I'm honestly conflicted

[MarAzul]

The next time I'm truly afraid of something will be the first time since I hit puberty. Being cautious is different.

I pull vehicles on a frame rack using chains and hydraulic rams. I have put 7 tons of pressure on a chain with this machine. If the chain were to break it could kill someone in it's path. The other day I was doing this while our mechanic was near.

I yelled at him to stay out of the way of the machine. He told me "you can't be scared all of your life"

I wasn't scared, I am educated to what can happen and have seen people hurt by it before.

So the memes are bullshit. More people are scared of being labeled a racist or a pussy about this than anything.

Soooo, sorry. Help them, that doesn't mean bring them here.

I guess I am an asshole. Just not afraid.

Very well said sir!

It pisses me off to hear the President chiding us about fearing 3 year old and widows! He is the stupid asshole, not you.

 

[DaLincolnJones]

Very well said sir!

It pisses me off to hear the President chiding us about fearing 3 year old and widows! He is the stupid asshole, not you.

spot on

and to those that go around espousing the same brainless drivel..be aware that you may get what you deserve

 

[BlazerDuckSeahawkFan94]

It's a complex situation at least we are going to be screening the refugees coming in. I don't agree with bringing them in though.

 

[magnifier661]

The gumball analogy is a poor one, but, it's making the rounds on Facebook, so I guess I'll just have to get used to seeing it repeated.
But let's say for every 10k guns manufactured in the country, 10 are going to be used illegally to murder innocent people. By your same thinking with refugees, it's worth it to get rid of guns to protect innocent lives, no?

LOL good point! So you are for no gun control then? Maybe we are making progress!

 

[magnifier661]

Some some widows and orphans coming to America

 

[Denny Crane]

LOL good point! So you are for no gun control then? Maybe we are making progress!

Uh... he schooled you.

 

[magnifier661]

 

[magnifier661]

Uh... he schooled you.

I told him "good point" as in, that makes sense. And I also agree that we should not have any gun control because his statement should be held to the same standard. Obviously, you are too dense to see that.

 

[PDXFonz]

The gumball analogy is a poor one, but, it's making the rounds on Facebook, so I guess I'll just have to get used to seeing it repeated.
But let's say for every 10k guns manufactured in the country, 10 are going to be used illegally to murder innocent people. By your same thinking with refugees, it's worth it to get rid of guns to protect innocent lives, no?

 

[RR7]

LOL good point! So you are for no gun control then? Maybe we are making progress!

I'm just interested in how you justify or explain the blatant hypocrisy in your two positions.

 

[Denny Crane]

I'm just interested in how you justify or explain the blatant hypocrisy in your two positions.

You hoisted him on his own petard.

However, you have a similar hypocrisy if you favor gun control (elimination) and favor allowing the refugees to come here.

 

[magnifier661]

You hoisted him on his own petard.

However, you have a similar hypocrisy if you favor gun control (elimination) and favor allowing the refugees to come here.

Which is, once again, why I said, "good point!" So he and I can both agree that we should let refugees in and eliminate gun control. RR7 and I made progress. Thanks for playing

 

[magnifier661]

I'm just interested in how you justify or explain the blatant hypocrisy in your two positions.

I'm not... I am agreeing with you. Let the refugees in and lets eliminate complete gun control! We are making progress.

 

[Further]

You hoisted him on his own petard.

However, you have a similar hypocrisy if you favor gun control (elimination) and favor allowing the refugees to come here.

not necessarily, it depends on his reasoning. He could believe (perhaps wrongly) that banning guns will lead to less violence and that accepting refugees will lead to less violence. No hypocrisy there. Perhaps the logic isn't solid but there is no hypocrisy.

 

[Denny Crane]

not necessarily, it depends on his reasoning. He could believe (perhaps wrongly) that banning guns will lead to less violence and that accepting refugees will lead to less violence. No hypocrisy there. Perhaps the logic isn't solid but there is no hypocrisy.

Gumball theory applies to both cases.

If 3 out of 200,000 refugees are terrorists, that's enough to keep them all out.

If 3 out of 200,000 gun owners shoot someone, that's enough to ban guns.

Right?

