LaxPower Back-Up Stick

WaffleTwineFaceoff wrote: ↑Thu Nov 16, 2023 8:44 am

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Wed Nov 15, 2023 5:41 pm

WaffleTwineFaceoff wrote: ↑Tue Nov 14, 2023 6:55 pm Apologies. Utilized this link and tapped "White". 52.3%

https://www.theviolenceproject.org/mass ... -database/

In 2023 the 8 incidents to date in 2023 have 3 white, 2 hispanic, 2 asian, and 1 black perpetrators. One female.

And I don't recall implying the horrific death totals hadn't grown in recent years. That trend is clear and I didn't suggest otherwise. Thank you for the corrections and nitpicks as evidence of my post's much broader insidious Un true ness.

The whole "look at the use of semi-auto rifles spiking more recently" thing ties into the influence and inspiration of copycat contagion researchers have identified as a reason AR-15's are being selected by these sick individuals. Tactically speaking, a rifle is generally not a good choice for mass public shooters. Hard to conceal. Hard to wield in tighter places. Heavier magazines. The Va Tech murderer, the 3rd most lethal mass public murderer ever, used a 9mm and a 22 calibre pistol to horrific and devastating effect. Note: the US military generally feel 9mm leave then "undergunned" as a sidearm.

You can certainly pick through my post and come back at me granularly for rounding errors or neglecting to point out something important to you explicitly, as evidence of false, bad, un true, etc. Is that your takeaway?

Here's an imaginary reply to my post from an imaginary poster interested in productive dialogue and discourse on criminal violence with firearms in America: "Thank you for taking the time to express your opinions. I would like clarification on a few things you cited, as my findings are different. I disagree with (some, much, most, all) of what you shared, but it appears you do care and have spent considerable time researching and endeavoring to understand the complicated issues at hand. I look forward to exchanging ideas".

“He who knows only his own side of a case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them. But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for offering either opinion. Nor is it enough that he should hear the opinions of adversaries from his own teachers, presented as they state them, and accompanied by what they offer as refutations. He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them. He must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.”
John Stuart Mill (1806-1873) , written in 1859


And, sorry, despite being essentially called a liar (which I promise not to point back at you a toxic masculinity micro aggression), I am indeed a center-left Democrat in a Blue State. And a Blue state resident, including my college years, for 100% of my existence on this planet.

Be well.

I appreciate the attempts to be polite.
Good style of communication, but it sure feels like you wrote or are parroting propaganda.

This data set says 79% since '82 are white. Do you read that the same as I do?

And do you see anything in this graphic: Prevalence of Assault Weapons in 193 US Mass Public Shootings, 1966–present
Assault Weapons in Red

https://www.theviolenceproject.org/key-findings/

Do you see the difference between the many red bars in the past decade and a half versus earlier? And, very importantly, the average number of deaths associated with those red bars relative to the black ones?

My issue with your "research" is that I find you to be grossly misrepresenting what the data shows. That ain't "well researched".

You say there is a "contagion" of people choosing assault weapons to commit mass murders despite these weapons somehow not being as useful for mass murder as other weapons...with the logic that more events were done with handguns than with assault weapons...but nearly all of the most deadly events were with assault weapons. I see no basis at all for your claim that mass murderers are choosing these weapons because they look scary but aren't the most lethal weapons. None. Indeed, I see the evidence that these are the weapons that kill the most people the fastest, as they were designed to do.

Is there a "contagion" of recognition of their lethality? You betcha.

and yeah, I'm quite skeptical about your claim to be a center-left Dem, whatever state. I've looked at your other posts and see no evidence of such political views in them. You want to call my skepticism "a toxic masculinity micro aggression "? mmm, that sure smacks of the far right's use of reverse projection and the appropriation of terminology of the far left.

I'm a lifelong Republican (though not MAGA), hunter and gun owner since I was 12, own several guns, but I see no valid hunting purpose for these rapid fire, high capacity weapons. Nor any valid self defense purpose, unless the premise is that everyone has these weapons so the only way to protect oneself is to have one or several myself?

As I've written previously on this topic, I'm fine with the notion of these weapons being used for sport at licensed, well regulated gun ranges and kept there securely. But their easy accessibility to the general population makes no sense to me.

Are there all sorts of other aspects to the issues of gun violence? Whether mass murder, crime, familial, suicide or whatever? You betcha, and I'm happy to engage in good faith in such discussions.

But when I read something claiming to be "well researched" only to find it's quite bogus, then I'm not seeing 'good faith'.

1) Not going to address again my Blue State registered Democrat ness again. My original post and my reply to your initial skepticism stand. Your right to be skeptical does, too. God bless America.

My skepticism is about where your political leanings are, not what state you're in nor your prior party registration. My dad, for instance, was a registered Dem in a blue state and I don't think voted Dem for President in his lifetime. You said "center-left". I see no evidence from what you wrote, how you wrote, nor from any other posts that "center-left" is accurate. If you'd like to tell us who you've voted for for President in the past 40 years of elections (if you're as old as I am), that might be interesting additional info on your perspectives. For instance, I've voted only once for the Dem in all those election cycles (2020), though twice independent as a protest vote (1980 and 2016). Still a registered R, stubbornly, but expect to vote D in 2024 given MAGA choice.

2) I was kidding on the toxic masculinity micro aggression comment. Should have included a wink. I am not a snowflake, and I weep for our younger generation's focus on tempest's in teapots while Rome burns. And if you think the far left doesn't reverse project and appropriate, I have a only driven on Sunday's by a little old lady shiny used car to sell you.

Of course there is "projection" and "appropriation" of various sorts from the left, but what you wrote is straight out of the right-wing projection handbook and your statement about "I weep for our younger generation's focus on tempest's in teapots" betrays again exactly where your political ideological leanings are. I understood that you were "kidding", indeed I 'got it' entirely as a typical right-wing sneer at youthful exaggeration on the left.

