HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Topics » Justice & Public Safety » Gun Control & RKBA (Group) » Ultimately this whole thr...
Introducing Discussionist: A new forum by the creators of DU

Thu Sep 6, 2012, 09:49 AM

 

Ultimately this whole thread is offensive.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1014220300

Bad guys still armed in a European society that demonizes firearms. All the pity and sympathy for the victims never brings them back. There's a time to be a person of words and a time to be a person of action. Nature gave it's creatures claws, fangs, muscles, and venom so that they could defend themselves and their babies, human beings are the only ones that have devolved to personal disarmament, paperwork and care more about the dead than the living.

112 replies, 8270 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 112 replies Author Time Post
Reply Ultimately this whole thread is offensive. (Original post)
Remmah2 Sep 2012 OP
dipsydoodle Sep 2012 #1
DanTex Sep 2012 #2
Missycim Sep 2012 #3
DanTex Sep 2012 #4
bongbong Sep 2012 #5
Missycim Sep 2012 #8
bongbong Sep 2012 #11
Missycim Sep 2012 #26
bongbong Sep 2012 #31
Atypical Liberal Sep 2012 #57
bongbong Sep 2012 #61
Atypical Liberal Sep 2012 #79
bongbong Sep 2012 #80
Atypical Liberal Sep 2012 #100
bongbong Sep 2012 #104
HALO141 Sep 2012 #90
DanTex Sep 2012 #91
HALO141 Sep 2012 #93
bongbong Sep 2012 #92
rrneck Sep 2012 #27
DanTex Sep 2012 #37
bongbong Sep 2012 #40
discntnt_irny_srcsm Sep 2012 #46
bongbong Sep 2012 #47
discntnt_irny_srcsm Sep 2012 #97
Union Scribe Sep 2012 #108
bongbong Sep 2012 #110
discntnt_irny_srcsm Sep 2012 #111
rrneck Sep 2012 #43
DanTex Sep 2012 #53
rrneck Sep 2012 #75
DanTex Sep 2012 #78
rrneck Sep 2012 #81
DanTex Sep 2012 #82
rrneck Sep 2012 #83
DanTex Sep 2012 #84
rrneck Sep 2012 #89
holdencaufield Sep 2012 #50
DanTex Sep 2012 #54
bongbong Sep 2012 #69
eqfan592 Sep 2012 #73
bongbong Sep 2012 #77
Remmah2 Sep 2012 #85
Simo 1939_1940 Sep 2012 #112
holdencaufield Sep 2012 #34
Missycim Sep 2012 #45
DanTex Sep 2012 #59
eqfan592 Sep 2012 #65
gejohnston Sep 2012 #68
eqfan592 Sep 2012 #71
Remmah2 Sep 2012 #86
discntnt_irny_srcsm Sep 2012 #38
bongbong Sep 2012 #6
DanTex Sep 2012 #9
Missycim Sep 2012 #10
bongbong Sep 2012 #12
slackmaster Sep 2012 #13
bongbong Sep 2012 #15
slackmaster Sep 2012 #17
DanTex Sep 2012 #16
bongbong Sep 2012 #20
X_Digger Sep 2012 #23
bongbong Sep 2012 #30
DanTex Sep 2012 #39
bongbong Sep 2012 #41
discntnt_irny_srcsm Sep 2012 #42
DanTex Sep 2012 #48
gejohnston Sep 2012 #52
DanTex Sep 2012 #56
bongbong Sep 2012 #49
discntnt_irny_srcsm Sep 2012 #98
DanTex Sep 2012 #99
gejohnston Sep 2012 #101
discntnt_irny_srcsm Sep 2012 #102
bongbong Sep 2012 #105
bongbong Sep 2012 #103
Union Scribe Sep 2012 #109
eqfan592 Sep 2012 #24
bongbong Sep 2012 #29
eqfan592 Sep 2012 #51
bongbong Sep 2012 #55
eqfan592 Sep 2012 #60
bongbong Sep 2012 #63
eqfan592 Sep 2012 #70
DanTex Sep 2012 #62
eqfan592 Sep 2012 #64
bongbong Sep 2012 #66
eqfan592 Sep 2012 #67
bongbong Sep 2012 #72
eqfan592 Sep 2012 #74
bongbong Sep 2012 #76
eqfan592 Sep 2012 #95
Jenoch Sep 2012 #87
bongbong Sep 2012 #88
eqfan592 Sep 2012 #94
discntnt_irny_srcsm Sep 2012 #19
rrneck Sep 2012 #25
discntnt_irny_srcsm Sep 2012 #35
discntnt_irny_srcsm Sep 2012 #36
rrneck Sep 2012 #44
discntnt_irny_srcsm Sep 2012 #96
Progressive dog Sep 2012 #7
bongbong Sep 2012 #14
Remmah2 Sep 2012 #22
bongbong Sep 2012 #28
Remmah2 Sep 2012 #32
bongbong Sep 2012 #33
Remmah2 Sep 2012 #21
ileus Sep 2012 #18
Jenoch Sep 2012 #58
MicaelS Sep 2012 #106
Jenoch Sep 2012 #107

Response to Remmah2 (Original post)

Thu Sep 6, 2012, 09:53 AM

1. There is nothing at present to suggest

that the culprits were in fact European. The fact only known fact at present is that the incident occurred in Europe.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Remmah2 (Original post)

Thu Sep 6, 2012, 09:56 AM

2. Europe has far lower rates of homicide and gun violence than the US.

I admit that I haven't heard the "Nature gave it's creatures claws, fangs, muscles, and venom so that they could defend themselves and their babies" NRA talking point yet, but the fact of the matter is that in modern societies, easy access to guns results in more people getting shot to death.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DanTex (Reply #2)

Thu Sep 6, 2012, 10:14 AM

3. Dude get help

 

you have NRA on the brain.


You can get better anti-gun talking points then from the NRA.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Missycim (Reply #3)

Thu Sep 6, 2012, 10:23 AM

4. LOL. Grammatically challenged trolling. The gungeon special!

PS. Hey krispos, did you see that? A gratuitous personal attack by a pro-gunner!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DanTex (Reply #4)

Thu Sep 6, 2012, 10:26 AM

5. IOKIYAGR

 

The gungeon's version of IOKIYAR. Replace "repiglican" for the last "R" with Gun Religionist for the "GR".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bongbong (Reply #5)

Thu Sep 6, 2012, 10:50 AM

8. Well when you guys stop being insulting

 

I will do the same. I know anti-gunners have more leeway then pro-liberty posters, its just something I will have to work with.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Missycim (Reply #8)

Thu Sep 6, 2012, 11:09 AM

11. Laughs

 

> pro-liberty posters

Sounds like you're trying to co-opt the repigs' lying phrase "pro-life".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bongbong (Reply #11)

Thu Sep 6, 2012, 11:43 AM

26. Carrying a gun is a Liberty,

 

someone who wants to take that away is anti liberty.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Missycim (Reply #26)

Thu Sep 6, 2012, 12:04 PM

31. Assertions are fun!

 

> Carrying a gun is a Liberty, someone who wants to take that away is anti liberty.

I wanna go 200 MPH on city streets. Someone who wants to take that away is anti liberty.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bongbong (Reply #31)

Thu Sep 6, 2012, 01:38 PM

57. A person lawfully carrying a gun is statistically far, far safer than someone driving 200 MPH.

 

A person lawfully carrying a gun is statistically far, far safer than someone driving 200 MPH on city streets

The right to drive 200 MPH is also not a Constitutionally-enumerated right.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Atypical Liberal (Reply #57)

Thu Sep 6, 2012, 01:43 PM

61. Laughs

 

> The right to drive 200 MPH is also not a Constitutionally-enumerated right.

Neither is using the Internet.

> A person lawfully carrying a gun is statistically far, far safer than someone driving 200 MPH on city streets

Depends on the streets. They don't QUITE hit 200 MPH on some of the straights in the various Grand Prix races around the world, but it isn't for lack of trying.

And who cares anyway? Safety shouldn't determine what makes my freedom!!! If that was so, then the safest course of action would be to get rid of all guns.

You heard it here first, folks. A gun-relgionist is now advocating to have all your Preciouses taken away!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bongbong (Reply #61)

Thu Sep 6, 2012, 02:16 PM

79. Wrong.

 

Neither is using the Internet.

Really? You really think that speech, particularly political speech, over the internet is not Constitutionally protected? Really?

Depends on the streets. They don't QUITE hit 200 MPH on some of the straights in the various Grand Prix races around the world, but it isn't for lack of trying.

I'm sorry, I assumed we were talking about firearms in public, not in special-use places.

And who cares anyway? Safety shouldn't determine what makes my freedom!!!

Exactly so. Safety should not determine what makes freedom. To quote Benjamin Franklin, "Those who would forsake essential liberty to gain a little temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."

If that was so, then the safest course of action would be to get rid of all guns.

Or live in little padded cells with each of us having our own police officer watching over us. Not very free, though.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Atypical Liberal (Reply #79)

Thu Sep 6, 2012, 02:28 PM

80. Endless laughs

 

> Really? You really think that speech, particularly political speech, over the internet is not Constitutionally protected? Really?

Really? You think I can't come up with another easy rebuttal to your ridiculous Talking Point besides the Internet? Really?



> I assumed we were talking about firearms in public, not in special-use places.

I assumed we were talking about FREEDOM, which has no limitations set by you!



> Safety should not determine what makes freedom.

Exactly! That's why your post gives me carte blanche to dump heavy metal pollution into your back yard, since you're all for freedom!



> Or live in little padded cells with each of us having our own police officer watching over us.

Or have fields filled with Strawmen, all NRA-Approved of course.



Overall, I would rate your post at 5 machineguns out of 5 on the Ted Nugent "Empty Talking Points Filling Up A Post" scale.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bongbong (Reply #80)

Thu Sep 6, 2012, 08:32 PM

100. No, I don't.

 

You think I can't come up with another easy rebuttal to your ridiculous Talking Point besides the Internet? Really?

Huhwah? You said that the Internet is not protected speech. This is clearly not true. The internet is (supposed to be) as protected a form of speech as talking on the phone or sending a letter in the mail. Of course, we all know that since Bush and even before we are now under the shackles of pervasive domestic surveillance, but that is another matter.

Electronics speech is still protected speech.

I assumed we were talking about FREEDOM, which has no limitations set by you!

No, we were talking about driving cars at 200 MPH, and then you stipulated race tracks.

Exactly! That's why your post gives me carte blanche to dump heavy metal pollution into your back yard, since you're all for freedom!

No one is advocating for anarchy or some kind of libertarian wet dream with no government regulation. You are constructing a straw man.




Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Atypical Liberal (Reply #100)

Thu Sep 6, 2012, 09:59 PM

104. El Yawno. Make it harder next time.

 

> You said that the Internet is not protected speech.

Never said it. If you can find where I said that, I'll buy you a sandwich.

> No, we were talking about driving cars at 200 MPH, and then you stipulated race tracks.

No, I was talking about FREEDOM! And the only mention of race tracks was because you said it's unsafe to drive 200 MPH on city streets, and I pointed out that some cars do, indeed, reach that speed or close to it on city streets.

You gun-relgionists can't really keep threads straight, can you? Too much Precious-worship has clouded your thinking. Hint: you can use your computer mouse to look at sub-threads within one thread.

You're Welcome.




> No one is advocating for anarchy or some kind of libertarian wet dream with no government regulation.

Gun-religionists are. The most extreme of them want to have unlimited firepower available 24x7 with no checks of any kind, and the "less extreme" gun-nuts want just a little bit less anarchy.

Thanks for giving me an opportunity to respond.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bongbong (Reply #61)

Thu Sep 6, 2012, 03:58 PM

90. "Safety shouldn't determine what makes my freedom!!!"

OK, then. Neither is your assertion (flawed as it is) that someone legally carrying a gun is injurious to your safety grounds to bar the exercise of that freedom.


You heard it here first, folks. A control-religionist is now advocating that anyone who wants to should be able to carry a gun.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HALO141 (Reply #90)

Thu Sep 6, 2012, 04:19 PM

91. Wow! Totally missing the point!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DanTex (Reply #91)

Thu Sep 6, 2012, 04:26 PM

93. Yes. Yes you are.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to HALO141 (Reply #90)

Thu Sep 6, 2012, 04:24 PM

92. Pity

 

> Neither is your assertion (flawed as it is) that someone legally carrying a gun is injurious to your safety grounds to bar the exercise of that freedom.

Judging by all the massacres by "law-abiding" gun-religionists, you're going to have an uphill battle proving THAT False Equivalence.

Further, to make your ludicrous "point", you'll have to prove that an unarmed person is as dangerous as somebody walking around with guns and ammo.



I pity you guys, really I do. Too scared to go to the supermarket without a weapon on you. The world is a SCARY place!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Missycim (Reply #8)

Thu Sep 6, 2012, 11:53 AM

27. How to be a chickenshit troll:

Find an internet message board with a clearly partisan slant.

Select a group on that board that holds an unpopular opinion.

Flog them relentlessly with as much emotional tripe and as many slanderous accusations as possible.

Troll like crazy because the boards moderation system will always favor your partisan ass kissing.

Leverage your cloying mechanizations to build a posse of syncophants who will parrot what you say and prop up your fragile ego.

Earn a 1000 post grave dancing thread (if you're good).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rrneck (Reply #27)

Thu Sep 6, 2012, 12:17 PM

37. Breaking news! Calling fellow DUers "chickenshit trolls" is now OK (as long you're a pro-gunner)

Wait, wait, I though you guys always insisted that "gun rights" were popular on DU! Based an all those scientifically validated gungeon polls. Which is it?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DanTex (Reply #37)

Thu Sep 6, 2012, 12:41 PM

40. Which is it?

 

Gun-religion is simultaneously very popular, but at the same time very persecuted.

Gun-relginoists are simultaneously very tough, but at the same time too scared to walk out the door un-strapped.