 

[RR7]

You hoisted him on his own petard.

However, you have a similar hypocrisy if you favor gun control (elimination) and favor allowing the refugees to come here.

I hadn't really taken a strong position on either topic, I think he was just making assumptions. And now having been shown the hypocrisy of his beliefs, he'll just pretend he's all for the refugees coming, because saying otherwise would make him sound stupid. Until he gets another good Facebook meme like the gumball one to throw out.

 

[magnifier661]

not necessarily, it depends on his reasoning. He could believe (perhaps wrongly) that banning guns will lead to less violence and that accepting refugees will lead to less violence. No hypocrisy there. Perhaps the logic isn't solid but there is no hypocrisy.

You got it... I was just playing along with RR7 and Denny. RR7 doesn't want to control guns because he accepts refugees. Denny is just a fool and he's fun to play with

 

[Denny Crane]

I hadn't really taken a strong position on either topic, I think he was just making assumptions. And now having been shown the hypocrisy of his beliefs, he'll just pretend he's all for the refugees coming, because saying otherwise would make him sound stupid. Until he gets another good Facebook meme like the gumball one to throw out.

The tweet he posted about kids on the playground. SCARY! What was the point of that?

LOL

And then he says, he's good with taking in refugees.

 

[RR7]

That being said, I don't favor a complete elimination of guns and total gun control, the same way I don't favor unfettered access to our country without a proper vetting process. Will bad seeds slip through the cracks? In both cases, yes. Of course. It's just comical to me to see those who say we could do nothing about gun violence, so let's do nothing, and that politicians are quick to politicize every mass shooting and its wrong are then ok with the logic that if even one life could be saved from turning them all back, we have to, and oh, let's politicize what happened in Paris to support closing our borders to refugees. Where is the outcry when some politicians politicize a tragedy, but it's in favor of something you support? Oh, go figure, there is no outcry about it. Then politicizing tragedies are ok. Hypocrisy.

 

[Further]

Gumball theory applies to both cases.

If 3 out of 200,000 refugees are terrorists, that's enough to keep them all out.

If 3 out of 200,000 gun owners shoot someone, that's enough to ban guns.

Right?

But he started out by saying that he didn't subscribe to the gumball theory. He was just pointing out that if that was what mags believed, he was full of hypocrisy. You were the one who was ascribing hypocrisy to RR7 when he had not said anything that warranted such a reaction.

 

[magnifier661]

That being said, I don't favor a complete elimination of guns and total gun control, the same way I don't favor unfettered access to our country without a proper vetting process. Will bad seeds slip through the cracks? In both cases, yes. Of course. It's just comical to me to see those who say we could do nothing about gun violence, so let's do nothing, and that politicians are quick to politicize every mass shooting and its wrong are then ok with the logic that if even one life could be saved from turning them all back, we have to, and oh, let's politicize what happened in Paris to support closing our borders to refugees. Where is the outcry when some politicians politicize a tragedy, but it's in favor of something you support? Oh, go figure, there is no outcry about it. Then politicizing tragedies are ok. Hypocrisy.

Yea, why does Obama use tragedy to politicize gun control?

 

[Denny Crane]

But he started out by saying that he didn't subscribe to the gumball theory. He was just pointing out that if that was what mags believed, he was full of hypocrisy. You were the one who was ascribing hypocrisy to RR7 when he had not said anything that warranted such a reaction.

I did no such thing.

I just pointed out there's hypocrisy by being for banning guns and for allowing refugees to come here.

The former relies on the gumball theory. The latter ignores it.

RR7 didn't state his position on banning guns or accepting refugees.

BTW, my views are consistent. No ban on guns. Let the refugees in.

 

[Denny Crane]

oh yeah...

fuck trump.

 

[RR7]

Yea, why does Obama use tragedy to politicize gun control?

Lol

So again, you notice your hypocrisy. Ok to politicize Paris. You can try to steer the thread anyway you like.

 

[magnifier661]

Lol

So again, you notice your hypocrisy. Ok to politicize Paris. You can try to steer the thread anyway you like.

I do. I didn't like how Trump politicized the Paris Tragedy. So I'm asking you the question. Why does Obama politicize tragedy?

