- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Winter Olympics
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: Why Are White Men Stockpiling Guns?
Posted on 5/19/18 at 2:40 pm to CollegeFBRules
Posted on 5/19/18 at 2:40 pm to CollegeFBRules
quote:
Exactly what I thought, you wouldn’t touch anything else in that response.
You can't even back up the idea in your question.
You have no idea what "stockpiling" is, but you think you know why people are doing it..
0
Posted on 5/19/18 at 2:41 pm to Taxing Authority
quote:
I’d live to know why teens are shooting up their schools too. But examining “white people” ownership rates seems like a stupid place to start looking.
That wasn’t the point or correlation in the article, TA. I would love to know why teens are shooting up their schools as well, but that wasn’t what that article I linked was trying to correlate to.
Posted on 5/19/18 at 2:42 pm to CollegeFBRules
quote:
CollegeFBRules
\
Is it still your assertion that all firearms should be confiscated until mental health can be evaluated?
Posted on 5/19/18 at 2:43 pm to HempHead
quote:
Y'all baws know anyone who still does on-foot deer hunting?
Done it a few times with little luck. Jumped a buck that was bedded in a thicket coming around a ridgeline.
Gotta be downwind. Super slow. Our place has a bunch of ridges in the back, seemed to work better around there than in the rolling hills or flat land
Edit: also I’d stay clear the frick away from public land.
This post was edited on 5/19/18 at 2:44 pm
Posted on 5/19/18 at 2:43 pm to CollegeFBRules
quote:
How effective are those methods, and have we seen those acts carried out in other countries that actually have a ban on guns?
I don’t disagree the crazy idiots in the world will find a way to do it regardless of having a gun or not, but they won’t be as efficient at killing people via those other methods.
Currently the most effective method is explosive. Which I believe the last school kid had but failed to be used or detonated for whatever reason, could have been a incorrect news report?
Trucks in france, Sweden. Bombs at nightclubs and train stations. All have killed large scores of people.
Posted on 5/19/18 at 2:44 pm to CollegeFBRules
No its not if youre a collector you could have 1000 firearms and not two identical. Also not fire one and have then all antique.
Posted on 5/19/18 at 2:44 pm to HempHead
quote:
Y'all baws know anyone who still does on-foot deer hunting?
Stalk hunting is all we do locally. For anything.
Mountain goat hunting is the best hunt by far IMO.
Most taxing, but most rewarding.
Posted on 5/19/18 at 2:45 pm to CollegeFBRules
quote:
How effective are those methods, and have we seen those acts carried out in other countries that actually have a ban on guns?
I don’t disagree the crazy idiots in the world will find a way to do it regardless of having a gun or not, but they won’t be as efficient at killing people via those other methods.
You just don't know. Thankfully,you fall in with 99% of the population,that doesn't realize the killing potential,of things that are around them everywhere,and are not regulated in any way.
So,you just focus on the guns. Congrats on not knowing much.
Posted on 5/19/18 at 2:45 pm to CollegeFBRules
I have a good collection of bull whips. Some of y'all are going to get a good old fashioned beating when the time comes.
Posted on 5/19/18 at 2:46 pm to Y.A. Tittle
quote:Must EVERY study address EVERY potential implication of its findings? Or does it make a certain amount of sense to conduct studies of manageable sub-topics?quote:Yet you seem uninterested in discussing whether gun ownership or "stockpiling", in and of itself, correlates to people actually doing harmful things with those weapons. So, to what end is the discussion worthy? What is it, we are looking to draw from this data, if not that?
(t)here is a problem, and understanding the motivations behind gun ownership - which is all this article was - is a discussion worth having.
Personally, I doubt that there is much correlation between stockpiling and commission of crimes (as I said several pages ago). Why? Assuming that the OP study is accurate ("fear"), I would surmise that there is not a causative relationship between "fear" and "affirmative, unilateral aggression."
Posted on 5/19/18 at 2:46 pm to beerJeep
quote:
Edit: also I’d stay clear the frick away from public land
We have over 17 million acres of national forest land in an area the size of Florida, with less than 70,000 population in the SE part of the State. It's heaven.
