Marxists in the classroom aren't a fiction

[Rum]

Yep, except one side effect is dead children whose right to 'life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness' appears to be trumped by the second amendment.

That, Rum, if I may say, is a cheap shot. How many children per year are killed by vehicles? Should we call those who drive "child killers"? What about all the abusive parents that kill their children, should I say that parents are "child killers"?


To be fair though, the post you wrote which you were given a warning for, to me, looked like you were accussing Seth of being a wishy washy liberal type.

I don't agree. You aren't comparing like with like. For starters cars main function is transportation. Occasionally they fail in this function, but there is a constant attempt to design more and more safety into them. If a driver is careless and someone is killed as a result they are indeed held responsible.

Guns on the other hand are only designed for one thing. To be pointed at someone with the intention of maiming or killing them.

[aspire1670]

Yep, except one side effect is dead children whose right to 'life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness' appears to be trumped by the second amendment.

That, Rum, if I may say, is a cheap shot. How many children per year are killed by vehicles? Should we call those who drive "child killers"? What about all the abusive parents that kill their children, should I say that parents are "child killers"?

Strangely (geddit) enough, Audley, we do call drivers who kill children with their cars child killers ditto abusive parents who kill their children. We also call those who genuflect at the feet of the 2nd Amendment historically illiterate, religious fundamentalists. Or the Taliban for short. Hope this helps.

[Audley Strange]

Yep, except one side effect is dead children whose right to 'life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness' appears to be trumped by the second amendment.

That, Rum, if I may say, is a cheap shot. How many children per year are killed by vehicles? Should we call those who drive "child killers"? What about all the abusive parents that kill their children, should I say that parents are "child killers"?


To be fair though, the post you wrote which you were given a warning for, to me, looked like you were accussing Seth of being a wishy washy liberal type.

I don't agree. You aren't comparing like with like. For starters cars main function is transportation. Occasionally they fail in this function, but there is a constant attempt to design more and more safety into them. If a driver is careless and someone is killed as a result they are indeed held responsible.

Guns on the other hand are only designed for one thing. To be pointed at someone with the intention of maiming or killing them.

No I'm not comparing like with like. That shouldn't matter though, I'm sure there are many many people worldwide who use guns who have never killed anything. Now I'm not a Gun enthusiast, but it does seem to me unfair to make such a generalisation on the entirety of those who do. Remember that, rape apologist. (To make the point, you know I don't think that of you.)

[Audley Strange]

Yep, except one side effect is dead children whose right to 'life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness' appears to be trumped by the second amendment.

That, Rum, if I may say, is a cheap shot. How many children per year are killed by vehicles? Should we call those who drive "child killers"? What about all the abusive parents that kill their children, should I say that parents are "child killers"?

Strangely (geddit) enough, Audley, we do call drivers who kill children with their cars child killers ditto abusive parents who kill their children. We also call those who genuflect at the feet of the 2nd Amendment historically illiterate, religious fundamentalists. Or the Taliban for short. Hope this helps.

No. Not at all, unsurprisingly.

[Seth]

Yep, except one side effect is dead children whose right to 'life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness' appears to be trumped by the second amendment.

No, their right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness is protected by the Second Amendment, if the scrote-bag anti-gun liberals and Marxists would get the hell out of the way.

[Seth]

I've found that it's easier to not comment in posts where Seth is spewing his nonsense. It would be a guaranteed warning-fest headed my way. Talk about buying into the whole "Red under the bed" mythology spewed out during the Cold War. Hook line and sinker with Mr Sethy-pants.

Well, the problem is it wasn't a mythology at all. It was a very real, very intentional, and very dangerous attempt by the Communists in the Soviet Union (among others) to infiltrate the government and suborn the Constitution, not to mention make us vulnerable to Soviet first-strike attack.

Although Marxists like you will deny it, the Venona Decrypts, along with many other documents in the National Archives, prove beyond any shadow of a doubt that the government was, and indeed still is infested with Marxists.

Joe McCarthy has been proven, through documents from the now-defunct KGB, to have been absolutely correct in every single accusation he ever made against an individual as being a Communist, Communist sympathizer, flat-out Soviet spy, or fellow traveler.

You can find all the evidence in the book "Blacklisted by History" by M. Stanton Evans. He has exhaustively researched McCarthy and turned up all the documents that prove that McCarthyism is not what McCarthy was alleged (wrongly) to have done to "innocent government employees" but rather it was what was done TO McCarty by the Communists and his own party. His name was besmirched not because he was wrong, but because he revealed the incompetence and illegal acts of too many powerful people in Washington, who would rather have Communist spies in government than admit their own errors in hiring them in the first place.

[Seth]

I've found that it's easier to not comment in posts where Seth is spewing his nonsense. It would be a guaranteed warning-fest headed my way. Talk about buying into the whole "Red under the bed" mythology spewed out during the Cold War. Hook line and sinker with Mr Sethy-pants.

A wise strategy. I don't respond for the most part, but his justification of child killing is a step too far.

Fuck you, Rum.

[Seth]

So there are people with strong political opinions in the classrooms?

