#1 |
#2 |
#3 |
Paste this URL into an email or IM: |
Click here to send this debate via your default email application.
|
Click here to login and CreateDebate will send an email for you.
|
Where are you Republicans?
This is wrong
Side Score: 180
|
 |
No it's cool
Side Score: 109
|
|
Well as a Republican I'm certainly no Trump supporter but I'll grab the opportunity to condemn this disgraceful violence with both hands. Trump the 'rabble-rouser' incites his 'rent-a-mob' into violent, unjustified protests then tells them all to go home after they've 'wrecked the place'. ''The grand old Duke of New York, He had 10,000 men, He marched them up to the top of the hill, Then he marched them down again, When they were up they were up, And when they were down they were down, But when they were only half way up the were neither up or down''. Once again this latest episode by 'Trumpites' along with the previous violent demonstrations by those of their opposite numbers in the BLM and ANTIFA, has further shamed America. However, there COULD be a degree of hypocrisy in your post. I can't tell, but maybe you would confirm that you condemned the BLM and ANTIFA riots and will continue to do so. Violence must be openly and loudly denounced by all right thinking people regardless of their political persuasion. Side: This is wrong
2
points
I support protesting. I do NOT support riots. I do NOT support using act of terrorism to complain against a perceived slight. I do NOT care what side a person is on, when they resort to acts vandalism and rioting, they are wrong. Of course, but what is interesting is how much this all comes down to the way language is used. Language has become the battleground of ideology. If you agree with the ideology of the protesters it's a protest. If you don't then it's a riot. They are looting and burning. Destroying small businesses. Side: This is wrong
the overwhelming majority of protesters were peaceful and cooperative. they were not acting over a perceived slight either; they were acting over a perceived injustice. i think they're delusional, but i do believe that many of them genuinely believe that they were resisting sedition and preserving democracy. ironic that you call republicans on their hypocrisy while enacting ur own. fucking partisans... Side: No it's cool
Criminal proceedings should be taken against Trump he called on his people to riot and urged them on , he furiously deleted damaging Tweets on Twitter and is facing a ban also FB are considering banning him Ivanka also deleted her tweets When Trump became president the US lost a long standing respect at once , Trump has single handedly made the US into a laughing stock worldwide again ..... The American police are absolute wankers as they mostly stood by and did nothing until things got desperate , corruption follows Trump everywhere Side: This is wrong
1
point
He called the BLM protesters "thugs" but has shown nothing but support for the terrorists that act in his name. Double standards have become the bread and butter of the Republican Party. And in fairness I don't think Trump should be singled out for it because it goes back at least to Reagan. Reagan would happily refer to places like Nicaragua as terrorist states, while he simultaneously referred to places like Ecuador and Guatemala as "fledgling democracies", despite the fact the governments in those countries were using roving death squads which were kidnapping and "disappearing" dissidents in the dead of night. It all really came down to whether or not you were prepared to play ball with the United States. Side: This is wrong
america's extensive history of violent interventionism, the nation's relatively low quality of life standards, and its citizens' propensity for exaggerated self-importance have ensured that it is not well respected. much of the world hates america and much of the remainder thinks it's a bad joke with a nuclear punchline. but do carry on with your delusions of being respected. Side: No it's cool
america's extensive history of violent interventionism, the nation's relatively low quality of life standards, and its citizens' propensity for exaggerated self-importance have ensured that it is not well respected. much of the world hates america and much of the remainder thinks it's a bad joke with a nuclear punchline. but do carry on with your delusions of being respected. But I didn’t say they were mine you donkey I said the US was respected by governments (mostly) worldwide ......try and keep up Side: This is wrong
yes, you did say that. and then i provided multiple reasons to think that ur wrong. Yes none of them convincing , you should get a job in FOX news restating ur false beleif and then deluding urself into thinking ur ahead in this exchange Translation .... You really mean you don’t like being corrected you can go back to your obsession with gender debates now.....run along .... must be pleasant masturbation, tho, so i'll just leave u to it. Thank you that will leave you plenty of free time to work out “creative” ways of how to lure kiddies into the back of your van you perv Side: This is wrong
2
points
Trump is not a President, never has been! He's a mob leader, a spoiled brat capable of ANYTHING when he doesn't get his way! He has the nuclear codes and is not stable enough for that responsibility! The 25th Amendment SHOULD BE EVOKED IMMEDIATELY! Impeachment should be begun again! He should NEVER be allowed to hold public office again! His assets should be frozen and HE should pay the damages and court fees/investigation costs to bring his MOB to justice! This should include what is happening in state capitols also! Taxpayers should NOT be liable for his idiocy! This Lame Fuck Prsidnt (oops ... typo ;) should pay the price! (Likwise, his organization)! Side: This is wrong
I am not, and have never, been a Trump supporter. There are those who believe me to be conservative and would demand a condemnation. You people can fuck right the hell off, because I don't owe you that. I do however wish to state my condemnation because it needs to be said, not just by conservatives, but by anyone calling themselves an American. Yesterday saw without a doubt the worst and most apalling attack on democracy, American values and sacred institutions since 9/11. There are those who insist that it is time to remind our representatives of who they work for, and make them do their jobs. This is a sentiment I can understand and I will agree that there comes a point - one which we have not reached - where conducting such violence is our moral and patriotic duty. This is irrelevant, because that's not what yesterday was about. The riot yesterday was about delegitamizing an election. This election, I grant, was suspicious but we cannot topple the system based on suspicion. Repeatedly, complaints were brought before courts and were dismissed due to a lack of evidence. Cornerstones of civilization, from faith in election systems to being innocent until proven guilty and many points in between, were attacked. The actions of the president leading up to the events, while I can't call them illegal, were indisputably despicable and if he has any shame, and any respect for the office of the president of the United States, he will step aside and let Mike Pence finish the term. I can only be glad I didn't vote for him because I don't know how I would sleep at night, and further, I will not from this point forward associate with someone who condones this. Seeing the behavior of Donald Trump made me glad, for the first time, that Joe Biden won. And I still think that Biden's a cunt. I would like to add, at this point, that if you were praising BLM protests for the last year, billions of dollars in property damage and people killing people with impunity but have the fucking audacity to condemn this event now that the shoe is on the other foot as protests are turning into riots because people feel their government isn't listening to them: good. We should all be condemning this. Then shut the fuck up and fade into obscurity, because you're still a hypocrite. Likewise if you spent the last year shouting about sending in the National Guard, then quietly applaud this violence. I can only hope we all look at this event, look at ourselves, and ask how the fuck we ever got here. Then maybe start to come back from the edge. Side: This is wrong
Part of the BLM/ANTIFA riots included nightly attempts to break into the federal building in Oregon. This is exactly the same kind of gutter behavior as that, only more egregious in DC. I've heard it roundly condemned by almost everyone save for a couple politicians who made excuses (and nevermind Trump himself). I know some are claiming that ANTIFA instigated this from inside. If you believe that, then you should happily condemn it as easily as condemning ANTIFA directly. And if you don't believe it, you should happily condemn it as behavior we've come to expect from ANTIFA. Also, I hope this makes it very clear to everyone how ridiculous it sounds to call them "mostly peaceful" protests when they are riots or claim people who do it are just an idea. Side: This is wrong
1
point
Part of the BLM/ANTIFA riots included nightly attempts to break into the federal building in Oregon. Oh shut up you boring corporate shill factory. Include sources when you make claims otherwise they are just going to be ignored. The only related stories I could find were this one from December:- Which mentions neither BLM or Antifa. In fact if you look at the picture of them all waving American flags, then these were clearly right wing protesters. And this one from July:- https://www.portlandoregon.gov/police/ Again, a single incident (or at least a series of incidents at one event). Again, no mention of Antifa or BLM. And the story is straight from the police homepage. I just find you absurd, Amarel. Even if there were any credibility in the claims you make, and even if we could trust you enough so that we didn't need the source to check for ourselves, just yesterday you were here making excuses for the Republican violence at the Capitol building. You claimed it would be "denounced" by Republicans, thus trying to create distance between the violent elements and the rest of the party. But today you are here doing the exact opposite with left wing protesters. On the basis of some story you claim to have heard about a rogue group in Oregon, you've lumped all the members of two completely different social justice groups together, and tarred them all with the same brush. Your right wing bias and your double standards are so laughably overt, unashamed and unapologetic, that you cannot possibly be taken seriously by anybody with half an iota of intellect. Side: No it's cool
2
points
If you haven't heard Republican denunciations, you are trying not to What exactly is the point in denouncing violence which your own leader has incited? That just makes you look like a hypocrite. You supported the guy. You voted for the guy. You helped spread his message of hate and division. Now you're denouncing his violence? Really? Side: No it's cool
The President is the whole nations leader. It doesn't matter that I didn't vote him into office. LOL yet you keep defending him You'll notice the vast majority of this nation denounced the Capital riot, even though Trump is the nations leader. Except you who can see no crime there on Trumps part ....hows that work again 4 cock mouth ? Side: No it's cool
I already did. No you didn’t cock breath And since I don't owe you shit, Nice out ....keep running cock breath I'll just refer you to Twitter. You mean the place you refuse to look at Trumps deleted Tweets on? Run along you idiot when you can formulate a plausible defence of your god Trump get back to me Side: No it's cool
|
2
points
2
points
How about those Antifa and Black Liva Matter riots which have resulted in more murders and damages, than this? All violence is wrong If all violence is wrong then why are you sat on your stupid ass attacking Antifa and BLM when Trump supporters are storming the Capitol building armed with guns? Why aren't you busy condemning the violence which is actually going on, instead of trying to excuse it by deflecting to other, unrelated historical violence? Side: This is wrong
1
point
1
point
I am a Trump supporter not a Ttump worshipper You're an anti-abortionist Trump supporter who blames BLM and Antifa for a bunch of violent Trump nutters storming the Capitol building, and you simultaneously claim to be a "centrist" every third sentence. What is anybody supposed to do with that, Dana? Side: This is wrong
1
point
My veiws on abortion are none of your busuness, unless I speak them to you. I don't owe you anything, just like that unborn baby does not owe the mother, it/s life. I have done nothing wrong, will not apologize, and will never change my mind. Ate least I don't support butt fucking, like you, and other leftists. Sick! Side: This is wrong
1
point
1
point
Legal matters are often open to interpretation. As such, I could be persuaded that charges against Trump for incitement would hold up in court. I just couldn't be persuaded by the likes of you. A jackass ignoramus who comes here mostly to say what you heard from someone you mistook for smart. You then demand agreement with your chosen authority whose position you aren't even capable of repeating. When you make Nom appear tolerable by contrast, you need to bathe. It'll be a start. Side: No it's cool
Legal matters are sometimes open to interpretation. As such, I could be persuaded that charges against Trump for incitement would hold up in court. I just couldn't be persuaded by the likes of you. But I’m not trying to persuade you cock breath sadly that’s you trying to do what you claim I’m “trying” to do A jackass ignoramus who comes here mostly to say what you heard from someone you mistook for smart only to demand agreement with your chosen authority whose position you aren't even capable of repeating. Says the moron who posted up a You tube video to make a point only known to himself When you make Nom appear tolerable by contrast, you need to bathe. It'll be a start. Wonderful isn’t it a cocksucker like you who says “ I know things “ and repeats legal codes “ thinks it’s now an “authority “ on law 🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣 Side: This is wrong
You are quite a disgusting turd. This isn't anything to do with anything racial other than the fact that the dumbest bunch of idiots to walk the planet attacked our countries most precious citadel of Democracy and those pieces of shit were overwhelmingly white men. A traitorous mob of mostly super stupid white men stormed the United States Capital Building after being sent there by Donald Trump himself in an attempted coup. They were trying to overthrow the government and install Trump as a dictator. And that's it, that's what happened. Side: This is wrong
1
point
1
point
1
point
1
point
I will continut to talk about Antifa and Black Lives Matter, because they have also killed people. No they haven't. Stop lying you demented old bat. Anti-fascists linked to zero murders in the US in 25 years Side: This is wrong
1
point
0
points
1
point
We meaning some debaters, and the media, who tend to demand the someone be eithe a Democrat or a Republican So let me just get this straight dear. The media forced you to vote Republican this year? It was all their fault and had nothing to do with you visiting a polling station of your own free volition and voting for the Republican Party? I am a centrist Oh go away Dana. Side: This is wrong
1
point
1
point
You are twisting what I said again, and what I said did not imply that the media had anything to do, with my vote. I didn't twist anything. You tried to assume the moral high ground by blaming the media for promoting partisanship, without mentioning that you are extremely partisan yourself. That is misleading. Side: This is wrong
1
point
How about you address what's going on now instead of trying to smokescreen? Where is your outrage? If all you do is point the finger elsewhere then you are essentially saying this is ok. You haven't said one word against it until now yet if it HAD been BLM you would have gone crazy in the debate and yelled crap about Dems. Last I checked BLM and Antifa didn't break into the Capitol, but them good ol' boys waving the confederate flag sure did. Side: This is wrong
She's not going to answer it. If she actually did she'd either be lying or admitting that she supports acts of terrorism (but only if it's her side doing it). That's also why she's trying to bring up BLM and Antifa instead of commenting about the actual issue on point. Side: This is wrong
I’ve dealt robustly with her on DI where she kept whining about her “ rights “ being infringed , mods got sick of her and kicked her ass off site with a permanent ban logo on her name I’m great Mint as I hope you are I gave this place a miss for nearly a year now as Andy promised a tidy up but done nothing , I post on Debate Island most days as it has great moderation and excellent debate , this place is just the usual “you said “ ....”he said” political brawling and I only dropped in to torment one or two users out of sheer devilment Side: This is wrong
1
point
Yes Jody. What we need is more of this:- Jody on blacks:- Mingiwuwu: Are you surprised that I spotted who you were so well? Jody: Oh shut up you filthy nigger , dadman is a scaremongering troll and a religious nut , you're just a dirty little fat nigger with an attitude problem. Jody on motherhood:- Jody: Men get discriminated against because they don't get paid for maternity. Oh how we have missed your great pearls of wisdom Jody. Remind us all again: how do you feel about black people? Side: No it's cool
Great piece of creative writing there buddy ,funny how you a rabid racist and hate monger who attacks and bans everyone is now a victim ........bwahahahaha Also this from you who claimed ..... 1: two unemployed Russian “socialists “ invented a time machine 2: 9/11 was an “inside job “ because you bought a book from a former janitor at the World Trade Centre 3: Black rioters are entitled to riot on account of being former slaves 4 : Marx and Engels were “working class” despite having servants dining on fine cuisine , quaffing vintage wines and smoking Cuban cigars 5: Stalinism is a preferred system to capitalism Bwaaaaaaahahahahahaha Side: This is wrong
1
point
Have to say, Burrito said it best. "Why aren't you busy condemning the violence which is actually going on, instead of trying to excuse it by deflecting to other, unrelated historical violence?" If you really wanted to condemn the actions on Capitol hill, you would do so without spending so much time deflecting. I've already said I support protesting, everyone has a right to do that, I do not support when protesting turns to rioting, looting, and violent tactics. What happened this week is an attack on American democracy and was encouraged by Trump, a man who should be leading the people to be "great again", not encouraging them to acts of domestic terrorism. You are so stuck on BLM and Antifa you can't even wrap your head around that to comment. Beware false idols, if you still support that traitor in chief then nothing will open your eyes to the truth. Side: This is wrong
1
point
Ok let's take a look at the evidence. -You are not telling, the truth. I think innocent political Parties, do not exist. Also, if you support Antifa and Black Lives Matter, you are a hypocrite. Crime is crime regatdless of label, and the dick size contest needs to stop. -How about those Antifa and Black Liva Matter riots which have resulted in more murders and damages, than this? All violence is wrong, and we should stop looking for a label, when it happens. Hypocrite. If Antifa and Black Lives Matter can riot, so can everyone else. Are you discriminating based on political beliefs, ha ha? ;) -I am a Trump supporter not a Ttump worshipper as I belong to Yeshua, and I have nothing to do with Capital Hill. Regardless of ideology or Party, it is wrong, to agress upon the rights of another. And of course your debates: -I condemn the violence against the Capital, but let's be real. If you support leftist Marxist riots and violent crimes, against, people, animals, and property, but you condemn what happened at the Capital, you are an intellectually retarded hypocrite, and anyone with logica, what you to shit the fuck up, you mental, midget. -Leftist hypocrisy re Capital Holl vs Antifa and Black Lives Matter. ALL of that was said by you yet NONE of that only condemned the happenings at the moment ie. Trump supporters forcing their way into the capitol, acting like terrorists and Trump encouraging it. The few times you condemned the actions of Trumps party you immediately back peddled and deflected or tiptoed around actually saying those Trump supporters (terrorists) were wrong. You've spent more time pointing the finger at BLM and Antifa then you have those idiots. It's clear you favor those Trumpettes when you can't even step back and say "no, they are wrong, they aren't acting to make America great again and Trump needs to stop inciting these lunatics." The only thing I hear from you is a modified "But Obaaaaammmaaaaaaa" whine to excuse the bullshit happening here encouraged by the President you still support. Side: This is wrong
1
point
1
point
Luttle girl, you don't have the right to decide what labels I use, and yes I am a centrist. If you ran your fucking mouth to my face like that, I would beat you two faced feminist ass. I don't give a fuck what you think, and you need to go play with Legos, while the adults debate. Stay fay away from me. Side: No it's cool
1
point
Luttle girl, you don't have the right to decide what labels I use She's 100 percent right and countless people have made the mistake of patiently trying to explain to you why you are not a centrist. Using false labels can get you jailed for fraud in certain circumstances. Given how far right your views are it is simply ludicrous that you could ever believe you are in the political centre. Side: This is wrong
1
point
1
point
I don't care, it's my, desicision. My beliefs, my choice. Yes, if you want to purposefully misrepresent yourself then that is your choice. As I'm sure you've noticed, that choice leads to ridicule and nobody taking a word you say seriously. Go you. Don't be antichoice Says the one who wants to force women to have unwanted kids. Side: This is wrong
1
point
1
point
1
point
What about the god you worship ? Evil Bible Numbers 31:17 (Moses) “Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every women that hath known man by lying with him.” In other words: women that might be pregnant, which clearly is abortion for the fetus. Hosea 13:16 God promises to dash to pieces the infants of Samaria and the “their women with child shall be ripped up”. Once again this god kills the unborn, including their pregnant mothers. 2 Kings 15:16 God allows the pregnant women of Tappuah (aka Tiphsah) to be “ripped open”. And the Christians have the audacity to say god is pro-life. How and the hell is it that Christians can read passages where God allows pregnant women to be murdered, yet still claim abortion is wrong? Side: This is wrong
1
point
1
point
Mkay. First- If you think Lego's can't be enjoyable as an adult then you are so far removed from your childhood that I pity you. My kids love them and I rediscovered enjoyment with those damn caltrop blocks though the kiddos. (Side note: this is how seriously I take your blustering. I address Lego's first) Second- If I ran my mouth off to you, face to face, nothing would happen. If you want to claim to be an adult debating, then you need to act like an adult who is debating instead of trying to posture and act tough online. You can label yourself all you want, it doesn't mean you are right. Side: This is wrong
1
point
You should probably have a better grasp of the Spanish language before you try to speak in it. Unless you meant to say "Why you crazy in crazy kisses girl", what you probably MEANT to say was "loca en la cabeza." The feminine form of crazy in the head. Unless of course you have a really weird way of propositioning someone, in which case I'm not interested. Comprendes? Side: This is wrong
1
point
1
point
1
point
1
point
1
point
You don't have the right to judge me because I don;t anser to you, and I have done nothing wrong. I have every “right “ to judge you on your comments, if you did nothing wrong what makes this statement someone doing something right? Who fucked you in the ass, and called you, Charlie?. Side: This is wrong
1
point
I have done nothing wrong, So Jesus and god approve of you asking ...... “Who fucked you in the ass, and called you, Charlie?.” do not answer to to you, Yet here you are answering and will not discuss your troll question. So will god be a “troll “ when he asks you on judgement day why you said to a fellow human ......”Who fucked you in the ass, and called you, Charlie?.”” How will you answer god? Who fucked you in the ass, and called you, Charlie?. Side: This is wrong
1
point
1
point
1
point
I hope Yeshua ministers to your soul and mind and heart. You deserve Yeshua's Love no more or no less. Funny that last year you said you hated god and you were an atheist now you’re preaching to others and you’re not even a Christian Tell us what part of Christ’s teachings you follow again? Side: This is wrong
1
point
The past doesn't matter, the present and the future, in Yeshua. Yeshua said let He who is without sin, cast the fist stone, and accordding to Romans 3:23, all have sinned, and fall short, of the glory, of God. Yeshua calls all to repentance, and I have answered His call. Side: No it's cool
The past doesn't matter, So why do you keep whining about it and pretending you were raped .....in the past ? the present and the future, in Yeshua. Yeshua said let He who is without sin, cast the fist stone, and accordding to Romans 3:23, all have sinned, and fall short, of the glory, of God. Yeshua calls all to repentance, and I have answered His cal You said “I hate god “ last year ......he won’t forget you said that fatty Side: This is wrong
1
point
I talk about the absolute fact the I was raped, to give a voive to other survivors. A “voive” right , yet you spend your time spewing hate online I went to Yeshua, and repented. That's all you have to do, sweetheart. Yeshua, is Faithfai. You said you hate him and you’re a compulsive liar and a fantasist which is why you got your lard ass banned on DI Side: This is wrong
1
point
1
point
Whatever you say Ma'am, I’m still male but hey that’s another reason you need to change your meds here's your Estroven for your menopause. ??? ......” I was raped” .....snicker .....”I hate god “ chuckle .......”I’m gonna shoot you “ .....Bwaaaaaaahahahahahaha Side: This is wrong
1
point
1
point
I talk about the absolute fact the I was raped You have to prove something is an absolute fact before expecting other people to believe it. That's how it works. You don't get to stand in the dock at court and talk about "the absolute fact I did not murder that man", and expect to be taken at your word. Especially when you have a history of making false rape allegations and false sexual harassment allegations. Side: This is wrong
1
point
1
point
No I don't. I don't have to prove to you, that I was raped. Yes you do. If you want other people to accept this "absolute fact" in conversations, which is what you are repeatedly trying to force other people to do, then you need to prove it is an absolute fact. Understand? Stop calling it an "absolute fact" because you have not proved it to be such. See how easy that is? Side: This is wrong
1
point
1
point
1
point
1
point
You don't have the right to slander, me. Oh just fuck off Dana. It's like talking to a six year old. You don't have the right to dictate reality to other people and demand that no-one questions the claims you make. You don't get to decide what is and what isn't an "absolute fact", just like you don't have the right to decide what my reasons are for banning you from my debates. You are an impossibly selfish, absolute monster of a person mate. It is overwhelmingly evident from a mere 5 minutes of conversation with you that you do not give a single fuck about anybody else on the planet. Side: This is wrong
1
point
You've spent more time pointing the finger at BLM and Antifa then you have those idiots. That's the right wing all over. They greatly exaggerate and frequently entirely misattribute violence to left wing organisations, then when you shove the data up their noses proving it is the right wing committing the vast majority of the violence, they call you a hypocrite because you don't give equal value to both sides of a data set which are not equal. This time last year Bronto was blasting Antifa for supposed violence, and the best story he had was that a Conservative troll, who had gone there deliberately to provoke them, had a milkshake thrown at him by someone in the crowd. It was ridiculous. Side: This is wrong
1
point
1
point
1
point
God has caught you in yours, and I have not lied, bitch.................................. Did he catch me , he never told me or texted me so how do you know he “caught me” ? Is this a Paulist thing where he tells you but not me? Your first name is liar ......how do you feel about saying you hated god last year? You’re gonna have to suck Satans flame encased dick for that one bitch Side: This is wrong
1
point
1
point
1
point
1
point
Or don't believe in delusional sociopaths like Charles Darwin. Atheism, is a delusion. Charles Darwin hasn't got anything to do with atheism you seriously unwell girl. And your claim that he was a delusional psychopath is based on what exactly? That he pioneered an extremely successful scientific theory which is inconvenient for your batshit mad religion which is stuffed full of paedophiles and has killed more people than the plague? Side: This is wrong
1
point
I'll just leave this here for you. The identification of Jesus with any number of individuals named Yeshu has numerous problems, as most of the individuals are said to have lived in time periods far detached from that of Jesus; Yeshu the sorcerer is noted for being executed by the Hasmonean government which lost legal authority in 63 BC, Yeshu the student is described being among the Pharisees who returned to Israel from Egypt in 74 BC, and Yeshu ben Pandera/ben Stada's stepfather is noted as speaking with Rabbi Akiva shortly before the rabbi's execution, an event which occurred in c. 134 AD. Side: This is wrong
1
point
1
point
1
point
1
point
Yeshua has brought me a lot of joy lately, Yet you hate him .......interesting and can you go in the kitchen, make me a sandwitch, and bring me, a Diet Coke? The podcast starts in 5 minutes. Can Jesus not do it ? What’s the podcast “ how to be a pretend Christian “ ? Side: This is wrong
1
point
2
points
1
point
1
point
You are a liar. After I repented, What were you repenting for fatty if I lied? I stopped doing it. You lie like Bill Clinton Why Clinton ? As he is a liar why not Trump fatty ? Oh we know why if Trump was caught raping a woman idiots like you would applaud and claim “ he was only showing her love” No I did not, sleep with her. What the fuck are you ranting about tubby? Side: This is wrong
What is this Paulist you are talking about? I forgot where you live in Bumfuck all education starts and ends with the local pedo preacher In your end of days cult you do not even have a rudimentary comprehension of the religion you claim to follow. You and other so called christians do not follow the law as Jesus did I bet you don’t know how many laws you do not follow? You follow st Pauls reinterpretation of the law which is in direct opposition to what Jesus said regards the law One Lord died for my sins, and rose from the dead, and His Name, is Yeshua. Did he indeed? Yet you said you hated him last last year , that’s so you isn’t it? Yeshua is God and Lord Almighty in Human Flesh, and He loves you. He loves you absolutely and nothing you can do, can stop Him. Well yes he loves me but yet he commanded his people slaughter men , women and infants and to take the infants and dash their heads against rocks ......the power of “Paulist “ love ......lol Side: This is wrong
1
point
You were born in Bumfuck Egypt, Says the fatty who was caught whining “I was raped “ on DI .......fantasy island and you don't know anything about religion. Which is strange coming from a Paulist who said last year “ I hate god” ......ROFLMAO I suggest psychiatric medications for your mental heal issues, and hormonal treatment, for your menopause I’m still not a girl and it’s great I get a non Christian who pretended to be raped to get a sympathy vote advising me on meds LOL .You go, girl! “I hate god “ says miss “ I got raped” ........LOL Side: This is wrong
1
point
On;y a prorape supporter of rape culture, would ever make such Satanic comments about me as a rape surivor. But you’re not one you’re a tub of lard and a fantasist which is why you got your jelly ass kicked of DI. You are also slandering me about Yeshua, Actually you slandered Jesus and said you hated god I’m afraid you will have to accept Satans fiery member up your ass for that one and I will troll you. I love that , I’m pretty good at it ........Imagine Jesus saying “ I’m going to troll you” .....bet you won’t mention that to the preacher tomorrow when you’re pretending to be a good Paulist Side: This is wrong
1
point
K was my request the deleted my Debate Ilsland account. I want nothing to do with a site that allows that Dee bitch to lie and call the one person a child molester and me a racist, and I would be banned, for calling her DeeFuckADiddleDingDong, so I left. I f this Dee bitch wants to roll with the big dogs, she better play the fucking game. Side: No it's cool
K was my request the deleted my Debate Ilsland account No it wasn’t you liar you got repeated warnings and went mental in your posts we all laughed and mods stepped in and firmly said “ remove the mad tub of lard “ . I want nothing to do with a site that allows that Dee bitch to lie and call the one person a child molester and me a racist, Yet your buddy was removed and is now back behind bars but you supported him ....like wow! You are a racist you said you hated Jesus .....you do know Jesus was not a white Republican......right? and I would be banned, for calling her DeeFuckADiddleDingDong, so I left. I f this Dee bitch wants to roll with the big dogs, she better play the fucking game. I agree you are a big dog a very big one ....Bwaaaaaaahahahahahaha Side: This is wrong
1
point
I see you never stop whining about getting banned on debates by other cowards but have no hassle doing it yourself you idotic creature So in response to your rant on your "end of days" video where you ranted Congratulations, on fulfilling, Bibble prophecy. “Bibble” LOL Babble is a better fit fatty Right so the bible "predicted" a mentally unwell bible basher would ban me from debate LOL if you have a proplem with ideas, stay off the internet, and take your meds. "Ideas" that what you call an insane wanker talking about " end of days ,regards " meds" you're the one who got kicked off DI afterseveral psychotic episodes where you admitted you forgot to take your meds I am trying to convert people, because Yeshua saved my life so many times, and I love Him If people wanted to here your preaching they would ask ask for it you fat mental cow . I have the right to religious liberty and free speech, and have done nothing wrong. Toodles. I have the right to tell you to fuck your self sideways fatty ,remember the time during one of your weekly "episodes" where you said you hate Jesus and supported abortion .......you change positions weekly just like you do every night when you're getting your ass pounded by the local drunks for loose change 5hrs ago Side: This is wrong
1
point
Disrespecting the Bible is hate speech, No it’s not you fat pig , read your constitution fatty and I would love for you to prove, you are this much of a vi;e bitch, to any other person of faith. You’re not a “Christian “ four eyes , you said last year you hated god ...... for that crime Satan will have to give you his fiery dick up your aching ass Keep up the mega bitch rouitine, and you will be olld and alone'. Excellent all good so ......how are you doing with that “christian “ group you hang out with ? Are you still living life in the “fast lane “ as you play “pin the tail on the donkey “ every Sunday? Side: This is wrong
1
point
Yes I am a Christian, You’re not at best you’re a paulist and you don't have the right to tell me, I am not a Christian. I do , I have the right to do as I wish fatty you’re not a “Christian “ you’re a tub of lard masquerading as a Christian My soul, is none of your business. Inti majnoun! Your “soul” Bwaaaaaaahahahahahaha ......what’s your soul weigh is it a fatty like you Your sentence finished with gibberish I guess the meds are kicking in .....I’m right ain’t I ? Side: This is wrong
1
point
1
point
1
point
Only I, have the right to deicide what I belive But what you don't have the right to do is what you are actually doing, which is misrepresenting your beliefs as something they are not. If you ignore the teachings of Jesus Christ then you are not a Christian and it is as simple as that. Side: This is wrong
1
point
1
point
1
point
1
point
A week ago you argued that Catholics aren't Christians. Guess what? Catholics believe in Yeshua too. Are you pissed because you have no ass, and you can't get laid, you bloody wanker? Lol. Dana, you're a 40 year old virgin. You're a 40 year old virgin who simultaneously claims to have been raped. Twice!!!! It's lucky neither of those incidents led to pregnancy otherwise you'd be telling us all about the miracle of the virgin birth and hailing your poor son as the new messiah. Side: This is wrong
1
point
1
point
1
point
You don'Tt have the right to tell me to fuck myself I suggested you do so from a sideways angle , sorry I made the concept to difficult for your melon head to comprehend , unless, I have the right, to tell you, that all you have been doing, is fucking yourself. I grant you that “right “ fatty ......I enjoy fucking myself sideways fatty so your point is ? Side: This is wrong
1
point
1
point
1
point
1
point
Damn, at least I try. No you don't. You have convinced yourself you are the only person in the world with rights; you don't listen to reason; you don't listen to encyclopaedias or scientific journals; you don't even listen to Jesus, despite insisting you are a Christian and spending 16 hours of every day writing about him. You Dana, are as thick as an ox and as stubborn as a mule. Side: This is wrong
1
point
1
point
1
point
1
point
1
point
1
point
1
point
1
point
1
point
1
point
1
point
1
point
1
point
Nom deleted that other debate where I was kicking your ass again. Following is what I posted that he deleted: You don't even have the right crime genius. For sedition you need to prove conspiracy. Namely that Trump got together with at least one other person to"conspire to overthrow, put down, or to destroy by force the Government of the United States" 18 US Code 2384. You want 18 US Code 373. That's the law concerning Solicitation to commit a violent crime, or incitement. Try posting what Trump said to break 18 US Code 373, rather than arguing that someone said that he said something in Twitter. I'm sure someone said that Trump said something or other Jody. Good job. Side: No it's cool
2
points
Nom deleted that other debate where I was kicking your ass again. I did no such thing. Obviously that wasn't my debate to begin with, because if it were I'd have banned you the same as I usually do, for being a sneering right wing shill. Mere hours ago I was replying to one of your posts where you lambasted Jody for being "too lazy" to prove his allegations. Quite the U-Turn, hey mate? Side: This is wrong
1
point
2
points
In have no problem admitting when I'm wrong. You just think I'm wrong more than I do. I admitted when I misread that data table and if I would have insulted you based on my misreading I would have apologized. Incidentally, did you read my post about the legal standard for impeachment being less than for criminal conviction? Or was that deleted? Side: This is wrong
It makes sense to impeach him for that. Unlike criminal prosecution, there's literally no legal standard for impeachment. They don't have to meet the legal definition. And if they just him, and even if they charge him, they won't criminally convict him. Oh, and I never actually said "I know things". I said that not knowing things is what you do. This is another example of that. Side: No it's cool
It makes sense to impeach him for that. Unlike criminal prosecution, there's literally no legal standard for impeachment. They don't have to meet the legal definition. And if they just him, and even if they charge him, they won't criminally convict him. Amarel the man who knows the future , every one of your “arguments” relies on two tactics....... 1: ask people for sources regarding their contentions then when provided with such stating “there you go another appeal to authority “ 2: Stating emphatically how future events will pan out and nearly always wrong , your subjective opinions are just that and mostly based on your avoidance of facts Oh, and I never actually said "I know things". I said that not knowing things is what you do. But not knowing things means I know things as in how to avoid knowing things about the subjects I’m deliberately avoiding knowing things about Yet another baseless opinion which is why people like you only ever appear debating here as your stupidity would be exposed elsewhere where actual debate takes place ( ask you buddy Jace) this place is only a vehicle for you to attempt to praise people like Trump for evading the law as it somehow demonstrates to idiots like you that this means “we have the best legal system in the world” Most likely you delighted there were deaths during the riot as it gave you an excellent way to form an argument of how Trump could not be blamed in any way , shape or form because he’s wealthy and powerful and it just wouldn’t be fair This is another example of that. No it’s another example how a raging egotist like you thinks his bull shit is fact what’s even more laughable is it’s based on “your opinions “ which are based on interpretations from FOX and You Tube videos 🤔 Side: This is wrong
Nom deleted that other debate where I was kicking your ass again Your denial of facts and reliance on FOX and You Tube to make a case demonstrate how desperate you are ......What’s that “ bullshit” you claimed Trump spouted during the riot that you refuse to mention? That’s right legal experts in the US don’t know what sedition means also your ignorance of the laws of your own country is staggering Trump violated an oath to protect the constitution Trump and his traitors were advocating martial law , National emergency and paramilitarism It’s getting boring kicking you up and down the site and I suggest you get a copy of American law for dummies instead or relying on FOX news take on the matter .....can you do that ? Side: This is wrong
What’s that “ bullshit” you claimed Trump spouted during the riot that you refuse to mention? Still hoping I'll post the words necessary to make your argument for you! Lazy little bitch. His rhetoric was typically bad Trump rhetoric. That doesnt make it illegal. And the fact that's it's legal doesn't make it good or ok. Simple stuff here Jo. Post any given Trump quote and I'll tell you why it's not in breach of the law in question. I suggest you get a copy of American law for dummies I literally just referenced the law to demonstrate that your ignorance is only surpassed by your confidence in it. Side: No it's cool
Hey cock breath you still whining like a banshee? Here is a definition of the term you don’t understand...... sedition /sɪˈdɪʃ(ə)n/ noun noun: sedition; plural noun: seditions conduct or speech inciting people to rebel against the authority of a state or monarch. Similar: incitement (to riot/rebellion) agitation Do your party piece again and tell us the code of the term you don’t understand Side: This is wrong
2
points
Legal code includes legal definitions. I just know you want to cite the code for the term you don’t understand ......again I don't blame you for not knowing that since not knowing things is what you do. Funny that from a guy like you who doesn’t know the law of his own country but knows how much dick he has to suck to make rent ...... Amarel knows “things” ......🤣🤣🤣🤔 Side: This is wrong
1
point
2
points
1
point
No-one gets killed at the anti-fascist violence Multiple people were shot, and some killed, at the CHOP in Seattle, Washington. It was a left wing event in a left wing city. https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.bbc. Side: No it's cool
1
point
Multiple people were shot, and some killed, at the CHOP in Seattle, Washington. It was a left wing event in a left wing city And who would possibly shoot left wing protesters at a left wing event? Gee, let me think now... “Two African American men are dead, at a place where they claim to be working for Black Lives Matter. But they’re gone, they’re dead now,” Seattle police Chief Carmen Best said last week after the most recent killing. “Enough is enough.” You left that part out didn't you buddy? That the victims were black people working for BLM. Side: This is wrong
2
points
Not sure exactly what your point is. Leftists shot leftists in a left wing CHOP in a city that is 99.99% Left. You don't count black leftists being killed by leftists as leftists killing leftists? The story you posted says the CHOP has become so violent and deadly that the people are getting concerned about its existence. Side: No it's cool
The Small Arms Survey stated that U.S. civilians alone account for 393 million (about 46 percent) of the worldwide total of civilian held firearms. Only a fucking idiot like you using Amarel speak could argue 393 million guns in a society is what qualifies as a peaceful society Side: This is wrong
So you’re arguing about what exactly percentages which are based on flawed metrics ? AUR The exact number of U.S. gun owners is unclear due to the fact that there is no federal registration requirement or similar regulation that would enable an official count. In fact, federal law prohibits a central registry of firearms owned by private citizens. About 40% of Americans say they or someone in their household owns a gun, and 22% of individuals (about 72 million people) report owning a gun, according to surveys from Pew and Harvard and Northeastern. This figure has declined over time, down from 51% of gun-owning households in 1978. Gun purchases, however, have hit historic highs in recent years and during the COVID-19 pandemic. Americans also own a disproportionate share of the world’s firearms: The U.S. has just 4% of the world’s population but owns about 40% of civilian-owned guns globally, according to a 2018 report from the Switzerland-based Small Arms Survey. The SAS estimates that American civilians own 393 million guns, ranking the U.S. number one in firearms per capita. And there are costs associated with these high levels of gun ownership: Researchers at Harvard have found that across developed nations, this widespread ownership of firearms is associated with higher rates of gun homicides. Side: This is wrong
1
point
The gun violence in america doesn't justify the statement that in america we all need to own a gun to feel safe in our homes. Most homes don't have a firearm. Our violence is a cultural problem. Bringing a gun into my home did not make my home more violent. Side: No it's cool
The gun violence in america doesn't justify the statement that in america we all need to own a gun to feel safe in our homes. I’m afraid your favourite site for stats PEW disagrees with your assertions , if you want to resort to your usual pedantry let’s say the majority as PEW cites protection as the top reason at 67 per cent Most homes don't have a firearm. That’s an unfounded assertion and is purely your subjective opinion Our violence is a cultural Rather you’re from a culture of violence and a nation that glorifies it Bringing a gun into my home did not make my home more violent. That’s what you say how do you prove that ? Your statement is nonsense how do you know how many homes don’t become more violent with guns in them? Side: This is wrong
the majority as PEW cites protection as the top reason at 67 per cent Right, I carry mine because safety cannot be assured outside my home. You carry a gun for safety, you lock it up at home where it's safe. Most gun owners don't need a gun to feel safe in their home. That’s an unfounded assertion and is purely your subjective opinion It's supported by survey data, which is the best we can get on the topic. Rather you’re from a culture of violence and a nation that glorifies it There's more to it then that, but sure. Violence is a person problem. Inanimate objects don't create that problem. That’s what you say how do you prove that ? Your statement is nonsense how do you know how many homes don’t become more violent with guns in them? Do you have kitchen knives? Do they make you feel "stabby"? Side: No it's cool
Right , I carry mind because safety cannot be assured outside my home. Yes most Americans don’t feel safe outside their home as well as inside You carry a gun for safety, you lock it up at home where it's safe. Maybe look up gun accidents in the home? Most gun owners don't need a gun to feel safe in their home. Again that’s simply not true It's supported by survey data, which is the best we can get on the topic. The “best” does not in any way mean the most accurate and your “most “ is nonsense Here is what you ignored from earlier ..... The exact number of U.S. gun owners is unclear due to the fact that there is no federal registration requirement or similar regulation that would enable an official count. In fact, federal law prohibits a central registry of firearms owned by private citizens. There's more to it then that, but sure. Violence is a person problem. Inanimate objects don't create that problem. So if it’s a “person problem “ why not have a gun free society ? Do you have kitchen knives? Do they make you feel "stabby"? Oh here we go with the first step in that much loved American argument next step being “ a gun is actually a tool etc , etc” A kitchen knife is not designed to make one feel “stabby ” but a gun is designed to kill you just admitted you need one outside your home to feel safe Do you ever tire of making fallacious arguments? Side: This is wrong
Yes most Americans don’t feel safe outside their home as well as inside Baseless. Maybe look up gun accidents in the home? Most gun owners lock up. Gun accidents notwithstanding. Again that’s simply not true Of course it is. Carrying a personal defense tool does not imply you are afraid without it. My wife carries mace. She's not afraid when she forgets it. So if it’s a “person problem “ why not have a gun free society ? Because we don't want one. It's a person problem that isn't a problem for most gun owners. We also have a alcoholics. But it's not a problem for most drinkers, and we don't want a beer free society. a gun is designed to kill So what? Martial arts are designed to help you effectively strike people....oh boy, doni have to defend martial arts next? you just admitted you need one outside your home to feel safe Safety cannot be assured outside the home, but I left my gun at home today and did not feel unsafe. I was simply less of a potential asset to those around me. Side: No it's cool
Baseless. Protection number one reason for having one so your charge is invalid Most gun owners lock up. Gun accidents notwithstanding. Did you even bother looking up gun accidents in the home Of course it is. Carrying a personal defense tool does not imply you are afraid without it. A “tool “ 🤣 Ok you feel unsafe without it as you’ve admitted My wife carries mace. She's not afraid when she forgets it. Why does she carry it then ? Is it not to feel safe ? Christ what a country dad carry’s a gun mum carries mace what about the kids knuckle dusters? It’s truly tragic Americans see this as a norm Because we don't want one. It's a person problem that isn't a problem for most gun owners. Yes we’ve agreed on this your society is very violent , here now is the part where most Americans start arguing the opposite as in they live in a very peaceful society We also have a alcoholics. But it's not a problem for most drinkers, and we don't want a beer free society. Why would you ? Drinking your fill of beer normally doesn’t kill you it’s mostly pleasurable So what? Martial arts are designed to help you effectively strike people....oh boy, doni have to defend martial arts next? Yes and gun owners training is designed to teach you to kill You do not have to defend anything you don’t wish to Safety cannot be assured outside the home, but I left my gun at home today and did not feel unsafe. Wonder if you would say that depending on the time of day /night / area you were in ? I was simply less of a potential asset to those around me. And you realised it your wife still had here mace though and probably checked and asked “have you got your gun” Must be terrible going out for a day , house keys , phone , car keys , oh and gun Side: This is wrong
Did you even bother looking up gun accidents in the home Yeah Ok you feel unsafe without it as you’ve admitted No I don't. I've never said that. But you comprehend very poorly. I don't buckle up because I'm afraid of a car accident. I don't actually expect a car accident. Furthermore, I don't see protective gun use as a an avenue of defending only ones self. here now is the part where most Americans start arguing the opposite as in they live in a very peaceful society How do you argue that most Americans argue that they are perfectly safe and also argue that most Americans don't feel safe? If they argue that, it's because they personally live in a safe place. Many gun owners are rural while most crime is urban. So rural gun nuts have a bunch of gun owning neighbors and they all feel perfectly safe because they are are perfectly safe with or without the guns. Why would you ? Drinking your fill of beer normally doesn’t kill you it’s mostly pleasurable Owning and shooting a gun is mostly pleasurable. Wonder if you would say that depending on the time of day /night / area you were in ? Area makes a difference. But not too much of one. Must be terrible going out for a day , house keys , phone , car keys , oh and gun You don't carry a wallet? Side: No it's cool
