Jump to content

Bobby_Batronic

Legacy Members
  • Posts

    2457
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Bobby_Batronic

  1. 40 minutes ago, DefinitelyNotHollywoodColt said:

    Bobby you are a liar. You just told me you don’t believe more guns are the solution to our gun violence problem.

    I believe your simplistic emotional one liner was something to the effect of ….”just admit that you want more guns.”

    No. I’d like decidedly less guns. Particularly in the hands of the kind of people who decide to attempt mass murder in schools and elsewhere. 
     

    I believe I’ve also made it clear that I don’t see any meaningful lawmaking taking place toward that goal. So I believe hardening the targets is the best solution going forward. And that would involve in part an armed presence as well as other means to deter an attacker. I’m not overly fond of that being the actual educational staff, but there’s quibble room on that. 

    Que up the battlefield hyperbole. It’s about time for that round of nonsense again. No. I don’t want wars playing out at elementary schools. I want them to be very unattractive targets for what are generally disturbed cowards. 
     

    So, no, I am not a liar. You just have real difficulty stringing together pretty straight line conclusions. 
     

    I agree that it’s insanity that we have to even contemplate it, but the insanity isn’t stopping. You’ve already admitted that multiple times in this thread, and yet you seem to cling to some hope that it will. The answer becomes obvious. I’d love to hear the solution to deterring mass shootings when one beloved that no laws will be passed. 

  2. 1 hour ago, DefinitelyNotHollywoodColt said:

    You waded into this conversation and did 2 things:

    1. Wondered aloud whether or not the adults the mass murderer encountered (a principle and janitor) being armed would have changed the outcome.

    2. Shared your belief that hardening soft targets like schools is our best course of action.

    You quickly realized you were going to get attacked for that opinion BECAUSE IT IS FUCKING INSANE and quickly pivoted to your grand theory:

    Kids are being slaughtered at school because of a lack of civil discourse.

    I hope you at least take off your “Fuck your feelings” bumper sticker at some point.

    Yes. I wondered aloud if the staff being marked would have made a difference. 
     

    Yes, I believe that hardening targets is the only course forward because neither side can come to an agreement. Hardening targets would mean guns would be a part of the solution. I said that too. In whose hands is another matter and a lot of hardening target has nothing to do with weapons at all. I know all you can see is weapons. I expect nothing less. 
     

    I’m not worried about being attacked for that at all. You’re very poor at projecting, but do it a lot all the same 

    Yes, kids are being slaughtered at schools because our leaders as extensions of us cannot have a discourse on the matter. You’ve spent ample time proving that in the last few pages. it’s not a hard line of reasoning to follow. 
     

    We’re spending a lot of time trying it your way with hoping politicos will come to an accord while we don’t protect the schools. I’ve accepted that the former will not happen and that leaves few options to do something about it.

    What I actually think is worth doing doesn’t matter, because it’s not going to get passed anyway so I don’t waste my time tilting at windmills.

    Your bumper sticker jab is just more emotional diarrhea that you’ve mistaken for a knock out punch. 

    • Hook 'Em 1
    • Like 1
  3. 15 minutes ago, DefinitelyNotHollywoodColt said:

    If you would just be honest and say “I believe the solution to our nation’s gun violence is to make sure more people have more guns” we could just agree to disagree and move on.

    That’s not what I believe at all, but it doesn’t surprise me that you attempted to create a position for me of such eye water shallowness and absurdity. 

    You can quit replying at any time.

  4. 26 minutes ago, DefinitelyNotHollywoodColt said:

    “Vote for my political candidate” while accusing me of misrepresenting your viewpoints?

    What the fuck are you talking about?

    It’s in the best interest of our country to have political parties with opposing views/ideas on how best to shape our future. That’s a foundational piece of a functioning democracy.

    Again, we’re in a state of dysfunction not because I keep calling you a disingenuous moron, but because politicians for one political party can’t even consider trying to address gun violence. Any “gun reform” efforts that don’t start with “get more guns into the hands of more Americans” will ensure a well-backed primary challenger and political ruin.

    We’re here because politicians don’t have the moral courage to take action to try and save kids’ lives because doing so would mean they lose power. You can keep screaming and pointing over there, but your bullshit won’t work here.

