Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 25, 2018 21:20:57 GMT
Illustrating how inane your comment is by putting it into application is not in any sense a straw man argument. (But you have previously shown your lack of understanding of the rules of logic, haven't you.)
Please. You said this: But I never said people couldn't criticize the validity of rules if they aren't subject to them, did I? So since your allegation was false and then you criticized this false allegation you made, like so: it's a strawman. |
|
|
|
Post by goz on Feb 25, 2018 21:23:06 GMT
Fair enough, I see it was interpreted differently in 1876. Just increases my thoughts that the whole system needs work. You're right. There should be a mandatory sentence of life in prison without parole for anyone who opposes the right to keep and bear arms. LULZ. Dig deeper! |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 25, 2018 21:24:03 GMT
You're right. There should be a mandatory sentence of life in prison without parole for anyone who opposes the right to keep and bear arms. LULZ. Dig deeper! He's not that far off. It's borderline treason to subvert the Constitution. |
|
|
|
Post by gadreel on Feb 25, 2018 21:24:40 GMT
Illustrating how inane your comment is by putting it into application is not in any sense a straw man argument. (But you have previously shown your lack of understanding of the rules of logic, haven't you.)
Please. You said this: But I never said people couldn't criticize the validity of rules if they aren't subject to them, did I? So since your allegation was false and then you criticized this false allegation you made, like so: it's a strawman. more intellectual dishonesty from you: It's pretty clear criticism is your goal. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 25, 2018 21:26:25 GMT
Please. You said this: But I never said people couldn't criticize the validity of rules if they aren't subject to them, did I? So since your allegation was false and then you criticized this false allegation you made, like so: it's a strawman. more intellectual dishonesty from you: It's pretty clear criticism is your goal. Criticizing you for doing it? Yes. That's different than saying you can't. Words have meaning. Words like "belief," for instance. |
|
|
|
Post by rachelcarson1953 on Feb 25, 2018 21:27:57 GMT
wow. Really? Look honestly if you want to bear arms fine, but surely a check on your sanity and a registration of the gun is not a big ask? Yeah, nothing bad can happen when guns are registered. If someone wants background checks to include better mental health screening then that's a conversation that can be had. But the truth is that this most recent shooting is the fault of the shooter, the Sheriff's Department and the FBI. Trying to deflect the blame anywhere else is pathetically ridiculous. Just wondering, what could the FBI have done differently? |
|
|
|
Post by gadreel on Feb 25, 2018 21:29:25 GMT
more intellectual dishonesty from you: It's pretty clear criticism is your goal. Criticizing you for doing it? Yes. That's different than saying you can't. Words have meaning. Words like "belief," for instance. And the implication of criticism is that you believe they should not be doing what you criticise people of.. This is why it takes 100 questions to get a straight answer from you, you deal in semantics and dodges. When you are prepared to behave like an adult, please feel free to converse with me again. |
|
|
|
Post by theoncomingstorm on Feb 25, 2018 21:30:56 GMT
Yeah, nothing bad can happen when guns are registered. If someone wants background checks to include better mental health screening then that's a conversation that can be had. But the truth is that this most recent shooting is the fault of the shooter, the Sheriff's Department and the FBI. Trying to deflect the blame anywhere else is pathetically ridiculous. Just wondering, what could the FBI have done differently? They knew he had made threats of violence. That's a crime. People who commit crimes are arrested. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 25, 2018 21:32:10 GMT
Criticizing you for doing it? Yes. That's different than saying you can't. Words have meaning. Words like "belief," for instance. And the implication of criticism is that you believe they should not be doing what you criticise people of.. This is why it takes 100 questions to get a straight answer from you, you deal in semantics and dodges. When you are prepared to behave like an adult, please feel free to converse with me again. I am prepared to do nothing but call you out for the wolf you are. I have no desire to mince arguments or words with you anymore. You have proven to me once and for all what you are. |
|
|
|
Post by gadreel on Feb 25, 2018 21:33:31 GMT
Just wondering, what could the FBI have done differently? They knew he had made threats of violence. That's a crime. People who commit crimes are arrested. And if they know he had access to guns that would have made the threat more important to chase up. I mean I have made threats of violence, so one wonders how the FBI chooses which to go after. |
|
|
|
Post by Isapop on Feb 25, 2018 21:35:17 GMT
Illustrating how inane your comment is by putting it into application is not in any sense a straw man argument. (But you have previously shown your lack of understanding of the rules of logic, haven't you.)
Please. You said this: But I never said people couldn't criticize the validity of rules if they aren't subject to them, did I? Here, once again, is your sarcastic remark to gadreel: "Thank you for your opinion on the validity of rules you aren't asked to follow." So, OF COURSE, you are saying that people shouldn't criticize the validity of rules if they're not subject to them. There is no other plausible understanding of that comment. And its monumental stupidity is now so evident even to you that you're trying to deny that you ever said it. |
|
|
|
Post by rachelcarson1953 on Feb 25, 2018 21:36:23 GMT
Just wondering, what could the FBI have done differently? They knew he had made threats of violence. That's a crime. People who commit crimes are arrested. I was wondering why, if the shooter had made threats on social media, no one seemed to think that was an indicator. Seems to me that the Behavioral Analysis Unit should have been involved. |
|
|
|
Post by theoncomingstorm on Feb 25, 2018 21:36:30 GMT
They knew he had made threats of violence. That's a crime. People who commit crimes are arrested. And if they know he had access to guns that would have made the threat more important to chase up. I mean I have made threats of violence, so one wonders how the FBI chooses which to go after. They knew he had guns. |
|
|
|
Post by theoncomingstorm on Feb 25, 2018 21:37:58 GMT
They knew he had made threats of violence. That's a crime. People who commit crimes are arrested. I was wondering why, if the shooter had made threats on social media, no one seemed to think that was an indicator. Seems to me that the Behavioral Analysis Unit should have been involved. This was a total screw-up on every level. The Sheriff's Department had been called on him at least a dozen times and did nothing. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 25, 2018 21:38:53 GMT
Please. You said this: But I never said people couldn't criticize the validity of rules if they aren't subject to them, did I? Here, once again, is your sarcastic remark to gadreel: "Thank you for your opinion on the validity of rules you aren't asked to follow." So, OF COURSE, you are saying that people shouldn't criticize the validity of rules if they're not subject to them. There is no other plausible understanding of that comment. And its monumental stupidity is now so evident even to you that you're trying to deny that you ever said it. Except, no, I am not saying people shouldn't criticize the validity of rules if they're not subject to them. I am simply scoffing at it. Much like I would not say that people who are broke shouldn't be giving financial advice, but I do scoff at them for doing it. |
|
|
|
Post by gadreel on Feb 25, 2018 21:38:59 GMT
And if they know he had access to guns that would have made the threat more important to chase up. I mean I have made threats of violence, so one wonders how the FBI chooses which to go after. They knew he had guns. Wow. ok yeah the FBI should have done something. But that does kind of bolster my point that a national registry would be a good thing. |
|
|
|
Post by gadreel on Feb 25, 2018 21:40:00 GMT
Please. You said this: But I never said people couldn't criticize the validity of rules if they aren't subject to them, did I? Here, once again, is your sarcastic remark to gadreel: "Thank you for your opinion on the validity of rules you aren't asked to follow." So, OF COURSE, you are saying that people shouldn't criticize the validity of rules if they're not subject to them. There is no other plausible understanding of that comment. And its monumental stupidity is now so evident even to you that you're trying to deny that you ever said it. I am not convinced you should waste your time, I think this guy is blade lite. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
@Deleted
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Feb 25, 2018 21:40:58 GMT
Here, once again, is your sarcastic remark to gadreel: "Thank you for your opinion on the validity of rules you aren't asked to follow." So, OF COURSE, you are saying that people shouldn't criticize the validity of rules if they're not subject to them. There is no other plausible understanding of that comment. And its monumental stupidity is now so evident even to you that you're trying to deny that you ever said it. I am not convinced you should waste your time, I think this guy is blade lite.  I would prefer if you followed your own advice, Gadreel. |
|
|
|
Post by gadreel on Feb 25, 2018 21:42:29 GMT
I am not convinced you should waste your time, I think this guy is blade lite. I would prefer if you followed your own advice, Gadreel. I thought you had decided you were not going to waste your time with me, or is this yet another lie from you? |
|
|
|
Post by theoncomingstorm on Feb 25, 2018 21:43:43 GMT
Wow. ok yeah the FBI should have done something. But that does kind of bolster my point that a national registry would be a good thing. Maybe, if the law was written to guarantee that registration would not lead to confiscation. I've even said on another board that I could support raising the minimum age on buying semi-automatic weapons to 25. |
|
