Skip to main content

Five of 36 guns discovered by TSA agents at airports around the country last week.
Since we last visited, and up through last Friday, 15 hearty patriots have accidentally second amendmented themselves. That's 15 of our 40 entries in this installment. And continuing the pattern, several did so while happily and unconcernedly carrying their hand-held instant death machines among you, while out shopping, dining or otherwise enjoying the amenities. Were you in Chipotle in Sandy, Utah, last week? Walmart in Hattiesburg, Mississippi? Sam's Club in Waterloo, Iowa? Perhaps the YMCA in Austin, Texas? Maybe you weren't, but people who were certain they knew how to properly handle their firearms were. And guess where they found out that they weren't really up to the task? Right in the middle of the crowds, of course! Miraculously, only one car window and one ass (anatomically speaking) were damaged. You can thank the Flying Spaghetti Monster that none of the children at their swimming lessons at the Y were shot when mom blew a hole in her purse rummaging around down in Austin.

A few "coincidences" worthy of note this time around: two people accidentally discharged their weapons while giving demonstrations of how safe they were, one lodging a bullet in his living room floor, and one lodging a bullet in a place that stopped him from living and left him on the floor. Last week also saw two young men accidentally shoot their mothers, one in Oconee Co., South Carolina, and one in Dayton, Nevada. And although this one doesn't exactly fit, an Orlando, Florida, man accidentally fired his gun twice while he was cleaning it (of course). His first shot flew through his garage door and into the street, where it blasted a hole in a passing car, and microseconds thereafter, the 12-year-old girl inside it. So flustered by this accident was he that he fired a second shot through his own thigh.

There were three "home invasion" shootings, in which civic-minded patriots opt to share their used ammunition with neighbors. The most worthy of note being the Marion, Ohio, accident in which a good guy with a shotgun decided to participate in the prayer meeting in the downstairs apartment. His testimony was witnessed by two of the ladies of the assembly.

Outside of those noteworthy items, we saw the usual assortment of accidents. One hunting accident, one accident while "fixing" a gun, one target shooting mishap, one stray bullet shooting, and one cop's gun that went off when it was grabbed by a suspect. And finally, we note that this installment's children of GunFAIL were ages 5, 7, 12, 12, 12, 13, 15 and 17.

The rest of our list follows, below the fold.

  1. MILWAUKEE, WI, 1/16/14: Milwaukee police arrested a 14-year-old boy who was armed with a handgun that he tossed outside the Grand Avenue Mall, where it discharged without hitting anyone. Officers approached the teen to talk about his possible truancy about 11 a.m. Thursday outside the mall in the 200 block of W. Wisconsin Ave., according to a police spokesman. The teen struggled with officers before he was eventually taken into custody. The discarded gun was driven over by a passing vehicle, causing one round to be fired, Lt. Mark Stanmeyer said. In addition to having open warrants for several crimes including burglary and auto theft, the teen is a suspect in an armed robbery and wanted as a runaway from a group home, Stanmeyer said. The teen faces possible charges of resisting and possession of a dangerous weapon by a child.
  2. MADISON, TN, 2/10/14: Metro detectives believe a 22-year-old man unintentionally shot and killed his friend during a February shooting in Madison. Police are now trying to find Darius Montez Tate, who was charged with one count of reckless homicide and two counts of attempted first degree murder after he allegedly shot 25-year-old Jamahl Saunders and then opened fire at two other men. On Feb. 10, officers found Saunders lying on the ground next to a gun after they heard multiple gunshots at the 1200 block of Berwick Trail. Police now believe Saunders and Tate had opened fire at two other men who sat in a car across the street when Saunders was shot.
  3. ATHENS, TN, 2/17/14: McMinn County investigators are trying to figure out how a woman was shot while driving her car Monday morning. It happened on County Road 139 just before 9 a.m. That's when a bullet flew through the glass, grazing her ear. Sandra Hicks told them it was a stray bullet. Detectives believe there could be more to the story. And that's what they're trying to figure out. "I'm still looking around. I'm scanning through the woods looking around," said neighbor Tommy Buckner about the scare it gave him. Buckner says it's not entirely uncommon for him to hear shots around there. "People hunt in this area, they target practice in this area," he said. "She was in her vehicle, and according to her she heard what sounded like a rock hitting her windshield and at that point she realized she'd been injured. The round came through her window and struck her ear," explained McMinn County Sheriff Joe Guy. The sheriff isn't totally convinced by the stray bullet story. Hicks lives with some family members who they've been interviewing to get to the bottom of what may have happened. "We think there might be some other story that hasn't been told yet," Sheriff Guy said.
  4. WOLFE CO., KY, 2/19/14: A man drove from Wolfe County to Lexington after suffering a gunshot wound overnight. UK Hospital staff called police when the man showed up early Wednesday morning. Investigators say it appears the man shot himself unintentionally. Kentucky State Police took over the investigation since the incident happened in Wolfe County. Officials didn't release any information on the man's condition or exactly how he suffered the wound.
  5. FORT WAYNE, IN, 2/22/14: A man who was selling a handgun to a family member and who thought the gun was unloaded accidentally shot himself in the chest Saturday night and later died, police said. The accident happened about 8 p.m. Saturday in the man’s home at 1419 Landers Court in Georgetown Place, an upscale development off Maplecrest Road. Medics responded within minutes, but the man was later pronounced dead at the scene.
  6. MEMPHIS, TN, 2/22/14: Courtney Hatch was fiddling with a gun in the back seat of a car Saturday night, police said, when he pulled the trigger. The bullet shot out of the gun—which Hatch allegedly thought was unloaded—tore through the front passenger’s seat and buried itself in the back of 17-year-old Kennedra Miles. Hatch and another man in the car took her to an area hospital, but it was too late. Miles didn’t survive, and Hatch has been charged with reckless homicide.
  7. GREENEVILLE, TN, 2/22/14: Local law enforcement investigated two accidental shooting incidents over the weekend, one involving a 7-year-old boy. Gage Ricker was injured about 9:15 a.m. Saturday in the 1300 block of Iron Bridge Road, sheriff's Deputy Jeff Caudill said in a report. The boy's father, Leonard Ricker, told deputies he and his 7-year-old son were squirrel hunting in the woods.
  8. BROOKVILLE, OH, 2/22/14: Jerry Stanley, Brookville, Ohio: Accidental shooting—Stanley shot himself in the hand while trying to fix his firearm, receiving minor injuries, 4060 Chester Blvd., 4:47 p.m. Saturday.
  9. TOPEKA, KS, 2/23/14: A man who may have unlawfully been in possession of a firearm showed up Sunday afternoon at a local hospital with a self-inflicted accidental gunshot wound to the leg, an official with the Topeka Police Department said. Lt. Mike Cross said the 26-year-old man, who is doing all right after the incident, was still at Stormont-Vail Regional Health Center late Sunday evening. The incident happened after the man shot himself in the leg at a house at 2300 S.E. 22nd. Cross said an acquaintance drove him to the hospital. Hospital security called authorities when the man walked into Stormont at 4:13 p.m. The man, whose name hasn’t been released, wasn’t being cooperative with police as he may be a previously convicted felon in possession of a firearm, Cross said, adding he may be taken into custody after being released.
  10. PHILADELPHIA, PA, 2/23/14: A woman wound up shot after she got caught in the middle of a fight between two brothers in Philadelphia’s Kensington neighborhood last night. The shooting began as a fistfight between two brothers around 11 p.m. Sunday, according to Philadelphia Police. After the fight, the younger brother went to his girlfriend’s house along the 200 block of E Tioga Street, police said. The man’s 33-year-old brother showed up at the house a short time later looking for his 28-year-old sibling. The older brother then allegedly opened fire on his brother but missed—striking the younger man’s girlfriend three times, according to police. The 22-year-old woman was rushed to temple University Hospital in stable condition. The alleged shooter—who was recently released from prison—fled the scene, according to police.
  11. INDEPENDENCE TOWNSHIP, MI, 2/23/14: The Oakland County Sheriff’s Office is investigating what appears to be a self-inflicted shooting death in Independence Township. It happened Sunday night at a home in the 4400 block of Pinedale. The victim’s live-in girlfriend told deputies that her 36-year-old boyfriend had been demonstrating the safety of his three handguns by holding them to his head and pulling the trigger. The third gun fired and he was struck in the head. The victim was pronounced dead at the scene. His name was not immediately released.
  12. COLLINSVILLE, IL, 2/23/14: A young man died in what police said may be an accidental shooting Sunday. Andrew Birch, 23, of Collinsville died of a single gunshot wound to the head early Sunday morning. Collinsville police were called to the 600 block of Arrowhead at 1:30 a.m. on reports that someone had been shot. First responders transported Birch to Anderson Hospital, where he was pronounced dead. Collinsville Police Maj. Tom Coppotelli said that there were three people located inside the residence along with Birch, and all individuals are cooperating with the investigation. Coppotelli said they are not currently looking for any suspects in the shooting. While nothing has yet been ruled out, Coppotelli said they do not think that Birch's death was a suicide. "We have information that leads us to believe this may have been an accidental shooting," Coppotelli said. The Collinsville Police Department and Madison County Coroner's Office are continuing to investigate Birch's death.
  13. SALEM, OR, 2/24/14: An 18-year-old Silverton man was wounded by a ricochet bullet while target shooting with four other teens in a wooded area. The Marion County sheriff’s office said Monday that one of the friends shot a steel target at close range with a high-caliber rifle and the bullet hit the victim in the neck. He was treated at Silverton Hospital and released. The sheriff’s office says no charges will be filed, but it reminds target shooters to follow safety precautions.
  14. ROANOKE, VA, 2/24/14: Two men were shot Monday in Roanoke outside of the Rescue Mission Ministries. One of the victims was hit by a stray bullet and was not involved in the argument that led up to the shooting, according to the Roanoke Police Department. Both victims are being treated at Carilion Roanoke Memorial hospital for injuries that are not believed to be life-threatening. No arrests have been made but an active search is taking place, according to the Roanoke Police Department. The shooting happened around 2:55 p.m. Monday afternoon after an argument, which involved one of the victims. According to Roanoke police, a suspect grabbed a gun from a car in front of the Rescue Mission Ministries and began shooting from outside of the car. The second victim appears to have been an unintended victim in the shooting. Rescue Mission Ministries CEO Joy Sylvester-Johnson said the second victim was hit by a stray bullet while leaving the Rescue Mission. The second victim lived at the Rescue Mission. The first victim appears to know the suspect but is not providing detectives with details about the shooting, according to Roanoke police.
  15. BIRMINGHAM, AL, 2/24/14: A 6-year-old Birmingham girl accidentally brought a gun to her elementary school this week, Birmingham police said Tuesday. The young girl, police said, didn't know the gun was in her backpack. She discovered it herself when she went to get her snack out, said police spokesman Lt. Sean Edwards. Central Park Elementary School staff notified police Monday. Investigators learned the girl's mother was in a car accident Sunday night in which the car was totaled. While transferring her belongings from the wrecked car to her sister's car, the girl's aunt put the gun in the girl's backpack and seemingly forgot about. The girl stumbled on the gun at lunchtime when she went to get her snack. She immediately told her friend to tell a teacher, Edwards said. The teacher notified office staff and the police were called to the scene. Edwards said no charges will be filed. "It was determined that this was an honest mistake,'' he said.
  16. BAYTOWN, TX, 2/24/14: A Baytown man was arrested after his gun discharged while showing his wife it was safe to use. Police were called to an RV park in the 1100 block of Bob Smith Road at 5:55 p.m. Monday after someone reported hearing a shot fired at a trailer home. Once there, the man told officers that he was showing his wife how to safely handle a pistol when it discharged into the living room floor.
  17. BLOUNTVILLE, TN, 2/24/14: The Transportation Security Administration discovered two firearms at the checkpoint at Tri-Cities Regional Airport Monday. At approximately 2:28 p.m., a loaded .38 caliber Charter 2000 revolver with five rounds and a loaded .22 caliber Jennings semi-automatic with six rounds were discovered in a passenger’s carry-on bag. TSA said the passenger was cited by local law enforcement.
  18. MEMPHIS, TN, 2/25/14: Memphis police arrested a 15-year-old on reckless homicide charges in the accidental shooting death Tuesday of a 13-year-old. The victim, Cartrial Robertson, was shot in the upper chest while the two wrestled over the gun, police said. The shooting occurred minutes before 3 a.m. in the rear bedroom of a home in the 600 block of Hillcrest. Police haven’t said how the teens got the gun or if adults were in the Binghamton-area home at the time. A detention hearing for the suspect is scheduled Wednesday in Shelby County Juvenile Court.
  19. PINE HILLS, FL, 2/25/14: Deputies trying to find the person who shot a 15-year-old boy Tuesday in Pine Hills didn't have to go far: He shot himself by accident, then lied about it, the Orange County Sheriff's Office said. Calls reporting the shooting gave different addresses on Silver Star Road, so it took deputies about 15 minutes to find the boy, sheriff's spokeswoman Jane Watrel said. Then they searched for a shooter until the truth came out. The shooting happened in the J-Mart parking lot at the corner of Hiawassee and Silver Star roads. It was reported about 3:20 p.m. The boy is a student at Innovations Middle School, a charter school in the same plaza, Watrel said. He was taken to Arnold Palmer Hospital for Children in Orlando for treatment of a high-caliber gunshot wound to his thigh. The teen could face a weapons-possession charge when he is discharged, Watrel said.
  20. BOARDMAN, OH, 2/25/14: Boardman police, fire and emergency personnel responded to a home on Carter Circle at 5:30 p.m. Tuesday for a woman who accidentally shot herself in the leg. The 24-year-old woman told police she was dusting when she dropped her husband’s .45 caliber semi-automatic Glock she was attempting to move it. She attempted to catch the gun and grabbed it by the trigger, causing it to fire and hit her in the calf. The woman was transferred to St. Elizabeth Health Center in downtown. The gun and three other guns were taken by a family member for safekeeping.
  21. NIAGARA FALLS, NY, 2/25/14: Falls police say a woman was shot and wounded after another woman grabbed at the gun of a narcotics detective during an incident in the area of 27th Street and Orleans Avenue Tuesday night. Police Superintendent Bryan DalPorto confirmed the shooting which occurred around 8:30 p.m. The woman’s wounds are not believed to be life-threatening. The detective was not injured. DalPorto said the suspect attempted to dive out a window of the home but was taken into custody. Then as detectives attempted to “clear” others in the house, they encountered two women. “One of the women began to fight with a detective and his gun accidentally went off,” DalPorto said. The bullet grazed the leg of the second woman. “Her injuries do not appear to be serious,” DalPorto said. An infant inside the home was not inured during the incident.
  22. OKEECHOBEE, FL, 2/25/14: An Indiana man who was in stable condition yesterday after he was accidentally shot in the stomach by a .45 caliber handgun will not be pressing charges. Okeechobee County Sheriff’s Office say the victim and his friends were apparently at a hunting camp on the prairie when the accident took place, the Okeechobee News reported. When questioned by investigators, witnesses at the hunting camp said the shooting was an accident. The shooter, a 68 year old man, and the victim were reportedly laughing at the scene. The victim told police "it was horseplay and that accidents happen."
  23. HATTIESBURG, MS, 2/25/14: A man has been charged for discharging a gun in the parking lot of the Walmart on Highway 49 in Hattiesburg. According to authorities, Gerrel Rhodes accidentally discharged a gun in his car Tuesday afternoon, shattering the window of his vehicle. No one was hurt in the incident, and the man is being charged with discharging a weapon within city limits.
  24. LOUISVILLE, KY, 2/25/14: A woman is charged after police said she barged into a west Louisville convenience store waving a handgun at customers and staff. Police said the loaded weapon was later found in the backseat of a vehicle, next to a toddler. A short time later, police apprehended Marhsall across the street attempting to get into a vehicle. An officer saw her make a throwing motion with her arm when she saw police. According to arrest records, officers found a loaded .25 caliber semi-automatic pistol next to a 22-month-old child in the backseat of the vehicle. Marshall is charged with five counts of wanton endangerment, possession of a handgun by a convicted felon and tampering with physical evidence.
  25. DANVILLE, CA, 2/25/14: A 12-year-old Danville boy was injured after he was allegedly playing with a gun. The Danville Police Department says the boy accidentally shot himself at his home on Tuesday. KTVU obtained a recording of the 911 call made by the boy’s mother around 4:50 p.m. "Requesting police response ... RP calling 911 advising her son accidentally shot himself in the arm, RP is an off-duty officer, she has secured the gun, son is 12 years of age, its accidental shooting, he’s awake and breathing." The dispatcher mentions the person who reported the incident was an off-duty officer and a source, within the Oakland Police Department told KTVU the boy’s parents are both officers with OPD. The source goes on to say that the boy was staying with his mom Tuesday and that he was “playing with the gun when he shot himself in the arm.” Danville Police Lt. Allan Shields said the boy accidentally shot himself, and that he was released from the hospital. Lt. Shields declined to answer where the boy got the loaded gun and if it was an Oakland Police issued firearm. Shields did say the case was sent to the Contra Costa County District Attorney's office for review.
  26. OCONEE CO., SC, 2/26/14: A woman was airlifted to an Upstate hospital after being shot by her son, according to the Oconee County Sheriff's Office. Deputies responded to a shooting on Rock Crusher Road Wednesday afternoon, public information officer Jimmy Watt said. A woman inside the home suffered a gunshot wound to the leg, according to Watt. Deputies said their investigation determined that the woman's adult son was walking through the kitchen with a loaded gun when it accidentally discharged. The victim was airlifted to Greenville Memorial Hospital.  Her condition is not being released. Deputies say the son will not be charged in the case.
  27. SANDY, UT, 2/26/14: A scary moment inside a Sandy restaurant when a man paying for his food drops a bag and a gun goes off. It happened just before 1:30 Wednesday afternoon at the Chipotle near 104th South State Street. Sandy Police say the man removed his backpack to pay for his meal and accidentally dropped it. When the bag hit the floor, the handgun he had inside accidentally discharged. Luckily the bullet hit the floor and lodged into the concrete. The man with the gun reportedly picked up the backpack and the shell casing, got his lunch and then waited outside for police. Sandy Police Sgt. Jon Arnold said, "The individual is a conceal carry permit holder. He had the gun legally and lawfully." Sgt. Arnold says because it was an accident, and because no one was hurt, the man was not cited.
  28. WATERLOO, IA, 2/26/14: A Dike man was injured when he accidentally shot himself while shopping in Waterloo Wednesday. According to police, 50-year-old David Kugel was removing his handgun to store in his vehicle in the parking lot of Sam’s Club, 210 E. Tower Park Drive, at about 6 p.m. when he weapon fired. The bullet struck Kugel in the buttocks, causing a minor wound, according to the police report. Kugel then drove home, where a family member persuaded him to seek medical attention. He was treated at Covenant Medical Center in Waterloo. Capt. Tim Pillack said Kugel had the proper permit to carrying the weapon.
  29. UHRICHSVILLE, OH, 2/26/14: Union Hospital personnel reported Wednesday to Tuscarawas County Sheriff’s deputies that an 81-year-old Uhrichsville man was treated in the emergency room for an accidental self-inflicted gunshot wound. Deputies said the man told them he was loading his .22-caliber revolver, with the hammer partially cocked so he could rotate the cylinder, when his thumb slipped off the hammer and the gun discharged. The bullet grazed the man’s thigh and he received four stitches, deputies noted.
  30. PORTLAND, ME, 2/27/14: Portland police are investigating an accidental shooting in which a person mishandled a gun and was shot in the hand. The incident happened at about 3:30 p.m. Thursday on Cornell Street, in the Morrill’s Corner neighborhood. Police and rescue workers were called to a reported shooting and determined it was accidental. The person was cleaning the gun and it fired, police said.
  31. DAYTON, NV, 2/27/14: A woman was transported to a hospital after her son's gun accidentally went off and shot her. According to the Sergeant with the Lyon County Sheriff Dayton Substation, on Thursday, February 27, 2014, a young man was showing his new gun to his father. The young man pulled the gun out of the holster when it went off and shot his mother in the leg, according to the sergeant. The woman was transported by Careflight to Renown Regional Medical Center in Reno. Careflight arrived on scene around 3:40 p.m., according to an official with Careflight. According to an official with Careflight, the woman's injuries are critical. No one was taken into custody.
  32. MARION, OH, 2/27/14: Two women are recovering after being accidentally shot at a prayer meeting. Lt. Ed Brown, with the Marion Police Department, said a shotgun was accidentally fired in an upstairs room around 4:25 p.m. Thursday in a home at 423 S. Prospect St. The shotgun blast came through the ceiling and struck two women in the room below. One elderly woman was struck in the right leg, right forearm and cheek. A middle-aged woman was struck in the right leg. None of the injuries appeared to be life-threatening, Brown said. Both women were taken to Marion General Hospital by a Marion City Fire Department ambulance. The building was a duplex with separate residences upstairs and downstairs. Both parties were in the front rooms of the home. Terry Thacker, 59, of Marion, was charged with two counts of negligent assault in the shooting.
  33. WASHINGTON, DC, 2/27/14: A man shot himself in the leg in an apparent accident Thursday afternoon in the parking garage of the homeland security campus in Southeast Washington, according to police. The incident occurred about 4:55 p.m. in the 2700 block of Martin Luther King Jr. Ave., across from St. Elizabeths Hospital. Authorities said the shooting occurred on part of the campus that is used by federal agencies. Police would not immediately say whether the man is connected to a law enforcement agency. The man’s condition was not known, but police said the wound does not appear to be life threatening. The man was taken to an area hospital for treatment.
  34. AUSTIN, TX, 2/27/14: A woman accidentally discharged her gun on Thursday while she was watching her children’s swim lesson at the YMCA. Buda police arrived at the YMCA at about 8:30 p.m. and found the woman, Kamila Brudi, waiting for them outside. According to the police report, Brudi said she was rummaging through her purse when she accidentally set off the .38 caliber Derringer pistol. She said she usually keeps the pistol in her car for self defense but forgot to take it out of her purse before going into the YMCA. The police report says she immediately reported the shot to the manager when she saw people around her were curious as to what caused the loud noise. Police said Brudi did not have the weapon in a holster. Officers saw no intent to discharge the weapon, so they issued her a citation for Discharge of Firearm where Prohibited – a city ordinance violation.
  35. CASTRO VALLEY, CA, 2/27/14: Four men have been in arrested in connection with Thursday’s brazen shooting along Interstate 580. Bullets flew on the freeway, and also above it creating a close call for one nearby resident. The shooting happened along 580 in Castro Valley and shut down traffic at the height of the evening commute for half an hour.  It also created quite the scare for Justin Detro, whose SUV was shot at, and Lauren Kreiss, whose home was hit by stray bullets. "I'm very very lucky where it decided to land," says Lauren Kreiss. A stray bullet flew through Kreiss's sliding glass door and embedding in her apartment wall. "It's a little crazy that it was at random, especially all the way from the freeway," she says. Kreiss lives on a hill above the freeway and far enough from the shooting scene that she couldn't even see it. Investigators say the bullet was one of several fired from a silver sedan yesterday along 580. At least seven others struck the SUV Detro was driving. "It seems like if people pull guns on someone its usually a pissed off thing, but these guys are laughing like they've done it before," says Detro.
  36. OPELOUSAS, LA, 2/27/14: A 5-year-old Opelousas boy suffered life-threatening injuries in an early evening shooting Thursday. Events surrounding the incident, which happened at about 4:20 p.m., were not immediately clear. Police said they were initially told it was a drive-by shooting, but that appeared to be an erroneous account later in the investigation. The boy suffered a single gunshot wound to his head in the front yard of his home in the 500 block of Martin Luther King Drive, just down the street from North Elementary School. “We’re not ruling (the drive-by) out, but the investigation has taken a different direction,” Opelousas Police Chief Perry Gallow said. The victim was initially taken to Opelousas General Health System before being airlifted to Our Lady of the Lake Regional Medical Center in Baton Rouge. Gallow characterized the wound as “life-threatening.” Police recovered a .22-caliber long-barreled revolver, thought to have been the one used in the shooting. The weapon was found beneath the front porch of the home. Friends, family and other witnesses are being interviewed for details on the shooting. Officers at the scene said information gleaned after the initial report indicated the shooting may have been an accident, resulting from children playing with guns. Gallow said he couldn’t comfortably label the incident as an accidental or deliberate shooting. “There are a lot of unanswered questions,” he said. UPDATE: Five-year-old Jon-Qualon Pitre, critically injured when he was shot in the head in an incident at his home Thursday, was taken off life support and died at Our Lady of the Lake Regional Medical Center in Baton Rouge Saturday.
  37. ORLANDO, FL, 2/28/14: Orlando police said a 12-year-old girl was struck with a bullet while she was in a car, from a gun that was accidentally discharged in a nearby house around 7:43 p.m. Friday. Police said an adult male was handling a gun inside a home near the Beachline and Daetwyler Drive when it accidentally discharged. The man was struck in the thigh, while the young girl, who was a passenger in a car traveling on the same street, was struck in the arm. Both victims were transported to nearby hospitals for minor injuries. UPDATE: Orlando police said Ventura Mateo, 50, said he was showing a friend how to clean his SIG Sauer handgun. Mateo told investigators he pulled back on the slide and put his hand on the trigger, accidentally firing the weapon. Mateo told police that around the same time he became flustered and fired a second round, hitting himself in the thigh.
  38. INDIANAPOLIS, IN, 2/28/14: A 12-year-old boy is recovering after accidentally firing a gun and injuring himself. Police were called to Community East Hospital just before 10:30 Friday night after family members took the boy to the emergency room. The mother of the boy told police she arrived at her father’s home to pick up the child when she saw he was bleeding. The grandfather of the boy told police that he was running an errand and left the boy and five other children in his car unattended. When he got back to the car, he found out that his grandson had accidentally shot himself. The boy told police he found the gun in the car and thinking it was a BB gun, started playing with it. He then accidentally discharged the gun and shot himself. None of the other children were hurt. The boy’s condition is unknown at this time.
  39. MACON, GA, 2/28/14: A man is charged with involuntary manslaughter after accidentally shooting his cousin in the back and killing him, according to a Bibb County sheriff's news release citing witness accounts. The victim, Cedric Recardo Patrick Jr., 21 years old, was shot Friday night at 10:15 p.m. while sitting in the front seat of a car in a Taco Bell restaurant parking lot at 1090 Eisenhower Parkway. According to others in the car, the suspect, Dominick Kantrel Howell Sr., 27, was sitting in the back seat with a pistol in his lap. When the pistol fell, he tried to catch it and the gun accidentally fired, shooting his cousin in the back. Howell turned himself in to investigators after Patrick was taken to a hospital and pronounced dead around 11 p.m. Howell is being held without bond at the Bibb County jail.
  40. WELLFORD, SC, 2/28/14: Deputies in Spartanburg County said they are investigating a shooting that damaged an apartment in the Wellford area. Deputies said they were called to a duplex on Fort Prince Boulevard on Friday night, where a woman living there told deputies she heard a loud boom earlier in the day but was unable to identify the source. The woman said her husband later discovered damage to a dresser drawer, a bullet inside and bullet holes in the wall behind the dresser. Deputies said they bullet appeared to have come through the wall from the neighboring unit. Deputies said they attempting contacting the victims' neighbors but were unsuccessful.

