911
'Gun-loving' GOP governor reportedly seen 'running scared for his life' from mass shooting (www.rawstory.com)
submitted 2 years ago by to c/news@lemmy.world
268 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Run, you fucking piece of shit. Go go go gogogogogogog!

My niece told her grandmother about her fear of getting murdered at school. Feel that fear, asshole.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 1 point 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 child)

So, wait. . .it's my fault you made a BS claim you can't back up, despite the fact that you made the comment before I ever even posted in the thread?

You mean the one I immediately backed up, that you could have fact checked yourself in seconds? Because "citizens with guns have stopped fewer mass shootings than unarmed civilians" is objectively true.

And I was posting "apologism" despite explicitly saying I want it to be true.

So? It's the internet. People lie about who they are and what they think all the time, especially among the far-right. I'm not obligated to politely believe you.

And to put it bluntly, I don't.

Your "do you have the stats" sounded like sealioning and when I gave you the benefit of the doubt and answered, your entire comment focused on trying to claw back a win for gun owners.

Now suddenly it's a "BS fact", despite still being objectively true. Are you sure you haven't let your true feelings get involved?

At no point did you use the phrase "you shouldn't give a fuck." Another amazing thing by me misinterpreting something you didn't even say. Man, I'm even outdoing myself today.

I also didn't use the phrase "I don't give a fuck", but that didn't stop you.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (1 child)

    You mean the one I immediately backed up

    And to which I immediately pointed out why it doesn't actually support your claim that they had a "lower success rate" but only that it happened more often one way. It's like arguing that the crime rate is higher in some place because there is 5x the amount of crime there, but ignoring the fact that the population is 20x as great.

    Your “do you have the stats” sounded like sealioning

    I explained why I was doing it: confirmation bias is a hell of a drug. If be cognizant of my own biases is suspicious to you, that says a lot more about you than it does about me.

    your entire comment focused on trying to claw back a win for gun owners.

    This is the ultimate problem here. I'm trying to get to the truth, you're trying to be right. So the fact that I'm not just blinding agreeing with you, and pointing out the faults in your argument. . .well, that must mean I'm arguing the other side. You're thinking is too black and white, which is probably why simply pointing out the fault in your position has sent you into a partisan fit.

    I also didn’t use the phrase “I don’t give a fuck”, but that didn’t stop you.

    Stop me from what? I never said "I don't give a fuck" or even that "you don't give a fuck." I asked, after you questioned why anyone would give a fuck about the claim you made, why you brought it up in the first place. You've been sent into such a tizzy by someone simply trying to help you refine your argument, instead of just blindly saying "you're right," that you can't even follow the posts from one to the next.

    You'd be far better served to stop trying to be right, and start trying to figure out what's right.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (1 child)

    And to which I immediately pointed out why it doesn't actually support your claim that they had a "lower success rate" but only that it happened more often one way

    Sounds like you're going to have to prove that for each of these shootings, it wasn't the case that every single person there had a gun on them, otherwise it would be completely unfair on unarmed civilians.

    At the very best, you've immediately latched on to semantics to twist "which groups more often stop a mass shooter" into "is someone more likely to stop a mass shooting if they have a gun".

    " I asked, after you questioned why anyone would give a fuck about the claim you made, why you brought it up in the first place.

    Thanks for clarifying that you absolutely did misinterpret exactly the part you were insisting you didn't misinterpret. I was asking who gives a fuck about which group "more effective".

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (1 child)

    At the very best, you’ve immediately latched on to semantics to twist “which groups more often stop a mass shooter” into “is someone more likely to stop a mass shooting if they have a gun”.

    I twisted nothing, it's what you said. You're just now regretting what you said, so instead of just admitting fault - because remember the goal here for you isn't to get to the truth, but to be right - it has to be some fault of mine. Sorry, but the only one twisting here is you.

    I was asking who gives a fuck about which group “more effective”.

    Clearly you do because you said:

    Last I looked, they had a lower success rate than unarmed people.

    So you brought it up, and if no one gives a fuck about it, why did you bring it up? Why is this so hard for you to remember what you said? Why is it so hard for you to admit what you said?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 child)

    Sure, we can do yet another lap.

    ChatGPT, trained on every piece of written content it could scrape and notorious for giving the most generic answers to every question doesn't seem to have any issue with my phrasing, nor does it demand I turn it into some bizarre "effectiveness per capita" thing.

    Of course, you did. I explained that "effectiveness" didn't matter, because we'd be trading "3% of mass shooting were slightly less bad" for "there are half as many mass shootings", so "who gives a fuck [which group is more effective] ".

    And fuck me sideways, it looks like if you phrase it more politely, that usage is common enough to turn up as the second definition.

    So I'm done going in circles. You're either autistic and struggling with language and continuing is functionally just bullying someone for being neurodivergent or you're a liar, grasping at straws.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (1 child)

    Oh, we're using AI now to try and win the argument? lol

    Of course, because we've already established that you are not trying to figure out what's right, but trying to win, you didn't ask the follow up question I did to see what it said. Here's what happens when you do that

    Wow, imagine that! It reveals the assumption that it made and how the answer actually tells an incomplete story. I guess considering you are hanging your hat on AI, you kind of have to admit that I'm right now. (lol. jk We both know that won't happen).

    I feel kind of naive right now. I should have realized right at the start when you said people are disingenuous on the internet and lie about shit all the time, you were actually just warning me that you are disingenuous and lie on the internet. I'm a little ashamed of myself, it was so obvious. Thanks for teaching me something.

    And fuck me sideways, it looks like if you phrase it more politely, that usage is common enough to turn up as the second definition.

    Yes, and, again, that "immediately preceding statement" is what you said, not me. I was asking you that if it isn't "important" (the thing you were diminishing with the statement) why bring it up at all?

    The only struggling going on here is you with your inability to admit that you were just wrong. Hell, this was such an easy time for you to do it too, because we are generally in agreement, but your ego is so fragile that you just can't even do it then. It's like how I imagine dealing with Trump.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago) (1 child)

    Didn't read. It'll just be you doing your weird "mass shootings stopped per capita" thing again.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (1 child)

    We both know you did, and we're the only ones here. Why lie?

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (1 child)

    Looks like your understanding of what I know is about as deep as your understanding of what I said.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago* (1 child)

    Oh, so you didn't read the previous post, but read this post. Lol totally believable.

    But you win, congrats. You turned this into empty insults, the only thing you can convince yourself that you "won."

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 years ago (1 child)

    Yes, I read it because it was much shorter. I'm having none of the feelings you're projecting on me so once again, your whole "I see right through you" schtick isn't landing.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •