Liberal Forum

Vegas » 14 Oct 2020, 12:54 pm » wrote: ↑

14 Oct 2020, 12:54 pm

Veghead reframing and being dishonest again? Never.

He has no clue about functionality.  

Isabel » 14 Oct 2020, 9:34 am » wrote: ↑

14 Oct 2020, 9:34 am

All the RussianRepublican whores are trained the same way.

Change the subject.
Demand proof that they won't read, to waste opponents' time.
Accuse democrats of whatever the cons are doing.
Ask endless questions, but never answer any.
and, of course:
Lielielielielielielielielielielielielie.

They are all very obedient and well-trained by their masters.

It's like he is you and blathe, but from the rat wing instead of the misogynist party...  

Huey » 14 Oct 2020, 12:53 pm » wrote: ↑

14 Oct 2020, 12:53 pm

Yes.  But NOW you are reframing by specifying a battlefield.  Do you wish to change your thought on this? I can also fire that weapon as fast as a semi automatic sports weapon.

Dwarf,

I didn't introduce the 45 OR its origins

​​​
You did...

Now you're running from it..
 

FOS » 14 Oct 2020, 12:57 pm » wrote: ↑

14 Oct 2020, 12:57 pm

i dont think you understand his point. It was very simple. Hysteria about assault rifles is unfounded because relatively few people are killed by them.

No...that's the point...

That is an idiotic premise..


 

Blackvegetable » 14 Oct 2020, 1:00 pm » wrote: ↑

14 Oct 2020, 1:00 pm

No...that's the point...

That is an idiotic premise..

what the hell do you even mean when you say 'idiotic premise'? it is just a statistical fact.

Blackvegetable » 14 Oct 2020, 12:57 pm » wrote: ↑

14 Oct 2020, 12:57 pm

No...that's "built", Reframy..

We are talking DESIGNED.

Yes, the weapons you buy in todays world as a civilian are DESIGNED specifically for civilian use.  If they weren't you could not buy them.  The only weapons you as a civilian can buy that were designed for modern battlefield use (automatics)  have to be made prior to 86, you have to go thru an anal probe of a background, cost thousands and tens of thousands of dollars to purchase, and the supply is very limited.  

This is all been posted for you before.
 

Blackvegetable » 14 Oct 2020, 12:59 pm » wrote: ↑

14 Oct 2020, 12:59 pm

Dwarf,

I didn't introduce the 45 OR its origins

​​​
You did...

Now you're running from it..

The 45 Colt will put a hole in you the same size as a semi auto sports rifle.  

Huey » 14 Oct 2020, 12:57 pm » wrote: ↑

14 Oct 2020, 12:57 pm

He has no clue about functionality.

I exposed him as fraud in front of Isabel. I warned her to not be his disciple. The guy is a phony.

Vegas » 14 Oct 2020, 2:21 pm » wrote: ↑

14 Oct 2020, 2:21 pm

I exposed him as fraud in front of Isabel. I warned her to not be his disciple. The guy is a phony.

His lack of knowledge on the subject matter and his misuse of google screw him every time.  Hell, I just slammed him with his own source.

FOS » 14 Oct 2020, 12:52 pm » wrote: ↑

14 Oct 2020, 12:52 pm

well this is just like...your opinion dude. The fact remains that more people are killed by knives than rifles.

As many gun deaths are by unspecified types of guns your claim is, as usual, a lie.
 
In any case, since the issue is GUN deaths, not "rifle" deaths, your **** is meaningless.
 

Huey » 14 Oct 2020, 2:23 pm » wrote: ↑

14 Oct 2020, 2:23 pm

His lack of knowledge on the subject matter and his misuse of google screw him every time.  Hell, I just slammed him with his own source.

He rarely reads his own sources. I slammed him before also. He posted a article from Business Insider about presidential rankings bragging that Obama was ranked 8 and Trump was ranked last or something like that. The article  stated that the study was skewed since they only judged Trump after one year, thus there was no way anyone could give him an accurate rating. That was from his article. He didn't read that. He still tries to pedal it around now even.

Isabel » 14 Oct 2020, 3:03 pm » wrote: ↑

14 Oct 2020, 3:03 pm

As many gun deaths are by unspecified types of guns your claim is, as usual, a lie.
 
In any case, since the issue is GUN deaths, not "rifle" deaths, your **** is meaningless.

the issue was not gun deaths for huey. you are shoehorning that in there. He was obviously only speaking of the specific hysteria against assault weapons

FOS » 14 Oct 2020, 3:13 pm » wrote: ↑

14 Oct 2020, 3:13 pm

the issue was not gun deaths for huey. you are shoehorning that in there. He was obviously only speaking of the specific hysteria against assault weapons

The what was his point, you greasy homeless guy?

Vegas » 14 Oct 2020, 3:11 pm » wrote: ↑

14 Oct 2020, 3:11 pm

He rarely reads his own sources. I slammed him before also. He posted a article from Business Insider about presidential rankings bragging that Obama was ranked 8 and Trump was ranked last or something like that. The article  stated that the study was skewed since they only judged Trump after one year, thus there was no way anyone could give him an accurate rating. That was from his article. He didn't read that. He still tries to pedal it around now even.

He does that with his famous academic survey that was taken BEFORE trump completed 1 year.  In it is said that this was taken in Trumps first year and like others his ranking could change after 4 years.  The after that he switched to sienna poll where he was making the case Trump was the worst yet that poll did not have trump at the bottom.  I told him he could stop talking about his academics poll because the sienna source trumped it.  

See what I did there?    

Isabel » 14 Oct 2020, 3:29 pm » wrote: ↑

14 Oct 2020, 3:29 pm

The what was his point, you greasy homeless guy?

his point was just that very few people are killed with assault weapons. THat is all. ALl this other stuff is jsut stuff you want to talk about. Its irrelevant to the point, though

FOS » 14 Oct 2020, 3:36 pm » wrote: ↑

14 Oct 2020, 3:36 pm

his point was just that very few people are killed with assault weapons. THat is all. ALl this other stuff is jsut stuff you want to talk about. Its irrelevant to the point, though

They why is he citing stats for "rifles"?
And disregarding stats for "unspecified weapons"/
 

Isabel » 14 Oct 2020, 3:40 pm » wrote: ↑

14 Oct 2020, 3:40 pm

They why is he citing stats for "rifles"?
And disregarding stats for "unspecified weapons"/

because assault weapons is a subset of rifle label

FOS » 14 Oct 2020, 3:42 pm » wrote: ↑

14 Oct 2020, 3:42 pm

because assault weapons is a subset of rifle label

Prove that the stats cited make that claim.

Isabel » 14 Oct 2020, 3:43 pm » wrote: ↑

14 Oct 2020, 3:43 pm

Prove that the stats cited make that claim.

what? stats are irrelevant. all assault weapons are rifles not all rifles are assault weapons. Its definition.

FOS » 14 Oct 2020, 3:44 pm » wrote: ↑

14 Oct 2020, 3:44 pm

what? stats are irrelevant. all assault weapons are rifles not all rifles are assault weapons. Its definition.

So you can't support your claim.

Glad to see you admit it.