Originally posted to David Waldman on Tue Mar 04, 2014 at 02:20 PM PST.

Also republished by Repeal or Amend the Second Amendment (RASA), Shut Down the NRA, and Daily Kos.

Tags

EMAIL TO A FRIEND X
Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags

?

More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Check out my new gun diary (15+ / 0-)

    "If Wall Street paid a tax on every “game” they run, we would get enough revenue to run the government on." ~ Will Rogers

    by Lefty Coaster on Tue Mar 04, 2014 at 02:39:44 PM PST

  •  I'd also like to nominate a local officer (13+ / 0-)

    who lost his gun during a chase.

    Following the foot chase, one of the officers noticed his service weapon had been dislodged from his holster and was now missing.
    ...
    An extensive search was initiated which lasted throughout the day...  The efforts to locate the weapon were exhausted and it was not located.

    "He who fights monsters should see to it that he himself does not become a monster. And if you gaze for long into an abyss, the abyss gazes also into you."

    by Hayate Yagami on Tue Mar 04, 2014 at 02:58:21 PM PST

  •  The one in the Chipotle in Sandy, Ut never even (14+ / 0-)

    made the newspaper. And there was no charge because no one got hit. Guess what, tickets are written every day for the simple act of driving over the speed limit, and no one feels it necessary to wait for the crash.

    There can be no protection locally if we're content to ignore the fact that there are no controls globally.

    by oldpotsmuggler on Tue Mar 04, 2014 at 04:04:10 PM PST

    •  another benign deadly weapon. appreciate the gun. (5+ / 0-)

      Now they have the 2nd (safety net for sloppy) Amendment, and can't be infringed to actually treat their gun like a gun and not a video game controller.

      by 88kathy on Tue Mar 04, 2014 at 06:33:22 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  See my comment below. (5+ / 0-)

      Any auto accident resulting in property damage will get you a citation for failing to maintain control of your vehicle.

      To put the torture behind us is, inevitably, to put it in front of us.

      by UntimelyRippd on Tue Mar 04, 2014 at 07:55:51 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Not necessarily (4+ / 0-)

        If a malfunction of the motor vehicle was the proximal cause of the accident, a citation is unwarranted.

        Considering modern firearm safeties, I can't really see that happening though.

        I've carried firearms for decades, both on and off duty, neither I or any of my men ever even came close to an unintentional discharge of a firearm.
        Since I retired from the military, the only firearms I carry are to and from the range or hunting, the same story is true of those and they're only loaded when I'm ready to fire. That means well away from a highway and residences or physically on the firing line.
        When not in use or being cleaned, my firearms are in locked safes, where they belong when not being cleaned or used on a range or when hunting.

        Safety isn't that hard, dammit!
        Regrettably, stupid is easy.   :(

        Perhaps we should require a test be passed before any enumerated right is exercised, a combination of common sense and specific knowledge on proper usage of said right.
        For the first amendment, that would be excellent! Westboro Baptist would be shuttered, the tea party would be silenced and assholes wouldn't  be allowed to possess a firearm.

        •  but the big question is ... if your firearm falls (0+ / 0-)

          off the dashboard and discharges into your hand, causing you to lose control of your vehicle ... will you be cited?

          how i hate the legal mind.

          To put the torture behind us is, inevitably, to put it in front of us.

          by UntimelyRippd on Wed Mar 05, 2014 at 05:08:01 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

        •  Yep, there's no excuse (0+ / 0-)

          Even if you do have an unintentional discharge, nobody would get hurt if you're following the first rule of gun safety: always point the muzzle in a safe direction, even if you're sure it's not loaded. In other words, don't go pointin' guns at people!

    •  Just about every company in the country (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      LilithGardener, WakeUpNeo, 88kathy

      has an employee handbook stating that dangerous items (and specifically mentioning ALL firearms) are prohibited on-premises.  It makes business sense because it results in lower liability insurance rates.  Clearly, Chipotle needs to extend that policy from behind the counter to in front of as well.

    •  And tickets are written for people who (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      WakeUpNeo, Piren, 88kathy

      park next to a fire hydrant. They even face temporary forfeiture for such disregard of safe parking practice. We need similar sanctions for careless, impatient, and sloppy gun owners who prove careless disregard for safe gun handling.

      "The pessimist complains about the wind; the optimist expects it to change; the realist adjusts the sails.” — William Arthur Ward

      by LilithGardener on Fri Mar 07, 2014 at 06:02:20 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  What is a (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    88kathy

    Flying Spaghetti Monster. Is that Rush Limbaugh?

    You best believe it does

    by HangsLeft on Tue Mar 04, 2014 at 06:01:17 PM PST

  •  Can we exclude self-inflicted gun wounds (9+ / 0-)

    from the ACA, just like the right-wingers are trying to do for contraception? My religious beliefs don't include everyone walking around heavily armed and I really don't want to be paying for other people's carelessness.

    Seriously.

    •  As an owner of a full dozen firearms (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Sharon Wraight

      I agree.

      Though, that would be a death sentence for some, either due to the gunshot wound itself or by infection.

      Pity that we don't have a reckless endangerment of oneself as a charge. It'd slow the self-inflicted accidental firearms related injuries and stop Jackass in their mutual tracks.

  •  Even more fun when demonstrating gun safety (7+ / 2-)

    8 on the 25th !! The most reported one was left off your list. A fatality in Michigan. Made the UK and India papers among other countries.

    Google Search

  •  This is illuminating: (8+ / 0-)
    Sandy Police Sgt. Jon Arnold said, "The individual is a conceal carry permit holder. He had the gun legally and lawfully." Sgt. Arnold says because it was an accident, and because no one was hurt, the man was not cited.
    In Wisconsin, if you lose control of your automobile in such a way as to cause damage to property, you will receive a citation (with demerits on your license). "It was an accident" is not a defense -- you are presumptively responsible for not having an accident while driving a motor vehicle.

    To put the torture behind us is, inevitably, to put it in front of us.

    by UntimelyRippd on Tue Mar 04, 2014 at 07:54:30 PM PST

    •  Again, not quite accurate (0+ / 0-)

      If you lose control of your motor vehicle due to a mechanical malfunction, such as lost brakes, broken steering, etc, you are not given a citation.

      The same can be true for a firearm, but the likelihood of a malfunction disabling all safety features on a modern firearm that would permit said firearm to fire when dropped is about the same as my hitting the lottery. Sounds slightly lucky until you realize, I don't waste money on the lottery.
      The only firearm in these stories that sounds like it may fire would be the derringer and that would have to be carried in a full hammer down position and be a really old model.
      We'll suffice it to say that I'm dubious that it was such an instance and more likely carelessness in the form of not engaging the safety.
      Hence, the idiot should have been given a citation for discharging a firearm in city limits.

      This is akin to a car careening off of the highway, striking a wall or tree near a home wall, then claiming no citation is issued because nobody was hurt, ignoring the speeding and reckless driving that caused the accident in the first place.
      Not akin to brake failure, someone unsafely operating a motor vehicle and striking ones own, resulting in a loss of control.

