sadolite

I addressed your points. You live in denial.

You saying the same thing over and over again is not a conversation.

I have addressed everything you have said. It is your problem that you live in denial of reality. This ridiculous conversation is over.

"Little to no evidence of such, " Are you f-ing kidding me. Have you ever read a history book?  I did address your question of imagination very thoroughly, you refuse to acknowledge my answer. You didn't

address whether the good intentioned would be held accountable for their horrendous unintended concurrences  when their ideas hurt people. 

Here is a very recent example of well meaning people with good intentions destroying peoples live and thinking they should not be held accountable but luckily people with critical thinking skills like mine stepped in. I am guessing you were educated by people exactly like these well meaning people with good intentions.

I have read what you have written. You fail to acknowledge that more people than not by a huge margin think you are naive. Again most people don't think like you. Your ideas come from a sheltered bubble life. You ignore the fact that evil exists and try to write it off as some sort of treatable mental disorder. You are wrong, plain and simple. I have 2000+ years of history on my side that proves you are wrong. You will never get every single human being to give up their guns and bombs and missiles. Not ever.  The ones that do give them up will live in tyranny and oppression by those who don't. You simply do not live in reality. I would much rather live in a world of indifference or bad intentions than a world of good intentions. All of the genocide that has ever occurred in this world since recorded history started with someone who thought their intentions were good. Indifference serves me best. bad intentions are manageable. Good intentions are unmanageable and you cant protect yourself from them and the endless unintended horrendous consequences that come with good intentions.

Tell me something. If you have a well intentioned idea to help a person or people and it ends up hurting that person or people, are you accountable for your actions? Do you have to make things right and pay restitution?  Or do you say your intentions were good and think you should suffer no consequences for your actions. Will your position just be sucks to be those people who's lives i ruined with my good intentions.  That's the problem with good intentions, No accountability. Indifference is neutral because you mind your own business and bad intentions can be held accountable.

I have lots and lots of guns and thousands and thousands of rounds of ammo. Yet not a single person ever harmed or threatened. People should fear you more than me. You advocate taking peoples guns simply for having opinions.

I avoid all people that have good intentions for me. the last time someone had good intentions for me it cost me $500. They, and their good intentions thought it would be a good idea to mow my lawn for me. But of course those good intentions ended up pulling cutting a cable that they did not know about causing severe damage to my pool cage. Nope you can keep your good intentions and punish someone else with them. I would prefer people to be indifferent or hostile to me. At least I can control those people. The well intentioned are f-ing nightmares waiting to happen.

In my opinion you argue against the blatantly obvious just to occupy your mind as you have no real solutions to anything but only to argue against everything to occupy your mind....... and then repeat.

It is people such as yourself and the good intentions that you have that make the world the hell it is now.  The road to hell is paved with you good intentions

Me and my fellow gun owners is my militia. We meet regularly to shoot our firearms at the gun range regularly. You are not suggesting that we be regulated by the very entity that gave us all reason to own firearms are you?

Yes yes yes evil is so hard to pin down. Suppose I am evil. Give me your address so I come come to your house and rape all the woman in your family while you watch and then cut all their heads off and then I'll cut your head off.

Some of us have families and jobs that consume massive amounts of time and lives. We still like to debate issues but only have a few minutes a day or week to devote time to it. That would be why I don't debate formally. The other reason is that debating on debate sites is devoid from reality when debating in the real world. People don't respond to issues like they do here in the real world. All this line by line dissection of every word is preposterous. I find it tedious and diverts from the topic but rather turns into a bickering match of who thinks what the word "IT" means. People dont talk like that in the real world, not anywhere.

Good luck with all that. I'll keep my guns. If you want them send other people with guns to come get them because you will need to pry them from my guns from the hands of my dead body. You know as well as I do that if you had the power you would use guns to disarm people with guns. Your unicorn utopia BS is just that BS. You are naive and gulable. 

"Where there is faith in human kind there is hope."  Hope and faith isn't a plan to deal with evil. 

"Evil = Crazy, Insane etc"   Like I said you don't think evil exists  You think it's some kind of mental disorder that can be treated. Evil is not a mental disorder. Evil is an ideology, "absolute power by any means necessary"  If you banned all guns from the kind of good men I described earlier we would all be slaughtered like pigs by the harmless good men. For it is evil that does the work for the harmless good man. I would say you are one of those harmless good men. You know whats best for everyone.

The logic in your thinking is naive and highly flawed. It is all based on you thinking other people think like you. If we just get rid of guns problem solved. That would work if ALL people thought like you. I am also guessing you don't believe Unadulterated true evil exists. Only good men willing to do things 100 times more evil to evil people stop evil evil people. Evil will always have guns ALWAYS. The problem isn't good men with guns it is misplaced compassion and making excuses for the actions evil people.   

"A Harmless Man Is Not a Good Man. a Good Man Is a Very Dangerous Man Who Has That Under Voluntary Control:"

Hmm well you can throw away your guns if you have any and think you will change the world. I plan on surviving or die tying should the Armageddon of toys take place. 

When I see a armed govt such as the US govt treat an armed citizenry with such disdain, condensation and disrespect one can only imagine how they would treat a disarmed society. That is why I own a gun, lots of them and plan to buy more.

I know, I was being sarcastic.

So you believe people invented these things because they wanted to make peoples lives better?

I love these video's, there are a whole slue of them.

So it is your belief that we are better off now because groups of people got together way back in history and said we need to make life better for other people? 

Excellent intellectual argument. College should be free because you say so.

There are 50 states to choose from to live in. Move to another state that suits your moral compass. Problem solved. I'd like to live in California it's got beautiful land, but I wont. I believe The state and it's population to be morally bankrupt. I just don't  and will never live there, problem solved. I have no interest in forcing my views and moral compass on the people that live there to change it to what I want. I am tolerant of other views and will give space so that other views can be practiced.

"Has anything concrete ever been confirmed/denied or figured out do to any discussion of philosophy?" Not at all, just the same shit repackaged and resold. Everyone thinks they know something nobody else does. I used to think I did. But then I realized what I thought was a new idea or way of thinking was thought of, done/tried and abandoned dozens if not hundreds of times over thousands of years. 

Two things: 1) I don't care that you don't eat meat. There is no reason what so ever to bring it up unless I offer you meat to eat or something that has some form of animal product in it. 2) Don't ever lecture me about eating meat. You are not morally superior because you don't eat meat. I don't care about all the political causes you attach to being vegan anymore than you care about any political causes I care about. Got it? Good. Have a nice day.

All rise, court is now in session. The improper use of credit cards is all on you. And any negative that results because of your improper use of credit cards is all on you. Credit cards are neither bad or good. They are a alternative method of payment to pay for goods and services. The terms of use is clearly spelled out in great detail when you apply for one. Your failure to read and understand those terms of use is all on you.  Bailiff, what's the next case?

Whats your point nothing has changed since the dawn of time. There will always be poor people always been always will be. You some how think some one size fits all solution will change that?

OK I concede, tell me how my life as a taxpayer in the United states has suffered under Trump's Presidency. I am clearly an intellectual dolt and unable to see it. I mean I have more money after taxes and regulations for the kind off work I do have made doing business much easier and cheaper. tell me where my blindness is. Oh and I dont know quite what the economics of the UK have to do with anything.

??????https://ourworldindata.org/economic-growth???????

I edited my previous post and with that said are you really expecting me to post something that says because of TDS in it?

The opinions of Trumps policies before they were implemented are just that opinions based on TDS the results of Trumps policies after they have been implemented are fact proving the TDS opinions to be that of TDS

I just posted a link describing instances where he was right. It's up to you if you want to read it. I even cut and pasted an excerpt. again it's up to you if you want to read it. He said cutting taxes would increase job creation and raise tax revenue. He was right. I posted a link showing this. You just ignore it and keep saying the same thing. Trump said if we don't build a wall on our southern boarder illegal migration was going to reach unsustainable crisis proportions he was right.

I am not a line by line responder. I find that tedious, boring and ultimately only serves to deflect away from the topic. The topic I am currently discussing is Trump and Trump derangement syndrome. My goal is to show that all of the dooms day predictions and accusations that people make are based on TDS 

Your responses about the economy have been proven to be false. Obama has nothing to do with it. You wish he did but cant possibly show that any actions he took as president made it better under Trump. Yet you cling to that like Christians cling to their guns. The lowering of taxes are responsible for reduced unemployment, greater GDP and increased tax revenues. Trump has spent less on govt. Under Obama the yearly deficit  was over 1 trillion every single year, and not one thing to show for it. That kind of spending should have ended poverty as we know it and built a house for every man woman and child in this country. Where did all that money go? You gonna tell me Trump stole it? Yes you do have TDS. The funny part is he has zero effect on your life, maybe that's the part you hate, not being able to blame someone else for your lot in life and having to look in the mirror and blame that person.  As far as Trump being a failure at Business, He has started and sold 515 businesses with a 96% success rate. All big business loses money a billion dollars is a drop in the bucket over ten years.

