Geeto67

I am not asking for the numbers killed in mass shootings, I am asking for someone to study the data on the shooter's lives, the market place, the current system, to cross compare all of it, do root cause analysis, look at commonalities, and really investigate in an impartial way. Collection of Data is only one part and honestly it's the easiest part. The hard part is finding dedicated researchers in this field to analyze the data, compare it to other data points, really investigate it in depth, and draw intelligent conclusions. That costs a lot of money. The federal government is the largest driver of independent research in this country, and it has a very rigid set of standards to insure independence and impartiality. To deny this issue access to that resource is to essentially to ignore any hope of truth in this area.

Ok, great, if that's really the case then what's wrong with a study to confirm it ? Here's what's really nefarious about the Dickey Amendment. It's an amendment to a budget bill that denies funds to any research that may be used for gun control advocacy. That includes other methods in the context of guns. It's basically a subjective standard that conservatives have used for decades now to kill all sorts of research well beyond just zeroing the budget for the study of gun violence. It's had a chilling effect on the flow of information in this country. Why? what is the NRA so afraid of? or that's right - gun control of any kind that's what they are afraid of. There is a positive to research by the way. If we can use the data to drive a national standard for gun control, then we can fix the interstate possession/carry/conceal travel problems as well. Think of it like driver's licenses - they are all recognized and administered at the state level because the federal government published a voluntary standard for rules of the road and the states adopted it on their own. Why can't we let data establish some standards of truth in this area, and then let the states all come to the same conclusion?

You oppose gun control full stop, so no matter what I say you aren't open to it. The point of a study is to reveal information, not to go in looking to confirm information. You come in with questions and leave with answers, not the other way around. We already have gun control in this country as it stands, I want to know why isn't it effective? I want to know what are the root cause factors that lead to these shootings and where are the choke points? I want to know if the data suggests that there are some voluntary actions the industry can take that would greatly reduce government intervention? I want to know how much the firearm really is a factor and how much other things are a factor? I'd love to know what effects economics have on the overall market place and if they can have an effect on these shootings as well? In order to do that the people have to stop the false notion that any and all control is bad and they have to be open to learning about this space. The whole reason the Dickey amendment exists in the first place is because a study in the early 1990's showed that the NRA's hard line that "you are always safer with a gun than without" was false. To the NRA an informed public is against their interests. There is no rational argument you can make against information gathering, study, and research in this area. It's only useless to you if your aim is to prevent any progress being made full stop, which is an extremist position. To that end, all I can say is enjoy the more nonsensical proposals that are going to keep coming (and some even get passed) because you can't stop progress, you can only slow it down. You mean the "smart" people that are just making assumptions too because there is no data, analysis, or informed discussion. You mean the "smart" people that are pulling it out of their ass just as much as the other side because there is a choke hold on the flow of information, right? Tim, there are no "smart" people in this situation - everyone is being kept in the dark on purpose for the NRA's overall agenda to frustrate any and all types of gun control. All you have are two different sides arguing about their feelings. Again, you have an extremist position on this so I don't expect rational or intelligent discourse in this area. And it's too bad too, your other post on Dick's was so intelligent and spot on I was actually shocked I was reading a post from you. All the questions Tim. I want all the questions we can ask in this area to at least have a fighting chance of being asked. Why are you so afraid of information, Tim?

yeah, but don't forget about the invisible hand of the market which will price adjust. If the supply decreases and the demand spikes, the curves readjust and the price goes up. And maybe that's not a bad thing. I'd love to know the demographics on the people that use AR-15's for mass murder, if only there was a way we could pay people to independently study that information.....oh, right...NRA doesn't want that because it would lead to gun control. Anyway, if the AR-15 prices out the demographic that normally follows the profile of a mass shooter, maybe the market solves for it another way. Or not, the demand could lead to increased production which means a glut in the market when the demand spike settles and used ones become dirt cheap. I'd like to think that if a gun gets a certain reputation associated with mass murder it would have had a negative impact on it's sales....except that hasn't been the experience. Any time someone even looks at an AR-15 negatively in the political sphere speculators, preppers, and just general nutballs go out and buy one thinking they will never get the chance to do that ever again. I highly doubt people would go out and buy a car that was used to kill a whole bunch of people, but a gun...Weird world we live in. And the other question is: is the AR-15 being unfairly framed? Is it just scary looking or has it actually been used in a shit ton of mass murders? If only we had independently researched data to drive intelligent decisions making in this area.

