If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Read the community guidelines before posting ✨
Options
Essential support for under 25s
Essential support for under 25s
Take a look around and enjoy reading the discussions. If you'd like to join in, it's really easy to register and then you'll be able to post. If you'd like to learn what this place is all about, head here.
Comments
That one doesn't really need a comment does it
The article exists, it's not a lie, but it's also quite a controvertial opinion with a lot of people who disagree - I'm one :yes:
John Lott also thinks that global warming is a myth, wealthy criminals should be able to purchase legal representation that will allow them to escape conviction despite their guilt, supports arming teachers in schools, among other nice ideas.
my source:
who is john lott?
which I found from searching Google with: "John R. Lott" "wall street journal"
-taken from the reference of Greenhat's article.
I'm not getting into this argument (damn;)), but just suggesting a little research can help you both understand and argue against a view, rather than denounce the poster.
but, hey, it's your board. be reasonably civil and you can do what you like
-BB
There was no research in this field performed by Dennis Charney M.D. Ph.D. As for 'Nancy Anreasen Ph.D'?
Who she
That's what the point was all about.
Psychic, when the bloodhound skills do not work as expected?
Should maybe demand refund for the psychic skills as well?
I means what I said. Would be best of you to observe, before you jump in. You might get a reaction you don't like, which would be quite hard acting against.
Think that I proved my point rather well, when Big Brother aka Ben, came with the mentioning of banning, if your kind of behaviour didn't change immdeately.
So yes I was using metaphors, cause quite frankly I don't see any logics in searching for you and commiting violence against you 'offline', on the base of the things you have said here, 'online'.
But they weren't threatened in America, were they? Under American law, they would be the victims of assault. And they might be accused of battery (with self-defense as their defense). But this was in Britain, where you condemn people who defend themselves.
Dennis Charney is currently doing his research (as you might have noted if you'd paid attention). As for Nancy, you really need to learn to use a good search engine if you can't find one of the 2000 winners of the National Medal of Science.
Oh, you meanNancy Andreasen
What research?
Is this getting too difficult for you Greenhat? If so just say the word and retire from the 'debate' (that's a laugh). You know what Greenhat, it's ok to admit that you were wrong sometimes. Nobody here will think any worse of you for doing so. It's an adult thing you see. Go on, you know it makes sense
Well?
Hmmm. You're obviously not of the academic persuasion are you Greenhat.
Come on, lets see some research based evidence for your claims. It's not that difficult you know
Stop the slammin' or as ben said, you'll be history. Attack the argument not the individual.
Seems pretty simple to me.
Sq
Sorry Squinty.
Greenhat.
Do you have any links or references to the aforementioned psychiatrists?
Dennis is currently doing research of a group that almost entirely carries weapons. I'm not going to say further about it without his permission.
Nancy was involved in a study of Special Forces soldiers about 2-3 years ago (I have a signed copy of the published piece somewhere). Special Forces soldiers do carry firearms, and they sure don't fit WhoWhere's generalization (my experience is that his generalization is completly wrong, period, but I'm just a person who has been around those who carry guns his whole life, what do I know).
And, no, I'm not of the academic persuasion. My job is to actually get things done. On the other hand, my academic qualifications include a BA and two MAs.
I don't think so. My argument is that WhoWhere's claim is fantasy. I don't think it takes much research to prove that. As for the argument that lawful gun ownership leads to less crime, there is a great deal of evidence and research to back that claim up.
All we see here is you slagging off people's views as fantasy while giving us nothing but your opinion, which is, not surprisingly, pro-gun.
My view is from observations, from real life and from the users on this board.
My observations have led me to believe all of you are trigger happy pyschos.
Just take one look at Thanatos who is willintg to kill someone who might dare to break into his car.
As for the gun ownership, the only research you use to back up your claim was carried out in the USA and doesn't apply to ANYWHERE else. Kind of useless then.
There is more evidence to suggest that a society without guns is more peaceful than one with them.
