Active Users:348 Time:26/04/2025 01:01:52 PM
A wood chipper isn't a gun, and evidence without proof isn't evidence Isaac Send a noteboard - 22/12/2012 06:10:34 PM
Also, when something doesn't sound right to me, and I ask for a citation, it is absolutely not my job to find it or shrug and say 'You're right', it's the person who says it is. I don't know who the hell taught you to argue but FYI if you ever cite a law with serious debaters and someone asks "Hey, I think that sounds strange, what law is that? What's the text?" and you say "Go look it up." you'll get the stink eye, because on any claim, especially law, the person citing it is the one who expected to prove its true, not the person disputing it. If you claim Canadian law requires a snorkel in a public pool, I am damn well within my rights to say "Which law is that? What's the specific text?" and expect you to prove it or withdraw it.

This is basic stuff man, and with law doubly true because the snorkeling law might well say, "The manager of the public pool is permitted to require such equipment... ... as deemed reasonable at the time, e.g. snorkel." And in the ... ... it says "be used by an employee engaging in repairs or looking for lost items if he has decided not to drain the pool, and may require any non-employee assisting to don the same" and the whole thing changes.

But all of this is irrelevant because neither I or Moondog actually care about Aussie law, if he's wrong (he's not, I did look it up, and there are caveats too) it wouldn't matter, he'd just say "I wish the law here was X" and I'd reply, "I think that's morally wrong" and we'd continue. You're running on tangents again, same as your weird digression into my preferred choice of weapons to clear a room. You want to debate with me, then you either accept that claims, especially legal ones, get backed up on request with proper citation (which means the actual legal code) or you don't present the claim. Law rarely reads flat out the way casual readers, journalists, or wiki editors think it does and I certainly do not take 'trust me' as sufficient.
The intuitive mind is a sacred gift and the rational mind is a faithful servant. We have created a society that honors the servant and has forgotten the gift.
- Albert Einstein

