Spurious arguments and their causes

[Jaythulhu]

There is a descriptor of a location (i.e: go over there), their is a descriptor relating to a person's ownership of something (their work is overdue). No way are they interchangable. Your university is actually wrong if they allow such a substitution. Much the same as Your, and You're. They are entirely different in meaning, one being a contraction of You Are, and they aren't interchangable either.

Also, according to google and my primary school education, E is only used in arguments by americans, however, I will accept that may have changed in the last 20 years.

 

[Logan Westbrook]

Incredibly poor spelling and misused or fake words (like proactive) will always get me into a fighting mood.

also, just for reference: there in the topic shoulda been their, and arguments doesn't have an e.

Arguements does have an "e" if you English and their or there can be used if used in that case. As spurious arguements are not personifications.

Wrong on both counts I'm afraid. Arguments contains only a single 'e' regardless of which side of the Atlantic you're from and the word in the title should be 'their' because the causes effectively 'belong' to the spurious arguments.

I'm a little worried that the university you attend is teaching things that are wrong.

Also, according to google and my primary school education, E is only used in arguments by americans, however, I will accept that may have changed in the last 20 years.

I typed 'arguement' into Word and and it came up as an error in both UK and US English.

 

[AuntyEthel]

People who say that power metal continues the work of classical composers.

Any argument involving animal rights and PETA members. I like animals and all, but PETA's braindead fairytale ideals just piss me off.

 

[Jaythulhu]

AuntyEthel: I 100% agree with you on the Peta issue. I work for the rspca, and I have to say that Peta people have caused us far more problems than they've helped solve.

 

[WlknCntrdiction]

Religion, difference between Traceurs and Free runners, Pro-choice,(though hypocritically if my gf ever got pregnant I would want her to have an abortion, I'm not ready to have a kid......yet, maybe never)Carrying a knife protects you, Love and sex are mutually exclusive.

Just some of the things that make me go *facepalm*

 

[electric discordian]

Carrying a Knife does protect you, from pain and anguish as the moment the mugger takes it off you and plunges it into your heart. Pretty much all pain and fear tend to stop.

On a more serious note, the fact that I do not in any shape or form qualify for any government assistance whilst I am studying to be a driving instructor. If I had four kids and was doing nothing constructive due to having some spurious reasoning behind not getting a job I would have people throwing money at me. I am now In debt twice thanks to my student loan and the loan I took out to train. Meanwhile the family with the eight children across my road have just bought a PS3 and a plasma Tv whilst there children walk the streets in tatters until gone midnight everynight, they are now so malnurished the are starting to look like Ethopian famine victims. I have made them sandwhiches and have been called a Peado by their parents... Who are now dripping in fake gold and Fila Trainers.

I hate the fact that the universe is unfair and that anytime anyone trys to redress the balance the get shafted by those who seek to keep the unfairness everpresent.

That and the Lottery who do people pay money into something which was the same odds as me suddenly being voted pope.

 

[sneakypenguin]

People who hate conservatism, who want the government to take care of them , people that claim tolerance then hate you because you are conservative, own guns, believe in God and intelligent design and don't believe in global warming. Also people who play class warfare, that will get a instant response

 

[TrooP]

I would have to answer fanatics... of any kind... be it religious, animal rights or whatever they just drive me bonkers... it seams that the more *into* something u are the more brain you leave behind...

 

[corporate_gamer]

A few of the many..
"Spelling and grammar aren't important!"
"Abortion is murder!"
"You're going to hell for your homosexuality/bisexuality."
"I need guns for self defence."
"My family of 4 people need 8+ cars."
"You should wait until marriage to have sex."
"You should be loyal and obedient to your male spouse."
"[race/sexuality/gender/stereotype] should, without exception, be degraded."
Edit: I'm adding Creationism to the list.

While none of these cause a complete separation between body and brain, they do tend to warrant a fist-to-face reaction if, after several minutes of heated argument, the tactless Burke still clings to them.

i'm adding 'if you don't use the precise spelling and grammar i will disregard any point you make' to the list.

 

[Imitation Saccharin]

"I need guns for self defence."

I could understand A gun, but why multiple? What is he arming his cats when the intruder breaks in?

i'm adding 'if you don't use the precise spelling and grammar i will disregard any point you make' to the list.

Irony. Definition of.

 

[electric discordian]

People who hate conservatism, who want the government to take care of them , people that claim tolerance then hate you because you are conservative, own guns, believe in God and intelligent design and don't believe in global warming. Also people who play class warfare, that will get a instant response

I dont hate conservatives. I just disagree vehemently with any point they have to make
even if thats dangerous as they have all the guns!

 

[sneakypenguin]

I could understand A gun, but why multiple? What is he arming his cats when the intruder breaks in?

because not all guns are useful for all situations. that glock 9mm that you carry in the winter might be too big to conceal when wearing a t-shirt when a small frame Kimber might be better. A .357 revolver is a better car gun than a clip loaded (because if it's sitting in your car it's not going to be maintained like your CCW. a shotgun is better home defense, less penetration and all that. Plus they are all fun to shoot at the range so more guns= more fun

EDIT: answer to above post. Well CC holders are 13 times less likely to commit violent crime so i'd say your pretty safe arguing with us

 

[Imitation Saccharin]

EDIT: answer to above post. Well CC holders are 13 times less likely to commit violent crime so i'd say your pretty safe arguing with us

Source?

 

[TrooP]

im european... *swedish* so i dont really get it with u yanks and guns... sure guns ARE fun... and i´ve been in the military so i have tried quite a few... but the biggest issue as i can se it with carrying a gun is the ladder effect... once u use it to protect u the bad guys will bring bigger gunns to outperform u... i mean wheres it gonna end? everyone going around with Ak´s?

*oh wait... i just realised... u already do.. dont u?*

 

[NewClassic_v1legacy]

I'm European, Swedish, so I don't really get it with you Yanks and (your) guns. Sure guns are fun, and I´ve been in the military, so I have tried quite a few. But the biggest issue as I can see it with carrying a gun is the Ladder Effect. Once you use it to protect yourself, the bad guys will bring bigger guns to outperform you. I mean, where's it gonna end? Everyone going around with AKs?

Oh wait, I just realised. You already do, don't you?

Aside from the horribly slanted, entirely racist, and grammatically-offensive argument you make here, your point doesn't hold valid. Granted, while larger guns (such as AK-47 when compared to a Colt 9mm) do contain a certain level of power-to-kill ratio, maintaining a bigger gun does not immunize you from smaller arms. A headshot from a stub-nosed pistol will kill you just as hard and fast as a tactical nuke going off between your eyebrows.

I see no harm in maintaining a gun for your own personal protection, so long as you have the proper permits, training, etc. By your argument, it would be absurd for the Police to issue anything other than tanks. Police carry handguns because they're effective, and they can be trained to use them effectively. Don't say guns are wrong simply because they're capable of being misused. If that's your logic, then stop everyone from driving too, as cars can also be misused. (Granted, this is an extreme argument, and not something I'm advocating, just using as an example.)

I could understand A gun, but why multiple? What is he arming his cats when the intruder breaks in?

because not all guns are useful for all situations. that glock 9mm that you carry in the winter might be too big to conceal when wearing a t-shirt when a small frame Kimber might be better. A .357 revolver is a better car gun than a clip loaded (because if it's sitting in your car it's not going to be maintained like your CCW. a shotgun is better home defense, less penetration and all that. Plus they are all fun to shoot at the range so more guns= more fun

EDIT: answer to above post. Well CC holders are 13 times less likely to commit violent crime so i'd say your pretty safe arguing with us

Although I'd like to argue with the finer points of this. A single handgun can serve the function of all of these, just requires more precision and practice than having a full range. Although I do see some merit in your argument, as you wouldn't want to go putting on the green with your driver in Golf, you wouldn't want to under-value several guns for their uses.

Although you're thinking on more military scale. I'm thinking simple self-defense.

 

[corporate_gamer]

"I need guns for self defence."

I could understand A gun, but why multiple? What is he arming his cats when the intruder breaks in?

i'm adding 'if you don't use the precise spelling and grammar i will disregard any point you make' to the list.

Irony. Definition of.

Thank you. i just won a little bet with myself.

 

[TrooP]

My grammar aint perfect but considering this aint my language it will have to do...

my point is simply this... there has to be a reason to why there are more killings and so on in places where it´s legal to carry guns dont it? look at the statics... im not saying that its an issue just in america but all over the world... i mean sure there will always be bad guys with guns... guns exist and thats not going to change... the big difference is that in most places they dont need to shoot u to get what they want... they will if they have to... *even here in little old sweden* but since we dont carrie guns they dont need to either...

and sure this is a kind of pacifist defense and in a perfect world it would be very stupid to use/need this argument but the fact reamins that people will have their reasons for fighting... i have even done my share... but a beating i can take... a bullet i cant...

and i didnt mean to sound like a racist... but stuff like this tends to come out that way

 

[qbert4ever]

Arguments themselves don't make me angry, it's the people that bring them up that sends me into a blind rage.

Me saying to friend: "So you want to go deer hunting this weekend?"

Idiot that overheard: You boys shouldn't be hunting! Murder is wrong, and all hunting is is the murder of animals!"

Me: Actually, when done properly, deer hunting is a great time to spend the day out of the house. Really, when we hunt it's more about walking in the woods then it is the killing. Not to mention the fact that if it isn't kept in check through hunting (among other things), the deer population will explode, as it has in the past, and most of them will starve to death anyway. While I do agree that things like hunting lines (when lots of people walk side-by-side through the woods) and pushes (same thing, only with two lines walking starting at different points and walking AT each other) are un-sportsmanlike and dangerous, if done right then deer hunting is a fun sport that anyone can enjoy. If you don't believe in doing it, that's fine. But nothing you say will change our minds on the matter.

Idiot: "Well.... It's still nasty murder and you shouldn't do it!"

Friend and me: *Walks away*

While it's great that you have your own opinion, being a loud obnoxious tool is not going to change anybodys mind on the matter, and will only serve to make you look like a dip-tard.

 

[TomNook]

Whenever someone tries to convince me that I don't need my gun because I can always trust the government. Or when people say civil liberties are what the government uses to protect us. Then there was the time someone tried to convince me that censorship was needed to protect society. Funny thing is, all these people are voting for Obama.

 

[NewClassic_v1legacy]

My grammar aint perfect but considering this aint my language it will have to do...

my point is simply this... there has to be a reason to why there are more killings and so on in places where it´s legal to carry guns dont it? look at the statics... im not saying that its an issue just in america but all over the world... i mean sure there will always be bad guys with guns... guns exist and thats not going to change... the big difference is that in most places they dont need to shoot u to get what they want... they will if they have to... *even here in little old sweden* but since we dont carrie guns they dont need to either...

and sure this is a kind of pacifist defense and in a perfect world it would be very stupid to use/need this argument but the fact reamins that people will have their reasons for fighting... i have even done my share... but a beating i can take... a bullet i cant...

and i didnt mean to sound like a racist... but stuff like this tends to come out that way

Well, it's true that the easier it is for people to get a hold of guns, the easier it is to use them. But having them, then taking them away is a bad idea. If you outlaw guns, then only outlaws will have guns.