Republican vs Democrat

[74Hunter]

Really guys, its a freaking joke. Geeze....

Yeah. Just a freaking joke . . . that happens to be very offensive to women.

Well, when EVERY SINGLE woman quits wearing makeup, spending hundreds of dollars on her hair, quits going to the gym, quits wearing revealing bathing suits and clothes, and quits working at Hooters, as a stripper, or a porno actress etc., then I will worry about it.

 

If you are someone is offended, time to start growing your skin a little thicker, oh, and grow the hell up. This is the real world, there are some things out there that you may not like.

Someone missed where I said I wasn't offended. It's alright . . . reading comprehension doesn't appear to be a strength for you.

 

(Also, your makeup/hair/revealing clothes/etc. spiel looks frighteningly similar to rapists who say "if she didn't want it she wouldn't have worn a low cut shirt." I don't think I've ever seen women so conclusively blamed for sexism. Kudos, sir.)

There, fixed it for you, sorry for the confusion, sometimes dyslexics do have a problem with reading comprehension. Oh, and thanks for acting as the voice for all women!

 

Also, your comparison to a rapist is, quite frankly ignorant and uneducated. When women quit making themselves out to be sexual objects, then people (not you, Mr. Literal) can start becoming offended. I'm sure that you know that a man put that collage together, huh?

 

Junior, you don't want to get into a pissing contest with me, not over this. You are good at trying to make an apples to oranges arguments, even though you fail.

[carlfense]

Really guys, its a freaking joke. Geeze....

Yeah. Just a freaking joke . . . that happens to be very offensive to women.

Well, when EVERY SINGLE woman quits wearing makeup, spending hundreds of dollars on her hair, quits going to the gym, quits wearing revealing bathing suits and clothes, and quits working at Hooters, as a stripper, or a porno actress etc., then I will worry about it.

 

If you are someone is offended, time to start growing your skin a little thicker, oh, and grow the hell up. This is the real world, there are some things out there that you may not like.

Someone missed where I said I wasn't offended. It's alright . . . reading comprehension doesn't appear to be a strength for you.

 

(Also, your makeup/hair/revealing clothes/etc. spiel looks frighteningly similar to rapists who say "if she didn't want it she wouldn't have worn a low cut shirt." I don't think I've ever seen women so conclusively blamed for sexism. Kudos, sir.)

There, fixed it for you, sorry for the confusion, sometimes dyslexics do have a problem with reading comprehension. Oh, and thanks for acting as the voice for all women!

 

Also, your comparison to a rapist is, quite frankly ignorant and uneducated. When women quit making themselves out to be sexual objects, then people (not you, Mr. Literal) can start becoming offended. I'm sure that you know that a man put that collage together, huh?

 

Junior, you don't want to get into a pissing contest with me, not over this. You are good at trying to make an apples to oranges arguments, even though you fail.

I've just been called "junior." That's certainly the hallmark of a well reasoned argument.

 

What exactly is ignorant and uneducated? Both are blaming women for something that is perpetrated by men using largely the same reasoning. You saying my comparison is "ignorant and uneducated" doesn't make it so.

 

And good point. I'm sure the collage was put together by a woman. (Maybe a HuskerJen type of woman . . . but not a woman by birth.)

 

 

 

 

 

 

As an aside, I certainly hope this isn't another one of your gun rights arguments where you have an entirely unreasoned argument without any regards for the actual facts. (You: "They're taking all of our guns!" Reality: "Gun rights have been increasing for nearly a decade.")

[74Hunter]

What exactly is ignorant and uneducated? Both are blaming women for something that is perpetrated by men using largely the same reasoning. You saying my comparison is "ignorant and uneducated" doesn't make it so.

I guess since you don't have the capacity to understand it, this will be difficult to get across to you. Women MAKE themselves objects of lust and sexual desires, thankfully. Since you have already spoken for all women, are you telling me that MEN FORCE women to wear makeup and become strippers? Are you really insinuating that women have no control, and are only here to be at the sexual beconning to men? Wow, you must have very little respect for women. So, to compare the choice a woman makes (being sexy) to a woman being assaulted against her will by a sexual predator is ignorant, uniformed, and disturbing. Not sure if you can understand that or not, but.....

