S
SportsBookJunkie
Guest
On Jun 11, 10:31 am, neoconis_ignoramus <bellamac...@verizon.net>
wrote:
> On Jun 11, 10:08 am, Grendel <wstho...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Jun 11, 11:39 am, neoconis_ignoramus <bellamac...@verizon.net>
> > wrote:
>
> > > On Jun 11, 9:30 am, SportsBookJunkie <JimmyD...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > On Jun 11, 9:22 am, neoconis_ignoramus <bellamac...@verizon.net>
> > > > wrote:
>
> > > > > On Jun 11, 6:19 am, Grendel <wstho...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>
> > > > > > On Jun 11, 7:12 am, "Joe S." <non...@nosuch.net> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > Almost daily this newsgroup is subjected to posts about how an "armed
> > > > > > > citizen" "stood his ground" and protected life and limb from an armed
> > > > > > > desperado.
>
> > > > > > > The NRA furthers this useless bullshit with an article in their monthly
> > > > > > > magazine in which they repeat the same alleged incidents.
>
> > > > > > > They won't tell you about the day-in-day-out senseless slaughter of innocent
> > > > > > > people by firearms.
>
> > > > > > Seeing as firearm has no consciousness, no will, and no ability to do
> > > > > > anything on its own, then it is incapable of 'slaughtering' anyone.
> > > > > > It takes someone with a consciousness, a will and ability to
> > > > > > accomplish anything with a firearm.
>
> > > > > > Why are you so afraid of inanimate objects? Do you live in abject
> > > > > > fear that a pencil sharpener is going to jump up and assault you? Are
> > > > > > you afraid that the kitty litterbox is sneaking into the kitchen in
> > > > > > the morning and placing poop in your Froot Loops?
>
> > > > > > > "A two-year-old shoots himself with a gun he finds behind the sofa,
>
> > > > > > Okay, was this the malicious intent of the firearm to hide behind the
> > > > > > sofa in hopes that it would be found by the two year old? Or is it
> > > > > > the stupidity and carelessness of the adult who hid it there with the
> > > > > > knowledge that a child would be in the house?
>
> > > > > > Why are you afraid to blame the person, instead of the inanimate
> > > > > > object?
>
> > > > > > > a
> > > > > > > shopper is killed by a security guard,
>
> > > > > > Okay, did the gun maliciously throw itself into the guard's hand with
> > > > > > intent to kill? Or was the guard negligent (or was it possible the
> > > > > > 'shopper' was doing something that required stopping him?)?
>
> > > > > > Why are you afraid to blame the person, instead of the inanimate
> > > > > > object?
>
> > > > > > > one brother fires on another -
>
> > > > > > Okay, did the gun maliciously throw itself into one brother's hand and
> > > > > > whisper, 'your brother says you're an asshole'?
>
> > > > > > Why are you afraid to blame the person, instead of the inanimate
> > > > > > object?
>
> > > > > > > so it
> > > > > > > goes. Nine dead in 24 hours" -- not a single case of an "armed citizen"
> > > > > > > defending himself.
>
> > > > > > Yes, but what if during that same 24 hours, there WERE 10 cases of an
> > > > > > 'armed citizen' defending himselfs...but it does not get published in
> > > > > > the newspaper as 1) no one was killed as the mugger ran away when
> > > > > > faced with an armed citizen and 2) the fact that the news media finds
> > > > > > 10 people not getting killed is no where near as sensation as one that
> > > > > > does.
>
> > > > > > Plus, have you proven that the guard, or the brother, were in fact NOT
> > > > > > using them in self defense...they very well could have been doing just
> > > > > > that.
>
> > > > > > Basically, you're a sniviling little coward who is afraid to take
> > > > > > responsibility for your own life, and would rather blame an inanimate
> > > > > > object for results of violent people because you don't have the balls
> > > > > > to cast the blame on a 'meany' (after all, he might hurt you if he
> > > > > > found out).
>
> > > > > > After all, it's SO much easier to blame an inanimate object.
>
> > > > > > It still makes you an idiot, though.
>
> > > > > > Yol Bolsun,
> > > > > > Grendel.
