Everytown for Gun Safety: We Won’t Debate Because Our Opponents Aren’t Credible

[gryphon]

http://static.c-span.org/assets/swf/CSPANPlayer.1427210424.swf?clipid=4535518

"John Lott was originally supposed to be on C-SPAN for an hour to discuss these issues with Ted Alcorn, the research director for Michael Bloomberg’s Everytown," Lott's crimeresearchcenter.org reports. "But Alcorn would not appear at the same time and insisted that he be allowed to appear after Lott." When pressed on the issue by a caller [as above], Alcorn dismissed his detractors as unworthy due to their lack of credibility.



+++++

If you don't know who John Lott is, from Wikipedia:

John Richard Lott, Jr. (born May 8, 1958) is an American economist, political commentator, and gun rights advocate. Lott was formerly employed at various academic institutions including the University of Chicago, Yale University, the Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania, and the University of Maryland, College Park, and at the American Enterprise Institute conservative think tank. He is also currently a columnist for FoxNews.com. Lott holds a Ph.D. in economics from UCLA.

He has written for both academic and popular publications. Lott is a frequent writer of op-eds, and has written seven books, including More Guns, Less Crime, The Bias Against Guns, and Freedomnomics.

He is best known as an advocate in the gun rights debate, particularly his arguments against restrictions on owning and carrying guns. In 2000, Nobel laureate Milton Friedman said that "John Lott has few equals as a perceptive analyst of controversial public policy issues." Newsweek referred to Lott as "The Gun Crowd's Guru."

[CitizensHaveRights]

We don't want a fair debate, just let us tell our lies AFTER we see what he says.
...Because we're credible and he isn't...

It would be funny if it wasn't pathetic.

[gryphon]

They are losers.  I have a big 'L' for them.


▬▬▬.◙.▬▬▬
═▂▄▄▓▄▄▂
◢◤█▀▀████▄▄▄▄◢◤
█▄ █ █▄███▀▀▀▀▀▀▀╬
◥█████◤
══╩══╩══
╬═╬
╬═╬
╬═╬
╬═╬
╬═╬
╬═╬
╬═╬
╬═╬☻/L
╬═╬/▌
╬═╬/ \



So does this girl.

[Bear1]

You think this sounds funny, but this is the same tactic the global cooling/global warming/man made climate change nut jobs used. There used to be debates about that too. They kept losing. To prevent them from losing debates and look like idiots they simply stopped showing up for the debates. Then simply said "the debates are over". How many times have you heard Al Gore or Obama say that? They simply said we're right, you're wrong, facts don't matter. Look at the mess they've made as a result. Everytown for gun safety is following the same script.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[freediver]

If you want to have an open and honest debate on open carry (or any other topics out there), it might be best to stick to the facts. Fats like crime rates, firearms deaths, accidental shootings, etc. And not the inflated numbers that some entities put out there, but real ones such as the FBI statistics or stuff from the CDC. To equate the open carry debate with climate change is foolish. Climate change is real, the SCIENTISTS who actually study the topic are in near-unanimous agreement, and there's no denying the numbers on greenhouse gasses, rising levels of carbon dioxide, temperature increases, more violent weather patterns, and ocean acidification. Rather than debating the truth of the numbers, we should accept the judgement of the pros and move on to figuring out what to do. Ditto with firearms. We have a problem with firearms deaths in this country. More guns will NOT sold this problem. It will only make it worse. Rather than fight it, we should look for effective ways to stop criminals, the mentally ill, and the merely stupid from getting their hands on guns. Be part of the solution, not part of the problem.

[CitizensHaveRights]

Climate change is an observable phenomenon. Just look out the window. 

Manmade climate change is a theory, still subject to proof or disproof.

Carbon dioxide is such a minor factor in causing the suspected greenhouse mechanism as to be laughable. Humidity dwarfs it.

[TucTom]

Hey freediver I invite you to become a paid member of MOC. Join us and I'll be happy to listen.

[freediver]

To Mr CitizensHaverights: Manmade climate change has progressed beyond a theory to a generally accepted premise among scientists. The data is pretty clear in all categories. Carbon dioxide levels and ocean acidification because of that CO2 are pretty definitive. So rather than engaging in a futile argument on whether it is happening, perhaps we should move forward, listen to the smart people who actually study the problem, and figure out what we're going to do about it. And I fail to see what climate change has to do with the open carry debate, anyway.
To Mr TucTom: Thank you for the invite. I will take it under consideration.

[gryphon]

Manmade climate change has progressed beyond a theory to a generally accepted premise among scientists. The data is pretty clear in all categories.

[Pond Scum]

   

[freediver]

To Mr TucTom: Consider it done.

[TucTom]

Welcome Freediver. Now facts can be, and often are, skewed to prove ones point they want to get across. In my eyes facts that don't lean one way or another are rarely seen. And trust me there are some good people here who can come up with facts to show a solid argument.

[CitizensHaveRights]

My apologies freediver. I had you figured for an anti gun shill claiming to be a gun owner from the "Islands" thread.

