Top products from r/progun

[And there just so happens to be a well research book on this very topic.] (http://www.amazon.com/Why-Civil-Resistance-Works-Nonviolent/dp/0231156839)

Sure, an insurgency movement can be pretty effective at thwarting the attempts of an invading army. However, they don't have a great track record, when compared with mass non-violent movements, for bringing about any sort of society that most of us want to live in.

Edit: To clarify my point, I don't think it is a very accurate to compare insurgency movements to the reason that many people in the US cite for the reason to have their firearms; the ability to stop the government from becoming more authoritarian. There is a lot of academic literature on insurgencies, social movements and revolutions. Having read a lot of the literature on social movements and revolutions, I can't remember a single peer reviewed article or book that can show that access to firearms is a particularly important variable in the success of a revolution or social movement. If someone can point me to that literature, I would be happy to read it.

One of the best contemporary books I've read in recent months that gives a nice overview of the events leading up to and through the American Revolution is Patriots: The Men Who Started the American Revolution by A.J. Langguth. It covers a lot of the background (from around 1765ish, I think) all the way through Yorktown.

Another absolutely great book describing the events surrounding the eruption of open hostilities between England and the colonists on 19 April 1775 (Battle of Lexington and Concord) is Paul Revere's Ride by David Hackett Fischer. This book serves as the basis for the history portion of Project Appleseed, some of the best and most fun rifle marksmanship training out there. If you've never done an Appleseed weekend, I highly recommend it.

A lot of the things I read now tends to be original source material....as a lot of authors can put their own spin or interpretations on events (whether intentional or subconsciously). While slightly more difficult to read, original source material is invaluable in understanding the events as they happenned. For this, I recommend not only the Declaration of Independence, Constitution and Federalist/Antifederalist Papers, but Founding America: Documents from the Revolution to the Bill of Rights is also a fascinating resource.

> ....when the creator/owner of /r/xkcd (among others) finally went inactive for six months, allowing a better group of folks to take over.

begin irrelevancy/

I just read the book by the creator of that sub, ["What If?"] (http://www.amazon.com/What-If-Scientific-Hypothetical-Questions/dp/0544272994/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1420590797&sr=1-1&keywords=what+if+serious+scientific+answers+to+absurd+hypothetical+questions).

It was quite funny, and the stick figures are great!

/end irrelevancy.

I think the best thing we could do is find a way to fight gang violence. Most counties have had only 0-1 homicides and only a handful contain the majority of homicides with many being specific to certain streets. Fighting gangs and providing better mental health treatment is the best solution to gun violence.

Sources:

https://crimeresearch.org/2017/04/number-murders-county-54-us-counties-2014-zero-murders-69-1-murder/

https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2017/apr/25/most-murders-occurred-in-5-percent-of-countys-says/

https://www.foxnews.com/us/us-murders-concentrated-in-5-percent-of-counties

http://www.latimes.com/opinion/op-ed/la-oe-duwe-rocque-mass-shootings-mental-illness-20180223-story.html

https://www.nraila.org/articles/20130124/mental-health-and-firearms

> I truly believe the Founding Fathers had one of the best ideals ever conceived and put into place; leave us to make our own choice. If we fail, we fail. But at least WE, as a people, got to choose. And so far we seem to be doing OK. Room for improvement sure, but that shows we are still growing and that's the key.

Actually the ideals of the founding fathers spread across the world and spread democracy. Read this.

http://www.amazon.com/This-Nonviolent-Stuffll-Get-Killed/dp/0465033105

Visiting Martin Luther King Jr. at the peak of the Montgomery, Alabama bus boycott, journalist William Worthy almost sat on a loaded pistol. “Just for self defense,” King assured him. It was not the only weapon King kept for such a purpose; one of his advisors remembered the reverend’s Montgomery, Alabama home as “an arsenal.”

Like King, many ostensibly “nonviolent” civil rights activists embraced their constitutional right to selfprotection—yet this crucial dimension of the Afro-American freedom struggle has been long ignored by history. In This Nonviolent Stuff’ll Get You Killed, civil rights scholar Charles E. Cobb Jr. describes the vital role that armed self-defense played in the survival and liberation of black communities in America during the Southern Freedom Movement of the 1960s. In the Deep South, blacks often safeguarded themselves and their loved ones from white supremacist violence by bearing—and, when necessary, using—firearms. In much the same way, Cobb shows, nonviolent civil rights workers received critical support from black gun owners in the regions where they worked. Whether patrolling their neighborhoods, garrisoning their homes, or firing back at attackers, these courageous men and women and the weapons they carried were crucial to the movement’s success.

Giving voice to the World War II veterans, rural activists, volunteer security guards, and self-defense groups who took up arms to defend their lives and liberties, This Nonviolent Stuff’ll Get You Killed lays bare the paradoxical relationship between the nonviolent civil rights struggle and the Second Amendment. Drawing on his firsthand experiences in the civil rights movement and interviews with fellow participants, Cobb provides a controversial examination of the crucial place of firearms in the fight for American freedom.

> > (3) The evidence here is (somewhat) inconclusive, and a fair amount of studies show that waiting periods and background checks do deter criminals from acquiring guns.

> In one, researchers found that a 1995 Connecticut law requiring gun buyers to get permits (which themselves required background checks) was associated with a 40 percent decline in gun homicides and a 15 percent drop in suicides.

> Similarly, when researchers studied Missouri's 2007 repeal of its permit-to-purchase law, they found an associated increase in gun homicides by 23 percent, as well as a 16-percent increase in suicides.

These studies failed to account for other legislation and enforcement policies enacted at the same time. I'd be happy to buy you a copy of John Lott's "More Gun's, Less Crime" if I could figure out a way to anonymously get it to you. Dr. Lott is an award winning economist and statistician, and until I read his book a number of years ago I also believed some of the same things you do. That book began to open my eyes to how skewed the research was on this topic.

Also Universal Background Checks aren't. The DOJ Bureau of Justice Statistics show that over 40% of firearms used in crimes were obtained from 'off the radar' sources, such as drug deals, stolen, friends or family.

> True story, look it up.

I hear you. You're preaching to the choir here ;) One of the books in my firearms reading collection is Silencer History and Performance, which talks about requiring silencers in some European countries, as you point out.

https://www.amazon.com/dp/B07V6KXCZ1/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_awdb_t1_75FEDbFC96VG0

LOL you can prime this crap

They now hand out felonies like candy.

https://www.amazon.com/Three-Felonies-Day-Target-Innocent/dp/1594035229?SubscriptionId=AKIAILSHYYTFIVPWUY6Q&tag=duckduckgo-d-20&linkCode=xm2&camp=2025&creative=165953&creativeASIN=1594035229

For non-violent felonies, its not even a question. You shouldnt lose your rights in the first place.

> After a time they should be able to petition for their rights to be restored - as is current process/law.

Rights arent subject to "evaluation". They are inherent.

And about that restoration process... Wait, what restoration process?

https://www.atf.gov/firearms/qa/there-way-prohibited-person-restore-his-or-her-right-receive-or-possess-firearms-and

But even more ridiculous is the idea that we're going to set a man free and prevent him from "legally" purchasing a firearm because we dont know if he can be trusted...

But feel free to use your legs, fists, a knife, an "illegally" purchased firearm, a blunt object, a vehicle, any number of chemical concoctions etc etc etc

Its just another excuse to deprive someone of their 2A rights, right to self protection.

The same reason why we need to return to a pre-NICS era.

Supporting data:

https://www.amazon.com/This-Nonviolent-Stuffll-Get-Killed/dp/082236123X

Check out your state laws. In my state deadly force can be used to defend others from the same kind of threats that justify using deadly force for self defense.

This is a good spot to pitch Andrew Branca’s excellent Law Of Self-Defense

The Origin of the Second Amendment

The Founders' View of the Right to Bear Arms: A Definitive History of the Second Amendment

The Second Amendment Primer: A Citizen's Guidebook to the History, Sources, and Authorities for the Constitutional Guarantee of the Right to Keep and Bear Arms

Just so everyone is aware, this is the second edition, which was published in 2000. The most current is the third edition, published in 2010.

If you read it and like it, or would just rather have the most current stats right off the bat, Amazon has it for less than $12 for paperback, and about $5 for the E-Book (Kindle Edition).

https://www.amazon.com/Law-Self-Defense-Indispensable-Citizen/dp/1943809143/ref=sr_1_1?s=books&ie=UTF8&qid=1466103628&sr=1-1&keywords=the+law+of+self+defense

How to Lie with Statistics - Darrell Huff
https://www.amazon.com/dp/0393310728/ref=cm_sw_r_cp_apa_i_AZEgDb4HMAXFY

I believe I read it in this book. You should be able to find it for a reasonable price somewhere other than in this link. Sorry I couldn't find a web link for it.

I think this is a great book.

http://www.amazon.com/Evolution-Black-Rifle-Upgrades-Accessories/dp/0692317260/ref=sr_1_1?ie=UTF8&qid=1449305871&sr=8-1&keywords=eugene+stoner

Damn, son, you aren't very well-read, are you? My favorite is this (well, by favorite, I mean most in-depth and offering transparent methods of analysis). I know the name of the book itself claims otherwise, you need to actually read it to understand specifics. Statistical analysis is a many-faceted beast and drawing conclusions is rarely simple.

You can look around for any number of other studies, though, there being no correlation between amount of guns and crime rates is very-well researched phenomena (if it can be called such). At least it was, I've seen some studies challenging it in recent years (as in, more guns = actually less crime), but I haven't read them personally, so I would abstain from comment. You can check this out for more sources against gun control. Obviously "biased", but back when I did some fact checking, it came through clear.

Harvey Silverglate told us all that we commit an average of Three Felonies A Day.

Have you talked to your cat about gun safety yet?

> The article I posted refers to a researcher

I just checked, and that researcher, (actually plural) were Phillip Cook, and Kirsten Goss. This is the book referred to in your article.

In that book they refer to a better designed Assault Weapon Ban in Australia which was actually designed to be effective. They report that the AWB actually worked "to reduce gun homicide and eliminate rampage shootings".

If only the USA could have a similar AWB, we could also benefit.

Your citation amounts to shooting yourself in the foot. Want to try again?

How’s about a tenured professor with a Ph.D. From Columbia University?

No?

How about one from MIT?

Suit yourself

"No pity for felons"?

Everything is a felony.

Nobody even knows how many federal crimes exist.

http://www.amazon.com/Three-Felonies-Day-Target-Innocent/dp/1594035229

http://www.volokh.com/2009/12/14/honest-services-fraud-your-third-felony-today/

Felons can be someone who had 4 ounces of pot on them. Felons can be someone who drove too fast. Felons can be someone who didn't get the right permit TO have A GODDAMN RAFFLE FOR THEIR CHURCH FUNDRAISER

So when you say you have no pity for felons, you are either being ignorant and painting with too broad a brush, or you are callous and on a moral high horse.