LinuxQuestions.org
Share your knowledge at the LQ Wiki.
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Non-*NIX Forums > General
User Name
Password
General This forum is for non-technical general discussion which can include both Linux and non-Linux topics. Have fun!

Notices


Reply
  Search this Thread
Old 04-11-2019, 12:13 AM   #1
slackwarenewbee
Member
 
Registered: Jul 2010
Posts: 78

Rep: Reputation: 1
Rifles Pistols and Shotguns Help You Protect Your Home Pro/Con


This is a response to the 'allowed' and 'guns' post

The wording in the title is anti gun.

It's a trap to participate in it because it is already slanted.

Firearms are what they are called.

Poster used guns because it sounds bad.

The right to bear arms IS A RIGHT.

Guaranteed by the Second Amendment to the constitution.

Basically I'm busting that poster for his

insidious mealy mouth 'yet another' attempt to

limit Americans Second Amendment rights.

Americans can say what they want and this American is

saying it.

Last edited by slackwarenewbee; 04-11-2019 at 01:34 AM.
 
Old 04-11-2019, 01:39 AM   #2
jsbjsb001
Senior Member
 
Registered: Mar 2009
Location: Earth? I would say I hope so but I'm not so sure about that... I could just be a figment of your imagination too.
Distribution: CentOS at the time of this writing, but some others over the years too...
Posts: 2,624

Rep: Reputation: 1317Reputation: 1317Reputation: 1317Reputation: 1317Reputation: 1317Reputation: 1317Reputation: 1317Reputation: 1317Reputation: 1317Reputation: 1317
Since this thread is basically a dupe of https://www.linuxquestions.org/quest...ce-4175651781/ I've reported it to be closed.
 
Old 04-11-2019, 02:22 AM   #3
slackwarenewbee
Member
 
Registered: Jul 2010
Posts: 78

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 1
Closing my post is censorship.

It is heavy handed leftist leaning favoring the leftist post.

Just in case someone wants a preview of what it would be like under socialism

Letting the the first poster get away with steering the whole post in an anti Second

Amendment direction is wrong.

Unjust if you will.Fine thing when people that practice free speech that we defend in this

country can find there where into somewhere like here where 'Senior Members' can create a

little Un America of their own.

Sounds like somebody is afraid to hear what some members might say

when posters are on a 'level playing field' or 'open arena' of discussion.

'Oh no! Pro American way of life talk.We better shut that

down'.Whatever!

Last edited by slackwarenewbee; 04-11-2019 at 03:13 AM.
 
Old 04-11-2019, 02:36 AM   #4
jsbjsb001
Senior Member
 
Registered: Mar 2009
Location: Earth? I would say I hope so but I'm not so sure about that... I could just be a figment of your imagination too.
Distribution: CentOS at the time of this writing, but some others over the years too...
Posts: 2,624

Rep: Reputation: 1317Reputation: 1317Reputation: 1317Reputation: 1317Reputation: 1317Reputation: 1317Reputation: 1317Reputation: 1317Reputation: 1317Reputation: 1317
It's not up to me whether it gets closed or not... that's why I reported it. How's it "censorship" ? There's always been a rule saying you can't post a thread that already has been posted, and is already being discussed. If it was "censorship", then the other thread in question would have already been closed, has it ?

And if you're going to argue, can you at least learn to post properly, what's with all the unnecessary spaces in your posts ? It looks like a 5 year old has written it.
 
Old 04-11-2019, 03:28 AM   #5
slackwarenewbee
Member
 
Registered: Jul 2010
Posts: 78

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 1
You're being deceptive.Can't anybody play it straight around here?

'Disingenuous.' It means you purposely overlook facts.

This post is not a duplicate of the other one.

You are being obtuse saying they are the same.

Fixed the last post.Apparently I forgot to put it in 'Advanced mode'.

Please don't get a lawyer and sue me for 'mental anguish' over that.

I know it is tough on you to go to the next line to finish reading a sentence.

The only similarity between these posts is firearms.

The only 'duping' is that thread poster duping user's into even posting in it being it is

skewed with anti gun rhetoric.

The poster is actually being manipulative dangling a topic that user's would want to get in

on.Then he/she is counting on they will overlook the subtle 'planting' of anti gun dogma in

the title.
 
Old 04-11-2019, 03:31 AM   #6
cynwulf
Senior Member
 
Registered: Apr 2005
Posts: 2,229
Blog Entries: 5

Rep: Reputation: 1391Reputation: 1391Reputation: 1391Reputation: 1391Reputation: 1391Reputation: 1391Reputation: 1391Reputation: 1391Reputation: 1391Reputation: 1391
Quote:
Originally Posted by slackwarenewbee View Post
Letting the the first poster get away with steering the whole post in an anti Second

Amendment direction is wrong.
The OP of that thread is free to make and name the thread as he chooses, so long as it's within the forum rules. The fact that there are opinions in the thread you happen to disagree with, does not make the thread some kind of troll thread with a hidden "leftist" agenda. Most of the opinions in that thread are already set and polarised, I don't see any "steering".
 
Old 04-11-2019, 04:33 AM   #7
jsbjsb001
Senior Member
 
Registered: Mar 2009
Location: Earth? I would say I hope so but I'm not so sure about that... I could just be a figment of your imagination too.
Distribution: CentOS at the time of this writing, but some others over the years too...
Posts: 2,624

Rep: Reputation: 1317Reputation: 1317Reputation: 1317Reputation: 1317Reputation: 1317Reputation: 1317Reputation: 1317Reputation: 1317Reputation: 1317Reputation: 1317
@OP, In addition to the above, you have admitted you didn't like the responses in the other thread, and therefore more or less admitted by extension that, that's the reason for starting this thread, if it wasn't obvious before - which it very much was. Therefore, this thread is essentially asking the same question as the other thread, being, "should there be gun control in the US?". Therefore it's a dupe, just with two different OP's. This is the very reason I reported it in the first place.

Or is that too "tough" for you to understand? Or should I say, is that too "tough" for you to

understand?

whichever you prefer

Looks like I'm going to be the second to put you on Ignore...
 
Old 04-11-2019, 09:24 AM   #8
fatmac
Senior Member
 
Registered: Sep 2011
Location: Upper Hale, Surrey/Hants Border, UK
Posts: 2,886

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
You prove the point that guns should be banned.
 
Old 04-11-2019, 10:21 AM   #9
TB0ne
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Jul 2003
Location: Birmingham, Alabama
Distribution: SuSE, RedHat, Slack,CentOS
Posts: 21,286

Rep: Reputation: 5527Reputation: 5527Reputation: 5527Reputation: 5527Reputation: 5527Reputation: 5527Reputation: 5527Reputation: 5527Reputation: 5527Reputation: 5527Reputation: 5527
Quote:
Originally Posted by slackwarenewbee View Post
You're being deceptive.Can't anybody play it straight around here?

'Disingenuous.' It means you purposely overlook facts. This post is not a duplicate of the other one. You are being obtuse saying they are the same. Fixed the last post.Apparently I forgot to put it in 'Advanced mode'. Please don't get a lawyer and sue me for 'mental anguish' over that. I know it is tough on you to go to the next line to finish reading a sentence.

The only similarity between these posts is firearms. The only 'duping' is that thread poster duping user's into even posting in it being it is skewed with anti gun rhetoric. The poster is actually being manipulative dangling a topic that user's would want to get in on.Then he/she is counting on they will overlook the subtle 'planting' of anti gun dogma in the title.
Grow up, snowflake. Seems you're only comfortable if people agree with YOUR stand on things. As I said in that other thread, I'm former military, and have numerous firearms. And I totally agree there needs to be better background checks to keep weapons out of the hands of mentally unfit people, period.

And since you're such an 'expert' on the 2nd, what are the first four words again??? Does the term "regulated" appear anywhere in there?
 
Old 04-11-2019, 11:50 AM   #10
szboardstretcher
Senior Member
 
Registered: Aug 2006
Location: Detroit, MI
Distribution: GNU/Linux systemd
Posts: 4,237

Rep: Reputation: 1649Reputation: 1649Reputation: 1649Reputation: 1649Reputation: 1649Reputation: 1649Reputation: 1649Reputation: 1649Reputation: 1649Reputation: 1649Reputation: 1649
Quote:
Originally Posted by slackwarenewbee View Post
This is a response to the 'allowed' and 'guns' post

Do you have a question? Or a legitimate argument to make? Showing up in a forum and saying 'guns are X' then fueling fire to any responses seems like you might be trolling.


State your case and argument, or ask a question or get out.
 
Old 04-11-2019, 12:01 PM   #11
scasey
Senior Member
 
Registered: Feb 2013
Location: Tucson, AZ, USA
Distribution: CentOS 7.6
Posts: 2,760

Rep: Reputation: 950Reputation: 950Reputation: 950Reputation: 950Reputation: 950Reputation: 950Reputation: 950Reputation: 950
Opinions in that other thread seem to be pro gun. Over 50% (as of this writing) polled pro gun.
So, not at all sure what the OP here is trying to accomplish, but the double spacing and whining have put them on my ignore list.
 
Old 04-11-2019, 01:36 PM   #12
slackwarenewbee
Member
 
Registered: Jul 2010
Posts: 78

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 1
Somebody asked 'Where do you stand on statement in the title'.

I am Pro having firearms in the home for protection.

The way the premise of the other post is worded is biased towards having pro firearms posters

asking to be 'allowed' to keep firearms.

WRONG! It is a RIGHT every American is born with.

Just to be clear.

High capacity magazines is a totally different issue.

Rifle here means standard type.About 10 rounds tops.

I don't see the need for those 50 rounds in a clip myself.

This is fun!

Last edited by slackwarenewbee; 04-11-2019 at 01:37 PM.
 
Old 04-11-2019, 01:57 PM   #13
TB0ne
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Jul 2003
Location: Birmingham, Alabama
Distribution: SuSE, RedHat, Slack,CentOS
Posts: 21,286

Rep: Reputation: 5527Reputation: 5527Reputation: 5527Reputation: 5527Reputation: 5527Reputation: 5527Reputation: 5527Reputation: 5527Reputation: 5527Reputation: 5527Reputation: 5527
Quote:
Originally Posted by slackwarenewbee View Post
Somebody asked 'Where do you stand on statement in the title'.
I am Pro having firearms in the home for protection. The way the premise of the other post is worded is biased towards having pro firearms posters asking to be 'allowed' to keep firearms. WRONG! It is a RIGHT every American is born with.
Wrong. It is not a 'right' for someone mentally unstable to be able to get one, so don't split hairs. You are ALLOWED to have one if you pass a background check, just like you're ALLOWED to drive a car, if you can pass a driving test. Like you're ALLOWED to walk around, if you don't break laws. That's what it is...a privilege that can be taken away.
Quote:
Just to be clear. High capacity magazines is a totally different issue. Rifle here means standard type.About 10 rounds tops. I don't see the need for those 50 rounds in a clip myself. This is fun!
Many pistols come with 21 round magazines. And with a small bit of practice, you can switch magazines in less than a second. Limiting the number of rounds in a particular box as a 'solution' is plain stupid. And add to that the fact that a magazine is **NOTHING but a box with a spring in it**, and someone with basic tools can easily take a 10 round magazine, and make a 50 round one in their garage...and make 10 of those...that you can switch in a second. Explain to me how that's going to keep someone 'safer' if a nut has a weapon?

Far better to take guns away from idiots and nuts.

Last edited by TB0ne; 04-11-2019 at 03:37 PM.
 
Old 04-11-2019, 02:30 PM   #14
ondoho
LQ Addict
 
Registered: Dec 2013
Posts: 11,308
Blog Entries: 8

Rep: Reputation: 2935Reputation: 2935Reputation: 2935Reputation: 2935Reputation: 2935Reputation: 2935Reputation: 2935Reputation: 2935Reputation: 2935Reputation: 2935Reputation: 2935
Quote:
Originally Posted by fatmac View Post
You prove the point that guns should be banned.
+1! +1!
 
Old 04-11-2019, 02:35 PM   #15
slackwarenewbee
Member
 
Registered: Jul 2010
Posts: 78

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 1
'Wrong. It is not a 'right' for someone mentally unstable to be able to get one, so don't split hairs. You are ALLOWED to have one if you pass a background check, just like you're ALLOWED to drive a car, if you can pass a driving test. Like you're ALLOWED to walk around, if you don't break laws. That's what it is...a privilege that can be taken away. You are either a troll or just dimwitted.'

Every sentence there is bending the truth.This person has had practice.Lots of it!

That is what the average American is up against.

While they are busy working and raising families these types work on ways to deceive them.

This person could write deceptive ballot measures that sound like they mean one thing and

actually do the other.

The insane person killing people has nothing to do with average people keeping firearms in

there home or owning them period.Constitutional right to bear arms.

This person has a invalid and empty argument.It is just 'take firearms' blather.

'Far better to take guns away from idiots and nuts.'

I agree with him on that.That person just wrote that sloppily.What the person wants is to

rewrite the Constitution and take away the RIGHT to bear arms.
 
  


Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off



Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
LXer: Running With Rifles Top Down Action Game Releases Beta 0.96 For Linux LXer Syndicated Linux News 0 06-07-2014 08:11 AM
LXer: Rifles powered by Linux purchased by US Army LXer Syndicated Linux News 0 01-24-2014 02:22 AM
LXer: Running With Rifles action game releases 0.89 for Linux with a new map! LXer Syndicated Linux News 0 06-25-2013 02:11 AM
LXer: Running With Rifles release 0.8 with boats! LXer Syndicated Linux News 0 02-19-2013 02:30 AM

LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Non-*NIX Forums > General

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 04:57 PM.

Main Menu
Advertisement
My LQ
Write for LQ
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute content, let us know.
Main Menu
Syndicate
RSS1  Latest Threads
RSS1  LQ News
Twitter: @linuxquestions
Facebook: linuxquestions Google+: linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration