Notice From My Cold Dead Hands...... (4 Viewers)

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

That seems like a stretch, frankly. Vanessa Redgrave must be in her 80s by now, how many kids today have even heard of her?

barfo
I was thinking it was Ving Raines..."I'm pretty fuckin far from OK!" (Pulp Fiction)
 
Based on the mere mention of a single subject? Yeah, that's extremism.

In my opinion, it's unhealthy to be so wrapped up in one "enthusiasm" that it's the only thing that determines your vote.

barfo

how does that work for those who are told if they vote for a party they support something?

like if you vote republican, you are supporting/for taking womens right's away?

isn't that a mirror image?
 
how does that work for those who are told if they vote for a party they support something?

like if you vote republican, you are supporting/for taking womens right's away?

isn't that a mirror image?

You may not support that, but your party does?

Republicans are the anti abortion, anti gay, etc party. They vote against all of those things.
 
how does that work for those who are told if they vote for a party they support something?

like if you vote republican, you are supporting/for taking womens right's away?

isn't that a mirror image?

What people say about you is pretty unimportant, unless you are unsure of your own convictions.

What matters is the decisions you make.

barfo
 
What people say about you is pretty unimportant, unless you are unsure of your own convictions.

What matters is the decisions you make.

barfo

some political/moral topics aren't sure things though unless ones is fool enough to think they know everything. So wouldn't a wise person be open to alternative thoughts and not be sure ones own views are so perfect?

I do agree what matters is the decisions we make. But yet for someone who has made it clear he is not for certain things, sure gets railed on (not by you as much per say)for wanting to discuss things…
Seems a bit contradicting and counterproductive to learning and growing, in my opinion.
 
some political/moral topics aren't sure things though unless ones is fool enough to think they know everything. So wouldn't a wise person be open to alternative thoughts and not be sure ones own views are so perfect?

Yes, of course. One should listen to other people's opinions on things - not so much their necessarily uninformed opinions of you. In my opinion, of course.

I do agree what matters is the decisions we make. But yet for someone who has made it clear he is not for certain things, sure gets railed on (not by you as much per say)for wanting to discuss things…
Seems a bit contradicting and counterproductive to learning and growing, in my opinion.

Only if you take it personally. Imagine that message board posters are AI rather than human, and you are reading algorithmic responses to your posts. Nothing to get upset about.

barfo
 
Yes, of course. One should listen to other people's opinions on things - not so much their necessarily uninformed opinions of you. In my opinion, of course.



Only if you take it personally. Imagine that message board posters are AI rather than human, and you are reading algorithmic responses to your posts. Nothing to get upset about.

barfo

crandc says hi:

giphy.gif
 
Yes, of course. One should listen to other people's opinions on things - not so much their necessarily uninformed opinions of you. In my opinion, of course.



Only if you take it personally. Imagine that message board posters are AI rather than human, and you are reading algorithmic responses to your posts. Nothing to get upset about.

barfo

and the flip side? Maybe the AI can not take it personal when someone who has said over and over he is against restricting abortions just wants to discuss the details?
 
I didn’t say they ‘turn you into a sociopath’. That is just blatant hyperbole. I did say they could be a contributing factor in children who are already at risk from other factors….like sociopathy, and access to a firearm.
I see. So now we're going to start blaming random things that trigger existing psychos?
This seems like a good idea...
 
I listened to a lot of 60s music with drug references. Never did anything more than pot.

I also grew up listening to 60s music with drug references. I did mostly pot. Tried shrooms and coke once.
 
and the flip side? Maybe the AI can not take it personal when someone who has said over and over he is against restricting abortions just wants to discuss the details?

You don't really know what other people/robots take personally/impersonally - and even if you did know, you can't control it.

All you can control is your reaction to the disembodied words that appear on your screen.

barfo
 
You don't really know what other people/robots take personally/impersonally - and even if you did know, you can't control it.

All you can control is your reaction to the disembodied words that appear on your screen.

barfo

And that goes both ways to those who cant handle a conversation between two adults without telling them to mind their own damn business due to emotions.