      The number of profanities that pass through my mind while reading these stories would be considered legendary were I to actually utter them!

  •  Thank you and Peace to you, David Waldman. n/t (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Oh Mary Oh, allensl, Sharon Wraight
  •  I loves me some Austin, but dang, it's in Texas. (4+ / 0-)
  •  Best headline of the year. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Sharon Wraight
  •  I hope Jim Carey is reading this. (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    WakeUpNeo, Sharon Wraight, wilywascal

    "two people accidentally discharged their weapons while giving demonstrations of how safe they were"

    Reminds me of a Fire Marshall Bill sketch.

    "Let me show ya somethin'."

  •  Funny funny gun owners (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    FrankRose, Tominator

    When they accidentally hurt their mom or someone they love we make fun of them.  They are not like us, they don't feel pain like us so we can dehumanize them and laugh when they are stupid!  Stupid funny gun owners.

    I wonder why we cannot convince them to listen to us about gun control - they must be really stupid if they don't listen to us.  Stupid, stupid gun owners.

    •  I own a dozen firearms (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      jrudisill, Tominator

      I fire competitively and hunt.

      I think that the majority of the people illustrated in these stories are assholes.
      But, I don't laugh at them. Safety violations are never funny.
      Ever.
      Injuries are really not funny at all.

      To be honest, were I to have witnessed many of these incidents, I'd probably have disassembled the firearm that discharged and scattered the sear, firing pin, screws and springs throughout the landscape. Then, I'd hand what was left of their newly non-functional firearm back.

      •  @Wzrd1 - We agree (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        FrankRose, Tominator

        This comment was mocking those 'progressives' who take delight in bad (gun-related) things happening to gun owners and their families.  Anyone who mocks a gun owner who accidentally shoots a loved one is an awful human being - the gun owner may be foolish and stupid - but the one who mocks that situation is ... evil.  

        It turns my stomach to see people claim that they care about the lives and safety of their fellow Americans and then laugh at the ones who are harmed by guns ... just because they own guns.  

        I didn't think I needed to explain that until I read @Sharon's comment.  

        •  deserves HR for calling David "evil, awful human" (0+ / 0-)

          I'd give the donut but I'm mentioned in the comment and am engaged in discussion with him elsewhere in this diary.

          Anyone who mocks a gun owner who accidentally shoots a loved one is an awful human being - the gun owner may be foolish and stupid - but the one who mocks that situation is ... evil.  
          Also deserves HR for DBAD for mischaracterizing David's intent:
          It turns my stomach to see people claim that they care about the lives and safety of their fellow Americans and then laugh
          The implication is that David doesn't care about the lives and safety of fellow Americans. I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest this is not true.
        •  This will not work. (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          WakeUpNeo

          And you'll have to take a number.

          I don't go in for this particular form of concern trolling. Nor do I believe you have the compassion you profess to have, so that makes us even.

        •  You are projecting your own spin on this diary (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          WakeUpNeo

          and seem to have joined those who call David's diaries "violence porn."

          I'm a strong supporter of the individual right to keep and bear arms and see these diaries as important for several reasons.

          1. Gun owners have generally failed to educated their potential allies on all the ways gaps in gun law and enforcement policy allow sloppy, careless, and irresponsible gun owners to get away with negligent homicide, day in and day out. It's one of the most persistently under-reported stories of this decade.

          2. These stories are hard to read week in, week out. They are depressing, and each story is one or more lives shattered. It's important that we bear witness to the carnage. The author compiles these reports so that we can.

          3. Those who don't want the ugly underbelly of American gun culture exposed come into these diaries to disrupt the discussion.

          Read the stories. Comment on the stories. Complaining about how others feel and how they comment is the fastest route to convince readers you have nothing to offer.
          Or skip the diary if it's not your cup of tea.

          In either case, don't be a dick.

          "The pessimist complains about the wind; the optimist expects it to change; the realist adjusts the sails.” — William Arthur Ward

          by LilithGardener on Fri Mar 07, 2014 at 06:58:03 PM PST

          [ Parent ]

    •  Welcome to DailyKos, BadBoyScientist (4+ / 0-)

      I see you joined almost a month ago (Feb 9th 2014), you have made 14 comments, of which 8 of the 9 most recent ones are all pro-gun comments.

      •  Pro Gun comments (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        FrankRose, Tominator

        @Sharon Wright, do you have an issue allowing pro gun comments on this blog? Perhaps every good card-carrying progressive, which I am, should be required to be anti-gun in order to post. Would this make you happy, or did I miss your point?

        •  there's been some issues recently with (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Sharon Wraight

          sock puppeting, one way to start researching is to look at join dates

          •  You got me, my real name is ... (0+ / 1-)
            Recommended by:
            Hidden by:
            WakeUpNeo

            Adolf Hitler - that is right.  I am not just as bad as Hitler, I
            am Hitler.

            You got me.  The cat is out of the bag.  

            •  And now you're proving yourself to being a dick. (2+ / 0-)

              Congratulations. Have a donut.

              One rule to rule them all

              The core of the Daily Kos behavior guide is simple: don't be a dick. While we go into some depth below about sanctionable behavior, it's not an all-encompassing list. There are always types of behavior that while not listed below, rise to the level of "dickishness", and as such are actionable...
               
              •  @WakeUpNeo Your comment says more about YOU (2+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                FrankRose, Tominator

                than it does about me ...

                Seriously, I have posted a handful of comments - many quite progressive - but I dared to mention that we ought not vilify all gun owners, nor should we take delight in gun-related tragedies - even those befalling gun owners and I am attacked and accused of being a sock puppet.

                When I mock that baseless accusation by claiming to be the actual Adolf Hitler - and not merely someone who is just as bad as Hitler - I am told that I am proving myself of being a dick.

                Well ... this is why America continues to suffer senseless gun deaths - the most ardent supporters attack anyone who doesn't see eye to eye with them and their attitude rallies more foes than allies.  Wayne LaPierre thanks all of you for your aid.

                •  As a scientist please don't claim (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  Sharon Wraight

                  causality without reason, rather than opinion

                  'this is why America continues to suffer senseless gun deaths the most ardent supporters attack anyone who doesn't see eye to eye with them and their attitude rallies more foes than allies. Wayne LaPierre thanks all of you for your aid.'

                  There have been dozens of people banned from this site for making useless inflammatory remarks on several sides of gun related issues, it tends to be a pattern over time rather than a one-off, your pattern is developing

                  Rather than useless inflammatory remark, as a scientist, how about reasoned discourse?

                  However if you simply want to flame there's plenty of places rather than Kos

                  •  I am sorry (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    Tominator

                    Obviously I have insulted and/or offended a number of people here. Despite the fact that I, too, feel offended and insulted by some of the things said to me and the fact that I am not sure exactly how I offended and/or insult you:

                    I apologize.  I am sorry for saying or doing things that offended or insulted you (the plural you). I didn't not mean to offend or insult anyone, much less people who are working on making America (including my loved ones) safer against gun violence - we are all in this fight together and on the same side.   Divisiveness is the enemy.  I apologize for any contribution I may have made toward divisiveness.

                    This apology does not mean I have changed my mind: I still think it is inappropriate to make light of people being shot - whether they are gun owners or Trayvon Martin - it is a tragedy... and one we should be taking seriously.   I also think we would have better success convincing some of the tens of millions of gun owners to join us, rather than driving them deeper into the arms of the NRA. [It is notable, both Ronald Reagan and G.W Bush supported gun control.  If they are on our side why not Joe Six-Pack?]

                    However, since I caused 'bad blood' here - I'll avoid reading and contributing to firearm discussion on Kos.  

                    FWIW: As a scientist, I can tell you scientists make assertions and act on opinion and intuition all of the time.   If we had to wait until all the facts were in, that day would never come.   We bounce around ideas and sift the wheat from the chaff in informal settings.  Additionally, I generally do not treat blogs with the same seriousness as I do peer review journals... few people do.

                    •  Don't let them bully you. (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      BadBoyScientist

                      You made a statement & they went on to verify your statement with their behavior.

                      You have nothing to apologize for.

                      Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.

                      by FrankRose on Thu Mar 06, 2014 at 03:16:54 PM PST

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  No bullying ... (0+ / 0-)

                        My comments were not welcome in this community - and it is not my place to 'teach them the error of their ways.'   Arguing, insulting and offending does not bring people to your point of view - it pushes them away.

                        I  did exactly what I accused them of doing - it was wrong.

                        Yes, I have something to apologize for - hypocrisy.

                        -- illegitimi non carborundum

                        by BadBoyScientist on Thu Mar 06, 2014 at 03:34:37 PM PST

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  If you wish to comment on firearms & gun control (0+ / 0-)

                          you should be able to do so.

                          Those that you conversed with are not the arbiters of what issues you can comment on & what positions you hold or espouse.

                          That said, it's all up to you.
                          Just be sure to keep it that way.

                          Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.

                          by FrankRose on Thu Mar 06, 2014 at 04:00:15 PM PST

                          [ Parent ]

                          •  Thanks, my friend (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            FrankRose

                            That is exactly the point - this venue is not a good fit with my views.  If I persist sharing my views here I'll just alienate more people and get into more annoying exchanges where they ignore my main points but nitpick this word or that.  

                            I have no need to make my voice heard here.  I teach, so hundreds of students hear (and sleep through) my voice every week.  LOL.  

                            [In fact, I am only monitoring this thread in case any of those  who had the most, call it, 'friction' with me would care to 'mend fences'.  For all I know, one of them would be a terrific collaborator on another issue... besides, life is too short for enemies.  ]

                            -- illegitimi non carborundum

                            by BadBoyScientist on Thu Mar 06, 2014 at 04:15:51 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

        •  Welcome to DailyKos, jrudisill (2+ / 0-)

          I see you joined 2 Dec 2013, you have made 12 comments, of which 11 are pro-gun comments (all of which are in reply to David's GunFAIL diaries: eight on Dec 3rd -- from 12:04-12:45AM, hours after you joined, one on Dec 18, and two on Mar 5).

          •  Point? (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Tominator

            If you are going to accuse him of being a sock-puppet, have the guts to say so.

            Otherwise you are bullying a new user simply because he doesn't agree with your draconian & authoritarian viewpoint on this issue.

            Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.

            by FrankRose on Thu Mar 06, 2014 at 09:12:45 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  There have been dozens of people banned (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Sharon Wraight

              With several views on gun related issues, for making useless inflammatory remarks

              Letting new users know that there have been thousands and thousands of useless inflammatory related to guns is now considered dickish is doing them a favor

              •  Oh, so THAT'S what it is? (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                Tominator

                A favor.

                Gosh, in that case, the baseless accusations of sock-puppetry & the calls for an HR pile are excellent examples of the kinds  of 'kindness'  one can expect from the RASA & FLAP crew, and your comment is an excellent example of the honesty to be expected from those that share their viewpoint.

                Tell you what, if you don't want to be a bully, stop with the 'favors' & encourage others to do the same.
                However, if you want to stifle the conversation, just keep doing what you're doing & encourage others to do the same.

                Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.

                by FrankRose on Thu Mar 06, 2014 at 12:05:00 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  As we remember, Frank (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  Sharon Wraight

                  This has all been done before, that's what we're trying to let new commenters know

                  We're not 'stifling' a conversation, but trying to avoid harmful categorizations, degradation, and just meanness from people who just haven't bothered to get a few facts together
                  http://www.dailykos.com/...

                  Some of the participants in that conversation were eventually banned, for good reason, and thanks to the people who did check out the facts

                  •  When it comes to 'not putting facts together' (0+ / 0-)

                    gun controllers are experts.

                    Which is why, in this very thread, I have provided pertinent & linked facts & you have provided opinion-barf & completely unrelated links to DKos diaries.

                    Which is why my predictions on the political fallout of this subject has been far more accurate than those of gun controller's.

                    Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.

                    by FrankRose on Thu Mar 06, 2014 at 01:21:47 PM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  The relevancy is the abuse (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      Sharon Wraight

                      The relevancy is the abuse, the misinformation and the eventual banning of abusive commenters.

                      Your excerpted one sentence citations from Slate magazine are just that, journalism. Reference the report with adequate citation if you seek accuracy.

                      Finally I'm pretty sure calling me afraid, uneducated and cited and refereneced quotes, "opinon-barf" is (a), (a) and (a)

                      Just one example:
                      We know the username and we know we sometimes agree on issues yet we really disagree on the points made.What should we do?
                      a) Attack the diarist
                      b) Make a reasoned argument as to why we disagree

                      Third example:
                      a)No matter the argument deflect and deceive and attempt to convince others that only we hold the truth while flinging insults.
                      b)Make a reasoned argument as to why we disagree.

                      Fifth example:
                      a)Make accusations against others without supporting facts/links
                      b)Make a reasoned argument as to why we disagree.

                      If any of your answers were, a), you are being a dick and should be considered as such.
                      http://www.dailykos.com/...

                      •  "abuse"--Displayed above with the bullying of (0+ / 0-)

                        new users. Bullying you are defending.

                        Reference the report with adequate citation if you seek accuracy.
                        As you--yourself said--the report cannot be linked.
                        However, anyone that has the report can read that quote for themselves (it's on page 24).
                        Slate magazine is a credible organization and quotes that exact passage from the CDC.
                        As I linked to Slate that is an example of "supporting facts/links". Something that you have been unable/unwilling to do in your false accusation of me (and Slate) quoting out of context.

                        My statements have been substantiated. Yours have not.

                        Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.

                        by FrankRose on Thu Mar 06, 2014 at 02:50:50 PM PST

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  I already provided the quote in full (0+ / 0-)

                          and that's important, in full

                          It's from p. 31 of the pdf. Hey, I like Slate, but it's only a zine. I don't find them that credible.

                          Clearly there was abuse in the thread sent or users wouldn't have been banned.

                          And of course you know that many of those banned were new users engaging in those behaviors that were warned against today.

              •  Do any other "single-issues" attract as many men? (1+ / 0-)
                Recommended by:
                i saw an old tree today

                None that can think of, offhand, compared to guns. The vast majority of them are male, and with such anxiety about their 'guns' being taken away. Why do you think that is?

                •  There are men at this site that avoid these (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:
                  Sharon Wraight

                  Hurls, they may have participated at the beginning but stay away because of the abuse

                  I only say men because I think some of these guys are men based on years of chatting with them, but as others have learned it's stupid to assume

                  While there are many women on this site who have weapons, or defend weaponry, there aren't many who do so rabidly, I can think of a couple that started but backed out; I believe you are correct that most of the hurled comments are from men, because they have at some point said they were men (of course there's too many hurled comments to wade through to be certain), or they have spoken of their wives or some such reference

                  But then maybe Frank's a woman for all I know

                  Insofar as gun ownership is predominately male it's not a surprise that vocalization about the issue follows; having said that, just a warning, pink was first used in marketing as a support for breast cancer survivor support, and that it has been copped by gun manufacturers is really sleazy

                  •  Oh, absolutely! (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    i saw an old tree today

                    I was referring to the single-issue types, who come here and (nearly) immediately jump into gun pie-fights, repeating NRA talking points that our community has dissected months ago, adding little new, using Scalia's dickish invective on 2A, spending little if any time on positive proposals to reduce gun-violence, and largely ignoring all the other issues and campaigns that progressive Democrats work on.

                    *laf*, you could be right, "a Rose by any other name"...  A good reminder, about the internetz.

                    •  Completely, I'm trying very hard today (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      Sharon Wraight

                      To raise the level of the debate in the hopes that the types you're referring to actually want to improve. The discussion of puerile penile fantasy has happened here lots before, and while much truth to it, both sides get dicky. I was skating.

                      Seems that if they repeatedly, day after day, meet more than one of the a) criteria:  

                      a) Attack the diarist
                      a) Our "friends" know the username and never agree on the issues and we attempt to defend them no matter the content.
                      a)No matter the argument deflect and deceive and attempt to convince others that only we hold the truth while flinging insults.
                      a)Go to "the hiddens" find a name and pile on.
                      a)Make accusations against others without supporting facts/links

                      and always avoid the b) criteria
                      b)Make a reasoned argument as to why we disagree.

                      ...then they should be HRd and soon banned if appropriate.

                      Seems like the harder I tried to raise the level of debate, I got more, 'go educate yourself.' Clearly that's not the problem : )

                    •  ran across this example (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      Sharon Wraight

                      http://www.dailykos.com/...

                      I'm failing to see what a bunch of this crowd is actually doing to establish the Democratic agenda, rather its an obvious immature ploy to attempt to get the Democrats to bow to their agenda, which is largely sexist and ill-informed in the larger scheme,

                      guns first then policy -

      •   I am NOT making pro-gun comments (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        FrankRose, Tominator

        I am making pro-civility in political discourse comments/

        The things I have read on these pages have made me ashamed of being a progressive (I have been reading Kos for years - I only decided to post a little while ago).   The progressives I identify with value the lives of all people - even those they disagree with.  The progressives I identify with do not endorse bigotry or prejudice against anyone - even those they disagree with.

