Originally Posted by shakran

I like how you make all these assumptions about anyone who disagrees with you. When did any of us ever say that? Show me one place where we say that, otherwise, argue the facts and stifle the rest.

I also like how you use hare-brained, totally illogical arguments to support your cause (even though there are plenty of arguments that are much more sound), and then you wig out when someone points out the flaws in your thinking.

To listen to you talk. .er. .type. . one gets the impression that you think the world will only be safe when everyone has a loaded gun on their hip. If you can't see that you'd only be replacing one danger with another, then you need to do a little more thinking before you speak.

But the best part is that when someone points out the flaws in your argument, you assume they want to ban guns. If I said "we should have freedom of the press because the sky is blue," and someone pointed out that my argument was idiotic, that would not mean they were against freedom of the press.

I'm sorry that your arguments do not make sense, but that is the fact. You are hurting the gun-rights cause because you come off sounding like a foaming-at-the-mouth crazy who wants everyone to pull a gun at the first sign of trouble.

Using debate tactics like that, you'll convince no one but yourself.