Almost had to call the cops on a kid at walmart

[Texashiker]

Setting aside the controversial issue of "anti-gun," what exactly is wrong with being "anti-violence"? Is that a problem with our society, that we need to have a more pro-violence mindset? I've never heard that one before. Fascinating.

We demonize video games, kids should not play with toy guns and parts of our society would ban violent books from libraries, but we idolize boxers and football players.

How can we say children should not play with toy guns, but turn around and watch a boxing match?

If we wish to demonize violence, lets start with the adults. No more football, no more boxing, no more mixed martial arts,,,.

Living in bumfuck america is your own choice.

And?

Maybe people posting "shopping at walmart,,, lulz" need to spend more time in rural areas?

 

[Lash444]

Living in bumfuck america is your own choice.

He's right though. They own rural america. Where's he going to go? Another rural uneducated portion of the country? Walmart will be there. We all know the type of people in Walmart. I'm pretty sure Walmart just looks at the republican districts and plants the supercenters there.

 

[Texashiker]

He's right though. They own rural america. Where's he going to go? Another rural uneducated portion of the country?

Lets not associate rural with being uneducated.

I live in a rural area by choice. In all honesty, it is the city dwellers who are uneducated.

 

[trenchfoot]

It's a good thing the kid wasn't running around acting like he was a panicky suicide bomber, or better yet, a suicide bomber flying a hijacked 747 that's gonna crash into the White House.

Well, he'd probably get his butt whomped for the former and gotten hoisted and paraded around on customer's shoulders for the latter though.

 

[brycejones]

That kid isn't the only one freely using his imagination. You had a daydream that reinforced your political views.

Pretty much this. OP wants to troll and starts retarded thread. Now how many posts will OP make before making a comment on homosexuality or someone else besides the OP blames Muslims?

 

[Brainonska511]

 

[Texashiker]

Pretty much this. OP wants to troll and starts retarded thread. Now how many posts will OP make before making a comment on homosexuality or someone else besides the OP blames Muslims?

I was looking for an honest discussion on varying opinions on violence in our society.

I should have known liberals are not capable of having an honest, open and frank discussion on anything.

 

[BlueWolf47]

I was looking for an honest discussion on varying opinions on violence in our society.

I should have known liberals are not capable of having an honest, open and frank discussion on anything.

Really? Because i think you started the thread with, "liberals want to ban finger guns!"

 

[Brainonska511]

I was looking for an honest discussion on varying opinions on violence in our society.

I should have known liberals are not capable of having an honest, open and frank discussion on anything.

You were looking for an honest discussion by starting the thread off with a strawman the size of Big Tex? LOL

 

[Texashiker]

You were looking for an honest discussion by starting the thread off with a strawman the size of Big Tex? LOL

Opening post is based on real event.

Typical liberal, unable to debate the details starts throwing insults around.

Really? Because i think you started the thread with, "liberals want to ban finger guns!"

There is a link in this thread to a school that kicked a kid out for playing finger pistol.

 

[thraashman]

I was looking for an honest discussion on varying opinions on violence in our society.

I should have known liberals are not capable of having an honest, open and frank discussion on anything.

Of course, an honest discussion. That's why you started the thread claiming a bullshit liberal position that painted liberals badly. You wanted an honest discussion. From your posting history I'd say that you and honesty wouldn't know eachother if you met on the street and had nametags on.

 

[Perknose]

I knew the OP shops at Walmart somehow.

And that he was the "kid" running around, shooting imaginary people. Also, that he was sporting the classic Walmart "pudge exploding from neon spandex" look.

The technical advantages of "hand" guns are legion, but this makes them dangerous in the wrong, errrrr, hands:

Their accuracy is off the charts, shooters never miss with them.

They can be switched to deadly silencer mode instantly.

Their magazines have near infinite capacity.

No one really knows where their ammunition comes from.

Have you noticed that "hand" gun perps almost always carry TWO of them?

Sure, they are mostly used to kill imaginary victims, but who cleans up all that imaginary blood? It's an imaginary holocaust! Our imaginary graveyards are running out of room for our imaginary dead.

Collateral damage. The media hasn't reported the epidemic of accidental discharges when kids have stopped to pick their noses. Noses! Look at my username! You know I'm concerned!

Why do you think the first thing cops do on a suspicious traffic stop is the tell the driver, "Show me your hands"?

Why do you think perps with such weapons are always referred to as "armed and dangerous"?

Guys, if you're S.O. is angry with you yet sweetly suggests she give you a hand job, RUN AWAY! D:

 

[Texashiker]

Of course, an honest discussion. That's why you started the thread claiming a bullshit liberal position that painted liberals badly. You wanted an honest discussion. From your posting history I'd say that you and honesty wouldn't know eachother if you met on the street and had nametags on.

I posted my opinion on the topic.

If you disagree, please post your opinion and why you disagree.

