FBI report debunks popular anti-gun myth

a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

OSOTC, I can show you dozens of examples where "progressives" in the United States have advocated for this very position. They state that "a good guy with a gun" is only a myth, in very plain words.

Just take a look at the RKBA/activism forum over at Dem Underground and tell me no one is claiming this. Or that they aren't advocating for gun confiscation. They are. They admit as much.

*Not all of them, obviously. Plenty are reasonable people looking at practical and effective measures: such as, expanding access to NICS for private sellers, fixing the NICS system, increasing penalties, etc.

a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

The argument the OP presented was that people where actually seriously arguing that no shooting has ever been prevented by a good guy with a gun stopping the would be attacker.

Note the use of the word "never" as in never in history has this ever happened.

If anyone is actually claiming this they they are just too stupid to be taken seriously.

I don't think anyone who is serious about gun control would actually make this claim, I think the OP is arguing against a fake argument just for the sake of claiming a "win".

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

The argument the OP presented was that people where actually seriously arguing that no shooting has ever been prevented by a good guy with a gun stopping the would be attacker.

Note the use of the word "never" as in never in history has this ever happened.

If anyone is actually claiming this they they are just too stupid to be taken seriously.

I don't think anyone who is serious about gun control would actually make this claim, I think the OP is arguing against a fake argument just for the sake of claiming a "win".

What you describe, the OP, is the definition of a straw man fallacy.

a reply to: introvert

A mass shooting in Australia has nothing to do with our second amendment rights. Neither does a mass shooting in America or anywhere else. Those were carried out by criminals, not law abiding Citizens.

You should read the first few replies to this thread. Australia was first brought up by Taggart, the poster with the Halloween mask as an avatar.

I engage people about our 2nd amendment right.

What is their to engage over? It is a "right" not a privilege. I wouldn't expect Americans to start ceding rights.

That said, unfortunate you find FBI's *facts* so distasteful that you continue to ignore them entirely. Your choice though.

a reply to: introvert

No, it isn't. It is factual data from FBI.gov that destroys your anti-gun argument(s)

Sorry, but the facts seldom agree with a poorly informed POV.

www.fbi.gov...

a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

It is not a fake argument. It is factual data.

Yet you realize there were ZERO innocent bystanders shot during these incidents by armed Citizens in the same period covered by FBI's stats, yes? So what data is your anti-gun argument based on exactly?

originally posted by: OtherSideOfTheCoin
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

The argument the OP presented was that people where actually seriously arguing that no shooting has ever been prevented by a good guy with a gun stopping the would be attacker.

Note the use of the word "never" as in never in history has this ever happened.

If anyone is actually claiming this they they are just too stupid to be taken seriously.

I don't think anyone who is serious about gun control would actually make this claim, I think the OP is arguing against a fake argument just for the sake of claiming a "win".

People use "never" and 'always' rather frequently as hyperbole rather than as absolute truth.

Fact is, as i showed, there is quite a large amount of noise that the FBI study should quieten. The gist of the OP's argument is correct, if you remove an eye for disagreeing on technicality.

a reply to: OtherSideOfTheCoin

Incorrect my friend.

www.guns.com...

Please. Tell me that "no one serious" makes this argument. There are hundreds of other examples. Google, and get informed.

From the OP:

During the conversation, the co-host of the show Victor Blackwell challenged Watts on whether there was some truth to the National Rifle Association’s maxim that the only way to stop a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun.

“Is there an example in school shootings or a mall shooting or these public facilities, where that has been wrong? Where a bad guy with a gun has been stopped in any other way or by a person other than a law enforcement officer with a gun or by killing himself?” asked Blackwell.

“This has never happened,” replied Watts. “Data shows it doesn’t happen.”

So yes, there are plenty of petty liars peddling false information. Pretending "Good guys with guns" don't stop mass shootings/stop crimes/save their own lives is incorrect. To wit, it is a factually incorrect position to hold. Watts is entirely wrong in her sentiment, and should get better informed.

a reply to: JBurns

A mass shooting in Australia has nothing to do with our second amendment rights. Neither does a mass shooting in America or anywhere else. Those were carried out by criminals, not law abiding Citizens.

It does when you try to use it, whether you originally posted it or not, to push a narrative that makes no sense. Like I said, you didn't even read your source before you posted that tripe.

What is their to engage over? It is a "right" not a privilege. I wouldn't expect Americans to start ceding rights.

That said, unfortunate you find FBI's *facts* so distasteful that you continue to ignore them entirely. Your choice though.

I did no such thing. Just pointing out your ignorance and my disgust that people like you are at the forefront of the debate. You can't even get your facts straight and it sucks that uninformed people such as yourself are what people see when they approach the 2nd amendment issue.

originally posted by: JBurns
a reply to: introvert

No, it isn't. It is factual data from FBI.gov that destroys your anti-gun argument(s)

Sorry, but the facts seldom agree with a poorly informed POV.

www.fbi.gov...

By definition, your OP is a strawman fallacy.

a reply to: introvert

And I've debunked your "straw man" claim. You are extremely uninformed.

