Just the facts!

[azdesertrhino]

The link below contains a lot of fact and figures


This listing of facts is derived from over 200 hours of research and analysis of more than 100 articles, documents, and books. Every statistic from a given year was chosen based on availability, and not to slant the results by singling out a specific year that was different from others. Especially when dealing with statistics, the determination of what constitutes a credible fact and what does not, can contain elements of personal subjectivity. It is our mission to minimize subjective information and to provide highly factual content. Therefore, we are taking the additional step of giving our readers a tool to determine for themselves the viability of our work. To that end, we have provided four examples to illustrate the type of material that was excluded because it did not meet Just Facts' Standards of Credibility


http://www.justfacts.com/gun_control.htm

[TRobertsRN]

You have got to be kidding me? The Washington Times is a credibile source? It is a notoriously conservative paper...Think of it as the anti-thesis of the Washington Post. They might as well be using Fox news as a source.

And come on, the NRA?

Just the facts?

I also checked out their other pages...It seems that sight has an overwhelming love for the conservative agenda.

Please. :rolleyes:

Which would be a more credible source, a conservative or a liberal one? Do we have a objective source?

[xFallen]

You have got to be kidding me? The Washington Times is a credibile source? It is a notoriously conservative paper...Think of it as the anti-thesis of the Washington Post. They might as well be using Fox news as a source.

And come on, the NRA?

Just the facts?

I also checked out their other pages...It seems that sight has an overwhelming love for the conservative agenda.

Please. :rolleyes:


All the political rhetoric aside, that site is certainly not any sort of almanac of truth. There are enough credible facts to make it appear so at first. It is clearly biased and some of the "facts" attempt to draw questionable conclusions.

That's okay -- we're human and presumably the author of the site is too.

That site has the author's agenda peppered throughout, whatever it is, and regardless of whether one agrees or disagrees. That relegates it to an opinion or entertainment site at best.

But it is entertaining...


Barry

[mingoglia]

I don't know why others have to wander around looking for the truth when all they have to do is tune in to the Fox News Channel....duh. ;) It's fair and balanced, what else could you ask for?

Mike

[xFallen]

I don't know why others have to wander around looking for the truth when all they have to do is tune in to the Fox News Channel....duh. ;) It's fair and balanced, what else could you ask for?

Mike

Made me giggle.

[mingoglia]

No, you can always count on Barry breaking his junk each weekend.... so you can count on Barry's junk and gravity...two constants in life. :)

Mike

[mingoglia]

(Insert Barry pointing out that my junk isn't trail worthy here)

[mingoglia]

Rebuttal:

I have my axle all painted and my old D35 ripped from under the Heep.... just need to (hopefully) bolt the new one up this weekend. Then I have the SYE to do...

[xFallen]

Rebuttal:

I have my axle all painted and my old D35 ripped from under the Heep.... just need to (hopefully) bolt the new one up this weekend. Then I have the SYE to do...

This is pretty cool. I don't even have to type to watch my own banter exchange back and forth. :D Great service, Mike! ;)

Get your junk wheelable already. :rolleyes:

It is coming along though, I know how it goes...

[mingoglia]

I thought you'd like that. I just changed clothes and am about to head out to the garage to throw some tools around and bust some knuckles. I cooked a big dinner and I'm already regret eating so much before working in the garage.

[My1stJeep]

OIIIIO

You are correct. There is a flaw in the Gravity Theory.

For evidence to support that gravity does not exist please see one of Devilmans trail reports.... :D

Sorry, could not resist...:D

[azdesertrhino]

You have got to be kidding me? The Washington Times is a credibile source? It is a notoriously conservative paper...Think of it as the anti-thesis of the Washington Post. They might as well be using Fox news as a source.

And come on, the NRA?

Just the facts?

I also checked out their other pages...It seems that sight has an overwhelming love for the conservative agenda.

Please. :rolleyes:

I notice you bring up the Washington Times and the NRA, both, of course, on the conservative side but mention nothing about Sarah Brady and her comments mentioned in the list, or misconstrued information by Bill Clinton in his speeches.

Also nothing mentioned regarding the site listed in the link below, also used as a "credible source" in the report.

No agenda, just an observation.

http://www.handguncontrol.org/

:D

[Barker]

So, Clinton's comments on armor-piercing bullets - what's the story on this? Why do we need armor-piercing bullets to be available to the general public?

Personally on Clinton's comments - it appears he was just using the example of an officer killed in the line of duty, and why would we want to inflict this type of agony on other officers' families by allowing armor-piercing bullets to be used by criminals. I'm pretty sure the Clinton quote was taken out of context and time. At the time Clinton said that, I think his listeners would have been aware of the officer's cause of death.

Do any of you use armor-piercing bullets? Just curious why.

Thx,
Bill

[TRobertsRN]

I don't know of any use for these bullets other than defeating body armor. Maybe huntiung Grizzly Bear as .44 mag pistol won't penetrate the animals hair. Personally I don't have a particular use for them. If someone had a need to defeat body armor with a pistol they are not needed. There are a couple of handguns that do this with normal rounds. Their impact is so strong that at 25 feet or less a shot to the chest scrambles the hearts electrical system and kind of rubberizes the heart from which the induvidual does not recover.

[Antman]

So, Clinton's comments on armor-piercing bullets - what's the story on this? Why do we need armor-piercing bullets to be available to the general public?

Personally on Clinton's comments - it appears he was just using the example of an officer killed in the line of duty, and why would we want to inflict this type of agony on other officers' families by allowing armor-piercing bullets to be used by criminals. I'm pretty sure the Clinton quote was taken out of context and time. At the time Clinton said that, I think his listeners would have been aware of the officer's cause of death.

Do any of you use armor-piercing bullets? Just curious why.

Thx,
Bill


This whole thing was a bunch of hogwash. This is about pistols of course, but if I want armor piercing bullets, I'll just bring my hunting rifle along. Mosts cops vest are only able to stop pistol velocities. even a soft tip .223 will go through a vests! So its a moot point to stir up the ire of the public. Sure there are armor piercing pistol bullets like the Black Talon supposedly able to pierce a vest. BTW, want to shoot a cop? Make it a head shot and the vest is useless. But wait, most criminals cant shoot very good? NOT!
Clinton knew what he was talking about was ridiculous, so what does that make him?

[TRobertsRN]

So if we can't trust Sarah Brady, Bill Clinton, the NRA, none of the Washington Newspapers, Fox News, 60 minutes, or anyone else to be a credible source who do we trust? We have to listen to both sides with that grain of salt. What is their agenda? Who funded the reasearch? What data was left behing?

In the end the people make the decision, though it takes time. I seem to remember that congress changed to Republican control in the election after the Brady Bill. Correct my if I am wrong.

[xFallen]

So if we can't trust Sarah Brady, Bill Clinton, the NRA, none of the Washington Newspapers, Fox News, 60 minutes, or anyone else to be a credible source who do we trust? We have to listen to both sides with that grain of salt. What is their agenda? Who funded the reasearch? What data was left behing?

In the end the people make the decision, though it takes time. I seem to remember that congress changed to Republican control in the election after the Brady Bill. Correct my if I am wrong.

Trust No One.

(insert X-Files theme song here)

[azdesertrhino]

Had a statistician (sp?) that lived near us one time tell me that numbers and facts can be turned around to say whatever the particular author wants it to say.
I don't write this stuff, I find it, post it and watch the discussion, sometimes I enter into the debate sometimes I just read and try to learn.

Myself, I am a gun owner, believe the 2nd amendment protects my right to keep and bear arms. I feel lack of proper gun education causes accidents. I believe parents that have guns in a house bear the burden of educating every person in the household about firearms (at the proper age).
I feel the police are not capable of protecting my family and I. They are the first reponders after the fact. They can't be everywhere at all times.
I feel there are individuals in our society that look for easy targets. There are also individuals so addicted to drugs they will kill you for what you have in your pocket. There a gangbangers just looking for a target to prove themselves.
This is why I carry a gun to protect myself, my family and if necessary, my friends.

[TRobertsRN]

Say it loud, say it proud, Jim for President! Or at least for Supreme Court Justice to intrepret the Constitution for those who just don't understand.