Gun Control & RKBA

stone space

(6,498 posts)

29. Gunhumping is kind of like chairhumping, but with a gun instead of a chair.

Reply to Marengo (Reply #27)

Wed Oct 12, 2016, 11:05 AM

Oct 2016

The NRA candidate has demonstrated exactly how this works in the most recent debate.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

99 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

An objective of the RKBA [View all] discntnt_irny_srcsm Oct 2016 OP

I agree that the RKBA is an implicit statement of trust in the citizenry, unique in Eleanors38 Oct 2016 #1

I don't trust this guy. stone space Oct 2016 #2

I could be wrong but I believe that guy is jail discntnt_irny_srcsm Oct 2016 #4

He's not in jail. He killed himself after engaging in a bloody massacre. stone space Oct 2016 #6

I missed this earlier discntnt_irny_srcsm Oct 2016 #14

I don't trust you. beevul Oct 2016 #12

I respect you enough to not carry a gun. stone space Oct 2016 #15

Like hell you do. beevul Oct 2016 #16

Wow. I'm not sure what's got you so upset here. stone space Oct 2016 #17

Do you trust him to carry a gun? Trust him enough not to demand the government prevent him... Marengo Oct 2016 #33

Of course not. stone space Oct 2016 #34

Why don't you trust Beevul to carry a gun? What has he done to earn your distrust? Marengo Oct 2016 #35

For the same reason that he doesnt trust me. stone space Oct 2016 #36

Am I to assume that fundamentally you distrust anyone with firearms? Other than to say... Marengo Oct 2016 #42

Who said I was upset? beevul Oct 2016 #82

Who do you trust with firearms? Marengo Oct 2016 #13

It doesn't matter. stone space Oct 2016 #23

I didn't ask who you don't trust, rather who you do trust with firearms. Can you answer? Marengo Oct 2016 #26

Again, it doesn't matter. stone space Oct 2016 #28

You appear to be dodging as my question stands on it's own. Why can't you answer? Marengo Oct 2016 #30

The OP doesn't advocate disenfranchising folks who CAN be trusted with guns. stone space Oct 2016 #38

Just to narrow the focus... discntnt_irny_srcsm Oct 2016 #40

For purposes of this discussion, that would be... stone space Oct 2016 #41

I understand your set description discntnt_irny_srcsm Oct 2016 #43

As you are the bottleneck here, not me, that's pretty much out of my hands. stone space Oct 2016 #44

How does Beevul fall into the same intersection as Zimmerman? What similarities are there? Marengo Oct 2016 #46

Are you assuming that Beevul is in the intersection? stone space Oct 2016 #49

Do you, or do you not, trust Beevul with guns. Do you, or do you not, trust Zimmerman with guns? Marengo Oct 2016 #50

No and no. stone space Oct 2016 #51

What about Beevul and Zimmerman are similar to cause you not to trust either? Marengo Oct 2016 #61

Do you believe that Beevul and Zimmerman are similar? stone space Oct 2016 #64

I'm not quite sure what to make of your apparent difficulty following your own train of thought. Marengo Oct 2016 #66

Are there any character or trait based intersections between the two within your set? Marengo Oct 2016 #68

I infer that you are unable to answer the question discntnt_irny_srcsm Oct 2016 #47

For the most part I don't control the criteria for the intersection. stone space Oct 2016 #48

I guess you don't discntnt_irny_srcsm Oct 2016 #52

You want to disenfranchise people and you don't even know who they are? stone space Oct 2016 #54

Perhaps you could hold up your end of the discussion... discntnt_irny_srcsm Oct 2016 #56

Both Beevul and Zimmerman are in the set under my control. stone space Oct 2016 #58

Actually, I'll leave it you to make the determination who is a member of your set discntnt_irny_srcsm Oct 2016 #60

I answered. You didn't. stone space Oct 2016 #63

re: "I answered. You didn't." discntnt_irny_srcsm Oct 2016 #77

Tired of the diversions and deflections. stone space Oct 2016 #78

I'm happy for you n/t discntnt_irny_srcsm Oct 2016 #79

Why are they in the same set under your control? Marengo Oct 2016 #62

Because they both satisfy the condition for set membership. stone space Oct 2016 #65

And that condition would be? Marengo Oct 2016 #67

I don't trust them with guns. stone space Oct 2016 #69

Why not? Based on what criteria? Marengo Oct 2016 #70

Why are you so obsessed about this? stone space Oct 2016 #71

Why are you so reluctant to answer? It's very odd, as if you are fearful to answer. You must have... Marengo Oct 2016 #72

What is this fear thing all about? stone space Oct 2016 #76

Why won't you answer the question? If not out of fear, than why the reluctance? Marengo Oct 2016 #80

Again, fear. Is fear the only way you have to assert dominance? stone space Oct 2016 #81

Why won't you answer the question? What am I to assume is the reason for your reluctance to do so? Marengo Oct 2016 #90

He does that a lot Duckhunter935 Oct 2016 #92

What metrics, in general terms, do you base a belief someone is not to be trusted... Marengo Oct 2016 #45

He won't answer Duckhunter935 Oct 2016 #73

Apparently not. One is left to wonder why. Marengo Oct 2016 #74

He never answers simple questions Duckhunter935 Oct 2016 #75

Why are you baiting and engaging in personal insults? stone space Oct 2016 #83

Unfortunately what has happened Duckhunter935 Oct 2016 #85

Your insults are not facts. They are just personal insults. stone space Oct 2016 #86

Which ones? Duckhunter935 Oct 2016 #87

Do you have anything besides insults? stone space Oct 2016 #88

They're accurate observations of your behavior. beevul Oct 2016 #89

Indeed, that is true Duckhunter935 Oct 2016 #91

Where did you run off to? Lots of pending questions here, crickets are gathering. Marengo Oct 2016 #100

Post removed Post removed Oct 2016 #101

Prove him wrong by answering my simple questions... Marengo Oct 2016 #93

You really expect an answer? Duckhunter935 Oct 2016 #94

I've been engaging him under the assumption he was participating in good faith. Perhaps... Marengo Oct 2016 #95

5+ irrelevant flame bait threads locked in a few days and our genial host is reaching his limits DonP Oct 2016 #96

Yes indeed, the host here is the best Duckhunter935 Oct 2016 #98

Heh. The very long strand appearing on the screen should tip you off... Eleanors38 Oct 2016 #97

Why are you opposed to the right to vote? stone space Oct 2016 #3

re: "Why are you opposed to the right to vote?" discntnt_irny_srcsm Oct 2016 #5

I'm talking about disenfranchised inmates who neither of us trust to have AR-15s in their cells. stone space Oct 2016 #7

The R E A L L Y short answer discntnt_irny_srcsm Oct 2016 #8

Too short. You don't what? Don't trust them with votes, or don't stand by your OP? stone space Oct 2016 #9

The only question in your reply (post #7): discntnt_irny_srcsm Oct 2016 #10

I would, but I can't see an "edit" button on the OP. Can you see one? stone space Oct 2016 #18

I said YOU could use it because you seem to be the one with a problem understanding discntnt_irny_srcsm Oct 2016 #19

As it stands, your OP advocates disenfranchisement. stone space Oct 2016 #20

No, it really doesn't DonP Oct 2016 #21

The OP openly and directly advocates disenfranchisement of anybody too dangerous to have guns. stone space Oct 2016 #22

Another of your unproven assertions n/t discntnt_irny_srcsm Oct 2016 #24

It's not my assertion. It's the OP's gunhumping assertion. stone space Oct 2016 #25

What do you mean by "gunhumping" in this context? Marengo Oct 2016 #27

Gunhumping is kind of like chairhumping, but with a gun instead of a chair. stone space Oct 2016 #29

If that is your answer, then your use of the term is gratuitous and nonsensical in context. Marengo Oct 2016 #31

It is your "humping" of your thread-jacking assertion that... discntnt_irny_srcsm Oct 2016 #32

About that. beevul Oct 2016 #84

Perhaps it is because oneshooter Oct 2016 #99

Dec 1969 #