King of Cairhien 20-7-2
Chancellor of the Landsraad, Archduke of Is'Mod
Reply to message
When guns are a big national issue, how do reporters & pundits not know facts about them? - 21/12/2012 05:33:14 PM 1652 Views
You don't hunt by walking into a classroom and shooting 20 deer - 21/12/2012 05:56:16 PM 1073 Views
You're actually not right on that one - 21/12/2012 07:49:53 PM 1010 Views
That wasn't the point I was making - 21/12/2012 09:49:40 PM 941 Views
You should probably clarify it then - 21/12/2012 10:47:26 PM 1100 Views
His post was perfectly clear. Yours seemed like a response to an entirely different post. - 21/12/2012 10:53:39 PM 1266 Views
Explain that remark, it is not obvious to me *NM* - 21/12/2012 11:00:10 PM 564 Views
I think - 21/12/2012 11:13:34 PM 935 Views
Thats' easy, there is simply no such thing as a 'hunting rifle' - 21/12/2012 11:17:41 PM 948 Views
I'd say the expert gunsmith - 21/12/2012 11:28:02 PM 1000 Views
I thought I was being perfectly clear. - 21/12/2012 10:57:35 PM 960 Views
Re: I thought I was being perfectly clear. - 21/12/2012 11:25:04 PM 1015 Views
Oh I wasn't commenting on the standard of people here - 21/12/2012 11:29:36 PM 941 Views
you're largely correct, which is why we need stronger laws on ownership not guns per se - 21/12/2012 09:39:14 PM 920 Views
I can't think of a better reason than self defense - 21/12/2012 10:33:26 PM 985 Views
He is right about Australia - 21/12/2012 10:46:27 PM 946 Views
No kidding - 21/12/2012 10:59:28 PM 947 Views
If you knew all that - 21/12/2012 11:02:38 PM 991 Views
Because I used wiki of course - 21/12/2012 11:21:25 PM 1020 Views
He said ""self defense" is not a valid excuse to own a lethal weapon" - 21/12/2012 11:34:59 PM 889 Views
Yes,which is un-cited, but I did prove it's a valid excuse to use one, so... - 22/12/2012 12:36:19 AM 1009 Views
The difference between allowing someone to defend themselves with a gun they have - 22/12/2012 01:09:40 AM 935 Views
Which you apparently think they shouldn't be able to obtain? Catch-22 comes to mind. - 22/12/2012 01:17:25 AM 958 Views
Re: Which you apparently think they shouldn't be able to obtain? Catch-22 comes to mind. - 22/12/2012 09:51:51 AM 1029 Views
A wood chipper isn't a gun, and evidence without proof isn't evidence - 22/12/2012 06:10:34 PM 945 Views
If only you'd asked him for a citation rather than just saying you thought he was wrong eh? *NM* - 23/12/2012 12:29:30 AM 675 Views
Same thing, don't split hairs *NM* - 23/12/2012 12:43:44 AM 636 Views
I think you are on the right track, but to the wrong destination; "lethal weapon" is redundant. - 21/12/2012 11:05:29 PM 939 Views
My read is that the 2nd Amendment not only allows, but mandates, cop-killer bullets. - 22/12/2012 12:45:04 AM 994 Views
Does the Second Amendment protect the rights of felons and the mentally incompetent to have guns? - 22/12/2012 02:35:16 AM 1167 Views
Yes the media is using terms incorrectly but the point still stands. - 22/12/2012 03:02:18 AM 876 Views
Re: Yes the media is using terms incorrectly but the point still stands. - 22/12/2012 04:12:30 AM 933 Views
umm... - 22/12/2012 12:41:31 PM 838 Views
1997 North Hollywood Shootout - 22/12/2012 04:07:39 AM 1023 Views
Laws against murder failed to prevent that, too; clearly they are ineffective and should be repealed - 22/12/2012 06:02:24 AM 1071 Views
Such laws were never intended for prevention, they define actions that will be punished. *NM* - 23/12/2012 12:57:57 PM 601 Views
So do laws against getting a gun without screening, training and certification. - 23/12/2012 02:01:32 PM 889 Views
Then CHANGE the Constitution, don't ignore it. *NM* - 26/12/2012 03:12:11 PM 518 Views
I am not suggesting either changing or ignoring the Constitution. - 26/12/2012 04:01:02 PM 1003 Views
Yes you are. - 26/12/2012 08:06:01 PM 826 Views
Learn logic, and stop needlessly trying to teach me grammar. - 26/12/2012 08:55:25 PM 973 Views
Lear to read, and I won't have to - 27/12/2012 04:28:59 PM 1015 Views
You are wrong. - 22/12/2012 12:14:40 PM 971 Views
That explains much; I read somewhere Brits are averse to it. - 22/12/2012 01:17:15 PM 913 Views
We're also averse to being wrong. - 22/12/2012 02:53:49 PM 971 Views
So you say... - 22/12/2012 03:32:16 PM 897 Views
guns r stpid *NM* - 23/12/2012 12:39:30 AM 621 Views
What bemuses me about this thing with Adam Lanza, is that his mother had 5 registered guns - 23/12/2012 07:10:26 AM 969 Views
She was asleep with him in the house. - 23/12/2012 02:24:47 PM 984 Views
LOOK, look, there is another one... - 26/12/2012 03:13:45 PM 902 Views
I find the absolutist ant/pro-gun positions equally dangerous and absurd. - 26/12/2012 04:20:37 PM 903 Views
So we should just *kinda* ignore the Constitution *this* time... But what about NEXT time... - 26/12/2012 08:08:12 PM 877 Views
No, we should enact gun regulation the Constitution explicitly empowers. - 26/12/2012 09:02:12 PM 879 Views
Which would be... NONE. *NM* - 27/12/2012 04:31:53 PM 560 Views
"A well regulated militia being necessary to the security of a free state...." - 28/12/2012 05:14:49 PM 880 Views
*see previous grammar lesson* *NM* - 28/12/2012 10:31:43 PM 522 Views
The instant it becomes relevant, I shall. - 28/12/2012 11:45:01 PM 1080 Views
Your point being? - 27/12/2012 10:47:29 AM 869 Views
Facts are irrelevant when FUD is the order of the day. - 24/12/2012 04:34:18 PM 874 Views
It irritates me too. *NM* - 01/01/2013 01:55:05 PM 546 Views

Reply to Message