clause that if you have a domestic violence conviction its considered like a felony and you cant have a firearm.
yea i know. but not Texas. and this guy had more then just a basic domestic violence charge. he was dishonorably discharged and spent a year in confinement.

this is the type of shit that makes it so hard for law abiding gun owners.

i believe good law abiding people should be able to obtain any type of gun they want. BUT. the government needs to look more into who they are giving weapons to. this guy absolutely should not have been allowed to get his hands on any guns. they knew he had some history so they denied him permission to carry in public but allowed him to buy multiple guns as long as he didn't take them out in public. lol. if you know he has a history you shouldn't allow the fucker to have the fucken guns.
chuckz28 and lipripper like this.
is Online   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-17, 09:46 AM
  #8
 
lipripper's Avatar
 
Superior Admiral
Join Date: May 2011
Location: SE GA
Age: 54
Likes: 1912
Did he own them prior to him getting convicted, or was he allowed to buy afterward? If he owned them prior to I wonder if there is some how they would check to ensure he got rid of them upon his conviction.. If he got them after..thats pretty fucked up!

But you know the deal..a criminal isn't gonna follow laws.
is Online   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-17, 09:59 AM
  #9
 
Scrumhalf's Avatar
 
Moderator
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Beyond the Event Horizon
Likes: 2002
The rule has to be national. No point having a patchwork of state by state rules.

Also, the CDC declared gun violence as a national health crisis but they are explicitly forbidden by law to spend a penny on research on the causes of gun violence. Why? Because the NRA has explicitly lobbied against it. It is clear that while guns are super easy for unstable people to purchase, we also have some kind of pathological condition in this country regarding gun violence. We need the CDC to research this. No different from tobacco or whatever.

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk
Bouncer likes this.
is Online   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-17, 09:59 AM
  #10
 
Bouncer's Avatar
 
Administrator
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: California
Likes: 9749
i'm not sure if he had the weapons before or after his crimes.
is Online   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-17, 11:37 AM
  #11
 
Bouncer's Avatar
 
Administrator
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: California
Likes: 9749
So the neighbor shot the suspect with his AR-15 when the suspect walked out of the church. The suspect was hit and dropped his weapon. He jumped in his car and took off. The neighbor and some guy driving by chased after him hitting speeds of 95mph. The suspect called his father and told him he had been shot and he wasn't going to make it. He then shot himself and drove into a ditch.

That neighbor very likely prevented many more deaths. The suspect had 3 more loaded rifles and a handgun in his car.
is Online   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-17, 02:53 PM
  #12
 
Bouncer's Avatar
 
Administrator
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: California
Likes: 9749
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scrumhalf View Post
The rule has to be national. No point having a patchwork of state by state rules.

Also, the CDC declared gun violence as a national health crisis but they are explicitly forbidden by law to spend a penny on research on the causes of gun violence. Why? Because the NRA has explicitly lobbied against it. It is clear that while guns are super easy for unstable people to purchase, we also have some kind of pathological condition in this country regarding gun violence. We need the CDC to research this. No different from tobacco or whatever.

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk
its simply the unstable people getting guns that leads to this kind of violence. there are millions and millions of legal gun owners that never break the law. there is no pathological condition with 99% of legal gun owners. you simply dont ever hear about the millions of gun owners who follow the law everyday. its only during times of tragedy which gives people this false impression that guns are evil and everyone that owns one must be some kind of gun nut.
lipripper likes this.
is Online   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-17, 03:22 PM
  #13
 
Scrumhalf's Avatar
 
Moderator
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Beyond the Event Horizon
Likes: 2002
If we don't think we have a gun violence problem in this country, then there is no hope for us. It's an epidemic and we are not going to fix it until we study it and come up with solutions.