        For the record (and as I have said before) I agree with stricter laws regulating firearms ... in fact, I want those laws so badly I am willing to work with gun owners (who vastly outnumber the non-gun owners) to get rational and effective laws keeping society safe.

        My comments are also about decency - you don't laugh at  people who have loved ones harmed by guns... even if they are gun owners and 'deserve' it.

        •  Link? (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Sharon Wraight
          ...gun owners (who vastly outnumber the non-gun owners)
        •  Link? ("stricter laws regulating firearms") (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          wilywascal
          BadBoyScientist writes: For the record (and as I have said before) I agree with stricter laws regulating firearms ...
          I've read all 18 of your comments on DailyKos, and I see only two passing references to supporting gun-magazine restrictions (buried in comments critical of gun-safety advocates).

          Under what username(s) did you post comments agreeing with stricter laws regulating firearms, and what stricter gun-safety laws do you support?

          •  Clearly I owe everyone an apology - but you mostly (0+ / 0-)

            Sharon, - I already offered an apology to the group and now, I am making a personal one-to-one apology to you because you seem to be especially offended by my comments.

            It was not my intent to insult and offend - I was sincere in my comments suggesting that some of the things being posted would be counter productive to getting better gun control laws.  I did get a bit riled by the accusations leveled at me and made some emotional and snarky comments - those were unfair and unjustified: I am sorry.  

            If you want a list of gun legislation I support (posted these at other sites but under the same name ;):

            FIRST - REPEAL STAND YOUR GROUND LAWS (Are we fucking INSANE?)
            SECOND - Magazine limits (large capacity magazines are not only unnecessary for hunting & target shooting their weight and bulk are a hindrance.  They are also the #1 attribute of firearms that enable mass shootings.  No one shoots up a Walmart with a muzzle-loader!)
            THIRD - STRICTER ACCOUNTABILITY FOR GUN OWNERS (even if it's an accident car owners are liable - why not gun owners?)
            FOURTH - BACK GROUND SEARCHES, WAITING PERIODS & PROHIBIT GUN OWNERSHIP TO PEOPLE WITH ANY HISTORY OF VIOLENCE (if it ain't guns that kill people, let's crack down on the people who kill people - hard).
            FIFTH - DECREE ALL SCHOOLS, COLLEGES AND UNIVERSITIES GUN FREE ZONES (IIRC: This is the case in my home state) - science labs have plenty of stuff that can kill you already.  Actually, throw in Malls, Movie Theaters, Bars, Sporting Arenas ... plus anywhere you can get thousands of people in one place.
            SIXTH - REINSTATE THE DRAFT.  If American's youth spends 18 months having gun safety screamed into their ears and carrying rifles for 20 mile hikes maybe the fascination will wear off (give them old WWII rifles - they were really heavy).

            Well, besides my apologies I'm quitting the firearms topics on Kos.  The topic is too emotionally charged - for all of us - it isn't surprising because  many people have lost loved ones to guns (most gun deaths are suicides! OMG!)  and it isn't just a political or academic issue to them - it is personal.  I am sorry to you and anyone else who I offended.

            •  I saw this too late to rec, but I appreciate (0+ / 0-)

              your sincerity, reaching out, effort at genuine dialogue, and your willingness to list the measures you support to reduce gun-violence.

              Fwiw, I was neither offended nor angered by your comments.

      •  Sorry I'm late to the game, Sharon (0+ / 0-)

        But I only found this right now as I was looking at a new user's history. A new user that appears to have some things to say to our community.

        If you're going to accuse a new user of being a shill or a sockpuppet, come right out and do it. Don't be passive-aggressive, don't be subtle.

        And if you don't have the background to support your accusation then don't be surprised if you're the one who's answering to admins for being a dick.

        Screw John Galt. Who's John Doe?

        by Mike Kahlow on Sat Mar 08, 2014 at 04:29:10 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Nopology accepted? (0+ / 0-)
          If you're going to accuse a new user of being a shill or a sockpuppet
          Where did I say this?
          Don't be passive-aggressive
          Are you insulting me by accusing me of "being passive-aggressive", or are you performing an online psychological evaluation?
          don't be subtle.
          Sorry, perfessor, but I'll reserve that right.
          if you don't have the background to support your accusation
          What accusation are you referring to, if any? What "background" would be appropriate, in your opinion?

          I think BadBoyScientist's apologies, above, say more than your comment.
          http://www.dailykos.com/...
          http://www.dailykos.com/...
          http://www.dailykos.com/...

          •  You caught me at a cranky moment. (0+ / 0-)

            I was in a diary written by the prev commenter and I think he's got some potential here on DKos.

            We've both been around the block here on this site.

            How's about we both try to be better/nicer to others? Deal?

            Screw John Galt. Who's John Doe?

            by Mike Kahlow on Sun Mar 09, 2014 at 08:04:03 PM PDT

            [ Parent ]

    •  Welcome new user! (0+ / 0-)

      The Daily Kos FAQ are worth your time if you want to engage effectively.

      "The pessimist complains about the wind; the optimist expects it to change; the realist adjusts the sails.” — William Arthur Ward

      by LilithGardener on Fri Mar 07, 2014 at 06:51:32 PM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  There are gun laws that need to be repealed. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      LilithGardener

      The 'haw, haw, haw that was close gun laws.'

      I think we are all sick and tired of out of control guns and bullets being dismissed because they missed.

      My boilerplate opposed vehemently by RKBA

          1. Improper storage of a gun - loss of physical possession of the gun - no matter the outcome - loss of privilege gun ownership for many many years.

          2. Improper handling of a gun - gun discharged inappropriately - no matter the outcome - loss of privilege gun ownership for many many years.

          Limiting of gun kill speed
          Limiting of gun ownership speed.

      Now they have the 2nd (safety net for sloppy) Amendment, and can't be infringed to actually treat their gun like a gun and not a video game controller.

      by 88kathy on Sat Mar 08, 2014 at 06:23:25 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  These should be posted (4+ / 0-)

    where EVERYONE will see them.  Every week.

    People don't care because numbers are not people, not real stories.  The truth is that many, many gun injuries and gun deaths occur every year, and posting the details will convince people far better than anything else.

  •  What's really the point of GunFAIL... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    FrankRose, Tominator

    ...if not to make the false argument, "People do stupid things with guns, ergo, guns should be illegal."? Could it instead be, "Let's all laugh at the stupid people who have guns", but I don't think this is the point is entertainment. Or, perhaps, the point is to "prove" to ALL progressives that their beliefs in making gun ownership illegal is well founded. I still think the point of GunFAIL is as an illogical argument to outlaw gun ownership.

    If that's the case, please consider...

    The Consumer Product Safety Commission says there are 200,000 people injured each year because of (power) mowers, 16,000 of those are children.
    http://www.wkyt.com/...

    and...

    Each year, more than 67,000 U.S. workers and do-it-yourselfers suffer blade contact injuries (from power tools) - http://www.fairwarning.org/...

    There are many other such areas where ignorant or stupid people do harm to themselves and others. See http://www.cpsc.gov/...

    So @David Waldman, I ask again, "What's your point of providing this information? What are people supposed to do, think, or believe?"

    •  What are people supposed to do, think, or believe? (5+ / 0-)

      Well, that's a tough question because, unlike with apparently any other object, guns are held in such reverence due to the Second Amendment that, frankly, no one has any good answers about what to make of this endless stream of stupid things being done with guns. Why is that? Because the NRA and their ilk literally oppose even the smallest, most common-sense gun regulations, no matter what well-meaning people try to "do, think, or believe."

      I don't think that's a "false argument"; rather, it is an argument born of the tremendous frustration many people experience when trying to propose even the smallest, most rational adjustments to the way guns and gun owners are dealt with in this nation.

      If there is any false argument here, it is the argument that because people do other stupid things, that somehow stupid things done with guns should therefore be immune from all criticism. That is what I think is implied by your mentioning of these other examples.

      Note also that the lawn mower article you cited has this line: "When it comes to your mower, safety mechanisms are key." Don't you think the same should apply to guns? And don't you get frustrated when someone says that only to be derided as a "gun grabber"? Do you run around calling people "lawn mower grabbers" for wanting safety for lawn mowers?

      The kind of citations you make sound to me like the "Not as bad as" fallacy, which is also a form of "false argument."
      http://rationalwiki.org/...

      But as with many fallacies, probably the emotional pull of this polarizing argument over guns has gotten the best of your rational thinking. That's the way I see it, anyway.

    •  You forgot bathtubs and swimming pools? (4+ / 0-)

      As you once again attempt to hijack a diary about gun safety.

      How original of you, really.

      •  lawn-mowers! ladders! pools! All need 2.5 Amndmnt (4+ / 0-)

        protections, otherwise they will be confiscated from us!

        Bicycles! Fists! Cars! Unless ownership of these is guaranteed in the Constitution, then the tyranny of libruls will come take them away, preventing us from e.g. driving cars to prevent an authoritarian takeover.

        ;-)

      •  Don't worry: (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Tominator

        Accidental deaths from drowning: 2,000
        Accidental deaths from firearms: 600

        As the CDC report commissioned by Pres Obama put it:

        “Unintentional firearm-related deaths have steadily declined during the past century. The number of unintentional deaths due to firearm-related incidents accounted for less than 1 percent of all unintentional fatalities in 2010.”

        Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.

        by FrankRose on Thu Mar 06, 2014 at 09:29:52 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  The report is a 121 page report, reading it now (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Sharon Wraight, WakeUpNeo

          The report establishes recommendations for further research into gun violence as a public health hazard, not a report on the state of gun violence

          Again, your comment fallaciously quotes out of context:

          The practice of quoting out of context, sometimes referred to as "contextomy", is a logical fallacy and a type of false attribution in which a passage is removed from its surrounding matter in such a way as to distort its intended meaning.

          Advertisers seem to practice it when convenient.

          It is related to the fallacy of cherry-picking

          Cherry picking, suppressing evidence, or the fallacy of incomplete evidence is the act of pointing to individual cases or data that seem to confirm a particular position, while ignoring a significant portion of related cases or data that may contradict that position. It is a kind of fallacy of selective attention, the most common example of which is the confirmation bias.

          We're looking to get past endless fallacious argument.

          •  I provided a 'stand-alone ' quote. (0+ / 0-)

            I.E. a quote whose context is clear by it's wording.
            Al Franken, in one of his books explains what 'stand alone quotes' are while mocking those that, falsely, try to claim a contextual problem where  one does not & could not exist.

            Feel free to add the text from the CDC that adds the context you claim is missing.
            Don't forget to link.

            Of course that text doesn't exist. Therefore allow me to offer you a lesson about "stand alone quotes":  Simply try making up a statement that changes the meaning of the quote provided.
            Go ahead! Go crazy!
            Quite frankly, you have to in order to change the meaning of the very clear statement the CDC provided.

            Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.

            by FrankRose on Thu Mar 06, 2014 at 12:17:26 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Can't link to it, they require an account (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              Sharon Wraight

              To access it, but you know that don't you?

              •  Just quote the CDC text that changes the meaning (0+ / 0-)

                of the CDC quote I provided.

                Like I said you can even try to make something up & it doesn't change the meaning of that very clear statement.
                Hence, "stand alone quote".

                Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.

                by FrankRose on Thu Mar 06, 2014 at 01:14:14 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  That exact quote does not appear in the report. (0+ / 0-)
                  •  Yes. It does. (0+ / 0-)

                    Although I cannot link the report itself: Here is an overview by Slate
                    quoting the CDC report:

                    “Unintentional firearm-related deaths have steadily declined during the past century. The number of unintentional deaths due to firearm-related incidents accounted for less than 1 percent of all unintentional fatalities in 2010.”
                    That statement is not only a quote from the CDC report commissioned by Pres Obama--it is basic fact.

                    Educate yourself.
                    Stop being afraid.

                    Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.

                    by FrankRose on Thu Mar 06, 2014 at 01:36:46 PM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  Here's the report, it seems you haven't read it, (3+ / 0-)

                      so I thought I'd help you out:

                      http://books.nap.edu/...

                      "Looking back over a lifetime, you see that love was the answer to everything." — Ray Bradbury

                      by We Shall Overcome on Thu Mar 06, 2014 at 05:49:37 PM PST

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  I have. (0+ / 0-)

                        Thus my quoting of it.

                        Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.

                        by FrankRose on Thu Mar 06, 2014 at 05:50:50 PM PST

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  Quoting from an article by a journalist who (3+ / 0-)

                          read the report, yeah?

                          "Looking back over a lifetime, you see that love was the answer to everything." — Ray Bradbury

                          by We Shall Overcome on Thu Mar 06, 2014 at 05:54:14 PM PST

                          [ Parent ]

                          •  That's because MY link actually included the (0+ / 0-)

                            quote I cited & YOUR link stops at page 10.

                            Next time you should take it upon yourself to read your links; otherwise something really embarrassing might happen.

                            Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.

                            by FrankRose on Thu Mar 06, 2014 at 06:01:27 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  your partial quote, now I get it (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Sharon Wraight, Glen The Plumber

                            you couldn't have quoted more of the report because you only ever read the one slate article

                          •  I have...but as I stated before: (0+ / 0-)

                            Feel free to write the part of the report that contradicts it's very clear statement:

                            “Unintentional firearm-related deaths have steadily declined during the past century. The number of unintentional deaths due to firearm-related incidents accounted for less than 1 percent of all unintentional fatalities in 2010.”
                            As I said, it's a stand alone quote & nothing in the report contradicts the blockquote I provided above....as you would know if you had read the entire report.

                            Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.

                            by FrankRose on Thu Mar 06, 2014 at 06:12:37 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  I already provided the rest of the relevant (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Sharon Wraight, Glen The Plumber

                            quote (with citation from the full report), quit making things up

                            How much of the report have you read? How much of the full quote have you read?

                            And again what is the point, to claim I'm afraid and uneducated, that I'm supposed to do something with the partial quote?  Someting else?

                          •  And NOTHING that you provided changed the (0+ / 0-)

                            context of the statement I quoted.

                            You have no complaint with me.
                            Your complaint is with the CDC & the facts they provided.

                            Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.

                            by FrankRose on Thu Mar 06, 2014 at 06:42:45 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Oh for Christ's the report's pretty good (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Sharon Wraight, Glen The Plumber

                            You quoted out of context and cherry picked, until tonight quoted only the Slate journo, never the Academy of Science report,  and now you're borrowing my material... you're lying.

                          •  Oh? (0+ / 0-)

                            What part of

                            "Unintentional firearm-related deaths have steadily declined during the past century. The number of unintentional deaths due to firearm-related incidents accounted for less than 1 percent of all unintentional fatalities in 2010"
                            was disproved exactly?

                            Did unintentional deaths due to firearm-related incidents account for less than 1 percent of all unintentional fatalities in 2010?
                            If not, please make it a bit more clear to me where this was disproved by 'added context'.

                            Has unintentional firearm-related deaths steadily declined during the past century?
                            If not, please make it a bit more clear where this happened.
                            Here's the entire sub-chapter. An excellent link. H/T We Shall Overcome.
                            Do tell, what context changes the meaning of the statement above?

                            Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.

                            by FrankRose on Thu Mar 06, 2014 at 06:57:00 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  http://www.dailykos.com/comments/1279809/52829062# (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Sharon Wraight, Glen The Plumber
                          •  That's a lie, which, coming from you is not (3+ / 0-)

                            surprising, you have been called out often for that:

                            http://www.dailykos.com/...

                            And seeing that you are back here on this diary again SPAMMING about the CDC report, you have proven beyond a doubt you are a troll.

                            Here, try again:

                            http://books.nap.edu/...

                            use the arrow buttons at the top to jump page by page or jump to the beginning and end of the report.

                            You can also try again, here:

                            http://books.nap.edu/...

                            Click the "Read the report for free" button.

                            "Looking back over a lifetime, you see that love was the answer to everything." — Ray Bradbury

                            by We Shall Overcome on Thu Mar 06, 2014 at 06:09:45 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  I have provided quotes from the CDC. (0+ / 0-)

                            Quotes aren't 'lies'.
                            Providing simple fact backed by the CDC isn't 'being a troll'--it is 'introducing verifiable fact.

                            There is a reason why I quote the CDC report & you merely complain about CDC quotes being provided.

                            Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.

                            by FrankRose on Thu Mar 06, 2014 at 06:14:59 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  The lie is that you said the report only goes to (3+ / 0-)

                            page 10 of 120 - that is a lie.

                            You can read the entire report, and if you bothered to, you could then stop cherry picking and SPAMMING one quote over and over and over - considering you have already been called out for that, you'd think you'd stop:

                            http://www.dailykos.com/...

                            "Looking back over a lifetime, you see that love was the answer to everything." — Ray Bradbury

                            by We Shall Overcome on Thu Mar 06, 2014 at 06:22:31 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  The first link you sent me did only go to page 10. (0+ / 0-)

                            The second link in your last does include the whole report.

                            "You can read the entire report"
                            I have. I have a paper copy.