 

And good point. I'm sure the collage was put together by a woman. (Maybe a HuskerJen type of woman . . . but not a woman by birth.)

Again, in your infinite wisdom, you make a rather rash, ignorant assumption. I have no idea who put that collage together. Heck it could have been Ann Coulter for all I know. I personally know quite a few women (not of the panty-waste liberal persuasion) who would not be offended by that joke. Would they think it is stupid, possibly, but offended, no. They are much bigger, much stronger people than that.

 

As an aside, I certainly hope this isn't another one of your gun rights arguments where you have an entirely unreasoned argument without any regards for the actual facts. (You: "They're taking all of our guns!" Reality: "Gun rights have been increasing for nearly a decade.")

I'm glad you brought that up, because it just makes my point. I don't recall ever saying, "They're taking all of our guns!" I do recall mentioning that firearm laws have become more restrictive, and I expect them to become even moreso if Obama gets his way.

 

I'll just metioned a couple firearms regulations like mandatory waiting period, background check, "assault" weapons bans and reclassifications, etc. as opposed to more lenient gun laws of years past. Another small gun related issue is that I am legally allowed to carry a concealed firearm by over 40 different states, however, any knucklehead property owner can put a "no guns allowed" sign on his property, which only disallows law-abiding citizens of their rights, while making his property a target for criminals. Besides the expiration of the Brady Bill (which hasn't really effected gun ownership rights positively, IMO), I don't recall any actual FACTS presented by you that indicate that gun laws are becoming less restrictive. Heck, I never even got to mention specific gun laws in DC or California. Honestly, I didn't want to rehash that argument.

[carlfense]

What exactly is ignorant and uneducated? Both are blaming women for something that is perpetrated by men using largely the same reasoning. You saying my comparison is "ignorant and uneducated" doesn't make it so.

I guess since you don't have the capacity to understand it, this will be difficult to get across to you. Women MAKE themselves objects of lust and sexual desires, thankfully. Since you have already spoken for all women, are you telling me that MEN FORCE women to wear makeup and become strippers? Are you really insinuating that women have no control, and are only here to be at the sexual beconning to men? Wow, you must have very little respect for women. So, to compare the choice a woman makes (being sexy) to a woman being assaulted against her will by a sexual predator is ignorant, uniformed, and disturbing. Not sure if you can understand that or not, but.....

 

And good point. I'm sure the collage was put together by a woman. (Maybe a HuskerJen type of woman . . . but not a woman by birth.)

Again, in your infinite wisdom, you make a rather rash, ignorant assumption. I have no idea who put that collage together. Heck it could have been Ann Coulter for all I know. I personally know quite a few women (not of the panty-waste liberal persuasion) who would not be offended by that joke. Would they think it is stupid, possibly, but offended, no. They are much bigger, much stronger people than that.

 

As an aside, I certainly hope this isn't another one of your gun rights arguments where you have an entirely unreasoned argument without any regards for the actual facts. (You: "They're taking all of our guns!" Reality: "Gun rights have been increasing for nearly a decade.")

I'm glad you brought that up, because it just makes my point. I don't recall ever saying, "They're taking all of our guns!" I do recall mentioning that firearm laws have become more restrictive, and I expect them to become even moreso if Obama gets his way.

 

I'll just metioned a couple firearms regulations like mandatory waiting period, background check, "assault" weapons bans and reclassifications, etc. as opposed to more lenient gun laws of years past. Another small gun related issue is that I am legally allowed to carry a concealed firearm by over 40 different states, however, any knucklehead property owner can put a "no guns allowed" sign on his property, which only disallows law-abiding citizens of their rights, while making his property a target for criminals. Besides the expiration of the Brady Bill (which hasn't really effected gun ownership rights positively, IMO), I don't recall any actual FACTS presented by you that indicate that gun laws are becoming less restrictive. Heck, I never even got to mention specific gun laws in DC or California. Honestly, I didn't want to rehash that argument.

