Chris wrote:
>> Hint: Post your definition as you refute facts without even a single cite!
>
> It's literally on the front page: https://www.fda.gov/
>
> See how "Food", "Drugs" and "Vaccines" are listed separately? Vaccines are
> a biological, not a drug as their Mode of Action are completely different.
>
> Drugs stop having an effect once they are metabolised and/or excreted.
> Vaccines continue working for years after.

OMG.
You don't even know what this shot is composed of, Chris.
You lack the education and intelligence to even decompose the difference
between the definition of an FDA-approved shot, and a drug, Chris.

Seriously.

You completely lack any scientific perspective whatsoever.
And that's OK.

Most people are as ignorant as you are in the sciences.
Science is hard. Too hard for most people. Too hard for you.

Most people have the scientific knowledge of a mere kindergarten child.

But as long as you don't _force_ others to do ignorant things that you do,
I'm completely fine with you having the perspective of a kindergarten child.

> Who the fuck cares about Russia?! Why bring them up?

Steve brought up Russia, not me.
Steve brought up Trump, not me.
Steve brought up all the politics, not me.

>> Again, I realize you advocate force to make other people act on ignorance
>> and fear, but to destroy the Constitution will accomplish nothing good.
>
> The ones living in fear are the gun owners. It's all about "self defence"
> apparently. If that isn't ignorance and fear then nothing is.

Chris,
The 2nd Amendment isn't about "gun owners" - it's about freedom. Government.
Democracy.

Your newfound utter lack of historical perspective on governance is only
matched by your ignorance on science which we've already amply proven.

> I quoted you verbatim. No surprise that you try to deny it. You don't like
> being proven wrong. Again.

You quoted me saying exactly what I said I said, Chris.
Your brain, is that of a kindergarten child, Chris.
Seriously.

That you think I said something other than what I said is what you proved.

On 2/18/2022 3:42 PM, Chris wrote:

<snip>

> You have a very odd relationship with the law if that's how you see it. It
> enables freedoms not revoke them.

That's what is so infuriating to the vast majority people who believe in
science, statistics, facts, and logic. The reliance on fake news and
misinformation of people like "Arlen/Harry/Andy" have cause them to
engage in childish, illogical behavior that ends up affecting the
general population. It's the smart people that have actually lost
various "freedoms" because of the low-information U.S. residents like
Arlen/Harry/Andy, and what's even more infuriating is that they are
proud of their ignorance.

Until 80-90% of the population either get vaccinated, get Covid, or
isolate, we will keep getting new strains. One benefit of Omicron is
that it spreads so quickly is that the unvaccinated people that get it
will at least have immunity for a couple of months.

We're at 70% vaccination rate in the U.S. now. The top vaccinated
countries are, in order: United Arab Emirates, Brunei, Portugal, Malta,
Chile, Singapore, Cuba, Cayman Islands, South Korea, China, Faeroe
Islands, Spain, Denmark, Cambodia, Canada, Seychelles, Japan, Ireland,
Australia, Malaysia.

There needs to be another segment added to the movie "Where to Invade
Next." My favorite segment was about school lunches,
<https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rXK591Rp4BU>. Anyone that went to a
public school in the U.S. can relate to this, regardless of political
persuasion.

sms wrote:

> That's what is so infuriating to the vast majority people who believe in
> science, statistics, facts, and logic.

People who believe in facts and science can't be swayed by their bullshit.

Notice this very _adult_ observation...
1. Every argument by the Democrats is based on FEAR & EMOTION, not fact.
2. The Democrats are infuriated by those _not_ driven by FEAR & EMOTION.
3. Gavin Newsom said it himself when "intellectuals" didn't believe that
all the PG&E fires were not caused by PG&E, but by "climate change"!
<https://deadline.com/2020/09/california-governor-gavin-newsom-no-patience-for-climate-change-deniers-1234572770/>

Notice Steve did _exactly_ what Gavin Newsom did.
a. Steve's _entire_ argument isn't based on facts, but on emotional fears.
b. So was Gavin Newsom's _entire_ argument based on emotional fears.
c. Neither has "patience" for people who aren't driven by emotional fears.

In summary, people who don't believe in their bullshit, infuriate them.
People who believe in facts and science can't be swayed by their bullshit.

On Sun, 20 Feb 2022 02:18:34 +1100, sms <scharf.steven@geemail.com> wrote:

> On 2/18/2022 3:42 PM, Chris wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
>> You have a very odd relationship with the law if that's how you see it.
>> It
>> enables freedoms not revoke them.
>
> That's what is so infuriating to the vast majority people who believe in
> science, statistics, facts, and logic. The reliance on fake news and
> misinformation of people like "Arlen/Harry/Andy" have cause them to
> engage in childish, illogical behavior that ends up affecting the
> general population. It's the smart people that have actually lost
> various "freedoms" because of the low-information U.S. residents like
> Arlen/Harry/Andy, and what's even more infuriating is that they are
> proud of their ignorance.
>
> Until 80-90% of the population either get vaccinated, get Covid, or
> isolate, we will keep getting new strains.

That will happen regardless, essentially because those with HIV/AIDS
and the severely immunocompromised who have a fucked immune
system is the ideal breeding ground for new strains.

> One benefit of Omicron is that it spreads so quickly is that the
> unvaccinated people that get it will at least have immunity for a couple
> of months.

But a few months isnt long enough to stop new strains evolving.

> We're at 70% vaccination rate in the U.S. now. The top vaccinated
> countries are, in order: United Arab Emirates, Brunei, Portugal, Malta,
> Chile, Singapore, Cuba, Cayman Islands, South Korea, China, Faeroe
> Islands, Spain, Denmark, Cambodia, Canada, Seychelles, Japan, Ireland,
> Australia, Malaysia.

And it isnt clear that no new strains will show up there.

> There needs to be another segment added to the movie "Where to Invade
> Next." My favorite segment was about school lunches,
> <https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rXK591Rp4BU>. Anyone that went to a
> public school in the U.S. can relate to this, regardless of political
> persuasion.

Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> wrote
> Andy Burnelli <spam@nospam.com> wrote

>>>> Why do you deprecate choice?
>>>
>>> I do not. I expect people to accept the consequences of their choices,
>>> however. As a society we all have to accept that. It's called the rule
>>> of law.
>>
>> I realize you advocate force to make other people act on ignorance and
>> fear,
>> but to call ignorance and fear "the rule of law" is what defines you,
>> Chris.
>
> You have a very odd relationship with the law if that's how you see it.
> It
> enables freedoms not revoke them.

That's overstated with the new UK laws against 'hate speach'

Jacob Jones wrote:

> And it isnt clear that no new strains will show up there.

I realize almost nobody has any education, hence the lack of perspective on
Covid...

But for an RNA virus, and, specifically for a _huge_ RNA virus, this virus
doesn't seem to be mutating all that much.

And why should it?
It infects almost everyone.

Most don't show any symptoms, and some are even seronegative, but why should
the virus mutate when it easily already infects everyone with an affinity
that is an order of magnitude greater already than SARS-CoV-1 was.

I get it that few here have any perspective at all on this subject.
But I do.

I'm trying to _elevate_ those who are intelligent to a level that is above
ignorant.

In message <sur3pq$1ngo$1@gioia.aioe.org>
Andy Burnelli <spam@nospam.com> wrote:

> sms wrote:
>
> > That's what is so infuriating to the vast majority people who believe in
> > science, statistics, facts, and logic.
>
> People who believe in facts and science can't be swayed by their bullshit.
>
> Notice this very _adult_ observation... 1. Every argument by the Democrats
> is based on FEAR & EMOTION, not fact. 2. The Democrats are infuriated by
> those _not_ driven by FEAR & EMOTION. 3. Gavin Newsom said it himself when
> "intellectuals" didn't believe that
> all the PG&E fires were not caused by PG&E, but by "climate change"!
> <https://deadline.com/2020/09/california-governor-gavin-newsom-no-patience-for-climate-change-deniers-1234572770/>
>
> Notice Steve did _exactly_ what Gavin Newsom did. a. Steve's _entire_
> argument isn't based on facts, but on emotional fears. b. So was Gavin
> Newsom's _entire_ argument based on emotional fears. c. Neither has
> "patience" for people who aren't driven by emotional fears.
>
> In summary, people who don't believe in their bullshit, infuriate them.
> People who believe in facts and science can't be swayed by their bullshit.

You dismiss large swathes of reality and science as fear, emotion and
clickbait. It is never going to be possible to have a logical discussion
with you.

David

David Higton wrote:

> You dismiss large swathes of reality and science as fear, emotion and
> clickbait. It is never going to be possible to have a logical discussion
> with you.

It's you who lack reality.
a. I have a degree in this stuff...
b. You know absolutely nothing.

FACT:
You posted _zero_ facts out of how many messages so far... not even one.
Your _entire_ argument... I knew... years ago... it never changes.

You and Steve and Chris and almost all the ignorant people who want to
_force_ others to get shot with a substance that _they_ maybe do not want to
get injected with are filled to the brim with three things only...
1. *Fear*
2. *Ignorance*
3. *Emotion*

And not a single fact.
Not even one.

You're all like kindergarten kids...
a. Chris lied about his degree
b. Steve brings up Trump in every post
c. And you? You can't find a cite that isn't about politics.

What facts did _any_ of you _ever_ bring up in this entire thread?
*None*

Not even one!

You think I don't completely _understand_ you inside and out.
You know less than my grandchildren do about Covid... much less.

Yet...

You're right about one thing though...
There is no way to have an _adult_ discussion with ignorant people like you.

On 2022-02-19 4:41 p.m., Andy Burnelli wrote:
> David Higton wrote:
>
>> You dismiss large swathes of reality and science as fear, emotion and
>> clickbait.  It is never going to be possible to have a logical discussion
>> with you.
>
> It's you who lack reality.
> a. I have a degree in this stuff...

You're lying.

On Sat, 19 Feb 2022 23:52:49 GMT, David Higton <dave@davehigton.me.uk>
wrote:

>In message <sur3pq$1ngo$1@gioia.aioe.org>
> Andy Burnelli <spam@nospam.com> wrote:
>
>> sms wrote:
>>
>> > That's what is so infuriating to the vast majority people who believe in
>> > science, statistics, facts, and logic.
>>
>> People who believe in facts and science can't be swayed by their bullshit.
>>
>> Notice this very _adult_ observation... 1. Every argument by the Democrats
>> is based on FEAR & EMOTION, not fact. 2. The Democrats are infuriated by
>> those _not_ driven by FEAR & EMOTION. 3. Gavin Newsom said it himself when
>> "intellectuals" didn't believe that
>> all the PG&E fires were not caused by PG&E, but by "climate change"!
>> <https://deadline.com/2020/09/california-governor-gavin-newsom-no-patience-for-climate-change-deniers-1234572770/>
>>
>> Notice Steve did _exactly_ what Gavin Newsom did. a. Steve's _entire_
>> argument isn't based on facts, but on emotional fears. b. So was Gavin
>> Newsom's _entire_ argument based on emotional fears. c. Neither has
>> "patience" for people who aren't driven by emotional fears.
>>
>> In summary, people who don't believe in their bullshit, infuriate them.
>> People who believe in facts and science can't be swayed by their bullshit.
>
>You dismiss large swathes of reality and science as fear, emotion and
>clickbait. It is never going to be possible to have a logical discussion
>with you.

Of course not. He's a troll. It is never possible to have a logical
discussion with any troll.

Please don't try. Trying just gives him the argument he wants to have
and clutters up the newsgroup. Like all trolls, he should be
killfiled.

In article <sus3ni$fes$2@dont-email.me>, Alan <nuh-uh@nope.com> wrote:

> On 2022-02-19 4:41 p.m., Andy Burnelli wrote:
> > a. I have a degree in this stuff...
>
> You're lying.

but he has photos of books!

nospam wrote:

>>> a. I have a degree in this stuff...
>>
>> You're lying.
>
> but he has photos of books!

This has always been my point in this thread which Steve gleefully opened.
*Those most ignorant are those trying to force others to be like they are*

However... to your kindergarten games that you just played above...

I have to be more gentle with people like you nospam who have no education.
I get it you _hate_ that you are ignorant, nospam.
It's not really your fault.

Maybe you're too stupid to get into college.
Maybe you didn't have the money.
Maybe your parents were bad.
I don't know why you have no education at all nospam.

I just know that you are not educated so you play silly kindergarten games.
Chris did too.

Chris claimed a PhD, which is impossible given how little he knows.

In fact, Chris claimed to have a PhD in the sciences, and yet he argued
endlessly about extremely common immunology words (i.e., "vehicle") like a
kindergarten kid, because he has _never_ seen its use ever in a paper.

Chris argued endlessly that he doesn't "like" the standard metrics used in a
pandemic, which shows clearly he has _zero_ education in measurement of such
things.

