Latest Episode
Play

Go Back   Keith and The Girl Forums Keith and The Girl Forums Show Talk

Show Talk Talk about the show

View Poll Results: Who is more gay?
Kristen Stewart 11 14.10%
This new generation of vampires 67 85.90%
Voters: 78. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 07-26-2012, 05:27 PM   #1 (permalink)
PARTY! SUPER PARTY!
 
Keith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: NYC, baby!
Posts: 12,062
1628: Team Cheater

"She just broke his dick! She just broke his dick!"


The Official Site of Comedian John Roy. Site by Say Em

Diane O'Debra | Facebook
(Offline)   Reply With Quote
Old 07-26-2012, 07:10 PM   #2 (permalink)
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Nebraska
Posts: 1,200
Another great band name would be, "The Asthmatics".

John Holmes the Batman killer not to be confused with the former porn star of the same name.
(Offline)   Reply With Quote
Old 07-26-2012, 09:39 PM   #3 (permalink)
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 16
Let's see how the handgun ban worked out in the UK... now obviously banning "assault weapons" doesn't mean jack (Viriginia Tech shooter: armed with 9mm and .22lr handguns) when the murderer is the only person armed with a firearm which can be reloaded in a matter of seconds i.e. any modern handgun. This is an article from the sporting shooters association of australia (I can't use an American article because hey every gun owner in the US just has dick insecurities and that explains it all away) The figures used are from UK's Home Office which keeps crime statistics among other things.

SSAA - Evaluating Britain’s handgun ban

Anyone who didn't want to read the article: it definitively shows that after handguns were banned, there was an increase in robberies, robberies with firearms, homicides, and overall violent crimes involving firearms.
Correlation doesn't imply causation, you say? Here's a correlation the UK DIDN'T see: a reduction in violent crime including gun crime after the gun ban.

The UK's handgun ban didn't prevent the Cumbria shooting which killed 12 (not including the psycho) and injured 11. Instead of an "assault weapon" he used a .22lr and a shotgun. Is the handgun ban responsible for reducing the number of mass shootings (which btw make up the overwhelming MINORITY of all shootings)? It would be absurd to say it did since prior to the Dunblane Massacre which prompted the handgun ban, there had been ONE mass shooting- the Hungerford massacre. Something which occurs infrequently like mass shootings (in the UK anyways) can be seemingly banished by anything from gun bans to prayer in school and for a time it would seem to work... until disaster struck again. The question is should we use the same knee jerk response which didn't lower the UK's relatively low murder rate, and expect it to work for our higher murder rate? Fuck no.

These psychos want a pedestal and it's no coincidence that public killings from celebrity stalker/murderers to mass shootings all became more and more common as the television became more and more popular. News agencies have to report on things like this, but they don't have to give any information about the killer. No lingering shots of the killer's "arsenal." No discussion of his "meticulous plans." No pictures of the killer, not even his name. If you're serious about preventing these mass killings, this is what has to be done. It should be illegal for any news agency or ISP to allow true information about the killer to be circulated... in the same way it's illegal to shout "fire" in a crowded theater (isn't there any other analogy I could use instead?) The 1st amendment can be "reinterpreted" in the same way the Brady Campaign wants to "reinterpret the 2nd. If any information about the shooter leaks on the net in spite of these precautions, internet users should take it upon themselves to spread disinformation (preferably negative and hilarious) which will bury real info.

Not trolling, if anyone has a better idea which they can back up with statistics / logic, please share.

Last edited by John Walker; 07-26-2012 at 09:42 PM.
(Offline)   Reply With Quote
Old 07-26-2012, 09:58 PM   #4 (permalink)
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 16
And my name has nothing to do with John Lindh, Keith.
(Offline)   Reply With Quote
Old 07-26-2012, 11:32 PM   #5 (permalink)
Member
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 94
Gun homicides and gun ownership listed by country | News | guardian.co.uk

TL;DR:
United States 9,146 deaths by firearm.
England 41

United States % of Homicides by firearm = 60%
England % of homicides by firearm = 6.6%

...and these stats are from a globally distributed newspaper, not a 4 year old article off the website of an Australian gun club.
(Offline)   Reply With Quote
Old 07-26-2012, 11:48 PM   #6 (permalink)
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 16
The statistics in the article I linked to are from the United Kingdom's Home Office. And you haven't addressed the issue. Where do we go from here? Yes our country has more gun deaths than the UK...it always has. But when the UK banned handguns in 1997, their violent crime rate increased, including murders. This isn't proof that the gun ban CAUSED the increase in violent crime, but if the UK had fewer firearm deaths before the gun ban than the years after the ban, then obviously the UK's relatively low murder rate isn't because of the gun ban. Look at the UK's murder rate year by year and see if the handgun ban in 1997 helped at all.

SSAA - Evaluating Britain’s handgun ban

Last edited by John Walker; 07-27-2012 at 12:28 AM.
(Offline)   Reply With Quote
Old 07-27-2012, 12:59 AM   #7 (permalink)
Senior Member
57-hour Marathon 2015 Kickstarter Backer
 
PsychoLoco's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Ukraine
Posts: 316
This is my friend's wife's gun collection.

(Offline)   Reply With Quote
Old 07-27-2012, 01:11 AM   #8 (permalink)
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 16
Terrifying, but does the number of weapons owned by your friend's wife determine whether or not she is dangerous? Judging by this picture I know one thing for sure about her: she isn't poor. Watch out for those rich folk robbing people in the streets!

Is this supposed to be an argument against gun ownership? Pro gun control supporters would say right off the bat that letting people own that many guns in dangerous, but seriously it's not like she's going to shoot all of them at you at the same time... How many hands do you have? Count them!

Last edited by John Walker; 07-27-2012 at 01:16 AM.
(Offline)   Reply With Quote
Old 07-27-2012, 01:19 AM   #9 (permalink)
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2011
Posts: 16
She's not a gun dealer? There are several rifles in there that are identical, most people tend to have a collection of unique firearms...
(Offline)   Reply With Quote
Old 07-27-2012, 03:28 AM   #10 (permalink)
Senior Member
57-hour Marathon 2015 Kickstarter Backer
 
PsychoLoco's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Ukraine
Posts: 316
Quote:
Originally Posted by John Walker View Post
She's not a gun dealer? There are several rifles in there that are identical, most people tend to have a collection of unique firearms...
Look, when you decide to shoot a rabbit that is moving so fast that it's hard to see, it's quicker to switch to an identical gun than to reload. Just like a baseball, you never take your eye off of the target.
(Offline)   Reply With Quote
Reply


Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 1 (0 members and 1 guests)
 
Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off



All times are GMT -5. The time now is 07:34 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2021, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
SEO by vBSEO 3.6.1
Keith and The GirlAd Management plugin by RedTyger