The Official JREF Lone Nut Challenge

Ladewig said:
which aren't very deadly, are they Galileo?



which is a weapon that requires the type of skill that a serf or commoner would not have.



again, as Aoidoi pointed out, we are talking about a weapon that requires skill and cannot be concealed





I suppose if there were organized cabals that killed several rulers by throwing the odd rock, then we would be puzzled by the lack of lone nuts that successfully completed their assassinations with hand-thrown rocks - but there weren't, so we aren't.




No one is denying that mentally ill people may have wanted to kill the ruler. We are denying that they had the means or the opportunity.


But more importantly, what is the point you are trying to make? Even if you are 100% correct and there were opportunities for lone nuts to commit assassinations and there were no recorded occurrences of such - so what?
Click to expand...

"Lone nuts" are sometimes well trained people; for example the "lone nut" who killed Huey Long was a doctor. Ancient or medieval armies could have produce many lone nuts.

If the weapons weren't as good, then we should have more failed assassination attempts by lone nuts.

And guns became common by 1500, so where are the lone nuts from 1500 to 1750?

You are just making excuses.
 
Last edited:
Loss Leader said:
I can't write better criteria because I have absolutely no idea what it is you're trying to prove.
Click to expand...

I am proving that lone nuts don't exist. The people called lone nuts in modern times are, in fact, patsies. In reality, political murders in modern times are just like they have always been for 5000 years; conspiracies and/or inside jobs.

I can't because your criteria are too poor.[/QUOTE]

Make up you own criteria, then.

You have already made my point. There are no known documented "lone nuts" prior to 1750. There are none prior to 1812, in fact. There is a possible bordeline case from 1757 and that's it. But in that case, no sane person believed it was a lone act.

Too bad, the JREF brain trust can't find me one measly lone nut.

:boxedin:
 
Galileo said:
I am proving that lone nuts don't exist. The people called lone nuts in modern times are, in fact, patsies. In reality, political murders in modern times are just like they have always been for 5000 years; conspiracies and/or inside jobs.

I can't because your criteria are too poor.
Click to expand...


Let me get your logic straight. Not being able to find a "lone nut" assassin before 1750 PROVES that any after are patsies? How does that follow?
 
Galileo said:
You're just upset that you can't locate any lone nuts.
Click to expand...
I (and others) showed your "challenge" to be completely it, and demonstrating the logical phallacies presented in it. Do you have any counter-arguments to this, or are you just upset your dishonest attempt was once again shot down?
 
riptowtan said:
Let me get your logic straight. Not being able to find a "lone nut" assassin before 1750 PROVES that any after are patsies? How does that follow?
Click to expand...

Not by itself it doesn't. But I'm in favor of considering all the evidence. You are playing the straw man game. You are just having an emotional response because you can't find any lone nuts prior to 1812.
 
Hawk one said:
I (and others) showed your "challenge" to be completely it, and demonstrating the logical phallacies presented in it. Do you have any counter-arguments to this, or are you just upset your dishonest attempt was once again shot down?
Click to expand...

I know how you are feeling right now, I empathize with you.
 
Galileo said:
Not by itself it doesn't. But I'm in favor of considering all the evidence. You are playing the straw man game. You are just having an emotional response because you can't find any lone nuts prior to 1812.
Click to expand...

We have already found several, you liar. Please stop lying and start considering the arguments -why- one-man assassinations of prominent figures were so rare before 1750.

I'll give you two hints that you've already overlooked: Reliable handguns, and accurate hunter/sniper rifles.
 
Galileo said:
Opposition leaders to kings were among crowds frequently.

And ancient Kings ruled smaller populations were meeting the people had more pull. Unpopular kings had every reason to be like JFK and go among the People. Security wasn't as good, and bodyguards didn't have guns to protect the Kings.

They also had slingshots, javelins, bows N arrows, and rocks in those days of yore when lone nuts must have abounded.

They didn't have mental health professionals either, in the Roman Empire.

You just speculate without facts.

:eye-poppi
Click to expand...
Meh, you're not worth the effort.
 
Galileo said:
Who's that?
Click to expand...

Player in italian politics. Referenced in the divine comedy which is why any fairly well read italian such as Galileo Galilei would know the name.
 
No,I just don't think this lone nut challenge is relevant to whether or not Oswald or any other lone gunman were patsies or not. You would have to investigate their backgrounds and motives. I find that Oswald's background and motive are consistent with all of the evidence.
 
Last edited:
Hawk one said:
We have already found several, you liar. Please stop lying and start considering the arguments -why- one-man assassinations of prominent figures were so rare before 1750.

I'll give you two hints that you've already overlooked: Reliable handguns, and accurate hunter/sniper rifles.
Click to expand...

You have only found nuts, not lone nuts. Reliable handguns just makes it easier for security to protect people.

:confused:
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom