Rachel Maddow spouts anti-gun nonsense

[barnbuddy]

the point that was being made is actually simple.

statistically, if there is a gun in your house

there a greater chance of someone committing suicide

and, of the gun being used against its owner

now I know someones going to say

"blah blah blah, personal responsibility."

and you're right -

obviously many gun owners are very careful and keep the weapons secure.

but the problem is, humans are very emotional animals

and even in the best of communities, jealousy, stupidity and drunkenness do exist.

so unfortunately many supposedly "cheating" spouses, (and other folks who got somebody mad) get shot.

I mean, we have something like 250 million guns in this country, and that doesn't seem to make the criminals afraid, does it?

 

[rareboy]

^ Of course you do realize that Laika's primary aim is to create 'searchable' agit-prop threadlines so that somewhere on page 2387 of Google search results for Rachel Maddow.....the idea that she is spouting nonsense about guns will appear in some nutjob's Google search and will appear to validate their obsessive hatred of her.

Which she clearly isn't if anyone bothered to watch the entire clip instead of just barfing out deceptive or at the very least poorly researched knee-jerk hates-Maddow nonsense.

It is like someone was emotionally scarred for life after they made an advance in a bar one time and Rachel just laughed in their face.

 

[CowboyBob]

^ Of course you do realize that Laika's primary aim is to create 'searchable' agit-prop threadlines so that somewhere on page 2387 of Google search results for Rachel Maddow.....the idea that she is spouting nonsense about guns will appear in some nutjob's Google search and will appear to validate their obsessive hatred of her.

Which she clearly isn't if anyone bothered to watch the entire clip instead of just barfing out deceptive or at the very least poorly researched knee-jerk hates-Maddow nonsense.

It is like someone was emotionally scarred for life after they made an advance in a bar one time and Rachel just laughed in their face.

You're exactly right. Do a google search an this pops up. It's part of the far-right agenda to discredit anyone that doesn't obediently goose step behind their Masters. They have been trained well in propaganda.

ON TOPIC:

No, Ms Maddow didn't spout anti-gun nonsense. She used common sense.

 

[Kulindahr]

I mean, we have something like 250 million guns in this country, and that doesn't seem to make the criminals afraid, does it?

Yes, it does.

Criminals who see a sticker on a house stating that a resident is a member of the Marine Corps, the NRA, the Fraternal Order of Police, the Gun Owners of America, and similar organizations strongly tend to go find another house to bother. Criminals faced with a citizen holding a gun either run or surrender nine times out of ten.

The social benefits so far outweigh the negatives it isn't funny. Instead of wasting time and money trying to restrict gun ownership by punishing the innocent, lawmakers should be offering free training programs.

 

[Knucklehead]

Looks like another hit and run thread..I've watched that entire show,even the part where a Pittsburg Congressman offered to take NRA delegates through his district,a hell hole ravaged by gun violence..

He didn't get any takers..But Rachel did show up and discuss the Pennsylvania gun laws with him.Such as the ones that prohibit tougher gun laws in the cities then are on the books in rural areas..

But as usual,Laikia seems unconcerned with the truth..I've never heard Rachel saying guns should be outlawed,not once..

But,I guess that wouldn't support the right wing narrative that all liberals are against responsible gun ownership.

 

[andysayshi]

I think what's confused Laika here is the intelligent discussion between two informed, respectful human beings. They may have different points of view but, after reasonable discussion, intelligent questions and considered answers, both seem to find a middle ground, rather than telling each to shut up or cutting off a mic.

Laika is so invested in the Fox-centric conservative news format, where the only way to make a point is to scream and yell, or deride your opponents point of view, that respectful and intelligent discussion is confusing to him.

Btw, just for the record, it's been almost exactly 3 days since Laika started this thread. In that time, around 250 Americans citizens died on American soil from a gun shot.

