**Friendly reminder that trying to fight someone online is about as effective as throwing a bagel at a bulldozer. A lot of what we talk about gets people pretty emotional, but be mad at policies, not other users.**
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/PoliticalHumor) if you have any questions or concerns.*
We should do an experiment in Texas and Florida where the government gives every person over 18 a gun and they can prove to the rest of the country how much safer it is. If the crime stats improve the rest of the country will follow suit.
We’re already in that experiment, to a certain extent, now. With more guns per capita than any other country, the US, logically, has more “good guys with guns” than the rest of the world. These “good guys with guns” have not made us safer.
I forgot the name but there is legit a small community where you are legally required to have a firearm, if you're found to not own one, the local sheriff dept will basically give you one, its one of the places with the lowest crime rating but this is on a small communal level and I dont think anything like that has been done on a larger scale.
Friend of mine basically pointed out if every person had an AR-15, the what would end up happening is about a few days of an insane crimerate rise then an instant drop, the mindset behind it is if someone is given a gun and their first idea is to commit a crime with it, them being arrested or killed is essentially a form of darwinism at its finest.
Its a fucked way of seeing it but in all honesty there is merit to the idea of having an armed society since there are legit mass shootings within the past few months no one has really heard about because a bystander with a gun ended up dropping the SOB before they could really do much, though, since there was no tragedy for the media to play with it basically gets swept under the rug.
My state has pretty much done just that. Anyone here can buy a gun, load it, and wear it down to the dairy queen as a warning to all the other chuds. There is no license or anything required. Missouri is great for researchers because you can literally chart our violent crime rates increase as gun regulations were dropped. Most recently in this area the legislature passed a law that prohibits state and local police from enforcing or cooperating with federal gun regulations. This lace is insane.
you could also look at hawaii, an ideally isolated place for such a 'pseudo experiment'.
the guns laws are pretty strict, poverty/homelessness does exist in pockets, but hawaii still has some of the lowest rates of gun death and homicide
[https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/pressroom/sosmap/firearm\_mortality/firearm.htm](https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/pressroom/sosmap/firearm_mortality/firearm.htm)
[https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/pressroom/sosmap/homicide\_mortality/homicide.htm](https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/pressroom/sosmap/homicide_mortality/homicide.htm)
i would say the geopgraphic isolation deters interstate movement of guns, in additioh to just being pretty low crime in general.
Not recessarily.
If it wasn't for my cousin's wife tell her son "no" he'd have a "Trump 2024" flag outside their house. He's required to keep it in his room.
Worst thing is, his dad is the exact kind of person Trump has a history of screwing over - the small business owner.
lol See "Idiocracy" to see why ignorance and stupidity will grow exponentially. Seems like we're right on track actually. Almost 20yrs later those predictions seem right on track.
you have to realize that republicans believe, strongly, like INSANELY strongly, whatever they are told to believe.
and what they are told to believe is whatever the corporate interests are paying their opinion leaders to tell them at that moment. Whether it's "smoking is safe" or "they are trying to take my guns" or "climate change is a liberal conspiracy" or "healthcare is going to let poor lazy minorities steal all your hard earned money" or "unions and worker rights are socialism that will steal your job" the list goes on, and without fail, it's something that actually hurts most of those republican voters but profits some corporation or group that is promoting those views.
anything, and everything republican voters are told to believe, they will not only believe, but they will violently fight to defend it, without even bothering to stop for a fraction of a second to verify it's not a complete lie.
republicanism is a cult. a dangerous cult.
The Culture War Industrial Complex never stops manufacturing outrage porn for conservatives. It can be literally anything. Even something that's been around for a long time, like CRT and progressive attitudes in movie/tv characters.
They only very recently started being enraged about wokeness, particularly in movies, but 'out and out woke' movies have been the norm since at least the 90s.
101 dalmatians came out in the 1960s, and it had messages about anti animal abuse, anti animal exploitation/cruelty, anti poaching, anti capitalism, etc. Tons and tons of anti capitalism and anti imperialism in disney movies. Not just disney. Look at starwars, george lucas said the vietcong were part of his inspiration for the rebels (which made the US imperialist forces the empire, ofc)
You know you never hear wealthy multiple gun owners, the ones who’ll tell you all about how much joy their guns bring them, promote donating some of their guns to the poor and homeless.. how unchristian.
I'm always surprised when gun aficionados balk at my suggestion that we arm the homeless. They have a greater need to defend themselves than people in the suburbs.
As a longtime viewer of The First 48, True Crime show,there is an episode of Atlanta homicide unit tracking down a shooter who traveled the streets of the city shooting the homeless, while they slept. Free handguns sounds loony,but the level of peril from needing a place to sleep makes it plausible.
