OT LeBron James said Kyle Rittenhouse should 'knock it off' after the teen cried during murder trial

Welcome to our community

Be a part of something great, join today!

Register Log in

Users who are viewing this thread

Total: 1 (members: 0, guests: 1)
SlyPokerDog said:
Click to expand...


Lebron through a punch there. He cocked his fist to do it. He needs to be suspended.


They play each other again in a week. That will be an awkward game. Though Stewart and LeBron might still be suspended.
 
Phatguysrule said:
Cars are used in mass murders regularly... More people die from cars in the US than die from guns.

It's a silly argument either way. Prohibition doesn't work unless we want to give up more rights than it's worth.
Click to expand...
People drive cars through crowds frequently? I had no idea.
 

calvin natt said:
You did though
Click to expand...

Regularly and frequently are not the same word for a reason.

The attempt at changing the word comes off as petty. Which is fine, I guess.

Now back to the point. Lots of people use cars as a weapon. Lots of people kill themselves with cars.

But it's not politically beneficial to make it a part of your platform so nobody does it.
 
calvin natt said:
You did though
Click to expand...

Phatguysrule said:
Regularly and frequently are not the same word for a reason.

The attempt at changing the word comes off as petty. Which is fine, I guess.

Now back to the point. Lots of people use cars as a weapon. Lots of people kill themselves with cars.

But it's not politically beneficial to make it a part of your platform so nobody does it.
Click to expand...

what would you expect after being provided with such information aNd the only response is about the claim made…and not the amount of tragedies listed in the link?

check out @Chris Craig’s response to the same info. Thats why, though a complete political opposite, i will always have respect for him as a person.

The only way to fix anything is to be 100% upfront and honest on all things.
That type of response above only invites more frustration and walls going up, creation further tension and division…

and its hard not to get dragged down that path of two wrongs…i fail often.
 
Phatguysrule said:
Regularly and frequently are not the same word for a reason.

The attempt at changing the word comes off as petty. Which is fine, I guess.

Now back to the point. Lots of people use cars as a weapon. Lots of people kill themselves with cars.

But it's not politically beneficial to make it a part of your platform so nobody does it.
Click to expand...

Frequently is literally a synonym of regularly
 
Chris Craig said:
Frequently is literally a synonym of regularly
Click to expand...
Awesome. I'm sorry I mentioned a person re-wording my post. I can go delete if it's too much of a distraction...

But I see what part of the post you're uncomfortable discussing, so...
 
Orion Bailey said:
what would you expect after being provided with such information aNd the only response is about the claim made…and not the amount of tragedies listed in the link?

check out @Chris Craig’s response to the same info. Thats why, though a complete political opposite, i will always have respect for him as a person.

The only way to fix anything is to be 100% upfront and honest on all things.
That type of response above only invites more frustration and walls going up, creation further tension and division…

and its hard not to get dragged down that path of two wrongs…i fail often.
Click to expand...

Im always open to admit when I am wrong. It's not as hard as it's made out to be to just say, hey you were right about that. That's how you learn.

I appreciated you sharing that link. I had heard about some of them, like London and New York, but alot of those I hadn't heard of. There are more than I thought. And yes, they have happened frequently or regularly in the past few years, especially after George Floyd. It does seem to be a newer strategy of mass killing, (not counting stereotypical hit and runs) but a disturbing one at that.
 
Phatguysrule said:
Awesome. I'm sorry I mentioned a person re-wording my post. I can go delete if it's too much of a distraction...

But I see what part of the post you're uncomfortable discussing, so...
Click to expand...

What's the problem with saying hey they do happen frequently/regularly at least in the last few years. I did say that. See the links above. End of story.

It's no distraction. I'm comfortable discussing all of it.

I saw the links.

I commented on them.
 
Chris Craig said:
What's the problem with saying hey they do happen frequently/regularly at least in the last few years. I did say that. See the links above. End of story.

It's no distraction. I'm comfortable discussing all of it.

I saw the links.

I commented on them.
Click to expand...
Excellent!
 
Phatguysrule said:
But those objects aren't commonly owned items and as such, they aren't part of our culture and heritage.

This is no different than saying we should just make all knives illegal as well.

Guns have far more practical uses for the average American than the weapons you mentioned.
Click to expand...
So you do agree we need to limit some weapons.
 
Orion Bailey said:
remember when you weren't posting condescending posts and always taking ownership?

yeah me neither….
……

to no one im particular…

why is being a dick consider cool?
Click to expand...
Who is being a dick? Take ownership.
 
Lanny said:
So you do agree we need to limit some weapons.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I think it's acceptable to regulate some weapons.

The way the 2nd ammendment was written, it seems apparent to me, it was intended that the people be a capable militia (or infantry, in today's terms).

It's also important to note the meaning of well regulated at the time of the writing. It meant to be well functioning, or in proper working order.

A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.
Click to expand...

In today's terms I would expect we'd encourage people to own and be well versed in the use of standard issue infantry weapons, and any weapon below that class of weapon.

Anything a standard battle ready infantry soldier needs additional training to be certified to use should also be acceptable to restrict of US citizens.

So sure, restrict explosives, 50 cal, RPG, atomic weapons, ICBMs, Osprey, tanks, fighter jets, Blackhawks, Apache, aircraft carriers, etc...

Encourage the population to be well versed and own anything up to and including military issue, select fire rifles capable of single, burst, and automatic fire.
 
Phatguysrule said:
Yeah, I think it's acceptable to regulate some weapons.

The way the 2nd ammendment was written, it seems apparent to me, it was intended that the people be a capable militia (or infantry, in today's terms).

It's also important to note the meaning of well regulated at the time of the writing. It meant to be well functioning, or in proper working order.



In today's terms I would expect we'd encourage people to own and be well versed in the use of standard issue infantry weapons, and any weapon below that class of weapon.

Anything a standard battle ready infantry soldier needs additional training to be certified to use should also be acceptable to restrict of US citizens.

So sure, restrict explosives, 50 cal, RPG, atomic weapons, ICBMs, Osprey, tanks, fighter jets, Blackhawks, Apache, aircraft carriers, etc...

Encourage the population to be well versed and own anything up to and including military issue, select fire rifles capable of single, burst, and automatic fire.
Click to expand...
In those days people in areas with slaves were required to train as well as own a rifle in order to be able to stifle any potential slave uprisings who often outnumbered the Whites.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top