The Rabbit Hole | Page 35 | Forex Factory

Options

Go to
Permalinks
Print Thread

Similar Threads

Peering down the algorithmic trading rabbit hole 11 replies

Badgers Bolt hole 39 replies

Different Charting software: Hole in charts? 0 replies

Pipbuilder's hole 2 replies

Black Hole Trading 0 replies

Attachments: The Rabbit Hole
Exit Attachments

The Rabbit Hole

  • #681
  • Oct 28, 2016 3:30am Oct 28, 2016 3:30am
Quoting ThunderHeart
{quote} How many registered Gun Owners go out and commit crimes with their firearms? Less than 1% maybe? In fact most gun violence committed are with illegally purchased weapons! Just the facts! So the question still remains, why do responsible gun owners have to suffer and get the blame when crimes are committed with illegal guns? We have enough regulations on the books as it is, they just aren't being enforced!
There are 112.6 guns per 100 people in the US (source Wikipedia). Population is 319 million. Say 30% are children (likely it's a lot less). That's 223.3 million with guns. At 1% like you say, that's 2.23 million who commit crimes with their guns. Just the maths.
  • #682
  • Oct 28, 2016 3:32am Oct 28, 2016 3:32am
Quoting ThunderHeart
{quote} What are the actual stats in America of Kids getting hold of guns? Do you have an actual reference of the actual statistics that verify or back up your assertion? I would be willing to bet it is not a common occurrence. While I knowledge that there have been cases of careless owners, and for that certain measures have been taken in order to insure gun safety such as charging the gun owners with negligence and endangerment of Child welfare safety laws. Both have severe consequences if negligence is found to be the case.
Google it yourself. There is at least one. I said even one is too much.
  • #683
  • Oct 28, 2016 3:36am Oct 28, 2016 3:36am
Quoting jen101
{quote} There are 112.6 guns per 100 people in the US (source Wikipedia). Population is 319 million. Say 30% are children (likely it's a lot less). That's 223.3 million with guns. At 1% like you say, that's 2.23 million who commit crimes with their guns. Just the maths.
That is incorrect. I am surprised by you Jen. I would think you of all people would know enough better not to be quoting wikipedia for accurate data. Also using false equivalencies doesn't support this argument. I also said less than 1%.


This is an actual link that is updated regularly with actual accurate data.
http://www.gunfacts.info/gun-control-myths/crime-and-guns/
  • #684
  • Oct 28, 2016 3:40am Oct 28, 2016 3:40am
Quoting jen101
{quote} Google it yourself. There is at least one. I said even one is too much.
You are the one that made the claim, and throwing it out there as a fact without anything to back it up. Also I never said that it never happened! Why is the burden of proof fall on me? I am merely suggesting that it is a rare occurrence due to the severe laws in place for Gun Owners. If one accident or a case of negligence happens does that mean every other responsible gun owner should be punished in your view?
  • #685
  • Oct 28, 2016 4:02am Oct 28, 2016 4:02am
Quoting ThunderHeart
{quote} That is incorrect. I am surprised by you Jen. I would think you of all people would know enough better not to be quoting wikipedia for accurate data. Also using false equivalencies doesn't support this argument. I also said less than 1%. This is an actual link that is updated regularly with actual accurate data. http://www.gunfacts.info/gun-control-myths/crime-and-guns/
0.5% would make it 1.12 million. You're the one who mentioned committing crimes with guns, not me. That was never my argument. I just used your figures.

Quoting ThunderHeart
{quote} You are the one that made the claim, and throwing it out there as a fact without anything to back it up. Also I never said that it never happened! Why is the burden of proof fall on me? I am merely suggesting that it is a rare occurrence due to the severe laws in place for Gun Owners. If one accident or a case of negligence happens does that mean every other responsible gun owner should be punished in your view?
This is one story in the news concerning a child: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2740913/Parents-nine-year-old-girl-accidentally-shot-gun-instructor-dead-Uzi-didn-t-realize-hit-complaining-recoil-hurt-shoulder.html

And another: http://news10.com/2016/09/17/12-year-old-boy-shoots-at-his-mother-three-times/

And another: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/04/27/us-mother-shot-dead-by-two-year-old-in-car/

Well, that's three which I found in a matter of seconds.

