American Politics

[QUOTE=PVMonger;2785098]Talk about a stupid comment: "If the dem douches and fake news actually wanted to reduce the amount of gun crime, they would focus their attention on where it happens the most. But they do not."

Evidently you are too much of a douche to realize that absolutely no meaningful legislation re: handguns will go anywhere. Thanks for telling that to everybody.[/QUOTE]Oh, and while they're at it, why haven't those lazy, opportunistic Dems prevented all acts of domestic violence, drunken brawls, disgruntled workers "going postal", Road Rage and Prickly Heat?

How dare they shirk their responsibility as Public Servants to solve every conceivable problem by wasting so much of their time on silly stuff like Recovering Us From Great Repub Recessions, Massive Repub Jobs Destruction, Historic Repub Deficit Spending With Nothing To Show For It, World-wide Economic Paralysis Due To Crippling Pandemics Thanks To Colossal Repub National Security Negligence, Pulling Us Out Of Multiple Quagmire Repub Wars, etc, etc, etc?

[QUOTE=PVMonger;2785098]Talk about a stupid comment: "If the dem douches and fake news actually wanted to reduce the amount of gun crime, they would focus their attention on where it happens the most. But they do not."

Evidently you are too much of a douche to realize that absolutely no meaningful legislation re: handguns will go anywhere. Thanks for telling that to everybody.[/QUOTE]Another low-IQ obfuscating non-sequitur. Those really are your specialty, aren't they.

I'll make it simple so you can understand it. There is over ten times more gun crime committed in urban areas with handguns than in rural / suburban areas with rifles.

Why, therefore, do the dem douches and the fake media / hollyweird not focus their message and legislative efforts on the areas (urban ghettos / handguns) which would save most lives and reduce most crime?

Because they don't care about saving lives or reducing crime. We've already seen that with the leftist reaction to the George Floyd fentanyl overdose, with Kamala Harris among others cheering on billions of dollars of damage in riots and looting and bailing out the perps on the rare occasion they were actually arrested.

Many lives have been lost and violent crime has spiked as a direct result of the democrat and media encouragement of the riots and attacks on law enforcement.

The left are very happy to see this, as long as it promotes their nefarious agenda which hates America, hates capitalism and enterprise, hates law and order, hates white people, hates stable families and hates Christianity; and wishes to replace it with illegal dregs from the third world, communism, plus trannies and faggots grooming kids at "drag queen story hour".

[QUOTE=ChrisP;2785032]No, it does support my factual statement that the vast majority of gun crime in America is carried out with handguns in democrat-voting high-crime urban areas.[/QUOTE]My I suggest, you seek an eye examination. As per the original chart supplied. Perhaps you'll past the eye exam using it?

[URL]https://www.statista.com/statistics/195325/murder-victims-in-the-us-by-weapon-used/[/URL]

So let me restate and double-down (just has you have) with unsubstantiated inflammatory, incendiary and wrongheaded logic. According to your logic, urban people ONLY use "handguns", therefore that leaves vast majority of [b]"Firearms, type not stated"[/b] (as the 2nd most causes of death at 4,740, behind "Handguns" at 6,012) and most of the other categories, to people in the burbs / rural US, you know the ones that, commit mass murders, insurrectionist pole killing deniers, pipe-bombers and American child soldiers with AR-15's and bazookas.

[QUOTE=ChrisP;2785032] No matter how much shucking and jiving you do with bold text, exclamation marks, attempts at humor and other clownery, that fact will not change. [/QUOTE]What facts? You've haven't provided any to substantiate your false claims.

As I told Tiny 12, I was only following and "playing along" with your initial "shucking and jiving". So until you provide the data and evidence to backup your claims, its all [B]just noise[/B] to me. But I'm sure the dog whistle drivel you put forth is very entertaining to some.

And the fact that [B]my style of writing[/B] is obviously getting to you, is [B]music to my ears.[/B].

[QUOTE=ChrisP;2785032] If they wanted to maximally reduce the amount of gun crime, they would target their focus on the areas and weapons (urban ghettos/handguns) where the vast majority of it occurs. But they do not do that.

Clearly therefore, their aim is not to maximally reduce gun crime.[/QUOTE]BTW, ask yourself, before you put this all on the Dems, [B]what have Repubs done[/B] to reign in any form of gun control?

