[J m HofMarN]

I'm noticing a pattern, is anyone else noticing a pattern. It's almost as if Civ's trying to tell us that criminals dont use assault rifles all the time.

[Deucaon]

I'm noticing a pattern, is anyone else noticing a pattern. It's almost as if Civ's trying to tell us that criminals dont use assault rifles all the time.

Yes I am noticing that too. I don't know why he keeps repeating himself. Its not like I am currently arguing that criminals invade your home with assault rifles... maybe I did at one point but the argument has evolved into something less mundane.

[Otal Nimrodi]

So, we need assault rifles because someone killed our friends?

Dude. That sounds like justification for, like, a bulletproof vest.

[civilian_number_two]

If this conversation has evolved, Deuc, I haven't noticed. Now we're imagining crack dens loaded with weapons, which is ridiculous for the very obvious reason. Granted, I know JM was just kidding around, since said crackheads were also zombies, but you seemed to be taking it seriously, minus the zombie part.

[Jordan]

Crackheads are harmless. They're so exhausted they could'nt put up a fight, only steal something when you're not looking.

They're favorite

1) bikes
2) auto theft (not the car just the stuff in it)
3) Any kind of item that they take to a pawn shop, usually hit up open doors in alleys to restaurants and bars, if they can

What they do 99% of the time

1) collect cigarette butts
2) cans, bottles, and as of recent scrap metal
3) pan handle, sleep, score drugs

Where they hang out

Cities, not suburbs. It's to far of a walk for them to go hit up a nice quiet area. They usually never get into apartments since it's much harder, so they tend to leave peoples homes alone. They just drift around on the street like scavangers, if they can rip off a easy bike or smash a window in a parkade to get 25 cents, they will.

How to get rid of them

You tell them to fuck off and they go away. They ain't looking for a fight, they're exhausted, weak, and pathetic.

[J m HofMarN]

I don't know why he keeps repeating himself. Its not like I am currently arguing that criminals invade your home with assault rifles... maybe I did at one point but the argument has evolved into something less mundane.

Oh well as long as you're not CURRENTLY saying it, everything's fine. It's jist like this statement:

"It's not like I'm currently arguing that blacks are an inferior race, I just did at one point!"

Means no one gets to call you a racist anymore.

So, yes, because you are not, as of this moment, arguing that A: All Americans are dumb and B: Criminals want to shoot you with assault rifles in close quarters combat, Civ is required to shut his fat trap as, clearly, you are no longer making the offensive/ludicrous statements that you previously made. There's no need for you to recant in any way whatsoever, just as long as you are not as of right now saying those things.

So howabout you change the topic with a question about whether wolves have found Jesus yet, and we can all just forget the very, very silly things that you are most definately no longer saying, not because they were blatant falsehoods, but because, well, you're no longer saying it.

[Deucaon]

So, we need assault rifles because someone killed our friends?

Dude. That sounds like justification for, like, a bulletproof vest.

Because a bullet proof vest covers a whopping 35% of your body and makes people think twice about stabbing or beating your facial area!

Crackheads are harmless. They're so exhausted they could'nt put up a fight, only steal something when you're not looking.

They're favorite

1) bikes
2) auto theft (not the car just the stuff in it)
3) Any kind of item that they take to a pawn shop, usually hit up open doors in alleys to restaurants and bars, if they can

What they do 99% of the time

1) collect cigarette butts
2) cans, bottles, and as of recent scrap metal
3) pan handle, sleep, score drugs

Where they hang out

Cities, not suburbs. It's to far of a walk for them to go hit up a nice quiet area. They usually never get into apartments since it's much harder, so they tend to leave peoples homes alone. They just drift around on the street like scavangers, if they can rip off a easy bike or smash a window in a parkade to get 25 cents, they will.

How to get rid of them

You tell them to fuck off and they go away. They ain't looking for a fight, they're exhausted, weak, and pathetic.

So its not junkies who are invading homes... then who? AND WHY? AND WAZZA?

So, yes, because you are not, as of this moment, arguing that A: All Americans are dumb and B: Criminals want to shoot you with assault rifles in close quarters combat, Civ is required to shut his fat trap as, clearly, you are no longer making the offensive/ludicrous statements that you previously made. There's no need for you to recant in any way whatsoever, just as long as you are not as of right now saying those things.

Everything except...

B: Criminals want to shoot you with assault rifles in close quarters combat,

...and...

There's no need for you to recant in any way whatsoever, just as long as you are not as of right now saying those things.

...is an accurate interpretation of things that have happened.

[J m HofMarN]

Ok so without those the statement becomes:

So, yes, because you are not, as of this moment, arguing that All Americans are dumb. Civ is required to shut his fat trap as, clearly, you are no longer making the offensive/ludicrous statements that you previously made.

Funny, it still seems to have the same meaning to me: You're a dick and you're unapologetic about your dickery. I don't see how your little line-item veto deal helped your cause at all.

By the way, as of this sentence, I'm no longer currently calling you a dick, so it's ok.

Also, if you werent implying that crackhead zombies with assault rifles want to kill me in close quarters combat (CQC, ROFLS!), Then why did you bring up the issue of hordes of criminals wielding assault rifles, and then bring up close quarters combat? The intonation for me was that the murder squad coming to my door was wielding assault rifles and trained in close quarters combat.

This post has been edited by J m HofMarN: 17 June 2008 - 01:29 PM

[Deucaon]

Ok so without those the statement becomes:

Funny, it still seems to have the same meaning to me: You're a dick and you're unapologetic about your dickery. I don't see how your little line-item veto deal helped your cause at all.

By the way, as of this sentence, I'm no longer currently calling you a dick, so it's ok.

Actually since you called me a dick in THE SAME POST, one can assume the topic hasn't changed. But don't, I forgive you since I don't expect much coherency or logic from someone of your (Yank) upbringing.

Also, if you werent implying that crackhead zombies with assault rifles want to kill me in close quarters combat (CQC, ROFLS!), Then why did you bring up the issue of hordes of criminals wielding assault rifles, and then bring up close quarters combat?

Well I am sure that a pissant such as yourself can show me where I specifically used the term "CQC" (SNAKE? SNAKE! SNAAAAAAAAAAAKE?) and where I stated that "hordes of criminals wielding assault rifles" will attack your home. I can assume you don't live in a 100 acre mansion which would mean that your home (whether it be a house or an apartment) is a close quarters environment. CQB is a term used to describe close quarter fighting if you didn't know.

The intonation for me was that the murder squad coming to my door was wielding assault rifles and trained in close quarters combat.

Its CQB (Close Quarters Battle), CQC is a fictional fighting style in the Metal Gear Solid series.

[J m HofMarN]

Actually since you called me a dick in THE SAME POST, one can assume the topic hasn't changed. But don't, I forgive you since I don't expect much coherency or logic from someone of your (Yank) upbringing.

Whatever, that's SO one post ago. We've moved on now.

And as for your problems with my yank education, how is it that you believe that, in a country filled with roaming murder squads looking to steal tvs and kill with automatic weapons, that the education system would be functional?

As for the lack of logic there, of course it's lacking, because it's a satire of your statement. An argument is not closed because it is from one page, or one post ago. It is closed when one side admits they were wrong, or a compromise is reached that satisfies both parties. If the topic was from, say, ten pages ago, or several months, than it would be necroposting and you'd have an argument. However your idea that you should get off scott free because you only made your silly statements a page or so ago just doesnt hold water.

And finally to your insults of my education. You have, in this thread, shown a stunning ignorance of American culture. In another thread you intoned that wolves had religion, and that religion and human sacrifice predated society. One of your esteemed countrymen recently made the argument that American involvement against the Japanese in world war 2 was a mistake, and that all people were either self loathing capitalists, or Islamic war mongers.

Therefore, based upon personal interaction rather than bias and hearsay, I'm going to put forth the theory that sociology and history classes in Australia probably involve copious amounts of beer.

Well I am sure that a pissant such as yourself can show me where I specifically used the term "CQC" (SNAKE? SNAKE! SNAAAAAAAAAAAKE?) and where I stated that "hordes of criminals wielding assault rifles" will attack your home. I can assume you don't live in a 100 acre mansion which would mean that your home (whether it be a house or an apartment) is a close quarters environment. CQB is a term used to describe close quarter fighting if you didn't know.

