Had it out with my liberal female co-worker to-day

Site Notices

[ARCHIVED THREAD] - Had it out with my liberal female co-worker to-day (Page 1 of 2)

Posted: 10/28/2004 3:41:24 PM EDT

She is the cute, red-headed, 26-yo architect who has a workstation next to mine. She's a typical Austinite liberal vegetarian who just voted for Kerry today. She doesn't like guns, ESPECIALLY military-style guns. She told me, "What do people need those for - they should be completely banned except for police and military people."

So I told her:
"It's not about need. Nobody needs a monster 4X4, but does that mean they can't get one?"

Her:
"Yeah, but 4 x 4s aren't made for killing people."

Then I said:
"I also don't like the govt to be my nanny and tell me what I can or cannot have." I brought up legalizing marijuana, which she agreed with.

Then I also said:
"Also, if criminals wanted those guns, a law won't do anything to stop them from getting them."

She looked at me with squinted eyes and said nothing, and returned to her computer.

So, what do you think? Did I win?

Posted: 10/28/2004 3:42:39 PM EDT

[#1]

Not possible...

also:

if she's 26 and an architect

18-19 at HS grad

5 yr program/apprenticeship

she's barely into the real world, artistic, and hasn't been gang raped in her own apartment.

go figure.

Posted: 10/28/2004 3:45:34 PM EDT

[#2]

You shopuld point out that England's handgun crime rate went up after they banned all handguns.

Banning guns just renders decent people defensless.

Posted: 10/28/2004 3:46:02 PM EDT

[#3]

Quoted:
You shopuld point out that England's handgun crime rate went up after they banned all handguns.

Banning guns just renders decent people defensless.

Good point.

Posted: 10/28/2004 3:46:06 PM EDT

[#4]

Quoted:

So, what do you think? Did I win?

You're arguing with a woman and you ask, "Did I win?"

Posted: 10/28/2004 3:46:11 PM EDT

[#5]

She'll be filing a complaint about you with the boss tomorrow.

Posted: 10/28/2004 3:47:20 PM EDT

[#6]

Her:
"Yeah, but 4 x 4s aren't made for killing people."

neither are ny of the guns i own... they are for killing wild game, plinking, and target and competition shooting... except for that one gun.. but that wasnt made to kill people, it was made to get them out of my house.

Posted: 10/28/2004 3:48:18 PM EDT

[#7]

You lost with that 4X4 remark. No way for you to come back from her rebuttal. next time at least use the sports car theory. Then when she says sports cars aren't made to kill people , you can say then how come more people die each yr in car accidents?

Posted: 10/28/2004 3:52:12 PM EDT

[#8]

Ask her why she owns a car that is capable of exceeding the posted speed limit in your state. Who needs a car that can go that fast anyway. Aren't those cars only designed to break the law?

Posted: 10/28/2004 3:53:25 PM EDT

[#9]

Your debating skills suck and now another women thinks you are a loser.

Sgatr15

Posted: 10/28/2004 3:54:27 PM EDT

[#10]

Quoted:
Your debating skills suck and now another women thinks you are a loser.

Sgatr15

Yeah but at least I stood my position.

Posted: 10/28/2004 3:54:49 PM EDT

[#11]

One more time.
NEVER EVER get into the need vs want argument. They will never understand. You will lose everytime, because of the "made to kill" distinction. You lost this time.
Ask if the presence of the weapons causes measurable harm to society. She will likely try to say yes.
Then point out that a Justice Dept study could find no evidence that banning such weapons had any effect on crime. There is no evidence to support the idea that the banning of the AWs prevented or stopped any crimes.
Stop there. Explain no further. Let her chew on that.
Then when she tries to make the same point from another angle, simply choose different words to restate your point.
Society gains nothing from banning the weapons to law abiding citizens, because the LACs aren't the problem. Criminals will always be the problem. The basic nature of the criminal is to break the law, so there only needs to be one law made against a behavior (such as the one against murder) and enforce it.
Then point out the prime flaw in her slaw is that in order to make her next point, she HAS to assume that the average law abiding citizen is a latent psychopath just looking for a reason to snap and kill people. Treating people like they are guilty and forcing them to prove themselves innocent goes against everything the American legal system is based upon. Remember 'innocent until proven guilty'? The burden of proof is not upon the accused, but rather the accuser.
The very concept of gun control and certainly the AWB is Unamerican, because it contradicts our best legal traditions.
I can't say if you will win, ie, convince her, but you will make her shut up, and you may even make her think about it for a while.