Posted on 5/19/18 at 2:48 pm to CollegeFBRules
I just read through the actual study.
That article is fallacious on its face.
None of the conclusions discussed in that article are brought up or discussed in the actual study, which was simply a collection of gun owner statistics.
There were no claims in regards to fear or emotional state of the owners.
As a matter of fact, there was actually a higher percentage of females reporting that they own guns for “protection against people”, which makes me curious as to why it is males being singled out.
That article you linked is a blatant misrepresentation of the data on nearly all fronts with, IMO, the distinct purpose of presenting an overly biased political opinion.
That article is fallacious on its face.
None of the conclusions discussed in that article are brought up or discussed in the actual study, which was simply a collection of gun owner statistics.
There were no claims in regards to fear or emotional state of the owners.
As a matter of fact, there was actually a higher percentage of females reporting that they own guns for “protection against people”, which makes me curious as to why it is males being singled out.
That article you linked is a blatant misrepresentation of the data on nearly all fronts with, IMO, the distinct purpose of presenting an overly biased political opinion.
This post was edited on 5/19/18 at 2:51 pm
Posted on 5/19/18 at 2:49 pm to AggieHank86
quote:
Assuming that the OP study is accurate ("fear"),
I don't think it's inaccurate just to assume many people have firearms because of fear. That seems like a given.
Your personal protection is up to you, not the police.
Posted on 5/19/18 at 2:49 pm to AggieHank86
quote:It isn’t. The study makes no such claims.
Assuming that the OP study is accurate ("fear")
Posted on 5/19/18 at 2:49 pm to CollegeFBRules
Every gun collector I know, and I mean every one of them is 180 degrees from that profile.
Most of the guys I know who collect guns (and we all would have been considered to have an arsenal before the boating incident) are well educated, executives or business owners, church going, God fearing people. Many, many of them are veterans. We are what you call sheepdogs.
Most of the guys I know who collect guns (and we all would have been considered to have an arsenal before the boating incident) are well educated, executives or business owners, church going, God fearing people. Many, many of them are veterans. We are what you call sheepdogs.
Posted on 5/19/18 at 2:49 pm to AggieHank86
quote:
Must EVERY study address EVERY potential implication of its findings? Or does it make a certain amount of sense to conduct studies of manageable sub-topics?
Personally, I doubt that there is much correlation between stockpiling and commission of crimes (as I said several pages ago). Why? Assuming that the OP study is accurate ("fear"), I would surmise that there is not a causative relationship between "fear" and "affirmative, unilateral aggression."
I understand all of this and generally agree. Yet the study and subsequent posts of the OP seem to be associating this as being inherently some sort of problem. So, I would think it reasonable to inquire as to whether it is and what that may be. What else are we supposed to be looking to glean from this data?
This post was edited on 5/19/18 at 2:55 pm
Posted on 5/19/18 at 2:49 pm to RogerTheShrubber
LINK
I know you don’t like reading, but you can have at it with that thread and have my actual stance by about the fifth or sixth page.
But, to give you a cliff note response, no. If someone is in the mental health registry though, their guns should absolutely be confiscated. And that includes depression.
I know you don’t like reading, but you can have at it with that thread and have my actual stance by about the fifth or sixth page.
But, to give you a cliff note response, no. If someone is in the mental health registry though, their guns should absolutely be confiscated. And that includes depression.
Posted on 5/19/18 at 2:49 pm to Scruffy
quote:
That article you linked is a blatant misrepresentation of the data on nearly all fronts with, IMO, the distinct purpose of presenting an overly biased political opinion.
So, to reiterate, it was a sociological study?
Posted on 5/19/18 at 2:50 pm to Scruffy
quote:
That article you linked is a blatant misrepresentation of the data on nearly all fronts with, IMO, the distinct purpose of presenting an overly biased political opinion.
Correct. Hell, it's been posted here several times over the past year.
Posted on 5/19/18 at 2:51 pm to CollegeFBRules
quote:
I don’t think Congress lets the CDC even study such things. That would be a problem, wouldn’t it?
Does the FBI release studies on cancer and small pox deaths?
Page 14 of 34
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News