Again, I gave you the analogy.......I am sorry you don't see how its analogous. The analogy is specious.
Tim, it wasn't deceptive at all.
Your analogy would be accurate if people said "don't try to control guns, let people die because we can't stop all guns". In your analogy guns are the cancer. And gun control is the cure for cancer. It would be more accurate to call gun control the cancer because it caused more deaths.
In my analogy I equating the difficulty in finding a cure for cancer to the difficulty in controlling guns. Actually, controlling the proliferation of guns would be the easier task if it weren't for the NRA.
You were the one who described this group as kooks.
I did nothing of the sort. I said people some people in the media think of them as kooks.
This what you said in post # 142090....."If you think there is a good reason for people to think that a group is all dangerous kook and you know that some people do think this way,". You went on to explain this was basis for or the reasoning behind why you thought the news media was biased. In that explanation, I viewed your comments as admitting that there was reason why gun advocates are considered kooks. And my suggestion was, you might want to consider why that was.
All I suggested to you is that if that's how you think the world perceives gun advocates, then you might consider why that is instead of worrying what the press thinks or doesn't think.
I worry about why the press thinks that in a way similar to how I worry about why radical Islamic terrorist groups hate the US. In both cases if you hope to counter them it helps to understand them, and in both cases most of the reasons for thinking the way they do are not based on reality.
Real quickly, when is the last time, you've heard of a white man being tied behind a car and forced to run behind that car til he dies?
White men and women are the victims of awful crimes too. If you adjust for the % of whites and minorities that live in poverty stricken areas I'm not sure that minorities are the victims of a greater amount of crime then whites. Some of the crime against whites is racially motivated. Most crime against whites or minorities is committed by people of their own race. Most minorities have not had things like this happen to them, nor do they know anyone who knows anyone who has seen something like that.
Do you really think that the fact that blacks can sit in the same restaurant as white people makes up for being
forced to run behind a car until you die? That this is an example of "discrimination as much for them as against
them?"
No, being able to sit in a restaurant doesn't make up for getting murdered. But then people of all races get murdered sometimes in horrible ways. The example of discrimination against whites is affirmative action and diversity programs. This isn't some hateful criminal committing a horrible but isolated crime, it is rather official discrimination, sometimes mandated by the courts.
Your comments re crimes against whites do not reflect my experiences at all and thus, are not worth my arguing.
As for your complaints re affirmative action, its sounds to me like the whites crying about affirmative action are as lame as the minorities complaining about discrimination pointed out by the author in your townhall article. I have worked under the affirmative action laws and never once thought I was discriminated against or deprived of a job because I was white.
ted |