Almost everything Chris argued about would be covered in the first month of
a beginning class in {immunology,virology,genetics}, which proves he has no
PhD in the sciences, nospam.

Chris was imply ignorant that he couldn't pull it off just by googling.
He's _that_ stupid.

Googling won't give him the perspective a college degree gives me, nospam.
Neither you, nor Chris, nor Steve has _any_ perspective on Covid, nospam.

All of you completely lack perspective.

Chris even argued endlessly that when he Googled the Covid genome size, he
was astounded at how "small" it seemed to him and yet it's one of the
largest known to man in terms of perspective on what we're talking about.

Endlessly Chris couldn't find a simple concept of the percentage of deaths
even after I provided him the exact CDC document and then even the exact
page (only an uneducated moron wouldn't be able to find it in the doc).

On and on Chris went, from not comprehending the definition of a vaccine and
not comprehending the definition of a drug, where every statement from Chris
shows he has _zero_ scientific background.

Chris has no education in the sciences, nospam.
Neither do you nospam.

None of you have any perspective on Covid.
I can see right through every single one of you.

You're nothing but a bunch of uneducated fifth-grade bullies, nospam.

And yet, I should be more gentle with people like you nospam.
I get it you _hate_ that you are ignorant, nospam.

You prove me correct _every_ single time you post.
But that's OK.

At least you're not trying to _force_ your ignorant decisions on others.
That.

That has always been my point in this thread which Steve gleefully opened.
*Those most ignorant are those trying to force others to be like they are*

Andy Burnelli <spam@nospam.com> wrote:
> Chris wrote:
>
>>> Hint: Post your definition as you refute facts without even a single cite!
>>
>> It's literally on the front page: https://www.fda.gov/
>>
>> See how "Food", "Drugs" and "Vaccines" are listed separately? Vaccines are
>> a biological, not a drug as their Mode of Action are completely different.
>>
>> Drugs stop having an effect once they are metabolised and/or excreted.
>> Vaccines continue working for years after.
>
> OMG.
> You don't even know what this shot is composed of, Chris.
> You lack the education and intelligence to even decompose the difference
> between the definition of an FDA-approved shot, and a drug, Chris.

It's notable that you complain about cites and never provide any of your
own.

>>> Again, I realize you advocate force to make other people act on ignorance
>>> and fear, but to destroy the Constitution will accomplish nothing good.
>>
>> The ones living in fear are the gun owners. It's all about "self defence"
>> apparently. If that isn't ignorance and fear then nothing is.
>
> Chris,
> The 2nd Amendment isn't about "gun owners" - it's about freedom. Government.
> Democracy.

American gun owners are the most frightened people in the world. NRA prey
on people's fears. No citizen ever needs an AR-15. It's all bullshit.

Andy Burnelli <spam@nospam.com> wrote:
> David Higton wrote:
>
>> You dismiss large swathes of reality and science as fear, emotion and
>> clickbait. It is never going to be possible to have a logical discussion
>> with you.
>
> It's you who lack reality.
> a. I have a degree in this stuff...

No you don't. You may have read some ancient books on the subject matter,
but you don't have a formal education in it.

> b. You know absolutely nothing.

LOL.

> FACT:
> You posted _zero_ facts out of how many messages so far... not even one.
> Your _entire_ argument... I knew... years ago... it never changes.
>
> You and Steve and Chris and almost all the ignorant people who want to
> _force_ others to get shot with a substance that _they_ maybe do not want to
> get injected with are filled to the brim with three things only...
> 1. *Fear*
> 2. *Ignorance*
> 3. *Emotion*
>
> And not a single fact.
> Not even one.

You ignore every fact that doesn't fit your bias. That's not science.
That's wilful ignorance.

> You're all like kindergarten kids...
> a. Chris lied about his degree

Degrees. Plural. Thank you very much!

Chris wrote:

> It's notable that you complain about cites and never provide any of your
> own.

You lack perspective.
I don't.

What's notable is I said the definition was right there on the FDA web site.
And then you claimed it doesn't match for a reason that is just wacko.
Which was my point.
*Those who are most ignorant about Covid are the ones _forcing_ others*

Here, I'll give it to you again from the FDA web site Chris:
"Drugs are defined as articles intended for use in the diagnosis, cure,
mitigation, treatment, or prevention of disease and as articles intended
to affect the structure or any function of the body of man or animals."
<https://www.fda.gov/drugs/fda-drug-info-rounds-video/transcript-definition-drug-april-2017>

Bear in mind you are completely ignorant about everything surrounding Covid.
And that's OK.