Again, I point out our crime rate of 30 gun crimes per 100,000 people, compared to the USA's 506.
Maybe in states with guns there is less crime. But COUNTRIES with guns have more crime than ones without.
Still the arrogant wanker, aren't you? Wallowing in your own ignorance...
Post a link where I stated that I would "kill someone who might dare to break into {my} car", or zip the sewer. You imply that I would "gun down" anyone just looking into my vehicle. Such would get me free room & board at a state run facility for the rest of my life. Not my choice of accomodations. :rolleyes:
You still need to get an education sufficient to comprehend the difference between "willing" and "eager". Yes, I am willing to defend myself, and those around me. No, I am not "eager" to kill another person. Been there, done that, more times than I can or care to remember. Just because I have done something in the past, and have already settled the "moral dilemmas", does NOT mean I would chase the moment to "relive the glory". Ain't no "glory" in combat; just a dangerous and difficult job.
In the three decades since I got back from Vietnam, all those many years that I have carried a sidearm - plus a rifle or shotgun in my vehicle - how many times would you think that I have actually shot another person?
Exactly...
Zero.
Been in moments when it could have happened, had the other not seen the error of his chosen path, and ceased his aggression. However, the threat signature did not reach what I deemed the critical moment. In the post refering to having received a phone call in the middle of the night, and came to my neighbors aid while the would be rapist was attempting to mount her, the buttstock of my shotgun was used as a pugil stick, rather than ventilating him.
So much for my "craven bloodlust".
Suggest you pull your head out from the orifice in which you have reposited it, and expose it to the light of day... :rolleyes:
Because it does not support your emotional perspective?
Reality is irrelevant to you, then?
Bloody hell :eek:
If I had written any of that shit, I'd be walking the Green Mile by now :rolleyes:
It is surprising to see him using British slang after he repeatedly claimed I could not be an American for using British terminology and spellings! lol. Guess it's alright for him though, since he's got some monopoly on reality! :rolleyes:
Actually I think it has been three/four times now - under different names.
Proof positive that you can't keep a good (or bad) Marine down.
The poor boy's going to end up taking a stroke otherwise
It's all about control Thantoss, you really must try to learn how to control your emotions son. Believe me, I've seen some of the nasty symptoms of not doing, or not being able to do so.
Chill out sonny
"The term stroke actually refers to a large range of diseases, the usual result of which is the sudden onset of symptoms; from mild weakness of an arm or leg to loss of speech, paralysis, coma, and death. Many people with this disease have no symptoms. A serious problem, TIAs (transient ischemic attacks, often called "mini-strokes") are strokes, but the symptoms last less than 24 hours.
A TIA is a big warning that a major stroke is in your future. This is not something to take lightly. Although these events are often called "mini-strokes" and shrugged off by patients and even some doctors, they should not be ignored. For 1 in 3 people, a TIA will result in a full-blown stroke within five years, if left untreated. Usually the strokes occur within a few days or a weeks of the TIA. The buildup of plaques in the carotid or vertebral arteries happens over time, and there are usually no symptoms until the narrowing reaches a critical state."
A website with big words
There may be a few others on the way out too if things don't improve.
Sq :cool:
You should have paid attention, as the research has included Britain and Australia.
And Clandestine, I guess you don't consider the UN or the various law enforcement agencies of the countries in question as third party sources, eh?
Simple thing, really, and consistent. Violent crime has risen in each area that has placed stringent gun control measures in place. Violent crime has decreased in those areas that have made lawful gun ownership easier/more accessible. Since you won't believe me, try this simple test. Get the violent crime statistics for the country/area in question from their law enforcement agency over a number of years, then check the correlation between gun control laws and the crime rate changes. Isn't difficult. Is consistent.
Why was sopite banned
You'd think that Teuflehund might have sussed by now that this site, although demonstrating remarkable flexibity in recent weeks, is still less tolerant of potty talk than U75...