>
> > > > > > "Have all the opinions you want. They're free. Just don't confuse
> > > > > > them with reality."-Solomon Short.
>
> > > > > Um, dummy, pencil sharpeners were not designed to KILL PEOPLE. I know
> > > > > that your enfeebled brain may have trouble grasping this fact, so
> > > > > let's approach it another way. When you go to buy a pencil sharpener,
> > > > > does the seller require you to fill out a background check, like they
> > > > > do when you buy a gun? Now ask your enfeebled brain why that is.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > > > People have to go through a background check because that's the law.
> > > > Now, ask your enfeebled brain if everyone obeys that law.
>
> > > > So, since they don't always obey that law, you're wanting to pass
> > > > ANOTHER law that people can still ignore.
>
> > > > Missing the point on the post about the sharpener doesn't advance your
> > > > cause very well. I bet if someone picked up an electric pencil
> > > > sharpener and based your head in with it, you'd be just as dead.
> > > > Granted, the didn't have to pass a background check to use it as a
> > > > "weapon" but what does it matter to you? You're DEAD!- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > > OOOOh the "law abiding citizens" concept. You mean like Klebold and
> > > Harris law-abiding? Or like Charles Carl Roberts? Good "law abiding"
> > > citizens until they decided to KILL people with a weapon that was
> > > specifically designed to KILL PEOPLE.
>
> > You keep stating that. Personally, my gun was designed specifically
> > to propel a tapered cylindrical chunk of metal over a distance in an
> > accurate manner utilizing a chemical reaction. What few times I do
> > shoot it, it accomplishes it designed purpose well....I use it for
> > plinking.
>
> > It's up to me to determine what, exactly, it is aimed at.
>
> > > I could go on...but why belabor
> > > the point that your argument is worthless?
>
> > Actually, his points are valid. Yours are useless. You've yet
> > mentioned how making something double illegal will affect someone who
> > breaks the law.
>
> > > By the way, by your "logic", and I use that term loosely, practically
> > > every inanimate object we buy should be registered just in case we
> > > want to use it to off someone in the future?
>
> > No, that is your stupid assed logic. His logic is that making
> > something illegal does not effect criminials, and that a inanimate
> > object has no other use than that to which it is wielded.
>
> > > Stupid outcomes arise
> > > from stupid arguments
>
> > And your stupid arguments reflect your stupidity. (hell, at least you
> > got the 'ignoramus' part of your handle right).
>
> > Yol Bolsun,
> > Grendel.
>
> > "Have all the opinions you want. They're free. Just don't confuse
> > them with reality."-Solomon Short
>
> > "- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> Damn I love you gun nuts. You'd come up with any rationalization to
> keep your penile compensation device safely at your side, just in case
> al-queda, the boogeyman, or the violent illegal comes bursting through
> your trailer door, and you can bravely, boldly take him / her / it
> out, John Wayne style, finally living out your long-dreamed fantasy.
>
> Back to your drivel...clearly, the government, as well as many other
> organizations, don't see your gun as a cylrindrical propellant, as
> they've all asked you to actually register the thing when you go to
> buy it. Again, explain to me why you have to register it, if it's so
> safe to begin with? Oh, that's right, because any sane person sees it
> for what it is, a device to KILL THINGS OR PEOPLE.
>
> If you had actually read, instead of inferred, dumb****, you'd see
> that I had not mentioned how we should address the issue. I had not
> mentioned one thing about enacting more gun laws. I know your scared
> little mind regresses quickly to proetection of said penile
> compensation device, but I was merely pointing out the idiocy of the
> gun nut positions on the issues. Never did I say anything about how
> it AFFECTS (not "effects", dummy) criminals.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
So, you're arguing just for the chance to call people dumb****s,
retarded, penile focused, etc?
Yes, you can look at a gun as a device to KILL PEOPLE, to put it in
your upper case.
You can also look at a gun as a device to KILL ANIMALS for food, again
in your upper case.
With your comment about registering guns, why does the government
require people have to have a driver's license to "legally" drive an
automobile? Automobiles are safe, aren't they? Hell, you have to
register your car too, don't you? Why should we have to register cars
if they're so safe?
