02-16-2013 03:28 PM
ASS MURPHY wrote:The OP's questions are stupid. He thinks he's making some sort of point, but he is not.
It's so pointless that you responded - twice.
02-16-2013 03:38 PM
ASS MURPHY wrote:The OP's questions are stupid. He thinks he's making some sort of point, but he is not.
they are the questions of a child, asked in that way of a child.
02-16-2013 03:39 PM
ASS MURPHY wrote:The OP's questions are stupid. He thinks he's making some sort of point, but he is not.
Exactly. Which is why I answered him as I did.
02-16-2013 03:52 PM
How do you ask a question that not only appears intelligent but also results in an answer that satisfies the knowledge you are seeking?
There are two elements that you need to be concerned about in asking questions. Those elements are process and outcomes. The two side of the process element is perspective questions and evaluative questions. The outcome elements involve knowledge questions and action questions. The best questions involve both process and outcome elements in the question.
Start with something simple. Asking something simple first lets the information provider know that you are about to state your opinion, but that you fully realize that you do not comprehend the whole story, and that you are hoping they can fill in some gaps. For example,
"Have you heard about the latest modifications to the Farm Bill?"
02-16-2013 03:58 PM
Have you heard about the latest modifications to the Farm Bill?
02-16-2013 04:04 PM
SHRED wrote:
Gun Rights
If a "tyrannical government" were to come to take your guns, which arm(s) of government would they use?
Immigration
If Canadians were willing to hire you illegally for ten times your current pay would you ignore Canadian law and go?
---
Reported for using big words when asking righties questions.
02-16-2013 04:15 PM
Ed wrote:
Sloppy Santa wrote:
Ed wrote:The question wasn't whether or not it'd care but which arm(s) of the government would be used.
And the answer is that it doesn't matter.
Nope. What you just claimed is the answer "it doesn't matter" is the answer to the question "does it matter which arm(s) of the government would be used?"
But I get it. Answering questions is difficult and annoying. The simpler the worse it is.
02-16-2013 04:17 PM
ASS MURPHY wrote:The OP's questions are stupid. He thinks he's making some sort of point, but he is not.
He's fantasizing again...
02-16-2013 04:29 PM
ASS MURPHY wrote:The OP's questions are stupid. He thinks he's making some sort of point, but he is not.
The questions are very simple. One only needs to answer them and then the OP can make his point, if he has one, and it can then be discussed / dismissed.
People that frequently avoid questions typically have very little to back up their views.
02-16-2013 05:15 PM
Davo17 wrote:they are the questions of a child, asked in that way of a child.
Takes one to know one?
02-16-2013 05:41 PM
If and or when it happens here, It would under the flag of the UN.
No I wouldn't go to Canada to work. I took a huge cut in pay when I left DC for Florida.
Still..........stupid thread. BTW SHRED, how long till I'm going to have to subsidise your insurance so you can retire early?
02-16-2013 05:54 PM
02-16-2013 06:22 PM
Sloppy Santa wrote:
ASS MURPHY wrote:The OP's questions are stupid. He thinks he's making some sort of point, but he is not.
The questions are very simple. One only needs to answer them and then the OP can make his point, if he has one, and it can then be discussed / dismissed.
People that frequently avoid questions typically have very little to back up their views.
I did answer his questions, even though I'd already dismissed his stupid questions, because I love wasting my time.
02-16-2013 06:31 PM - edited 02-16-2013 06:40 PM
SHRED wrote:
Gun Rights
If a "tyrannical government" were to come to take your guns, which arm(s) of government would they use?
Immigration
If Canadians were willing to hire you illegally for ten times your current pay would you ignore Canadian law and go?
---
That's a good question. In SC there is a bill in the General Assembly as we speak to exempt any weapon bought prior to Dec. 31 2012 from any federal weapons ban. I don't think the SCNG would do it. Maybe troops from Fort Bragg?
No. I don't want to break the law and I don't want to live in Canada. I have no problem with a path to immigration as the illegal aliens in my neck of the woods contribute far more to society than do any of the local liberals; in short, the aliens work.
02-16-2013 06:50 PM

02-16-2013 06:57 PM
Shred qoutes,
"Setting aside your refusal to answer my questions and not-so veiled attempt to change the subject...my car requires I insure it in case of an accident or any damage done by the user neglectful or not. Guns carry no such requirement. Why not?"
this is a question of epic biblical stupidity that common sense can answer.
legally having a POV (personally owned vehicle for you non-military types), is not a right. legally having a firearm is!
02-16-2013 07:03 PM
360vodka wrote:Shred qoutes,
"Setting aside your refusal to answer my questions and not-so veiled attempt to change the subject...my car requires I insure it in case of an accident or any damage done by the user neglectful or not. Guns carry no such requirement. Why not?"
this is a question of epic biblical stupidity that common sense can answer.
legally having a POV (personally owned vehicle for you non-military types), is not a right. legally having a firearm is!
Uh, correction, dumbass. Having a driver's license may be a privilege, but vehicle ownership is a right.
Feel free to prove me wrong.

02-16-2013 07:09 PM
Belva wrote:
360vodka wrote:Shred qoutes,
"Setting aside your refusal to answer my questions and not-so veiled attempt to change the subject...my car requires I insure it in case of an accident or any damage done by the user neglectful or not. Guns carry no such requirement. Why not?"
this is a question of epic biblical stupidity that common sense can answer.
legally having a POV (personally owned vehicle for you non-military types), is not a right. legally having a firearm is!
Uh, correction, dumbass. Having a driver's license may be a privilege, but vehicle ownership is a right.
Feel free to prove me wrong.
(crickets...)
02-16-2013 07:13 PM
Belva wrote:
360vodka wrote:Shred qoutes,
"Setting aside your refusal to answer my questions and not-so veiled attempt to change the subject...my car requires I insure it in case of an accident or any damage done by the user neglectful or not. Guns carry no such requirement. Why not?"
this is a question of epic biblical stupidity that common sense can answer.
legally having a POV (personally owned vehicle for you non-military types), is not a right. legally having a firearm is!
Uh, correction, dumbass. Having a driver's license may be a privilege, but vehicle ownership is a right.
Feel free to prove me wrong.
My Maserati does 185
I lost my license, now I don't drive.
02-16-2013 07:18 PM
About HCHarmonyCentral.com is the leading Internet resource for musicians, supplying valuable information from news and product reviews, to classified ads and chat rooms.
Advertise on HC