They can't stand by their principles

[bigrebnc1775]

Not one anti gunner wanted the gun free sign

[ame=http://youtu.be/cj3v78UPK3A]Journalists, Politicians Refuse to Post Lawn Sign saying HOME IS PROUDLY GUN FREE - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Old Rocks]

Dumb ****, what a failure of a straw man arguement. Dumb asses like you are the prime reason we need more background checks.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Dumb ****, what a failure of a straw man arguement. Dumb asses like you are the prime reason we need more background checks.

So it's ok to release the names and address of gun owners but those in the media don't want to advertise that they are gun free. How interesting that you show the good old fasion butt hurt.
Stupid ****.

 

[Old Rocks]

Hey, then my name and address has been revealed. What do I care? Anyone that knows me, knows I own guns, and know well how to use them. I just don't revel in the thought of using them on my fellow human beings like you do. And I don't need a mega-clip to hunt with. One shot kills are the norm.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Hey, then my name and address has been revealed. What do I care? Anyone that knows me, knows I own guns, and know well how to use them. I just don't revel in the thought of using them on my fellow human beings like you do. And I don't need a mega-clip to hunt with. One shot kills are the norm.

That's total bullshit and irrelevant.

 

[bodecea]

Not one anti gunner wanted the gun free sign

Journalists, Politicians Refuse to Post Lawn Sign saying HOME IS PROUDLY GUN FREE - YouTube

I'd put it up for yucks and grins...and wait inside with my .357

 

[healthmyths]

Dumb ****, what a failure of a straw man arguement. Dumb asses like you are the prime reason we need more background checks.

Do you know what a "straw man argument" really means???

Unlike you I won't guess so here is what the experts say it means...

"A straw man or straw person, also known in the UK as an Aunt Sally, is a type of argument and is an informal fallacy based on misrepresentation of an opponent's position. To "attack a straw man" is to create the illusion of having refuted a proposition by replacing it with a superficially similar yet unequivalent proposition (the "straw man"), and to refute it, without ever having actually refuted the original position This technique has been used throughout history in polemical debate, particularly in arguments about highly charged, emotional issues."
Straw man - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

If it is a STRAW MAN argument it is de FACTO a failure because it is a misrepresentation of an opponent's position!

So when you SAID the "straw man argument "FAILED" then there was solid validity to the position: "Not one anti gunner wanted the gun free sign"!

It wasn't a misrepresentation of the argument that anti-gunners are ALL talk , but when it comes to the reality of accepting an "gun free zone sign...
. whoa... NO 'gun free sign" for the anti-gunner!

And you agreed.

Because you called it a "FAILED" straw man argument..i.e. there was no illusion it is reality.. the anti-gunner doesn't want a gun free zone sign!

If this was a straw man argument that FAILED you mean you support the statement that "they can't stand by their principles" which is
what the thread title states and "bigrebnc1775 " proved when the anti-gunner refused the "gun free sign"!

So OLD ROCKS.. maybe before you throw out those old worn CBS/ABC/NBC talking heads cliches like "straw man argument".. you should learn what the real meaning is.. i.e. "creating the illusion of having refuted a proposition by replacing it with a superficially similar yet unequivalent proposition"

This was pretty simple argument: anti-gunners don't stand on their principles when it comes to putting a "Gun Free Zone" sign in their front yard!

 

[idb]

I don't understand.
Why would you advertise it?

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Not one anti gunner wanted the gun free sign

Journalists, Politicians Refuse to Post Lawn Sign saying HOME IS PROUDLY GUN FREE - YouTube

I'd put it up for yucks and grins...and wait inside with my .357

Well, Hummm.... I would advise you not doing that.
Because I recall you live in California and they might hold you accountable for entrapping people to break into your home so you could murder them.
That's California law for you, criminals have rights where you don't.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

I don't understand.
Why would you advertise it?

You don't get it? The people in the video had no problem advertising the address of gun owners, but they didn't want to advertise their principles of a gun free home.
The video was educational, and it appears this thread will be also.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

Dumb ****, what a failure of a straw man arguement. Dumb asses like you are the prime reason we need more background checks.

Do you know what a "straw man argument" really means???

Unlike you I won't guess so here is what the experts say it means...

"A straw man or straw person, also known in the UK as an Aunt Sally, is a type of argument and is an informal fallacy based on misrepresentation of an opponent's position. To "attack a straw man" is to create the illusion of having refuted a proposition by replacing it with a superficially similar yet unequivalent proposition (the "straw man"), and to refute it, without ever having actually refuted the original position This technique has been used throughout history in polemical debate, particularly in arguments about highly charged, emotional issues."
Straw man - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

If it is a STRAW MAN argument it is de FACTO a failure because it is a misrepresentation of an opponent's position!

So when you SAID the "straw man argument "FAILED" then there was solid validity to the position: "Not one anti gunner wanted the gun free sign"!

It wasn't a misrepresentation of the argument that anti-gunners are ALL talk , but when it comes to the reality of accepting an "gun free zone sign...
. whoa... NO 'gun free sign" for the anti-gunner!

And you agreed.

Because you called it a "FAILED" straw man argument..i.e. there was no illusion it is reality.. the anti-gunner doesn't want a gun free zone sign!

If this was a straw man argument that FAILED you mean you support the statement that "they can't stand by their principles" which is
what the thread title states and "bigrebnc1775 " proved when the anti-gunner refused the "gun free sign"!

So OLD ROCKS.. maybe before you throw out those old worn CBS/ABC/NBC talking heads cliches like "straw man argument".. you should learn what the real meaning is.. i.e. "creating the illusion of having refuted a proposition by replacing it with a superficially similar yet unequivalent proposition"

This was pretty simple argument: anti-gunners don't stand on their principles when it comes to putting a "Gun Free Zone" sign in their front yard!

That was clear cut and too the point.

 

[idb]

I don't understand.
Why would you advertise it?

You don't get it? The people in the video had no problem advertising the address of gun owners, but they didn't want to advertise their principles of a gun free home.
The video was educational, and it appears this thread will be also.

They shouldn't have advertised the addresses of gun owners.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

I don't understand.
Why would you advertise it?

You don't get it? The people in the video had no problem advertising the address of gun owners, but they didn't want to advertise their principles of a gun free home.
The video was educational, and it appears this thread will be also.

They shouldn't have advertised the addresses of gun owners.

No they shouldn't but they are also hypocritical for not standing by their principles
What's good for the goose.

 

[Clementine]

I don't understand.
Why would you advertise it?

Because it's worked so well putting them up at schools and a few other places.

When a criminal sees a sign saying gun free zone as they enter a store, such as a farm fleet store we have in town, they likely take that to mean that the owner won't have a gun under the counter or other customers won't have guns in the event he decides to rob the place.

Seeing it in front of a home would be the same. I am wondering what would happen if a person put one up even though they were waiting inside their home with a gun. Do you think home invaders or potential rapists would have a lawsuit if they claimed that they thought it was safe to enter, only to get shot when they made their move? I bet some liberal lawyers would be happy to take cases like that.

 

[bigrebnc1775]

I don't understand.
Why would you advertise it?

Because it's worked so well putting them up at schools and a few other places.

When a criminal sees a sign saying gun free zone as they enter a store, such as a farm fleet store we have in town, they likely take that to mean that the owner won't have a gun under the counter or other customers won't have guns in the event he decides to rob the place.

Seeing it in front of a home would be the same. I am wondering what would happen if a person put one up even though they were waiting inside their home with a gun. Do you think home invaders or potential rapists would have a lawsuit if they claimed that they thought it was safe to enter, only to get shot when they made their move? I bet some liberal lawyers would be happy to take cases like that.

Depending on the state the criminal might have a law suit
States like California New York

 

[healthmyths]

Despite his calls for greater gun control, including a new assault
weapons ban that extends to handguns, President Obama's administration has turned away from enforcing gun laws,
cutting weapons prosecutions some 40 percent since a high of about 11,000 under former President Bush.

"If you are not going to enforce the laws on the books, then don't start talking about a whole new wave of new laws," said a gun rights advocate.

Read more: http://times247.com/articles/gun-prosecutions-under-obama-down-over-40#ixzz2HXrwrWdf