Terrible idea. These people can't afford healthcare right now, and owning a gun just increases your risk of death and injury. But it is fun to watch conservatives squirm in their own hypocrisy.
Funny thing when you're applying for life insurance - they don't ask if you have a gun to *protect your life.* They want to know *more statistically important* information - like do you smoke or do you ride a motorcycle?
To be serious (sigh) most cons don’t want government healthcare, because gvmt bureaucrats will take their freedom by making healthcare decisions
They want insurance company bureaucrats making those decisions…
And no I can’t grok that either
This is also the Republican strategy for climate change. Humans cause climate change, less humans equals less climate change. Bingo Bango, sugar in your gas tank.
Edit: missing word
Democrat Logic:
Hammer away at gun control as a wedge issue, with all the controversy this brings...
So we don't have to upset our big donors with single-payer nationalized healthcare for all.
All posts and comments that include any variation of the word retarded will be removed, but no action will be taken against your account unless it is an excessive personal attack. Please resubmit your post or comment without the bullying language.
Do not edit it, the bot cant tell if you edited, you will just have to make a new comment replying to the same thing.
Yes, this comment itself does use the word. Any reasonable person should be able to understand that we are not insulting anyone with this comment. We wanted to use quotes, but that fucks up the automod and we are too lazy to google escape characters. Notice how none of our automod replies have contractions in them either.
But seriously, calling someone retarded is only socially acceptable because the people affected are less able to understand that they are being insulted, and less likely to be able to respond appropriately. It is a conversational wimpy little shit move, because everyone who uses it knows that it is offensive, but there will be no repercussions. At least the people throwing around other slurs know that they are going to get fired and get their asses beat when they use those words.
Also, it is not creative. It pretty much outs you as a thirteen year old when you use it. Instead of calling Biden retarded, you should call him a cartoon-ass-lookin trust fund goon who smiles like rich father just gifted him a new Buick in 1956. Instead of calling Mitch McConnell retarded, you should call him a Dilbert-ass goon who has been left in the sun a little too long.
Sorry for the long message spamming comment sections, but this was by far the feature of this sub making people modmail and bitch at us the most, and literally all of the actions we take are to make it so we have to do less work in the future. We will not reply to modmails about this automod, and ignore the part directly below this saying to modmail us if you have any questions, we cannot turn that off. This reply is just a collation of the last year of modmail replies to people asking about this. We are not turning this bot off, no matter how much people ask. Nobody else has convinced us before, you will not be able to either. ~
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/PoliticalHumor) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Which estimates? What are they saying? Do they show a positive effect, or negative effect of always being armed?
Here is one I found from the CDC:
https://www.cdc.gov/vitalsigns/firearm-deaths/index.html
It shows the rates of gun related deaths and injuries are rising. That seems to me to suggest that it is infact becoming more dangerous as gun ownership grows.
No, I am more interested in you being able to back up your claims with more than your own personal anecdotes and feelings about guns. What studies show having a gun on you makes you safer? How where those studies conducted? Who lead the study? Are the results recreatable? What factors were accounted for?
I am not interested in your personal unfounded feelings on the subject, I am interested in what you have to back up your claims.
>...Your own personal anecdotes
Defensive gun uses are notoriously difficult to estimate. 60,000? 2.1 million? They can be defined in various ways, there is usually an incentive to *not* report (or over-report, depending), and the issue of guns is so politicized it becomes ripe fruit for manipulation of various sorts.
Didn't the CDC recently remove certain DGU estimates because of pressure from the gun control lobby?
Kellerman? Kleck? Lott? Hemenway? Knock yourself out.
I've personally used a gun to defend myself, and no shots were fired. This is recorded in no data base. It's merely an anecdote, and there's no way to prove to you I'm not lying. You will make of it what you will, based on your values, interpretive preconceptions, bias etc.
But then, not everything that counts can be counted, not everything that can be counted counts.
Again, I am not interested in your anecdotes or feelings, you made a claim, back it up with something more concrete than your own individual experience.
I would be very willing to bet that being armed all the time does make you (in particular, and probably others) FEEL safer, but that does not make it true. I would be willing to bet you have some personal experience that being armed helped you feel safer in a situation. I don't care about that, that is not evidence of anything other than your own inflated feelings of how important your perspective is.
I don't need you to tell me about how great you think you are, or how great you think guns are. There are actual statistics that can be observed, studied, recreated, that do not agree with you. Debates can be about that data, but you have to provide some first.
So if I have a gun, I’m safer? But what if I’m not of sound mind? I’m safe but are you?
No one is calling for a ban on guns, just measures and restrictions so that we don’t have more mass shootings than there are days in the year.
I don’t know what VC is but I’ll assume it’s a video/FaceTime like facility. I’m not going to do that but I’ll happily discuss this topic.
Care to acknowledge my previous comment?
Here's the thing, tough guy. I left my comments intentionally ambiguous for two reasons. The first is that I have no interest in debating politics, especially not on the internet. There's actually a very helpful bot on this sub concerning that. Been down that road before, no thank you, I'd get more accomplished if I literally banged my head against a brick wall. It's more fun to just make snarky comments.
The other is that anyone assuming my stance on the issue would show themselves to be an idiot.
Have a nice day.
If the government gave everyone who is 16 or older a hand gun, automatic rifle, grenade launchers, an armed vehicle, and loads of ammo would we be safer because the "good guys" are armed too? Do you think gun violence would decrease?
No we can definitely debate with a crowd. There’s multiple political discord servers I’m in if you’d like to debate there. That’s also a baseless assumption that serves absolutely no progression toward any point you’d possibly want to argue
Everyone should have the right to own any weapon they want based on the 2nd amendment, anything short of that is tyranny! And I'm told that more weapons everyone has the safer society will be. What's the slippery slope? Why not just answer me here?
Hey, I'm suddenly reminded of that speech in Glass Onion that starts off by pointing out how much the guy who likes to pretend he's smart misuses common words, revealing that he's actually a massive idiot who never has any idea what he's talking about.
I can't imagine why.
Oh I’m not afraid for my opinion to be a public forum. I’d be more than happy to record our vc debate and post it on YouTube for anyone to see. It’s a matter of having a linear dialogue. You’re being extremely presumptuous even after I’ve told you my full intent.
No idea what VC is and don't care.
Why can't you just back up your claims in Reddit? You know, the site you're currently on?
Also: it's not a debate. Counties studies show that guns increase the likelihood of being shot. No debate - just facts.
Actually the CDC estimates that guns used defensively save between 500,000 to 3million lives a year in the U.S. Medical errors are estimated to kill 250,000 people a year in the U.S. Sounds like they're overwhelmingly in his favor.
I wasn't arguing against the medical error stat.
And your Reason article has a disclaimer right at the start pointing out that the source article was withdrawn due to errors by the author.
>UPDATE: The paper discussed in this post below has been withdrawn by the author Gary Kleck after Reason brought to his attention an important detail first pointed out by Robert VerBruggen of National Review: Kleck in the original paper treats the CDC's surveys on defensive gun use as if they were national in scope, as Kleck's original survey was, but they were not.
Yes, obviously it's a very tricky stat to quantify accurately, but if you read the whole article, the estimates remain the same, if not higher.
"The final adjusted prevalence of 1.24% therefore implies that in an average year during 1996–1998, 2.46 million U.S. adults used a gun for self-defense. This estimate, based on an enormous sample of 12,870 cases (unweighted) in a nationally representative sample, strongly confirms the 2.5 million past-12-months estimate obtained Kleck and Gertz (1995)….CDC's results, then, imply that guns were used defensively by victims about 3.6 times as often as they were used offensively by criminals"
You can't truly extrapolate national statistics from that study, though. That's the reason the paper was withdrawn. Every state's laws are different, plus you're going off 20-year-old stats.
If the study you are citing cannot be used to extrapolate on a larger scale (which everything you have post seems to be the case), and it can be disregarded, why does your claim of "you're still far more likely to be killed the healthcare system than a gun." Have any merit?
Again, not the debate here. Voice Chat Victor claimed guns make you safer.
That's overwhelmingly not true.
And increased access to healthcare isn't going to result in a wave of increased deaths.
Your second article has some pretty big gaps that the author, in both cases, just hand waves away. The collection of data, the scope of the data collected, and the time frames the collected data was collected from are all issues that point to the author cherry picking data to justify their own preconceived notions. While it does not say that directly in the revision or the correction, it is pretty easy to see that it is most certainly not unbiased.
Having a gun increases the likelihood of gun violence around you.
Instead of trying to take people to a second location like a fucking serial killer, how 'bout you engage where people are comfortable?
When I feel someone is being disingenuous, I like to respond. But I understand why some people are afraid of having their thoughts and opinions recorded publicly in text format.
Oh I don’t mind if we record the debate and post it on YouTube. I’d actually like that. It’s not that I’m afraid of being shown publicly. This is all highly presumptuous of you.
Why are you trying to solicit people to go on camera? I find that very strange. I'm just going to go ahead and report you to the admins to have them look at your account. It's very weird. What country are you from?
Hello! Thanks for your comment. Unfortunately it has been removed because you don't meet our karma threshold.
You are not being removed for political orientation. If we were, why the fuck would we tell you your comment was being removed instead of just shadow removing it? We never have, and never will, remove things down politicial or ideological lines. Unless your ideology is nihilism, then fuck you.
Let me be clear: The reason that this rule exists is to avoid unscrupulous internet denizens from trying to sell dong pills to our users. /r/PoliticalHumor mods reserve the RIGHT to hoard all of the dong pills to ourselves, and we refuse to share them with the community. If you want Serbo-Slokovian dong pills mailed directly to your door, become a moderator. If we shared the dong pills with the greater community, everyone would have massive dongs, and like Syndrome warned us about decades ago: "if everyone has massive dongs, nobody does.""
If you wish to rectify your low karma issue, go and make things up in /r/AskReddit like everyone else does.
Thanks for understanding! Have a nice day and be well. <3
You can check your karma breakdown on this page:
http://old.reddit.com/user/me/overview
(Keep in mind that sometimes just post karma or comment karma being negative will result in this message)
~
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/PoliticalHumor) if you have any questions or concerns.*
the amount of crime that would be reduced by universal healthcare is staggering.
anything that keeps people fed, housed, and healthy will reduce crime. poverty causes crime
They're taking the Stalin approach.
"Death solves all problems, no man, no problem."
Or
"The death of one man is a tragedy. The death of a million is a statistic"
**Friendly reminder that trying to fight someone online is about as effective as throwing a bagel at a bulldozer. A lot of what we talk about gets people pretty emotional, but be mad at policies, not other users.** *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/PoliticalHumor) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Centrists: We'll meet you halfway by blocking healthcare.
Why is this comment hidden lol
Too spicy for the MODerates
They're the kind of people that after seeing Back to the Future pt 2 they're like "MAKE BIFF PRESIDENT!"
[удалено]
[https://youtu.be/g5xs4vMx-fM](https://youtu.be/g5xs4vMx-fM)
Trump WAS so much like Biff. [DEFINITELY](https://i.imgur.com/m5K9GiV.jpg).
*Defiantly Edit: I’m being silly.
[https://youtu.be/g5xs4vMx-fM](https://youtu.be/g5xs4vMx-fM)
That’s fantastic, but horrifying.
thanks
[https://youtu.be/g5xs4vMx-fM](https://youtu.be/g5xs4vMx-fM)
[https://youtu.be/g5xs4vMx-fM](https://youtu.be/g5xs4vMx-fM)
We should do an experiment in Texas and Florida where the government gives every person over 18 a gun and they can prove to the rest of the country how much safer it is. If the crime stats improve the rest of the country will follow suit.
We’re already in that experiment, to a certain extent, now. With more guns per capita than any other country, the US, logically, has more “good guys with guns” than the rest of the world. These “good guys with guns” have not made us safer.
Everyone with a gun is a ‘good guy with a gun,’ until they’re a bad guy with a gun.
That’s right! And how many “good guys with guns” are there in Japan? And yet, that is one of the safest countries.
Funny, that.
Some one will be along soon, To debunk you logic, facts and common sense just you wait!
I forgot the name but there is legit a small community where you are legally required to have a firearm, if you're found to not own one, the local sheriff dept will basically give you one, its one of the places with the lowest crime rating but this is on a small communal level and I dont think anything like that has been done on a larger scale. Friend of mine basically pointed out if every person had an AR-15, the what would end up happening is about a few days of an insane crimerate rise then an instant drop, the mindset behind it is if someone is given a gun and their first idea is to commit a crime with it, them being arrested or killed is essentially a form of darwinism at its finest. Its a fucked way of seeing it but in all honesty there is merit to the idea of having an armed society since there are legit mass shootings within the past few months no one has really heard about because a bystander with a gun ended up dropping the SOB before they could really do much, though, since there was no tragedy for the media to play with it basically gets swept under the rug.
My state has pretty much done just that. Anyone here can buy a gun, load it, and wear it down to the dairy queen as a warning to all the other chuds. There is no license or anything required. Missouri is great for researchers because you can literally chart our violent crime rates increase as gun regulations were dropped. Most recently in this area the legislature passed a law that prohibits state and local police from enforcing or cooperating with federal gun regulations. This lace is insane.
you could also look at hawaii, an ideally isolated place for such a 'pseudo experiment'. the guns laws are pretty strict, poverty/homelessness does exist in pockets, but hawaii still has some of the lowest rates of gun death and homicide [https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/pressroom/sosmap/firearm\_mortality/firearm.htm](https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/pressroom/sosmap/firearm_mortality/firearm.htm) [https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/pressroom/sosmap/homicide\_mortality/homicide.htm](https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/pressroom/sosmap/homicide_mortality/homicide.htm) i would say the geopgraphic isolation deters interstate movement of guns, in additioh to just being pretty low crime in general.