Liberals are simultaneously wimpy for not carrying a gun, but at the same time tough as nails for not needing a gun to conduct everyday life.

It seems the DU Gun Lobby has solved the riddle of Shroedinger's Cat!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bongbong (Reply #40)

Thu Sep 6, 2012, 01:10 PM

46. OT question...

...Is there a term for misspelling a non-word? Hypoginoistically speaking.

(No I don't mean Schrödinger, Schrödinger is a name.)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to discntnt_irny_srcsm (Reply #46)

Thu Sep 6, 2012, 01:23 PM

47. See my post #41

 

I still feel ignored by you gun-religonists, compared to your BFF DanTex!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bongbong (Reply #47)

Thu Sep 6, 2012, 07:11 PM

97. Sorry to hear that....

...please note from yesterday: < http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1172&pid=69515 >

You're not ignored.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bongbong (Reply #47)

Fri Sep 7, 2012, 04:34 PM

108. That explains the behavior I suppose.

I don't imagine it ever occurred to you that participating in discussions might get you some attention, as opposed to carpet bombing the forum with wearisome insults and smileys?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Union Scribe (Reply #108)

Fri Sep 7, 2012, 05:25 PM

110. Laughs

 

> That explains the behavior I suppose.

You got me all wrong. I comment on gungeon posts because I love reading the same NRA Talking Points over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and ....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Union Scribe (Reply #108)

Fri Sep 7, 2012, 05:50 PM

111. I used to...

...have a dog that carpet bombed the basement if it was left alone. We got a cage and that stopped.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DanTex (Reply #37)

Thu Sep 6, 2012, 01:03 PM

43. Why would you take that post personally? nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rrneck (Reply #43)

Thu Sep 6, 2012, 01:33 PM

53. Who says I took it personally?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DanTex (Reply #53)

Thu Sep 6, 2012, 02:00 PM

75. Feeling busted huh?

Why would you defend calling trolls "chickenshit".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rrneck (Reply #75)

Thu Sep 6, 2012, 02:05 PM

78. Umm... you're the one who started calling people "chickenshit trolls".

I don't know who you were referring to. You want to clear that up?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DanTex (Reply #78)

Thu Sep 6, 2012, 02:33 PM

81. Why are you defending trolls? nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rrneck (Reply #81)

Thu Sep 6, 2012, 02:36 PM

82. Who are you calling a troll?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DanTex (Reply #82)

Thu Sep 6, 2012, 02:54 PM

83. Why are you defending them?

Or are you okay with calling trolls names?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rrneck (Reply #83)

Thu Sep 6, 2012, 03:06 PM

84. What are you talking about? Who am I defending?

I think you need to go back to just repeating NRA talking points. Your troll talk isn't making much sense.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DanTex (Reply #84)

Thu Sep 6, 2012, 03:43 PM

89. I just don't know Dan.

You spout statistics and polls like the people they describe are marks on a scorecard, now you're defending trolls. You are aware that there is a bloodless technocratic fascist running for president?

I just don't know...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DanTex (Reply #37)

Thu Sep 6, 2012, 01:28 PM

50. Do you feel that post...

 

... was addressed specifically to you?

Are you paranoid, or just enjoying the feel of an exceptionally well-fitted shoe?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to holdencaufield (Reply #50)

Thu Sep 6, 2012, 01:34 PM

54. More insults! We're setting a record here! Keep 'em coming!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DanTex (Reply #54)

Thu Sep 6, 2012, 01:54 PM

69. The Delicate Flowers are stamping their feet!

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bongbong (Reply #69)

Thu Sep 6, 2012, 01:58 PM

73. So you two are.

I would suggest a thicker skin.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to eqfan592 (Reply #73)

Thu Sep 6, 2012, 02:03 PM

77. question

 

> I would suggest a thicker skin

What makes you think that my skin is thin?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DanTex (Reply #37)

Thu Sep 6, 2012, 03:07 PM

85. Sort of like calling pro2A Democrats

 

NRA right wing gun worshiping baby killers or similar things.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DanTex (Reply #37)

Fri Sep 7, 2012, 07:58 PM

112. Boo hoo, Dan.


When a pro-gun rights supporter libels a dues-paid fellow Democrat, refuses to retract his lie and isn't banned - then you can whine all you want. Until then, you just make yourself look very silly.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1172&pid=24252

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Missycim (Reply #8)

Thu Sep 6, 2012, 12:13 PM

34. When you feed a troll ...

 

... all you get is fat troll.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to holdencaufield (Reply #34)

Thu Sep 6, 2012, 01:07 PM

45. I know but they are so

 

cute, kind of like puppies, rabid puppies but cute non the less.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Missycim (Reply #45)

Thu Sep 6, 2012, 01:40 PM

59. Calling fellow DUers "rabid puppies"! Raising the bar!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DanTex (Reply #59)

Thu Sep 6, 2012, 01:51 PM

65. Calling your fellow DUers "stalkers!" Raising the bar!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to eqfan592 (Reply #65)

Thu Sep 6, 2012, 01:54 PM

68. it is raising the bar from

racist-misogynist-creationist-climate science denier-anti intellectual-uneducated-bloodlusting sociopath
did I miss any?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gejohnston (Reply #68)

Thu Sep 6, 2012, 01:56 PM

71. LOL! True enough!

And I'm sure you did miss some, but who could possibly keep track of them all?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to eqfan592 (Reply #65)

Thu Sep 6, 2012, 03:09 PM

86. Apparently the bar is open.

 

Happy hour!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DanTex (Reply #4)

Thu Sep 6, 2012, 12:20 PM

38. Hmmm...

...there's never any gratitude for gratuitous personal attacks; the horror of it all!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Missycim (Reply #3)

Thu Sep 6, 2012, 10:29 AM

6. Barrage

 

> you have NRA on the brain.

A barrage of NRA Talking Points (AKA Big Lies) slimed onto the DU servers by the gun-religionists, seeking to soften the Liberal position on gun control, will do that.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Missycim (Reply #3)

Thu Sep 6, 2012, 10:52 AM

9. Shocker! The jury didn't hide it!

JURY RESULTS

A randomly-selected Jury of DU members completed their review of this alert at Thu Sep 6, 2012, 09:46 AM, and voted 2-4 to LEAVE IT ALONE.


A blatant personal attack in the gungeon, and the jury let it slide! Gosh, it must be nice to be the host, so then I could just ban Missycim for hurting my feelings.

Whatever shall I do?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DanTex (Reply #9)

Thu Sep 6, 2012, 11:02 AM

10. Truth is the truth

 

Sorry

To be honest I am shocked myself, even mild criticism of an anti-gunner is usual grounds for a blocking.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DanTex (Reply #9)

Thu Sep 6, 2012, 11:10 AM

12. IOKIYAGR

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bongbong (Reply #12)

Thu Sep 6, 2012, 11:12 AM

13. PMFJI, bongbong, but did you just mean to say "It's OK If You Are A Gay Republican?"

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to slackmaster (Reply #13)

Thu Sep 6, 2012, 11:15 AM

15. IOKIYAGR

 

See my post #5

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bongbong (Reply #15)

Thu Sep 6, 2012, 11:16 AM

17. Oh. That's just stupid.

 

Thanks.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink



Response to DanTex (Reply #16)

Thu Sep 6, 2012, 11:23 AM

20. More insults

 

Look at what slackmaster said to me in his post #17:

"Oh. That's just stupid."

Do you think I should alert on this personal insult like the gun-religionists do?

Naw, I got better things to do, and I have a thick skin to boot. Lots of "keep smoking that bong" type reply-posts from gun-relgionists will do that

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bongbong (Reply #20)

Thu Sep 6, 2012, 11:33 AM

23. Is English not your first language?

If he'd said, "You're stupid."-- that would be a personal insult.

Pointing out that a post is stupid? Not a personal insult.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to X_Digger (Reply #23)

Thu Sep 6, 2012, 12:02 PM

30. insults

 

> Pointing out that a post is stupid? Not a personal insult.

Sorry, I was using the gun-relgionists' meaning of "personal insult".

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bongbong (Reply #30)

Thu Sep 6, 2012, 12:25 PM

39. It's really amazing how much the NRA bots enjoy insulting people, isn't it.

I'm used to just ignoring all the insults, like background noise, but if you actually pay attention, you realize that a pretty large portion of their posts are straight personal insults. I think that all the loud banging noises at the gun range must make them permanently crabby and on edge.

I mean, in this thread, we've got a bunch random NRA bots just chiming in for no reason other than to add more personal attacks on you and me. And all because I pointed out that there is much less homicide in Western Europe where gun ownership is more heavily regulated.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DanTex (Reply #39)

Thu Sep 6, 2012, 12:44 PM

41. I feel like a second class citizen!

 

> And all because I pointed out that there is much less homicide in Western Europe where gun ownership is more heavily regulated.

At least you got that much. All I got was, among others, protests about my use of smillies, and pointing out that "your POST was stupid" is not a personal insult.

Delicate Flowers indeed.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DanTex (Reply #39)

Thu Sep 6, 2012, 12:57 PM

42. An important issue

"And all because I pointed out that there is much less homicide in Western Europe where gun ownership is more heavily regulated."

This is an obviously true and non-trivial issue. Realizing that the word you use, "where" is neither equivalent to nor interchangeable with the word "because", is essentially the fulcrum of the argument by the pro-rights side against adopting similar laws.

Do you have anything to suggest that the term "because" would be appropriate?
Do you have any suggestions for what is to be done should we accept, for the sake of argument, that the term "because" is correct?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to discntnt_irny_srcsm (Reply #42)

Thu Sep 6, 2012, 01:26 PM

48. There is plenty to suggest that the term "because" is appropriate.

For example, criminologists have observed for a long time that crimes committed with guns are more likely to result in homicide than other crimes, simply because it is so much easier to kill someone with a gun. If you compare violent crime rates overall, you find the US is comparable to other wealthy nations such as in Western Europe, it is only homicide, and gun homicide specifically. This is perfectly consistent with the instrumentality effect -- you aren't more likely to be a victim of a crime in the US, but if you are a victim of a crime, you are much more likely to get shot, and thus more likely to get killed.

And there is plenty more than that. Studies examining statistical trends within the US have also found the same guns/homicide link. Of course, there are other factors that affect homicide rates as well, but none of these factors can account for the fact that the US has by far the highest homicide rate of all developed nations, and yet our overall violent crime rates are not really out of the ordinary. If Americans were really just more violent people, then the US would have more violent crime across the board.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DanTex (Reply #48)

Thu Sep 6, 2012, 01:32 PM

52. if that is the case,

why is the violence concentrated in a few areas in a few cities and not across the board?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to gejohnston (Reply #52)

Thu Sep 6, 2012, 01:37 PM

56. It's concentrated in cities and a few areas in other countries as well.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to discntnt_irny_srcsm (Reply #42)

Thu Sep 6, 2012, 01:27 PM

49. Wow!

 

> Do you have anything to suggest that the term "because" would be appropriate?

That, along with the rest of your post, is quite an erudite way to say "guns don't kill people, people kill people!"

Who said the NRA bots wouldn't figure out new ways to slip their Standard (AKA, long-debunked) Talking Points (AKA, Big Lies) into the discussion?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bongbong (Reply #49)

Thu Sep 6, 2012, 08:05 PM

98. Damn Ma...

...that sixth grade edgication dun comed in handy! This feller says I's erudite.


FWIW, I suggest that there are some folks out there who, for whatever reason or for no reason whatever, want to kill. I just think it's naive to believe that not letting them have a gun for weapon will stop them. I think it's even more naive to believe that making it illegal to buy/own a gun will stop someone, who has already decided to break the law against murder, from getting a gun.

Post hoc ergo propter hoc is the formal name of the logical fallacy whereby an event is ascribed as a cause only due to it's occurring before prior to another event or condition. Having said that the expression "guns don't kill people, people kill people!" does not follow from my post and your saying this is just a straw-man.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to discntnt_irny_srcsm (Reply #98)

Thu Sep 6, 2012, 08:26 PM

99. Speaking of a sixth grade education...

While you lecture others, the truth is that you have not a clue about the very basic facts about homicide in America. Most people who end up killing others don't actually start out wanting to kill. Most homicides are the result of either escalating arguments, or occur during the course of committing another crime. That is why a guns make such a difference to homicide rates. It's because it is much easier to kill with a gun than without. So, an argument or a crime that would end up with a non-lethal assault, ends up as a homicide when a gun is present. This is why the homicide rate is so much higher in the US than in other wealthy nations with less easy access to guns.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DanTex (Reply #99)

Thu Sep 6, 2012, 08:48 PM

101. where was the drastic drop in Canada in 1977?

Do you have any sources for that? Last week you said "guns were not your pet theory" so, which is it?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DanTex (Reply #99)

Thu Sep 6, 2012, 09:39 PM

102. Why is it...

...that prior to "...during the course of committing another crime" one would choose that particular time to carry a gun?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to discntnt_irny_srcsm (Reply #102)

Thu Sep 6, 2012, 10:12 PM

105. Gun!

 

> that prior to "...during the course of committing another crime" one would choose that particular time to carry a gun?

Well, we know that gun-relgionists are too scared to walk in public without being strapped, and the most extreme of them take their Precious into the shower with them. So a lot of them will have their Security Blanket with them during all waking hours.

Naturally those "law-abiding" gun-nuts will shoot first, ask questions later, after their fear reaches a breaking point - which seems to happen often in the USA with its ultra-lax gun laws.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to discntnt_irny_srcsm (Reply #98)

Thu Sep 6, 2012, 09:51 PM

103. good luck

 

handling all your fear.