"In politics, opponents like to emphasize the negative and ignore the positive. Now we see Donald Trump being lambasted for his business failings. What most people that never built a business don’t realize, is that you must fail your way to the top.
Take Warren Buffet, who lost $200 billion dollars when he bought a company called Berkshire Hathaway. At the time Berkshire Hathaway was a textile Mill.
And then there is Mitt Romney, arch-nemesis of Donald Trump who saw 22% of Bain Capital’s investments go bankrupt while he was its leader. As one researcher put it: “Trump has 515 subsidiary companies that he owns. Trump has also had more successful companies than just those 515 that he has sold, but let’s just use that number anyway. So at most Trump has had around 9 failed or bankrupt businesses, that puts his success rate at  98.3% 

I think you have Trump Derangement Syndrome (TDS):  "The name itself explicitly suggests a ‘syndrome,' which the Oxford English Dictionary defines as "a characteristic combination of opinions, emotions, or behavior." Several commentators have run with this, putting forth suggestions about opinions, emotions and behaviors characterizing TDS.

Shared amongst these is a notion that the everyday activities of President Trump trigger some people into distorted opinions, extreme emotions and hysterical behaviors. Well-known writer Bernard Goldberg gives supposed behavioral examples of TDS among Trump’s political opponents, including fainting, vomiting, students retreating to ‘safe spaces’ and others demanding ‘therapy dogs.' Political commentator Justin Raimondo focuses on opinions, language and cognition, writing in the LA Times that "sufferers speak a distinctive language consisting of hyperbole [leading to] a constant state of hysteria… the afflicted lose touch with reality."
Such forms of highly emotional reaction could be something akin to the fainting and screaming characterizing American Beatlemania in the 1960s. Unlike the Beatles however, the extreme emotional reaction alleged to characterize TDS is not based on adoration and admiration, but on fear and loathing."

Source https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/talking-about-men/201901/is-trump-derangement-syndrome-real-mental-condition

I rest my case bwhahahahahah

I am quoting your words, they are not mine. That would make you childish.

And I quote  "Say what? Do you know how to cut an paste? "

Ok then, what page should I cut and paste

On what page of the Muller report does it say this?

Read it again

I make it a point to never vote for anyone (republican or democrat) that denigrates the people of their own country because they don't tow the line and have a differing opinion. That's what tyrants like Hitler did. The minute I hear anyone running for office use desperiging words towards any demographic of people who are not in public office or running for office they lose my vote instantly

Um no, The law either indicts or it doesn't. There is nothing to be exonerated from if you are not charged with a crime. That's how the law works, don't believe me look it up. There is nothing for Barr to interpret. Muller made no recommendation to indict citing lack of evidence. To continue any further investigation one must show a crime has been committed and one must also show reasonable cause to indict based on evidence. We have two and one half years of investigation that turned up jack shit.

Small scale? This is 1000 times bigger than Watergate. The FBI the DOJ and the CIA conspired to overthrow a dully elected president.

No, Trump has no reason to be vindicated of anything. What part of "if you are not charged with a crime do you not get" ? What is there to be vindicated from if you are not charged with a crime? The fact that people still think you are guilty means nothing is not sufficient to start another investigation. What was the point of this last unlawful BS banana republic witch hunt?  Michael Flynn and Roger Stone are two perfect examples of this countries Banana Republic judicial system.  Michael Flynn was interrogated fort hours on end and eventually ended up contradicting himself under the pressure and threats of imprisonment. He plead guilty to a crime he did not commit. Roger Stone was also interrogated for days but refused to accept some BS plea deal again for a crime he did not commit.

No, actually the law is supposed to demonstrate a crime has been committed to start an investigation. You don't just investigate to look for crime. That would make every person on earth a suspect of a crime. That's what banana republics, socialist and communist countries do. Accuse people of crimes and then look for anything they can find to make it stick no matter how ridiculous. The most common practice is to interrogate people for hours on end and get them to contradict them selves. Which of course 99.9% of all people will do when being threatened with jail. That's how Muller got all of his indictments all be it not one had anything to do with the purpose of the investigation.

Um this just proves we do have the money to build the wall, take all the money being used to pay for illegal aliens which is taxation without representation anyway and use it to build the wall.

The law doesn't vindicate people , it only decides if there is sufficient evidence to indict. You are either charged with a crime and given a trial or you are not. That is all the law does. He does not have to be vindicated of anything, He has not been charged with a crime. Anyone's personal feelings that a person who has not been charged with a crime has to be vindicated is delusional.  A trial vindicates accusation off guilt. No trial and no charges require no vindication.