So in 2016 when there are still gun owners in the United States you will be apologizing heartily, right? Or is this a heads you win tails we lose situation where if you’re wrong it’s only because gun luvin’ freedom fighting rugged individualists like yourself stood up to tyranny and wouldn’t LET him take the guns by executive fiat so he didn’t even try?
What are you talking about? That’s been my point in the entire thread and I specifically said it over and over since people kept throwing these irrelevant counterarguments at me. What could even remotely be described as backpedalling?
This whole thread has been
OP: Haha, all these gun nuts thought Obama was going to declare all guns illegal today and he didn’t, idiots
Me: What? No one thought he was going to just try to declare them illegal today. Who said that?
Others: Here are a few quotes about people concerned about future gun control events, gradual whittling away of gun rights, etc. (being hyperbolic, but irrelevant to my point)
Me: Yeah, I’m talking about what the OP said, which was that people thought guns would all be banned at once by executive order
You: Haha, backpeddling!
That’s your victory hill? You thought that OP was claiming that Obama was going to – what? – take over the country and make all guns illegal as of noon on Executive Action day?
Okie-doke. Well won. Congratulations. Off you go now. Try not to hurt yourself.
Yes, if you read the OP, that’s exactly what he said. Not necesarily the “take over the country part”, but clearly he’s saying there was an paranoid expectation by “gun nuts” that guns would be banned under Obama’s executive actions, and since they weren’t, let’s all point and laugh at the retards. The straw retards.
The OP doesn’t make sense read any other way. Could you provide an alternate interpretation?
Well, I prefer to let the OP explain his own … um, OP, but I read it as, “Well today Obama issued very sensible Executive Orders to help try and contain gun violence,” the key being “very sensible,” followed by rhetoric making fun of the gun-nuts who expect somewhat less sensible Executive Orders – which didn’t happen by a longshot, so … yuk, yuk, yuk … look at me chuckling.
I certainly didn’t read into it hyper-literally as you did that anyone thought that Obama would, let alone could, just make guns illegal with the swipe of a pen.
Nope, but I can do one better-I can read it without trying to reinterpret it:
Not seeing the word “now”(or any word that means anything like “now”) in there.
Yes. In fact, the idea that Obama would take away guns through executive order was so pervasive that Mitch McConnell can write that Obama’s executive orders in fact did take away people’s guns.
Your protestations to the contrary are just laughable. You might as well argue that there was no TeaParty as argue there was/is no pervasive belief on the right that Obama would, will and even did take away guns through executive order.
As per the actual title of this thread, Mitch McConnel thought Obama was going to take away “all the guns” via executive order?
These protestations are retarded. When someone on my side of an argument is making dishonest or stupid arguments, I don’t pat themselves on the back because they happen to be on my side. I want my side represented by the best, and most honest arguments possible. These circle jerks are just people one-upping each other with stupid shit and all congratulating each other.
Obama was expected to take action via executive order on gun issues. The OP is stating that he believes that gun nuts thought that this meant that Obama was going “to take all the guns”, both said in the title of this thread, and then repeated in his OP. Since Obama took executive actions short of “tak[ing] all the guns”, the OP is trying to show that gun nuts warnings of Obama trying to “take all the guns” was incorrect and that they should be embarassed about being wrong and paranoid.
This could be a valid line of argument to take, if it were the position of any significant portion of gun nuts that they honestly predicted Obama would “take all the guns” via executive order that day. But it was not, making it a rather ridiculous straw argument.
Pretending it meant something else makes you look ridiculous to anyone else who isn’t in your little circle jerk ready to pat you on the back for making poor arguments but being on their side.
That doesn’t mean that people aren’t reacting hyperbolically to what actually happened, but that doesn’t matter - the only way the OP would’ve been valid is if the idea that Obama was going to “take all the guns” via executive order that day was prevalent. Pretty much everyone expected something along the lines of what he actually did.
[Quote=Mitch McConnell]
And then he went one step further, spelling out the 23 different Executive Orders he will take to get your guns.
[/quote]
Don’t see how that can be read any other way.
But he doesn’t just read it-he interprets it, and that takes a little time. He’ll be back in just a minute to tell you what Mitch meant.
I’m not going to defend McConnel. He’s using hyperbole to rile up his base. That doesn’t mean that the position he’s appealing to is actually widespread, nor does it mean he believes it - unless you actually think that Mitch McConnel actually believes Obama is going to ban all the guns via those 23 executive orders.
Undoubtedly you will view this as backpeddling, but it really isn’t. My point is that it’s not a common belief amongst gun nuts that those 23 executive orders spell the end of gun ownership in the US. They may think it will eventually impair it, or it’s a first step in a long term renewal in gun control efforts, but that’s different from what the OP was proposing.
