Page 9 of 10 FirstFirst ... 5678910 LastLast
Results 121 to 135 of 141

Thread: Dick's Sporting Goods CEO says the company DESTROYED $5M worth of assault weapons

  1. #121 | Top
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Posts
    7,863
    Thanks
    98
    Thanked 4,219 Times in 3,171 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 239 Times in 227 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Into the Night View Post
    Argument from randU fallacy. Neither the Britannica nor any dictionary defines any word. Neither owns any word.
    The Britannica did not use the term until 2006, quite a bit less than 70 years ago, and well after WW1, when machine guns first began to appear in numbers. I discount da Vinci's design since it was unsuccessful.
    You truly are a desperate hack. Again, the TERM has been around and used for 70 years. Period. It began in WWII. Your desperate attempts to pretend otherwise show what a hack you are.

  2. #122 | Top
    Join Date
    Sep 2018
    Posts
    76,854
    Thanks
    30,538
    Thanked 12,939 Times in 11,525 Posts
    Groans
    11
    Groaned 1,361 Times in 1,347 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Superfreak View Post
    straw man! I did not state Wiki has been around for 70 years you lying hack. I stated the TERM 'assault rifle' had been around that long. You idiot.
    No, it hasn't. So far your references are much less than 70 years old. By using Wikipedia as an authoritative reference (which I summarily dismiss anyway, you can't use it as a reference with me), you are essentially claiming that Wikipedia has been around for 70 years.
    Britannica didn't use the term until 2006. It defines no words. Neither does any dictionary. Neither owns this word.

    Fallacy fallacy. false authority fallacy. Insult fallacy.

  3. #123 | Top
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Posts
    7,863
    Thanks
    98
    Thanked 4,219 Times in 3,171 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 239 Times in 227 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Into the Night View Post
    No, it hasn't. So far your references are much less than 70 years old. By using Wikipedia as an authoritative reference (which I summarily dismiss anyway, you can't use it as a reference with me), you are essentially claiming that Wikipedia has been around for 70 years.
    Britannica didn't use the term until 2006. It defines no words. Neither does any dictionary. Neither owns this word.

    Fallacy fallacy. false authority fallacy. Insult fallacy.
    You are a fucking idiot. You have no justification for 'summarily dismissing' everything. you are simply a hack.

    You are a fucking moron. You claim dictionaries cannot define words, yet YOU think YOU are the ONLY one able to define words.

    Again you fucking moron, the term assault rifle has been used since WWII. You fucking moron.

    and again... NO... using Wiki as a reference does not mean Wiki itself has been around 70 years... your stupidity there means nothing on the internet would suffice since no website has been around 70 years. You fucking idiot.

    Further... your ignorant dismissing of Wiki ignores the fact that the source material is linked at the bottom. Do you dismiss all of the sources as well? is that how arrogant and moronic you are?

  4. #124 | Top
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Posts
    7,863
    Thanks
    98
    Thanked 4,219 Times in 3,171 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 239 Times in 227 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Into the Night View Post
    No, it hasn't. So far your references are much less than 70 years old. By using Wikipedia as an authoritative reference (which I summarily dismiss anyway, you can't use it as a reference with me), you are essentially claiming that Wikipedia has been around for 70 years.
    Britannica didn't use the term until 2006. It defines no words. Neither does any dictionary. Neither owns this word.

    Fallacy fallacy. false authority fallacy. Insult fallacy.
    https://www.theatlantic.com/technolo...-rifle/489428/

    "The assault rifle is a class of weapon that emerged in the middle of the last century to meet the needs of combat soldiers on the modern battlefield, where the level of violence had reached such heights that an entirely new way of fighting had emerged, one for which the existing weapons were a poor match. The name “assault rifle” is believed to have been coined by Adolf Hitler. Toward the end of World War II, the story goes, Hitler hailed his army’s new wonder weapon by insisting that it be called not by the technical name given it by its developers, the Machinenpistole (the German name for a submachine gun), but rather something that made for better propaganda copy. A Sturmgewehr, he called the new gun: a “storm” or “assault” weapon."


    You fucking moron.