Posted: 10/28/2004 3:56:18 PM EDT

[#12]

Quoted:
You lost with that 4X4 remark. No way for you to come back from her rebuttal. next time at least use the sports car theory. Then when she says sports cars aren't made to kill people , you can say then how come more people die each yr in car accidents?

There is STILL the distinction of 'made to kill'.
You CANNOT win with that tack.

Posted: 10/28/2004 3:58:12 PM EDT

[#13]

Quoted:
One more time.
NEVER EVER get into the need vs want argument. They will never understand. You will lose everytime, because of the "made to kill" distinction. You lost this time.
Ask if the presence of the weapons causes measurable harm to society. She will likely try to say yes.
Then point out that a Justice Dept study could find no evidence that banning such weapons had any effect on crime. There is no evidence to support the idea that the banning of the AWs prevented or stopped any crimes.
Stop there. Explain no further. Let her chew on that.
Then when she tries to make the same point from another angle, simply choose different words to restate your point.
Society gains nothing from banning the weapons to law abiding citizens, because the LACs aren't the problem. Criminals will always be the problem. The basic nature of the criminal is to break the law, so there only needs to be one law made against a behavior (such as the one against murder) and enforce it.
Then point out the prime flaw in her slaw is that in order to make her next point, she HAS to assume that the average law abiding citizen is a latent psychopath just looking for a reason to snap and kill people. Treating people like they are guilty and forcing them to prove themselves innocent goes against everything the American legal system is based upon. Remember 'innocent until proven guilty'? The burden of proof is not upon the accused, but rather the accuser.
The very concept of gun control and certainly the AWB is Unamerican, because it contradicts our best legal traditions.
I can't say if you will win, ie, convince her, but you will make her shut up, and you may even make her think about it for a while.

You sound like you have a lot of experience with Austinites.

Posted: 10/28/2004 3:58:43 PM EDT

[#14]

Quoted:
Quoted:

So, what do you think? Did I win?

You're arguing with a woman and you ask, "Did I win?"

+1.

(Not that it EVER stopped me from trying...)

Posted: 10/28/2004 4:00:00 PM EDT

[#15]

But otherwise she is actually quite nice.

Posted: 10/28/2004 4:01:21 PM EDT

[#16]

Quoted:
Quoted:
One more time.
NEVER EVER get into the need vs want argument. They will never understand. You will lose everytime, because of the "made to kill" distinction. You lost this time.
Ask if the presence of the weapons causes measurable harm to society. She will likely try to say yes.
Then point out that a Justice Dept study could find no evidence that banning such weapons had any effect on crime. There is no evidence to support the idea that the banning of the AWs prevented or stopped any crimes.
Stop there. Explain no further. Let her chew on that.
Then when she tries to make the same point from another angle, simply choose different words to restate your point.
Society gains nothing from banning the weapons to law abiding citizens, because the LACs aren't the problem. Criminals will always be the problem. The basic nature of the criminal is to break the law, so there only needs to be one law made against a behavior (such as the one against murder) and enforce it.
Then point out the prime flaw in her slaw is that in order to make her next point, she HAS to assume that the average law abiding citizen is a latent psychopath just looking for a reason to snap and kill people. Treating people like they are guilty and forcing them to prove themselves innocent goes against everything the American legal system is based upon. Remember 'innocent until proven guilty'? The burden of proof is not upon the accused, but rather the accuser.
The very concept of gun control and certainly the AWB is Unamerican, because it contradicts our best legal traditions.
I can't say if you will win, ie, convince her, but you will make her shut up, and you may even make her think about it for a while.

