In this task, you are given a public comment from online platforms. You are expected to classify the comment into two classes: threat and non-threat. Threat is a statement that someone will be hurt or harmed, especially if the person does not do something in particular.

[EX Q]: Comment: .......or the very distinct possibility that with [MORE] guns, fewer people will [think about killing other people]?   just throwing out an alternative thought....trying to keep the pendulum arc from getting too big in one direction....on "balance".....
[EX A]: Threat

[EX Q]: Comment: Nope
[EX A]: Non-threat

[EX Q]: Comment: I think your multi-faceted rhetorical repitoire would be quite impressive to most.  But, to me, your comment above is akin to the cheapest of cheap tricks--similar to your "profession", aka spin doctoring:)--in it's completely transparent use of the first refuge of scoundrels: cherry-picking parts of quotes out of context, and then spinning them to make patently obvious and false "straw man" arguments that, as usual in your case, sound superficially clever--at least to yourself (because, after all, you never fail to "like" your own comments:)  

I also acknowledge how difficult it must have been for you to admit I might have superior knowledge about anything, in contrast to your half-baked and purportedly omniscient stereotypying of nearly everything.  I hope that superficial act of humility was not too painful for your otherwise impervious sense of self-certitude:)  So I'll finish in kind, by paraphrasing Shakespeare: First, we kill all the lawyers.  Next we kill all the PR flacks!:)
[EX A]:
Threat