To avoid a complete threadjacking, the guns discussion is here. link I can provide direct links to each thing I mention in that thread if that would be helpful.

 

You're right. As said before . . . women wear revealing clothes and therefore welcome sexism and rape.

 

Do you know a lot of women who would assemble a collage of attractive right wingers and unattractive left wingers? I'd bet no.

 

"Panty waist?" Really? I'm not sure you could sound more ignorant if you tried.

[74Hunter]

You're right. As said before . . . women wear revealing clothes and therefore welcome sexism and rape.

Those are your words, Mr. Voice of All Women.

 

Do you know a lot of women who would assemble a collage of attractive right wingers and unattractive left wingers?

For someone who chastises others for their lack of reading comprehension, maybe you should work on yours. Are you the pot or the kettle?

 

I'd bet no.

And you'd lose. Again. You do know what happens when you make assumptions?

 

"Panty waist?" Really? I'm not sure you could sound more ignorant if you tried.

To use a lame quote, it is what it is. And yes, I could have sounded more ignorant if I would have said this:

 

(Also, your makeup/hair/revealing clothes/etc. spiel looks frighteningly similar to rapists who say "if she didn't want it she wouldn't have worn a low cut shirt." I don't think I've ever seen women so conclusively blamed for sexism. Kudos, sir.)

[carlfense]

Well, this has regressed into insult hurling.

 

If you'd like to discuss whether women are responsible for the sexual discrimination perpetrated against them please start a thread about it. If you'd rather call me "junior," I'll leave you to your foolishness.

[74Hunter]

Well, this has regressed into insult hurling.

Yes, and you should have thought about that before your smart-a$$ed "reading comprehension" remark. If you didn't want to make it personal, then you never should have made that remark. Your actions have consequences.

 

If you'd like to discuss whether women are responsible for the sexual discrimination perpetrated against them please start a thread about it.

Quit changing your stance and putting words in someone else's mouth. This thread was about whether this was a joke and if it were offensive. You derailed it by somehow mixing in sexual assault and descrimination, and who is responsible for these offenses into the discussion.

 

Since you can't stay on topic, I have no need to further discuss it.

[carlfense]

You said:

Women MAKE themselves objects of lust and sexual desires, thankfully. Since you have already spoken for all women, are you telling me that MEN FORCE women to wear makeup and become strippers? Are you really insinuating that women have no control, and are only here to be at the sexual beconning to men?

and:

Well, when EVERY SINGLE woman quits wearing makeup, spending hundreds of dollars on her hair, quits going to the gym, quits wearing revealing bathing suits and clothes, and quits working at Hooters, as a stripper, or a porno actress etc., then I will worry about it.

 

Which I summarized as:

Women are responsible for the sexual discrimination perpetrated against them . . .

 

Still with me? No one else has chimed in but I think that is a very fair summary of what you are saying. Also, you might want to note in post #14 that YOU are the one who derailed this into women being responsible for being seen as nothing more than eye candy.

 

But hey, if you want to keep blaming crimes on the victims you go right ahead, junior.

 

 

 

 

 

(Also, I notice that you still haven't joined the gun rights discussion thread. I'm beginning to think that you realized that the facts don't support your position.)

[74Hunter]

You said:

Women MAKE themselves objects of lust and sexual desires, thankfully. Since you have already spoken for all women, are you telling me that MEN FORCE women to wear makeup and become strippers? Are you really insinuating that women have no control, and are only here to be at the sexual beconning to men?

and:

Well, when EVERY SINGLE woman quits wearing makeup, spending hundreds of dollars on her hair, quits going to the gym, quits wearing revealing bathing suits and clothes, and quits working at Hooters, as a stripper, or a porno actress etc., then I will worry about it.

 

Which I summarized as:

Women are responsible for the sexual discrimination perpetrated against them . . .

 

Still with me? No one else has chimed in but I think that is a very fair summary of what you are saying. Also, you might want to note in post #14 that YOU are the one who derailed this into women being responsible for being seen as nothing more than eye candy.

 

But hey, if you want to keep blaming crimes on the victims you go right ahead, junior.