After the Dunblane massacre here, gun laws were really tightened. Are you saying the rest of us were punished because of one nutcase? We don't feel that way at all. If it saves the life of just one child, it's worth it. http://theconversation.com/dunblane-massacre-20-years-on-how-britain-rewrote-its-gun-laws-and-the-challenge-it-faces-now-55896
  • #686
  • Oct 28, 2016 4:16am Oct 28, 2016 4:16am
Quoting ThunderHeart
{quote} What do you mean you don't like stuff like that? Watson is just telling the truth about the SJW's assault on Halloween costumes and the freedom to be able to wear whatever you want. It's gotten absurd with the PC police! Seriously!
Quoting jen101
{quote} I didn't play the video. I don't like that sort of thing so wouldn't. Like burquas and burkinis on the beach?
Further to my previous comment, what about the kids? What if they've been scared by these clowns and are waking up in the night with nightmares? Not your kids so not your problem? Personally I would want to throttle these idiots, but all I can do is make sure my kids don't see stuff like that. It's pointless and ignorant.
  • #687
  • Oct 28, 2016 4:29am Oct 28, 2016 4:29am
Quoting jen101
{quote} 0.5% would make it 1.12 million. You're the one who mentioned committing crimes with guns, not me. That was never my argument. I just used your figures. {quote} This is one story in the news concerning a child: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2740913/Parents-nine-year-old-girl-accidentally-shot-gun-instructor-dead-Uzi-didn-t-realize-hit-complaining-recoil-hurt-shoulder.html And another: http://news10.com/2016/09/17/12-year-old-boy-shoots-at-his-mother-three-times/ And another: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/2016/04/27/us-mother-shot-dead-by-two-year-old-in-car/...
After the Dunblane massacre here, gun laws were really tightened. Are you saying the rest of us were punished because of one nutcase? We don't feel that way at all. If it saves the life of just one child, it's worth it. [/quote]

I am sorry but I m going to have to disagree with you on that unequivocally! Your premise is nothing more than a knee-jerk reaction to address an issue with a band-aid with out really going deeper into addressing the real systemic problem altogether. Remember the cliche, "Guns don't kill people people do"? Thinking that getting rid of guns altogether is going to make the world a safer and a happier place is a nice dreamy thought but it is not rooted in reality! As long as man is inherently evil and an aggressive animal, the need to protect oneself will always be a fundamental individual right no matter what politician thinks or tries to do to circumvent that unalienable right of natural law. That is just the way it is.

Fact: 59% of the burglaries in Britain, which has tough gun control laws, are “hot burglaries” 12 (http://www.gunfacts.info/gun-control-myths/crime-and-guns/#note-93-12) which are burglaries committed while the home is occupied by the owner/renter. By contrast, the U.S., with more lenient gun control laws, has a “hot burglary” rate of only 13%.

This fact alone supports that Gun owners deter crime from happening, or are less likely to become victims of crimes such as Burglary!
If a home invader got between me and my wife and Kids, you better believe sure as sh*t I am going to pull the trigger and not think twice about it. The point is, if heaven forbid a home invasion happened to you, you will be less able to defend yourself and your kids from repelling such an invasion. Never mind calling the police and waiting for a response! You increase your odds of survival exponentially by having a firearm!
  • #688
  • Edited 8:05am Oct 28, 2016 4:43am | Edited 8:05am
Quoting ThunderHeart
{quote} ''''''' If a home invader got between me and my wife and Kids, you better believe sure as sh*t I am going to pull the trigger and not think twice about it. The point is, if heaven forbid a home invasion happened to you, you will be less able to defend yourself and your kids from repelling such an invasion. Never mind calling the police and waiting for a response! You increase your odds of survival exponentially by having a firearm!
The most likely scenario is that the burglar will then shoot, probably kill you and your wife and children...
If you think you can be "sure as sh*t I am going to pull the trigger and not think twice about it" - meaning that you will save the day. Then you obviously have never been in a gunfight.
Of course, if the "home invader" does not have a gun, feel free to shoot him. just follow the advice given to me by my local sheriff. "If you shoot him on your front porch, make sure to drag his body inside your house and only then call the police"

Most NRA / 2nd amendment enthusiasts have a romantic idea about guns that will get them killed in a combat situation either by accident or because they are just stupid and untrained. Fortunately, the great majority is never ever confronted to use a gun in a life or death situation. They just shoot at targets fantasizing they are shooting at terrorists, Hilary Clinton or liberals.
  • #689
  • Edited 7:07am Oct 28, 2016 5:14am | Edited 7:07am
Quoting ThunderHeart
{quote} I am sorry but I m going to have to disagree with you on that unequivocally! Your premise is nothing more than a knee-jerk reaction to address an issue with a band-aid with out really going deeper into addressing the real systemic problem altogether. Remember the cliche, "Guns don't kill people people do"? Thinking that getting rid of guns altogether is going to make the world a safer and a happier place is a nice dreamy thought but it is not rooted in reality! As long as man is inherently evil and an aggressive animal, the need to protect oneself will always be a fundamental individual right no matter what politician thinks or tries to do to circumvent that unalienable right of natural law. That is just the way it is. Fact: 59% of the burglaries in Britain, which has tough gun control laws, are hot burglaries 12 (http://www.gunfacts.info/gun-control-myths/crime-and-guns/#note-93-12) which are burglaries committed while the home is occupied by the owner/renter. By contrast, the U.S., with more lenient gun control laws, has a hot burglary rate of only 13%. This fact alone supports that Gun owners deter crime from happening, or are less likely to become victims of crimes such as Burglary! If a home invader got between me and my wife and Kids, you better believe sure as sh*t I am going to pull the trigger and not think twice about it. The point is, if heaven forbid a home invasion happened to you, you will be less able to defend yourself and your kids from repelling such an invasion. Never mind calling the police and waiting for a response! You increase your odds of survival exponentially by having a firearm!
Fact, our burglaries tend not to involve guns. Yours do. Then it's a 50/50 chance on who gets shot first. Nice thought anyway .

Where I live and in the surrounding villages, it's a sleepy little place with no crime. If you forget to lock your door, it's no big deal. Nevertheless, having your house well secured, alarmed with rapid response and camera surveillance is plenty of reassurance. I feel pretty safe here.

Also, with 5 lever mortice locks as standard, internally glazed windows, alarms and surveillance equipment, it is highly unlikely you would ever get burgled. There are far easier targets. That, is the best deterrent.
  • #690
  • Oct 28, 2016 7:31am Oct 28, 2016 7:31am
Northern Ireland doesn't get a veto on leaving the EU: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3881968/First-legal-challenge-Brexit-dismissed-judge-rejects-claims-Northern-Ireland-veto-quitting-EU.html

Is someone going to tell Jimmy Krankie?

A cross party group of politicians, including Social Democratic and Labour party leader Column Eastwood (pictured outside the Belfast High Court today) contested the validity of the historic EU referendum result without a vote in Parliament of Northern Ireland's Stormont Assembly.

