Liberal response to gun control

ZappasGuitar said:
Well now that someone other than myself has pointed out the YurTiva that it is indeed hyperbole, maybe he will agree.

I've claimed over and over that the author was OBVIOUSLY resorting to hyperbole, unfortunately YurTiva's hatred for me runs so deep it renders him incapable of rational discourse.
Click to expand...

and of course the hate filled washed up....thinks i'm the only one who disagrees with him.

settle down little girl, if you really want to go by who has the most people agree with them....you lose

lol
 
Sativa said:
yes i did. i used his words to show you that he was serious. he never said he was joking, in fact, he said quite the opposite, he was very upset and wanted change, no more talk (he referenced his dozens of other articles as being ineffectual etc).
Click to expand...


No. you merely quoted a couple lines from the article and CLAIMED it proved your point.

You've provided NO evidence to support your claim that you've shown he was being serious.

He never said he was joking? Really? THAT'S your proof?

From the article: "Declare the NRA a terrorist organization and make membership illegal. I would also raze the organization’s headquarters, clear the rubble and salt the earth, but that’s optional."

Raze the NRA's HQ and salt the Earth...but since he didn't explicitly state he was joking, then according to the YurTard, this proves he's being serious...ROTFLMAO!!


Sativa said:
if you really think 'indicate' and 'proof' are similar, such that it is word games to explain to you that they are different, you are far dumber than i thought. words have meaning zappa, just because you are not intelligent enough to know that, does not mean people are playing word games with you.
Click to expand...


And now for some more of those "insults" the YurTard supposedly never engages in.
 
SmarterthanYou said:
says the guy that thinks he can stop school shootings with magnets. :lol:
Click to expand...


It's nice to see you admitting you never intended to have a reasonable discussion about guns with me.

I knew it was a waste of my time trying to have a rational discussion with you psychotic Wyatt Earp wannabes, but what the heck.

Tell me, do you ever plan on stepping up and leading that "revolt" you're always whining about?

Or will you just continue being the internet tough guy everyone here knows?
 
ZappasGuitar said:
It's nice to see you admitting you never intended to have a reasonable discussion about guns with me.
Click to expand...
I gave it a shot. you were not being realistic.

ZappasGuitar said:
I knew it was a waste of my time trying to have a rational discussion with you psychotic Wyatt Earp wannabes, but what the heck.

Tell me, do you ever plan on stepping up and leading that "revolt" you're always whining about?

Or will you just continue being the internet tough guy everyone here knows?
Click to expand...
are you going to take over for legion troll now?
 
ZappasGuitar said:
No. you merely quoted a couple lines from the article and CLAIMED it proved your point.

You've provided NO evidence to support your claim that you've shown he was being serious.

He never said he was joking? Really? THAT'S your proof?

From the article: "Declare the NRA a terrorist organization and make membership illegal. I would also raze the organization’s headquarters, clear the rubble and salt the earth, but that’s optional."

Raze the NRA's HQ and salt the Earth...but since he didn't explicitly state he was joking, then according to the YurTard, this proves he's being serious...ROTFLMAO!!





And now for some more of those "insults" the YurTard supposedly never engages in.
Click to expand...

1. cite where i said i never engage in insults. i never said any such thing.

2. you're still hung up on indicate vs. prove. there really is no point in discussing this further as i gave you a chance to learn the difference, but you just want to continue lying about what people say.

carry on
 
Sativa said:
1. cite where i said i never engage in insults. i never said any such thing.

2. you're still hung up on indicate vs. prove. there really is no point in discussing this further as i gave you a chance to learn the difference, but you just want to continue lying about what people say.

carry on
Click to expand...


Diversion, evasion and obfuscation.

The YurTard's standard bag of tricks for when he gets cornered and his whining doesn't cut it anymore.

But we'll continue to wait while Yurt figures out how to explain to everyone what exactly the evidence he's supposedly got that indicate the author was being serious.

Yurt claims he's used the author's words to show everyone that he (the author) was serious...he just can't show anyone exactly HOW he used the author's words to do that.
 
1. another claim zappa couldn't back up...and then dishonestly whines that i'm diverting by asking him to back up his claim

2. already showed you TWICE. in post 5 and in a response post to you where you claimed i never did explain it, though i did in post 5.
 
Sativa said:
yes i did. i used his words to show you that he was serious.
Click to expand...


WRONG...you used his words to make an assumption.

Unless his words clearly say "I am being serious", AND THEY DON'T, then you've got NOTHING but supposition.


Sativa said:
he never said he was joking, in fact, he said quite the opposite, he was very upset and wanted change, no more talk (he referenced his dozens of other articles as being ineffectual etc).
Click to expand...

Once again, your "proof" is the author never said he was joking??

REALLY?!?

The author never says he is being serious either.
 
Sativa said:
• Repeal the Second Amendment, the part about guns anyway. It’s badly written, confusing and more trouble than it’s worth. It offers an absolute right to gun ownership, but it puts it in the context of the need for a “well-regulated militia.” We don’t make our militia bring their own guns to battles. And surely the Founders couldn’t have envisioned weapons like those used in the Newtown shooting when they guaranteed gun rights. Owning a gun should be a privilege, not a right.

• Declare the NRA a terrorist organization and make membership illegal. Hey! We did it to the Communist Party, and the NRA has led to the deaths of more of us than American Commies ever did. (I would also raze the organization’s headquarters, clear the rubble and salt the earth, but that’s optional.) Make ownership of unlicensed assault rifles a felony. If some people refused to give up their guns, that “prying the guns from their cold, dead hands” thing works for me.

• Then I would tie Mitch McConnell and John Boehner, our esteemed Republican leaders, to the back of a Chevy pickup truck and drag them around a parking lot until they saw the light on gun control.

And if that didn’t work, I’d adopt radical measures. None of that is going to happen, of course. But I’ll bet gun sales will rise.

http://www.desmoinesregister.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=2012312300033&nclick_check=1
Click to expand...

Please change the title. I don't know anyone who calls himself a 'liberal' who would support your right wing solution.
 
Sativa said:
yes i did. i used his words to show you that he was serious. he never said he was joking, in fact, he said quite the opposite, he was very upset and wanted change, no more talk (he referenced his dozens of other articles as being ineffectual etc).
.
Click to expand...

Someone call the village and let know their idiot has been found.
 
Howey said:
Let them know you're ok.



Umm...

Because the author is a nationally known satirist?

I swear...you dimwits are so used to believing FOX and their BS that when a satirist publishes a funny rip on the NRA you believe it?

Newsflash!

Stephen Colbert really isn't a conservative.
Click to expand...


The YurTard is one funny guy, isn't he?

The author of the article makes an OBVIOUSLY HYPERBOLIC statement about dragging Boehner and McConnell behind a truck, but according to the YurTard it isn't hyperbole.

But I understand the predicament the YurTard finds himself in.

He HAS to lie his ass off and pretend the author was serious...if he admits it was indeed hyperbole, then he has to admit I am right...and frankly that is something the YurTard will NEVER be able to do.
 
ZappasGuitar said:
The YurTard is one funny guy, isn't he?

The author of the article makes an OBVIOUSLY HYPERBOLIC statement about dragging Boehner and McConnell behind a truck, but according to the YurTard it isn't hyperbole.

But I understand the predicament the YurTard finds himself in.

He HAS to lie his ass off and pretend the author was serious...if he admits it was indeed hyperbole, then he has to admit I am right...and frankly that is something the YurTard will NEVER be able to do.
Click to expand...

oh look who is not engaging in derision and insults and look who is taking the high road

:rofl2:

i'm not lying he was serious, it is my opinion you dumbfuck.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top