If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(CNN)   What used to be called imagination is now called "A Level 2 look alike firearm", and will get your 10 year old a 3 day suspension   (cnn.com) divider line 267
    More: Asinine, Ohio Department of Education, school year  
•       •       •

10997 clicks; posted to Main » on 04 Mar 2014 at 6:36 PM (33 weeks ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



267 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all
 
2014-03-04 10:18:00 PM  

drwiki: The question I really want an answer to is: What's a Level 1 simulated firearm if you can reach "level two" without holding anything.

When I was a kid "simulated firearm" meant you took a TOY firearm (notice the distinction) and removed the bright orange bits so it wasn't obviously fake, and/or deliberately convinced someone you had a real weapon.

Adults have guns. Most of the US seems to want more of them to have guns. Kids model adult behavior in play. They do so in a childish and unrealistic fashion because they're children. Redirecting them to another game, and then explaining WHY something is inappropriate if they do it again makes a lot more sense than zomgthinkofthechildrensuspension.


I would imagine that level 1 is what you describe, a physical toy.

As far as modelling adult behavior, I wouldn't mind if kids learned to shoot bb and pellet guns (rifles and handguns), in a classroom setting at their school, provided they learn how to be responsible with firearms as part of the process.

Oh yeah... and I voted for Obama.

And I'd like to see kids have a martial arts class instead of gym class. Again, use the class to teach discipline.
 
2014-03-04 10:23:03 PM  

kortex: whatshisname: kortex: Isitoveryet: kortex: This is what you get when libtards run the schools.

well rest assured, because there's a libtard fighting to have the Ohio zero tolerance law reversed.

http://wosu.org/2012/news/2013/08/19/bill-would-ban-zero-tolerance-p ol icies-in-ohio-schools/

One libtard doesn't fix the other libtards.  Maybe I could poison libtards like roaches?  That way, when libtards convene, all libtards would be infected?

Why is your user name kortex when you are clearly lacking in one?

Wuuuuuurhsrl


way to prove his point, inbred
 
2014-03-04 10:24:14 PM  
Seriously? Zero tolerance needs to die and common sense needs to come back.
 
2014-03-04 10:26:20 PM  
s1.hubimg.com

www.bloomberg.com
www.jdavidstein.comi1005.photobucket.com
 
2014-03-04 10:29:53 PM  

Dahnkster: [s1.hubimg.com image 520x313]

[www.bloomberg.com image 627x418]
[www.jdavidstein.com image 800x419][i1005.photobucket.com image 850x566]


Interesting math-number charts. What are you trying to prove, exactly? I *think* I might know, but if my notions are correct, half of your graphs contradict the point you want the other half to make.

So, what exactly?
 
2014-03-04 10:31:23 PM  

blindpreacher: You can thank the feminization of our school system for this.


Nonsense. My little sister had something similar happen to her. In 1963. Dumbo, over-reaction by school officials wasn't invented last week.
 
2014-03-04 10:31:52 PM  

grinding_journalist: Interesting math-number charts. What are you trying to prove, exactly? I *think* I might know, but if my notions are correct, half of your graphs contradict the point you want the other half to make.

So, what exactly?


Res ipsa loquitur
 
gja [TotalFark]
2014-03-04 10:34:21 PM  

grinding_journalist: Dahnkster: [s1.hubimg.com image 520x313]

[www.bloomberg.com image 627x418]
[www.jdavidstein.com image 800x419][i1005.photobucket.com image 850x566]

Interesting math-number charts. What are you trying to prove, exactly? I *think* I might know, but if my notions are correct, half of your graphs contradict the point you want the other half to make.

So, what exactly?


Also, since we are once again comparing cars and guns you either have to:
1. Throw out all suicides by guns to be fair and balanced, OR....
2. Include all deaths where a car was involved in any way including gassing ones self to death and such.

Otherwise, take your tired bullshiat false sampling charts and use them for kindling.
 
2014-03-04 10:37:28 PM  
self discipline, that is. I'm not suggesting that the martial arts teacher beat the children.

Wouldn't that be great? Kids with more self respect, more respect for others, more self discipline, being less sedentary, and learning self defense. Win/win/win/win/win.
 
gja [TotalFark]
2014-03-04 10:38:03 PM  

Dahnkster: grinding_journalist: Interesting math-number charts. What are you trying to prove, exactly? I *think* I might know, but if my notions are correct, half of your graphs contradict the point you want the other half to make.

So, what exactly?

Res ipsa loquitur


No, it does not.

