Am I being testy or paranoid or an utter butt-head?

[PavePusher]

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=139x7792

Please don't jump in, just let me know if I'm being out of line, Thanks.

[Glassunion]

1. A bit testy IMHO on both sides. nt

[petronius]

2. My opinion, that wasn't the place or the tone

So I would say testy and out of line, but not paranoid or utter butt-head...

[donheld]

3. Maybe a testy, paranoid butthead.

[rrneck]

4. You might have baited them a bit,

but they weren't angels either.

[ProgressiveProfessor]

5. You sure brought out the "best" in at least one other poster

and they clearly were over the top.

[Hangingon]

6. I think you were right.

[RSillsbee]

7. Yes :D EOM

:bounce:

[one-eyed fat man]

8. You know how to tell your First Sergeant is multi-lingual?

He can cuss out each trooper in his native language! They probably won't like my answer either.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=139&topic_id=7792&mesg_id=7843



2nd Bn, 34th Armor
"Fear God, Dreadnaught!"

[Up Quark]

9. Restrained and admirably diplomatic.

:D

[DonP]

10. Repetitive problem

Any time you mention "students" carrying on campus, the ignorant (small i) and less informed jump to the lowest common denominator.

They don't realize that the "students" under discussion are 21 or older, are already carrying everywhere else anyway, with permits of course. Hence the stupid "teenager" references in every other post. (Gee, do you think anyone would object if someone referred to any other collective group as "hormonal"?)

And, of course these people think that Animal House was actually a documentary and college is full of only drunken, stoned wastrels.

If you are rude enough to actually ask them about the campus shootings at VT, NIU or any other gun free college, they start screaming at you in print. Mainly because they don't actually think through the "what if" scenarios.

Their solution to an illegal gun on campus is to quickly call for people with legal guns to rush to the campus as a solution. In their mind it's far better to wait for an execution style death and hope the killer doesn't find you or can't break into your poorly barricaded classroom than to risk ... "being caught in a crossfire of bullets so the police can't tell the criminal from the armed students".

Little information, vivid imaginations, ignorance reigns supreme.

[lapsstir]

12. They also ignore

all the campuses in this country where carrying is legal e.g. Utah, WA state, etc. And that there is no evidence that those campuses are any more violent, or that students with CCW are any sort of safety problem.

[Texasborncowboy]

19. The VT scenario is truly frightening.

I can imagine sitting in class thinking about a test, the basketball/football team, a study date with someone you find attractive, your parents hassling you to come home once a month to help with chores...BANG BANG BANG POP BANG, people screaming, people running, blood, BANG BANG BANG POP POP. Your fight or flee reflex kicks in and you run for the door. The gunman has chained the door and you are trapped in the building. What do you do?

[lawodevolution]

23. Some of them are ignorant while others

Know the truth but still post up ignorant statements because they want to manipulate weak minded people. There is a reason why ignorant views on campus carry are so common throughout the US. This forum is an important front on the battle for gun restriction vs gun freedom so I assume the Brady campaign, VPC, and other gun control groups have people posting here and they don't care about the facts or the truth, they only care about bringing in those donations. $$$

[tortoise1956]

11. Pretty restrained, actually

I would have had some choice words for at least one of the posters...

[jazzhound]

13. I thought you were fairly restrained as well, given that you

were dealing with the usual felony-fatiguing jive-ass bs. But coming from me, I realize that doesn't mean much. :)

[hendo]

14. Not quite out of line, but not quite civil either. NT

[PavePusher]

16. Well, you may have a point there.

As a counter-point, how civil do I need to be to people who would deny Civil Rights and effective tools of self-defense to legal adults and, when asked if they intend to volunteer to provide security for those people, ignore the question?

All while casting out unsupported, invalid assumptions and claims, and insinuating vile insults?

[DonP]

15. Self identifying and damn proud of it "ignorance" on display

Wow! I posted a slightly edited (e.g. more polite) version of my post above and got an angry "How dare you call me names" response. I find that entertaining and ironic from a poster that refers to all teenagers as "Hormonal".

