BigSteelThrill
Footballguy
Concentrate on whether or not "anyone" would "need" and assault rifle.
That's the topic of this thread.
Concentrate on whether or not "anyone" would "need" and assault rifle.
That's the topic of this thread.
That's because I think it's a valid question. If you had your way, you'd remove guns from our country in order to save lives. But, you crack a cold one and light up a Lucky Strike while toasting those that died from drunk drivers or second hand smoke.You already dumbed it down as far as it can get. You keep banging the same gong over and over for months.
Whats about X? What about Y? What about Z? A: This is not the XYZ thread.
We know, youve been at the same thing for months and people have been grossly put off by your style of anti-discussion communications and yet you keep doing it.That's because I think it's a valid question. If you had your way, you'd remove guns from our country in order to save lives. But, you crack a cold one and light up a Lucky Strike while toasting those that died from drunk drivers or second hand smoke.
I think the word I'm looking for is hypocritical. (and it's not just you. society has determined what deaths are acceptable by their lack of action)
Let me be clear. I don't care what others here think of me. I've had a lot of discussions with multiple people here. I just refuse to make it narrow conversation.We know, youve been at the same thing for months and people have been grossly put off by your style of anti-discussion communications and yet you keep doing it.
Imagine if this was the premise of posters in every thread at FBGs? To sidetrack it into and what about discussion to proper up something else?
https://i.redd.it/gu14ku4nd1c31.pngEvery American should be trained in martial arts. Then there wouldn't be a need for guns for self defense. Personally, I'm a karate man.
You never said what your solution is either.I never said I was the solution.
Not a bad idea. Mandatory martial arts would probably help with a few of our country's problems.Every American should be trained in martial arts. Then there wouldn't be a need for guns for self defense. Personally, I'm a karate man.
You're not discussing and raising awareness. You're discussing banning something. There's a difference.Mis: Im discussing and raising awareness for cerebral palsy.
KC: Dont you know cancer affects way more people, such hypocrisy for you to focus on CP! It doesnt deserve its own considerations and discussions so we must constantly conflate it!
Ah, so its exactly like the other gun thread and KCs dui thread.Its about seatbelts and obesity.
Ah, so its exactly like the other gun thread and KCs dui thread.
You're not discussing and raising awareness. You're discussing banning something. There's a difference.
This is false. I've given a lot of suggestions on how to fix the problem.
Evidently there can be no discussion that includes you though.
It went off the rails when the anti gun crowd had to accept a small loss. The fact that there may actually be a need for an assault rifle.Ah, so its exactly like the other gun thread and KCs dui thread.
That obscure language is the same thing that defines many laws in this country. I don't think it was penned without purpose. That alone should make you take pause.I've given my ideas in the other gun thread multiple times. I thought I was having a respectful conversation with you. The reality is that it's a complex problem that demands a complex multi-faceted solution. Pointing to some obscure language written hundreds of years ago doesn't get us anywhere.
nope wasn't meYes.
Again, statistically you are adding danger to the situation. Didn't you tell a story a while ago about an accident you or a family member had with a gun?
actually the core problem is simple - violent peopleThe reality is that it's a complex problem that demands a complex multi-faceted solution.
Ignore works greatWe know, youve been at the same thing for months and people have been grossly put off by your style of anti-discussion communications and yet you keep doing it.
Imagine if this was the premise of posters in every thread at FBGs? To sidetrack it into a "what about _xyz_?" discussion to distract from something else?
From that page: "Gun nut" is a term of derision that anti-gun supporters roll out when they don't have a substantive argument to make and want to belittle and dehumanize their opponents. The use of such a term, along with others like "ammosexual", "gun humper" and so on, basically indicates that the person is acting like a child and should be treated as such.
You seem to think I'm defecting. What I'm doing is comparing. It's what we do here on a fake football board.Please try to stay on topic...
... by deflecting to another topic!?! Brilliant!
So you bleed on the inside?Every American should be trained in martial arts. Then there wouldn't be a need for guns for self defense. Personally, I'm a karate man.