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk
is Online   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-17, 04:05 PM
  #14
 
lipripper's Avatar
 
Superior Admiral
Join Date: May 2011
Location: SE GA
Age: 54
Likes: 1912
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scrumhalf View Post
If we don't think we have a gun violence problem in this country, then there is no hope for us. It's an epidemic and we are not going to fix it until we study it and come up with solutions.

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk
Not saying it shouldn't be fixed..but how many studies have been done on drug problems..drinking problems...gambling problems, gang problems... has it helped? no...it still continues Sad but true. people will alwayws be fucked up. that's why you need to be able to protect yourself. It is a mental health issue and a problem of violating someone rights. Unfortunately, The same laws that allow people to have the freedoms they do here also STOP law enforcement from doing a lot more preventive measures. Unfortunately ya cant have it both ways. So in this assholes case...if the cops came and took his guns because of something he did in the past..he could simply say hes being "profiled" just like a Muslim..or a black man or a anything one else.. See..People want it one way..when it benefits them..but not when it impedes them.
is Online   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-17, 04:06 PM
  #15
 
Bouncer's Avatar
 
Administrator
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: California
Likes: 9749
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scrumhalf View Post
If we don't think we have a gun violence problem in this country, then there is no hope for us. It's an epidemic and we are not going to fix it until we study it and come up with solutions.

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk
Mental health problem.

The issue is when unstable people have access to guns. That's what needs to be fixed.

In the case of this Texas shooting. The state failed. He was denied a permit to carry because they knew he had some kind of record yet he was not denied access to weapons and was allowed to legally purchase.
lipripper likes this.
is Online   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-17, 04:09 PM
  #16
 
Bouncer's Avatar
 
Administrator
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: California
Likes: 9749
This guy broke the skull of his infant son in 2012 yet he was allowed to purchase weapons legally.

Fucking shame on Texas. Jesus Christ. What the fuck were they thinking allowing a person capable of cracking his own child's skull to purchase a weapon.
is Online   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-17, 04:15 PM
  #17
 
Bouncer's Avatar
 
Administrator
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: California
Likes: 9749
god damn right. i'd like to shake this hillbillers hand.

'He needed to be stopped,' says man who pursued Texas gunman | Reuters
is Online   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-17, 04:31 PM
  #18
 
Bouncer's Avatar
 
Administrator
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: California
Likes: 9749
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=SKMv_B_08Pg
is Online   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-17, 05:08 PM
  #19
 
Scrumhalf's Avatar
 
Moderator
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Beyond the Event Horizon
Likes: 2002
Bouncer, there are a lot of moving parts to this. There's the easy availability of guns, there's mental health, there's drug abuse that can contribute, there's PTSD. What the NIH and CDC can do is to do epidemiological studies to tie all these things together and to come up with strategies to address what is unquestionably an epidemic.

But we refuse to let them do these studies. Do you know that Congress explicitly forbids a single penny in the NIH/CDC budgets to go on researching this? That's the NRA at work. If we don't understand the problem, we won't fix it.

Sent from my Nexus 5X using Tapatalk
is Online   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-17, 05:09 PM
  #20
 
rado's Avatar
 
Founding Member
Join Date: Jun 2012
Likes: 2912
Quote:
Originally Posted by lipripper View Post
A lot of places have a clause that if you have a domestic violence conviction its considered like a felony and you cant have a firearm.
is Online   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-17, 05:53 PM
  #21
 
lipripper's Avatar
 
Superior Admiral
Join Date: May 2011
Location: SE GA
Age: 54
Likes: 1912
Scrum...Who is the NRA?
is Online   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-17, 08:04 PM
  #22
 
Scrumhalf's Avatar
 
Moderator
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Beyond the Event Horizon
Likes: 2002
Quote:
Originally Posted by lipripper View Post
Scrum...Who is the NRA?
The NRA has lobbied heavily against funding the CDC/NIH to research gun violence. Why? Is it not in our best interest to determine causes and fixes for the gun violence epidemic we have in this country?
is Online   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-17, 08:10 PM
  #23
 
Bouncer's Avatar
 
Administrator
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: California
Likes: 9749
I'm all for research as long as it's not done with any bias or agenda. I'm not sure how politics could be kept away from that kind of research. Who would fund it?
is Online   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-17, 08:16 PM
  #24
 
lipripper's Avatar
 
Superior Admiral
Join Date: May 2011
Location: SE GA
Age: 54
Likes: 1912
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scrumhalf View Post
The NRA has lobbied heavily against funding the CDC/NIH to research gun violence. Why? Is it not in our best interest to determine causes and fixes for the gun violence epidemic we have in this country?
Not what I asked but nice play...thanks for the response

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk
is Online   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-17, 08:24 PM
  #25
 
Scrumhalf's Avatar
 
Moderator
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Beyond the Event Horizon
Likes: 2002
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bouncer View Post
I'm all for research as long as it's not done with any bias or agenda. I'm not sure how politics could be kept away from that kind of research. Who would fund it?
CDC and NIH are funded under the federal budget. The research is done by scientists with peer review. I trust their findings and am confident in the quality of the research.

Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk
is Online   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-17, 08:27 PM
  #26
 
Bouncer's Avatar
 
Administrator
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: California
Likes: 9749
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scrumhalf View Post
CDC and NIH are funded under the federal budget. The research is done by scientists with peer review. I trust their findings and am confident in the quality of the research.

Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk
Do you believe that research could not be effected by politics or scientist that already have a strong opinion on the issue of guns one way or another?

With an issue like guns I'm not sure it's possible to find someone who doesn't already have a strong opinion on the matter. So if you go into something with a strong set of beliefs, that may effect the work their doing.

I trust science. I'm just not sure politics can be separated from this issue.
is Online   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-17, 08:29 PM
  #27
 
Scrumhalf's Avatar
 
Moderator
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Beyond the Event Horizon
Likes: 2002
Quote:
Originally Posted by lipripper View Post
Not what I asked but nice play...thanks for the response

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk
What did you ask? I am confused. I just pointed out that NRA lobbying ensured that no CDC or NIH funds be used for gun violence research. It's a shame because we can learn a lot regarding the solutions.

Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk
is Online   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-17, 08:31 PM
  #28
 
Scrumhalf's Avatar
 
Moderator
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Beyond the Event Horizon
Likes: 2002
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bouncer View Post
Do you believe that research could not be effected by politics or scientist that already have a strong opinion on the issue of guns one way or another?

With an issue like guns I'm not sure it's possible to find someone who doesn't already have a strong opinion on the matter. So if you go into something with a strong set of beliefs, that may effect the work their doing.
As a scientist, I am fairly confident that the peer review process will help maintain objectivity on the research.

Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk
is Online   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-17, 08:34 PM
  #29
 
lipripper's Avatar
 
Superior Admiral
Join Date: May 2011
Location: SE GA
Age: 54
Likes: 1912
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scrumhalf View Post
What did you ask? I am confused. I just pointed out that NRA lobbying ensured that no CDC or NIH funds be used for gun violence research. It's a shame because we can learn a lot regarding the solutions.

Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk
Ok....who is the NRA?

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk
is Online   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-17, 08:35 PM
  #30
 
Bouncer's Avatar
 
Administrator
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: California
Likes: 9749
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scrumhalf View Post
As a scientist, I am fairly confident that the peer review process will help maintain objectivity on the research.

Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk
You aren't a scientist that deals with something so strongly politically driven as guns bro. I honestly believe the gun issue is so heated and so divisive that even scientists can be swayed one way or another.
is Online   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-17, 08:36 PM
  #31
 
Scrumhalf's Avatar
 
Moderator
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Beyond the Event Horizon
Likes: 2002
Quote:
Originally Posted by lipripper View Post
Ok....who is the NRA?