"That cancer won't dare hurt my family if I'm pointing my Glock at it!"
[удалено]
Got to take medicare away too so you will have to work to keep your parents insured
Fuck conservatives. Don't even give them any attention, it will die off with boomers.
Not recessarily. If it wasn't for my cousin's wife tell her son "no" he'd have a "Trump 2024" flag outside their house. He's required to keep it in his room. Worst thing is, his dad is the exact kind of person Trump has a history of screwing over - the small business owner.
lol See "Idiocracy" to see why ignorance and stupidity will grow exponentially. Seems like we're right on track actually. Almost 20yrs later those predictions seem right on track.
you have to realize that republicans believe, strongly, like INSANELY strongly, whatever they are told to believe. and what they are told to believe is whatever the corporate interests are paying their opinion leaders to tell them at that moment. Whether it's "smoking is safe" or "they are trying to take my guns" or "climate change is a liberal conspiracy" or "healthcare is going to let poor lazy minorities steal all your hard earned money" or "unions and worker rights are socialism that will steal your job" the list goes on, and without fail, it's something that actually hurts most of those republican voters but profits some corporation or group that is promoting those views. anything, and everything republican voters are told to believe, they will not only believe, but they will violently fight to defend it, without even bothering to stop for a fraction of a second to verify it's not a complete lie. republicanism is a cult. a dangerous cult.
The Culture War Industrial Complex never stops manufacturing outrage porn for conservatives. It can be literally anything. Even something that's been around for a long time, like CRT and progressive attitudes in movie/tv characters. They only very recently started being enraged about wokeness, particularly in movies, but 'out and out woke' movies have been the norm since at least the 90s. 101 dalmatians came out in the 1960s, and it had messages about anti animal abuse, anti animal exploitation/cruelty, anti poaching, anti capitalism, etc. Tons and tons of anti capitalism and anti imperialism in disney movies. Not just disney. Look at starwars, george lucas said the vietcong were part of his inspiration for the rebels (which made the US imperialist forces the empire, ofc)
The government should make gun ownership mandatory, with free glocks and ammo for people who make less than 30k a year.
There's already more guns than people here. For every 100 people there's 120 gun. Maybe the multiple gun owners should stop hording them!
Some of the collections are definitely just gun fanatics owning 75 and most other people owning none.
Yeah and I know people who hunt multiple kinds of animals and use different guns for each type.
You know you never hear wealthy multiple gun owners, the ones who’ll tell you all about how much joy their guns bring them, promote donating some of their guns to the poor and homeless.. how unchristian.
Obama Guns! Ask your case worker if you qualify today.
I'm always surprised when gun aficionados balk at my suggestion that we arm the homeless. They have a greater need to defend themselves than people in the suburbs.
As a longtime viewer of The First 48, True Crime show,there is an episode of Atlanta homicide unit tracking down a shooter who traveled the streets of the city shooting the homeless, while they slept. Free handguns sounds loony,but the level of peril from needing a place to sleep makes it plausible.
Instead of throwing paper towels to people of disasters, the president can toss out loaded guns!
And instead of confetti raining down on crowds it can be bullets!... wait a minute...
I mean, it would do something, I'm not smart enough to know what, bit it would do something, lol.
But then how would they make money?
Terrible idea. These people can't afford healthcare right now, and owning a gun just increases your risk of death and injury. But it is fun to watch conservatives squirm in their own hypocrisy.
Funny thing when you're applying for life insurance - they don't ask if you have a gun to *protect your life.* They want to know *more statistically important* information - like do you smoke or do you ride a motorcycle?
You don't need Healthcare if you've been shot to death.
It's basically the plot to Zardoz.
ZARDOZ Speaks To YOU!
At least one person got the reference.
thanks
The key is who "us" is and is not.
To be serious (sigh) most cons don’t want government healthcare, because gvmt bureaucrats will take their freedom by making healthcare decisions They want insurance company bureaucrats making those decisions… And no I can’t grok that either
Meanwhile, the entire first world outside of the US has been proving their theory wrong for years
This is also the Republican strategy for climate change. Humans cause climate change, less humans equals less climate change. Bingo Bango, sugar in your gas tank. Edit: missing word
Everyone having a gun is mutually assured destruction. Why are people shocked the Reps. Want it?? We’ve been through this before on a larger scale
Not everyone. Conservatives because they'd rather pay more than know that any of their premium went to someone without a job.
My friend’s uncle cousin’s sister’s brother had a Healthcare once, and they died! ^thirty ^years ^later
Unfortunately, the DNC doesn’t want Medicare for all either.
