SuzukiSavage.com - Print Page

SuzukiSavage.com
/cgi-bin/YaBB.pl
General Category >> Politics, Religion (Tall Table) >> I did not know about this stuff
/cgi-bin/YaBB.pl?num=1722270481

Message started by Graybeard on 07/29/24 at 09:28:01

Title: I did not know about this stuff
Post by Graybeard on 07/29/24 at 09:28:01

Works out Kamala was never the border czar.
She wasn't in support of defunding the police.
She wasn't involved in raising bail for violent criminals.
And No! That program didn't put anyone on the street who went and murdered someone.

Lies? The media are biased Against the left? Unreal..

Title: Re: I did not know about this stuff
Post by Eegore on 07/29/24 at 13:34:00

I think it depends on what "media" one chooses to consume.

The larger networks, or "mainstream" are pretty much just emotional reinforcement anymore. It's like money is important to them or something.

My favorites are the YouTube videos of people listening to Harris quotes thinking she can't be that illiterate and guessing that Trump said them. This of course works the other way around. At the end of the day most humans don't care, they just go with who they like, not what they do.

Title: Re: I did not know about this stuff
Post by MnSpring on 07/29/24 at 20:00:43

Word SALAD !

She grew up with it, learned how from her father, (a Marxist college professor), who used the deliberate vagueness in his writing & lectures.

It IS the SAME as a 6th grader who just skimmed a book, at the last minuet, before doing a report in it.

“If ya can’t Dazzle them with Brilliance, ya Baffle them with Bullshit”

( Just like a frequent poster on this forum who uses double and triple negatives, and spins)

Listen closely when Harris, is doing ‘word salad’, it is simply gibberish.
Hopping, you will actually think she is smart !

“… the veep’s bizarre ramblings resemble someone who’s been hitting either the bottle or the pipe …”

“…“Maybe the coke in the Whitehouse wasn’t Hunter’s after all,…”

;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D ;D

Title: Re: I did not know about this stuff
Post by Graybeard on 07/30/24 at 04:18:44

Any media denying she was handed the mantle of border czar is trying to adjust reality to avoid the consequences of the absolute failure to secure the border. Mayorkas should be hanging from a lamp post . She should be laughed out of town. Why the difference? For the same reason some tribes didn't kill the mental midgets. Mayorkas KNOWS what he did. She's too Stewpid to be held to account.
Funny thing about biden, tho. Innit strange that the doctor, who has No authority to decide whether or not someone gets charged with a crime, said Poor Ol' Joe,a jury would likely feel sorry for him, seeing him as a well intentioned old man with a bad memory, and now, the party has been forced to admit what we,the nonidiots, have known for a long time, that Joe actually IS a Puddin Head, and Can Not proceed with the campaign.

However, he should remain as president.

And ya wonder why people don't treat you with respect.
You Do remember wanting to Article 25 Trump, right? He did more for YOU than any other president I ever saw. Unappreciative children. Blinded by ideology.
Ohh,I'm In the Cult. I say, think and do whatever Trump says!
No,I don't. I'm critical of him. He has totally screwed up. You lefties accuse people like me of having no ideas of our own. We just parrot Trump. Quite the opposite. He came along and stood for what people like me have been waiting for someone to come along and stand for. Instead of shipping our manufacturing overseas, he created economic incentives for corporations to bring manufacturing back. He did more to control the border than anyone else I've seen. Go ahead, tell me what he Didn't do. Why was he OPPOSED? You lefties revel in the fact that he Did Not Build the Wall. You are so Dumb. It's like celebrating the fact that the captain of the titanic couldn't fix the hole. I'm pretty sure he wouldn't have been forced to fight half of the passengers to try to fix it.
So,, you have Any criticism for biden? No? The sound of the film clacking though the gears drowns out your words. You don't have Any actual thoughts. You just say what you have been taught. You Project. You Say I'm brainwashed. Yet, you never explained How it's possible to Be brainwashed by what is NOT The Constant Droning of the Media. Seems to me that IF someone is suffering from being brainwashed They are spewing the same crap that is The Predominant and Approved Message. Since I'm the minority, and Went Against and Criticized Trump for his continued pushing the jabs,wouldn't That mean I'm not? And I CRITICIZE TRUMP. Wowww!,, Howboutthatschitt!!?? That Ottsta make the polyester fly outcher ears and nose,cuz that head must surely be spinning Hard.

Aaand I will get No response from the Muppet..

Title: Re: I did not know about this stuff
Post by Graybeard on 08/03/24 at 18:06:26

5B7B79716C7B1E0 wrote:

No. The source doesn't matter. That these things are facts is what matters.
She Did work to raise bail for violent criminals. The organization she supported, may have created, bailed out at least one who went and murdered someone.

At the end of the day most humans don't care, they just go with who they like, not what they do.[/quote

That's true. Which is why I post solid reasons why Liking her is Stewpid.

Everyone agrees gun control is Stewpid now, right?
Because it clearly doesn't work..
And all the adults said
Yes..
.

Title: Re: I did not know about this stuff
Post by Eegore on 08/04/24 at 12:36:15

No. The source doesn't matter. That these things are facts is what matters.

What I am saying is that not all "media" or "news" will report the same thing. Whatever "media" you are consuming must be pro-left specific to Harris. Humans that do not consume left-friendly media will have different information - so it depends on what media you choose to consume.

Everyone agrees gun control is Stewpid now, right?

No. Many humans think less guns will result in less gun crime and suicides.

Title: Re: I did not know about this stuff
Post by Graybeard on 08/04/24 at 14:21:27

Many humans think less guns will result in less gun crime and suicides.
Back to top

That is the problem. They believe that in opposition to what every statistical metric says. IOW,they choose to believe what decades of data prove is not so. Why? I'm supposed to believe in their unsupported by evidence GW crap, but they won't admit what has been indisputably demonstrated is true? But they expect me to have Any respect for them or their desires? Not happening. No more patience with unreachable, unteachable lefties.

Title: Re: I did not know about this stuff
Post by Eegore on 08/04/24 at 15:35:04

"They believe that in opposition to what every statistical metric says."

So would it be fair to say that people should pay attention to the fact that 90% of the humans in your region alone own guns, but less than 1% commit crimes with them?

The defense would be the statistics are false/wrong/made up by the NRA etc. but the Observed reality is that there aren't tons of mortality events. If only 1% of legal gun owners killed others there would be hundreds dead per day right? Somewhere around 300,000 murders per year.

Those metrics should be acknowledged even if there is mass shootings and a certain percentage of criminal activity?

Title: Re: I did not know about this stuff
Post by Graybeard on 08/04/24 at 15:39:39

The news about the shootings in Chicago are made up? That would shine a negative light on the left. IDK if you're aware, but the media are the mouthpieces of the left.

Title: Re: I did not know about this stuff
Post by Eegore on 08/04/24 at 15:44:24

I'm just wondering if pro-gun-control humans should pay attention to the fact that 90% of the humans in your region alone own guns, but less than 1% commit crimes with them?

Wouldn't there be tons and tons of more death, like atrocity level violence with bodies filling morgues, pages of obituaries?

Should the lack of carnage be Observed, even if there are criminal events like mass shootings or criminal shootings, or even add in suicide?

How would they explain the lack of death in areas where there are private/conceal carry humans? Just go find more crime articles right?

Title: Re: I did not know about this stuff
Post by Graybeard on 08/04/24 at 17:19:05

I'm not following. What are you trying to accomplish? Are you sayin the shootings reported, say,in Chicago are lies?

Title: Re: I did not know about this stuff
Post by Eegore on 08/04/24 at 17:42:25

I'm asking if pro-gun control humans, if they were using what every statistical metric says, would come to the conclusion that in your region alone about 90% of humans own guns but less than 1% commit crime?

If even 1% of gun owners committed crime there would be hundreds of thousands of more murders right?

Should the lack of carnage be Observed, even if there are criminal events like mass shootings or criminal shootings, or even add in suicide? If so how do they explain the lack of deaths where 90% of the population carry guns?

Just claim that evidence is wrong? That there actually are people dying in TX like they do in Chicago, even though not one morgue, newspaper, newscast, social media post, obituary section etc., show any evidence of it?

Title: Re: I did not know about this stuff
Post by Graybeard on 08/04/24 at 18:35:13

How about address what Is? Some BS Gee,what if. Let's delve into what can't be proven and ignore the obvious.
Your little game is so convoluted I don't understand what you're even trying to get me to waste my time on. I saw someone called an Intellectual Pickpocket the other day and immediately thought of you and your twisting and obfuscation.

Title: Re: I did not know about this stuff
Post by Eegore on 08/04/24 at 21:02:19

Pretty simple:

If even 1% of gun owners committed crime there would be hundreds of thousands of more murders right?

Title: Re: I did not know about this stuff
Post by Graybeard on 08/04/24 at 21:39:01

Well, duuh,, Neaux Schitt..
So?

Title: Re: I did not know about this stuff
Post by Eegore on 08/05/24 at 08:11:28

Well, duuh,, Neaux Schitt..
So?

