Topic Can "gun people" and "anti-gun people" ever come to the table together and talk
13 May 2013 05:39
I never said "halfway decent". You did. I said "halfway competent". A vital difference which you're not understanding, either by accident, or deliberately. Which is it? And the point, which you're pretending to be too obtuse to understand, is that if it only takes a little learning to circumvent a magazine capacity ban, then what good does that ban do? None at all.
No, I never said "all people who fire guns automatically know how to bend metal to exact specifications", either. You're pretty good at trying to put words in other people's mouths. The point is, when a man introduces himself as a person technically competent in firearms, and I can prove he's not, he should either disqualify himself from the argument, or admit that he's lacking as any kind of expert.
The bridge I'm trying to build is to get people to think for a moment, about just what the laws they're proposing will actually do to fight crime. So far, the answer is nothing. If anyone can come up with a new law that actually will help, I'm all ears.
It's called paraphrasing Nudes. I had your exact quote right above it, so nobody was going to not know what you actually said. To me, "decent," and "competent," are synonyms. If they are not to you, then simply replace the word "competent" in my statement, and you will see what I was trying to say. But then, you'd have to actually argue my point, and not my words, and you don't want that.
On the second point, this is what you said:
Now I know that you're not being truthful about being a "gun person." Because a "gun person" knows that a magazine is just bent sheet metal, and it doesn't take any kind of special machine to do it. Fuck, I could do it right here with a pair of tin snips and a vice. Only someone equally as unlearned about guns as you are would take your word for anything.
I've never seen a magazine, so I can't say whether you can actually see how it is made, or whether you just see the outside of it. In that, I'm at a disadvantage. But, whether or not you can see that it is "just bent sheet metal," that still does not mean that someone knows how to bend sheet metal to specific specifications. (A magazine, which will fit his or her particular gun) If I take my computer apart, I can see that the circuit board is "just metal laid out on plastic," but it doesn't mean that I would know how to actually make it. So does that mean that I don't know how to use a computer? You may think that you have proven that he knows nothing about gun use. To me, at best, you have proven he doesn't know anything about gun manufacturing. And he never said he knew how to make a gun, or a magazine, or even ammunition.
And the last point, I don't even know what to say. You want to make people think, to consider the opposite side, but refuse to do the same yourself. You shoot down every attempt at a compromise, admit that limiting magazine sizes would delay someone, either by forcing them to create a larger magazine themselves, or by forcing them to change magazines more often; and yet, still don't believe that there is a benefit to that. I asked you what you thought was a step in the right direction, as a way to help us understand how we could bridge the gap between us. That's always a good way to get a compromise started, if the other side is willing to move. Which you are not. I shouldn't have even responded to this, knowing that you are only looking to tell people they are stupid, naive, or flat out lying, when they have a viewpoint that's different than your own. But hey, I'm stubborn and reckless sometimes, and figure I just might be able to bite the troll before he bites me.