Now is not the time to talk about gun control (1 Viewer)

Thread Attachment browser

Users who are viewing this thread

    Total: 2 (members: 0, guests: 2)
    brandon said:
    I didn’t say it was impossible to do a great photoshop job so that the hair isn’t a hack job. I can do it pretty well, and don’t need a green screen. And I wouldn’t use the color range tool to do it, either.

    I’m pushing back on your notion that it’s a bad photoshop job. If it is a photoshop (and you haven’t really given any evidence that it is), it’s a good one.

    Do you have any specific evidence you can point to indicating that it is, in fact, a photoshop?
    Click to expand...
    Brandon, my original post had two specific comments which explained why I thought it was an obvious fake. I'll further clarify that a bit.

    How I know it is a fake, is I looked at it, and in that instant I knew it was a fake, the perspective of the subjects appeared wrong. It really is as simple as that. To make my first post about it, I looked at it more and explained two details that seemed glaringly out of place about it to me.



    To address the comment made by SystemShock in his post: She and the fellow next to her with the smile thing over his face to hide his identity are clearly in a seated posture. She and he are not standing in that aisle taking a selfie. Yet that is the impression that the creator of the Photoshop was attempting to suggest by their placement into that NRA auditorium background.



    Here is how we can all go froward from this point because I can see no resolution coming from further discussion about it because "evidence" as Brandon has requested of me is not available, only my impressions are available to me. "Evidence" is similarity not available to him. This is a discussion of impressions ,and that is the real limitation as it exists.

    So persons as they choose can think it's a real photo, and regard that as being proof that she was there, and her daytime drama is true, and that now has the secret service hot on her tail if they want to. That's fine by me.

    :)

    Alternatively I and any other persons as they so choose can regard the photo as being a fake, and think her on-line drama is way over the top, and choose to as I have chosen to, ignore her from now on. I can't think of any reason that wouldn't be fine by either of you.

    :)
     
    SamAndreas said:
    :)

    Alternatively I and any other persons as they so choose can regard the photo as being a fake, and think her on-line drama is way over the top, and choose to as I have chosen to, ignore her from now on. I can't think of any reason that wouldn't be fine by either of you.

    :)
    Click to expand...
    My question is why would anyone pay attention to her in the first place other than MAYBE for some occasional comic relief?
     
    Last edited:
    BullSheetBuddha said:
    My question is why would anyone pay attention to her in the first place other than MAYBE for some occasional comic relief?
    Click to expand...
    Yesterday I tried to plant her name into my memory so that in the event that I ever stumbled onto one of her Tweets again I could ignore it instead of reading it to see what it was, without remembering who it was.

    But today I find that I can't remember her name even after having tried to remember it.

    I would scroll up and look for that post, so I could read her name again, so I could fail to remember it again by tomorrow. But by tomorrow it would require even more scrolling up than it would today, all so I could fail to remember her name for the third time the day after tomorrow. That is a multiplicative function if I ever saw one.

    Avoid them.

    I've decided to bag it. I'm going to give up on this whole idea of remembering her name starting about 12 hours ago. Unlike this remembering her name which appears to be impossible, I do think not remembering her name is something I can do. I will be good at it, able to not remember her name without any effort on my part at all.

    Yes, doing nothing is doable. :p
     
    I just heard on CNN that the weapon used in Tulsa was either an AR15-styled rifle or an actual AR15. I didn't quite catch it. So that's 3 mass shootings in approx 3 weeks all involving AR15s. Further, the Tulsa shooter bought his firearm, AR, just a few days ago.

    Edit to add: he also had a handgun.
     
    Last edited:
    Bolo said:
    Americans aren't smart enough to fix this problem. Voters elect the same people over and over again and expect a different result in how government functions.
    Click to expand...

    Or maybe they expect the same ol', same ol'.
    Bolo said:
    These school shootings have been ongoing for 23 years and each time politicians on all sides call to action on every major media outlet in the hours that follow and nothing has been done. Until there is a paradigm shift in how people conduct their voting, you're just peeing into the wind. If I could walk away from left vs right politics knowing its a foolish errand, so can other people. Politicians should fear the voter, instead, they brazenly ignore the voter once they get into the great game that is Washington politics, fully knowing they'll never be held accountable.
    Click to expand...
    Problem is, some politicians fear the voter so, they are compelled to run ads with them shooting shirt up with high powered rifles.

    Bolo said:
    23 years have passed since Columbine and we're no closer to universal healthcare or even scratching this surface for a viable solution. Americans are just gonna keep doing the same thing and expect a different result, that is the definition of insanity at this point.

    Perhaps I should start telling kids the reason they could be next is because the American voter is too stupid to realize their failures to hold politicians feet to the fire is getting people killed now. If you're so caught up in the left vs right struggle, at this point, whilst mass shootings continue to accelerate, you're not better than a cultist at this point.
    Click to expand...

    It's not the American voter, it is the GOP voter. It's the "responsible gun owners" who say they want gun control, but vote for the Ted Cruzes and the Greg Abotts and the Marjorie Taylor-Greens and the Lauren Boeberts and on and on and on.... it is the people who think school shootings are bad, but abortion is worse (they need more live targets), and 'em immigrants and open borders and liberal tears and all of that...
     
    brandon said:
    www.cnn.com

    Opinion: This is what happened when 3 nations that experienced mass shootings did something about it | CNN

    Here’s how three nations – Australia, the United Kingdom and New Zealand – tightened gun controls after mass shootings to safeguard future generations.
    www.cnn.com www.cnn.com

    A template for gun buybacks.
    Click to expand...
    Unfortunately, that, buybacks, won't happen here. At least not on a national level.

    Edit to add: I thought Conn. did it so I looked it up.

    www.nbcconnecticut.com

    Statewide Gun Buyback Events Held Across Conn.

    A statewide gun buyback was held in several cities and towns across Connecticut on Saturday. Multiple organizations came together to host the first annual #KeepKidsSafe gun buyback and gun safe giveaway day in Bridgeport, Guilford, Hartford, Newtown, Norwalk, Stamford and Waterbury. Guilford...
    www.nbcconnecticut.com www.nbcconnecticut.com
    Click to expand...

    So maybe? That'd be a wet dream if we did buy back assault rifles.
     
    Last edited:
    samiam5211 said:
    No matter why you want to kill people, guns work best.
    Click to expand...
    And machine guns work better for killing many people quickly than bolt action guns or muzzle loaders.

    Yes, indeed I am referring to semi-automatic hand guns and rifles as being machine guns because unlike a manually operated bolt action or muzzle loader, they are auto load machines which are guns, therefore they are machine guns.
     
    SamAndreas said:
    And machine guns work better for killing many people quickly than bolt action guns or muzzle loaders.

    Yes, indeed I am referring to semi-automatic hand guns and rifles as being machine guns because unlike a manually operated bolt action or muzzle loader, they are auto load machines which are guns, therefore they are machine guns.
    Click to expand...
    Personally, I'd be completely satisfied with revolvers, bolt action long guns, and hammer shotguns.
     

    Create an account or login to comment

    You must be a member in order to leave a comment

    Create account

    Create an account on our community. It's easy!

    Register

    Log in

    Already have an account? Log in here.

    Share this page

    Advertisement

    General News Feed

    Fact Checkers News Feed

    Sponsored

    Back
    Top Bottom