Scumpup, I tell you this in all sincerity, and I do believe this is for your own sanity and well-being:
Maybe you should clear your cookies or something so that ugly temptation doesn’t keep rearing it’s ugly head.
He knows exactly what you mean. He is just hoping that he can use your use of child molestation to imply that you have secret fantasies about child molestation just like people who accuse others of being Nazis have secret fantasies of committing genocide.
And your answer is “do something, anything, it doesn’t matter what”
The point you’re trying to make is stupid. Scumpup brought up child molestation to point out how stupid Elvis’s theory is (the oen where everyone is just one bad day away from going on a rampage). Do you really not get this or are you being intentionally obtuse?
Everyone gets angry from time to time. *Not *everyone is “just one bad day” from raping a child. Only a pedophile would even think of that one.
But congratulations on finding someone in this thread with even worse mental health issues than yourself.
Anything is better than nothing, which is what *you *offer (and please don’t repeat that lie about supporting a measure you actually opposed). Why is that? And why should you be taken seriously as long as that is the case?
All they have left is intentional distortion at this point. They pretend that your criticism of Elvis’s ridiculous theory that “we are all one bad day away from a multiple murder”
When we use of the statistics about the dangers to children of having a pool in the back yard compared to having a gun in the house to show that there are plenty of things that pose more of a threat to a child than a gun in the house that do not generate anywhere near the level of hysteria that guns do.
When we make this comparison to show that they are acting irrationally WRT to guns, they pretend that we are saying that pools can be used as weapons just like guns. They don’t want debate, they want to vent because they are mad that they have lost the debate and are not likely to turn things around any time soon (i.e. this century).
You’re wrong. There are some “gun control” measures that are harmful to your cause.
A dogged insistence on banning guns based on cosmetic features has got more than a few liberal posters on this board reevaluating their position on guns. They will never be on the wavelength and Bone or even me but they are no longer uncritically accepting everything that the gun control crowd proposes. You really shot yourself in the foot with that.
I have supported licensing and registration at the federal level for years. Show me where I have opposed universal licensing and registration? I suspect you believe you can read my mind based on my reaction to Manchin Toomey (which I didn’t oppose, I was happy to rub your nose in its failure because it showed how badly you had biffed it but I never opposed it). manchin Toomey was not licensing and registration. it was not even universal background checks. it was a fig leaf so that the gun control side of the debate wouldn’t be too embarrassed and you blew it so bad that you couldn’t even get something as watered down as Manchin Toomey.
It has occurred to me that if gun owners were really as irresponsible and prone to violence as some anti-gunners claim, there wouldn’t be any anti-gunners left to make the claim.
Thus, ElvisL1ves is defeated by his own arguments.
Tell us more about “hoplophobia”. :rolleyes:
No, we observe that you are evading and obfuscating the problem rather than addressing it.
Do you realize how telling it is that those who want to save lives are “they” and not “we”?
I do note that you’re not even trying to promote better mental health treatment, and removal of access to guns by the mentally ill, as a way to do that. That may indicate your realization that it would result in disarming you.
Do look into excluded middles sometime. It’s a fascinating subject.
In your own delusions.
When are you going to drop that lie? You claim to have supported it, but you’re fucking gleeful that the filibuster born of NRA bribes born of your own dues money defeated it. You’re gleeful that a measure you lie about having supported could not overcome you.
So, when asked again for what you actually propose, what bills you support, you have nothing. You can’t even use the word “we” to describe people who want to cut down on the killings. If only you were merely dishonest; that could be dealt with. You are sick and dangerous.
Repeatedly, ad nauseum, like he was, idunno, fixated or something. It was fucking creepy. Hence my derision.
OK, so show me where I am gleeful that the measure was defeated? And where do I say I supported the Manchin Toomey bill? I am pretty sure I ridiculed it as being a fig leaf from the very beginning. It wasn’t just a maginot line, it was like a damming a river with a chain link fence.
So you can read my mind but scumpup cannot read yours?
He was basically flinging the accusation at Elvis. It is about as creepy as accusing Elvis of being one bad day away from being a Nazi but no one uses Nazi anymore so he used pedophile. I don’t really see WTF you don’t understand about how he was using the term.
Elvis is just frothing at the mouth because he is so pissed that he is not omnipotent and this country is a democracy that requires he actually convince people over to his side with reason rather than get people to do what he wants by accusing them of being evil. You know, “one bad day away from being a mass murderer”
Here, I’ll say it: I have never wanted to rape or kill a toddler; such acts are evil and I would never do or want to do such things.
Now you say it.
The only one here who refuses to say he has never wanted to rape a toddler is you, Chester. My stars, what a reprehensible piece of shit you are. Too bad your mother was apparently not allowed to have wire clothes hangers.
It’s okay that you don’t understand. You’re just not equipped to keep up.
Then why do you think about it so much?
Any response to this?