sfc 0
Recommended Posts
mr2mk1g 10
I didn't attack the source. I asked who in the world trawls through medical journals (the source, which I am confident is quite reputable it being the BMJ and all) for their political ideas. This is a pair of doctors addressing other doctors who read a medical journal - not a politician telling voters what his party is about to put through parliament. It is the idea that this article ought to be of any concern to anyone is the laughable one.
And whoever said this harebrained idea by a pair of doctors is reasonable? If you check the other thread started a day prior to this one you'll see I think this is a stupid and unworkable suggestion. Thankfully though it's just a pair of doctors addressing other doctors in a medical journal and not a politician telling us what he's trying to get through parliament.
I need not attack the content of the post because a) I made my position quite clear a day before this thread appeared and b) I don't want to attack it - the doctors have a stupid idea... that doesn't mean I can't express surprise that this otherwise innocuous article is causing so much concern to some.
Ah well... twas too windy to jump today so I'm grumpy.
And whoever said this harebrained idea by a pair of doctors is reasonable? If you check the other thread started a day prior to this one you'll see I think this is a stupid and unworkable suggestion. Thankfully though it's just a pair of doctors addressing other doctors in a medical journal and not a politician telling us what he's trying to get through parliament.
I need not attack the content of the post because a) I made my position quite clear a day before this thread appeared and b) I don't want to attack it - the doctors have a stupid idea... that doesn't mean I can't express surprise that this otherwise innocuous article is causing so much concern to some.
Ah well... twas too windy to jump today so I'm grumpy.
QuoteQuoteQuoteI always find it interesting when opposing arguments are merely attacking the source instead of the content of a post. It generally shows that there is some apparent merit to the argument.
Or no apparent counter point.
The point of this thread was to take a report from a couple of medical doctors and make it sound like the UK was trying to ban kitchen knives.
This kind of thread, or actual 2 identical ones in this case, is pure NRA propaganda and in not intended to invoke intelligent discussion. It is really intended to bring more people over to the point of view of of the NRA, a kind of political statement.
Discussing it is pointless as the kind of person that would post this is programmed to be an NRA drone and will use cut and paste from NRA literature to respond rather than their own thought and that is quite boring.
I started one of the threads. I am not a NRA member. I do not own a gun. I doubt if I will ever own a gun. I can find no link to the story on the NRA's web site. Please explain how you come to your conclusion.
Jimbo 0
QuoteThis kind of thread, or actual 2 identical ones in this case, is pure NRA propaganda and in not intended to invoke intelligent discussion. It is really intended to bring more people over to the point of view of of the NRA, a kind of political statement.
I think your tin foil hat might be a bit too tight.
-
Jim
"Like" - The modern day comma
Good bye, my friends. You are missed.
Good bye, my friends. You are missed.
Quotethe kind of person that would post this is programmed to be an NRA drone and will use cut and paste from NRA literature to respond rather than their own thought and that is quite boring.
Oh by the way, the guy that owns this site has a kinda funny attitude about people who insult his "guests". You might want to read up on what constitutes a Personal Attack if you intend on continuing to post here.
sfc 0
QuoteQuotethe kind of person that would post this is programmed to be an NRA drone and will use cut and paste from NRA literature to respond rather than their own thought and that is quite boring.
Oh by the way, the guy that owns this site has a kinda funny attitude about people who insult his "guests". You might want to read up on what constitutes a Personal Attack if you intend on continuing to post here.
Read the rules again, no I could not see what would constitute a personal attack, however if you were insulted that I suggested you were an NRA member then I apologize.
craddock 0
QuoteI started one of the threads. I am not a NRA member. I do not own a gun. I doubt if I will ever own a gun. I can find no link to the story on the NRA's web site. Please explain how you come to your conclusion.
Actually, there is a link to this story on the Hompage of the NRA website. Actually suprised me as there is more than enough news the last couple weeks here in the USA to write about.
That spot isn't bad at all, the winds were strong and that was the issue! It was just on the downwind side.
QuoteActually, there is a link to this story on the Hompage of the NRA website. Actually suprised me as there is more than enough news the last couple weeks here in the USA to write about.
As there are links in different non-political news sites all over the internet and the world. Actually I knew about this call for banning before it was posted and it was off of a different website. Believe it or not, I don't even frequent the NRA website. Hell, it was even posted on Fark!
Just because its not necissarily something that folks believe in politically or otherwise, doesn't mean that the link came from a group with an agenda. Its news, a lot of people are concerned that a group with possible political power (doctors) are talking about such a measure. Concerning even those without ties to organizations with a political agenda.
--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline."
sfc 0
Quote
Just because its not necissarily something that folks believe in politically or otherwise, doesn't mean that the link came from a group with an agenda. Its news, a lot of people are concerned that a group with possible political power (doctors) are talking about such a measure. Concerning even those without ties to organizations with a political agenda.
SC is bombarded by right wing anti-gun-control threads. It is propaganda, plain and simple. The purpose to strengthen support for the anti-gun control lobby. This thread for instance carries the message that if gun control is allowed in the USA that eventually other types of weapon will be controlled.
This is SC so folks can post what they like, but you shouldn't try to argue that this is not politically motivated by groups with an agenda. Oh, but wait, if people reaslise that then the propaganda will not work because it will be recognised for the BS it really is.
Whatever you want to think and hold for your opinion is fine.
Personally I'm pro-gun rights, simply because I enjoy shooting and it IS a right (for me in the USA atleast).
On the flipside, SC is bombarded by anti-gun rights propaganda every time someone mentions something remotely close to gun rights. For instance, this article has nothing to do with guns, but you brought it up. That's a hell of a chip on your shoulder there.
Once you realize that other folks are actually entitled to their opinions and there aren't secret groups of skydivers on DZ.com working in concert to push a political agenda, then your bloodpressure might go down a bit.
Personally I'm pro-gun rights, simply because I enjoy shooting and it IS a right (for me in the USA atleast).
On the flipside, SC is bombarded by anti-gun rights propaganda every time someone mentions something remotely close to gun rights. For instance, this article has nothing to do with guns, but you brought it up. That's a hell of a chip on your shoulder there.
Once you realize that other folks are actually entitled to their opinions and there aren't secret groups of skydivers on DZ.com working in concert to push a political agenda, then your bloodpressure might go down a bit.
--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline."
craddock 0
Whatever.
I just said I was surprised to see it there with all the news here going on.
I am an NRA member as well as of the ISRA (Illinois State RA) and have been busy keeping up with what it going on here on my own turf.
I could care less about some doctors and their theory on kitchen knives regardless of where it is posted.
But go ahead, heep trying to educate me because of your preconceived notions about my views.
I just said I was surprised to see it there with all the news here going on.
I am an NRA member as well as of the ISRA (Illinois State RA) and have been busy keeping up with what it going on here on my own turf.
I could care less about some doctors and their theory on kitchen knives regardless of where it is posted.
But go ahead, heep trying to educate me because of your preconceived notions about my views.
That spot isn't bad at all, the winds were strong and that was the issue! It was just on the downwind side.
QuoteBut go ahead, heep trying to educate me because of your preconceived notions about my views.
Naw, I posted in reply to your post more in regards to a theme persistant in these threads.
I don't know anything about you so how can I have an idea of what your views are besides what you state here.
--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline."
sfc 0
Quote
On the flipside, SC is bombarded by anti-gun rights propaganda every time someone mentions something remotely close to gun rights. For instance, this article has nothing to do with guns, but you brought it up. That's a hell of a chip on your shoulder there.
Guns were introduced into this thread in the first post, not by me. Go to the top of the thread and have a look.
Quote
Once you realize that other folks are actually entitled to their opinions and there aren't secret groups of skydivers on DZ.com working in concert to push a political agenda, then your bloodpressure might go down a bit.
I never said folks were not entitled to an opinion, what did I write that gave you this impression?
I often see people accused of this when they post a conflicting opinion in SC.
It would be nice if people would express their own opinions a little more rather than just cutting and pasting from NRA (or similar) website or writing what they had heard on talk radio.
I do not agree with a gun ban, I think you should be able to shoot for fun. I do think the USA has a high gun death rate compared to other 1st world/civilised countries and I think some sort of gun control could reduce this. I do not know what this would be, but with highly polarised groups like the NRA pumping out propoganda like this it is unlikely that a rational debate aimed at finding some sort of solution to the problem will ever occur.
mr2mk1g 10
QuoteIts news
I don't agree. That was my point when I posted to this thread. This is not news - it's an article in the British Medical Journal. Anyone (without looking) want to give me the content of another article in the BMJ this month... or last... or any other month? No?
Articles in the BMJ are not normally news (regardless of what they're about) unless someone or some organisation or some news agency wants to make them news.
It will take a fundimental shift in society's concious to curb firearm violations as you would like. For instance, currently there are many many many gun control laws on the books, how many of them are actively enforced to the fullest extent? Well, I keep seeing news stories about felons using a firearm in a criminal manner, people that are not allowed to legally have a firearm in the first place. What would more laws due to curb that?
It would be nice if you didn't assume I did.
QuoteIt would be nice if people would express their own opinions a little more rather than just cutting and pasting from NRA (or similar) website or writing what they had heard on talk radio.
It would be nice if you didn't assume I did.
--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline."
Quoteunless someone or some organisation or some news agency wants to make them news.
Ok, now please explain to me how that's different then 95% of all the other reported news in the media?
--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline."
kallend 1,643
QuoteJust because its not necissarily something that folks believe in politically or otherwise, doesn't mean that the link came from a group with an agenda. Its news, a lot of people are concerned that a group with possible political power (doctors) are talking about such a measure. Concerning even those without ties to organizations with a political agenda.
If physicians had a lot of political clout, malpractice lawsuit reform would have happened decades ago.
...
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one.
QuoteIf physicians had a lot of political clout, malpractice lawsuit reform would have happened decades ago.
Right, that's why they never play the role of an activist lobbing groups and officials for change. Just like academics never do the same.
HA! If only that dribble was true.
--"When I die, may I be surrounded by scattered chrome and burning gasoline."
The point of this thread was to take a report from a couple of medical doctors and make it sound like the UK was trying to ban kitchen knives.
This kind of thread, or actual 2 identical ones in this case, is pure NRA propaganda and in not intended to invoke intelligent discussion. It is really intended to bring more people over to the point of view of of the NRA, a kind of political statement.
Discussing it is pointless as the kind of person that would post this is programmed to be an NRA drone and will use cut and paste from NRA literature to respond rather than their own thought and that is quite boring.
Share this post
Link to post
Share on other sites