Help me debunk these anti gun arguments

[KAPA]

http://m.motherjones.com/politics/2013/01/pro-gun-myths-fact-check

#4. I know a CCW guy stopped the Oregon mall shooting, so there is one.

Need some help with the others though.

[Dave_L]

http://randy.house.gov/sites/randy.house.gov/files/images/2ndAmendment.jpg

/argument

[blacklabel]

That's about where I'm at Dave. I'm done arguing with people that will never understand the concept of a natural right. I'm not going to waste my time attempting to change someone's mind when they don't respect my rights in the first place.

[Rucker61]

Myth #6 - the recent CDC report to the President showed that armed resistance gives a better chance of survival than no resistance.

Myth #9 - while the percentage of household with guns has gone down, the total number of households has increased. The total number of households with guns is relatively stable.

Just read the responses underneath the story.

[Ridge]

Arapahoe High School shooter offed himself after being cornered by a lawman.

The Christmas Eve church shooting in CO Springs a few years back was stopped by an armed guard. As was the shooting a couple days after Century 16 in a church in Aurora.

[TFOGGER]

Use their own stats against them:

http://www.gallup.com/poll/150341/Record-Low-Favor-Handgun-Ban.aspx

October 26, 2011
Record-Low 26% in U.S. Favor Handgun BanSupport for stricter gun laws in general is lowest Gallup has measuredby Jeffrey M. Jones


PRINCETON, NJ -- A record-low 26% of Americans favor a legal ban on the possession of handguns in the United States other than by police and other authorized people. When Gallup first asked Americans this question in 1959, 60% favored banning handguns. But since 1975, the majority of Americans have opposed such a measure, with opposition around 70% in recent years.

http://content.gallup.com/origin/gallupinc/GallupSpaces/Production/Cms/POLL/n9ggmdee1k60atawqdbprq.gif
The results are based on Gallup's annual Crime poll, conducted Oct. 6-9. This year's poll finds support for a variety of gun-control measures at historical lows, including the ban on handguns, which is Gallup's longest continuing gun-control trend.
For the first time, Gallup finds greater opposition to than support for a ban on semiautomatic guns or assault rifles, 53% to 43%. In the initial asking of this question in 1996, the numbers were nearly reversed, with 57% for and 42% against an assault rifle ban. Congress passed such a ban in 1994, but the law expired when Congress did not act to renew it in 2004. Around the time the law expired, Americans were about evenly divided in their views.

http://content.gallup.com/origin/gallupinc/GallupSpaces/Production/Cms/POLL/ylqmvpzqn0muer-v0mqgkq.gif
Additionally, support for the broader concept of making gun laws "more strict" is at its lowest by one percentage point (43%). Forty-four percent prefer that gun laws be kept as they are now, while 11% favor less strict laws.
As recently as 2007, a majority of Americans still favored stricter laws, which had been the dominant view since Gallup first asked the question in 1990.

http://content.gallup.com/origin/gallupinc/GallupSpaces/Production/Cms/POLL/kk9_hpwse06tvouxgygx0a.gif

[clublights]

They lie and bend the truth with their " fact check" already

#1 yup the cops and feds are out gunned and we intend to keep it that way.

#2 you mean that murderers use the tools they have available ?? wow big surprise there...

#3 Disagree.. read more guns less crime for any stats you wish to counter this

#4 see above... as well as showing full facts like the orgean mall.. the Ogden mall.. the Pearl MS school shooting... the list goes on and on .. ( love you they cite them selves as proof... also ER Shooting? has anyone here ever advocated carrying into the ER ? way to use some sort of bullshit stat to lie your way

#5 is from the many times over debunked Kellerman study that even Kellerman won't stand behind anymore .

#6 tho I can't read the study without signing up for something... I'm willing to bet the data is skewed by gang members/ drug dealers.

#7 uses "studies" by the VPC which as an anti gun organization all of it's " studies" are suspect by nature.

#8 Japan is an EXTREMELY different culture.

#9 I guess I'm below average....

#10 the 40% private sales number....

that 40% is from criminals that got the gun from family/friends. no BGC law is going to affect this. they will still get the guns the same way .

More "studies" by anti gun groups where the numbers are highly suspect.

All Department Directors ( ATF FBI Homeland) must be approved by congress WTF does it matter if the NRA agrees with a long standing Federal law ?

[ChunkyMonkey]

#1 happening in California.. soon in couple States in the East Coast.

#2 they are comparing gun ownership vs gun homicide. The real comparison should be gun ownership vs homicide in general. Homicide is at all time low as gun ownership is increasing. http://nation.time.com/2014/01/02/murders-in-u-s-cities-again-at-record-lows/

The rest is so dumb LOL... 'owning gun increase risk of any kind of event involving gun' DOH! Owning knives increasing shit happens w/ knives too.

[Rucker61]

Here's my favorite debunk site, complete with government sources: http://www.gunfacts.info/

[Rooskibar03]

Not worth arguing emotion vs fact. But it you want a ton of good ammo (see what I did there) Becks book "Control" debunks almost every myth there is and as a bonus has notes with all the supporting documents so you don't have to quote GB.

[spqrzilla]

Mother Jones are shameless liars.

[SideShow Bob]

Plenty of cases of armed citizens preventing crimes here:
http://gunwatch.blogspot.com/

Also see "The Armed Citizen" in the American Rifleman magazine.

[Great-Kazoo]

Ask them how Chicago , a gun free city, has such a high murder rate.
Then again why bother? The AG crowd wants more / tougher gun laws to combat the incident in CA. Yet completely ignores a Knife & Car were also used to kill & injure people. MORE, MORE MORE THYE DEMEND. Why, More doesn't solve the true problem, criminals and psychologically disturbed people.

[BPTactical]

Talk to your ass and your head hurts.

[Great-Kazoo]

One more item to ask "them " about.

How is it a party / the dems are demand stricter gun laws, only when a lot of white folks get killed. Yet blatantly ignore the mass shootings in urban D controlled areas. Not even Sharpton or jackson call for more police activity in "urban / colored areas" Sounds racist to me.

[BPTactical]

How about this, it shuts them down every time:
How is it your can push for gun control under the ruse of saving children and yet you advocate the killing of an unborn child?
Fuck you hypocrite.

Crickets.......

[rondog]

I gave up trying to teach pigs to sing.....

[sniper7]

Liberalism is a disease. A mental disease. Those people need to be regulated and kept from owning anything that could be a danger to themselves or others. That includes vehicles, kitchen knives, having children, you name it.

[KAPA]

Thanks for all the help guys. Some of the "facts" seem pretty good until you dig a bit deeper and see where they are coming from. In the end it comes back to you can get stats to argue whatever the hell you want. I think the wife just won her first gun argument with her girlfriends.

I think we are starting to see where Bloomberg's $50Mil is going to. I anticipate lots of crap like this coming up from now on and being spread around. Hopefully he is paying through the nose for it!

[clublights]

Thanks for all the help guys. Some of the "facts" seem pretty good until you dig a bit deeper and see where they are coming from. In the end it comes back to you can get stats to argue whatever the hell you want. I think the wife just won her first gun argument with her girlfriends.

I think we are starting to see where Bloomberg's $50Mil is going to. I anticipate lots of crap like this coming up from now on and being spread around. Hopefully he is paying through the nose for it!


Just remember 95% of statistics on the internet are made up .

[Great-Kazoo]

Just remember 95% of statistics on the internet are made up .


You should double check that info. Lincoln clearly said, 75% of internet statistics were made up.

[BPTactical]

And 5 out of 4 people have problems with fractions......

[hurley842002]

And 5 out of 4 people have problems with fractions......

I'm one of those 5...lol

[alxone]

http://i.imgur.com/UHDLCnJ.jpg

[BPTactical]

http://i.imgur.com/UHDLCnJ.jpg

Hi Alex!

[ChadAmberg]

The only response is to call them a fascist. Every time they open their mouth...

[Ronin13]

There are two guarantees in life:
1. It eventually ends for everyone.
2. Anything on Mother Jones is either emotional-based bullshit, or complete batpoop insane bullshit.

[Aloha_Shooter]

Who reads Mother Jones besides dedicated Marxists? WTF, no point in even trying to talk to those ninnies.

[Dave_L]

Had this posted by someone on Facebook in regards to what should be done about guns:

"For example, yes, actual comprehensive background checks without loopholes would be a good start. A step further, some sort of psychological evaluation. The UCSB shooter clearly would have not passed one of these. Limitations on the number of bullets that can be purchased, limits on the size of magazines, restrictions on the number of weapons one can purchase in a year, restrictions on the ability to purchase certain weapons... there's a whole list of possibilities that have not even been tried in the US. We keep claiming the "evil men will get guns and kill people no matter the regulations" argument, yet 1) we haven't even really tried to restrict them and 2) other countries have, and have seen results."

UGGGGGGGGGGH. This is why I just don't really feel like defending my beliefs anymore. It's hopeless.

[Rucker61]

Had this posted by someone on Facebook in regards to what should be done about guns:

"For example, yes, actual comprehensive background checks without loopholes would be a good start. A step further, some sort of psychological evaluation. The UCSB shooter clearly would have not passed one of these. Limitations on the number of bullets that can be purchased, limits on the size of magazines, restrictions on the number of weapons one can purchase in a year, restrictions on the ability to purchase certain weapons... there's a whole list of possibilities that have not even been tried in the US. We keep claiming the "evil men will get guns and kill people no matter the regulations" argument, yet 1) we haven't even really tried to restrict them and 2) other countries have, and have seen results."

UGGGGGGGGGGH. This is why I just don't really feel like defending my beliefs anymore. It's hopeless.

Two points from this:

1. Comprehensive background checks only work with a registry, and won't capture bad guys with guns. Given the level of civil disobedience we see in Connecticut, all this law will do is create about 60 million new criminals from law abiding citizens.
2. Any psychological requirement is a de facto gun ban. Even if the current mental health infrastructure could handle the increase in traffic (it can't, and people with real mental health needs will suffer), at first we'll see a race to laxity, like we did with marijuana prescriptions. It won't take long, though, for mental health professionals to realize that they are liable for any false positives, and once the first previously passed shooter kills a bunch of people, the resulting lawsuits will ensure that no mental health provider (and especially their insurance provider) will sign up to do psych evals for gun purchases. Without anyone to sign off on the psych evals, no one gets to buy a gun.

[james_bond_007]

#1 yup the cops and feds are out gunned and we intend to keep it that way.


Cops and FEDS should be properly "double counted". Once as "cops and feds", and again as "armed citizens".

Thus the number of armed citizens will ALWAYS be > or = "cops and Feds".

[vossman]

#1 is a bunch of crap. The number of LE and Mil guns vs civilians may be true but the govt won't fight with that ratio. One guy holes up in a bunker and 30-40 if not more are on the scene waiting to take him down. The dude in Nevada had 200+ agents waiting to take over his shit. You better believe if it was just him and a few others they would have completed their mission, when they found they were equally matched the Fed agents thought about it for a second and then backed off.

[james_bond_007]

Had this posted by someone on Facebook in regards to what should be done about guns:

"For example, yes, actual comprehensive background checks without loopholes would be a good start. A step further, some sort of psychological evaluation. The UCSB shooter clearly would have not passed one of these. Limitations on the number of bullets that can be purchased, limits on the size of magazines, restrictions on the number of weapons one can purchase in a year, restrictions on the ability to purchase certain weapons... there's a whole list of possibilities that have not even been tried in the US. We keep claiming the "evil men will get guns and kill people no matter the regulations" argument, yet 1) we haven't even really tried to restrict them and 2) other countries have, and have seen results."

UGGGGGGGGGGH. This is why I just don't really feel like defending my beliefs anymore. It's hopeless.

Let me put another spin on this:

What if ....
During the War of Independence, some of the patriots had said the same things as the Quote(above), in regards to whether a revolutionist could own a firearm ?


I can hear George Washington and Thomas Jefferson talking now:


TOM: Boss, guess what I heard ?

GEORGE: What Tom?

TOM: That the people are more afraid of their neighbors having guns, than of the British.

GEORGE: What are you taking about, Tom?

TOM: "For example, they want [for every patriot wanting to own a gun], yes, actual comprehensive background checks without loopholes, would be a good start. "

GEORGE: Why? Everyone's background is pretty much "English" and they all hate the Crown...except old Ben Arnold. That guy always rubbed me the wrong way. I just don't TRUST him.

TOM : Well they also want to go "A step further, some sort of psychological evaluation. "

GEORGE: What will that prove? The whole world thinks were nuts anyway...a bunch of poor, over-taxed, farmers going up against the entire British Army!!! Everyone would FAIL such an eval.

TOM: They say we probably should not be in this war because if laws restricting firearms were in place, the shooter that killed the first British soldiers in the battles of Lexington and Concord "[The UCSB shooter] clearly would have not passed one of these. [evaluations]" and would not have been able to HAVE a firearm to "do the deed".

GEORGE: UH-HUH....what else ?

TOM : "Limitations on the number of bullets that can be purchased ,[B] limits on the size of magazines[B], restrictions on the number of weapons one can purchase in a year[B], restrictions on the ability to purchase certain weapons[B]... "

GEORGE: Tom, let me get this straight. The British government is subjugating the people, treating them almost as slaves, taxing them until they can hardly feed their families, and they are MORE afraid of their next door neighbors having guns and bullets, than of the British having guns and bullets? I say, that if the British's guns can only hold ONE round, we should have guns that can hold MORE...like TWO.

TOM: But then they will figure out how to make one hold THREE rounds.

GEORGE: OK then FIVE..no THIRTY. Confound it Tom, Unlimited!!! WE should NOT have a limit on how many rounds we can have in our guns. We always need at least ONE more than the guys shootin' AT us. Right ? And you know Tom, a magazine, as far as I know about the .30–.51 calibre airguns (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Air_gun) that have magazines, is just PART of a gun. So no more of this trying to make a magazine something different than a gun. It is a part of a gun...airguns can't work with out them, right? Guns have lots of parts to make them work: triggers, stocks, barrels...and magazines. I'll have no more of this treating a magazine as something different than a "gun part". Got it?

TOM: Got it!

GEORGE: Anything else?

TOM: Yes. They "keep claiming the "evil men [other patriots] will get guns and kill them [ the people] no matter the regulations" argument, yet 1) [the laws] haven't even really tried to restrict [patriots from owning guns] and 2) [they say] other countries have [restricted citizens from owning weapons] , and have seen results [of less citizens dying]."

GEORGE: That's a bunch of BULL, Tom. Where are they getting these "facts" from? Mother Earth News ?
The "Evil Men", Tom, are their own government...the British. Don't they know that? THESE are the guys they need to be afraid of. Look at what terrible shape the country is in now, because of "Their good FRIEND, the British Government" ?
Good God, man, we've got to import practically EVERYTHING we need. Do you know what our GDP is ? Nil !!!! Practically NIL. And what we DO export, the British Gov over-taxes. We're all going BROKE, Tom. Doesn't anyone see that the only one benefiting is the British Government? We're kind of like indentured servants, Tom.

And now that we've got SOME way of organizing the people with Polaski, von Steuben and Lafayette, we've got a chance to change things. All this talk about "being afraid of their neighbors with guns" sound like something the wimpy FRENCH would concoct. Did you hear me Tom? I said "The FRENCH" !!!! You know, the guys with the the bugle that can only play "RETREAT"? Kind of like if the French were plotting "Let's let those stoo-peed pa-tree-ohts fight weeth dee Bree-teesh. Af-tur zay keel itch uh-thoor, weel come een an take EV-REE-THEEN".

No ! We're not going there, Tom.
You know that "Constitution thingy" you've been working on ? I've got some input. Get out your quill and make some notes.

We need everybody, and I mean EVERYBODY, Tom, to be prepared to band together or fight separately to protect themselves and each other from ANYTHING that threatens them...even the British government. And since the British or the French or whoever might be trying to pull a "fast" one on us has guns, WE should always be allowed to have guns too, Tom. You know, the kind of guns with at least ONE MORE ROUND than the other guy's got ? I'm talking about each patriot...not just those those that meet some goofy criteria (likely thought up by those yellow-bellied French)...should be able to defend himself in the manner in which he sees fit. And if that manner is using a gun...so be it !!!

Got all that Tom ?

TOM: Got it...but I pretty much done with that document.

GEORGE: Then add an Appendix or Volume II or and Ammendment or something !!!!

TOM: OK...got it, boss.

GEORGE: So you take those notes I gave you and do a little "word-smithing" on them and put them in your "Appendix thing-a-ma-bob". When you get it done, have Benny make some copies and send them around to the heads of the colonies. OK?

TOM: Benny? Benny who?

GEORGE: Benny Franklin ...the printer guy. You know...short, fat and bald Benny...the guy that's always going over and rubbing elbows with the French?

TOM: Oh, yah.

GEORGE: You know, Tom, if we don't set things up correctly NOW, so that citizens can protect themselves against the British, in a few hundred years it will happen again. (If we make it that far).
Mark my words, the government will try to subjugate the great-great-great-grandchildren of you, me, and these patriots.
So we GOT to get it right from the start, Tom. It's super important !!!
Got it ?

TOM: Got it. I'll work on it and get a draft out shortly.

GEORGE: Good man, Tom ....Good man.
200 years from now, people are going to be thanking us for doing this.
Why they are going to think we were "Frickin' Geniuses" for thinking this up, Tom!!!

TOM: Right, Boss !!!

[Dave_L]

Yeah...we just agreed to disagree. He still firmly believes there should be limits on ammo, guns, etc.

I really wish anti-gun people would have to wear something showing they don't believe in guns so when SHTF, we know who to let be.

[Ah Pook]

Welcome to January 3013.

[funkymonkey1111]

Here's some help:

http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2014/05/foghorn/debunking-mother-jones-10-pro-gun-myths-shot/