4 ms·

You seem to have responded to me in error. I didn't make the statement you quoted. I merely responded to the question regarding where else the black market cou

You seem to have responded to me in error. I didn't make the statement you quoted. I merely responded to the question regarding where else the black market could have acquired those guns.

mulmen 4y ago
I made no error. You seem to have lost track of the context in this thread. I replied to a comment (not yours) that essentially said guns come from the black market instead of being stolen. I pointed out through a rhetorical device the possibility that the black market sells stolen products and so both are true. You then replied to that rhetorical.
- falcrist 4y ago
  I haven't lost track of anything. You asked a question and I replied to that. As far as your rhetorical device, I'm sorry but theft isn't the only way firearms get into that market. You're trying to attribute arguments to me that I never made, and I'd appreciate it if you'd stop. Thanks.
  - mulmen 4y ago
    > You're trying to attribute arguments to me that I never made, and I'd appreciate it if you'd stop. I explicitly did the exact opposite of that. You are clearly confused but at this point I don’t think I can help you.
    - falcrist 4y ago
      No. You did exactly that. I'm asking you politely to please stop that and the condescension. It's ineffective and rude.
      - deleted 4y ago
        [deleted]
      - mulmen 4y ago
        You’re clearly still confused and I think that’s why you are being defensive. I replied to sha256sum’s (not you!) comment at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31912312 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31912312 with a rhetorical question. You then answered it as if it were an actual question. Since that wasn’t the reason for the question I then explained my interpretation of the original post (that again, you did not make). Since that point you seem to believe I claimed sha256sum’s post was yours but in fact I did no such thing and actually disclaimed it specifically.
        falcrist 4y ago
        No. I'm clearly not confused. I know who you replied to. I'm not responding to them. I'm tired of the disingenuous way you've approached this conversation, and your awful attitude. As I said in my last comment, you need to cut it out.

You seem to have responded to me in error. I didn't make the statement you quoted. I merely responded to the question regarding where else the black market could have acquired those guns.

mulmen 4y ago

I made no error. You seem to have lost track of the context in this thread. I replied to a comment (not yours) that essentially said guns come from the black market instead of being stolen. I pointed out through a rhetorical device the possibility that the black market sells stolen products and so both are true. You then replied to that rhetorical.

falcrist 4y ago
I haven't lost track of anything. You asked a question and I replied to that. As far as your rhetorical device, I'm sorry but theft isn't the only way firearms get into that market. You're trying to attribute arguments to me that I never made, and I'd appreciate it if you'd stop. Thanks.
- mulmen 4y ago
  > You're trying to attribute arguments to me that I never made, and I'd appreciate it if you'd stop. I explicitly did the exact opposite of that. You are clearly confused but at this point I don’t think I can help you.
  - falcrist 4y ago
    No. You did exactly that. I'm asking you politely to please stop that and the condescension. It's ineffective and rude.
    - deleted 4y ago
      [deleted]
    - mulmen 4y ago
      You’re clearly still confused and I think that’s why you are being defensive. I replied to sha256sum’s (not you!) comment at https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31912312 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=31912312 with a rhetorical question. You then answered it as if it were an actual question. Since that wasn’t the reason for the question I then explained my interpretation of the original post (that again, you did not make). Since that point you seem to believe I claimed sha256sum’s post was yours but in fact I did no such thing and actually disclaimed it specifically.
      - falcrist 4y ago
        No. I'm clearly not confused. I know who you replied to. I'm not responding to them. I'm tired of the disingenuous way you've approached this conversation, and your awful attitude. As I said in my last comment, you need to cut it out.