Texas School District Will Let Teachers Carry Guns

  • Thread starter Thread starter stanmaxkolbe
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
So you think this is a conspiracy by the NRA to get guns more accepted by people?
What is it with you people and “conspiracies?” Why would there have to be a conspiracy?
I do not feel isolated at all or embattled and I have no hope for getting guns to gain greater acceptance.
I see the denial, but your behavior is more eloquent.
My hope is that people can discuss something with out going into third person or alluding to things when they could just come out and say what they mean.
Self-referential statement. Cool. :cool:
 
What is it with you people and “conspiracies?” Why would there have to be a conspiracy?

I see the denial, but your behavior is more eloquent.

Self-referential statement. Cool. :cool:
You are the one who said there is a hidden agenda. Wouldn’t that be a conspiracy? If its not for the kids and it is really just about getting guns accepted that would be a conspiracy. Would it not? What do you mean by you people? Are you paranoid about something?

No I would never deny anything if it were true. I have found honesty is much easier to deal with. I felt somehow isolated, embattled I’d let you know. Lies do nothing to help ones position. I only share my opinion and my experiences and what I have found to be true. You can disagree with me, but don’t ever suggest that I am being less then honest.

I was glad to see that you didn’t start your reply in Third Person omniscient. Although it is great for literary compositions it grows annoying in forums. It was also very refreshing. :cool:
 
Tom writes:
You are the one who said there is a hidden agenda.
I did? (Barbarian looks) Nope. Turns out that I didn’t. What’s all this paranoia about “hidden” and “conspiracies?” It’s why people are suspicious of you guys in the first place.
No I would never deny anything if it were true. I have found honesty is much easier to deal with.
Odd, it seems to infuriate you.
I was glad to see that you didn’t start your reply in Third Person omniscient.
(Barbarian chuckles)
Perhaps you don’t know what “omniscient” means.
 
What is it with you people and “conspiracies?” Why would there have to be a conspiracy?
Why does there need to be an *agenda *for the majority here to disagree with you? Do you really see your viewpoint as that unassailable?
 
Tom writes:

I did? (Barbarian looks) Nope. Turns out that I didn’t. What’s all this paranoia about “hidden” and “conspiracies?” It’s why people are suspicious of you guys in the first place.

Odd, it seems to infuriate you.

(Barbarian chuckles)
Perhaps you don’t know what “omniscient” means.
No I know what omniscient means. I am glad you got the chuckle it was meant as a literary joke. Perhaps you did learn something in your little school.

Once again you have assumed something I am not infuriated. The truth never infuriates me. Being honest is what I strive for. You should try it. It’s rather freeing. Also you think too highly of yourself if you think that I am actually infuriated by you. Personally I enjoy your silly banter… third person and all.

Sorry I added hidden. But you were keeping what you think is the agenda hidden. We didn’t know what you thought the agenda was so it was a hidden agenda. Now it has been revealed. At least you feel it is an agenda on the part of big gun companies and people who like to own guns.
 
Tom writes:
Once again you have assumed something I am not infuriated.
There’s really not much point in denial when you carry on like that.
Sorry I added hidden.
I can understand. After all, you needed it to make it into a “conspiracy.” So you “adjusted” it a little to make it fit.
 
Why does there need to be an agenda for the majority here to disagree with you?
That’s not what “agenda” means.
Do you really see your viewpoint as that unassailable?
Every viewpoint is assailable. Mine isn’t even invincible. It’s just quite a bit stronger than yours.
 
Every viewpoint is assailable. Mine isn’t even invincible. It’s just quite a bit stronger than yours.
I had to post this bigger. This is truly the funniest thing I have read in a long while.:rotfl: I thought other would get the same kick from it I got. That and it explains a lot about the age and type of person we are dealing with.
 
Tom writes:

There’s really not much point in denial when you carry on like that.

I can understand. After all, you needed it to make it into a “conspiracy.” So you “adjusted” it a little to make it fit.
OK you win I am infuriated… ROAR! Does that make you feel better now? I just want you to be happy and feel you are right about something.

I didn’t need to make it into a conspiracy. You were the one who said there was an agenda and then were evasive by always ending your sentence as a question. You worded it to sound like it was some dark secret that was being snuck in and the poor children were just pawns in this little game. I was just going with what you said.
 
Tom writes:
I didn’t need to make it into a conspiracy.
Again, the denial is less persuasive than your need to embellish what I said to make it so. And your convoluted excuse only makes it clearer why you did it.
 
Tom writes:

Again, the denial is less persuasive than your need to embellish what I said to make it so. And your convoluted excuse only makes it clearer why you did it.
Who is Tom and how dare you say he said what I said.

OH no another agenda? Why do you think I did it? Please say it is another conspiracy. Tell me please why I did it.
 
(Barbarian asks:)
How old do you think I am?😃

Tom replies:
I’d say in your 50’s possibly 60’s

:dancing: :extrahappy:
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top