So it applies directly to your assessment of believing in something that is "in opposition to what every statistical metric says."

Should the lack of carnage be Observed, even if there are criminal events like mass shootings or criminal shootings, or even add in suicide? If so how do they explain the lack of deaths where 90% of the population carry guns?

Even without the metrics, lets just say those metrics are claimed to be false/wrong/NRA lies/Government supplied whatever, how can any reasonable human look around and not realize the difference between an area where guns are allowed and an area where they aren't?

Title: Re: I did not know about this stuff
Post by Graybeard on 08/05/24 at 10:09:44

And WHY are those places so different? Did they Become different after they lost their rights? Would a Rule Reversal lead to a surge in shootings? Most likely. You can't create a screwed up environment and expect it to go smoothly into what it should be.

And what are YOU doing? Arguing against freedom? Quite the Patriot you are.

Title: Re: I did not know about this stuff
Post by Eegore on 08/05/24 at 10:20:00

And what are YOU doing? Arguing against freedom? Quite the Patriot you are.

Are you trying to make this an argument? I've said nothing, absolutely nothing about pro-gun control measures being a positive action or removing freedoms of any kind. Not one of my words indicate that in any way.

I'm asking should the lack of carnage be Observed, even if there are criminal events like mass shootings or criminal shootings, or even add in suicide?

If so how do they (pro-gun control) explain the lack of deaths where 90% of the population carry guns?

How do they account for the lack of dead bodies when 90% of the population (in specific regions) have guns?

Title: Re: I did not know about this stuff
Post by Graybeard on 08/05/24 at 10:39:57

so how do they (pro-gun control) explain the lack of deaths where 90% of the population carry guns?

Well, shucky Darns!!
Why didn't I ever ask That?
Maybe if I had asked That One More Time then the talking point spouters would have realized that they were Not thinking, but parroting..

Title: Re: I did not know about this stuff
Post by Eegore on 08/05/24 at 11:37:01

My experience is they say the data is inaccurate. It's not reliable becuase it's provided by official government numbers, NRA, etc.

But the lack of dead bodies from gun violence seems to be ignored.

90% of the population have guns, = less gun deaths.

Lower % of the population have guns = more gun deaths.

Sounds like that experiment you were talking about. Seems that one could use the number of actual dead bodies to predict if a city has high-gun control or low-gun control measures.

Another question though is how critical should we be of counter-evidence? We can't deny mass-shootings happen, so should we be critical of evidence like mass-shooting numbers in other countries? Or shooting death numbers in areas where the numbers are drastically inaccurate. Like saying hundreds of "mass shootings" happen annually and there's video footage of shootings that happened outside of a year, or "annual" parameter. Should that be scrutinized or just accepted as part of the gun-control's point of guns=violence?

Title: Re: I did not know about this stuff
Post by MnSpring on 08/05/24 at 12:25:57

What’s that about re-writing the 2A ?

The word, "Militia", today, means something different than in the 1770’s
The words, "well-regulated”, today, means something different than in the 1770’s.

Are their no, ‘happy’, people today, because the word ‘gay’ now means something else ?
Or, can, GAY, have two meanings ?

Title: Re: I did not know about this stuff
Post by Graybeard on 08/05/24 at 12:56:08

69494B435E492C0 wrote:

I apologize. I was being defensive. And, it Is that Experiment I was talking about. The thing is, most people don't See the data and Observed Reality as the data generated from a Laboratory Experiment. Just like college chemistry, and every endeavor I've gone at, observation is The First Rule of Science. If you're a mechanic, you're operating scientifically. Or you're getting your AssKikkt.
Being observant matters. When we had to take a test tube with three elements in it and figure out what they were, I looked at all of the tubes, and looked at the bottom shelf of the roll about. Jars,labeled Jars,, that were used to make up the tubes. I grabbed a tube with three layers,as they all had, but I looked for three dissimilar layers, looked at the jars,wrote the names, went and tested for those. Bingo.
Grades came out. Dr. Taylor asked
Who used the jars??

I was the only one.

You Can pay attention and be deceived.
But the odds of figuring it out, whatever IT is, is pretty slim if you're not paying attention.

Title: Re: I did not know about this stuff
Post by Graybeard on 08/05/24 at 13:07:53

It bugs me that the only parts of posts I put effort into often only get responded to in snarky replies to the one part I didn't completely prove all aspects of what I'm sayin,, and you raise good points.

