I want to apologize for losing my temper with you all yesterday.

[zanana1]

I'm really sorry for the insults and the people I offended. I passionately disagree with most of you, but I couldn't just allow the insults and rudeness of yesterday to stand. I won't be looking at this forum again because it drives me crazy, but best of luck to all of you.

[wtmusic]

1. You've earned your membership card to the DU Regret Club

Welcome brother :thumbsup: (S'all good)

:toast:

[PavePusher]

2. What did I miss? n/t

[PavePusher]

10. O.K., I went back and looked at some of your posts...

You came here, made a bunch of claims and accusations, provided no proof or evidence or supporting material, got soundly rebutted on cross, by people who were both polite, if blunt and direct, and who provided support for their arguments. Then, when asked directly for responses or answers to questions, after yours were answered, you either ignored those requests or, apparently, made replys which were rude enough to be squelched by the mods.

You then make a non-apology apology, and further accuse people of rudeness and attacks.

Meh. Apology not accepted.

I, for one, will welcome any reasoned debate, and so will almost everyone here, including the people who have addressed you previously. Please bring some.

[zanana1]

15. That's OK. nt

[baldguy]

3. Dealing with people who have a less than accurate view of the world will do that.

[SteveM]

4. Are you saying you want to apologize as well? Please do. nt

[baldguy]

7. I haven't lost my temper.

[SteveM]

8. Just the arguments, one after another.

I admire the OP for owning up to the only thing left for gun-controllers: over-wrought compassion, smear, personal attack and culture war. For what it's worth, she at least sees that the most constructive thing is to not do any more damage to Democrats, and not to turn on her allies in this forum, who are just as progressive (if not more so) than others in DU.

[baldguy]

9. Like I said - some people have a less than accurate view of the world.

[SteveM]

11. Pffft. Dust in the wind. nt

[cowman]

12. And I suppose

that enlightened people like you do. Wow it's good to know that we have such a person on this site. Oh great one please impart more of your great knowledge to us :sarcasm: :rofl:

[Tim01 2.0]

17. From the horses mouth. nt

[rl6214]

35. That would be

YOU

[Fire_Medic_Dave]

14. Don't you mean dealing with people who care more about civil rights than you do.

[notadmblnd]

5. so what you're saying is....

it makes you angry when other do it, but it's okay for you to be rude and throw insults as long as you come back an apologize?

[Name removed]

6. Deleted message

Sub-thread removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Callisto32]

13. Hey, been there, done that.

Come on back. As long as you apologize, it's cool.

[zanana1]

16. I still don't agree with you guys, but I could have been more civil. nt

[GreenStormCloud]

18. A civil discussion can bring understanding all around.

Hang around and try civil discussion with us.

[zanana1]

19. I have to admit that's not possible because...

Every time I've had a "discussion" with you guys it's been one against about 50 of you. It's frustrating and it makes me lose my temper. You guys can be intimidating when that happens and some DU'ers just stay away. Now I'm staying away, too.

[lepus]

20. Generally speaking,

you didn't get mobbed. You threw comments at several people who, for the most part broke apart your arguments single handedly. It may have seemed you were getting mobbed, but you threw comments at a lot of people who decided to respond.

Hints and handy helpers for the future. Think a little before commenting. Ensure your comments are logical and well thought out.

[AtheistCrusader]

21. If you could back up your points, it wouldn't matter if there was 5 million of us.

Or 500 million.


If your posts withstood any sort of factual scrutiny, you would win regardless.

Check out Michael Harris's posts in the NOLA gun confiscation thread if you want to see how it's done. I'm very impressed.

[zanana1]

26. This would be a good time for you to be civil, too. nt

[AtheistCrusader]

27. Please point out anything in my post that was uncivil.

[tburnsten]

28. Dude, how touchy are you?

Nothing he wrote was anything but the epitome of polite discussion, he even referred you to a thread with a picture-perfect example of someone disagreeing with him and other pro-gun posters by using rational, informed debate.

I think you need to lighten up, Francis.

[slackmaster]

22. People who care about an issue tend to be passionate about it

Try posting something against same-sex marriage in the GLBT forum, and you'll get just as dog-piled as you do posting anti-RKBA stuff here.

[NewMoonTherian]

23. I have that feeling sometimes as well.

And chats and forums can just be a generally distracting medium for conversation. If I find myself debating someone who seems sincere and level-headed, I usually offer to continue the conversation via PM. If you still want to debate the topic in less maddening environs, that might be a way to do so. Anyway, intemperate remarks are the lifeblood of the internet, and you seem like a fairly reasonable person, so don't sweat it.

[jody]

24. Your decision seems valid given your present knowledge of all things RKBA.n/t

[zanana1]

31. Well, I see that we're alike. You like to insult, too. nt

[jody]

32. How can a statement acknowledging your lack of knowledge based on your posts be an insult?

[zanana1]

36. It's an insult to say I know nothing about the 2nd Amendment.

But I forgive you.

[jody]

38. Please cite a post in which I said you "know nothing about the 2nd Amendment.".

[GreenStormCloud]

25. Suggestion: Pick one of the more civil and well informed of us and have a civil PM discussion. N/T

[The Green Manalishi]

29. If you use facts rather than emotion

and respect the fact that people just as progressive as you, who have worked just as hard for justice and equality, can see the specifics of an issue differently.....
if you can debate like and adult, not tossing out red herrings or ascribing to the other person evil motives regardless of hjow exactly the opposite of you they are...

Then I'll discuss anything with you, any time, and be proud to do so.

You've (general firearm restrictionist 'you) HAVE to realize that just tossing insults, penis comparisons and emotion around is only going to get you more of the same back from a lot of us.

I try my damndest to be civil, but if someone is going to imply that the fact I own and enjoy using firearms, and am prepared to drop a thug before seeing myself beat or my wife raped makes me ANY less progressive than anyone else who has walked precincts, given money, taken to the streets for racial and economic justice, then my 'Irish' gets up.

So, sorry if I've capped on you; we all want the best for the world or we wouldn't be here on DU.

[zanana1]

30. You have a right to your opinions. nt

[The Green Manalishi]

34. But not my own facts.

My sincere belief is that 'truth' can and should be determined by the examination of which side of an argument is the strongest.

I believe in rational debate. Formal debate, with burden of rejoinder, argument from emotion not allowed, ad hominum and red herrings preferably ridiculed and most definitely admission of failure of one's arguments.

Facts, not prejudice.

The problem is that many anti firearms people come in to this forum and start lobbing insults, such as "If you support CCW you're not really a progressive", "If you want to plug a thug you must be a freeper" and "You're compensating for something"; then they wonder why they are treated with contempt rather than accolades.

Few on here mind honest debate, but it seems like it's always the people against the RKBA that come off with major attitude and a complete refusal to consider that they might be wrong, and then get all pissed off when they are insulted and vilified due to their inability to really muster sound arguments or counter arguments and concomitantly result to insult.

"You have a right to your opinions". No shit? I don't really give a flying fuck if you think so or not. I, and probably a serious majority of the people on this forum and in the country as a whole have no more reason to grant any of your arguments any more or less validity than if you were proselytizing a 6000 year old earth or female genital mutilation. In other words, *YOU* are the one who has to make your case. If you don't know how to debate then stop bothering the adults. If you want to try to convince me that firearms should be more highly restricted, and what criteria you would propose to administer said restrictions, I shall listen and consider.

[aikoaiko]

33. I missed whatever you wrote, but I am impressed with the apology.

Good on you. ;)

[zanana1]

37. Thank you. nt