From that page: "Gun nut" is a term of derision that anti-gun supporters roll out when they don't have a substantive argument to make and want to belittle and dehumanize their opponents. The use of such a term, along with others like "ammosexual", "gun humper" and so on, basically indicates that the person is acting like a child and should be treated as such.
A gun-nut is the same as an anti-gun nut. A person on one side of the argument who is so convinced they are right that they refuse to even listen or acknowledge the opposing sides argument. The people who actually say AND mean "from my cold dead hands". A gun-nut is somebody who refuses to acknowledge a problem even related to guns and therefore will not talk about solutions. They generally believe that those who disagree are un-American traitors and/or idiots. They are most likely firearms owners, although money and/or felonies may change that.
A firearms owner is somebody who owns firearms. THEY ARE NOT AUTOMATICALLY A GUN NUT!!!
Somebody in favor of gun control may or may not be a firearms owner, but who believes that a (the?) major contributing factor to the violence issues in this country are related to our gun laws.
Somebody in favor of gun rights believes either/both a.) firearms ownership is an inalienable right (this group usually refuses to acknowledge the full text or the 2nd amendment) and b.) that the violence crisis in this country is primarily due to causes other than firearms, and that guns are either a very minor factor or a solution.
An anti-gun nut is somebody who believes that ownership of a firearm is proof that you want to murder their children in cold blood. Like the gun nuts, they refuse to acknowledge other points of view or other potential causes or solutions. Like the gun nuts, you cannot have a conversation with them about gun control. They believe that those who don't agree are simply bad human beings.
how can you karate a guy pointing a gun at you from 20' away ?Sheriff Bart said:Every American should be trained in martial arts. Then there wouldn't be a need for guns for self defense. Personally, I'm a karate man.
yes, that's the spirit of an internet forum designed to exchange ideas and beliefs !! bury your head in the sand and ignore - BRAVO !!!-fish- said:Ignore works great
Perhaps if you took karate you would know the answer.how can you karate a guy pointing a gun at you from 20' away ?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2fjMpn7JCJ0Perhaps if you took karate you would know the answer.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Vh4Kx9IqIZw
I cant remember who reminded me of this, Man of Constant Sorrow, perhaps.
When someone intentionally tries to derail discussion by constantly deflecting and raising irrelevant topics, it doesn't further discussion, it hinders it. Collectively ignoring such postings furthers discussion. If you'll notice above, there is a fairly interesting discussion of the Supreme Court's judicial advocacy and when it is appropriate to alter Constitutional rights. Contrast that with a poster changing the subject to alcohol, cars, or the sun, which just interferes with rational discussion and intelligent discourse. Ignoring such postings allows more valuable discourse to continue while filtering out posts that are pure noise.yes, that's the spirit of an internet forum designed to exchange ideas and beliefs !! bury your head in the sand and ignore - BRAVO !!!
This is why people call posters here elitists. How many people on this board (or in this country) are able to discuss the judicial advocacy of the Supreme Court? By contrast, how many are able to understand the comparison of gun laws vs laws on cigarettes, alcohol, or cars?When someone intentionally tries to derail discussion by constantly deflecting and raising irrelevant topics, it doesn't further discussion, it hinders it. Collectively ignoring such postings furthers discussion. If you'll notice above, there is a fairly interesting discussion of the Supreme Court's judicial advocacy and when it is appropriate to alter Constitutional rights. Contrast that with a poster changing the subject to alcohol, cars, or the sun, which just interferes with rational discussion and intelligent discourse. Ignoring such postings allows more valuable discourse to continue while filtering out posts that are pure noise.
Would you like to talk about the price of grapes?
I prefer my karate throwing stars!how can you karate a guy pointing a gun at you from 20' away ?