Ah yes, good of you to stress that you were applying military terms to a very civilian defense question. You clearly did put forth the speculation that criminalSSSSS wielding assault rifles could break into someones home and clearly said that they would blow one's head off and then steal the tv.

If ever third house has an assault rifle then criminals would think twice before attacking that house.

So you stated that criminals attack houses unless assault rifles are present. ATTACK. not rob, not break into. Multiple criminals will ATTACK your house if you dont have an assault rifle. But if you DO have an assault rifle you can fight those MULTIPLE criminals in close quarters BATTLE. Not combat, but a fucking battle. Battle, by the way, is a military kind of term. A fight, combat, duel, whatever indicates one or two guys are going at it. A battle is a military term for a meeting of parts of two opposing ARMIES.

So if we understand that criminals intend to attack your home using tactics of close quarters BATTLE, then your meaning is that a large number of well armed criminals want to kill you.

And yes, it was largely this side of the debate that put up the claim of crackhead zombie hordes, but there's a reason for that. You like to suggest that I will be attacked by an assault rifle wielding criminal who wants to give me a case of CQB and steal my tv while I'm dying. I like to say that crackhead zombies are after me. I've never encountered either, but if you're going to seriously propose one of those events, you have no place claiming that my own feverish delusions are wrongful.

Its CQB (Close Quarters Battle), CQC is a fictional fighting style in the Metal Gear Solid series.

That's good.

[civilian_number_two]

I repeat:

a ) Nobody is talking about right to bear arms. We are talking about the feasbility and dubious necessity of unrestricted access to assault rifles.

b ) Gun control cleaned up Dodge City.

c ) The Tarrasque.

This post has been edited by civilian_number_two: 18 June 2008 - 10:38 PM

[Deucaon]

My arguments:

1. If many homes had assault rifles then it would discourage criminals from invading homes.
Your rebuttal: criminals would just go into a house when everyone is away and steal the assault rifle.
My rebuttal to your rebuttal: then why have a gun at all if they are just going to get stolen?
Your rebuttal to my rebuttal to your rebuttal: ZOMBIES!

2. An assault rifle has an edge over pistols and rifles in close quarters when up against an assault rifle, sub machinegun or shotgun.
Your rebuttal: criminals don't invade homes with assault rifles.
My rebuttal to your rebuttal: what about sub machineguns or shotguns?
Your rebuttal to my rebuttal to your rebuttal: them neither.
My rebuttal to your rebuttal to my rebuttal to your rebuttal: if a criminal knew many people in a particular street had pistols and rifles then they would probably come prepared with something more fearsome (since they would know who had an assault rifle and who wouldn't I am guessing they would also know who had a pistol/rifle and who didn't or at the very least which street had the most likely chance of a victim being armed with such and such weapon).
Your rebuttal to my rebuttal to your rebuttal to my rebuttal to your rebuttal: CQC, LMAO.

Your arguments:

1. You claimed that wolves worshipped a spiritual power.
My rebuttal: I never stated that, I simply asked how you knew that wolves didn't worship a spiritual power. I only entertained the idea in order to show everyone that you had no evidence that they didn't.

2. American culture is not as crazy as everyone makes it seem.
My rebuttal: that's why American crime statistics would be comparable to a war zone and such important cultural aspects like obesity and fear of minorities.

3. You claimed that hordes of criminals wanted to kill me.
My rebuttal: the only thing you can show as proof of this is that I stated that "criminals" (you thinking that I stated there would be more then one criminal at a time though obviously there isn't a single criminal in the world so I chose the word "criminals" instead of "criminal") would think twice about "attacking" (which you thought meant something akin to "assaulting with soldiers") a house if that house or houses in that area were armed with assault rifles.

4. If everyone had access to assault weapons then the place would be like Dodge City.
My rebuttal: this isn't 1880.
Your rebuttal to my rebuttal: Tarrasque.

