The problem is that we have stupid guns in the United States

[AVGWarhawk]

This is all I have to say about it.


And that's final!

[Sailor Steve]

Originally Posted by Tribesman

Isn't it amazing how that troll can spew such obvious lies.
I suppose that is the price of ignorance for August.

Troll? Pot-kettle. From where I sit he got it pretty much right.

[Sailor Steve]

Originally Posted by Tribesman

Ask a simple question get a simple answer.

Not an answer at all.

Can you remember my position on the registration of firearms?
How about the eliminating of loopholes on backround checks for firearms sales?

No. Why don't you tell me rather than dance around?

Can you remember why I think the NRA proposed "list of mentals" is a useless database to work with?

Yes, but that was you reacting again. What is your stance on the question of gun control? You've never said.

[Sailor Steve]

Originally Posted by Tribesman

Facts?
Lets see. Take a post you complained about.
1 It is totally misleading.
2 Not outlawed then.
3 Specify the legislation of whim or stand exposed in your bull.
4 Wow, if you are released on bail they can set bail conditions relative to the charges and the individual, whoda thunkit eh?
5 Steve already tried to defend that line of bull last time you spouted it. He came up with the amazing total of one single person in Florida calling for such a thing.

Show one line that is not factual.

Not one of those lines actually says what you think about the subject. Every single one is a negative reaction to something someone else has said. This is your modus operandi: Always react, but never actually say anything concrete, and make sure that what you do say is an insult.

So...What is your stance on gun control?

[Sailor Steve]

Originally Posted by Tribesman

Feeling bad over the Mali topic eddie?
if you had decided to get even a little basic information on the recent history of the place you would have avoided all the "why US" claims you made.

Actually, he's expressing a feeling that more than a few people here have about you. You are the most intelligent troll this forum has ever seen, and you manage to get away with dancing right on the line over and over again, yet you are still a troll. Once in a blue moon you actually say something worth reading, but mostly it's these hit-and-run attacks, without actually stating a real opinion of your own.

So, what is your stance on gun control?

[Takeda Shingen]

Originally Posted by Tribesman

You are expected to read and to digest what is written, if you fail to do do so then it is you who is at fault and you should not be complaining because you have not understood.

Plastic fruit is not digestible.

Facts?
Lets see. Take a post you complained about.
1 It is totally misleading.
2 Not outlawed then.
3 Specify the legislation of whim or stand exposed in your bull.
4 Wow, if you are released on bail they can set bail conditions relative to the charges and the individual, whoda thunkit eh?
5 Steve already tried to defend that line of bull last time you spouted it. He came up with the amazing total of one single person in Florida calling for such a thing.

Show one line that is not factual.
Or considering the claim you made about it show one line which does not counter the line it was responding to.
3 of course is slightly different as that is a question for someone to provide the legislation of "whim" they say covers firearms.
5 is a rather good example, as that was someone else providing the data but not reading it and also not managing to notice the difference in what he was claiming and what I and his data was saying.
It also provides an example of August again parroting something which has already been shown as false.

So your answer is "but...but....August!".

Originally Posted by Takeda Shingen

So your answer is "but...but....August!".

No the answer is plain.
Your claim was false.
It is demonstrated as being false.
Simple isn't it.

Plastic fruit is not digestible.

That explains why you have problems, you are supposed to read the words.
I did wonder how you couldn't identify facts that were plainly presented to you.

[Takeda Shingen]

Originally Posted by Tribesman

No the answer is plain.
Your claim was false.
It is demonstrated as being false.
Simple isn't it.

No, all you demonstrated was that you tried to deflect the criticism by pointing at someone else. This is a textbook example of a tu quoque ad hominem used to obscure the point. Some light reading:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tu_quoque

That explains why you have problems, you are supposed to read the words.
I did wonder how you couldn't identify facts that were plainly presented to you.

You did not pick up on the metaphor. I am not surprised.

Originally Posted by Sailor Steve

Troll? Pot-kettle. From where I sit he got it pretty much right.

Really Steve? You only have to look at the front page to positively and unquestionably confirm that Augusts claim is a lie.

Which comes to....

Actually, he's expressing a feeling that more than a few people here have about you

He agreed with a post that is demonstably false
Would you like me to point out the most obvious lie it contained?

Not one of those lines actually says what you think about the subject.

It does actually, it says that all those lines of arguement which were countered must be rejected as an answer as they are not true.

Removing the answers that are not true is the method of reason you are objecting to.

Yes, but that was you reacting again.

Can you remember what was the reason I gave for objecting to that proposal?
It did go on for quite a while and I had to repeat the points often so it should have "registered", though on that occasion it was someone else who missed out the key details of legislation that I put in not you.

Always react, but never actually say anything concrete, and make sure that what you do say is an insult.

Strange, that objection was concrete and the reasoning behind and around it was presented and solid.

So, what is your stance on gun control?

It is still evolving.
Is your view no longer evolving?

No, all you demonstrated was that you tried to deflect the criticism by pointing at someone else.

No, it demonstrates that your claim is false.
Would you like to be reminded of your words as yopu seem to be having problems with words?
Follow the sequence.

Tribesman has shown himself to be a master at countering people
For the first part, I disagree. Tribesman presents no evidence or data to the contrary of any argument

The reply to that shows your thoughts on the post in question are clearly incorrect.
Unless of course you can show how my reply was not factual and didn't counter Augusts attempted defence of that silly slogan
Very simple isn't it, if you want to object to what was written about a particular post you have to use both posts.
You manage to take it a step further by including Steves post yet fail to gather your information on the other two posts.
You are like the NRA mental database proposal, missing the key ingredients.

[Takeda Shingen]

Originally Posted by Tribesman

No, it demonstrates that your claim is false.
Would you like to be reminded of your words as yopu seem to be having problems with words?
Follow the sequence.

Tribesman has shown himself to be a master at countering people
For the first part, I disagree. Tribesman presents no evidence or data to the contrary of any argument

The reply to that shows your thoughts on the post in question are clearly incorrect.
Unless of course you can show how my reply was not factual and didn't counter Augusts attempted defence of that silly slogan
Very simple isn't it, if you want to object to what was written about a particular post you have to use both posts.
You manage to take it a step further by including Steves post yet fail to gather your information on the other two posts.
You are like the NRA mental database proposal, missing the key ingredients.

Saying it over and over again doesn't make it true, kiddo. You're beaten. Move on and learn from it.

Here endeth the lesson.

Saying it over and over again doesn't make it true, kiddo. You're beaten. Move on and learn from it.

Yeah right young man, you said that when you didn't understand that different years are different years.
Saying it again doesn't make it true, being true makes it true
Unless you can show that the post didn't counter the false statements then all you are showing is that you are very wrong and seem to have a real problem understanding the word true.

[Takeda Shingen]

Originally Posted by Tribesman

Yeah right, you said that when you didn't understand that different years are different years.
Saying it again doesn't make it true, being true makes it true
Unless you can show that the post didn't counter the false statements then all you are showing is that you are very wrong and seem to have a real problem understanding the word true.

Actually, you have demonstrated that what everyone has been saying about you has been completely true. Steve and I have been talking about four points regarding your behavior.

1. You substitute polemics for facts.
2. You refuse to engage in meaningful discussion.
3. You utilize ad hominems to deflect criticism.
4. You evade lines of direct questioning.

You have demonstrated for several pages now that these things are completely true, which is the only reason that I have been content to allow you to run your mouth for so long. I didn't defeat you; you defeated yourself.

Come along Takeda dear, you made a claim that the post didn't counter the points.
Don't try and run away from it. Stand by your words.
Either show that your claim was true or accept that it was false and has been shown as false.
You cannot deflect it.

I didn't defeat you; you defeated yourself.

Yoo hoo, look in the mirror

BTW as it is words you are having problems with , do you know what this word means "everyone" ?
Or are you just demonstrating that you have a hard time when it comes to simple facts.

[Sailor Steve]

Originally Posted by Tribesman

Really Steve? You only have to look at the front page to positively and unquestionably confirm that Augusts claim is a lie.

I was referring to the things he said about you.

Originally Posted by August

It's because he literally has nothing worth reading. Ever.

Not quite true. You have from time to time actually contributed something. I'd say 20% contribution and 80% attack mode.

You never seen him wish someone a happy birthday or express his condolences at someones loss or post anything that is not just another iteration of his own special brand of sardonic hate speech that adds nothing to the conversation except vitriol.

That pretty much nails it.

Which comes to....

He agreed with a post that is demonstably false
Would you like me to point out the most obvious lie it contained?

The things he said about you are demostrably false? I think he has you pegged.

It does actually, it says that all those lines of arguement which were countered must be rejected as an answer as they are not true.

You counter lines of argument. True, but you do it in the most objectionable way possible, using it as a reason to mock people.

Removing the answers that are not true is the method of reason you are objecting to.

No, what I'm objecting to is the fact that you attack other people's arguments, but you don't make any of your own.

Can you remember what was the reason I gave for objecting to that proposal?
It did go on for quite a while and I had to repeat the points often so it should have "registered", though on that occasion it was someone else who missed out the key details of legislation that I put in not you.

The point now is that you didn't make any proposals of your own.

Strange, that objection was concrete and the reasoning behind and around it was presented and solid.

It was all in your head. You may think you have an answer, but you never come across that way. You come across as insulting and arrogant, and you seem to live to belittle people. We're not talking about an argument you may or may not have made. We're talking about the way you go about it.

It is still evolving.
Is your view no longer evolving?

Always, but on any given day I'm more than willing to say what it is. You never say what it is, you only say why others are wrong.

So, what is your stance on gun control?