I “revised” it? The two are not functionally different, given that it’s the anti-gun lobby which I would expect to be seeing in the news. If you claim that by anti-gun side, I meant the masses of people who I don’t see reported in mainstream media…then that really doesn’t make sense.
If you think I meant people on this message board, yeah, right, I was cleaning anti-gun folks clocks 10 years before you joined up. If I meant to refer to folks here I sure as shit would have done just that.
Talk about revision. Holy shit. What I actually posted in this thread was “I note no one on the anti-gun side wants to touch with a ten-foot pole the fact that this woman was on the phone with 911 for 21 fucking minutes and no cop managed to waddle their way to her property.”
There is no claim that they need to issue a statement “immediately,” nor any that they condemn the police. I refuse to discuss things I didn’t say. This has become silly and ignorant.
Yes. Obviously, I must have had factual evidence that the officer(s) involved actually walk with a waddle. :smack:
Jeez. Yes, you revised it, and you just revised it again. You didn’t say anything about statements on the news, you just said the anti-gun side was silent regarding the police response. Since you said it on a message board, why do you think it’s bizarre for people to think you were referring to the message board, and not CNN? (Calm down, I know you didn’t explicitly say “CNN.”)
It makes more sense than all this speculation about what I thought, when I TOLD you what I thought, in my previous post. To review, I thought you meant the people in this thread who found her behavior strange.
a) How should I know what you posted ten years before I joined, and if I did somehow know that you have been “cleaning clocks” here for ten years, why should that knowledge make me less likely to think you were doing it in this thread?
b) Since I have already said that I assumed you were going after the people on this board, why are you trying to convince me that you have the balls to go after people on this board?
So we’re supposed to somehow know that by “side” you mean “lobby,” and that you were talking about statements to news outlets without your mentioning them, and that when you slam the cops you don’t mean your insults literally, but anybody who responds to you must be absolutely literal, and not say you are asking for an immediate statement when you complained that there hadn’t been one within three days of the incident. Got it.
I think you’re being much too hard on yourself.
I apologize for thinking you might be able to back up your claims. I promise it won’t happen again.
Um, because we’re on a message board discussing an event in the news?
You’re not making sense. Perhaps you should calm down.
No, you’re supposed to debate what I post and not what you wanted me to post. Examples have been provided for you herein. The issue here is whether or not you will actually issue a retraction of your false claims about what I posted. You do realize folks here can scroll back up and see I never said what you claimed I did, right?
I think you’re being much too hard on yourself.
[/QUOTE]
Since that’s a roundabout way to making a direct personal insult in Great Debates, you probably shouldn’t post that. Then again, since historically I seem to be about the only person who can be insulted in Great Debates and have nothing done about it, I guess we’ll just have to let it stand now, won’t we?
You honestly felt like I was making a claim that the police walked with a “waddle?” Holy shit; that’s really quite unfortunate for you.
In effect, you have nothing substantive whatsoever to actually post here, you pretty much have only posted to make personal attacks on my post. I’m sorry you don’t want to discuss the issue of whether or not a 21-minute 9-11 wait supports or rebuts gun control arguments, but that isn’t my fault, it’s yours.
And by the way, we’re done here, since you don’t have anything interesting to say. You don’t have to like it, but you do have to accept that fact.
Well played - you made me smile. Honestly. Maybe you and I can drop this specific dispute as it is, and meet again on a more agreeable topic in the future.