(08-11-2019 12:54 PM)Fort Bend Owl Wrote:  I am for any measure that makes it harder, if not impossible, to buy, own, or operate a firearm.

You happy now?

Last I checked, that's not illegal for me to say that.

BTW you're wrong on suicides, but that's not surprising since you're wrong on most things. It's 60 percent as I said, according to most recent stats released (2017 deaths). 23,854 suicides out of 39,773 deaths. But again whether it's 0, 60 or 99, it's too many.

https://edition.cnn.com/2018/12/13/healt...index.html

I am happy. I dont have to listen to the half-assed arm flapping anymore about trying to play hide the fing salami with crap assed fairy tale level terms like 'assault rifle' or the equally as fing vacuous 'military-style firearm' crap that usually emanates from the entire left as a whole on this issue.

Or the inclusion of every fing suicide as a 'gun death that needs to combated' via licensing and registration. You know, the typical artifice and misleading mannerisms inherent in the progressive's normal stated viewpoint.

In fact, I actually respect you quite a bit for being able to say that, and saying it. I wish more on your side actually had the fing spine to do that, to be honest.

I would say actually grow some more fing spine and actually do the 'real legal' way and advocate for the repeal of the 2nd Amendment. And then go hit the statehouses to get those changes. I would have even more of an extraordinary tremendous amount of respect for you. But that is the reason why I probably have less than zero respect for the progressive MO overall.

Or keep doing the spineless progressive **** of trying to ignore that piece of the law and the 'let's just do as many end runs around it as we can' that progressives seem all excited (and very adept) about (i.e. the 'lets just ignore the words' thingy that you do so smashingly well at...)

But being the spineless progressive cause that it is, and the spineless progressives that most progressives are, I will expect the adherents to keep to the 'cut it a million times and bleed it to death' style and the 'lets use fairy tale words to mask everything we want *everyone* else to adhere to' style of rule of law that progressive side seemingly has wet dreams about. Sound about right?

And yes, tossing in suicide gun deaths is a pretty fing stupid move; and an absolutely and fundamentally intellectually dishonest tactic. Thank you for clearing that up once again for us.

Quote:But again whether it's 0, 60 or 99, it's too many.

And funny you dont preach all to fing high heaven about the number of auto deaths with that fing hosanna.

I mean you are absolutely riled about 'even one death' by gun (even if intentionally self-inflicted), but refuse to even consider getting joshed up and ornery about the 30 - 40 thousand auto deaths (most of which arent intentionally self-inflicted). I would hazard your religious commitment to your politics cant let you do *that*, so you dont. Is that right?

Or is it that you are so hateful of any or all firearms that that 'one death' makes you stand so firmly on that soapbox while utterly fing ignoring car deaths in the same number? I mean if you were rational in the the even slightest sense you would be as morally outraged at autos as you are at firearms.

Honest answers if you could: a) why is it so hard for progressives to simply state what you just did? b) Why is it so hard for progressives to simply state 'the time has passed for the 2nd Amendment, we need to rework it to a more reasonable issue'?

c) If the answer to b) is 'it is politically impossible to do so', then what does that tell you about that position relative to the country as a whole?

d) What does the *fact* that you require artifice and indirection to make your position the position of society tell you about *your* position (i.e. the progressive position) on the issue? What does that artifice and indirection that is so liberally (haha) applied tell you about the progressive viewpoint on making sure the *rest* of the country adheres to that stance?

Honestly, if you dont want guns in your household, that is your choice. If you dont want them anywhere, anytime, the fact that your position has to employ artifice and misdirection to get to that endpoint doesnt reflect well on the underlying motives of the progressive movement in the slightest.

--------------------------

But in all seriousness FBO, I actually *do* respect *you* for saying that. Quite a bit actually. Too bad hardly anyone else on the progressive side can do explicitly what you have just done. At least you have a goal, and dont have to use artifice around here in achieving that goal or arguing that viewpoint. If I could buy you a beer right now, I actually would.