TOTALLY GEEKED!

Ohfour · Hooker

RE: Obama Preparing Series of Executive Gun Control Actions

flan327 · Itty bitty's Grammy

Ohfour wrote:
flan327 wrote:
Owning a gun is a privilege.

Not everyone gets to legally own a gun.

flan
No, owning a gun is a right. You have that right until you lose it. A privilege is earned...

And there is where we disagree.

Yes, I know what the Second Amendment says. But, if you lose the right & still own guns...

flan

just Czech · Give Me Grand's!

flan327 wrote:
Ohfour wrote:
flan327 wrote:
Owning a gun is a privilege.

Not everyone gets to legally own a gun.

flan
No, owning a gun is a right. You have that right until you lose it. A privilege is earned...
And there is where we disagree.
Yes, I know what the Second Amendment says. But, if you lose the right & still own guns...
flan

Then you are a criminal. Simple.

See how that works?

Riding · Guru

flan327 wrote:
Riding wrote:
I don't see it as a curious "American Belief" this MUST own guns, I see it as my right and yours if you wanted to, to own a gun. and along with that come responsibility for it. But the GUN is not what kills people, the person holding it and misusing the gun is at fault.

I had no experience with guns growing up...not family or friends, etc.
This board has opened my eyes to a certain fanaticism about guns.
The GUN, in the hands of a SHOOTER, certainly does kill people.
flan

I most likely will not argue the bolded, you are correct in your statement...but also a KNIFE in the hands of a KILLER will kill someone, a crock pot even confuse the common denominator is the SHOOTER, the KILLER, the person who makes the choice to KILL someone, not the inanimate object that is chosen to be the weapon.

We had a classroom killing at a local community college about 3 years ago and it was a son who was upset that his father (a professor) left his mother and was living with another female teacher, so he went to his fathers home and killed the GF with a knife and chased her as she ran from house and continued to stab her...she died. He then went to his fathers classroom and killed his father with a CROSS BOW! You never heard that one on national TV I bet. and yes the CROSS BOW killed a man....no wait, the person using the cross bow killed the man as that same person used a knife to take another life.

I truly do not mean to argue, just stating what I feel in my opinion are facts.

smile

Lady Gaga Snerd · Guru

flan327 wrote:

Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:
You don't think guns have ever been used for Good? Wow. Hunting. Protecting our country, family, lives. Police protection and on and on. Really flan? .
In other words, killing.
flan

Yes, which in those instances is GOOD. Not sure what is so hard to understand about that? But yet, the KILLING of abortion you have NO problem with. Or the killing of patients by Dr Kerorkian, etc. Uh huh.

Lady Gaga Snerd · Guru

I assume you eat meat. You usually KILL it to eat it.

Lawyerlady · On the bright side...... Christmas is coming! (Mod)

Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:
flan327 wrote:

Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:
You don't think guns have ever been used for Good? Wow. Hunting. Protecting our country, family, lives. Police protection and on and on. Really flan? .
In other words, killing.
flan

Yes, which in those instances is GOOD. Not sure what is so hard to understand about that? But yet, the KILLING of abortion you have NO problem with. Or the killing of patients by Dr Kerorkian, etc. Uh huh.

Seriously, for someone that has no compunction about abortion or euthanasia, it's rather odd to hate guns for doing what they are intended to do.

lilyofcourse · My spirit animal is a pink flamingo.

I think we found the disconnect.

Not know a right from a privilege.

Being all for killing, but not wanting to witness it.

huskerbb · Guru

flan327 wrote:
Ohfour wrote:
flan327 wrote:
Owning a gun is a privilege.

Not everyone gets to legally own a gun.

flan
No, owning a gun is a right. You have that right until you lose it. A privilege is earned...
And there is where we disagree.
Yes, I know what the Second Amendment says. But, if you lose the right & still own guns...
flan

You don't seem to know what the second amendment says. It even has the word "right".

I know what to do_sometimes · Frozen Sucks!

So people are now hiding their guns and on the ready for the impeding gov't tyranny, you will see revenue spike on gun and ammo sales. Just saying.

Ohfour · Hooker

We have many guns. We have an entire closet full of ammo. We buy as much ammo as we can. When the time comes, my family will be safe.

chef · Guru

flan327 wrote:
1. A baseball bat is commonly used to play baseball.

2. String?

3. Knives are used for cooking.

A gun SHOOTS people. Period.

flan

1. It can also be used to kill.

2. Doubt it. The speech bubble states the killer STRANGLED the victim so the object in the killer's hand is probably rope.

3. So? Cars are used for driving but can also be used to commit murder. Also, I seriously doubt the very first knife ever invented was created for cooking. More likely, it was invented to kill the animal that would end up being cooked.

4. No. Unless the gun misfires, IT does NOT do the shooting. The PERSON pulling the trigger does the shooting.

It's patently absurd to blame an OBJECT for something happening. Objects are not alive. They do not move/act on their own. Guns are objects. They do not pull their own triggers.

Also, not all guns shoot people nor do all guns kill. Ever hear of a starting gun? It's fired to start a race, not shoot people.

chef · Guru

flan327 wrote:
just Czech wrote:
flan327 wrote:
Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:
You don't think guns have ever been used for Good? Wow. Hunting. Protecting our country, family, lives. Police protection and on and on. Really flan? .
In other words, killing.
flan
Knives are used for killing all the time. Humans and animals. So, IMHO, there is no difference between the two.
Knives are also used for cooking. How many people can you kill with a knife? One at a time, if you know what you're doing? Same question, but substitute a gun.
flan

You only kill one person at a time with a gun too. If you line up people front to back then you may be able to shoot more than one person with the same bullet if the gun is powerful enough to send a bullet through one person into another but, even then, the deaths are not truly simultaneous.

Lady Gaga Snerd · Guru

Well, guns are lethal. They are very efficient at killing. That isn't in question. And, yes, someone with a rapid fire gun is going to inflict far more damage than someone with a knife or any other object. Guns obviously need to be taken very seriously. But, you aren't going to Wish them away. They are here to stay. And, guns also have a long history of saving lives, personally, on the battlefield, providing food, etc.

flan327 · Itty bitty's Grammy

Ohfour wrote:
We have many guns. We have an entire closet full of ammo. We buy as much ammo as we can. When the time comes, my family will be safe.

No disrespect, but I simply cannot imagine living like this.

flan

Lady Gaga Snerd · Guru

Well, you don't have too. Who said you did?

flan327 · Itty bitty's Grammy

Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:
Well, you don't have too. Who said you did?

I am allowed to have an opinion.

flan

Lady Gaga Snerd · Guru

flan327 wrote:

Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:
Well, you don't have too. Who said you did?
I am allowed to have an opinion.
flan

And, who said you weren't allowed to have an opinion? hmm

flan327 · Itty bitty's Grammy

Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:
Well, guns are lethal. They are very efficient at killing. That isn't in question. And, yes, someone with a rapid fire gun is going to inflict far more damage than someone with a knife or any other object. Guns obviously need to be taken very seriously. But, you aren't going to Wish them away. They are here to stay. And, guns also have a long history of saving lives, personally, on the battlefield, providing food, etc.

Just scroll up...there are posters actually disagreeing with this...

flan

Tinydancer · Guru

Where? I don't see anyone disagreeing with that. Just disagreeing with your stance that more laws will solve the problem of some nutcase shooting up a school. What they are doing is already illegal.

flan327 · Itty bitty's Grammy

chef wrote:
flan327 wrote:
just Czech wrote:
flan327 wrote:
Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:
You don't think guns have ever been used for Good? Wow. Hunting. Protecting our country, family, lives. Police protection and on and on. Really flan? .
In other words, killing.
flan
Knives are used for killing all the time. Humans and animals. So, IMHO, there is no difference between the two.
Knives are also used for cooking. How many people can you kill with a knife? One at a time, if you know what you're doing? Same question, but substitute a gun.
flan
You only kill one person at a time with a gun too. If you line up people front to back then you may be able to shoot more than one person with the same bullet if the gun is powerful enough to send a bullet through one person into another but, even then, the deaths are not truly simultaneous.