If you can't understand that women allowing themselves to be sexually exploited when it benefits them but acting as if it is offensive when it doesn't benefit them is hypocritical, then we are done. This "joke" has nothing to do with being the victim of a brutal crime, and for you to lay the blame victims is ignorant and insensitve on your part. But obviously you don't have the capacity to understand the difference, so we should let it drop.

 

Also, I notice that you still haven't joined the gun rights discussion thread. I'm beginning to think that you realized that the facts don't support your position.)

I have done quite a bit of research on the subject, and I could bury you there, too. I have just spent too much time on this silly thread, and I don't really want to spend even more time in that thread trying to straighten out your spin, uneducated generalization, half-truths, and misunderstandings, only for you to make idiotic assumptions and skirt around the issue. There is no reason for me to waste more of my time on someone who derails the discussion instead of addressing it.

 

I don't use this website to validate my being, I visit it to take my mind away from the more pressing issues that I deal with on a daily basis for a few minutes. But if a pissing match on a message board makes you feel better about yourself, rock on, brother.

[carlfense]

"I have done quite a bit of research on the subject, and I could bury you there, too."

 

Thank god you won't follow up on this. I'd hate for my facts to be embarrassed by all of your research.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

(I don't use this website to validate my being either. I use it as a welcome distraction from the monotony of my schooling. Would I rather win an argument than lose an argument? (assuming such a thing is possible on the internet) Absolutely. So would you.)

[74Hunter]

"I have done quite a bit of research on the subject, and I could bury you there, too."

 

Thank god you won't follow up on this. I'd hate for my facts to be embarrassed by all of your research.

Yes, a few years ago, I extensively researched and wrote a thesis on that very topic, but what would I know. Just keep on, keeping-on making assumptions.

 

Oh, and real world, (I know that for coddled students who have never had to deal with reality and only know what academia hand feeds them, the real world may be difficult to understand) first hand experience (actually purchasing and carrying firearms) has told me that your "facts" (which have been few and far between) are nothing more than a few statements that support your opinions. Lies, damn lies, and statistics.

[carlfense]

"I have done quite a bit of research on the subject, and I could bury you there, too."

 

Thank god you won't follow up on this. I'd hate for my facts to be embarrassed by all of your research.

Yes, a few years ago, I extensively researched and wrote a thesis on that very topic, but what would I know. Just keep on, keeping-on making assumptions.

 

Oh, and real world, (I know that for coddled students who have never had to deal with reality and only know what academia hand feeds them, the real world may be difficult to understand) first hand experience (actually purchasing and carrying firearms) has told me that your "facts" (which have been few and far between) are nothing more than a few statements that support your opinions. Lies, damn lies, and statistics.

Let's address these:

1. I too have researched and written about gun laws in the United States. If you've bothered to look at the links I posted in the other thread you'll notice that in the last few years gun laws have changed as the result of both the judiciary and the legislature. Therefore, your thesis, however well researched it was, is outdated. Do you have a copy of your thesis? I'd love to read it. Mine wasn't so much a thesis; it was just a 15 page essay. I'll try to boot up my old computer and get a copy of it if you will provide me with your thesis.

 

2. Real world? Coddled student? Hmmm. Sounds like someone is unfamiliar with my life story. Just to clear things up: I was born on a farm with a shovel in my hands . . . not a silver spoon in my mouth. I got my first job outside of the family farm when I was 12 years old working as a hired hand for my neighbor's dairy farm. I've worked residential construction for 7 years to fund my education (coupled with academic scholarships awarded because of academic success.) My parents have not paid for a cent of my undergraduate or graduate schooling. I chose to go to law school accepting the fact that it will probably take me a decade to pay back my student loans. However, if you want to denigrate me because of my educational decisions I'll just laugh at what an uneducated bumpkin you are. (That is tongue in cheek, by the way.) But no . . . you're correct. I have no idea what real work or the real world is like.

