Nothing about the nine dead in South Carolina?

[calfzilla]

Black lives matter. (When killed by whites)

[Wiggs]

Jacob's trouble

[The Ugly]

I'm serious.  Have you not seen every time there's a school or mass shooting he pushes his gun grabbing agenda?  This is nothing new. 

I know you're serious, just not interested in conspiracy nonsense. Never helps anyone.

[Wiggs]

I know you're serious, just not interested in conspiracy nonsense. Never helps anyone.

Then take that part out and listen to what I said about every time one of these events happen, Obama is on his pulpit trying to go after guns.  He's been doing this a while now.  You see this don't you? He will continue to do this till he gets his way believe that.

[SF1900]

Then take that part out and listen to what I said about every time one of these events happen, Obama is on his pulpit trying to go after guns.  He's been doing this a while now.  You see this don't you? He will continue to do this till he gets his way believe that.

But hes out of the office in about a year. So, unless he can take guns away in a year or so, your conspiracy theory is not really valid.

He should have started this campaign about 7 1/2 years ago.

[Wiggs]

But hes out of the office in about a year. So, unless he can take guns away in a year or so, your conspiracy theory is not really valid.

He should have started this campaign about 7 1/2 years ago.

Assuming that doesn't happen, do you think that agenda would stop with him and wouldnt continue with the next POTUS?

[SF1900]

Assuming that doesn't happen, do you think that agenda would stop with him and wouldnt continue with the next POTUS?

It doesn't matter what the next POTUS does. Your original premise had nothing to do with the next POTUS. If Obama had a gun agenda (to remove all guns, which was your original premise),but fails to remove all guns from Americans, then your conspiracy theory has failed and makes little sense, because if he did have a gun agenda, it would have made more sense to start when he first got in office.

Now, if you want to reframe your argument such as, "Obama is trying to take away our guns and is attempting to pave the way for the future POTUS to do so" then do so. But that is a different premise than your original premise.

[The Ugly]

Then take that part out and listen to what I said about every time one of these events happen, Obama is on his pulpit trying to go after guns.  He's been doing this a while now.  You see this don't you? He will continue to do this till he gets his way believe that.

Of course he is: Never let a good crisis go to waste. All politicians use tragedy, no-brainer. The nefarious scheme attached is all you, though. Zero evidence, zero sense, all fantastic speculation.

[Wiggs]

It doesn't matter what the next POTUS does. Your original premise had nothing to do with the next POTUS. If Obama had a gun agenda (to remove all guns, which was your original premise),but fails to remove all guns from Americans, then your conspiracy theory has failed and makes little sense, because if he did have a gun agenda, it would have made more sense to start when he first got in office.

Now, if you want to reframe your argument such as, "Obama is trying to take away our guns and is attempting to pave the way for the future POTUS to do so" then do so. But that is a different premise than your original premise.

Just so we're clear, this is my original premise...

What policy?

Obama and gang has been setting up false flags to go after guns for several years.

You have not and never will win a war of words with me dude so quit trying to twist my words to what you want me to say and pay attention to what I am saying.

Obama AND GANG want your guns!  He and his people use false flags to tug at the publics' hearts to want to give them up.  

YOU changed it to he's out office in a year.  His GANG AND HE will continue until it is completed whether he is in office or not.  Hillary and Bill are a part of his gang.  So yes genius, it does matter who is the next president. You once again, can't see the forest through the trees.  

[The Ugly]

Just so we're clear, this is my original premise...

You have not and never will win a war of words with me dude so quit trying to twist my words to what you want me to say and pay attention to what I am saying.

Obama AND GANG want your guns!  He and his people use false flags to tug at the publics' hearts to want to give them up

Who judges these contests?

[Wiggs]

Who judges these contests?

You have no concept of critical thinking so not you.

[The Ugly]

You have no concept of critical thinking so not you.

Are you familiar with irony?

[SF1900]

Just so we're clear, this is my original premise...

You have not and never will win a war of words with me dude so quit trying to twist my words to what you want me to say and pay attention to what I am saying.

Obama AND GANG want your guns!  He and his people use false flags to tug at the publics' hearts to want to give them up.  

YOU changed it to he's out office in a year.  His GANG AND HE will continue until it is completed whether he is in office or not.  Hillary and Bill are a part of his gang.  So yes genius, it does matter who is the next president. You once again, can't see the forest through the trees.  

haha, winning a war of words with you would not be too difficult. Trust me, you are not smarter than I am. No matter how much you want to convince yourself of that lol.

Anyway, then your original premise needs to be consistent. You can't write, "Obama and his gang," then later on only write, "Obama." That is not a consistent premise Second, you never defined who is gang is. Is the next POTUS part of his gang or not? And how do you know they are part of his gang? Or are there certain people who are part of his gang? Or are certain people excluded?

Clearly, you still have much work to do regarding your original premise. Get back to me when you operationally define your terms in a more clearer manner.

