Debates Forum

Debates Forum

  1. Standard membershavixmir
    Guppy poo
    Sewers of Holland
    Joined
    31 Jan '04
    Moves
    56327
    10 Mar '18 12:44
    The balls on these people!
    God damn! Sort of like suing equal rights activists the day after MLK was gunned down...

    What the hell is wrong with you yanks? Bloody hell.

    The bill says: you can’t buy guns until you are 21, you can’t make your gun an automatic and if you buy a gun you gotta wait 3 days to get it.

    And the NRA sues???
    You would think they’d be on their knees thanking satan guns aren’t completely banned and that they’ve not been deported to Syria.

    Because that’s what any rational society would do.
    Ban guns and send gun pervs off to a war zone.
    Hell, I’d even give them T-shirts with bullseyes on them... just to help them along.
  2. SubscriberWOLFE63
    Tra il dire e il far
    C'e di mezzo il mar!
    Joined
    06 Nov '15
    Moves
    22167
    10 Mar '18 14:20
    Originally posted by @shavixmir
    The balls on these people!
    God damn! Sort of like suing equal rights activists the day after MLK was gunned down...

    What the hell is wrong with you yanks? Bloody hell.

    The bill says: you can’t buy guns until you are 21, you can’t make your gun an automatic and if you buy a gun you gotta wait 3 days to get it.

    And the NRA sues???
    You would think ...[text shortened]... war zone.
    Hell, I’d even give them T-shirts with bullseyes on them... just to help them along.
    Hear! Hear!
  3. Subscriberdivegeester
    Leave Means Leave
    Voting not marching!
    Joined
    16 Feb '08
    Moves
    88898
    10 Mar '18 14:331 edit
    Originally posted by @shavixmir
    The balls on these people!
    God damn! Sort of like suing equal rights activists the day after MLK was gunned down...

    What the hell is wrong with you yanks? Bloody hell.

    The bill says: you can’t buy guns until you are 21, you can’t make your gun an automatic and if you buy a gun you gotta wait 3 days to get it.

    And the NRA sues???
    You would think ...[text shortened]... war zone.
    Hell, I’d even give them T-shirts with bullseyes on them... just to help them along.
    It’s all supposedly about the “Constitution”, nothing to do with money.
  4. Unknown Territories
    Joined
    05 Dec '05
    Moves
    20408
    10 Mar '18 14:59
    Originally posted by @wolfe63
    Hear! Hear!
    And this is the problem--- at least one of the main problems in the current turmoil surrounding this latest media-won't-relent-topic.
    [Side note: it was the media who both built up and then systematically eviscerated Tiger Woods, building its story from a throw-away early morning domestic dispute, despite knowing fully the scoundrel he'd been from the moment he assumed the role they made for him...]

    In this case, desperate for a galvanizing event in which to deliver the bride unarmed to the very impatient bridegroom, the media handmaiden continually and constantly sings and harps, pulling on heart strings with all intensity--- whatever it takes to get the bride more than ready, willing and able to drop those prohibiting drawers.

    Perhaps the next event will be at a daycare for Down's Syndrome toddlers, abutting a bunny factory, across the street from the Daisy Hill Puppy Farm.
    In Pleasantville, PA--- because everyone has a friend in Pennsylvania.

    The pandering is understandable, as those to whom they are pandering are so ready, willing and waiting--- practically dripping--- for the slightest breeze of emotion-laden 'reason' to, literally, give it all away.

    Thinking is not allowed on these hallowed grounds, so common sense and/or objective consideration is completely out of the question.
    Someone says something stupid, completely off-base, but frothing forth with unfettered emotion?
    Well, someone equally unthinking is right there with their own emphatic "Amen!"

    The ERA and MLK have literally nothing to do with one another, save existing in the same era of societal changes.
    It is highly doubtful that anyone--- including King's own family--- would have taken offense at a discussion of ERA following his senseless death, since the ERA had nearly nothing (other than perhaps spiritual kinship) to do with his call for equal treatment for blacks.

    But one confused and mindless thought deserves another, right?

    Can a confused and highly emotional social justice warrior who clearly lacks historical accuracy, let alone perspective, get a "Hear! Hear!"?

    Ouch, are we in deep doo-doo...
  5. SubscriberWOLFE63
    Tra il dire e il far
    C'e di mezzo il mar!
    Joined
    06 Nov '15
    Moves
    22167
    10 Mar '18 15:12
    Originally posted by @freakykbh
    And this is the problem--- at least one of the main problems in the current turmoil surrounding this latest media-won't-relent-topic.
    [Side note: it was the media who both built up and then systematically eviscerated Tiger Woods, building its story from a throw-away early morning domestic dispute, despite knowing fully the scoundrel he'd been from the mo ...[text shortened]... torical accuracy, let alone perspective, get a "Hear! Hear!"?

