Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
No I did not twist nor deflect. You brought that all in yourself. Your words exactly were air planes and house codes. I only tried to make the equivalent pertaining to firearms to air planes and building codes.
Only one who's dodging and weaving has been you dragging in air planes and houses... I merely adapted to your argument...
In otherwords. Tried to make an apples to apples with your apples to orangutans argument.
We have house codes. We have air plane protocols etc etc
Wrong.
You are correct about what words were included in my comment, but you did not comprehend my comment.
Simple as that.
I would try to reconnect those dots for you, but I already tried and failed, so best leave it at that.
The point was specifically about how tragedies draw attention to these sorts of issues and that gun violence tragedies are no exception in that regard. Focus, because these points of clarification help narrow down what is most relevant, what arguments are not. It's not that hard if you make the effort...
Wish I could stay and play some more, but already out of time this morning...
No I cannot. Never said I could. Aren't you the one always wanting to point out what you DIDN'T write? (When the focus is on what you DID write)...
Likewise, I never suggested I could or would do anything you ask here.
That was/is NOT the point!
You just don't understand, which is fine, but why continue to ask all these ridiculous questions as if germane to the issue of what is a racist way of putting things and what is not?
Saying something defamatory that isn't true is racist. I did not do that.
If you choose to see racism instead of the truth, that's on you.
You are correct about what words were included in my comment, but you did not comprehend my comment.
Simple as that.
I would try to reconnect those dots for you, but I already tried and failed, so best leave it at that.
The point was specifically about how tragedies draw attention to these sorts of issues and that gun violence tragedies are no exception in that regard. Focus, because these points of clarification help narrow down what is most relevant, what arguments are not. It's not that hard if you make the effort...
Wish I could stay and play some more, but already out of time this morning...
I'm focused.
Problem-mass shooters.
Your solution, turn to emotion for legislative measures to further limit and restrict access to a type/class of weaponry in vain of tragedy with the utopian impression it will affect the issue. Wrong, it disarms and limits access to the law abiding citizens to have legislative measures written to address the issue.
It's plain and simple. You want the populace to rely on another entity other than themselves to be protected.
I and many others disagree. We would rather keep the implements you seek to further legislate away. In exchange for the individual to hold the right to defend themselves and their community from evil with impunity. For it is a God given right to life liberty and pursuit of happiness, for it shall not be infringed.
Just be honest and come out and say it.
Don't play charades and give false equivalencies masking "common sense" and "gun control"
It's not about guns. It's about control and a lack of common sense with feeble emotion clouding judgement.
I will not, and I hope more like me, will not allow society to forfeit rights to bend at the knee and become feeble helpless and hopeless to rely on an adult in the room (more governance, more bureaucracy, less freedom) to protect themselves.
It's very simple and your arguments lack by dragging a false comparrison.
It's one thing if you say, gee I want to have the government to have absolute authority and control to protect society from evil by forfeiting freedoms and privileges. At least you're being honest.
When comparing tragedy to tragedy... the response from you and many like you is the same. My side simply shows there are more ways than one to succumb to death and tragedy, and those ways far supercede in deaths than fire arms yet there isn't nearly the outrage media attention blowing those issues out of proportion like they do with firearms.
So just come right out and be honest and say it.
You, based an opinion, on emotion, to arrive to the conclusion, that firearms that you don't like, ought to be restricted, banned, and limited access to. You and your side do not want personal responsibility. Your side wants to become dependent upon an entity, protocol, and laws to protect you.
You do not want others to possess the means and the ability to defend themselves, their communities, their fellow man.
Again. For the last time.
We all want the same thing. Different measures to get there.
We've placed statistics up that show when gun ownership goes up, crime goes down, your side tries their hardest to discredit it. We show areas with the strictest gun control measures have the highest rates of crime reported. And your side goes mute on it. Absolutely mute.
It's fact, and the numbers prove it. Inconvenient truth for your side of the argument? Absolutely.
Seriously just be honest come out and say "I don't possess the ability nor desire to defend myself, my family, my fellow citizens. I want to rely on another entity and tougher more restrictive laws that will only affect law abiding citizens and their ability and decision to defend themselves and their fellow citizens."
That is what it boils down to.