 

[magnifier661]

oh yeah...

fuck trump.

Yeah!!!!

 

[RR7]

I do. I didn't like how Trump politicized the Paris Tragedy. So I'm asking you the question. Why does Obama politicize tragedy?

Because that's what politicians do?

 

[magnifier661]

 

[magnifier661]

Because that's what politicians do?

It seems that way doesn't it?

 

[magnifier661]

And then we have Ben Carson... LOL

http://www.usnews.com/news/politics...e-program-must-screen-for-mad-dogs?src=usn_tw

GOP candidate Ben Carson compares screening Syrian refugees for threats to handling 'mad dogs'

A vendor sells campaign buttons supporting Republican presidential candidate Dr. Ben Carson during a campaign stop, Thursday, Nov. 19, 2015, in Mobile, Ala. (AP Photo/Mike Kittrell)

By BILL BARROW, Associated Press

MOBILE, Ala. (AP) — Republican presidential candidate Ben Carson said Thursday that blocking potential terrorists posing as Syrian refugees from entering the U.S. is akin to handling a rabid dog.

At a campaign stop in Alabama, Carson said halting Syrian resettlement in the U.S. doesn't mean America lacks compassion.

"If there's a rabid dog running around in your neighborhood, you're probably not going to assume something good about that dog," Carson said. "It doesn't mean you hate all dogs, but you're putting your intellect into motion."

Carson said that to "protect my children," he would "call the humane society and hopefully they can come take this dog away and create a safe environment once again."

He continued: "By the same token, we have to have in place screening mechanisms that allow us to determine who the mad dogs are, quite frankly. Who are the people who want to come in here and hurt us and want to destroy us?"

Carson is among the GOP hopefuls who have called for closing the nation's borders to Syrian refugees in the wake of the shooting and bombing attacks in Paris that killed 129 people and wounded hundreds more.

The Islamic State has claimed responsibility for the carnage, stoking fears of future attacks across Europe and in the U.S.

The retired neurosurgeon, who is near the top of many national and early state preference polls, said he's been in touch with House GOP leaders about a bill that would establish new hurdles for Syrian and Iraqi refugees trying to enter the U.S.

With dozens of Democrats joining majority Republicans, the House defied President Barack Obama's veto threat Thursday and passed the measure, 289-137.

It would require the FBI to conduct background checks on people coming to the U.S. from those countries. The heads of the FBI and Homeland Security Department and the director of national intelligence would have to certify to Congress that each refugee "is not a threat to the security of the United States."

Asked whether he would sign such a measure, Carson said he hasn't reviewed the details. "If, in fact, it does satisfy basic needs for safety, of course," Carson said.

Even with his rabid dog comparisons, Carson sought to separate himself from the rhetorical divide between Republicans and Democrats on how to talk about Islam amid concerns about IS attacks.

Many GOP figures frequently blast "radical Islamic terrorism." Many Democrats, including the party's presidential favorite, Hillary Rodham Clinton, say the phrase unfairly implicates all Muslims.

Carson said, "Islam itself is not necessarily our adversary." But he said Americans are justified in seeing threats from Muslim refugees and the U.S. shouldn't "completely change who we are as Americans just so we can look like good people."

He continued: "We have an American culture, and we have things that we base our values and principles on. I, for one, am not willing to give all those things away just so I can be politically correct."

Carson's comments come days after some people in and around his campaign offered public concerns about his command of foreign policy. Carson tried to distance himself from them.

The chief critic, former CIA agent Duane Clarridge, is "not an adviser," Carson said Thursday. Clarridge told The New York Times that Carson struggles with Middle Eastern affairs, in particular.

Armstrong Williams, Carson's longtime business manager, "has nothing to do with my campaign," Carson said. Williams spoke to the Times, the Associated Press and other media about Carson's need to improve, though Williams praised the candidate's work so far.

Carson described Williams as an independent operator who "speaks for himself." But, Carson acknowledged, Williams as recently as this week helped the candidate edit a foreign policy op-ed the campaign sent to The Washington Post.

___

Follow Bill Barrow on Twitter at: http://twitter.com/BillBarrowAP

Copyright 2015 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.