[QUOTE=ChrisP;2785032] That begs the question of what their true goal is, by focusing their propaganda and attacks almost exclusively on rural and suburban white rifle owners who commit a tiny fraction of the total gun crime in America?

Given the broader attacks and demonization of straight white non-leftist men by government deep state, fake news media and hollyweird, in terms of negative fictional portrayals, affirmative action, "equity", "racial justice" and so on, which have been ramping up significantly in recent years, it would seem quite apparent why they wish to disarm us.[/QUOTE]Silly rant, but do ya feel better? Victim hood doesn't become you.

Surely, you can do better.

If you are going to rant, spew your hatred and bullpucky nonsense ad nauseam, may I suggest you bring [B]data, facts[/B], and [B]actually evidence[/B] to the discussion.

[QUOTE=Tiny 12;2785123]Why do Republicans believe governance, and voting practices and legislation, should be closer to the people, at the state level, instead of dictated by politicians in Washington D.C. ? If there are egregious violations of voting rights, haven't the courts always stepped in?[/QUOTE] Sure the courts step in. But do all voters (Dems & Repubs), have the same equal treatment under the law, given their respective states of voter fraud?

[QUOTE=Tiny 12;2785123]Why do all politicians make a spectacle of all things that promote their political careers?[/QUOTE] Yeah, why do they? Please do enlighten me.

[QUOTE=Tiny 12;2785123]Why does a 6 year jail sentence handed down to an ex felon who voted have to be a Democrat vs. Republican matter? [/QUOTE]My sentiments exactly. Also to further your point, it shouldn't even but about ex-felon vs. non-felon. It should just about the right to vote, if you've have the right or have been granted the right to vote. And you vote ONCE and ONCE ONLY, given that right.

But it is indeed very strange, how the Dem voters got jail sentences and the Repubs offenders who clearly committed voter fraud and voted TWICE on the behalf of their dead mothers, brothers or some other related dead family members, where treated with "kid gloves" and given a slap on the wrist.

[QUOTE=Tiny 12;2785123]Why isn't it an issue of a criminal justice system gone awry?[/QUOTE]Well, I'll put it like this. The criminal justice system in red states, will definitely treat Repubs with voter fraud, with "kid gloves" vs. jail for a Dem with voter fraud.

When events like where SCOTUS, a justice system at the very top, that has become partisan (Repub) and an unhinged president like Repub Trump (aka.Agent Orange), weaponizes the DOJ for personal vendettas, yes the justice system may have gone awry.

[QUOTE=ChrisP;2785201]Another low-IQ obfuscating non-sequitur. Those really are your specialty, aren't they.

I'll make it simple so you can understand it. There is over ten times more gun crime committed in urban areas with handguns than in rural / suburban areas with rifles.

Why, therefore, do the dem douches and the fake media / hollyweird not focus their message and legislative efforts on the areas (urban ghettos / handguns) which would save most lives and reduce most crime?

Because they don't care about saving lives or reducing crime. We've already seen that with the leftist reaction to the George Floyd fentanyl overdose, with Kamala Harris among others cheering on billions of dollars of damage in riots and looting and bailing out the perps on the rare occasion they were actually arrested.

Many lives have been lost and violent crime has spiked as a direct result of the democrat and media encouragement of the riots and attacks on law enforcement. And the same goes with the riots after George Floyd's death. But you only listen to the hatred spewed by rightwingnut media so we really should give you a break. "Forgive him, Father, he knows not what he does."

The left are very happy to see this, as long as it promotes their nefarious agenda which hates America, hates capitalism and enterprise, hates law and order, hates white people, hates stable families and hates Christianity; and wishes to replace it with illegal dregs from the third world, communism, plus trannies and faggots grooming kids at "drag queen story hour".[/QUOTE]I'll make it even simpler for you to understand, especially since you don't seem to have enough IQ points to decorate a domino.

In gambling, there is a maxim that says "don't throw good money after bad". And that's what any handgun legislation is: throwing good money after bad.

You dumber-than-dogshit Repubs are bought and paid for by the NRA. When the NRA says "SHIT", the Repub politicians respond with the following question: "How much, how brown and how high?" Case in point, what handgun legislation did you morons propose and pass when Donnie the Dumbass and his merry band of grifters ran the show? How about 0. You will probably bring up the "Bump Stock Ban" but guess what? Bump stocks aren't for handguns. I'll bet you didn't even know that.

And your "violent crime" rhetoric is getting old. Everybody else knows that your tropes of Heritage Americans, Law and Order, Urban Ghettos and the rest are simply code words for promoting violence against People of Color.

One of these days, maybe you'll get smarter and realize the George Floyd died from knee to the neck, not an overdose. But Fucker "His lawyers argued that nobody in their right mind should ever believe a word he says" Carlson said it so must be true.

[QUOTE=Spidy;2785238]My I suggest, you seek an eye examination. As per the original chart supplied. Perhaps you'll past the eye exam using it?

[URL]https://www.statista.com/statistics/195325/murder-victims-in-the-us-by-weapon-used/[/URL]

So let me restate and double-down (just has you have) with unsubstantiated inflammatory, incendiary and wrongheaded logic. According to your logic, urban people ONLY use "handguns", therefore that leaves vast majority of [b]"Firearms, type not stated"[/b] (as the 2nd most causes of death at 4,740, behind "Handguns" at 6,012) and most of the other categories, to people in the burbs / rural US, you know the ones that, commit mass murders, insurrectionist pole killing deniers, pipe-bombers and American child soldiers with AR-15's and bazookas.

What facts? You've haven't provided any to substantiate your false claims.

As I told Tiny 12, I was only following and "playing along" with your initial "shucking and jiving". So until you provide the data and evidence to backup your claims, its all [B]just noise[/B] to me. But I'm sure the dog whistle drivel you put forth is very entertaining to some.

And the fact that [B]my style of writing[/B] is obviously getting to you, is [B]music to my ears.[/B].

BTW, ask yourself, before you put this all on the Dems, [B]what have Repubs done[/B] to reign in any form of gun control?

Silly rant, but do ya feel better? Victim hood doesn't become you.

Surely, you can do better.

If you are going to rant, spew your hatred and bullpucky nonsense ad nauseam, may I suggest you bring [B]data, facts[/B], and [B]actually evidence[/B] to the discussion.[/QUOTE]You expect Chrissie to provide "data, facts and actual evidence"? You must be joking. Chrissie never does that. To him and the rest of the Moron Brigade, "data and facts" are what they hear on FUX Snooze or some other equally ridiculous rightwignut site. But that's where they get their bullpucky nonsense. Like the meme says, "Dogs get more information from sniffing another dog's asshole than Repubs get from watching FUX Snooze".

[QUOTE=Elvis2008;2785152]Your butt buddy Tooms has been saying that for years.

I would say could have been stolen and when you refer to Trump like that, you give us plenty of ammunition to believe it was true.

The alleged law being broken was the exact same. What was different was how the Department of Injustice handled the cases, and it is obvious to me that a political hack like yourself will justify the kid gloves Biden was handled with versus the SWAT team with Trump. Thing is you do not have to give your justifications. We know you are going to always support the DOJ when it goes after Republicans PVM.

In Republican eyes, the Department of Injustice made complete fucking asses of them with the SWAT team raid on Mar a Largo and how they handled Biden just magnified how stupid they were.[/QUOTE]You still don't get it, do you? Here's the timeline of what Donnie the Dumbass did. And, by the way, thanks for saying that Donnie the Dumbass was a dumbass.

January 20,2021.

Trump departs the White House as Democrat Joe Biden is sworn in as the nation's 46th president and heads to his private Florida estate known as Mar-a-Lago.

May 2021.

The National Archives and Records Administration, also known as NARA, emails Trump's lawyers, notifying them that some two dozen boxes of original records were not turned over, according to The Washington Post.

December 2021.

A Trump representative tells the National Archives "that they had located some records," according to a statement published later by the National Archives.

Mid-January 2022.

The National Archives retrieves 15 boxes of presidential records from Trump's estate.

The nonpartisan presidential records agency said it "identified items marked as classified national security information, up to the level of Top Secret and including Sensitive Compartmented Information and Special Access Program materials" and sought permission to alert the FBI.

February 8, 2022.

The National Archives issues a public statement saying it is still searching for more of Trump's presidential records, one day after The Washington Post reported the boxes were retrieved from Florida.

February 10,2022.

USA House of Representatives Oversight Committee announces an investigation into Trump's handling of the documents, later expanding its probe in a February 24 letter to the agency.

