# I pit YogSosoth **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [March 6, 2009, 8:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-yogsosoth/488503 "2009-03-06T08:47:11Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 1\ **Showing post:** 75
**Author:** ![FinnAgain](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/finnagain/32/12500_2.png) [@FinnAgain](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FinnAgain)\ **Post date:** [March 21, 2009, 12:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-yogsosoth/488503/75 "2009-03-21T00:59:28Z")
Dear troll: > [@Obama to Seek New Assault Weapons Ban](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-to-seek-new-assault-weapons-ban/487475/483): > > And here is where your critique of me is flawed. By stating the 100% accurate truth and pointing out how you were forced to continually move the goalposts as each one of your rationalizations was shot down? Yah, my bad. :rolleyes: > [@Obama to Seek New Assault Weapons Ban](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-to-seek-new-assault-weapons-ban/487475/483): > > I asked a question, with a simple 2 sentence elaboration. Yes, showing your profound, willful ignorance of the mechanics and nature of various firearms. And arguing that since they weren’t necessary (in your ignorance-based view), people should not have them. Of course, you’ve also remained deliberately ignorant of why you’d use various firearms for various purposes (your claim that a handgun could replace a hunting rifle is priceless), or for that matter, why a flash suppressor, muzzle shrouds, etc.. need to be banned. Generally when someone tries to pin you down on that point, you shift the goalposts again and complain about how it’s simply unreasonable for someone to ask that you know wtf you’re talking about before you attempt to violate the Bill of Rights. > [@Obama to Seek New Assault Weapons Ban](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-to-seek-new-assault-weapons-ban/487475/483): > > and for you or anyone else to take that as anything but a beginning is an intellectually dishonest debate tactic. You obviously have no clue as to what intellectual honesty means. Here’s a hint, it doesn’t mean “pointing out that your original ignorance-based rationalization was crap, and you shifted the goalposts as soon as you were caught at it.” Complaining about how you are being held to your own words though, you whiny bitch? Yah, that might do it. > [@Obama to Seek New Assault Weapons Ban](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-to-seek-new-assault-weapons-ban/487475/483): > > Your reply included _"Assault weapons also have no functional definition and the term is a meaningless scare phrase. "_ Shall I assume that is your ONLY objection to the AWB? Yes, if you’re a moron. That means: go ahead spunky. Of course, were you not a deliberately ignorant trolling asshole, you might even recognize that one can add different arguments without abandoning the first. While you, on the other hand, abandoned your first and added additional rationalizations, without ever conceding that you were wrong. > [@Obama to Seek New Assault Weapons Ban](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-to-seek-new-assault-weapons-ban/487475/483): > > You didn’t mention anything about incompentent writers of the bill at all, yet you use it as a foundation for your later objections! No, you lying schmuck. When you, like the gleefully stupid troll you are, pointed out that you were supporting a bill without even having read it, many of us responded by pointing out that since the bill itself was created by people who were ignorant or lying on the subject of the bill, there was no reason to place blind faith in them. I know you’re also painfully stupid, but try real hard to figure out why " ‘Assault weapon’ is a meaningless scare phrase… and the people who are using it are wrong to do so" is not shifting the goalposts but “People should not have ‘assault weapons’ because they’re not necessary. Er, I mean, they’re too dangerous. Er, I mean, they’re too dangerous and their functions can be replaced by any other gun. Er, I mean, they have no uses. Er…” is shifting the goalposts. > [@Obama to Seek New Assault Weapons Ban](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-to-seek-new-assault-weapons-ban/487475/483): > > However your debate tactic of falsely attributing a single, 3 sentence post as my **entire** argument is nothing short of extreme strawman and a sad waste of what could have been a decent debate, True, especially since you’re lying through your rotten little troll teeth in order to pretend that I did any such thing, you stupid son of a bitch. What did I, in fact, say, you liar? Ya know, in the post you quoted and responded to, idiot? > [@](#): > > Your original risible rationalization for violating the Bill of Rights was “necessity”, only. > Once when you realized how poor a metric that was, you added in additional rationalizations. And then started claiming that since you shifted the goalposts once you were caught, that it was somehow a lie to point out what your original argument had been. What did I say [before that](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=10942552&postcount=426)? > [@](#): > > By your own standard, which you quickly changed and shifted the goalposts, the only metric was necessity. Only necessity. Not any of your other post-hoc rationalizations. You stupid liar, why lie about me when all I have to do is quote my own posts? Obviously, I made quite clear that I was taking you to task for your stupidity in your original argument, and how you had changed it. Are you really so fucking stupid that you think that my specific claim of you shifting the goalposts meant you never changed your tune? Are you really that much of a fool? That when I delineate between your original argument and the rationalizations that you added in later when you shifted the goalposts, that I’m claiming your argument remained exactly as it was at first? I don’t believe it. You’re stupid, but you’re not that stupid. Just a troll. --- _[View the full topic](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/i-pit-yogsosoth/488503)._