>"The average CCW holder is better trained and more qualified

>>31916499

I certainly don't.
The average CCW holder is pretty retarded, and knows jack shit about the law.
>inb4 hurr cops are too
But go ahead and say it, if it makes you feel better.

File: 1478277489809.jpg (119KB, 1200x630px) Image search: [Google]

119KB, 1200x630px

>>31916499
Better than the average female cop anyway

>>31916514

If we're bringing gender into this, then let's just agree that female CCW holders and female cops are equally worthless.

http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/queensland/queensland-police-officers-less-experienced-at-firing-weapons-than-civilians-with-gun-licences/news-story/65104bca4b2da8ba0993800a5954f1c1

This article's Australian, but it still holds true in America.
CCW holders train on average far more often than cops and are much more competent in firearms handling.
This is just a fact.

If you want to talk about threat management and psychological training then that's another story, but civilians are more capable with firearms than police.

>>31916527

>This is just a fact.
Okay, show us your evidence.

>>31916535
>Post an article discussing something
"O-okay, show us your evidence!"

>>31916541

No, I'm asking for evidence showing that the "fact" you asserted is indeed a fact, and not just your personal belief.

>>31916548
You mean like the article specifically discussing it?
What evidence would actually be acceptable to you?

>>31916551

>What evidence would actually be acceptable to you?
Any evidence which shows that the average American CCW holder has more training/qualification than the average American police officer.
It's not hard to understand.

>>31916558
Where's the evidence that they don't?

>>31916499
>Show dd214
>Get ccw license

You tell me, prick.

>>31916558
Oh okay, so it's country-specific now.
Apparently Australia doesn't count.

Okay, here you go:
http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2015/04/robert-farago/study-why-police-firearms-training-sucks/

>>31916551
An article is not evidence. Observed evidence in a suitable sample size whose results are reproducible is.

>>31916568

You're the one who stated a "fact".
Burden of proof is on you.

>>31916575
Okay, let's consider this.
>Australian police have to qualify once per year
>Almost none of them shoot any more than that
>Many of them can't safely or competently handle firearms
>Civilians have to shoot on minimum six times as often

Six is larger than one.

>>31916576
Ops strawman assumes they don't, what evidence is there that lead him to this belief

>>31916574

I don't see evidence in here that the average CCW holder is better trained than the average police officer.

>>31916583

So you're not going to accept the burden of proving your assertion,
and instead try to burden me with proving another person's statement to be true?
How about no

>>31916597
>Cops are completely useless

You don't think that CCW holders ever shoot their guns?
You don't think they do it more than once per year?

>>31916606
The op is the one who made an assertion through a strawman, so op needs to back it up

>>31916609

No idea what your greentext is supposed to be,
but let me answer your question with my own.

Do you think the average cop only shoots once a year?
For that to be true, then none of them could be recreational shooters, sports shooters, hunters, ect.
Which many are.

>>31916624

Actually, you're wrong yet again.
(quite the pattern)
OP merely questioned whether anyone here believes a certain idea.
He did not state anything as a fact.

Further, even if he had, that does NOT excuse you from posting "facts" without evidence.

>>31916634
So you're rebutting the claim that sports shooters are better shooters than police...
By saying that some police are sports shooters?

That's completely retarded. If being a sports shooter was likely to make a cop a better shot, then sports shooters would be better than cops.

>>31916634
Do you think the average cop is a hunter, sport shooter etc?

>>31916642

>So you're rebutting the claim that sports shooters are better shooters than police...

Uh, no.
You're having a hard time right now I guess.
The conversation has been specifically about CCW holders.

Also, you realize how police could possibly be a subset of the sports shooter category,
and still shoot more than the average sports shooter right?

I mean, whether you agree with it or not, surely you understand how that's possible, right?
And you understand why your argument was so terrible now, right?

>>31916648

Possibly.
The average cop is far more pro gun than the average citizen.
You can find those stats easily on google.

>>31916649
>Sports shooters are better than police
>But the moment you get a CCW license you suddenly forget how to use a gun

>>31916651
Post proof

>>31916640
so what excuses OP from his non fact evidence posting? Are you saying the perosn who states something first will be untouchable unless someone responds with a fact based argument?

If I were to just assert that "You were molested by your father while you were asleep for 10 years", does that make my shitposting invincible until you post actual fact based counter?

>>31916649
and your evidence is?

>>31916657
Not him, CJ major. Cops, on average, are progun.

I was a grunt. If you had to guess, would you think I'm progun?

>People who carry firearms for a living must be against firearms

Next time I'm going to take your lunch money, you simple fuck.

>>31916689
That's a nice assumption but this thread is about the pursuit of evidence, if all you have is anecdotes you might just be in the wrong place

>>31916499
>any cop
>any
Can you prove that anyone, anywhere, has ever made such a claim?
The average cop is another matter.

>>31916698
Kek. Sorry I disturbed your retard party. Proceed.

