I’m also Jewish!!
This is long debunked, going all the way back
To the Kellerman study. It only counts events where someone was shot as a successful use of a gun in self defense. It is a deliberately dishonest way of examining the issue. The overwhelming majority of defensive uses do not involve shots fired.
Again, this has been studied at least as recently as the Obama era CDC.
It seems your sources on this subject might be extremely biased. You continue to put forward what can only be described as deliberately deceptive statistics.
I know that. See my additions to the post above.
I personally don’t like to associate with organised religion… But I am proud of my Jewish heritage and will thus forever identify as Jewish
Unfortunately it does appear as if there is still a lot of hate directed a Jews. I have been insulted on the basis of my judiasm numerous times, I’m sure you’re unfortunately also familiar with this.
The fact discrimination upon the basis of sexual orientation, race and religion is still so common deeply saddens me.
I wouldn’t… Everyone is entitled to their own opinion until they start preaching hate and/or insulting me on the basis of whatever my sexual orientation may be. I can’t say I understand why some harbour resentment towards homosexuals, however I respect such an opinion so long as you don’t start making analogies comparing homosexuals to child molesters/sexual sadists/people having sex with animals or throwing around homophobic slurs.
My reason for misunderstanding stems from the notion that homosexuality isn’t a choice, nor does same sex sexual activity (or consensual heterosexual activity) harm anyone if said acts are done in private. Stating people shouldn’t be allowed to be homosexual seems ignorant. Homosexual coupling isn’t merely based within humanity, numerous primates have been shown to engage in homosexual activity. Having also been viciously picked on throughout my younger years on the primary basis of one of two comments/acts makes it somewhat of a soft spot for me.
Granted if you said you didn’t support same sex marriage on the basis of biblical reasoning (the Torah if I recall correctly states men shouldn’t have sex with other men as does the Bible via “a man shall not lay with another man”) I’d understand, although I wouldn’t agree with such an opinion. Same goes with the opinion “I just don’t understand it… Thus I don’t like it”, fair enough.
Perhaps try to place yourself in another’s shoes. Being gay (I’m not gay… Probably not even bisexual) Isn’t exactly easy, one does have to face quite a bit of unwarranted persecution.
I find this rather irritating… I’ve been called anti semitic/self hating a few times for supporting Obama/Bernie over Trump/no one. I dislike Benjamin Netseyahu… I’ll openly state this, I don’t believe his policies align with trying to create peace between Isrealis and Palestinians
I have my reasons for supporting a two state solution (I DON’T support giving Isreal “back to the Palestinians”… Nor do I support Hamas, they’re a terrorist organisation.) Giving Isreal to Hamas would potentially result in a large portion of the Isreali populace getting wiped out (all the Jews who can’t leave in time) as well as promote generalised radical beliefs within the populace.
I’m open to talking about any subtopic on here. We have had quite a long (yet very interesting) debate regarding drug related societal reform. We can continue the initial debate at hand… We could also sprinkle in some conversation about other similarly complex issues
Deliberately deceptive… How? I haven’t found much data to support the idea that America doesn’t have dramatically and disproportionately higher rates of gun violence (of all types) compared to other Western countries. You can probably find data to support both sides of this arguement, I just can’t happen to find any CLINICAL data that indicates the need for loosened gun restrictions. Nor have I come across any literature that states the current state of regulation shouldn’t be altered… I don’t believe my sources are biased. I don’t know how one can argue that allowing citizens to generally purchase guns without background checks and/or without much in the way of regulation wouldn’t read to an increased rate of gun crime (I don’t actually know what you’re stance is)
As I’ve said prior, I’m not for Australia levels of draconian regulation… I like what Canada has done, what New Zealand has done… What is the problem with this? You will still be able to buy you’re guns.
If I recall correctly scientific journals don’t generally allow for the publication of highly biased data. That being said there will be exceptions.
Can you send me some data to suggest this piece of literature has been widely debunked.
We were referring to self defence in terms of its impact upon gun violence, right?
Lol okay. That’s cute.
I’ve got to get to work. Do you really need a link to get your head around the idea that only counting someone getting shot is deliberately dishonest?
Google Kellerman study debunk or something similar.
See I don’t understand this… You leave the arguement with a quasi insult of sorts… It wasn’t nessecary, I did nothing to provoke you… and stating “I don’t need to link studies” doesn’t get you very far within legitimate debate.
