Stop being dishonest and simply engage with the topic.
If you want to control the conversation, run along and get yourself a blog.
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
Stop being dishonest and simply engage with the topic.
Point of order.
Invited to speak on a particular topic doesn't mean I invited someone to not speak on the topic. You are ridiculous.Point of order.
BoganUSAFFLClerk started this thread on June 25, and no one responded to it. He then created a second post on June 29, and again, no one responded to it. Then, on July 1, BoganUSAFFLClerk posted, "Come at me bros." and tagging the majority of active users. Again, no one cared about his thread until he invited people to it. So now he is upset that people do not want to stick to a thread they were not interested in in the first place?
Firearms instructor but waffle on I suppose.Come at me bros....
Is there a state in the US that lets juveniles own guns and work in gun stores? It's really hard to marry the images of this childish moron and the expected responsibility of a firearm owner.
Firearms instructor but waffle on I suppose.
Invited? Tagging several people in a thread that you were only posting in with the phrase, "come at me bros," is how you invite people? You know there is a reason why people are clowning on you, right?Invited to speak on a particular topic doesn't mean I invited someone to not speak on the topic. You are ridiculous.
Retail assistant.
That is part of my job. Don't be jealous that my job is far cooler and interesting than yours.Not job-shaming or anything, but dude - you work in fucking retail.
Yes it is a funny way to invite people and not a boring way to do so correct? I mean you guys are here right? I accomplished my goal.Invited? Tagging several people in a thread that you were only posting in with the phrase, "come at me bros," is how you invite people? You know there is a reason why people are clowning on you, right?
I am always going to look in the direction of a clown.Yes it is a funny way to invite people and not a boring way to do so correct? I mean you guys are here right? I accomplished my goal.
Like you did here?What you are supposed to do in threads to talk about the topic of the thread which you didn't do - not directly anyway.
Not like there was anything else to do here.What you guys primarily did was just throw insults and waste my time.
That is a sad use of a day off. But I agree; this thread is very entertaining.I did get a certain amount of entertainment from this though. Not a total loss especially when I am on my day off.
No you didn't. The context of this is sending a screenshot of you not starting off hostile with insults. Where the screencap of me initiating with insults and not responding with insults? You are smart enough to know the difference right?We already did this clown.
1) Most executive orders apply to outside policy meaning they outnumbers being applied on the inside according to the Federal Register.I then pointed you to the fact that executive orders resulted in the internment of over 100,000 people... and you responded with some internally contradictory garbled nonsense then started talking about drinking tears and engaging in homoerotic fantasies about me.
Yes I argued concisely against points being made. If people were using insults I used insults against them. Point proven.
Like directly address the cited laws at the start of the thread like a normal person? But you didn't do that.Not like there was anything else to do here.
Well that isn't the only thing. I got firearms cleaning out of the way so I could go shoot later. Still more productive than you.That is a sad use of a day off. But I agree; this thread is very entertaining.
Argued concisely against points!? Laughable.Yes I argued concisely against points being made. If people were using insults I used insults against them. Point proven.
Yep. I did not do that. You posting, "Come at me bros" and tagging me into your boring thread is the only reason I am here. If I did not do that before you tagged me, why did you think I would after?Like directly address the cited laws at the start of the thread like a normal person? But you didn't do that.
Sure you were.Well that isn't the only thing. I got firearms cleaning out of the way so I could go shoot later. Still more productive than you.
Screencap it.you did not stick to the OP of that thread, yet here you are screeching about people not sticking to your OP.
Simple awareness of the thread is why you would At someone. Its not guaranteed someone notices a topic on any platform let alone a platform I am entirely new to at the time."Come at me bros" and tagging me into your boring thread is the only reason I am here. If I did not do that before you tagged me, why did you think I would after?
I wasn't even aware of such a thread namely because no one tagged me to send an alert - I didn't even notice. Hah I think this comment has backfired on you severely.I do not know if you noticed this, but there was another thread going with a creationist for the last few weeks. Do you see how no one tagged you in that thread? You could have joined whenever you wanted, but you did not.
Well again ironic considering the argument above.tag other people in them after a week of no one caring about it, why would you be surprised when no one sticks to the OP?
I go out and shoot cheap ammunition which is not known for being clean in terms of powder residue and carbon build up. This is especially disabling in .22 rimfire caliber firearms. What do you mean?Sure you were.
This is hilarious. Guy who works in a store wants to career-shame an anthropologist and film maker who's made a solid life of world travel by teaching English.That is part of my job. Don't be jealous that my job is far cooler and interesting than yours.
This is hilarious. Guy who works in a store wants to career-shame...
I will provide a link to the thread, as is customary for forums. Anyone that wants can read through your posts and see for themselves.Screencap it.
Most people are not as inept as you when it comes to navigating a forum.Simple awareness of the thread is why you would At someone. Its not guaranteed someone notices a topic on any platform let alone a platform I am entirely new to at the time.
I wasn't even aware of such a thread namely because no one tagged me to send an alert - I didn't even notice. Hah I think this comment has backfired on you severely.
I am pretty sure you do not know what that word means.Well again ironic considering the argument above.
