Community >> View Post
Post By

Member Since: Sat May 17, 2008
In Reply To

Member Since: Tue Apr 04, 2017
Posts: 1,511
Subj: Re: You're Arguing On An Emotional Level.
Posted: Sat Mar 03, 2018 at 12:00:50 am EST (Viewed 616 times)
Reply Subj: Re: You're Arguing On An Emotional Level.
Posted: Fri Mar 02, 2018 at 04:29:38 pm EST (Viewed 677 times)


      All you're saying here is that because there are other ways to kill people
    I was referring to mass killings and how people who want to commit mass murder have found ways aside from guns.

That's irrelevant to the gun debate. I stated that other countries have been able to minimize gun violence and your retort was to say there are other ways to kill people so we should ignore guns being a way to kill people despite guns being by far the best way to kill people in the United States.


      we shouldn't mind so much that guns are killing 33,000-39,000 people a year in the U.S.
    Now you're arguing on an emotional level, And just lumping ALL gun deaths in together, even self-defense and suicides and are any of these deaths due to police using their weapons? Of course people care, but you're dismissing the whole 'Guns are used for lawful purposes." side of things.

Citing the true number of deaths each year by guns in the U.S. is not arguing on an emotional level. It's just citing a true statistic. It should arouse emotions because it's so horrifying, but you're trying to repress it because it goes against your argument. The number of times guns are used in self-defense is tiny and outweighed by homicides, suicides, and accidents.

How to make an entrance: