Skip to main content

View Diary: How Many Of Those are Veterans? Gun Policy, Suicide, and Our National Conversation (185 comments)

Comment Preferences

  •  The arguments DO indeed exist (0+ / 0-)

    The arguments you say do not exist DO INDEED EXIST!!!!

    I have shown you those arguments stated in print.  Go read my comment title "In Response" - there you will find proof of the existence of these arguments.

    If we look only at homicides, we get for firearms 11,493 with a rate per 100,000 of 3.74,  far lower than total deaths by firearm of 30,561 and 9.95 per 100,000.
    Here is a person arguing that ONLY 11,000 Americans die annually from gunshot injuries (a mere 11,000!) we s/he discounts suicides.  There is no other to accurately characterize this person's thinking!!!

    Now I agree entirely that not EVERY gun owner in America thinks this way, and not even EVERY member of dk RKBA thinks this way.  But I can identify by name 7 and 12 members of dk RKBA who DO think that way: those who "recced" the two comments I copied above.

    "The fool doth think he is wise: the wise man knows himself to be a fool" - W. Shakespeare

    by Hugh Jim Bissell on Tue Sep 25, 2012 at 03:36:22 PM PDT

    [ Parent ]

    •  And yet... (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      PavePusher, FrugalGranny

      ...the "examples" you provided still did not, in fact, state what you insist that they state.

      I can see this quite plainly by reading what the comments in question state and comparing that to your description of those comments -- the two are quite different.

      You keep insisting on putting words and contexts onto the statements that are simply not there.

      For instance, the example you use here is explaining the numbers.  It is you who are attempting to state that this is some sort of dismissal of suicides -- it is  not.  It is simply explaining how the different numbers are arrived at.  You are trying to put in a new meaning that does not exist.

      It's really very simple -- people are not stating what you insist they are stating.

      So, no matter how many times you insist that people are saying something that they are not, it still won't be true.  This has now been pointed out to you numerous times, quite clearly.

      That being the case, the most reasonable explanation is that you are purposefully and intentionally misrepresenting what others are saying.  You've been caught out doing that enough times now that it's become exactly what we expect of you -- and you never disappoint.

      Yes, I often dress as a pirate. Your point?

      by theatre goon on Tue Sep 25, 2012 at 03:56:49 PM PDT

      [ Parent ]

      •  Is it time to consider him HOS yet? n/t (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        theatre goon, FrugalGranny
        •  Probably not, according to site rules. (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          rockhound, FrugalGranny

          His little game, juvenile as it is, doesn't really impact the site as a whole -- and that's what it seems it takes to get HOS to stick.

          I mean, he's not bad at this little tactic of his.  He re-writes the statements of others into things they didn't actually say, but he stays close enough to the actual words so that he can play at simply misunderstanding what was said.

          We know the difference because it's our diaries he trolls most of the time.  Others aren't as familiar with the tactic.

          Even then, what would be the point?  Look at how little support his last couple of diaries have gotten.  The tactic isn't working any better for him than it is for the Republicans with their "Obama Apology Tour" nonsense -- it is identical, and it's not working for either of them.  When you invest in that tactic, though, you have to really commit to it.

          He plays his little game, we come in and point out just how foolish his little arguments are, and it moves off the list.

          Making him HOS would just get him a bit of the support he's not getting now, out of a sense of pity, if nothing else.

          Heck, if we ignored him, he'd get no response whatsoever.  I just goes against the grain to let such outright falsehoods go without pointing them out.  

          I'm starting to wonder if it's not like responding to the wilder conspiracy theories -- to even take the time to refute them is to give them more attention than they deserve.

          Yes, I often dress as a pirate. Your point?

          by theatre goon on Wed Sep 26, 2012 at 04:20:22 AM PDT

          [ Parent ]

      •  I'm making this harder than it needs to be (0+ / 0-)

        Sorry to take so long getting back to you - I was out of town for a bit.

        Anyways, I think I've been making this harder for us than it needs to be.

        The issue is simple: the CDC reports that 30,000+ Americans die every year from gunshot injuries.  On hearing that statistic, people (you, I, others) will either accept that as a fact, or decide the statistic is wrong, for whatever reason(s).

        After reading the two comments I previously quoted to you, I concluded these two commenters did not accept as a fact that 30,000+ Americans die every year of gunshot injuries; I understood that these two commenters were saying that the statistic was somehow wrong or in error.

        If, as you say, I have misintepreted those two commenters (and all the people who "recced" those comments) and they do indeed accept as a fact that 30,000+ Americans die every year of gunshot injuries, then we are all in agreement, and nothing more need be said on the subject.

        Thank you for setting me straight.

        "The fool doth think he is wise: the wise man knows himself to be a fool" - W. Shakespeare

        by Hugh Jim Bissell on Thu Sep 27, 2012 at 01:46:43 PM PDT

        [ Parent ]

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site