so my arguments are worthless but calling someone a moron is valuable to the argument.
Is a person who thinks calling someone a moron is a good insult let alone a valuable argument to add to the discussion the best one to be judging who is and isn't smart.
Notice how you avoided answering my question. Why were you attacking what I said. Do you believe we shouldn't get to the bottom of the gun problem?
so my arguments are worthless but calling someone a moron is valuable to the argument.
Is a person who thinks calling someone a moron is a good insult let alone a valuable argument to add to the discussion the best one to be judging who is and isn't smart.
Notice how you avoided answering my question. Why were you attacking what I said. Do you believe we shouldn't get to the bottom of the gun problem?
sorry buddy but im alot smarter than you, as are most people on here. stop deluding yourself.
Some of the states with the highest gun ownership have the lowest gun deaths. Rather than just saying get rid of guns why not find out what those states with high gun ownership and low gun deaths are doing.
So that must mean ..
This was the point I made today. You have made it pretty clear you don't agree with what I said. So that must mean you think we shouldn't find out what the states with low gun deaths are doing. Why is that. Why shouldn't we find out what the states with low gun death are doing?
its because i believe it is pointless as it is unlikely you could understand the reasons behind the gun problems, so why would i want to discuss it with you? your quite clearly one of those people who reads something on fb then that becomes your opinion
I'm not sure that's correct Bazza, the stats are indisputable and show that countries with high gun ownership and relaxed gun laws tend to have the highest gun related deaths than other countries, there is no arguing this..........
My point was that some of the highest gun ownership states have very low gun deaths and it would be good to know the reason for this rather than rush in and say we need to ban all guns. ........
The way I read it, he was saying they need to look at all those things to see what the difference is, not just focus on the firearms themselves.
So it turns out the two of you agreed.
I imagine the fact that a multi faceted social strategy is required to deal with a problem such as America's gun culture is a given for most people of modest intelligence, not a revelation. I'd wager it's also fairly obvious that the biggest benefit can be had in the shortest amount of time (which realistically will still be a fairly long period) by controlling access to firearms.
1) Check the definition of logical fallacy.
2) Structure and word your arguments better.
Another day wasted and the debate hasn't advanced at all. It's tiring.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?