I thought this was from the Onion.
Twice.
Anyone wanna bet there’s a stronger correlation between anti-gun grant money and the authors of this story than any correlation between gun ownership and uncontrollable anger?
Let’s face it: those who hate guns are scared to death of what they don’t understand. They too often project their own deficiencies at self-control and decency to others as a psychological defense mechanism. See the definition of psychological projection: Psychological projection is a theory in psychology in which humans defend themselves against unpleasant impulses by denying their existence in themselves, while attributing them to others. For example, a person who is rude may constantly accuse other people of being rude.
Gun ownership and uncontrollable anger go hand in hand, new study concludes
(The Oregonian) – The more guns you own the more likely you a
re to be subject to angry outbursts that you cannot control.
This conclusion about Americans and their guns comes from a study published this week in the journal Behavioral Sciences. Researchers found that some 9 percent of people in the United States have both guns and significant anger issues.
And the money quote:
Behavioral risk-based approaches to firearms restriction, such as expanding the definition of gun-prohibited persons to include those with violent misdemeanor convictions and multiple DUI convictions, could be a more effective public health policy to prevent gun violence in the population.
Yes, let’s create new classes of “prohibited individuals”.
I have no doubt the authors of this junk science would support doing the same with First Amendment protections for gun owners.
Your article clearly shows that you “know” about science.
I guess as much as a creationist.
Unfortunately, you are in complete denial.
And the science (which is merely overwhelming facts here, collected over decades, all around the world) is rock solid.
When did an inanimate piece of metal impair anyone’s ability at impulse control? Your posting makes the case for people that are in denial and who use psychological projection as a replacement for their own deficiencies. We appreciate the display of ignorance, it makes the article all the more relevant. All you have done here is use an ad hominem attack on the author without any factual evidence whatsoever.
I could say you are so ignorant that your 1st Amendment rights should be revoked, but then I would be the same as you now wouldn’t I?
“rock solid”. Call derogatory names, declare the case closed and anyone who disputes the findings is not just wrong, but crazy.
Sounds like the recipe for global warming.
This is the first, EVER, study I’ve heard about to make this claim. If the science is “rock solid” the scientists have been doing a very good job hiding it.
But I guess the scientists don’t have to publish the facts or convince the rest of us. After all, we’re just the unenlightened masses; why should our opinion matter?
Eyanosa, you ought to attend a Guns Save Life meeting. You’d be surprised how many college graduates, advanced degrees, and intelligent professionals you might find there.
Him in denial? You, on the other hand….
The only anger issue I ever have is when I read crap spewed from people like Eyanosa.
It seems that, when I am carrying, I have a mindset that makes me be even more polite to others than I might normally be.
Anyone else find that to be the case?
Darn near everyone is here at the NRA Convention packing heat.
Never ran into a more polite, amiable bunch of folks I had never met before.
The courtesy, politeness and kindness is overflowing here.
Even the cops are nice as pie.
John
The finest junk science money can buy…
The fail boat has sailed for tbose goofs.
Look at their claimed numbers in context.
Over 500,000 attendees at NRAAM over the last 8 yrs.
The authors claim 45,000 of them have anger issues and 500 of them ‘carry guns outside the home’. (yeah, we know it’s more like thousands at the AM)
Find an incident. That’s all I ask. I’m sure I’ll wait for the response.