[knox]

Originally Posted by !@#$%!

that's why i don't argue with trolls

if you don't have anything to say on the subject, don't say anything at all.

i already told you, i haven't got a problem with you there's no reason to be all rude and personal.

you seem to ignore all the points you don't want to address in a discussion, so i'm not willing to argue with you, all i'm gonna say is that you shouldn't say people are making weak points here, because your last points are probably the weakest (not to mention unrelated).

i know this sounds a bit personal, but i'm only talking about internet discussions, but i get the impression you feel too threatened everytime someone poses a question you don't exactly know to respond to.

i wish you don't turn this into an opportunity to show how much knowledge you have over something unrelated, because i feel this is an important discussion for both sides.

it isn't a personal argument. i'm honestly trying to understand why the people who disagree with me think what they do, and how do they respond to the questions i pose.

so i'm being civil and all. you don't like me, fine, fair enough. but i'm far from being any kind of troll, but you're honestly being childish to take it so personally to continue to pop every now and then to be rude and insult me.

besides, i thought i was on ignore that's what you had said anyway.

[knox]

Originally Posted by Rob Instigator

regulation is fine and dandy, just don't screw with the Bill of Rights to get it done.

i'm afraid i don't know much about it, but is it possible to regulate more without doing that?

[!@#$%!]

Originally Posted by knox

if you don't have anything to say on the subject, don't say anything at all.

all kinda rhymes with troll.

troll.

[knox]

very mature.

well, God knows I tried.

everyone behaves like an idiot once in a while, but some people choose to stick to it on an ongoing basis.

what can I do.

[ann ashtray]

Knox is making a difference man. People like her are making the world a safer, more reasonable place. If we all follow her example, just imagine how fantastic everything would be.

Not.

This thread is growing more + more absurd.

[knox]

how awful I must be, alliances of hate.
you should call that bitter one g.death and bond over it.

meanwhile, i still wonder what's so bad about these questions i've been bringing up that some people would rather start a whole personal drama rather than actually responding to them.

it bothers me because i'd like to know what people would say but by the time they get here this whole wankery will be too distracting and they will miss the actual discussion.

but you do have a point you know, i am an idealist.

[ann ashtray]

Well, now your being serious? What happened to making fun of people because they have different opinions?

[knox]

i'm still doing it.

[ann ashtray]

You're just miserable.

[!@#$%!]

Originally Posted by ann ashtray

Knox is making a difference man. People like her are making the world a safer, more reasonable place. If we all follow her example, just imagine how fantastic everything would be.

bullshit

lol

idiot

my cuntitude

you ignore my points

...

shall i continue? i feel the peace already. soon we're going to levitate the pentagon!

[ann ashtray]

hahaha, I love you symbol guy!

[!@#$%!]

Originally Posted by ann ashtray

hahaha, I love you symbol guy!

yeah, i feel that alliance of hate too!

alliance of hate. are we like, the axis of evel knievel?

 

[ann ashtray]

The alliance of hate started off being pretty nice, I think.

[Genteel Death]

Originally Posted by ploesj

yeah, wow, i seriously can't agree with that. hitler was indeed elected in a time when germany was struggling, and cleverly placed the blame on one group of civilians. certainly at the beginning of his power, most germans didn't intend at all to fight him, except maybe the radical communists. it was even the opposite: he got the industry on wheels again and gave them a road network that still exists. what they saw was the good things in their own environment, and the people they were made believe to be evil disappear.

this is quite one-sided of course and i'm sure there will have been exceptions, but it is crazy what the power of one strong political individual can do with a person's mind. hitler wasn't the first one who got a whole nation into doing crazy stuff.

The ''radical''* communists see nazism and fascism as a phase in the constant re-balancing of power within capitalist imperialism, not an isolated evil chapter in history with unrelated consequences to everything that happened before or after, which is an extremily sore point between them and the various liberals (many a SY fan can be described politically as just that, no more no less), theoretically/tactically under-developed anarchic groups, and especially the parliamentary section of leftist parties, as much an enemy to them as your token right-winger.
* I wrote that between brackets because by radical I gather you mean REAL communists, or at least those who push it into serious political activity of non-extremist thought/doing .

[Genteel Death]

Oh and I strongly recommend to heroine in residence knox at least one book by Alexandra Kollontai, in this case ''The Autobiography of a Sexually Emancipated Communist Woman''.

[verme (prevaricator)]

i'm slightly inebriated, with nothing better to do so here goes some more:

i think that individuals should have the right to own weapons, namely guns.
that itself is why it needs to be properly legislated: to protect that right. you protect it not by gun-toting, but through the means of regulation by assuring that it doesn't conflict with other given rights.

in my opinion the current legislation in the usa does not guarantees this.

but that's not the worse, the worse is that your irresponsibility is affecting other nations.

even if there's no popular urge to legislate on this matter, like some here are suggesting, there's factual correlation between usa's lenient laws and the war going on in mexico. perhaps that's something that ought to be taken into consideration.

but america being america i can see why it isn't.

anyway,
enjoy the fear-mongering
enjoy being bitches of the gun industry

[knox]

Originally Posted by verme (prevaricator)

i'm slightly inebriated, with nothing better to do so here goes some more:

i think that individuals should have the right to own weapons, namely guns.
that itself is why it needs to be properly legislated: to protect that right. you protect it not by gun-toting, but through the means of regulation by assuring that it doesn't conflict with other given rights.

in my opinion the current legislation in the usa does not guarantees this.

but that's not the worse, the worse is that your irresponsibility is affecting other nations.

even if there's no popular urge to legislate on this matter, like some here are suggesting, there's factual correlation between usa's lenient laws and the war going on in mexico. perhaps that's something that ought to be taken into consideration.

but america being america i can see why it isn't.

anyway,
enjoy the fear-mongering
enjoy being bitches of the gun industry

that's kind of what i've been saying, except for the first part.

but why is it a man always more entitled to get away with jest? not fair.

if i had been the one to write the last two sentences, oh man, what a troll.

i like rivals/arguments with more wit (sorry sway) wondering if i could get that if i unblock genteel death.

[verme (prevaricator)]

eh?

i AM a troll.

but that's not the point.

[knox]

Originally Posted by knox

where are all the revolutions? where are all the constitutional by right revolutions? with guns?

so instead, let's be logical and i'd like to hear

we all know people get guns, we all know guns make it easier for killers to kill, we all know people die as a result of legally purchased guns. so which right is more important? to protect yourself or to protect society as a whole? whose rights are more important? the rights of the ones that have proctected themselves or the rights of the ones who die? or do dead people have no rights?

and i'll ask one more time: Althought I'd say most people shouldn't be driving, unfortunately people NEED cars in most areas. From what Rob told me, it's much easier and quicker getting a permit to puchase a gun than getting a permit to drive a car, does that make any sense? Given that people can ve violent, insane and whatnot does it make any sense to assume ANYONE is apt to carry a gun as long as they haven't been committing crimes or being to a madhouse yet?

Is it not putting society in danger that there is no screening? Ask anyone who's had a relative shot over a petty fight in a nightclub or something. Well, I believe these people had the right to be protected by stricter regulations.

And please don't say these people would kill anyway, it's much harder to stab someone to death.

this was my point before the threesome happened.

[ann ashtray]

Wit? Like making false assumptions about things/people you know absolutely nothing about?

yeah, knox, you are soooo witty.