3) I will respect your beliefs in rounding up 44 million AR-15's and marching them into "AR-15 Internment Camps" at gun ranges. And I will continue with my belief in that such an idea doesn't work logistically, realistically, constitutionally, socially, or philosophically.

There you go again with gross exaggeration and hyperbole. We had an assault weapon ban that worked. I'm layering a voluntary opportunity managed by the private sector, regulated by the public sector, that addresses those people who truly wish to use these weapons for "sport".

4) "You say there is a contagion..."

Well, no, I refer to its existence and factor in Mass Public Shootings as put forth by an expert who has forgotten more about Mass Public Shootings since her cup of coffee this morning - than you and I will likely ever know.

And I agree that there is a "contagion". Not disputing that mass shooters are 'inspired' by other shooters to do these acts. Indeed, they share their manifestos, their advice on protective gear and weaponry, etc and high capacity, rapid fire assault weapons are typically featured...and the killings that occur with them result in many more people shot per event than with other weapons...typcally. My dispute is on the notion that this contagion exists despite these weapons somehow being "less lethal", less useful to accomplish the desired task...according to you. That's a ridiculous claim.

5) "My issue with your "research" is that I find you to be grossly misrepresenting what the data shows. That ain't "well researched".

If you want a quick peek into my "research" process, I tend to be skeptical when I see highly polarized and toxic discourse. You name the societal issues, and when I see such behavior, I get...curious. And interested in utilizing the liberal part of my university education to see where MY research into THE research available on that headline grabbing and talking head inciting topic leads me. I then endeavor to weigh my findings in order to make what I feel, in my own head, is an informed choice of WHICH research I feel confident and comfortable with.

You feel like pooh poohing Contagion, so be it. I took the path above into the research regarding Contagion when I first heard it posited, and made my informed choice. I shared contagion in my post in the context of an acknowledged expert pointing it out as a notable factor in AR-15 being chosen because of "contagion inspiration". You want to accuse someone of gross misrepresentation, please reach out to Katherine Schweit.

Similar "research process approach" were how I came up with "my truth" regarding Lethality of AR-15s (thus far ignored) which I shared in my original post.

See above. I'm not disputing "contagion", just the rationale you posit which on its face is specious.

And I've also done that same process when I've read things like "guns are the number on killer of children in America" (don't even get me started on THAT chestnut!) and a whole bunch of other things that have piqued my curiosity. Sorry if my post count on a site I barely visit isn't filled with political pathologies. You don't see any because I've barely and just started to engage. And what does my post history have to do with, anything?

Merely that you have shown no other interest politically in any other topic on here, thus no way to affirm your claim of "center-left" views. You trickled a few small comments on the lax bds pretty randomly, then started weighing in hard on guns...I find that suspicious, but it will be interesting to hear more from you on various topics if you do choose to engage...just don't expect the forum to be a place where opinions, logic, and facts aren't challenged by other posters.


I'll endeavor to close my mind, not be curious, and stop parroting bogus ness. I am duly chastened as I realize now it upsets the balance of entrenched online forum echo chambers where the same 15 posters - each with 50,000 posts - lob grandiose grenades at each other all day, every day. Just kidding . Be well.

WaffleTwineFaceoff wrote: ↑Thu Nov 16, 2023 8:04 am

DMac wrote: ↑Wed Nov 15, 2023 6:38 pm

WaffleTwineFaceoff wrote: ↑Wed Nov 15, 2023 12:20 pm I agree with such an Apollo type program. Not due to the 2A but because of the mental health crisis in this country. Let’s make sure our veterans are included, and we could lump in resources to better address the public education dumpster fire while we’re at it. Wouldn’t take much more than asking the military industrial complex to give up a few F-22 Raptors and stealth bombers from the budget each year.

Health. Education. Mental wellness. Bring it on. I didn’t realize it was up to me, though.

Mental health = many Xanax prescriptions, the anxiety medicine, helps with panic disorders too.
https://drugabuse.com/benzodiazepines/x ... tatistics/
Can remain a member of the armed militia if prescribed Xanax, keep your guns.
Medical marijuana card, can only be an unarmed member of the militia, no guns
for you.

While many states grant patients access to medical marijuana, the clash between state and federal laws casts a shadow of uncertainty over the Second Amendment rights of those who choose this alternative form of treatment.

https://www.thecannabiscommunity.org/ca ... dical-card
They've got it backwards, Xanax is far more apt to make one nuts than any edible, and I'd find it hard to believe that a nugget of Cocoa Nuggz wouldn't accomplish the intended result of the Xanax prescription without the "side effects".

So, you don't have to do it all, there's my contribution, one step in the twelve million and sixteen needed to be taken in order to ensure safety with guns for all. Get pot off Sched1 and ban Xanax (and the like), switch the 'scrips.

Am a recent edibles experimenter, proceed with caution, better too little than too much. Find the right level and I'm sayin' aint no way you're feeling overwhelmed with anxiety. I think we're way overmedicated with dangerous drugs and I do believe that plays a role in the shootings we get. Eat Nuggz, ban Xanax!!

On can only hope a bipartisan call for research into the contributing factor of "Assault Pharma" drugs in the minds of Mass Public Shooters (and broader criminal violence and self-harm in America). Conduct a mass public shooting? Lose your HIPPA protections, dead or alive. Autopsies & medical records become public record and available to researchers. Similar to the Military Industrial Complex, the Pharmaceutical Industrial Complex is so lucrative and entrenched that there seems to be little chance for meaningful reforms to be enacted by our elected leaders.