                            "SPAMMING one quote over and over and over"
                            Very well.
                            Here's three:

                            “Almost all national survey estimates indicate that defensive gun uses by victims are at least as common as offensive uses by criminals"
                            “Studies that directly assessed the effect of actual defensive uses of guns (i.e., incidents in which a gun was 'used' by the crime victim in the sense of attacking or threatening an offender) have found consistently lower injury rates among gun-using crime victims compared with victims who used other self-protective strategies.”
                            “Unintentional firearm-related deaths have steadily declined during the past century. The number of unintentional deaths due to firearm-related incidents accounted for less than 1 percent of all unintentional fatalities in 2010.”
                            Of course, as GunFAIL is about accidents, only the final paragraph is terribly pertinent to this conversation.

                            "stop cherry-picking"
                            Here is the entire sub-chapter (p 31)

                            Unintentional Fatalities

                            Unintentional firearm-related deaths have steadily declined during the past century.27 The number of unintentional deaths due to firearm-related incidents accounted for less than 1 percent of all unintentional fatalities in 2010 (Hoyert and Xu, 2012). Despite this progress, more than 600 people in the United States died as a result of an unintentional discharge of a firearm in 2010 (Hoyert and Xu, 2012). Risks are highest among adolescents and young adults. Approximately 10 percent of unintentional deaths in 2010 involved children under age 15 (Hoyert and Xu, 2012).

                            About half of unintentional firearm-related fatalities are self-inflicted (Hemenway et al., 2010). Unintentional firearm-related deaths caused by someone other than the victim are primarily committed by friends or family members (Hemenway et al., 2010). Only 2 percent of unintentional firearm-related deaths were connected with self-defense (Hemenway et al., 2010). Rates of unintentional firearm death are significantly higher in rural than in urban counties (Carr et al., 2012).

                            What part of that chapter changes the context of the quote I have provided?

                            Just because the CDC commissioned by President Obama doesn't support your argument as much as you wish, doesn't mean that I cannot quote it's pertinent parts.

                            Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.

                            by FrankRose on Thu Mar 06, 2014 at 06:40:35 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  By all means, quote to make a point, but when (3+ / 0-)

                            you mis-characterize the research review and are called out on that, yet, continue to mis-characterize, then there is a problem.

                            The report is politicized because the NRA's hand picked "researchers" who have been discredited are part of the research review, and so the report itself loses value.

                            That's the point I'm making.

                            You're aim seems to be to conflate the fact the Obama commissioned the report with Obama's full endorsement of all its findings and that the findings undermine Obama's agenda.

                            The bottom line on the report is that it is a first step and a research review, it isn't breaking new ground, yet, you want to hold it up as proof beyond a doubt that Obama is wrong on gun reform and therefore so are all gun reform advocates.

                            You have been called out repeatedly on this point and yet continue to play dumb and SPAM the same message:

                            http://www.dailykos.com/...
                            http://www.dailykos.com/...
                            http://www.dailykos.com/...

                            "Looking back over a lifetime, you see that love was the answer to everything." — Ray Bradbury

                            by We Shall Overcome on Thu Mar 06, 2014 at 06:51:26 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Oh. I see. CONSPIRACY! How TOTALLY convincing. (0+ / 0-)
                            The report is politicized because the NRA's hand picked "researchers" who have been discredited are part of the research review, and so the report itself loses value.
                            This is a CDC report commissioned by President Obama.
                            The CDC is credible.
                            Slate isn't the NRA.
                            President Obama isn't the NRA.
                            Your conspiracy theory is unconvincing.

                            Tell you what:
                            I will continue to quote the relevant parts of the CDC report.
                            You keep screaming "CONSPIRACY!!11!"
                            To each their own, I guess.

                            Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.

                            by FrankRose on Thu Mar 06, 2014 at 07:01:02 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  When you're in a hole, the best thing to do (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Sharon Wraight, Glen The Plumber

                            is stop digging. But instead you continue to dig and dig and dig with more SPAM and insults, as if we haven't all heard the same thing ad nausea for the past year. And in the process reveal the real reason you post at DKos - to confuse, insult, distort and troll.

                            You have been called out yet again for the same lies and distortion about the CDC report that you were called out on a few weeks ago, and yet, you jump right back in with the same lies and distortions.

                            Anyone who wants to know you're true intent here can go back a few weeks and read the exact same nonsense you are posting tonight after being called out on it repeatedly:

                            http://www.dailykos.com/...

                            "Looking back over a lifetime, you see that love was the answer to everything." — Ray Bradbury

                            by We Shall Overcome on Thu Mar 06, 2014 at 07:47:57 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  I have been quoting the CDC. (0+ / 0-)

                            You have questioned the credibility of the CDC.

                            Your issues with the CDC isn't shared, no matter how often you try to denigrate an organization considered highly credible.....especially when the CDC says something that is basic & accepted fact.

                            Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.

                            by FrankRose on Thu Mar 06, 2014 at 07:57:24 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Your schtick is wearning really thin, just (3+ / 0-)

                            ask any of the 30 people who tipped this comment debunking your "CDC credibility" nonsense SPAM from a two weeks ago:

                            Dude, stop lying. (30+ / 0-)

                            That CDC report was not, as was explained extensively, a report derived from CDC research, it was a literature survey designed to determine:

                            What needed to be studied.

                            And among the topics that need study are the DGU numbers, which the report says explicitly are controversial, even with Kleck as one of the committee members.

                            You have been told this, more than once.

                            So bringing up the CDC report as anything authoritative is flat out lying at this point.

                            Shame on you.

                            by Ozy on Fri Feb 14, 2014 at 11:40:40 AM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                            http://www.dailykos.com/...

                            "Looking back over a lifetime, you see that love was the answer to everything." — Ray Bradbury

                            by We Shall Overcome on Thu Mar 06, 2014 at 08:19:18 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Those 30 users don't have the credibility (0+ / 0-)

                            the CDC has.

                            I will quote the CDC & other credible organizations.

                            If you are unable to do the same that isn't my problem.

                            Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.

                            by FrankRose on Thu Mar 06, 2014 at 08:25:49 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Suit yourself, keep digging your own grave to (3+ / 0-)

                            irrelevance on DKos ... you've already reached it, but why stop there?

                            Here's another one - DKos community 28 points; FrankRose 0 points.

                             

                             It's not a 'lie'. It's a quote. (0+ / 0-)

                            Sorry that you don't find a quote from a CDC report commissioned by Pres. Obama to be credible enough for you.

                            Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.

                            by FrankRose on Fri Feb 14, 2014 at 11:43:04 AM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                            ...

                            It's a selective quote (28+ / 0-)

                            that doesn't include the context of the discussion, or the charge and conclusions of the panel, and deliberately misleads the reader into thinking the CDC report is saying something that it is not.

                            I.E lying

                            And it's deliberate because this already has been explained to you, in quite some detail.

                            The CDC report does not, in any way, confirm the DGU numbers reported in past self-reported surveys as accurate. It merely reported that they exist, reported that there is controversy, and states this should be an area of study.

                            "Looking back over a lifetime, you see that love was the answer to everything." — Ray Bradbury

                            by We Shall Overcome on Thu Mar 06, 2014 at 08:32:54 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  How fun. Do tell.... (0+ / 0-)

                            If "Patriotism is the last refuge of the scoundrel", then who would take refuge in citing comment recs on Daily Kos?

                            While you are pondering that, let me help you out by informing you who wouldn't take refuge there:
                            People that can quote credible organizations.

                            Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.

                            by FrankRose on Thu Mar 06, 2014 at 08:39:16 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Why not write a diary. (6+ / 0-)

                            Instead of harassing, SPAMMING and insulting in the comment section, you could try to show all the unenlightened people on Dkos the error of their ways.

                            No one is buying your SPAM and insults. And anyone reading your comments can see right through them for what they actually are - trolling.

                            You've been here a year and have failed to persuade any front pages to agree with your point of view. And you yourself have failed to write diaries that persuade anyone.

                            In a nut shell, you are failing.

                            But by all means, keep on digging.

                            "Looking back over a lifetime, you see that love was the answer to everything." — Ray Bradbury

                            by We Shall Overcome on Thu Mar 06, 2014 at 08:47:22 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Someone most certainly is failing. (2+ / 4-)

                            Particularly when it comes to protecting Senators.

                            But, I'll give you this: you did one hell of a job convincing registered Democrats to vote for the recall of Democrats.

                            Perhaps you should try bringing up comment recs on Daily Kos to them next time.
                            I'm certain they will find it every bit as convincing as I have.

                            Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.

                            by FrankRose on Thu Mar 06, 2014 at 08:53:13 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  How about I bring up HRs? You seem to be (4+ / 1-)

                            quite apt at getting those and then being banned from Dkos for 30 days at a time. Here's just a few from the past two weeks - you're on roll:

                            http://www.dailykos.com/...
                            http://www.dailykos.com/...
                            http://www.dailykos.com/...
                            http://www.dailykos.com/...
                            http://www.dailykos.com/...

                            Clearly, you have changed a lot of minds here - a year ago, no one knew you and now everyone doesn't seem to think much of your comments.

                            "Looking back over a lifetime, you see that love was the answer to everything." — Ray Bradbury

                            by We Shall Overcome on Thu Mar 06, 2014 at 08:59:18 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Markos has clearly said that (1+ / 3-)
                            Recommended by:
                            ancblu
                            Hidden by:
                            We Shall Overcome, LilithGardener, howarddream

                            Dragging in old shit from hiddens and referencing past admins actions are forbidden. Elfling has as well. HR for repeated dbad and community guideline violations.

                          •  OK, thanks, we both set the record straight. (4+ / 0-)

                            "Looking back over a lifetime, you see that love was the answer to everything." — Ray Bradbury

                            by We Shall Overcome on Fri Mar 07, 2014 at 06:07:46 AM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  HR abuse by Kasoru, above. (5+ / 0-)

                            Not to mention DBAD. And false allegation:

                            repeated dbad and community guideline violations.
                          •  Hypocrisy. (0+ / 0-)

                            HR abuse.

                            Your favorite activities.

                          •  Can you show the links please ? (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Glen The Plumber
                            Markos has clearly said that
                            Dragging in old shit from hiddens and referencing past admins actions are forbidden. Elfling has as well.
                            http://www.dkosopedia.com/...
                            There isn't actually any site rule that says you can't quote hidden comments in order to make a point. You should still think carefully about doing it -- after all, they were hidden because we believe that they are so unrepresentative of the community as to be unworthy of display -- but there are valid reasons to bring them up, and it isn't against the rules to do so.

                            "please love deeply...openly and genuinely." A. M. H.

                            by indycam on Fri Mar 07, 2014 at 02:37:43 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Support thread question just a few days ago... (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            FrankRose

                            http://helpdesk.dailykos.com/...

                            And confirmed by Elfling.

                            SUPPORT STAFF9 Posted by elfling on Mar 03, 2014 @ 11:26 AM

                            Yes, that's still policy as far as I know.

                            I don't make policy.

                            If you have some example you'd like to bring to our attention, feel free.

                            Enjoy.
                          •  Sorry , I don't see your link as relevant . (3+ / 0-)

                            No fight was brought in .
                            Links that show comments that have been hide rated
                            isn't continuing the fight that are in the hide rated comments .

                            and referencing past admins actions
                            Is there any past admins actions shown / linked to in the comment you objected to ?

                            I suggest that if you think the comment was as you put it ,

                            repeated dbad and community guideline violations.
                            that you take Elflings advice .
                            If you have some example you'd like to bring to our attention, feel free.

                            "please love deeply...openly and genuinely." A. M. H.

                            by indycam on Fri Mar 07, 2014 at 02:58:13 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  It's a misreading and selective quoting (3+ / 0-)

                            from a different context.

                            "The pessimist complains about the wind; the optimist expects it to change; the realist adjusts the sails.” — William Arthur Ward

                            by LilithGardener on Fri Mar 07, 2014 at 06:45:52 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  This is a Noble Effort. (4+ / 0-)

                            And at one point, Kos did say that bringing old fights into un-related diaries is a punishablle/bannable offense. That is how slinkerwink got banned for a few days before she was reinstated.

                            But kos's rules are so Wishy-washy and he only strictly enforces some of them when the mood strikes him.

                            In addition, I don't think linking hidden comments by a user is dragging in old fights, just providing examples.

                            I miss Speaker Pelosi :^(

                            by howarddream on Fri Mar 07, 2014 at 06:36:57 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  HR for intentionally misrepresenting Kos' policy (3+ / 0-)

                            and supporting FrankRose persistent threadjacking and dickishness.

                            Here's the policy link. The important policy guidance from Kos is bolded for your selective reading skills.

                            The "guest in someone's house" rule
                            Walking into someone's diary is like walking into someone's home. You are a guest. Act accordingly. That doesn't mean you can't disagree. It just means you have to be civil and courteous and limit your arguments to substance.

                            That level of courtesy must be even higher in group diaries. If people want to hang out and talk about X, and you are anti-X, then either be on your bestest of best behavior or just stay away. You are always free to write your own response diary or start your own anti-X group.
                            So, my tolerance for dickishness will be least in group diaries, followed by personal diaries, followed by your own diaries.

                            Bottom line: If you don't like someone, ignore or argue PURELY on the facts. If you refuse to heed and seek out your foes to shit all over their diaries, I will zap you. You don't need to go after the same people every day to remind them that yes, you still don't like them.

                            [bold mine]

                            Which is excerpted at the helpdesk, here:
                            Is Kos' dictum against dredging up old fights in unrelated diaries still in effect? The rule was explicitly stated here: http://www.dailykos.com/.... The germane portion:

                            "A sampling of additional dickish behavior: Going back to hidden comments and pulling stuff out that's six months old. People are allowed to have an off-day without having it rubbed in their face in perpetuity.
                            ... Hijacking other people's diaries by dragging in meta fights from outside. I will actually have particularly low tolerance for meta hijacks."

                            I imagine examples of Markos reiterating this policy can be found with a diligent search.

                            I would appreciate clarification of the present state of site policy regarding old arguments. I imagine other Kossacks would as well.

                            Thanks in advance.

                            It's not clear whether Kasoru ever bothered to read Kos's  policy diary. Kasoru has clearly read this comment out of context and used it as an excuse to support FrankRose's  dickishness in this diary and his persistent threadjacking.

                            This is not about respectful disagreement.

                            The threadjackers here are BadBoyScientist and FrankRose. Both of them appear to fancy themselves as masters of misrepresentation. And Kasoru, you know as well as everyone this is not FrankRose just having a bad day. This is FrankRose's normal mode.

                            I think he gets away with it because most people have put him on shrink and don't bother anymore to even read threads where Frank is pissing/posting.

                            "The pessimist complains about the wind; the optimist expects it to change; the realist adjusts the sails.” — William Arthur Ward

                            by LilithGardener on Fri Mar 07, 2014 at 06:42:47 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  What a bunch (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Kasoru, FrankRose

                            of self-righteous priggish crap.

                            The beloved "gun fail" series here is about accidents ... and just as persistently as this series presents that polemic it just as equally ignores CDC injury and fatality data for firearms relative to other causes.  This is Frank's persistent and perfectly valid point ... however much it gets under your and other anti-advocate's skin.  These data are perfectly relevant for those who prefer a reality based community discussion ... and it is not trolling or thread-jacking when it must be continually raised for purposes of balance and perspective against the purely emotional appeal of the series.

                            But keep censoring by HR misuse.  It's perfectly predictable from you and others in the usual coterie.

                          •  Shopping in the hiddens, again? (4+ / 0-)

                            Is that a daily past time of yours?

                            Do you really intend to misstate my views, impugne my character, and lie about what I've written at Daily Kos?

                            Curious readers can view my publishing and comment history and decide for themselves.

                            I'm a strong supporter of the individual right to keep and bear arms. I don't recall you ever visiting any of my diaries to discusse gun law and policy. I don't recall you ever participating in any of the Firearms Law and policy diaries covering topics in the CDC report.

                            Yet here you are helicoptering in posing as some kind champion to rescue FrankRose from another round of persistent dickishness, threadjacking, and lying.

                            "The pessimist complains about the wind; the optimist expects it to change; the realist adjusts the sails.” — William Arthur Ward

                            by LilithGardener on Fri Mar 07, 2014 at 07:44:18 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  More than 50 diaries in the past 6 months (3+ / 0-)

                            I've written more than 50 diaries on firearms law and policy, mostly in the past 6 months, along with thousands of comments. I have nurtured and supported other authors, even whether or not I agree with their whole position. And I have participated in dozens of others' diaries, informing about the law, about research, asking questions and presenting experience and facts about firearms fatalities.

                            Proof is easily available, e.g. here: http://www.dailykos.com/...

                            Readers like ancblu seem to project their own negative attitudes onto anyone who dares to discuss any aspect of gun violence and who dare to support other writers' discussing gun law, policy, and culture. Ancblu's claims are false labeling, similar to others who arbitrarily assign "anti" to anyone who doesn't agree with their personal libertarian view of gun rights.

                            "The pessimist complains about the wind; the optimist expects it to change; the realist adjusts the sails.” — William Arthur Ward

                            by LilithGardener on Fri Mar 07, 2014 at 07:59:48 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Readers like ancblu? Hah. (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Kasoru, FrankRose

                            Come now LG ... who is doing the foam-mouthed projecting here?  