The New York Times reports White House staff periodically found clumps of documents clogging White House toilets, an accusation Trump has said is false. Reporter Maggie Haberman later releases photos of some of the alleged found documents.

February 18,2022.

The National Archives tells Congress that Trump took classified information to his Florida home after leaving the White House.

April 7, 2022.

Sources confirm to Reuters that the USA Justice Department was investigating Trump's removal of official presidential records from the White House.

April 11,2022.

The White House Counsel's Office under Biden formally requests that the National Archives give the FBI access to the 15 boxes. The National Archives notifies Trump's representatives about the FBI review in an April 12 letter.

April 29 and May 1, 2022.

Trump lawyer Evan Corcoran seeks to delay disclosure to the FBI in two letters sent to the National Archives.

May 10,2022.

Acting USA Archivist Debra Steidel Wall responds to Corcoran, rejecting Trump's requested delay and refusing his "'protective' claim of privilege," adding the FBI can access the records as soon as May 12. The letter is made public August 23 and notes hundreds of pages of classified documents were recovered so far.

May 11,2022.

Jay Bratt, chief of counterintelligence and export control at the USA Justice Department's National Security Division, requests that Trump's custodian of records appear before a federal grand jury in Washington, Tuesday's filing showed. Bratt, in a separate letter to Corcoran, says the representative can comply with the subpoena by giving the FBI "any responsive documents" and a sworn statement, instead of appearing in court. The grand jury probe was first reported by The New York Times.

June 3, 2022.

A Trump representative, whose name is redacted in the Justice Department filing, asserts that "a diligent search" was conducted for documents at Mar-a-Lago removed from the White House and that "any and all responsive documents accompany this certification. ".

August 8, 2022.

Federal agents execute a search warrant at Trump's Florida property, uncovering 13 boxes or containers with documents marked classified — "more than twice the amount produced June 3 in response to the grand jury subpoena. " Trump was not at the property at the time, and media reports showed him at Trump Tower in Manhattan.

A photo released in a court filing later that month shows some of the seized documents with clear markings of "Top Secret" and "Secret. ".

Trump, in a post online, says the records were "all declassified" and placed in "secure storage. " A day later, Trump, who continues to hint at a possible 2024 run for the presidency, cites the FBI search in a campaign fundraising appeal.

August 12,2022.

The FBI's search warrant is released to the public following approval by USA Magistrate Judge Bruce Reinhart.

August 22,2022.

Two weeks after the FBI's search, Trump separately asks the USA District Court for the Southern District of Florida for a so-called special master to review the documents, prompting the Justice Department's 54-page response on Tuesday.

The next day, the National Archives releases its May 10 letter to Trump's attorney.

August 26,2022.

The Justice Department releases a heavily redacted affidavit — a sworn statement outlining the evidence giving law enforcement officials probable cause to ask a judge to approve a search warrant — after media outlets sued for its release. A judge approved its release.

August 30,2022.

The department files its response to Trump's request for a special master review.

September 1, 2022.

At a hearing in West Palm Beach, Cannon suggests she is willing to accede to Trump's request and appoint a special master to review the documents.

September 2, 2022.

The FBI reveals in a court filing that it recovered more than 11,000 government documents and photographs during the August 8 search of Trump's estate, as well as 48 empty folders labeled as "classified. ".

That's the timeline. Note that Donnie the Dumbass gave back [B]some[/B] of the records he had about [B]seven months[/B] after being notified by NARA. Then, a month or so after that, Donnie the Dumbass lied (through his lawyers but let's make no mistake about it, Donnie the Dumbass told them what to say). Then, a month or so after that, based on a tip received by the DOJ, the FBI raided Mar-a-Lardo. [URL]https://www.voanews.com/a/timeline-of-the-trump-documents-inquiry-/6734453.html[/URL].

Here's the Biden timeline.

Nov. 2, 2022: Biden's personal attorneys come across Obama-Biden administration documents in a locked closet while packing files as they prepare to close out Biden's office in the Penn Biden Center. They notify the National Archives.

Nov. 3, 2022: The National Archives takes possession of the documents.

Nov. 4, 2022: The National Archives informs the Justice Department about the documents.

Nov. 8, 2022: Midterm elections.

November-December 2022: Biden's lawyers search the president's homes in Wilmington, Delaware, and Rehoboth Beach, Delaware, to see if there are other documents from his vice presidency.

