"abusive and irrational hysterics" (Reply #65) - Democratic Underground Forums

iverglas

(38,549 posts)

65. "abusive and irrational hysterics"

Thu Jan 5, 2012, 12:37 PM

Jan 2012

Would you like to stand up and spit those mealies out of your mouth and state clearly the name(s) of the poster(s) who you allege engaged in abusive and irrational hysterics in that thread?

"Abusive" indicates a violation of the rules of the website. If your characterization is accurate, why were the posts in question not deleted? Obviously you reported such a violation.

Irrational? Hm, was(were) the poster(s) in question a woman (women)?

I'd think so, becuase "hysterics", as we all know, refers to a weakness of women.

What a spectacle.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

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

107 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

What defines "reasonable restrictions"? [View all] Nuclear Unicorn Dec 2011 OP

Think in this context... MicaelS Dec 2011 #1

Excellent point! OneTenthofOnePercent Dec 2011 #3

Thorny questions one-eyed fat man Dec 2011 #6

Here the issue of minors comes into play DissedByBush Dec 2011 #11

Nor do I one-eyed fat man Dec 2011 #16

Technicalities DissedByBush Dec 2011 #27

Sure fightthegoodfightnow Dec 2011 #37

sure I am! iverglas Jan 2012 #60

I think banning third-trimester abortions is a reasonable restriction Common Sense Party Jan 2012 #67

well good for you, chum! iverglas Jan 2012 #68

You're not nearly as clever as you think you are. Common Sense Party Jan 2012 #75

"hostile"? iverglas Jan 2012 #77

Post removed Post removed Jan 2012 #78

oh dear, nothing to quote, I see iverglas Jan 2012 #80

There you go again. Common Sense Party Jan 2012 #82

I do indeed iverglas Jan 2012 #87

You are challenging the most sacred, most liberal, most progressive, most important of all rights! TPaine7 Jan 2012 #69

huh iverglas Jan 2012 #74

Restrictions that are within the ability rrneck Dec 2011 #2

...and still Wayne Lapierre with fightthegoodfightnow Dec 2011 #38

I'm sure you can provide a cite for that claim, right? DonP Dec 2011 #43

Wand Rape fightthegoodfightnow Dec 2011 #50

Parts of it gejohnston Dec 2011 #53

Read Thread fightthegoodfightnow Dec 2011 #56

Florida has what I consider "reasonable restrictions" ... spin Dec 2011 #4

another question is gejohnston Dec 2011 #5

I think the real question is -- Nuclear Unicorn Dec 2011 #7

see my post 59 iverglas Jan 2012 #61

I asked that a few years back and got abusive and irrational hysterics in response TPaine7 Dec 2011 #8

I would like to see something along the lines of -- Nuclear Unicorn Dec 2011 #9

Some initial reactions DissedByBush Dec 2011 #12

For the most part, I agree with you on these. Having to purchase a product to exercise a SlimJimmy Dec 2011 #24

Of course you have to purchase a gun DissedByBush Dec 2011 #26

You COULD concievably make one... We_Have_A_Problem Dec 2011 #28

The question is the reason for the cost DissedByBush Dec 2011 #31

I agree with you 100%. We_Have_A_Problem Dec 2011 #35

Agree, well stated. SlimJimmy Dec 2011 #36

There's a Constitutional Right to Cheap Guns? fightthegoodfightnow Dec 2011 #39

You know if you worked at it ... just a little ... you could be even less informed DonP Dec 2011 #40

What part of that fact do you disagree with? fightthegoodfightnow Dec 2011 #42

The post did not imply that DonP Dec 2011 #44

Read Post 31 Again fightthegoodfightnow Dec 2011 #47

Wrong as usual... We_Have_A_Problem Dec 2011 #57

No, that's not a fact. PavePusher Dec 2011 #45

No, but there is a Constitutional Right.... PavePusher Dec 2011 #46

In order to make sure poor people couldn't get guns DissedByBush Dec 2011 #49

Banning and Taxing are Different Things fightthegoodfightnow Dec 2011 #51

Not when it comes to Constitutionally protected activities. See "Minneapolis Star v. Minnesota"... friendly_iconoclast Dec 2011 #54

Ridiculous fightthegoodfightnow Jan 2012 #95

It is when the taxes act to limit availability. And there are already taxes on guns and ammo. friendly_iconoclast Jan 2012 #99

Not if the "tax"... We_Have_A_Problem Jan 2012 #71

Ban? fightthegoodfightnow Jan 2012 #96

not recent but gejohnston Jan 2012 #98

No i cannot We_Have_A_Problem Jan 2012 #102

Well let’s see…. MicaelS Dec 2011 #13

Please keep in mind -- my bullet list was NOT recommendations Nuclear Unicorn Dec 2011 #14

Sure I undertand that... MicaelS Dec 2011 #15

I've had a number of "does not exist" responses... SteveW Dec 2011 #25

"abusive and irrational hysterics" iverglas Jan 2012 #65

Yes, abusive and irrational hysterics. TPaine7 Jan 2012 #70

I'm sorry; I forgot to answer iverglas Jan 2012 #88

"What a spectacle " MicaelS Jan 2012 #72

gosh iverglas Jan 2012 #73

Jurors have axes to grind? Simo 1939_1940 Jan 2012 #84

hahahaha iverglas Jan 2012 #92

Depends on who you are DissedByBush Dec 2011 #10

yes, it is the actions that need to discussed and "restricted" Tuesday Afternoon Dec 2011 #30

I think we mostly agree on restricted actions already DissedByBush Dec 2011 #32

This message was self-deleted by its author Tuesday Afternoon Dec 2011 #34

What I don't understand is We_Have_A_Problem Dec 2011 #17

Well, I invite the advocates of reasonable restrictions to define that term Nuclear Unicorn Dec 2011 #18

That's the thing though... We_Have_A_Problem Dec 2011 #19

It might be argued that background checks are reasonable Nuclear Unicorn Dec 2011 #20

Well except that... We_Have_A_Problem Dec 2011 #21

I dunno. The law would state its illegal for covicted felons to own Nuclear Unicorn Dec 2011 #22

But a felon knows he is ineligible... We_Have_A_Problem Dec 2011 #23

You wouldn't believe DissedByBush Dec 2011 #33

It reminds me of the Army DissedByBush Dec 2011 #29

Right.... fightthegoodfightnow Dec 2011 #41

seatbelts sylveste Dec 2011 #48

Good luck with that... fightthegoodfightnow Dec 2011 #52

You mean that CCW licenses should be honored universally, like driver's licenses... friendly_iconoclast Dec 2011 #55

Wish For? fightthegoodfightnow Jan 2012 #106

Lets look at this... We_Have_A_Problem Dec 2011 #58

since you ask ... iverglas Jan 2012 #59

um Nuclear Unicorn Jan 2012 #63

hm iverglas Jan 2012 #64

Thank-you for your replies Nuclear Unicorn Jan 2012 #66

Re. mandatory registration: Simo 1939_1940 Jan 2012 #85

Yes, political surveys rarely contain validity checks to ensure that the answers are meaningful slackmaster Jan 2012 #101

It's a war of words. Reasonable restrictions versus compromise. Remmah2 Jan 2012 #62

Reasonable? Fredjust Jan 2012 #76

Or the Swiss model gejohnston Jan 2012 #79

Perhaps Nuclear Unicorn Jan 2012 #81

The Supreme Court isn't always right... Fredjust Jan 2012 #86

Nope sorry - you're wrong. We_Have_A_Problem Jan 2012 #91

And here I thought "judicial activism" was a solely RW complaint Nuclear Unicorn Jan 2012 #93

death spewers? rrneck Jan 2012 #83

They can take my death spewer when they pry it from my cold dead hands. Remmah2 Jan 2012 #89

If you're armed and they're not I wonder how that is supposed to work. Nuclear Unicorn Jan 2012 #94

If you see no purpose... We_Have_A_Problem Jan 2012 #90

Not One Thing? fightthegoodfightnow Jan 2012 #97

Yeah really We_Have_A_Problem Jan 2012 #103

Boogy Man Logic fightthegoodfightnow Jan 2012 #104

PS fightthegoodfightnow Jan 2012 #105

Hehe... ellisonz Jan 2012 #107

death spewers...instant classic. disdeathspew the public NOW! it's for the childrenz. ileus Jan 2012 #100

Gun Control & RKBA

iverglas

Edit history

Recommendations