Again, sure pal.I go out and shoot cheap ammunition which is not known for being clean in terms of powder residue and carbon build up. This is especially disabling in .22 rimfire caliber firearms. What do you mean?
With all due respect, Bogan, the reason why this topic took a wrong turn is because you made a spurious claim - immigrants cause (violent) crime.There are relative percentages as well as absolute percentages. Also it doesn't really matter when we consider the topic of the forum. The argument is at the beginning of the thread. It doesn't have any relevance when I am arguing that a piece of plastic is not a firearm or converts a firearm to a machine gun. The topic doesn't really require this explanation and I am tired of addressing topics irrelevant to the thread.
These sort of statements - and others - is why some here have accused you of being racist.Also immigrants doesn't take into consideration people from the 3rd world and are born here. They are still from the 3rd world originally. Correct? Their bloodline comes from the 3rd world. So this analysis still doesn't take into consideration this
Assuming you meant "from where exactly?", most come from India, China, and the UK [1][2], although they differ depending on type of visa.Australia's immigrants are from majority from here exactly?
Again, racist undertones.Again I am arguing on a generality of 3rd world countries with high violent crime rates. Even then if they are not immigrants and that family or individual is from the 3rd world related by blood then they are still originally from the 3rd world. Many things contribute to a person wanting to commit crime and genetics I think play a role among environment etc.
To which I'll add another factor: a recent study shows that - even if you're a law-abiding citizen - you can get arrested, and end up in prison, if you happen to live during a period of "zero-tolerance" policies on crime.A developmental psychologist of my acquaintance used to work in the prison system here in Dublin, the capital city of the Republic of Ireland. He'd give talks to inmates on the sociological data of crime.
He pointed out two things:
1) He told them that in Dublin there were six "toxic" post codes. Anyone who grew up in one of these was highly likely to end up in prison. He'd then ask the inmates where they grew up - more often than not, all the inmates were from those post codes. This often shocked them - it showed that they weren't necessarily just a bunch of "bad apples".
2) He'd then show them that there was also a "personal responsibility" side to the equation, by pointing out that others on their street, and even siblings, hadn't ended up in prison. What choices had they made that were different from those who'd ended up in prison?
It gave them a different perspective - they weren't bad people or "losers", as you put it. Some changed their attitudes, and learned to read, and even went on to get degrees. In short, to discover their better nature within themselves.
This was in response to my point that your claim wasn't based on any crime statistics but merely because they were in the country illegally.They also commit other types of crime not necessarily violent that make other forms of violent crime necessary for other people to commit (for example theft of private identification by others to produced falsified documents in order to obtain other credentials).
In arguing that illegal immigrants acted as mules for drug cartels, the implication was that all of them used people-smugglers linked to such, and then became involved in crime for the cartels.Never argued they did. Key word "all".
The simpler solution is to assimilate them through providing ways for them to gain citizenship.Or you could simply take the illegal alien population out and if they attempt to return punishment is severe.
A summary doesn't show any detail. A summary is not good for trying to convince others. I usually submit a screenshot showing wording and specifics.
The impact of unauthorized immigrants on the federal budget differs from that population’s effect on state and local budgets primarily because of the types of services provided at each level of government and the rules governing those programs. For instance, most unauthorized immigrants are prohibited from receiving many of the benefits that the federal government provides through Social Security and such need-based programs as Food Stamps, Medicaid (other than emergency services), and Temporary Assistance for Needy Families.
I'm sure Americans aren't only concerned about violent crime.Do you think Americans only are concerned about violent crime?
Given they come from the same culture - and "bloodlines" - why focus on the fact that they're in America illegally?We don't like illegals because of concerns over general crime and lack of shared values among other things.
Individuals may or may not be anti-gun. And there's no reason to assume that Mexicans, as a culture, are anti-gun, particularly given the amount of violent crime you appear to associate with them based on homicides in Mexico.Easy being generally anti gun considering their corrupt state. It is inherently unamerican.
Yes, gang-related violence is a issue in America. As I pointed out above with regard to social construction of communities, America's policies aren't helping,There are still droves of gangs regarding Hispanics. Obviously those parents haven't adhered to those values.
Fair enough, however, the fact that they are willing to join the armed forces in order to gain citizenship is indicative of their wish to assimilate - and their doing so also shows that they're not anti-gun.I'm generally anti military as the reasons for conflict regarding the armed forces in the U.S. is primarily wrong. Fix your own house before you involve yourself in the affairs of others.
Having earned tax revenue from electronic transfer and cost of exchanging to other currencies..Still American made income is primarily sent home.
Unless you were in the same situation.Ah so screw the established law of the land eh? They don't enter at legal points required for sanctuary and tie up U.S. systems. That would be like gun law in the U.K. shouldn't be applied to me because I suffer medical care discrimination. I am going to illegally enter the U.K. to seek refuge. Its ridiculous. The U.K. has the right to uphold their laws no different than the U.S..
Again do we enforce the law or not? None of that emotional argument is compelling.
If you want to decrease the tide of immigrants into your country, change national policy to help those countries economies to improve - that way, immigrants will head home.Also considering the Mexican - U.S. border and Mexican immigration policy should be reflected back at anyone attempting to enter from that side.