Today's "Reading Pleasure"--Pinheads on Parade

[MrBenchley]

The "courteous" enlighted gun wankers speak out with opinions ranging from ignorant and ugly to ugly and ignorant...with a brief stop at psychotic.

TNFrank: " FOX news is saying that a judge has ruled that the bill stoping Partial Birth Abortion is "Unconstitutional", WTF, all the gun control laws passed in the last 100 years are Unconstitutional and that's not stopped them from being enforced. Now that they're trying to stop the killing of full term babies their saying it's Unconstitutional. What a load of horse crap. If Planned Parenthood can get this to court so fast why in hell can't the NRA get some of the gun control laws to court?"
Kbaker: " Liberal judges support abortion, and support gun control. And, like it or not, the system has been bent to the point where "legislation from the bench" is the norm. Liberals like it. But then, it's liberals on the bench. That's why they so stringently oppose anybody Bush nominates."
Brohawk: " When one of these liberal, legislating-from-the-bench judges makes a call about something like this partial-birth abortion bill being unconstitutional, I'd like to be able to demand that he show me chapter and verse. Of course, they can't. Saying it's unconstitutional doesn't always mean that it really is."
Seamaster: " The great danger being that a liberal court will find that the 2nd is not an individual right. At which point we will be screwed."
TNFrank: "OR we will take up arms and regain our country".

http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=1&f=5&t=247154


Wobblin-Goblin: " Funny how many Pro-abortion people Swear up and down that life does not begin at conception...but then contend that we evolved from some single-cell amoeba after some mysterious matter went "bang."
JohnnyMcEldoo: " "Funny how many Pro-abortion people...." are environmentalists to an extreme wanting to protect every living thing and its habitat."
sharky30: " or that a lot of the pro abortion people are anti death penalty"
crashburnrepeat: " this is not at all weird. It's almost the definition of liberalism; punish the innocent and pardon the guilty. Or tax the working and pay the non. Or, well, you get the idea."
Exmarine: "I read today about partial birth abortion and frankly it made me ill. How can these tree hugging, save the animals, anti death penalty shit stains even think that this is right?!!?"

http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=1&f=5&t=247491

Sewer_Urchin: " Just went into Barnes and Noble and am blown away by the anti-bush and republican bashing books out there. I swear that there was one table with nothing but anti-bush stuff and another half dozen book shelves with nothing but anti-conservative shit. It was under the section of "war" which was kind of strange. It seems that writting anti-bush stuff has become a national pass-time. Is it really that bad or is it that the idiots with english degrees realized how useless college was? I tend to favor the latter and not the former. Although I am in the SF Bay Area, I am in a predominantly white/conservative area of the Bay."
007: " Weird.....I too went to the "book store" today.....it was a "Border Books and Music" store. Same thing here, it was in the war section, although they didn't have a whole table devoted to it. They had one whole shelf sytem for conserv, and 2 for liberal srew-ball shit. The one for conserv. was cool, had Michael Savage book and Ann Coulter and some others. The Lib one had Michael Mooo...nure, and row upon row of Bush hating books, I saw everthing on the covers except one that said Bush was the devil........I'm sure I just missed it. They had the "Bush Haters Handbook" and "The Liberal Handbook" among others. I spent the next 2 hours transferring books from the conserv. section over 2 the Liberal section. I put Michael Savages book over that fat toads book and Ann coulters books over the BHH book. By the time I was done it looked like they had 3 bookcases of conservative books and no liberal shit, everone just left me alone even the few employees that walked by.....they probably just thought I worked there. Having done my good deed for the day I turned around and gave a thumbs up to the cctv camera watching me and walked out."
ClayP: " Bookstores are the "Gay Bath-houses of the new Millenium." Always a bunch of people there cruising for ramrods. The only bookstores not so liberally polluted are the airport bookstores which have to sell to the gainfully employed clients."

http://www.ar15.com/forums/topic.html?b=1&f=5&t=247460

[iverglas]

1. good question, eh??

"If Planned Parenthood can get this to court so fast why in hell can't the NRA get some of the gun control laws to court?"

S/he should email somebody right away.

[MrBenchley]

2. I know, teacher!! Pick meeeeeeee!

It's because Planned Parenthood isn't lying to its membership, unlike a certain other bunch of right wing fuckwits.

[CO Liberal]

3. At Least One of the People in That Thread....

...used to post here at DU. KBaker was tombstoned after a mod saw his anti-liberal, anti-Democrat rantings on a pro-gun web site.

Many conservative pro-gunners have come here over the years pretending to be progressive Democrats. And once they're found out, they're gone....

[MrBenchley]

4. Meanwhile you'll notice

that despite the claims that there are millions of rootin' tootin' gun totin' Democrats and liberals out there, even moderate opinions in such cesspools are scarce as hens' teeth.

But hey, if the gun rights movement wasn't rotten from stem to stern, those specimens wouldn't have to troll over here pretending to be what they are not.

[CO Liberal]

5. And Pretending That Their Position....

...is based on logic and reason.

BWA-HA-HA-HA-HA!!!!!!!!

[Wickerman]

6. Thats not true, so stop saying it

I know because its the Librul's fault - a guy with a PhD said so:

GunLvrPHD
Team Member
Joined :: November 2000
Post Number :: 2550

This is why the liberals in the Senate are blocking up to 70 of Pres. Bush's picks for the judiciary.


70? 70? I didn't think it was even 7. I guess the librul media has been lying to me.

[MrBenchley]

7. Piled Higher & Deeper

(snicker)

[Liberal Classic]

8. Why not simply

Ban me, and anyone else who make a pro-gun or anti-gun control statement? I mean, we're all trolls anyway, right?

[Name removed]

9. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Wickerman]

10. Why, was that you?

I wasn't posting against the beloved gun - I was commenting on the intelligence of someone at that site who would lead fellow posters to believe they have an earned PhD. Same individual who buys into the RW spin that there are 70 folks waiting confirmation.

Since you produced no evidence that there are, in fact, (which goes against ALL media reports) 70 judges unconfirmed I'll just have to assume that you aren't the mailorder PhD at AR15.

As for banning you? Nah, I like to keep around folks who get all worked up into righteous indignation without ever having had an iota of previous contact with me. :wtf:

Had you, you would know that we are reasonably fair down here. Lots of RW gun folks come in here and spout silly crap that makes it difficult to decide who is a troll and who isn't, but we try to be pretty careful who gets the nuke. There is an extensive case built against each violator.

If you doubt that, please note the stat comparison of pro-gun vs. pro control gungeon users from a few days ago. Search around if you are new to the forum, you'll find it. About 30% of users are pro control. Guess I would have a lot of nuking to do.

In the meantime, should you want your account turned off, feel free to contact Skinner, I am confident he would oblige you.

thank you,

have a nice day

[Liberal Classic]

12. I'm not talking about that other site I am talking about this one

I directed my question at you, only because you have a moderator tag.

I've been trying to think of ways to improve J/SP.

Now, I am not questioning the fairness of the moderators in the slightest. Rather, I am wondering about the purpose of J/PS in the first place. Very few threads have anything at all to do with either justice or public safety. To the contrary, this subsection seems to foster nothing but flames and attracts undesirable elements such as your's truly.

I believe one constructive suggestion would be to create a separate subsection of its own under J/SP such as is done with the Israeli/Palestinian debates. This is if the topic of gun control is not considered a verboten topic.

Another suggestion would be to amend the standing rule of attacks versus groups. In my humble opinion, attacks against ideas represent acceptable argumentation. A policy allowing attacks against groups is often twisted such that the letter of the rule is followed while the spirit of the rule is broken. I think I've mentioned this to one or two mods before. If gun control does not deserve its own section, then a sticky thread at the top with acceptable debate guidelines could help.

Perhaps, what I am asking for is a little less fairness in moderation. There is an adage of to please all is to please none. I'm wondering not idly if DU's core constituency even wants or needs a gun dungeon. With fora of limited scope and topic, it is often better for moderation to be forthrightly and honestly biased towards one view or another, than to attempt to be imperfectly impartial. With a hot button issue such as weapons or abortion impartiality is often impossible, not because people aren't trying to be fair but due to the inflammatory nature of the topic itself.

On Edit,

Someone flagged my previous post. I am wondering if this message will likewise be considered an attack on the moderators.

[CO Liberal]

13. One Way to Find Out

If it gets deleted, it's probably considered an attack on the moderators.

:-)

[Wickerman]

14. I'm sorry I missed that concept from the first post

my bad.

It is not a bad idea to subdivide the forum into gun issues and J/PS issues. It has been proposed before, some folks were against it, and it kind of died on the vine. You could take it to Ask the Administrators again if you like. Perhaps Skinner will give it new consideration.

On Edit,

Someone flagged my previous post. I am wondering if this message will likewise be considered an attack on the moderators.

No, this one is not an attack. The first one was, and somewhat out of left field, I might say.

[Liberal Classic]

15. Actually, I was being sincere

Though, without a smiley it's hard to tell.

Why allow it at all?

[Wickerman]

16. Because many Dems own guns and want to talk about the 2nd Amend

but I guess you know that. They are going to talk about it so we give them the chance.

Outside of the flaming I see great conversation every day and I often see folks who gain new perspectives. Some of the gun folk down here are the brightest on the board. 3 or 4 of our pro-control folks are also very bright folks (wait - how many pro's are down here?) :) . Its a fun forum - though not everyone's cup of tea.

[Liberal Classic]

17. Now we're cooking with gas

I often see folks who gain new perspectives.

Which is the entire purpose of DU, if I may be so bold.

Its a fun forum - though not everyone's cup of tea.

I agree. I generally enjoy argumentation and debate with everybody (no exceptions) here.

However, it ceases to be fun if the participants aren't having a good time, making things personal and taking things personally.

This is, of course, the purpose of moderation. I am certian that the administrators don't want an unmoderated forum, or there would be no moderators at all.

Outside of the flaming I see great conversation every day...

Now, I have never flamed a moderator and I'd appeal that warning if I knew how. But I have on occasion flamed and have been on the business end of a flame thrower. Does the management believe the level of flame posts is acceptable, or too high in J/PS?

What about the other readers in this forum?

[Wickerman]

18. You are welcome to appeal the warning

simple send Skinner a PM.

I won't speak to management's opinion of moderation of the forum. Again, I will kindly direct you to the ATA forum with your questions.


thanks

[CO Liberal]

11. He Probably Can't Count Any Higher...

...than the number of bullets his gun can hold.

:-)