Nov. 9, 2022: The FBI begins an assessment of whether classified information has been mishandled.

Nov. 14,2022: Garland assigns USA Attorney John Lausch to look into whether a special counsel should be appointed to investigate the matter.

Dec. 20,2022: Biden's personal counsel informs Lausch that a second batch of classified documents has been discovered in the garage at Biden's Wilmington home. The FBI goes to Biden's home in Wilmington and secures the documents.

Jan. 5, 2023: Lausch advises Garland he believes that appointing a special counsel is warranted.

Jan. 9, 2023: CBS News, followed by other news organizations, reveals the discovery of the documents at the Penn Biden Center. The White House acknowledges that "a small number" of Obama-Biden administration records, including some with classified markings, were found at the center. It makes no mention of the documents found in Wilmington.

Jan. 10:2023: Biden for the first time addresses the document issue. During a press conference in Mexico City, he says he was "surprised to learn that there were any documents" in the Penn Biden Center and doesn't know what's in them. He does not mention the documents found in Wilmington.

Jan. 11,2023: Biden's lawyers complete their search of Biden's residences, find one additional classified document in the president's personal library in Wilmington. NBC News and other news organizations reveal a second batch of documents has been found at a location other than the Penn Biden Center.

Jan. 12:2023: Biden's lawyer informs Lausch that an additional classified document has been found. Richard Sauber, special counsel to the president, reveals publicly for the first time that documents were found in Biden's Wilmington garage and one document was found in an adjacent room. Garland announces that he has appointed Robert Hur, a former USA Attorney in the Trump administration, to serve as special counsel.

Jan. 14:2023: The White House reveals that Biden's lawyers found more classified documents at his home than previously known. Sauber said in a statement that a total of six pages of classified documents were found during a search of Biden's private library. Sauber said Biden's personal lawyers, who did not have security clearances, stopped their search after finding the first page on Wednesday evening. Sauber found the remaining material Thursday as he was facilitating their retrieval by the Justice Department.

Jan. 19,2023: A frustrated Biden said there is "no there there" when he was persistently questioned about the discovery of the documents. "We found a handful of documents were filed in the wrong place," Biden said to reporters who questioned him during a tour of the damage from storms in California. "We immediately turned them over to the Archives and the Justice Department. " Biden said he was "fully cooperating and looking forward to getting this resolved quickly. ".

"I think you're going to find there's nothing there," he said. "There's no there there. ".

Jan. 21,2023: Biden's attorneys say the FBI searched Biden's home in Wilmington, Delaware, and located additional documents with classified markings and also took possession of some of his handwritten notes. The search lasted nearly 13 hours. The FBI took six items that contained documents with classified markings, said Bob Bauer, the president's personal lawyer. The items spanned Biden's time in the Senate and the vice presidency, while the notes dated to his time as vice president, he said. [URL]https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/a-timeline-of-the-discovery-and-disclosure-of-classified-records-tied-to-biden[/URL].

Even you can't be dense enough to believe that obstructing the government for a year is equal to turning over found records immediately.

To be sure, both "mishandled" documents. But when Donnie the Dumbass mishandled them, he [B]obstructed[/B] the governments efforts to get the documents returned and [B]ignored a subpoena[/B] during the government's attempts. When Biden mishandled them, he [B]voluntarily[/B] turned the documents over to the feds.

The other thing you sorry SOBs always seem to forget is that if Donnie the Dumbass would have simply returned everything voluntarily and invited the DOJ to send people to Mar-a-Lardo to search for more, none of this would have happened. But nooooooo. Not Donnie the Dumbass. He wasn't smart enough and held true to his name: [B]dumbass[/B].

[QUOTE=ChrisP;2785027]

If the dem douches and fake news actually wanted to reduce the amount of gun crime, they would focus their attention on where it happens the most. But they do not.

That is because the whole issue is simply a tool to push their political agenda, which ultimately ends in the disarmament and dispossession of heritage white Americans in the name of "equity" and "racial justice", two buzzwords we are seeing more and more of among leftists.[/QUOTE]Good post, Chris. I had to take a course on suicides, and one of the things I learned is that like 90% of people do not engage in multiple suicide attempts. The other was that suicide by firearm is way more successful than other means.

So another issue I saw with the anti-gun nuts is they would say there were so many deaths but firearm but not distinguish between homicide and suicide. In fact, by a factor of three, the most likely person to shoot you is you. If someone kills themselves with a gun, it does not create the buzz and fear as killing others.

It would seem to me if you really want to reduce gun deaths, you would get a lot less resistance training gun owners about how to identify those at risk for suicide versus just banning guns.

But this is just another example of the anti-gun lobby really not caring that much about public safety.

[QUOTE=PVMonger;2785262]Repubs are bought and paid for by the NRA. When the NRA says blabla [/QUOTE]Classic PVMonger obfuscation and avoidance. So obvious and transparent he reminds me of a three year old covering his own eyes and thinking nobody can see him.

I didn't say anything about republicans. I asked why the democrats and media don't focus their anti-gun propaganda and weepy movies / ad campaigns on handguns in urban ghettos rather than AR-15's in suburbs and rural areas, given that crime and murder committed by the former vastly outstrips the latter.

Surely if the dems and media actually cared about gun casualties and actually wanted to reduce gun crime, they would focus their considerable efforts on the areas in which it was most heavily concentrated, ie urban ghettos and handguns? Unless of course the entire thing is a ruse, they don't care a damn about gun victims and are just using the issue to further attack rural and suburban white people and the Second Amendment.

You couldn't answer the above question, so you went on an unrelated and uninformed spittle-flecked rant about the republicans.

[QUOTE=PVMonger;2785262]And your "violent crime" rhetoric is getting old. Everybody else knows that your tropes of Heritage Americans, Law and Order, Urban Ghettos and the rest are simply code words for promoting violence against People of Color.[/QUOTE]No, it is about accepting the factual reality that the rates of violent crime in urban ghettos are vastly higher than in white areas. But I understand you leftists have trouble with factual reality, given your wacky claims that men are women, the border is secure, and so on.

Nobody wants to promote violence against non-whites. Well, perhaps the left does, as their policy of defunding the police has led to even more violence in urban ghettos.

We simply want to prevent our nice suburban and rural areas from being subject to the astronomical rates of violent crime found in those ghettos.

[QUOTE=PVMonger;2785262]One of these days, maybe you'll get smarter and realize the George Floyd died from knee to the neck, not an overdose.[/QUOTE]LOL. Chauvin's knee was barely on him. Steven Crowder did an experiment in which he lay in exactly the same position with a knee on his neck for the same period and guess what. He survived! Might have had something to do with the fact that he wasn't high as a kite from an overdose of meth and fentanyl that he'd just swallowed to prevent the cops busting him for it.

On a broader note, it really is peak hilarity clownworld that the dem douches and leftists have made George Floyd their new saint. He was an absolutely worthless druggie piece of shit multiple felon with several fatherless bastard children he had abandoned, who (among many other crimes) invaded the home of a pregnant woman and pointed a gun at her belly. And the leftists are putting up statues of him! Epic clownery, and an apt metaphor for the decline of the country.

[QUOTE=Spidy;2785238]therefore that leaves vast majority of [b]"Firearms, type not stated"[/b] (as the 2nd most causes of death at 4,740, behind "Handguns" at 6,012) and most of the other categories,[/QUOTE]I didn't need to wade any further into your verbal diarrhea than the above, thank goodness.

As Tiny 12 stated in his earlier response to your wrongheadedness:

"Chris' estimate of a 10 to 1 ratio of deaths from handguns versus rifles, shotguns and other guns looks pretty darn good to me based on the FBI numbers:

[URL]https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2019/crime-in-the-u.s.-2019/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-8.xls[/URL]

The most reasonable way to treat the "type not stated" category is to apportion it in accordance with the other categories."

As we can see from the data, handgun murders are more than ten times the number of the other three categories (rifles, shotguns and other guns) combined.

As Tiny 12 and other intelligent people will agree, it makes perfect sense to apportion the unknown murders in accordance with the other three categories. Handguns are the weapon of choice in over 90% of firearm murders.

The question now becomes why the democrats and the media largely ignore the vast majority of firearm crime, involving handguns in urban ghettos, and instead focus on a tiny minority of firearm crime involving AR-15's and suburban / rural white people?

I would surmise the answer is quite clearly that it suits their leftist agenda to attack these groups, and they don't care a jot about the explosion in urban ghetto crime caused by handguns, by defunded police, or by any other of their nefarious policies. Perhaps you have an alternative explanation?

