No, that is an opinion based on what she wrote. If I said she was misguided because she believed aliens had abducted her, THAT would be a lie as she never stated any such thing (That I know of. Sorry if you've been abducted, Katie!!) and I made it up. This is a debate forum. People express their opinions, but base it on what others write, not stuff they make up about what the other person said.

Wrong again. I was basing my statements on what you wrote. Trying to wiggle out of your blatant lie based on nothing I've ever written by trying to claim everyone else is the same just shows more of your character.

WTF. There you go stating the same BS lie, only this time it is worse as I have CLEARLY spelled out exactly what I believe and now you have repeated the same lie. Let's try this one more time. I was not making a generalized statement about the population. I was takling specifically to ONE person about HER beliefs about violence. I was not talking about her choice not to carry. That is her choice and more power to her. I also clarified that I do not want to force everyone to carry. I also clarified that I do not think bad of those who do not wish to carry.

Do you get it now? Or are you just flame baiting by repeating a blatant lie? Either way it doesn't look good for you. You should quit while you're behind.

I would like to see your hard evidence of what percentage of the guns in Chicago are stolen from lawfully owned guns. I knew a TON of people in Chicago who owned illegal guns, and all of them were purchased outside the city limits or from a person who bought a bunch outside of Chicago and is selling them for profit illegally. I knew even MORE people who owned a legal gun outside the city limits of Chicago (Oak Park, River Forest, Berwyn, Cicero to name a few), yet not one of them ever had a gun stolen that I know of.

As for what will help the "hoods", education on the value of life would be a good one. Murder doesn't mean squat if you neither value your life nor the lives of others. It is one of the main reasons for gangs. In a gang, you belong. You're important. You matter. It use to be you got this from your family, but we've destroyed the family unit to the point that people either don't "get" that they matter and so does everyone else or they join a gang where they get what they miss from family. That, to me, would help far more than giving criminals a leg up on victimizing others.

As for your "if it saves one life", that is a very dangerous attitude because ANYONE can justify ANYTHING by the "if it saves one life" mantra. But there is something called the law of unintended consequences which should give us ALL pause to carefully examine what we are asking for to make sure there are no unintended consequences.

You claim getting guns out of the hands of legal gun owners will save lives because thieves won't be able to steal guns and use them in crimes. Does it stop a criminal from getting a gun? Will they still be able to travel outside city limits and purchase a gun legally and then illegally bring it back inside city limits? Yes. Will gun runners be able to buy large quantities of guns in other states and bring them into the city to sell for profit? Yes.

So what have you fixed? You've certainly made life easier for the criminal. Getting a gun was never a major concern, nor will that change. All you've done is assured him that there is less of a chance of running into a victim that can fight back. As for the victims, all you've done for them is removed a means by which they have a chance against an armed criminal.

As for your point of view, I never called it invalid because it is not. Everyone is entitled to their opinion, including my opinion of your opinion.

No, I think you are doing a good job of seeing yourself able to say whatever you want and not be called on it. If I misrpresented you, I apologize. The problem with two way communication is that it very possible not to initially understand your point and I appreciate you explaining it more.

But,iIf YOUR standard is that you call being a liar deliberately misrepresenting what somebody says, where have I written about EVERY location I've been in Chicago? When you made the statement "Nope. I worked as a driver. I had no choice but to go to the places you pretend don't exist. " This is not a statement of fact, this is your opinion of me based upon my CTA comment. As if where the CTA goes is safe but there are secret parts of Chicago where the CTA doesn't go? What neighborhood are you talking about buddy? Here's your chance to really prove me wrong. Where in Chicago does the CTA not run but you did with your truck. Look, if you use the CTA, you know you also wear out a lot of shoes. Plus I've drove and peddled around various areas of the city.

Come on, here's your chance to prove how by using YOUR standard of claiming to misrepresent what somebody says as a lie--aren't you doing the same thing here? Maybe not, because this magical neighborhood that I supposively pretend doesn't exist would provide your answer. So tell me this location in Chicago?

OK, here you go:

First off, from your comment it is clear you live in the suburbs, otherwise you wouldn't have just said worked there. Then you said you didn't go to the worst parts while throwing in the ad hominem "just to test myself out". You live for the personal insult, don't you. Anyway, my claim is valid. You didn't go to the bad parts so you don't understand why anyone would need a gun. I did and on a regular basis. Turns out I DID need a gun. Didn't need to shoot it. Just needed to have it and be willing to use it. Which again validates my point; just because YOU don't think anyone needs one doesn't mean some people in some places DO.

At least I didn't have to make up a blatant lie like you did to try and make a point. I based my opinions off of what you said, not out of what I wanted you to say.

Now listen to you. I made that statement to basically say I didn't do an actual test to know whether I was in more danger at various times in various neighborhoods, but you are twisting it into just repeating part of the sentence. That's pretty dishonest. Not only that, you are only interested in proving your part of the statement, not understanding the content of what I wrote and what that means with my actual experience. Then you basically back off and give yourself a different standard.

Tell me again about this standard YOU have where any misrepresenting of words is considered a lie? My old job in the city required me to make some trips to pick things up all over. I myself have traveled to various events, festivals, music, bike rides, marathons all over all parts of the city. You name it, I've been to a lot of areas. On the other hand, Chicago is a big place and there are places I can say I haven't been. Its silly to claim I've been to every street, neighborhood, etc. Its really big. If there was nothing going on I probably wouldn't go. Why would I? Just to test my toughness?

I gave you a great opportunity to prove your point--just give us the neighborhood in Chicago you were in or you can use the grid points. You may pick a place I haven't been (or the CTA of course). On the other hand, I can probably tell you if I had been in the vicinity and tell you why. I knew people who I worked with in the city who were scared to death of it. They take the train, then a bus to their job and then back home. Not me. Too much to do in the city. I loved it and I miss it. And I did it gun free.

I think I've made my point here. I never claimed to know every place you've been. That is a strawman argument you're putting up since apparently you can't debate the facts. And since it is awfully hard to debate someone who insists on outright lying in order to make their points, I will leave you to lie about others. Have a good one!

HA! You are being dishonest. You were counting on me not knowing the city. Maybe only going downtown. Nope, that wasn't me. The devil is always in the details. You throw up a bunch of generalities, post about how guns personally saved your (or your loved ones) life, negatively label the people who disagree with you and then make sure you go on the aggressive. That will prove to people that more guns will cut down on violence and Mayor Daley is wrong, right?

You're right in that you're making a point. Probably not the point you wished to make though.

So let me guess, your "little friend" saved your life when violence almost broke out in.........................

Barrington Hills?

Nice try. OK, you want exact location? One was at Chicago and Cicero avenues back in 1987. To prove the location, there was a burger king at the northwest corner, a JC Licht paint store on the southwest side of Chicago ave, a couple doors down from there a company called J.W. Donchins that I know is still there, and just up Cicero ave. was the Brach's candy factory.

The other one was around 55th and Kedzie. I was admittedly lost and in an area I should not have been in.

I also saw a lot of gang violence around the Ashland and Augusta area. The primary gang there was the "Gents". Not sure if they are there anymore, but I saw plenty of violence there, including someone getting shot and several dead bodies.

As for your snide remark about Barrington Hills, a plush little western suburb, thanks for showing what a wonderful debater you are!

Pat, actually I figured you'd probably laugh over Barrington Hills because you would get that and most people here would not, kind of a private joke. If there are evil gangs there, they are pretty well dressed.

I'm thinking Chicago and Cicero is the Austin neighborhood-Oak Park area? I ran a couple of road races over there. The goal was a course to unite some of the blighted areas of Austin with Oak Park's great looking architecture. Met Alderman Danny Davis there. Pretty friendly guy. Pretty funny. He wore a jogging outfit and smoked a cigarette. All at about 7am in the morning which I'll bet was early for him, especially on the weekend. As you probably know, he became Congressman Davis. (CTA does go there)

Ok, I had to look up the other location. You're talking about the area around the University of Chicago and the Museum of Science and Industry-Hyde Park neighborhood? Definitely have been there pretty frequently. Ran a couple of road races over there too. We've all visited the museum mucho times. I know you have. (I'm not going to even mention the CTA-you know why!)

NOTE: THESE EXPERIENCES WERE ALL GUN FREE!

Those are not real exotic locations although the blight that existed in the Austin neighborhood is easy to remember (people always think south side was supposed to be bad, but west side was bad in those days. When I think of bad looking areas I've seen, I do remember that.)

Well, I'll give you credit, you did step up there and admit the truth. What the heck were you delivering anyway? Hopefully newspapers or plumbing supplies or something like that and not anything of great value. If you got to drive all over, you probably saw all kinds of neighborhoods. Chicago seems crazy, the neighborhoods seem to just change out of nowhere.

For some reason you seem to be telling me what my motives are here and claim I am a liar and am making an emotional appeal while you yourself are actually using that in your own posts. Isn't calling people "liars" or "having misguided and utopian views" rather emotional name calling? I mean I understand the concept of trying to tell me what I'm thinking or doing, guessing that I was just a suburbanite who doesn't venture into the city in order to help you "win" an argument. I apologized if I misrepresented you, but you appear to have these super powers to tell others why they think the way they do. Could you tell me how you acquired those powers and why sometimes they can be faulty? (maybe the effect of kryptonite or something)

and speaking of Chicago.............

http://www.suntimes.com