Pages:
Author

Topic: In the gun debate who do you think is the most stupid? (Read 15506 times)

legendary
Activity: 2156
Merit: 1072
Crypto is the separation of Power and State.
Nice one. Though I'd just like to point out that not all British citizens are quite as hopeless as you make out (in the same was that many US citizens actually are). Worth bearing in mind that Washington was, at one point, a colonel in the British army.

Yes, many Brits resent their gormless peers and envy the freedom enjoyed across the pond.  Some even move here, acquire citizenship, and appear on American Guns.   Grin  Good for them!

Also, many Americans are as pitiful as any helpless Euroweenie and spend their time strenuously objecting to the Liberty secured by their forefathers.  It's sad.

Good point about Gen. Washington, it really emphasizes how important it is for individuals to choose rebellion to tyrants and fight until free, or die trying.

Here a couple more memes for ya:







legendary
Activity: 2576
Merit: 2267
1RichyTrEwPYjZSeAYxeiFBNnKC9UjC5k


Nice one. Though I'd just like to point out that not all British citizens are quite as hopeless as you make out (in the same was that many US citizens actually are). Worth bearing in mind that Washington was, at one point, a colonel in the British army.
legendary
Activity: 2156
Merit: 1072
Crypto is the separation of Power and State.
Well i think the whole premise of the gun debate wether who is more stupid is wrong  i think a better question to answer is "Who is more right". I actually think that is more constructive question to ask as people can come forth with an argument. . I think the most imortand reason why people should beable to bear arms or own a gun is to beable to defend themselfs or be able to fight back from a government  if it  becomes too tyranical.  What i understand it is  the reason  the second amendment was put there in the first place .
 I think the right of the american people to practice the 2nd amendment  has  has never had more value meaning or importance  in the whole history of the American time period. 

All of this is true.  But the OP doesn't want a better question or a constructive argument.  It's just a cowardly way to replace discussion of important matters with mere ridicule.  Very Jon Stewart, as he stated.

The most ridiculous idea is that free, rugged individual Americans would care about our UK/Euroweenie cousins' worthless bien pensant opinions regarding personal liberty and the force multiplying hardware that originally won and ultimately defend it.

When they see fit to stand on their own as sovereign people instead of subjects to hereditary Monarchs, we can have a worthwhile conversation.

Meanwhile, it is an exercise in futility to attempt explaining concepts so far beyond their experience and comprehension.

All they have ever known is generations lived as serfs or vassals controlled by their owner, the Queen, and master, the State.  You'd have better luck teaching quantum cosmology to a jellyfish!

Here is their ruler, resplendent in Her Royal Crown and Scepter:

Quote
"Thou Shalt Not Bear Arms, you spineless bloody peasant worm.  Off with your head!"

Here is our ruler, resplendent in its Bill of Rights:

Quote
"the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed"

In conclusion,

donator
Activity: 1731
Merit: 1008
Sorry but what gun debate ? I only see a fight.

The government wanting it's population to disarm themselves is all what it is.

Only the naive sheeples watching main stream news think it's worth debating.

Please stop feeding these gun vs no gun threads.
full member
Activity: 126
Merit: 100
Well i think the whole premise of the gun debate wether who is more stupid is wrong  i think a better question to answer is "Who is more right". I actually think that is more constructive question to ask as people can come forth with an argument. . I think the most imortand reason why people should beable to bear arms or own a gun is to beable to defend themselfs or be able to fight back from a government  if it  becomes too tyranical.  What i understand it is  the reason  the second amendment was put there in the first place .
 I think the right of the american people to practice the 2nd amendment  has  has never had more value meaning or importance  in the whole history of the American time period.  
hero member
Activity: 532
Merit: 500
FIAT LIBERTAS RVAT CAELVM
And with that, ladies and gentlemen, we have both an excellent example of how to be a good person, and how to be a douchebag. I'll leave it to the reader to determine which of the previous two posters is doing which.
full member
Activity: 126
Merit: 100
hero member
Activity: 532
Merit: 500
FIAT LIBERTAS RVAT CAELVM
Sorry.

Accepted. Thank you for showing enough intellectual integrity to understand when you've stepped in it, and not continue to track it around the thread. Wink
full member
Activity: 126
Merit: 100
Rob, that was the post history of one of the posters on the anti-gun side. It's not a "biblical sized discussion," It's not a discussion at all. You asked for evidence why the anti-gun activists are the stupid ones, that link will provide it, and then some.

And it's spelled "douchebag." If you're going to insult someone, at least do it right. Kiss
Right. Just like "Google" will provide it  Huh

Youre not making a clear point. And either case i was asking you. And i understood by your earlier post that "You" where an " anti gun activist" maybe that is where the misunderstanding was. On my part.

Are you referring to this post, that you were originally responding to?
Anti-Gun Activists

Keep in mind, that without context, it's reasonable to assume that this is in response to the post title and question posed in the OP:
Quote
In the gun debate who do you think is the most stupid?

So, yes, I'd say the misunderstanding was entirely on your part, and most likely from the very beginning.

And then, as a sort of punch line, you call me "like reall fucking stupit."  Cheesy

* face palm *

hmmmm m. .  ok i understood you where saying you where a anti gun activist my bad . . don't shoot me. .  Ok i will take full responsibility for being a "Douchebag" . Sorry.
hero member
Activity: 532
Merit: 500
FIAT LIBERTAS RVAT CAELVM
Oh, and Rob, this^ moron's posts are more evidence. This one is representative, no need to browse his post history, they're all that sort of mixture of idiocy and dictionary definition, peppered with time-wasting graphics.
hero member
Activity: 532
Merit: 500
FIAT LIBERTAS RVAT CAELVM
Rob, that was the post history of one of the posters on the anti-gun side. It's not a "biblical sized discussion," It's not a discussion at all. You asked for evidence why the anti-gun activists are the stupid ones, that link will provide it, and then some.

