Reminder: Courts ruled police have NO legal obligation to protect you

But we should totally give up all our guns
and rely solely on the police to protect us.

Because... REASONS.

Other urls found in this thread:

nap.edu/read/18319/
youtube.com/watch?v=tIeEotdOVew
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

For those with anti-gun friends that insist on saying that gun rights are correlated with gun violence, send them the 2013 CDC report done by Obama called "PRIORITIES FOR RESEARCH TO REDUCE THE THREAT OF FIREARM-RELATED VIOLENCE". It's an official 110 page report that declares that the data is inconclusive for the relationship between gun rights and shootings. Send them it and watch them try to squirm their way out of it. It's hilarious!
Here's a link: nap.edu/read/18319/

who said we should ban all guns?
that person is an idiot, whoever they are

>Reminder: Courts ruled police have NO legal obligation to protect you
Thats alright, I always felt the rule of law was really more of a suggestion

I agree. they are here to protect the constitution and enforce the law. to protect our rights. protecting US is not really the purpose, and that infantalizes us. guns are the dumbest protection imaginable. good relations and rule of law protect much more. police should be civil servants, not a paramilitary force to suppress dissent. provide reasonable access to resources, most communities will self police for the most part. poverty, degradation, racism and hopelessness breed desperation and criminal attempts to break out. stop turning to police for salvation.

The left will claim they don't want to ban guns, but they 100% do. It's fucking naive to think they don't after how they've been saying that the USA needs to be like Europe for so long.

you fail to mention that
>need more research
is not
>data is inconclusive
when
>banned from doing research

You would think no Jew would have the Chutzpah to tell goys to disarm after their epic display of utter cowardice.
But... he's a Jew.

lynch him

youtube.com/watch?v=tIeEotdOVew

I'm a liberal gun owner.
The world isn't as black and white as your racist brain would believe

Funny how this is research that was done while the CDC was supposedly banned from doing research. Also, not having enough data to reach a conclusion means that the data is currently inconclusive you fucking retard.

Sheriff Israel is a faggot and I’d like do take a watery dump in his mouth.

You are just saying that because you want to sound reasonable when you aren't. If you truly think the left doesn't want to ban guns then you are completely brain dead.

Yet, the deputy who let the children die is getting protected.
Cops protect cops and say your children are not worth saving.
Cops like this Sheriff Israel are useless tits on the boar hog

Go on. I'm listening...

I guess I have a different standard of "research"
A systematic review is NOT research, while a meta-analysis MIGHT qualify. This is a systematic review in all cases. Did you even read it? This is hardly secondary literature at this point.
>If you truly think the left doesn't want to ban guns then you are completely brain dead.
The persecution complex is so powerful

and im obama and ur naive

The delusional and self entitlement complex is equally powerful, friendo.

I'm only delusional by trying to see if anyone on Sup Forums has a shred of critical thinking
Threads die before anyone will admit it. Not everyone is out for your guns and I'm not entitled to anything, even your pathetic replies.

We have a 110 page research report carried out by the CDC and commissioned by Obama about gun violence. You proclaim that this massive report published by an unbiased organization and funded by a leftist president is wrong because it goes against your retarded narrative.. Sad!

It's tough to make science biased, but if anybody can do it, it's definately someone smarter than you. Ala the genetic fallacy, which will be followed by the ad hominem.

So you don't accept the CDC's report on gun violence using the most up to date and well cited data?

>I'm only delusional by trying to see if anyone on Sup Forums has a shred of critical thinking

Oh yeah. What a major intellect you are.
Secondly - the issue isn't reasonable people. It's the unreasonable ones that take everything to the 9th degree and die hard liberals (Some of which who are in powerful positions) will use that opportunity to gun grab.

I'm not saying all conservatives are great either - because if they had their way it'd just be, "MUH PERSONAL FREEDUMBS. WHO CARES THAT THE CEREAL COMPANY PUT A NAIL IN BY ACCIDENT. THATS THE FREE MARKET! YOU CHOSE TO ATE IT!"

But get off your fucking high horse you pathetic piece of shit. You're a shitty human like the rest of us. Now either start being reasonable or stay ass blasted for the rest of your miserable life.

Never said I didn't accept it. (straw man)
You aren't versed in research enough to read that
>needs more research
means that you can't make a scientifically sound conclusion about the data

The burden of proof is on those proposing that they know how to solve something or how something works, by the way.

Bump

Guess we better get to doing research then.
Don't see why you couldn't also gather research. This really should be decided in the public space with freely available published studies on it
I'm being unreasonable by saying not every liberal is unreasonable?

You're the one making a claim about inconclusive research.

>needs more research
>means that you can't make a scientifically sound conclusion about the data
This is what I've been fucking saying you retard. What part of THE DATA IS CURRENTLY INCONCLUSIVE WHEN IT COMES TO THE RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN GUN RIGHTS AND GUN VIOLENCE do you not understand?

Fucked kek’d at the capstone.

Because it is inconclusive

The problem with what you are saying is this: A million deaths is merely a statistic, one death is a tragedy.

No one gives a fuck about scholarly articles. They sometimes never get read at all. What matters to people is EMOTION. "What about the poor children in bum-fuck Florida?" Ohh, now people care. When it's 30,000 deaths by cars, no one cares.

Daily Stormer knows about this phenomenon. Want people's attention, and to move them to your side? Emotion, anecdotes and jokes will work.

*according to our current evidence

>It's an official 110 page report that declares that the data is inconclusive for the relationship between gun rights and shootings. Send them it and watch them try to squirm their way out of it. It's hilarious!
>*according to our current evidence
And we can't get any more evidence. I wonder why? Who would make a rule like that?

You're being unreasonable by ignoring that when someone says liberal, or conservative or any other demographic group they're speaking about the vocal primary representatives and not about every individual.

IF you identify as a liberal or conservative - you no longer represent yourself as an individual. You represent the party that you are aligned too and in many cases alot of retards make up the new status quo of how it's viewed.

The fact that I have to explain this to you shows how stupid you are as a person.

So i'll tl;dr it for you - you're a retard for not understanding that those who represent you are willing to push further then you would.

This!

We can actually still collect data, the CDC just isn't allowed to do research projects (except apparently this one I posted). There is a difference.

Why are they given tax dollars then?/Privatize the police now.

>No one gives a fuck about scholarly articles
Truly a sad time.
>The fact that I have to explain this to you shows how stupid you are as a person.
I'm squirming my way out of it pretty well then?

if you have good randomized controlled trials then yes, your metaanalyses and systematic reviews will be valuable.
If you have shit to work with you get shit. That's why often times a systematic review will have levels of evidence indicating how strongly the evidence is for a particular claim.

>research projects (except apparently this one I posted)
Yep. The president asked his government to synthesize what we knew, and it said we don't know enough. I wouldn't call that much of a research project.

We need original research. That's what your study says. That's all it says.

Is this your first day shill?

Pro tip:You aren't convincing anyone here.

I just like to
>watch my conservative friends squirm their way out of it.
It's hilarious. But mostly sad that I would consider you my friends. Cheers.