Court reporter fined for courting reporting in court reporting.



  • @lucas said:

    Surely crybaby is accusing one of doing that?

    Well, now you've done it!


  • Discourse touched me in a no-no place

    @lucas said:

    Surely crybaby is accusing one of doing that?

    Nah, it's just funny watching him get all riled up.


  • Discourse touched me in a no-no place

    @Rhywden said:

    Well, now you've done it!

    Don't you have some gloves to hand out in case your students get papercuts?



  • @FrostCat said:

    Nah, it's just funny watching him get all riled up.

    ...which also fits the description 😄



  • https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MGQaH3-LK54

    This is all gun control debates come down to when an American is involved



  • I always thought it was: "From my cold dead hands!"

    From my Cold Dead Hands! – 00:08
    — Gunnyman88


  • Discourse touched me in a no-no place

    @Rhywden said:

    I always thought it was: "From my cold dead hands!"

    Your people know a lot about having guns pried from their cold dead hands.



  • @FrostCat said:

    Your people know a lot about having guns pried from their cold dead hands.

    How does this knowing work exactly, though? You're not accusing us of being a nation of Zombies, are you?


  • Discourse touched me in a no-no place

    @Rhywden said:

    How does this knowing work exactly, though? You're not accusing us of being a nation of Zombies, are you?

    Naw, that was a world war two reference.

    You're the one who came in here shitting all over the thread, I just wanted to make you feel at home.



  • @FrostCat said:

    Naw, that was a world war two reference.

    woosh


  • Discourse touched me in a no-no place

    @Rhywden said:

    woosh

    Crack a history book, dumbass.

    BTW, you can call me a stupid troll all you want but you just can't make yourself stop, whereas I had you pegged almost from the very first in your original crybaby thread, and have just been having fun winding you up all this time.

    I'm living rent-free in your brain!!1



  • @FrostCat said:

    Crack a history book, dumbass.

    woooooosh


  • Discourse touched me in a no-no place

    @Rhywden said:

    woooooosh

    You can keep saying it but that don't make it true unless you're admitting you're missing my dig.



  • @FrostCat said:

    You can keep saying it but that don't make it true unless you're admitting you're missing my dig.

    It's not me who missed something 😃

    Then again, what do I expect from someone who's from a country which gave Hitler a nice demonstration on how to go about his Endlösung.


  • Discourse touched me in a no-no place

    @Rhywden said:

    It's not me who missed something

    Are you still nattering on? I sort of abstractly admire your tendency toward Teutonic tendentious tenacity on this tedious topic.



  • @FrostCat said:

    Are you still nattering on? I sort of abstractly admire your tendency toward Teutonic tendentious tenacity on this tedious topic.

    Crack a history book, dumbass. Oh, wait, this stuff isn't in your history books because the US is pathologically incapable of admitting to being on the wrong side of issues.


  • Discourse touched me in a no-no place

    @Rhywden said:

    admitting to being on the wrong side of issues.

    Oh, so you think your country was on the right side of WWII? Don't you people have a law about that?



  • @FrostCat said:

    Oh, so you think your country was on the right side of WWII? Don't you people have a law about that?

    Wrong side of issues, my dear. Learn to read ;)


  • Discourse touched me in a no-no place

    @Rhywden said:

    Wrong side of issues

    Which issue? Lebensraum? Untermenschen and Ubermenschen?

    @Rhywden said:

    my dear

    Are you still doing that? Is that what you consider to be patronization? Or do you think my orc avatar is sexy?



  • @FrostCat said:

    Untermenschen and Ubermenschen?

    Jepp. And guess where Hitler got that one from?


  • Discourse touched me in a no-no place

    @Rhywden said:

    And guess where Hitler got that one from?

    If your answer involve the word "Jews" I don't want to know.



  • You were not called crybaby. In @frostcat's post:

    @FrostCat said:

    Sorry, crybaby Rhywden's already derailed this one in a different direction.

    @Rhywden was being called a crybaby. Keep working on those reading skills!


  • Discourse touched me in a no-no place

    I was wondering why he went on the attack.



  • @FrostCat said:

    If your answer involve the word "Jews" I don't want to know.

    Well, I'll just drop some names you might know: Carnegie, Rockefeller, Bell.


  • Discourse touched me in a no-no place

    @Rhywden said:

    Well, I'll just drop some names you might know: Carnegie, Rockefeller, Bell.

    BWEAHAHAHAHAH! Hitler presided over genocide but it's the Americans' fault!

    Oh god, I have to wipe tears from my eyes. Thanks for the laugh, I think I'm going to have to bow out of this thread because I don't think I can come up with anything stupid enough to top that.

    Oooh, watch out for the American Robber Barons! They'll convince otherwise-stable people to kill millions of people! Booga booga booga!

    Next you'll be telling me, I dunno, that the Rosicrucians introduced Lenin to Communism. Ha! OMG, I didn't know you were such a comedian.



  • @lucas said:

    This is all gun control debates come down to when an American is involved

    Nope. But I'm not going there, because you tend towards not being willing to change your mind.

    Ah what the hell. I'll give you one post. Many studies have shown that countries which have more restrictive gun laws tend to have higher rates of violent crimes. Now, since those rates can be difficult to compare, due to differences in the way crimes are reported by different countries, I will point out how the US cities with the most restrictive gun laws have the highest rates of violent crime in the US (e.g., Chicago, Detroit, Washington D.C.). On the other end of the spectrum is Kennesaw, Georgia, a town were each household is required to own and maintain a firearm and ammunition, with limited legal exceptions. Since Kennesaw passed that law, their violent crime has dropped to almost nothing.

    You want to try and tell me how a gun debate is going to go?



  • Yeah I missed the comma, it is quite easy to miss.



  • @FrostCat said:

    BWEAHAHAHAHAH! Hitler presided over genocide but it's <i>the Americans'</i> fault!

    Oh god, I have to wipe tears from my eyes. Thanks for the laugh, I think I'm going to have to bow out of this thread because I don't think I can come up with anything stupid enough to top that.

    Oooh, watch out for the American Robber Barons! They'll convince otherwise-stable people to kill millions of people! Booga booga booga!


    Where did I speak of fault? I'm saying that the Eugenics movement in the US gave Nazi Germany quite a lot of ideas.

    You're obviously ignorant of your own history - not surprisingly, as this is a chapter of US history which is usually rewritten a bit to make the US look better. I mean, you guys still have eugenic laws in the books and actually still practice them.



  • @abarker said:

    Nope. But I'm not going there, because you tend towards not being willing to change your mind.

    Ah what the hell. I'll give you one post. Many studies have shown that countries which have more restrictive gun laws tend to have higher rates of violent crimes. Now, since those rates can be difficult to compare, due to differences in the way crimes are reported by different countries, I will point out how the US cities with the most restrictive gun laws have the highest rates of violent crime (e.g., Chicago, Detroit, Washington D.C.). On the other end of the spectrum is Kennesaw, Georgia, a town were each household is required to own and maintain a firearm and ammunition, with limited legal exceptions. Since Kennesaw passed that law, their violent crime has dropped to almost nothing.

    You want to try and tell me how a gun debate is going to go?

    Since when is a city a country?


  • Discourse touched me in a no-no place

    @Rhywden said:

    I'm saying that the Eugenics movement in the US gave Nazi Germany quite a lot of ideas.

    Got it. Your people killed millions, but mine are the bad guys. You're on fire today, bro!



  • The previous conversation was nothing about not being able to change my mind. I had a very good reason why I think CSS should have been done in particular way due to combination of personal experience and techniques from top end industry professionals (I linked stuff to them to support my point).

    You already admitted that it is impossible to measure because different countries consider the term violent crime differently

    Lets then instead measure the death rate via guns ... you have 40 times the death rate via gun the UK does according to wikipedia:



  • @Rhywden said:

    Since when is a city a country?

    Ummm, it isn't? I was switching to comparable statistics. As I mentioned:

    @abarker said:

    Many studies have shown that countries which have more restrictive gun laws tend to have higher rates of violent crimes. Now, since those rates can be difficult to compare, due to differences in the way crimes are reported by different countries

    Hmm, so we can't really compare violent crime rates from different countries due to differences in the ways those crimes are recorded and reported? Guess we better find some comparable statistics! Oh I know!

    @abarker said:

    I will point out how the US cities with the most restrictive gun laws have the highest rates of violent crime in the US

    There we go, cities in the US all report crimes in the same manner, so no problem comparing statistics there!

    Need anything explained to you?



  • @FrostCat said:

    Got it. Your people killed millions, but mine are the bad guys. You're on fire today, bro!

    And you dare to accuse me of not reading your posts.

    While you seem to be pathologically incapable of understanding anything.



  • @abarker said:

    Ummm, it isn't? I was switching to comparable statistics. As I mentioned:

    @abarker said:

    Many studies have shown that countries which have more restrictive gun laws tend to have higher rates of violent crimes. Now, since those rates can be difficult to compare, due to differences in the way crimes are reported by different countries

    Hmm, so we can't really compare violent crime rates from different countries due to differences in the ways those crimes are recorded and reported? Guess we better find some comparable statistics! Oh I know!

    @abarker said:

    I will point out how the US cities with the most restrictive gun laws have the highest rates of violent crime in the US

    There we go, cities in the US all report crimes in the same manner, so no problem comparing statistics there!

    Need anything explained to you?

    So, you first say that we can compare countries. Then we suddenly can't. And then you use cities in order to try to make your point?

    How does that even make sense? I mean, if we even can't compare countries why should that suddenly work for cities?


  • Discourse touched me in a no-no place

    @Rhywden said:

    While you seem to be pathologically incapable of understanding anything.

    No, not at all. It's much more fun to wind you up. At this point, it's like that comedy bit in a movie where someone punches a huge German guy and he just won't fall down. I'm enjoying seeing how much you're investing in this: You get to work out your Teutonic rage issues, and I have all kinds of fun taunting your lack of humor or sense of proportion.