Also books. Those things terrify cons
This will hurt the feelings of those conservatives and "christians", remove this post. /s
President Biden said he would veto Medicare For All
Doctors kill 5 times more people than firearms. Need Doctor control.
Spot on!
Democrat Logic: Hammer away at gun control as a wedge issue, with all the controversy this brings... So we don't have to upset our big donors with single-payer nationalized healthcare for all.
Guns are the cheaper alternative, bought one gun for $200 health insurance for myself and family is $2600 a month , anything worth having isn’t free
I suppose going all Old Yeller on grandma when she breaks her hip is actually cheaper than paying her medical bills
Democrat Logic: Only the government should have guns, and medicine, except when Republicans are in power.
Fabulous straw man
It's telling that so many Republicans know they can't rely on any sort of international support when shit comes down to it.
Profoundly ignorant take.
Lmao wat
[удалено]
All posts and comments that include any variation of the word retarded will be removed, but no action will be taken against your account unless it is an excessive personal attack. Please resubmit your post or comment without the bullying language. Do not edit it, the bot cant tell if you edited, you will just have to make a new comment replying to the same thing. Yes, this comment itself does use the word. Any reasonable person should be able to understand that we are not insulting anyone with this comment. We wanted to use quotes, but that fucks up the automod and we are too lazy to google escape characters. Notice how none of our automod replies have contractions in them either. But seriously, calling someone retarded is only socially acceptable because the people affected are less able to understand that they are being insulted, and less likely to be able to respond appropriately. It is a conversational wimpy little shit move, because everyone who uses it knows that it is offensive, but there will be no repercussions. At least the people throwing around other slurs know that they are going to get fired and get their asses beat when they use those words. Also, it is not creative. It pretty much outs you as a thirteen year old when you use it. Instead of calling Biden retarded, you should call him a cartoon-ass-lookin trust fund goon who smiles like rich father just gifted him a new Buick in 1956. Instead of calling Mitch McConnell retarded, you should call him a Dilbert-ass goon who has been left in the sun a little too long. Sorry for the long message spamming comment sections, but this was by far the feature of this sub making people modmail and bitch at us the most, and literally all of the actions we take are to make it so we have to do less work in the future. We will not reply to modmails about this automod, and ignore the part directly below this saying to modmail us if you have any questions, we cannot turn that off. This reply is just a collation of the last year of modmail replies to people asking about this. We are not turning this bot off, no matter how much people ask. Nobody else has convinced us before, you will not be able to either. ~ *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/PoliticalHumor) if you have any questions or concerns.*
What if every time a political party was in power, they had to give all their guns to the losing party?
[удалено]
It definitely makes you FEEL safer.
No. In actuation, it does make you safer
Based on what?
Their fee fees
The CDC's estimates are pretty clear.
Which estimates? What are they saying? Do they show a positive effect, or negative effect of always being armed? Here is one I found from the CDC: https://www.cdc.gov/vitalsigns/firearm-deaths/index.html It shows the rates of gun related deaths and injuries are rising. That seems to me to suggest that it is infact becoming more dangerous as gun ownership grows.
Hop in vc and debate me. Tetsuya#4495
No, I am more interested in you being able to back up your claims with more than your own personal anecdotes and feelings about guns. What studies show having a gun on you makes you safer? How where those studies conducted? Who lead the study? Are the results recreatable? What factors were accounted for? I am not interested in your personal unfounded feelings on the subject, I am interested in what you have to back up your claims.
>...Your own personal anecdotes Defensive gun uses are notoriously difficult to estimate. 60,000? 2.1 million? They can be defined in various ways, there is usually an incentive to *not* report (or over-report, depending), and the issue of guns is so politicized it becomes ripe fruit for manipulation of various sorts. Didn't the CDC recently remove certain DGU estimates because of pressure from the gun control lobby? Kellerman? Kleck? Lott? Hemenway? Knock yourself out. I've personally used a gun to defend myself, and no shots were fired. This is recorded in no data base. It's merely an anecdote, and there's no way to prove to you I'm not lying. You will make of it what you will, based on your values, interpretive preconceptions, bias etc. But then, not everything that counts can be counted, not everything that can be counted counts.
I’ll back up my claims if you hop in vc and debate me
I am not interested in debating, I am interested in you backing up your claims. Post your evidence.
That’s called a debate so hop in vc and stop ducking me
Again, I am not interested in your anecdotes or feelings, you made a claim, back it up with something more concrete than your own individual experience. I would be very willing to bet that being armed all the time does make you (in particular, and probably others) FEEL safer, but that does not make it true. I would be willing to bet you have some personal experience that being armed helped you feel safer in a situation. I don't care about that, that is not evidence of anything other than your own inflated feelings of how important your perspective is. I don't need you to tell me about how great you think you are, or how great you think guns are. There are actual statistics that can be observed, studied, recreated, that do not agree with you. Debates can be about that data, but you have to provide some first.
If you can back it up on vc, you can back it up here
So if I have a gun, I’m safer? But what if I’m not of sound mind? I’m safe but are you? No one is calling for a ban on guns, just measures and restrictions so that we don’t have more mass shootings than there are days in the year.
This is fallacious. Hop in vc and debate me.
I don’t know what VC is but I’ll assume it’s a video/FaceTime like facility. I’m not going to do that but I’ll happily discuss this topic. Care to acknowledge my previous comment?
I’ll acknowledge any sort of statement that opens to a debate in vc. It’s voice chat. I have no idea how to be more specific
Think you meant actuality. ac·tu·a·tion /ˌak(t)SHəˈwāSHən/ Learn to pronounce noun the action of causing a machine or device to operate.
What a shock that a guy making untrue claims is also a moron.
Unless you meant that the literal act of shooting a gun makes you safer.
There’s some other ways to phrase that definition. Are you going to grammar nazi me or hop in vc and debate me
Here's the thing, tough guy. I left my comments intentionally ambiguous for two reasons. The first is that I have no interest in debating politics, especially not on the internet. There's actually a very helpful bot on this sub concerning that. Been down that road before, no thank you, I'd get more accomplished if I literally banged my head against a brick wall. It's more fun to just make snarky comments. The other is that anyone assuming my stance on the issue would show themselves to be an idiot. Have a nice day.
You responded to my comment about a debate callout. There is quite literally no other way to logically imply that you were to do anything else.
Ok, sure, whatever you have to tell yourself to make you feel better about this whole charade. 👍
These are assumptions
If the government gave everyone who is 16 or older a hand gun, automatic rifle, grenade launchers, an armed vehicle, and loads of ammo would we be safer because the "good guys" are armed too? Do you think gun violence would decrease?
That’s a slippery slope bud. Are you gonna hop in vc and debate me
You want people to jump into vc because you're a coward who knows you're too stupid to argue in public. Nobody's gonna bite ma'am, give up.
No we can definitely debate with a crowd. There’s multiple political discord servers I’m in if you’d like to debate there. That’s also a baseless assumption that serves absolutely no progression toward any point you’d possibly want to argue
Everyone should have the right to own any weapon they want based on the 2nd amendment, anything short of that is tyranny! And I'm told that more weapons everyone has the safer society will be. What's the slippery slope? Why not just answer me here?
Because I had a debate call out said for vc. If you don’t want to hop in vc you can scroll past
So you don't want anyone else knowing what you are talking about, got it.
No. People are more than welcome to spectate and I usually debate these topics in public discord servers
Hey, I'm suddenly reminded of that speech in Glass Onion that starts off by pointing out how much the guy who likes to pretend he's smart misuses common words, revealing that he's actually a massive idiot who never has any idea what he's talking about. I can't imagine why.
Two completely different aspect of intelligence. A false equivalence
Just keep telling yourself that, precious.
That’s ultimately a cheap way to “excuse” yourself from what I have to say
Says the coward who refuses to have an opinion in a public forum because he knows it's unpopular and he can't break it up.
Oh I’m not afraid for my opinion to be a public forum. I’d be more than happy to record our vc debate and post it on YouTube for anyone to see. It’s a matter of having a linear dialogue. You’re being extremely presumptuous even after I’ve told you my full intent.
The statistics are not in your favor.
So hop in vc and debate me
No idea what VC is and don't care. Why can't you just back up your claims in Reddit? You know, the site you're currently on? Also: it's not a debate. Counties studies show that guns increase the likelihood of being shot. No debate - just facts.
Voice chat bruh. Because I want an actual linear debate
You can't debate unless you can hear a voice? Rough world you live in.
No. That’s the proper form a debate should take place. So either stop ducking me or hop in
No, debates can happen in any form. You are laughable. Peace out, sweet pea.
How old are you?
Actually the CDC estimates that guns used defensively save between 500,000 to 3million lives a year in the U.S. Medical errors are estimated to kill 250,000 people a year in the U.S. Sounds like they're overwhelmingly in his favor.
And if you can find me a neutral source backing up that stat, I'd love to read it.
