do you believe Kleck's numbers?

I didn't assume anything. My point is as stated. VERY seldom is it necessary to fire, even more rare to have to actually hit anybody, much less get lots of solid lethal hits, with powerful loads, as so many in the biz of making money off of guns/shooting would have you believe is needed. :-) i've pointed guns at men 4x, they all froze on the spot, cause they could SEE that I was quite ready to empty the mag into their chests. If you are too lazy to look up such a simple thing, then stay ignorant.
 
yuppor said:
I didn't assume anything. My point is as stated. VERY seldom is it necessary to fire, even more rare to have to actually hit anybody, much less get lots of solid lethal hits, with powerful loads, as so many in the biz of making money off of guns/shooting would have you believe is needed. :-) i've pointed guns at men 4x, they all froze on the spot, cause they could SEE that I was quite ready to empty the mag into their chests. If you are too lazy to look up such a simple thing, then stay ignorant.
Click to expand...
Look up what simple thing?
 
yuppor said:
I didn't assume anything. My point is as stated. VERY seldom is it necessary to fire, even more rare to have to actually hit anybody, much less get lots of solid lethal hits, with powerful loads, as so many in the biz of making money off of guns/shooting would have you believe is needed. :-) i've pointed guns at men 4x, they all froze on the spot, cause they could SEE that I was quite ready to empty the mag into their chests. If you are too lazy to look up such a simple thing, then stay ignorant.
Click to expand...

Theres several ways to get your point across, but you've found one way that most people don't cotton too. Not trying to offend sir but calling people ignorant and

lazy isn't the best way to make your point. Just sayin',
 
yuppor said:
I didn't assume anything. My point is as stated. VERY seldom is it necessary to fire, even more rare to have to actually hit anybody, much less get lots of solid lethal hits, with powerful loads, as so many in the biz of making money off of guns/shooting would have you believe is needed. :-) i've pointed guns at men 4x, they all froze on the spot, cause they could SEE that I was quite ready to empty the mag into their chests. If you are too lazy to look up such a simple thing, then stay ignorant.
Click to expand...
If YOU say something then be prepared to back it up with cites and/or links to actual facts. To do less is to expect others to simply believe that you are above reproach. And to expect others to go find the cites and/or links YOU should be willing to provide to back up your statements while calling other people "lazy" because they won't do your legwork for you reeks of arrogance.

So...

yuppor said:
there's 13 million ex felons "on the street", so it's highly likely that most families have a felon in their home, several times per year. Here's what's rich, guys. How many attackers get SHOT by civilians in justfiable self defense, hmm? The number is like 10,000 per year. So it's only necessary to hit somebody with a bullet about 1% of the time. :-) Which is a good thing, because most people, to include cops, are way too slow, inaccurate, not able to use tactics properly, etc. to actually handle a situation with minimal risk to themselves and other innocents, and maximum effectiveness vs the bad guy.

even when
Click to expand...

Please provide cites and/or links to actual factual sources that support the statements you made above.

I would be most interested in reading the studies/sources you have researched that prove:

yuppor said:
-snip-
most people, to include cops, are way too slow, inaccurate, not able to use tactics properly, etc. to actually handle a situation with minimal risk to themselves and other innocents, and maximum effectiveness vs the bad guy
Click to expand...
 
I never had to fire. I so stated. if this is really the best you can do, you should seriously consider suicide. if you are too lazy to google for yourself, remain ignorant, as I stated before. I'm not doing your work for you.
 
yuppor said:
I never had to fire. I so stated. if this is really the best you can do, you should seriously consider suicide. if you are too lazy to google for yourself, remain ignorant, as I stated before. I'm not doing your work for you.
Click to expand...

Actually hotrod, when you make a claim, it's your work to back it up with cites and/or documentation.

Are you new at this?

Blues
 
In 2013, 100 people will die by a gun in the US. 99 of those will be suicide, and 1 will be yuppor's 5th self defense incident in which he actually has to fire the gun. No citation needed...trust me guys, I know what I'm talking about ;)
 
yuppor said:
I never had to fire. I so stated. if this is really the best you can do, you should seriously consider suicide. if you are too lazy to google for yourself, remain ignorant, as I stated before. I'm not doing your work for you.
Click to expand...
Incorrect... it is everyone else who is not going to do YOUR work for you. And it is the height of arrogance for you to expect others to prove your words are truth for you. You said it... man up and support it.

Again.... I would honestly like to see cites and/or links to factual sources supporting your statement that:

Originally Posted by yuppor View Post
-snip-
most people, to include cops, are way too slow, inaccurate, not able to use tactics properly, etc. to actually handle a situation with minimal risk to themselves and other innocents, and maximum effectiveness vs the bad guy
Click to expand...

However... if you don't have cites and/or links then..... you got nothing... and are trying desperately to hide the fact that you have nothing behind a smoke screen of insult and ridicule.

About using ridicule as a tactic for winning arguments... are you familiar with a guy named Saul Alinsky?

Rules for Radicals

By Saul Alinsky - 1971

-snip-
7. Tactics
-snip-
5. "Ridicule is man's most potent weapon. It is almost impossible to counteract ridicule. Also it infuriates the opposition, which then reacts to your advantage."
-snip-

Entire article can be read here:

Saul Alinsky's Rules for Radicals

However... I am well aware of the leftist tactic of using ridicule and insult to diminish, demean, and discredit anyone who dares question a statement in the hopes of redirecting the discussion away from the statement and put the focus upon the one who dared to question the veracity of the statement.

Oh.. please note the use of a cite and a link....
 
says WHO, dude? there's hundreds of claims made here, that are COMPLETE bs, utterly uncheckable, and you never contested a ONE of them, either. :-) Because what I say interferes with your fantasy world, you want me to do your work for you. Like I said, if you want to remain ignorant of the facts, be my guest.
 
yuppor said:
says WHO, dude? there's hundreds of claims made here, that are COMPLETE bs, utterly uncheckable, and you never contested a ONE of them, either. :-) Because what I say interferes with your fantasy world, you want me to do your work for you. Like I said, if you want to remain ignorant of the facts, be my guest.
Click to expand...
And you continue to prove my point. As expected. More ridicule and insults with an attempt to deflect .... only it didn't work.

I asked you to provide cites and/or links to YOUR claims and YOU continue to evade....
 
yuppor said:
says WHO, dude? there's hundreds of claims made here, that are COMPLETE bs, utterly uncheckable, and you never contested a ONE of them, either. :-) Because what I say interferes with your fantasy world, you want me to do your work for you. Like I said, if you want to remain ignorant of the facts, be my guest.
Click to expand...

Link RemovedLink Removed


Sent from behind enemy lines.
 
yuppor said:
says WHO, dude? there's hundreds of claims made here, that are COMPLETE bs, utterly uncheckable, and you never contested a ONE of them, either. :-) Because what I say interferes with your fantasy world, you want me to do your work for you. Like I said, if you want to remain ignorant of the facts, be my guest.
Click to expand...

Out of all the people you could have chosen to challenge on the point of making unsubstantiated claims, you chose me and Bikenut. I'm not tooting my own horn, just relaying my observation after several years on this forum, but I don't know anyone who provides links to their sources more consistently than Bikenut or myself. And never contested a "single ONE of them?" Even the people I'm most friendly with around here will tell you that I contest sources on a regular basis.

When I logged on yesterday, you had around 30 posts. As of this writing, you've now got 58. You're going for that quantity over quality method of drawing attention to yourself, and while you're succeeding at the former, you're failing miserably at the latter.

Blues
 
BluesStringer said:
Out of all the people you could have chosen to challenge on the point of making unsubstantiated claims, you chose me and Bikenut. I'm not tooting my own horn, just relaying my observation after several years on this forum, but I don't know anyone who provides links to their sources more consistently than Bikenut or myself. And never contested a "single ONE of them?" Even the people I'm most friendly with around here will tell you that I contest sources on a regular basis.

When I logged on yesterday, you had around 30 posts. As of this writing, you've now got 58. You're going for that quantity over quality method of drawing attention to yourself, and while you're succeeding at the former, you're failing miserably at the latter.

Blues
Click to expand...
When someone use to say the "former" and "latter" thing it use to take me like 10 minutes to figure out which is which. I've been reading the Leatherstocking Tales by James Fenimore Cooper and I gotta tell ya, between Deerslayer and The Last Of The Mohicans alone, I'm a pro now. It's funny because I read it so much in those books that I started actually using it regularly in conversation, and once I said that I may as well have stopped talking because they were busy trying to figure out which the former and the latter were.
 
AndeyHall said:
When someone use to say the "former" and "latter" thing it use to take me like 10 minutes to figure out which is which. I've been reading the Leatherstocking Tales by James Fenimore Cooper and I gotta tell ya, between Deerslayer and The Last Of The Mohicans alone, I'm a pro now. It's funny because I read it so much in those books that I started actually using it regularly in conversation, and once I said that I may as well have stopped talking because they were busy trying to figure out which the former and the latter were.
Click to expand...
I don't plant crops so I'm not a "former" but I do use a "latter" when I need to clean leaves out the eaves troughs...


:biggrin:
 
Bikenut said:
I don't plant crops so I'm not a "former" but I do use a "latter" when I need to clean leaves out the eaves troughs...


:biggrin:
Click to expand...
That must have been what was so confusing. They probably wondered why I was talking about "formers" and "latters" when I was talking about anything growing or climbing on anything.

...and on that note my mind will now be in the gutter for the remainder of the day.
 
yuppor said:
says WHO, dude? there's hundreds of claims made here, that are COMPLETE bs, utterly uncheckable, and you never contested a ONE of them, either. :-) Because what I say interferes with your fantasy world, you want me to do your work for you. Like I said, if you want to remain ignorant of the facts, be my guest.
Click to expand...

Link Removed

About time to get a new email address and come back under a different name, isn't it? Or do you need to grandstand a little bit more?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

New Threads

Members online

No members online now.
Total: 537 (members: 0, guests: 537)

Latest posts

Forum statistics

Threads
49,531
Messages
610,692
Members
75,032
Latest member
BLACKROCK6

Share this page

Back
Top