As for Obama "disappointing the far left", well duh. He's not a commie you know ...

Heh, I pointed that latter issue out elsewhere. This steaming pile of Randroid faeces was his response.

But of course, in SethWorldTM, using the statute book to stop rapacious and piratical people and organisations with money and power from shitting on the rest of us is "Marxist". I bet the people of Bhopal wished better regulation had been in place, to stop Union Carbide taking advantage of sweatshop labour conditions to park a dodgy factory in the middle of a large town. But I suppose I'll be labelled a "Marxist" for suggesting this, despite the fact that I handed him his arse on a plate over this elsewhere.

The fuck you did. Declaring victory isn't the same thing as achieving it, Sparky.

[Seth]

Yep, except one side effect is dead children whose right to 'life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness' appears to be trumped by the second amendment.

That, Rum, if I may say, is a cheap shot. How many children per year are killed by vehicles? Should we call those who drive "child killers"? What about all the abusive parents that kill their children, should I say that parents are "child killers"?


To be fair though, the post you wrote which you were given a warning for, to me, looked like you were accussing Seth of being a wishy washy liberal type.

I don't agree. You aren't comparing like with like. For starters cars main function is transportation. Occasionally they fail in this function, but there is a constant attempt to design more and more safety into them. If a driver is careless and someone is killed as a result they are indeed held responsible.

Guns on the other hand are only designed for one thing. To be pointed at someone with the intention of maiming or killing them.

Which is odd reasoning because fewer than one a hundred thousand guns is actually used for the purpose you allege, and the majority of those that are held for that purpose are held with the intention of LAWFULLY putting a stop to a deadly dangerous criminal attack by law-abiding citizens. Most guns are used for their intended, designed purpose, which is to propel a projectile using the gaseous expansion of burning gunpowder down a barrel and through the air towards a target selected by the shooter, the vast majority of which are made of paper, clay, and wild game.

All my guns have been used only for shooting at those three types of targets so far. This is not to say that I will hesitate to any of them for the purpose you cite if I have a lawful reason to do so.

In other words, you're completely full of shit, and you know it.

[aspire1670]

Yep, except one side effect is dead children whose right to 'life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness' appears to be trumped by the second amendment.

That, Rum, if I may say, is a cheap shot. How many children per year are killed by vehicles? Should we call those who drive "child killers"? What about all the abusive parents that kill their children, should I say that parents are "child killers"?


To be fair though, the post you wrote which you were given a warning for, to me, looked like you were accussing Seth of being a wishy washy liberal type.

I don't agree. You aren't comparing like with like. For starters cars main function is transportation. Occasionally they fail in this function, but there is a constant attempt to design more and more safety into them. If a driver is careless and someone is killed as a result they are indeed held responsible.

Guns on the other hand are only designed for one thing. To be pointed at someone with the intention of maiming or killing them.

Which is odd reasoning because fewer than one a hundred thousand guns is actually used for the purpose you allege, and the majority of those that are held for that purpose are held with the intention of LAWFULLY putting a stop to a deadly dangerous criminal attack by law-abiding citizens. Most guns are used for their intended, designed purpose, which is to propel a projectile using the gaseous expansion of burning gunpowder down a barrel and through the air towards a target selected by the shooter, the vast majority of which are made of paper, clay, and wild game.

All my guns have been used only for shooting at those three types of targets so far. This is not to say that I will hesitate to any of them for the purpose you cite if I have a lawful reason to do so.

In other words, you're completely full of shit, and you know it.

Remind us all, Seth, how many times did you hesitate to use your firearm when you were a cop?

[JimC]

Yep, except one side effect is dead children whose right to 'life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness' appears to be trumped by the second amendment.

That, Rum, if I may say, is a cheap shot. How many children per year are killed by vehicles? Should we call those who drive "child killers"? What about all the abusive parents that kill their children, should I say that parents are "child killers"?


To be fair though, the post you wrote which you were given a warning for, to me, looked like you were accussing Seth of being a wishy washy liberal type.

In the most part, child deaths by car aren't deliberate, whereas many by gun (allowing for tragic accidents) are.

Calling another poster a "child killer" directly has been rightly deemed a personal attack.

However, I agree with Rum to this extent. The NRA, and all proponents of the status quo as far as gun laws in the US, including those on this forum, are clearly enablers of child killers. Full stop.

[Rum]

I don't see how calling someone a child killer is a personal attack at all. It may be right or it may be wrong and in this case it is a matter of personal interpretation. I believe that Seth's attitude to guns directly contributes to the deaths of children. He can argue differently and in this case in fact offensively by telling me to fuck off, which I do see as a personal attack.

Mods - you aren't right on this one.

Merry Christmas to you though!

[Gawdzilla Sama]

You can call me a child-killer.

[Tero]

In order to have this gun thingie work...exactly how many so we need? 300 million, carried at all times. Including the felons in the count.

[Gawdzilla Sama]

In order to have this gun thingie work...exactly how many so we need? 300 million, carried at all times. Including the felons in the count.

I can arm a fair few of them.