America is arguably the worldwide capital of Big Pharma, with six of the top ten pharmaceutical companies in 2017 headquartered in the U.S. Furthermore, America has been the breeding grounds for the business success of Big Pharma, as it’s one of the only two countries in the world that allow for direct-to-consumer pharmaceutical drug advertising, i.e. the familiar commercials promising the effectiveness of drugs like Zoloft or Prozac that pop up on TV after a long day. These 45 second to 1 minute commercials aren’t just regular passing advertisements for everyone — these commercials can lead to conversations between doctors and patients about these pills and are more likely to lead to a prescription of them. But Big Pharma’s just one part of the equation, as the disconcertingly high rates of antidepressants also reflect another weakness in our healthcare system: the lack of transparency in the relationship between doctors and the pharmaceutical industry.

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Thu Nov 16, 2023 9:43 am

WaffleTwineFaceoff wrote: ↑Thu Nov 16, 2023 8:44 am

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Wed Nov 15, 2023 5:41 pm

WaffleTwineFaceoff wrote: ↑Tue Nov 14, 2023 6:55 pm Apologies. Utilized this link and tapped "White". 52.3%

https://www.theviolenceproject.org/mass ... -database/

In 2023 the 8 incidents to date in 2023 have 3 white, 2 hispanic, 2 asian, and 1 black perpetrators. One female.

And I don't recall implying the horrific death totals hadn't grown in recent years. That trend is clear and I didn't suggest otherwise. Thank you for the corrections and nitpicks as evidence of my post's much broader insidious Un true ness.

The whole "look at the use of semi-auto rifles spiking more recently" thing ties into the influence and inspiration of copycat contagion researchers have identified as a reason AR-15's are being selected by these sick individuals. Tactically speaking, a rifle is generally not a good choice for mass public shooters. Hard to conceal. Hard to wield in tighter places. Heavier magazines. The Va Tech murderer, the 3rd most lethal mass public murderer ever, used a 9mm and a 22 calibre pistol to horrific and devastating effect. Note: the US military generally feel 9mm leave then "undergunned" as a sidearm.

You can certainly pick through my post and come back at me granularly for rounding errors or neglecting to point out something important to you explicitly, as evidence of false, bad, un true, etc. Is that your takeaway?

Here's an imaginary reply to my post from an imaginary poster interested in productive dialogue and discourse on criminal violence with firearms in America: "Thank you for taking the time to express your opinions. I would like clarification on a few things you cited, as my findings are different. I disagree with (some, much, most, all) of what you shared, but it appears you do care and have spent considerable time researching and endeavoring to understand the complicated issues at hand. I look forward to exchanging ideas".

“He who knows only his own side of a case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them. But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for offering either opinion. Nor is it enough that he should hear the opinions of adversaries from his own teachers, presented as they state them, and accompanied by what they offer as refutations. He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them. He must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.”
John Stuart Mill (1806-1873) , written in 1859


And, sorry, despite being essentially called a liar (which I promise not to point back at you a toxic masculinity micro aggression), I am indeed a center-left Democrat in a Blue State. And a Blue state resident, including my college years, for 100% of my existence on this planet.

Be well.

I appreciate the attempts to be polite.
Good style of communication, but it sure feels like you wrote or are parroting propaganda.

This data set says 79% since '82 are white. Do you read that the same as I do?

And do you see anything in this graphic: Prevalence of Assault Weapons in 193 US Mass Public Shootings, 1966–present
Assault Weapons in Red

https://www.theviolenceproject.org/key-findings/

Do you see the difference between the many red bars in the past decade and a half versus earlier? And, very importantly, the average number of deaths associated with those red bars relative to the black ones?

My issue with your "research" is that I find you to be grossly misrepresenting what the data shows. That ain't "well researched".

You say there is a "contagion" of people choosing assault weapons to commit mass murders despite these weapons somehow not being as useful for mass murder as other weapons...with the logic that more events were done with handguns than with assault weapons...but nearly all of the most deadly events were with assault weapons. I see no basis at all for your claim that mass murderers are choosing these weapons because they look scary but aren't the most lethal weapons. None. Indeed, I see the evidence that these are the weapons that kill the most people the fastest, as they were designed to do.

Is there a "contagion" of recognition of their lethality? You betcha.

and yeah, I'm quite skeptical about your claim to be a center-left Dem, whatever state. I've looked at your other posts and see no evidence of such political views in them. You want to call my skepticism "a toxic masculinity micro aggression "? mmm, that sure smacks of the far right's use of reverse projection and the appropriation of terminology of the far left.

I'm a lifelong Republican (though not MAGA), hunter and gun owner since I was 12, own several guns, but I see no valid hunting purpose for these rapid fire, high capacity weapons. Nor any valid self defense purpose, unless the premise is that everyone has these weapons so the only way to protect oneself is to have one or several myself?

As I've written previously on this topic, I'm fine with the notion of these weapons being used for sport at licensed, well regulated gun ranges and kept there securely. But their easy accessibility to the general population makes no sense to me.

Are there all sorts of other aspects to the issues of gun violence? Whether mass murder, crime, familial, suicide or whatever? You betcha, and I'm happy to engage in good faith in such discussions.

But when I read something claiming to be "well researched" only to find it's quite bogus, then I'm not seeing 'good faith'.

1) Not going to address again my Blue State registered Democrat ness again. My original post and my reply to your initial skepticism stand. Your right to be skeptical does, too. God bless America.

My skepticism is about where your political leanings are, not what state you're in nor your prior party registration. My dad, for instance, was a registered Dem in a blue state and I don't think voted Dem for President in his lifetime. You said "center-left". I see no evidence from what you wrote, how you wrote, nor from any other posts that "center-left" is accurate. If you'd like to tell us who you've voted for for President in the past 40 years of elections (if you're as old as I am), that might be interesting additional info on your perspectives. For instance, I've voted only once for the Dem in all those election cycles (2020), though twice independent as a protest vote (1980 and 2016). Still a registered R, stubbornly, but expect to vote D in 2024 given MAGA choice.