Imagine being called Column!
  • #691
  • Oct 28, 2016 8:03am Oct 28, 2016 8:03am
Quoting jen101
Northern Ireland doesn't get a veto on leaving the EU: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3881968/First-legal-challenge-Brexit-dismissed-judge-rejects-claims-Northern-Ireland-veto-quitting-EU.html Is someone going to tell Jimmy Krankie? A cross party group of politicians, including Social Democratic and Labour party leader Column Eastwood (pictured outside the Belfast High Court today) contested the validity of the historic EU referendum result without a vote in Parliament of Northern Ireland's Stormont Assembly. Imagine being called...
If people started telling Jimmy Krankie anything, they might not be able to stop. But really someone should just tell her to Foxtrot Oscar, in the bluntest terms.

That could be (and probably is) an LA porn screen name. Maybe rammer13 could adopt it?
  • #692
  • Oct 28, 2016 8:26am Oct 28, 2016 8:26am
Quoting Devauxt
{quote} If people started telling Jimmy Krankie anything, they might not be able to stop. But really someone should just tell her to Foxtrot Oscar, in the bluntest terms. That could be (and probably is) an LA porn screen name. Maybe rammer13 could adopt it?
Rammer13's name is already descriptive of a ruminant mammal's inclinations.

Nelson's Column - something that is tall, hard as a rock, has one eye at the top and attracts filthy birds.
  • #693
  • Oct 28, 2016 8:37am Oct 28, 2016 8:37am
Quoting jen101
{quote} Rammer13's name is already descriptive of a ruminant mammal's inclinations. Nelson's Column - something that is tall, hard as a rock, has one eye at the top and attracts filthy birds.
ROFL no comment
  • #694
  • Oct 28, 2016 10:07am Oct 28, 2016 10:07am
Quoting Devauxt
{quote} ROFL no comment
It's all in your mind.
  • #695
  • Oct 28, 2016 10:35am Oct 28, 2016 10:35am
Quoting jen101
{quote} It's all in your mind.
That is what worries me about you
  • #696
  • Oct 29, 2016 1:36pm Oct 29, 2016 1:36pm
American media this election:https://www.publicintegrity.org/2016/10/17/20330/journalists-shower-hillary-clinton-campaign-cash?utm_source=email&utm_campaign=watchdog&utm_medium=publici-email&goal=0_ffd1d0160d-9567d30c7c-100391041&mc_cid=9567d30c7c&mc_eid=a4a523f69c
  • #697
  • Edited 8:18pm Oct 29, 2016 7:19pm | Edited 8:18pm
This is my take and although I can't cite specific data to back it up I know it to be true:

You will never be adequately protected by your government on a community-level basis. You must take responsibility for your own protection on this level. By the time the police arrives after you call them you are likely to be dead.

Individuals who own guns legally in the US are responsible gun owners and would use them in self-defense only as an absolute last resort.

A well armed citizenry does far more to deter crime than an unarmed one.

Criminals are more likely to commit crime in so-called "safe-zones" or in areas where they know the public is most-likely unarmed. If more responsible citizens owned guns and carried in public there would be much less crime and many more opportunities where well-armed citizens would be able to intervene and de-escalate hostile situations. Currently and for the most part armed criminals are like a fox in the chicken house.

Citizens in countries disarmed by government are less free, less able to protect themselves and more likely to be victims of crime or terrorism and in general enjoy overall less freedoms in other areas of their lives.

Citizens who have set aside their individual freedoms and opted instead to put their faith in their government may enjoy short term benefits of this decision but in the long term they will surely suffer.

My wife and I own several weapons and are in the process of acquiring many more. We enjoy going to the gun range and practicing target shooting. We enjoy reading about weapons, disassembling them and reassembling them and keeping them clean. We are currently training to obtain our concealed hand gun licenses and also engaged in training our children and grandchildren to responsibly handle these weapons. It is not only enjoyable but a true expression and exercise of our 2nd amendment rights that free individuals like us hold dear in the USA.

This is only one of many reasons why my wife, I and our children of voting age are voting for Mr. Trump. The fake disgust with the unsubstantiated claims so conveniently announced by to date 12 females is merely a distraction created by the Clinton crime machine who has been proven to have engaged to a much higher degree in the very actions they accuse Trump. Mr. Trump's grasp of the issues most important to America are spot on.

I am not articulate as some but I know that being FREE is everything. Being free means being free of over-control by one's government. Currently the USA is in decline because it's citizenry has been apathetic. They are uneducated regarding the constitution and it's origins. They don't understand the true meaning of freedom and how America came about. A simple example is Obamacare that legally requires its citizens to purchase healthcare insurance. Previously we were free not to do so. This is just another way government confiscates from hard-working Americans and redistributes it as it sees fit.

The US government has exceeded it's constitutional limits on many levels. Many are engaged including myself to defeat this using the Convention of States as described in Article 5 of the US Constitution which gives power to the people to propose amendments when the government has become to powerful. I invite those of you interested to look up Mark Levin.
  • #698
  • Oct 30, 2016 5:14am Oct 30, 2016 5:14am
I agree that the majority of gun owners in the US are law abiding, responsible citizens. So why should the majority be punished?

The majority of Muslims are peaceful, law abiding citizens. Trump is going to ban Muslims from entering America until he "can figure what the hell is going on." Is that not punishing the majority over the actions of a few? Is it not the same argument?
https://youtu.be/cAoXgZLRee0

I can't see any country wanting to adopt the American laws on gun ownership. I wonder why if it is so great?
Attached Image (click to enlarge)
Click to Enlarge Name: GunDeaths.gif Size: 17 KB


As to which country is the freer, I think it all depends on who you are, but here are some interesting arguments: https://www.quora.com/In-which-country-do-you-feel-the-most-free-the-USA-or-the-UK

Personally I am glad to be British /European.
  • #699
  • Edited 8:14am Oct 30, 2016 8:01am | Edited 8:14am
Here's just one of many articles with facts about guns including your dramatic "gun deaths per 100,000" statistic. Those against personal gun ownership have no shortage of similar statistics that distort the truth about guns. I guess we should take away every one's cars since most people who die in automobile accidents drive cars. Only people who drink alcohol become alcoholics. We can prevent alcoholism if we just ban alcohol.

http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2014/05/foghorn/debunking-mother-jones-10-pro-gun-myths-shot/

I could really care less about other countries adopting our gun laws. It matters nothing to me. I own them and I feel safer because I do. If a criminal enters my house they will leave in a body bag.

I'm not sure what you expect me or anyone to take away from the "quora" piece about one person essentially bashing the US. The piece was rather insulting but honestly I could care less what other people think about the US. They don't have to come here. The piece was really ridiculous and has nothing to do with true freedom. Rather it was about bashing American culture. It's funny how everyone wants to come to our country yet they love to bash it at the same time.

I don't have any problem with being picky about who comes into our country. The US has no obligation to accept anyone into this country no matter their race, ethnicity or religion. No one the right to enter the US. Not allowing others to enter our country is not punishing them so your analogy about gun ownership and our right to limit immigration is incorrect. The US is a sovereign nation and can do what it sees fit to protect itself. Right now the current terror situation is directly related to radical Islam. Radical Islam wants to destroy everyone who is not on board with their ideology. There seems to be no shortage of recruits signing up to join their sick cause. I support Trump's logical conclusion that their needs to be a temporary ban on any group with overwhelming ties to terrorism until a process is developed that adequately vets these groups before allowing them into our country.
  • #700
  • Oct 30, 2016 8:22am Oct 30, 2016 8:22am
Quoting Winston Reed
If a criminal enters my house they will leave in a body bag.
If a burglar enters my house whilst I am there, I would grab the children and get the hell out, leave them to it and then call the police. The only things of value to me are photographs and videos and those are backed up. Everything else is insured and replaceable. I don't believe it's worth risking your life or that of your family's over possessions.

There were 55 answers to date on the Quora piece, a mixture of Brits and Americans having lived in both countries.
6 traders viewing now