Nice try though.
wrote:
> On Jun 11, 10:08 am, Grendel <wstho...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Jun 11, 11:39 am, neoconis_ignoramus <bellamac...@verizon.net>
> > wrote:
>
> > > On Jun 11, 9:30 am, SportsBookJunkie <JimmyD...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > > > On Jun 11, 9:22 am, neoconis_ignoramus <bellamac...@verizon.net>
> > > > wrote:
>
> > > > > On Jun 11, 6:19 am, Grendel <wstho...@bellsouth.net> wrote:
>
> > > > > > On Jun 11, 7:12 am, "Joe S." <non...@nosuch.net> wrote:
>
> > > > > > > Almost daily this newsgroup is subjected to posts about how an "armed
> > > > > > > citizen" "stood his ground" and protected life and limb from an armed
> > > > > > > desperado.
>
> > > > > > > The NRA furthers this useless bullshit with an article in their monthly
> > > > > > > magazine in which they repeat the same alleged incidents.
>
> > > > > > > They won't tell you about the day-in-day-out senseless slaughter of innocent
> > > > > > > people by firearms.
>
> > > > > > Seeing as firearm has no consciousness, no will, and no ability to do
> > > > > > anything on its own, then it is incapable of 'slaughtering' anyone.
> > > > > > It takes someone with a consciousness, a will and ability to
> > > > > > accomplish anything with a firearm.
>
> > > > > > Why are you so afraid of inanimate objects? Do you live in abject
> > > > > > fear that a pencil sharpener is going to jump up and assault you? Are
> > > > > > you afraid that the kitty litterbox is sneaking into the kitchen in
> > > > > > the morning and placing poop in your Froot Loops?
>
> > > > > > > "A two-year-old shoots himself with a gun he finds behind the sofa,
>
> > > > > > Okay, was this the malicious intent of the firearm to hide behind the
> > > > > > sofa in hopes that it would be found by the two year old? Or is it
> > > > > > the stupidity and carelessness of the adult who hid it there with the
> > > > > > knowledge that a child would be in the house?
>
> > > > > > Why are you afraid to blame the person, instead of the inanimate
> > > > > > object?
>
> > > > > > > a
> > > > > > > shopper is killed by a security guard,
>
> > > > > > Okay, did the gun maliciously throw itself into the guard's hand with
> > > > > > intent to kill? Or was the guard negligent (or was it possible the
> > > > > > 'shopper' was doing something that required stopping him?)?
>
> > > > > > Why are you afraid to blame the person, instead of the inanimate
> > > > > > object?
>
> > > > > > > one brother fires on another -
>
> > > > > > Okay, did the gun maliciously throw itself into one brother's hand and
> > > > > > whisper, 'your brother says you're an asshole'?
>
> > > > > > Why are you afraid to blame the person, instead of the inanimate
> > > > > > object?
>
> > > > > > > so it
> > > > > > > goes. Nine dead in 24 hours" -- not a single case of an "armed citizen"
> > > > > > > defending himself.
>
> > > > > > Yes, but what if during that same 24 hours, there WERE 10 cases of an
> > > > > > 'armed citizen' defending himselfs...but it does not get published in
> > > > > > the newspaper as 1) no one was killed as the mugger ran away when
> > > > > > faced with an armed citizen and 2) the fact that the news media finds
> > > > > > 10 people not getting killed is no where near as sensation as one that
> > > > > > does.
>
> > > > > > Plus, have you proven that the guard, or the brother, were in fact NOT
> > > > > > using them in self defense...they very well could have been doing just
> > > > > > that.
>
> > > > > > Basically, you're a sniviling little coward who is afraid to take
> > > > > > responsibility for your own life, and would rather blame an inanimate
> > > > > > object for results of violent people because you don't have the balls
> > > > > > to cast the blame on a 'meany' (after all, he might hurt you if he
> > > > > > found out).
>
> > > > > > After all, it's SO much easier to blame an inanimate object.
>
> > > > > > It still makes you an idiot, though.
>
> > > > > > Yol Bolsun,
> > > > > > Grendel.
>
> > > > > > "Have all the opinions you want. They're free. Just don't confuse
> > > > > > them with reality."-Solomon Short.