2) I was kidding on the toxic masculinity micro aggression comment. Should have included a wink. I am not a snowflake, and I weep for our younger generation's focus on tempest's in teapots while Rome burns. And if you think the far left doesn't reverse project and appropriate, I have a only driven on Sunday's by a little old lady shiny used car to sell you.

Of course there is "projection" and "appropriation" of various sorts from the left, but what you wrote is straight out of the right-wing projection handbook and your statement about "I weep for our younger generation's focus on tempest's in teapots" betrays again exactly where your political ideological leanings are. I understood that you were "kidding", indeed I 'got it' entirely as a typical right-wing sneer at youthful exaggeration on the left.

3) I will respect your beliefs in rounding up 44 million AR-15's and marching them into "AR-15 Internment Camps" at gun ranges. And I will continue with my belief in that such an idea doesn't work logistically, realistically, constitutionally, socially, or philosophically.

There you go again with gross exaggeration and hyperbole. We had an assault weapon ban that worked. I'm layering a voluntary opportunity managed by the private sector, regulated by the public sector, that addresses those people who truly wish to use these weapons for "sport".

4) "You say there is a contagion..."

Well, no, I refer to its existence and factor in Mass Public Shootings as put forth by an expert who has forgotten more about Mass Public Shootings since her cup of coffee this morning - than you and I will likely ever know.

And I agree that there is a "contagion". Not disputing that mass shooters are 'inspired' by other shooters to do these acts. Indeed, they share their manifestos, their advice on protective gear and weaponry, etc and high capacity, rapid fire assault weapons are typically featured...and the killings that occur with them result in many more people shot per event than with other weapons...typcally. My dispute is on the notion that this contagion exists despite these weapons somehow being "less lethal", less useful to accomplish the desired task...according to you. That's a ridiculous claim.

5) "My issue with your "research" is that I find you to be grossly misrepresenting what the data shows. That ain't "well researched".

If you want a quick peek into my "research" process, I tend to be skeptical when I see highly polarized and toxic discourse. You name the societal issues, and when I see such behavior, I get...curious. And interested in utilizing the liberal part of my university education to see where MY research into THE research available on that headline grabbing and talking head inciting topic leads me. I then endeavor to weigh my findings in order to make what I feel, in my own head, is an informed choice of WHICH research I feel confident and comfortable with.

You feel like pooh poohing Contagion, so be it. I took the path above into the research regarding Contagion when I first heard it posited, and made my informed choice. I shared contagion in my post in the context of an acknowledged expert pointing it out as a notable factor in AR-15 being chosen because of "contagion inspiration". You want to accuse someone of gross misrepresentation, please reach out to Katherine Schweit.

Similar "research process approach" were how I came up with "my truth" regarding Lethality of AR-15s (thus far ignored) which I shared in my original post.

See above. I'm not disputing "contagion", just the rationale you posit which on its face is specious.

And I've also done that same process when I've read things like "guns are the number on killer of children in America" (don't even get me started on THAT chestnut!) and a whole bunch of other things that have piqued my curiosity. Sorry if my post count on a site I barely visit isn't filled with political pathologies. You don't see any because I've barely and just started to engage. And what does my post history have to do with, anything?

Merely that you have shown no other interest politically in any other topic on here, thus no way to affirm your claim of "center-left" views. You trickled a few small comments on the lax bds pretty randomly, then started weighing in hard on guns...I find that suspicious, but it will be interesting to hear more from you on various topics if you do choose to engage...just don't expect the forum to be a place where opinions, logic, and facts aren't challenged by other posters.


I'll endeavor to close my mind, not be curious, and stop parroting bogus ness. I am duly chastened as I realize now it upsets the balance of entrenched online forum echo chambers where the same 15 posters - each with 50,000 posts - lob grandiose grenades at each other all day, every day. Just kidding . Be well.

Kismet wrote: ↑Thu Nov 16, 2023 12:41 pm WaPo lowers the boom mass shootings/gun violence and. specifically assault weapons and the utter damage they cause - hard to watch this

https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/i ... gn=wp_main

cradleandshoot wrote: ↑Thu Nov 16, 2023 1:13 pm

Kismet wrote: ↑Thu Nov 16, 2023 12:41 pm WaPo lowers the boom mass shootings/gun violence and. specifically assault weapons and the utter damage they cause - hard to watch this

https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/i ... gn=wp_main

Too bad nobody gives a chit about the nightly holocaust in our urban cities. They don't get the glamour that some shootings get. Everytime I mention the carnage caused by illegal weapons in the hands of convicted criminals. Your bung holes pucker up like a snare drum. You folks will stop at nothing to prevent law abiding Americans from owning an AR 15. You will also stop at nothing to not do a god damn thing to deal with the REAL problem of illegal weapons in the hands of very dangerous people. Collateral damage in urban America is no big deal to you pasty faced lily white liberals.

WaffleTwineFaceoff wrote: ↑Thu Nov 16, 2023 11:00 am

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Thu Nov 16, 2023 9:43 am

WaffleTwineFaceoff wrote: ↑Thu Nov 16, 2023 8:44 am

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Wed Nov 15, 2023 5:41 pm

WaffleTwineFaceoff wrote: ↑Tue Nov 14, 2023 6:55 pm Apologies. Utilized this link and tapped "White". 52.3%

https://www.theviolenceproject.org/mass ... -database/

In 2023 the 8 incidents to date in 2023 have 3 white, 2 hispanic, 2 asian, and 1 black perpetrators. One female.

And I don't recall implying the horrific death totals hadn't grown in recent years. That trend is clear and I didn't suggest otherwise. Thank you for the corrections and nitpicks as evidence of my post's much broader insidious Un true ness.

