Go ahead, Feinstein, MAKE MY DAY

[JMohegan]

Yeah, when you can't answer an argument, just slander your opponent. I'm still waiting for you to bring up an valid issue and actually answer points raised against you rather than ducking, weaving, tackling strawmen and making appeals to emotion. I suppose you might have missed my last post- I'll give you the benefit of the doubt there.

One of the reasons I rarely engage in political debates is because I despise how ideologues will stake everything on appearing to win an argument over actually settling a question. Some people approach a debate as an opportunity to present facts, discuss those facts, and produce something approaching a valid conclusion. Some people apparently just aren't interested in that kind of cognition, I guess.

You cut off the wink on that statement. For christ's sake, dude, lighten up. = JM is joking.

I'm not interested in arguing with you. I thought I made that obvious.

You have one opinion, I have another. In post 101, I acknowledged your position, and stated that I simply don't share it. There's no winning here.

If you're looking for a fight, go find someone who's easier to provoke.

 

[ZRT]

You cut off the wink on that statement. For christ's sake, dude, lighten up. = JM is joking.

'Dude, I was just being sarcastic.' That's an old dodge. In the ghetto, I believe the term is 'punk-ass bitch'.

I'm not interested in arguing with you. I thought I made that obvious.

You have one opinion, I have another. In post 101, I acknowledged your position, and stated that I simply don't share it. There's no winning here.

Let's see:

ZRT, you are reading condescension into a statement that was delivered straight up.

There are people suffering all over the world, in thousands of different ways, for reasons that I neither focus on nor address. I don't fund efforts to relieve every victim's suffering, and I don't donate my time on every issue. One person can only do so much.

I have not been ignoring your statements on self defense. This is, essentially, the same point as Netzach's. I understand why people, who live in areas where they fear their neighbors, and can afford to purchase guns and ammo, would want to do so.

However, my personal view with regard to the areas of heaviest violence is that increasing the level of crossfire is unlikely to help those who are already caught up in, and dying from, existing crossfire levels.

As for your perspective on the motives of proponents of gun control, having worked with many of these people all I can say is that I find your view ill-informed and don't share it.

I don't see anything of the sort there. As for winning and losing, as I said that's not what I'm interested in, I'm interested in facts. You never were willing to provide those. So you blow on by and continue with your smugly superior statements- your silly little video, the 'shouting louder' bullshit.

So you can't handle a factual discussion, fine, at least have the grace to bow out manfully instead of sniping from the sideline.

If you're looking for a fight, go find someone who's easier to provoke.

Yeah, I'm so spoiling for a fight that I went straight for the throat of everyone who disagreed with me during the course of the discussion. Or not. And pretty much everybody at some point or another disagreed with something I said, and most offered some factual/logical basis for their disagreement, or conceded not having answers.

I'm not interested in picking a fight with you, never was. I just took your thinly veiled condescension* poorly, as well as your continual mischaracterization of my arguments. That's how you roll, fine, these sort of discussions are indeed pointless.

So we're both done here. Hurray.

*By the way, condescend means 'to talk down to'.

 

[JMohegan]

'Dude, I was just being sarcastic.' That's an old dodge. In the ghetto, I believe the term is 'punk-ass bitch'.



Let's see:



I don't see anything of the sort there. As for winning and losing, as I said that's not what I'm interested in, I'm interested in facts. You never were willing to provide those. So you blow on by and continue with your smugly superior statements- your silly little video, the 'shouting louder' bullshit.

So you can't handle a factual discussion, fine, at least have the grace to bow out manfully instead of sniping from the sideline.



Yeah, I'm so spoiling for a fight that I went straight for the throat of everyone who disagreed with me during the course of the discussion. Or not. And pretty much everybody at some point or another disagreed with something I said, and most offered some factual/logical basis for their disagreement, or conceded not having answers.

I'm not interested in picking a fight with you, never was. I just took your thinly veiled condescension* poorly, as well as your continual mischaracterization of my arguments. That's how you roll, fine, these sort of discussions are indeed pointless.

So we're both done here. Hurray.

*By the way, condescend means 'to talk down to'.

Ha! That was cute at the end.

ZRT, I've heard or read all of your arguments, made by countless anti-regulation folks, before. I just don't agree with your positions, and I'm not interested in discussing them. I don't know how to state this any more plainly.

 

[Keroin]

Just had to resurrect this one briefly.