Ok, despite the national discourse having drifted to include the discussion concerning assault weapons, prove that the popular (i.e. majority) public opinion that the "something" that should be done shouldn't include "assualt" weapons. Keep in mind that generally speaking that according to independent voting metrics progressives outnumber conservatives. I'll wait. They stopped selling what they designated as assault weapons in Dick's branded stores in 2012. They allowed Field and Stream to continue to carry them as they were more hunting focused (some say they stopped temporarily but it may have been due to inventory shift from the retail stores). That's the real change here - it's not that they stopped and "went back" to selling in all stores a few months later - they made a business decision based on demographics of their shoppers and the statement they are trying to make, and now they have made another. For someone who understands its their right to do so, you seem to want to be hard on them about it, why?

I guess this boils down to whether you are so far right that everything looks left, or whether you are actually centrist. If I say generally it's not hard to see the discussion that's occurring in the media around this and your response is "the liberal media" then you are probably just talking out of your ass. But I also think you are misreading my statements. I said, the popular opinion is that something needs to be done. Not that the specific something is banning assault weapons, or making AR-15's illegal, or anything like that, just that the national discourse is that that people want some kind of movement in this space, and polls and reporint, even the pundits of both conservative and progressive media outlets are showing the same thing. This particular retailer chose to make a decision based on how they felt as is their right (the fact they are publicizing it is the PR "stunt" but that's par for the course for political statements). Maybe if they had Independent, government funded research they might have made a different decision, and again that is the value of data and research - it helps people make educated decisions instead of those based on emotion. I have to agree with Greg, this is the way things should be going. There is too much emotion tied up with the government restricting things, so it is (at least in part) going to have to come from the voluntary will of the people. Here we have an entity in the supply chain making a voluntary decision to try to be part of the solution rather than part of the problem, there is nothing wrong with that. Rather than chastise them for doing at least something (even if that something doesn't seem rational), maybe we should get back to providing the marketplace with data so rational decisions can be made. I think this is where we are going to eventually end up with the Russia Collusion. Not that the President overtly planned in conjunction with the Russian government to influence the election, but that Kushner and Trump international were moving money for the Russians through their business dealings in circumvention of the Magninsky act, thus incentivizing Russia to favor the Trump campaign in their election tampering efforts. Remember, the Magninsky act is why the Russians had that meeting with the Trump campaign - The richest in russia (including Putin) are blocked from the international banking system, which means their money is at risk to the corruption they continue to foster in their own country.

I didn't say it wasn't profitable, but it probably wasn't a large portion of their sales, and they could probably make up the revenue other ways. But you dodged my original question: What is it about their decision you don't like? What's the moral objection you specifically have? If you read their CEO's statements on the matter, their records indicated they had sold a firearm to Nicholas Cruz, and it was only by his preference he didn't use it in the shooting - seems like a pretty compelling reason to change their attitude and shift more toward sporting goods.

ok, so what about it don't you like? Why is it influencing your normally economic based decision? They haven't stopped selling all guns, just ones they feel probably don't add much to their profitability and fall outside the aim of their brand to promote sporting activities?

I didn't say the popular opinion was rational or data driven. To ignore the public outcry right now about school shootings and wanting the government to do something is to stick your head in the sand. To think that the media is inflating a minority opinion is to fail to understand that those opposing gun control in this county have a minority opinion in and of itself. There are more people wanting something, literally anything, to be done than are willing to accept this as the cost of freedom. Just because you have an opinion, doesn't mean the majority of people in the country agree with it.