You sound like you have a lot of experience with Austinites.

Remember my post from yesterday pointing out that DU is a great source of intelligent regarding the leftist mindset?
Wouldn't you agree?

Posted: 10/28/2004 4:01:36 PM EDT

[#17]

Quoted:
But otherwise she is actually quite nice.

Why?

Seriously...why do you think she is nice.

Sgatr15

Posted: 10/28/2004 4:03:13 PM EDT

[#18]

Quoted:
Not possible...

also:

if she's 26 and an architect

18-19 at HS grad

5 yr program/apprenticeship

she's barely into the real world, artistic, and hasn't been gang raped in her own apartment.

go figure.

Oh man, that's friggin' BRUTAL, but also true. Well said.

Posted: 10/28/2004 4:03:19 PM EDT

[#19]

Quoted:
Quoted:
But otherwise she is actually quite nice.

Why?

Seriously...why do you think she is nice.

Sgatr15

Because she is...

Because she cares about people...

Posted: 10/28/2004 4:03:31 PM EDT

[#20]

Quoted:
Quoted:
You lost with that 4X4 remark. No way for you to come back from her rebuttal. next time at least use the sports car theory. Then when she says sports cars aren't made to kill people , you can say then how come more people die each yr in car accidents?
There is STILL the distinction of 'made to kill'.
You CANNOT win with that tack.

but gun's are suposed to kill people, its against the law to kill someone with a gun infact.
car's kill people more offten than guns do, and tehy arent made to kill people either, infact, its also a crime to kill someone with them.

cars ang guns alike, they are fun, , they are used for practical perposes, and a vary few people use them un responsably.

you gotta pick your right analogys if you want to win an argument over.

Posted: 10/28/2004 4:04:41 PM EDT

[#21]

Quoted:
Because she cares about people...

How? And how do you know that?

Sgatr15

Posted: 10/28/2004 4:05:36 PM EDT

[#22]

Quoted:
She is the cute, red-headed, 26-yo architect who has a workstation next to mine. She's a typical Austinite liberal vegetarian who just voted for Kerry today. She doesn't like guns, ESPECIALLY military-style guns. She told me, "What do people need those for - they should be completely banned except for police and military people."

So I told her:
"It's not about need. Nobody needs a monster 4X4, but does that mean they can't get one?"

Her:
"Yeah, but 4 x 4s aren't made for killing people."

Maybe not, but cars kill more people than guns.
Besides, without guns you'd have no freedoms. Thanks to people with guns willing to put their life on the line you can live your bogus lifestyle. There was a time when absolute rulers could ride into your village and take you away from your family on a whim, burn your hut down and massacre your entire family. All with impunity. In fact that kind of thing still happens some places in the world. It doesn't happen here thanks to the 2nd amendment.

"God created man, Sam Colt made them equal."

Posted: 10/28/2004 4:07:35 PM EDT

[#23]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
But otherwise she is actually quite nice.

Why?

Seriously...why do you think she is nice.

Sgatr15

Because she is...

Because she cares about people...

So did Hitler.

Posted: 10/28/2004 4:08:19 PM EDT

[#24]

Quoted:
Quoted:
You shopuld point out that England's handgun crime rate went up after they banned all handguns.

Banning guns just renders decent people defensless.

Good point.

Right up there with the SECOND AMENDMENT.

Posted: 10/28/2004 4:08:38 PM EDT

[#25]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
One more time.
NEVER EVER get into the need vs want argument. They will never understand. You will lose everytime, because of the "made to kill" distinction. You lost this time.
Ask if the presence of the weapons causes measurable harm to society. She will likely try to say yes.
Then point out that a Justice Dept study could find no evidence that banning such weapons had any effect on crime. There is no evidence to support the idea that the banning of the AWs prevented or stopped any crimes.
Stop there. Explain no further. Let her chew on that.
Then when she tries to make the same point from another angle, simply choose different words to restate your point.
Society gains nothing from banning the weapons to law abiding citizens, because the LACs aren't the problem. Criminals will always be the problem. The basic nature of the criminal is to break the law, so there only needs to be one law made against a behavior (such as the one against murder) and enforce it.
Then point out the prime flaw in her slaw is that in order to make her next point, she HAS to assume that the average law abiding citizen is a latent psychopath just looking for a reason to snap and kill people. Treating people like they are guilty and forcing them to prove themselves innocent goes against everything the American legal system is based upon. Remember 'innocent until proven guilty'? The burden of proof is not upon the accused, but rather the accuser.
The very concept of gun control and certainly the AWB is Unamerican, because it contradicts our best legal traditions.
I can't say if you will win, ie, convince her, but you will make her shut up, and you may even make her think about it for a while.