 

[Centexfarmer]

I think what's confused Laika here is the intelligent discussion between two informed, respectful human beings. They may have different points of view but, after reasonable discussion, intelligent questions and considered answers, both seem to find a middle ground, rather than telling each to shut up or cutting off a mic.

Laika is so invested in the Fox-centric conservative news format, where the only way to make a point is to scream and yell, or deride your opponents point of view, that respectful and intelligent discussion is confusing to him.

I think that you're giving Laika more credit than he's due, I've yet to see any discussion that he's actually contributed anything to here.

Btw, just for the record, it's been almost exactly 3 days since Laika started this thread. In that time, around 250 Americans citizens died on American soil from a gun.

And he's only posted in it twice; the first post was to create this thread, and the second post (same day) was deleted for going "off-topic."

Seriously.

 

[MoltenRock III]

Yes, it does.

Criminals who see a sticker on a house stating that a resident is a member of the Marine Corps, the NRA, the Fraternal Order of Police, the Gun Owners of America, and similar organizations strongly tend to go find another house to bother. Criminals faced with a citizen holding a gun either run or surrender nine times out of ten

Really?!?!

I'd love to see those statistics. Where did you pull those from?

 

[Kulindahr]

Really?!?!

I'd love to see those statistics. Where did you pull those from?

A study done of violent felons in prisons, about fifteen years ago.

I wonder if Navy SEALs get avoided, too.

 

[andysayshi]

^ So the result is that NRA stickers will get your next door neighbour's house broken into?

 

[Telstra]

^ Of course you do realize that Laika's primary aim is to create 'searchable' agit-prop threadlines so that somewhere on page 2387 of Google search results for Rachel Maddow.....the idea that she is spouting nonsense about guns will appear in some nutjob's Google search and will appear to validate their obsessive hatred of her.

Which she clearly isn't if anyone bothered to watch the entire clip instead of just barfing out deceptive or at the very least poorly researched knee-jerk hates-Maddow nonsense.

It is like someone was emotionally scarred for life after they made an advance in a bar one time and Rachel just laughed in their face.

If this is Laika's intention. Yeah he is a bad man.

America is a gun obsessed country.

 

[Kulindahr]

^ So the result is that NRA stickers will get your next door neighbour's house broken into?

More like two doors down, I suspect.
Like in my neighborhood: we used to have a petty crime rate that was obnixious enough people stopped calling the police. Things left outside unattended frequently vanished -- even a lawnmower, still running, once! as its operator dashed inside for something.
Then a sheriff's deputy moved in, four blocks away. Suddenly unattended items were safe, in daylight anyway.
Then a city officer moved in five doors down. Three weeks ago, I actually forgot to bring my chain saw in off the open tailgate of my pickup -- and in the morning, it was still there, whereas a year ago I had a six-pack of beer stolen from the front of the bed of my pickup -- under a canopy.

The interesting side of it is that it doesn't matter if the officer or deputy are at home or not.



As for figures -- best I'm finding online is a justice department study that found 3/4 of violent criminals would not go after someone they were sure was armed. Reasonably, a house with one of those stickers visible is fairly certain to have someone armed.

That's the big catch in "more guns, less crime": overall, crime does drop somewhat when citizens can go armed if they please, but the real significant shift is from crime where people are present and crime where they aren't. Bizarrely, there have been figures showing a decrease in nighttime burglaries of residences and an increase in daytime ones! Basically criminals start avoiding people, so crimes against people drop sharply, but overall crime not nearly as much.

One figure I appreciate is that when a state shifts from no-concealed carry to shall-issue carry (law-abiding citizens merely have to ask for a permit, and get one), the figures on rape in urban areas has plunged. Yet that doesn't hold for less-populated areas -- which fits in with the desire of criminals to avoid armed opposition: if your victim is in a remote area, there's less chance of someone else, armed, coming along (though that varies with another figure: the popularity of hunting: remote areas where hunting is popular get less rapes than where it isn't... again fitting the pattern of criminals avoiding places they're likely to face armed people).