Hopefully most folks think of the victim first. Something so simple says so much about priorities and reality.
Most folks do think of the victims first. Funny that this revision of reality is now your "reality". The loudest reaction after the shooting was Anti-Gun zealots and Media coming out of the woodwork proposing new bans "for the children", "Something must be done" and other drivel. The reaction of that BS drove the pro gun counter reaction.
I think when you compare the motivations of the "anti gun zealots" to the pro gun crowd, the difference is quite stark. The people who want to refine our gun laws are looking to save lives. People like you think...what again? Oh yes...
Meanwhile, he plays Kaa the snake, and says, "Don't worry your ugly little heads about that. Everything's fine, go to sssleep. Trussst in meee, go to ssssleep..."
That's Larry from another post. The problem begins and end with your crowd, 6Kings, not the various groups out there who are...ahem...actually trying to solve a very serious problem. You continually fall victim to appeal to fear and appeal to probability and then hilariously claim that liberals are not "logical." The government is coming to get our guns and it really doesn't matter how many piles of bodies we have to endure as long as we are ever vigilant, right? In short, your motivation is based purely on fantasy and the motivation of the gun safety folks is based on reality.
Also, since when did "for the children" became a derisive phrase? Honestly, that really shows exactly where your priorities are
Right. Because it can't be that the children actually do need to be protected or are terribly frightened and need to see that the adults (see: not you and the other TSM mouth foamers) are actually trying solve a serious problem in reality as opposed to coddling a fever dream derived from one to many viewings of Red Dawn.
Poor M, doesn't like having his faith challenged by reason. Has to immediately throw a baseless and irrational accusation like a howler monkey flings his own shit.
Also doesn't want to have the power tools of the narrative deconstructed lest they lose their ability to intimidate.
You are just full of lose today. Guess that isn't different from most days, is it?
No, Mark, my comment is a pretty accurate observation of your behaviour over the past few years on this subject. You are certainly dishonest and unable to keep your lies straight within a single comment thread, let alone over longer periods of time. And on gun control, especially semi-auto rifles, you've flipped positions faster than a Valley porn starlette on a shoot. And no, right now you say you don't want to take handguns, but given that rifles of ALL types account for such a tiny percentage of murders, I'd say the odds are at least 1,000-to-1 that it's just because that's the slice of the salami you think you can get right now. And in a few years, if you get what you want right now and it proves as thoroughly and stupidly ineffective as the 1994 AWB, and some atrocity happens, you'll be all hot after another slice of the salami. Wash, rinse, repeat until like Britain and Australia, you've taken the whole salami. You seem to forget that unlike you, we KNOW history. And we've come to know you for what you are, a perennial wannabe changer-of-worlds, fighting on the educational front. As if burning fields of strawmen actually accomplishes anything.
Given some of your posts like the one from April 2, and all of Nikto's on the subject, the question is whose amygdala is hyper-active, and who's fearful?
You are, Larry, because I deal with what is happening right now as opposed to what might happen in a paranoid, fever dream.
The other thing you need to fully realize is that I know how you guys argue (see: all you have left). The insults and criticisms you hurl at me are more accurate reflections of yourselves and you use them to head me off at the pass.
And here's the irony about the AWB. Not only did it not prevent gun violence but it also did not result in government confiscation of weapons and a totalitarian state. Neither side was right. So now what? Maybe a good place to start would be to think...
And WHY didn't it result in gun confiscations, even though many of the supporters of the original AWB openly hoped it would lead to more gun control? Because people who were "paranoid" that people who said they wanted to disarm Americans actually meant what they said. And fought back hard! And then you continue your never-ending bullshit line about how they're not coming to take our guns. Again, the only reason they won't be is because we're fighting to not let them, asshole! While you preach, "Go to sleep, you stupid paranoids, nobody's going to do that. You've got nothing to worry your ugly little heads about, go to ssleeep..." We see through that 2nd-grade trick, Marky.
Meanwhile, the President himself continues the Brady Campaign decision from the late 1980's to conflate and confuse the issue between fully automatic military weapons and semi-automatic civilian rifles. Either that, or he's completely ignorant of the subject, yet still feels compelled to urge the American people to useless measures. Again. But this time with some extra nonsense added to the sauce." It may be an old failed idea, and laughably stupid and pointless once any honest analysis of it's made, "{whine}But at least we're tryinnng...{/whine}" Pathetic. Just fucking pathetic.