[QUOTE=EihTooms;2785081]JustTK said "your party keeps losing." I refuted that blatantly false assertion. Unless you think Biden did not win in 2020 and so on. I don't think there is anything "partisan" politically about refuting a blatant falsehood.
[/QUOTE]Once again, you choose to understand words in a way that fits your own ideology. And that is why you are dishonest bcos you twist everything for win.

"Keeps losing" - means losing on a regular basis. It does not claim that they lost the last election. So, far from refute my claim (whch is irreftuable), you twisted the claim dishonestly in to one that you know so well and that you can attack (stoeln election) . As you do so often.

[QUOTE=ChrisP;2785398]I didn't need to wade any further into your verbal diarrhea than the above, thank goodness.

As Tiny 12 stated in his earlier response to your wrongheadedness:

"Chris' estimate of a 10 to 1 ratio of deaths from handguns versus rifles, shotguns and other guns looks pretty darn good to me based on the FBI numbers:

[URL]https://ucr.fbi.gov/crime-in-the-u.s/2019/crime-in-the-u.s.-2019/tables/expanded-homicide-data-table-8.xls[/URL]

The most reasonable way to treat the "type not stated" category is to apportion it in accordance with the other categories."

As we can see from the data, handgun murders are more than ten times the number of the other three categories (rifles, shotguns and other guns) combined.

As Tiny 12 and other intelligent people will agree, it makes perfect sense to apportion the unknown murders in accordance with the other three categories. Handguns are the weapon of choice in over 90% of firearm murders.

The question now becomes why the democrats and the media largely ignore the vast majority of firearm crime, involving handguns in urban ghettos, and instead focus on a tiny minority of firearm crime involving AR-15's and suburban / rural white peope

I would surmise the answer is quite clearly that it suits their leftist agenda to attack these groups, and they don't care a jot about the explosion in urban ghetto crime caused by handguns, by defunded police, or by any other of their nefarious policies. Perhaps you have an alternative explanation?[/QUOTE]I own a couple of rifles and a shotgun. Those firearms can be useful for putting food on the table. And they kind of fit with the 2nd amendment concept of a "militia...being necessary to the security of a free State." Switzerland requires all young Swiss men to do military service, and they're issued with assault rifles they keep at home. As a result nobody's fucked with Switzerland in centuries. The homicide rate there is off the charts low.

As long as they don't touch what I've got, I wouldn't give a flying f* if people had to give up their handguns, in the interest of reducing homicides and suicides. Now yes, that's a pretty selfish attitude on my part. I don't own handguns. Well, maybe some Democrats have a similar idea, only in reverse. They've got their handguns but no semiautomatic rifles, so they want to take away the rifles while sweeping the epidemic of deaths from handguns under the table.

As opposed to letting people in their own families, communities and states decide how they want to run their lives, many Democratic Politicians want a central government in Washington D.C. that will tell everyone what to do. And there's backlash against that, at least where I live. But there's "0" chance you'll see some kind of uprising, at least IMHO.

Anyway, maybe that fits in somehow with all this, why the threat from semiautomatic rifles and right wing militias and the like is way overblown. Maybe it's not just them trying to get a political advantage, which isn't hard to do given the media coverage of shootings with semiautomatic rifles. Maybe the paranoid among them think there's going to be some kind of uprising in red, rural America, so it's best to de-weaponize those they mistakenly believe are their enemies.

[QUOTE=EihTooms;2785166]Oh, and while they're at it, why haven't those lazy, opportunistic Dems prevented all acts of domestic violence, drunken brawls, disgruntled workers "going postal", Road Rage and Prickly Heat?[/QUOTE]Good question Tooms, except that you shouldn't characterize Democrats as lazy. Yes, rates of violent crime in cities with blue mayors is much higher. These kids show in 2019 that the overall rate of violent crime was 80% higher in the cities with blue mayors. Murder was 150% higher and robbery was 120% higher. This is for the 100 most populated cities:

[URL]https://www.jsr.org/index.php/path/article/download/1371/1108/7732[/URL]

So yes, there's a problem.

Now is it because Republican mayors are better at creating conditions that discourage crime and violence? Maybe so. I think that's part of the answer.