If we talk about gun VIOLENCE, then no… It doesn’t… I was referring to “out of every time someone shoots a gun” (I.E events wherein someone is actually injured). When a weapons are discharged, what percentage of shots fired were fired in self defence
But I will search for the Kellerman study debunking
I have nothing against you, our opinions actually appear to align regarding a few subjects.
Sorry, it was more a sigh. All of your talking points are very old and the idea that peer-reviewed journals are free of bias is, well, charming I suppose. That’s not your fault, you’re young.
Again, I don’t see why you’re struggling with this notion. It is really quite simple.
If I brandish a gun and make someone leave me alone who would have otherwise stolen my car, robbed me, came into my home, etc, is that not a successful use?
If so, what would you describe a study that deliberately omits these events and then presents its findings as fact?
Yes but a successful use doesn’t account for the fact that I believe we have a dispoportionately higher rate of incorrect use (if I’m incorrect can you link me some data). If we were talking about self defence as a Generalisation I’d be in agreement, this isn’t what the study was looking at. It was looking to self defence within the context of how often a weapon is fired. I’m referring to self defence in the context of a weapon being discharged… Nothing more
Problem is the NRA (to my knowledge) routinely blocks/makes it more difficult for firearm research to be released to the public (tiahrt amendment, dicky amendment etc)
Sorry if I came across as dismissive earlier. It is just that you’re basically repeating long-debunked gun control propaganda. There are valid arguments for gun control, but most of what you’re putting forward is a half-truth at best that needs to be unpacked.
This is actually related to the highly politicized, deliberately deceptive Kellerman study. This talking point in and of itself is highly politicized, deliberately deceptive and oft-repeated.
What you’re referring to is the Dickey Amendment. You can call that “the NRA blocking research” if you want, but the last time I checked the NRA is a non-profit single issue lobbying group, of which there are thousands. The NRA doesn’t make any laws. Congress does.
You’re correct, it does appear implicit, media, gender etc bias can exist with peer reviewed jounals. Some studies in particular (not these studies recently linked) do appear to make an effort to account for bias
Could we refrain from taking shots/making comments about my age? It isn’t particuarly relevant to the debate and makes me feel as if I’m being undermined on the sole basis of my age.
The dicky ammendment didn’t block anything, made it more difficult to acquire funding. The tiahrt amendment did if I recall corrrctly
I’m not, though more than one time I’ve been told “you’re the only Jewish guy I like.”
Is that… Supposed to be a compliment?
A personal compliment while certainly not being complimentary to Jews as a group. Those who said it, about three people if I recall correctly, genuinely liked and were good to me.
Were you upset in response to these comments? Did it affect future interaction with these people?
Really? I was under the impression you’d have to be in good shape to complete basic training
I was on the verge of deciding to sign up for the army with a friend for a gap year (could get a pass for the testosterone as it’s prescribed by a doctor, don’t think they test recruits for that either… Though they do test soldiers for PED’s.) but realised I probably wouldn’t make the cut due to psychiatric history (problems in my early teens) and chronic pain.
Sounded like getting payed to work out and learn how to fight for a year. I would’ve passed the drug test easily (generally nothing will ever be in my urine aside from THC depending on which week i’m to be tested, obviously in the army there would be none of that bullshit).
Interestingly the friend signed up for the army to get rid of his old lifestyle, I was all for it… Someone like him desparately needed the discipline. I believe the army has had a positive influence so far, he’s enjoying the experience
You do have to be. What I was saying is they’re having issues finding qualified recruits.
Well many teenagers nowdays don’t exercise, live sedentary lifestyles, eat badly etc… I assume fewer and fewer will be able to pass the fitness test.
Perhaps there’s also dwindling interest in the millitary, I don’t know… A LOOOT of kids are also using drugs nowdays, if they aren’t willing to give that up they’ll fail random testing, get kicked out etc. Remember THC can stay in you’re urine for slightly over 30 days. The only substances they can’t really test for (unless hair testing is implimented) are LSD and psilocybin… Perhaps DMT? Regardless many kids for whatever reason would rather take drugs than be payed to exercise and make 60k in a year… This befuddles me, sixty grand is worth way more to me than all the parties I’ve been to
The millitary here pays sixty grand per year for a new recruit (just for a gap year, and theoretically even if they go to war, the gap year guys can sign up for a program which states they can’t be drafted). Surprised more aren’t enticed by the money. 60 grand is a lot for a kid, post service (only one year) you can travel the world.
No, I wasn’t. Our future interactions were fine and that statement didn’t cross my mind again during them.