The whole "look at the use of semi-auto rifles spiking more recently" thing ties into the influence and inspiration of copycat contagion researchers have identified as a reason AR-15's are being selected by these sick individuals. Tactically speaking, a rifle is generally not a good choice for mass public shooters. Hard to conceal. Hard to wield in tighter places. Heavier magazines. The Va Tech murderer, the 3rd most lethal mass public murderer ever, used a 9mm and a 22 calibre pistol to horrific and devastating effect. Note: the US military generally feel 9mm leave then "undergunned" as a sidearm.

You can certainly pick through my post and come back at me granularly for rounding errors or neglecting to point out something important to you explicitly, as evidence of false, bad, un true, etc. Is that your takeaway?

Here's an imaginary reply to my post from an imaginary poster interested in productive dialogue and discourse on criminal violence with firearms in America: "Thank you for taking the time to express your opinions. I would like clarification on a few things you cited, as my findings are different. I disagree with (some, much, most, all) of what you shared, but it appears you do care and have spent considerable time researching and endeavoring to understand the complicated issues at hand. I look forward to exchanging ideas".

“He who knows only his own side of a case knows little of that. His reasons may be good, and no one may have been able to refute them. But if he is equally unable to refute the reasons on the opposite side, if he does not so much as know what they are, he has no ground for offering either opinion. Nor is it enough that he should hear the opinions of adversaries from his own teachers, presented as they state them, and accompanied by what they offer as refutations. He must be able to hear them from persons who actually believe them. He must know them in their most plausible and persuasive form.”
John Stuart Mill (1806-1873) , written in 1859


And, sorry, despite being essentially called a liar (which I promise not to point back at you a toxic masculinity micro aggression), I am indeed a center-left Democrat in a Blue State. And a Blue state resident, including my college years, for 100% of my existence on this planet.

Be well.

I appreciate the attempts to be polite.
Good style of communication, but it sure feels like you wrote or are parroting propaganda.

This data set says 79% since '82 are white. Do you read that the same as I do?

And do you see anything in this graphic: Prevalence of Assault Weapons in 193 US Mass Public Shootings, 1966–present
Assault Weapons in Red

https://www.theviolenceproject.org/key-findings/

Do you see the difference between the many red bars in the past decade and a half versus earlier? And, very importantly, the average number of deaths associated with those red bars relative to the black ones?

My issue with your "research" is that I find you to be grossly misrepresenting what the data shows. That ain't "well researched".

You say there is a "contagion" of people choosing assault weapons to commit mass murders despite these weapons somehow not being as useful for mass murder as other weapons...with the logic that more events were done with handguns than with assault weapons...but nearly all of the most deadly events were with assault weapons. I see no basis at all for your claim that mass murderers are choosing these weapons because they look scary but aren't the most lethal weapons. None. Indeed, I see the evidence that these are the weapons that kill the most people the fastest, as they were designed to do.

Is there a "contagion" of recognition of their lethality? You betcha.

and yeah, I'm quite skeptical about your claim to be a center-left Dem, whatever state. I've looked at your other posts and see no evidence of such political views in them. You want to call my skepticism "a toxic masculinity micro aggression "? mmm, that sure smacks of the far right's use of reverse projection and the appropriation of terminology of the far left.

I'm a lifelong Republican (though not MAGA), hunter and gun owner since I was 12, own several guns, but I see no valid hunting purpose for these rapid fire, high capacity weapons. Nor any valid self defense purpose, unless the premise is that everyone has these weapons so the only way to protect oneself is to have one or several myself?

As I've written previously on this topic, I'm fine with the notion of these weapons being used for sport at licensed, well regulated gun ranges and kept there securely. But their easy accessibility to the general population makes no sense to me.

Are there all sorts of other aspects to the issues of gun violence? Whether mass murder, crime, familial, suicide or whatever? You betcha, and I'm happy to engage in good faith in such discussions.

But when I read something claiming to be "well researched" only to find it's quite bogus, then I'm not seeing 'good faith'.

1) Not going to address again my Blue State registered Democrat ness again. My original post and my reply to your initial skepticism stand. Your right to be skeptical does, too. God bless America.

My skepticism is about where your political leanings are, not what state you're in nor your prior party registration. My dad, for instance, was a registered Dem in a blue state and I don't think voted Dem for President in his lifetime. You said "center-left". I see no evidence from what you wrote, how you wrote, nor from any other posts that "center-left" is accurate. If you'd like to tell us who you've voted for for President in the past 40 years of elections (if you're as old as I am), that might be interesting additional info on your perspectives. For instance, I've voted only once for the Dem in all those election cycles (2020), though twice independent as a protest vote (1980 and 2016). Still a registered R, stubbornly, but expect to vote D in 2024 given MAGA choice.

2) I was kidding on the toxic masculinity micro aggression comment. Should have included a wink. I am not a snowflake, and I weep for our younger generation's focus on tempest's in teapots while Rome burns. And if you think the far left doesn't reverse project and appropriate, I have a only driven on Sunday's by a little old lady shiny used car to sell you.

Of course there is "projection" and "appropriation" of various sorts from the left, but what you wrote is straight out of the right-wing projection handbook and your statement about "I weep for our younger generation's focus on tempest's in teapots" betrays again exactly where your political ideological leanings are. I understood that you were "kidding", indeed I 'got it' entirely as a typical right-wing sneer at youthful exaggeration on the left.

3) I will respect your beliefs in rounding up 44 million AR-15's and marching them into "AR-15 Internment Camps" at gun ranges. And I will continue with my belief in that such an idea doesn't work logistically, realistically, constitutionally, socially, or philosophically.

There you go again with gross exaggeration and hyperbole. We had an assault weapon ban that worked. I'm layering a voluntary opportunity managed by the private sector, regulated by the public sector, that addresses those people who truly wish to use these weapons for "sport".

