#BoycottNRA

#4,001
#4,001
luthervol said:
We all know that the great concern of the gun non-control side is that the long term objective is to completely eliminate guns. Sleep easily - that's not the objective. And even if it was (WHICH IT"S NOT), you know it would never happen.

My basic premise is this....fewer guns is preferable to more guns.

I base everything on that premise.
Click to expand...

Orange_Crush said:
You were obviously trying to rationalize bad policy on the correlation, thus you were not agreeing with me per the correlation. This all after blatantly stating that you can't prove that fewer guns will mean fewer violent crimes, nor that I can prove that more guns is a deterant to violent crimes.

Thus, you use that phrase "rational and reasonable", when your discussion is anything but. You make a bald, unsupported claim that "fewer guns is preferable". It's useless, as all it means is "I prefer fewer guns".

You're one of the least rational persons in this discussion and you exercise very little reason in them.
Click to expand...

Premise - my basic premise is.....
I base everything off of that basic premise.

Feel free to disagree with the premise. (I have a sneaky suspicion that the vast majority of Americans agree with the premise.) But obviously not all.
 
#4,002
#4,002
luthervol said:
Premise - my basic premise is.....
I base everything off of that basic premise.

Feel free to disagree with the premise. (I have a sneaky suspicion that the vast majority of Americans agree with the premise.) But obviously not all.
Click to expand...

And... As pointed out, your premise is unproven and, even by your admission, unprovable. And, as stated, your premise equates to little more than the statement "I prefer fewer guns", which is neither rational nor reasonable. Rationality and reason dictates that you establish your premise, or everything that comes from that premise is useless.

To then try to defend the premise with a "suspicion", is also neither rational, nor reasonable.

And the suspicion that you use to defend your premise is a failed appeal to popularity, which is also neither rational, nor reasonable. It's a logical fallacy.

So... If you have even a shred of intellectual honesty, you'll stop claiming that you are here for/with "rational, reasonable" discussions.

You are here to wallow in your emotional fear-mongering.
 
#4,003
#4,003
Orange_Crush said:
And... As pointed out, your premise is unproven and, even by your admission, unprovable. And, as stated, your premise equates to little more than the statement "I prefer fewer guns", which is neither rational nor reasonable. Rationality and reason dictates that you establish your premise, or everything that comes from that premise is useless.

To then try to defend the premise with a "suspicion", is also neither rational, nor reasonable.

And the suspicion that you use to defend your premise is a failed appeal to popularity, which is also neither rational, nor reasonable. It's a logical fallacy.

So... If you have even a shred of intellectual honesty, you'll stop claiming that you are here for/with "rational, reasonable" discussions.

You are here to wallow in your emotional fear-mongering.
Click to expand...

Uh,..... that's why it's called a premise.

Kind of like, is it your basic premise that the number of immigrants coming to this country is harmful or helpful?

Nobody will adequately be able to prove either, but a person's basic premise will go a long way in determining and justifying their positions.

I shared mine knowing full well many would disagree. So be it. I also know that most do agree.
 
#4,004
#4,004
luthervol said:
Uh,..... that's why it's called a premise.

Kind of like, is it your basic premise that the number of immigrants coming to this country is harmful or helpful?

Nobody will adequately be able to prove either, but a person's basic premise will go a long way in determining and justifying their positions.

I shared mine knowing full well many would disagree. So be it. I also know that most do agree.
Click to expand...

The problem is that your premise can be objectively proven wrong.
 
#4,005
#4,005
luthervol said:
Uh,..... that's why it's called a premise.

Kind of like, is it your basic premise that the number of immigrants coming to this country is harmful or helpful?

Nobody will adequately be able to prove either, but a person's basic premise will go a long way in determining and justifying their positions.

I shared mine knowing full well many would disagree. So be it. I also know that most do agree.
Click to expand...

You may want to study logic. Your premise needs to be either self-evident or proven, else its conclusion is invalid.

You are the one that keeps claiming to be "rational and reasonable", when you are using neither rationality, nor reason. You are literally here just to repeatedly profess your personal preferences and make unsubstantiated appeals to popularity.

You are emotional and a-rational.
 
#4,007
#4,007
Orange_Crush said:
You may want to study logic. Your premise needs to be either self-evident or proven, else its conclusion is invalid.

You are the one that keeps claiming to be "rational and reasonable", when you are using neither rationality, nor reason. You are literally here just to repeatedly profess your personal preferences and make unsubstantiated appeals to popularity.

You are emotional and a-rational.
Click to expand...

It is self-evident and the conclusions are valid unless the premise is proven false.
 
#4,008
#4,008
luthervol said:
It can not be objectively proven wrong.
Click to expand...

...fewer guns are preferable to more guns.

If a woman is being attacked by an unarmed rapist, her possession of a gun would be preferable. Therefore more guns would be preferable.

Same scenario with both armed, fewer guns might be preferable, depending on who possesses the gun.
 
#4,010
#4,010
midnight orange said:
...fewer guns are preferable to more guns.

