Article worth reading perhaps...

It certainly would be interesting to see a study to determine just who is really in the minority, pro gun Americans or anti gun Americans.
I'm betting that this nancy boy columnist might be surprised.
 
I understand he doesn't actually suffer from PTSD. I believe the correct diagnosis of Mr. Kuntzman is Chronic Cranial Rectitus.
 
He is clearly suffering from some sort of delusional disorder, though not PTSD; it is an elitist liberal world view of the majority of Americans who he has only contempt for. His assertion that a very small percentage of gun owners own a high percentage of the guns in America is not supported. His statement that anyone who owns guns for self-defense needs psychiatric help is the raving of of a deluded zealot. His article serves no purpose here, other than to remind us of how we are viewed by those who would take our guns and ultimately our freedom.
 
The study also offers another reason why our lawmakers should ignore the worst fears of gun owners: Two out of three firearm owners say that self-defense was their primary motivation for getting a gun. That’s up from 46% in 1994.

What has happened during those 20 years? Crime has plummeted. FBI stats show that overall violent crime and murder are half of what they were in the early 1990s. Robbery has been reduced by more than half.
Click to expand...
I know that correlation does not equal causation, but he could at least acknowledge the correlation rather than try to use it as an excuse to disavow the Constitution.

What's the statistic? Is it that 1% of the people control 90% of the money? By this guy's logic (as well as mine!), then, he should also be calling for the politicians to ignore the 1% who control the money, because they are holding the rest of us hostage.
 
Oh nice, a non-peer reviewed "leaked" study with great analysis. Trying to understand the "worth reading" part.

I am now in the estimation of the editor of the NY Daily News a "super paranoid whack job" that "Law makers don't have to listen to anymore". Strange, if I were a super paranoid whack job with a bunch of guns you would think I would have the undivided attention of most everyone I talk to.

:rolleyes:

Must have been all those years in the military and law enforcement that did me in.

;)
 
Last edited:
And what did you expect from the NY Daily News almost has bad as the NY Post
all from the People Liberal Republic of NY. Lived there left there.
 
It seems he has resorted to name calling.

This is a sign of desperation for those who realize that their words are falling on deaf ears. Whack job is right. Just ask his mirror.
 
Last edited:
The article is devoid of any facts whatsoever. What I do know for a fact:

1. No one knows how many guns are owned by private individuals in the US. Not the FBI, BATFE or anyone else.

2. The last Census was taken in 2010. It's 2016. The author of the article doesn't even know how many people live in the United States.

Without these two critical pieces of data, the author can not draw any conclusions on who owns what guns.

3. Even if 50% of all guns are owned by only 3%; assuming there are likely over 1 Billion guns in the US, that means that some or all of the remaining 97% of the people in the US own on average about between 2 and 3 guns. This is an estimate based on a population of 350,000,000 and total firearms of One Billion. At least I provide real statistics to back up my claim.:rolleyes:

Oh, and one more thing. When the Democrats lost the House of Representatives in 2011 it was because of threats of gun control from members of that party. No one had the gun-banner politician's backs in 2011. Trust me, no one "has their backs" in 2017 either.
 
Worth reading perhaps??

NO, after reading it, I don't think it was.

Perhaps, someone should send the author a white sheet & pillow case with eye holes in it, or a brown uniform with swastika armbands...

Because, while he SAYS "gun owners" what he is constantly referring to is minorities. And he flat out says that our "spineless politicians" should stop listening to minorities!!!

Where is his concern for the rights of minorities? No where in the article that I saw.

Clearly he either does not understand, or does not believe in equal protection and treatment under the law, unless it happens to favor HIS chosen agenda.

The majority of people in the US do not write for the NY Daily News. So, HE is a minority in that regard, can we ignore his right to free speech because of that?

He calls gun owners super paranoid wack jobs (if you own more than one, though I suppose if you only own one, then you are just an ordinary paranoid wack job), and chide us on our "fears" about self protection. Yet here he is, promoting HIS fear about gun owners. WHO IS THE PARANOID here???

Ok, so what if by the numbers (and decide for yourself if those claimed numbers are accurate) gun owners are a small percentage of the people? He urges politicians not to listen to them, and says "We the people have got your back".

That argument, applied to any other minority, is instantly discarded. Will the author tell the black, brown, red, yellow, LGBT, Moslem, Mormon, or any other class of defined minorities that the politicians should not listen to them, ignore their Constitutional rights, because they are only a small percentage of the population???

His attitude, and comments are elitist, and bigoted. It is allowed and even promoted by his peers, because it is about gun owners. If that exact same attitude were applied to any other minority group, he would be shunned, and banned. How is that in any way fair, and honest "reporting"??
 
This article is from the NYPost by the idiot who was terrified when he shot an AR15 and said he suffered from PTSD. He's at it again.
Click to expand...

Arrg. Idiot is right. Said his shoulder hurt after shooting the AR.

His attitude, and comments are elitist, and bigoted. It is allowed and even promoted by his peers, because it is about gun owners.
Click to expand...

Yep. He is one of the truly close minded folk that just aren't open to any reason at all. Colonel Cooper's term hoplophobe:

Hoplophobia is a political neologism coined by retired American military officer Jeff Cooper as a pejorative to describe an "irrational aversion to weapons." It is also used to describe the "fear of firearms" or the "fear of armed citizens."
Click to expand...

fits this guy to a tee. He is irrational. Hopefully there are not a lot of his ilk around.
 
The article listed above from 'The Truth About Guns' takes the survey to task for the way they got their data. That is, he doesn't like the method they used to run the poll.

Better minds than mine should check out the methods used in the poll and if appropriate they should discredit the thing.

However...the poll isn't going to be released until next year so maybe the folk that know how to do polls can't criticize it until it is released???

The big 'revelation' of the poll is that 50% of guns are owned by 3% of the population.

Public radio is all over this poll and are naturally delighted.

The inference is of course that gun owners are a small, small part of the population and therefore politicians really don't have to pay any attention to them.
 
I don't see how any poll that is about gun ownership would be accurate. I don't know any gun owner who would tell a random poll that he owns guns let alone how many he owns. I won't believe any poll like this because it is severely skewed.
 
The inference is of course that gun owners are a small, small part of the population and therefore politicians really don't have to pay any attention to them.
Click to expand...

Strangely whenever they give that a whirl in many parts of the country it does not play out that way.

People like my mother never owned a gun their whole lives. Yet she was always strongly on favor of the RKBA. It was kind of shocking when we found a loaded 1911 in her closet after she passed. She always claimed she never owned a gun, but she actually had for many, many years.
 
I don't see how any poll that is about gun ownership would be accurate.
Click to expand...

Ah, here we have the spot where the entire argument breaks down. Based on a POLL, that says gun owners are a tiny (and therefore insignificant) part of our population. A poll of "gun owners". People whom the author believes and describes as "paranoid wack jobs".

Given his premise that we are paranoid wack jobs, why would we (any of us) answer ANY poll honestly and accurately? The author thinks we are unstable and untrustworthy (and fears for his, and "society's" safety as a result), yet accepts as holy writ, without question, poll results from a survey of those same "paranoid wack jobs".

"Studies show..." has become equal to "the check is in the mail" these days.
 
"Studies show..." has become equal to "the check is in the mail" these days.
Click to expand...

Or, "According to an unnamed official, or source." It is interesting how often "studies" and unidentified "sources" support positions that can't be intelligently supported.
 
Doesn't surprise me. This "author" has repeatedly proven how incompetent he is at producing any half decent article worth reading.

America is being held hostage by a tiny minority of absolute lunatics for whom owning two, three, eight or even 10 guns is simply not enough
Click to expand...

Just the fact that he started with that sentence shows that the rest of the article is just going to be filled with his own person bias, and only the "facts" and "studies" that will support that bias.

I would call HIM the lunatic.
 
Let me get this straight.
(1) The author is the same guy who thought that firing an AR-15 gave him a temporary form of PTSD.
(2) In spite of his alleged "temporary PTSD," he says we're the "fraidy cats."
(3) He claims that politicians can safely ignore gun owners based on a "comprehensive study of gun owners."
(4) That "comprehensive" study: (a) has not completed peer review; and (b) was nonetheless leaked (as far as I can tell) only to The Guardian and The Trace (a Michael Bloomberg production), whose political biases are well-known.

I think this situation as been addressed before:
William Shakespeare said:
. . . .it is a tale
Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,
Signifying nothing.
Click to expand...
William Shakespeare, Macbeth​

Still, watch for some anti-gunners to seize on the term "super owner," and to attempt to portray such folks in a particularly negative light. If it starts to take hold, you'll start hearing The Usual (Antigun) Suspects asking, "Why does anyone need 15 guns?"
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top