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk
I am not sure why you are declining to engage in a reasonable conversation. Are you suggesting that lobbying by the National Rifle Association is not impeding the ability of the CDC and NIH to do much needed research on gun violence in the US?

Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk
is Online   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-17, 08:38 PM
  #32
 
lipripper's Avatar
 
Superior Admiral
Join Date: May 2011
Location: SE GA
Age: 54
Likes: 1912
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scrumhalf View Post
I am not sure why you are declining to engage in a reasonable conversation. Are you suggesting that lobbying by the National Rifle Association is not impeding the ability of the CDC and NIH to do much needed research on gun violence in the US?

Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk
Sorry..your the one refusing..I asked a very simple question your obviously avoiding.

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk
is Online   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-17, 08:39 PM
  #33
 
Scrumhalf's Avatar
 
Moderator
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Beyond the Event Horizon
Likes: 2002
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bouncer View Post
You aren't a scientist that deals with something so strongly politically driven as guns bro. I honestly believe the gun issue is so heated and so divisive that even scientists can be swayed one way or another.
So do nothing is your answer? We can do objective research on stem cells and on global warming, but according to you, guns will turn otherwise objective scientists into rabid pro-gun or anti-gun zealots.

I'm sorry but you seriously underestimate the professional integrity of scientists.

Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk
is Online   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-17, 08:40 PM
  #34
 
Scrumhalf's Avatar
 
Moderator
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Beyond the Event Horizon
Likes: 2002
Quote:
Originally Posted by lipripper View Post
Sorry..your the one refusing..I asked a very simple question your obviously avoiding.

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk
Again, I am not sure what you are asking, and I mean that sincerely. The NRA is the National Rifle Association. They have been very effective at lobbying against even what I consider is beneficial research on gun violence.

Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk
is Online   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-17, 08:44 PM
  #35
 
Bouncer's Avatar
 
Administrator
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: California
Likes: 9749
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scrumhalf View Post
So do nothing is your answer? We can do objective research on stem cells and on global warming, bit according to you, guns will turn otherwise objective scientists into rabid pro-gun or anti-gun zealots.

I'm sorry but you seriously underestimate the professional integrity of scientists.

Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk
like the scientists that worked for the lead companies in the 1950's? how about the "sugar scientists" that worked for coke/pepsi etc..

and no i'm not saying it shouldn't be studied. i'm saying whatever the result, the other side will do nothing but try and discredit it.
is Online   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-17, 08:45 PM
  #36
 
lipripper's Avatar
 
Superior Admiral
Join Date: May 2011
Location: SE GA
Age: 54
Likes: 1912
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scrumhalf View Post
Again, I am not sure what you are asking, and I mean that sincerely. The NRA is the National Rifle Association. They have been very effective at lobbying against even what I consider is beneficial research on gun violence.

Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk
But who is the NRA scrum...common now.

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk
is Online   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-17, 08:51 PM
  #37
 
Scrumhalf's Avatar
 
Moderator
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Beyond the Event Horizon
Likes: 2002
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bouncer View Post
like the scientists that worked for the lead companies in the 1950's? how about the "sugar scientists" that worked for coke/pepsi etc..

and no i'm not saying it shouldn't be studied. i'm saying whatever the result, the other side will do nothing but try and discredit it.
None of those "studies" passed muster at a peer reviewed journal or conference. I have faith in CDC/NIH scientists over people working for gas or sugar companies.

Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk
is Online   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-17, 08:53 PM
  #38
 
Bouncer's Avatar
 
Administrator
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: California
Likes: 9749
i think ripper is saying its gun owners and donators.. essentially people. without the people there would be no NRA.
is Online   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-17, 08:58 PM
  #39
 
lipripper's Avatar
 
Superior Admiral
Join Date: May 2011
Location: SE GA
Age: 54
Likes: 1912
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bouncer View Post
i think ripper is saying its gun owners and donators.. essentially people. without the people there would be no NRA.
Smart guy....it's the will of the majority of the people in this country fighting to save their rights as they know them and believe them to be.

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk
Bouncer likes this.
is Online   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-17, 08:59 PM
  #40
 
Bouncer's Avatar
 
Administrator
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: California
Likes: 9749
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scrumhalf View Post
None of those "studies" passed muster at a peer reviewed journal or conference. I have faith in CDC/NIH scientists over people working for gas or sugar companies.

Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk
people trusted what the lead companies and their scientists were telling them for decades bro.

my point about guns specifically though is that they just cannot be separated from strong emotions and politics. but even so, the study would simply be dismissed by "the other side". in the end sadly it would do nothing. regardless of the findings. thats the harsh reality..
is Online   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-17, 08:59 PM
  #41
 
Scrumhalf's Avatar
 
Moderator
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Beyond the Event Horizon
Likes: 2002
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bouncer View Post
i think ripper is saying its gun owners and donators.. essentially people. without the people there would be no NRA.
So none of you guys are even curious if there can be objective data on how to reduce gun violence? If the data shows strong correlation to certain aspects of mental health or some other stats, then wouldn't it benefit responsible gun owners as well to put in specific programs to address it?

Or are you really so cynical about the ability of scientists to put their personal opinions aside and show us objective results?

If so, we should just move on. Sandy Hook, Orlando, Vegas,... we should just shrug and move on. Nothing can be done. It's just the price we have to pay to be Americans.

Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk
is Online   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-17, 09:03 PM
  #42
 
Bouncer's Avatar
 
Administrator
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: California
Likes: 9749
Quote:
Originally Posted by lipripper View Post
Smart guy....it's the will of the majority of the people in this country fighting to save their rights as they know them and believe them to be.

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk
And that's why I joined. Because I know for a fact that I will never harm anything or anyone with a gun unless they are trying to harm my family. I do not want the right to defend my family ever to be taken away from me. The NRA is far far far from perfect but they are our best hope.
lipripper likes this.
is Online   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-17, 09:09 PM
  #43
 
Bouncer's Avatar
 
Administrator
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: California
Likes: 9749
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scrumhalf View Post
So none of you guys are even curious if there can be objective data on how to reduce gun violence? If the data shows strong correlation to certain aspects of mental health or some other stats, then wouldn't it benefit responsible gun owners as well to put in specific programs to address it?

Or are you really so cynical about the ability of scientists to put their personal opinions aside and show us objective results?

If so, we should just move on. Sandy Hook, Orlando, Vegas,... we should just shrug and move on. Nothing can be done. It's just the price we have to pay to be Americans.

Sent from my SM-G930P using Tapatalk
Yes scrum I would be curious, absolutely. But look at politics in America brother. Take climate data for example. Any person with half a brain knows the Earth is warming.

But what people can't and won't agree on including scientist (conflicting data) is exactly how much we are speeding up that process.

I am 100% for science that leads to reduced gun violence. But I am also 100% against giving up my right to own a gun to defend my family. I have legitimate fears that the science could be politicized and used against my rights to defend my family.
is Online   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-17, 09:23 PM
  #44
 
Bouncer's Avatar
 
Administrator
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: California
Likes: 9749
i think we can all agree on 1 thing. this guy in texas should never have been given the ability to buy a gun. the air-force not registering him on the FBI list is unforgivable.
lipripper likes this.
is Online   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-17, 09:27 PM
  #45
 
Scrumhalf's Avatar
 
Moderator
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Beyond the Event Horizon
Likes: 2002
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bouncer View Post
But what people can't and won't agree on including scientist (conflicting data) is exactly how much we are speeding up that process.
Actually, the science is fairly strong on this. I think we know exactly whow much human activities are contributing to global warming.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bouncer View Post
I am 100% for science that leads to reduced gun violence. But I am also 100% against giving up my right to own a gun to defend my family. I have legitimate fears that the science could be politicized and used against my rights to defend my family.
Your first sentence is common sense, but in your second & third sentences, you are veering from skepticism to paranoia.
is Online   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-17, 09:37 PM
  #46
 
Bouncer's Avatar
 
Administrator
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: California
Likes: 9749
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scrumhalf View Post
Actually, the science is fairly strong on this. I think we know exactly whow much human activities are contributing to global warming.



Your first sentence is common sense, but in your second & third sentences, you are veering from skepticism to paranoia.
We don't know exactly how much humans contribute. That's absolutely false. We have a good understanding but it is very far from exact. The Earth warms and cools in natural cycles. We do not have a full understanding of exactly how fast the Earth would be warming if we didn't exist. It's more of an educated guess.

Paranoia when it comes to today's politics is warranted I think. 10 years ago you would never have believed in a million years Trump would be our president. Who the fuck knows what will happen next. Whoever gets elected after Trump may be the extreme opposite. That would probably be good for most things because I agree with Trump on almost nothing. But the way he views the 2nd amendment is one of them. So paranoia or not, I think the political climate warrants such fears.
is Online   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-17, 09:40 PM
  #47
 
Scrumhalf's Avatar
 
Moderator
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Beyond the Event Horizon
Likes: 2002
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bouncer View Post
We don't know exactly how much humans contribute. That's absolutely false. We have a good understanding but it is very far from exact. The Earth warms and cools in natural cycles. We do not have a full understanding of exactly how fast the Earth would be warming if we didn't exist.
Disagree completely. Scientists have an excellent idea of how much man-made vs. natural causes contribute to global warming. And if anything, they have been conservative about the man made sources, which means that the reality is almost certainly going to be worse than predicted.

You want references? Michael Mann has spoken extensively about this.
is Online   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-17, 09:44 PM
  #48
 
Scrumhalf's Avatar
 
Moderator
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Beyond the Event Horizon
Likes: 2002
By the way, firearm deaths per 100,000 is exactly the same as motor vehicle deaths in the US. That's how big a public health concern firearm deaths are. Yet we choose to do nothing other than offer "thoughts and prayers." Think about how much science research has gone into and is going into reducing road deaths - safety features on cars, tire research, road engineering, lighting, snow/ice control, etc. That's what we need to be doing on the gun side as well.


Here are the stats (2014 data):



Here is the link to the data in case you want to dig further.

https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr65/nvsr65_04.pdf
is Online   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-17, 09:46 PM
  #49
 
Bouncer's Avatar
 
Administrator
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: California
Likes: 9749
Again. It's about comparing to the Earth's natural warming and cooling cycles. Who's to say some warming periods are slightly more excelirated than others? Can science say without a shadow of a doubt how fast the Earth went through it's natural warming cycle during the Jurassic period?

The science is based on certain assumptions. More of an educated guess.

But what the fuck are we even talking about here. This is about gun research. LoL
is Online   Reply With Quote
Old 11-06-17, 09:49 PM
  #50
 
Bouncer's Avatar
 
Administrator
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: California
Likes: 9749
Quote:
Originally Posted by Scrumhalf View Post
By the way, firearm deaths per 100,000 is exactly the same as motor vehicle deaths in the US. That's how big a public health concern firearm deaths are. Yet we choose to do nothing other than offer "thoughts and prayers." Think about how much science research has gone into and is going into reducing road deaths - safety features on cars, tire research, road engineering, lighting, snow/ice control, etc. That's what we need to be doing on the gun side as well.


Here are the stats (2014 data):



Here is the link to the data in case you want to dig further.

https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr65/nvsr65_04.pdf
Most of those gun deaths are suicide or gang related. They simply use the easiest tool for the job. If not guns it would be knives etc..

Fact is, you are far more likely to be injured or killed on the road then you are by a gun.
is Online   Reply With Quote

SEO by vBSEO 3.6.0