And it's spelled "douchebag." If you're going to insult someone, at least do it right. Kiss
Right. Just like "Google" will provide it  Huh

Youre not making a clear point. And either case i was asking you. And i understood by your earlier post that "You" where an " anti gun activist" maybe that is where the misunderstanding was. On my part.

Are you referring to this post, that you were originally responding to?
Anti-Gun Activists

Keep in mind, that without context, it's reasonable to assume that this is in response to the post title and question posed in the OP:
Quote
In the gun debate who do you think is the most stupid?

So, yes, I'd say the misunderstanding was entirely on your part, and most likely from the very beginning.

And then, as a sort of punch line, you call me "like reall fucking stupit."  Cheesy
full member
Activity: 126
Merit: 100
Rob, that was the post history of one of the posters on the anti-gun side. It's not a "biblical sized discussion," It's not a discussion at all. You asked for evidence why the anti-gun activists are the stupid ones, that link will provide it, and then some.

And it's spelled "douchebag." If you're going to insult someone, at least do it right. Kiss
Right. Just like "Google" will provide it  Huh

Youre not making a clear point. And either case i was asking you. And i understood by your earlier post that "You" where an " anti gun activist" maybe that is where the misunderstanding was. On my part.
hero member
Activity: 532
Merit: 500
FIAT LIBERTAS RVAT CAELVM
Rob, that was the post history of one of the posters on the anti-gun side, it's not a 'biblical sized discussion' It's not a discussion at all. You asked for evidence why the anti-gun activists are the stupid ones, that link will provide it and then some, and it's spelled "douchebag" If you're going to insult someone, at least do it right. Kiss

Fixed that for you Smiley

lol.. no, it's enough of a separate sentiment that it deserves it's own sentence and paragraph, grammatical error of starting a sentence with "and" notwithstanding.

So, perhaps this would be better:

Oh, and it's spelled "douchebag." If you're going to insult someone, at least do it right. Kiss
legendary
Activity: 1540
Merit: 1000
Rob, that was the post history of one of the posters on the anti-gun side, it's not a 'biblical sized discussion' It's not a discussion at all. You asked for evidence why the anti-gun activists are the stupid ones, that link will provide it and then some, and it's spelled "douchebag" If you're going to insult someone, at least do it right. Kiss

Fixed that for you Smiley
hero member
Activity: 532
Merit: 500
FIAT LIBERTAS RVAT CAELVM
Rob, that was the post history of one of the posters on the anti-gun side. It's not a "biblical sized discussion," It's not a discussion at all. You asked for evidence why the anti-gun activists are the stupid ones, that link will provide it, and then some.

And it's spelled "douchebag." If you're going to insult someone, at least do it right. Kiss
legendary
Activity: 1540
Merit: 1000
That article could have been making intelligent points if it wasn't using so many bolded sentences.
legendary
Activity: 3108
Merit: 1531
yes
full member
Activity: 126
Merit: 100

This link should give you all the evidence you need to answer that question.

That's it? You refer me to some sort of biblical size discussion and say there you go its in there? Are you fuckin high or somethin a bad joke a silly joke a really weak joke.. are you slurping on a soda right now? Eating french fries? Great you just made my ignore list. Doucebag.

couldnt answer a simple question " because i think guns induce voilence - my mom got killed by a gun - i was in the war and ive seen enough guns - im doing time for murder no more guns for me- i'm a peace activist and guns dont fit my ideals" or the countless of other answers that could have possibly applied and you refer me to some sort of biblical sized dialogue and say" this is why..?

youre like reall fucking stupit .. arent you.
donator
Activity: 2058
Merit: 1007
Poor impulse control.
I was referring to the fact that hazek was not adding anything new to the debate, and he was doing it in a rude and shouty manner. Do you honestly think that sort of post helps anyone understand either point of view?

Not really, but it wasn't meant to add anything new, or really explain anything to anyone. It was ridicule, pure and simple. ...

Of course it was. And this thread is about poking fun at emotional slanging matches that don't add anything useful to the debate. Don't misconstrue my comment as being pro gun control, it was solely that hazek made the type of comment the OP created the thread to ridicule in the first place.

Unless it was a piss-take and hazek is actually pro gun control?

There is no debate because one side doesn't have a leg to stand on. That was my point. There is nothing to understand here except that one side sees the reality for what it is and acts accordingly and the other side doesn't and instead clings on to some sort of a fantasy and acts irrationally and I call that the most stupid thing one can possibly do.

I never said the pro gun side on the other hand isn't stupid. No the vast majority of them are stupid too because they let themselves being goaded into arguing with irrational people instead of just standing their ground and may the irrational do whatever.

Eventually that is what it will come down to. Either the pro gun stand their ground and defend their position even if it means by any means necessary or the irrational side will win and force the pro gun side to give up their weapons. There's no other way to resolve a dispute with irrational people, cause they're irrational. You defend yourself against them or they win.

Thanks for a more measured response, hazek.
hero member
Activity: 532
Merit: 500
FIAT LIBERTAS RVAT CAELVM
And lastly, since when do I feel the need to follow your directives? Did you actually think I would?

If you want to have polite conversation and debate with me, you will.

I'm still awaiting your reply relating to guns as tools. Until you choose to answer it, you can quietly accept my polite movie recommendations, which have been nothing but polite. Especially in light of the fact that you wished to change the topic and requested a break. Your choice.
Have you calmed down now? Can you converse without insults? If so, then we can continue.
Pages:
Jump to: