About Us

[email protected]

On Tue, 27 Mar 2018 12:55:59 -0000 (UTC), "Dove Tail"
wrote:

On 3/26/2018 at 7:35:51 PM, wrote:

I stand by my statement that this is misleading bull**** that is
simply fodder for useful idiots like you.

There was no doubt that you would run and hide in the "bull****"
corner. The Gun Violence organization presents the facts in a
rational, reasonable way. Which of course means that you would object.

LOL!

What is logical about including BB guns, Air soft guns and assault
rifles in the same scare tactic statistic?

Dove Tail

On 3/27/2018 at 9:31:25 AM, wrote:

What is logical about including BB guns, Air soft guns and assault
rifles in the same scare tactic statistic?

Once again Fretwell, I call bull**** on your assertion, from the GVA
methodology statement:

"AirSoft/BB Guns

We collect incidents where Airsoft or BB guns are used AS weapons, not
where they are used in general vandalism or delinquency. Those
collected ARE "NOT" included in our Incident Totals on the Daily
Summary Ledger"

Here is their definition of "Gun Violence", also from the methodology
page:

"Gun Violence describes the results of all incidents of death or injury
or threat with firearms without pejorative judgement within the
definition. Violence is defined without intent or consequence as a
consideration. To that end a shooting of a victim by a subject/suspect
is considered gun violence as is a defensive use or an officer involved
shooting. The act itself, no matter the reason is violent in nature."

So Fretwell, once again, in your haste to discredit a source of
information, you have only succeeded in discrediting yourself.

--
"In matters of conscience, the law of the majority has no place."

"Truth Sounds Like Hate To Those Who Hate The Truth"

trader_4

On Tuesday, March 27, 2018 at 1:39:21 PM UTC-4, Dove Tail wrote:
On 3/27/2018 at 9:31:25 AM, wrote:

What is logical about including BB guns, Air soft guns and assault
rifles in the same scare tactic statistic?

Once again Fretwell, I call bull**** on your assertion, from the GVA
methodology statement:

"AirSoft/BB Guns

We collect incidents where Airsoft or BB guns are used AS weapons, not
where they are used in general vandalism or delinquency. Those
collected ARE "NOT" included in our Incident Totals on the Daily
Summary Ledger"

Here is their definition of "Gun Violence", also from the methodology
page:

"Gun Violence describes the results of all incidents of death or injury
or threat with firearms without pejorative judgement within the
definition.

How very logical. A kid waving around a BB gun, gets counted like a gangbanger murdering someone.

Violence is defined without intent or consequence as a
consideration. To that end a shooting of a victim by a subject/suspect
is considered gun violence as is a defensive use or an officer involved
shooting. The act itself, no matter the reason is violent in nature."

So too is waving a BB gun around and threatening someone defined as "violence".
Let's confiscate those BB guns too!

[email protected]

On Tue, 27 Mar 2018 17:39:16 -0000 (UTC), "Dove Tail"
wrote:

On 3/27/2018 at 9:31:25 AM, wrote:

What is logical about including BB guns, Air soft guns and assault
rifles in the same scare tactic statistic?

Once again Fretwell, I call bull**** on your assertion, from the GVA
methodology statement:

"AirSoft/BB Guns

We collect incidents where Airsoft or BB guns are used AS weapons, not
where they are used in general vandalism or delinquency. Those
collected ARE "NOT" included in our Incident Totals on the Daily
Summary Ledger"

They are still in that bogus "scare" number at the top of their page
and when you actually drill down on that ledger (The CSV file) none of
their scary numbers hold water.
Have you ever actually seen an air soft gun? They are exactly what the
name implies, it shoots a soft 6mm plastic ball that wouldn't even
injure a bird.

Here is their definition of "Gun Violence", also from the methodology
page:

"Gun Violence describes the results of all incidents of death or injury
or threat with firearms without pejorative judgement within the
definition. Violence is defined without intent or consequence as a
consideration. To that end a shooting of a victim by a subject/suspect
is considered gun violence as is a defensive use or an officer involved
shooting. The act itself, no matter the reason is violent in nature."

So Fretwell, once again, in your haste to discredit a source of
information, you have only succeeded in discrediting yourself.

Not really, you simply refuse to accept any criticism of the dogma you
have ascribed to. I will trust the FBI's numbers, not someone packing
the statistics with bull****.

[email protected]

On Tue, 27 Mar 2018 11:02:33 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

On Tuesday, March 27, 2018 at 1:39:21 PM UTC-4, Dove Tail wrote:
On 3/27/2018 at 9:31:25 AM, wrote:

What is logical about including BB guns, Air soft guns and assault
rifles in the same scare tactic statistic?

Once again Fretwell, I call bull**** on your assertion, from the GVA
methodology statement:

"AirSoft/BB Guns

We collect incidents where Airsoft or BB guns are used AS weapons, not
where they are used in general vandalism or delinquency. Those
collected ARE "NOT" included in our Incident Totals on the Daily
Summary Ledger"

Here is their definition of "Gun Violence", also from the methodology
page:

"Gun Violence describes the results of all incidents of death or injury
or threat with firearms without pejorative judgement within the
definition.

How very logical. A kid waving around a BB gun, gets counted like a gangbanger murdering someone.

