Yeah an actual study not a poll. It was done by Crime Prevention Research Center. Good opportunity for you to educate yourself.
In before the gun confiscation NUTS.....
- Thread starter Capt Ron 1
- Start date
Let me see if I have this straight.
A 'study' by a pro gun group came to a pro gun conclusion.
Well color me shocked!
Its fascinating, even a bit scary, to see how your mind works when it comes to guns. So in your mind, the people trying to PREVENT crime are....pro gun?
If that's the case, then you just positioned yourself as being AGAINST that group, which means you are in favor of MORE gun violence!
Again, it's amazing watching how your mind works on this issue.
Weill color me shocked.
You clearly didn't read the study.
They posted links and back up from each incident including wait for it....the FBI's incorrect reporting of instances of armed civilians thwarting crime.
I stopped a crime (against myself) due to carrying a handgun 3 years ago.
Last edited:
I totally understand that there are pro gun people that will publish pro gun stuff.
What if I gave you a 'study' that David Hogg completed? What would the value of that 'study' be?
It's HILARIOUS that John Lott named his pro gun organization 'Crime Prevention Research Center' and you totally buy it.
I guess I'll have to be more open-minded and intelligent. Like you are.
Or doesn't. He constantly bleats on about us never criticizing Trump or this is an echo chamber while in reality he will not try to see any issue in a different way other than his own myopic view.
I would read it before I made ridiculous comments like you do without actually reading the damn study.
No need. I've seen plenty of pro gun 'studies'. They simply pick and choose segments of data and manipulate them in a way to make guns look good. Anti-gun people do the same thing. Heck, pretty much all special interest groups spin things to support their agenda.
I am still waiting for him to cite posts that say Trump shouldn't be criticized. I asked him 3 times to produce evidence of that. He does not do himself any favors.
LOL. No, a big pick up truck did not come with my gun. I missed out on that promotion unfortunately.
All I needed to hear. Your ignorance is astonishing. Glad you admitted it. "Was that so hard"?
Last edited:
Jonn lott was a pro gun con control economist. Bet you bought the shit he was shoveling when he started.
In other words...just like EVERY dimocrat if it does not prove my ridiculous, unamerican point...I refuse to discuss it. THIS IS EXACTLY what your point is, son.
I see they've switched their sign from "BUY MORE GUNS".
'Tactical' - do they have little Rambo costumes?
'Tactics' in this case would mean the things that people would do to protect their families from armed criminals. Such as in this case, buying a gun.I see they've switched their sign from "BUY MORE GUNS".
'Tactical' - do they have little Rambo costumes?
Another tactic would be buying a dog, and running out the back door and hiding in the bushes.
The new yorker. Remember that thing where you dont believe pro gun sources?
Exactly!
It's a biased source that's going to give you slanted information to support their agenda......just like Lott's group.
It's just an analysis of reported data.
Tell me what they got wrong here, or admit that their analysis is correct. Two choices.
UPDATED 2: A Deep Dive into Cases Where Civilians Stopped Active Shooters. Did they accidentally shoot bystanders, get in the way of police, get their gun taken away, or create other problems? How does it compare to police who stopped these attacks?
UPDATED March 7th, 2025: We have previously put out our study on the FBI’s active shooting reports. If you watch entertainment television police shows, you would think something always seems …
crimeresearch.org
And yet you still have not read the study. Keep digging dumpling.
He won't touch it. He avoids accountability every chance he gets. He has truly passed Kalim level stupidy and is closing in on BSC911 level of stupidity.It's just an analysis of reported data.
Tell me what they got wrong here, or admit that their analysis is correct. Two choices.
UPDATED 2: A Deep Dive into Cases Where Civilians Stopped Active Shooters. Did they accidentally shoot bystanders, get in the way of police, get their gun taken away, or create other problems? How does it compare to police who stopped these attacks?
UPDATED March 7th, 2025: We have previously put out our study on the FBI’s active shooting reports. If you watch entertainment television police shows, you would think something always seems …crimeresearch.org
Last edited:
Is this you from last Halloween? Looks like you consistently miss calf day Tina.I see they've switched their sign from "BUY MORE GUNS".
'Tactical' - do they have little Rambo costumes?
Or run in the bushes and hide.It's just an analysis of reported data.
Tell me what they got wrong here, or admit that their analysis is correct. Two choices.
UPDATED 2: A Deep Dive into Cases Where Civilians Stopped Active Shooters. Did they accidentally shoot bystanders, get in the way of police, get their gun taken away, or create other problems? How does it compare to police who stopped these attacks?
UPDATED March 7th, 2025: We have previously put out our study on the FBI’s active shooting reports. If you watch entertainment television police shows, you would think something always seems …crimeresearch.org
Never knew he had one. How did you know? (DEMOCRAT)How about you read David Hogg's book and report back?
Damn dude. If you fought as hard for your family's protection as you do your troll attempts...
Look in the mirror homey. You won't even read an article before making a conclusion. The term for that is prejuduce.
But, I expect that from a Kamala supporter. Oh wait, she said she has a Glock. How on earth did you vote for her?
Unlike you. I have made no conclusions on David Hogg's book.
This is a similar to you claiming people here have posted Trump shouldn't be criticized when nobody has. You still haven't proven that.
Who needs to learn how to think?
Similar threads