I'm just guessing here but I'm betting that if anyone referred to the poster as "hormonal", the alert button would be pushed so fast and often it might catch fire from the friction. Just guessing.

"Animal House a documentary, I've never been so insulted."

That's great! Obviously she hasn't been around much. I was just pointing out the facts of CCW, but I guess some people feel their "ideas" and "Opinions" are far more important than the reality on an issue and if you question their opinion or challenge it in any way - you are insulting.

Short answer PP - not rude, testy or a butt head. Incredibly patient with the far less than informed.

[one-eyed fat man]

24. The same poster

Completely ignored the reference to military veterans, in either sense. As those who returned from combat service to become students or as examples of 18 and 19 year olds with weapons, responsibility and dedication.

What annoys me greatly is some of those who were shamelessly dodging the draft in the Sixties, now, themselves in their sixties, are lying about their "service" in Viet Nam. Worse, they are telling their offspring military service is for "losers."

Some of those "uber Left" who truly feel that service in the Army is beneath them should consider that by discouraging military service to those who identify with the Left is pretty dumb as a policy. How will you command the loyalty and service of an Armed Force who, by default, has an antipathy to everything you believe in?

[friendly_iconoclast]

25. I asked for examples of real-world problems on that thread, and was given

an unsupported citation of a study of - testosterone levels. I think we are dealing with people who are not used to having

their prejudices examined closely....

[DonP]

26. "Examined Closely"? - More likely not at all.

Even questioning, relatively courteously, a statement or offering facts that refute someone's pet beliefs is considered rude, a personal attack and downright heretical.

I was waiting for the Penis references and Brady press release quotes to come out any minute up there.

[rrneck]

17. Actually, I missed a post

and need to revise my statement.

You were admirably restrained.

[Texasborncowboy]

18. I don't think so.

It's easy to get upset with people who assume that teenagers will be carrying concealed. You pointed out that you must be 21 to obtain a concealed handgun license. There's no doubt that you may have hurt a couple of peoples feelings, but they showed their ignorance on the subject and you called them on it.

[AtheistCrusader]

20. Perceieved as 'dancing in the blood'.

It's not right when we do it either. We can't know the motives or the risk assessment the shooter has performed on his or her victims. We can't know if the shooter is even conscious of the 'no guns' policy of the campus.

We can't know if the victim would be willing, eligible, or capable to carry anyway.
Etc.


I would not have gone there.

[PavePusher]

21. I understand what you are saying...

but the point is that the U takes any decision-making out of the individuals hands (contrary to both state and federal Constitutions) and offers no remedy. And neither do the nay-sayers.

[AtheistCrusader]

22. Agreed, but a thread about a victim probably isn't the best place to discuss that.

It's extremely provocative. Family, friends of the victim may even come here and see.

It's really for someone who has standing, to sue to change the policy.

Edit: if that thread were here in the gungeon, where firearms policy and law is the issue of the day, different story.

[SteveM]

27. I don't think you were too out of line...

That said, the subject of guns-on-campus is one of the hot-beds of gun-control vitriol. Personally, I try to get background on issues like this; otherwise, one ends up using this most blatted-out characterization used by the one who is fastest getting on camera. I've done the same thing. Thanks for bringing up your concerns, it is noble for you to do so.

Hang around. You get good debate, here. Be aware, however, that some posters here are really into disruption, smear, stereotyping, and degrading this forum. I think they do this for their own unseemly satisfaction, or they have run out of argument and rely on the hobgoblin images of any prohibition.

I think most pro-2A folks here support progressive policies which address the root causes of crime, but they do not have much sympathy after the deed is done. Violent crime is down, as you may know, and I think law enforcement has a better means of zeroing in on the repeat goblins who, like Liberty Valance in the movie of the same name, just can't get enough, esp. when they are enabled.

As for me, when two punks empty their guns into a crowded nightclub, hitting several patrons, all because they weren't allowed to perform their act on stage, they should get 40 years, not the 20 "liberal Austin" authorities gave them.

There is nothing wrong with being a lefty, and removing violent criminals from society for a significant amount of time.