Well said.When someone intentionally tries to derail discussion by constantly deflecting and raising irrelevant topics, it doesn't further discussion, it hinders it. Collectively ignoring such postings furthers discussion. If you'll notice above, there is a fairly interesting discussion of the Supreme Court's judicial advocacy and when it is appropriate to alter Constitutional rights. Contrast that with a poster changing the subject to alcohol, cars, or the sun, which just interferes with rational discussion and intelligent discourse. Ignoring such postings allows more valuable discourse to continue while filtering out posts that are pure noise.
Would you like to talk about the price of grapes?
just because you don't understand the relevancy of comparisons, analogies and deeper connections within a thread doesn't mean others don'tWhen someone intentionally tries to derail discussion by constantly deflecting and raising irrelevant topics, it doesn't further discussion, it hinders it. Collectively ignoring such postings furthers discussion. If you'll notice above, there is a fairly interesting discussion of the Supreme Court's judicial advocacy and when it is appropriate to alter Constitutional rights. Contrast that with a poster changing the subject to alcohol, cars, or the sun, which just interferes with rational discussion and intelligent discourse. Ignoring such postings allows more valuable discourse to continue while filtering out posts that are pure noise.
Would you like to talk about the price of grapes?
The price of grapes is affecting the price of wine and.... OMG DRUNK DRIVERS!!!!!!When someone intentionally tries to derail discussion by constantly deflecting and raising irrelevant topics, it doesn't further discussion, it hinders it. Collectively ignoring such postings furthers discussion. If you'll notice above, there is a fairly interesting discussion of the Supreme Court's judicial advocacy and when it is appropriate to alter Constitutional rights. Contrast that with a poster changing the subject to alcohol, cars, or the sun, which just interferes with rational discussion and intelligent discourse. Ignoring such postings allows more valuable discourse to continue while filtering out posts that are pure noise.
Would you like to talk about the price of grapes?
I find fish to be a very perspicacious fellow. I take umbrage with this characterization.just because you don't understand the relevancy of comparisons, analogies and deeper connections within a thread doesn't mean others don't
more likely, you can't argue your view, get frustrated and either quit or block .... that's very typical Democrat/Liberal move
tie grapes to AR15's in any way and sure I will ... but i will never block you
Of course. Unfortunately this time it was @BigSteelThrill trying to keep him on topic. Really wish there was a "super-ignore" where you wouldn't see it when someone like that gets quoted, but all you can do is encourage rational people to ignore or not quote them.Is that one guy I have on ignore still conflating, and calling it "comparing"?
I did buy a hard-top convertible to keep me safe from the cheetahs.I find fish to be a very perspicacious fellow.
Who knows what perspicacious means without looking it up?I find fish to be a very perspicacious fellow. I take umbrage with this characterization.
Yep. And I'm still against including suicides as part of the overall gun deaths.Is that one guy I have on ignore still conflating, and calling it "comparing"?
If you aren't also buying and planting lemongrass around your house to keep you safe from killer bees, then you are a hypocrite.I did buy a hard-top convertible to keep me safe from the cheetahs.
If you aren't also buying and planting lemongrass around your house to keep you safe from killer bees, then you are a hypocrite.
Killer bees aren't dangerous. Only criminal killer bees. Without intent, there can be no danger.If you aren't also buying and planting lemongrass around your house to keep you safe from killer bees, then you are a hypocrite.
Well -fish-, for one. Still I will take under advisement your counsel here and try to communicate in a more common idiomatic vernacular.Who knows what perspicacious means without looking it up?
If you're trying to communicate with the masses, it's best to use language that the majority will understand. Otherwise, it appears that you're speaking in only to the elites.
Don't bother. You and fish enjoy your conversations.Well -fish-, for one. Still I will take under advisement your counsel here and try to communicate in a more common idiomatic vernacular.
As a student of English literature long before legal writing crippled my ability to write creatively, I appreciate the use of the mot juste. It's not like the masses even need to refer to a dictionary anymore. If they're too lazy to highlight and right click, they can't be all that interested in learning from a discussion anyway.Well -fish-, for one. Still I will take under advisement your counsel here and try to communicate in a more common idiomatic vernacular.