California gun purchases nearing record

[bongbong]

125. Reading comprehension

> Point out where anyone in this thread said "more guns = more safety"

Start with post #9.

> is "more guns does NOT equal more crime", which is not the same thing as "more guns = more safety."

"More guns = more safety" is my shorthand for any of the dozens of illogical & impaired "arguments" (AKA NRA Talking Points) (AKA NRA Big Lies) on that theme that gun-relgionists like to post over & over to try to gain acceptance for their Precious. Sometimes gun-relgionists just like to take the subtle route, implying without stating directly that "more guns = more safety".

If you use Venn Diagrams or another elementary logic tool you can see that the two statements that you claim are different are actually the same. Get a refund.

> As for my supposed contradiction, where is it?

Your statement 1: "All you have is to say that maybe it would be even lower if there weren't so many guns on the streets, which is possible but completely unprovable."

Your statement 2: "All we can say with the evidence at hand is that adding millions more guns to the US didn't cause gun crimes to increase."

I can prove contradiction if #2 is inconsistent with #1. Could #1 be true if #2 was true? Could you both add millions of guns to the street and actually CAUSE, instead of NOT CAUSE (your secondary premise in #2) crimes to go down? That is all it would take to prove a contradiction - does #1 support the conclusion that adding millions of guns to the street CAUSES (or COULD CAUSE) crime to go up?

Well, by golly, yes it does. QED. You contradicted yourself.


Maybe you should pay ME for the logic class I just gave you.

(And before you or any other gun-relgionist asks, my teaching rates are very high, and I don't take barter, like "I can give you a buncha guns that will mow down dozens of thugs (wink wink) in a second if you just share some of that book larnin' with me!&quot