Another possibility, you'd think that cities with blue mayors have more Democrats than Republicans and vice versa. Maybe Democrats are just more prone to commit violent crimes:

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2784898]
[b]Seven Times more Democrat than Republican Felons[/b]

Here's something that might be of interest to some of the readership. By matching voter registration records to prison discharge discharge records in New York, researchers determined the ex-felons who were registered were overwhelmingly Democrats.

"Those ex-felons who are registered overwhelmingly register as Democrats. Of those discharge records that match to at least one voter file record, 61.5 percent match only to Democratic voter records. In contrast, 25.5 percent match only to voter records with no affiliation or an affiliation with a minor party, while 9 percent match only to Republican voter records. The remaining 4 percent of matched discharged records are cases where the discharge record matches with multiple voter file records that have inconsistent party identification."

https://scholar.harvard.edu/files/morse/files/notificationlaws.pdf[/QUOTE]Now most Democrats are good people. Misguided, but good. But there are going to be some bad apples in any large segment of the population, and perhaps there are just more among Democrats.

[QUOTE=Elvis2008;2785327]Good post, Chris. I had to take a course on suicides, and one of the things I learned is that like 90% of people do not engage in multiple suicide attempts. The other was that suicide by firearm is way more successful than other means.

So another issue I saw with the anti-gun nuts is they would say there were so many deaths but firearm but not distinguish between homicide and suicide. In fact, by a factor of three, the most likely person to shoot you is you. If someone kills themselves with a gun, it does not create the buzz and fear as killing others.

It would seem to me if you really want to reduce gun deaths, you would get a lot less resistance training gun owners about how to identify those at risk for suicide versus just banning guns.

But this is just another example of the anti-gun lobby really not caring that much about public safety.[/QUOTE]Very good post, showing yet again that there are many things the democrats and fake news media / hollyweird could do if they genuinely wanted to reduce firearm deaths. But they don't.

[QUOTE=Tiny12;2785492]Good question Tooms, except that you shouldn't characterize Democrats as lazy. Yes, rates of violent crime in cities with blue mayors is much higher. These kids show in 2019 that the overall rate of violent crime was 80% higher in the cities with blue mayors. Murder was 150% higher and robbery was 120% higher. This is for the 100 most populated cities:

[URL]https://www.jsr.org/index.php/path/article/download/1371/1108/7732[/URL]

So yes, there's a problem.

Now is it because Republican mayors are better at creating conditions that discourage crime and violence? Maybe so. I think that's part of the answer.

Another possibility, you'd think that cities with blue mayors have more Democrats than Republicans and vice versa. Maybe Democrats are just more prone to commit violent crimes:

Now most Democrats are good people. Misguided, but good. But there are going to be some bad apples in any large segment of the population, and perhaps there are just more among Democrats.[/QUOTE]This post might not get past the mod, but the harsh reality is that it is a race issue. Black people. Specifically black males aged 15 to 35 - commit an astronomically high amount of violent crime compared to other groups.

I'm not going to get into the reasons for it, which could range from testosterone levels, low IQ, low impulse control, lack of fathers (which is linked to the previous three) but the factual reality is what matters. The dem douches will try to deny this factual reality, as they often do, but that will not change it.

As you say, most black people are perfectly law-abiding, good people. But you only need a minority of violent criminals to make an area unlivable.

Unfortunately, the significantly higher proportion of violent crime in black communities has this effect. And so you get urban ghettos like South Chicago, Baltimore, Gary, and many more places that are euphemistically called "democrat-run urban areas", but we all know what that means.

Great for an HBO drama; not so great to actually have to live there.

The only way to stop this is to have a hardline republican mayor like Giuliani in NYC, who completely backs the police to get tough with criminals.

This will inevitably result in isolated incidents of police abuse. However for every such incident, hundreds of violent crimes are prevented.

The problem we have now is that the fake media, hollyweird, leftist judiciary and Washington deep state all want more violent crime, so they focus hysterical, neverending meltdowns on the isolated cases of police abuse, while ignoring the overall positive effect that tough policing has by making the wider community safe from crime.

(We saw that the left support violent crime when Kamala Harris openly cheered on the leftist / BLM riots which burned and looted cities and caused billions of dollars of damage in 2020. Harris is particularly stupid so she publicly acclaimed the violent rioters; most of the other leading dems and deep staters are smart enough to acquiesce silently).