| ZenfoldorVGI said: I'm not trying to argue with you. I see your point, I just simply disagree with it. However, if I were, I don't think your replies could detract much from my point, and I certainly dont' think you could consider what I wrote "poor debating" on the contrary, I think by your response, you know its the most poingient post on this topic so far.
When you said I got off topic with the car example, didn't you contradict yourself by bringing up Guantanamo Bay, and then again, prove you have little insight on this conversation when you say that you don't understand our country.
Personally, I don't think you understand my country "anytime," if you don't see any truth in my post, whatsoever. |
It is poor debating to compare subjects entirely unrelated and to appeal to emotion. The first is purely bad reasoning, its the equivalent of me saying that because the government has taken away the right to own slaves they are going to take away our right to use telephones. The second looks impressive but really has no factual influence on the debate, it really doesn't matter how you feel emotionally about this, what matters is statistical and legal facts.
I stand by the fact that both are poor debating.
Guantanamo bay is an entirely apt example as the topic at that point was the erosion of rights and that is the single most poignant example of the erosion of rights in America.
Also I don't understand your country as in I don't understand why a country would get sp very angry about firearms reform, I don't see why you consider it an important right to carry deadly weapons and I don't see how banning firearms leads you to say;
"Do we lay down for our government?
I dunno, ask the protesters outside the White House. Ask the soldgers in Iraq. Ask the gang members in Harlem, ask the clan in Mississippi(My home state, btw), ask the self govermentalist in texas, ask the sec-progs in california who have marijuana in vending machines, ask the fishermen of washington, ask the common man of Iowa. Go tell them the supreme court ruling, tell them its time to lay down and obey."
Oh and I saw some truth in this point of your post
'The street gangs who shoot innocent bystanders in drivebys? Do you think they're shooting registered weapons? Do you think the gun ban will actually stop that violence? Maybe you think them having guns will give the police an excuse to lock them up? Don't you know they already lock them up if they have a gun on them? You think America won't have an underground gun trade?'
Which is the only point where you actually argued about the effects of banning guns, the rest of it was to be honest bullshit. I seriously don't think it was close to the most poignant post on this topic, there have been far better arguments both for and against it before hand. My reply is in the style of all my replies to debates like this.
