EPTUS Politics Mega-thread - Page 8943
| Forum Index > Closed |
Read the rules in the OP before posting, please. In order to ensure that this thread continues to meet TL standards and follows the proper guidelines, we will be enforcing the rules in the OP more strictly. Be sure to give them a re-read to refresh your memory! The vast majority of you are contributing in a healthy way, keep it up! NOTE: When providing a source, explain why you feel it is relevant and what purpose it adds to the discussion if it's not obvious. Also take note that unsubstantiated tweets/posts meant only to rekindle old arguments can result in a mod action. | ||
|
Dangermousecatdog
United Kingdom7084 Posts
| ||
|
crms
United States11933 Posts
| ||
|
Wulfey_LA
932 Posts
| ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On October 07 2017 04:32 Wulfey_LA wrote: Some 25 year old video editor banged out that video in 3 hours to make the deadline. He obviously reused the best 3D model of an 'assault weapon' style AR15 he could find. The CNN video guys don't have the skills or time to generate their own 3D renderings of accurate bump stocks. That Gunners/Cons insist on shitlording and pedanting on these minor graphical details reveal the weaknesses of their underlying arguments. This hits the nail on the head. People are really getting bent out of shape about the quality of CNNs quickly slapped together graphics. I get it, we all played halflife and CoD, so we know what an under barrel grenade launcher is, so its bothers people a bit. But this nit picking at its finest. | ||
|
Artisreal
Germany9235 Posts
On October 07 2017 04:18 Dangermousecatdog wrote: Danglars, ok, I looked up bump stocks. Does the addition of the handle really changes things that much? I guess it does. I really don't understand why you don't like the image. But you are more knowledgeable than me about this so I'll defer to your knowledge. But really, what I want to know is why are you just arguing past me? Why do you presume I am defending CNN blindly, rather than against your craptastic twitter and youtube links? Why is sourceless source considered a source? Why do you seem to lack awareness of sources? Who the fuck are these random people names your are just dropping and why should I care? Why are you accusing people of partisanship against you when they don't even have a position for you. WTF is a MAGA and why are you talking about Trump? At some point you aren't talking to anybody but yourself and are just flailing at windmills. MAGA is a popular catchphrase that has turned its meaning to Make America Gruesome Again. | ||
|
Sermokala
United States14113 Posts
| ||
|
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
On October 07 2017 04:18 Dangermousecatdog wrote: Danglars, ok, I looked up bump stocks. Does the addition of the handle really changes things that much? But you are more knowledgeable than me about this so I'll defer to your knowledge. But really, what I want to know is why are you just arguing past me? Why do you presume I am defending CNN blindly, rather than against your craptastic twitter and youtube links? Why is sourceless source considered a source? Why do you seem to lack awareness of sources? Who the fuck are these random people names your are just dropping and why should I care? Why are you accusing people of partisanship against you when they don't even have a position for you. WTF is a MAGA and why are you talking about Trump? At some point you aren't talking to anybody but yourself and are just flailing at windmills. You want the recoil to press on your finger against the trigger (holding the pistol grip as part of the bump stock). Not the essential entire rifle recoiling wildly telescoping off its "adjustable" stock rod. You alleged the video was a fake recording despite the image from the blogger's capture posted on Twitter absolutely agreeing with the image off the video. You should have immediately dismissed some conspiracy between a mainstream conservative blogger and youtube MAGAhat that requires fake chyrons and footage and voiceover to make CNN look bad. All done in a day. Ridiculous. It's easy. CNN messed up big time. They're relying on an animator/artist's conception who's never seen a bump stock to theorize it's operation. And making it a cable news bit. Which is why it should've warranted a simple laugh at CNN instead of denying the observation, subsequent posting of clip, and alleging all kinds of lying. I made the future comparisons to show this is the exact kind of dithering undertaken by the worst of Trump supporters--It's all a conspiracy. | ||
|
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
On October 07 2017 04:32 Wulfey_LA wrote: Some 25 year old video editor banged out that video in 3 hours to make the deadline. He obviously reused the best 3D model of an 'assault weapon' style AR15 he could find. The CNN video guys don't have the skills or time to generate their own 3D renderings of accurate bump stocks. That Gunners/Cons insist on shitlording and pedanting on these minor graphical details reveal the weaknesses of their underlying arguments. That Wulfey_LA moves seemlessly from accusation that it's all made up to "it's all true, but unimportant" should show how this is all about narrative and not about facts. Maybe they should have more consultations between video editors that don't know the actual subject of the piece and people that do. Then you don't show GENERIC_SCARY_ASSAULT_RIFLE and confirm the opinion of 2nd amendment supporters that nobody has a clue. | ||
