Jump to content
Kyrshamarks Kyrshamarks (New Member) New Member

Mental Health Checks

Politics   (2,666 Views 46 Comments)
1 Like; 1 Follower; 21,733 Visitors; 598 Posts
If you find this topic helpful leave a comment.
advertisement

You are reading page 3 of Mental Health Checks. If you want to start from the beginning Go to First Page.

What you were trying to do was glaringly obvious to me which is why I waited to respond until you returned with your big reveal.

Well spotted. What genuinely sociopathic behavior ...

I agree with you re: the ridiculousness of the correlation.

If this yadda, yadda X 4 hadn't already given it away...

This certainly did:

Talk about obvious. Suicide and homicide as discussed in the other thread you recently participated in.

Personally I think it's ridiculous to try to make the case that the damage one mass murderer on a shooting spree can inflict is equivalent the damage one confused voter could possibly do. Confused voters are after all only dangerous when 63 million or so of them manage to congregate at the polls in the same year...

Well spotted.

What a genuinely sociopathic thing to do, OP.

Agreed re: the ridiculousness of that correlation. I can't imagine loving guns so much and liking people so little.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Typical hypocrisy. Get pissed off and attack when confronted with a truth you don't like. Attacked the poster but not the issue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Well spotted.

Thanks. I had the advantage of having read many of OP's previous posts and threads he's started and I've also taken part in the recent thread that was supposed to be about what nurses can do to make patients safer, but that pretty much immediately morphed into something else. That and my previous career in law enforcement, where you regularly meet people (criminals) who are quite fond of playing, or at least trying to play, mind games.

I'm not the most trusting person and my radar for deceptive behavior is pretty finely tuned. That's not necessarily a good thing though, it's simply a consequence of my previous life/work experience. It's better to have more faith in mankind, so I hope no one feels bad if they assumed that OP was being honest. That's in my opinion a healthier default assumption than my cynicism.

Kyrshamarks, trying to prove that people are wrong in this way is in my opinion quite underhanded and simply not nice. If you really had a solid argument to make, you could have made it in the existing thread. Without attempting to deceive people.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Typical hypocrisy. Get pissed off and attack when confronted with a truth you don't like. Attacked the poster but not the issue.

Uh, no. OP, listen. I, personally, have never interacted with you re: your gun politics. I don't know our politics. You are also assuming my stance on gun ownership. Do you know what I think about the topic? No. I can glean that you are deeply supporting of gun ownership, but that is all. This is not about hypocrisy - you intentionally manipulated your research cadre. You are so deeply biased that the only result you could have found in your analysis was the one that was cooking in your brain as those little fingers got going on the keyboard - "I'll prove everyone is a hypocrite." There was no other outcome for you and that's just bad science and bad social skills.

Why not post a well-written discussion around the two topics? You can't expect people to be able to address a hidden topic when it is just that.

Honestly, you creep me out. If you had approached the two honestly you may have received richer answers. You came in, acting all "sweet" and unbiased, but really, you were a nasty, creepy, manipulator who wanted to watch conflict unfold.

Get some help, please.

Edit: and please, never, ever let this behavior affect your professional practice.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Kyrshamarks, trying to prove that people are wrong in this way is in my opinion quite underhanded and simply not nice. If you really had a solid argument to make, you could have made it in the existing thread. Without attempting to deceive people.

Exactly. Intelligent people use their social skills and writing abilities to discuss topics that matter to them. This is akin to middle school behavior.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

My sarcasm/humor radar picked up zero activity in this post. In failed sarcasm i at least think, is this a joke?

So going with my instinct that this was not an attempt at funny.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
advertisement
I actually am NOT advocating mental health checks for those things in my post.

What I have done is shown the hypocritical view of some posters here. I chose those two things on purpose. They both are protected constitutional rights. There cannot be any means testing for a person to exercise them. now let's talk about another constitutional right. The 2nd amendment. Many people here who said we can't put mental health checks on thise two rights want to do just that to the right to bear arms. I argue that both the right to vote and religion can be far more dangerous than guns....

You cannot put means testing on one right and say it's not doable for another right.

Op, It would not let me link the clip, so please just google: "george carlin you have no rights"

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Typical hypocrisy. Get pissed off and attack when confronted with a truth you don't like. Attacked the poster but not the issue.

Isn't that what you're doing with that last post?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Isn't that what you're doing with that last post?

Nope, not pissed, not surprised. Not attacking even when my own mental health is questioned by people here. Just pointing out the disparity of some people's beliefs.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Furthermore, no one has yet out forward why it is ok to put means testing on the second amendment but not the other amendments.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Furthermore, no one has yet out forward why it is ok to put means testing on the second amendment but not the other amendments.

I'm not sure your point really works since those found to be mentally incapacitated aren't actually allowed to vote, same as gun ownership requirements that prevent the criminally insane from owning guns. Are you actually arguing that those who have been adjudicated to be mentally incapable of differentiating from right and wrong should be free to own guns?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Furthermore, no one has yet out forward why it is ok to put means testing on the second amendment but not the other amendments.

Um, i didnt, but i told you where to go: George Carlin. Watch the "carlin you have no rights". I assume you wont because, well, you are you. You are either trolling to inflame people, likely a socio, or a truly ignorant person. The former makes this boring, becuase you dont care, the latter we will be going in circles forever...and carlin is beyond your capacity...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
×