Brandon, just stop. You've already lost enough face - the more you prolong this the worse it gets. Just take a break, take a breather, and come back in like a day and put it behind you. Look, I will fully own I am not proud of some of the comments I made to work Brandon up into a frothy frenzy. I am not apologizing for my original opinion, but it was a weakness of my character to keep pushing his button long past the point where it was funny to do so. That is an ugliness I probably shouldn't have put the CR community through. Let's not be to hard on Brandon here. He made a mistake and allowed his frustration and anger get the better of him. He's a kid in his 20's, I don't know a single person living today (including yours truly) that wasn't a raging asshole full of poor judgement in his 20's - it comes with the territory. He's reached out to me via PM, and I am going to work it out off board with him, let's just put it behind us and get back to calling each other ignorant morons for our political opinions in a harmless fashion like we did before. My final note on this has to do with this recent attitude toward victims of tragedies that I see growing in America. With this Hogg kid, nobody is saying you have to like his message just because he was a victim of the recent tragedy in florida. He's a kid who went through some shit, and now he's trying to do something about it. He may not have all the facts, he may not be consistent, he may not be eloquent or using his time on the air in the most efficient fashion. And that's fine. But to attack his status as a victim, to denigrate his character, or somehow state that he is a lesser person because his reaction to a traumatic event is different than how you would have acted or expected others to act is complete and utter failure of your moral character. You are entitled to your opinion, but understand that in sharing that opinion with others you are entitled also to hear how others think you are being an amoral person. In case you are wondering what I am referencing here it is: Brandon, We get that you don't like his opinion, but its his, and he's free to it. But you make a point to say he's not a victim, or he's somehow less a victim, or that his experience is not credible because of his opinion. You even recognize that it isn't moral to attack him but then you do exactly that. I mean this with all sincerity Brandon: a person who would write what you wrote and think nothing is wrong with it is a person with poor fundamental values in my opinion. This is all I am going to say on the Hogg matter for now. I don't really care to hear your response, or whatever you are going to say to save face here. I'm going to go back to treating this thread like the burning dumpster fire of civil political opinions it is. So, this is what it looks like if you leave it up to the private sector to be the engine of change instead of the government. Popular opinion right now isn't in support of these types of weapons or the events they are being tied to, and the people have been looking to the government for a long time now and it's clear the government is deadlocked and not going to make progress - so it falls to the private sector and the marketplace. It's their right to do it, and honestly good for them. Large companies like this rarely do anything without a financial analysis so they wouldn't do it if they remotely thought it would hurt their business. For those proponents of the "free market" this is what free market sometimes looks like when it crosses the political spectrum.

fuck I totally missed that. OMG that's hilarious.

or it could be you weren't there. you are some kind of retarded aren't you? it's detailed in an earlier post. Even some of the mods were talking about how they can't really have you making threats on the board last night, they probably haven't taken action because, like me, they realize you are harmless. Still, If you are banking on the idea that you haven't overtly stated you are going to kick my ass or something like that, our prisons are full of people that don't understand that their comments are taken in aggregate, in context, and with presumed intent. Just inferring any kind of harm is enough. Dude, stop being lame. It's bad enough you have to live as human garbage, don't make it worse.

I'll make sure to ask for you by name. It hadn't occurred to me to do that. Although, why do you want to livestream nothing? This is just a dumb kid who took it too far through his typing. He's not actually stupid enough in real life to throw away his whole future to physically attack someone who called him a name on the internet. My money is he's gonna lay low off CR for a few days, let this blow over, and he'll forget all about it and come back having learned nothing about his toxic victim hating rhetoric. To be honest though, I'm kinda surprised he was stupid enough to be threatening in writing on the internet. Now if something happens to me, even if it is an accident and not fatal, he's a prime suspect.

Day 1 of Brandon not showing up at my house.

Just seeing how far mr "come say it to my face" wants to take it. If I end up shot in the face, I'll let you guys know tomorrow. This is kind of fun, I haven't had someone even fake threaten me in a while.