Most people are as ignorant as you are, Chris.
Your ignorance is so easy to prove anyway.

My issue is people like Steve, who opened this thread, want to _FORCE_
people to make the same ignorant decision that people like Steve make.
a. Out of Steve's ignorance
b. Out of Steve's fear

I've proven that point, in spades.
Every post from you proves my point, in fact.

>> The 2nd Amendment isn't about "gun owners" - it's about freedom. Government.
>> Democracy.
>
> American gun owners are the most frightened people in the world. NRA prey
> on people's fears. No citizen ever needs an AR-15. It's all bullshit.

You completely lack perspective.
You have no understanding whatsoever what the "gun issue" is all about.

You (and Steve) completely lack perspective.
The only way you can comprehend facts is to assume they don't exist.

Here's a fact which you wackos assume doesn't exist:
"A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State,
the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

Where are your "people's fears" written into the 2nd Amendment Chris?
How can you claim that the 2nd Amendment is, in your words "all bullshit?"
--
Every post from these wackos proves my point that are wholly ignorant.
PS: I know _exactly_ what they'll claim about the 2nd amendment because I
know how kindergarten kids think (they can be predicted years in advance).

Chris wrote:

> No you don't. You may have read some ancient books on the subject matter,
> but you don't have a formal education in it.

And yet you got _every_ single thing wrong about Covid, Chris.
Not me.
You.

And that's OK.
Most people are just like you, Chris.
Most people are completely ignorant of Covid, Chris.

My point isn't that you're ignorant.
That I proved only because it's a necessary condition for what you _do_.

My point is that the more ignorant people like you are, the more people like
you are afraid, and the more you are afraid the more you want to _force_
others to have a drug forcibly injected into their bodies.

I repeat:
*You want a drug _forcibly injected_ into other people's bodies*, Chris.

Maybe they don't want that drug forcibly injected into their bodies, Chris?
Did you ever consider that?

> You ignore every fact that doesn't fit your bias. That's not science.
> That's wilful ignorance.

Name even a _single_ fact that I've ignored Chris.
*Name Just One*

>> You're all like kindergarten kids...
>> a. Chris lied about his degree
>
> Degrees. Plural. Thank you very much!

It's unlikely you have even an undergraduate college degree Chris.
Certainly not in the sciences.

You don't remember playing your kindergarten games around immunology, Chris?
You thought it was funny - and yet - I used terms _all_ scientists use.

Remember how you googled the RNA genome and you lacked perspective that you
claimed it was tiny when, in fact, it's fantastically huge for what it is?

You completely lack perspective on Covid.
And that's OK.

Mot people completely lack perspective on Covid, Chris.

The fact you lack perspective isn't my point.
It's merely the condition for my point.

a. Those who are the most ignorant about Covid...
b. Tend to be those who are most afraid of Covid...
c. And, out of ignorance & fear, they want to _force_ others

This is my point, Chris:
*You want a drug _forcibly injected_ into other people's bodies*, Chris.

What you ignore is maybe they don't want that drug injected in their body.

Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> wrote

> American gun owners are the most frightened people in the world. NRAprey
> on people's fears. No citizen ever needs an AR-15. It's all bullshit.

Thats bullshit if someone shows up at your place with just a glock
and you prefer to kill them before they get close enough to kill you.

Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote:
> Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> wrote
>
>> American gun owners are the most frightened people in the world. NRAprey
>> on people's fears. No citizen ever needs an AR-15. It's all bullshit.
>
> Thats bullshit if someone shows up at your place with just a glock
> and you prefer to kill them before they get close enough to kill you.

You watch too many films.

Andy Burnelli <spam@nospam.com> wrote:
> Chris wrote:
>
>> It's notable that you complain about cites and never provide any of your
>> own.
>
> You lack perspective.
> I don't.
>
> What's notable is I said the definition was right there on the FDA web site.
> And then you claimed it doesn't match for a reason that is just wacko.
> Which was my point.
> *Those who are most ignorant about Covid are the ones _forcing_ others*
>
> Here, I'll give it to you again from the FDA web site Chris:
> "Drugs are defined as articles intended for use in the diagnosis, cure,
> mitigation, treatment, or prevention of disease and as articles intended
> to affect the structure or any function of the body of man or animals."
> <https://www.fda.gov/drugs/fda-drug-info-rounds-video/transcript-definition-drug-april-2017>

Now compare it to the definition for vaccines. Very different.

> Bear in mind you are completely ignorant about everything surrounding Covid.
> And that's OK.
>
> Most people are as ignorant as you are, Chris.
> Your ignorance is so easy to prove anyway.
>
> My issue is people like Steve, who opened this thread, want to _FORCE_
> people to make the same ignorant decision that people like Steve make.
> a. Out of Steve's ignorance
> b. Out of Steve's fear
>
> I've proven that point, in spades.
> Every post from you proves my point, in fact.
>
>>> The 2nd Amendment isn't about "gun owners" - it's about freedom. Government.
>>> Democracy.
>>
>> American gun owners are the most frightened people in the world. NRA prey
>> on people's fears. No citizen ever needs an AR-15. It's all bullshit.
>
> You completely lack perspective.
> You have no understanding whatsoever what the "gun issue" is all about.
>
> You (and Steve) completely lack perspective.
> The only way you can comprehend facts is to assume they don't exist.
>
> Here's a fact which you wackos assume doesn't exist:
> "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State,
> the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

No-one's denying the existence of the 2nd amendment. You're a loon to even
think people do.

> Where are your "people's fears" written into the 2nd Amendment Chris?
> How can you claim that the 2nd Amendment is, in your words "all bullshit?"

The gun lobby is bullshit and the policies which normalise children's gun
drills are criminal.

Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> wrote
> Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> wrote

>>> American gun owners are the most frightened people in the world.
>>> NRAprey
>>> on people's fears. No citizen ever needs an AR-15. It's all bullshit.

>> Thats bullshit if someone shows up at your place with just a glock
>> and you prefer to kill them before they get close enough to kill you.

> You watch too many films.

Don't watch any at all. I look at the official stats.

Even the cops manage to hit fuck all with their glocks. In spades with
stupid gang bangers.

Chris wrote:

>> Here, I'll give it to you again from the FDA web site Chris:
>> "Drugs are defined as articles intended for use in the diagnosis, cure,
>> mitigation, treatment, or prevention of disease and as articles intended
>> to affect the structure or any function of the body of man or animals."
>> <https://www.fda.gov/drugs/fda-drug-info-rounds-video/transcript-definition-drug-april-2017>
>
> Now compare it to the definition for vaccines. Very different.

Funnily so, this shot meets the FDC definition of a drug far better.
You can't comprehend that fact only because you _hate_ that fact.

But you can't go on believing like a kindergarten kid, Chris.
You can't deny all facts simply because you hate all facts, Chris.

It takes a while for a kindergarten kid to grow up to about fifth grade (or
so) to realize Santa Claus doesn't exist even if you _think_ he does.

You need to start growing up, Chris.
a. Understand what this shot contains
b. Compare it to the CDC vaccine definition
c. Compare it to the FDC drug definition

Which does it fit perfectly, Chris?
>> Here's a fact which you wackos assume doesn't exist:
>> "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State,
>> the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
>
> No-one's denying the existence of the 2nd amendment. You're a loon to even
> think people do.

I know _exactly_ how you think.
It's the same reason you believe everything Apple feeds you in fact.

You call me a loon because you have no _adult_ defense to the facts.
What part of _your_ argument has anything to do with the 2nd amendment
Chris?

Remember, you're the one who claimed it was all about emotion & fear.
Not governance.

You don't realize that _every_ claim you make is based on three things:
a. Lack of education (ignorance)
b. Emotion & fear (not facts)
c. Force (you want to take away our rights)

Your "solution" is a kindergarten solution (aka "take away the sticks").

Notice I _predicted_ years in advance your argument.
How can I do that?

Because you think exactly how kindergarten children think, Chris.
>
>> Where are your "people's fears" written into the 2nd Amendment Chris?
>> How can you claim that the 2nd Amendment is, in your words "all bullshit?"
>
> The gun lobby is bullshit and the policies which normalise children's gun
> drills are criminal.

Notice you can't argue without demonizing everyone else, Chris?

I said the 2nd amendment is about governance.
You said that's bullshit - you said it's about ignorance & fear.

Now you demonize what you call "the gun lobby" which I _never_ mentioned.
I mentioned the 2nd amendment - you brought up the "gun lobby".

Every argument from you is never based on facts but emotion & fears.
Every solution you put forth is a too-simple kindergarten solution.