 

3. I'm very impressed that you have actually purchased guns. I'm so blessed that I can finally talk with someone who knows what it's like to purchase guns because I've never actually met one as I've been sequestered away in my academic ivory tower . . . wait . . . I've actually purchased guns too. Shocking stuff. I've purchased 6 guns in the last 8 years (2 handguns and 4 rifles). So, yes, I too know something about "real world" gun purchases.

 

4. "Lies, damn lies, and statistics." Really? Saying that gun rights are more secure today than they were 10 years ago based on Supreme Court decisions and the expiration of firearms restrictions is a damn lie? Interesting. Whereas, you are saying the equivalent of "TRUST ME. I KNOW. I LIVE IN THE REAL WORLD AND PURCHASE GUNS." But go ahead . . . I'm sure your shadowy and unsubstantiated opinion is more impressive than actual research.

[74Hunter]

Let's address these:

1. I too have researched and written about gun laws in the United States. If you've bothered to look at the links I posted in the other thread you'll notice that in the last few years gun laws have changed as the result of both the judiciary and the legislature. Therefore, your thesis, however well researched it was, is outdated. Do you have a copy of your thesis? I'd love to read it. Mine wasn't so much a thesis; it was just a 15 page essay. I'll try to boot up my old computer and get a copy of it if you will provide me with your thesis.

Much like you, I have replaced my PC (twice), and moved twice since I wrote that paper. If I still have it, I'm not sure where it is. As for your statement that my research could be dated, you could be correct. However your statement that gun laws have become less restrictive may be theoretically correct in certain instances, but according to personal experience, is unfounded. I have a permit to legally carry a concealed weapon in NE, which theoretically is less restrictive. In reality, all a property owner has to do is put up a "no weapons" sign, and I can't legally carry my gun, not to mention the different and confusing local gun ordinances. So, in essence, the only place I feel safe legally having a concealed weapon is in my own home. Get the difference between a theory and real world practice?

 

2. Real world? Coddled student? Hmmm. Sounds like someone is unfamiliar with my life story.

Isn't it fun to make uneducated assumptions about the person that you are talking to?

 

3. I'm very impressed that you have actually purchased guns. I'm so blessed that I can finally talk with someone who knows what it's like to purchase guns because I've never actually met one as I've been sequestered away in my academic ivory tower . . . wait . . . I've actually purchased guns too. Shocking stuff. I've purchased 6 guns in the last 8 years (2 handguns and 4 rifles). So, yes, I too know something about "real world" gun purchases.

So I guess you are familiar with:

1) having to get a permit to purchase

2) go purchase handgun

3) go to the Omaha Police Department to register (possibly un-Constitutional) handgun before taking posession

4) going back to the store where purchased to provide proof of registration

5) finally being able to take posession

 

Not exactly very user friendly.

 

Also, I purchased a new shotgun a few years back, all I had to do was show my ID and fill out some paperwork. When I purchased a rifle last fall, thankfully I had my handgun purchase permit which, according to the sales associate (what would he know) made it much easier and less time consuming to finish with the transaction, which consisted of more paper work than I filled out previously. But then again, real life experiences are all BS.

 

4. "Lies, damn lies, and statistics." Really? Saying that gun rights are more secure today than they were 10 years ago based on Supreme Court decisions and the expiration of firearms restrictions is a damn lie? Interesting. Whereas, you are saying the equivalent of "TRUST ME. I KNOW. I LIVE IN THE REAL WORLD AND PURCHASE GUNS." But go ahead . . . I'm sure your shadowy and unsubstantiated opinion is more impressive than actual research.

Obviously, you have no idea what that quote means. It means that you can manipulate facts or statistics to support your argument. If we really wanted to discuss it, I'm sure I could provide one law that is more restrictive for every one that you feel is less restrictive. As for your ascertation that gun laws are less restrictive (I think you mentioned the Brady Bill experation) the only thing I could find using a quick google search was that the manditory waiting period expired in favor of a background check through the NCIS (FBI), not the whole bill itself (could be wrong). Again, theory and legal-ease can only go so far, but when you exercise it in the real world, experiences tell you something else.

[Bradr]

Good god guys, can't we all just post some funny pictures?

