dagblog - Comments for "If Typhoid Mary lived next door, would you let your kids visit? Drink the lemonade? Gun owners are a public health issue."

Can you both just agree to

Ramona — Mon, 07 Jan 2013 23:03:15 +0000

In reply to This is not an answer. Again

Can you both just agree to disagree? I think we all would appreciate it. Thanks.

This is not an answer. Again

ocean-kat — Mon, 07 Jan 2013 22:14:05 +0000

In reply to Are you serious? Up until

This is not an answer.

Again I will agree to your request to leave you alone if you will agree to leave me alone.

Do we have an agreement? Let the record be clear, yes or no?

Are you serious? Up until

Resistance — Mon, 07 Jan 2013 21:57:24 +0000

In reply to Someone made the comment, I

Are you serious? Up until you made another comment, I hadn't violated the agreement.

I moved on, as I will again.

I figured, hmmmmm. here's someone who disregards Constitutions as worthless instruments and now you were to be trusted?

In the fable The scorpion and the frog, the frog asks "Why did you sting me? Scorpion replies " You knew I was a scorpion".

I know what you are.

You violated your law and I reckon you'll disregard all other agreements when you see an advantage to do so.

BYE

Someone made the comment, I

ocean-kat — Mon, 07 Jan 2013 21:57:16 +0000

In reply to The proverbial ink, hasn?t

Someone made the comment, I don’t know if it were you, or someone else; implying, how would I like it, if it was me or my family who were to be massacred.

I did not post that comment.

The proverbial ink, hasn’t even dried on your proposed agreement, to cease and desist.

Yes, proposed agreement which you have not agreed to. I am happy to respect your request to no longer reply to you if you also agree to no longer reply to me.

Apparently you feel I should shut up while you can pontificate and attack me at will.

Again I will agree to your request to leave you alone if you also will agree to leave me alone.

Do we have an agreement?

Another curious proclamation

PeraclesPlease — Mon, 07 Jan 2013 21:29:14 +0000

In reply to I don't believe you found my

Another curious proclamation - personal privacy doesn't exist because there's a better hacker out there somewhere. So if I tell you a secret, well, you can tell everyone because someone would find out somehow anyway. Stalking? No problem - who could possibly expect to be walled off in this interconnected brave new world?

And that makes you superior, because you are "prepared to take personal responsibility for my statements". How grownup of you. Me, I'm banking it being too much trouble for the average idiot to track me down, and that those with the skills won't find much of use if they do. Between those 2, I find posting by pseudonym vastly preferred to letting a lazy hacker use some script kiddie tools to come pester me over some nonsense. And I like that the US government has to show a modicum of effort to go dragnet the internet, and hopefully some of the assholes involved feel guilty even if it's not that hard, that they've pressured the ISPs & telcos and other providers into cooperation. Anyway, viva anonymity, whether for Wikileaks, George Sands, Deep Throat, or your average blogger.

The proverbial ink, hasn?t

Resistance — Mon, 07 Jan 2013 21:25:03 +0000

In reply to I don't believe you found my

The proverbial ink, hasn’t even dried on your proposed agreement, to cease and desist.

Like you, I haven’t the time to deal with your BS.

Within days after the Sandy hook incident, I took a stand, to protect the Second Amendment, against hastily proposed gun legislation.

Fearing every step towards control, could lead to the slippery slope.

But it was clear I was in the minority at Dagblog, but whatever; I thought without reservation, it was a matter of; to each to their own opinion or expression of thought, in order to deliberate and sort things out.

Through a concerted effort by some, to purposely misconstrue my true intentions, one or more of the contributors here at Dagblog, tried to lay the blood, of those innocent children and teachers at my feet.

Someone made the comment, I don’t know if it were you, or someone else; implying, how would I like it, if it was me or my family who were to be massacred.

It’s one thing to disagree, on what should be done, but it is sinister, to suggest I was to blame.

So now you suggest how inconsequential I am and how easy it would be, for someone to find me.

It’s clear you gun control fanatics, want to stifle anyone, who disagrees with your goal.

What’s next, maybe I should take the hint from you, that I can be found and maybe some late night; I might be met by some folks in white sheets, threatening my family, because I’m to be considered a trouble maker?

Maybe someone, who was triggered to do violence, by the suggestion made at Dagblog, to blame me for the massacre and they begin the process in their twisted minds; “Yeah why don’t we hack the system and find out who it is, that’s causing us gun control fanatics, trouble. All because I dared, to speak up for a minority?

Reminding me of our beloved Martin Luther King, who was murdered; because he was considered a trouble maker?

I don't believe you found my

ocean-kat — Mon, 07 Jan 2013 20:02:33 +0000

In reply to Are you kidding? Ever hear of

I don't believe you found my comment intimidating. I think that's just your typical method of diverting the conversation away from the areas you can't logically sustain or defend. You don't want to discuss your ridiculous interpretation of the fourth amendment so you pretend I've made a threat.

If in fact you feel intimidated then you must admit that your interpretation of the Fourth Amendment is patently wrong and it offers no protection from anyone or any newspaper from publishing information in the public domain.

If this is not one of your ruses to avoid discussing the Fourth Amendment issue you raised and you truly felt threatened. I apologize. As I stated I personally would never dox anyone, especially you, Resistance, simply because I don't care about you. I come here for education and entertainment and you're just some inconsequential stranger to me. While its possible that I might become friendly with some people here, I've read enough of your posts to know that you will never be more than an inconsequential stranger to me.

I'm surprised in this day and age that you seem unaware that there is no anonymity on the internet. I think that's a good thing. People would not post the things they do if they felt they had to take personal responsibility for it. Unlike you when I post I accept and am prepared to take personal responsibility for my statements. While I use a screen name I've posted both my home address and my job on this site. That wasn't an accident, lack of awareness, or stupidity. I deliberately made myself vulnerable, made a deliberate hole that people can go through to easily find out my real name. One does not need to be a computer wiz or hacker. I use a screen name only to slow the process down. To find that information one must be a regular reader here or be willing to search all my comments. I am not an anonymous poster hiding behind a screen name.

Yet even without posting personal information no one here or anywhere on the internet is truly anonymous to a determined hacker. That's not a threat I'm making against every person posting here its simply a statement of factual reality.

Jolly has very kindly

erica20 — Thu, 03 Jan 2013 23:21:22 +0000

In reply to Why didn't you provide the

Jolly has very kindly provided the link; I apologize for not posting it.

Here it is again, for your convenience.

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_and_politics/crime/2012/12/gun_death_...

As you will see, it's a pretty simple tally, broken down by age and gender. The total number--yes, of gun deaths, not deaths for other reasons--was 409 when I last looked, and it appeared to include data up to/including Jan 1. Of those 409, six were children.

I did not and do not believe that posting the link would undermine my position.

I believe you are incorrect about Slate's position.

Regarding the statistics themselves, I can't say offhand whether gun deaths are increasing, but I do know they are increasing relative to other types of fatalities such as car accidents--an area in which we have made strides in safety. (A-Man has mentioned this, and I recently wrote a blog about it--please let me know if you would like links.)

I still would like to know what you suggest regarding reducing the number of gun fatalities. Thanks, but I am not likely to be impressed with further warnings about my, or anyone's, freedoms being eroded by changes to gun laws.

I know, honey, I know.

erica20 — Thu, 03 Jan 2013 23:03:08 +0000

In reply to That was more of a rhetorical

I know, honey, I know.

Res, you put the "absurd" in

jollyroger — Thu, 03 Jan 2013 22:36:54 +0000

In reply to What's next, to be displayed

Res, you put the "absurd" in reductio ad absurdum