Yeah PEW is only your friend when it suits you No I don't. I've never said that. But you comprehend very poorly. I comprehend perfectly you carry to feel safe and protect your family as you also admitted .....the wife has back up just in case I don't buckle up because I'm afraid of a car accident. I don't actually expect a car accident Another dreadful analogy , you see the difference is you do carry to protect you and your family as you admitted but now are denying . Furthermore, I don't see protective gun use as a an avenue of defending only ones self. No it’s to protect your vulnerable family as well as you admit How do you argue that most Americans argue that they are perfectly safe and also argue that most Americans don't feel safe? But that’s exactly the road you’re going now If they argue that, it's because they personally live in a safe place. Many gun owners are rural while most crime is urban. So rural gun nuts have a bunch of gun owning neighbors and they all feel perfectly safe because they are are perfectly safe with or without the guns. You’re making no sense at all another poor attempt at deflection Owning and shooting a gun is mostly pleasurable. “Mostly” yes Americans get pleasure from shooting guns we know this stats confirm that Area makes a difference. But not too much of one. Says he as he takes a late night walk in certain areas You don't carry a wallet? See that forgot my wallet bet you don’t forget your gun ......or remind the missus “get your mace , just in case “ ....... Side: This is wrong
Accidental gun death stats are not a problem, I just won't do your research for you. I didn't say anything about protecting my family. We almost never go out at the same time. Taking precautions does not imply fear without said precautions. Your position that most Americans don't feel safe was contradicted by your assertion that most Americans will argue that they live in a peaceful society. I walk in all kinds of places at various times of day and night. Usually I have a gun, but not always. In neither case am I particularly afraid. As for the mace. I don't know if she still has it. She may take it or leave it, but she would never say it's a bad idea. She also has her conceal carry permit, though she very rarely carries. Side: No it's cool
That was your research to do. No , I just won’t do your research for you as that was your research to do It’s amazing how you come up these “rules “ that always somehow exempt you , bit like you prefer people with money and power also to be exempt from the law they want applied to others I settled for Nom providing some of Trump's statements for you. Still no one has quoted his relevant tweets here. Incidentally I actually did the research you refused to maybe you could get your buddy Jace to assist you if he’s not busy working on gender issues ....”again” BTW I posted one of the reasons why Trump should be charged and even the legal code of said charge , but as you keep saying the law shouldn’t apply to Trump Side: This is wrong
Accidental gun death stats are not a problem, I know life is cheap I just won't do your research for you. I’m well aware of the stats all this is deflection on your part I didn't say anything about protecting my family. We almost never go out at the same time. No , you used typical Amarel speak as in “ I’m more of an asset with a gun” Taking precautions does not imply fear without said precautions. Fear will depend on time , area etc , etc in the US again as you conceded Your position that most Americans don't feel safe was contradicted by your assertion that most Americans will argue that they live in a peaceful society. That’s not my “position “ I said it’s a typical position by gun nuts as in they need a gun for protection but then don’t , you’re doing that very dance I walk in all kinds of places at various times of day and night. Usually I have a gun, but not always. In neither case am I particularly afraid. You do not seem to acknowledge how ridiculous that sounds to people who live in civilised societies As for the mace. I don't know if she still has it. She may take it or leave it, but she would never say it's a bad idea. See that more Amarel speak why not just say “she thinks it’s a good idea” ? She also has her conceal carry permit, though she very rarely carries. That probably worries you a lot Side: This is wrong
It's not that life is cheap. It's just that in 2018, accidental gun deaths are near the very bottom of the list of accidesntal deaths according to the CDC. Before you bitch and moan about links and sources, the accidental death argument is yours, not mine. I am more of an asset with a gun if a circumstance arises requiring a gun. Not specifically to my family, but to anyone in the area that requires a gun. Sure, fear may exist in certain locations. That's independent of the carrying of a gun. If it's the position of gun nuts that they need it for protection, but it is also the position of gun nuts that they live in a safe society, then gun nuts must believe they need a gun for protection in a safe society. If they believe that, then they don't feel unsafe, regardless of the desire for protection. I don't live where you do, so I don't know why it sounds ridiculous to you that I am not particularly afraid of my mostly peaceful environment whether I carry or not. We all now know how mostly peaceful things can be. My wife has the ability to carry for practical legal reasons. I don't care that she rarely carries since the few occasions she does are mostly for convenience. (Transport laws and whatnot) Side: No it's cool
1
point
I am more of an asset with a gun if a circumstance arises requiring a gun. Not specifically to my family, but to anyone in the area that requires a gun. Amarel, your language is just fucking ridiculous. Asset? You are more of a threat with a gun. People are more likely to shoot you. You are more likely to shoot other people. How can any situation "require" a gun if guns have only existed for 500 or so years out of a history comprised of some 200,000 years? You are someone who is completely dependent upon the abuse of language in order to make any form of argument. Side: This is wrong
Asset? You are more of a threat with a gun. People are more likely to shoot you. You are more likely to shoot other people. My gun is carried concealed. At the outset of most conceivable situations of this sort, I would be no more likely than any other person walking around. If/after it is known that I have a gun, sure. I would be more likely to get shot. So I agree. Overall I am more likely to get shot, I am more of a threat to those who I would be inclined to shoot, and of course with a gun I am more likely to shoot someone than if I don't have one. None of those point, which I concede, would make me less of an asset. Myself and others are still better of with me having a gun than with me not having a gun. There are situations where lethal threats need to be stopped, and lethal force of a gun is the most effective way to do it. In those situations, it's best if someone has one. Have you ever been in a situation that required money? A car? A computer? A cell phone? How long something has been around doesn't change it's hypothetical necessity now. Especially with weapons, the proper use of which depends on the other weapons at play. Side: No it's cool
It's not that life is cheap To me it’s not you’re correct , to you life is very cheap as you again brush it off . It's just that in 2018, accidental gun deaths are near the very bottom of the list of accidesntal deaths according to the CDC. Government warning ⚠️ ⛔️ incoming Amarel - speak put on your bullshit filters ...... Typical piece of Amarel -speak lets talk gun accidents .... yet there are on average 40,000 gun deaths through accident and 84,000 gun injuries yearly (CDC) Do the addition I’m “glad “you see such figures as of no consequence Before you bitch and moan about links and sources, the accidental death argument is yours, not mine. I’m bitching and moaning about nothing just pointing out yet again you cannot even be honest with stats and still ask me to do independent research yet demand links and data when from me in your hypocrisy you have consistency anyway I am more of an asset with a gun if a circumstance arises requiring a gun. That’s 21 times now you’ve told me you feel safer with a gun I get I concede you live in a violent society Not specifically to my family, but to anyone in the area that requires a gun. Ahh right you’re a protector of the general public at large as well as yourself and your family , you’re an “asset “to society in general ..... How does one greet you “ thank you for your service” ? Sure, fear may exist in certain locations. That's independent of the carrying of a gun. But you carry the gun in all locations so all your journeys a gun is mostly party to as you’re dependent on it If it's the position of gun nuts that they need it for protection, but it is also the position of gun nuts that they live in a safe society, then gun nuts must believe they need a gun for protection in a safe society. Gun nuts always cite government tyranny as high on the list and live in total fear of such as recent times showed when Covid first hit America and they were told to wear masks all over FB Twitter it kicked off post after post of “ you won’t gag us freedom of speech , they wanna take our guns “ all this with photos of mask free idiots carrying guns and not wearing masks going on marches Europeans watch American news flashes in astonishment at the sheer lunacy of Americans and the tragedy is most try to normalize it Side: This is wrong
According to the CDC, there were 454 unintentional gun deaths in 2018. 486 in 2017. It's the cause of nearly the fewest accidental deaths. Would it bother you if where I live people thank me? So gun nuts cite fear of a the government turning tyrannical (not according to Pew polls), but claim they live in a peaceful society. That still cuts against your initial assertion that they need a gun to feel safe in their home. Side: No it's cool
It's the cause of nearly the fewest accidental deaths. Take gun deaths including accidents and suicides hows that work for you? I’ve corrected you twice on this Would it bother you if where I live people thank me? It wouldn’t actually as you live in a very violent society where you are reliant on guns for protection So gun nuts cite fear of a the government turning tyrannical (not according to Pew polls) but claim they live in a peaceful society. That still cuts against your initial assertion that they need a gun to feel safe in their home. It’s still not “my assertion “ it’s the average Americans where they hold two conflicting positions , yet you keep ignoring what I’m saying and repeating what you think I said , not very convincingly either Side: This is wrong
Last time we went round about this you denied that the CDC was a credible source. When you finally came around to acceptance, you denied that thier data visualization app called WISQARS was actually the CDC. Should I expect more of the same this time around? Side: This is wrong
I haven’t a clue what you’re bullshitting about but your constant denial and ignoring of data that doesn’t suit from your favourite site PEW is typical , I’m not the only one to call you on this Burrito has done so also . You as predicted admit you carry outside to feel safe and protect your family then spend 6 posts denying such as is the same old American song and dance every time Ask an American “why do you carry a gun” number reason is home protection , when asked “do you not feel safe at home “ normal response is “ I feel perfectly safe we live in one of the safest societies in the world.” etc ,etc I guess it’s an “American thing “ Side: This is wrong
My preferred source is the CDC. It's easy and accessable. I didn't say anything about protecting my family. I don't know why you keep saying that. I said without a gun I am less of an asset to others. Owning a gun for protection and feeling perfectly safe are not a contradiction. Furthermore, your admission that this is your experience of Americans makes my point that Americans do not need to own guns to feel safe. They simply feel safe and own a lot of guns. Side: No it's cool
2
points
I said without a gun I am less of an asset to others. Ahahaha! Here we go. Welcome to the weird and wacky world of Amarel-speak. I'm a member of a gun control lobby. Are you less of an asset to me? I'm all the fathers and mothers of the people killed by the completely senseless gun violence in your country. Are you less of an asset to us? Your posts don't even make sense Amarel. I mean, your sneering far right bias comes through every time so that's no problem, but your posts themselves are sheer nonsense. Side: This is wrong
My preferred source is the CDC. It's easy and accessable. Your constant appeals to authority are typical but you never really check what your sources say for example you brushed off gun injures as being not important yet there are on average 40,000 gun deaths through accident and 84,000 gun injuries yearly (CDC) You don’t formulate beliefs on the basis of evidence you do exactly what the religious do as in become more in entrenched in your beliefs which are not tethered to reality This is a common phenomenon amongst people like you as facts don’t change minds quite the opposite in fact as you cleary demonstrate , theres some excellent literature on this phenomenon of which you’re an excellent example I didn't say anything about protecting my family. I don't know why you keep saying that. Really? You clearly stated ..... Right, I carry mine because safety cannot be assured outside my home. You carry a gun for safety, A prime example again of your cognitive dissonance. Your safety and family’s cannot be guaranteed outside the home and you want to be an asset to your family but it’s not about protecting you or your family ....... Vintage Amarel speak it’s utter bullshit and as I keep saying you’re the only person I know who can hold two totally opposed positions at the same time and think himself rational I said without a gun I am less of an asset to others. Owning a gun for protection and feeling perfectly safe are not a contradiction. Yes you cannot protect them I get that. Yes you said you need a gun for safety and to protect your family as in they see you carrying as an “asset” Also if you felt just as safe without it why have one? Furthermore, your admission that this is your experience of Americans makes my point that Americans do not need to own guns to feel safe. They simply feel safe and own a lot of guns. My experience of living amongst Americans is that everyone of them I’ve ever asked “why do you own a gun “ have replied for protection when then asked what sort of protection and where number one answer is home protection every stat and source gives this as the main reason until the stats and sources are subjected to Amarel speak When one then says “so you need a gun to feel totally protected in your home” that’s when the tap dance begins as in a total denial of having a gun to feel safe ,it’s the very same dance religious nuts do and it’s a total mental disengagement from the facts as the reality of the matter is denied just to crow “ I’m right you’re wrong “ normally accompanied by such bullshit as “ how do you stop government tyranny without guns” etc ,etc If Americans keep telling us all how wonderful America is and how progressive it is how do guns make a society progressive? Side: This is wrong
There were 454 unintentional gun deaths in 2018. There were 18,921 unintentional non-lethal gun injuries in 2018. The top link is to CDC's WISQARS for death and the second bus for injury. https://www.cdc.gov/injury/wisqars/ https://wisqars-viz.cdc.gov:8006/ I don't buckle up because I live in fear of collision. I don't lock my doors out of paranoia. I've never been afraid my car would be stolen, but I've never left the keys in it. And of course, I don't carry a gun because I feel unsafe without it. Side: No it's cool
I don't buckle up because I live in fear of collision. You buckle up to feel safe , you carry a gun to fell safe and make your family feel safe you’ve admitted this , you’re exactly like a religious nut in your style of argumentation I don't lock my doors out of paranoia. I never said it was out of paranoia , you do it to feel secure and you have several guns as you admit to “bolster “ that feeling I've never been afraid my car would be stolen, but I've never left the keys in it. Yet you’re afraid your family could be threatened which is why you claim your an asset with a gun Your constant red herrings , piss poor analogies and deflections are boring And of course, I don't carry a gun because I feel unsafe without it Warning ⚠️ ⛔️ Amarel -speak incoming ...... I don't carry a gun because I feel unsafe without it .......yet you claim .... I carry mine because safety cannot be assured outside my home. Yes you feel safer with it you keep saying it but denying it , your comments predictably are totally irrational there are on average 40,000 gun deaths through accident and 84,000 gun injuries yearly (CDC) Side: This is wrong
Just to reiterate..... there are on average 40,000 gun deaths through accident and 84,000 gun injuries yearly (CDC) Putting CDC at the end of your sentence doesn't make it accurate. I provided the link so that you can see what the CDC day actually says. You'll find it matches my numbers, not yours. there are on average 40,000 gun deaths through accident and 84,000 gun injuries yearly (CDC) Visit the CDC data visualiser that I links to and you'll find that accidental gun deaths are typically under 500. The average non-fatal accidental gun injury was under 20,000 between 2007 and 2018. Side: No it's cool
There were 454 unintentional gun deaths in 2018. I already covered that. Idk why you want me to include suicides. My suicide is not hazard to others, regardless of how I do it. Nonetheless, let's talk about suicide. Guns are the preferred method of suicide in the US, accounting for just over 50% of all suicides in 2018. But what about suicide as a percentage of gun deaths? Well, suicide accounted for 61.5% of all gun deaths in 2018. Wow! It turns out that our problem with guns is more of a suicide problem rather than a murder problem. With all these guns, the US must have terrible suicide rates compared to other countries, right? Not according to worldpopulationreview.com. With all their gun laws, civilized countries like France, Japan, and South Korea couldn't get their suicide rates below that of the US. If the US had Japan's gun laws, would we have Japan's suicide rate? Of course not. That's because suicide rates are not dependant on gun laws. But thanks for bringing it up. I know I live in a violent society Jody. Thats a reason to have a gun, in addition to them being fun. But it's a big country so I want to make sure we are clear about American violence. It's not widespread. More than half of our murders occur in just 2% of our counties. https://www.washingtontimes.com/news/ Side: No it's cool
2
points
There were 454 unintentional gun deaths in 2018. I already covered that. From 2006-2016, almost 6,885 people in the U.S. died from unintentional shootings. In 2016 alone, there were 495 incidents of accidental firearm deaths. https://www.aftermath.com/content/ Accidental gun deaths occur mainly to those under 25 years old. In 2014, 2,549 children (age 0-19) died by gunshot and an additional 13,576 were injured https://www.aftermath.com/content/ Guns are the preferred method of suicide in the US, accounting for just over 50% of all suicides in 2018. It is so easy and painless to commit suicide with a a gun, that people who would not ordinarily have committed suicide in fact do so because they have access to firearms. But what about suicide as a percentage of gun deaths? Well, suicide accounted for 61.5% of all gun deaths in 2018. Stop treating statistics like a pick and mix section you utter clown. Why not mention that the US has the 34th highest rate of suicide out of all the countries on Earth? It has the highest rate of suicide per person of ALL the developed countries, with the sole exceptions of Belgium, Japan and Sweden. I think we both know why you don't mention things like this. These statistics are inconvenient for your absurd narrative that guns are safe if people only use them to shoot themselves instead of each other. Side: This is wrong
In 2016 alone, there were 495 incidents of accidental firearm deaths. Ok. I referred to 2018 CDC data and you referred to 2016 from another source that says the same thing, as if that made a different one point. In both years the number of accidental gun deaths (<500) was very small by comparison to other kinds of accidental deaths. In 2018 guns accounted for less than .5% of the accidental deaths; about the same as machine accidents. Meanwhile 3491people were poisoned by non-drugs (2,1% of accidental deaths); eat organic because chemicals are bad. 3710 people drowned(2.2%); pools are dangerous, ban em. Falling and suffocating are giant hazards, but they mostly affect old people who are a drain on the free healthcare system, so in the name of expanding that free healthcare let's just not count the loss of thise additional costs to the system. Traffic is a huge killer too, but vehicles are a lethal weapon we all enjoy so nevermind that. How about drug poisoning? Top cause of accidental deaths come from drugs. 58,908 people died from accidental drug poisoning in 2018 (35.2%)(that's down from earlier). Good thing we have experts doling out our script drugs like xanax and fentynal so they don't end up on the street... nevermind. To reiterate the context, of the CDC's 19 listed causes of accidental death, guns were 17th in 2018. Accidental gun deaths occur mainly to those under 25 years old. In 2014, 2,549 children (age 0-19) died by gunshot and an additional 13,576 were injured Talk about dishonest wording. First, children are under 18. Second, you go straight from accidental deaths to gun deaths overall. So let's get accurate. CDC data shows that in 2014, 73 minors (under 18) died of accidental gun death. That's tied with falls for cause of death at 10th accounting for 1.4%. The total number of juveniles killed from guns in 2014 from all intents was 1,330, not 2,549. That's just shy of 16% of total juvi deaths that year. Not small, but smaller than your bogus post. Of course most juvi deaths are accidental (63.8%) and of those only 1.4% are caused by guns. It is so easy and painless to commit suicide with a a gun, that people who would not ordinarily have committed suicide in fact do so because they have access to firearms. Yes, guns increase the chances of an attempt becoming a successful follow-through for suicide, but guns are banned in Japan. If someone wants to kill themselves, a gun ban doesn't stop them. Why not mention that the US has the 34th highest rate of suicide out of all the countries on Earth? It has the highest rate of suicide per person of ALL the developed countries, with the sole exceptions of Belgium, Japan and Sweden. You forgot South Korea, Switzerland, Austria, India, and France. I would be remiss if I didn't mention that Sweden did slightly better in the US in n 2020 according to worldpopulationreview.com, but they are neck and neck. Apparently people are not very suicidal in Syria. These statistics are inconvenient for your absurd narrative that guns are safe if people only use them to shoot themselves instead of each other. I've used statistics from the get go, and you get angry when I do. Side: No it's cool
There were 454 unintentional gun deaths in 2018. I already covered that. Idk why you want me to include suicides. My suicide is not hazard to others, regardless of how I do it. Nonetheless, let's talk about suicide. Hint : because they are a gun death Guns are the preferred method of suicide in the US, accounting for just over 50% of all suicides in 2018. But what about suicide as a percentage of gun deaths? Well, suicide accounted for 61.5% of all gun deaths in 2018. Wow! It turns out that our problem with guns is more of a suicide problem rather than a murder problem. With all these guns, the US must have terrible suicide rates compared to other countries, right? Not according to worldpopulationreview.com. With all their gun laws, civilized countries like France, Japan, and South Korea couldn't get their suicide rates below that of the US. If the US had Japan's gun laws, would we have Japan's suicide rate? Of course not. That's because suicide rates are not dependant on gun laws. But thanks for bringing it up. Your constant juggling of stats and data is hilarious and is totally irrelevant to my original commentary which was you live in a very violent society which you admit , you need a gun for safety your wife needs mace which you admit ( kids not known preferred method ) so what are you arguing again? I know I live in a violent society Jody. Yes Thats a reason to have a gun, Yes in addition to them being fun. For a sportsman / woman but again that’s irrelevant But it's a big country so I want to make sure we are clear about American violence. It's not widespread. More than half of our murders occur in just 2% of our But again that’s deflection as we have to take in all gun incidents into account which I think you have conceded is a huge problem and the reason your country is rated one of the most violent on the planet Side: This is wrong
Did you know that 38 of the 59 States are larger than Ireland? When 2% of the counties in the US account for half the murder, it's worth noting. I'm happy to focus on national level statistics, but there's a reasonable explanation why most Americans feel their society is safe. Because for most Americans it is. Especially in rural America where murder is low and gun ownership is high (I'm not arguing this is causal). Side: No it's cool
Did you know that 38 of the 59 States are larger than Ireland? Yes , also I lived in the states for many years and I enjoyed it , I lived in LA (Santa Monica) When 2% of the counties in the US account for half the murder, it's worth noting. I'm happy to focus on national level statistics, but there's a reasonable explanation why most Americans feel their society is safe. Because for most Americans it is. Especially in rural America where murder is low and gun ownership is high (I'm not arguing this is causal). Yet as I stated before every American I’ve met has when asked why they own a gun has told me for protection , I deal with Americans daily over here and they are astonished that as a society we abhor the notion of citizens carrying guns and equally amazed when they see cops without PEW While many gun owners say they have more than one reason for owning a firearm, 67% cite protection as a major reason. About four-in-ten gun owners (38%) say hunting is a major reason, and 30% cite sport shooting. Smaller shares cite a gun collection or their job as major reasons. Side: This is wrong
2
points
Guns are the preferred method of suicide in the US, accounting for just over 50% of all suicides in 2018. They are also the preferred method of homicide in the US, used in 75 percent of homicides. Guns are used three times more often to kill other people than the grand total of all other weapons combined. Guns are very good at killing things, Amarel. That is why they are popular when you want to kill something. Whether that something is yourself or someone else doesn't matter in the goddamned slightest. Suicides are yet another red herring with no relevance to any conversation about the safety of guns. Side: This is wrong
2
points
Wow! It turns out that our problem with guns is more of a suicide problem rather than a murder problem. No Amarel. It turns out you are simply playing pick and mix with statistics again. You were very keen to tell us that guns are used in 50 percent of suicides in the US, but of course you did not mention that they are also used in 75 percent of homicides!!!! Side: This is wrong
1
point
Only about 30% of American adults own a gun. You have been told repeatedly to include sources when you make claims, and yesterday you were criticising Jody for not doing exactly that. What you are Amarel is a joke. Your sneering hypocrisy is just a simple laughing matter. The Small Arms Survey stated that U.S. civilians alone account for 393 million (about 46 percent) of the worldwide total of civilian held firearms. This amounts to "120.5 firearms for every 100 residents." https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gunownership So almost half of the private gun owners in the entire world live in America and there are more guns in America than there are people. And it gets even crazier:- The world's armed forces control about 133 million (approximately 18 percent) of the global total of small arms https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gunownership So US citizens have three times more guns than all the armies in the world combined. Finally, I found your source, and quite predictably you are distorting the findings. Americans were asked whether they own a gun. Thirty two percent of them said yes. Your claim arbitrarily eliminates the possibility that any of them lied. You have taken a claim which you cannot be sure is accurate and presented it as though it were a fact. Side: This is wrong
The poll is Pew, which is credible. The poll goes on to cover people with multiple firearms, which is quite a few. Relatively few households hold large shares of the firearms and that's how the matter has been discussed for over a decade. A poll that supports that is credible if not perfectly accurate. I personally have 6 for now. And I'm not a gun nut by the standards of my area. Jody wouldn't even give a quote for what he meant by Trump's incitement. He referenced twitter but couldn't reproduce what they were even referring to. He made an assertion on the authority of someone some why at Twitter and told me to go find it. That's what pissed me off. If I make a data based statement, it most often came from a source I recently consumed. So if I make a data claim, you don't have to go searching for my source, you can ask or even rudely demand. I'll provide it unless I don't have it. Side: No it's cool
1
point
If I make a data based statement, it most often came from a source I recently consumed. So if I make a data claim, you don't have to go searching for my source, you can ask Fuck off Amarel. It is your responsibility to support your claims with evidence, not my responsibility to chase you for it, as you know full well because you were arguing the exact same thing yesterday when the shoe was on the other foot, you completely pointless hypocrite. Side: This is wrong
1
point
1
point
OK, here is the poll:- https://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2017/06/ This is what the poll says:- Three-in-ten American adults say they currently own a gun This is what you changed it to:- 30 percent of Americans own a gun You don't link the stuff you source because nine out of every ten times you are misrepresenting the source somehow, and you don't want to increase the chances of someone finding out. Side: This is wrong
1
point
Which I changed to "only about 30%" because I don't presume precision in surveys. The issue is not that you weren't precise. The issue is that you deliberately omitted the word "say" from the poll's vocabulary and hence misrepresented something as a fact which is not necessarily a fact. Side: This is wrong
For the record, I am inclined to agree that surveys are a somewhat poor data source. And I doubt that this survey covered the significant number of households with illegal guns. Nonetheless, for certain kinds of data, only a survey will do. And if the survey is supported over time or by other metrics, it's more likely to be more accurate. Side: This is wrong
1
point
For the record, I am inclined to agree that surveys are a somewhat poor data source. If you agree then why did you use a survey as your data source, and then try to obfuscate that fact by failing to even link it? That's essentially an admission of bias. And I doubt that this survey covered the significant number of households with illegal guns. Exactly. People lie for all sorts of reasons. They also frequently misunderstand questions. For example, you might legitimately ask someone if they own a gun, and they might say no on the grounds that they own five. As stupid as that sounds, I guarantee you it happens. Side: This is wrong
As I explained, surveys often present some information that cannot be gotten through "harder" scientific means. While the info is imprecise and sometimes problematic, it is better than a guess. Nom, anyone who doesn't admit to bias is lying at least to themselves. Side: This is wrong
2
points
As I explained, surveys often present some information that cannot be gotten through "harder" scientific means. You don't explain Amarel. You backtrack and obfuscate. If you were confident that the information you were giving was accurate then there was no reason not to include your source. Side: No it's cool
|