Ahem: www.guns.com...

Also, thousands of other examples:

www.google.com...

So please, tell me that "no one serious" claims Good guys with guns stop bad guys with guns

That is the purpose of this argument. Not talking about failed gun-free zones, failed anti-gun policies and failed anti-gun lies.

So either explain to me how this statement is untrue: Good guys with guns stop bad guys with guns
or admit the premise of my OP is entirely correct

There are only two options here.

a reply to: introvert

But it does entirelly make sense. I don't need to know every last detail to know A MASS SHOOTING HAPPENED IN AUSTRALIA, DESPITE THEIR RIDICULOUS GUN CONTROL LAWS

Period. They have gun control, yet a mass shooting happened. And this was AFTER Taggart, another uninformed poster, stated the "Gun control laws prevent mass shootings" nonsense. I simply referenced Australia's VERY RECENT mass shooting to indicate his statement was entirely untrue and incorrect.

YOU and other members have seized on that post in order to deflect or otherwise distract from the facts.

The fact is

Good guys with guns save lives - Says FBI data

a reply to: JBurns

And I've debunked your "straw man" claim. You are extremely uninformed.

One example does not justify the use of the word "proponents" in the OP.

Also, thousands of other examples:

Incorrect. That's a google search link that does not show what your OP claims.

So please, tell me that "no one serious" claims Good guys with guns stop bad guys with guns

What?

So either explain to me how this statement is untrue: Good guys with guns stop bad guys with guns or admit the premise of my OP is entirely correct There are only two options here.

No. There are other options.

a reply to: introvert

Despite the lies of anti-gunners and especially morons like Shannon Watts:

FBI data PROVES Good guys with guns save lives.

www.fbi.gov...

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: JBurns
a reply to: introvert

No, it isn't. It is factual data from FBI.gov that destroys your anti-gun argument(s)

Sorry, but the facts seldom agree with a poorly informed POV.

www.fbi.gov...

By definition, your OP is a strawman fallacy.

I think you are misreading it.

He isn't saying "never". He's saying others have said "never".

To compare to that...the claim that the 'good guy with a gun' is a 'myth' in the articles i linked above. If it is a myth, "never" seems to be a good synonym, right?

Some people, especially media, create these narratives.

a reply to: JBurns

But it does entirelly make sense. I don't need to know every last detail to know A MASS SHOOTING HAPPENED IN AUSTRALIA, DESPITE THEIR RIDICULOUS GUN CONTROL LAWS

So now you are going to be dishonest?

Period. They have gun control, yet a mass shooting happened. And this was AFTER Taggart, another uninformed poster, stated the "Gun control laws prevent mass shootings" nonsense. I simply referenced Australia's VERY RECENT mass shooting to indicate his statement was entirely untrue and incorrect.

It would have been more effective if you would not have shown your ignorance in that post, making it very clear you did not even read your source and did not know the facts.

YOU and other members have seized on that post in order to deflect or otherwise distract from the facts.

What facts? Good guys with guns save lives?

Of course. It happens.

The fact also remains that, by definition, bad guys with guns take lives.

Correct?

So what value does your argument have when the converse is so easily pointed out to be true?

Find a better argument. It's pure laziness.

a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

He isn't saying "never". He's saying others have said "never".

One example is proof of a narrative that needs to be addressed?

To compare to that...the claim that the 'good guy with a gun' is a 'myth' in the articles i linked above. If it is a myth, "never" seems to be a good synonym, right?

So the narrative is not the use of the specific phrase he mentioned?

Some people, especially media, create these narratives.

It appears those narrative are also being created here.

originally posted by: introvert

originally posted by: JBurns
a reply to: introvert

No, it isn't. It is factual data from FBI.gov that destroys your anti-gun argument(s)

Sorry, but the facts seldom agree with a poorly informed POV.

www.fbi.gov...

By definition, your OP is a strawman fallacy.

Exactly my point.

People talk about the straw man all the time, quite often incorrectly but this is actually a straw man argument.

a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

If he didn’t mean the literal meaning of the word never then the entire thread is pointless.

Sorry it’s just one big straw man

originally posted by: introvert
a reply to: bigfatfurrytexan

He isn't saying "never". He's saying others have said "never".

One example is proof of a narrative that needs to be addressed?

To compare to that...the claim that the 'good guy with a gun' is a 'myth' in the articles i linked above. If it is a myth, "never" seems to be a good synonym, right?

So the narrative is not the use of the specific phrase he mentioned?

Some people, especially media, create these narratives.

It appears those narrative are also being created here.

Well...i gave 4 examples. Because I thought piling on more would be overkill. But I can absolutely provide more than 4 examples. From MSM sources, not fringe blogs. MSM, as you are aware, are the ones who steer the narrative on a national level. We talk about the topics they issue to talk about. So I'd say that having multiple MSM outlets creating multiple stories each regarding "the good guy with a gun myth" would definitely be far more than "one example".

What is happening here is we are discussing an FBI report that counters the myriad articles mentioned above. You can call it "creating a narrative", but the audience here is so ridiculously small in scope that I'd have to chuckle if you did.