Presidential debate tonight 9/10/24 at 9pm est

  • Thread starter Thread starter Totally Bored
  • Start date Start date
Dan Gleesak said:
But you are altering “the point” to make it about something you can disagree with me about. I clearly stated that “irresponsible gun owners kill people” and saying that meant “responsible gun owners do not kill people”
Responsible gun owners are not responsible for gun crime. Plain and simple.

If you think that responsible owners create crime, then feel free to disagree and extrapolate.

But picking a part of my post you can disagree and ignore that actual point if it… is why it’s all semantics. It’s cherry picking. It’s a logical fallacy, and that isn’t putting words in your mouth.
Click to expand...

I have no clue what you're talking about now. If anything you're the one who's "altering the point." Please specifically point out to me where I in any way said or implied that responsible gun owners create crime. You won't find it because I did not say or imply it.

I do understand what you are attempting to say and understand your use of irresponsible gun owner. I have a different interpretation of that which you are either failing to or not wanting to undertsand.

acceptance said:
As to whether "irresponsible gun owner" is a meaningful phrase for purpose of the discussion.

I don't think criminals are irresponsible gun owners FWIW. I agree they are people in possession of a gun. But someone who legally owns a gun and goes on to commit a crime is not irresponsible, but criminal. And is a legal gun owner throughout so far as I can tell.
Click to expand...
This mostly sums up my point. I equate irresponsibility with firearms as being unsafe in their use which I gave examples of. Irresponsible gun owners are not automatically criminals and criminals are not automatically irresponsible when it comes to operation of a firearm. The only piece I would extend upon is that as soon as a legal gun owner commits a crime they forfeit that right and are now illegally in possession of a firearm; at least at the point of conviction in a court of law.

Dan Gleesak said:
But at some point the gun was legally made and owned though, right? I didn’t think I’d have to go this deep into it lol but at some point an irresponsible owner sold it or gave it away or did whatever to the gun so that someone else could “illegally posses” it. It still goes back to an owner that didn’t care
Click to expand...
Are you saying that not having the ability to predict how someone may eventually use a firearm and doing your due diligence to ensure the buyer can legally own & possess a firearm when making a legal sale is irresponsible?
 
MadAsAHatter said:
I equate irresponsibility with firearms as being unsafe in their use which I gave examples of. Irresponsible gun owners are not automatically criminals and criminals are not automatically irresponsible when it comes to operation of a firearm.
Click to expand...
This is a sage insight.
 
Thumbpicker said:
It's what's commonly known as the Baldwin Principle ;-)
Click to expand...
"Treat every firearm as though it were loaded"

"Never point a gun at anything you do not wish to destroy"

Mr. Baldwin probably doesn't have the brain power to pass a firearms safety training course.
 
MadAsAHatter said:
Are you saying that not having the ability to predict how someone may eventually use a firearm and doing your due diligence to ensure the buyer can legally own & possess a firearm when making a legal sale is irresponsible?
Click to expand...


Dude how are you making this so complicated lol.
 
Oh no, the cackle is back.

https://www.thegatewaypundit.com/2024/09/cringe-kamala-harriss-fake-accent-shrill-cackle-returns/

Screenshot 2024-09-12 193713.jpg
 
Dan Gleesak said:
given my explanation of why I specified “irresponsible” instead of gun owners in general, you don’t believe your picking apart of “ownership” is purely semantics.
Given the context of what I said, do you really think it matters?
Click to expand...
Of course it matters Dan. For all the reasons already pointed out to you. Your definition is flawed and completely ridiculous. Yet you keep going on like you said something intelligent. You're right about one thing. It isn't semantics. You're just straight up wrong.
 
Dan Gleesak said:
Dude how are you making this so complicated lol.
Click to expand...
He's not. You are. As usual. That's your whole MO. Just like a woman. Make a simple fucking thing so complicated and convoluted that you can somehow claim what you said is true.


"At some point someone owned it" That's some retarded bullshit right there. Even if we disregard your ridiculous notion that criminals are actually just irresponsible gun owners, your original statement is dumb as fuck. It's like saying, " Aspirin kills people". Yeah, sure it does. Very, very few people, but it kills people. Same goes for irresponsible gun owners. Alec Baldwin maybe? But who fucking cares? The amount of people they kill in this country in an entire year is less than bangers kill in Chicago on any given weekend.

You just like running threads around in circles because in reality you don't have a fucking clue what you're talking about, but if you can keep people talking about it for 43 pages someone is paying attention to you.
 
MadAsAHatter said:
I have no clue what you're talking about now. If anything you're the one who's "altering the point." Please specifically point out to me where I in any way said or implied that responsible gun owners create crime. You won't find it because I did not say or imply it.

I do understand what you are attempting to say and understand your use of irresponsible gun owner. I have a different interpretation of that which you are either failing to or not wanting to undertsand.


This mostly sums up my point. I equate irresponsibility with firearms as being unsafe in their use which I gave examples of. Irresponsible gun owners are not automatically criminals and criminals are not automatically irresponsible when it comes to operation of a firearm. The only piece I would extend upon is that as soon as a legal gun owner commits a crime they forfeit that right and are now illegally in possession of a firearm; at least at the point of conviction in a court of law.


Are you saying that not having the ability to predict how someone may eventually use a firearm and doing your due diligence to ensure the buyer can legally own & possess a firearm when making a legal sale is irresponsible?
Click to expand...
Dude, you are just prolonging Danielle's orgasm. She gets off on retarded circles.
 
Floyd Eye said:
You just like running threads around in circles because in reality you don't have a fucking clue what you're talking about, but if you can keep people talking about it for 43 pages someone is paying attention to you.
Click to expand...
Characteristic of a faggot.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
 
Back
Top