[carlfense]

Let's address these:

1. I too have researched and written about gun laws in the United States. If you've bothered to look at the links I posted in the other thread you'll notice that in the last few years gun laws have changed as the result of both the judiciary and the legislature. Therefore, your thesis, however well researched it was, is outdated. Do you have a copy of your thesis? I'd love to read it. Mine wasn't so much a thesis; it was just a 15 page essay. I'll try to boot up my old computer and get a copy of it if you will provide me with your thesis.

Much like you, I have replaced my PC (twice), and moved twice since I wrote that paper. If I still have it, I'm not sure where it is. As for your statement that my research could be dated, you could be correct. However your statement that gun laws have become less restrictive may be theoretically correct in certain instances, but according to personal experience, is unfounded. I have a permit to legally carry a concealed weapon in NE, which theoretically is less restrictive. In reality, all a property owner has to do is put up a "no weapons" sign, and I can't legally carry my gun, not to mention the different and confusing local gun ordinances. So, in essence, the only place I feel safe legally having a concealed weapon is in my own home. Get the difference between a theory and real world practice?

 

2. Real world? Coddled student? Hmmm. Sounds like someone is unfamiliar with my life story.

Isn't it fun to make uneducated assumptions about the person that you are talking to?

 

3. I'm very impressed that you have actually purchased guns. I'm so blessed that I can finally talk with someone who knows what it's like to purchase guns because I've never actually met one as I've been sequestered away in my academic ivory tower . . . wait . . . I've actually purchased guns too. Shocking stuff. I've purchased 6 guns in the last 8 years (2 handguns and 4 rifles). So, yes, I too know something about "real world" gun purchases.

So I guess you are familiar with:

1) having to get a permit to purchase

2) go purchase handgun

3) go to the Omaha Police Department to register (possibly un-Constitutional) handgun before taking posession

4) going back to the store where purchased to provide proof of registration

5) finally being able to take posession

 

Not exactly very user friendly.

 

Also, I purchased a new shotgun a few years back, all I had to do was show my ID and fill out some paperwork. When I purchased a rifle last fall, thankfully I had my handgun purchase permit which, according to the sales associate (what would he know) made it much easier and less time consuming to finish with the transaction, which consisted of more paper work than I filled out previously. But then again, real life experiences are all BS.

 

4. "Lies, damn lies, and statistics." Really? Saying that gun rights are more secure today than they were 10 years ago based on Supreme Court decisions and the expiration of firearms restrictions is a damn lie? Interesting. Whereas, you are saying the equivalent of "TRUST ME. I KNOW. I LIVE IN THE REAL WORLD AND PURCHASE GUNS." But go ahead . . . I'm sure your shadowy and unsubstantiated opinion is more impressive than actual research.

Obviously, you have no idea what that quote means. It means that you can manipulate facts or statistics to support your argument. If we really wanted to discuss it, I'm sure I could provide one law that is more restrictive for every one that you feel is less restrictive. As for your ascertation that gun laws are less restrictive (I think you mentioned the Brady Bill experation) the only thing I could find using a quick google search was that the manditory waiting period expired in favor of a background check through the NCIS (FBI), not the whole bill itself (could be wrong). Again, theory and legal-ease can only go so far, but when you exercise it in the real world, experiences tell you something else.

My handgun purchases were different. All I had to do was get the handgun purchase permit from my county sheriff's office and go purchase the handgun. There were no waiting periods or registrations required. One of the benefits of not living in Omaha I suppose.

 

Actually, your quote just means that statistics are unreliable because they can be manipulated. It's not directly applicable to facts other than statistics. The Brady Bill (and DC v. Heller, McDonald v. Chicago, etc.) can be found linked in this post: link. The Brady Bill was the so called Assault Weapons Ban that banned certain military style rifles based on arbitrary features such as prominent pistol grips, bayonet lugs, etc. It's gone now, and good riddance.

 

Even the NRA admits that the gun rights movement has had significant victories in the last few years. Will there be threats in the future? Undoubtedly. However, the individual right to keep and bear arms is as secure now as it has been at any time in decades.

 

Please, look for your thesis if possible. I'd be very interested in what you have to say.