Our side, does not want to forfeit or see the access restricted. Our side is willing to be its own preventative measure against evil doers of all types. It's within our rights in some states to have no duty to retreat. Our side simply want to make it hard for evil to carry out by removing incentive.
Your side wants to breed sheep and rely on dogs to protect from wolves.
Our side want to breed sheep dogs of our own and not rely on a badge to do it for us.
As simple as possibly put.
Then there's the whole what if... but... think of the children!...
If anything these tragedies have in common... it shows you can't rely (no offense to any law enforcement officer) on a badge to protect you. They're spread thin, and lack either the training or the gear to thwart these events. It's not their fault. Again, when there was a thread about "militarization of the police" it was the same side who argue more gun control, who also argued against police having access to military surplus. Because of appearances...
Back to square one again with "appearances" gee I wonder if police had better training and better implements if they'd have more incentive to respond to such events in a more rapid fashion...
I wonder if a legislative measure that gave immunity to those who thwart evil inside their homes, or out in public, would give the boogey man and psychotic less of an incentive to carry out such an evil task with facing the fact they'd be amongst a vigilant and armed society/community, that won't be prosecuted in the line of defending life liberty and pursuit of happiness.
My offer still stands. Don't like an armed society, I'll skip range day once a month and get others to donate to buy your type a 1 way ticket to Mexico Canada Honduras Venezuela Germany and buy your houses at Fair market value or pay your lease off and throw a few thousand towards the lease of a new dwelling similar to that of which you once resided.
Edit to Add: If I wanted to live in an unarmed society I would have stayed put in NY not move to a state that is pro 2A
Problem-mass shooters.
Your solution, turn to emotion for legislative measures to further limit and restrict access to a type/class of weaponry in vain of tragedy with the utopian impression it will affect the issue.
Wrong. Please find where I stated that was the solution. Strike three!
And please, before you go into another very long tirade of nonsense after leading with an incorrect premise, simply address/focus on one thought at a time, and try to get the first one right before you move onto the next. Do us all that favor...
Saying something defamatory that isn't true is racist. I did not do that.
If you choose to see racism instead of the truth, that's on you.
Not true!
Anyone can make a derogatory statement based on what is true...
For example, racists, white supremacists, Nazis tend to be white. The great majority are white. True.
The problem, however, is not "whites" let alone "exactly."
Understand?
To suggest the problem is whites rather than what causes people to be racist or white supremacists or Nazis is the insulting problem I am trying to get you to understand, but this is the sort of issue/nuance that racists can't really understand...
Tell you what, however. Simply let be known whether you think the problem has to do with the make-up or DNA of a black person vs a white person, and we can be done with this waste of time.
If you say you are not racist and that you don't think what causes blacks to be disproportionately higher in number when it comes to incarceration rates, is not as a result of their inherent nature (DNA), then okay.
And if that's the case, maybe you can further prove you are not racist by explaining why blacks represent the higher incarceration rates with an explanation other than that they are simply black...
If you can't do those things, you ARE a racist or ignorant about the causes of these problems...
You challenged me for the support of my contention, and I have done as asked. We will continue to be in disagreement about this, and that's OK.
However, It is abundantly clear that you have attempted to denigrate those who point out your apparent hypocrisy, RE: my point #5:
If I am incorrect about this assessment, I'm sure you will have no problem directing us to other threads that you have participated in where we can see you attempting to address, for example, the huge numbers of deaths from automobile accidents, and where you call for similar restrictions on cars as you call for on guns. Since, as you claim, you really do care about saving lives.
Yes you did respond to my challenge, and I addressed your arguments in your response, item by item...
No matter whether we agree or disagree. I just wanted to make clear, more clear anyway, how much of what you assume or presume is not as you insist and/or not valid as you insist. I can't help it if you don't agree and/or if you don't understand, but I did try to address each and every item specifically for purposes of that better understanding in any case.
What you claim is "abundantly clear" is getting us further afield from those specifics, but I don't have any trouble addressing any confusion about what I ACTUALLY DO WRITE. I would rather not bother addressing what others CLAIM is my position, opinion or reasons for them.
Regarding automobile accidents, again specifically, that's your issue, not mine, but I can try again to attempt your better understanding about this too, as follows!
The number of people who die as a result of any tragedy (for example in auto accidents, war, food poisoning, disease, crib deaths) IS NOT RELEVANT when addressing what can or should be done about preventing or lessening any other source of tragedy!
What about that is so hard to understand?
Just because one tragedy brings more deaths as compared to another does NOT mean addressing and/or attempting to prevent any tragedy accounting for fewer deaths is unworthy! Certainly not simply because fewer deaths are caused by that tragedy.
And if that's the case, maybe you can further prove you are not racist by explaining why blacks represent the higher incarceration rates with an explanation other than that they are simply black...
...
I hope you don't mind if I answer. It has nothing to do with DNA. Blacks normally get longer sentences than white people for the same crimes, it is not fair, but it is true. But, percentage-wise, more blacks commit violent crimes. I personally think it is the culture in which they are raised. In some predominantly black neighborhoods, not most, children grow up seeing their older siblings, parents, friends, and other relatives using drugs and settling issues with guns. Many don't expect to live to be much more than a teen. Until this culture can be addressed, and I have no idea how, it won't change. It some respects, it is a catch-22. There are no jobs in those neighborhoods because businesses don't feel safe there and it won't be safe there until there are jobs.
I hope you don't mind if I answer. It has nothing to do with DNA. Blacks normally get longer sentences than white people for the same crimes, it is not fair, but it is true. But, percentage-wise, more blacks commit violent crimes. I personally think it is the culture in which they are raised. In some predominantly black neighborhoods, not most, children grow up seeing their older siblings, parents, friends, and other relatives using drugs and settling issues with guns. Many don't expect to live to be much more than a teen. Until this culture can be addressed, and I have no idea how, it won't change. It some respects, it is a catch-22. There are no jobs in those neighborhoods because businesses don't feel safe there and it won't be safe there until there are jobs.
I don't mind you answer, but I suspect the reason the person I was addressing, really asking, didn't answer for obvious reasons...
I think you are largely correct, but additionally there is the issue of racism that gives blacks all the more reason to feel a lack of hope that can lead to despair and a good many other negatives. Hope is really what drives people to excel and/or overcome their challenges. Lack of hope, especially when pervasive among those around you, tends to send people spiraling downward, toward drugs, crime, violence and all the rest.
Lack of hope, and lack of confidence, lack of opportunity, lack of good parenting, lack of good example, etc...
Those are really the reasons that blacks are disproportionately represented in all too many crime related statistics as well as poverty statistics, poor levels of education and all the rest that compounds and exasperates a very difficult social problem indeed.
Some say racism is not really still a problem in America today, but show me a white person that would "trade skins" with a black person given all these issues just outlined, and I'll show you someone who doesn't know the first thing about this issue in the first place...
I came across this article this morning about something I didn't know before. This conspiracy theory that the Vegas shooting was staged "meant to help push gun control policies."
I'm not sure if these are "gun nuts" or nuts of a different sort, but no doubt we've got a few too many people among us who are way too nutty for anyone's comfort...
Wrong. Please find where I stated that was the solution. Strike three!
And please, before you go into another very long tirade of nonsense after leading with an incorrect premise, simply address/focus on one thought at a time, and try to get the first one right before you move onto the next. Do us all that favor...
I have to go digging through your posts at the Mandalay thread and show where you were ranting about AR15s etc?
Quote:
Originally Posted by LearnMe
I can easily justify the goal of making it illegal to sell, buy or own the sort of weapons Paddock chose to kill and maim all those people so quickly. I cannot justify doing the same with handguns.
Those are your words... are they not?
Quote:
Originally Posted by LearnMe
I came across this article this morning about something I didn't know before. This conspiracy theory that the Vegas shooting was staged "meant to help push gun control policies."
I'm not sure if these are "gun nuts" or nuts of a different sort, but no doubt we've got a few too many people among us who are way too nutty for anyone's comfort...
Claimed to have been shot/grazed in the back of the head...
Anyone with medical/ER/trauma expirience will tell you that's a load of horse crap of the highest order. They'd have shaved his head due to hair holding bacteria to avoid infection. His head would have been shaved and he'd have a bandage wrapped around where the wound would have been stitched or stapled... Both my little sister and mother are nurses. Sister worked quite a few ER and Trauma rotations and a few times in ICU...
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
what if... but... think of the children!...
gee I wonder if police had better training and better implements if they'd have more incentive to respond to such events in a more rapid fashion... 
