If you enjoy the forum please consider supporting it by signing up for a NES Membership The benefits pay for the membership many times over.
Be sure to enter the NES/MFS May Giveaway ***Canik METE SFX***
Did you read the article? The article is pretty much arguing that there isn't a legitimate argument for gun control.Sounds like we have a pool of dr's playing politician that should spend more time helping the sick than trying to tell people how to live their lives......
Especially after the johns hopkins study a year or two back that reveals that at least 250k people die (are killed) due to medical malpractice every year.....
Compared to what......12-14k murders with firearms of all kinds on average each year in a population of 310 million plus another 40-50 million illegal aliens?
Lets call it an even 350 million for back of envelope calc given ~13k firearm murders every year.......what is that...about 3.7/100k?
Even by the CDC's own data there are much bigger fish to fry by orders of magnitude......
When you throw in defensive uses of firearms between 750k and ~1.2 million times every year.......there's no LOGICAL argument for gun control
That Time The CDC Asked About Defensive Gun Uses
Why did the CDC fail to publish 1990s research on numbers of defensive gun uses?www.forbes.com
Here is an excerpt from the article: The fact is, there ain’t no new “truth” or legitimate study showing that expanded background checks, bans on certain firearms or any of the other popularly bloviated “truths” diminish gun violence. The word legitimate is key because, while there have been and are academic studies concluding the opposite, all I am aware of have been discredited.First of all.....the name of the group should set off warning flags
Read their mission statement
Just another bunch of Md's that think they should be dictating policy/how civil rights are handed out or "managed"...they just dont happen to agree 100% with the AMA
If you think their on your side you better guess again.....just another group of tyrants trying to split the baby.
Further, the article was written by a fmr CNN reporter and originally published in vox
No where in the article did the author actually come out and make a full throated opposition to the decades and decades of gun control
So, forgive me if I take the article, its publishers etc with a bucket of salt......
The article was not originally posted in DRGO. I did read the whole article, more than once, tell me where in the article did he say there was a legitimate case for gun control? Sometimes it seems like all you want to do is argue.I could not disagree more strongly with your characterization of the article.....dont cherry pick one part....read it in its totality......and look at the mission statement of drgo....
Yes there are those that consider anything they do as being legitimate. The article points out that what the antis claim is legitimate hasn't been shown to be true but of course they have their own version of truth.In this context "legitimate" is a meaningless word, as it means different things to different people. Someone who believes in absolute subservience to the state would believe with equal sincerity that there is no legitimate case for private gun ownership. Assertions like this are as meaningless as starting an argument by tell the other party "you know I am right".
Yes a former CNN reporter. I'm sure there are people on here who's thoughts have changed on gun control over the years. Sometimes people do change their beliefs. Whether he has or not would have to be checked with what he has written about the subject since then. The article was originally in the California Rifle and Pistol associations newsletter. In the article he points out instances where the anti's arguments for gun control were debunked so I don't see where he's claiming a legitimate case for gun control can be made but you seem to see it somewhere.As I stated in a previous response
the whole article is an attempt to split the baby/battle wit AMA for political power......not that there should be NO gun control.....just a "different" gun control
The title is "can a legitimate case be made for gun control" and I don't see where he is making a case for gun control. The reasons you state are because of where it was printed and because of VOX. I added a statement on VOX because I'm pretty sure the diagram was used to demonstrate what the anti's claimed not where the article was originally posted. The author points out that the anti's claim anything is legitimate but he doesn't make the claim that it is. I'm not reading more into it than what is there but it seems like you are. Anyway enjoy your day.Thats the thing....its NOT a "Pro Gun" article for all of the reasons I stated previously
You're the one that seems to have it stuck in your craw since you commented on my post. In that article nowhere that I can see does he claim that there is a legitimate case for gun control. The article wasn't about whether gun laws should be repealed or not which I think they should be but that's not what the article is about. If you can show me in the article where he voices support for gun control I'll apologize. Yes the AMA and VOX and CNN do but he's not with any of them as far as I can tell. You're taking your negative feelings towards those organizations which I understand and agree with and putting them on this article which as I said doesn't as far as I can see say that there should be any gun control it just says that the claims the anti's have made for gun control have been debunked.You've got this stuck in your craw for some reason.....its STILL not a Pro RKBA article...for all the reasons previously pointed out....amongst other things all they did was take a couple pot shots at the AMA, peer review BS and a couple other minor details.
Get back to me when they:
call for a repeal of gun control
assert RKBA is an individual right and no one, including Md's have any business poking their noses into peoples personal choices
insert long list of actual pro constitutional rights based arguments
You seem to be the only one that interprets it to call for more gun control which it doesn't. The author points out that their arguments have been debunked, but if it makes you happy believing something is in the article that isn't go right ahead.dude.....get over it
You love the article for its battered gun owner squishy baby spllitting position
I dont....
First off, life isnt a popularity contest......
Second, please point to where I said the article called for more gun control?
Cut the bullshit already and move on.....the article still sucks for the same reasons
Even though the article was not written by the AMA, DRGO, VOX or CNN you in your quote here say that they're calling for gun control. Yes life is not a popularity contest but you obviously think you're the popular one since you keep posting on my op. Why don't you move on off of my post.the whole article is an attempt to split the baby/battle wit AMA for political power......not that there should be NO gun control.....just a "different" gun control
Because your interpretation of it is nowhere to be found in the article. No where in the article does the author support or call for more gun control. You seem to be the only one that finds the article dumb. The author points out in the article that the anti's arguments for gun control haven't been shown to be legitimate and he also points out that that won't stop them from pushing for more but nowhere does it support or call for more gun control. It appears that you automatically discredited the article because of CNN, VOX, DRGO etc. It may be that the author is a former CNN reporter because he doesn't hold to all of their agenda. Here is another article by him: Fake News Firing LineYou're the one that keeps grinding an axe.....
I voiced my concerns and issues with the article, the author and where its been published
note....no one else has posted a full throated support of the article either.....
Its a dumb effing article.....no clue why you're argueing about it
All you have to do is go back and read what you said in your prior posts to see that you did say it. There is someone that did agree with my read. We have thousands on here and most people don't comment on the articles. You claimed my characterization of the article was wrong. I showed that it wasn't. The problem is not that you voiced your opinion. It's that you voiced an opinion that didn't make sense and didn't fit the article.You keep trying to assert that I said something that I didnt say.....
You also keep trying to assert that other people agree with your read of the article and so far no one has.....
I voiced my opinion....you dont like it.....get over it and move on.