With an assault weapon? Really? The shooters aren't using muskets & having to load each individual bullet.

flan

Tinydancer · Guru

Even with a gun you can only kill one person at a time unless you shoot through one and hit somebody behind. I'm pretty sure that was her point. Try reading what she wrote without those blinders on.

Lady Gaga Snerd · Guru

You can rapidly mow down a lot of people in a hurry. Yes a shooter oncampus will inflict far more damage than with a knife.

flan327 · Itty bitty's Grammy

Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:
You can rapidly mow down a lot of people in a hurry. Yes a shooter oncampus will inflict far more damage than with a knife.

It's not rocket science!

flan

Tinydancer · Guru

Nobody said it was and that wasn't chefs point.

chef · Guru

flan327 wrote:
chef wrote:
flan327 wrote:
just Czech wrote:
flan327 wrote:
Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:
You don't think guns have ever been used for Good? Wow. Hunting. Protecting our country, family, lives. Police protection and on and on. Really flan? .
In other words, killing.
flan
Knives are used for killing all the time. Humans and animals. So, IMHO, there is no difference between the two.
Knives are also used for cooking. How many people can you kill with a knife? One at a time, if you know what you're doing? Same question, but substitute a gun.
flan
You only kill one person at a time with a gun too. If you line up people front to back then you may be able to shoot more than one person with the same bullet if the gun is powerful enough to send a bullet through one person into another but, even then, the deaths are not truly simultaneous.
With an assault weapon? Really? The shooters aren't using muskets & having to load each individual bullet.
flan

A knife can also be an assault weapon. So can a car. And yes, really. Regardless of how many bullets are in the clip (I think that's the term), unless a bullet goes through one person and into another, you cannot shoot more than one person with the same bullet.

Did I mention muskets? No. Read what I said instead of twisting it.

chef · Guru

Tinydancer wrote:
Even with a gun you can only kill one person at a time unless you shoot through one and hit somebody behind. I'm pretty sure that was her point. Try reading what she wrote without those blinders on.

Exactly. Thank you.

chef · Guru

Tinydancer wrote:
Nobody said it was and that wasn't chefs point.

Absolutely correct. Again, thank you.

Tinydancer · Guru

I hate it when posters twists any ones words. Some of them do it often and it makes me want to remind them of what they're doing. I'm glad I didn't misinterpret.

chef · Guru

Tinydancer wrote:
I hate it when posters twists any ones words. Some of them do it often and it makes me want to remind them of what they're doing. I'm glad I didn't misinterpret.

You were spot on.

I'm not sure what's so hard to understand about what I posted. One bullet is one bullet. It doesn't boomerang back into the gun. One can shoot multiple bullets rapidly but one would be doing a great job at bending the laws of physics to kill multiple people at exactly the same time.

flan327 · Itty bitty's Grammy

chef wrote:
flan327 wrote:
chef wrote:
flan327 wrote:
just Czech wrote:
flan327 wrote:
Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:
You don't think guns have ever been used for Good? Wow. Hunting. Protecting our country, family, lives. Police protection and on and on. Really flan? .
In other words, killing.
flan
Knives are used for killing all the time. Humans and animals. So, IMHO, there is no difference between the two.
Knives are also used for cooking. How many people can you kill with a knife? One at a time, if you know what you're doing? Same question, but substitute a gun.
flan
You only kill one person at a time with a gun too. If you line up people front to back then you may be able to shoot more than one person with the same bullet if the gun is powerful enough to send a bullet through one person into another but, even then, the deaths are not truly simultaneous.
With an assault weapon? Really? The shooters aren't using muskets & having to load each individual bullet.
flan
A knife can also be an assault weapon. So can a car. And yes, really. Regardless of how many bullets are in the clip (I think that's the term), unless a bullet goes through one person and into another, you cannot shoot more than one person with the same bullet.
Did I mention muskets? No. Read what I said instead of twisting it.

