• We will be taking the server down at approximately 3:30 AM ET on Wednesday, 10/8/25. We have a hard drive that is in the early stages of failure and this is necessary to prevent data loss. We hope to be back up and running quickly, however this process could take some time.
  • This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Two Siblings Shot During Family "Target Practice"

I don’t address lies; I just point them out. So, quit lying, and we might have a conversation.

Oh come on. Don't sell yourself short.

In over 160000 posts, there has to have been at least a couple times you supported your accusations and assertions.
 
Bet?

If in 10 years you cannot buy an unlimited number of guns, more than any and every drug cartel and mafia on the planet combined, I'll pay you a $100.
not this stupidity again. You claim if I can buy 100000 single shot bolt action 22 rifles, I have the same freedom if I can go buy a M4 select fire carbine (as I should be able to do)\

like many lefties, you constantly confuse QUANTITY with QUALITY
 
How silly is that? Buying an unlimited number of anything would require unlimited funds.

More importantly, how do you know when someone has reached the "unlimited" bar? 😆

I'm afraid you lose your wager by default.
he also claims that if the government bans all but one type of firearm, as long as you can buy hundreds of that one type of firearm, you haven't lost any freedoms. It is as stupid as telling a Jew or a Greek Orthodox Christian that their religious freedoms are not curtailed, even if their houses of worship are banned, as long as there are plenty of Baptist Churches or Islamic Mosques they can attend
 
not this stupidity again. You claim if I can buy 100000 single shot bolt action 22 rifles, I have the same freedom if I can go buy a M4 select fire carbine (as I should be able to do)\

like many lefties, you constantly confuse QUANTITY with QUALITY
Did you ever notice that you never take my bet?
 
Did you ever notice that you never take my bet?
that's because it is stupid. and it has nothing to do with my point. The government has already banned an entire class of firearms that people without records ought to be able to freely buy and own
 
Did you ever notice that you never take my bet?
How would you know when he has successfully bought an unlimited number of guns, and thus win your bet? You are betting that he can buy an infinite number of guns in a finite period of time. You don't see why you lose that bet by default?
 
Oh come on. Don't sell yourself short.

In over 160000 posts, there has to have been at least a couple times you supported your accusations and assertions.
Just quit lying and things will be fine.
 
Just quit lying and things will be fine.

Sadly, this wasn't one of the times you supported an accusation, nor does it appear it is going to be one of those times. Still, I'm sure an example or two exists.
 
Sadly, this wasn't one of the times you supported an accusation, nor does it appear it is going to be one of those times. Still, I'm sure an example or two exists.
Look. Your “B...b..but carz!” Post was bullshit.

You want to deny it. I call that a lie.
 
Look. Your “B...b..but carz!” Post was bullshit.

You want to deny it. I call that a lie.

Look. Still no support for your accusation/assertion. I'm not surprised. Like I said, at some point I have to credit inability.
 
Look. Still no support for your accusation/assertion. I'm not surprised. Like I said, at some point I have to credit inability.
Asked and answered. You just thought my response about some hick shooting his kids was bigoted.

I guess you approve of that sort of behavior, see it like others would a car accident.

...or, you are lying.
 
Asked and answered. You just thought my response about some hick shooting his kids was bigoted
I guess you approve of that sort of behavior, see it like others would a car accident.

...or, you are lying.
Behavior? Is there new evidence the fatal shooting was deliberate?

Who approves of fatal car accidents?

You're struggling.
 
Behavior? Is there new evidence the fatal shooting was deliberate?

Who approves of fatal car accidents?

You're struggling.
Shooting guns where kids play doesn’t raise a flag with you?

No one does donuts on a crowded ball field. Do they? And, if they did, it wouldn’t be treated as a “car accident.” Would it?

Keep lying.
 
Shooting guns where kids play doesn’t raise a flag with you?

No one does donuts on a crowded ball field. Do they? And, if they did, it wouldn’t be treated as a “car accident.” Would it?

Keep lying.

I figured you might have forgot my original analogy by now. Or did you just deliberately change it up?
 

The girl’s mother was headed north on Route 66, when she approached the stop sign at Route 53, and lost control of the car, which rolled over several times before coming to a stop in a field next to the Gardner American Legion post.

When I see an article like the above, my first impulse is not to call for the mother to be jailed, nor to immediately log into a political site and wail and bemoan that:
1. There's just too damn many cars.
2. Car owner's are scummy Trumpers.

For your benefit, @calamity
 
Sadly, this wasn't one of the times you supported an accusation, nor does it appear it is going to be one of those times. Still, I'm sure an example or two exists.
you are being generous.
 
You're simply scared to make the bet.
what is the point? you cannot prove if you win and it has nothing to do with my point. The issue is not whether some type of firearm will remain legal for the next ten years. You know that so your "bet" is both moronic and dishonest.
 
what is the point? you cannot prove if you win and it has nothing to do with my point. The issue is not whether some type of firearm will remain legal for the next ten years. You know that so your "bet" is both moronic and dishonest.
Of course I can prove it if I win and you're still too scared to bet.
 
Nonsense. I understood the stupidity of your post and the dishonest spin it put on facts. Fail less.
Like spinning the Rittenhouse shootings by saying skateboards are not deadly weapon when used as a bat?
 
It wasn't a caveat. The difference I noted,, was the point.

I noticed you still haven't explained what makes the alleged false equivalence false, or what is stupid about it. You just make the allegations, over and over.

Need help? Try this:

A fatal gun accident is substantially different from a fatal vehicle accident because _______?

If you're still at a loss, I can do a multiple choice for you, perhaps.
He claimed skateboards aren't deadly weapons. When I proved they were he ran straight to his " that's a stupid comparison" line. Guess what he didn't offer me a that's a stupid comparison "because" either lol.

It is his MO!
 
...Normal people have the latter while only scumbag asshole morons “accidentally” shoot two kids playing in their own backyard.
What if mom ran a red light unintentionally?

The comparison is valid because they both depict unintentional accidents. One in a car the other with a gun.

It's different for you only because of your anti gun bias.

We could change it to any unintentional accidents and it wouldn't be good enough for your bias.

Mom falls asleep smoking and house catches fire. Child sleeping upstairs is burned alive. Horrific but still not good enough.
 
Back
Top Bottom