@PaulZh @EmergenciasEc Si quieres las bases de datos me avisas pero probablemente ni los leas, de pronto siento que estoy hablando con un barcelonista pero toma los datos asno a alguien debe de servirle menos a un ignorante atorrante como tú. https://t.co
RT @ProfessorC14: Gun regulations don’t work: https://t.co/p91AShUjQL https://t.co/Q2CA9D3I49 https://t.co/9UPM5HiTfy Guns save net live…
Gun regulations don’t work: https://t.co/p91AShUjQL https://t.co/Q2CA9D3I49 https://t.co/9UPM5HiTfy Guns save net lives: https://t.co/iee0hfkGdz https://t.co/oWJLcYiwzY https://t.co/TwLea1ynyd https://t.co/xtj5Jn4Jw2 How to prevent violent crime: ht
RT @ajnamdeplume: @revdrjanet @wh0967 @TonyPeric @AGRobBonta @SenateDems @HouseDemocrats #GunReformNow COMMITTEE TO IMPROVE RESEARCH INFO…
@fincaelsordo @Paul4GunSense I never said Americans have to use guns 100 million times per year to avoid being killed. And since you don’t want to read the “opinion piece”, you can start here instead. It’s only 300 pages. https://t.co/FPBhNvNPL2
@JoeBiden Owning a firearm does not harm *anyone*. Multiple studies show that the 1994-2004 Assault Weapons Ban had no discernible effect on gun violence. https://t.co/MOJBzuzyET https://t.co/UrghYA88o3 https://t.co/QyF7X0NM2z
@bschaeffer12 @anniefreyshow Owning a firearm does not harm *anyone*. Multiple studies show that the 1994-2004 Assault Weapons Ban had no discernible effect on gun violence. https://t.co/MOJBzuzyET https://t.co/UrghYA88o3 https://t.co/QyF7X0NM2z
@Dans373181Danes @DeGorilas @JMilei 1ro No sirve un análisis sobre EE.UU. solamente, es una demográfica muy distinta a la nuestra. 2do por cada artículo en contra hay uno a favor https://t.co/WaD3rnoMet 3ro Hablé de países limítrofes o si querés más faci
Firearms and Violence: A Critical Review (2005). Chapter 5. https://t.co/g2ccOIAJen
@GavinNewsom Owning a firearm does not harm *anyone*. Multiple studies show that the 1994-2004 Assault Weapons Ban had no discernible effect on gun violence. https://t.co/MOJBzuzyET https://t.co/UrghYA88o3 https://t.co/QyF7X0NM2z
@SenSchumer Owning a firearm does not harm *anyone*. Multiple studies show that the 1994-2004 Assault Weapons Ban had no discernible effect on gun violence. https://t.co/MOJBzuzyET https://t.co/UrghYA88o3 https://t.co/QyF7X0NM2z
@CarlHebert @jeffery_haskell @monsterhunter45 Bullshit. A gun is the single best deterrent to violence, as evidenced by the hundreds of thousands of defensive gun uses where nobody gets shot. https://t.co/VxAnm8sYUl
@PramilaJayapal Owning a firearm does not harm *anyone*. Multiple studies show that the 1994-2004 Assault Weapons Ban had no discernible effect on gun violence. https://t.co/MOJBzuzyET https://t.co/UrghYA88o3 https://t.co/QyF7X0NM2z
@RBReich Multiple studies show that the 1994-2004 Assault Weapons Ban had no discernible effect on gun violence (& more importantly no discernible effect on violence in general). https://t.co/MOJBzuzyET https://t.co/UrghYA88o3 https://t.co/QyF7X0NM2z
@spencerjw @davidhogg111 Well I would still like to see this “FBI Data”.. just provide a link so I can see what you are referring to. There’s over 100,000 times a a year that a firearm is used for defensive purposes. https://t.co/eMwzZ0LxI8
@Investnstress @PaulHook_em @elonmusk False. You can't even cite a stat on that. The reason is that guns stop crimes every single day. https://t.co/4FRojktFxv https://t.co/KH2ZWCoy01 https://t.co/cGEMksepNz
Fighting back with a firearm massively reduces your chances of being injured - https://t.co/o5iXL2ps1Q - per a source far more reliable than that massively-disproven hack Hemenway: https://t.co/YD3sHjogne https://t.co/qP5E5nWCpC
@bradybuzz “A recent evaluation of the short-term effects of the 1994 federal assault weapons ban did not reveal any clear impacts on gun violence outcomes.” -- National Research Council (2005) https://t.co/cEofrpCfQR
@mikeoes @jburnmurdoch In 2005 a National Academies of Science panel estimated the number of defensive gun uses as ranging between 100,000 and 2,500,000 per year. As others have said, the exact number is controversial and difficult to estimate accurately.
@ripescribe @LuciferX_Fallen @Audjuice9989 @itsJeffTiedrich Kleck’s study is 30 years old, and sampled 5,000 people. His study is not without its own problems, and is rather outdated. https://t.co/5WFdRbuF34
@Samxsteal @RidOfGOP @ted_hutson @JoJoFromJerz @triomonkey You should read the chapter of this book where they tried to reproduce John Lott's work but were not able to. He's a liar, just ask Mary Rosh. https://t.co/l8b5hNwBtY
RT @MikemanCommeth: @krassenstein "Kleck and Gertz (1995), using data from the a National Self-Defense Survey (NSDS), found around 2.5 mill…
RT @MikemanCommeth: @krassenstein "Kleck and Gertz (1995), using data from the a National Self-Defense Survey (NSDS), found around 2.5 mill…
RT @MikemanCommeth: @krassenstein "Kleck and Gertz (1995), using data from the a National Self-Defense Survey (NSDS), found around 2.5 mill…
RT @MikemanCommeth: @krassenstein "Kleck and Gertz (1995), using data from the a National Self-Defense Survey (NSDS), found around 2.5 mill…
RT @MikemanCommeth: @krassenstein "Kleck and Gertz (1995), using data from the a National Self-Defense Survey (NSDS), found around 2.5 mill…
RT @MikemanCommeth: @krassenstein "Kleck and Gertz (1995), using data from the a National Self-Defense Survey (NSDS), found around 2.5 mill…
RT @MikemanCommeth: @krassenstein "Kleck and Gertz (1995), using data from the a National Self-Defense Survey (NSDS), found around 2.5 mill…
@krassenstein "Kleck and Gertz (1995), using data from the a National Self-Defense Survey (NSDS), found around 2.5 million defensive gun uses each year." You made it up and got it wrong. Again. As usual. https://t.co/fyMsT6JZbQ.
@jeny2163 @AZSenateGOP There were several (these are a few of them): https://t.co/T1eSXAc7ho https://t.co/P1sfPJfgM0 https://t.co/kdhqi65kpJ
@angrypooka @TPABillTweets @bennyjohnson @RepThomasMassie Looks like Billy blocked me. But not before citing an open letter by disgraced gun advocate @JohnRLottJr. "Firearms and Violence" has a chapter dedicated to attempting to replicate his work (spoile
@Barney02073101 @whenermania67 @LiquidatorPod @MarcusRain01 @isabellarileyus @piersmorgan 3. Plenty of video of people using guns to save lives defensively and that's enough to show they save lives, but then there are also countless studies revealing data
@HillaryClinton “A recent evaluation of the short-term effects of the 1994 federal assault weapons ban did not reveal any clear impacts on gun violence outcomes.” -- National Research Council (2005) https://t.co/cEofrpCfQR
@ohjustbehave @SassyKru @Om9h12u @krassenstein Sure. Here is a book on it: https://t.co/fnW25PZEkC Here is another that reviewed the previous work: https://t.co/BgPnRAZMqF Here is a Wikipedia relating the two: https://t.co/faa8pbpyQj
@mandadorni @arjulianjota @Nicolas_Ajz «De hecho, este otro estudio reciente de 2022, que también contradice tu tesis. Tiene la mayor muestra de países hasta el momento (55)» Ah, del mismo Gary Kleck. Interesante. Por cierto: a Kleck le respondió Hemenway
@DarkMatter2525 @MarcusDAurelius @ProverbialSoups @JackPosobiec The lowest estimates are ~100,000 lifesaving defensive gun uses per year which is still more than 4x the number of firearm homicides per year. But potentially there is up to 2.5 million lifesa
@tennis70 @jilevin “A recent evaluation of the short-term effects of the 1994 federal assault weapons ban did not reveal any clear impacts on gun violence outcomes.” -- National Research Council (2005) https://t.co/cEofrpCfQR
“A recent evaluation of the short-term effects of the 1994 federal assault weapons ban did not reveal any clear impacts on gun violence outcomes.” -- National Research Council (2005) https://t.co/cEofrpCfQR
@TallentPhyllis @DAG23103560 @Topher_Lane @GavinNewsom It wasn't valid based on what opinion? Yours? As I stated you'd simply dismiss the information as invalid because you disagree with it. The CDC seemed to think it was valid enough to use it on multiple
RT @MsKerolynC: @jlounsbury59 This is a fairly rich resource: https://t.co/wy283rVbO4
@jlounsbury59 This is a fairly rich resource: https://t.co/wy283rVbO4
RT @dovgvlad: @wavesandmeans @schotts @AT20939504 @jle4psu @theliamnissan “A recent evaluation of the short-term effects of the 1994 federa…
RT @dovgvlad: @wavesandmeans @schotts @AT20939504 @jle4psu @theliamnissan “A recent evaluation of the short-term effects of the 1994 federa…
@wavesandmeans @schotts @AT20939504 @jle4psu @theliamnissan “A recent evaluation of the short-term effects of the 1994 federal assault weapons ban did not reveal any clear impacts on gun violence outcomes.” -- National Research Council (2005) https://t.co/
Defensive use of guns are as common as offensive use. Many more innocent people would be victimized without legal carry. Unfortunate sign of the times. https://t.co/g0ieA1YSd4 I believe this study was commissioned by Obama administration.
@177lbsga1 @Someone4once @davidhogg111 Lololol I actually don’t have to here is some great work that already does: https://t.co/qQHmjB6bP8
@DerekPederson3 @wil_da_beast630 You might want to educate yourself a more before using words like “infinitesimal” re that phenomenon. It says a lot about your specific socio-cultural bubble. https://t.co/oUZKYOHBME
@ryelle62 @TimothyTobias2 @MrMayfieldUSA “A recent evaluation of the short-term effects of the 1994 federal assault weapons ban did not reveal any clear impacts on gun violence outcomes.” -- National Research Council (2005) https://t.co/cEofrpk6CJ
@TrillTexan89 @CherokeeBlood10 @AndrewPollackFL Based on your thought process, you will agree with these stats too - that owning a gun neither increases nor decreases crime. In other words guns are a non-factor and are proven not to help at all with cri
@SusanHokanson @mittensgme21 @Coachhoove @Elex_Michaelson @GavinNewsom I am just telling you the reality. It is not always brandishing. Sometimes it is just verbally stating. https://t.co/GeAVu6TUWY https://t.co/b1A4c1RJjC https://t.co/2qi3LOitom https://t
@MotownGirl2018 @SaltteamS @POTUS “A recent evaluation of the short-term effects of the 1994 federal assault weapons ban did not reveal any clear impacts on gun violence outcomes.” -- National Research Council (2005) https://t.co/cEofrpk6CJ
@TonyBarona1 @Weinsteinlaw Here’s a report you need. It’s one the experts use, not talking heads on TV or the web. The study shows that the introduction of guns into the community doesn’t do a thing for changing crime stats. They don’t move the needle
@frumoasa____ The National Academy of Sciences reviewed hundreds of studies and could not document a single gun regulation that reduced violent crime. Guns are used defensively more often than they’re used for violent crime. https://t.co/jrWjrFup9Q; https:
@Pwnitz https://t.co/knuQk8IuQk Here's some more commentary that references well over a dozen.