And now you seem to be deliberately missing the point I am making.

Knives and cars have other uses. Does a gun?

Knives haven't changed much over the last hundred years, but guns have become MUCH MORE EFFICIENT at slaughtering people. And that is WHY I brought up muskets.

flan

Tinydancer · Guru

flan327 wrote:
chef wrote:
flan327 wrote:
chef wrote:
flan327 wrote:
just Czech wrote:
flan327 wrote:
Lady Gaga Snerd wrote:
You don't think guns have ever been used for Good? Wow. Hunting. Protecting our country, family, lives. Police protection and on and on. Really flan? .
In other words, killing.
flan
Knives are used for killing all the time. Humans and animals. So, IMHO, there is no difference between the two.
Knives are also used for cooking. How many people can you kill with a knife? One at a time, if you know what you're doing? Same question, but substitute a gun.
flan
You only kill one person at a time with a gun too. If you line up people front to back then you may be able to shoot more than one person with the same bullet if the gun is powerful enough to send a bullet through one person into another but, even then, the deaths are not truly simultaneous.
With an assault weapon? Really? The shooters aren't using muskets & having to load each individual bullet.
flan
A knife can also be an assault weapon. So can a car. And yes, really. Regardless of how many bullets are in the clip (I think that's the term), unless a bullet goes through one person and into another, you cannot shoot more than one person with the same bullet.
Did I mention muskets? No. Read what I said instead of twisting it.
And now you seem to be deliberately missing the point I am making.
Knives and cars have other uses. Does a gun?
Knives haven't changed much over the last hundred years, but guns have become MUCH MORE EFFICIENT at slaughtering people. And that is WHY I brought up muskets.
flan

Hunting, protection, police, military. That is a really pathetic question flanny.

chef · Guru

flan327 wrote:

And now you seem to be deliberately missing the point I am making.
Knives and cars have other uses. Does a gun?
Knives haven't changed much over the last hundred years, but guns have become MUCH MORE EFFICIENT at slaughtering people. And that is WHY I brought up muskets.
flan

I'm not deliberately missing anything. I have comprehended everything you have said. I simply disagree with your position that guns are so much more heinous than other tools used to kill people.

Yes, a gun has uses other than killing people. Target practice. Clay shooting (I forget the name of it but it's a sport). Signifying the start of a race. In my area, it's popular to welcome the New Year by firing a shot or a few into the air (dangerous, yes, I know but there ya go). Paintball. Water guns. etc.

You vilify the object (the gun) but give the shooter a pass. It's not the gun's fault it was used nefariously. You don't like guns because they can be used to kill people. Well, so can knives, cars, rocks, rope, plastic bags, water, etc. Yet, I don't see you vilifying any of those objects. Death is death. The manner of killing someone does not make death any less lethal.

Tinydancer · Guru

chef wrote:
flan327 wrote:

And now you seem to be deliberately missing the point I am making.
Knives and cars have other uses. Does a gun?
Knives haven't changed much over the last hundred years, but guns have become MUCH MORE EFFICIENT at slaughtering people. And that is WHY I brought up muskets.
flan
I'm not deliberately missing anything. I have comprehended everything you have said. I simply disagree with your position that guns are so much more heinous than other tools used to kill people.
Yes, a gun has uses other than killing people. Target practice. Clay shooting (I forget the name of it but it's a sport). Signifying the start of a race. In my area, it's popular to welcome the New Year by firing a shot or a few into the air (dangerous, yes, I know but there ya go). Paintball. Water guns. etc.
You vilify the object (the gun) but give the shooter a pass. It's not the gun's fault it was used nefariously. You don't like guns because they can be used to kill people. Well, so can knives, cars, rocks, rope, plastic bags, water, etc. Yet, I don't see you vilifying any of those objects. Death is death. The manner of killing someone does not make death any less lethal.

