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

@oralloy,

I've confronted you many times and you refuse to listen to reason. Shame on you. You continually erroneously confuse your opinion as fact.

1 Reply

@MontereyJack,

MontereyJack wrote:

I've confronted you many times and you refuse to listen to reason.

I responded to your past challenges to my claims by providing evidence that what I said is correct.

Why is it that whenever someone either opposes civil liberties or supports fascism they always claim reason or common sense?

MontereyJack wrote:

Shame on you.

There is no shame in me telling the truth and backing it up.

MontereyJack wrote:

You continually erroneously conflate your opinion with facts.

This is another example of you misrepresenting my record because you are unwilling to confront my claims. You cannot provide any examples of me ever conflating opinion with facts.

I can see why it would be frustrating to challenge my claims since I always back up everything I say. But if you are no longer willing to challenge my claims, that does not make it OK to misrepresent my posts.

1 Reply

@oralloy,

You have a variety of ways to avoid proving your posts. You claim they are your opinion and opinions have no truth value, they are merely opinions. You make faulty inferences of motive based not on what people are actually saying but what you think they are saying; you make faulty generalizations from one disputed conclusion that your cite was probably wrong on to claim all facts on that side even onn that side are tainted no matter if they have nothing to do with that conclusion. You make logical leaps based not on what someone actually saying but what you think they are saying; and your primary sin is confusing someone else's opinion or your own with fact.

2 Replies

@MontereyJack,

MontereyJack wrote:

You have a variety of ways to avoid proving your posts.

You cannot provide any examples of me ever failing to back up a factual claim with a reputable cite, with logic, or with both.

MontereyJack wrote:

You claim they are your opinion and opinions have no truth value, they are merely opinions.

Correct. Opinions are neither true nor false.

MontereyJack wrote:

You make faulty inferences of motive based not on what people are actually saying but what you think they are saying;

That is incorrect. I address what people actually say.

MontereyJack wrote:

you make faulty generalizations from one disputed conclusion that your cite was probably wrong on to claim all facts on that side even onn that side are tainted no matter if they have nothing to do with that conclusion.

You cannot provide any examples of me offering a cite that is probably wrong.

There is nothing faulty about pointing out the reality that progressives enjoy violating people's civil liberties.

MontereyJack wrote:

You make logical leaps based not on what someone actually saying but what you think they are saying;

That is incorrect. I address what people actually say.

MontereyJack wrote:

and your primary sin is confusing someone else's opinion or your own with fact.

You cannot provide any examples of me ever confusing opinion with fact.

Given your above comment about opinions and truth, it appears that you are the one who is having trouble distinguishing opinion from fact.

0 Replies

@MontereyJack,

Maybe this will help.

This is a fact: Progressives deliberately violate people's civil liberties.

This is a fact: Progressives deliberately violate people's civil liberties solely because progressives derive sadistic enjoyment from violating people's civil liberties.

This is an opinion: Progressives are really horrible people.

This is an opinion: Progressives should be rounded up and placed in labor camps for the good of the nation.

See the difference?

3 Replies

@oralloy,

both of your "facts" are opinions and in fact contrary to fact.

2 Replies

@oralloy,

And stupid defamatory opinion at that.

1 Reply

DC police: Suspect arrested for shooting at Cuban Embassy
Source: AP

By MICHAEL BALSAMO

WASHINGTON (AP) — Someone opened fire using an assault rifle outside the Cuban Embassy in Washington early Thursday and was arrested, authorities said.

The gunfire broke out around 2 a.m. outside the embassy in northwest Washington. Metropolitan Police Department officers were called to the scene after neighbors reported hearing gunshots, authorities said.

Officers found the suspect with an assault rifle and took the person into custody without incident, police said. Investigators say they believe the person had been shooting toward the embassy, though details about any potential motivation remained unclear.

The suspect’s identity and the charges against the suspect were not immediately known. No injuries were reported.

Read more: https://apnews.com/8591f583057f48d26a236b4c2efb8959

1 Reply

@MontereyJack,

Don't you find it odd that only your opinions seem to count as facts? You ignore facts that you don't like and then try to gaslight them as opinion. You did this with the first mention of the increase of first time gun buyers since the pandemic was declared. You demanded hard proof but oddly once again you usually fail to provide any proof of your own but insist others proof is opinion. You are a very dishonest debater with a complete lack of any honor. It's no wonder there are no real new additions to this board, people like you drive them away.

2 Replies

@oralloy,

oralloy wrote:

This is a fact: Progressives deliberately violate people's civil liberties.

This is a fact: Progressives deliberately violate people's civil liberties solely because progressives derive sadistic enjoyment from violating people's civil liberties.

Prove these "facts."

1 Reply

@Baldimo,

Look in the mirror. You're describing yourself too, and certainly oralloy. I was wrong in that partiucular instance about a lot of first time gun buyers yho that was accurate about gun buyers in other cases. I was and am right about the role of the e.c. in elections. You weren't.

2 Replies

@MontereyJack,

What were you write about in regards to the electoral college? The claim that it was based on racism? Or that myth that the popular vote seems to count for the presidential election? From what I recall you seem to think the popular vote is what wins you the election and you would be categorically wrong and constitutionally wrong.

1 Reply

@Baldimo,

You're wrong about what I said and you're wrong about the role the pop vote actually plays in the e.c.

0 Replies

@InfraBlue,

InfraBlue wrote:

Prove these "facts."

Very well. Look at New York's gun law that they recently abandoned before the Supreme Court could strike it down. The only purpose of that law was to make it difficult for people to exercise their Second Amendment rights.

Look also at progressive attempts to outlaw pistol grips on semi-auto rifles. Since there is no compelling government interest to justify outlawing pistol grips on semi-auto rifles, that is another deliberate attempt to violate people's civil liberties.

Now look at this thread and at all the times that I've asked what is the real motivation for deliberately violating civil liberties if it is anything other than the sadistic pleasure. Notice how no one has ever bothered to produce any other motivation for violating people's civil liberties. The stunning silence when asked for some sort of alternative motivation is pretty clear evidence that there is no other motivation.

1 Reply

@MontereyJack,

MontereyJack wrote:

both of your "facts" are opinions

That is incorrect. "That progressives deliberately violate people's civil liberties" is a fact, not an opinion.

"That progressives' sole motivation for violating civil liberties is sadistic pleasure" is a fact, not an opinion.

MontereyJack wrote:

and in fact contrary to fact.

That is incorrect. It is a fact that progressives deliberately violate people's civil liberties.

It is a fact that progressives only violate people's civil liberties for sadistic pleasure.

0 Replies

@MontereyJack,

MontereyJack wrote:

And stupid defamatory opinion at that.

That is incorrect. Facts are not opinions.

Facts, being true, are also not defamatory.

0 Replies

@Baldimo,

Baldimo wrote:

Don't you find it odd that only your opinions seem to count as facts? You ignore facts that you don't like and then try to gaslight them as opinion. You did this with the first mention of the increase of first time gun buyers since the pandemic was declared. You demanded hard proof but oddly once again you usually fail to provide any proof of your own but insist others proof is opinion. You are a very dishonest debater with a complete lack of any honor. It's no wonder there are no real new additions to this board, people like you drive them away.

I agree that he is factually wrong. But I don't believe that his incorrectness derives from dishonesty or lack of honor.

I also think people are driven away mostly by progressive name-callers, and MJ usually does not partake in such name-calling.

0 Replies

@bobsal u1553115,

bobsal u1553115 wrote:

Investigators say they believe the person had been shooting toward the embassy, though details about any potential motivation remained unclear.

Maybe a relative of one of Castro's many victims.

0 Replies

@MontereyJack,

MontereyJack wrote:

Look in the mirror. You're describing yourself too, and certainly oralloy.

No. Baldimo and I are quite honorable.

I believe that you honorable too for that matter. I don't believe there have been any dishonorable people in this thread recently.

The dishonorable ones are people like Blatham. Luckily for us, Blatham is not polluting this particular thread with his filth.

MontereyJack wrote:

I was and am right about the role of the e.c. in elections. You weren't.

You're being pretty vague here. What is it that you are claiming to be right about?

0 Replies

@oralloy,

Those are not facts, they're expressions of your feelings about New York's gun laws and assault weapons bans about which you fixate on pistol grips.

That you feel there is no motivation other than that of violating peoples civil liberties doesn't mean there is no other motivation. The motivation—to mitigate gun violence—has been explained to you throughout these threads. That you don't agree, or do not understand, or are deliberately obtuse does not negate the motivation, and does not make your feelings about the issue "facts;" they're merely opinions.

1 Reply

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

Related Topics

Quick Links

My Account

able2know