To be sure some of your charts are contradictio in adjecto
 
2014-03-04 10:39:03 PM  

gja: Otherwise, take your tired bullshiat false sampling charts and use them for kindling.


That's a little hasty, it looks like cars have gotten much safer since the late 70s.
 
2014-03-04 10:39:52 PM  

Dahnkster: Res ipsa loquitur


Yes, latin is fun. But I asked you to explain the point you were trying to make with the charts you posted- simply saying the data speaks for itself when someone is asking for an explanation of why it was presented doesn't work.

For an example of what I'm talking about, let's look at chart #2 comparing auto and firearm fatalities. Here's what the data in that chart says to me: 1. Cars have gotten significantly safer with technological developments over time. 2. Since we're looking at straight quantity, coupled with an increase in total # of guns owned and total population, gun fatalities have essentially stayed flat, if not decreased marginally over time (via ratio of population.)

My guess is that isn't the point you were trying to make, but it's what I've inferred without any explanation from you, and whatever point you were attempting to make is just as valid as mine, since you said the data speaks for itself.

You saying res ipsa loquitur in this instance makes as much sense to me as me asking a bible thumper why something is the way it is in the good book, and they respond with "Because that's the way it is."
 
gja [TotalFark]
2014-03-04 10:41:21 PM  

Dahnkster: grinding_journalist: Interesting math-number charts. What are you trying to prove, exactly? I *think* I might know, but if my notions are correct, half of your graphs contradict the point you want the other half to make.

So, what exactly?

Res ipsa loquitur


BTW, Mother Jones as a source is massively a fail. Highly suspect at best.
And the first and third chart bears no source, so bullshiat card on those.
The Bloomberg chart is the only one with any veracity at all. And there the sampling has been manipulated to fit a model.
Fail.
 
2014-03-04 10:43:04 PM  

gja: Otherwise, take your tired bullshiat false sampling charts and use them for kindling.


I await your graphs and statistical evidence to the contrary.
 
gja [TotalFark]
2014-03-04 10:44:32 PM  

ko_kyi: gja: Otherwise, take your tired bullshiat false sampling charts and use them for kindling.

That's a little hasty, it looks like cars have gotten much safer since the late 70s.


I will concede that point. It is likely, and bears the mark of sensibility.
But using gun suicides to add to gun deaths while not then making and effort to also include deaths that may have included things like CO related deaths where a car was the source is falsely weighting the data.
 
gja [TotalFark]
2014-03-04 10:45:53 PM  

Dahnkster: gja: Otherwise, take your tired bullshiat false sampling charts and use them for kindling.

I await your graphs and statistical evidence to the contrary.


No. The burden is on you little boy. Try that crap with someone as feeble-minded as yourself.
YOU presented the charts without sourcing them. Not I.
Burden of proof.
 
2014-03-04 10:47:18 PM  

gja: Dahnkster: gja: Otherwise, take your tired bullshiat false sampling charts and use them for kindling.

I await your graphs and statistical evidence to the contrary.

No. The burden is on you little boy. Try that crap with someone as feeble-minded as yourself.
YOU presented the charts without sourcing them. Not I.
Burden of proof.


Mother Jones is a perfectly cromulent source of objective, unbiased representation of gun facts.
 
gja [TotalFark]
2014-03-04 10:51:33 PM  

Dahnkster: gja: Otherwise, take your tired bullshiat false sampling charts and use them for kindling.

I await your graphs and statistical evidence to the contrary.


Here, in the interest of being magnanimous

It requires you read, so this may be burdensome to those of short attention spans. Tough crap.
The sources are fully disclosed and quite well vetted.
 
gja [TotalFark]
2014-03-04 10:54:27 PM  

super_grass: gja: Dahnkster: gja: Otherwise, take your tired bullshiat false sampling charts and use them for kindling.

I await your graphs and statistical evidence to the contrary.

No. The burden is on you little boy. Try that crap with someone as feeble-minded as yourself.
YOU presented the charts without sourcing them. Not I.
Burden of proof.

Mother Jones is a perfectly cromulent source of objective, unbiased representation of gun facts.


I will carve shapes into the tongue of the next person to use that non-word.
 
2014-03-04 10:58:21 PM  
Ah name-calling and ad hominem attack, the last vestige of the internet argument.

I present easily verifiable charts that I believe are relevant to the thread. You attack sources and then you project the what you believe to be the point I was trying to make. You finish with school yard name calling.
 
2014-03-04 10:59:09 PM  
This is what happens when you let retarded people be teachers.
 
2014-03-04 11:03:48 PM  

gja: The sources are fully disclosed and quite well vetted.


Just as another datapoint to the Mother Jones graph, the 2013 numbers (not on the chart), using the FBI definition of mass shootings, was 28 fatalities, 1 wounded, the majority being domestic violence including 4 fatalities by a police officer -  a number likely unaffected by gun laws. This 28 deaths would be a significant decline from 2012.
 
gja [TotalFark]
2014-03-04 11:04:51 PM  

Dahnkster: Ah name-calling and ad hominem attack, the last vestige of the internet argument.

I present easily verifiable charts that I believe are relevant to the thread. You attack sources and then you project the what you believe to be the point I was trying to make. You finish with school yard name calling.


So go check the link. Otherwise you are being obtuse and intellectually dishonest.
See? no name calling there. Just calling you out on your falsehoods.

Very full of clearly defined proof. With ALL sources disclosed.
Unlike your pretty pictures without any proof at all due to lack of sources (except the BB chart, and they used VCP.org as source so that is dead).
 
gja [TotalFark]
2014-03-04 11:06:12 PM  

ko_kyi: gja: The sources are fully disclosed and quite well vetted.

Just as another datapoint to the Mother Jones graph, the 2013 numbers (not on the chart), using the FBI definition of mass shootings, was 28 fatalities, 1 wounded, the majority being domestic violence including 4 fatalities by a police officer -  a number likely unaffected by gun laws. This 28 deaths would be a significant decline from 2012.


I still dislike that site for its tilt and leanings.
Give me cold logic over ZOMGLOOKATTHIS every time.
 
2014-03-04 11:06:39 PM  

Dahnkster: I present easily verifiable charts that I believe are relevant to the thread. You attack sources and then you project the what you believe to be the point I was trying to make. You finish with school yard name calling


Anyone that can read a graph knows that you are standing on an anthill and declaring that you have the high ground.

I'm gonna go pop some popcorn, hope you two keep going.
 
gja [TotalFark]
2014-03-04 11:10:56 PM  

Dahnkster: Ah name-calling and ad hominem attack, the last vestige of the internet argument.

I present easily verifiable charts that I believe are relevant to the thread. You attack sources and then you project the what you believe to be the point I was trying to make. You finish with school yard name calling.


I have no patience for those who seek to publish lies and knowingly manipulated numbers, then try to redirect and misdirect when asked for source and veracity. Then when faced with hard facts turn to the electronic equivalent of 'na na na, fingers in ears cant hear you' to avoid dealing with the proof they do not know what the hell they are talking about and the numbers they tried to lie with fell apart under the light of scrutiny.
 
gja [TotalFark]
2014-03-04 11:13:37 PM  

Dahnkster: I present easily verifiable charts


List sources or BS. The BB chart is sourced. You get a pass on the source for that one, but not the data, which I have given you a source that tears it to small pieces.
 
gja [TotalFark]
2014-03-04 11:15:48 PM  
G'nite all. I fully expect D-ster to load the posts while I get some rest because I am certain I have his type and number, as it were.
 
2014-03-04 11:22:53 PM  

Sin_City_Superhero: Your kid was warned. You knew about your kid being warned. Yet you act all surprised that your kid got suspended? No sympathy.


This is how a "reasonable" person believes we will reduce gun violence.
 
2014-03-04 11:25:28 PM  

Lord Schtupp: kortex: whatshisname: kortex: Isitoveryet: kortex: This is what you get when libtards run the schools.

well rest assured, because there's a libtard fighting to have the Ohio zero tolerance law reversed.

http://wosu.org/2012/news/2013/08/19/bill-would-ban-zero-tolerance-p ol icies-in-ohio-schools/

One libtard doesn't fix the other libtards.  Maybe I could poison libtards like roaches?  That way, when libtards convene, all libtards would be infected?

Why is your user name kortex when you are clearly lacking in one?

Wuuuuuurhsrl

way to prove his point, inbred


That's Kentucky. I'm just drunk
 
2014-03-04 11:25:46 PM  

Marcus Aurelius: Sin_City_Superhero: Your kid was warned

And 10 year olds are known for their ability to model their behavior to conform to arbitrary adult standards.  That's why they make such good witnesses in a court of law.

Public schools are completely and utterly retarded, and zero tolerance is just the icing on the two neuron cake.


This.

/This AND this.
//Anyone who sees merit in zero-tolerance at this level of event is a Level 11 asshat.
///If you are truly frightened by things such as drawings/logos of guns, fingers/bread/pastries in the shape of any firearm, you have serious mental problems and need deep, deep therapy far away from the big skeery world outside.
 
2014-03-04 11:33:16 PM  

grinding_journalist: Dahnkster: [s1.hubimg.com image 520x313]

[www.bloomberg.com image 627x418]
[www.jdavidstein.com image 800x419][i1005.photobucket.com image 850x566]

Interesting math-number charts. What are you trying to prove, exactly? I *think* I might know, but if my notions are correct, half of your graphs contradict the point you want the other half to make.

So, what exactly?


That "school violence by years" chart has to be the worst thing I've ever seen. The fact that they have to split it out into 25 year bars pretty much proves there IS NO school violence annually, at least, none that matters. See, I can use fancy Latin legal terms: de minimis. Even 60 deaths in school by violence, in a 25 year period (1975-1999) is so few as to be virtually zero when divided by the number of kids in school.

Moreover, that doesn't explain what "violence" is (I'm assuming deaths, because otherwise "60" means nothing) and wndhat a "school" is. Does that include the Vietnam protests of the early 70's? Does it include colleges (which means, for instance, Kent State is in there)? Is it only public schools (which removes the Amish school shooting)? Is it only child-on-child violence (which removes not only Kent State, but also the Sacramento schoolyard shooting)? Does it include gang-related violence (which inflates things in the 80's before anti-gang policies went into effect)? Are day-care centers included (that gets the Murrah Building fatalities into your count)?

Your "mass shooting" chart isn't any better, btw. For purposes of the FBI and VICAP, any shooting where more than four people are shot is a "mass shooting". So that includes Columbine and Aurora Theater and Virginia Tech; it also includes countless murder/suicides here in So Cal; gang shootings without number; it would EXCLUDE, for instance, the Reagan assassination attempt (only three people shot, one died).

Oh, and your use of "res ipsa loquitur" in this context is somewhat odd. The concept of res ipsa in legal terminology means "the thing happens of itself," or, more colloquially, "shiat happens." In court it means that a thing is unlikely to occur absent negligence. So what is your point? That shootings will happen no matter what? I mean, that would be MY point, but it seems strange that it would be YOUR point.
 
2014-03-04 11:40:32 PM  

sobriquet by any other name: Carousel Beast: sobriquet by any other name: I hate to say it, but that's a pretty effective way of getting the point across to kids that the shiny show-n-tell special is NOT something you should bring to school.... no matter how many times your drunk dad packed a piece in your backpack and a banana in his holster.

It actually a real problem, all the more so with lax gun laws. If you want one, don't be surprised at the other, at least. It is a building full of irreplaceable stuff after all.

That's a whole lot of derp right there.

sure *I* believe you, but can you help phrase it for conveying to the Parent-Teachers Association why it's bad? No foul language and under a minute, if you don't mind.


I can't even begin to dumb it down enough for you to get it. You presuppose so much in your rambling that I don't think we have a common enough worldview to communicate.
 
2014-03-04 11:47:46 PM  
You send me to a gun-petter blog complete with bullet hole in the logo, but then complain about Bloomberg and Mother Jones as reliable source material... Hmm, Interdasting.

Oddly enough, I had JUST read some of the material from that sight while looking for gun violence statistics and charts.

Perhaps you should reread your material yourself. His "point" is trying to compare the number of gun permit holders to licensed motor vehicle operators. Talk about false equivalences. He then attempts to "unskew" his own data by removing suicides and gun "accidents" from the number of gun deaths. His charts do seem to match up well with mine the fact that gun deaths were at an all time high in the 1980's and 1990's. His FBI murder rate is given in percentages rather than total number , which makes for completely different looking graph as opposed to total number of deaths.
He also adds comparative US map graphic showing number of states that have added "Right to Carry" legislation which as far as I can tell has zero cause-effect to any salient point... unless he is trying to claim that when gun violence was at an all time high it was because there was less people with CCP. BTW, I am a huge advocate of CCP.

His second map shows increased number of CCP. Not surprised in the least there is an increase in Republican-controlled statehouses. The NRA and ALEC are strong lobbyist and the far-right noise machine is good at getting out a message of fear and woe. Again, I see no bearing to cause-effect. I could make the same useless argument that there were more white zinfadel drinkers and leg warmers in the 90's during peak gun violence. His FBI murder rates go up to 2005. I make no argument against his FBI murder percentages, other than to add that murder numbers have risen slightly during the past 10 years... same as with my figures. Overall violent crime is down. I can't see one single place where I claimed otherwise. Mass shootings are up (Aurora,CO Sandy Hook et al) and that's why many of these silly 'zero tolerance' in school were enacted... Often at the insistence of parents insisting their children be kept 'safe'.

The rest of your link is all about "gun grabbers" and the Constitution. That's certainly no surprise.
Did I say anything about getting rid of guns? No. In fact, I mentioned that I was an avid hunter, and target shooter, who enjoys teaching young people about safety and proper firearm usage. I hope you get a good night's rest.

As for your "I will carve shapes into the tongue of the next person to use that non-word" to super-grass and your name-calling tirade, I'll just put that down to late night grouchiness. Toodles.
 
2014-03-04 11:47:57 PM  

gja: DrBenway: Why do you think God created elbows?

To know where to stop in your mom?

/ducks and covers
//i keed!


Nah, that's what the kneecaps were for.
 
2014-03-04 11:59:29 PM  
4.bp.blogspot.com
Must be holding an imaginary AR-15.
 
2014-03-05 12:45:11 AM  

whatshisname: Dad can stick a loaded weapon in his jacket and go to the mall. Junior can't point his finger at someone. Anyone else seeing a disconnect here?


Yeah but did Junior have a concealed carry permit?
 
2014-03-05 12:46:29 AM  

Gecko Gingrich: Relatively Obscure: They can send out notes saying "any and all child-like behavior from children will not be tolerated," but people will probably still be annoyed when kids kicked out of school for it.

I don't think I want to know a six-year-old who isn't a dreamer, or a sillyheart. And I sure don't want to know one who takes their student career seriously. I don't have a college degree. I don't even have a job. But I know a good kid when I see one. Because they're ALL good kids, until dried-out, brain-dead skags like you drag them down and convince them they're no good. You so much as scowl at my niece, or any other kid in this school, and I hear about it, and I'm coming looking for you!

Take this quarter, go downtown, and have a rat gnaw that thing off your face! Good day to you, madam.


Thank you Uncle Buck! One of the best lines in the movies.
 
2014-03-05 12:52:49 AM  

Calmamity: Sin_City_Superhero: No sympathy.

Fingers, man. A 10 year old kid with fingers.

Your scorn is woefully misplaced.


i can relate cause i have fingers. but i have not been ten for quite some time. still very childish though.
 
2014-03-05 12:53:21 AM  
When the kid gets into class he ought to play dead...and shoot for a whole weeks vacation.
 
2014-03-05 01:12:42 AM  

MassAsster: [i306.photobucket.com image 649x430]


My work here is done.

Anyone who supports this decision needs their head examined.

I grew up with all sorts of gun toys and to this day it wouldn't occur to me to shoot someone unless I was in the gun nut dream situation of being able to pull a gun out and shoot some naked guy with a kife chasing down a woman in an alley

/Gun collector with an 03 FFL
//Most people I meet in gun stores - especially staff - make my eyes roll
 
2014-03-05 01:15:50 AM  

Dadoody: Welcome to Libtard Land.

[images.sodahead.com image 480x480]

[lh4.ggpht.com image 353x512]


When you dial it up to potato with every post you're just asking to become Miss Ignore List 2014.
 
2014-03-05 01:18:06 AM  
The stupid, it burns


// make the teacher a Native American, slapsho
 
2014-03-05 02:20:05 AM  

grinding_journalist: Mine eyes have seen the glory of the burning of the school
We're torturing the teachers and we're breaking all the rules
We broke into the office and we hung the principal
The kids go marching home
Glory, glory hallelujah
Teacher hit me with a ruler
I met her at the door with a loaded .44
and the teacher ain't my teacher no more.

I went to grade school in the early 90s. We used to sing this (or variants of it) on the playground. I'm certain older farkers did too. Today, I'm 100% certain it'd get a kid suspended or expelled.

/i will teach this song to my son


Also, Alice Cooper's "School's Out."
 
2014-03-05 02:59:16 AM  

yakmans_dad: blindpreacher: You can thank the feminization of our school system for this.

Nonsense. My little sister had something similar happen to her. In 1963. Dumbo, over-reaction by school officials wasn't invented last week.


Exactly. Your sister. 50 years later it's happened to the boys. Feminization.
 
