Why Do Victims Suddenly Aquire Field-Expert Status?

[Warfish]

Originally Posted by intelligentjetsfan

As the sole basis for an evaluation? Of course not. But if the person offers a perspective to help understand a complex issue, I have no issue with it.

Transalation: If the person offers exceedingly questionable, fractured/limited, biased testimony that ssupports positions IJF supports, he's all for it.

If it's anything he doesn't support, he'd be here telling us how inappropriate annecdotal evidence is.

[intelligentjetsfan]

Originally Posted by Warfish

Transalation: If the person offers exceedingly questionable, fractured/limited, biased testimony that ssupports positions IJF supports, he's all for it.

If it's anything he doesn't support, he'd be here telling us how inappropriate annecdotal evidence is.

[Axil]

Originally Posted by cr726

There are not any valid reasons for a civilian to own a AR-15. If the kid in Sandy didn't have that weapon it would of had a very different result, I'm not saying no one would of been killed.

Originally Posted by Warfish

<snip>So if he was in posession of a M1911 Semiauto Handguns (i.e. WWII vintage), he couldn't have done the same thign in the same time, eh?<snip>

Wait... you guys realize there was no rifle used in the shooting right? I thought this was common knowledge now. This is a video from MSNBC confirming this fact.

http://video.today.msnbc.msn.com/tod...08495#50208495

Yeah... that AR-15 in the trunk of his car made things "very different"

[PatriotReign]

Originally Posted by Warfish

Today's example, Gabby Giffords on Gun Control. She was shot. She is not an expert on guns, civil rights or any other related or appropriate topic, best as I know.

But this is a common thing. Sept. 11th Family Members became subject matter experts on Terrorism. Shooting victims become subject matter experts on guns. Sandy victims become subject matter experts on climate and climate change.

Why is this? How does being the victim of something make one an instant expert on that thing?

Gabby Giffords, with respect, is about the last person I'd want to hear on the issue of Gun Control, her bias and lack of expert knowledge is obvious. I want to see gun experts, sociologists, economists, therapists/psycologists and others who can explain, via science and fact, the differences between various gun types and ammo types, why society needs/doesn't need guns socialogicy, how gun crimes are raleated to poverty and socioeconomic issues, and the myriad factors involved in the mental state of those who commit gun crimes.

Last I checked, Gabby Giffords is none of those things. She was an unknown politician in the wrong place at the wrong time.

Am I wrong on this?

Reminds me of when that two bit comic Bobcat Goldthwaite was charged with arson for lighting the chair on fire on The Tonight Show. As part of his sentence he had to do PSAs on the dangers of lighting fires...I dunno shouldn't they have used a firefighter as a fire safety expert instead of a convicted arsonist?

[PatriotReign]

Originally Posted by cr726

There are not any valid reasons for a civilian to own a AR-15. If the kid in Sandy didn't have that weapon it would of had a very different result, I'm not saying no one would of been killed.

It would've been even more effective to have a law where it's illegal for a gun to be in any household where a mentally ill person lives. Oh that's right we don't want to stigmatize a whole group of people based on the actions of a very few.

[Brooklyn Jet]

Originally Posted by Axil

Wait... you guys realize there was no rifle used in the shooting right? I thought this was common knowledge now. This is a video from MSNBC confirming this fact.

http://video.today.msnbc.msn.com/tod...08495#50208495

Yeah... that AR-15 in the trunk of his car made things "very different"

That report from Dec 15th was proven to be wrong (check Snopes)

CNN begs to differ, that the gun in the trunk was a shotgun, and a rifle was used in the shooting:

http://www.cnn.com/2012/12/18/us/con...uns/index.html

State Police also confirmed that on 1/23:

http://www.nbcconnecticut.com/news/l...188031071.html

[cr726]

Originally Posted by Axil

Wait... you guys realize there was no rifle used in the shooting right? I thought this was common knowledge now. This is a video from MSNBC confirming this fact.

http://video.today.msnbc.msn.com/tod...08495#50208495

Yeah... that AR-15 in the trunk of his car made things "very different"

Not common or correct knowledge.

[Axil]

Originally Posted by Brooklyn Jet

That report from Dec 15th was proven to be wrong (check Snopes)

CNN begs to differ, that the gun in the trunk was a shotgun, and a rifle was used in the shooting:

http://www.cnn.com/2012/12/18/us/con...uns/index.html

State Police also confirmed that on 1/23:

http://www.nbcconnecticut.com/news/l...188031071.html

Originally Posted by cr726

Not common or correct knowledge.

Whups!

Thanks for the update, i wasn't aware of the latest revisions to the story.

At this point there have been so many versions floated I'm not sure there's any way to know which weapons were used.

[brady's a catcher]

Originally Posted by cr726

That seems to be a pretty big leap "expert status", her life was shattered and she has a right to be heard.

Why her and not one of the zillions of other gun shot victims?

[cr726]

Originally Posted by brady's a catcher

Why her and not one of the zillions of other gun shot victims?

Zillions? I would guess that a fellow congressmen gunned down during an official function might hit home a little bit? She was a survivor of a bloody rampage.

[brady's a catcher]

Originally Posted by cr726

Zillions? I would guess that a fellow congressmen gunned down during an official function might hit home a little bit? She was a survivor of a bloody rampage.

Why? How is that more relevant that some girl on a street corner who gets shot in a drive by? You talking about what others have already said, that is sells better. She has no more understanding of gun violence than my example just because she was a congress woman shot at an official function.

In fact, I'd say my example is more real world relevant that Giffords.

Nice to see you back posting, btw.

[cr726]

Originally Posted by brady's a catcher

Why? How is that more relevant that some girl on a street corner who gets shot in a drive by? You talking about what others have already said, that is sells better. She has no more understanding of gun violence than my example just because she was a congress woman shot at an official function.

In fact, I'd say my example is more real world relevant that Giffords.

Nice to see you back posting, btw.

Thanks. Giffords I guess makes sense because there is a direct connection to mental illness and guns.

[freestater]

Originally Posted by 32green

I fired off a letter to State Sen. Dean SKelos (R) to remind him that while my vote is now useless on the national level, my local vote still counts....and I didnt elect him to help Andy Cuomo get elected president by assisting him with spurious, ill-thought-out legislation.

Got a very nice letter back basically stating that the penalties for illegal gun possession will be increased bla bla bla.

The irony being, I was now one of the illegal gun possessors because of the legislation he voted for.

So...I guess he was threatening me?





Meanwhile, the flow of illegal guns to bad guys remains unabated....and 30,000 plus good guys in NYS just became.... criminals.

Good times.

If the govt. was really serious about getting guns out of the hands of criminals, a good first step would be for them to stop selling guns to Mexican drug cartels.

[Brooklyn Jet]

Originally Posted by Axil

Whups!

Thanks for the update, i wasn't aware of the latest revisions to the story.

At this point there have been so many versions floated I'm not sure there's any way to know which weapons were used.

The media was in such a rush to report things first, theres a ton of incorrect info out there. Sign of the times I guess. It sucks.