Another question though is how critical should we be of counter-evidence? We can't deny mass-shootings happen, so should we be critical of evidence like mass-shooting numbers in other countries? Or shooting death numbers in areas where the numbers are drastically inaccurate. Like saying hundreds of "mass shootings" happen annually and there's video footage of shootings that happened outside of a year, or "annual" parameter. Should that be scrutinized or just accepted as part of the gun-control's point of guns=violence?

What Counter Evidence? When anyone who Wants to carry,openly, can,and many others are carrying concealed, AND people aren't shooting each other at birthday parties, not a buncha drive bys.. But where having a gun is ILLEGAL, right frikking Now ,,or close to it,,
That is where the Three Day Weekend shooting numbers make national news.

Just exfukktly how in in the Zakk is there Any rational argument Forgun control??

Nothing else matters. The argument is made. It's not refutable. Increasing the complexity of the problem ( moving goal posts) doesn't diminish the obvious truth.
Where gun control is most restrictive is where the most trouble is.
The opposite is also true.

How about everyone just admit the obvious..
Howboutthat?

Ohh! Wouldn't finding one or two exceptions nullify what is obvious?
No,,
Pretending something is not good enough because it can't be proven Perfect
When it would So Obviously make things so much better
Is something only a lefty could do.

Title: Re: I did not know about this stuff
Post by Eegore on 08/05/24 at 18:39:04

What Counter Evidence? When anyone who Wants to carry,openly, can,and many others are carrying concealed, AND people aren't shooting each other at birthday parties, not a buncha drive bys.. But where having a gun is ILLEGAL, right frikking Now ,,or close to it,,
That is where the Three Day Weekend shooting numbers make national news.

Lets say they show a video where 9 mass shootings are recorded on cellphones or surveillance cameras. The claim is they were within the past year, but in reality only 2 were.

Wouldn't that be considered counter evidence? The point would be that mass shootings do indeed happen and there are indeed victims, even if those 9 shootings didn't actually happen in the timespan claimed. The claim that guns are dangerous and should be controlled is still proven right?

Where gun control is most restrictive is where the most trouble is.
The opposite is also true.

How about everyone just admit the obvious..
Howboutthat?

Agreed. Like admitting that if just a small percentage of legal gun owners were using guns to commit crimes (thus guns/ownership being the problem) there would be tons of dead humans anywhere there were a large amount of guns. Like daily shooting reports, in high gun ownership areas with little to no Government restrictions.

Ohh! Wouldn't finding one or two exceptions nullify what is obvious?
No,,
Pretending something is not good enough because it can't be proven Perfect
When it would So Obviously make things so much better
Is something only a lefty could do.

So drudging up an internet article of a guy buying 500 bullet-proof backpacks for kids (the kind where the plate goes into the spine of the bag) is proof that gun ownership is the problem isn't exactly proof that owning guns with little Government restriction is a problem?

Title: Re: I did not know about this stuff
Post by Graybeard on 08/05/24 at 19:04:38

I've made my points. I'm waiting for the gun control supporting lefties to admit the obvious.

Title: Re: I did not know about this stuff
Post by Eegore on 08/06/24 at 11:00:11

I'm waiting for the gun control supporting lefties to admit the obvious.

Well it should be obvious why they don't. It is the same reasons you won't admit there are not anymore Observable dead kids from vaccinations.

Dead bodies mean nothing. "every statistical metric" means nothing, because they decided beforehand that guns = bad. No amount of reduced crime will change their minds just as no amount of healthy kids will change yours.

The numbers I used for the gun ownership statistics and crime results are actually Covid vaccination statistics. Over 90% of kids in your region are vaccinated, yet every statistical matrix shows a 0% increase in child fatalities.

Even if those metrics are wrong, no reasonable human can ignore that there are no additional obituaries, funerals, shortages in schools etc. Not one. Not one Observable source shows more dead kids. Just as not one Observable source shows more crime where there is less gun-control.

But there are still those humans that claim kids are collapsing to the ground dead. The evidence is a series of videos of kids where 7 out of 9 happened before Covid. Yet it's garbage evidence for gun-control to use 7 out of 9 incorrect references for mass-shootings.

If you wouldn't accept evidence that a guy buying bullet-proof backpacks is "proof" of a need for gun-control, then why would someone accept evidence that a guy buying child caskets is proof vaccinations are killing kids?

https://www.lifesitenews.com/news/canadian-casket-maker-says-demand-for-child-size-coffins-has-increased-dramatically-since-2020/

There's no additional dead kids INSIDE those caskets. Just as there are not additional victims of gun-crime INSIDE high-gun ownership regions.

Lefties will admit low-gun control regions have less crime on the same day you admit high-vaccination regions don't have more dead kids. The strategies to combat the statistical metrics is almost identical.

Title: Re: I did not know about this stuff
Post by Graybeard on 08/06/24 at 11:18:43

Lefties will admit low-gun control regions have less crime on the same day you admit high-vaccination regions don't have more dead kids.

Evidence that PROVES what I am saying exists.
You can pretend what suits you re
Vaccine injuries and death.
While it's true I can't Prove what I believe Re vaccines, the Truth is OBVIOUS re gun control.
It requires some willingness to believe the jabs have been a very bad idea, because the Authorities whose numbers You so joyfully cited are Bullschitt.
The difference is DECADES of data. The number of shot and killt'em Daid in The Most Restrictive places is obvious.

Nice try at conflating and calling them equal.
The Evidence that the jabs were a mistake exists. It Requires Wanting to piece it together. Trying to get enough together that is Bulletproof and able to overcome a Deniers emotional needs isn't possible.
The Gun Control question is, however, settled.

You really Are an intellectual pickpocket.
You are Not wasting more of my time.

You LEFTIES need to admit The Obvious.
Gun control not only Does Not Achieve the goal of a safe society,,
It makes it worse.

Stop trying to move the goal posts.
Why are YOU arguing For what is clearly a failure?
Explain THAT.

Title: Re: I did not know about this stuff
Post by Eegore on 08/06/24 at 11:51:30

You want to know why gun-control idiots won't accept that in low-gun-control regions there are not more Observable dead bodies. The same reason you won't Observe there aren't more dead kids in high-vaccine areas, like where you live.

Evidence that PROVES what I am saying exists.

Yeah some videos of kids dying before 2019. Where are the dead kids in 2020 or after? If just .03% of kids died from the vaccine we'd have had thousands of them. Thousands. Where are they?

I make the same argument about gun-control, if just 1% of gun owners in low/no-gun control regions killed someone - we'd have hundreds per-day dying. Where are they?

It requires some willingness to believe the jabs have been a very bad idea, because the Authorities whose numbers You so joyfully cited are Bullschitt.

Except I worked to change the counting methods in my State because the data was incorrect, a fact you refuse to Observe. You refuse to Observe this so you can continue to falsely claim I cited official numbers as being accurate. I said your numbers were inaccurate, NOT that "official numbers" were.

The difference is DECADES of data. The number of shot and killt'em Daid in The Most Restrictive places is obvious.

Decades of data shows that the number one killer of young athletes dropping on the field was heart problems. It's obvious, it's been an issue for decades, an entire medical field has been dedicated to this.

Did you know the data-set you provided of all the young-dead athletes actually has 5 names of Olympians currently competing? That proof is what you want people to use?

This is no different than gun-control ignoring that mass-shooting "victims" numbers exceed actual dead humans, because those victims are actually alive. Would you accept that as evidence?

The Evidence that the jabs were a mistake exists. It Requires Wanting to piece it together.

Evidence does exist but it exists primarily in adult males in their 40's. Not in kids with heart inflammation. You refuse to Observe there are no additional dead kids in your area. Just as gun-control refuses to Observe low-gun control regions do not have additional deaths.

That's the same thing. Refusing to Observe the lack of actual real dead bodies.

Why are YOU arguing For what is clearly a failure?
Explain THAT.

I'm not. Nothing I have said is pro-gun control. Nothing. You just won't accept that I think gun-control is wrong AND vaccine related deaths in kids is also wrong.

I am not pro-gun-control, I just think the logic used to deny the lack of real dead bodies is the same.

Title: Re: I did not know about this stuff
Post by Serowbot on 08/06/24 at 12:41:56

http://https://www.tonymappedit.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/gun-deaths-per-100000-residents-by-us-state-2017.jpg

http://https://legacy-cdn.tytnetwork.com/wp-content/uploads/gun-deaths-us-other-countries-chart.jpg

Title: Re: I did not know about this stuff
Post by Graybeard on 08/06/24 at 13:48:20

Ohh,Lookie, Pictures!

So?
What does it say To You that supports your continued support for gun control. Use words.

Title: Re: I did not know about this stuff
Post by MnSpring on 08/06/24 at 14:07:43

Bot, can you tell us all,
which country, (in your meme)
Has a Constitutional Right for free speech ?
Which one has a Constitutional right to defend oneself ?

Then do the SAME % of per 100,000,
of DEATH,
by Knife, Club, fist, etc,etc,etc,.

What is the % of per 1000,000
of Riots, Steeling, Destroying things, Injuring Humans ?

Oh, that's right, your voting for two balls-less people !

;D
;D
;D
;D
;D ;D ;D ;D