                            Are you really so unhinged from my stern critique that you misused your TU status and misplaced an HR by censoring something relevant to the issue of accident rates when supposedly trying to formulate POLICY based on facts rather than emotion ... you know, policy, that thing you've supposedly written so much and thoughtfully about.

                            But yes ... I'm obviously just someone in your mind and projections who just doesn't want to discuss any aspect of gun violence.  Do you realize how amusingly ironic that comment of yours actually is?  Can ya see it?  I rather suppose not ... because it appears easier for you to demonize with intellectually lazy slurs devoid of reason and laden instead with brittle emotional intensity. These are not signs of a credible policy analyst ... at least in worlds I've traveled.

                            But is was you, I'll remind you dear LG,  who in point of fact censored for disagreement.  I brought it back into the light because, and despite your silly certainty otherwise (based yet again on little respect for data, I'll further add), I actually care about rational Democratic policy approaches to the issue, not the emotionally driven hysteria that gun fail fans so love but that do cause harm to the party in certain regions and states.  And that was Frank's "hidden" point as well if you take the time to read it again and think just a wee bit.  

                            Your up-raters make me smile as well ... the usual claque of censors for disagreement on this broader issue, tending to shout out troll! or NRA Shill! for anything that doesn't comport with their cramped need for purity.

                            I'm looking forward to your next round of snorting and foot-stomping that persistently ignores the points ... it's more revealing than you know.

                          •  Here's the problem with FR's use of the CDC (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            LilithGardener

                            report:

                            http://www.dailykos.com/...

                            If you take the time to read through the comment thread, you will find that FR mischaracterizes the report.

                            He uses the CDC report as proof that gun reformers are wrong, because the CDC report comes to certain conclusions about the research it reviewed - research that is infected with the discredited ideas of Gary Kleck.

                            FR never addresses this point - that Gary Kleck is a discredited researcher that the gun lobby uses as a basis for many of its claims.

                            Furthermore, the CDC report is not new research - it is a review of research with recommendations for further research.

                            The issue is that FR never acknowledges these short comings in the report - instead he holds it up as the end all to the debate.

                            The truth is, there is a lot of research reviewed in this report from a variety of points of view - but FR only uses those research points that support the point he wants to make without acknowledging the issues are not settled, nor that other researchers don't support his points, nor the fact that the gun lobby has intentionally stifled research into gun violence and gun violence prevention.

                            "Looking back over a lifetime, you see that love was the answer to everything." — Ray Bradbury

                            by We Shall Overcome on Sat Mar 08, 2014 at 08:54:50 AM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  The CDC report is a partial map of the unknown (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            We Shall Overcome

                            to help prioritise research focus.

                            It's really a commissioned map of what's not known so the research funding agencies can give priority to programs that study the gaps in criminal justice and public health approaches. It's a peer-reviewed survey of some important open questions.

                            The DGU studies cited are also cited because of the huge uncertainties evident in the wide range of the estimates.

                            "The pessimist complains about the wind; the optimist expects it to change; the realist adjusts the sails.” — William Arthur Ward

                            by LilithGardener on Sat Mar 08, 2014 at 09:34:00 AM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  There were three separate issues (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Kasoru, FrankRose

                            identified in the DGU section ... not just one as you imply.

                            Concerning the issue you are uniquely focusing on, the Report stated as a declarative point -- "Defensive use of guns by crime victims is a common occurrence."  

                            Elaborating, the Report then notes that the exact number is disputed but that "Almost all national survey estimates indicate that defensive gun uses by victims are at least as common as offensive uses by criminals," ... "in the context of about 300,000 violent crimes involving firearms in 2008." [and we know from FBI Bureau of Statistics data that all violent crime rates have been falling since 2008 -- the Report's benchmark year].

                            Your purported "huge uncertainties" only really applies to but one noted outlier 1997 study that estimated 108,000 cases of DGU ... but the Report emphasized "[that study estimate] is difficult to interpret because respondents were not asked specifically about defensive gun use."  

                            Whatever the flawed methodology of that particular outlier study -- and there is substantial criticism of it -- the estimate still represents a significant percentage of the violent crimes figure the Report used for contextual reference.  Moreover, the other DGU studies -- some dozen or more I believe - noted by the Report offer a range of some 500,000 to 3 million cases that clearly dwarf the violent crime reference figure.  This may provide grounds for "huge uncertainty" in your policy making world -- but you seem to have lost sight of the bigger DGU forest for the single outlier tree that certain folks would prefer to uniquely rely upon for demagogic purposes.

                            So yes ... this is certainly an identified area for further research, but a persistent gaggle, including the HR Brigade here, clearly do not want to admit the significant incidence of DGU from "almost all studies" as actually noted by the CDC Report.  

                            When Frank, me or any one else tries to emphasize these points it not even remotely lying as you and others have persistently and falsely asserted -- and it is actually a much more faithful reading of what the Report actually says than what you in fact suggest.

                          •  Gun law is complex, it's dry, it's rather boring (2+ / 0-)

                            Gun law is complex. It's dry. It's rather boring much of the time. In the Firearms Law and Policy group we divide up the heavy lifting and share what we learn, holding our ideas and the sources on which we base opinions up to public scrutiny.

                            Gary Kleck was obviously an important voice, he was cited in the Heller decision (minority opinion) and was a member of the panel chosen by the National Academy of Sciences and the Institute of Medicine to help assess the limit of what's known. The estimates vary from a low about 100,000 to a high of more than 3 million DGUs/year. At first I thought the extremely large difference was because public health officials and criminologists were just measuring difference populations. You know, Gary Kleck studies hammers, so he's better at finding nails in the jumble of public information that gun owners will admit to.

                            There are two big questions that readers can answer for themselves in the diaries below.

                            1. Why are there so few published reports of DGUs?
                            2. Why are all of Kleck's claims dependent on 20 year old study?

                            If there are 6-8000 DGUs per day why do we have so few documented incidents? Haven't you wondered why there aren't more recent studies using the same method? If it was a robust study why aren't they tracking DGU over time using the same method?

                            Defensive Gun Use

                            The Firearms Law and Policy group examined in detail several studies of DGU, including the high and low estimates cited in the CDC report (the NCVS and the NSDS). You may read those diaries and disagree with our  analysis and/or disagree with the conclusions drawn. If you think there is something we missed and you decide to write a rebuttal diary addressing an issue you see, please send the group a Kosmail so that we can participate and add it to the collection of Daily Kos writers who care that policy be based on sound science.

                            Another Look at Estimates of Defensive Gun Use (Part VI) - Open Thread
                            A closer look at DGU numbers
                            Defensive Gun Use (Part V) - A Comparison of Two Studies
                            Defensive Gun Use (Part IV) - The National Self Defense Survey
                            Defensive Gun Use (Part III) - The National Crime Victimization Study
                            Defensive Gun Use (Part II) - You Decide
                            Defensive Gun Use (Part I) - The CDC Report on Gun Violence
                            Center for Disease Control Addresses Gun Violence
                            The bottom line is that self-reporting surveys of gun use are biased in various ways, and there is no way to correct for the obvious limits of the method.

                            "The pessimist complains about the wind; the optimist expects it to change; the realist adjusts the sails.” — William Arthur Ward

                            by LilithGardener on Sat Mar 08, 2014 at 03:30:01 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  There are several reports in the CDC review that (0+ / 0-)

                            are authored or co-authored or use research by Kleck, it's not just one. Check the footnotes, he is mentioned at least 5 times, if I am not mistaken.

                            "Looking back over a lifetime, you see that love was the answer to everything." — Ray Bradbury

                            by We Shall Overcome on Sat Mar 08, 2014 at 04:18:26 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Bullshit. (0+ / 0-)

                            I accurately quote the CDC report commissioned by President Obama.

                            Your conspiracy theories and attempts to claim political bias for a report commissioned by President Obama is ridiculous.

                            Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.

                            by FrankRose on Sat Mar 08, 2014 at 11:46:57 AM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  I've read through the Report (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Kasoru, FrankRose

                            several times and this entire thread (and others before it) and it's perfectly telling your and LG's presumption that I have not.

                            Your own bias is quite evident here and there will be no value debating you further on this. Discredited only by  lazy witch hunters who prefer to demonize him as a gun lobby shill, Dr. Kleck has perfectly credible academic credentials at a leading U.S. University and was one of 14 committee members who were appointed to prepare the recent CDC Report pursuant to the President's Executive Order -- under the leadership of Dr. Leshner, the head of the American Association for the Advancement of Science.  What a hack, huh?

                            You tend to infer or surmise much to much -- and I simply don't agree with your assessment how Frank is using language quoted from the Report. But your evident anxiety about this concern seems quite over-wrought.

                            By appearances you and the HR brigade here have an axe to grind and particular agenda to pursue that isn't particularly inclined to discussion or debate ... even as some of us also fully understand the Report's summaries of existing research, with identification of controversies that exist and suggested lines of further enquiry.  The Report's language can still be validly quoted however -- despite your own clearly hostile interpretation about that and conjured grounds for HRing based on "lying."

                            One of the first rules of science is to fall in love with your data not your hypothesis. Think about that for a bit.

                          •  As I have asked FR on many occasions, please (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Sharon Wraight

                            write more diaries. Comments in the comment threads are not the best way to have an open debate and to make a case. A diary allows you to include sources, links and make your case without all the interference of a comment thread.

                            I'm also disappointed to hear that in our first interaction on DKos you have immediately divined my intentions and my biases and that you won't be debating because you already know my positions.

                            As for the CDC report, Gary Kleck and defensive gun use (not our immediate issue, but certainly related), I suggest Lilith's advice — a list of diaries that can be read and an invitation to join us with a diary:

                            http://www.dailykos.com/...

                            "Looking back over a lifetime, you see that love was the answer to everything." — Ray Bradbury

                            by We Shall Overcome on Sat Mar 08, 2014 at 04:14:36 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  When you start out with (2+ / 1-)
                            Recommended by:
                            FrankRose, Kasoru
                            Hidden by:
                            Sharon Wraight

                            an immediately discreditable and clearly biased assertion slurring Professor Kleck's academic integrity ... you do not evidence any merit for debate -- open or otherwise.  I'm sorry if that conclusion troubles you ... but it is you who first asserted the bias of shilling and I have shown where your own is clearly evident and disqualifying.

                            It takes only modest effort to investigate Dr. Kleck's academic credentials, his particular emphasis on empirical data, his self-aware acceptance of critical arguments pro or con concerning his own studied conclusions and his appropriate rejection of agenda-driven "research" that permeates the field -- of the Hemenway variety (as I have studied myself and concluded).  

                            Moreover, your invitation to honest debate is also suspect given your handling of Frank's several repeated points where he has fairly quoted the CDC Report and never disputed as I have seen the other narrow quotations you and LG prefer to emphasize that acknowledge areas of academic dispute.

                            But you and others here have branded Frank a liar and thread-jacker for his emphases ... in a diary series no less that fixates on inflammatory anecdotal recitation without any effort to incorporate real and relevant data or critical thought. It is a clear appeal to emotion only ... and your advocates seem to prefer to censor and hide with misplaced HRs anyone with the temerity to challenge that unfortunate myopia in community that congratulates itself as "reality-based."

                            I'm sure though you firmly believe you and LG are trying to educate this community.  In this thread I do not see that ... but my view is unquestionably a minority perspective and is not well accepted as you and the several up-raters have demonstrated.  If I am correct, there is little value in posturing the facade of debate with you, LG or your up-rater crowd.

                            And so you know ... because I am interested in politics and policy on this and other issues, I tend to follow 2A/Gun Control diaries here in DK... including those posted at FLAP.

                            Sorry for being so blunt and, in LG's utter laughable attack, for "parachuting in" the Hiddens where actually I as a TU am perfectly entitled to see how our community moderation efforts are functioning or not.  I'm certainly capable of less scathing interaction, but not when I'm responding to what I've seen here.  

                            And by the by, if you can remember that you, LG and your up-raters are addressing fellow Democrats, liberals and progressives who might hold quite different views on these 2A/Gun Control issues, you might be interested in this nugget:

                            In his 1997 book, Targeting Guns, Kleck revealed that he is a member of several liberal organizations, including the American Civil Liberties Union, Amnesty International, and Democrats 2000. He is registered as an active Democrat and has contributed financially to the campaigns of Democrat political candidates. He is not a member of the National Rifle Association, or any other pro-gun organization.
                            http://civilliberty.about.com/...
                          •  Appeals to Kleck's liberal background have been (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Sharon Wraight

                            rightly called what they are "thou doth protest too much":

                            Spitzer's review of outside researchers' views on gun control offers some small pleasures for the supporter of gun control. He matter-of-factly reviews and dismisses the work of Florida State University professor Gary Kleck (whose discredited claim that Americans use firearms more than 2 million times a year to stop crimes is routinely cited by the NRA) with the observation that Kleck's “estimates are at odds with national crime data, and suffer from severe methodological problems.” Spitzer notes in the book's preface that “declaratory statements by some [pro-gun] lawyers and academics that they were good liberals, or not members of various gun associations, seemed anxious efforts to protest too much.”
                            http://www.nejm.org/...

                            "Looking back over a lifetime, you see that love was the answer to everything." — Ray Bradbury

                            by We Shall Overcome on Sat Mar 08, 2014 at 08:26:01 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  And of course you miss the salient point(s) (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            FrankRose, Kasoru

                            entirely.  Whoosh ... as they say.

                          •  Whoosh indeed: (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Sharon Wraight
                            A National Research Council report said that Kleck's estimates appeared to be exaggerated and that it was almost certain that "some of what respondents designate[d] as their own self-defense would be construed as aggression by others" (Understanding and Preventing Violence, 266, Albert J. Reiss, Jr. & Jeffrey A. Roth, eds., 1992).

                            The 2.5 million figure would lead us to conclude that, in a serious crime, the victim is three to four times more likely than the offender to have and use a gun. Although the criminal determines when and where a crime occurs, although pro-gun advocates claim that criminals can always get guns, although few potential victims carry guns away from home, the criminal, according to Kleck’s survey, is usually outgunned by the individual he is trying to assault, burglarize, rob or rape.

                            Kleck’s survey also included gun uses against animals and did not distinguish civilian uses from military of police uses.  Kleck’s Interviewers do not appear to have questioned a random individual at a given telephone number, but rather asked to speak to the male head of the household.  Males from the South and West were oversampled.  The results imply that many hundreds of thousands of murders should have been occurring when a private gun was not available for protection. Yet guns are rarely carried, less than a third of adult Americans personally own guns, and only 27,000 homicides occurred in 1992.

                            http://vacps.org/...

                            "Looking back over a lifetime, you see that love was the answer to everything." — Ray Bradbury

                            by We Shall Overcome on Sat Mar 08, 2014 at 08:31:57 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  So you still insist (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            FrankRose, Kasoru

                            Professor Kleck is simply a gun lobby shill?  Is that your evidence?

                          •  His research is used by the gun lobby to make (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Sharon Wraight

                            erroneous claims - that's not necessarily him shilling for the gun lobby. I think it's just bad research.

                            "Looking back over a lifetime, you see that love was the answer to everything." — Ray Bradbury

                            by We Shall Overcome on Sat Mar 08, 2014 at 08:48:22 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Of for fuck's sake. (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            FrankRose, Kasoru

                            Are you really that dense?

                            If data or studies have merit, do YOU really give a damn who uses that information?  I mean seriously?  Do have any academic experience or insight?

                            If you think (I suspect believe) his research is bad, then show some empirical data and address some of my substantive points.  Otherwise ... you're continuing to prove yourself simply a copy/paster stenographer with a particular agenda and poor judgment.

                          •  I've already pointed you to research that (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Sharon Wraight

                            contradicts Kleck and to research that picks apart his findings - not opinion, but actual research:

                            http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/...

                            I suppose even Harvard can't match up with your intellect.

                            "Looking back over a lifetime, you see that love was the answer to everything." — Ray Bradbury

                            by We Shall Overcome on Sat Mar 08, 2014 at 09:10:00 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Oh yes. (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            FrankRose, Kasoru

                            Whatever comes from Harvard can never be wrong.

                            What an absurd perspective.  Really?

                            You need to recalibrate your infatuations toward critical thinking rather than objects of worship.

                          •  So, insult and then skate by the actual (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Sharon Wraight

                            research - that's a little dodgy, isn't it?

                            And Harvard isn't rated in the top 5 global universities for research for nothing.

                            "Looking back over a lifetime, you see that love was the answer to everything." — Ray Bradbury

                            by We Shall Overcome on Sat Mar 08, 2014 at 09:19:31 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Top 5 ... (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Kasoru

                            So what?

                            Are you really that incapable of parsing matters just a wee bit thinner?  

                            If you don't like the insult, stop being stupid about these things.  Harvard?  You really believe that label gives special credibility?  Wow.

                            Keep studying.

                          •  It's been real - I get your schtick, heard it here (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Sharon Wraight

                            1000s of times.

                            Fortunately, gun reform is coming to the US of A thanks to a bevy of political action groups that have sprung up post Newtown, and a public that's had enough - so, no more guns in Starbucks, no more gun sales on Facebook, Havey Weinstein is coming out with movie that's going to nail the NRA to the wall, gun reform is passing in the states and the courts are upholding those laws, the SC is rejecting NRA-backed court cases, the CDC is getting it's budget back, the ATF has a director again, we're about to get a surgeon general that says gun violence is a major problem and rich folks who are embarrassed by the mockery that's been made of our public square with school shootings, mall shootings, office shootings, airport shootings, places of worship shootings and on and on, are opening their wallets and pouring money into organizations that are leveling the playing field.

                            So, in 1-2 years, if not sooner, you're going to realize you are wasting your time defending the status quo on gun policy.

                            There's your bed time story.

                            Sleep tight.

                            "Looking back over a lifetime, you see that love was the answer to everything." — Ray Bradbury

                            by We Shall Overcome on Sat Mar 08, 2014 at 09:33:05 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Thanks for confirming (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Kasoru

                            your phony "objectivity" and your actual agenda driven approach.

                            For me, I'll just keep residing in a data driven policy world where facts, critical reasoning and intellectual integrity matters more than politics.

                            It's been real.  Ta.

                          •  Ba Dum Tish! (0+ / 0-)

                            "Looking back over a lifetime, you see that love was the answer to everything." — Ray Bradbury

                            by We Shall Overcome on Sat Mar 08, 2014 at 09:49:15 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  How can I miss you (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Kasoru

                            if you never leave.  Song I heard once.

                            Nightie-night.

                          •  Show me that you've actually (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            FrankRose, Kasoru

                            read anything Professor Kleck has written rather than these agenda-driven smear jobs (yes, it happens even in academics).  He's directly addressed, persuasively to my mind, most of these criticisms.

                            Keep studying.

                          •  Can you point me to sources where he has addressed (0+ / 0-)

                            the criticisms?

                            "Looking back over a lifetime, you see that love was the answer to everything." — Ray Bradbury

                            by We Shall Overcome on Sat Mar 08, 2014 at 08:49:50 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  I could, but tell me why I should bother. (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            FrankRose, Kasoru

                            The research is simple enough ... I've done it. You're seem an axe grinder and without much ability to discern the weight of competing arguments.

                            Show me otherwise and I"ll more inclination to discuss the issue with you.

                            In the meanwhile, how about retracting your "gun lobby shill" crap?

                          •  Never said Kleck was a shill - only that he's (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Sharon Wraight

                            done bad research that has then been used by the gun lobby for its purposes. There's a difference. Sort of like GOPers watching Faux News and expecting Romney to win. Romney didn't tell Faux what to report. And the gun lobby didn't tell  Kleck what to publish.

                            "Looking back over a lifetime, you see that love was the answer to everything." — Ray Bradbury

                            by We Shall Overcome on Sat Mar 08, 2014 at 08:57:32 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Ok ... that's fair nuance. (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            FrankRose, Kasoru

                            I don't agree with your conclusions about the merits of different research studies any more than you evidently agree with mine.

                            But ... to stay on point to my original involvement in this thread ... I believe you do misstate the "CDC Report" by suggesting it is only a literature search summary .. without any conclusory statements concerning existing research.

                            If so, the Report's language quoted clearly refutes that point that has served as the basis of your repeated assertion that Frank (and maybe me I suppose in your world) is a liar.

                            If you want me to be as careful as you'd like, you need to do the same.

                          •  Correction: (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Sharon Wraight

                            I didn't say "without any conclusory statements concerning existing research."

                            I said, it didn't break new ground with new research.

                            Of course they made concluding statements about the research they reviewed.

                            "Looking back over a lifetime, you see that love was the answer to everything." — Ray Bradbury

                            by We Shall Overcome on Sat Mar 08, 2014 at 09:12:51 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  You have repeatedly (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Kasoru

                            emphasized that it the point about literature searches without conclusory observations.

                            Own it.

                            And if only now you change tack, then let's discuss those "conclusions" about existing research they in fact made ... rather than the points you and LG and up-raters have repeatedly emphasized to the point of HRing someone for disagreeing.

                          •  Show me where I said that, and I will own it. (0+ / 0-)

                            Or are you going to tell me "you show me"

                            FL&P has already written a number of diaries on the CDC  report, which I've read and commented on and read comments.

                            Ultimately, research about gun violence is spotty, incomplete and inconclusive - thanks to an industry that sells dangerous products that doesn't want consumers to know about those dangers because it would cut into quarterly profits and make shareholders angry.

                            Very similar to the tobacco industry.

                            "Looking back over a lifetime, you see that love was the answer to everything." — Ray Bradbury

                            by We Shall Overcome on Sat Mar 08, 2014 at 09:24:10 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  You seem perfectly (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Kasoru

                            incapable of recognizing the existence of bias in matters of policy -- even if the conclusions align with your own personal preferences.

                            That is a rather damning indictment -- as I see it.

                            Even Kleck does a better job of owning up to where his research conclusions might be wrong.

                            If you and LG are exemplars of FLAP, this is exactly why I want no part of it.  You emote much better than you reason. And it's perfect that we're addressing this in Gun Fail -- the perfect emoter's haven at DK.

                          •  And did you even bother (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            FrankRose, Kasoru

                            to compare the academic credentials of Dr. Spitzer and Dr. Kleck -- in the field of criminology, firearm violence and public policy?

                            No?  I thought not.

                            And the NEJM is a not an authoritative publication in this field ... it doesn't remotely strive to provide reference to alternative data or studies even as it concerns public health considerations.

                            Keep studying.  

                          •  Oh, I've studied quite a bit on this subject: (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Sharon Wraight
                            Guns are not used millions of times each year in self-defense

                            We use epidemiological theory to explain why the “false positive” problem for rare events can lead to large overestimates of the incidence of rare diseases or rare phenomena such as self-defense gun use. We then try to validate the claims of many millions of annual self-defense uses against available evidence. We find that the claim of many millions of annual self-defense gun uses by American citizens is invalid.

                            Most purported self-defense gun uses are gun uses in escalating arguments and are both socially undesirable and illegal

                            We analyzed data from two national random-digit-dial surveys conducted under the auspices of the Harvard Injury Control Research Center.  Criminal court judges who read the self-reported accounts of the purported self-defense gun use rated a majority as being illegal, even assuming that the respondent had a permit to own and to carry a gun, and that the respondent had described the event honestly from his own perspective.

                            Firearms are used far more often to intimidate than in self-defense.

                            Using data from a national random-digit-dial telephone survey conducted under the direction of the Harvard Injury Control Center, we examined the extent and nature of offensive gun use.  We found that firearms are used far more often to frighten and intimidate than they are used in self-defense. All reported cases of criminal gun use, as well as many of the so-called self-defense gun uses, appear to be socially undesirable.

                            http://www.hsph.harvard.edu/...

                            "Looking back over a lifetime, you see that love was the answer to everything." — Ray Bradbury

                            by We Shall Overcome on Sat Mar 08, 2014 at 08:45:34 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Oh ... (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            FrankRose, Kasoru

                            You're Hemenway light.  Gotcha.  Not impressed.

                            Keep studying.

                          •  So then, you're argument seems to boil down to (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Sharon Wraight

                            "I'm right and you're wrong because I say so."

                            Where are your sources, research and studies that you base your claims on?

                            Haven't seen one yet and when I ask, you seem to hide behind "oh, you wouldn't read it anyways."

                            "Looking back over a lifetime, you see that love was the answer to everything." — Ray Bradbury

                            by We Shall Overcome on Sat Mar 08, 2014 at 08:55:06 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Prove me wrong. (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            FrankRose, Kasoru

                            You haven't proven yourself all that interested in addressing my issues about your own methodology, agenda and bias.  If you can't even do that honestly, all this is an utter waste of your and my time.

                          •  Got it - you're right and everyone is wrong (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Sharon Wraight

                            because you say so.

                            I'll leave you with this:

                            In the 1990s, politicians backed by the NRA attacked researchers for publishing data on firearm research. For good measure, they also went after the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention for funding the research. According to the NRA, such science is not “legitimate.” To make sure federal agencies got the message, Rep. Jay Dickey (R-Ark.) sponsored an amendment that stripped $2.6 million from the CDC’s budget, the exact amount it had spent on firearms research the previous year.
                            http://www.slate.com/...

                            The reason the research on gun violence is so spotty is that the gun lobby has made it so - because it doesn't want the public to know the true risks, for fear if it did, it would hurt sales.

                            "Looking back over a lifetime, you see that love was the answer to everything." — Ray Bradbury

                            by We Shall Overcome on Sat Mar 08, 2014 at 09:05:32 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Or ... (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            FrankRose, Kasoru

                            the "gun lobby" and many others of us don't particularly respect advocacy based and agenda driven "research."

                            Have you ever corrected anyone on the actual nature of the Congressional funding restriction?

                          •  I guess RJR Nabisco would make the same point (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Sharon Wraight

                            about cigarette research.

                            "Looking back over a lifetime, you see that love was the answer to everything." — Ray Bradbury

                            by We Shall Overcome on Sat Mar 08, 2014 at 09:14:23 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Wha? (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Kasoru

                            Oh so now I'm a tobacco lobbyist.  Brilliant. As usual.

                          •  Where did anyone say you were ? (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Sharon Wraight

                            "please love deeply...openly and genuinely." A. M. H.

                            by indycam on Sun Mar 09, 2014 at 09:55:02 AM PDT

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  You don't recognize (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            FrankRose

                            the desperate reliance on the guilt by association fallacy?  It's really not all that hard to see without blinders, but your failure to recognize it seems consistent with the poor self-reflection skills from agenda bias that is so evident in the HR abuser crowd here as well.

                          •  HR for insults, DBAD (0+ / 0-)

                            ancblu writes in comments to this diary, alone:

                            What a bunch
                            of self-righteous priggish crap.
                            foam-mouthed projecting
                            you do not evidence any merit for debate
                            My aren't we a tender hot house flower...
                            Are you really so unhinged from my stern critique...
                            I actually care about rational Democratic policy approaches to the issue, not the emotionally driven hysteria that gun fail fans so love...
                            Your tirade in response...
                            your silly certainty...
                            stay true to your emotion.  It's powerful ... blinding ...
                            But by all means continue to... hype the emotional drama and make all this a personal witch hunt against us "haters.
                            makes a purely emotional appeal to avoid the burden of actually thinking...
                            easier for you to demonize with intellectually lazy slurs devoid of reason and laden instead with brittle emotional intensity.
                            based on facts rather than emotion ...
                            It is a clear appeal to emotion only...
                            Your initial nonsensical diatribe was nothing but a self-impressed justification for an utterly false accusation
                            These are not signs of a credible policy analyst
                            Discredited only by lazy witch hunters
                            Are you really that dense?
                            Do [you] have any academic experience or insight?
                            What an absurd perspective.  Really?
                            You need to recalibrate your infatuations toward critical thinking rather than objects of worship.
                            Are you really that incapable of parsing matters just a wee bit thinner?  
                            If you don't like the insult [sic], stop being stupid about these things.
                            your "gun lobby shill" crap?
                            You're seem [sic] an axe grinder and without much ability to discern the weight of competing arguments.
                            You seem perfectly
                            incapable of recognizing the existence of bias in matters of policy
                            Keep studying.
                            Prove me wrong.
                            your demonstrable ... cherry picking priggishness ...
                            I realized what a hypocrite and poseur you really are on this matter.  You lost all credibility...
                            lazy minds who pretend to debate but studiously avoid use of actual data to form reasoned conclusions
                          •  Ahhhh ... the HR Maven (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            FrankRose

                            being the proverbial dick herself for failing to be consistent when she and others in this little wolf-pack falsely and persistently accuse a member of lying and thread-jacking for offering a direct and relevant quotation ... or when the object of your own silly infatuation -- LG -- herself hysterically makes up ad homs while studiously ignoring a valid critique.

                            Yawn.  Really dear Sharon? ... "Prove me wrong" provokes your poutrage?  How typically absurd and perfectly revealing.

                            To quote one of your bestest buddies upthead, though --- I've seen your HR abuse schtick 1000s of times.

                            ... Oh, and I still haven't seen you own up to the call out of  your other HR abuse where you phonied up the same sort of silliness as simply purposeful and agenda driven illiteracy.

                          •  Where is your rebuttal diary? (0+ / 0-)

                            You seem to have a lot to say on the topic. If keeping it bottled up is eating you up inside, perhaps you should write a rebuttal diary?

                            Just like everybody else, you, Frank and Kasoru are free to write diaries on any issue you find important, and hold your  views up to scrutiny.

                            What is holding you back? What prevents you from writing a weekly GunSUCCESS diary series? I'd welcome such a series if it educates readers about all the real ways guns are used.

                            "The pessimist complains about the wind; the optimist expects it to change; the realist adjusts the sails.” — William Arthur Ward

                            by LilithGardener on Sat Mar 08, 2014 at 09:46:25 AM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  We're also free to comment in comment sections (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Kasoru

                            despite your attempts to stifle such discussion with your HR abuse.

                            Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.

                            by FrankRose on Sat Mar 08, 2014 at 11:48:28 AM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  I'd look forward to that, as well. (0+ / 0-)
                            writing a weekly GunSUCCESS diary series
                            But I don't think they want to reveal all the measures they'd support to reduce gun-violence, nor to face the reality about the actual low number of alleged Gun"Successes". I'll look forward to it, if so.
                          •  My aren't we a tender hot house flower ... (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Kasoru, FrankRose

                            I responded to your demonstrable HR misuse and cherry picking priggishness ... here ... in this thread ... with some quite simple re-assertions for you about the repeatedly ignored relevance of different CDC accident rate data.  

                            Your tirade in response notably avoided the essential points of HR misuse and analytical relevance of what you sought to suppress. So if you can't even specifically address that a focused critique about your judgment and methods ... here ... don't you rather prove that the point you are a far more a polemicist than someone reasonable and balanced in any firearms discussion or debate?

                            Whatever your own self-congratulation about your "policy" forum, when you started contributing to the mocking and insult and even uprating a constant shit stirrer during one of her frequent and tiresome flame-baiting anti-agenda hijacks some time back ... I realized what a hypocrite and poseur you really are on this matter.  You lost all credibility for having any objectivity with your ratification of that sort of juvenalia under the phony guise of "it's all just in good fun", so I avoid "your forum."  Simple.  

                            I uprated to offset your and other's HR misuse in this thread clearly addressing a factual matter that is objectively relevant to accident rates, but that you contend is thread-jacking. But whatev ... stay true to your emotion.  It's powerful ... blinding ... but powerful.

                          •  Have you read the Firearms Law and Policy (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            LilithGardener

                            diaries about the CDC report?

                            "Looking back over a lifetime, you see that love was the answer to everything." — Ray Bradbury

                            by We Shall Overcome on Sat Mar 08, 2014 at 09:16:48 AM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  The ugly underbelly (0+ / 0-)

                            of gun culture. You clearly haven't read the diary or the comment threads. Perhaps you fail to comprehend the most basic facts of responsible gun ownership.

                            Or maybe you and Frank and Kasoru just hate that the diarist dares to report on the ugly underbelly of "gun culture" and the way negligent gun owners get a pass from law enforcement, week in, week out.

                            Facts:
                            1. Bullets don't accidentally load themselves into a magazine.
                            2. Bullets can't accidentally seat themselves in the chamber.
                            3. The trigger guard is there for a reason, someone intentionally puts there finger inside the trigger guard.
                            4. Triggers can't accidentally pull themselves. Someone has to exert force intentionally for the trigger to release the firing mechanism.
                            5. Guns don't accidentally climb out of the holster onto the table, nightstand, or into the closet where they are found by children.
                            6. Out of all the random directions the open end of a gun can be pointing, they somehow get "accidentally" pointed at someone's chest, or at someone's head, or into someone's back far more than chance could a count for.

                            Are you really going to stand as champion of continued whitewashing of irresponsible gun play? It took a century of research and law, along with mandated technology improvements to bring down the rate of MV injury and death. Sloppy and irresponsible MV drivers are sanctioned under the law.

                            Re your personal insults, unfounded accusations and vitriol. They are no match for the determination I have to secure the RKBA for actual responsible gun owners, people who don't leave guns ensecured, people who don't play with their gun when tbh are drunk.

                            "The pessimist complains about the wind; the optimist expects it to change; the realist adjusts the sails.” — William Arthur Ward

                            by LilithGardener on Sat Mar 08, 2014 at 09:25:01 AM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  The only thing I particularly dislike (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Kasoru, FrankRose

                            (hate is your persistent word of choice) is lazy minds who pretend to debate but studiously avoid use of actual data to form reasoned conclusions about a subject -- here, firearm accidents.  The Gun Fail series makes a purely emotional appeal to avoid the burden of actually thinking -- and that's a pretty dark underbelly of your preferred form of advocacy I suppose.

                            CDC data -- not the Report -- provides a basis to evaluate the relative public health risks based on the rates of different causes of accidental injuries and death, including firearms.  Some of us make that point reasonably often to folks of your mindset and in this diary series, but the sound of crickets usually follows other than the predicable accusations like yours of "thread-jacking," "liar, "NRA shill," "RWNJ" "troll" or some penis infatuation crap.