>Pursuit of evidence

I don't have a laughing girls pic that could laugh harder.

>>31916715
Its OK to admit you don't have any evidence to back up your claim you know, you can be a bigger man than op

>>31916719
Welcome to /k/. I know you're new.

Quick replies, with 0 substance. We are a slower board. Put some time in, lurk around. I'll see you this time next year, then you won't be such a painful newfag.

Happy Holidays, boring conversation, last (you) you get from me.

>>31916698
>is about the pursuit of evidence, if all you have is anecdotes you might just be in the wrong place

Pretty sure that meets police standards, though.

File: 1472923283687.png (48KB, 460x368px) Image search: [Google]

48KB, 460x368px

>>31916499
>"The average CCW holder is better trained and more qualified than any cop."
>better trained and more qualified than any cop
>than any cop
>any

See, here's your problem. Nobody argues this. Also, they don't use ambiguous statements like "better trained and more qualified". Better trained and more qualified in what?
However, I have seen people argue that the average CCW holder trains with their carry weapon more often than the *average* cop. That the average cop only trains maybe once a year to qualify for their job, where the average CCW holder trains every 1-2 months.

That being said, these aren't arguments I make; I haven't tried to verify those claims, so I don't know if they are true.

>>31916731
>still can't admit to making an assumption with no evidence
>makes another assumption

Let me guess, you've been here since sandy vag or zimzam so you are a supreme oldfag

>>31916748
>he throws assumptions himself over being triggered by assumptions
so when autism caves into itself, would that be a good time to do the inception thing with an autism theme? Like Auception?

>>31916597
I'm with you on this LEO bro

>>31916753
I was hazarding a guess, not making an assumption, lrn2 difference

How long have you been here, super oldfag?

>>31916499
I don't. But I do have a severe lack of trust for anyone and anything, therefore I don't trust any other CC other than myself and those that I do trust.

>>31916748
I said I wouldn't reply, so I shouldn't..

No. /b/tard from 2005. I grew up, I'm not a toys'R'us kid.

>>31916753
He thinks you're me. Newcastle never understand they're talking to more than 1 person.

>>31916763
educate me, what is the difference between hazarding a guess and an assumption?

>>31916775
You believe an assumption to be true, a guess is a guess

>>31916769
Thanks for the (you)

>I'm a /b/tard from 2005

Sure you are kid

>>31916779
and what evidence do you have to back up what are assumptions and guesses in this thread?

>>31916779
Learn 2 scientific method.
>>31916786
OK, lol. You sure showed me.

>Durr I've been on redit since 2013, I know things

>>31916792
If a guess originated from me I assume it was a guess, if an assumption was made I guess I just assum it wasn't a questionable

>>31916802
And the guesses and assumptions made by others, how do you know which are guesses and which are assumptions, you seem to know quite well in all your posts responding to them.

>>31916812
You are assuming I've been the one responding

>>31916814
I'm just hazarding a guess

>>31916814
He's going to attack anyone. He's a child that's been abused.

Mad Dog is what we will name him.

>>31916648
>Do you think the average cop is a hunter, sport shooter etc?
I'm a municipal police officer - I hunt, shoot 3 gun, etc.

>>31916657
>Post proof
http://www.policeone.com/Gun-Legislation-Law-Enforcement/articles/6183787-PoliceOnes-Gun-Control-Survey-11-key-lessons-from-officers-perspectives/

Aside from that, what kind of proof would you even want? Anecdotal? Every LEO I know (I'm sworn in NC) is vehemently pro-gun. But, obviously different areas/departments are going to have different views. NYPD has even arrested officers carrying under HR 218 because they don't think anyone but NYPD should be carrying in NY.

But it's not like the 1,000,000 sworn officers across this country have a unified view on gun control.

>>31916818
You stated

>in all your posts responding to them.

That isn't a guess

>>31916833
Why isn't it a guess?

>>31916624
holy fuck you're retarded

>>31916839
You assume its the truth, you weren't speculating

>>31916850
How was I not speculating?

>>31916864
By making a statement you believe to be the truth

>>31916868
And what gave you the basis to assume I was making an assumption?

>>31916875
It was an educated guess on my part based on the assertions in that post

>>31916879
and what sort of education did you draw from to arrive at your educated guess?

Stop responding to that guy, jesus fucking christ.

>>31916889
The text in the post was quite informative, it taught me all I need to know

>>31916897
enough to for it to be truth?

>>31916900
I guess so

>>31916902
what do you mean? Why do you guess it so?

>>31916905
Why at do you mean? Why wouldn't I?

You see /k/, this is how not to have a discussion.

I can only imagine at least one person is in this thread is screaming incoherently at his monitor with tears in his eyes as he types out this sorry excuse for a conversation.
With any luck, all parties involved will leave /k/ and never come back to shit up the board again.

>evidence plz
>proof plz
>facts plz
>citation needed
>ur proof isn't good enough
>ur evidence ain't evidence

I fucking hate these kinds of threads. Modern 'debate' tactics were a mistake. If I could, I'd go back to when disputes were solved by crushing the other motherfucker's head with a rock.

>>31916918
>>31916921
When your candidates for POTUS debate like retards, how can you expect actual retards to know how to debate?

>>31916932
You are assuming they are my candidates

>>31916937
>You are assuming they are my candidates
You might as well write in Bugs Bunny you faggot, nobody cares.

>>31916917
you stated >>31916779 that an assumption is something you believe to be true while a guess is a guess. Expand upon what you mean by "a guess is a guess".
Unless you mean to say that even truths you arrive at through your observation of info are things you don't even consider to be truths you believe in.
If that is the case, then how do you know what are assumptions and what are guesses?

>>31916942
An assumption is believed to be true, a guess is a guess, I thought we went through that already

Can this thread just go away? Holy shit loaded question or troll thread aside, this has devolved to a puddle.

>>31916953
Exactly, and you are not even sure of truth yourself >>31916902 as only guessing so of it after your own gathering of information and observation.

So how do you know what assumption and guesses are?

>>31916965
>So how do you know what assumption and guesses are?

Duh, the dictionary

>>31916941
>>31916932
I think it was that you assume they was american in the first place...

>>31916953
>>31916965
>>31916974
As stated in the OP

>You don't ACTUALLY believe this do you?
would imply that OP believes the opposite of this. So this thread was never a 'guess'. It was a statement of his assumption.

>>31916974
what does the dictionary say about a "guess"?

>>31916991
It says you should look it up

If you don't believe me, look it up

>>31916995
Why would I look it up?

>>31917012
Aren't you curious?

>>31917016
Are you assuming or guessing that I am curious?

>>31917024
Im questioning, are you?

>>31917025
you tell me.

>>31917040
How would I know?

>>31917045
You assumed enough to ask me a question.

>>31917057
And I want the answer, are you?

>>31917060
Don't assume I am

>>31916499
> be average CCW
I know not to go into someone's house uninvited. I might get shot at or their dog may come and great me with prejudice. If I then defend myself, the owner may decide I'm now a threat worth shooting at.

>>31917062
I'm just curious if you are

Are you?

>>31917066
I know what a guess is, I'm just trying to bump this bootlicking thread to a 100 posts since OP wanted a discussion but asked a stupid question

>>31916991
>>31916995
>>31917012
>>31917016
>>31917024
>>31917025
>>31917040
>>31917045
>>31917057
>>31917060
>>31917062
Both of you are annoying as fuck.

Problem with the argument is that there's too much generalization. Not all departments or individual officers train to the same standards. I've seen people that only fire once a year, and people that fire once or twice a week. Same goes for CCW holders.

>>31917071
So you aren't curious?

>>31917065
>Shoots a dog
>Believing that is somehow equivalent to a threat to your life

Idiot detected

>>31917077
You really think OP or half of the 17 posters doesn't already know the answer you posted? OP wanted a shit thread with his shitpost. He's about to get it.

>>31917087
That sounds like a wild assumption to me, but I'm no expert

>>31917092
How can it sound like an assumption? It's text.

>>31917100
Im blind so someone reads all the responses to me

>>31917071
>assuming op wanted a discussion

Kek

>>31916499
Actually yeah, because they're not statists who only carry because they have to. They go out of their way to acquire knowledge because they want to.

bait/10 for making me post

>>31916651
>The average cop is far more pro gun than the average citizen.

LOL no, the average (and average is the key word here) is more "guns for police not for civilians"
http://www.baka.com.au/world/dallas-police-chief-expresses-worry-about-armed-civilians-in-texas-20160712-gq3sjl.html

Anyway, back to topic
http://www.couriermail.com.au/news/queensland/queensland-police-officers-less-experienced-at-firing-weapons-than-civilians-with-gun-licences/news-story/65104bca4b2da8ba0993800a5954f1c1
http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2015/04/robert-farago/study-why-police-firearms-training-sucks/

The average CCW Holder doesn't pull their weapon on everyone with an attitude

>>31916506
Fpbp

>>31917077
That's a pretty tall post for a manlet!

File: 145511816669167.png (26KB, 192x191px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 192x191px

>>31916514
>Misty Flowers

What was her daughter named, Red Childs?

>>31916499

Having shot with numerous beat cops, I completely believe it. Average CCW-holder shoots at least a couple times a year.

File: police.jpg (109KB, 533x800px) Image search: [Google]

109KB, 533x800px

Lotta bootlickers in here.
And well, you know what they say about bootlickers...

Holy cow this OP is a master troll.

ITT: butthurt LEOs.

get rekt fgts.

File: tmp_5784-d2ebe11a00626486b9cc752ad88cbf7c0dabf46ba7cb08e203f83254f9e4de1a-725953529.jpg (78KB, 500x641px) Image search: [Google]

78KB, 500x641px

>>31916541
That's not an argument.