General Discussion

SuperDutyTX

(79 posts)

56. Thanks!

Tue Jun 14, 2016, 05:51 PM

Jun 2016

Thanks for the reply!

You are correct in that I do not know what a decidua, choronic villi, or vacurrette is. That said, I am personally pro-choice. I'm a married male; so it's something that (up to this point) I've never had to deal with, or felt very passionate about, but I do fundamentally believe there are reasons a woman would need to terminate a pregnancy. As a result, I would never go making technical recommendations on the specifics of when, and under what circumstances one is performed; I'd just generally support the idea.

I didn't mean to turn this into an abortion thread either; I was simply trying to help the OP (and others) to more accurately describe their beliefs. For this specific issue, the framing is of critical importance; it's literally the difference between "I am advocating the ban/restriction/limitation a thousand firearms" to "I am advocating the ban/restriction/limitation hundreds of millions of firearms".

Regardless of what side you fall on, I was just trying to be helpful.

Take care!

Click here to purchase valentine hearts!

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

194 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

Do not think about arguing [View all] uppityperson Jun 2016 OP

a kick uppityperson Jun 2016 #1

K&R demmiblue Jun 2016 #2

Perhaps some context would help SuperDutyTX Jun 2016 #3

there is a time and place for every argument. passiveporcupine Jun 2016 #11

If it's time to discuss legislation, it's time to discuss technical accuracy... Marengo Jun 2016 #15

That has happened JustAnotherGen Jun 2016 #53

Yep, my point exactly. The absolute ignorance of those pieces of legislation... Marengo Jun 2016 #126

Well I'm a woman JustAnotherGen Jun 2016 #147

Not really. People can express the size and the shape of the thing they want without technical DisgustipatedinCA Jun 2016 #125

Sure, anyone can bring anything to the table. But, if demands are based on ignorance, it's.. Marengo Jun 2016 #128

spot on Locrian Jun 2016 #149

Are you suggesting that DU will write legislation? Maru Kitteh Jun 2016 #176

Rubbish. Go ahead and apply the stifling argument in a discussion concerning... Marengo Jun 2016 #179

Thank you. uppityperson Jun 2016 #16

Agreed. So why are so many arguing for gun bans? cleanhippie Jun 2016 #18

Respectfully SuperDutyTX Jun 2016 #20

SuperDutyTX, I understand what you are trying to say and I concur. Stonepounder Jun 2016 #68

"assault weapon" is used becasue it is a gray area, and has no meaning in law. As far as I know... Matt_R Jun 2016 #89

I think it's a moot point, as I don't expect to see any meaningful regulation Crunchy Frog Jun 2016 #92

In my opinion lancer78 Jun 2016 #114

I don't think anyone is saying that. Stonepounder Jun 2016 #117

I read a lot here, but lancer78 Jun 2016 #119

I think it would be nice if you let us have our funerals Mojorabbit Jun 2016 #118

Were you addressing me? nt passiveporcupine Jun 2016 #135

No, sorry. It is just so jarring when things are still really raw here. nt Mojorabbit Jun 2016 #136

I understand. passiveporcupine Jun 2016 #137

Let's ban civilian sales of assault weapons. yallerdawg Jun 2016 #14

Vent away, but you just stepped into the trap. ManiacJoe Jun 2016 #30

Assault weapons. yallerdawg Jun 2016 #32

Of all the variations on the definition of "assault weapon" ManiacJoe Jun 2016 #34

Assault weapon. yallerdawg Jun 2016 #37

Wow. They really got that one wrong. ManiacJoe Jun 2016 #39

How bad of a damn shot do you have to be Aerows Jun 2016 #58

I completely take your point, but the "but" here is important: Recursion Jun 2016 #74

What makes you believe that magazine capacity is related to shooter accuracy? ManiacJoe Jun 2016 #75

? blue neen Jun 2016 #95

Paper targets, steel targets, etc. ManiacJoe Jun 2016 #101

Paper targets don't have hearts and lungs and brains. blue neen Jun 2016 #108

Glad we understand paper targets. ManiacJoe Jun 2016 #116

Precisely the point I was making to the person above you Aerows Jun 2016 #112

Training, hunting.... ManiacJoe Jun 2016 #120

"I don't hunt anymore" Aerows Jun 2016 #134

You seem to be suggesting that some guns were "designed for hunting". ManiacJoe Jun 2016 #140

It looks like Aerows Jun 2016 #141

While you could use that tool, it would not be the ManiacJoe Jun 2016 #143

And we've arrived at our destination. n/t Aerows Jun 2016 #144

Thanks, if not for you, an anonymous poster on a internet forum, I would have totally A Simple Game Jun 2016 #154

No, that is neither how it is supposed to work nor actually does work. ManiacJoe Jun 2016 #157

"the idiots who created the artificial definition of "assault weapon". Damn Gun Digest - those jmg257 Jun 2016 #160

Yes, that particular list does contain some ManiacJoe Jun 2016 #161

Do us all a favor and give us your definition of an assault weapon. A Simple Game Jun 2016 #173

I have no definition of "assault weapon". ManiacJoe Jun 2016 #177

You do realize that there were assault weapons even before gunpowder was invented don't you? A Simple Game Jun 2016 #180

Obviously you are not using the phrase the way everyone else is. ManiacJoe Jun 2016 #181

So according to you a weapon is a weapon is a weapon and that's all there is to it? A Simple Game Jun 2016 #182

Thank you for confirming your non-standard use of the phrase. ManiacJoe Jun 2016 #183

OK I'll lower myself to play your semantics game. A Simple Game Jun 2016 #185

I cannot take credit for any semantics game. ManiacJoe Jun 2016 #186

If you can't grasp the concept of categories of weapons then there is no sense in continuing A Simple Game Jun 2016 #187

Sorry that the conversation is not going your way. ManiacJoe Jun 2016 #188

In my case talking with someone that doesn't admit a assault rifle A Simple Game Jun 2016 #189

Thank you for at least admitting your ignorance. ManiacJoe Jun 2016 #191

OK just one more time because it seems you are trying. A Simple Game Jun 2016 #193

Thanks for taking the next step. ManiacJoe Jun 2016 #194

Maybe you guys should start with the "legal" definitons..may vary depending what jurisdiction, jmg257 Jun 2016 #190

No argument there regarding NY. ManiacJoe Jun 2016 #192

But, we tried that already and it didn't work. Major Hogwash Jun 2016 #70

Hm. I feel the opposite: handguns are the real problem in the US Recursion Jun 2016 #73

Yet, you are including suicides in the figure that you're using for all gun deaths. Major Hogwash Jun 2016 #87

Even in mass murders, handguns have a slight majority Recursion Jun 2016 #88

The gun manufacturers did away with some of the offending characteristics . . . Major Hogwash Jun 2016 #99

And your last sentence is the most important thing on the thread, I think Recursion Jun 2016 #100

The AMA has finally taken a stand to restrict gun ownership. Jim Beard Jun 2016 #107

We didn't fail to go to the moon Aerows Jun 2016 #113

And there we go lancer78 Jun 2016 #115

Let's do OwlinAZ Jun 2016 #152

TX bigot language suks, imo saidsimplesimon Jun 2016 #28

If gun trolls and the NRA would get out of the way, there is no doubt in my mind that Squinch Jun 2016 #42

+1 Gidney N Cloyd Jun 2016 #52

Thanks! SuperDutyTX Jun 2016 #56

You have completely missed the point. The point was that you have an opinion about these topics Squinch Jun 2016 #59

Thanks! SuperDutyTX Jun 2016 #62

No, actually it really wouldn't be like that at all. It would be like saying, "we don't want these Squinch Jun 2016 #63

Sounds like we're at an impasse. SuperDutyTX Jun 2016 #64

Some of us lancer78 Jun 2016 #129

You always seem to emerge from somewhere when these massacres happen, just to tell Squinch Jun 2016 #164

Your civility is admirable PJMcK Jun 2016 #54

NRA REPORTING FOR DUTY Skittles Jun 2016 #77

Exactly. Squinch Jun 2016 #105

I see where you're going with this. Bucky Jun 2016 #122

Any weapon that can do THAT needs to go away stopwastingmymoney Jun 2016 #142

Then get a Democrat to propose a bill that makes them go away Recursion Jun 2016 #146

agree treestar Jun 2016 #4

Understood. But what about forums where legislation is being discussed (A LOT)? jmg257 Jun 2016 #5

As I said in the OP Yes, those terms matter for legislation, but not on forums, not on Facebook, not uppityperson Jun 2016 #6

OK but they matter if people's ignorance of the subject means they're going in literally Recursion Jun 2016 #71

Pls forgive my ignorance-- lastlib Jun 2016 #82

Accepting detachable magazines Recursion Jun 2016 #84

Why perpetuate ignorance? TipTok Jun 2016 #139

+1, any device DESIGNED to kill a lot of humans efficiently shouldn't be in the hands of avg citizen uponit7771 Jun 2016 #7

That's a principle I can be on board with. BUT Recursion Jun 2016 #72

+1000. n/t pnwmom Jun 2016 #8

God, YES! I have moaned about the semantics war being used by Photographer Jun 2016 #9

K&R! Duval Jun 2016 #10

Your argument is more effective if you use actual facts, accepted terms and language to support it. Android3.14 Jun 2016 #12

You're exactly what the post is talking about. You missed the point, entirely. Ignore. lindysalsagal Jun 2016 #38

He didn't miss the point. Chellee Jun 2016 #61

For the record, I also loathe that sort of pedantic deflection. Lizzie Poppet Jun 2016 #13

Precisely, it is all Bettie Jun 2016 #67

OK, but this detail really, really, really matters to the OP's cause Recursion Jun 2016 #78

They do that to discredit the messenger ErikJ Jun 2016 #17

"to make him look like he doesnt know what he's talking about" AtheistCrusader Jun 2016 #21

Only to a gun-nut techy geek. ErikJ Jun 2016 #23

Let me let you in on a secret AtheistCrusader Jun 2016 #26

It does SuperDutyTX Jun 2016 #27

I said situations like these. ErikJ Jun 2016 #31

The AR platform in the right configuration, such as the AR-10, is an excellent hunting rifle... Marengo Jun 2016 #41

Greatly reduced Aussy suicide and mass shootings. ErikJ Jun 2016 #47

I've heard that as well, but in researching found several studies which suggest... Marengo Jun 2016 #123

Your last point is crucial: Australia targeted all semi-automatics Recursion Jun 2016 #80

The OP is talking about the kinds of firearms that can be used to kill hundreds in minutes. Squinch Jun 2016 #65

No, the OP *thinks* he or she is talking about that Recursion Jun 2016 #79

You can read my mind?!?!!!! uppityperson Jun 2016 #81

I can read your posts Recursion Jun 2016 #86

I support not being able to kill 49 people in a short period of time. I don't use uppityperson Jun 2016 #90

OK, so step 1 is coming to terms with the fact that we need a new law to do that Recursion Jun 2016 #94

I am in agreement with you. Doing the wrong thing doesn't help. uppityperson Jun 2016 #97

That's because the NRA and gun lobbies were allowed to write the legislation. Squinch Jun 2016 #93

I posted this on truth-out.org and it was REMOVED ... Jopin Klobe Jun 2016 #19

What makes you think people who are disgusted with guns being used in mass shootings passiveporcupine Jun 2016 #24

"recreate the feeling of automatic firing" but not the accuracy. AtheistCrusader Jun 2016 #29

This is not the right thread for that video. Would you please consider posting it elsewhere? uppityperson Jun 2016 #36

K and r. cwydro Jun 2016 #22

I just heard this Jackson Browne song for the first time today bonemachine Jun 2016 #25

This technical diversion shit means nothing when some maniac The_Casual_Observer Jun 2016 #33

Exactly, thank you uppityperson Jun 2016 #57

Rec & Kick. Well stated. MerryBlooms Jun 2016 #35

Anyone who uses any of the following arguments is a troll and should be ignored completely. Squinch Jun 2016 #40

As if you have the authority to set any rules on this discussion... Marengo Jun 2016 #43

Simply expressing my opinion. I am sorry if that offends you. uppityperson Jun 2016 #50

Why are NRA / 2A so entrenched ? karadax Jun 2016 #44

Yes, those terms matter for legislation uppityperson Jun 2016 #46

This message was self-deleted by its author Sissyk Jun 2016 #45

Best wishes to your niece, hoping she regains her equilibrium. uppityperson Jun 2016 #51

But what about the zombies? ErikJ Jun 2016 #48

A right wing friend failed an attempt to bait me. edgineered Jun 2016 #49

The distinction between a semi-automatic weapon and fully automatic AR 15 means very little to the still_one Jun 2016 #55

People who espouse opinions on guns with no clue how they work sound as clueless and out of touch Lee-Lee Jun 2016 #60

You won't take my opinion seriously that too many were killed too fast by a murderous jerk and his uppityperson Jun 2016 #66

I believe it was both. And I believe that this one and the one who said, "You Squinch Jun 2016 #69

It is all about how you express your opinion. ManiacJoe Jun 2016 #85

Let's make this simple. I don't like people having access to guns that can kill that many people uppityperson Jun 2016 #91

We care about actually addressing the problem rather than appearing to Recursion Jun 2016 #96

An excellent example of a non-technical statement. ManiacJoe Jun 2016 #98

Therefore....what? Confiscate all repeating firearms? Just reading posts Jun 2016 #145

One could carry the logic that far. ManiacJoe Jun 2016 #158

Good point. While I disagree with imposing more gun control, I can at least see a rationale behind Just reading posts Jun 2016 #159

Lol, 50 dead and you whine about this? Logical Jun 2016 #132

they are cowards Skittles Jun 2016 #76

It usually matters. Words have meanings even on DU. aikoaiko Jun 2016 #83

A 5 or 6 shot revolver could NEVER kill that many people. A double barrel shotgun the same. JanMichael Jun 2016 #102

A person with a essme Jun 2016 #103

Bullshit. Less accuracy and less kill velocity. That has never happened. JanMichael Jun 2016 #109

I really, really want one of these essme Jun 2016 #111

The Va tech shooter used pistols and killed nearly as many people jack_krass Jun 2016 #150

Ah but how different was the total number of casualties? JanMichael Jun 2016 #166

Sandy Hook would have been much worse with an AK-47 clone. ManiacJoe Jun 2016 #167

Then ban them first? nt JanMichael Jun 2016 #168

Why first? ManiacJoe Jun 2016 #169

You just said that the AK-47 knockoffs would kill more than the 20 or so little kids. JanMichael Jun 2016 #171

No, that is not what I said. ManiacJoe Jun 2016 #172

See Virginia tech Duckhunter935 Jun 2016 #153

Not a revolver though, huh? JanMichael Jun 2016 #170

. Squinch Jun 2016 #110

Exactly. Time we start treating gunners like dung, rather than coddling them and their sick junk. Hoyt Jun 2016 #104

You, Sir... 63splitwindow Jun 2016 #106

K&R Dem2 Jun 2016 #121

Oh yes, this^^^^^ Arazi Jun 2016 #124

It's like a goddamn Tom Clancy novel for the gunner trash alcibiades_mystery Jun 2016 #127

it is easy to see why they support Trump Skittles Jun 2016 #148

This message was self-deleted by its author Lint Head Jun 2016 #130

huh, thanks for the kick but maybe to the wrong thread? uppityperson Jun 2016 #131

Thanks. Fumbled fingered tonight. Lint Head Jun 2016 #133

Too late... TipTok Jun 2016 #138

And the question remains - how many more before we do something? liberal N proud Jun 2016 #151

k and r niyad Jun 2016 #155

distractive bullshit heaven05 Jun 2016 #156

It's like claiming the argument against a nuke murdering millions is invalid.... Spitfire of ATJ Jun 2016 #162

"but you look foolish and how can you ask for something without being accurate" uppityperson Jun 2016 #163

Another way of putting it.... Spitfire of ATJ Jun 2016 #165

Strongest recommendation suffragette Jun 2016 #174

You are welcome. I still feel that way, 2 date later. I'm getting angry now,past shocked pain, but uppityperson Jun 2016 #175

There's a reason some on here refer to it as a 'trap' suffragette Jun 2016 #178

You will get no argument from me! Initech Jun 2016 #184