Larry, do you honestly think that if the government was as bad as you say they are, that the things you are doing would make a difference? The fact is that there is no Stalin-esque villain waiting to pounce. These are just concerned citizens who want the level of violence to go down in this country. They aren't after you, Colonel Flagg.
What I'm trying to do is break out of the paradigm we seem to be in where the same old bullshit is being flung. I don't have a problem conceding that the AWB didn't work. Bans generally don't work anyway. But that doesn't mean we can't explore other options in ensuring that criminals and nutballs don't get guns which is something you guys seem bent on making happen.
Mark, slow the fuck down and ACTUALLY READ WHAT I WROTE, and then THINK ABOUT IT fer Christsake(!) instead of responding to what some script in your head imagines I must be saying. Until you show some sign of actual reading comprehension, I'm with juris.
The last time I checked you guys were all against universal background checks because it leads to Hitler, right? You're also against increased mental health checks and any small iota of more scrutiny on who buys a gun because it leads to Hitler, right? Please do correct me if I am wrong.
The last time I checked you guys were all against universal background checks because it leads to Hitler, right?
I'd really be happy to slap your smarmy little mug right at the moment, but I'll settle for re-iterating what I've said only a few dozen times here.
The federal govt does not have the power to do so. A state can because it has a general police power. Nothing to do with Hitler, just simply sticking to only doing what the Constitution allows.
Progressives are like Hitler - they don't want any fucking limits on their power. Now go fuck yourself unless you are willing to admit you are wrong.
22 comments:
Yes! I'm happy you put this on here.
I don't think that, but I am as sickened by the politicians racing to stand on the corpses as by the actual shitbag shooter.
Hopefully most folks think of the victim first. Something so simple says so much about priorities and reality.
Hopefully most folks think of the victim first. Something so simple says so much about priorities and reality.
Most folks do think of the victims first. Funny that this revision of reality is now your "reality". The loudest reaction after the shooting was Anti-Gun zealots and Media coming out of the woodwork proposing new bans "for the children", "Something must be done" and other drivel. The reaction of that BS drove the pro gun counter reaction.
You can't even get recent history right.
I think when you compare the motivations of the "anti gun zealots" to the pro gun crowd, the difference is quite stark. The people who want to refine our gun laws are looking to save lives. People like you think...what again? Oh yes...
Meanwhile, he plays Kaa the snake, and says, "Don't worry your ugly little heads about that. Everything's fine, go to sssleep. Trussst in meee, go to ssssleep..."
That's Larry from another post. The problem begins and end with your crowd, 6Kings, not the various groups out there who are...ahem...actually trying to solve a very serious problem. You continually fall victim to appeal to fear and appeal to probability and then hilariously claim that liberals are not "logical." The government is coming to get our guns and it really doesn't matter how many piles of bodies we have to endure as long as we are ever vigilant, right? In short, your motivation is based purely on fantasy and the motivation of the gun safety folks is based on reality.
Also, since when did "for the children" became a derisive phrase? Honestly, that really shows exactly where your priorities are
The people who want to refine our gun laws are looking to save lives.
Well they like to say that, but just saying that doesn't make it true.
Of course people would rather cling to a lie than learn to see the truth.
Also, since when did "for the children" became a derisive phrase?
When? From the get-go. It was created for same purpose that "protecting our white women" served for generations.
It is a cudgel to beat the opposition with.
but just saying that doesn't make it true.
They's a comin'!
It is a cudgel to beat the opposition with.
Right. Because it can't be that the children actually do need to be protected or are terribly frightened and need to see that the adults (see: not you and the other TSM mouth foamers) are actually trying solve a serious problem in reality as opposed to coddling a fever dream derived from one to many viewings of Red Dawn.
They's a comin'!
Poor M, doesn't like having his faith challenged by reason. Has to immediately throw a baseless and irrational accusation like a howler monkey flings his own shit.
Also doesn't want to have the power tools of the narrative deconstructed lest they lose their ability to intimidate.
You are just full of lose today. Guess that isn't different from most days, is it?
Imperial Declaration=Must Be True
Imperial Declaration=Must Be True
That ol' black magic ain't workin' like it used to, is it M?
Yes, the "monsters are getting to close" and I'm all afeared...
Yes, the "monsters are getting to close" and I'm all afeared...
Flinging your own shit at your own strawmen isn't very impressive to me. Does it impress you?
No, Mark, my comment is a pretty accurate observation of your behaviour over the past few years on this subject. You are certainly dishonest and unable to keep your lies straight within a single comment thread, let alone over longer periods of time. And on gun control, especially semi-auto rifles, you've flipped positions faster than a Valley porn starlette on a shoot. And no, right now you say you don't want to take handguns, but given that rifles of ALL types account for such a tiny percentage of murders, I'd say the odds are at least 1,000-to-1 that it's just because that's the slice of the salami you think you can get right now. And in a few years, if you get what you want right now and it proves as thoroughly and stupidly ineffective as the 1994 AWB, and some atrocity happens, you'll be all hot after another slice of the salami. Wash, rinse, repeat until like Britain and Australia, you've taken the whole salami. You seem to forget that unlike you, we KNOW history. And we've come to know you for what you are, a perennial wannabe changer-of-worlds, fighting on the educational front. As if burning fields of strawmen actually accomplishes anything.
Given some of your posts like the one from April 2, and all of Nikto's on the subject, the question is whose amygdala is hyper-active, and who's fearful?
You are, Larry, because I deal with what is happening right now as opposed to what might happen in a paranoid, fever dream.
The other thing you need to fully realize is that I know how you guys argue (see: all you have left). The insults and criticisms you hurl at me are more accurate reflections of yourselves and you use them to head me off at the pass.
And here's the irony about the AWB. Not only did it not prevent gun violence but it also did not result in government confiscation of weapons and a totalitarian state. Neither side was right. So now what? Maybe a good place to start would be to think...
And WHY didn't it result in gun confiscations, even though many of the supporters of the original AWB openly hoped it would lead to more gun control? Because people who were "paranoid" that people who said they wanted to disarm Americans actually meant what they said. And fought back hard! And then you continue your never-ending bullshit line about how they're not coming to take our guns. Again, the only reason they won't be is because we're fighting to not let them, asshole! While you preach, "Go to sleep, you stupid paranoids, nobody's going to do that. You've got nothing to worry your ugly little heads about, go to ssleeep..." We see through that 2nd-grade trick, Marky.
Meanwhile, the President himself continues the Brady Campaign decision from the late 1980's to conflate and confuse the issue between fully automatic military weapons and semi-automatic civilian rifles. Either that, or he's completely ignorant of the subject, yet still feels compelled to urge the American people to useless measures. Again. But this time with some extra nonsense added to the sauce." It may be an old failed idea, and laughably stupid and pointless once any honest analysis of it's made, "{whine}But at least we're tryinnng...{/whine}" Pathetic. Just fucking pathetic.
Larry, do you honestly think that if the government was as bad as you say they are, that the things you are doing would make a difference? The fact is that there is no Stalin-esque villain waiting to pounce. These are just concerned citizens who want the level of violence to go down in this country. They aren't after you, Colonel Flagg.
What I'm trying to do is break out of the paradigm we seem to be in where the same old bullshit is being flung. I don't have a problem conceding that the AWB didn't work. Bans generally don't work anyway. But that doesn't mean we can't explore other options in ensuring that criminals and nutballs don't get guns which is something you guys seem bent on making happen.
Maybe a good place to start would be to think...
Weeping Jesus on the cross - even I can't take that much irony.
break out of the paradigm we seem to be in where the same old bullshit is being flung.
THEN STOP FLINGING YOUR OWN SHIT FOR A START.
Mark, slow the fuck down and ACTUALLY READ WHAT I WROTE, and then THINK ABOUT IT fer Christsake(!) instead of responding to what some script in your head imagines I must be saying. Until you show some sign of actual reading comprehension, I'm with juris.
The last time I checked you guys were all against universal background checks because it leads to Hitler, right? You're also against increased mental health checks and any small iota of more scrutiny on who buys a gun because it leads to Hitler, right? Please do correct me if I am wrong.
The last time I checked you guys were all against universal background checks because it leads to Hitler, right?
I'd really be happy to slap your smarmy little mug right at the moment, but I'll settle for re-iterating what I've said only a few dozen times here.
The federal govt does not have the power to do so. A state can because it has a general police power. Nothing to do with Hitler, just simply sticking to only doing what the Constitution allows.
Progressives are like Hitler - they don't want any fucking limits on their power. Now go fuck yourself unless you are willing to admit you are wrong.
Post a Comment