C4 Hilariousness
in [Commodore]
|
Prev: Key-Mapper on C64?
Next: Datel SuperRom Expander..
From: White Spirit on 13 May 2010 17:18 On 13/05/10 19:27, Brandon Staggs wrote: > "White Spirit" wrote on Thu, 13 May 2010 17:18:31 +0100: >> No one has even proven a correlation. > Untrue. I posted a link to a book by an economist that does exactly > that. Of course, causation is a different matter. Well, when we're talking about 0.32 percent of the population, it's hardly a representative sample. > But I see that this thread has degenerated into nonsense like "the USA > has to pay back what it's been stealing" and other mindless tripe. > Not much point in continuing here. For you, your government > (presumably Great Britain) doesn't trust you with a gun. Not much you > can do there, since everybody's only concerned with staying on their > "benefits." Here, our government still (in most places) respects our > right to personal weaponry, and hopefully, is just a tad bit fearful > of it. I think there are genuine reasons for them to be fearful, but not for the reasons you might think. For example, take David Murray's post where he says that '4 big black guys got out that looked like they were part of a gang'. Why would he mention their colour? It sounds to me that it's only significant because he is racist. Claiming that they looked as though they were part of a gang is simply a matter of him projecting his antipathy onto them. So in other words, a racist is thinking the worst of some black people in order to justify the possibility of shooting them. And then you have the archetypal Internet hard man, Dragos, who is so insecure that he posts pictures of firearms on a computing newsgroup. Hardly the actions of a reasoned mind. No, I'd be bloody fearful if I lived in a country where I knew that people like them were carrying around deadly weapons. That's why I prefer the situation in the majority of European countries, where I know that they are carried by people who have been highly trained and are, above all, sane.
From: White Spirit on 13 May 2010 17:20 On 13/05/10 19:22, Dragos wrote: > ; it's time to pay back some of >>> what you've been taking away for decades, centuries from the rest of >>> the world... > How about every country that owes us from our help rebuilding their > country pay us the debt they owe us. We just finished paying the exorbitant war loan several years back. Next.
From: Clocky on 13 May 2010 22:46 Dragos wrote: > ; it's time to pay back some of >>> what you've been taking away for decades, centuries from the rest of >>> the world... > > How about every country that owes us from our help rebuilding their > country pay us the debt they owe us. Oh it just keeps getting better...
From: Clocky on 13 May 2010 22:51 White Spirit wrote: > On 13/05/10 19:27, Brandon Staggs wrote: > >> "White Spirit" wrote on Thu, 13 May 2010 17:18:31 +0100: > >>> No one has even proven a correlation. > >> Untrue. I posted a link to a book by an economist that does exactly >> that. Of course, causation is a different matter. > > Well, when we're talking about 0.32 percent of the population, it's > hardly a representative sample. > >> But I see that this thread has degenerated into nonsense like "the >> USA has to pay back what it's been stealing" and other mindless >> tripe. Not much point in continuing here. For you, your government >> (presumably Great Britain) doesn't trust you with a gun. Not much >> you can do there, since everybody's only concerned with staying on >> their "benefits." Here, our government still (in most places) >> respects our right to personal weaponry, and hopefully, is just a >> tad bit fearful of it. > > I think there are genuine reasons for them to be fearful, but not for > the reasons you might think. For example, take David Murray's post > where he says that '4 big black guys got out that looked like they > were part of a gang'. Why would he mention their colour? It sounds > to me that it's only significant because he is racist. Claiming that > they looked as though they were part of a gang is simply a matter of > him projecting his antipathy onto them. So in other words, a racist > is thinking the worst of some black people in order to justify the > possibility of shooting them. > > And then you have the archetypal Internet hard man, Dragos, who is so > insecure that he posts pictures of firearms on a computing newsgroup. > Hardly the actions of a reasoned mind. > > No, I'd be bloody fearful if I lived in a country where I knew that > people like them were carrying around deadly weapons. That's why I > prefer the situation in the majority of European countries, where I > know that they are carried by people who have been highly trained and > are, above all, sane. Amen to that.
From: Dragos on 14 May 2010 00:17
>>Hardly the actions of a reasoned mind. Right, responding to a threat real or otherwise with a little background is unreasonable. While I am quite sure I can handle any of the typical morons who would send me such a threat, Why not give them a heads up about the possible consequences? Seems only fair.... yes the UK FINALLY repaid their loan ("exorbitantly" given at 2% for FIFTY YEARS) Five years late.... And they were more than happy to take the money. What about the other countries? hmmmmm. Yes, We are terrible. So, claiming 4 big black guys who looked like they were in a gang is racist? Because he mentioned black? So is he also a sizist since he mentioned they were big? You are quite a piece of work, calling someone a racist based on one comment.(which probably was hitting the nail on the head) He called it like he saw it, nothing more. He didn't call them any derogatory names based on their skin color. You however have attempted to brand him a racist. I hope you love living where you do, and if anyone ever attempts to do you harm, I hope you are able to defend yourself with your frying pan or whatever. Here, intruders or would-be assailants get bullets... I take no chances with the security of my family. You should do some research on the gun laws here, I bet you have no clue how it works. I also suggest anyone in this country that would seek to do a law abiding second amendment exerciser harm, do some research on the so-called castle doctrine and the fact that(at least in this state) one has NO DUTY TO RETREAT if they are being assaulted or reasonably believe they or a third party are about to be assaulted. |