    Another showed me post. My choices are vote for someone I nearly completely disagree with and who would most assuredly overreach and abuse any leeway given on this issue and another candidate I generally agree with but has minimal solutions here. Don’t be a hypocrite in addition to being a tribalitst. You’re not waiting on that one R to vote for who’s strong on gun control. 

    22 minutes ago, Pam Cummings said:

    Man, for a guy who hates "gotcha" posts, you sure do attempt a lot of them.

    It’s not a gotcha when I provide requested reasoning, and then the other person proceeds to do what I suggested to a fare thee well while denying it. 

    • Hook 'Em 1
  5. 8 minutes ago, DefinitelyNotHollywoodColt said:

    We're talking about a single issue here: gun violence. You are a completely dishonest person that has suggested we live in a world where our kids' schools are war zones that must be 'hardened' because of a lack of civil discourse. That's complete and utter bullshit.

    We live in that world because one political party is entirely dependent upon gun lobbyists whose job it is to make sure as many guns as possible are sold, not because I won't stop calling you out as a disingenuous moron.

    “The world would be a much better place if everyone would just agree with me and vote for my political candidates” said the tribalist as he derided any opposition, misrepresented their viewpoints and denied that we have issues with discourse. 

     

    • Like 1
  6. 1 hour ago, DefinitelyNotHollywoodColt said:

    We live in a world where “nothing gets done” because you choose to elect officials that wouldn’t ever consider making it more difficult for people to get the weapons of war that keep being used to murder school children because doing so would be political suicide.

    We will be whatever society we collectively choose to be.

    You’ve decided we should live a society where schools are war zones. You vote for politicians that agree, and whose solution is to arm teachers and janitors because they are soldiers at war.

    My choices aren’t between two politicians I largely agree with but have differing opinions on gun violence. I tend to mostly disagree with most of what one candidate offers and vice versa. 
     

    Don’t pretend you are a single issue voter. 

  7. 1 hour ago, DefinitelyNotHollywoodColt said:

    SO MANY PEOPLE ARE DYING FROM GUN VIOLENCE BECAUSE OF A LACK OF CIVIL DISCOURSE AND OH BTW WE COULD FIX THIS BY HAVING MORE GUNS!!!!

    Screen Shot 2023-03-30 at 10.36.57 AM.png

    You continue to illustrate my point. You seem to think you’re landing haymakers when all you are doing is retreating deeper into just what I suggested. 
     

    No. We don’t have civil discourse. On the micro level we can’t disagree anymore in an adult manner. Friends and family members are cut off. People seek to professionally ruin others. People think the sniping that they are now accustomed to on their particular brand of social media is an acceptable interaction in real life. 
     

    On the macro, our elected officials are equally incapable of actual debate and dialogue on the subject of gun violence. It’s just a series of talking points, one ups, fact checks and gotchas. So nothing gets done. Or will get done anytime soon. 
     

    You keep dreaming that dream though. It’s the world we live in and directs me to the most logical way to protect our children since  actual reforms aren’t going to happen. And no, that’s not strictly a more guns option though it’s would be a part of the process. 
     

    I’d love to go back to never worrying about it. To open campuses, no need for resource officers and the occasional good old boy’s pickup in the lot with a shotgun  on the rack that no one cares about because it’s not even considered an option. 
     

    That is not the world we live it. It’s not anywhere close to the world we’re headed towards. 

    • Hook 'Em 3
  8. 20 minutes ago, DefinitelyNotHollywoodColt said:

    At least we can agree on that last sentence. My question to you is this:

    Why is this country broken?

    For the reason you passively called me insane and broken in the post. We can’t talk to each other. Tribalism rules the day. Someone disagrees with you, and therefore they must be derided and piled on until one group of monkeys asserts dominance over the other on the internet or public forum. It’s a dunk contest where everyone loses. 
     

    The root causes of that are many, but that’s the rough outline of why nothing will be done on this and numerous other subjects. 

    13 minutes ago, Pam Cummings said:

    This is just straight up bullshit. If you wanna own a gun i do not care. But if you are not willing to do minimal things like register it and take training to use it, you're lazy and you don't deserve to own it in my opinion. That's not "i wanna take all your guns away". That's "i want for you to be responsible with your weapons".

     

    Sorry, but you're just absolutely full of garbage man.

    Know how I know you didn’t read several of my posts?

    • Hook 'Em 1
  9. 2 minutes ago, aggie08 said:

    Heroes, one and all.

    Again, such bullshit. No serious politician or gun control advocate is trying to come door to door to take away your guns. They know full well what would come from that. Gun ownership isn't illegal in California or New York or even Hawaii. It never will be in our lifetimes, and it's not because of the diligent work of the gun lobby. Republicans aren't the only people who like guns.

    Most politicians would happily take the smallest fucking victory wrt reforms, so they could put it in their next campaign ad, and then fuck off. But even that's asking too much. You go ahead and keep on both-siding it though.

     

    You showed me. Virtue signaling on a sports message board will probably save 0 lives in the next year. But you feel good about it sir.

    • Hook 'Em 2
    • Like 1
    • Fuck You 4
  10. 7 hours ago, SydneyCarton said:

    That being said, whenever Batronic shows up to give an opinion about something it usually goes tits up in short order. Like the time he insisted players shouldn't tackle in practice because of injury risks. I'm shocked he didn't make the connection at the time that they'd have had a 5% less chance of injury if they just carried a fucking pistol in their waistbands at practice. 

    This kind of poo flinging monkey brigade comment is silly and lacks context. Was the comment made when we only had 5 OL on the entire roster? Or when we were one deep at some other position with Johnny Highschool walk on behind them? I seriously doubt I ever suggested that the entire program never tackle in practice. You provide the quote and I’ll eat crow, but I suspect general assholery because its something you tend to revel in. 

    • Hook 'Em 1
    • Fuck You 1
  11. 7 minutes ago, aggie08 said:

    Ah yes, the slippery slope argument. When absolutely nothing remotely meaningful has been taken away from gun owners in decades.

    Yes, because the gun lobby and proponents fight it at every step. They do so because they know that gun control advocates will not stop until they finally get them all. A disarmed society is what they seek as is the case around the rest of the world. It’s not a slippery slope. It’s the end game. 

    2 minutes ago, aggie08 said:

    But, yes, I agree, if Sandy Hook didn't force the gun lobby to give a little ground, nothing that happens in this country ever will.

    That said, all politics aside, fortifying schools is fucking stupid.

    It is. But perhaps less stupid than thinking meaningful gun reform will be enacted in our lifetimes. You know it. You just admitted it. So hope in this hand if it makes you feel better. I’d prefer to do what I can with what we can rather than hoping the country summons the national will to do something. 

    • Hook 'Em 2
    • Like 1
    • Fuck You 2
  12. 7 hours ago, Blotto said:

    Dude, that's such a bullshit argument. The primary purpose of transportation is to move people from point A to point B. The primary purpose of a gun is to kill/destroy a person, animal or object. When the use of transportation results in death, its usually an accident. When the use of guns results in death, its overwhelmingly because that was the intent when the trigger was pulled. And yet, even with that distinction, Texas requires a drivers license and annual automobile registration and inspection for the operator of the transportation. Guns....fuck it, no license or registration required?

    The dead don’t care what killed them, the intent of it’s use or if the act of their death was intentional or an accident. They’re dead. I don’t attribute animus to inanimate objects. 

    Texas requires licensing and registration of cars and still they are killing children at far greater numbers than mass shooters. Do we have a gun problem? Particularly crazy people or criminals getting them too easily?  Hell yes we do. If you want to require training and recurrent training for responsible gun owners then that sounds good to me, and most the people who I know who own weapons would be onboard with that. Most are or were weapons instructors at some point in their life. 

    • Fuck You 2
  13. 7 hours ago, DefinitelyNotHollywoodColt said:

    You are fundamentally broken when that is your solution.

    I’m not name-calling there, I’m serious. You’re completely broken.

     

    6 hours ago, aggie08 said:

    That's the answer, huh? Lots of jail-like schools in other countries? That's their secret? Put Barney Fife next to every door at 150,000 schools? Arm Mrs. Livingston with the bad hip? And when the shooters just change their targets to crowded public parks and soccer games?

    It's so brilliant that it's certifiably insane.

    I’m neither broken or insane. The country is broken. The gun control proponents will not stop until none are left in private hands and the 2A proponents largely aren’t willing to give up anything either. 

    So nothing is going to happen. We’re well beyond the point where one act of violence in a school, church, store or wherever is going to spur national outrage and change. If anything it further deepens the divide.  So if nothing is going to happen, and again, I suggest you challenge the sun each morning if you really think it is, I can see only trying to better protect those we care about with what means we have at our disposal. 

    • Hook 'Em 1
    • Like 1
    • Fuck You 1
  14. 7 hours ago, SydneyCarton said:

    First, you're not answering the guys question that has been bolded. You're just calling him a meanie for deriding you, but you can't refute his point that building a nuclear shelter would give your family a 5% increase of survival in a nuclear holocaust, while claiming people would do "anything" to give themselves a 5% increase in living.

    The point that you missed by quite a larger margin was that people would do anything to increase their life expectancy in a life or death circumstance. At no point did I mention day to day activities. Reading comprehension is an art form. Practice it more. 

    But to answer your foolish attempt at parroting a gotcha, no, I do not have or intend to build a nuclear bomb shelter. It is not a life or death situation. It’s a death or death situation where the survivors would face a far more hellish demise than those who experienced a few millisecond of blinding light as Stephen Falken so adeptly noted. 

    7 hours ago, SydneyCarton said:

    Secondly, I'm not inadvertently making your point, you're (I will assume obliviously) fundamentally missing MY original point. Which is that in your absolutist take on doing things that increase your chances of survival in general, you'd NEVER get on a plane, you'd NEVER get in a car. You're picking and choosing your point. And then a single fucking post later, you literally use the "buying your kid a car" as proof of your point. You dunked on yourself, you fucking buffoon. 

    My point, vis a vis the 5% was again about life and death situations, and not the daily mundane.  But if you’d like to tackle the daily mundane then you would be the biggest retard on this thread if you didn’t admit that you make decisions on a daily basis based on perceived levels of safety that are completely at odds with reality or consistency. Such is life.  I never posited not stepping in a car for safety. I said I sometimes think about how I’d react in an accident situation. I believe that was in my first post. Stepping on an airplane is something I do with greater regularity than 99.99% of the populace. I mentioned it in passing several times that aviation training is replete with practicing for things that are statistically unlikely to ever happen in most aviator’s experience let alone the average passenger. Those would be life or death situations btw, and not your basic jaunt to Austin on the 6 AM SWA bird. The poster I was responding to suggested that keeping a weapon in the house increases the likelihood that a child will die of some unfortunate mishap with the gun. He was right, but its no more dangerous that buying a child a car or letting them use yours as far more kids are dying behind the wheel than because of domestic gun accidents. 

    7 hours ago, SydneyCarton said:

    The point is, you're real quick to pick and choose which scenarios that improves one life by "5%" that you choose to accept are real, versus those that you're actively dismissive of...which is more sad than it is funny. And shockingly, you're passionate about just one of those things to increase your life percentages is gun ownership. Guns are a lot cheaper to build than bomb shelters, and much quicker to acquire, after all. 

    Again, you didn’t read what I posted at all before you got emotional and lost the plot. 

    7 hours ago, SydneyCarton said:

    Additionally, what you're failing to realize, is that lots of things are dangerous. People tacitly accept the risk whenever they get in a car. Whenever they get in a plane. Whenever they light up a cigarette. Whenever they put a glass of alcohol to their lips. There are short term and long term dangers associated with all of those things. But, and follow me here, people get fucking passionate things like gun safety, or say pedophilia, because they are things that inordinately these days in the case of guns, HAPPEN TO FUCKING CHILDREN. There is a reason pedophiles get treated the worst in prison. It's because by and large as a species we are HARD WIRED to fucking want to protect children. That's why this shit gets so passionate. That's why the outcry for Uvalde, or a Nashville, is much more passionate than say, the night club in Miami, the massage parlors in Atlanta, or even the big shooting in Las Vegas. And those get PLENTY of outrage, media coverage, and passion. But school shootings are a fucking next level, order of magnitude level of outrage. Because it's children. And because children can't tacitly accept the risk associated with going to school. They're complete innocents, but they're being buttfucked by the decisions of others in which they have no control.

    Setting aside your continued failure to understand what I wrote yet again, I have no need for you to lecture me on why people are passionate about the deaths of children. The topic was concealed carry. I made several posts replying to a snide comment about 5% efficacy of gun owners in shootings. You jumped the shark and somehow applied that to school shootings because emotions. 

     

    • Hook 'Em 1
  15. 19 minutes ago, DefinitelyNotHollywoodColt said:

    We’re in complete agreement that we will do absolutely nothing while school kids continue to get murdered while trying to learn.

    This is America, the only place on earth where it routinely happens.

    Yep. You go work as hard as you can to inactbgun control, I’ll go push to harden soft targets like schools, and we can meet back up when none of it happens. 

    14 minutes ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

    That's why we set training and require tests before allowing a kid to drive.

    And still they kill themselves in others that dwarf those killed in mass shootings. 
     

    Look, if you want to require firearms training enroute to legal gun ownership then I think most gun supporters would be behind that. 

    • Haha 1
  16. 4 minutes ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

    But don't fool yourself into the belief that you're not introducing a dangerous weapon into your house.

    Yes, it does if you’re foolish about securing your weapons. 
     

    Buying your kid a car is probably more dangerous and yet there is no outcry to ban them. 

    • Hook 'Em 2
  17. 24 minutes ago, DefinitelyNotHollywoodColt said:

    Well, let’s keep debating it while people keep legally buying these things and mowing down little kids at school.

    As I said, you might as well try to stop the sun from rising. The all or nothing solution isn’t happening. 

    23 minutes ago, Patricio Swayze said:

    I’m curious what the chances of a nuclear war are and if that is enough for Bobby to build a bomb shelter. I mean, it could happen and if it does, he would definitely use it.

    I get it. Someone has reached a different conclusion about their personal safety and you feel derision is the best path forward. Whatever. I’m not here for your approval. 

    20 minutes ago, SydneyCarton said:

    How can he reasonably get in a car or on a plane? 

    You are inadvertently making my point. The odds of dying in a plane crash are astronomically low. And yet the pilots practice for emergencies as a matter of course several times a year. And you would demand no less of them. Statistically speaking, they shouldn’t bother. 

  18. 1 minute ago, DefinitelyNotHollywoodColt said:

    That would make a ton of sense if life weren’t life and we could ignore every other possible outcome and make decisions based on hypotheticals in a vacuum.

    You can control what you can control and can’t what you can’t. You’re happy rolling the dice one way. I prefer another. 
     

    I have a doohickey in my car that will break a window or cut a seatbelt. I’ll probably never use it. It’s there for all the possibilities I can’t see coming. Not the ones I do. 

    • Like 1
  19. 7 minutes ago, Patricio Swayze said:


    I think he is longcatting “you will wish you had it.”

    I’m good.

    Also incorrect. It’s not a “wish you had it” statement. It’s a “you would absolutely use it” statement. 

  20. Just now, DefinitelyNotHollywoodColt said:

    Why do you keep speaking for everyone when you suggest we would all want to carry a gun?

    You don’t get to speak for me.

    You’re not following. 
     

    It’s a life and death situation. Doesn’t matter if it’s gun play, house fire, auto accident, plane crash or whatever. 
     

    In the heat of the moment every last one of us would agree to use the option that gives us a 5% better chance of surviving. Or protecting our loved ones. 

    It’s easy to say that you wouldn’t because of strong beliefs on a subject, but that’s just not how it works.  

     

  21. 13 minutes ago, Nice Guy Eddie said:

    Not sure what that means.  However I bet every parent of a child, killed by a gun, would opt for stronger gun control measures if that would have given their child a 5% improved chance of survival too.

    The quoted OP suggested that conceal carry guys with guns are only effective 5% of the time.  We’d all take that extra 5 % of margin when the chips are down and our life is on the line. 
     

    I agree, parents would want that margin for their killed kids too. It’s not CHL people committing these atrocities so taking the guns away isn’t a direct correlation, those who carry often have them for their children too and one has to ask if fewer people would have died if one of the adults slain in Nashville had any means at all to protect themselves or their students. 
     

    Unfortunately, it’s not a one to one transaction where if x then y, and we can quantify the possibilities definitively. 

  22. 7 minutes ago, locodos said:

    It sure seems like the Nashville cops remembered their training and their balls and went to confront the shooter ASAP instead of detaining parents and setting up road blocks at a safe distance.

    I would suspect that the NPD probably regularly practiced such exercises and was funded to o so whereas UPD did not and was not. It does not excuse the cowardice of letting children die in safety. 

    • Hook 'Em 1
×
×
  • Create New...