If a woman is being attacked by an unarmed rapist, her possession of a gun would be preferable. Therefore more guns would be preferable.

Same scenario with both armed, fewer guns might be preferable, depending on who possesses the gun.
Click to expand...

Luth as usual didn’t give us the whole statement. It’s self-evident in his fascist thinking disarmament oriented mind. Which, when you take the viewpoint, makes perfect sense.
 
#4,011
#4,011
midnight orange said:
...fewer guns are preferable to more guns.

If a woman is being attacked by an unarmed rapist, her possession of a gun would be preferable. Therefore more guns would be preferable.

Same scenario with both armed, fewer guns might be preferable, depending on who possesses the gun.
Click to expand...

That makes as much sense as this..............

Two siblings ages 3 and 5 are playing in their parents bedroom. One finds a gun and accidentally shoots the other. Fewer guns would have been preferable.

Both of our scenarios stink.
 
#4,012
#4,012
luthervol said:
It is self-evident and the conclusions are valid unless the premise is proven false.
Click to expand...

See? That's where you jump the shark and shed every last vestige of the facade that you are trying to be rational and reasonable. At least, I HOPE that wasn't an effort at rationality or reason.
 
#4,013
#4,013
luthervol said:
That makes as much sense as this..............

Two siblings ages 3 and 5 are playing in their parents bedroom. One finds a gun and accidentally shoots the other. Fewer guns would have been preferable.

Both of our scenarios stink.
Click to expand...

Irresponsible parents having fewer kids would be more effective.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#4,015
#4,015
luthervol said:
That makes as much sense as this..............

Two siblings ages 3 and 5 are playing in their parents bedroom. One finds a gun and accidentally shoots the other. Fewer guns would have been preferable.

Both of our scenarios stink.
Click to expand...
If the 3 year old was packing too, then the 5 year old may not have shot his sibling. Of course the 5 year old may have been a bully, and deserved being shot by little brother. I need more info.
 
#4,017
#4,017
luthervol said:
That makes as much sense as this..............

Two siblings ages 3 and 5 are playing in their parents bedroom. One finds a gun and accidentally shoots the other. Fewer guns would have been preferable.
Click to expand...

I agree. In that situation fewer guns would be preferable.

luthervol said:
Both of our scenarios stink.
Click to expand...

No, the premise stinks. These are not unrealistic scenarios.

Woman in a Wheelchair Shoots an Attacker - The New York Times

Woman Shoots Rapist Who Came Back to Rape Her for a Second Time | LearnAboutGuns.com
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#4,018
#4,018
midnight orange said:
I agree. In that situation fewer guns would be preferable.



No, the premise stinks. These are not unrealistic scenarios.

Woman in a Wheelchair Shoots an Attacker - The New York Times

Woman Shoots Rapist Who Came Back to Rape Her for a Second Time | LearnAboutGuns.com
Click to expand...

Nope, not remotely unrealistic.

Woman with gun who chased burglary suspect from home confronts h - FOX Carolina 21

Woman shoots alleged would-be robber - Breaking News & Weather - Birmingham and Central AL - WBRC FOX6 News - Birmingham, AL

Update: Police identify armed robber shot by Tulsa liquor store clerk | Crimewatch | tulsaworld.com

http://www.timesfreepress.com/news/...n-point-cherokee-county-ala-homeowner/463454/

http://www.dothanfirst.com/news/blakely-woman-shoots-and-kills-home-intruder/958506836

http://gunwatch.blogspot.com/search...+10:00&max-results=20&start=280&by-date=false

All women, all recent and most assuredly not the only examples that are out there.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#4,022
#4,022
luthervol said:
That makes as much sense as this..............

Two siblings ages 3 and 5 are playing in their parents bedroom. One finds a gun and accidentally shoots the other. Fewer guns would have been preferable.

Both of our scenarios stink.
Click to expand...

It's all for the children, isn't it?


Too bad "Roe vs Wade was the best thing since sliced bread" (paraphrased luther statement).
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#4,023
#4,023
utvols88 said:
ok. I'll try there. Best chicken wings so far is Hooters by mall of ga and that's not a good sign lol.
Click to expand...

Taco Mac is also by the mall of ga and decent. Athena's is a hole in the wall on the outskirts of Buford. Also Shazzy's Bar and Grill.
 
#4,024
#4,024
utvols88 said:
ok. I'll try there. Best chicken wings so far is Hooters by mall of ga and that's not a good sign lol.
Click to expand...

Hooters used to be my favorite wings. Think 15 years ago. After the most recent batch I’m done with them. They suck.

I’m an old man. I actually go to Hooters for the wings and beer. Or did.
 
#4,025
#4,025
utvols88 said:
ok. I'll try there. Best chicken wings so far is Hooters by mall of ga and that's not a good sign lol.
Click to expand...
There is no reason ever to go to Hooters. Well, maybe if it is raining and you don't have an umbrella. Other than that... :no:
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top