/dev/null Posted March 1, 2018 Posted March 1, 2018 12 minutes ago, row_33 said: I have never heard a sermon saying it was a good thing for Lot’s daughters to do that.... what church do do do do you go to??? The Church of Craster?
LA Grant Posted March 1, 2018 Posted March 1, 2018 1 minute ago, DC Tom said: It's amusing the way he confuses his outrage with facts. Makes it a waste of time to engage him, but it is entertaining. Close!! But you have the order mixed up just a little here. —The facts are facts. Overwhelmingly, the facts are the facts. If we were to run a tally of who here is posting facts, data, links, supporting evidence — it's mostly just me, here, doing those things. The facts are there. Engage with them, or, prevailingly, don't. —I am outraged, though I'm not suggesting anyone else here isn't, unless they ascribe themselves to be. "This is outrageous. The problem is obvious, the pattern is clear. Solutions are available. Pick one. Or suggest something better." —It's entertaining because in making the above two points, over and over, with logic, and facts, and links, and data, and supporting evidence, ad nauseum, I'm dunking on dummies defending an indefensible position. I'm certainly open to having nuanced discussions relating to the facts, links, data, supporting evidence, the comparative value of ideas, but the conversation mostly is not that. The conversation is mostly BS, bumper stickers, borrowed ideas, lazy assumptions... just overall garbage reasoning, for any counter-argument, is the truth of it. Because at this point, the question isn't even "should something be done to address gun violence," though that continues to be pointlessly argued, here at least; the question should be "how & when will gun violence be addressed, and who is preventing it & why?" It's an overall societal question. The 'bad apple' cart is broken. So if it's going to be policy, wouldn't it be fun if it also made practical sense?
boyst Posted March 1, 2018 Posted March 1, 2018 3 hours ago, WhitewalkerInPhilly said: Wow. I had first hopped into this thread to post about the Georgia school shooting. This thread, and some of the people in it are special. Special Jack, "Full Retard" special, but special. Outside Person: "Wow, these shootings have been happening a lot. Maybe we should look at having stricter access to high capacity magazines and guns that can be easily be used for mass shootings. "Special Jack:" Well, it's tragic, but you can't legislate your morality over our intrinsic freedoms, even if there is a higher cost." Outside Person: "I don't think the government has a place to say what I do with my medical care, especially when it comes to birth control and whether I produce a human life" "Special Jack:" How dare you! My specific reading of a 6000 year old document which advocates daughters screwing their fathers tells me that a clump of fertilized cells is a complete human life! Therefore, we are going to ban everything associated with this process, even if it doesn't actually do what I my sincerely held personal beliefs say it does! How can you support those baby part farms!!! Come at me. Yeah. That's why it's a stupid idea. They haven't been happening a lot, though.
Wacka Posted March 1, 2018 Posted March 1, 2018 (edited) LA Grant will soon be on top of a gas tank yelling "Made it Ma! Top of the world Ma!" Edited March 1, 2018 by Wacka
DC Tom Posted March 1, 2018 Posted March 1, 2018 52 minutes ago, LA Grant said: Close!! But you have the order mixed up just a little here. —The facts are facts. Overwhelmingly, the facts are the facts. If we were to run a tally of who here is posting facts, data, links, supporting evidence — it's mostly just me, here, doing those things. The facts are there. Engage with them, or, prevailingly, don't. —I am outraged, though I'm not suggesting anyone else here isn't, unless they ascribe themselves to be. "This is outrageous. The problem is obvious, the pattern is clear. Solutions are available. Pick one. Or suggest something better." —It's entertaining because in making the above two points, over and over, with logic, and facts, and links, and data, and supporting evidence, ad nauseum, I'm dunking on dummies defending an indefensible position. I'm certainly open to having nuanced discussions relating to the facts, links, data, supporting evidence, the comparative value of ideas, but the conversation mostly is not that. The conversation is mostly BS, bumper stickers, borrowed ideas, lazy assumptions... just overall garbage reasoning, for any counter-argument, is the truth of it. Because at this point, the question isn't even "should something be done to address gun violence," though that continues to be pointlessly argued, here at least; the question should be "how & when will gun violence be addressed, and who is preventing it & why?" It's an overall societal question. The 'bad apple' cart is broken. So if it's going to be policy, wouldn't it be fun if it also made practical sense? No, I don't. You're entire argument boils down to "I feel...!" No one gives a **** about your feelings. It's why you don't get anything but mockery from anybody.
LA Grant Posted March 1, 2018 Posted March 1, 2018 (edited) 49 minutes ago, DC Tom said: No, I don't. You're entire argument boils down to "I feel...!" No one gives a **** about your feelings. It's why you don't get anything but mockery from anybody. Backwards again. It's not about "my feelings" at all, as much as you keep trying. I don't care about you caring about my feelings, lol. If it were, then the "mockery" from "anybody" (anybody who's anybody!) here would matter. It's about solving a problem. It's a question of logic and ethics. The side arguing for "there is no problem, don't do anything" boils down to "it doesn't affect me, so the problem may as well not exist." This is is the side arguing from the point of emotion. "I feel any gun control might be a slippery slope to totalitarianism. I don't have anything that backs that up that isn't provably bunk, exactly, but let's say I do to justify the feeling." or "I feel guns give me freedom, so I don't want to hear any pesky facts or data about how guns are bad, how could a gun be bad? And besides, the Constitution." or "I feel like gun control wouldn't work in the US. yeah yeah it works everywhere else but I just feel like I know my country, ok? And it wouldn't work." It's a side of myopia to the point of solipsism. Let's point out that you do give a **** about feelings, though — not mine, no. But you are very considerate with the feelings of the poor helpless guns, and the entirely innocent NRA. It's a value choice to put products over people. Anti-social misanthropy makes for a cute schtick, but you're not doing schtick. You're arguing for that as social policy, essentially. Edited March 1, 2018 by LA Grant
TtownBillsFan Posted March 1, 2018 Posted March 1, 2018 On 2/23/2018 at 8:38 AM, The_Dude said: I meant reason. You’ll find that the QWERTY keyboard is called so due to the close proximity of the r and the t. Nope, that’s how I feel. The United States police force is comprised of people who didn’t want to go to college or work hard to master a skill in a real profession like welding/plumbing or something like that. Columbine — cops didn’t go in. Now this....the armed police officer hid while children were slaughtered. Kinda dents the idea of putting cops in schools with guns to protect children...cops are cowards. There’s nothing to force the issue with them. Veterans wouldn’t have hid. Veterans would have followed the sound of the gun fire and made a stand. I know it to be true because those guys have done it in Iraq, Afghanistan, Africa, and other hot spots throughout the world. What happened is what we should expect from cops. They value their lives more than the public’s and they won’t risk their lives even for children. That’s what cops are. Pussies. Dude, you're now just showing yourself to be a jackass. Not all are good, but most are. They do a job that most don't want to, and couldn't do on their best day. Wow, man, I tried to give you benefit of doubt, but that was just a jackhole statement. I'm going to step away from keyboard before I get banned for saying stuff I shouldn't. But, man, you're unworthy. WOW.
The_Dude Posted March 1, 2018 Posted March 1, 2018 7 hours ago, TtownBillsFan said: Dude, you're now just showing yourself to be a jackass. Not all are good, but most are. They do a job that most don't want to, and couldn't do on their best day. Wow, man, I tried to give you benefit of doubt, but that was just a jackhole statement. I'm going to step away from keyboard before I get banned for saying stuff I shouldn't. But, man, you're unworthy. WOW. If I Have you money out of my wallet would that help? You opinion is very important to me, mate.
boyst Posted March 1, 2018 Posted March 1, 2018 12 minutes ago, The_Dude said: If I Have you money out of my wallet would that help? You opinion is very important to me, mate. You're such a whiny little thing
3rdnlng Posted March 1, 2018 Posted March 1, 2018 1 hour ago, The_Dude said: If I Have you money out of my wallet would that help? You opinion is very important to me, mate. I hope you are more careful handling firearms than you are in putting a sentence together.
row_33 Posted March 1, 2018 Posted March 1, 2018 26 minutes ago, 3rdnlng said: I hope you are more careful handling firearms than you are in putting a sentence together. locke and lowed
Tiberius Posted March 1, 2018 Posted March 1, 2018 Quote WASHINGTON — President Trump stunned Republicans on live television Wednesday by embracing gun control and urging a group of lawmakers at the White House to resurrect gun safety legislation that has been opposed for years by the powerful National Rifle Association and the vast majority of his party. In a remarkable meeting, the president veered wildly from the N.R.A. playbook in front of giddy Democrats and stone-faced Republicans. He called for comprehensive gun control legislation that would expand background checks to weapons purchased at gun shows and on the internet, keep guns from mentally ill people, secure schools and restrict gun sales for some young adults. He even suggested a conversation on an assault weapons ban. At one point, Mr. Trump suggested that law enforcement authorities should have the power to seize guns from mentally ill people or others who could present a danger without first going to court. “I like taking the guns early,” he said, adding, “Take the guns first, go through due process second.” The declarations prompted a frantic series of calls from N.R.A. lobbyists to their allies on Capitol Hill and a statement from the group calling the ideas that Mr. Trump expressed “bad policy.” Republican lawmakers suggested to reporters that they remained opposed to gun control measures. “We’re not ditching any constitutional protections simply because the last person the president talked to today doesn’t like them,” Senator Ben Sasse, Republican of Nebraska, said in a statement. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/28/us/politics/trump-gun-control.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=first-column-region®ion=top-news&WT.nav=top-news
LeviF Posted March 1, 2018 Posted March 1, 2018 (edited) 9 minutes ago, Tiberius said: https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/28/us/politics/trump-gun-control.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=first-column-region®ion=top-news&WT.nav=top-news Yeah I knew Donny dearest would break on gun control eventually. Good thing he got Gorsuch in first. Filed under: don't trust NYC politicians. Edited March 1, 2018 by LeviF91
row_33 Posted March 1, 2018 Posted March 1, 2018 8 minutes ago, LeviF91 said: Yeah I knew Donny dearest would break on gun control eventually. Good thing he got Gorsuch in first. Filed under: don't trust NYC politicians. as if the NRA and further out-theres are going to vote Democrat outside of the South
Tiberius Posted March 1, 2018 Posted March 1, 2018 Just now, LeviF91 said: Yeah I knew Donny dearest would break on gun control eventually. Good thing he got Gorsuch in first. After taking $30 million from the NRA! lol, He will not do anything to push for this
DC Tom Posted March 1, 2018 Posted March 1, 2018 (edited) 52 minutes ago, 3rdnlng said: I hope you are more careful handling firearms than you are in putting a sentence together. Oh, I'm sure the moron who can't control his temper at a traffic stop is a model of firearm safety... Edited March 1, 2018 by DC Tom
LeviF Posted March 1, 2018 Posted March 1, 2018 Just now, Tiberius said: After taking $30 million from the NRA! lol, He will not do anything to push for this He didn't "take" $30 million, the NRA does a lot of its own advertising. But your point stands anyway. He leaves me scratching my head a lot. I still can't tell if there are people pulling his strings playing 4D chess or if he's just buffooning his way into getting conservative stuff done.
row_33 Posted March 1, 2018 Posted March 1, 2018 (edited) 9 minutes ago, DC Tom said: Oh, I'm sure the moron who can't control his temper at a traffic stop is a model of firearm safety... you mean the badass who mouths off to the cops when he is rightly confronted by them? Edited March 1, 2018 by row_33
3rdnlng Posted March 1, 2018 Posted March 1, 2018 1 minute ago, DC Tom said: Oh, I'm sure the moron who can't control his temper at a traffic stop is a model of firearm safety... I can hear him telling the cops, "Ill fix you" and then proceed to bang on the top of his 1980 Vega. 1 minute ago, LeviF91 said: He didn't "take" $30 million, the NRA does a lot of its own advertising. But your point stands anyway. He leaves me scratching my head a lot. I still can't tell if there are people pulling his strings playing 4D chess or if he's just buffooning his way into getting conservative stuff done. Every single time people fall for what he says. He's a negotiator and one has to look at everything he says in that light. Judge him by what he does.
Recommended Posts