  5. #125 | Top
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Posts
    7,863
    Thanks
    98
    Thanked 4,219 Times in 3,171 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 239 Times in 227 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Into the Night View Post
    No, it hasn't. So far your references are much less than 70 years old. By using Wikipedia as an authoritative reference (which I summarily dismiss anyway, you can't use it as a reference with me), you are essentially claiming that Wikipedia has been around for 70 years.
    Britannica didn't use the term until 2006. It defines no words. Neither does any dictionary. Neither owns this word.

    Fallacy fallacy. false authority fallacy. Insult fallacy.
    "The U.S. Army defines assault rifles as "short, compact, selective-fire weapons that fire a cartridge intermediate in power between submachine gun and rifle cartridges."[16] In this strict definition, a firearm must have at least the following characteristics to be considered an assault rifle:[2][3][4]

    It must be capable of selective fire.
    It must have an intermediate-power cartridge: more power than a pistol but less than a standard rifle or battle rifle, such as the 7.92×33mm Kurz, the 7.62x39mm and the 5.56x45mm NATO.
    Its ammunition must be supplied from a detachable box magazine.[5]
    It must have an effective range of at least 300 metres (330 yards).
    Rifles that meet most of these criteria, but not all, are technically not assault rifles."

    You fucking moron.

    C. Taylor The Fighting Rifle: A Complete Study of the Rifle in Combat, ISBN 0-87947-308-8

    F.A. Moyer Special Forces Foreign Weapons Handbook, ISBN 0-87364-009-8

    R.J. Scroggie, F.A. Moyer Special Forces Combat Firing Techniques, ISBN 0-87364-010-1

  6. The Following User Says Thank You to Superfreak For This Post:

    Minister of Truth (10-17-2019)

  7. #126 | Top
    Join Date
    Sep 2018
    Posts
    76,854
    Thanks
    30,538
    Thanked 12,939 Times in 11,525 Posts
    Groans
    11
    Groaned 1,361 Times in 1,347 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Superfreak View Post
    You are a fucking idiot.
    YALIF.
    Quote Originally Posted by Superfreak View Post
    You have no justification for 'summarily dismissing' everything.
    I have all the justification I need. You simply cannot use Wikipedia as an authoritative reference for anything with me, no matter how much you stamp and scream like a little kid.
    Quote Originally Posted by Superfreak View Post
    you are simply a hack.
    You are a fucking moron.
    YALIF.
    Quote Originally Posted by Superfreak View Post
    You claim dictionaries cannot define words, yet YOU think YOU are the ONLY one able to define words.
    Never said any such thing. Lie. Dictionaries do not define any word. People define words. Etymology is a hobby of mine, you see.
    Quote Originally Posted by Superfreak View Post
    Again you fucking moron,
    YALIF.
    Quote Originally Posted by Superfreak View Post
    the term assault rifle has been used since WWII.
    No, it hasn't.
    Quote Originally Posted by Superfreak View Post
    You fucking moron.
    YALIF.
    Quote Originally Posted by Superfreak View Post
    and again... NO... using Wiki as a reference does not mean Wiki itself has been around 70 years...
    Yes it does, if you are claiming it has defined a word 70 years ago.
    Quote Originally Posted by Superfreak View Post
    your stupidity there means nothing on the internet would suffice since no website has been around 70 years.
    Nothing on the internet has defined any word before the internet.
    Quote Originally Posted by Superfreak View Post
    You fucking idiot.
    YALIF.
    Quote Originally Posted by Superfreak View Post
    Further... your ignorant dismissing of Wiki ignores the fact that the source material is linked at the bottom.
    Irrelevant. You cannot use Wikipedia as a reference with me.
    Quote Originally Posted by Superfreak View Post
    Do you dismiss all of the sources as well? is that how arrogant and moronic you are?
    As far as the definition of any word 70 years ago? Yes. As far as any other article on Wikipedia? The question is a compositional error fallacy.
    YALIF.

    You simply cannot use Wikipedia as an authoritative reference of any kind with me. Neither can you use ABC, NBC, MSN, CNN, CBS, FOX, NPR, the AP, the Guardian, or any newspaper, TV station, radio station parroting the AP, or the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, the Los Angeles Times, the Washington Post, Politico, nor any other newspaper or network of newspapers as an authoritative reference for anything but local news for their area either. Neither can you use any dictionary to define any word, since dictionaries do not define words.

    If you want to use the buzzword 'Assault Rifle', that is your choice, but it IS a buzzword, carrying only the meaning YOU have given it.

    Defining a word requires the reasoning behind that definition to be given with the definition. To simply say it means X, you must declare why, and always remember that it is YOU that defined the word. It is not possible to define a word with itself.

  8. #127 | Top
    Join Date
    Sep 2018
    Posts
    76,854
    Thanks
    30,538
    Thanked 12,939 Times in 11,525 Posts
    Groans
    11
    Groaned 1,361 Times in 1,347 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Superfreak View Post
    https://www.theatlantic.com/technolo...-rifle/489428/

    "The assault rifle is a class of weapon that emerged in the middle of the last century to meet the needs of combat soldiers on the modern battlefield, where the level of violence had reached such heights that an entirely new way of fighting had emerged, one for which the existing weapons were a poor match. The name “assault rifle” is believed to have been coined by Adolf Hitler. Toward the end of World War II, the story goes, Hitler hailed his army’s new wonder weapon by insisting that it be called not by the technical name given it by its developers, the Machinenpistole (the German name for a submachine gun), but rather something that made for better propaganda copy. A Sturmgewehr, he called the new gun: a “storm” or “assault” weapon."


    You fucking moron.
    The Atlantic newspaper is summarily dismissed. YALIF.

  9. #128 | Top
    Join Date
    Sep 2018
    Posts
    76,854
    Thanks
    30,538
    Thanked 12,939 Times in 11,525 Posts
    Groans
    11
    Groaned 1,361 Times in 1,347 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by reagansghost View Post
    why shouldn't AR's and AK's be considered assault weapons?
    Define 'assault weapon'.

  10. #129 | Top
    Join Date
    Sep 2018
    Posts
    76,854
    Thanks
    30,538
    Thanked 12,939 Times in 11,525 Posts
    Groans
    11
    Groaned 1,361 Times in 1,347 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by reagansghost View Post
    ATF, FBI, and local/state authorities will be coming for your pea shooters rambo, not them pesky libruls
    They do not have the authority to do so. It's amazing how afraid of these 'pea shooters' you are.

  11. #130 | Top
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Posts
    7,863
    Thanks
    98
    Thanked 4,219 Times in 3,171 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 239 Times in 227 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Into the Night View Post
    The Atlantic newspaper is summarily dismissed. YALIF.
    you are summarily dismissed. You have proven you are nothing more than the same level of idiot of Desh, Garud and Cypress.

  12. #131 | Top
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Posts
    7,863
    Thanks
    98
    Thanked 4,219 Times in 3,171 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 239 Times in 227 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Into the Night View Post
    YALIF.

    I have all the justification I need. You simply cannot use Wikipedia as an authoritative reference for anything with me, no matter how much you stamp and scream like a little kid.

    YALIF.

    Never said any such thing. Lie. Dictionaries do not define any word. People define words. Etymology is a hobby of mine, you see.

    YALIF.

    No, it hasn't.

    YALIF.

    Yes it does, if you are claiming it has defined a word 70 years ago.

    Nothing on the internet has defined any word before the internet.

    YALIF.

    Irrelevant. You cannot use Wikipedia as a reference with me.

    As far as the definition of any word 70 years ago? Yes. As far as any other article on Wikipedia? The question is a compositional error fallacy.
    YALIF.

    You simply cannot use Wikipedia as an authoritative reference of any kind with me. Neither can you use ABC, NBC, MSN, CNN, CBS, FOX, NPR, the AP, the Guardian, or any newspaper, TV station, radio station parroting the AP, or the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, the Los Angeles Times, the Washington Post, Politico, nor any other newspaper or network of newspapers as an authoritative reference for anything but local news for their area either. Neither can you use any dictionary to define any word, since dictionaries do not define words.

    If you want to use the buzzword 'Assault Rifle', that is your choice, but it IS a buzzword, carrying only the meaning YOU have given it.

    Defining a word requires the reasoning behind that definition to be given with the definition. To simply say it means X, you must declare why, and always remember that it is YOU that defined the word. It is not possible to define a word with itself.
    You are such a hack. It has been defined, not by me, but by others. It is a term that has been used for over 70 years. But you 'dismiss' everything that states that because you are a fucking idiot.

  13. #132 | Top
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Posts
    7,863
    Thanks
    98
    Thanked 4,219 Times in 3,171 Posts
    Groans
    0
    Groaned 239 Times in 227 Posts

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Into the Night View Post
    YALIF.

