Path: csiph.com!fu-berlin.de!uni-berlin.de!individual.net!not-for-mail From: Snit Newsgroups: sci.physics,comp.os.linux.advocacy,alt.checkmate,talk.politics.guns Subject: Re: Slaughtering concert goers. Date: Fri, 8 Jun 2018 22:52:41 -0700 Lines: 42 Message-ID: References: <2lvbhdl8m52dad4q6cc9tgqg02lmo3asid@4ax.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Trace: individual.net /wVdJZxc7bSlO2/iPdEtaAIGXVhWNr879mwYhwYlb0hu5G4+mR Cancel-Lock: sha1:77mM6tNFyMDHGpsauMTrM0jPmxo= User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.13; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.8.0 In-Reply-To: Content-Language: en-US Xref: csiph.com sci.physics:689615 comp.os.linux.advocacy:454528 alt.checkmate:172560 talk.politics.guns:1092086 On 6/8/18 10:44 PM, max headroom wrote: > In news:fo15klFcgkoU3@mid.individual.net, > Snit typed: > >> On 6/8/18 10:02 PM, max headroom wrote: > >>>>> All of it... because you can't. > >>>> Pick your favorite part. Or where you think you make the best point. >>>> It gets tiring rehashing the same long list of things. > >>> My favorite part was when Scout blew your "new interpretation in >>> 2008" lie out of the water! > >> The Heller case is pretty easy to reference, and is the first time the >> new interpretation was offered by the SCOTUS.... > > Yeah, that's the one! > > So you have nothing. Fair enough. Does not mean you have to agree... after all you clearly view things far more though the eyes of emotion than I do. No harm done. No offense taken. But I suspect you will want to push insults. I am not interested in that. We disagree. So what? Maybe at some point you will even find evidence to go against what I say... and if you do present it. I am open to it. The closest that has been done is pointing to the early laws being state and how federal amendments have a different impact. THAT actually showed some logic and reason and effort. Other than that there has not been much. So be it. -- Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They cannot use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel somehow superior by attacking the messenger. They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again.