Ya got me. My apologies. You didn't say guns have no value. But you are the pot calling the kettle black, IMO.
Re: "a bunch of unclear references in your post, e.g. > "a place speaking to that".
Scott, have you ever heard the phrase "you have no place _____(fill in the blank, e.g. Coming Here, messing around with that, Talking about that, Acting like that, or SPEAKING TO THAT)" Well, if not, it's common and well understood. It works exactly like it would if you substituted the word "business" for "place" in the example above, I just altered it to an affirmative. It is clear if you are familiar with it, I gather you were not.
It remains clear your words as to where I get my information were baseless, hence taken as derogatory by me. Just an Ad Hominen of no value to the discussion whatever.
Re: "And your reasoning is poor"
Oh? Why? If I'd wanted to offer you specifics, I could. The use of generalities or non-specified quantities does not equate to poor reasoning. The use of "huge," an adjective, does not imply poor reasoning in any way, unless you presume without evidence, that I've not reasonably used the word here. Also, I clearly did not say that a huge number "...serves us well,"(though all numbers have value, VBG) as you claim. If you can't see what the phrase "serves us well" refers to, you'll need to review grammar(hey, not that I'm a great whiz there), then come back and post accurately what I actually said before you criticize- you have not.
In both cases above, you have taken words or phrases out of the context of the very sentences they appeared in. The seeming non-sense resulting, is of your own making. I believe this amounts to nothing more than a trap for fools(you know, as in "my words twisted by knaves to make a trap for fools)."
Re: "A general conclusion drawn from a specific episode has no merit"
Huh? Where'd that come from? I didn't draw a conclusion from a specific episode. I was already aware of your little lesson in logic. The evidence? In fact my point was, "it happens everyday(self-defense with a firearm)," which clearly denotes an implication of many episodes untold, as intended. This does not a specific episode make. I plead innocent!
Again, my choice not to fill in the facts does not imply poor reasoning.
Re: "
And you attribute a position to me, which I did not infer or state:
"You claim there is no value in gun ownership.""
Right, again, ya got me. I drew a faulty inference from words which I held incorrectly in memory as I wrote, I did not accurately pharaphrase you at all, my apologies. My error.
Still, you have said "...no one has shown me a scenario, step by step, where the average American would come to NEED to "bear arms"."
That's an easy one. Average Americans don't need to COME to NEED guns, they already do.
Step by step. If I, an average American, feel I NEED a gun for self-defense, my judgement of NEED is sufficient. My simple argument so far bears strength, because it's easy to see my life itself may be at stake for want of a gun. Thus, it's reasonable of me to say I NEED one.
That's me, but what about average Americans?
I see that average Americans are at risk and could gain safety by owning a gun. So yes, I'm concerned for my fellow man. I think the average American NEEDS a gun just as I think I do, because of the insurance value of carrying one.
It doesn't matter if the Average American will never be threatened in his lifetime, so long as he might be. It doesn't matter either, if the average American will never buy a gun. My argument bears weight because lives may be at stake and I'm concerned. If it's a matter of life or death when I call gun ownereship a NEED, my opinion is reasonable. I hate to see the bad guys win, ;).
Freedom Works,
Dan B |