    Ouch, are we in deep doo-doo...
    We are still talking about innocent people being slaughtered by the hundreds...right?

    Some seem more concerned by media portrayals of facts...all the while trying to manicure the most advantageous pro-gun image possible. Dispicable.
  6. Standard membervivify
    rain
    Joined
    08 Mar '11
    Moves
    9780
    10 Mar '18 15:49
    http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-43352078

    The NRA filed its lawsuit on Friday just an hour after the bill was signed by the governor.

    One of its arguments is that the legislation violates the rights of young women as they are unlikely to commit violent crime.


    Lmao...the NRA is suing because it cares about women.
  7. Standard membershavixmir
    Guppy poo
    Sewers of Holland
    Joined
    31 Jan '04
    Moves
    56327
    10 Mar '18 15:59
    Originally posted by @freakykbh
    And this is the problem--- at least one of the main problems in the current turmoil surrounding this latest media-won't-relent-topic.
    [Side note: it was the media who both built up and then systematically eviscerated Tiger Woods, building its story from a throw-away early morning domestic dispute, despite knowing fully the scoundrel he'd been from the mo ...[text shortened]... torical accuracy, let alone perspective, get a "Hear! Hear!"?

    Ouch, are we in deep doo-doo...
    Tiger Woods and doo-doo?

    Do you think the NRA is right to sue an elected body for passing that bill?
  8. Joined
    24 Apr '10
    Moves
    14639
    10 Mar '18 16:25
    Originally posted by @freakykbh
    doo-doo
    Spot on, Freaky!
  9. Unknown Territories
    Joined
    05 Dec '05
    Moves
    20408
    10 Mar '18 16:33
    Originally posted by @great-king-rat
    Spot on, Freaky!
    Spot on the doo-doo!
  10. Joined
    02 Jan '06
    Moves
    10087
    10 Mar '18 16:42
    Originally posted by @shavixmir
    The balls on these people!
    God damn! Sort of like suing equal rights activists the day after MLK was gunned down...

    What the hell is wrong with you yanks? Bloody hell.

    The bill says: you can’t buy guns until you are 21, you can’t make your gun an automatic and if you buy a gun you gotta wait 3 days to get it.

    And the NRA sues???
    You would think ...[text shortened]... war zone.
    Hell, I’d even give them T-shirts with bullseyes on them... just to help them along.
    We all need to decide when a person becomes an adult.

    Currently, the state wishes to send kids off to war at age 18 using state of the art weapons, but then turns around and says they can't buy a gun till age 21?

    I don't think so.
  11. Unknown Territories
    Joined
    05 Dec '05
    Moves
    20408
    10 Mar '18 17:26
    Originally posted by @shavixmir
    Tiger Woods and doo-doo?

    Do you think the NRA is right to sue an elected body for passing that bill?
    Tiger Woods was Exhibit A (of a nearly bottomless storehouse of similar examples of activism or disingenuous manipulation) of media intrusion, i.e., the media becomes player in the drama instead of reporter/recorder of the drama.

    The NRA's charter has drastically changed from its origins to "promote and encourage rifle shooting on a scientific basis," itself a reaction to seeing such dismal marksmanship during the Civil War.
    Despite the tiniest hint of support for safeguarding the goverened from the governors by virtue of banging the 2nd Amendment gong--- think: a pack of hungry dogs getting a whiff of frying bacon--- the organization exists by-of-for money... as corrupt and disingenuous as the media, simply adorned with stars, perhaps, in place of stripes.
    Still corrupt.

    Under the vestiges of hey!-you're-taking-food-out-of-our-mouths disguised as 2nd Amendment motivations, they are well within the expected arc of reaction on this one.
    They are going to battle for an extremely critical age bracket: the first three years of legal adulthood.
    Impressionable people from this portion of society are generally forming life-long affiliations, mores.
    If the idiot-philosophers of what is currently called the leadership in Florida did not see it thusly, this move would not be seen as anything more than a administrative technicality.
    The bill (at least indirectly) is relying on the extended three year waiting period to be considered substantive, maybe even transformative.
    And it is.
    But, as we shall see (most probably, too late for profit), its impact would be far more impactful than imagined.
    Why?
    Because it makes permissible to curtail Constitutional rights on the basis of group affiliation.
    Go ahead and read that again, because if you aren't shocked and frightened into sobriety at the first reading, you're not paying attention.
    That, or you aren't thinking you'll ever be considered as part of a group.
    Either way, such a position is in stark denial of historical certainties.

    Thus, while the NRA is perfectly well within its rights for taking legal action against a body which has designed and attempted to implement laws specifically targeting the erosion of its political clout--- all under the guise of protecting the 2nd Amendment--- the bigger question is: which of the two devils' aftertaste will be less offensive swirling around the backs of our throats?

    Even MLK thought that women should have equal access to guns, regardless.
  12. Unknown Territories
    Joined
    05 Dec '05
    Moves
    20408
    10 Mar '18 17:471 edit
    Originally posted by @wolfe63
    We are still talking about innocent people being slaughtered by the hundreds...right?

    Some seem more concerned by media portrayals of facts...all the while trying to manicure the most advantageous pro-gun image possible. Dispicable.
    Somewhat.

    What you were reacting to with your heart-felt "Hear! Hear!" was, among other items, the idea that offense would have been generated by an attack on activists of the ERA in the immediate wake of MLK's murder.

    As the ERA (aka Lucretia Mott Amendment) did not pass both halves of the nearly whole Congress until 1972, and MLK was murdered four years previously, there's a slight logistical issue with such a suggested scenario.
    In the time between 1923 and 1972, the loose confederation of people involved could not be considered a powerful lobbying entity, by reasonable comparison.

    Compounding your #metoo-ism is the relevancy of the ERA, as it relates to what it was ostensibly intended to address, in light of MLK's message.
    The former targeted equal employment rights for women, while the latter addressed racial segegration and unequal access to basic rights.

    The original emotional complaint followed with your bandwagon hopping underscores one of the issues we must get our heads around--- and quick--- if we have any chance at all at staving off this latest attempt to divide and conquer.
    Namely, we must.
    Must.
    Must think first, and then act, without the emotionalism, the sensationalism of the moment.
    As your comment directly attests, emotional reactions do not contain reasoned thought.
    We are far too impressionable in such a state to make good decisions.
    Without reading and understanding what was being said, you allowed shav's post to resonate with your existing state of emotionalism on the topic and went "full retard" on the actual content... and the content was demonstrably wrong on its face.
  13. SubscriberWOLFE63
    Tra il dire e il far
    C'e di mezzo il mar!
    Joined
    06 Nov '15
    Moves
    22167
    10 Mar '18 18:41
    Originally posted by @freakykbh
    Somewhat.

    What you were reacting to with your heart-felt "Hear! Hear!" was, among other items, the idea that offense would have been generated by an attack on activists of the ERA in the immediate wake of MLK's murder.

    As the ERA (aka Lucretia Mott Amendment) did not pass both halves of the nearly whole Congress until 1972, and MLK was murdered four ...[text shortened]... went "full retard" on the actual content... and the content was demonstrably wrong on its face.
    I'm not a child. Though you seem to enjoy lecturing many of us as if we were.

    Shavi's post was entertaining and satirical: Again...my knee-jerks a hearty "HEAR! HEAR!" to it.

    I should attempt an economy of verse if I were you. Your missives are burdensome reading and any logical points contained therein are excavated with great difficulty.
  14. SubscriberAThousandYoung
    iEn guardia, Ingles!
    tinyurl.com/y43jqfyd
    Joined
    23 Aug '04
    Moves
    24791
    10 Mar '18 18:43
    https://www.reuters.com/article/us-california-incident-yountville/gunman-in-deadly-california-siege-was-decorated-veteran-treated-for-ptsd-idUSKCN1GL2TB
  15. Unknown Territories
    Joined
    05 Dec '05
    Moves
    20408
    10 Mar '18 19:05
    Originally posted by @wolfe63
    I'm not a child. Though you seem to enjoy lecturing many of us as if we were.

    Shavi's post was entertaining and satirical: Again...my knee-jerks a hearty "HEAR! HEAR!" to it.

    I should attempt an economy of verse if I were you. Your missives are burdensome reading and any logical points contained therein are excavated with great difficulty.
    No one claimed you are a child, and I would prefer to not be asked to explain things which can be otherwise reasonably considered self-evident.
    By indiscriminately endorsing shav's post without distinction of any kind--- and then complaining along completely unrelated guiding principles--- you presented yourself as someone unclear of the concept.

    Yes, I am verbose.
    Yes, I love the sound of my own voice.

    I could have used highly truncated language which has become the hallmark of our group's dialogue, but I felt that would serve the exact opposite dynamic to what I claim to be critically important, i.e., reasoned, considered conversation with each other.

    I'll put more effort toward economy, in honor of your suggestion.
Back to Top