4) "You say there is a contagion..."

Well, no, I refer to its existence and factor in Mass Public Shootings as put forth by an expert who has forgotten more about Mass Public Shootings since her cup of coffee this morning - than you and I will likely ever know.

And I agree that there is a "contagion". Not disputing that mass shooters are 'inspired' by other shooters to do these acts. Indeed, they share their manifestos, their advice on protective gear and weaponry, etc and high capacity, rapid fire assault weapons are typically featured...and the killings that occur with them result in many more people shot per event than with other weapons...typcally. My dispute is on the notion that this contagion exists despite these weapons somehow being "less lethal", less useful to accomplish the desired task...according to you. That's a ridiculous claim.

5) "My issue with your "research" is that I find you to be grossly misrepresenting what the data shows. That ain't "well researched".

If you want a quick peek into my "research" process, I tend to be skeptical when I see highly polarized and toxic discourse. You name the societal issues, and when I see such behavior, I get...curious. And interested in utilizing the liberal part of my university education to see where MY research into THE research available on that headline grabbing and talking head inciting topic leads me. I then endeavor to weigh my findings in order to make what I feel, in my own head, is an informed choice of WHICH research I feel confident and comfortable with.

You feel like pooh poohing Contagion, so be it. I took the path above into the research regarding Contagion when I first heard it posited, and made my informed choice. I shared contagion in my post in the context of an acknowledged expert pointing it out as a notable factor in AR-15 being chosen because of "contagion inspiration". You want to accuse someone of gross misrepresentation, please reach out to Katherine Schweit.

Similar "research process approach" were how I came up with "my truth" regarding Lethality of AR-15s (thus far ignored) which I shared in my original post.

See above. I'm not disputing "contagion", just the rationale you posit which on its face is specious.

And I've also done that same process when I've read things like "guns are the number on killer of children in America" (don't even get me started on THAT chestnut!) and a whole bunch of other things that have piqued my curiosity. Sorry if my post count on a site I barely visit isn't filled with political pathologies. You don't see any because I've barely and just started to engage. And what does my post history have to do with, anything?

Merely that you have shown no other interest politically in any other topic on here, thus no way to affirm your claim of "center-left" views. You trickled a few small comments on the lax bds pretty randomly, then started weighing in hard on guns...I find that suspicious, but it will be interesting to hear more from you on various topics if you do choose to engage...just don't expect the forum to be a place where opinions, logic, and facts aren't challenged by other posters.


I'll endeavor to close my mind, not be curious, and stop parroting bogus ness. I am duly chastened as I realize now it upsets the balance of entrenched online forum echo chambers where the same 15 posters - each with 50,000 posts - lob grandiose grenades at each other all day, every day. Just kidding . Be well.

Okay, I feel like I'm being stalked.

Never voted for either Bush. Never voted for Trump. Lament our choices basically being bad or Really bad. Wish there was a "None of the Above" box.

In a post yesterday above you can surmise my leanings on Education, health care, and mental health.

I'm not some deep red MAGA plant wrapping myself in a blue minidress. I think politically in a way that was much more prevalent a long time ago:

https://www.vox.com/2015/4/23/8485443/p ... ualization

Therefore on some issues I would indeed "vote red" despite being "registered and leaning quite blue".

Here's another political leanings clue, which I hope might help ease your mind. You want my thoughts on the current handling of the border crisis? How about a speech about lax border security that utilizes language that would have today's academics and their students losing their collective minds. "Illegal aliens". "Criminal aliens" They will think it was given by that bad orange man - who is a vile human - but it was actually given to a bipartisan standing ovation in his 1995 State of the Union Address by William Jefferson Clinton:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1IrDrBs13oA

Look, I am between large projects at work. Had some time. Have perused here and there on fanlax since I signed up. The politics tab on this site caught my eye. And the gun tab in particular as it just happens to be a topic of keen personal interest. And it reads like a microcosm of the broader debates and dialogue dysfunctions - flared up all across the political, social, economic, and philosophical landscape of this nation.

Another topic of interest to me is the classic definition of liberal - which in my opinion has been coopted by a statist radical left extremism. That makes me a paranoid right wing extremist zealot? No, that makes me a left of center old school liberal who is having trouble understanding some of the things I see in the political arena, news articles, social media posts, videos, and current scholarship such as secondary school and university curriculums and academic publishings. Older school liberals cherished independent thought, creation of opportunity, work ethic, and self determination as foundation stones. What I'm seeing today when I point my telescope to the galaxy in the far, far away Left scares me. Just as pointing it to the far, far Right does. Both are equally baffling.

Finally, you mention with great conviction the AWB worked. And malign the opinion I came to after my own "follow the research" assessment process I utilize as an interested, curious and concerned citizen. I shared this in the way I did on my original post as a pointed counterbalance to the prevalence of what I feel are very misleading representations of the "ifs and how much" the AWB actually "did or didn't" work. Apologies for my skepticism when, in my opinion, a stunning success is being broadly claimed, widely recirculated, and, pardon the term, "weaponized" (EveryBloomTownBerg, White House, et al), where the evidence and statistical data suggest any such rah rah claims should be taken with a healthy dose of skepticism. Did you happen to look up the studies and research papers I referenced in that part of my post? It's your prerogative not to do so. And it's my prerogative to draw the conclusions I did after doing so.

Be well.

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Thu Nov 16, 2023 2:14 pm
On Presidential voting, you mention a couple of Presidents you haven't voted for, but not who you did vote for...how long have you been voting and do you vote in each election cycle? You voted for Carter, Mondale, Dukakis, Clinton, Gore, Kerry, Obama twice, Hillary? Biden?

Just want to understand where you head was at in different points in time. My own views certainly have evolved over the years with more experience and observation, no judgments here about such.