That's why it's Day 0 sweet lips. Tomorrow will be day 1, because you won't show tonight. Jesus fucking Christ you don't even know how a count up timer works. You could ask them to show but I have a feeling that, like is common with most experiences with Brandon, they will be disappointed. since I am throwing more gasoline on this fire: I am not disrespecting a combat vet, I am disrespecting you. My opinion that you lack empathy, sympathy, human decency, and are basically a waste of human existence has nothing to do with your alleged military record - it's drawn directly from what you have chosen to post and your literal lack of compassion toward victims of....literally....anything. Honestly, I don't know if you were even in the military, I have no proof of it, nor do I want any. I am entitled to my opinion, as you are to yours and the only things that baffles me here are 1) why do you care so much? and 2) why are you so hell bent on doing someone physical harm because of an opinion that your character is mostly comprised of human feces? 3) what do you think physical harm is going to accomplish? It isn't going to change my opinion, in fact the more you push this the more you prove to everyone reading you are literally the human waste that I called you out for, so what's your end game? Also that's a real nice victim mentality you have, snowflake. I thought you were tired of all the victims whining and complaining that they don't get respect for having gone through some shit, I didn't realize that you just meant everyone but you.

Day 0 of Brandon not showing up at my house.

For the Sake of a clear record: And in case you didn't think it was obvious, others made comments in this thread that it was clear you were making threats. Should we add stalking to your list of potential crimes? Just to be clear, I have not threatened you physically, I have not insisted to meet you at your house, I have not done anything other than to express my opinion that you are human garbage. So far you have not disappointed in proving me right. You have all you need. The ball is in your court to walk away from this or not. I think the fact that I pm'ed you my address shows I am not shaking in my boots.

Good to know you are dangerous person intent on doing people harm for their opinion of you (which if you remember they have a constitutional right to) as a way of proving you are not human garbage. :dumb:

I don't want to talk. I think you are human garbage and if you really need to hear it from me in person, fine I will oblige you. I don't know what other discussion you need. I don't think you are coming to my house to talk. Considering the masked threats you have made here I do not believe for one moment that if you indeed show up on my doorstep that you are there for a benign reason. If that is unclear let me make it clear: If you show up on my doorstep I fully believe you are there to do me and my family harm. <---still feel like a hero? Still think you are the good guy? PM sent.

You have to be pretty fucking stupid to think a throwaway comment meant to mock your absurdity of needing this in person means I would actually want an unstable piece of human garbage on my doorstep threatening my family. Also, how you do not seem to grasp that even insisting that I give you my address and continuing to make threatening and menacing statements confirms that my character judgement is correct - human garbage is what ye be. You aren't the good guy here, nobody is on the side of the home invader. Go take a time out tough guy, you are clearly in over your head. See you in real life soon.

Come find me. Put those military tracking skills to good use. I'd tell you to use the phone book but I'm pretty sure your generation doesn't know what one is.

He's not going to do anything IRL. This is all playing to him, he told me himself last time I saw him at CCC. He's just another 20 something dipshit that thinks he has something to prove, but in reality the only thing he has to prove is that's he's got no follow through. He's the real crisis actor in this conversation. On the off chance he has follow through, he only proves he's exactly the human garbage I am claiming him to be because there is no moral high ground he can take for violence against my verbal judge of his character. For the record I have made no physical threat against him. I have stated my opinion, and will gladly restate it again if he really needs to hear it with his own ears. I don't know why, he's not illiterate - I've written it several times here. It must be nice for him to walk around being a person devoid of any empathy or moral compass and a genuine piece of shit and still think he's entitled to respect. You want proof of a millennial's sense of entitlement - there it is. This shit is boring. Brandon, It's going to be real disappointing seeing you in real life and watching you do nothing.

you are dumber than you look. And you look pretty fucking stupid.

ooooh... I'm, so scared I made the midget angry. What happened to me saying it to your face? where did all that thunder and fury go? you want me to PM you my address so you can come to my house personally to collect that in insult in real life? Come on, tell me what happens next once I tell you you are human garbage IRL? What a coward. You know stolen valor is a crime, you should probably stop telling people you are this big bad military dude when it's clear you are just a massively bleeding vagina.