You sound like you have a lot of experience with Austinites.
Remember my post from yesterday pointing out that DU is a great source of intelligent regarding the leftist mindset?
Wouldn't you agree?

You do your homework don't you.

Posted: 10/28/2004 4:09:50 PM EDT

[#26]

So you argued.

How was the make-up sex?

Posted: 10/28/2004 4:11:01 PM EDT

[#27]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
You lost with that 4X4 remark. No way for you to come back from her rebuttal. next time at least use the sports car theory. Then when she says sports cars aren't made to kill people , you can say then how come more people die each yr in car accidents?
There is STILL the distinction of 'made to kill'.
You CANNOT win with that tack.

but gun's are suposed to kill people, its against the law to kill someone with a gun infact.
car's kill people more offten than guns do, and tehy arent made to kill people either, infact, its also a crime to kill someone with them.

cars ang guns alike, they are fun, , they are used for practical perposes, and a vary few people use them un responsably.

you gotta pick your right analogys if you want to win an argument over.

You need to read the dictionary.......spelling monitor!!!!

Posted: 10/28/2004 4:11:53 PM EDT

[#28]

me thinks someone has a crush on a liberal

Posted: 10/28/2004 4:12:24 PM EDT

[#29]

Quoted:
So you argued.

How was the make-up sex?

Clean_Cut doesn't have sex.

Sgatr15

Posted: 10/28/2004 4:13:36 PM EDT

[#30]

Quoted:
Quoted:
So you argued.

How was the make-up sex?

Clean_Cut doesn't have sex.

Sgatr15

Actually, Sgtar15 is the one who doesn't have sex.

Posted: 10/28/2004 4:13:37 PM EDT

[#31]

Quoted:
Quoted:
So you argued.

How was the make-up sex?

Clean_Cut doesn't have sex.

Sgatr15

My condolences on the death of your pet sheep Clean_Cut.

Posted: 10/28/2004 4:15:34 PM EDT

[#32]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
So you argued.

How was the make-up sex?

Clean_Cut doesn't have sex.

Sgatr15

My condolences on the death of your pet sheep Clean_Cut.

A remark not even worthy of Full-auto.

Posted: 10/28/2004 4:18:56 PM EDT

[#33]

A monster 4x4, family sedans and soccer mom mini vans can all kill very easily with or without malice. And no, criminals don't need a licence or I guess hand eye skills for old people to drive a car.

www.cnn.com/2003/US/West/07/17/farmers.market.crash/

Posted: 10/28/2004 4:19:21 PM EDT

[#34]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
So you argued.

How was the make-up sex?

Clean_Cut doesn't have sex.

Sgatr15

My condolences on the death of your pet sheep Clean_Cut.

A remark not even worthy of Full-auto.

Posted: 10/28/2004 4:22:51 PM EDT

[#35]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
So you argued.

How was the make-up sex?

Clean_Cut doesn't have sex.

Sgatr15

My condolences on the death of your pet sheep Clean_Cut.

A remark not even worthy of Full-auto.

Pretty damn funny though

Posted: 10/28/2004 4:24:18 PM EDT

[#36]

<----doesn't have sex

<----still laughed.

Posted: 10/28/2004 4:24:35 PM EDT

[#37]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
So you argued.

How was the make-up sex?

Clean_Cut doesn't have sex.

Sgatr15

My condolences on the death of your pet sheep Clean_Cut.

A remark not even worthy of Full-auto.