WaffleTwineFaceoff wrote: ↑Thu Nov 16, 2023 3:33 pm I find shooting to be relaxing, challenging, and satisfying, and it invites an ongoing "journey toward mastery" mindset. There are obviously many genre's of shooting one can engage in, each with its own fan base, and unique challenges and rewards. The act of cleaning and maintenance is something I've always found enjoyable, like anyone changing the oil on a 70's muscle car like my dad used to do might feel. I like tinkering, and doing so with a glass of merlot and some jazz. Passing on the requisite knowledge, safety and respect to the next generation is an important part of the custodial responsibilities of any serious firearm owner.

WaffleTwineFaceoff wrote: ↑Thu Nov 16, 2023 3:33 pm

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Thu Nov 16, 2023 2:14 pm
On Presidential voting, you mention a couple of Presidents you haven't voted for, but not who you did vote for...how long have you been voting and do you vote in each election cycle? You voted for Carter, Mondale, Dukakis, Clinton, Gore, Kerry, Obama twice, Hillary? Biden?

Just want to understand where you head was at in different points in time. My own views certainly have evolved over the years with more experience and observation, no judgments here about such.

Busy in the weeds with a client this afternoon.

Too young for Carter. Voted Mondale. Dukakis. Clinton. Gore. Kerry. Obama twice. Reluctantly for Hillary (felt like writing in "The rent's too damn high" guy as Orange man wasn't an option). Biden. Felt like the patron saint of lost causes many years. Regularly vote even for rinky dinky village off year elections.

My ready thoughts on gun stuff is because it's been a keen personal topic for quite a while, and I dislike the way both the overarching as well as the individual and granular issues are being framed, debated, and legislated. I grew up in a household with firearms. Many members of the family tree served in the military, including a beloved niece currently on duty. I realize this may sound counter intuitive to many here, but holding and firing a gun is an act that, for myself, instills a feeling of connection, responsibility, and respect for the spirit and history of this nation.

I find shooting to be relaxing, challenging, and satisfying, and it invites an ongoing "journey toward mastery" mindset. There are obviously many genre's of shooting one can engage in, each with its own fan base, and unique challenges and rewards. The act of cleaning and maintenance is something I've always found enjoyable, like anyone changing the oil on a 70's muscle car like my dad used to do might feel. I like tinkering, and doing so with a glass of merlot and some jazz. Passing on the requisite knowledge, safety and respect to the next generation is an important part of the custodial responsibilities of any serious firearm owner.

a fan wrote: ↑Thu Nov 16, 2023 3:55 pm

WaffleTwineFaceoff wrote: ↑Thu Nov 16, 2023 3:33 pm I find shooting to be relaxing, challenging, and satisfying, and it invites an ongoing "journey toward mastery" mindset. There are obviously many genre's of shooting one can engage in, each with its own fan base, and unique challenges and rewards. The act of cleaning and maintenance is something I've always found enjoyable, like anyone changing the oil on a 70's muscle car like my dad used to do might feel. I like tinkering, and doing so with a glass of merlot and some jazz. Passing on the requisite knowledge, safety and respect to the next generation is an important part of the custodial responsibilities of any serious firearm owner.

There's few things more fun that hitting what you're aiming it if you have an ounce of competitive nature in you. And my dad wouldn't take us hunting if we didn't clean our "tools" when we were done. Cleaning and caring for your tools.....regardless of what they are, is indeed mediative. Completely agree with you.

When I was a VERY young hunter.....12 yo......when anyone dared show up with anything other a bolt action rifle for hunting stuff on the ground? They'd get mocked without mercy. It was a serious gun culture that took training, safety, and skill seriously.

It was viewed as the same thing with a guy with the $1000 skis, and the $1 turns: you shouldn't NEED anything more than a shot, maybe two to bring your prey down.

Given that....why should we be supplying these multi-round rifles to anyone? To what end? We might as well make Bows that fire four arrows at a time, if you ask me.

Those rifles that the "gun-grabbers" want off our streets are basically saying: I have no skill with this gun, and not only am I going to miss, I don't care what else that I"m not aiming at gets hit.

Why isn't THIS part of the conversation for folks who take their shooting with any seriousness?

Just curious what your thoughts are, because it's baffled me.

cradleandshoot wrote: ↑Thu Nov 16, 2023 1:13 pm

Kismet wrote: ↑Thu Nov 16, 2023 12:41 pm WaPo lowers the boom mass shootings/gun violence and. specifically assault weapons and the utter damage they cause - hard to watch this

https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/i ... gn=wp_main

Too bad nobody gives a chit about the nightly holocaust in our urban cities. They don't get the glamour that some shootings get. Everytime I mention the carnage caused by illegal weapons in the hands of convicted criminals. Your bung holes pucker up like a snare drum. You folks will stop at nothing to prevent law abiding Americans from owning an AR 15. You will also stop at nothing to not do a god damn thing to deal with the REAL problem of illegal weapons in the hands of very dangerous people. Collateral damage in urban America is no big deal to you pasty faced lily white liberals.

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Thu Nov 16, 2023 5:55 pm
You want to shoot a gun after a couple of glasses of merlot, not ok with that.

I was raised that drinking and guns don't mix, and BTW, that includes cleaning a weapon, as even in that state it's amazing how often a cartridge is found that darn well shouldn't be there.

NattyBohChamps04 wrote: ↑Thu Nov 16, 2023 7:36 pm The main legal need for semi-auto guns is unfortunately for self-defense. Not much need otherwise.

This is the sticky wicket where what one person's definition of a need is affects another person's rights. I respect your take, but you can be assured about one-third of the nation's adult population will disagree with you, and the common and lawful use protections apply.