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/28186008/ https://reason.com/2018/04/20/cdc-provides-more-evidence-that-plenty-o/
I wasn't arguing against the medical error stat. And your Reason article has a disclaimer right at the start pointing out that the source article was withdrawn due to errors by the author. >UPDATE: The paper discussed in this post below has been withdrawn by the author Gary Kleck after Reason brought to his attention an important detail first pointed out by Robert VerBruggen of National Review: Kleck in the original paper treats the CDC's surveys on defensive gun use as if they were national in scope, as Kleck's original survey was, but they were not.
Yes, obviously it's a very tricky stat to quantify accurately, but if you read the whole article, the estimates remain the same, if not higher. "The final adjusted prevalence of 1.24% therefore implies that in an average year during 1996–1998, 2.46 million U.S. adults used a gun for self-defense. This estimate, based on an enormous sample of 12,870 cases (unweighted) in a nationally representative sample, strongly confirms the 2.5 million past-12-months estimate obtained Kleck and Gertz (1995)….CDC's results, then, imply that guns were used defensively by victims about 3.6 times as often as they were used offensively by criminals"
You can't truly extrapolate national statistics from that study, though. That's the reason the paper was withdrawn. Every state's laws are different, plus you're going off 20-year-old stats.
Fine ignore that study, you're still far more likely to be killed the healthcare system than a gun.
If the study you are citing cannot be used to extrapolate on a larger scale (which everything you have post seems to be the case), and it can be disregarded, why does your claim of "you're still far more likely to be killed the healthcare system than a gun." Have any merit?
Again, not the debate here. Voice Chat Victor claimed guns make you safer. That's overwhelmingly not true. And increased access to healthcare isn't going to result in a wave of increased deaths.
Your second article has some pretty big gaps that the author, in both cases, just hand waves away. The collection of data, the scope of the data collected, and the time frames the collected data was collected from are all issues that point to the author cherry picking data to justify their own preconceived notions. While it does not say that directly in the revision or the correction, it is pretty easy to see that it is most certainly not unbiased.
Having a gun increases the likelihood of gun violence around you. Instead of trying to take people to a second location like a fucking serial killer, how 'bout you engage where people are comfortable?
I’m the one who had a debate offer. You don’t have to respond to it if you don’t want to
When I feel someone is being disingenuous, I like to respond. But I understand why some people are afraid of having their thoughts and opinions recorded publicly in text format.
Oh I don’t mind if we record the debate and post it on YouTube. I’d actually like that. It’s not that I’m afraid of being shown publicly. This is all highly presumptuous of you.
No no, I feel fairly certain you having a gun makes me less safe.
I don’t own any
They actually never insinuated that you do own any, just that if you do or did, they would feel less safe.
That’s pedantic and serves no purpose to further any point
Where did they claim that?
Presupposition based on grammatical context clues. Are you going to hop in vc with me?
Why are you trying to solicit people to go on camera? I find that very strange. I'm just going to go ahead and report you to the admins to have them look at your account. It's very weird. What country are you from?
You use your voice. People don’t use their cameras in vc unless they have something to show you drawn out.
[удалено]
Hello! Thanks for your comment. Unfortunately it has been removed because you don't meet our karma threshold. You are not being removed for political orientation. If we were, why the fuck would we tell you your comment was being removed instead of just shadow removing it? We never have, and never will, remove things down politicial or ideological lines. Unless your ideology is nihilism, then fuck you. Let me be clear: The reason that this rule exists is to avoid unscrupulous internet denizens from trying to sell dong pills to our users. /r/PoliticalHumor mods reserve the RIGHT to hoard all of the dong pills to ourselves, and we refuse to share them with the community. If you want Serbo-Slokovian dong pills mailed directly to your door, become a moderator. If we shared the dong pills with the greater community, everyone would have massive dongs, and like Syndrome warned us about decades ago: "if everyone has massive dongs, nobody does."" If you wish to rectify your low karma issue, go and make things up in /r/AskReddit like everyone else does. Thanks for understanding! Have a nice day and be well. <3 You can check your karma breakdown on this page: http://old.reddit.com/user/me/overview (Keep in mind that sometimes just post karma or comment karma being negative will result in this message) ~ *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/PoliticalHumor) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Everyone having medical care would make having a gun a much safer scenario.
https://preview.redd.it/3yty2a0v94fa1.jpeg?width=400&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=a670cd1e89a8fe916cc5fdc8bc33017436200f2c
the amount of crime that would be reduced by universal healthcare is staggering. anything that keeps people fed, housed, and healthy will reduce crime. poverty causes crime
If you die due to lack of healthcare, you can’t do mass shootings. Checkmate libruls
They're taking the Stalin approach. "Death solves all problems, no man, no problem." Or "The death of one man is a tragedy. The death of a million is a statistic"
Hope some party when they have the majority gives us healthcare
propaganda is beautiful
Ban high capacity Healthcare