Pretty damn funny though

He's not the same after they ran him out.

Posted: 10/28/2004 4:26:21 PM EDT

[#38]

Lend her a copy of "Innocence Betrayed"

or better yet invite her over for a private viewing

Posted: 10/28/2004 4:26:56 PM EDT

[#39]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
So you argued.

How was the make-up sex?

Clean_Cut doesn't have sex.

Sgatr15

My condolences on the death of your pet sheep Clean_Cut.

A remark not even worthy of Full-auto.

Pretty damn funny though

He's not the same after they ran him out.

The sheep was a HE!!!

Damn man, you are one sick puppy.

Posted: 10/28/2004 4:27:23 PM EDT

[#40]

pooper+pics

Posted: 10/28/2004 4:28:57 PM EDT

[#41]

Quoted:
Lend her a copy of "Innocence Betrayed"

or better yet invite her over for a private viewing

Is that a movie?

Posted: 10/28/2004 4:31:50 PM EDT

[#42]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
So you argued.

How was the make-up sex?

Clean_Cut doesn't have sex.

Sgatr15

My condolences on the death of your pet sheep Clean_Cut.

A remark not even worthy of Full-auto.

Pretty damn funny though

He's not the same after they ran him out.

The dumb asian kid seems to think "full-auto" is some kind of soft spot or something. You'll notice he brings it up in every thread where I appear. He's such a cry baby he can't take a fuggin joke these days. By the way dip.....no one at FA liked you either. A lack of acknowledgement isn't approval, dumbass.

Posted: 10/28/2004 4:34:54 PM EDT

[#43]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
So you argued.

How was the make-up sex?

Clean_Cut doesn't have sex.

Sgatr15

My condolences on the death of your pet sheep Clean_Cut.

A remark not even worthy of Full-auto.

Pretty damn funny though

He's not the same after they ran him out.

The dumb asian kid seems to think "full-auto" is some kind of soft spot or something. You'll notice he brings it up in every thread where I appear. He's such a cry baby he can't take a fuggin joke these days. By the way dip.....no one at FA liked you either. A lack of acknowledgement isn't approval, dumbass.

Posted: 10/28/2004 4:40:11 PM EDT

[#44]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Lend her a copy of "Innocence Betrayed"

or better yet invite her over for a private viewing

Is that a movie?

No, it's a record dumbfuck. Invite her over to VIEW your record. Are you retarded are do you just have a penchant for overlooking the obvious and asking really stupid questions?

Posted: 10/28/2004 4:41:15 PM EDT

[#45]

Quoted:
Quoted:
Quoted:
Lend her a copy of "Innocence Betrayed"

or better yet invite her over for a private viewing

Is that a movie?

No, it's a record dumbfuck. Invite her over to VIEW your record. Are you retarded are do you just have a penchant for overlooking the obvious and asking really stupid questions?

Dude, take a valium. You're going to burst a blood vessel.

Posted: 10/28/2004 4:42:55 PM EDT

[#46]

[<|:d>]

Posted: 10/28/2004 4:48:30 PM EDT

[#47]

kinda

jsut remember that guns are NOT specifically designed to kill people; anyone can kill as many folks w/ a monster 4x4 or a gallon of gas and a match

its just the PEOPLE who are willing to kill that cause folks to die, other thatn accidents...

so if we legalize MJ, should we also legalize cocaine, pcp, heroine, opium, etc?? ODs will then take the lead in deaths over guns

just tell her to read the news; your right that bad guys arnt hampered by gun control, cause i see it around me every day(i'm probably the only person in the nxt 10 square mile w/ a LEGALLY obtained firearm, and there are a lot on the block!) when crime hits her, she MIGHT come to reality.....

Posted: 10/28/2004 4:51:54 PM EDT

[#48]

Quoted:
Sthey should be completely banned except for police and military people."

"If civilians can't have them, why do the police need them? What heavily armed people are they going to need to use them against?"

"Against people who don't follow the law."

"So you're saying people will break that law?"

"Of course."

"Well, then, if it's not effective, what good is it?"