▲ 1763 ▼ Thanks for the help. (lemmy.world) submitted 2 years ago by FlyingSquid@lemmy.world to c/politicalmemes@lemmy.world 366 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[–] AmberPrince@lemmy.world 9 points 2 years ago (1 child) You still haven't discussed the actual issue of how to stop people from getting shot up by guns. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [+] thecrotch@sh.itjust.works -12 points 2 years ago (1 child) I've made it to step 1, understand the problem. That's further than you. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] irmoz@reddthat.com 5 points 2 years ago (1 child) No you're actually at step 0.2: "argue about the definitions of words used in describing the problem". permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] thecrotch@sh.itjust.works -1 points 2 years ago (3 children) It's really weird to me that you don't seem to think that understanding what you're asking for is important permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] AmberPrince@lemmy.world 5 points 2 years ago (1 child) If you don't understand what we are talking about in regards to gun violence at this stage of modern history you have no business debating anyone. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] thecrotch@sh.itjust.works -3 points 2 years ago (1 child) I understand that if you're advocating for a ban on assault rifles, which have been banned since 1934, you're not helping anyone but your opponents. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] AmberPrince@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago (1 child) No, you apparently don't understand. The contemporary public refers to "military-style" weapons as assault rifles. That is, if the gun looks at home in the hands of a soldier in camouflage the general public refers to it as an assault rifle. Again, if you do not understand the discussion around gun violence in today's world you should not be arguing over it. Also, you're still arguing semantics and haven't actually said anything, in any of your replies to anyone, about what can be done to curb gun violence which is the exact point the OP meme was making. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] thecrotch@sh.itjust.works -2 points 2 years ago Semantics my ass. Calling for a ban on something that is already illegal instead of addressing the real problem is going to get you nowhere and make you look foolish in the process. permalink fedilink source parent [–] irmoz@reddthat.com 1 point 2 years ago Man, those words in my mouth taste weird. permalink fedilink source parent [–] SwingingTheLamp@midwest.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) Sure, boss, and when somebody cries about their kid getting hit by a truck on the way to school, you can show up and say, “Well, akshually, it’s a crossover SUV, so it has a unibody.” I’m sure that completely changes the issue. /s permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] thecrotch@sh.itjust.works -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) If there's an epidemic of people being killed by pickup trucks, and a bunch of dipshits are on the internet screaming "we have to ban SUVs!" despite SUVs already being illegal, then yes, yes I will. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] SwingingTheLamp@midwest.social -1 points 2 years ago Your commitment to pendantry over empathy and common sense is rock solid, at least. permalink fedilink source parent
[+] thecrotch@sh.itjust.works -12 points 2 years ago (1 child) I've made it to step 1, understand the problem. That's further than you. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] irmoz@reddthat.com 5 points 2 years ago (1 child) No you're actually at step 0.2: "argue about the definitions of words used in describing the problem". permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] thecrotch@sh.itjust.works -1 points 2 years ago (3 children) It's really weird to me that you don't seem to think that understanding what you're asking for is important permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] AmberPrince@lemmy.world 5 points 2 years ago (1 child) If you don't understand what we are talking about in regards to gun violence at this stage of modern history you have no business debating anyone. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] thecrotch@sh.itjust.works -3 points 2 years ago (1 child) I understand that if you're advocating for a ban on assault rifles, which have been banned since 1934, you're not helping anyone but your opponents. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] AmberPrince@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago (1 child) No, you apparently don't understand. The contemporary public refers to "military-style" weapons as assault rifles. That is, if the gun looks at home in the hands of a soldier in camouflage the general public refers to it as an assault rifle. Again, if you do not understand the discussion around gun violence in today's world you should not be arguing over it. Also, you're still arguing semantics and haven't actually said anything, in any of your replies to anyone, about what can be done to curb gun violence which is the exact point the OP meme was making. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] thecrotch@sh.itjust.works -2 points 2 years ago Semantics my ass. Calling for a ban on something that is already illegal instead of addressing the real problem is going to get you nowhere and make you look foolish in the process. permalink fedilink source parent [–] irmoz@reddthat.com 1 point 2 years ago Man, those words in my mouth taste weird. permalink fedilink source parent [–] SwingingTheLamp@midwest.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) Sure, boss, and when somebody cries about their kid getting hit by a truck on the way to school, you can show up and say, “Well, akshually, it’s a crossover SUV, so it has a unibody.” I’m sure that completely changes the issue. /s permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] thecrotch@sh.itjust.works -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) If there's an epidemic of people being killed by pickup trucks, and a bunch of dipshits are on the internet screaming "we have to ban SUVs!" despite SUVs already being illegal, then yes, yes I will. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] SwingingTheLamp@midwest.social -1 points 2 years ago Your commitment to pendantry over empathy and common sense is rock solid, at least. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] irmoz@reddthat.com 5 points 2 years ago (1 child) No you're actually at step 0.2: "argue about the definitions of words used in describing the problem". permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] thecrotch@sh.itjust.works -1 points 2 years ago (3 children) It's really weird to me that you don't seem to think that understanding what you're asking for is important permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] AmberPrince@lemmy.world 5 points 2 years ago (1 child) If you don't understand what we are talking about in regards to gun violence at this stage of modern history you have no business debating anyone. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] thecrotch@sh.itjust.works -3 points 2 years ago (1 child) I understand that if you're advocating for a ban on assault rifles, which have been banned since 1934, you're not helping anyone but your opponents. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] AmberPrince@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago (1 child) No, you apparently don't understand. The contemporary public refers to "military-style" weapons as assault rifles. That is, if the gun looks at home in the hands of a soldier in camouflage the general public refers to it as an assault rifle. Again, if you do not understand the discussion around gun violence in today's world you should not be arguing over it. Also, you're still arguing semantics and haven't actually said anything, in any of your replies to anyone, about what can be done to curb gun violence which is the exact point the OP meme was making. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] thecrotch@sh.itjust.works -2 points 2 years ago Semantics my ass. Calling for a ban on something that is already illegal instead of addressing the real problem is going to get you nowhere and make you look foolish in the process. permalink fedilink source parent [–] irmoz@reddthat.com 1 point 2 years ago Man, those words in my mouth taste weird. permalink fedilink source parent [–] SwingingTheLamp@midwest.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) Sure, boss, and when somebody cries about their kid getting hit by a truck on the way to school, you can show up and say, “Well, akshually, it’s a crossover SUV, so it has a unibody.” I’m sure that completely changes the issue. /s permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] thecrotch@sh.itjust.works -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) If there's an epidemic of people being killed by pickup trucks, and a bunch of dipshits are on the internet screaming "we have to ban SUVs!" despite SUVs already being illegal, then yes, yes I will. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] SwingingTheLamp@midwest.social -1 points 2 years ago Your commitment to pendantry over empathy and common sense is rock solid, at least. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] thecrotch@sh.itjust.works -1 points 2 years ago (3 children) It's really weird to me that you don't seem to think that understanding what you're asking for is important permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 6 child comments replies: [–] AmberPrince@lemmy.world 5 points 2 years ago (1 child) If you don't understand what we are talking about in regards to gun violence at this stage of modern history you have no business debating anyone. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] thecrotch@sh.itjust.works -3 points 2 years ago (1 child) I understand that if you're advocating for a ban on assault rifles, which have been banned since 1934, you're not helping anyone but your opponents. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] AmberPrince@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago (1 child) No, you apparently don't understand. The contemporary public refers to "military-style" weapons as assault rifles. That is, if the gun looks at home in the hands of a soldier in camouflage the general public refers to it as an assault rifle. Again, if you do not understand the discussion around gun violence in today's world you should not be arguing over it. Also, you're still arguing semantics and haven't actually said anything, in any of your replies to anyone, about what can be done to curb gun violence which is the exact point the OP meme was making. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] thecrotch@sh.itjust.works -2 points 2 years ago Semantics my ass. Calling for a ban on something that is already illegal instead of addressing the real problem is going to get you nowhere and make you look foolish in the process. permalink fedilink source parent [–] irmoz@reddthat.com 1 point 2 years ago Man, those words in my mouth taste weird. permalink fedilink source parent [–] SwingingTheLamp@midwest.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) Sure, boss, and when somebody cries about their kid getting hit by a truck on the way to school, you can show up and say, “Well, akshually, it’s a crossover SUV, so it has a unibody.” I’m sure that completely changes the issue. /s permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] thecrotch@sh.itjust.works -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) If there's an epidemic of people being killed by pickup trucks, and a bunch of dipshits are on the internet screaming "we have to ban SUVs!" despite SUVs already being illegal, then yes, yes I will. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] SwingingTheLamp@midwest.social -1 points 2 years ago Your commitment to pendantry over empathy and common sense is rock solid, at least. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] AmberPrince@lemmy.world 5 points 2 years ago (1 child) If you don't understand what we are talking about in regards to gun violence at this stage of modern history you have no business debating anyone. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] thecrotch@sh.itjust.works -3 points 2 years ago (1 child) I understand that if you're advocating for a ban on assault rifles, which have been banned since 1934, you're not helping anyone but your opponents. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] AmberPrince@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago (1 child) No, you apparently don't understand. The contemporary public refers to "military-style" weapons as assault rifles. That is, if the gun looks at home in the hands of a soldier in camouflage the general public refers to it as an assault rifle. Again, if you do not understand the discussion around gun violence in today's world you should not be arguing over it. Also, you're still arguing semantics and haven't actually said anything, in any of your replies to anyone, about what can be done to curb gun violence which is the exact point the OP meme was making. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] thecrotch@sh.itjust.works -2 points 2 years ago Semantics my ass. Calling for a ban on something that is already illegal instead of addressing the real problem is going to get you nowhere and make you look foolish in the process. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] thecrotch@sh.itjust.works -3 points 2 years ago (1 child) I understand that if you're advocating for a ban on assault rifles, which have been banned since 1934, you're not helping anyone but your opponents. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] AmberPrince@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago (1 child) No, you apparently don't understand. The contemporary public refers to "military-style" weapons as assault rifles. That is, if the gun looks at home in the hands of a soldier in camouflage the general public refers to it as an assault rifle. Again, if you do not understand the discussion around gun violence in today's world you should not be arguing over it. Also, you're still arguing semantics and haven't actually said anything, in any of your replies to anyone, about what can be done to curb gun violence which is the exact point the OP meme was making. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] thecrotch@sh.itjust.works -2 points 2 years ago Semantics my ass. Calling for a ban on something that is already illegal instead of addressing the real problem is going to get you nowhere and make you look foolish in the process. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] AmberPrince@lemmy.world 4 points 2 years ago (1 child) No, you apparently don't understand. The contemporary public refers to "military-style" weapons as assault rifles. That is, if the gun looks at home in the hands of a soldier in camouflage the general public refers to it as an assault rifle. Again, if you do not understand the discussion around gun violence in today's world you should not be arguing over it. Also, you're still arguing semantics and haven't actually said anything, in any of your replies to anyone, about what can be done to curb gun violence which is the exact point the OP meme was making. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] thecrotch@sh.itjust.works -2 points 2 years ago Semantics my ass. Calling for a ban on something that is already illegal instead of addressing the real problem is going to get you nowhere and make you look foolish in the process. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] thecrotch@sh.itjust.works -2 points 2 years ago Semantics my ass. Calling for a ban on something that is already illegal instead of addressing the real problem is going to get you nowhere and make you look foolish in the process. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] irmoz@reddthat.com 1 point 2 years ago Man, those words in my mouth taste weird. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] SwingingTheLamp@midwest.social -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) Sure, boss, and when somebody cries about their kid getting hit by a truck on the way to school, you can show up and say, “Well, akshually, it’s a crossover SUV, so it has a unibody.” I’m sure that completely changes the issue. /s permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] thecrotch@sh.itjust.works -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) If there's an epidemic of people being killed by pickup trucks, and a bunch of dipshits are on the internet screaming "we have to ban SUVs!" despite SUVs already being illegal, then yes, yes I will. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] SwingingTheLamp@midwest.social -1 points 2 years ago Your commitment to pendantry over empathy and common sense is rock solid, at least. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] thecrotch@sh.itjust.works -1 points 2 years ago (1 child) If there's an epidemic of people being killed by pickup trucks, and a bunch of dipshits are on the internet screaming "we have to ban SUVs!" despite SUVs already being illegal, then yes, yes I will. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] SwingingTheLamp@midwest.social -1 points 2 years ago Your commitment to pendantry over empathy and common sense is rock solid, at least. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] SwingingTheLamp@midwest.social -1 points 2 years ago Your commitment to pendantry over empathy and common sense is rock solid, at least. permalink fedilink source parent
