"Bowling for Columbine"
- Thread starter nitro
- Start date
"I have not gotten to any of your responses mostly because you rarely state your opinion, but "studies" and other nonsense that you deem to be "proof." Your opinions aren't yours, but someone else's."
1) Nonsense? Claiming the studies are nonsense without even reviewing them is not only an empty assertion, but quite
close minded as well.
2) They are not my opinions, because im not interested
in opinions. I want to base things on factual data.
So I have been supplying the data, which contradicts many
of the myths surrounding guns in our society.
Do you take trade entries based on peoples OPINIONS or on
statistical research? I could care less what someones OPINION
of the market is. Have they done their homework is what
is important to me. Give me the numerical odds, not your opinion.
"I can set out to prove anything I want by suppling a "study." "
Setting out to prove something, and actually proving it
are two different things.
Are you asserting that all studies are worthless?
Or are you asserting that flawed studies can actually prove something?
In other words, if my "study" showed that people who go
to hospitals die often, and therefore concluded that
people should avoid hospitals, would you not immediately
see why my "study" was flawed??
Are you not capable of distinguishing between completely
flawed studies, and well done studies?
Gary Kleck won the American Society of Criminology's highest honor six years ago, for his book on guns.
He is well recognized in his field and knows his stats.
WHY should I completely ignore his RESEARCH over peoples
unsubstantiated OPINOINS????
Please answer this question.
You don't really reject all studies you read simply because
of this notion that "I can set out to prove anything I want
by supplying a study" do you? I find that quite shocking.
Do you reject all medical studies based on stats?
You always seemed to be a hard core stats dude.
"Look at all the "diets" that have changed their minds about what is or is not good for you, several times over, based on "studies." "
Two different worlds. You can fairly accurately count the
number of bodies each year with bullets in them.
Discovering the complexities of the human body is
no where near in the same league.
It could take thousands of studies, to remove all the variables,
and be able to conclude anything about something as
complex as the human body.
As for reasons for needing a gun, your simply guessing.
Your guessing that 99% don't really need them.
You may want to provide some data to support your assertion.
The rest of your post I agree with.
peace
axeman
1) Nonsense? Claiming the studies are nonsense without even reviewing them is not only an empty assertion, but quite
close minded as well.
2) They are not my opinions, because im not interested
in opinions. I want to base things on factual data.
So I have been supplying the data, which contradicts many
of the myths surrounding guns in our society.
Do you take trade entries based on peoples OPINIONS or on
statistical research? I could care less what someones OPINION
of the market is. Have they done their homework is what
is important to me. Give me the numerical odds, not your opinion.
"I can set out to prove anything I want by suppling a "study." "
Setting out to prove something, and actually proving it
are two different things.
Are you asserting that all studies are worthless?
Or are you asserting that flawed studies can actually prove something?
In other words, if my "study" showed that people who go
to hospitals die often, and therefore concluded that
people should avoid hospitals, would you not immediately
see why my "study" was flawed??
Are you not capable of distinguishing between completely
flawed studies, and well done studies?
Gary Kleck won the American Society of Criminology's highest honor six years ago, for his book on guns.
He is well recognized in his field and knows his stats.
WHY should I completely ignore his RESEARCH over peoples
unsubstantiated OPINOINS????
Please answer this question.
You don't really reject all studies you read simply because
of this notion that "I can set out to prove anything I want
by supplying a study" do you? I find that quite shocking.
Do you reject all medical studies based on stats?
You always seemed to be a hard core stats dude.
"Look at all the "diets" that have changed their minds about what is or is not good for you, several times over, based on "studies." "
Two different worlds. You can fairly accurately count the
number of bodies each year with bullets in them.
Discovering the complexities of the human body is
no where near in the same league.
It could take thousands of studies, to remove all the variables,
and be able to conclude anything about something as
complex as the human body.
As for reasons for needing a gun, your simply guessing.
Your guessing that 99% don't really need them.
You may want to provide some data to support your assertion.
The rest of your post I agree with.
peace
axeman
Hey, Michael Moore, LOSE SOME WEIGHT, FAT ASS! 
ROCK
ROCK
Been there done that......been stabbed in a fight, kicked the crap out of him and then went to hospital.....if he had a gun Im dead....and Im talking about these whackos who walk into an office or school.....ever been stabbed dick? ever been shot at?? tell you right now, person has a gun.....you run!!! don;t believe this crap you make up in your mind or see on TV where they dodge bullets
Just saw this film...Moore asks interesting and thought provoking questions, but he's just so damned biased and one-sided that it's hard to take him seriously. His 'blame whitey' attitude is not objective. Non-whites have their share of bad apples too, but Moore can't acknowledge that fact. When he and his Lib butt-buddy were walking around in South Central LA (In the daylight) to prove how safe that neighborhood is, I would have loved to see them get mugged by a crackhead. Now THAT would have been entertaining.
Also, Moore didn't mention a single word about the main reason why Americans have the right to bear arms. It's not about protection from criminals, but PROTECTION FROM THE GOVERNMENT. When the government fears the people, there is freedom. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny.
Also, Moore didn't mention a single word about the main reason why Americans have the right to bear arms. It's not about protection from criminals, but PROTECTION FROM THE GOVERNMENT. When the government fears the people, there is freedom. When the people fear the government, there is tyranny.
Very true.
Y'all listen to the Mav-man, 'cause he was at a book store or maybe it was a Starbucks, no matter, and some guy came up to him and told him about a plan that the government had to do bad stuff, And the mav-man told the police and even the FBI, and about 30 of his closest friends, so you know it's true, and everything. So that's why we gots to have guns.
Thank God for good citizens like him, who take their time to hang out in stores where bad people come up to him and tell him stuff.
What exactly does this post have to do with this thread? Are you liberals that mad at the world that all you can do is go from thread to thread attacking other members on this site? All you do is attack people without merit, at least if I attack a liberal, I have something to back it up and at least it's on a thread that is on topic. But you go from thread to thread trying to slander me. Somehow I don't think you would do that in person you chickenshit.
I guess I can understand a little bit. This is probably the worst time in history to be a liberal. You got no one on your side except terrorists and anti-americans. Nice crowd to be associated with.
Go on and keep attacking me on that post about 9/11, just shows your lack of character. You have no idea whether that story is true or not but you continue to slander me over it. Very tpyical of a liberal. Just keep making stuff up as you go along. Good for you man.