57
   

Guns: how much longer will it take ....

Forums: Politics, Guns, Gun Control, U S Politics, American Conservatives
Email this Topic • Print this Page
 
 
Olivier5
 
  2  
Reply Tue 5 Jun, 2018 03:20 am
@oralloy,
Quote:
The NRA does not enslave anyone. Rather it protects and defends our freedom.

Oh I'm sure they did wonders to protect Erik Scott and all the others, black or less black, from being murdered by the police.
oralloy
 
  -3  
Reply Tue 5 Jun, 2018 04:43 am
@Olivier5,
A mistaken shooting is not murder. And it isn't the NRA's job to prevent mistaken shootings.

The NRA's job is to prevent liberals from passing laws that violate the Second Amendment.
Olivier5
 
  2  
Reply Tue 5 Jun, 2018 04:59 am
@Blickers,
As you may be aware, Glennn does not actually pay attention to what you say. He's just trying to find technicalities here or there that he can safely disagree with.
0 Replies
 
Olivier5
 
  2  
Reply Tue 5 Jun, 2018 05:12 am
@oralloy,
I'm not interested in semantics and finickery. For me, a murder is a murder.
oralloy
 
  -3  
Reply Tue 5 Jun, 2018 05:38 am
@Olivier5,
If you can define "murder" to mean anything you want, so can I.

I hereby define the meaning of "murder" to include "advocating for gun control".

So now you're a murderer too.
Olivier5
 
  2  
Reply Tue 5 Jun, 2018 05:39 am
@oralloy,
Whatever rocks your boat. I'll stick to common English.
oralloy
 
  -3  
Reply Tue 5 Jun, 2018 05:51 am
@Olivier5,
You aren't sticking to common English. You are making up your own private definitions for words in order to falsely accuse the police of imaginary crimes.
oralloy
 
  -3  
Reply Tue 5 Jun, 2018 05:52 am
@Blickers,
Blickers wrote:
Glennn wrote:
Glennn said: "How many instances of someone turning a regular semiautomatic rifle into an automatic assault rifle are you aware of?"

Revelette said: "The Las Vegas shooter was one of them."

And then, in the same post, she clarifies her point by posting this video:

http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2010/10/robert-farago/how-to-turn-a-modern-sporting-rifle-into-an-assault-rifle/

No, she didn't. Because the link you "quoted" Revellette as posting in her response was NOT the link she posted. In fact, Revellette did not even post a link to a video at all, she posted a link to an article without a video. YOU substituted an entirely different link for the one Revellette actually posted, then several pages later "quoted" her now-doctored post as the real thing. How low can you go?

For the innocent A2K members reading this, here is a quote of Revellette's actual post, with a link Revellete's Original Post:

Come on now. When you guys expend 50 pages arguing about a non-issue, memories of an individual post a dozen pages back can get a bit foggy.

Revelette's post with the link in question can be found a few posts above the post that you linked to, on the same page.

There was no deception here. It was clearly a harmless mistake.

Anyway, do you understand that Trump has issued an executive order that will outlaw bump stocks? And as soon as the executive order becomes final, bump stocks will be outlawed? What is the point of this endless argument about bump stocks?

I'd much rather read a discussion of the Florida popcorn shooting case. Does anyone think the shooter will get a new "stand your ground" hearing under the new rules? (I think he probably will.) Does anyone think he will win his new "stand your ground" hearing if he gets one? (I have no idea what to think.)
0 Replies
 
Olivier5
 
  2  
Reply Tue 5 Jun, 2018 05:58 am
@oralloy,
I'm perfectly within common English by calling the deliberate killing of a defenseless, harmless person a "murder". You are the one playing with words.
oralloy
 
  -3  
Reply Tue 5 Jun, 2018 06:04 am
@Olivier5,
Olivier5 wrote:
I'm perfectly within common English by calling the deliberate killing of a defenseless, harmless person a "murder".
Firing on someone in the mistaken belief that they are a threat is NOT a deliberate attempt to kill a defenseless harmless person.

Olivier5 wrote:
You are the one playing with words.
Wrong. I am using the actual established meanings of the words that I use.
Olivier5
 
  2  
Reply Tue 5 Jun, 2018 07:01 am
@oralloy,
I'm not talking of some police pulling the trigger by mistake, haphazardly. I'm talking of deliberate cases, where they aim their weapon at a defenseless person and chose to pull the trigger in order to kill that person.
oralloy
 
  -4  
Reply Tue 5 Jun, 2018 07:07 am
@Olivier5,
When a police officer fires on an unarmed innocent person in the mistaken belief that this person is a threat, that counts as a mistake, not as a deliberate attempt to kill an unarmed innocent person.
Olivier5
 
  2  
Reply Tue 5 Jun, 2018 07:14 am
@oralloy,
What you really mean to say is that you believe them cops when they say "it was an honest mistake", and what I am really saying is that I don't believe them.
oralloy
 
  -3  
Reply Tue 5 Jun, 2018 08:01 am
@Olivier5,
The circumstances and evidence surrounding these cases make it very clear that the police were firing in the belief that there was a threat.
Olivier5
 
  2  
Reply Tue 5 Jun, 2018 08:12 am
@oralloy,
Just because they are easily scared does not give them the right to kill people, IMO.
oralloy
 
  -3  
Reply Tue 5 Jun, 2018 08:15 am
@Olivier5,
"Perceiving a threat" does not mean "easily scared".

And people who perceive a threat are indeed allowed to defend themselves.
Olivier5
 
  2  
Reply Tue 5 Jun, 2018 08:33 am
@oralloy,
Of course, cowards are allowed self-defence. The question is: why selects cowards to be cops? It's like hiring obese people as courriers or blind people as movie critics...
oralloy
 
  -4  
Reply Tue 5 Jun, 2018 08:37 am
@Olivier5,
Characterizing self defense as a cowardly act is silly.
0 Replies
 
Olivier5
 
  2  
Reply Tue 5 Jun, 2018 08:46 am
@Olivier5,
Characterising the pumping of 21 bullets into a guy holding a cell phone as "self-defense" is cowardly.
oralloy
 
  -2  
Reply Tue 5 Jun, 2018 08:50 am
@Olivier5,
Olivier5 wrote:
Characterising the pumping of 21 bullets into a guy holding a cell phone as "self-defense" is cowardly.
No it isn't. There is nothing cowardly about stating facts.
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
AMERICAN CONSERVATISM IN 2008 AND BEYOND - Discussion by Foxfyre
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
Fellow Bostonians: How many of us wished we had an assault weapon last night? - Question by maxdancona
What should be first on the agenda of the winner in November? - Discussion by Frank Apisa
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
  1. Forums
  2. » Guns: how much longer will it take ....
  3. » Page 184
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.08 seconds on 05/16/2024 at 02:43:02
▲ ▼