>
> > > > > Um, dummy, pencil sharpeners were not designed to KILL PEOPLE. I know
> > > > > that your enfeebled brain may have trouble grasping this fact, so
> > > > > let's approach it another way. When you go to buy a pencil sharpener,
> > > > > does the seller require you to fill out a background check, like they
> > > > > do when you buy a gun? Now ask your enfeebled brain why that is.- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > > > People have to go through a background check because that's the law.
> > > > Now, ask your enfeebled brain if everyone obeys that law.
>
> > > > So, since they don't always obey that law, you're wanting to pass
> > > > ANOTHER law that people can still ignore.
>
> > > > Missing the point on the post about the sharpener doesn't advance your
> > > > cause very well. I bet if someone picked up an electric pencil
> > > > sharpener and based your head in with it, you'd be just as dead.
> > > > Granted, the didn't have to pass a background check to use it as a
> > > > "weapon" but what does it matter to you? You're DEAD!- Hide quoted text -
>
> > > > - Show quoted text -
>
> > > OOOOh the "law abiding citizens" concept. You mean like Klebold and
> > > Harris law-abiding? Or like Charles Carl Roberts? Good "law abiding"
> > > citizens until they decided to KILL people with a weapon that was
> > > specifically designed to KILL PEOPLE.
>
> > You keep stating that. Personally, my gun was designed specifically
> > to propel a tapered cylindrical chunk of metal over a distance in an
> > accurate manner utilizing a chemical reaction. What few times I do
> > shoot it, it accomplishes it designed purpose well....I use it for
> > plinking.
>
> > It's up to me to determine what, exactly, it is aimed at.
>
> > > I could go on...but why belabor
> > > the point that your argument is worthless?
>
> > Actually, his points are valid. Yours are useless. You've yet
> > mentioned how making something double illegal will affect someone who
> > breaks the law.
>
> > > By the way, by your "logic", and I use that term loosely, practically
> > > every inanimate object we buy should be registered just in case we
> > > want to use it to off someone in the future?
>
> > No, that is your stupid assed logic. His logic is that making
> > something illegal does not effect criminials, and that a inanimate
> > object has no other use than that to which it is wielded.
>
> > > Stupid outcomes arise
> > > from stupid arguments
>
> > And your stupid arguments reflect your stupidity. (hell, at least you
> > got the 'ignoramus' part of your handle right).
>
> > Yol Bolsun,
> > Grendel.
>
> > "Have all the opinions you want. They're free. Just don't confuse
> > them with reality."-Solomon Short
>
> > "- Hide quoted text -
>
> > - Show quoted text -
>
> Damn I love you gun nuts. You'd come up with any rationalization to
> keep your penile compensation device safely at your side, just in case
> al-queda, the boogeyman, or the violent illegal comes bursting through
> your trailer door, and you can bravely, boldly take him / her / it
> out, John Wayne style, finally living out your long-dreamed fantasy.
>
> Back to your drivel...clearly, the government, as well as many other
> organizations, don't see your gun as a cylrindrical propellant, as
> they've all asked you to actually register the thing when you go to
> buy it. Again, explain to me why you have to register it, if it's so
> safe to begin with? Oh, that's right, because any sane person sees it
> for what it is, a device to KILL THINGS OR PEOPLE.
>
> If you had actually read, instead of inferred, dumb****, you'd see
> that I had not mentioned how we should address the issue. I had not
> mentioned one thing about enacting more gun laws. I know your scared
> little mind regresses quickly to proetection of said penile
> compensation device, but I was merely pointing out the idiocy of the
> gun nut positions on the issues. Never did I say anything about how
> it AFFECTS (not "effects", dummy) criminals.- Hide quoted text -
>
> - Show quoted text -
So, you're arguing just for the chance to call people dumb****s,
retarded, penile focused, etc?
Yes, you can look at a gun as a device to KILL PEOPLE, to put it in
your upper case.
You can also look at a gun as a device to KILL ANIMALS for food, again
in your upper case.
With your comment about registering guns, why does the government
require people have to have a driver's license to "legally" drive an
automobile? Automobiles are safe, aren't they? Hell, you have to
register your car too, don't you? Why should we have to register cars
if they're so safe?
Nice try though.