ST Alpha - "offs. nm -- nm" (Reading a Post)

SlickerTalk
Search Archives
The Leaderboard
The FAQ

Login
Create Account

Search Dr. S. Talk
TT/ST Wiki
How Well Do You Know ...

RSS Feed

Hosting by DigitalOcean

Support ST on Ko-Fi

Down to Post

Backboards:

Posts: 161

In response to "....and that's a bad thing? -- nm" by znufrii

offs. nm -- nm

Posted by groiny (aka groiny) Jun 12 '14, 11:00

(No message)

Responses:

well, you were so dismissive of the idea as being "just a speed bump"... - znufrii Jun 12, 11:02 34
- that is like cutting down lung cancer by putting 4 less cigarettes in a pack. -- nm - groiny Jun 12, 11:04 1
  - Why didn't I think of that? -- nm - Bloomberg Jun 12, 11:07
- if the purpose is "look, WE ARE DOING SOMETHING!!!!" -- nm - groiny Jun 12, 11:02 31
  - given the inability to take more substantive action in the face of relentless political opposition from the NRA, et al., I'll take speed bumps. -- nm - znufrii Jun 12, 11:06 30
    - so congrats on that, your killer was only able to shoot and kill 9 instead of 12. - groiny Jun 12, 11:07 29
      - You seem to be waiting for someone to come up with the 100% total fix solution before doing anything. -- nm - Reagen Jun 12, 11:28 1
        
        that is not true, I am saying that, again, a person with multiple clips - groiny Jun 12, 11:31
      - [deleted] 20
        
        because you argue that an armed bystander shooting at the gunman MIGHT hit someone not intended to be shot..... - groiny Jun 12, 11:24 19
        
        less deaths are better, yes. - Reagen Jun 12, 11:30 18
        
        you could have zero people dead if an armed citizen gets the shooter first. - groiny Jun 12, 11:32 17
        
        [deleted]
        
        as we've recently seen, that scenario is more likely to end with one more dead citizen. -- nm - Reagen Jun 12, 11:33 5
        
        small sample size. nm -- nm - groiny Jun 12, 11:35 4
        
        You're off in Rambo Fantasy Land. -- nm - Reagen Jun 12, 11:36 3
        
        if a gunman has to stop to deal with another shooter, doesn't it make sense that - groiny Jun 12, 11:38 2
        
        again, experience shows us otherwise. -- nm - Reagen Jun 12, 11:41
        
        There are hundreds of millions of guns in the US and shooters are *not* being stopped. This argument is fallacy -- nm - zork Jun 12, 11:41
        
        that's a pretty big if. - znufrii Jun 12, 11:33 6
        
        BUT IT IS POSSIBLE! -- nm - groiny Jun 12, 11:34 5
        
        a lot of things are possible. - znufrii Jun 12, 11:36 4
        
        but, you said you are fine with speedbumps! -- nm - groiny Jun 12, 11:36 3
        
        Because speed bumps, by design, mitigate risk by controlling behavior, they don't add to it. - znufrii Jun 12, 11:38 2
        
        no, speed bumps are there to cause something or someone to pause. - groiny Jun 12, 11:40 1
        
        which smaller magazines does accomplish -- nm - zork Jun 12, 11:42
        
        why would he shoot the person if they hadn't shot anyone? -- nm - Beaker Jun 12, 11:33 2
        
        shot, not killed. the gunmen do not have a 1 to 1 shot to kill ratio. nm -- nm - groiny Jun 12, 11:34 1
        
        neither does a would=be heroic bystander returning fire -- nm - znufrii Jun 12, 11:44
      - please read what you just posted -- nm - zork Jun 12, 11:10 2
        
        oh, I know full well that I posted. - groiny Jun 12, 11:11 1
        
        i think the point in both cases is "less people dead = good". -- nm - Andie Jun 12, 11:13
      - those 3 people that didn't die are probably pretty pleased about it. -- nm - Andie Jun 12, 11:09
      - offs. - znufrii Jun 12, 11:09 1
        
        you guys are funny. -- nm - groiny Jun 12, 11:09

Post a message top

Replies are disabled on threads older than 7 days.