So it’s not enough for you that we quote them verbatim-you want we should read their minds?!?
Reading this thread is like reading that pitting of Joe Paterno and the Penn State football program with SenorBeef playing Starving Artist. What is your paper towel roll SB? It’s the only thing you are missing.
By the way, have you ever heard the term Pyrrhic victory? I am not saying you are close to winning anything in this thread, just the opposite IMHO, but on the off chance you do score some points you are still coming off as a jackass.
So the original assertion was that people have said that Obama would take away guns through executive order.
Since then, every example you’ve been given, you’ve dismissed as hyperbole.
Is there an instance of someone saying exactly what has been claimed that they say on this subject that would not be hyperbole?
People are social creatures. They will group up against someone who is against their position and lose all perspective on objectivity or truth. Just having the herd on your side will convince you that you’re right, even embolden you to make more outrageous claims. You’d see the same thing if one of you all went to the freeper board and tried to talk some sense into them about global warming or something. They’d all gang up on you, and they’d be convinced they were right, not because the merits of their position, but because there’s a security in herding that outweighs such concerns.
I’ve not taken a particularly bold or outrageous position. This entire thread is essentially “haha, gun nuts thought Obama was going to ban all guns!” “No, not many people actually believed that” - I don’t care about the Paterno threads but I would imagine Starving Artist wasn’t taking such a mild position.
But for “no, most gun nuts don’t think that Obama planned to ban all guns via executive order” to be an outrageous position to you guys, you need that echo chamber herding effect to rile you up and have each person declare me more outrageous than the last.
In post #50, an unknown user from another forum is quoted as saying
This is in line with thinking that Obama was actually intending to ban all the guns via executive order. Technically not “all the guns” here, just the majority, but by all means I would say that this quote fits the attitude that the OP is mocking.
However, I don’t think that’s at all a common viewpoint. I don’t think many people at all took seriously the idea that we’d all have to turn our guns in because of these executive orders.
Most of the rest of the quotes presented have been griping about the power abuse of executive orders and such - not stuff that actually indicates that those people thought Obama was going to ban all guns by decree.
Mitch McConnel is closer, but he’s just being an asshole. He’s trying to drum up support rather than actually honestly predicting that these 23 executive orders actually ban gun ownership. “Come for your guns” is also sort of weasel language - it’s meant to convey that any and all guns are up for grabs, but if called on it he could always say he was only talking about assault weapons, or some other factor that the executive orders attempt to control.
Pretending that the OP is right, that the belief that Obama is going to ban all guns by executive action, is widespread, is just silly. Ganging up on me for pointing that out is kind of jeuvenile.
This whole video talks about how the Gov’t has been waiting for a massacre to “get rid of guns”, it’s been a right wing meme since BEFORE Sandy Hook that Obama was going to ban guns and ammo (which is why there have been so many ammo shortages and the prices have gone up), this guy has 111,000-odd subscribers, these beliefs are NOT niche ones and you’re a slimy toad for dancing around every example people give you of gun nuts claiming the gov’t/Obama is going to take all the guns as hyperbole etc.
This guy is actually fairly rational compared to most of the gun nuts out there.
Then we have this guy http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Kv4E7eDdVzg :
Before the video was taken down he had a lot of support in the comments section and pretty much every youtube video AT ALL that has to do with gun control since Sandy Hook gets completely INUNDATED with accusations that Obama was right about to take all their guns, you either are a slimy lying snake or you’ve had your head stuck in the sand to believe that Obama taking all the guns isn’t a common conspiracy theory, and has been by NRA types, for the past 4 years, and STILL they have all that they want and NO evidence whatsoever that their guns will be taken away.
I have no idea how I can repeat the same point 50 times and no one seems to care.
My only interest in this thread is to attack the entire point of the thread, which is the idea that gun nuts all thought Obama would ban guns by decree when he said that he was going to look into seeing what he could do via executive order.
The entire purpose of the OP is “oh they all thought guns would be banned today, and they weren’t, idiots!” and I’m saying no one thought guns would all be banned that day.
I’m not saying there are no people who think guns will never be banned, or that they may be banned down the road, or even that Obama will push whatever gun control legislation he can, or that this is a first step of a bigger gun control effort.
I’m saying there aren’t many people who thought Obama was seriously going to decree that all guns are illegal to own by executive order.
Anyway, there’s nothing to be gained by staying around this thread when people just keep repeating the same shit at me over and over without actually reading what I’m saying. It’s tiring.
You should do your handwaving from the wrist rather than the elbow or shoulder. It will be less tiring.
You can also cut and paste “hyperbole” rather than typing it out after every example that people give you of the thing you’re contending doesn’t exist.
No True Scotsman would use hyperbole.