Nothing in the words written in the discussion ever entailed suppression of women's rights.
Not the one i was in.
So id direct the AI thing to the one that initiated the emotional outburst. Because that was the initial reaction. But its fine for others to react, but i cant. Got it.
Double standard.
 
And that goes both ways to those who cant handle a conversation between two adults without telling them to mind their own damn business due to emotions.

Nothing in the words written in the discussion ever entailed suppression of women's rights.
Not the one i was in.
So id direct the AI thing to the one that initiated the emotional outburst. Because that was the initial reaction. But its fine for others to react, but i cant. Got it.
Double standard.

No, it's not a double standard. I'm not telling you not to react. I'm telling you that you could choose to not react. And that advice (and that's all it is, at most) would go for any poster in any discussion.

barfo
 
No, it's not a double standard. I'm not telling you not to react. I'm telling you that you could choose to not react. And that advice (and that's all it is, at most) would go for any poster in any discussion.

barfo

Fair enough.
 
I got to shoot an AK-47 when I was 9 or 10. It was pretty cool, but not really impactful in any way. I was back to riding bikes and playing with my dogs after that. I also didn’t play first person shooter video games for hours on end that are basically digital training sessions on how to walk into a building and waste a bunch of people, so I imagine that took away some of the gun stigma.
I shot my first gun when I was 12. Owned a 38 special when I was 17 and went in the Army at 19. When I went to Vietnam I was first slated to go to Pleiku where I could have any weapon I wanted including the AK-47. My orders got changed on route and so never got to fire one. I've only fired an M-14 and an M-16 in the Army although I was issued a 1911 Colt 45 a few times when handling prisoners. After the Army I bought a Sako 270 and later my friend's shotgun. I'm very familiar with firearms including when I was about 13 or 14 when I was hired by a man to take apart and clean his long barreled firearms. And yet I oppose handguns since they are used in by far the most murders. It's a small price to pay for those of us who have enjoyed owning many different firearms in order to save many lives. There is such a small need to own a handgun that it seems insane to allow their nearly unlimited use in our society.
 
I shot my first gun when I was 12. Owned a 38 special when I was 17 and went in the Army at 19. When I went to Vietnam I was first slated to go to Pleiku where I could have any weapon I wanted including the AK-47. My orders got changed on route and so never got to fire one. I've only fired an M-14 and an M-16 in the Army although I was issued a 1911 Colt 45 a few times when handling prisoners. After the Army I bought a Sako 270 and later my friend's shotgun. I'm very familiar with firearms including when I was about 13 or 14 when I was hired by a man to take apart and clean his long barreled firearms. And yet I oppose handguns since they are used in by far the most murders. It's a small price to pay for those of us who have enjoyed owning many different firearms in order to save many lives. There is such a small need to own a handgun that it seems insane to allow their nearly unlimited use in our society.
I respect your opinion, but as long as criminals have handguns, most law abiding people are going to want one on hand. I don’t worry about that aspect so much where I am, but mostly like to have one on hand when in the mountains hunting, camping, etc. It’s a lot easier to pull a pistol from a chest holster than it is to sling a long rifle from around your back if you need it.
 
I shot my first gun when I was 12. Owned a 38 special when I was 17 and went in the Army at 19. When I went to Vietnam I was first slated to go to Pleiku where I could have any weapon I wanted including the AK-47. My orders got changed on route and so never got to fire one. I've only fired an M-14 and an M-16 in the Army although I was issued a 1911 Colt 45 a few times when handling prisoners. After the Army I bought a Sako 270 and later my friend's shotgun. I'm very familiar with firearms including when I was about 13 or 14 when I was hired by a man to take apart and clean his long barreled firearms. And yet I oppose handguns since they are used in by far the most murders. It's a small price to pay for those of us who have enjoyed owning many different firearms in order to save many lives. There is such a small need to own a handgun that it seems insane to allow their nearly unlimited use in our society.
I get that, but use is very limited.

You're not even allowed to use them in cities.

But at least this argument makes some sense. Going after rifles but not handguns is just pandering.
 
Last edited:

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top