Very well said. Bravo!

flan327 · Itty bitty's Grammy

chef wrote:
flan327 wrote:

And now you seem to be deliberately missing the point I am making.
Knives and cars have other uses. Does a gun?
Knives haven't changed much over the last hundred years, but guns have become MUCH MORE EFFICIENT at slaughtering people. And that is WHY I brought up muskets.
flan
I'm not deliberately missing anything. I have comprehended everything you have said. I simply disagree with your position that guns are so much more heinous than other tools used to kill people.
Yes, a gun has uses other than killing people. Target practice. Clay shooting (I forget the name of it but it's a sport). Signifying the start of a race. In my area, it's popular to welcome the New Year by firing a shot or a few into the air (dangerous, yes, I know but there ya go). Paintball. Water guns. etc.
You vilify the object (the gun) but give the shooter a pass. It's not the gun's fault it was used nefariously. You don't like guns because they can be used to kill people. Well, so can knives, cars, rocks, rope, plastic bags, water, etc. Yet, I don't see you vilifying any of those objects. Death is death. The manner of killing someone does not make death any less lethal.

So how many people are killed by water guns?

I will say it one more time: Today guns are a more EFFICIENT way of killing people.

Let me know the next time a madman walks into a classroom & starts throwing rocks at students & teachers.

flan

Tinydancer · Guru

flan327 wrote:
chef wrote:
flan327 wrote:

And now you seem to be deliberately missing the point I am making.
Knives and cars have other uses. Does a gun?
Knives haven't changed much over the last hundred years, but guns have become MUCH MORE EFFICIENT at slaughtering people. And that is WHY I brought up muskets.
flan
I'm not deliberately missing anything. I have comprehended everything you have said. I simply disagree with your position that guns are so much more heinous than other tools used to kill people.
Yes, a gun has uses other than killing people. Target practice. Clay shooting (I forget the name of it but it's a sport). Signifying the start of a race. In my area, it's popular to welcome the New Year by firing a shot or a few into the air (dangerous, yes, I know but there ya go). Paintball. Water guns. etc.
You vilify the object (the gun) but give the shooter a pass. It's not the gun's fault it was used nefariously. You don't like guns because they can be used to kill people. Well, so can knives, cars, rocks, rope, plastic bags, water, etc. Yet, I don't see you vilifying any of those objects. Death is death. The manner of killing someone does not make death any less lethal.
So how many people are killed by water guns?
I will say it one more time: Today guns are a more EFFICIENT way of killing people.
Let me know the next time a madman walks into a classroom & starts throwing rocks at students & teachers.
flan

Or stabs them, or uses a bomb. Pathetic...lol

Tinydancer · Guru

If you focus on what they use to kill you will never solve the problem of why or how to stop it. Stop blaming the weapon and start blaming the person. Oh wait we can't do that because they might have a mental illness or their Mom was mean. I feel sorry for the truly mentally ill. They have to answer for all these killings just like the guns do.

chef · Guru

flan327 wrote:
chef wrote:
flan327 wrote:

And now you seem to be deliberately missing the point I am making.
Knives and cars have other uses. Does a gun?
Knives haven't changed much over the last hundred years, but guns have become MUCH MORE EFFICIENT at slaughtering people. And that is WHY I brought up muskets.
flan
I'm not deliberately missing anything. I have comprehended everything you have said. I simply disagree with your position that guns are so much more heinous than other tools used to kill people.
Yes, a gun has uses other than killing people. Target practice. Clay shooting (I forget the name of it but it's a sport). Signifying the start of a race. In my area, it's popular to welcome the New Year by firing a shot or a few into the air (dangerous, yes, I know but there ya go). Paintball. Water guns. etc.
You vilify the object (the gun) but give the shooter a pass. It's not the gun's fault it was used nefariously. You don't like guns because they can be used to kill people. Well, so can knives, cars, rocks, rope, plastic bags, water, etc. Yet, I don't see you vilifying any of those objects. Death is death. The manner of killing someone does not make death any less lethal.
So how many people are killed by water guns?
I will say it one more time: Today guns are a more EFFICIENT way of killing people.
Let me know the next time a madman walks into a classroom & starts throwing rocks at students & teachers.
flan

I don't know how many people have been killed by water guns. Google it.

