Jump to content

Won't anyone think of the poor, sensitive Lawful Gun Owner?


LA Grant

Recommended Posts

BiM, You and your friends should read Koko78’s post two up from yours. 

 

People get mocked here when they deserve it. Most uninformed posters get their asses handed to them quickly. Then they quickly resort to ad-hominem attacks and salacious insults as though that’s a defensefor their ass-hattery. 

 

It gets old for those on the other side of these social issues too, because an honest discussion rarely happens. Most of the “new” posters are woefully inept at putting forth a cogent idea in a coherent manner. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://www.vox.com/2016/2/29/11120184/gun-control-study-international-evidence

A huge international study of gun control finds strong evidence that it actually works

 

A 2016 study, published in the academic journal Epidemiologic Reviews, seeks to resolve this problem. It systematically reviewed the evidence from around the world on gun laws and gun violence, looking to see if the best studies come to similar conclusions. It was the first such study to look at the international research in this way.


The authors are careful to note that their findings do not conclusively prove that gun restrictions reduce gun deaths. However, they did find a compelling trend whereby new restrictions on gun purchasing and ownership tended to be followed by a decline in gun deaths.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

11 minutes ago, Logic said:

https://www.vox.com/2016/2/29/11120184/gun-control-study-international-evidence

A huge international study of gun control finds strong evidence that it actually works

 

A 2016 study, published in the academic journal Epidemiologic Reviews, seeks to resolve this problem. It systematically reviewed the evidence from around the world on gun laws and gun violence, looking to see if the best studies come to similar conclusions. It was the first such study to look at the international research in this way.


The authors are careful to note that their findings do not conclusively prove that gun restrictions reduce gun deaths. However, they did find a compelling trend whereby new restrictions on gun purchasing and ownership tended to be followed by a decline in gun deaths.

 

 

Quote

Santaella-Tenorio was insistent that he and his colleagues have not "proven" that gun laws reduce violence. The data, he says, is simply too complicated, and the analyses too primitive, to come to such a hard conclusion.

 

Well, they certainly did enough hedging of their bets in finding their 'trends'.

Edited by Koko78
Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, Nanker said:

BiM, You and your friends should read Koko78’s post two up from yours. 

 

People get mocked here when they deserve it. Most uninformed posters get their asses handed to them quickly. Then they quickly resort to ad-hominem attacks and salacious insults as though that’s a defensefor their ass-hattery. 

 

It gets old for those on the other side of these social issues too, because an honest discussion rarely happens. Most of the “new” posters are woefully inept at putting forth a cogent idea in a coherent manner. 

 

People get consistently mocked here whether they deserve it or not.  See the 'Know Anyone With a Disease' thread.  Pretty much everything I mentioned about the attacks on new posters is in there. 

 

In fact on page one I wrote a post pleading with Tom not to post his typical mst3k comments in the thread.  I did not count, but I would say he posted another 75 times.  Not to discuss anything though, just his typical crap.  Also easy to see the group attack point that I made in many places within that thread.

 

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Bob in Mich said:

 

People get consistently mocked here whether they deserve it or not.  See the 'Know Anyone With a Disease' thread.  Pretty much everything I mentioned about the attacks on new posters is in there. 

 

In fact on page one I wrote a post pleading with Tom not to post his typical mst3k comments in the thread.  I did not count, but I would say he posted another 75 times.  Not to discuss anything though, just his typical crap.  Also easy to see the group attack point that I made in many places within that thread.

 

PPP is tougher than TSW.  The regulars mock each other in every educated discussion.

 

The difference is that the regulars actually argue thoughtful points while trading barbs.  The newcomers, and the Tibs/gator/baskin gang, far too often forget to actually argue, and instead use boring sarcasm and tangential topics.  Then they get called idiots.

 

Your "Know Anyone With a Disease" thread was 99% preaching peudoscience and 1% thoughtful discussion, which is why it was roundly mocked.  If you want to talk on PPP, you up your game or you get trashed until you do.  That's just how it is.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, Bob in Mich said:

Yeah, ok.   So the people you agree with are the smart ones.  It's just those others that are idiots.  Sure, that makes perfect sense here.

That's not what he said, and you are dangerously close to proving his point for him.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

25 minutes ago, Bob in Mich said:

Yeah, ok.   So the people you agree with are the smart ones.  It's just those others that are idiots.  Sure, that makes perfect sense here.

I disagree with almost 100% of PPPers on the 2ndA.  They think me extreme, I think them not extreme enough.

 

Shut the !@#$ up, lemming.

 

See how that went for you? Act like a moron, make a **** argument, get **** on and shut down.

 

Class is over. 

Edited by jmc12290
Link to comment
Share on other sites

47 minutes ago, Bob in Mich said:

ok fukstik, you have proven no sense conversing with you either. 

 

I rest my case    lol

Again, you miss the mark.  It's not about trading insults, it's about arguing.  You and your ilk prove yourselves woefully incapable of making cogent points.

 

Look at your last couple of posts.  Pure nonsense.  Roll over and let me rub your belly!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, 3rdnlng said:

 You are the Maxine Walters of this forum.

 

:lol:

 

4 hours ago, Koko78 said:

 

If you start a rational discussion and back up your positions with facts (or at least factual something to ponder), then you'll get a rational conversation. Posting stupidity, then refusing to engage the posters who actually try to discuss the matter with anything approaching a rational thought does not work. That's neither a secret, nor an inside joke.

 

 

Yep. :beer:

 

3 hours ago, 3rdnlng said:

Any newcomer here should tread lightly at first. Get to know the landscape. When I call you Jersey Sue or Scooby or refer to hot sauce on your junk don't automatically feel insulted. Say you don't understand. I know that many people haven't been around long enough to get it and I and most others will explain the deal.

 

 

Yep.  :beer:

 

2 hours ago, Bob in Mich said:

 

People get consistently mocked here whether they deserve it or not.  See the 'Know Anyone With a Disease' thread.  Pretty much everything I mentioned about the attacks on new posters is in there.

 

 

Yeah, you've caught a lot of grief in that thread. :lol:

 

I can't remember if I've ever posted anything in that thread or not, but I've kept up with most of it. For what it's worth, a lot of people who post here support legalization for a multitude of reasons. I don't smoke it anymore, but I fully support it too.

 

Whether it's fair or not, some people here will make fun of you for being a stoner. Relentlessly. On the other hand, by continuing to add to the thread as you do, you've built up a pretty good reference source for information on the medical potential of marijuana.

 

 

  • Like (+1) 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...