• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

CNN silliness on the Hearing Protection Act

Rucker61 said:
Go for it. You'll find that some do, some don't. Depends upon the mission, the circumstances and the soldier.



Hard to say for sure, as one of the points that he made was that CNN edited their story to correct their mistake. I have't seen a link to the original version, so there we are.
Click to expand...

Uh, go for what?

Secondly, nobody made any point in this thread about CNN correcting any mistake. So, I'm going with, you're making it up and Breitbart is fake news as my proof showed.
 
jet57 said:
Uh, go for what?
Click to expand...
"As for Google, why should I go out and validate your assertions?"

It was right above my "go for it" suggestion. Curious how you didn't see it.

Secondly, nobody made any point in this thread about CNN correcting any mistake. So, I'm going with, you're making it up and Breitbart is fake news as my proof showed.
Click to expand...

My mistake - it wasn't TD, it was Breitbart itself, in the linked story:

"CNN referenced the tax correctly later in the segment, but the mention of a “$200,000 tax” was how they launched it."
 
jet57 said:
That's right: combat is rough business.
Click to expand...

So tell everyone again why someone should not be concerned about protecting their hearing while hunting???
 
jet57 said:
Rucker just kinda voided your post:

As for Google, why should I go out and validate your assertions?

Moreover, what about the thread topic? I showed how TD's assertion was just stupid.
Click to expand...
I could not expect any less from you....
It's obvious you make no attempt to validate your assertions before your fingers hit the keyboard...And you said you are not too proud to learn. Go figure.
As for TDs assertion, I really did not find much to fault to the article except what I mentioned and about the pinhead at the end.
 
Last edited:
Electronic headphones are the way. Allows you to talk and communicate but filters out the bang.

The silencer law is silly. Its like everything else. If a bad guy wants to silence a weapon for nefarious purposes there are so many ways to make that happen using common items you can get at Walmart.
 
BretJ said:
So tell everyone again why someone should not be concerned about protecting their hearing while hunting???
Click to expand...

Jet cannot own suppressors in California. Start with that fact and you can figure out his position
 
jet57 said:
Yea, I was raised around guns.

Do they use hearing protection in combat? Same thing....
Click to expand...

Yes we wear hearing protection in combat. You may wish to stop talking about things you have zero knowledge about.
 
jet57 said:
I dunno, they might wanna hear their orders and who's comin up on 'em, just basic survival stuff like that. In a fire fight, your hearing's the first thing to go anyway.
Click to expand...

You should probably just stop before you make yourself look any sillier.
 
TurtleDude said:
FAKE NEWS: CNN Claims GOP Trying to Remove '$200,000 Tax' on Firearm Suppressors - Breitbart


Too much Hollywood, not enough intelligence from the Clinton News Network
Click to expand...
If you're going to quote CNN, and bash CNN, perhaps you should see the actual CNN coverage of the issue. Breitbart lied again! CNN said nothing about a $200,000 tax. I just watched the coverage, and they said $200. Their coverage adequately represents both sides of the issue. If anything, they let a gun range operator espouse his views more than anybody. Breitbart is trash. Here's the link.

GOP introduces new gun suppressor law - CNN Video
 
So Jet. What exactly do you think the things covering that soldiers ears are.
67c613b7756c3e4556008d683276848d.jpg
 
jet57 said:
Yea, I was raised around guns.

Do they use hearing protection in combat? Same thing....
Click to expand...

Wait. I have hunted and have been in combat. They weren't the same thing. They weren't even close to the same thing. When we trained we wore hearing protection. I was the range officer for 7 years. We NEVER let anyone shoot without hearing protection.


Hunting

Photo_Pg14_youth.hunting.jpg


Combat

la-sci-sn-combat-wounds-microbiome-20140618.jpg
 
NonoBadDog said:
Wait. I have hunted and have been in combat. They weren't the same thing. They weren't even close to the same thing. When we trained we wore hearing protection. I was the range officer for 7 years. We NEVER let anyone shoot without hearing protection.


Hunting

View attachment 67212640


Combat

View attachment 67212641
Click to expand...

I don't know what that's supposed to prove: the OP has been destroyed.
 
jet57 said:
I don't know what that's supposed to prove: the OP has been destroyed.
Click to expand...

Now you are just posting stupid crap for the sake of posting stupid crap.
 
NonoBadDog said:
Now you are just posting stupid crap for the sake of posting stupid crap.
Click to expand...

Not at all dude: what were you trying to prove?

What you're trying to do is show how the CNN report was wrong about silencers and gun safety. The CNN story never said anything of the kind. Someone interviewed from an interest group said it, but not CNN.

So you prove nothing. In fact, you're proven wrong in post 7.
 
jet57 said:
Not at all dude: what were you trying to prove?

What you're trying to do is show how the CNN report was wrong about silencers and gun safety. The CNN story never said anything of the kind. Someone interviewed from an interest group said it, but not CNN.

So you prove nothing. In fact, you're proven wrong in post 7.
Click to expand...

I wasn't trying to prove anything. You proved what we wanted you to prove. You don't know **** about combat or hunting or suppressors so you pretty much don't know **** about anything that relates to this thread.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom