Thread: Nat'l Security Let's research gun violence.
View Single Post
Old 12-27-2012, 12:53 PM   #993
Direckshun Direckshun is offline
Black for Palestine
 
Direckshun's Avatar
 

Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Springpatch
Casino cash: $23737
Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinChief View Post
EVERY time you post this, it's pretty obvious that you are conceding that you are too ****ing stupid to respond with substance.
I've long had zero interest in endlessly rebutting purposefully false mischaracterizations of my point of view on this forum. I've humored you the first few times you did it in this thread, but I'm now up to my quota in correcting hilariously dumb strawman arguments.

If you want to make really dumb claims about what I've said, I can't change that. That's on you.

If you want to have a conversation about things I actually am arguing, we have a thread you can use.

Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinChief View Post
Once again, you shy away from the topic and instead pretend the analogy is bad. you have yet to explain AT ALL why it is a bad analogy.
I also have no interest in going 20 rounds on a bullshit analogy of Saul Good proportions.

I know you do, I know all conservatives who've ever proposed a dumb analogy love nothing more than to go 20 rounds defending them, but I have bigger fish to fry.

Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinChief View Post
Tell us at what level of reduction will it no longer be an epidemic? Obviously .0037% is too high for you, explain what is acceptable to no longer call it an epidemic.
The standard I shoot for is to put us on par with the rest of the Western world with gun related violence and deaths.

We have the resources and ability to make this happen. There is no reason for us not to make this happen.

Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinChief View Post
You ASKED ME what would it take for me to call it an epidemic. I picked a metric that made sense to me.
The continuing problem, one that has plagued your so-called metric from the start, is that you haven't explained why that metric makes sense to you.

I've asked for it repeatedly. You've repeatedly neglected to answer. I'm pretty sure we both know why.

Quote:
Originally Posted by AustinChief View Post
Those are complaints by people just like you.
The world isn't binary, compadre. Slate, the Times, Forbes, the AMA, etc... and there are others, but I highlight these four because they are each significantly different sources with different editorial boards with different agendas, and they're all seeing the same thing.

This is what some folks who mourn the conservative movement mean, when they accuse it of suffering from "epistemic closure." The inability to accept new information and adjust yourself to conform to reality -- it is a curse of the current GOP, and is becoming to enrapture the NRA as well.

To simply dismiss all these sources (and many more like them for years now) as "just like Direckshun" simply because I had to gall to absorb what it being widely observed is to stick your head in the sand.
__________________
Posts: 46,870
Direckshun is obviously part of the inner Circle.Direckshun is obviously part of the inner Circle.Direckshun is obviously part of the inner Circle.Direckshun is obviously part of the inner Circle.Direckshun is obviously part of the inner Circle.Direckshun is obviously part of the inner Circle.Direckshun is obviously part of the inner Circle.Direckshun is obviously part of the inner Circle.Direckshun is obviously part of the inner Circle.Direckshun is obviously part of the inner Circle.Direckshun is obviously part of the inner Circle.
  Reply With Quote