Tuesday, July 10, 2012

Let me clarify something for the gun zombies.

It is apparent in our exchange of comments, that at least some of our readers shrug off comments as simple exchanges of insults.

No. Wrong. Bad.

We mean what we say, very specifically when we fault the opposition for failure to correctly identify topics, for simplistic argumentation that fails logical analysis, and the two perennial problems, a lack of intellectual honesty, and a lack of critical thinking generally.

We are not simply throwing out those specific criticisms as if they were 'you're mother wears army boots' insults.

We specifically mean those things when we write them.  And while they are not complimentary - that part is correct - the problem they identify is real, very real, all too real.

Pulling something that sounds like vaguely, kinda maybe it might fit out of your asses after it enters your brain through our eyes from a web site somewhere is not thinking, it is not grasping concepts, and it is not engaging in either valid argumentation or critical analysis/ critical thinking.  Top that off with a severe lack of a solid foundational basis for comments in fact, and you have a situation where
we never can and never will get past the most trivial and superficial discussion on the level of bumper stickers.

In fact, we might be more successful simply playing dodgem cars with real cars, real bumpers and real bumper stickers.  Because the collision of bumper stickers would accomplish as little as some exchanges here towards a meeting of minds regarding facts, concepts, and intelligent thought.

What some of you try to write off as hate - presumably along the stupid lines of 'they hate us for our freedoms' espoused by the twit queen of quit Sarah Palin (an ill-educated, ignorant, intellectual pygmy if ever there was one) is NOT hate.  It IS frustration.  It IS outrage.  But no one hates you, and you are not the target of dire conspiracies either.  When you fail THIS much, people will get cross with you - in part because of our willful ignorance and your obdurate refusal to think - or learn how to think.

So don't blow off what we write as simple insults; it is genuine and valid criticism of your failures.  Trying to ignore it as "you just don't like me" or "you just don't understand" (we DO), or "you'll say anything mean because you disagree" is incorrect.  We understand what we are saying, we mean what we are saying, and it is objective criticism of you - not casual meaningless insult.

There is something seriously wrong (many things, actually) with what you call thinking.


  1. Ok apparantly you and Laci seem to think that what you post on this blog will make a difference in the world. I come here for the entertainment and I must say you two have really brought this blog to a screeching halt. You post long winded thesis that nobody is going to read (except Laci or you) and then jerk each other off on how well you write them. That is becoming pretty lame. I hope Mikeb makes it back soon and changes things back to how they used to be so that the entertainment value of the blog will come back.

    1. You come here for the entertainment?

      This is a blog primarily about guns and gun laws.

      I write to engage people in informed and intelligent discussion, not to put on a variety show. This was never intended to be a variety show, and you wouldn't like a rousing rendition of "Let me Entertain You, Let Me Make You Smile."

      What do you find entertaining about the comments before, that were bone ignorant and repetitive?

      Yes, Jim and the rest of the readers, thinking is work, it takes effort, and it requires education.

      Think. Do the work. Engage your brain; you might enjoy it.

      I don't think you're making a very good argument for a change back to unmoderated repetitive superficial comments from anonymous individuals.

    2. Thinking just isn't fun for Jimbo, it's too hard for him to do.

    3. Laci - why would I put a lot of effort into discussing guns with you or anyone else on a blog? What will change in the real world based on these posts or discussions? I take a break every now and then from my real work to see what inane things people have said. If I feel like it, I throw a comment out to share my opinion. I know my opinion means nothing to anyone on this blog just like your opinion means nothing (except to your fellow circle jerk companions). Do you think anything you post will make FWM or any other gun owner decide to give up their guns? You are delusional if you do think that.

    4. JimF, the point is that you don't have any good arguments to make. You don't recognize or distinguish between quality and crap opinions or sources.

      I research and think critically for myself; I enjoy engaging someone who hold a different opinion who is well-researched and who can make a good argument.

      But ultimately this is about what we do for our own intellectual integrity in trying to formulate a position.

      Do I think I can change someone's mind? Yes. Not everone who reads here is afflicted with your confirmation bias that seeks only to have someone affirm what you want to think.

      I do believe it is possible to persuade people the NRA is not acting in their best interest, and I do believe that it is possible to persuade responsible gun owners to support responsible - not NRA - legislation regulation firearms so that we don't have the current problem, so clearly resulting from lax gun laws in states like Arizona ruining this country and Mexico.

      I don't know how you were brought up, but I was raised to think, to challenge and most of all to believe that it was in fact possible to make a difference.

      When I was a little tyke wearing footie pajamas, with freckles, big blue eyes and a mop of curly red hair, occasionally my parents would wake me up to come out into the living room to meet their guests.

      I was well aware that what was really going on was I was dragged out of bed to go be brainy at adults. At first I was just a cute little kid to the visiting people; then I was a cute little kid who could use polysyllabic words - correctly. They were usually a bit patronizing at that stage. Then they would realize that I was engaging them at essentially an adult level, and successfully employing logic. The only question in my mind was did these people matter to my parents -- did I have to make them LIKE it when I beat their arguments and exposed the fallacies of their reasoning, or were they not coming back so it didn't really matter.

      But I learned early on that I could win an argument - even against adults who supposedly had a position of greater authority and power compared to a little kid. I learned that from an early mentor who thought I had a first class brain and wanted me to use it.

      It's harder to make a difference with people who don't reason, who aren't informed, and who don't know a fact from a fract from a fuct from a fruitcake. But yes, it's possible to make a change.

    5. why would I put a lot of effort into discussing guns with you or anyone else on a blog?

      Because you are a lonely wanker who needs attention.

      Frankly, Jim, I could give a fuck what you think.

      And, yes, I do make a difference, and that's not delusion on my part. If I keep posting, I know it pisses twits like you off that you can't silence me, or my kind.

      No matter how much you try to waste my time with fuckwitted comments.

  2. Nice, but...

    We have one commenter in particular who seems to be of the clueless variety. "That sounds good" seems to be his way of trying to deal with various forms of propaganda techniques and fallacies.

    For example, he tried to call a comparison between the right to vote and "gun rights" as "evading the issue". Comparing the value of voting to deadly weapons is hardly "evading the issue" if anything , it's raising the topic.

    How much more important is voting to firearms ownership? Not how firearms ownership is used as a wedge topic to get people to vote against their own interests, and so forth.

    DG raises an important issue here because it does seem that a lot of the arguments here are of the "well, it's up on the internet--it must be true" variety rather than based upon credibility of the source and how much it makes sense.

    1. Apparently thinking, and differentiating crap sources from credible ones is too hard for people promoting lethal force.

      What does that tell us about their thought processes and judgement?

  3. obviously, Jim isn't reading us.

    His comments show he is too clueless if he is.

  4. " You post long winded thesis that nobody is going to read (except Laci or you) and then jerk each other off on how well you write them)."

    It's "theses", dolt.

    I've been away and I'm unfamilar with JimF's particular brand of teh burnin' stoopit, but it's reminiscent of a certain crossdrawin' cretin who's all upset that HIS lack of critical thinking skills (or any desire to engage in same) is, rightly, known by others to be HIS problem.

  5. Thanks for the spell check DC - hope it didn't take you too long to look that up.

    1. Just because you are unfamiliar with correct spelling and usage is no reason to project your deficiencies onto Democommie, JimF.

      You may have needed to look that up; clearly your vocabularly has needed a bit of remediation which we have provided here for you -- along with our correcting the mistaken notions of history and other topics among the gun zombie hordes. That is no reason to postulate someone else did.