As for me, join me in celebrating the 19,000th day I've been able to fully function and walk around in public amongst other people without a gun. That's 19,000 days of "gut-wrenching" bravery!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DanTex (Reply #39)

Fri Sep 7, 2012, 04:37 PM

109. REALLY?

You seem to be able to recognize even the mildest rebukes from your opponents as insults, yet you claim you have no idea why Hoyt would be blocked? And what do you think of bongbong's tactics? Are you proud of those as examples of civility and logic? To call your selective outrage myopic would be far too generous.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bongbong (Reply #20)

Thu Sep 6, 2012, 11:37 AM

24. Ya know, you use that same smiley so much...

...you might as well just make it part of your sig line. Might as well include "gun-religionists" in there as well. And if you care about other posters, perhaps a warning about how you have no interest in a serious discussion on issues, but instead would just rather be as insulting as possible to those who don't go in lock step with your beliefs. That would save both you and others a lot of trouble.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to eqfan592 (Reply #24)

Thu Sep 6, 2012, 12:01 PM

29. LOL

 

> Ya know, you use that same smiley so much you might as well just make it part of your sig line.

Always glad to note obsession with me by a gun-relgionist!




> That would save both you and others a lot of trouble

If your poor "delicate flower" (as Tom Tomorrow puts it) gun-religionist psyche is so upset with my posts, you can put me on ignore.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bongbong (Reply #29)

Thu Sep 6, 2012, 01:31 PM

51. Not obsessed nor upset.

The ability to read through a variety of thread and pick up on a pattern of behavior is not a sign of obsession. However, always thinking people are obsessed with ones self, now that IS a sign of something.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to eqfan592 (Reply #51)

Thu Sep 6, 2012, 01:35 PM

55. Obsession by Calvin Cline

 

> However, always thinking people are obsessed with ones self, now that IS a sign of something

If you've seen me mention "obsession" any time other than this one, let me know. That would tend to support your word "always", above. Otherwise, you might just get accused of throwing crap on the wall and seeing if it sticks.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bongbong (Reply #55)

Thu Sep 6, 2012, 01:41 PM

60. From your post:

"Always glad to note obsession with me by a gun-relgionist! " The clear implication here is that you seem to think this is a semi-regular occurrence. If I miss interpreted, then I apologize.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to eqfan592 (Reply #60)

Thu Sep 6, 2012, 01:48 PM

63. Miss Interpreted - the newest hydroplane

 

> The clear implication here is that you seem to think this is a semi-regular occurrence.

Not at all. I could easily be "always glad" to see something even if it was once a year. How about "I'm always glad to see Paris", after seeing it 2x in 20 years.

> If I miss interpreted, then I apologize.

Yeah, you "miss interpreted" (whatever that means). Thanks for the apology, and no charge for the grammar lesson.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bongbong (Reply #63)

Thu Sep 6, 2012, 01:55 PM

70. Sometimes, when posting from my cell phone, I don't even notice when it separates words like that.

But thanks for the grammar lesson nonetheless.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bongbong (Reply #29)

Thu Sep 6, 2012, 01:48 PM

62. You might be picking up a stalker. But you're still way behind: I have like 8 of them...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DanTex (Reply #62)

Thu Sep 6, 2012, 01:50 PM

64. lol, way to keep it classy, DanTex. ;) (nt)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to DanTex (Reply #62)

Thu Sep 6, 2012, 01:51 PM

66. Yeesh

 

Stalkers with gunz on the brain. That would almost - almost - scare me enough to get something to defend myself with ....

... like an IQ of over 90.



(JUST KIDDING, gun-relgionists! Don't alert my post!)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bongbong (Reply #66)

Thu Sep 6, 2012, 01:52 PM

67. I love how the apology for the insult includes an insult. lol (nt)

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to eqfan592 (Reply #67)

Thu Sep 6, 2012, 01:57 PM

72. Oh you Delicate Flower!

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bongbong (Reply #72)

Thu Sep 6, 2012, 01:59 PM

74. Being able to see something as an insult does not equate to one being actually upset by it.


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to eqfan592 (Reply #74)

Thu Sep 6, 2012, 02:02 PM

76. Uh huh

 

> Being able to see something as an insult does not equate to one being actually upset by it.

That's very special. Thanks for clearing that up for all of us.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bongbong (Reply #76)

Thu Sep 6, 2012, 05:09 PM

95. Not a problem!

Tho I don't think anybody else seemed to need that cleared up for them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bongbong (Reply #66)

Thu Sep 6, 2012, 03:11 PM

87. Why would you be fearful

of anything posted anonymously on an internet message board? Your anonymous and those posting replies to you are anonymous. Are you afraid to walk the streets? Are you afraid to go to the grocery store?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jenoch (Reply #87)

Thu Sep 6, 2012, 03:25 PM

88. Jenoch should stop self-pwning himself

 

>Are you afraid to walk the streets? Are you afraid to go to the grocery store?

If I was scared, I'd get a gun like all the scared gun-relgionists do so they can venture into the daylight. But I'm not.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bongbong (Reply #88)

Thu Sep 6, 2012, 05:08 PM

94. "scared gun-religionists"



Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Missycim (Reply #3)

Thu Sep 6, 2012, 11:23 AM

19. IMHO...

...a fact finder finds facts that help him form an opinion.

A fault finder finds faults that help him defend his prejudices.

just sayin'

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to discntnt_irny_srcsm (Reply #19)

Thu Sep 6, 2012, 11:39 AM

25. Ooh, I am totally stealing that. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rrneck (Reply #25)

Thu Sep 6, 2012, 12:15 PM

35. Please feel free...

(uc) Thursday


...uncopyrighted

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rrneck (Reply #25)

Thu Sep 6, 2012, 12:17 PM

36. Just answer this...

...What is the sound of one prejudicial fact ignorer clapping?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to discntnt_irny_srcsm (Reply #36)

Thu Sep 6, 2012, 01:05 PM

44. Three words...

Silent but deadly.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to rrneck (Reply #44)

Thu Sep 6, 2012, 07:09 PM

96. Dit dit dah... n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Remmah2 (Original post)

Thu Sep 6, 2012, 10:31 AM

7. Yes murder is always offensive

That is incredibly good logic. A murder using firearms is used as the starting point for a rant on why we should all have firearms. Then it's pointed out the really amazing fact that creatures with venom, claws, fangs, muscles, and venom haven't evolved themselves to get rid of them. The finish is great, and would convince any reasonable person. I am certain that now no poisonous snakes will be signing consent agreement with a veterinarian to have their venom sacs removed. Congratulations

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Progressive dog (Reply #7)

Thu Sep 6, 2012, 11:14 AM

14. NRA logic

 

It's better understood if you remember it originates on the planet Bizarro.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bongbong (Reply #14)

Thu Sep 6, 2012, 11:32 AM

22. Are you saying rape, murder and assault are acceptable?

 

What is the solution?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Remmah2 (Reply #22)

Thu Sep 6, 2012, 11:58 AM

28. Strawman alert!

 

> Are you saying rape, murder and assault are acceptable?

I'm amazed that there is any straw left, what with the drought and everything.



> What is the solution?

You want "a general solution to crime" in one, or two, paragraphs?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to bongbong (Reply #28)

Thu Sep 6, 2012, 12:06 PM

32. Is that an answer?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Remmah2 (Reply #32)

Thu Sep 6, 2012, 12:09 PM

33. I don't know

 

Is that a question?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Progressive dog (Reply #7)

Thu Sep 6, 2012, 11:30 AM

21. Yes, murder, rape, assault are all offensive.

 

If people won't or are unable to do the right thing at the right time then it's just empty talk.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Remmah2 (Original post)

Thu Sep 6, 2012, 11:23 AM

18. We need to arm everyone all the time.





Finally someone said it.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Remmah2 (Original post)

Thu Sep 6, 2012, 01:39 PM

58. On one of the

British websites with this story they reported that an "automatic" pistol was used and that cartridge casings from an "automatic" pistol were at the scene. I wonder how they knew an "automatic" pistol was used since they also reported that a weapon was not found at the scene?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jenoch (Reply #58)

Thu Sep 6, 2012, 10:28 PM

106. Couple of reasons...

(1) If they found cartridge cases of a particular caliber at the scene .i.e; 32ACP, .380ACP, 7.62×25mm Tokarev, 9mm, 9mm Markarov, .40 S&W or .45ACP, they almost certainly came from a semi-automatic pistol, or a sub-machine gun. Sub-machine guns fire pistol caliber ammunition not rifle caliber ammunition. Revolvers don't eject cartridges automatically, and revolvers that fire semiautomatic pistol ammunition are very rare.

(2) Because of the firing pin indentations on the primers in the empty cartridge cases.

Different brands and models of semi-automatic pistols create different striking patterns on the primers when each cartridge is fired. Many have a round firing pin with a rounded tip that creates a hemispherical dimple in the primer when the cartridge is fired.

Other pistols, like the Glock, use a striker instead of a firing pin. The Glock striker is rectangular in nature, and creates a rectangular mark. Once you have seen fired cases from a Glock they're instantly distinguishable from more conventional pistols. If the cartridge cases have that rectangular mark, then they came from Glock semi-automatic pistols.

See picture below. Case on the left is from a gun with a conventional firing pin. The case on the right came from a Glock. If the cases looked like the one on the right, they came from Glocks.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to MicaelS (Reply #106)

Fri Sep 7, 2012, 12:05 AM

107. I guess I should have made my point

a little less subtle. I am aware of the differences in firing pin and striker technology. It seems the British press and/or law enforcement does not know the difference between automatic and semi-automatic weapons (which is also the case much of the time in the U.S. as well). Of course the empty shell casings at the scene indicate that a revolver was not used.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread