What is better, no guns, or more guns?

[LA Grant]

34 minutes ago, DC Tom said:

I'm sure he'd be more than willing to discuss things as long as we respect his feelings.  Of course, since feelings are all he has, disagreeing with him is disrespecting his feelings, so he's incapable of discussion.  

 

And that's what passes for rationality in today's liberals.  Same stupid logic that has "liberals" supporting the deletion of InfoWars' YouTube channel, because "they upset people!"  Used to be liberalism was about empowering the individual, not wrapping them in bubble wrap.

 

You & LAz doing the "la la la I can't heaaaaaaar you" bit would be farce if it weren't tragedy.

 

Gotta say, it's pretty crazy to watch the conservative "selective perception" happen in real time.

[DC Tom]

1 minute ago, LA Grant said:

 

You & LAz doing the "la la la I can't heaaaaaaar you" bit would be farce if it weren't tragedy.

 

Gotta say, it's pretty crazy to watch the conservative "selective perception" happen in real time.

 

Are you speaking for yourself this time, or for the "majority of Americans."

[IDBillzFan]

Dollar Tree Responds To LA Grants Calls For Gun Control

6 minutes ago, DC Tom said:

 

Are you speaking for yourself this time, or for the "majority of Americans."

 

I think he's speaking for the majority of Americans who agree with him.

 

Which apparently has been reduced to gatorman/tiberius/baskin/busey and a guy who thinks too many people will cause Guam to tip over.

[LA Grant]

Just now, DC Tom said:

Are you speaking for yourself this time, or for the "majority of Americans."

Well, Tom, I'm afraid it would have to just be me as "the majority of Americans" aren't aware of you & LAz's specific positions. I guess that's because the left only deals in archetypes instead of patting each of you on the head individually?

 

1 minute ago, LABillzFan said:

Dollar Tree Responds To LA Grants Calls For Gun Control

 

What point do you think The Onion is making here, LAz? I know conservatives struggle with "jokes" but do you realize your position is the butt of the joke?

[IDBillzFan]

1 minute ago, LA Grant said:

What point do you think The Onion is making here, LAz? I know conservatives struggle with "jokes" but do you realize your position is the butt of the joke?

 

What is my position?

[LA Grant]

5 minutes ago, LABillzFan said:

I think he's speaking for the majority of Americans who agree with him.

 

Which apparently has been reduced to gatorman/tiberius/baskin/busey and a guy who thinks too many people will cause Guam to tip over.

 

That's right, LAz, because the world is only what you, yourself, can see. The "majority of Americans who agree with [gun control]" don't exist. They're a hoax, like climate change. Globalists!

 

In fact, I'm not even real. I'm a figment of your imagination; we all are. I'm sent here by God above on a mission to communicate something very important, and only you can see this — only you know the truth, because you are the only one who exists. You have correctly identified that my son, Guns, are being unfairly crucified. I will now accept you into the Gates of Heaven. All you need to do now is take the communion. You know how.

 

3 minutes ago, LABillzFan said:

What is my position?

 

Well, I don't know, do I? You haven't clearly stated them and I certainly don't want to put words in your mouth. You appear to be opposing gun control of any kind, and have mentioned that they don't work, but you have also refused to plainly state your position, multiple times. You have instead been putting on a very dramatic show about how actually you're the victim here, because we're not thinking enough about you and your feelings. 

 

You've been quite clear that you are a one-of-a-kind independent snowflake with very unique and special opinions. So I wouldn't dare to speak for you. If you'd like to speak for yourself, don't let a little online rudeness stop you.

[IDBillzFan]

Grant, you freaking tool, how do you write this...

 

13 minutes ago, LA Grant said:

...do you realize your position is the butt of the joke?

 

and when asked what my position is, you then write this?

 

3 minutes ago, LA Grant said:

Well, I don't know, do I?

 

Are you intentionally this stupid or does it just happen by accident?

[3rdnlng]

4 minutes ago, LABillzFan said:

Grant, you freaking tool, how do you write this...

 

 

and when asked what my position is, you then write this?

 

 

Are you intentionally this stupid or does it just happen by accident?

He's the result of an ill-advised tryst between gator and Blzrul.

[DC Tom]

8 minutes ago, LABillzFan said:

Grant, you freaking tool, how do you write this...

 

 

and when asked what my position is, you then write this?

 

 

Are you intentionally this stupid or does it just happen by accident?

 

While I feel it was accidental, the fact that he does it so consistently and effortlessly leads me to not rule out intentional !@#$wittery.

[LA Grant]

1 minute ago, LABillzFan said:

Grant, you freaking tool, how do you write this...

 

and when asked what my position is, you then write this?

 

Are you intentionally this stupid or does it just happen by accident?

 

Well, can't argue that. Ya got me. Blam! Semantics for the win. I was giving you the benefit of the doubt, but you sure taught me a lesson.

 

So you were posting The Onion article (which mocks how easy it is to purchase guns legally) in an attempt to mock my position (that 'easily legally purchased guns' is a problem with available solutions), but what you actually meant was... well, who knows what you meant. You'll probably claim that having no point is your point.  Winning!

 

Now that you've scored one, are you able to articulate your position on gun control? Or is it just memes, bumper stickers, "I didn't say that," and "it doesn't work"? Because that's all I've seen from you on it, yet you keep insinuating you have some substance somewhere beneath the mounds of bullsh*t...

[DC Tom]

7 minutes ago, LA Grant said:

 

Well, can't argue that. Ya got me. Blam! Semantics for the win. I was giving you the benefit of the doubt, but you sure taught me a lesson.

 

That's not semantics, that's a fundamental flaw in reading comprehension and rational thinking that you repeatedly make.  

 

No one here's disagreeing with you as much as they're deconstructing your arguments for the ignorant bull **** that they are.  Again - this happens every time you pop in here and start mindlessly ranting.  It'll happen again in 9 months when you drop in and start ranting about whatever happens to catch your fancy then.

[LA Grant]

Just now, DC Tom said:

That's not semantics, that's a fundamental flaw in reading comprehension and rational thinking that you repeatedly make.  

 

No one here's disagreeing with you as much as they're deconstructing your arguments for the ignorant bull **** that they are.  Again - this happens every time you pop in here and start mindlessly ranting.  It'll happen again in 9 months when you drop in and start ranting about whatever happens to catch your fancy then.

 

First sentence is ... provably not true.

Second sentence is ... provably not true. 

Third sentence is ... provably not true.

Fourth sentence is possible, but it will probably be another mass shooting. 

[DC Tom]

6 minutes ago, LA Grant said:

 

First sentence is ... provably not true.

Second sentence is ... provably not true. 

Third sentence is ... provably not true.

Fourth sentence is possible, but it will probably be another mass shooting. 

 

You don't actually know what "provable" means, do you?

 

Hey, remember when you thought it was a great idea that the Bills start every home game by taking their mascot out to midfield and shooting blanks at him?

[row_33]

8 minutes ago, DC Tom said:

 

You don't actually know what "provable" means, do you?

 

Hey, remember when you thought it was a great idea that the Bills start every home game by taking their mascot out to midfield and shooting blanks at him?

 

what kinda blanks we talking about here?

 

 

[LA Grant]

8 minutes ago, DC Tom said:

You don't actually know what "provable" means, do you?

 

Hey, remember when you thought it was a great idea that the Bills start every home game by taking their mascot out to midfield and shooting blanks at him?

 

? I do! But hey, why don't you define it for me? Then you can paste the dictionary definition and I'll tell you that it's wrong. That's how you do it, right?

 

also hahaha I maintain that Billy Buffalo needs to be publicly shot AND that the Bills should have a cowboy mascot instead of a bison mascot. The bison logo is good, but they should own the "Buffalo Bill" pun more with their mascot, because it's a clever and unique sports nickname.

 

(to any fool thinking "But that would involve guns, gotcha" — Yeah, no kidding, again — no one is advocating banning or removing all guns)

(to any fool who misunderstands The Onion — my Billy Buffalo idea is a joke)

Edited March 2, 2018 by LA Grant

[DC Tom]

Just now, LA Grant said:

 

? I do! 

 

also hahaha I maintain that Billy Buffalo needs to be publicly shot AND that the Bills should have a cowboy mascot instead of a bison mascot. The bison logo is good, but they should own the "Buffalo Bill" pun more with their mascot, because it's a clever and unique sports nickname.

 

(to any fool thinking "But that would involve guns, gotcha" — Yeah, no kidding, again — no one is advocating banning or removing all guns). 

 

But only one person is advocating staging a shooting at mid-field in front of a crowd of tens of thousands for entertainment purposes.

 

Your posts from 2015 on this subject are...interesting.  You had the exact same incoherent posting style, were called out for it in exactly the same way, and got exactly as pissy because you could form a coherent thought.  It might be in your best interest to repeat this post, declare victory, and disappear for a while again.

[Nanker]

Fear no more! The streets of Buffalo are safe once more. A significant number of assault weapons were taken in by the authorities in a massive program. 

 

 

[LA Grant]

 

5 minutes ago, DC Tom said:

But only one person is advocating staging a shooting at mid-field in front of a crowd of tens of thousands for entertainment purposes.

 

Your posts from 2015 on this subject are...interesting.  You had the exact same incoherent posting style, were called out for it in exactly the same way, and got exactly as pissy because you could form a coherent thought.  It might be in your best interest to repeat this post, declare victory, and disappear for a while again.

 

Well, I like how you're trying to "gotcha" me on a joke, but... ok...? Do you have any actual point you're making here? No, you're just sniffing around to look for contradictions. Not within the argument, but with me and my posts. You're employing the exact same tactic as before, Tom: ignore the ideas, focus on the individual. If you can't destroy the idea, destroy the individual. Y'all have gotten so used to doing in your bubble here without being called out that you don't know what else to do when you're in an unwinnable position. For some reason, you can't stop replying, or admit to the superior argument.

 

You're right, the 2015 thread is interesting! We were all so young. So many mass shootings still ahead of us at that point. Oh and hey, look at this — the third reply in that thread. Weren't you just telling me "no one disagrees" re: gun control?

 

 

They're just "deconstructing my ignorant bulls**"? Why is it that those "deconstructions" are all memes, excuses, or semantics? You can also include your Billy Buffalo example of "deconstructing my argument" by way of "misinterpreting how humor works," similar to LAz's gotcha with The Onion link. 

 

Why aren't there any "deconstructions" that are merely a superior argument for a superior solution? You'd think such a thing would be easier to produce, considering how definitively so many seem to know gun control doesn't work & could never work.

 

 

[DC Tom]

2 minutes ago, LA Grant said:

You're right, the 2015 thread is interesting! We were all so young. So many mass shootings still ahead of us at that point. Oh and hey, look at this — the third reply in that thread. Weren't you just telling me "no one disagrees" re: gun control?

 

No, that is not what I was saying.

 

How do you expect to have ANY discussion when you can't even read?

[LA Grant]

Just now, DC Tom said:

No, that is not what I was saying.

 

How do you expect to have ANY discussion when you can't even read?

 

At least you keep up the same BS distraction strategy even after it's directly called out "Focus on the individual, focus on the individual, focus on the individual."

 

Tom, if I'm actually misunderstanding, you do possess the ability to articulate yourself differently. "Why bother" you'll say, "it's pointless." Well that's your solution to everything though isn't it?