By using this site, you agree to our Privacy Policy and our Terms of Use. Close
Zkuq on 07 January 2018
Edit Thread
o_O.Q said:
Zkuq said:

1. It was not. You drew your own conclusions. I said exactly what I meant and nothing else.

2. You did not. You said this:

if someone said... "-_- can you really believe bro that they are selling locks for property instead of dealing with the thief problem?" that would be dumb right?

You compared potential solutions in a logically unsound way.

3. I'm not suggesting anything. I'm just pointing out a logical fallacy, nothing else.

4. It's funny how homicide rates are much lower in other western countries with tighter gun laws. I guess you have an explanation for that then?

5. I know, like I said. I was explicitly talking about short-term implications. Long-term implications of more restrictive gun laws are interesting though.

". It was not. You drew your own conclusions. I said exactly what I meant and nothing else."

"Banning guns for the most part (and getting rid of them, which is the really hard part) "

1. this is what you posted, i considered it ambiguous because i couldn't really believe you were suggesting that it is possible to get rid of all of the guns that civilians possess... if that's the case then ok

 

"You did not. You said this:

if someone said... "-_- can you really believe bro that they are selling locks for property instead of dealing with the thief problem?" that would be dumb right?

"

yes... because thieves are a constant problem for society as guns are... so..."i'm saying that both result in an unsafe environment that necessitates preparations, how is that logically unsound?"

1.  i can't really lay this out any better

 

"You compared potential solutions in a logically unsound way."

2. what solutions am i comparing? honestly at this point you're confusing me

 

" I'm just pointing out a logical fallacy, nothing else."

2. which logical fallacy?


" It's funny how homicide rates are much lower in other western countries with tighter gun laws. I guess you have an explanation for that then?"

correlation=causation?

1. I think an "OK" is good enough here.

2. If you haven't got my message thus far despite me trying to make it really simple, I don't think it's trying to explain it one more time is going to work either. I think we're done with this.

3. Of course not, but the difference in gun laws seems like the most plausible explanation. At least I haven't come up with a better explanation yet. Either way, you have a pretty big homicide problem compared to the other western countries, and there's got to be a reason for it. Maybe you have a better explanation?