 

[thraashman]

You were looking for an honest discussion by starting the thread off with a strawman the size of Big Tex? LOL

Opening post is based on real event.

Typical liberal, unable to debate the details starts throwing insults around.

Um ... insults not found. Are you just assuming insults because based on your own comments and the OP you deserve to be insulted?

 

[woolfe9998]

We demonize video games, kids should not play with toy guns and parts of our society would ban violent books from libraries, but we idolize boxers and football players.

How can we say children should not play with toy guns, but turn around and watch a boxing match?

If we wish to demonize violence, lets start with the adults. No more football, no more boxing, no more mixed martial arts,,,.




And?

Maybe people posting "shopping at walmart,,, lulz" need to spend more time in rural areas?

I tend to doubt that the people complaining about violence in video games tend to be the same people who are fans of boxing and MMA.

Nonetheless, the question of children being exposed to violent influences is different from that of adults. First of all, children are more impressionable. Second, adults can view whatever they want, while children are at a minimum subject to parental authority. For children, we can address the issue short of censorship, by educating parents. For adults, there is no solution short of censorship. Your suggestion that we first focus on adults before children is backwards.

 

[Texashiker]

Your suggestion that we first focus on adults before children is backwards.

I see it as the pot calling the kettle black.

I wonder how many parents object to kids playing with toy guns, object to kids having a knife,,, then sign their kids up for contact sports?

How many liberal football moms say something like, "my Johnny is not allowed to play video games, but he can sure tackle that quaterback."

 

[brycejones]

I was looking for an honest discussion on varying opinions on violence in our society.

I should have known liberals are not capable of having an honest, open and frank discussion on anything.

Bullshit you started with a lame strawman about "liberals". Maybe if you had started with a question asking about is it a good thing for our society to teach kids to run around and pretend to shoot people you might have been seen as half way looking for an honest discussion. But you didn't start that way.

I'm moderate which to some of you whack jobs here means I'm as a red as Karl Marx and I don't see any issues with a kid running around Walmart pretending to shoot people with a finger gun.

 

[Texashiker]

Bullshit you started with a lame strawman about "liberals".

I posted my opinion on liberals.

If you disagree please post it.

I guess it is ok for liberals to attack conservatives, but when a conservative attacks a liberal then it is a strawman.

 

[shadow9d9]

He's right though. They own rural america. Where's he going to go? Another rural uneducated portion of the country? Walmart will be there. We all know the type of people in Walmart. I'm pretty sure Walmart just looks at the republican districts and plants the supercenters there.

Move to civilization?

 

[shadow9d9]

I posted my opinion on liberals.

If you disagree please post it.

I guess it is ok for liberals to attack conservatives, but when a conservative attacks a liberal then it is a strawman.

There is no liberal group in this country. The democrats are middle/right. You are arguing against a phantom group.

 

[shadow9d9]

Opening post is based on real event.

Typical liberal, unable to debate the details starts throwing insults around.




There is a link in this thread to a school that kicked a kid out for playing finger pistol.

You just tried to insult him by calling him a liberal. Disagree with the country bumpkin? LIBERAL!

 

[shadow9d9]

Lets not associate rural with being uneducated.

I live in a rural area by choice. In all honesty, it is the city dwellers who are uneducated.

Why? You prove this to be the case with every insane post you make...

You have fantasy ideas of what a "liberal" is... everything bad and every opposing opinion is automatically labelled to be this fantasy "liberal" enemy you've been trained to hate... Being afraid of gays, etc... You prove this.

 

[thraashman]

I posted my opinion on liberals.

If you disagree please post it.

I guess it is ok for liberals to attack conservatives, but when a conservative attacks a liberal then it is a strawman.

No, attacks are just different than trying to have an honest discussion. This is outside of whether or not attacks are ok. If you start a thread with an attack on a group, you are automatically no longer trying to have an honest discussion, you're trying to start a flame war. Which is what you did. Claiming that starting a flame war is the same as having an honest discussion is just utter bullshit.

Let me give you an example on the same level of BS you gave us in the OP. Let's pretend I started a thread titled "The real beliefs behind pro life" and as part of the OP I stated "Pro life people are against abortion to keep poor people having to raise more children so they can have a virtual slave labor force" and then I claimed I was just trying to start an honest discussion about abortion rights.

Screw it, I'm just going to assume you're schizophrenic. It's the only explanation I can come up with for your postings.

 

[Texashiker]

"The real beliefs behind pro life" and as part of the OP I stated "Pro life people are against abortion to keep poor people having to raise more children so they can have a virtual slave labor force"

From the eugenic programs of the 20th century, I would have to agree with you.

If everyone went to college and got a masters degree, who would pick up your trash, or fix your car?

Could we imagine how worthless higher education would be if the guy changing your oil had a phd?

 

[brycejones]

If you disagree please post it.

I did, I said I saw nothing wrong with what the kid was doing.