Riots in Oakland

[Heracles 417]

First we give up our sugary drinks... next we're being searched without PC. Way to set the standard, AUS!

I know this is a strange concept in those states that don't border oceans but its called the first world.

[slim 1,514]

Okay. I submit to your will, especially since I know you have guns and aren't afraid to use them.

I do NOT have guns. As posted in the other thread I was recently convicted of a gun-related crime and I cannot shoot for 11 more months. Anyway, you're WAY OUT of my effective range!

I am alas armed only with a can of Pledge and a dying butane lighter (disposable) Your facts is facts, and I shan't be so bold as to ask you to prove them. Far be it from me to expect anyone to back up their statements.

What leaves me puzzled is this: you state that this is the internet and it isn't that serious. If that's the case, why are you still defending a nearly indefensible position (i.e. "them's facts because I say so") so many pages on?

Why is it my job to prove something to you? If you don't believe what I've posted, that's fine. Believe whatever you want. However, claiming I'm wrong and being ignorant of what is and not a fact - simply because you do not agree with me - doesn't make it any less factual. Also claiming it's not a fact because I refuse to post figures doesn't make it any less factual.

Oh and by the way, reported.

For a guy who's demanding academic proof, you sure are quick to call the principal. "I don't like what he said."

I know this is a strange concept in those states that don't border oceans but its called the first world.

First world is strip-searches in public with no PC? Uh.... OK.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Yeah thats like totally convincing

[slim 1,514]

Once again, I'm not trying to convince any of you. It's not my job to convince you. If you choose to ignore the truth, so be it. I could care less.

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Clearly you do care, otherwise you couldn't be posting for page after page about it.

[Heracles 417]

First world is strip-searches in public with no PC? Uh.... OK.

So you are up in arms over suspicious teens being search using metal detectors in public places. Yet have no problem with the record homicide rate versus pretty much every other first world country. In fact, you continue to deny the fact that guns have not made America safer and actually resulted in the opposite.

[elmcitymaven 9,711]

I do NOT have guns. As posted in the other thread I was recently convicted of a gun-related crime and I cannot shoot for 11 more months. Anyway, you're WAY OUT of my effective range!

Fair enough. I readily admit to not reading VJ obsessively so I am not up on the latest.

Why is it my job to prove something to you? If you don't believe what I've posted, that's fine. Believe whatever you want. However, claiming I'm wrong and being ignorant of what is and not a fact - simply because you do not agree with me - doesn't make it any less factual. Also claiming it's not a fact because I refuse to post figures doesn't make it any less factual.

I'm not saying it's your job, it's just that usually when people make statements that come off as sweeping generalisations, they at least make a token gesture towards backing them up. It may very well BE a fact without you saying so, and that's completely true. But since I don't believe you, and you sound like you are trying to convince me (I may be wrong) it seems strange that you don't want to give me proof.

For a guy who's demanding academic proof, you sure are quick to call the principal. "I don't like what he said."

Pssst -- I'm a chick.

[Kathryn41 3,205]

Fact: It is a violation of TOS for Visa Journey for any member to:

Defame, abuse, harass, stalk, threaten or otherwise violate the legal rights (such as rights of privacy and publicity) of others.

http://www.visajourney.com/content/terms

Getting frustrated about being asked to prove your position is fact rather than opinion does not allow you to violate TOS. Violence, implied or otherwise, is not acceptable and will not be tolerated.

[slim 1,514]

Clearly you do care, otherwise you couldn't be posting for page after page about it.

I could be doing anything I choose to do right now except purchase a sugary drink out of a soda machine in a public building in San Francisco or buy a Happy Meal with a toy inside in wherever the hell that town that waived their rights is.

So you are up in arms over suspicious teens being search using metal detectors in public places. Yet have no problem with the record homicide rate versus pretty much every other first world country.

I have no problem with it because it's reality. What is not reality is willfully handing the police power to overstep my 4th Amendment rights simply because SOME criminals choose to disobey the law. I would never, ever consider handing over my 2nd Amendment rights because SOME criminals choose to disobey the law. Recently, I chose to disobey the law and as such, I was compelled to waive my rights for a while. I'm doing so right now. I don't pretend to think everyone should simply because I did.

In fact, you continue to deny the fact that guns have not made America safer and actually resulted in the opposite.

That is not a fact. America is safer because of guns. In the last 234 years we've pretty much dominated the planet, in large part because we're (or at least we were) a nation of marksmen. It has not become "more unsafe" at all. In fact, the crime rate is steadily declining once again.

Fair enough. I readily admit to not reading VJ obsessively so I am not up on the latest.

You would think someone who comments on the latest, and demands proof, would at least be informed themselves.

