Details of the guns used in the Dallas Police HQ shooting are surprising!

[CHLChris]

Assault rifle = pretty much any gun.

The phrase that Obama was trying to make stick was "weapons of war" which could definitely be applied to almost any firearm but a Thompson Contender single shot.

 

[U8395279]

That's quite an impressive bit of vitriol there. I'm not going to spend that much time on my reply. Of course I read what you typed. Quite carefully. Before my first response.

I remain unconvinced.

And my opinion of your comments remains unchanged as well.

You TWISTED my words around, taking them totally out of their proper context. Any reasonable person can see that.

That is a low-down and underhanded thing for you to do, and I personally resent you doing that.

You had no legitimate right to criticize me like that. Your comment was unfair, unreasonable, unnecessary, and totally petty in nature.

You remind me of the silly folks who get all upset and criticize folks for using the word clip instead of magazine. Your comment here in this thread was equally petty and pointless.

.

 

[Flopsweat]

You seem

And my opinion of your comments remains unchanged as well.

You TWISTED my words around, taking them totally out of their proper context. Any reasonable person can see that.

That is a low-down and underhanded thing for you to do, and I personally resent you doing that.

You had no legitimate right to criticize me like that. Your comment was unfair, unreasonable, unnecessary, and totally petty in nature.

You remind me of the silly folks who get all upset and criticize folks for using the word clip instead of magazine. Your comment here in this thread was equally petty and pointless.

.

You seem really upset. I'm done with this.

 

[soberups]

That's quite an impressive bit of vitriol there. I'm not going to spend that much time on my reply. Of course I read what you typed. Quite carefully. Before my first response.

I remain unconvinced.

It was quite obvious to me when I read his post that he was discussing the fact that the particular types of guns that the media typically and inaccurately refers to as "assault rifles" (such as AK's and AR's) were not the ones used by the shooter in this incident. It was also quite obvious to me that the intent of his post was to point out the anti-gun bias of that same media, and its tendency to use the term "assault rifle" in a hysterical manner when referring to virtually any weapon used in a crime that is semi-automatic or has a pistol grip or a black plastic stock or a detachable magazine.

Remain unconvinced if you wish. His meaning was certainly clear enough to me.

 

[CHLChris]

Lance, I noticed you're back to being involved on NWFA again. Welcome back! Maybe you never left, but it seemed like you stepped back a bit for a short season.

Please don't begin stirring things up again. You can argue the points. You can have strong opinions. But you just seem to have a way of taking every discourse DOWN a notch with your thin skin and personal attachment to everything people say.

 

[U8395279]

You seem


You seem really upset. I'm done with this.

I see, so you think that is is OK for you to take disparaging pot shots at people like this. And you are then surprised when the person objects to your criticism as being unfair and unwarranted?

Dude, don't go so far out of your way to criticize others, and maybe you won't get a hostile reaction.

.

 

[U8395279]

Lance, I noticed you're back to being involved on NWFA again. Welcome back! Maybe you never left, but it seemed like you stepped back a bit for a short season..

I never left the board. Just look at my posting history. I've been posting recently on numerous topics

and personal attachment to everything people say.

But his remark was not directed at the topic of discussion. He took the discussion off topic, and was the one that made it about persons, instead of discussing the actual topic. He clearly made a disparaging remark about me as a person, and clarified that I was the person that he was indeed referring to. I'm sorry, but his remark could not have been more petty in nature, and was totally unnecessary.

He took my words totally out of their proper context. And he went well out of his way to do that.

This could have all of been easily avoided, if he had simply kept his personal revulsion for for remarks to himself. Instead, he felt compelled to criticize, and make my remarks out to be something that they most clearly were not.

.

 

[CHLChris]

I agree, Lance, that it is frustrating to read someone attacking you. I have read a lot of your posts of late and you are quite fair and level-headed. Everyone deserves to be able to defend themselves, especially if an attack seems unwarranted.

I just know that I, too, have wanted to quit a thread because of your, let's say, spirited defense of your positions. If you feel someone is acting stupidly, perhaps just let it go sometimes.

 

[U8395279]

I agree, Lance, that it is frustrating to read someone attacking you. I have read a lot of your posts of late and you are quite fair and level-headed. Everyone deserves to be able to defend themselves, especially if an attack seems unwarranted.

I just know that I, too, have wanted to quit a thread because of your, let's say, spirited defense of your positions. If you feel someone is acting stupidly, perhaps just let it go sometimes.

Chris: you are totally mischaracterizing this matter with flopsweat.

I have not been arguing any issues with him. This is not a matter of disagreement between he and I over some issue of gun control, or other political position. He did not stay on the topic of discussion for this thread. He took the discussion to a totally personal level, speaking about me.

He directed a personal attack at ME. All because he felt offended by the language that I used in my original post. I'm sorry Chris, but I said nothing at all wrong in that original post. No reasonable person would have been offended by my language.

I did not refer to an AR-15 as being an Assault Rifle in that post, as he so falsely claimed. The subject of this discussion was about how inaccurately the news media was reporting on this shooting incident. And I was simply talking about their reporting. No Chris. The mere fact that I used the word "Assault" does not make me a bad person. I totally reject that notion.

Anyone who unfairly criticizes me on a personal level like that will always get a response from me.

.

 

[CHLChris]

You're right, Lance, @Flopsweat was totally wrong in his interpretation of what you said. But everyone reading the thread can see very easily that you are right and he was wrong. My point is just that sometimes you need to let it go and try to get back to just the actual conversation. I'm not calling you wrong. I'm just saying chill. Otherwise, Reagan will have to say to you:

 

[Flopsweat]

I see, so you think that is is OK for you to take disparaging pot shots at people like this. And you are then surprised when the person objects to your criticism as being unfair and unwarranted?

Dude, don't go so far out of your way to criticize others, and maybe you won't get a hostile reaction.

.

Just can't let it go, can you? I'm not opening this thread again. Knock yourself out - say whatever you want about me.

 

[P7M13]

WTH? I came to read a post and stumbled across AR15.com.
Of course the perp used an assault rifle. He'd have used his RPG too, but expended it on Brian Williams' helicopter.

 

[U8395279]

You're right, Lance, @Flopsweat was totally wrong in his interpretation of what you said. But everyone reading the thread can see very easily that you are right and he was wrong. My point is just that sometimes you need to let it go and try to get back to just the actual conversation. I'm not calling you wrong. I'm just saying chill. Otherwise, Reagan will have to say to you:

I did let it go Chris. But you questioned whether my defense was justified, and whether his remarks were personal in nature. Are you saying that I cannot disagree with you and say that your viewpoint of the matter is wrong?

If anyone here is holding onto any kind of grudge it is clearly yourself. For you are the one that has been prolonging this conversation, not I. You have been acting as sort of a surrogate for flopsweat. And apparently you have some negative feelings towards me from some unknown past conversation. And that means that you have been holding onto some hostility towards me for a very long time indeed.

Honestly, I cannot even recall having any past conversations with you. Your handle looks familiar, but that is all that I know about you.

I'm sorry if you have felt slighted from some past discussion, but I have totally forgotten about it a long time ago.

You are the one that clearly needs to move on, not I.
.