Menu
Forum
General Car Audio
Subwoofers
Speakers
Amplifiers
Head Units
Car Audio Build Logs
Wiring, Electrical and Installation
Enclosure Design & Construction
Car Audio Classifieds
Home Audio
Off-topic Discussion
The Lounge
What's new
Search forums
Gallery
New media
New comments
Search media
Members
Registered members
Current visitors
Classifieds Member Feedback
SHOP
Shop Head Units
Shop Amplifiers
Shop Speakers
Shop Subwoofers
Shop eBay Car Audio
Log in / Register
Forum
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
Log in / Join
What’s new
Search
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
Search titles and first posts only
Search titles only
General Car Audio
Subwoofers
Speakers
Amplifiers
Head Units
Car Audio Build Logs
Wiring, Electrical and Installation
Enclosure Design & Construction
Car Audio Classifieds
Home Audio
Off-topic Discussion
The Lounge
What's new
Search forums
Menu
Reply to thread
Forum
Off-topic Discussion
The Lounge
Current events discussion
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Message
<blockquote data-quote="RobGMN" data-source="post: 8921082" data-attributes="member: 683408"><p>Which is precisely what right-wingers do.</p><p>Are you new?</p><p></p><p>"A credible source that says guns don't go off on their own"? That's trying to prove a negative. </p><p>A man as highly educated as yourself should know better.</p><p></p><p>Haw about you show me a proof of a gun that spontaneously fired in the complete absence of human intervention, or a physical change of state, such as falling from a height, etc.</p><p></p><p></p><p>And yet you tried to defend him by saying his daughter voluntarily went to look at his new gun, at that Glocks are known to just fire on their own.</p><p></p><p>Any mechanical gun (i.e ALL of them, can be fired unintentionally. It's the nature of the beast. </p><p>But to support your argument, show me a gun that has NO possibility of being fired accidentally.</p><p>A gun that is 100% fail-safe.</p><p>Mfgr and model, please.</p><p></p><p>See above.</p><p></p><p>At this point, I don't even know WTF you are talking about. </p><p>There may be flawed court DECISIONS, but unless they get changed in some way, the flaws are irrelevant.</p><p>Do you think the mere existence of a flaw in a court decision simply changes the decision?</p><p></p><p>So an accidental discharge means he didn't kill his daughter? Or that the court simply declined to prosecute for negligent homicide, in disregard of the fact that he was drunk & handling a gun, the fact that he pointed the gun at his daughter while drunk, and the fact that he pulled the trigger while drunk, handling a gun, AND pointing it at his daughter?</p><p></p><p>If someone did the same but it was to a family member of yours, maybe your kid, would you celebrate the lack of prosecution, and defend the person by saying the gun they had is known to "go off", when the actual occurrence of such is 4/10,000%</p><p></p><p>The jury was picked by Trump's attorneys. Are you suggesting his attorneys were in on the conspiracy to nail him, or that EVERY possible person that could have been picked for the jury was anti-Trump?</p><p>The attorney option seems unlikely.</p><p></p><p>So that leaves a 100% chance that ANY jury pool would convict. Which in turn means that EVERYONE is against Trump. And if EVERYONE is against Trump, then he needs to go.</p><p></p><p>So which option do think it is?</p><p></p><p>Whether I agree or not is irrelevant. The decision is law.</p><p></p><p>What's with you right-wingers, thinking that your opinions, beliefs, feelings, somehow change the facts and reality></p><p>Sorry, you can opine all you want that the court decisions against Trump are invalid. That will NEVER change those decisions.</p><p>And if that confuses you, interpret it (as the right-wingers love to say) "F*ck your feelings", because they are 100% irrelevant in the face of facts they my contradict.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="RobGMN, post: 8921082, member: 683408"] Which is precisely what right-wingers do. Are you new? "A credible source that says guns don't go off on their own"? That's trying to prove a negative. A man as highly educated as yourself should know better. Haw about you show me a proof of a gun that spontaneously fired in the complete absence of human intervention, or a physical change of state, such as falling from a height, etc. And yet you tried to defend him by saying his daughter voluntarily went to look at his new gun, at that Glocks are known to just fire on their own. Any mechanical gun (i.e ALL of them, can be fired unintentionally. It's the nature of the beast. But to support your argument, show me a gun that has NO possibility of being fired accidentally. A gun that is 100% fail-safe. Mfgr and model, please. See above. At this point, I don't even know WTF you are talking about. There may be flawed court DECISIONS, but unless they get changed in some way, the flaws are irrelevant. Do you think the mere existence of a flaw in a court decision simply changes the decision? So an accidental discharge means he didn't kill his daughter? Or that the court simply declined to prosecute for negligent homicide, in disregard of the fact that he was drunk & handling a gun, the fact that he pointed the gun at his daughter while drunk, and the fact that he pulled the trigger while drunk, handling a gun, AND pointing it at his daughter? If someone did the same but it was to a family member of yours, maybe your kid, would you celebrate the lack of prosecution, and defend the person by saying the gun they had is known to "go off", when the actual occurrence of such is 4/10,000% The jury was picked by Trump's attorneys. Are you suggesting his attorneys were in on the conspiracy to nail him, or that EVERY possible person that could have been picked for the jury was anti-Trump? The attorney option seems unlikely. So that leaves a 100% chance that ANY jury pool would convict. Which in turn means that EVERYONE is against Trump. And if EVERYONE is against Trump, then he needs to go. So which option do think it is? Whether I agree or not is irrelevant. The decision is law. What's with you right-wingers, thinking that your opinions, beliefs, feelings, somehow change the facts and reality> Sorry, you can opine all you want that the court decisions against Trump are invalid. That will NEVER change those decisions. And if that confuses you, interpret it (as the right-wingers love to say) "F*ck your feelings", because they are 100% irrelevant in the face of facts they my contradict. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forum
Off-topic Discussion
The Lounge
Current events discussion
Top
Menu
What's new
Forum list
