sarcastic-mister-knowitall - Tumblr blog

[sarcastic-mister-knowitall]

[sarcastic-mister-knowitall]

So by that flawed and circular logic, we shouldn't tolerate you being intolerant of the cabinet members' intolerance. Gee, I love how much sense this makes.

BREAKING: Maxine Waters calls for attacks on Trump administration: “If you see anybody from that Cabinet in a restaurant, in a department store, at a gasoline station, you get out and you create a crowd and you push back on them, and you tell them they’re not welcome anymore, anywhere.”

[sarcastic-mister-knowitall]

Because the ninth circuit court of appeals ruled it unconstitutional to keep the children with the parents if they are caught crossing the border illegally. Would you rather have children held in prison with family members or separated and held in different facilities? By the way, there's an easy fix to this situation: if you want to cross the border with your children, do it legally.

Obama DHS Sec. Jeh Johnson: I Freely Admit We Detained Children, “It Was Necessary”

[sarcastic-mister-knowitall]

As was the first amendment. Your point is moot.

[sarcastic-mister-knowitall]

So he's saying that school shooters are the combat equivalents of boxing prize fighters? Doesn't make sense to me.

My husband was talking about the controversy in the US right now about arming teachers with guns because of our ridiculous national streak of school shootings.  There is rhetoric that is often expounded that “teachers will become fighters if armed during attacks.”  His response was, “If you put boxing gloves on me and stick me in the ring with a prize fighter, I’m not going to become a boxer.  I’m just going to be a dead guy wearing boxing gloves.” 

[sarcastic-mister-knowitall]

man if I had a sword I wouldn’t be worried about shit

[sarcastic-mister-knowitall]

Hmm. What could possibly protect you from guns? Maaaaybe having a gun yourself and being trained to use it is the best way to preclude yourself from being victimized by gun violence. Just maybe.

it astounds me that every time there is a mass shooting in America, politicians insist that had the victims been armed, they’d be still be alive, when the main problem is how accessible these weapons are. You don’t need guns from protection, you need protection from the guns.

[sarcastic-mister-knowitall]

periods are disgusting because its vaguely congealed, mucousy blood coming from your genitals. it has fuckin nothing do with you being a goddamn woman. if a mans dick was leaking mucousy, slightly congealed blood, people would think its just as gross.

not fucking everything has to do with fucking misogyny.

[sarcastic-mister-knowitall]

Holy shit how about just let people do what they want as long as it isn't hurting others.

Rebranding wearing makeup as “self care” only reinforces the patriarchal idea that women who reject the beauty industry aren’t taking care of ourselves. It’s sexist rhetoric.

[sarcastic-mister-knowitall]

Lol. Possibly the most ill-informed gun control post I've seen on here. My AR-15 is for target shooting. I may actually purchase a federally compliant short stack 5 round magazine so that I can use it for deer hunting next year. I'm not sure why you left semi-automatic handguns off the list, seeing as they kill more people every year than long rifles and shotguns combined. Do some learning, rethink your view of self defense and the right to self sovereignty, and try again.

via IG:bitches.of.karma

[sarcastic-mister-knowitall]

Dana Loesch is savage as fuck.

[sarcastic-mister-knowitall]

Let's try to dig to the principle we're disagreeing on. By the way, thanks for being intelligent and civil. I genuinely appreciate it and am open to having my mind changed.

I believe that the right to keep and bear arms extends to any use of those arms that does not endanger the safety, livelihood, or property of anyone affected by that use. This is a flawed analogy, but stick with me; since trucks are now a popular choice of weapon for terrorist attacks, and vehicles on the whole kill more people than guns every year by a landslide, would you say that some vehicles are too dangerous for the general public to possess? Excluding military vehicles of course. My point is that the item itself is not the issue. It's the education and intent of the user coupled with the capability of the hardware. This is why you need a class III FFL to purchase an automatic weapon.

A “GOOD GUY WITH A GUN” DID NOT STOP THIS. A “GOOD GUY WITH A GUN” WAS THERE, EVERYTHING WENT RIGHT FOR ONCE RATHER THAN HIM BEING UNABLE TO ACT OR MISTAKEN FOR A SECOND SHOOTER AS HAPPENS IN MOST SHOOTINGS, AND IT WAS STILL THE FIFTH WORST MASS SHOOTING IN MODERN AMERICAN HISTORY.

A “GOOD GUY WITH A GUN” IS NOT ENOUGH.