This post has been edited by Deucaon: 18 June 2008 - 05:01 AM

[Otal Nimrodi]

My rebuttal to your rebuttal to my rebuttal to your rebuttal: if a criminal knew many people in a particular street had pistols and rifles then they would probably come prepared with something more fearsome (since they would know who had an assault rifle and who wouldn't I am guessing they would also know who had a pistol/rifle and who didn't or at the very least which street had the most likely chance of a victim being armed with such and such weapon).

If you felt his response inadequate, I'll give you mine.

That's a mighty big if. Robbers and such generally case the outside of a house, not the inside. And if they somehow found out that you /had/ an assault rifle /AND/ decided to rob your house anyway instead of going to one which, you know, wasn't defended, they would probably come prepared with at least some rudimentary tactics, and most likely superior numbers as well. If they were so dead-set on robbing a person who had a rifle, or any gun, they would plan around that. The assault rifle is not necessary, any gun would do about the same thing. Defend you against unexpecting criminals, but those who really want to rob you will plan around it.

My rebuttal: this isn't 1880.

Yeah. More restrictions on guns, for one...

[J m HofMarN]

then why have a gun at all if they are just going to get stolen?

We've been over this, and the answer wasnt zombies. An assault rifle is a big giant assault rifle. You cannot put it in a drawer. You cannot put it under your floor. You cannod hide it under your friend Fred. Thieves will steal it, you'll be dead. But a pistol is easy to conceal, in any part of your home that you may feel, safe from kids and safe from thugs, you could put it under the terrarium where you keep your bugs.

if a criminal knew many people in a particular street had pistols and rifles then they would probably come prepared with something more fearsome (since they would know who had an assault rifle and who wouldn't I am guessing they would also know who had a pistol/rifle and who didn't or at the very least which street had the most likely chance of a victim being armed with such and such weapon).

Ok... You believe common criminals to have available to them statistics on gun ownership, but you do NOT believe that they could possibly know when a person has left their house for a vacation or weekend visit? So no, buying an assault rifle does not set off a bleedin arms race with your local hooligans leading to one group developing nuclear weapons. It just means that they'll still use the same strategy they had previously. Namely going in while no one is around to use the assault rifle/rpg/thermonuclear device.

My rebuttal: I never stated that, I simply asked how you knew that wolves didn't worship a spiritual power. I only entertained the idea in order to show everyone that you had no evidence that they didn't.

You tried to have me defend an assertion that I had justly made, knowing that there was no possible way to provide evidence in favor of it despite it being a fairly obvious conclusion. Therefore the logical reason for that statement is to force me to admit that I cannot prove a negative, and that therefore the positive could well be true. This is especially prescient as to prove that wolves did have religion would have helped your argument that only religious ethics keep people/wolves from killing eachother.

that's why American crime statistics would be comparable to a war zone and such important cultural aspects like obesity and fear of minorities.

Jolly good. I already agreed that Michael Jackson is pop king of sick fucking country. But you see, just that fact alone doesnt win the argument. Americans are obese does not lead to everyone in the US needing an assault rifle for CQB.

My rebuttal: the only thing you can show as proof of this is that I stated that "criminals" (you thinking that I stated there would be more then one criminal at a time though obviously there isn't a single criminal in the world so I chose the word "criminals" instead of "criminal") would think twice about "attacking" (which you thought meant something akin to "assaulting with soldiers") a house if that house or houses in that area were armed with assault rifles.

And yes, it was largely this side of the debate that put up the claim of crackhead zombie hordes, but there's a reason for that. You like to suggest that I will be attacked by an assault rifle wielding criminal who wants to give me a case of CQB and steal my tv while I'm dying. I like to say that crackhead zombies are after me. I've never encountered either, but if you're going to seriously propose one of those events, you have no place claiming that my own feverish delusions are wrong.

4. If everyone had access to assault weapons then the place would be like Dodge City.
My rebuttal: this isn't 1880.

In this same post you argued that "American crime statistics would be comparable to a war zone" and now you're saying that the US isn't like dodge city in the eighteen eighties. Ok, why?And wouldnt Dodge City be an improvement from the current (alleged) state of things?

[Spoon Poetic]

Please keep the personal insults out of here.