Yes, guns are more efficient at killing people. I never said otherwise. But, an object's efficiency at doing xyz does NOT mean the object is responsible for doing xyz. It's the person using the object that is responsible. Again, you're blaming the OBJECT while giving the PERSON a pass.

Let you know if/when that scenario happens? Why? Do you not have access to the news?

chef · Guru

Tinydancer wrote:
If you focus on what they use to kill you will never solve the problem of why or how to stop it. Stop blaming the weapon and start blaming the person. Oh wait we can't do that because they might have a mental illness or their Mom was mean. I feel sorry for the truly mentally ill. They have to answer for all these killings just like the guns do.

This. It's not rocket science.

Hey TD ... I got cut by cardboard today. Would you support me in banning cardboard? I mean, it just jumped out all by itself and cut me. I didn't touch it at all. I swear. We need to immediately ban such a dangerous object! wink

Tinydancer · Guru

Cardboard is like that. It's always cutting people. I'll go along with that ban.

flan327 · Itty bitty's Grammy

chef wrote:
flan327 wrote:
chef wrote:
flan327 wrote:

And now you seem to be deliberately missing the point I am making.
Knives and cars have other uses. Does a gun?
Knives haven't changed much over the last hundred years, but guns have become MUCH MORE EFFICIENT at slaughtering people. And that is WHY I brought up muskets.
flan
I'm not deliberately missing anything. I have comprehended everything you have said. I simply disagree with your position that guns are so much more heinous than other tools used to kill people.
Yes, a gun has uses other than killing people. Target practice. Clay shooting (I forget the name of it but it's a sport). Signifying the start of a race. In my area, it's popular to welcome the New Year by firing a shot or a few into the air (dangerous, yes, I know but there ya go). Paintball. Water guns. etc.
You vilify the object (the gun) but give the shooter a pass. It's not the gun's fault it was used nefariously. You don't like guns because they can be used to kill people. Well, so can knives, cars, rocks, rope, plastic bags, water, etc. Yet, I don't see you vilifying any of those objects. Death is death. The manner of killing someone does not make death any less lethal.
So how many people are killed by water guns?
I will say it one more time: Today guns are a more EFFICIENT way of killing people.
Let me know the next time a madman walks into a classroom & starts throwing rocks at students & teachers.
flan
I don't know how many people have been killed by water guns. Google it.
Yes, guns are more efficient at killing people. I never said otherwise. But, an object's efficiency at doing xyz does NOT mean the object is responsible for doing xyz. It's the person using the object that is responsible. Again, you're blaming the OBJECT while giving the PERSON a pass.
Let you know if/when that scenario happens? Why? Do you not have access to the news?

Because YOU were the one who brought up water guns, trying to prove some point.

WHEN DID I GIVE THE SHOOTER A PASS?

flan

Tinydancer · Guru

See if you blame the object (a gun, a baby) then you never really have to deal with the problem. You just ban it or kill it and problem solved.