                            Look up-thread ... even the guy first debating Frank can't restrain himself from accusing Dr. Kleck -- one of the Report's authors -- of being a "gun lobby shill." Own this behavior ... it's clear enough to some observers who call you out on it.

                            But by all means continue to misuse your TU status to improperly HR, ignore and suppress relevant facts, hype the emotional drama and make all this a personal witch hunt against us "haters.  However embarrassing it should be to you, it nonetheless seems to keep your passion burning.

                          •  So you disagree? Meh (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Sharon Wraight

                            It's fine to have an opinion, and to express disapproval of an HR. Reasonable people do disagree sometimes.

                            I don't recall ever reading any diary or comment you wrote, or replying to you, and I really don't know anything about you except for the vitriol you heaved up here.

                            Clearly shopping in the hiddens is something of a trigger for you and you saw an excuse to vent your whole bloated spleen of personal vitriol. Do you feel better now?

                            Sorry, you had your chance, but your 15 minutes of my attention have expired.

                            "The pessimist complains about the wind; the optimist expects it to change; the realist adjusts the sails.” — William Arthur Ward

                            by LilithGardener on Sat Mar 08, 2014 at 04:03:16 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  My vitriol? Hah. (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Kasoru, FrankRose

                            Your initial nonsensical diatribe was nothing but a self-impressed justification for an utterly false accusation that a DK member was lying.  He was not ... upon an ounce of honest reflection by you and your up-raters. But you persist in ignoring that fact all the while hyper-ventilating about entirely irrelevant tangents to my specific critique and engaging in wild-eyed and purely fanciful speculation about who I am and what I care about.

                            The irony of your silliness in palpable ... and I've had enough of it here as well. Bye.

                          •  HR for unsupported accusation of party treason (5+ / 0-)

                            (a version of DBAD).

                            FrankRose writes:

                            But, I'll give you this: you did one hell of a job convincing registered Democrats to vote for the recall of Democrats.
                            I'll remove the HR if you supply proof that We Shall Overcome convinced registered Democrats to vote for the recall of Democrats.
                          •  Oh please ... (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Kasoru, FrankRose

                            He was obviously referring to "you" in the general case -- meaning like-minded Democrats who voted for recall of a Democrat in Democratic counties.  Your conjuring some sort of a HRable personal insult out of this is laughable.

                            I hope you really aren't that dense ... but then again I see your upraters and it's clear this is a only a hunt and search mission for someone you all dislike and prefer to HR and censor for entirely fabricated reasons in the absence of anything remotely valid.

                          •  HR for baseless accusation (3+ / 0-)

                            and persistent threadjacking and dickishness. I posted the policy diary and relevant policy below.

                            "The pessimist complains about the wind; the optimist expects it to change; the realist adjusts the sails.” — William Arthur Ward

                            by LilithGardener on Fri Mar 07, 2014 at 06:45:05 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  And he sank to a new low today (3+ / 0-)

                            And now claiming credit for himself - I think he thought I was fresh meat.

                            He will not acknowledge the reports self-stated intent, as you say:

                            The research program envisioned by the committee, which is designed to produce impacts in 3-5 years, focuses on

                             the characteristics of firearm violence,
                             risk and protective factors,
                             interventions and strategies,
                             gun safety technology, and
                             the influence of video games and other media.

                            The committee identified potential research topics by conducting a survey of previous relevant research, considering input received during the workshop, and using its expert judgment. The committee was not asked to consider funding for the research agenda, and in addition to the CDC, it is likely that other agencies and private foundations will also implement the research agenda. Consequently, the committee identified a full range of high-priority topics that could be explored with significant progress made in 3-5 years. Research on these topics will improve current knowledge of the causes of firearm violence, the interventions that prevent firearm violence, and strategies to minimize the public health burden of firearm violence. p 13 of 121

                            Rather he reverts to until tonight a journalist's vaguely digested version and argues ad nauseum whilst "borrowing" from others.

                            He is making a mockery of the Academy and those who participated.

                            Why is he allowed to get away with this?

                          •  Glad I was able to provide that to you (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Sharon Wraight, Glen The Plumber

                            So you would quit quoting the Slate guy

                            http://www.dailykos.com/...

                            http://www.dailykos.com/...

                          •  Actually We Shall Overcome did. (0+ / 0-)

                            An excellent link.
                            I plan to use it often.

                            Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.

                            by FrankRose on Thu Mar 06, 2014 at 07:02:36 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  both of those links are from me today (2+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:
                            Sharon Wraight, Glen The Plumber

                            sorry caught in bojo again

                          •  Uh....no. They aren't. (0+ / 0-)

                            You might want to hit 'Parent' a few times.......

                            In fact, unless I'm missing something nowhere did someone named "i saw an old tree today" provide that link to me.

                            Which is....kinda weird.

                            Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.

                            by FrankRose on Thu Mar 06, 2014 at 07:28:57 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                  •  Here are all occurences of the term (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    Sharon Wraight

                    Unintentional firearm-related deaths

                    It's the use of the dash in your quote

                    Unintentional firearm-related deaths have steadily declined during the past century. The number of unintentional deaths due to firearm related incidents accounted for less than 1 percent of all unintentional fatalities in 2010 (Hoyert and Xu, 2012). Despite this progress, more than 600 people in the United States died as a result of an unintentional
                    discharge of a firearm in 2010 (Hoyert and Xu, 2012). Risks are highest among adolescents and young adults. Approximately 10 percent of unintentional deaths in 2010 involved children under age 15 (Hoyert and Xu, 2012). About half of unintentional firearm-related fatalities are self-inflicted (Hemenway et al., 2010). Unintentional firearm-related deaths caused by someone other than the victim are primarily committed by friends or family members (Hemenway et al., 2010). Only 2 percent of unintentional firearm-related deaths were connected with self-defense (Hemenway et al., 2010). Rates of unintentional firearm death are significantly higher in rural than in urban counties (Carr et al., 2012).
                    p. 31

                    Examples of topics that could be examined:
                    •What are the characteristics of non-self-inflicted fatal and nonfatal gun injury?
                    o What attributes of guns, ammunition, gun users, and other circumstances affect whether a gunshot injury will be fatal or nonfatal?
                    o What characteristics differentiate mass shootings that were prevented from those that were carried out?
                    o What role do firearms play in illicit drug markets?
                    •What are the characteristics of self-inflicted fatal and nonfatal gun injury?
                    o What factors (e.g., storage practices, time of acquisition) affect the decision to use a firearm to inflict self-harm?
                    o To what degree can or would prospective suicidal users of
                    firearms substitute other methods of suicide?
                    •What factors drive trends in firearm-related violence within subpopulations?
                    •What factors could bring about a decrease in unintentional
                    firearm-related deaths?
                    p.34

                    It was actually published by the NAS, Priorities for Research to Reduce the Threat of Firearm-Related Violence, ISBN
                    978-0-309-28438-7

                    Having gone through all that, what was your point?

                    •  I stand corrected it was the lack of (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:
                      FrankRose

                      citation and the resulting period ... "2010 (Hoyert and Xu, 2012)."

                      I am accustomed to technical and precise writing.

                      But again what's your point? That you believe I am afraid and uneducated?

                      •  Good. It would seem we can move on. (0+ / 0-)

                        Thanks for the--albeit begrudging--acknowledgment of the quote I posted earlier.

                        With the fact that accidental firearm fatalities are both extraordinarily low (less than 1%) and has been steadily declining for a hundred years, has been brought to your attention, do tell--what do you plan on doing with it?

                        Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.

                        by FrankRose on Thu Mar 06, 2014 at 05:57:05 PM PST

                        [ Parent ]

          •  "contextomy," good word! (2+ / 0-)
            The practice of quoting out of context, sometimes referred to as "contextomy", is a logical fallacy and a type of false attribution in which a passage is removed from its surrounding matter in such a way as to distort its intended meaning. ... As an appeal to authority, it involves quoting an authority on the subject out of context, in order to misrepresent that authority as supporting some position.
            Ayup, sounds familiar.
            •  Oh? How so? (0+ / 0-)

              The quote I provided didn't 'support any position'.

              It simply stated two basic facts:
              1) Unintentional firearm-related deaths have steadily declined during the past century.
              2) The number of unintentional deaths due to firearm-related incidents accounted for less than 1 percent of all unintentional fatalities in 2010.

              It is odd that such basic & verifiable facts have created such an uproar.
              It's almost as if such facts are completely contradictory & devastating to the image this diary is attempting to portray.
              It's almost as if there are some that don't want pertinent facts to see the light of day.

              Strange, that.

              Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.

              by FrankRose on Thu Mar 06, 2014 at 07:13:10 PM PST

              [ Parent ]

          •  "the CDC report commissioned by Pres. Obama" (2+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            Glen The Plumber, WakeUpNeo

            FrankRose has used this unusual phrasing (or similar) dozens of times in comments here on DailyKos.

            It's an odd phrase, not commonly used on DailyKos by anyone else nor for any other reports or studies. FrankRose uses it to imply that Obama approves of any quote taken from anywhere in that CDC literature review -- which wasn't even a research report, but an overview to help shape future research.

            So where does that framing come from? One likely possibility is the NRA News website, which had this article: "CDC Study Ordered by Obama Contradicts White House Anti-Gun Narrative." This NRA article includes the out-of-context quotes FrankRose has repeated dozens of times here.

            Another possibility is the even more extreme gun site, Gun Owners of America. They have an article which misleadingly says that "CDC study confirms that guns save lives," and adds: "After being commissioned by the President ..."  

            A third possibility is the equally-extreme Second Amendment Foundation, which posts a PDF article from the Gottlieb-Tartaro Report ("the insiders guide for gun owners"), saying various falsehoods, and this: "new report by the Centers for Disease Control (CDC). The $10 million study was commissioned by OBAMA."

            The NRA, GOA, SAF: the trifecta of the gun-manufacturers lobby and pro-gun extremists.

          •  Frank is comparing swimming the #3 activity (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            LilithGardener

            in the USA to a small dangerous hobby.

            Now they have the 2nd (safety net for sloppy) Amendment, and can't be infringed to actually treat their gun like a gun and not a video game controller.

            by 88kathy on Sat Mar 08, 2014 at 06:30:55 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

        •  And.... (3+ / 0-)

          Accidental injuries from firearms: 17,000+

          Why does this get left out?

          •  GunFAIL deals with accidental death, does it not? (0+ / 0-)

            Falls, Drowning, Motor Vehicles, Fire (yes, fire), Choking, Poisoning & Bicycles all have more accidental deaths than firearms.
            Further, as stated by the CDC report commissioned by President Obama, the already extraordinarily low rate of accidental death by firearm has been steadily decreasing for a century.

            But the facts just doesn't quite have the same ring to it as anecdote, does it Dave?

            Tell you what:
            If you refuse to be swayed by the facts, you are perfectly free to not own a firearm...or chlorine, or a bathtub, or stairs, or a car, or a bike, or any of the other objects that account for far more deaths by accident than firearms do.

            Just allow others, (whom may base their opinions on the facts I listed, or on the anecdote you listed) to make that same decision for themselves.

            Freedom sure is neat, innit?

            Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.

            by FrankRose on Thu Mar 06, 2014 at 04:13:46 PM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  What are you, blind? (5+ / 0-)

              I can't believe you actually asked that question.

              You've never even read these posts you come crying in every week? What a crock of shit, Frank.

              •  A 'crock of shit'? (0+ / 0-)

                Huh.
                I always called it 'anecdote'.

                you come crying in every week?
                You must be mistaking me for somebody else.
                I merely post factual numbers.

                After all, somebody has to do it.

                Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.

                by FrankRose on Thu Mar 06, 2014 at 05:21:38 PM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  Well, damn. (4+ / 0-)

                  Read this post, then.

                  Come on dude. I can see you read English.

                  Mister Factual Numbers Didn't. Even. Read.

                  Puh-lease. Crock. Crock of shit. The end.

                  •  "Mister Factual Numbers"--I like the ring of that. (0+ / 0-)

                    I suggest you keep it in mind.

                    Here is something from the CDC report commissioned by President Obama I can only assume you are happy about:

                    “Unintentional firearm-related deaths have steadily declined during the past century. The number of unintentional deaths due to firearm-related incidents accounted for less than 1 percent of all unintentional fatalities in 2010.”
                    Less than 1%.
                    Declining for a century.

                    This is why places with a higher rate of firearm ownership-& thus with less ignorance about firearms-are less likely to support gun control.
                    If reality looked less like the fact blockquoted above & more like the image you are trying to convey with your anecdotes, wouldn't those numbers be reversed?
                    Ya know, with how dangerous guns are and all?

                    Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.

                    by FrankRose on Thu Mar 06, 2014 at 05:46:22 PM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  Keep shuffling. (4+ / 0-)

                      Derp. GunFAIL's about accidental deaths, right?

                      Have you answered your own question yet, Frank? Or are you going to keep dancing in front of all these people?

                      •  You mean this one? (0+ / 0-)
                        If reality looked less like the fact blockquoted above & more like the image you are trying to convey with your anecdotes, wouldn't those numbers be reversed?
                        Answer: Yes. If reality was based upon the image you are trying to convey, those numbers would be reversed.

                        Of course, reality isn't based upon anecdote, but upon fact.
                        Something at least some of us are very grateful for.

                        Those who would sacrifice liberty for security deserve neither.

                        by FrankRose on Thu Mar 06, 2014 at 06:23:25 PM PST

                        [ Parent ]

        •  You're just a pool grabber n/t (3+ / 0-)
          •  Frank is comparing casualties from swimming pools, (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            LilithGardener

            bathtub mishaps, hot tub mishaps, boating mishaps, commercial boating accidents, fishing accidents, car accidents which resulted in drowning and many other activities to a exceedingly large number of deaths from a small dangerous hobby which regulation is fought savagely.

            Now they have the 2nd (safety net for sloppy) Amendment, and can't be infringed to actually treat their gun like a gun and not a video game controller.

            by 88kathy on Sat Mar 08, 2014 at 07:12:46 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

      •  Guns are #2 cause of accidental death among kids, (3+ / 0-)

        even according to a link posted by RiKBArmies:

        Firearms are the second-leading cause of non-natural deaths for kids, typically from a gun the kid finds somewhere around the house, according to a University of Utah report that mentioned additional horrific statistics.
        Oh, those University of Utah (!) libruls, they're at it again.
    •  The point. (0+ / 0-)

      The point is to demonstrate how often people do foolish things with their guns, even if they're specially trained, so that next time someone suggests that any teacher who wants to carry a weapon into the classroom and walk among the desks six hours a day, five days a week, for 180 days a year ought to be able to do so because what could go wrong, really... should think again.

  •  this'll be in the next GF diary, i reckon: (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    WakeUpNeo, Sharon Wraight, wilywascal

    To put the torture behind us is, inevitably, to put it in front of us.

    by UntimelyRippd on Wed Mar 05, 2014 at 05:28:19 PM PST

  •  If you get so flustered when your gun (3+ / 0-)

    accidentally discharges that you accidentally discharge it again, I'd say that means you shouldn't be handling guns.

  •  God Bless the 2nd Amendment (0+ / 0-)

    It's Mother Nature's way of culling the herd.

    •  If the loo-heads... (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Sharon Wraight

      of the 2nd amendment rights stuck to the "original" 2nd amendment rights like they do with the "original" bible they so profoundly pound on, on a daily basis, to influence our democracy, they wouldn't have a leg to stand on. From the beginning of the declaration up until 2010 at least, the amendment has been changed to accommodate the RWNJ's and unfortunately, to the detriment of this great country, will most likely be the downfall of democracy as we know it.
      Cue...the teabaggers! No gun control...No gubment...No women's rights...No equality...No help for the desperate...No immigration...NO...NO...NO...and as long as you live by these rules, set forth by and strictly enforced by the...teabaggers, you live a happy and "Not so healthy life", that determines this to be a "Freedum lovin' cuntry" as long as you live by their rules.

    •  the 2ndA has been culled to 2 words NOT INFRINGED. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      LilithGardener

      Now they have the 2nd (safety net for sloppy) Amendment, and can't be infringed to actually treat their gun like a gun and not a video game controller.

      by 88kathy on Sat Mar 08, 2014 at 06:25:55 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Thanks for keeping up w/ this series n/t (0+ / 0-)

    "One must never tire of repeating that racism is a monstrous error or an impudent lie." -- Franz Boas

    by Varlokkur on Fri Mar 07, 2014 at 05:38:27 PM PST

  •  the nra will defend (0+ / 0-)

    your right to own a gun who you kill with the gun is not necessarily your decision.

  •  I always start to read these, (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    LilithGardener

    but I never get all the way through.
    The stupidity is just so damn frustrating.
    I wasn't rased around guns, my Mom didn't like them, but my Dad taught me how to shoot and use a gun properly.
    Lesson 1:  ALWAYS assume a gun is loaded.
    2: NEVER point a gun at someone, unless you intend to shoot them.
    3:  NEVER play around with guns.  They are serious tools, and can kill.
    4: ALWAYS see what you are shooting at, and be aware of what is behind it.

    I had to stop reading at the incident where it was just "horseplay" and "accidents happen".  No, they do not just happen.  I'd say 99.9% of "accidental" shootings are preventable.

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site