Results 1 to 16 of 16

Thread: Gunslinger... Whats with you and Nazis?

  1. #1
    Regular Member ChiangShih's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    KC
    Posts
    628

    Gunslinger... Whats with you and Nazis?

    Here you go with the Nazi comments in another thread!

    Quote Originally Posted by Gunslinger View Post
    Lighten up. When I'm serious about comparing neo-fascists to the original product and you don't like it, feel free to jump in. When I'm kidding around to get the Administrator's goat, I'm joking. As to "Die Horst Wessel Lied," I've always thought it had good lyrics, but you couldn't dance to it.

    Quote Originally Posted by Gunslinger View Post
    The media salivates at the opportunity of kissing the cops ***. Of course, the police are your friends, so you should learn the lyrics to sing along with them:

    Die Fahne hoch! Die Reihen fest geschlossen!
    SA marschiert mit ruhig-festem Schritt.
    Oh wow, and in another thread!

    Quote Originally Posted by Gunslinger View Post
    Or could it be they're truly nothing more than thugs whose compensatory complex of superiority they think makes up for serious, psycho-sexual shortcomings? Just asking...

    Zum letzten Mal wird schon Appell geblasen!
    Zum Kampfe steh'n wir alle schon bereit!
    And another!
    Quote Originally Posted by Gunslinger View Post
    The Peoples Demokratic Republik of Kalifornia investigating illegal activity by the SA. Novel idea. Kind of like the KGB investigating the SS. Gov Moonbeam in the same room with Ubergruppenfuhrer holder. Kind of makes me want to heave...
    And another
    Quote Originally Posted by Gunslinger View Post
    Take the guns away from the cops and the problem will solve itself. The trouble is the mentality of a**holes like Lopez and his UberGruppenfuhrer superiors.

    "We must take the guns from the people to make the streets safe for the SS."

    A. Hitler
    Obergruppenführer was a Nazi Party paramilitary rank that was first created in 1932 as a rank of the SA and until 1942 it was the highest SS rank inferior only to Reichsführer-SS (Heinrich Himmler).


    I'm a little off put by this recurrence, particularly because there exists a stereotype of right wing extremism amongst anti-2A folks directed at pro-2A folks and this sort of conduct doesn't help.
    Last edited by ChiangShih; 04-02-2011 at 03:58 AM. Reason: Apparently I need to tame my direct manner.
    Tiocfaidh Ar La

  2. #2
    Regular Member Thomas Masse's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2010
    Location
    Warrensburg
    Posts
    42
    Quote Originally Posted by ChiangShih View Post
    I'm a little off put by this recurrence, particularly because there exists a stereotype of right wing extremism amongst 2A folks and this isn't helping.
    We as OCer's have had a hard time in the media lately regarding current run-ins with LEO's. I hardly think it is appropriate to be flinging around comparisons and metaphors that compare LEO's/the media to the Nazi party. I see this as some vain attempt at humor that is very inappropriate to say the least and should not enter this forum even in a humorous context.

    Most importantly, as we have seen in the media in recent events, context is a matter of perspective. Seen in the wrong light, even a joke can be damning.
    Last edited by Thomas Masse; 04-02-2011 at 03:44 AM.
    The God of War hates those who hesitate. - Euripides

  3. #3
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766
    Quote Originally Posted by ChiangShih View Post
    Here you go with the Nazi comments in another thread!
    And the same song at that.
    Remember what you said about "anyone can google it", you seem to be the only one googling it....and requoting it throughout the forum..
    I'm starting to worry about you buddy.






    Oh wow, and in another thread!



    And another!


    And another

    Obergruppenführer was a Nazi Party paramilitary rank that was first created in 1932 as a rank of the SA and until 1942 it was the highest SS rank inferior only to Reichsführer-SS (Heinrich Himmler).

    Gunslinger, Warum bist do so interessiert an den Nationalsozialismus?
    Sie verstehen die Bedeutung der Zahl 1488?
    I've got a suspicion about you.


    I'm a little off put by this recurrence, particularly because there exists a stereotype of right wing extremism amongst anti-2A folks directed at pro-2A folks and this isn't helping.
    QFT

    Forum rules violation. Personal attack--starting a thread solely to criticize another forum member.

    From the forum rules:

    (6) NO PERSONAL ATTACKS: While you may disagree strongly with another poster based upon their opinion, we will NOT tolerate any personal attacks or general bashing of groups of people based upon race, religion, sex, or choice of occupation (e.g., being a law enforcement officer, in the military, etc). NOTE THAT THIS RULE APPLIES TO PMs AS WELL AS FORUM POSTS!!!

    http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/misc.php?do=showrules

    Moderator alerted.

  4. #4
    Regular Member ChiangShih's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    KC
    Posts
    628
    Quote Originally Posted by Citizen View Post
    QFT

    Forum rules violation. Personal attack--starting a thread solely to criticize another forum member.

    From the forum rules:

    (6) NO PERSONAL ATTACKS: While you may disagree strongly with another poster based upon their opinion, we will NOT tolerate any personal attacks or general bashing of groups of people based upon race, religion, sex, or choice of occupation (e.g., being a law enforcement officer, in the military, etc). NOTE THAT THIS RULE APPLIES TO PMs AS WELL AS FORUM POSTS!!!

    http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/misc.php?do=showrules

    Moderator alerted.
    This is not a personal attack based on, race, sex or occupation, nor is this bashing opinion. This is a simply question of conduct. A directed question of intent and reasoning. I'm not bashing or attacking. I'm making an inquisitive observation.

    Or is pointing out aspects of forum conduct in the general discussion board against the rules?

    As I see those quite often. Questioning or discussing the motives, posts, and actions of other members, including a current thread pointing out the actions of a mod.

    Hmm.
    Last edited by ChiangShih; 04-02-2011 at 04:03 AM.
    Tiocfaidh Ar La

  5. #5
    Regular Member ChiangShih's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    KC
    Posts
    628
    In fact, just to give an example, during the 2qwik4u...tooquick...however he spelled it.. drama.. Multiple threads existed observing and questioning his conduct. I don't see how this is any different.
    Last edited by ChiangShih; 04-02-2011 at 04:30 AM. Reason: Oh man, because.
    Tiocfaidh Ar La

  6. #6
    Regular Member ChiangShih's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Location
    KC
    Posts
    628
    Quote Originally Posted by Citizen View Post
    QFT

    Forum rules violation. Personal attack--starting a thread solely to criticize another forum member.

    From the forum rules:

    (6) NO PERSONAL ATTACKS: While you may disagree strongly with another poster based upon their opinion, we will NOT tolerate any personal attacks or general bashing of groups of people based upon race, religion, sex, or choice of occupation (e.g., being a law enforcement officer, in the military, etc). NOTE THAT THIS RULE APPLIES TO PMs AS WELL AS FORUM POSTS!!!

    http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/misc.php?do=showrules

    Moderator alerted.
    In fact, didn't you start a thread directly commenting on the actions of grapeshot?!

    http://forum.opencarry.org/forums/sh...-a-4-1-Trixter

    Joke or not it is not much different from mine.
    Tiocfaidh Ar La

  7. #7
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766
    Chiang,

    I read your comments in the thread fight with Gunslinger and Marshaul. You've already discredited yourself with anybody who's paying much attention.

    Then you seemingly followed Gunslinger's post history and posted your counter-attacks in other threads.

    That you feel compelled to make three replies in a row here stands it in unmistakable stark relief.

    You've made it personal. You are so personally wrapped up in "winning" your fight with Gunslinger, it is laughable. You're no longer arguing the case. You're fighting personally just to fight. This thread proves it. (As if the other stuff didn't on its own.)

    The sad part is that you feel so invested into this, you cannot emotionally afford to lose or be wrong. You're not fighting Gunslinger to win. You're fighting to avoid feeling like you lost--to avoid being wrong.

    Wouldn't it be better to let it go? Begin rebuilding your credibility and reputation?
    Last edited by Citizen; 04-02-2011 at 03:47 PM.

  8. #8
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Sierra Vista, Arizona, USA
    Posts
    113
    Quote Originally Posted by Citizen View Post
    Chiang,

    I read your comments in the thread fight with Gunslinger and Marshaul. You've already discredited yourself with anybody who's paying much attention.

    Then you seemingly followed Gunslinger's post history and posted your counter-attacks in other threads.