Tinydancer · Guru

flan327 wrote:
chef wrote:
flan327 wrote:
chef wrote:
flan327 wrote:

And now you seem to be deliberately missing the point I am making.
Knives and cars have other uses. Does a gun?
Knives haven't changed much over the last hundred years, but guns have become MUCH MORE EFFICIENT at slaughtering people. And that is WHY I brought up muskets.
flan
I'm not deliberately missing anything. I have comprehended everything you have said. I simply disagree with your position that guns are so much more heinous than other tools used to kill people.
Yes, a gun has uses other than killing people. Target practice. Clay shooting (I forget the name of it but it's a sport). Signifying the start of a race. In my area, it's popular to welcome the New Year by firing a shot or a few into the air (dangerous, yes, I know but there ya go). Paintball. Water guns. etc.
You vilify the object (the gun) but give the shooter a pass. It's not the gun's fault it was used nefariously. You don't like guns because they can be used to kill people. Well, so can knives, cars, rocks, rope, plastic bags, water, etc. Yet, I don't see you vilifying any of those objects. Death is death. The manner of killing someone does not make death any less lethal.
So how many people are killed by water guns?
I will say it one more time: Today guns are a more EFFICIENT way of killing people.
Let me know the next time a madman walks into a classroom & starts throwing rocks at students & teachers.
flan
I don't know how many people have been killed by water guns. Google it.
Yes, guns are more efficient at killing people. I never said otherwise. But, an object's efficiency at doing xyz does NOT mean the object is responsible for doing xyz. It's the person using the object that is responsible. Again, you're blaming the OBJECT while giving the PERSON a pass.
Let you know if/when that scenario happens? Why? Do you not have access to the news?
Because YOU were the one who brought up water guns, trying to prove some point.
WHEN DID I GIVE THE SHOOTER A PASS?
flan

Well you know those fathers who kill their whole family because they can't deal with a certain situation? Well you gave them a pass. Oh, and those mothers who want to kill their babies, you give them a pass. I think I can find a few more examples if you'd like.

chef · Guru

flan327 wrote:

Because YOU were the one who brought up water guns, trying to prove some point.
WHEN DID I GIVE THE SHOOTER A PASS?
flan

I brought up water guns, among other examples, because you asked if gun have purposes other than killing people.

No need to lose your temper and shout, Flan. You give the shooter a pass every time you blame the gun for the shooting.

chef · Guru

Tinydancer wrote:
Cardboard is like that. It's always cutting people. I'll go along with that ban.

Excellent! That means I don't have to deal with my carelessness in handling the cardboard since it's obviously the cardboard's fault for cutting me since it's the object and I'm the person. biggrin

Tinydancer · Guru

chef wrote:
Tinydancer wrote:
Cardboard is like that. It's always cutting people. I'll go along with that ban.
Excellent! That means I don't have to deal with my carelessness in handling the cardboard since it's obviously the cardboard's fault for cutting me since it's the object and I'm the person.

Illogic at it's best!

flan327 · Itty bitty's Grammy

chef wrote:
flan327 wrote:

Because YOU were the one who brought up water guns, trying to prove some point.
WHEN DID I GIVE THE SHOOTER A PASS?
flan
I brought up water guns, among other examples, because you asked if gun have purposes other than killing people.
No need to lose your temper and shout, Flan. You give the shooter a pass every time you blame the gun for the shooting.

You do realize that ignoring me is an option?

flan

Tinydancer · Guru

Ignoring someone is always an option but what's the fun in that?

chef · Guru

Tinydancer wrote:
chef wrote:
Tinydancer wrote:
Cardboard is like that. It's always cutting people. I'll go along with that ban.
Excellent! That means I don't have to deal with my carelessness in handling the cardboard since it's obviously the cardboard's fault for cutting me since it's the object and I'm the person.
Illogic at it's best!

I tried!

chef · Guru

flan327 wrote:
chef wrote:
flan327 wrote:

Because YOU were the one who brought up water guns, trying to prove some point.
WHEN DID I GIVE THE SHOOTER A PASS?
flan
I brought up water guns, among other examples, because you asked if gun have purposes other than killing people.
No need to lose your temper and shout, Flan. You give the shooter a pass every time you blame the gun for the shooting.
You do realize that ignoring me is an option?
flan

Of course I do. It's an option for you too. But, that has nothing to do with the subject. Did you not like my answer to your question?

-- Edited by chef on Thursday 8th of October 2015 11:42:04 PM