Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0
soulpope

Where is Paul Secor .... ?

66 posts in this topic

Now what's this about we all despise personal attacks? :g

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Scott Dolan said:

Yes, now it’s all so very UN-Paul-like.

once again, pay attention, please.

No it's not "all" so very un-Paul like. It was all very Paul-like up to the post-deleting part.

 

Just now, Scott Dolan said:

Threats of harm are not personal attacks. You will likely be the only one that needs to be explained to. 

There were no threats of personal harm. None, zero, zilch, nada.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Personal attacks are things like calling you a disgusting human being, no matter how true. Worst consequence: pissing the other person off. 

Threatening someone with a weapon is something that can land you in jail. 

Wee bit of difference between those two things. Not that I expect you to comprehend any of that. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Threatening or not ... having read that amputated thread since, I would have not seen that statement as being that threatening either, BUT ...

In the same vein IMVHO there is nothing that offensive about that "certain type of American" either. Everyone following the discussion of guns and gun ownership in the USA (particularly when another madman has run amok again and killed inocent bystanders or some immature child has been let loose playing with loaded guns left unattended by a waaaay too dumb parent and killing his/her playmate) is that it is FAR from so that EVERY American is all out and eager to obtain, cherish and wield his/her gun as if his "Americanness" depened on it or even condone possession of guns. By all accounts and cutting ANY slack for possible exaggeration in what the news people write on that subject everywhere, it DOES look like there are plenty of Americans out there these days too who are all opposed to what the NRA and gun ownership advocacy stand for. In short, "one certain type of Americans" wants and cherishes their guns (of which the "stand your ground" approach may be fairly understandable and ONE reason why they cherish it - but just one) and another "certain type of American" does not approve of this at all and fears this will make things worse in too many situations. So what, then? Look at it any way you want, but OVERALL your country is quite divided about this. But that's a problem that will have to be solved within the country. Us others can only watch ...

Edited by Big Beat Steve

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, Big Beat Steve said:

Threatening or not ... having read that amputated thread since, I would have not seen that statement as being that threatening either, BUT ...

In the same vein IMVHO there is nothing that offensive about that "certain type of American" either. Everyone following the discussion of guns and gun ownership in the USA (particularly when another madman has run amok again and killed inocent bystanders or some immature child has been let loose playing with loaded guns left unattended by a waaaay too dumb parent and killing his/her playmate) is that it is FAR from so that EVERY American is all out and eager to obtain, cherish and wield his/her gun as if his "Americanness" depened on it or even condone possession of guns. By all accounts and cutting ANY slack for possible exaggeration in what the news people write on that subject everywhere, it DOES look like there are plenty of Americans out there these days too who are all opposed to what the NRA and gun ownership advocacy stand for. In short, "one certain type of Americans" wants and cherishes their guns (of which the "stand your ground" approach may be fairly understandable and ONE reason why they cherish it - but just one) and another "certain type of American" does not approve of this at all and fears this will make things worse in too many situations. So what, then? Look at it any way you want, but OVERALL your country is quite divided about this. But that's a problem that will have to be solved within the country. Us others can only watch ...

And then there’s me. A very liberal progressive type living in the heart of Red State America that sees and empathizes with both sides of the debate. 99.99% of gun owners are highly responsible and respectable people. But yes, gun violence and mass shooting are definitely a problem. 

I certainly have no solution, but I do recognize the problems. Do nothing and continue down this bloody path, do something and you’ll only affect the responsible owners since bad people will always be able to get guns. It’s an incredibly complicated problem with no easy solutions. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Big Beat Steve said:

Threatening or not ... having read that amputated thread since, I would have not seen that statement as being that threatening either, BUT ...

In the same vein IMVHO there is nothing that offensive about that "certain type of American" either. Everyone following the discussion of guns and gun ownership in the USA (particularly when another madman has run amok again and killed inocent bystanders or some immature child has been let loose playing with loaded guns left unattended by a waaaay too dumb parent and killing his/her playmate) is that it is FAR from so that EVERY American is all out and eager to obtain, cherish and wield his/her gun as if his "Americanness" depened on it or even condone possession of guns. By all accounts and cutting ANY slack for possible exaggeration in what the news people write on that subject everywhere, it DOES look like there are plenty of Americans out there these days too who are all opposed to what the NRA and gun ownership advocacy stand for. In short, "one certain type of Americans" wants and cherishes their guns (of which the "stand your ground" approach may be fairly understandable and ONE reason why they cherish it - but just one) and another "certain type of American" does not approve of this at all and fears this will make things worse in too many situations. So what, then? Look at it any way you want, but OVERALL your country is quite divided about this. But that's a problem that will have to be solved within the country. Us others can only watch ...

 Count me as one who is opposed to guns. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, Big Beat Steve said:

Threatening or not ... having read that amputated thread since, I would have not seen that statement as being that threatening either, BUT ...

In the same vein IMVHO there is nothing that offensive about that "certain type of American" either. Everyone following the discussion of guns and gun ownership in the USA (particularly when another madman has run amok again and killed inocent bystanders or some immature child has been let loose playing with loaded guns left unattended by a waaaay too dumb parent and killing his/her playmate) is that it is FAR from so that EVERY American is all out and eager to obtain, cherish and wield his/her gun as if his "Americanness" depened on it or even condone possession of guns. By all accounts and cutting ANY slack for possible exaggeration in what the news people write on that subject everywhere, it DOES look like there are plenty of Americans out there these days too who are all opposed to what the NRA and gun ownership advocacy stand for. In short, "one certain type of Americans" wants and cherishes their guns (of which the "stand your ground" approach may be fairly understandable and ONE reason why they cherish it - but just one) and another "certain type of American" does not approve of this at all and fears this will make things worse in too many situations. So what, then? Look at it any way you want, but OVERALL your country is quite divided about this. But that's a problem that will have to be solved within the country. Us others can only watch ...

Jim can clarify for himself but I am pretty certain that what he means is "certain kind of American" sounded like stereotypical yahoo, conservative or Trumpist (or both), probably a southerner, whereas Jim is on the left politically but supports the 2nd Amendment right to keep and bear arms for personal protection.  So Paul was lumping him in with a political cohort he is far away from, but with which he has one thing in common.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This thread is veering into american politics ....

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, Scott Dolan said:

Threatening someone with a weapon is something that can land you in jail.

At best, "would you like to find out?" in the context it occurred constitutes an unintended but unilaterally perceived threat. Absent any verbal inflection, that assumption is at best incomplete. There is no rational reason to assume that it was an actual, viable threat.

We're finding out all over America right now how foolish it is to empower "perceived" threats that have no further basis in facts, data, or context.

So ask yourself - what happens when individuals cede their ability to discern and consider over to their most base gut reaction towards just assuming the worst, and that the worst is going to happen to them? We're already to the point where I hear people claiming, in full seriousness, that "it DOESN'T MATTER what you meant, it's how I took it".

Yeah, what happens when people stop thinking altogether and just assume that everything is all about how they feel at the moment of initial impulse? What kind of civilization does that devolve into?

Would you like to find out?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, Dan Gould said:

Jim can clarify for himself but I am pretty certain that what he means is "certain kind of American" sounded like stereotypical yahoo, conservative or Trumpist (or both), probably a southerner, whereas Jim is on the left politically but supports the 2nd Amendment right to keep and bear arms for personal protection.  So Paul was lumping him in with a political cohort he is far away from, but with which he has one thing in common.

That’s a rampant problem all throughout American political discourse. Everything is either/or, there is no allowance for nuance. I’ve certainly been guilty of it in the past, but I tend to be hyper aware of it these days. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Dan Gould said:

Jim can clarify for himself but I am pretty certain that what he means is "certain kind of American" sounded like stereotypical yahoo, conservative or Trumpist (or both), probably a southerner, whereas Jim is on the left politically but supports the 2nd Amendment right to keep and bear arms for personal protection.  So Paul was lumping him in with a political cohort he is far away from, but with which he has one thing in common.

Yep.

And for anybody with real-world experience in/and around responsible gun ownership, you do not advertise if you own a gun/guns or not. It's nobody's damn business, and it's foolhardy to either advertise yourself one way or the other. Nobody needs to know except your own self. Nobody.

As it pertains to me, it is entirely possible that I support basic 2nd Amendment rights and choose not to avail myself of that particular freedom.

Or maybe I do?

The only way anybody will ever find out is to put themselves in the position to find out - come into my house uninvited. Well, when I'm at home, anyway. You come into an empty house, hey, nothing I can do about that. And if you're just there to take the records, my wife will probably say to let her know the next time you're coming.

Now would you like to find out? I don't think so, and would hope you wouldn't. Because if you would, and if you know what the only avenue available to you to find out is, then it is you that are threatening me.

And then I will have to get my gun ready. Or go out and buy one. Hell, one or the other.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

NO religious or political discussion will be tolerated .... are now even the binding forum rules out of order .... ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, soulpope said:

NO religious or political discussion will be tolerated .... are now even the binding forum rules out of order .... ?

I was wondering about that too. Then again, nothing about this forum really suprises me anymore.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, soulpope said:

NO religious or political discussion will be tolerated .... are now even the binding forum rules out of order .... ?

It’s just general observations, not really a debate, or even an actual conversation. But I’m done with it. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I don't know that calling me an asshole is necessarily political or religious. It seems more like a lot of angst-y people are suddenly having an easy outlet for venting and are aggressively taking advantage of it. Looks like I'm giving an empowering voice to the otherwise powerless. And all at no charge!

Y'all should thank me! :g

8 minutes ago, Scott Dolan said:

 But I’m done with it. 

And that's a good idea.

We've established where Paul is, that he can be reached, that he's welcome to return at any time, no questions asked, and that I'm a dangerous asshole.

Nothing more to add, thread now closed.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Paul sent me a PM weeks ago saying he was leaving. In the 16 years that this board has been in existence, people have come and go. I never like to see long-standing members leave, but I'm not going to take time out of my busy life to try and convince them to stay. That's a dead-end. I found that out the hard way with a certain member who is now passed.

I reviewed the thread in question after Paul messaged me and I honestly did not see how one could possibly construe what Jim wrote as a threat, unless English isn't one's first language. Paul even admitted in his PM to me that he didn't think Jim was going to travel to NY and hunt him down. So I really don't understand what the hubbub is about. I figured I'd just let things take their course rather than intervene. Perhaps I should've sent Jim a message, but are we not all adults here? If you have an issue with something that someone says, then say so, perhaps best in a private message. When they tell you that you are misinterpreting their intention, then take them at their word. Seems pretty easy to me. Nobody here is new to the internet. Sometimes the things we type are misconstrued. Sometimes we get offended by something someone states and often times they don't mean to be offensive. People think different. Such is life.

I am rather disappointed in the personal attacks towards Jim in this thread. I don't think that is deserved at all and they certainly went far beyond what Jim is accused of towards Paul. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
Sign in to follow this  
Followers 0

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.