    That you feel compelled to make three replies in a row here stands it in unmistakable stark relief.

    You've made it personal. You are so personally wrapped up in "winning" your fight with Gunslinger, it is laughable. You're no longer arguing the case. You're fighting personally just to fight. This thread proves it. (As if the other stuff didn't on its own.)

    The sad part is that you feel so invested into this, you cannot emotionally afford to lose or be wrong. You're not fighting Gunslinger to win. You're fighting to avoid feeling like you lost--to avoid being wrong.

    Wouldn't it be better to let it go? Begin rebuilding your credibility and reputation?
    But he is correct with that first post if nothing else. The OP did not break the rule that you said he did. So now you are discredited I guess. Start rebuilding your credibility and reputation perhaps? Or can you give a specific example as outlined in the rule you referenced?

    I wonder if you need to be reported for being so disruptive on the MB. Let me do some looking at the rules again and perhaps I'll report you to the mods.
    Last edited by mohawk001; 04-02-2011 at 03:59 PM.

  9. #9
    Founder's Club Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Fairfax Co., VA
    Posts
    18,766
    Quote Originally Posted by mohawk001 View Post
    SNIP But he is correct with that first post if nothing else. The OP did not break the rule that you said he did.
    Yes, he did. I will explain.

    First, let me be clear that I am not going to argue with him (nor you). I will explain it this once exactly and precisely only for your own personal understanding and any other readers regarding this rule.

    One could ask why I did not explain this to Chiang rather than render the my preceding post. It would not be an illegitimate question. The answer is because Chiang is interested in arguing. Any reply along the lines of demonstrating a violation to him would beget nothing but more argument from him. Just read the last of his three-in-a-row posts and evaluate it thoroughly. Thus, I am not about to waste time arguing the point. I am willing to assist your understanding. However, anybody wants to argue it can take it up with the mods.

    Here is the explanation:

    This forum has a long history of not allowing threads as personal attacks on individual forum members. For a few years now, every single one I've seen was locked or deleted. The rationale given by Mike (forum owner and Supermoderator) is that it gets nowhere and only serves to perpetuate acrimony. Such threads are about the person, not the 2A issue.

    The rule can be read to mean only politically incorrect personal attacks are prohibited. However, this would be a self-servingly narrow reading. The history of this forum is such that the Admin and mods delete all kinds of personal attacks, not just politically incorrect personal attacks. This has developed over time becoming more and more strict.

    Now, is my understanding guaranteed correct? Perhaps not. Am I willing to be wrong? Yes. However, until a mod intervenes permit to suggest something as a supportive clue. I have been here for years. I have a post count that shows I have spent a lot of time following threads during those years.
    Last edited by Citizen; 04-02-2011 at 04:43 PM.

  10. #10
    Regular Member Guido's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Wilder, Idaho, USA
    Posts
    46
    Just speaking for me, but if I were to start a thread of this nature it would be to start a fight, as I know that the person I just tried to call out in a thread would get pissed and reply in kind. and I know that other people would pile on to both sides to help out.

    Sometimes you just got to ask yourself "Is it really worth it?"


    Have a great night everybody !

  11. #11
    Regular Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Location
    Sierra Vista, Arizona, USA
    Posts
    113
    Quote Originally Posted by Citizen View Post
    Yes, he did. I will explain.

    First, let me be clear that I am not going to argue with him (nor you). I will explain it this once exactly and precisely only for your own personal understanding and any other readers regarding this rule.

    One could ask why I did not explain this to Chiang rather than render the my preceding post. It would not be an illegitimate question. The answer is because Chiang is interested in arguing. Any reply along the lines of demonstrating a violation to him would beget nothing but more argument from him. Just read the last of his three-in-a-row posts and evaluate it thoroughly. Thus, I am not about to waste time arguing the point. I am willing to assist your understanding. However, anybody wants to argue it can take it up with the mods.

    Here is the explanation:

    This forum has a long history of not allowing threads as personal attacks on individual forum members. For a few years now, every single one I've seen was locked or deleted. The rationale given by Mike (forum owner and Supermoderator) is that it gets nowhere and only serves to perpetuate acrimony. Such threads are about the person, not the 2A issue.

    The rule can be read to mean only politically incorrect personal attacks are prohibited. However, this would be a self-servingly narrow reading. The history of this forum is such that the Admin and mods delete all kinds of personal attacks, not just politically incorrect personal attacks. This has developed over time becoming more and more strict.

    Now, is my understanding guaranteed correct? Perhaps not. Am I willing to be wrong? Yes. However, until a mod intervenes permit to suggest something as a supportive clue. I have been here for years. I have a post count that shows I have spent a lot of time following threads during those years.
    So you are going to claim that you can twist the rules as stated to mean what you want them to mean? Classic. I also find classic that you have blasted him for following someone on the board. By the way you stated it and how you covered how his many posts are, I am wondering if it is you who are the stalker instead of him.

    I also find that you are trying to twist the rules because you claim it's a bad post because it's not related to the 2A. Well, the rules do state that there can be post not relating to the 2A, and that those posts must be in the General Discussion section. Is this thread not in that section?

    Oh, and your post count means jack to me. People such as myself read this board without even registering for a long time, if at all. Many of us also read here and don't feel the need to post a whole lot. After all, I could find a ton of posts that don't have anything to contribute. So by your thinking, those posts shouldn't count in the post count in the way you want them to. I also see why others say that this board isn't worth going to any longer since you are showing yourself to be one of those elitist that they talk about as they leave. I guess you are judging me not worthy of posting here because my post count doesn't match yours. All that means is that you are willing to see your words online and that makes you feel important. It doesn't mean you are actually worth anything at all.

  12. #12
    Regular Member DevinWKuska's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Spanaway
    Posts
    300
    Me myself personally I would like to see a response from gunslinger. As I understand this forum is to promote a learned and law abiding group of individuals, as well as promoting OC to the general public. I feel if someone in this forum is part of the Nazi party that puts a rather dim light on pro-2A movement. Furthermore the Nazi movement as far as I can recall has been involved in lots of illegal/brutal/shocking crimes. Thus if the OP has discovered someone who is possibly counter-productive to this forums ideas and concepts... adjustments should be made.

    I dont care if your protestant, jewish, muslim, black, white, latino, asian, ect.... none of these affect the 2A movement or OCing. BUT, if your part of the Nazi movement your ideals lead to illegal and imoraly beliefs and actions. You should not be allowed to even be associated with the 2a, and your firearms should be taken from you.
    "So there I was between a rock and a hard place, when it hit me... What am I doing on this side of the rock?"

  13. #13
    Regular Member DevinWKuska's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2011
    Location
    Spanaway
    Posts
    300

    Thumbs down

    Quote Originally Posted by Thomas Masse View Post
    We as OCer's have had a hard time in the media lately regarding current run-ins with LEO's. I hardly think it is appropriate to be flinging around comparisons and metaphors that compare LEO's/the media to the Nazi party. I see this as some vain attempt at humor that is very inappropriate to say the least and should not enter this forum even in a humorous context.

    Most importantly, as we have seen in the media in recent events, context is a matter of perspective. Seen in the wrong light, even a joke can be damning.
    +1
    "So there I was between a rock and a hard place, when it hit me... What am I doing on this side of the rock?"

  14. #14
    Regular Member MikeTheGreek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    Northville, Michigan
    Posts
    591
    Quote Originally Posted by DevinWKuska View Post
    BUT, if your part of the Nazi movement your ideals lead to illegal and imoraly beliefs and actions. You should not be allowed to even be associated with the 2a, and your firearms should be taken from you.
    As far as I know..Nazis support open carrying! Plus we all know they support the right to bear arms..

    I'm just kidding, we shouldn't have Nazis here, I would also like to see a reply by Gunslinger.


    ........--Moderator Comments--

    1) Paraphrasing what I said on another thread: Constant/repeat reference to Nazi (in a manner and context frequently seen) is beyond the tolerance level of OCDO. It ends here.

    2) I find this thread most distasteful. We do NOT hang our personal disputes out in public. If you perceive a serious problem or an infraction of the rules, try to moderate it via a simple reminder/request. If that doesn't work after a reasonable attempt, report it.

    This thread violates rules and courtesy equally - repeat at your peril.
    Molon Labe

    [+=] Eleftheria i thanatos [+=]

Posting Permissions

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