No I will not read and respond to the report, it takes to long and isn't relevant to the Bolsonaro thing.
It's a trick old as the hills, you throw a report (that you usually haven't read yourself and) out there for your opponents to read hoping they will just throw in the towel.
And the fact that it is published in a reputable magazine, does not mean that it isn't biased.
Reputable periodicals will typically vet studies like this quite intensely. Peer review isn't perfect, but it's far more objective than an NRA sponsored report printed in their house organ or a random blog post on the Daily Stormer.
I will respond to the headline though.
So you're sticking your fingers in your ears and going "nyah nyah"? :-)
What are they saying with their report? basically, they are just stating the obvious, People without guns don't commit suicide with guns. Is that even in dispute? The real question is, does it matter? did suicides go down? or did people go on committing suicide with other means? I think you know the answer. People without guns don't have have accidents with guns, again quite a nobrainer, if you own something that you can have an accident with some people are going to have accidents, if that is a knife, car, gun, or anything else really doesn't matter. Accidents happen, what's their point?
And lastly, gun related homicides fell, again, yes so what? that's to be expected, but did homicides fall? or did people just switch weapons? I'm guessing the latter. They just don't like guns and are a using science paper to scare people by stating the obvious.
1) Read it. Check the data. Think and be willing to change your mind if the data is accurate.
2) Cut it out with the strawmen arguments. Focus on one discussion at a time.
Did I say that the data isn't correct? I'm responding to the headline, how is that a strawman argument.
Now, on Bolsonaros relaxation of gun laws, his point is that if good citizens have the ability to shoot the bad guys, the bad guys will think twice before trying to rob someone, in the beginning that might very well lead to more gun deaths, as the bad guys are being culled, but that's not a bad thing, it's just according to plan.
Sounds great! Got any studies or evidence to back this up, I seem to recall people saying there were plenty of them. I guess Dirty Harry movies would count for something...
If the answer is you're just pulling this out of your ass, that's fine. It's called bullshitting and people love to do it. Just never, NEVER confuse bullshit with data or try to suggest that bullshit should be taken over data and facts. And the statement "this time it's different" is equally bullshit.
Here I'll bullshit with you: I think people should be allowed to own and carry .303 to .50 cal heavy machine guns. Partially because they would be useful to fight off pirates on a seastead, partially because the chance of walking into a mall with one and shooting people is pretty much zero. But that's bullshit, it's not supported by any data.
Really. Play with BS all you want, but when you need to make a real decision always follow the data and urge others to follow the data. Otherwise you're just someone's tool.
How can I have evidence of something that haven't happened yet? You will have to wait until the laws are in affect and wait until we have sufficient data, I'm just telling you what the plan is.
Read and understand what I'm writing instead of just poop words.
