It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

First Good Example for an Assault Rifle Ban???

page: 17
26
<< 14  15  16    18  19  20 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 3 2017 @ 09:26 AM
link   
a reply to: Jusvistn

Then we should legalize rpg’s , C4 and yanks huh??

It’s not the weapon it’s the person right??

So why can’t I have a fully loaded Apache helicopter???


There are legit reasons not to ban guns, that just isn’t one of them.. it’s a logical fallacy that ANY deductive reasoning should debunk..




posted on Oct, 3 2017 @ 09:28 AM
link   

originally posted by: Wayfarer
What kind of wacky logic is required to explain how in 1996 when Australia banned semi-auto,fully-auto, and shot guns they stopped having mass shootings if it wasn't the lack of those type of guns that stopped it?


I'm guessing it's because Australia continued to have mass shootings after 1996.



posted on Oct, 3 2017 @ 09:29 AM
link   
a reply to: EvillerBob

Though that’s retarded.. at least your consistent..

And absolutely I can explain the Boston bombings...

They are WAY WORSE with C4 or a nuke..



posted on Oct, 3 2017 @ 09:29 AM
link   
a reply to: JoshuaCox

You know at various times in the not to distant past you could buy a fighter jet assuming you had the cash right.



posted on Oct, 3 2017 @ 09:30 AM
link   

originally posted by: JoshuaCox
a reply to: Jusvistn

Then we should legalize rpg’s , C4 and yanks huh??

It’s not the weapon it’s the person right??

So why can’t I have a fully loaded Apache helicopter???


There are legit reasons not to ban guns, that just isn’t one of them.. it’s a logical fallacy that ANY deductive reasoning should debunk..


Speaking of logical fallacies, yours is a strawman argument. I don't think anyone here is arguing that the existing regulations on RPGs, C4, nuclear weapons or attack helicopters should be repealed.



posted on Oct, 3 2017 @ 09:37 AM
link   
a reply to: Irishhaf


Sure, but I’m not sure it was a good idea then either...

What about bio weapons.. they could just find another way right??

So if someone wants to grow Ebola.. more power to ya right??



posted on Oct, 3 2017 @ 09:43 AM
link   
I am very skeptical of gun regulations.

How ever, I support full automatic gun restrictions that we currently have.

It appears that this shooter may have modified a legal semi auto with a bump stock to make it peform similar to an automatic.

I am open to a conversation on restricting these types of modifications.
edit on 3-10-2017 by Grambler because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 3 2017 @ 10:03 AM
link   
a reply to: vor78


I am pointing out the logical fallacy in your argument. Not saying we shoul legalize C4..

That would be a logical fallacy.



posted on Oct, 3 2017 @ 10:11 AM
link   
a reply to: JoshuaCox


originally posted by: SlapMonkey

Think a bit more before you reply to me next time, please. I don't accept lazy responses...

Either you were lazy in your reading and comprehension of what I said, or you were lazy in your response to me.

Which is it.

In both events, your response was lazy and full of false equivocations to what I said. Why?


originally posted by: JoshuaCox
a reply to: vor78

I am pointing out the logical fallacy in your argument. Not saying we shoul legalize C4..

That would be a logical fallacy.

And then you have the audacity to call out OTHER people on logical fallacies? Holy hell...are you serious?

edit on 3-10-2017 by SlapMonkey because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 3 2017 @ 10:23 AM
link   
a reply to: SlapMonkey
Mine wasn’t a logical fallacy. I was using an analogy that highlights the logical fallacy in the 2 arguments i listed..

My actual argument would be that we always restrict things by their potential for damage..


PS the lazy comment was not from me.



posted on Oct, 3 2017 @ 10:27 AM
link   

originally posted by: JoshuaCox
a reply to: vor78


I am pointing out the logical fallacy in your argument. Not saying we shoul legalize C4..

That would be a logical fallacy.


You're pointing out one by engaging in one. You're trying to force people to defend a more extreme position than they're actually taking.



posted on Oct, 3 2017 @ 10:34 AM
link   
a reply to: SlapMonkey

A straw man requires totally different variables..

The variables are the same in my analogy.

If 2 guys get married , what’s next marrying animals?!!!”

Is a strawman.


When you say military weapons should be legal because “they could use something else”.

And I say what about other military grade weapons . That is not a strawman..

All the variables are the same..

Both are weapons where the military version make far more effective killing machines..



A human is not a dog..

A gun is a weapon .

The variables are not so different no analogy can be drawn.



posted on Oct, 3 2017 @ 10:37 AM
link   
a reply to: vor78

A straw man emrequires vastly different variables...

“Gay marriage will equal people marrying animals”

Is a straw man because of vastly different variables..

Comparing a hand gun or rifle to a military grade weapon .

And comparing a homemade explosive device to miltary grade explosives have the same variables..



posted on Oct, 3 2017 @ 10:41 AM
link   
a reply to: Abysha

"Are people calling semi automatic rifles "assault rifles"? If so, no wonder it's such a confusing debate."

Yes, there are SOME people, mostly Leftists, who like to call ANY gun that holds more than 10 rounds an "assault weapon." That includes handguns and even .22 "plinking" rifles that hold more than 10 little .22 bullets. Practically any kind of item can be used to assault other people with, so why aren't those items considered to be an "assault weapon?" Like those assault pressure cookers used at the Boston Marathon Bombing, or the assault truck used in France, or the assault rock used by Cain to kill Able. Where's the outrage over those? People are going to kill people. Period.
edit on 3-10-2017 by TrulyColorBlind because: Corrected a typo.



posted on Oct, 3 2017 @ 10:42 AM
link   
a reply to: JoshuaCox

Fully Automatic Assault Rifles are already illegal. So, where ever he got this it was illegal, and he would've gotten it despite any gun control.
edit on 3-10-2017 by IlluminatiTechnician because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 3 2017 @ 10:47 AM
link   
a reply to: JoshuaCox

this is the slippery slope logical fallacy that you refer to

if we allow X, Y , or Z to happen then it wont be long before X, Y , or Z happens

A strawman is where someone misrepresents someone else's argument to make it easier to attack

e.g.

John said we should increase funding to the education system in this campaign run
Dave said that John is an idiot and unpatriotic for wanting to cut military spending in this campaign.



posted on Oct, 3 2017 @ 11:00 AM
link   

originally posted by: IlluminatiTechnician
Fully Automatic Assault Rifles are already illegal. So, where ever he got this it was illegal, and he would've gotten it despite any gun control.


They're heavily regulated and have been out of production for the civilian market for 30+ years, but not entirely illegal.



posted on Oct, 3 2017 @ 11:02 AM
link   

originally posted by: JoshuaCox
a reply to: SlapMonkey

When you say military weapons should be legal because “they could use something else”.

I never made an argument for making something legal or illegal. That is your fallacy right there--you're claiming that I said something that I didn't say. At all. Ever in this thread.

Of course, unless you're willing and able to show me where I advocated for legalizing all military weapons (or even one).

(I didn't)

I think that you may be suffering from confirmation bias.

And BTW, a straw man argument does NOT "require totally different variables" in order for it to be a straw man fallacy. Where in the world did you come up with that nonsense?

Again, you should stop lecturing people about logical fallacies when you, yourself, are basing your responses on misinterpretations and misunderstandings.

edit on 3-10-2017 by SlapMonkey because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 3 2017 @ 11:05 AM
link   
a reply to: IlluminatiTechnician

I never said ban them nor confiscation..


I just said that “they could just use a home made device instead” , “it’s to protect us from the government “ and it’s the person not the weapon” are just ridiculously flawed arguments.

1) We ban a bajillion things because of their ability for one idiot to cause mass devestation constantly.. if “they could just find another way” was a reasonable excuse then that would apply to everything. So no reason to restrict C4, they could just find another way.


2) we let the military have toys that are far too cool for firearms to be a realistic deterrent. Also if we are doing it for that reason, we should definitely be allowed military grade weapons to combat them with.. which is talking about murdering us Troops and police offices FYI..


3 ) the same as 1..






Imho the reasons we could not institute an assault rifle ban and confiscation. Is because the reality of implementing that would cause far more destruction than having them in circulation.

A) cops nor the military would do it..

B) if you found some LE body to do it, it would require house to house fighting.

C) zero political will

D) they make up nothing of total gun deaths or even mass shootings really. Most are regular guns.


Would it be safer if we had some geni to wish them all away?? Likely, but ain’t no F’n genies...



posted on Oct, 3 2017 @ 11:10 AM
link   

originally posted by: sapien82
a reply to: JoshuaCox

this is the slippery slope logical fallacy that you refer to

if we allow X, Y , or Z to happen then it wont be long before X, Y , or Z happens

A strawman is where someone misrepresents someone else's argument to make it easier to attack

e.g.

John said we should increase funding to the education system in this campaign run
Dave said that John is an idiot and unpatriotic for wanting to cut military spending in this campaign.



I think Comparing civilian firearms to military grade firearms and home made explosives to military grade explosives are close enough to be a fair analogy.

FYI I NEVER SAD BAN OR CONFISCATION.. Just that those are crap arguments.




top topics



 
26
<< 14  15  16    18  19  20 >>

log in

join