Originally posted by blupblup
Originally posted by newcovenant
Originally posted by blupblup
We need more guns to stop all the needless shootings!!! We need more burgers to stop the obesity problem!!! edit on
17/1/13 by blupblup because: (no reason given)
Another comment that makes no sense at all.
Not really.... it makes perfect sense and it's the logic used by Gun Morons.
Every time there is a tragedy, gun sales rocket... what does that say? It says that people think the more guns that they have and ergo, everyone else
has, the safer they are.
The equivalent would be eating burgers (and more food) to stop getting fat.
Just the kind of logic Gun Lovin' Americans espouse.edit on 17/1/13 by blupblup because: (no reason given)
And rightly so, which shows people aren't as dumb as you wish they were.
And seriously, the burger analogy? Are you pleased with that one? I wouldn't be if I were you, it shows a a basic failure to grasp simple concepts and
a lack of logic one would expect from children. I'm trying hard not to call you a fool for even posting such trash, and sounding rather pleased with
yourself for doing so.
We are assuming in your example that one desires to combat obesity, therefore lose weight or at the very least not add any. Eating foods with no
nutritional value and a high content of fat, hamburgers, will increase your overall fat index. That is proven fact. You may lose weight anyway, if
other factors are involved, but taken in isolation, there is no sense in eating hamburgers to reduce your fat index. In every case, you will get an
increase in fat index. In other words, you will automatically obtain the opposite effect.
With regards to guns, we are assuming that one desires to protect himself when faced with crime. For your analogy to be correct, and you do use the
word 'equivalent' although it is quite clear you have no idea what the term means, you would need a negative issue producing an opposite effect each
time a gun is used to prevent crime. Each and every time.
I will not even bother with statistics because you would have to be a real idiot, and I mean completely deluded to try and argue that point of
view.
Resisting a crime with a gun, which happens up to 2,000,000 times a year, generally discourages criminals and only a small percentage of these
incidents result in death or injury, often to the criminal.
Why? It's difficult to believe you can miss this, but because, as hard as it may be to believe, criminals generally don't want to get shot...therefore
they desist, and seek more suitable targets. Unarmed ones.
Does any of that sound condescending? Good, it was meant to be.
The
hamburger analogy, ladies and gentlemen, is the kind of arguments you may expect from gun control proponents. A complete lack of logic,
based upon which they have the gall to suggest you are stupid.
Those who use their brains, when confronted by evidence of inexplicable violence, realize how vulnerable they and their families are becoming and take
appropriate action by arming themselves. They understand that gun control will not affect criminals, and they know that the best way to stop an
individual bent on evil who owns a gun, is to own a gun.
If this desire for a level playing field makes us morons, I guess not many of us have any problem with the term.
edit on 19-1-2013 by D377MC because: spelling, syntax