Thanks so much.

[The Ugly]

http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=f55_1434681962

 

[Parker]

Kid led out in handcuffs with a bulletproof vest on...
Any thoughts on that?

[polychronopolous]

Kid led out in handcuffs with a bulletproof vest on...
Any thoughts on that?

[Wiggs]

haha, winning a war of words with you would not be too difficult. Trust me, you are not smarter than I am. No matter how much you want to convince yourself of that lol.

Anyway, then your original premise needs to be consistent. You can't write, "Obama and his gang," then later on only write, "Obama." That is not a consistent premise Second, you never defined who is gang is. Is the next POTUS part of his gang or not? And how do you know they are part of his gang? Or are there certain people who are part of his gang? Or are certain people excluded?

Clearly, you still have much work to do regarding your original premise. Get back to me when you operationally define your terms in a more clearer manner.

Thanks so much.

Trust me, I'm much more intelligent than you are.  Much more.  lol
I was very consistent.  Obama is the head of the snake (for now).  I don't need to say Obama and his gang every time.  I wrote it the first time and shouldn't have to write it every time.  It should be clear to you he couldn't get this done on his own. Perhaps you should stick to threads with more pictures since you're having difficulties grasping the basics of conversation.  You lose every time, then get frustrated and try to nitpick other posts of mine to get back in anyway you can.  I think it's cute.  You have a hard-on for trying to prove me wrong whether it's God, "conspiracy theories" or anything else. I find you laughable the way you get frustrated.  Me, it's another day another dollar.  

You're very welcome

 

Now, back on topic since you're trying to move away from it, I provided videos of people in his gang stating their feelings on guns.  

[El Diablo Blanco]

Black lives matter. (When killed by whites)

In the last couple days alone about 10 times more black people were killed by blacks but the media doesn't even give a fuck.

[Parker]

[SF1900]

Trust me, I'm much more intelligent than you are.  Much more.  lol
I was very consistent.  Obama is the head of the snake (for now).  I don't need to say Obama and his gang every time.  I wrote it the first time and shouldn't have to write it every time.  It should be clear to you he couldn't get this done on his own. Perhaps you should stick to threads with more pictures since your having difficulties grasping the basics of conversation.  You lose every time, then get frustrated and try to nitpick other posts of mine to get back in anyway you can.  I think it's cute.  You have a hard on for trying to prove me wrong whether it's God, "conspiracy theories" or anything else. I find you laughable the way you get frustrated.  Me, it's another day another dollar.  

You're very welcome

 

Now, back on topic since you're trying to move away from it, I provided videos of people in his gang stating their feelings on guns.  

How do you know you're much more intelligent than I am? Because you have your crazy conspiracy theories? lol. You would first need to define the term "intelligence" before you say that you are smarter than I am. But I am sure you knew that.  

And I am not frustrated at all. Just calling out your ridiculous conspiracy theories. I assure you I am very calm when typing my responses.

By the way, I do not have to prove you wrong. You prove yourself wrong by never citing evidence.  haha lol

[Wiggs]

Kid led out in handcuffs with a bulletproof vest on...
Any thoughts on that?

That's standard protocol. Look at DC Sniper.  He was in a vest.

[Wiggs]

How do you know you're much more intelligent than I am? Because you have your crazy conspiracy theories? lol. You would first need to define the term "intelligence" before you say that you are smarter than I am. But I am sure you knew that. 

Stay on topic sir.  No more distractions. We're talking about 2nd Amendment rights not having a brain measuring contest with you on the internet.

[SF1900]

Stay on topic sir.  No more distractions. We're talking about 2nd Amendment rights not having a brain measuring contest with you on the internet.

True. I agree that arguing who is smarter is fruitless, since "intelligence" is almost an impossible construct to define. Furthermore, people are smarter in different areas of functioning. But, remember, you're the one who started the whole, "You can't beat me on words" and "I am smarter than you." 

Anyway, I think this gun agenda conspiracy theory is overblown. Sure, democrats want stricter gun control, but there is no evidence that they want to remove all our guns.

[Wiggs]

True. I agree that arguing who is smarter is fruitless, since "intelligence" is almost an impossible construct to define. Furthermore, people are smarter in different areas of functioning. But, remember, you're the one who started the whole, "You can't beat me on words" and "I am smarter than you." 

Anyway, I think this gun agenda conspiracy theory is overblown. Sure, democrats want stricter gun control, but there is no evidence that they want to remove all our guns.

Time will tell. I hope I'm wrong.

[calfzilla]

True. I agree that arguing who is smarter is fruitless, since "intelligence" is almost an impossible construct to define. Furthermore, people are smarter in different areas of functioning. But, remember, you're the one who started the whole, "You can't beat me on words" and "I am smarter than you." 

Anyway, I think this gun agenda conspiracy theory is overblown. Sure, democrats want stricter gun control, but there is no evidence that they want to remove all our guns.

It's called a slippery slope my friend.