I'm not saying it's your job, it's just that usually when people make statements that come off as sweeping generalisations, they at least make a token gesture towards backing them up. It may very well BE a fact without you saying so, and that's completely true. But since I don't believe you, and you sound like you are trying to convince me (I may be wrong) it seems strange that you don't want to give me proof.

It seems strange to me that most folks who are intelligent and resourceful enough to be on VJ seem to be ignorant of facts when it comes to things they often see in the media portrayed in a bad light. Funny how easily their opinion is swayed and their usual demand for "facts-based knowledge" is pushed aside into sheepish ignorance.

Pssst -- I'm a chick.

Well, that explains a lot.

Fact: It is a violation of TOS for Visa Journey for any member to:

http://www.visajourney.com/content/terms

Getting frustrated about being asked to prove your position is fact rather than opinion does not allow you to violate TOS. Violence, implied or otherwise, is not acceptable and will not be tolerated.

Where was violence implied?

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

It seems strange to me that you are spending all this time posting in this thread yet not once will you follow through on your own statements.

You care enough to have this back and north yet not enough to validate your own position.

[slim 1,514]

It seems strange to me that you are spending all this time posting in this thread yet not once will you follow through on your own statements.

You care enough to have this back and north yet not enough to validate your own position.

I've been very, very clear from the start of my postings. I will not post links to sources so you can see what is factual. If you're incapable of doing it yourself, that's just too bad.

It's amazing to me that someone who's kept up the whole "prove it to me" hasn't clicked on that little e at the bottom of their page and typed in "crime stats by country." Is that so hard?

[Trumplestiltskin 5,791]

Where was violence implied?

Give me a freaking break

I've been very, very clear from the start of my postings. I will not post links to sources so you can see what is factual. If you're incapable of doing it yourself, that's just too bad.

It's amazing to me that someone who's kept up the whole "prove it to me" hasn't clicked on that little e at the bottom of their page and typed in "crime stats by country." Is that so hard?

As I said you are more interested in butting heads than validating your own stated position.

It's lazy.

Edited July 10, 2010 by Its a MADHOUSE

[Kathryn41 3,205]

Where was violence implied?

Post #117

[quote

Slim, on 10 July 2010 - 06:59 PM said

]

Its a MADHOUSE, on 10 July 2010 - 06:49 PM, said:

Wouldn't the best way of silencing your opposition be to actually follow through on your own statements?

Follow through on what? I've never said I was going to do anything. I've posted facts. You've ignored them. What do I need to follow through on?

The best way to silence you would be illegal.

[elmcitymaven 9,711]

You would think someone who comments on the latest, and demands proof, would at least be informed themselves.

It seems strange to me that most folks who are intelligent and resourceful enough to be on VJ seem to be ignorant of facts when it comes to things they often see in the media portrayed in a bad light. Funny how easily their opinion is swayed and their usual demand for "facts-based knowledge" is pushed aside into sheepish ignorance.

Well, that explains a lot.

Where was violence implied?

Wow, so much to address.

First, I fail to see how my failure to read, absorb and analyse the minutiae of VJers posting in totum means that I am not informed. Do you know what knickers I'm wearing today? I posted about that.

Second, I have reiterated that I am open to being swayed in my opinion that you are wrong, but I need something in the way of proof that surpasses "it's true because I say so." I don't consider myself to be any more or less ignorant on this topic than the average person who has lived in both the US and UK for extended periods of time. I know my experience in both countries, but ultimately it is anecdotal and not persuasive. I like statistics, swoony graphs, footnotes, etc.

Third, I'm a girlygirlysqueeeee! variety of chick, who wears high heels and makeup every day. I just happen to also be curious and tenacious on occasion.

And lastly, your violence was implied when you stated that there was a way to take care of Six but it was illegal. Sorry if I read that wrong, but it came across as "Yo Six, I'm gonna pop a cap in yo azz", but of course there can be no gun at this juncture. So maybe just an arranged car accident? Who can say.

Hugs!

Edited July 10, 2010 by elmcitymaven

[slim 1,514]

Give me a freaking break

So you have no idea what you're talking about?

As I said you are more interested in butting heads than skating your own stated position.

It's lazy.

It's unnecessary. I stated facts. Regardless of whether they sound like "broad sweeping generalizations" and whehter you agree with them or not, they are facts. I'm simply not going to post links to other pages so you can be "converted."

Surprisingly enough, my reluctance to do so isn't based on being lazy or incorrect, it's being done because it's unnecessary as many of you who are already ignorant of reality don't care to acknowledge facts anyway. You tend to say, "well, those aren't true." I'm sorry. I guess the DOJ and FBI fabricate their numbers. AUS's government must do the same thing. UK too.