School shooting in Maryland - School officer takes down shooter

[Tsing Tao]

I could not have been more clear and less slippery. Try it sometime. I specifically addressed your argument about prevalence and made no mention of the Second Amendment. That is your fallback position whenever you find yourself up against a wall trying to debate the gun problem:

Yeah, really.

Ok, well then I apologize for not understanding what you were trying to ask. Assuming you weren't interested in just being snarky, tell me again what it is you were trying to say and I will do my best to respond in a polite manner. If all you were interested in is snark or trolling, well then have at it.

 

[Frederick Foresight]

Assuming you weren't interested in just being snarky, tell me again what it is you were trying to say and I will do my best to respond in a polite manner.

Self-explanatory:

https://www.elitetrader.com/et/thre...takes-down-shooter.319355/page-5#post-4629808

 

[Tsing Tao]

Self-explanatory:

https://www.elitetrader.com/et/thre...takes-down-shooter.319355/page-5#post-4629808

Right. And since I addressed the bomb making portion and didn't quite understand what you were getting at with the first comment, I'll once again ask you to clarify rather than simply posting a link.

 

[Frederick Foresight]

Right. And since I addressed the bomb making portion and didn't quite understand what you were getting at with the first comment, I'll once again ask you to clarify rather than simply posting a link.

Sorry, Tsing, but if you understood the point you, yourself, were making then you would not need me to explain my response. Just think about it; it's all there. No snark, no filler. But since you will always resort to your Second Amendment fallback position, we know how the "debate" ends. That is why I addressed only the specific component of what you said in isolation -- to avoid the generic conclusion.

 

[Tsing Tao]

Sorry, Tsing, but if you understood the point you, yourself, were making then you would not need me to explain my response. Just think about it; it's all there. No snark, no filler. But since you will always resort to your Second Amendment fallback position, we know how the "debate" ends. That is why I addressed only the specific component of what you said in isolation -- to avoid the generic conclusion.

Ok, you're obviously not interested in the point you made since you are continually providing excuses to not clarify it.

 

[Frederick Foresight]

Ok, you're obviously not interested in the point you made since you are continually providing excuses to not clarify it.

I'm not interested in repeating my point since I don't see how that will move us forward. You will either take a moment to understand it or I will be wasting my time going forward.

 

[Tsing Tao]

I'm not interested in repeating my point since I don't see how that will move us forward. You will either take a moment to understand it or I will be wasting my time going forward.

So you find it more important to waste your time over and over debating that you don't want to waste your time. Very effective.

 

[Frederick Foresight]

So you find it more important to waste your time over and over debating that you don't want to waste your time. Very effective.

You asked me to repeat myself. I directed you to what I wrote, which serves the same purpose. But you seem to want me to jump and dance. I'm disinclined.

 

[Tsing Tao]

You asked me to repeat myself. I directed you to what I wrote, which serves the same purpose. But you seem to want me to jump and dance. I'm disinclined.

But you're dancing right now.

 

[Frederick Foresight]

But you're dancing right now.

Am I? I would be if I bent over backwards repeating myself trying to get you to "understand" my point. Whereas this way, I'm just calling it for what it is.