Looking at that site, 2 kids playing with cap guns is probably
"violence" too if they point it at each other.
These are the people who want to ban toy guns too tho.
It is the same mentality as school boards who expel kids for chewing a
cookie into the rough shape of a gun.

trader_4

On Tuesday, March 27, 2018 at 3:58:20 PM UTC-4, wrote:
On Tue, 27 Mar 2018 11:02:33 -0700 (PDT), trader_4
wrote:

On Tuesday, March 27, 2018 at 1:39:21 PM UTC-4, Dove Tail wrote:
On 3/27/2018 at 9:31:25 AM, wrote:

What is logical about including BB guns, Air soft guns and assault
rifles in the same scare tactic statistic?

Once again Fretwell, I call bull**** on your assertion, from the GVA
methodology statement:

"AirSoft/BB Guns

We collect incidents where Airsoft or BB guns are used AS weapons, not
where they are used in general vandalism or delinquency. Those
collected ARE "NOT" included in our Incident Totals on the Daily
Summary Ledger"

Here is their definition of "Gun Violence", also from the methodology
page:

"Gun Violence describes the results of all incidents of death or injury
or threat with firearms without pejorative judgement within the
definition.

How very logical. A kid waving around a BB gun, gets counted like a gangbanger murdering someone.

Looking at that site, 2 kids playing with cap guns is probably
"violence" too if they point it at each other.
These are the people who want to ban toy guns too tho.
It is the same mentality as school boards who expel kids for chewing a
cookie into the rough shape of a gun.

Here is the insanity of the SwallowBeak types in NJ. As I've said here
before, we already have a very tough CCW law, where very few are issued,
because you have to justify why you need CCW. An example would be someone
who is a jeweler and regularly carries large sums of money to the bank.
Even then, a judge had to approve it and you might not get it. IDK of
a single case where a legal CCW was involved in a shooting, murder,
crime, etc. Yet that didn't stop these libs from passing this new law:

No application shall be approved by the chief police officer or the superintendent unless the applicant demonstrates that he is not subject to any of the disabilities set forth in [2C:58-3c.] subsection c. of N.J.S.2C:58-3, that he is thoroughly familiar with the safe handling and use of handguns, and that he has a justifiable need to carry a handgun.

Each application form shall be accompanied by a written certification of justifiable need to carry a handgun, which shall be under oath and, in the case of a private citizen, shall specify in detail the urgent necessity for self-protection, as evidenced by specific threats or previous attacks which demonstrate a special danger to the applicants life that cannot be avoided by means other than by issuance of a permit to carry a handgun. Where possible, the applicant shall corroborate the existence of any specific threats or previous attacks by reference to reports of the incidents to the appropriate law enforcement agencies.

If the application is not approved by the chief police officer or the superintendent within 60 days of filing, it shall be deemed to have been approved, unless the applicant agrees to an extension of time in writing.

d. Issuance by Superior Court; fee. If the application has been approved by the chief police officer or the superintendent, as the case may be, the applicant shall forthwith present it to the Superior Court of the county in which the applicant resides, or to the Superior Court in any county where he intends to carry a handgun, in the case of a nonresident or employee of an armored car company. The court shall issue the permit to the applicant if, but only if, it is satisfied that the applicant is a person of good character who is not subject to any of the disabilities set forth in [section 2C:58-3c.] subsection c. of N.J.S.2C:58-3, that he is thoroughly familiar with the safe handling and use of handguns, and that he has a justifiable need to carry a handgun in accordance with the provisions of subsection c. of this section. The court may at its discretion issue a limited-type permit which would restrict the applicant as to the types of handguns he may carry and where and for what purposes [such] the handguns may be carried.

So, now you have to demonstrate an urgent, actual threat or actual attack.
How nice. Basically they are saying come back from the dead and apply.
It's really amazing how they can take something where there isn't a problem
and make it into one. And one of the scum sponsoring this is from the
Camden district. People in Camden aren't being killed from people who
are lawfully carrying and they are mighty few. They are being killed by
all the gangbangers and drug dealers with totally illegal guns.

rbowman

On 03/27/2018 01:53 PM, wrote:
Have you ever actually seen an air soft gun? They are exactly what the
name implies, it shoots a soft 6mm plastic ball that wouldn't even
injure a bird.

Airsoft was developed in Japan in the '70s. The Japanese like to play
with guns but can't have anything that would threaten a sparrow. Even
Red Ryder BB guns were too deadly.

rbowman

On 03/27/2018 01:57 PM, wrote:
Looking at that site, 2 kids playing with cap guns is probably
"violence" too if they point it at each other.
These are the people who want to ban toy guns too tho.

Everybody in libland knows that boys really want Barbie dolls anyway.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search
Display Modes
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode

Similar Threads
Thread	Thread Starter	Forum	Replies	Last Post
WE MUST BAN ALL GUNS in America	Neill Massello	Home Repair	1	March 27th 18 03:36 PM
VIDEO: 5 Guns You Must Buy Before The Ban	Steve B[_13_]	Metalworking	1	January 6th 13 04:46 AM
“Pork” Bailout Bill Could Ban Guns for Millions of Americans	[email protected]	Metalworking	0	February 16th 09 05:09 AM
Constitutionality of light bulb ban questioned - Environmental Protection Agency must be called for a broken bulb	metspitzer	Home Repair	199	July 3rd 08 04:49 AM

Menu

About Us