JohnRich 4 #101 June 11, 2010 Quote Quote Quote Would you confiscate these illegally held guns in your home town of Chicago? See here: http://www.examiner.com/x-2581-St-Louis-Gun-Rights-Examiner~y2010m6d9-Score-Chicago-illegal-gun-owners-3-bad-guys-0 There are two false premises in your post. Fix them and I'll respond. Do you believe law enforcement officers should impound the firearms used in the thee incidents John offered? I've got a $1 bet that says kallend won't answer this question directly and forthright. Any takers? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,661 #102 June 11, 2010 Quote Quote Quote Quote Would you confiscate these illegally held guns in your home town of Chicago? See here: http://www.examiner.com/x-2581-St-Louis-Gun-Rights-Examiner~y2010m6d9-Score-Chicago-illegal-gun-owners-3-bad-guys-0 There are two false premises in your post. Fix them and I'll respond. Do you believe law enforcement officers should impound the firearms used in the thee incidents John offered? I've got a $1 bet that says kallend won't answer this question directly and forthright. Any takers? There are two false premises in your post. Answering a question containing false premises is absurd. Fix the errors and I'll respond.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kennedy 0 #103 June 11, 2010 In other words, you're not going to answer no matter how he gives you the question. Thanks for showing you still can't answer a question. You're one defense is pointing out one or more problems with how I asked the question, because I'm sure you and everyone else know what we're asking. I'm all ears to hear about what false premise I included by asking your opinion.witty subliminal message Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards. 1* Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,661 #104 June 11, 2010 QuoteIn other words, you're not going to answer no matter how he gives you the question. Thanks for showing you still can't answer a question. You're one defense is pointing out one or more problems with how I asked the question, because I'm sure you and everyone else know what we're asking. I'm all ears to hear about what false premise I included by asking your opinion. If he fixes the errors I WILL answer. I'll not answer a question that has false information embedded in it.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kennedy 0 #105 June 11, 2010 I'm pretty sure I asked you a question. QuoteDo you believe law enforcement officers should impound the firearms used in the three incidents John offered? Yep. There it is. Care to answer?witty subliminal message Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards. 1* Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,661 #106 June 11, 2010 Have you stopped beating your wife? Yes or no?... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skybill 19 #107 June 11, 2010 Quote Have you stopped beating your wife? Yes or no? Hi Kowboy Kaliforn Kallend, From gungrabbing to Standup Comedy!!!! Man, like you are just too much!! You're probably too young to remember Rusty Warren, and she'd direct "Your Question" to all the men out there,"Men, Do you still beat your wife????,....Why Hell every time!!!"SCR-2034, SCS-680 III%, Deli-out Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnRich 4 #108 June 11, 2010 Quote There are two false premises in your post. Answering a question containing false premises is absurd. Fix the errors and I'll respond. Blah blah blah. I knew you wouldn't have the ... to do it. And of course, you just can't bother to explain those "false premises" yourself and then answer the question conditioned upon that. Oh no. Not kallend the game-player. Blah blah blah. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
Kennedy 0 #109 June 11, 2010 I didn't say it was a yes or no, I asked if you thought the firearms in those three incidents should be "impounded" since they appear to violate local laws. It can be a yes or no, but no one demanded you answer with just one word. If you've got more of an answer I'd love to hear it because it seems you spend a lit of time trying not to say anything yourself while criticizing others. And to answer your question, I've never beat my wife, so since I never started, there's nothing to stop. So how about it, an answer, or another response full of sound and fury signifying nothing?witty subliminal message Guard your honor, let your reputation fall where it will, and outlast the bastards. 1* Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,661 #110 June 11, 2010 Quote Quote There are two false premises in your post. Answering a question containing false premises is absurd. Fix the errors and I'll respond. Blah blah blah. I knew you wouldn't have the ... to do it. And of course, you just can't bother to explain those "false premises" yourself and then answer the question conditioned upon that. Oh no. Not kallend the game-player. Blah blah blah. You asked a question containing (at least) 2 falsehoods. Why should anyone bother to answer it?... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,661 #111 June 11, 2010 The question is defective. Fix it.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skypuppy 1 #112 June 11, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteDon't you think it would be handy to KNOW that the new FELON has a gun, and what it is? The police should approach every felon as if they might be armed, regardless of whether or not their name is in some gun registry. Agreed. It would also be nice to know that said FELON had any (previously legal) guns hidden away. It makes no difference - they should still approach him as if he does. Of course it makes a difference. He may be out of prison in 6 months and just goes to pick up his stash of guns. Which, if they were illegally obtained and not registered, would not show up on the cop's screens anyway, so, as he said, it makes no difference if there are guns registered, they must treat them as if they do have guns. Even if some are registered and they confiscate them, that doesn't mean they don't have more. So again, the registry is useless.If some old guy can do it then obviously it can't be very extreme. Otherwise he'd already be dead. Bruce McConkey 'I thought we were gonna die, and I couldn't think of anyone Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,661 #113 June 11, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteDon't you think it would be handy to KNOW that the new FELON has a gun, and what it is? The police should approach every felon as if they might be armed, regardless of whether or not their name is in some gun registry. Agreed. It would also be nice to know that said FELON had any (previously legal) guns hidden away. It makes no difference - they should still approach him as if he does. Of course it makes a difference. He may be out of prison in 6 months and just goes to pick up his stash of guns. Which, if they were illegally obtained and not registered, would not show up on the cop's screens anyway, so, as he said, it makes no difference if there are guns registered, they must treat them as if they do have guns. Even if some are registered and they confiscate them, that doesn't mean they don't have more. So again, the registry is useless. FAIL! The premise is that he starts out as a law abiding citizen. Law abiding citizens don't have illegal guns.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skypuppy 1 #114 June 11, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteDon't you think it would be handy to KNOW that the new FELON has a gun, and what it is? The police should approach every felon as if they might be armed, regardless of whether or not their name is in some gun registry. Agreed. It would also be nice to know that said FELON had any (previously legal) guns hidden away. It makes no difference - they should still approach him as if he does. Of course it makes a difference. He may be out of prison in 6 months and just goes to pick up his stash of guns. Which, if they were illegally obtained and not registered, would not show up on the cop's screens anyway, so, as he said, it makes no difference if there are guns registered, they must treat them as if they do have guns. Even if some are registered and they confiscate them, that doesn't mean they don't have more. So again, the registry is useless. FAIL! The premise is that he starts out as a law abiding citizen. Law abiding citizens don't have illegal guns. If you have a registry and the gun is not registered, it is an illegal weapon. That is how a registry makes criminals out of law-abiding citizens. That is why the long-gun registry in Canada has been an abject and costly failure, and hopefully will soon be over-turned.If some old guy can do it then obviously it can't be very extreme. Otherwise he'd already be dead. Bruce McConkey 'I thought we were gonna die, and I couldn't think of anyone Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rhaig 0 #115 June 11, 2010 Quote FAIL! The premise is that he starts out as a law abiding citizen. Law abiding citizens don't have illegal guns. FAIL! They're illegal the minute the person becomes a felon.-- Rob Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
skypuppy 1 #116 June 11, 2010 perhaps the best analogy is the failure of prohibition in the states in the 1920's. A bad law which was ignored by over half the population (making criminals of them), which resulted only in the creation of millionaire rum-runners and beer-barons. You are saying that the majority of these law-breakers who enjoyed a beer or two deserved to made criminals? At least prohibition did create one thing worthwhile. Cocktails were created to when something was needed to mask the chemical taste of homemade hooch....If some old guy can do it then obviously it can't be very extreme. Otherwise he'd already be dead. Bruce McConkey 'I thought we were gonna die, and I couldn't think of anyone Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,661 #117 June 11, 2010 QuoteQuote FAIL! The premise is that he starts out as a law abiding citizen. Law abiding citizens don't have illegal guns. FAIL! They're illegal the minute the person becomes a felon. FAIL! I didn't say they did. That was skypuppy.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,661 #118 June 11, 2010 QuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteQuoteDon't you think it would be handy to KNOW that the new FELON has a gun, and what it is? The police should approach every felon as if they might be armed, regardless of whether or not their name is in some gun registry. Agreed. It would also be nice to know that said FELON had any (previously legal) guns hidden away. It makes no difference - they should still approach him as if he does. Of course it makes a difference. He may be out of prison in 6 months and just goes to pick up his stash of guns. Which, if they were illegally obtained and not registered, would not show up on the cop's screens anyway, so, as he said, it makes no difference if there are guns registered, they must treat them as if they do have guns. Even if some are registered and they confiscate them, that doesn't mean they don't have more. So again, the registry is useless. FAIL! The premise is that he starts out as a law abiding citizen. Law abiding citizens don't have illegal guns. If you have a registry and the gun is not registered, it is an illegal weapon. That is how a registry makes criminals out of law-abiding citizens. That is why the long-gun registry in Canada has been an abject and costly failure, and hopefully will soon be over-turned. Correct, so the concept of a "law abiding citizen" having an unregistered gun in a jurisdiction where registration is required is an oxymoron. Hence your original statement is irrelevant.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,661 #119 June 11, 2010 QuoteQuoteThe guns should be impounded. Would you confiscate these illegally held guns in your home town of Chicago? See here: http://www.examiner.com/x-2581-St-Louis-Gun-Rights-Examiner~y2010m6d9-Score-Chicago-illegal-gun-owners-3-bad-guys-0 Well, apparently you are unable make your question valid, but you might want to take a look at posts #36 - 41 of This thread. Edited - keep going beyond post #41.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
rhaig 0 #120 June 11, 2010 Quote FAIL! I didn't say they did. That was skypuppy. then you missed a key part of the situation and I refuse to respond in more detail until you figure out what that was.-- Rob Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnRich 4 #121 June 11, 2010 QuoteWell, apparently you are unable make your question valid, but you might want to take a look at posts #36 - 41 of This thread. Blah blah blah. All I see is someone afraid to answer a simple question. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
turtlespeed 212 #122 June 11, 2010 QuoteQuoteWell, apparently you are unable make your question valid, but you might want to take a look at posts #36 - 41 of This thread. Blah blah blah. All I see is someone afraid to answer a simple question. It is a deeper issue than that. He is having trouble reconciling that his views and his staements and beliefs are in conflict with each other, and has been cornered. The issue is that he is unwilling to expose himself as a hyporite. THAT is why he won't answer the questions.I'm not usually into the whole 3-way thing, but you got me a little excited with that. - Skymama BTR #1 / OTB^5 Official #2 / Hellfish #408 / VSCR #108/Tortuga/Orfun Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
kallend 1,661 #123 June 11, 2010 QuoteQuoteWell, apparently you are unable make your question valid, but you might want to take a look at posts #36 - 41 of This thread. Blah blah blah. All I see is someone afraid to answer a simple question. Well, apparently you are unable make your question valid, but you might want to take a look at posts #36 and on of This thread. Illegal IS illegal. So your heroes are, in fact, among the "bad guys". And it's not bad guys 0, because in a typical year "bad guys" kill hundreds in CHicago, mostly with illegal guns.... The only sure way to survive a canopy collision is not to have one. Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnRich 4 #124 June 11, 2010 QuoteQuoteBlah blah blah. All I see is someone afraid to answer a simple question. It is a deeper issue than that. He is having trouble reconciling that his views and his staements and beliefs are in conflict with each other, and has been cornered. The issue is that he is unwilling to expose himself as a hypocrite. THAT is why he won't answer the questions. Exactly! Thanks for posting that insight into the workings of his mind. And his demands to rephrase the question to his liking are just a ploy to harass and frustate the pro-gun folks. I'm sure that no matter how the question is phrased, it will never be good enough, and kallend will just continue to make excuses to not answer a simple question. You would think that a college professor would have a good ability to explain things to people, but somehow that apparently is not true in this case. Despite explaining complex engineering details to students all year long, somehow this simple question is just too difficult for him to handle! Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
JohnRich 4 #125 June 11, 2010 QuoteIllegal IS illegal. So your heroes are, in fact, among the "bad guys". So what you really should say, but are afraid to, is; "Those three people who used guns in self defense should be arrested, and their guns confiscated, because their firearms were illegal."I knew you wouldn't just come right out and say it, plain and simple. I win the $1 bets! Woo-hoo! Good guys are bad guys. Victims are criminals. That's kallend's world. By the way, are YOUR firearms registered? Quote Share this post Link to post Share on other sites
