| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
|
|
#2
|
|||
|
|||
"KMAN" wrote in message ... in article et, rick at wrote on 3/2/05 10:21 PM: "KMAN" wrote in message ... in article et, rick at wrote on 3/2/05 5:46 PM: "KMAN" wrote in message . .. snip... === So, coward, why are you being a scumbag and refusing to name those valid and valuable purposes of assault weapons? ====================== Because, liarman, unlike you, I don't purport to be the arbiter of what is useful, valuable, or necessary. That is the perogative of eack person, liarman. Why did you say weapons also have valid and valuable purposes if you were not prepared to name them? What a coward! ================== Nope. Because, unlike you, I don't pretend to be the arbiter of what is and is not a valuable use for 'any' product. You said that assault weapons have value. That's just an empty assertion unless you are prepared to state the value. Grow up. =========================== You've claimed alot of things here in this group, and have yet to back any of those assertion up with anything but your lies. Talk about emptiness, that's the whole of your writings. Why now must everyone else bend to your ignorance, liarman? Again, what is of 'value' is different to different people. Why should I presume to speak for everyine just because you feel you can, liarman? What a weasel! =============== No weasel about it, liarman. I don't claim to be the arbiter of everyone elses ideas like you do. You said assault weapons have value. ======================= They do. Just like cars. If you can't say what that value is, then your point is lost, your argument is once again defeated, and you can go home and clean your guns. ============================= Why does my value make any difference to you, liarman. You have lost again. Again, unlike you, I don't claim to make the call for everyone else. You can play at being the god you claim you don't belive in all you want. I'm not delusional like you are, and don't even care to pretend to be god. |
|
#3
|
|||
|
|||
|
"rick" wrote in message link.net... "KMAN" wrote in message ... in article et, rick at wrote on 3/2/05 10:21 PM: "KMAN" wrote in message ... in article et, rick at wrote on 3/2/05 5:46 PM: "KMAN" wrote in message . .. snip... === So, coward, why are you being a scumbag and refusing to name those valid and valuable purposes of assault weapons? ====================== Because, liarman, unlike you, I don't purport to be the arbiter of what is useful, valuable, or necessary. That is the perogative of eack person, liarman. Why did you say weapons also have valid and valuable purposes if you were not prepared to name them? What a coward! ================== Nope. Because, unlike you, I don't pretend to be the arbiter of what is and is not a valuable use for 'any' product. You said that assault weapons have value. That's just an empty assertion unless you are prepared to state the value. Grow up. =========================== You've claimed alot of things here in this group, and have yet to back any of those assertion up with anything but your lies. Talk about emptiness, that's the whole of your writings. Why now must everyone else bend to your ignorance, liarman? Again, what is of 'value' is different to different people. Why should I presume to speak for everyine just because you feel you can, liarman? What a weasel! =============== No weasel about it, liarman. I don't claim to be the arbiter of everyone elses ideas like you do. But you nevertheless claim that assault weapons have value. If the value (which would have to be named) is not comparable to the value of driving a car, then the analogy with cars fails. Understand, fool? |
|
#4
|
|||
|
|||
|
"KMAN" wrote in message ... "rick" wrote in message link.net... "KMAN" wrote in message ... in article et, rick at wrote on 3/2/05 10:21 PM: "KMAN" wrote in message ... in article et, rick at wrote on 3/2/05 5:46 PM: "KMAN" wrote in message . .. snip... === So, coward, why are you being a scumbag and refusing to name those valid and valuable purposes of assault weapons? ====================== Because, liarman, unlike you, I don't purport to be the arbiter of what is useful, valuable, or necessary. That is the perogative of eack person, liarman. Why did you say weapons also have valid and valuable purposes if you were not prepared to name them? What a coward! ================== Nope. Because, unlike you, I don't pretend to be the arbiter of what is and is not a valuable use for 'any' product. You said that assault weapons have value. That's just an empty assertion unless you are prepared to state the value. Grow up. =========================== You've claimed alot of things here in this group, and have yet to back any of those assertion up with anything but your lies. Talk about emptiness, that's the whole of your writings. Why now must everyone else bend to your ignorance, liarman? Again, what is of 'value' is different to different people. Why should I presume to speak for everyine just because you feel you can, liarman? What a weasel! =============== No weasel about it, liarman. I don't claim to be the arbiter of everyone elses ideas like you do. But you nevertheless claim that assault weapons have value. ================== Yes. If the value (which would have to be named) is not comparable to the value of driving a car, then the analogy with cars fails. =================== No, it does not, because the value of cars is also dependent on the person making the decision of what is valuable, liarman. Man, you really are this stupid, aren't you? Understand, fool? ================== Apparently you don't. that's plainly obvious, liarman. |
| Reply |
| Thread Tools | Search this Thread |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| Crimes Against Nature-- RFK, Jr. Interview | General | |||
Hybrid Mode