    I have all the justification I need. You simply cannot use Wikipedia as an authoritative reference for anything with me, no matter how much you stamp and scream like a little kid.

    YALIF.

    Never said any such thing. Lie. Dictionaries do not define any word. People define words. Etymology is a hobby of mine, you see.

    YALIF.

    No, it hasn't.

    YALIF.

    Yes it does, if you are claiming it has defined a word 70 years ago.

    Nothing on the internet has defined any word before the internet.

    YALIF.

    Irrelevant. You cannot use Wikipedia as a reference with me.

    As far as the definition of any word 70 years ago? Yes. As far as any other article on Wikipedia? The question is a compositional error fallacy.
    YALIF.

    You simply cannot use Wikipedia as an authoritative reference of any kind with me. Neither can you use ABC, NBC, MSN, CNN, CBS, FOX, NPR, the AP, the Guardian, or any newspaper, TV station, radio station parroting the AP, or the New York Times, the Wall Street Journal, the Los Angeles Times, the Washington Post, Politico, nor any other newspaper or network of newspapers as an authoritative reference for anything but local news for their area either. Neither can you use any dictionary to define any word, since dictionaries do not define words.

    If you want to use the buzzword 'Assault Rifle', that is your choice, but it IS a buzzword, carrying only the meaning YOU have given it.

    Defining a word requires the reasoning behind that definition to be given with the definition. To simply say it means X, you must declare why, and always remember that it is YOU that defined the word. It is not possible to define a word with itself.
    FYI moron... dictionaries do indeed define words. That is the point of a dictionary. Yes moron, the words are originally defined by humans... the dictionary is a record of that. You fucking moron.

  14. #133 | Top
    Join Date
    Jan 2014
    Location
    The Blue Ridge
    Posts
    37,741
    Thanks
    21,918
    Thanked 12,581 Times in 9,703 Posts
    Groans
    4,312
    Groaned 1,312 Times in 1,210 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by reagansghost View Post
    Ed Stack said following the decision last year to stop offering assault-style rifles, the question of what to with the remaining inventory lingered.

    "I said, 'You know what? If we really think these things should be off the street, we need to destroy them,'" Stack said, adding that the company turned $5 million worth of the weapons into scrap metal.

    Dick’s made the decision to stop carrying the rifles following the mass shooting at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School in Parkland, Fla., which left 17 dead and reignited the national conversation surrounding gun control.

    "We found out that we sold this kid a shotgun," Stack said. "That's when I said, 'We're done.'"


    https://thehill.com/business-a-lobby...t-rifles-were?

    sign of the times
    He probably sold them on the black market. Now terrorists and gang bangers have them.

  15. #134 | Top
    Join Date
    Sep 2018
    Posts
    76,854
    Thanks
    30,538
    Thanked 12,939 Times in 11,525 Posts
    Groans
    11
    Groaned 1,361 Times in 1,347 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Superfreak View Post
    you are summarily dismissed. You have proven you are nothing more than the same level of idiot of Desh, Garud and Cypress.
    YALIF.

  16. #135 | Top
    Join Date
    Sep 2018
    Posts
    76,854
    Thanks
    30,538
    Thanked 12,939 Times in 11,525 Posts
    Groans
    11
    Groaned 1,361 Times in 1,347 Posts
    Blog Entries
    1

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Superfreak View Post
    You are such a hack. It has been defined, not by me, but by others. It is a term that has been used for over 70 years. But you 'dismiss' everything that states that because you are a fucking idiot.
    Nope. Just by you. RQAA. RDCF. YALIF.

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 03-14-2019, 09:55 AM
  2. Dick's Sporting Goods stock plunges - Weak Sales and new ban on rifles
    By Text Drivers are Killers in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 03-13-2019, 11:32 AM
  3. Dicks Sporting Goods sucks dick
    By canceled.2021.2 in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 61
    Last Post: 08-30-2018, 07:32 PM
  4. Replies: 1
    Last Post: 08-30-2018, 09:33 AM
  5. Gun manufacturers refuse to sell to anti-gun Dick's Sporting Goods
    By Text Drivers are Killers in forum Current Events Forum
    Replies: 355
    Last Post: 05-16-2018, 05:46 AM

Bookmarks

Posting Rules

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •