Quote:
Originally Posted by Humerox
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
We were arguing about how to interpret the Second Amendment. Now it's nice that you put the Constitution up there for us...but you left out the Second Amendment.
|
No, we were discussing your clear lack of understanding of constitutional law regardless of school of thought. You ignorantly thought that since people interpret the constitution differently that somehow your flagrant and rampant assertions are valid. Either that or you confused me with Stealin.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Humerox
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
When we started all this you seemed pretty intelligent, but you've devolved into something that spits out ad hominem like Skittles.
|
I have intelligent discussions as long as my peer is able to possess one. When I find my peer so fervent on the subject they are unable to listen or if I find that my positions are being discarded for no justifiable reasons other than my peer being unable to answer it or if the situation is one in which intellectual progress can not be made, then I no longer continue in such a manner. Originally when we started this debate, you seemed intelligent enough and so I engaged you as an intelligent individual. You have not shown the same rhetoric in this thread and generally made child like taunts, just didn't listen, or used ad hominem and straw man tactics. I find my ad hominem well suited to your "arguments" in this thread as you behaved illogically and childishly.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Humerox
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
And I have yet to see you post any real scientific argument that supports your opinions. You regurgitate other links people have (like using the NRA analyst to support gun statistics) posted without even taking the time to read them. How the fuck do I know that study from Vallerti came from an NRA analyst? Because I actually read the fucking thing. You might want to start doing that yourself. You may learn something.
|
You are right! There is no
real scientific evidence for my argument. There is also no
real scientific evidence for yours. Yet, I claimed, many times in fact, that such a thing was impossible(with today's technology. I felt like I needed to add that in). All either side has in sociological studies is correlation via statistical evidence.
Vellatri posted an NRA
unofficial analyst's article and then verified them through the proper crime statistics. Just because the man's position might be pro-NRA does not mean that his study is biased. His statistics used more accurate metrics on the impact of assault rifle bans than the Australian article you posted. His statistics were taken from a much larger global pool making his case stronger while according to your "scientific data" I could shoot 500+ people and as long as only 4 died, it would not constitute a mass shooting.
Do you honestly not see how flawed that metric is? To reiterate my point, I do no think the Australian article you posted was complete bollocks. It did make some good points, but its major point was backed by a very skewed (and probably manipulated) statistic that you have just refused to acknowledge as such since that is the only piece of "evidence" you have brought to table which honestly makes me think it is the ONLY piece of evidence you have.
Did you know I used to be for the ban of assault rifles? I really was. I looked into statistics and tried to find what evidence I could to make my case stronger since I enjoy getting into perspicacious debates with people. As I read further into things(yes I read the article Vellatri linked), I found there was not only more evidence against my original position but stronger evidence as well. I then reconsidered my position and adjusted it accordingly. Are you able to do the same? If not, then there is no reason to have an intelligent debate as it can not be made.
I am all for going back to having an intelligent discussion, but you will have to behave accordingly or I am not going to waste my time. Make your points well worded, clear and backed with evidence and reason and I will respond in kind. Act like child and I will treat you like a child.