|
Artisreal
Germany9235 Posts
If you would show such enthusiasms with serious issues many regulars would appreciate the change. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On October 07 2017 04:43 Sermokala wrote: Its fairly legitimate nit picking though. Having extra accessories that aren't common and just exist to make the image look scarier devalues the points that they're making. Its really not that big of a deal as its being made to be though. Totally. The graphic is inaccurate. And you are right, people should be asking: Is it worth discussing? Do we need to post it on twitter with some implied commentary on the quality of CNN’s reporting? Is it worth reddit threads discussing how bad it is? Because I am of the opinion this entire topic isn’t worthy of anyone’s attention. It is a bad mock up that was thrown together. More will be made and they will be bad. It does not merit any discussion and posting it was some pretty lock quality bait. | ||
|
sc-darkness
856 Posts
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-41528526 | ||
|
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
On October 07 2017 04:43 Sermokala wrote: Its fairly legitimate nit picking though. Having extra accessories that aren't common and just exist to make the image look scarier devalues the points that they're making. Its really not that big of a deal as its being made to be though. Neither of them are making themselves look good though. It would've been like two responses had not Wulfey alleged the reporter made it up, and Danger not alleged the video recording was a nefarious fraud. I'm a little interested in seeing if posters actually retract instead of ignore and move on to guide who I interact with in the future. | ||
|
Wulfey_LA
932 Posts
On October 07 2017 04:47 Danglars wrote: That Wulfey_LA moves seemlessly from accusation that it's all made up to "it's all true, but unimportant" should show how this is all about narrative and not about facts. Maybe they should have more consultations between video editors that don't know the actual subject of the piece and people that do. Then you don't show GENERIC_SCARY_ASSAULT_RIFLE and confirm the opinion of 2nd amendment supporters that nobody has a clue. They have multiple stories covering bump stocks and you successfully tracked down the one with video that had 3D renderings in it. The 3D renderings used in the video are not caught up to where the images are. Check the images I showed on the CNN money article, the image guys get the details on bump stocks right. In every other CNN piece on google news search they use accurate images of bump stocks and they have REAL LIVE VIDEO of bump stock firing. EDIT: give the 3D guys two weeks, they will have the real models. Yes, it doesn't matter that on one early article their 3D models weren't as accurate as a gun nut would recognize. + Show Spoiler + ![[image loading]](http://i2.cdn.turner.com/money/dam/assets/171005120936-bump-stock-780x439.jpg) http://money.cnn.com/2017/10/05/smallbusiness/bump-fire-stocks/index.html And I addressed your underlying argument in my original post. You are shitlording and pedanting details for nothing because you don't want to make a real argument for bump stocks. This detail pedanting is a shit argument. That some video editor rushed out the best model he has is not an argument that we shouldn't regulate bumpstocks. You should feel bad for trying to troll some video editor. EDIT2: Check out all the videos CNN has on bump stocks. All kinds of accurate depictions. https://www.google.com/search?q=cnn video bump stocks&source=lnms&tbm=vid&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiekYeC49zWAhXqyVQKHTTqCmMQ_AUICygC&biw=1910&bih=945 | ||
|
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
On October 07 2017 04:50 sc-darkness wrote: Why are employers concerned with birth control in the first place? Shouldn't this be the job of pharmacies? Either way, this is a step back what Trump did. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-41528526 They wouldn't be concerned if people didn't make political hay out of "They must be absolutely FREE under any health insurance plan" rather than "They're medicine, pay your normal co-pay." The ACA changed that. An earlier pope said it was an evil (sinful), and some conscientious Catholics don't like the idea of their owned organization forced to fully subsidize them. It isn't good PR to fine a bunch of nuns because they conflict on the new regs on health plans. | ||
|
Sermokala
United States14113 Posts
On October 07 2017 04:50 Plansix wrote: Totally. The graphic is inaccurate. And you are right, people should be asking: Is it worth discussing? Do we need to post it on twitter with some implied commentary on the quality of CNN’s reporting? Is it worth reddit threads discussing how bad it is? Because I am of the opinion this entire topic isn’t worthy of anyone’s attention. It is a bad mock up that was thrown together. More will be made and they will be bad. It does not merit any discussion and posting it was some pretty lock quality bait. Its not worth discussing but its worth noting is my point I guess. You make a comment on it as an aside to your point and you move on. You shouldn't (from the other side) be trying to disprove it like mouse did so fervently that you're defending their use of it either though. Small potatoes/ball stuff that gets people distracted and serves no one that just makes the people involved look bad. Hes being an idiot for defending something dumb and that applies to both of them. | ||
|
Danglars
United States12133 Posts
On October 07 2017 04:54 Wulfey_LA wrote: They have multiple stories covering bump stocks and you successfully tracked down the one with video that had 3D renderings in it. The 3D renderings used in the video are not caught up to where the images are. Check the images I showed on the CNN money article, the image guys get the details on bump stocks right. In every other CNN piece on google news search they use accurate images of bump stocks and they have REAL LIVE VIDEO of bump stock firing. EDIT: give the 3D guys two weeks, they will have the real models. Yes, it doesn't matter that on one early article their 3D models weren't as accurate as a gun nut would recognize. + Show Spoiler + http://money.cnn.com/2017/10/05/smallbusiness/bump-fire-stocks/index.html And I addressed your underlying argument in my original post. You are shitlording and pedanting details for nothing because you don't want to make a real argument for bump stocks. This detail pedanting is a shit argument. That some video editor rushed out the best model he has is not an argument that we shouldn't regulate bumpstocks. You should feel bad for trying to troll some video editor. You're a real riot, with this "tracked down" bit. There's like fifteen stories of news organizations and nonprofits getting the basics of gun control topics dead wrong. I post one and you say it's a lie. When I call you out on it, you double down and never retract. Why do I even look up the proof if your modus operandi is "Deny, Say 'I already addressed that,' Change the topic"? It was live on their cable channel. You're still not acknowledging your defamation even as you excuse the mistake. Next time you want to accuse of lies, you'll make people remember the truth vs lies is just "shitlording and pedanting details for nothing." Second post in a row not acknowledging and retracting your error. You just move on and say the lie doesn't matter because the new topic is "It's not CNN's fault, it's the 25 year old video editor's fault." Maybe they should have more consultations between video editors that don't know the actual subject of the piece and people that do. Then you don't show GENERIC_SCARY_ASSAULT_RIFLE and confirm the opinion of 2nd amendment supporters that nobody has a clue. How about not playing into the easy narrative that they hardly know about guns, but want to discuss specifics of attachments as they relate to gun control. If the story's not ready, don't put the utterly ignorant in charge and rush it out. Trump's gone way too broad on what's fake news (obviously) and doesn't need more ammo. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On October 07 2017 04:57 Sermokala wrote: Its not worth discussing but its worth noting is my point I guess. You make a comment on it as an aside to your point and you move on. You shouldn't (from the other side) be trying to disprove it like mouse did so fervently that you're defending their use of it either though. Small potatoes/ball stuff that gets people distracted and serves no one that just makes the people involved look bad. Hes being an idiot for defending something dumb and that applies to both of them. We have all been in this thread for a while. Sometimes these arguments are about larger personal dynamics between people, rather than the merits of the argument itself. | ||
|
zlefin
United States7689 Posts
On October 07 2017 04:50 sc-darkness wrote: Why are employers concerned with birth control in the first place? Shouldn't this be the job of pharmacies? Either way, this is a step back what Trump did. http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-us-canada-41528526 most americans get their health insurance through their employer; so the less that insurance has to cover, the cheaper it is for their employer. some employers balked at having to pay for birth control. (with varying degrees of justification) | ||
|
Wulfey_LA
932 Posts
EDIT: if you (Danglars) listen to the audio, the video accurately describes the function of bump stocks. This 'libs don't know about guns so they can't regulate guns' narrative is a top to bottom lie. The CNN articles demonstrated precise and accurate research on bump stocks. Yet you insist on trying to push it because of a rushed 3D model. | ||
|
Plansix
United States60190 Posts
On October 07 2017 04:56 Danglars wrote: They wouldn't be concerned if people didn't make political hay out of "They must be absolutely FREE under any health insurance plan" rather than "They're medicine, pay your normal co-pay." The ACA changed that. An earlier pope said it was an evil (sinful), and some conscientious Catholics don't like the idea of their owned organization forced to fully subsidize them. It isn't good PR to fine a bunch of nuns because they conflict on the new regs on health plans. The real reason they want it to be free is to limit unwanted pregnancies. Poverty causes problems with paying for little things like birth control. | ||
| ||