2014-03-05 03:36:41 AM  
imageshack.com
 
2014-03-05 04:15:58 AM  

Dahnkster: [s1.hubimg.com image 520x313]

[www.bloomberg.com image 627x418]
[www.jdavidstein.com image 800x419][i1005.photobucket.com image 850x566]


you cite Bloomberg and mother jones for gun related stats?! many lol's
 
gja [TotalFark]
2014-03-05 07:11:42 AM  

Dahnkster: You send me to a gun-petter blog complete with bullet hole in the logo, but then complain about Bloomberg and Mother Jones as reliable source material... Hmm, Interdasting.

Oddly enough, I had JUST read some of the material from that sight while looking for gun violence statistics and charts.

Perhaps you should reread your material yourself. His "point" is trying to compare the number of gun permit holders to licensed motor vehicle operators. Talk about false equivalences. He then attempts to "unskew" his own data by removing suicides and gun "accidents" from the number of gun deaths. His charts do seem to match up well with mine the fact that gun deaths were at an all time high in the 1980's and 1990's. His FBI murder rate is given in percentages rather than total number , which makes for completely different looking graph as opposed to total number of deaths.
He also adds comparative US map graphic showing number of states that have added "Right to Carry" legislation which as far as I can tell has zero cause-effect to any salient point... unless he is trying to claim that when gun violence was at an all time high it was because there was less people with CCP. BTW, I am a huge advocate of CCP.

His second map shows increased number of CCP. Not surprised in the least there is an increase in Republican-controlled statehouses. The NRA and ALEC are strong lobbyist and the far-right noise machine is good at getting out a message of fear and woe. Again, I see no bearing to cause-effect. I could make the same useless argument that there were more white zinfadel drinkers and leg warmers in the 90's during peak gun violence. His FBI murder rates go up to 2005. I make no argument against his FBI murder percentages, other than to add that murder numbers have risen slightly during the past 10 years... same as with my figures. Overall violent crime is down. I can't see one single place where I claimed otherwise. Mass shootings are up (Aurora,CO Sandy Hook et al) and that's why many of these silly 'zero tolerance' in school were enacted... Often at the insistence of parents insisting their children be kept 'safe'.

The rest of your link is all about "gun grabbers" and the Constitution. That's certainly no surprise.
Did I say anything about getting rid of guns? No. In fact, I mentioned that I was an avid hunter, and target shooter, who enjoys teaching young people about safety and proper firearm usage. I hope you get a good night's rest.

As for your "I will carve shapes into the tongue of the next person to use that non-word" to super-grass and your name-calling tirade, I'll just put that down to late night grouchiness. Toodles.


My comment to SG was humor. DUH. Not too quick on the uptake?
So was my comment to DrB. Even HE got it. Lord you need a sense of humor.

On to your post for the charts.
Percentages are the RIGHT way to approach these number.
Ignore, and stop dragging into the argument his tangential mentions of causational factors. I don't care what causes the numbers.
Only that he used proper sources that can have their veracity verified. FBI stats are valid. CDC stats are valid too.
You failed to "show your work". Hence you fail. Just like in an engineering exam. If your sources were good why the fight about showing them?

I know the sites' (do try to use the right words) point is something to express his misplaced angst over gun regs.
But where the charts are concerned his data is excellent and logic is good. The analysis he arrives at is well thought out and clear.
You don't like it. Too bad. I don't like his political leanings. That's too bad as well. That's not why I presented it.
It was a direct rebuttal for your charts, with no offered source save the BB chart, and we all know who runs that place and their leanings.

As far as MJ site? Nobody takes that seriously. Don't be obtuse.
 
gja [TotalFark]
2014-03-05 07:13:40 AM  
Dahnkster: I present easily verifiable charts

List sources or BS. The BB chart is sourced. You get a pass on the source for that one, but not the data, which I have given you a source that tears it to small pieces.


And still you refuse to post your sources for the other charts......
Maybe you just wrangled them up without really reading about them?
 
gja [TotalFark]
2014-03-05 07:22:05 AM  

Fish_Fight!: Dahnkster: [s1.hubimg.com image 520x313]

[www.bloomberg.com image 627x418]
[www.jdavidstein.com image 800x419][i1005.photobucket.com image 850x566]

you cite Bloomberg and mother jones for gun related stats?! many lol's


I especially love BB for anything to do with guns.
Mike is an elitist asshole who would have us eating what he dictates and all guns removed from private citizens.
The whole WORLD knows how he rolls. Point: the only mayor in HISTORY to bypass term limits. Do you really need to know more about him?
His ego is unfathomably massive.

Mother Jones is a collection of pseudo-journalistic wanna-bes. If they were really any good they would be on serious media.
 
Displayed 50 of 267 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report