When I read your Examiner articles the Disqus comment section doesn't seem to load. Kurt's is the same. Once in a great while it loads but not very often.
Yes, never be ashamed for the actions of another as their guilt is not collective--in this case, a typical Prozi is doing what Prozis do, following the same perverted impulse to pollute the good and the noble with the profane. The best metaphor, if it is one, for such conduct is demonic.
In re Disqus comments, there are threads online discussing fixes dependent on browser, add-ons, etc. That's the best I can offer.
I suggest that Disqus posters click on the profile of a given Troll, and check out a history of their posts (if not private) before responding.
If someone, like BSATROOP, etc, simply "argues" by using straw-man misdirection, calls people morons, retarded, etc, without ever addressing facts, don't reply. They'll come unhinged if ignored. Really. Try it.
That's WAY better than trying to address them with facts.
Disclaimer: I've fed the trolls before. Now trying to resist the urge.
As contemptible a little punk as "WhiteslovetheKKK" indisputably is, he (certainly inadvertently) brings up an issue worth looking at when he says:
. . . should be happy we are ven going to offer to buy them back. I like most real Americans hope there is no compensation . . .
His twisted hope isn't as inconceivable as it might seem. The Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence (formerly Legal Community Against Violence) actually argues that there is a Constitutional mechanism for confiscation without compensation:
Laws banning dangerous guns—such as assault weapons—and large capacity ammunition magazines are not takings and do not require compensation. The Supreme Court and lower courts have long made a distinction between takings of property for public usage, which are takings, and legitimate exercises of state police power that result in a ban or limitation on property that is a threat to public safety or health, which are not takings.
Remember, these are the people who absolutely love the idea of militarized police, regardless of the what rest of society might think.
ReplyDeleteI'm quite ashamed that the guy has a name related to the Boy Scouts. He/she does not reflect those ideals.
ReplyDeleteWhen I read your Examiner articles the Disqus comment section doesn't seem to load. Kurt's is the same. Once in a great while it loads but not very often.
ReplyDeleteYes, never be ashamed for the actions of another as their guilt is not collective--in this case, a typical Prozi is doing what Prozis do, following the same perverted impulse to pollute the good and the noble with the profane. The best metaphor, if it is one, for such conduct is demonic.
ReplyDeleteIn re Disqus comments, there are threads online discussing fixes dependent on browser, add-ons, etc. That's the best I can offer.
I suggest that Disqus posters click on the profile of a given Troll, and check out a history of their posts (if not private) before responding.
ReplyDeleteIf someone, like BSATROOP, etc, simply "argues" by using straw-man misdirection, calls people morons, retarded, etc, without ever addressing facts, don't reply. They'll come unhinged if ignored. Really. Try it.
That's WAY better than trying to address them with facts.
Disclaimer: I've fed the trolls before. Now trying to resist the urge.
As contemptible a little punk as "WhiteslovetheKKK" indisputably is, he (certainly inadvertently) brings up an issue worth looking at when he says:
ReplyDelete. . . should be happy we are ven going to offer to buy them back. I like most real Americans hope there is no compensation . . .
His twisted hope isn't as inconceivable as it might seem. The Law Center to Prevent Gun Violence (formerly Legal Community Against Violence) actually argues that there is a Constitutional mechanism for confiscation without compensation:
Laws banning dangerous guns—such as assault weapons—and large capacity ammunition magazines are not takings and do not require compensation. The Supreme Court and lower courts have long made a distinction between takings of property for public usage, which are takings, and legitimate exercises of state police power that result in a ban or limitation on property that is a threat to public safety or health, which are not takings.
400 plus comments and no shortage of flames. Best yet, there Lib- fu is weak.
ReplyDelete