[sarcastic-mister-knowitall]

Well the issue then becomes what a better background check would look like. The issue wasn't the background check itself, it's that the information wasn't provided to the FBI for them to have it on file for the background check. It's an issue of government incompetence in this case. I do think private sales should require a background check. I'm not a full supporter of the NRA by any means. They've done some shady shit, but I think their outreach and educational programs have been a broad success in spreading awareness and providing the knowledge and training to responsible gun owners. I disagree with your point about AR-15s and other "assault weapons." I own an AR primarily for target shooting, marksmanship competitions, and fun. Hunting and self defense are far from the only reasons to own a gun. It's like saying you don't need a corvette for business travel or roadtrips. It's just an inapplicable statement.

A “GOOD GUY WITH A GUN” DID NOT STOP THIS. A “GOOD GUY WITH A GUN” WAS THERE, EVERYTHING WENT RIGHT FOR ONCE RATHER THAN HIM BEING UNABLE TO ACT OR MISTAKEN FOR A SECOND SHOOTER AS HAPPENS IN MOST SHOOTINGS, AND IT WAS STILL THE FIFTH WORST MASS SHOOTING IN MODERN AMERICAN HISTORY.

A “GOOD GUY WITH A GUN” IS NOT ENOUGH.

[sarcastic-mister-knowitall]

He was allowed to purchase a firearm because there was a pretty stupid error in our bloated, inefficient government, so his background check was faulty. I agree that's an issue that is completely necessary to address. And I agree that most gun owners are shamefully ill prepared to respond to an active shooter scenario. This is why we need organizations like the NRA to train people on how to react. We need better gun education and a higher respect and understand for what it means to be a responsible gun owner. If we can't agree on that, I'm not certain we will be able to agree on anything relating to gun control.

A “GOOD GUY WITH A GUN” DID NOT STOP THIS. A “GOOD GUY WITH A GUN” WAS THERE, EVERYTHING WENT RIGHT FOR ONCE RATHER THAN HIM BEING UNABLE TO ACT OR MISTAKEN FOR A SECOND SHOOTER AS HAPPENS IN MOST SHOOTINGS, AND IT WAS STILL THE FIFTH WORST MASS SHOOTING IN MODERN AMERICAN HISTORY.

A “GOOD GUY WITH A GUN” IS NOT ENOUGH.

[sarcastic-mister-knowitall]

You're more than welcome to think that. Also, I don't disrespect people. I disrespect their bad ideas. Notice that I don't say "you're dumb." I say "that's dumb." I'm talking about an idea you espouse, not you as a person. For all I know you're the most intelligent, kind hearted person in the world. But this idea you hold is dumb.

So honestly like. I refuse to own any lethal weapons because I believe the only way to change the murder rate in this country is if people actually decide that they shouldn’t have the power to instantly end someone’s life on command. I don’t care if I’m being attacked I will make do with nonlethal weapons. I don’t think I should ever have the ability to end someone else’s life.

[sarcastic-mister-knowitall]

Lol look kid, I already said your stance is valid. But it's also very dumb in my opinion. I'm not trying to change your mind. I'm not saying that thinking otherwise is incorrect. I'm saying I think you have a dumb view on self defense. Valuing the life of someone who violated your right to exist is dumb.

This is what my blog is nowadays. I don't argue with people that much because nobody is open to changing their mind. I point out dumb things and explain why they're dumb. If you wish to continue your very dumb approach to self defense, be my guest. But it's very dumb to do so.

So honestly like. I refuse to own any lethal weapons because I believe the only way to change the murder rate in this country is if people actually decide that they shouldn’t have the power to instantly end someone’s life on command. I don’t care if I’m being attacked I will make do with nonlethal weapons. I don’t think I should ever have the ability to end someone else’s life.

[sarcastic-mister-knowitall]

It's your choice to make because it's your life or the life of someone close to you being threatened. A violation of the sanctity of life is grounds for meeting that violation with deadly force in a self defense scenario. And I didn't say it was ridiculous; I said it was dumb. Your viewpoint is equally valid to mine. I'm just saying that it's dumb to preclude a more effective form of self defense when it is readily available.

So honestly like. I refuse to own any lethal weapons because I believe the only way to change the murder rate in this country is if people actually decide that they shouldn’t have the power to instantly end someone’s life on command. I don’t care if I’m being attacked I will make do with nonlethal weapons. I don’t think I should ever have the ability to end someone else’s life.