  • "Lets then instead measure the death rate via guns ... you have 40 times the death rate via gun the UK does according to wikipedia:"

    Man this is such a stupid argument. OF COURSE they have less violence VIA GUNS than places that actually HAVE guns. Here's a question: would you rather live in a country that has a murder rate of 100, half of which are from guns, or a country that has a murder rate of 200? But thanks for picking the violent crime capital of Europe as your example of a good outcome.



  • Murder rates tend to be less in countries that have guns than those that don't ... it is a lot harder to kill another person if you don't have a gun.


  • Discourse touched me in a no-no place

    @lucas said:

    it is a lot harder to kill another person if you don't have a gun.

    I'm sure all those Chinese people killed in mass stabbings are glad to hear that.



  • @lucas said:

    You already admitted that it is impossible to measure because different countries consider the term violent crime differently

    Lets then instead measure the death rate via guns ... you have 20 times the death rate via gun the UK does according to wikipedia:

    That is a strawman.

    My argument was that gun ownership by law abiding citizens leads to a reduction in violent crime. Firearm related deaths will obviously decrease with a reduction in gun-ownership, but that is not even a sub-set of violent deaths. Firearm related deaths include:

    • suicides
    • murders
    • cop shootings (where a cop shoots someone)
    • accidental shootings
    • gang incidents

    Three of those are not classified as violent crimes, at least not here in the US.

    Now, to illustrate my point: gun ownership by law abiding citizens leads to a reduction in violent crime. Imagine that you are a burglar. You have picked 10 houses to rob. Let's say you know for a fact that none of the homeowners owns a gun. You probably won't hesitate to rob all of them then. Now, say that there is a 10% chance for each homeowner to be a gun owner. Would you still rob all the homes? How about at 20%? 30%? 50%?

    One side of this is demonstrated in cities such as Chicago and Washington, D.C., where gun ownership is strictly regulated, violent and property crimes are higher than the national average. Kennesaw, GA, demonstrates the opposite end of the spectrum. And in spite of what many notable opponents have feared, there has not been one fatal shooting in Kennesaw since the mandatory gun ownership law was passed in 1982.


  • Grade A Premium Asshole

    @lucas said:

    Murder rates tend to be less in countries that have guns than those that don't

    But not that much less, if there is a difference. Once you adjust the statistics to remove bias, it turns out to be net zero. Given that, I would rather have my personal freedoms and liberty. If I do get assaulted, I would rather have the means to defend myself than to be defenseless.



  • Present some statistics ... I did.



  • @Intercourse said:

    But not that much less, if there is a difference. Once you adjust the statistics to remove bias, it turns out to be net zero. Given that, I would rather have my personal freedoms and liberty. If I do get assaulted, I would rather have the means to defend myself than to be defenseless.

    Yeah, well, that's a nice sentiment. But it's a crapshoot when it comes to reality.

    There's a reason why several of my martial arts trainers said that they'd rather deal with a gun than with a knife. And once they're inside 5 meters, a gun won't help you much.



  • Those three all sound pretty horrific to me.

    BTW I am one of the few brits that does own 2 guns.


  • Grade A Premium Asshole

    @lucas said:

    Present some statistics ... I did.

    You presented bullshit, apples to oranges, so am I free to do the same?



  • @Rhywden said:

    So, you first say that we can compare countries. Then we suddenly can't. And then you use cities in order to try to make your point?

    How does that even make sense? I mean, if we even can't compare countries why should that suddenly work for cities?

    Well, I like to bring up the countries as a starting point, but many anti-gunners like to point out that the statistics aren't comparable for various reasons (differing definitions of violent crime, different styles in when the crime is recorded - committed v. convicted, etc). I didn't want to get caught out either way, so I left both points in.

    As for comparing US cities, the US as a whole has standards for reporting crimes. So you can compare violent crime rates for different US cites.

    tl;dr: different countries can't be compared due to different reporting mechanisms, different US cities can be compared since they use the same reporting mechanisms.



  • Dunno I presented a death rate due to firearms, you presented nothing like statistics to argue.



  • @lucas said:

    Those three all sound pretty horrific to me.

    Sure they're horrific, but they aren't crimes.



  • @lucas said:

    Dunno I presented a death rate due to firearms, you presented nothing like statistics to argue.

    You presented a strawman.



  • Still deaths though ... does it really matter if a horrific death is a crime or not?



  • @abarker said:

    Well, I like to bring up the countries as a starting point, but many anti-gunners like to point out that the statistics aren't comparable for various reasons (differing definitions of violent crime, different styles in when the crime is recorded - committed v. convicted, etc). I didn't want to get caught out either way, so I left both points in.

    As for comparing US cities, the US as a whole has standards for reporting crimes. So you can compare violent crime rates for different US cites.

    tl;dr: different countries can't be compared due to different reporting mechanisms, different US cities can be compared since they use the same reporting mechanisms.

    That may well be. But then you run into cultural differences which is one of the reasons why there is different reporting in the first place.

    So you're trying to use the US as a template for the rest of the world, something which has gone wrong repeatedly in the past, sometimes spectacularly to boot.


Log in to reply