[Pond Scum]

To Mr TucTom: Consider it done.

Welcome Freediver.  Thanks for joining!   

[freediver]

Mr CitizensHaveRights: No, I'm not an anti-gun shill. I started shooting when I was ten. Hunting when I was 12. Military for 26 years. Law enforcement for another 7. I still have guns, including a handgun. I still hunt.
What I am is a concerned gun owner. I'm here to be educated, and to educate. Like a lot of people, I see a problem with both gun violence and criminality in our country, as well as the mental health issues that lead to mass murders. A big difference is that I think we can do something about it. I have no sympathy for the flaming liberals who want to take away guns. I also have no sympathy for the gun enthusiasts who believe their way is the only way. And I definitely don't believe in just saying "screw it, it's too hard a problem." We can start to fix gun violence in this country. But as I said in the "Islands" thread, you can't call tell everyone who disagrees with you to pound sand. You can't call them names like "gun rights haters." Most of "them" are good people, too. They care about their country and their safety just as much as you do. There are ways we can protect 2nd Amendment rights and make a dent in the public safety problem as well.
Thanks for the welcome.

[CitizensHaveRights]

Why do you say "gun violence"?
Is criminal violence with guns bad, and criminal violence without guns bad?
If not, wouldn't it be a lot more productive to do something about criminal violence than about "gun violence"?

(my initial reaction to you was because I react to idiotic progressive buzzwords like "gun violence" and "common sense gun control" the same way a black guy reacts to "nigger")

Anyway, did you see what happened last week in common sense gun control paradise?
http://waronguns.blogspot.com/2015/06/tunisian-mass-murderer-counted-on-gun.html

Per GunPolicy.org, as far as world rankings go, “In a comparison of the rate of private gun ownership in 178 countries, Tunisia ranked at No. 178.”

[TucTom]

Freedriver, I also agree with CitisizensHaveRights in that terms used  like gun violence etc are never favorable to promoting gun safety or gun rights. Gun violence will bring up the defenses with a lot of people here.

Also, feel free to introduce yourself here:   https://forums.miopencarry.org/index.php/board,3.0.html

[freediver]

Mr Tuctom and Mr CitizensHaveRights: I can see where the term "gun violence" is far too generic a term and does have the ability to set some people off, thereby not helping the dialogue. When I talk about gun violence I am talking about criminal uses of a firearm. I include both straight criminal acts as well as the mass murders perpetuated by mentally ill individuals. And let's not forget the use of firearms in suicides. In future discussions I will be more specific. Now as far the term "common sense gun control", this might be a good time to raise the BS flag on individuals feeling slighted when any term containing the phrase "gun control" is used. Perhaps gun regulation might be a better term and that's usually the one I use. But if someone uses the term "gun control", try to put on your big boy pants, don't feel slighted, and listen to what they actually have to say. What we're talking about is changing the gun culture here in America. We have a problem with death by firearm in this country, both from criminals and legitimate owners. I am in no way suggesting that banning or taking away firearms is the answer. It isn't. But there are some common sense things we can do as gun owners to start to curb the death rate. Universal background checks, mandatory locked storage, a higher bar such as a firearms license for gun owners, proper funding of the ATF by Congress, and a few other ideas. We're talking about changing our gun culture from one of "ain't this cool" to one of seriousness and responsibility. We're talking about finding a way to keep guns out of the hands of criminals and the mentally ill. Call it whatever you want.
As far as using the analogy of a black man reacting to the word nigger, that's a poor comparison. Nigger implies a whole host of insults stemming from hundreds of years of slavery, Jim Crow laws, violence in the form of the KKK, and whites idly standing by while people were murdered and tortured. To equate that with the semantics of using "gun violence" or "common sense gun control" seems ridiculous to me.
And to somehow use the tourist shooting in Tunisia as a justification for gun rights here in America strikes me as grotesque. These people were murdered by a crazed gunman while they were on the beach on vacation in a foreign country. Are you suggesting that they would have been better off carrying guns to the beach? That somehow the issues of Tunisia would be magically cured if everyone had guns? To even suggest that is barbaric. This is akin to the NRA official tweeting right after the Charleston massacre that they would have been better off with guns. They were in a church in a bible study! To use peoples' personal tragedies to further a narrow view of gun ownership is the height of selfishness.

[freediver]

Computer issues here.

[gryphon]

And let's not forget the use of firearms in suicides.

Come on.  Japan has a higher suicide rate than the US and they don't have any guns.  If people are terminally ill or depressed they are going to find a way to commit suicide whether they have a gun or not.  An engineer I know hanged himself after he got let go during a downsize.  Firearms have nothing to do with suicide.

Universal background checks

You don't view gun ownership as a right, do you?

mandatory locked storage

Um, no.

a higher bar such as a firearms license for gun owners

You don't view gun ownership as a right, do you?

proper funding of the ATF by Congress

How about we disband the ATF altogether?