The only thing we can maybe do regarding gun regulation that doesn't violate 2A is regulate ammo in a meaningful way. Or figure out how to get 2/3 of the states on board with limiting the 2nd.

a fan wrote: ↑Thu Nov 16, 2023 3:55 pm Given that....why should we be supplying these multi-round rifles to anyone? To what end? We might as well make Bows that fire four arrows at a time, if you ask me.

Those rifles that the "gun-grabbers" want off our streets are basically saying: I have no skill with this gun, and not only am I going to miss, I don't care what else that I"m not aiming at gets hit.

Why isn't THIS part of the conversation for folks who take their shooting with any seriousness?

Just curious what your thoughts are, because it's baffled me.

NattyBohChamps04 wrote: ↑Thu Nov 16, 2023 1:43 pm

cradleandshoot wrote: ↑Thu Nov 16, 2023 1:13 pm

Kismet wrote: ↑Thu Nov 16, 2023 12:41 pm WaPo lowers the boom mass shootings/gun violence and. specifically assault weapons and the utter damage they cause - hard to watch this

https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/i ... gn=wp_main

Too bad nobody gives a chit about the nightly holocaust in our urban cities. They don't get the glamour that some shootings get. Everytime I mention the carnage caused by illegal weapons in the hands of convicted criminals. Your bung holes pucker up like a snare drum. You folks will stop at nothing to prevent law abiding Americans from owning an AR 15. You will also stop at nothing to not do a god damn thing to deal with the REAL problem of illegal weapons in the hands of very dangerous people. Collateral damage in urban America is no big deal to you pasty faced lily white liberals.

You're like a broken record with that, and we've been over it before. Those pasty faced lily white liberals are also trying to fix those problems. Not much of a peep from the pasty faced lily white conservatives though. I do suppose y'all are calling for harsher sentences and more cops. Which doesn't address the cause at all.

a fan wrote: ↑Thu Nov 16, 2023 3:55 pm

WaffleTwineFaceoff wrote: ↑Thu Nov 16, 2023 3:33 pm I find shooting to be relaxing, challenging, and satisfying, and it invites an ongoing "journey toward mastery" mindset. There are obviously many genre's of shooting one can engage in, each with its own fan base, and unique challenges and rewards. The act of cleaning and maintenance is something I've always found enjoyable, like anyone changing the oil on a 70's muscle car like my dad used to do might feel. I like tinkering, and doing so with a glass of merlot and some jazz. Passing on the requisite knowledge, safety and respect to the next generation is an important part of the custodial responsibilities of any serious firearm owner.

There's few things more fun that hitting what you're aiming it if you have an ounce of competitive nature in you. And my dad wouldn't take us hunting if we didn't clean our "tools" when we were done. Cleaning and caring for your tools.....regardless of what they are, is indeed mediative. Completely agree with you.

When I was a VERY young hunter.....12 yo......when anyone dared show up with anything other a bolt action rifle for hunting stuff on the ground? They'd get mocked without mercy. It was a serious gun culture that took training, safety, and skill seriously.

It was viewed as the same thing with a guy with the $1000 skis, and the $1 turns: you shouldn't NEED anything more than a shot, maybe two to bring your prey down.

Given that....why should we be supplying these multi-round rifles to anyone? To what end? We might as well make Bows that fire four arrows at a time, if you ask me.

Those rifles that the "gun-grabbers" want off our streets are basically saying: I have no skill with this gun, and not only am I going to miss, I don't care what else that I"m not aiming at gets hit.

Why isn't THIS part of the conversation for folks who take their shooting with any seriousness?

Just curious what your thoughts are, because it's baffled me.

WaffleTwineFaceoff wrote: ↑Fri Nov 17, 2023 7:50 am

MDlaxfan76 wrote: ↑Thu Nov 16, 2023 5:55 pm
You want to shoot a gun after a couple of glasses of merlot, not ok with that.

I was raised that drinking and guns don't mix, and BTW, that includes cleaning a weapon, as even in that state it's amazing how often a cartridge is found that darn well shouldn't be there.

Oh, gosh. Guns 100% don't mix with alcohol. Didn't mean for my comment to imply that was okay. Without writing a short term paper on how we handle firearms and ammunition in our household, a procedural Exec Summary would look something like this - from unlocking of the separate rooms where firearms and ammo reside, to the individual a safe in the firearm room and individual locked ammo cans in ammo room - a chain of custody and "firearm condition" is never broken. Out in the world, be it range or public or private land, transportation includes separate locked containers, with of course any firearm(s) checked and cleared visually and with tactile checks before placement into said container. When shooting goes live, even if my daughter is standing next to me when I finish, and witnesses me visually and physically clear said firearm from a foot away, when she takes possession she immediately performs the (to some) seemingly ridiculous and redundant - yet 100% inviolable - act of verifying that firearm being clear herself. Procedures reverse when firing is finished. Transport home happens. The at home ammo usage chart is updated. Ammo room locked. The "cleared at firing place firearm" goes to cleaning area - call it a sizable equipment cave where all kinds of sporty stuff happens. That firearm is removed from its unlocked travel case. That firearm has a visual and tactile check and is placed on cleaning bench, which looks like a Formula 1 garage. At that point usually water, sometimes skinny decaf latte's, and once in a while a glass of merlot might be introduced, along with music. When cleaning and maintenance are completed, firearm is of course checked again simply out of good habit reiteration, and now travels back to the safe (after unlocking both the room and safe again, which of course was done when the firearm was first selected for use at the onset of this sequence of events when it left the secure area however many hours earlier). Safe locked, as is the room upon exit.

I will add that when we have been in environments where other shooters, professionals, RSO's and the like are present, we have over many years received many compliments regarding how our family comports themselves vis-a-vis gun handling, safety and firing. Complacency or the "an expert's arrogance" can and have sadly resulted in avoidable incidents.