@sconley00 @JoJoFromJerz @MarshaBlackburn Armed violence, #GunControl laws in Europe, by Country https://t.co/XC1cIbaosN Natl Research Council Committee to Improve Research Information & Data on Firearms https://t.co/m3seucMroa Library of Congress St
@BStinstin @primalpoly @jessesingal 2nd link: If the study referred to is Miller et al. (2002), the National Research Council found significant problems with this study. They found that using the same proxy for gun ownership yielded a negative association
@RightOnTarget76 @Roark_Architect @MAhealthforkids @comp1120 @rewinn @tpace123 @elkmovie @JakeSherman @SenateGOP https://t.co/Hf1jhqm2Xi So do those proving his information is wrong.
@GordiesStitches @BMLewis2 @HaimishTheRed @OpieRadio Stats, eh? Ok here is one for you. The introduction of guns does not do anything at all for helping stop crime. They are a proven non-factor. We’ve known this for years. https://t.co/9DMyRBwgKE
@MikeLoychik If guns worked to fight crime, crime would have went down when they were added. But it didn’t, so they don’t. https://t.co/9DMyRBwgKE
@trulyfree1978 @griswold12 @DanRather This is a great one showing having firearms did not increase or decrease crime. It was a non-factor. https://t.co/9DMyRBwgKE
@_ScottieTheKid @TedTratt @ZaRdOz420WPN @TalksShane @Strandjunker It's not a claim I'm making, the studies have been done. At the request of the US government which is very biased TOWARDS gun control. https://t.co/IhsxHi7uek
@WOmalley11 @TedTratt @ZaRdOz420WPN @_ScottieTheKid @TalksShane @Strandjunker https://t.co/IhsxHi7uek Study done at the request of the CDC, who is VERY biased towards gun control. NEXT.
@johansenburg @TedTratt @ZaRdOz420WPN @_ScottieTheKid @TalksShane @Strandjunker https://t.co/IhsxHi7uek There this even explores some of the controversies over the survey methodology. Still almost always more defensive use than criminal use.
@ZiemniakKaren @howdidwehether1 @meganranney Did you know that adding a gun does nothing to stop crime? It’s proven statistically all the way back in 1996 and hasn’t changed. https://t.co/SWPxwgjbnZ
@ewarren @sciam The science is, in fact, not clear. https://t.co/2gALCr8LyX Common sense tells us that finding and supervising dangerous people is a better way to keep us say, than putting people in prison for not doing the right paperwork around guns. htt
@LikesBikes432 @AlGonq @Msgargoyle13 @60Minutes Concurrently, this report used by the experts shows where adding guns neither decreased or increased crime. Seems adding them really didn’t scare the bad guys away. https://t.co/9DMyRBwgKE
@IJustAte3 @Cougarfan40 @KayTha @jbf1755 https://t.co/c13nKJ45d9 https://t.co/2HSa2edmnk https://t.co/Or4Ops9Dq3 How many more do you want?
@NunoCavac0 @DakotaFitz4 @AngryinH @RoseRue5 Heller is the biggest mass murderer of all time. Kleck would be 2nd, with Lott coming up 3rd. Too bad the excuse of self defense with a gun is also debunked. Data proves having a gun makes absolutely NO differ
@NRAA1F @NRA https://t.co/9DMyRBwgKE The National Research Academies Panel which found guns don’t increase or decrease crime. Refresh if you get a paywall. It usually goes away.
@Eptresist The National Research Council repoted that an "evaluation of the short-term effects of the 1994 federal assault weapons ban did not reveal any clear impacts on gun violence outcomes." See: "Firearms and Violence: A Critical Review" 2004. htt
@KuyuAnthony There was a National Academy of Science report on that issue that is a bit old now but still interesting (https://t.co/cxsdpNk25p), but mostly I formed this opinion after reading a lot of papers a few years ago, not any one thing in particular
@DeepBreathPeace Here’s the 2001 paper. These are not hard to find. https://t.co/xJb3H54vKk
@Sandbag_1 @JoeTurbie @OpieRadio I will close with this publication from 1996 by the National Research Academies Panel which found guns don’t increase or decrease crime. https://t.co/SWPxwgjJdx
@foimage https://t.co/8u4caVHyAG https://t.co/savpPSpLVW https://t.co/9sFqBHbwH6 Do you want more?