Over dinner two nights ago, with an ER surgeon from Colorado, the subject of guns and gun control came up. As he is the one who takes those fun bullets, from those sexy pieces of metal, out of people and tries to put them back together, it's no surprise he is all for heavy gun regulation. He lives in a part of the US I wouldn't associate with gun violence but he says he's dealt with hundreds of gunshot wounds.

So I came up with a brilliant idea! (Always thinking). Let everyone own as many guns as they like BUT anyone who owns a gun should have to do two things.

1. Watch, live and in person, a gunshot wound surgery and talk to the doctors about it afterward.

2. Volunteer X number of days per year at a hospital.

Just some crazy idea bouncing around in the cranium.

WD - you'll be happy to know he is also in favour of helmets for all kinds of activities.

 

[Homburg]

Just had to resurrect this one briefly.

Over dinner two nights ago, with an ER surgeon from Colorado, the subject of guns and gun control came up. As he is the one who takes those fun bullets, from those sexy pieces of metal, out of people and tries to put them back together, it's no surprise he is all for heavy gun regulation. He lives in a part of the US I wouldn't associate with gun violence but he says he's dealt with hundreds of gunshot wounds.

So I came up with a brilliant idea! (Always thinking). Let everyone own as many guns as they like BUT anyone who owns a gun should have to do two things.

1. Watch, live and in person, a gunshot wound surgery and talk to the doctors about it afterward.

2. Volunteer X number of days per year at a hospital.

Just some crazy idea bouncing around in the cranium.

WD - you'll be happy to know he is also in favour of helmets for all kinds of activities.

Want people to drive more safely and pay more attention when they're on the road? Have them ride along with a cop, ambulance, or me when I do my job. Want them to be more conscious of the dangers of cigarette smoking and fire? Ride along with a fireman.

Lots of people have very focused perspectives about issues when they are involved in the aftermath. This does not mean that those people have accurate views of the big picture though.

I see wrecked, destroyed, and mangled cars literally every day, and talk to people who were in the accidents that produced those mangled wrecks, or their loved ones because they can't talk. As a result, I will never buy certain types of automobiles, nor ride willingly in others. Does that mean those types of autos should be outlawed? No. Thousands and thousands of them go down the road safely every day. I just see the ones that get smashed up. My perspective on the aft end of the problem does not see the thousands of safe ones.

And, anecdote for anecdote, one of my oldest friends is a trauma surgeon. Given where he is, and what he does, I can pretty much guarantee that he sees more gunshot wounds (and worse) than your dinner companion. He's a gun owner, and supports gun rights. His take on it is that there is a need for more education, not more restriction.

 

[Keroin]

Want people to drive more safely and pay more attention when they're on the road? Have them ride along with a cop, ambulance, or me when I do my job. Want them to be more conscious of the dangers of cigarette smoking and fire? Ride along with a fireman.

Lots of people have very focused perspectives about issues when they are involved in the aftermath. This does not mean that those people have accurate views of the big picture though.

I see wrecked, destroyed, and mangled cars literally every day, and talk to people who were in the accidents that produced those mangled wrecks, or their loved ones because they can't talk. As a result, I will never buy certain types of automobiles, nor ride willingly in others. Does that mean those types of autos should be outlawed? No. Thousands and thousands of them go down the road safely every day. I just see the ones that get smashed up. My perspective on the aft end of the problem does not see the thousands of safe ones.

And, anecdote for anecdote, one of my oldest friends is a trauma surgeon. Given where he is, and what he does, I can pretty much guarantee that he sees more gunshot wounds (and worse) than your dinner companion. He's a gun owner, and supports gun rights. His take on it is that there is a need for more education, not more restriction.

Mmmmm, verbal flogging. Thanks! I've been on waivers for almost a month and I'm going a little squirrely.

You know I was being facetious, right? Just thought it was an interesting perspective and worth sharing.

BTW, I'm being to suspect y'all just have a car fetish.

 

[Homburg]

Mmmmm, verbal flogging. Thanks! I've been on waivers for almost a month and I'm going a little squirrely.

You know I was being facetious, right? Just thought it was an interesting perspective and worth sharing.

BTW, I'm being to suspect y'all just have a car fetish.

Verbal flogging? Not at all. I was offering a counterpoint to the anecdote.

I work in the auto industry. It is arguable that, yes, I do have a car fetish. But, in trying to personalise my initial response, I wanted to use my own perspective, as I deal with aftermath in my line of work.

I don't think his perspective is invalid at all. And, honestly, I don't disagree with the idea of educating someone who seeks to carry with the potential end results of their actions. Education is good.