You actually believe taking away guns will solve all your fears.
You really do.

That kindergarten solution is _how_ you and Steve think.
I know you inside and out, Chris.

Because you own the mind of a kindergarten child.
You ignore any facts that don't fit into your argument of emotion & fear.
You demonize anyone who thinks logically using logic & facts.

I know how you think.
Not because I'm a genius.

But because you think exactly like how kindergarten children think.
So does Steve.

I can predict _every_ argument from you years in advance.
DO you want to know what _you_ think about abortion, Chris?
Or about "global warming" (oh wait, "climate change")?

I know _exactly_ how you think.
It's the same reason you believe everything Apple feeds you in fact.

On 2022-02-20 8:21 p.m., Andy Burnelli wrote:
> Chris wrote:
>
>>> Here, I'll give it to you again from the FDA web site Chris:
>>> "Drugs are defined as articles intended for use in the diagnosis, cure,
>>>  mitigation, treatment, or prevention of disease and as articles
>>> intended
>>>  to affect the structure or any function of the body of man or
>>> animals."
>>> <https://www.fda.gov/drugs/fda-drug-info-rounds-video/transcript-definition-drug-april-2017>
>>>
>>
>> Now compare it to the definition for vaccines. Very different.
>
> Funnily so, this shot meets the FDC definition of a drug far better.
> You can't comprehend that fact only because you _hate_ that fact.

And yet, despite your alleged "degree", you don't explain how that's true.

>
> But you can't go on believing like a kindergarten kid, Chris.
> You can't deny all facts simply because you hate all facts, Chris.
>
> It takes a while for a kindergarten kid to grow up to about fifth grade (or
> so) to realize Santa Claus doesn't exist even if you _think_ he does.
>
> You need to start growing up, Chris.
> a. Understand what this shot contains
> b. Compare it to the CDC vaccine definition
> c. Compare it to the FDC drug definition

YOU do that.

Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote:
> Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> wrote
>> Rod Speed <rod.speed.aaa@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Chris <ithinkiam@gmail.com> wrote
>
>>>> American gun owners are the most frightened people in the world.
>>>> NRAprey
>>>> on people's fears. No citizen ever needs an AR-15. It's all bullshit.
>
>>> Thats bullshit if someone shows up at your place with just a glock
>>> and you prefer to kill them before they get close enough to kill you.
>
>> You watch too many films.
>
> Don't watch any at all. I look at the official stats.

what official stats? There aren't any in the US.

> Even the cops manage to hit fuck all with their glocks. In spades with
> stupid gang bangers.

Clearly not true. Police shootings areresponsible for about 1000 deaths a
year. The role of the police, however, is not to shoot and kill people.

Andy Burnelli <spam@nospam.com> wrote:
> Chris wrote:
>
>> You ignore every fact that doesn't fit your bias. That's not science.
>> That's wilful ignorance.
>
> Name even a _single_ fact that I've ignored Chris.
> *Name Just One*

I already did that. SIX times. OK. maybe only 5 as one of them you did
acknowledge.

Andy Burnelli <spam@nospam.com> wrote:
> Chris wrote:
>
>>> Here, I'll give it to you again from the FDA web site Chris:
>>> "Drugs are defined as articles intended for use in the diagnosis, cure,
>>> mitigation, treatment, or prevention of disease and as articles intended
>>> to affect the structure or any function of the body of man or animals."
>>> <https://www.fda.gov/drugs/fda-drug-info-rounds-video/transcript-definition-drug-april-2017>
>>
>> Now compare it to the definition for vaccines. Very different.
>
> Funnily so, this shot meets the FDC definition of a drug far better.

Prove it.

>>> Where are your "people's fears" written into the 2nd Amendment Chris?
>>> How can you claim that the 2nd Amendment is, in your words "all bullshit?"
>>
>> The gun lobby is bullshit and the policies which normalise children's gun
>> drills are criminal.
>
> Notice you can't argue without demonizing everyone else, Chris?

The people responsible for enabling mass deaths of children under the guise
of self defence. Should be demonised: they dance on the graves of the dead.

> I said the 2nd amendment is about governance.

Nope. You said it was about freedom.

> You said that's bullshit - you said it's about ignorance & fear.

Yup. The NRA are fear mongers.

It's funny how you use the risk of harm and lack of benefit to children to
push an antivax view. Yet when guns are a clear and present danger to
children then everything is fine.