Mega-Thread: Gun Control Thread

[Eroginous]

I haven't witnessed much difficulty in comprehending your posts here. The reaction you're receiving is a result of your posts screaming "BULLSHIT!!!" and "I'm just going to make shit up and declare it as valid because...everyone else is stupid!". It's not the superior intellect of your posts that's a problem...

Which is precisely the reaction one would expect from people who vehemently disagree on a subject but aren't capable of coming up with a productive counter argument.

[Rukentuts]

Which is precisely the reaction one would expect from people who vehemently disagree on a subject but aren't capable of coming up with a productive counter argument.

The definition of "counter argument" implies you're countering an "argument" to begin with, by definition.

[NYC17]

Which is precisely the reaction one would expect from people who vehemently disagree on a subject but aren't capable of coming up with a productive counter argument.

Well, first you have to present a viable argument based in something other than your own bullshit. You haven't.

Secondly, some people on both sides of the argument have tried to humor you with a counter, and even explain to you the issue you're having. You don't seem to understand it, yet you can't wait to claim the ignorance of everyone else.

Strange.

[Tinykong]

I can't believe the "knife vs. gun" argument has reached the level of absurdity that we're really discussing Navy SEALs as if that has anything to do with reality for normal people.

[Aeluron Lightsong]

Well apparently it's a variable. Gun v.s. Knife both inexperienced. I would in my opinion wager the gun wins. Sure bullets may miss I'm sure that luck will go away. Yes a knife can be used as a projectile but against a gun? It'd be stupid(Unless you're Batman which is not important here).


Navy Seal or whatever super human millitary dude with gun v.s. knife. I'd lean towards the gun but only slightly.

[Eroginous]

The definition of "counter argument" implies you're countering an "argument" to begin with, by definition.

Well, first you have to present a viable argument based in something other than your own bullshit. You haven't.

Secondly, some people on both sides of the argument have tried to humor you with a counter, and even explain to you the issue you're having. You don't seem to understand it, yet you can't wait to claim the ignorance of everyone else.

Strange.

Which is precisely the reaction one would expect from people who vehemently disagree on a subject but aren't capable of coming up with a productive counter argument.

You're making this far too easy.

[Rukentuts]

Which is precisely the reaction one would expect from people who vehemently disagree on a subject but aren't capable of coming up with a productive counter argument.

It's also what one would expect in response to someone spewing gibberish and hand-waving: no sources, no rational arguments, and dismissal of responding sources just because. Even dictionaries can't measure up to you.

[NYC17]

Which is precisely the reaction one would expect from people who vehemently disagree on a subject but aren't capable of coming up with a productive counter argument.

You're making this far too easy.

I imagine a lot of things are easy for you when you are incapable of understanding which side of the situation you're on. If this is the route you wish to take you're even more clueless than originally anticipated. The counter arguments have been laid out for you. You know, the ones people could actually apply to your nonsense. Your acceptance and understanding isn't crucial or required.

You've offered basically nothing, yet whine about nothing being offered in return. It's rather childish and clueless.

[Mayhem]

after all the talk about knifes vs. guns i do wonder why they even invented guns, if killing with a knife is not only equal easy but even easier

stupid people from the past

[Tinykong]

It's also what one would expect in response to someone spewing gibberish and hand-waving: no sources, no rational arguments, and dismissal of responding sources just because. Even dictionaries can't measure up to you.

The "gun vs. knife" argument has already been proven. No one in this thread has presented any counter argument to the Tueller drill and some-what-scientific-but-not-really Mythbusters clip.

[Mayhem]

Which is precisely the reaction one would expect from people who vehemently disagree on a subject but aren't capable of coming up with a productive counter argument.

You're making this far too easy.

i´m still waiting for your response btw.

[vaeevictiss]

It does not appear to be suppressed. It looks to have a Noveske flaming pig muzzle device on it (used commonly in SBRs to get them to cycle and function properly).

You may be right, its hard to tell in that small picture a few pages back and all the video ive seen has been low res. I only guessed a suppressor because many people set theirs up like that with the can sticking out just past the end of the rail.

This is mine, but the can sticks out a bit more than i want. Same idea but i may end up getting a longer rail. I do know the brake you are talking about tho because i have a buddy with one on an ar pistol...i hate them lol.

[Eroginous]

i´m still waiting for your response btw.

Response to what?

[Mayhem]

Response to what?

http://www.mmo-champion.com/threads/...1#post24913514

here you go

[Eroginous]

http://www.mmo-champion.com/threads/...1#post24913514

here you go

First of all, I was quoting that study for the part where it says:

Nonfatal Injury
While many people are killed each year by fire arms, even more are injured non-fatally. In 2008, there were 78,622 nonfatal firearm injuries in the United States, 73% of which were the result of interpersonal violence.

As evidence to support what I said here:

http://www.mmo-champion.com/threads/...1#post24907078

Specifically the part where I said you're more likely to survive a gunshot wound than die from it.

So when you say:

conveniently ignoring what numbers are used with the graph "assault and legal intervention of firearms" ...
and further ignoring whats right under the graph:

It has nothing to do with what I was saying or the reason why I linked the graph.

[Tinykong]

Specifically the part where I said you're more likely to survive a gunshot wound than die from it.

There is some validity to the notion that this may have more to do with emergency medical service advancements over firearm lethality.

[Mayhem]

First of all, I was quoting that study for the part where it says:



As evidence to support what I said here:

http://www.mmo-champion.com/threads/...1#post24907078

Specifically the part where I said you're more likely to survive a gunshot wound than die from it.

So when you say:



It has nothing to do with what I was saying or the reason why I linked the graph.

so you´re only ok with parts of your own source if they to a degree back up your point? gotcha

[Eroginous]

There is some validity to the notion that this may have more to do with emergency medical service advancements over firearm lethality.

Well, since firearm lethality directly depends on firearm proficiency, those numbers probably have more to do with the average proficiency with a firearm than anything.

After all, no amount of emergency medical service is going to help if someone gets hit in a vital organ and dies before EMTs can arrive.

so you´re only ok with parts of your own source if they to a degree back up your point? gotcha

Why would I address data that isn't part of the argument I'm making? Nowhere did I say I disagreed with the data you're bringing up, nor did I ignore it because of potential conflicts with arguments I've made.

I simply had no reason to address it, so I didn't. Would you like me to?

[Mayhem]

Well, since firearm lethality directly depends on firearm proficiency, those numbers probably have more to do with the average proficiency with a firearm than anything.

After all, no amount of emergency medical service is going to help if someone gets hit in a vital organ and dies before EMTs can arrive.

that´s mentioned in the paragraph i quoted, or are you telling me the youth is more proficient with guns than older ones?

Why would I address data that isn't part of the argument I'm making? Nowhere did I say I disagreed with the data you're bringing up, nor did I ignore it because of potential conflicts with arguments I've made.

I simply had no reason to address it, so I didn't. Would you like me to?

as this topic is about guns and how dangerous they are, take an educated guess

[Eroginous]

that´s mentioned in the paragraph i quoted, or are you telling me the youth is more proficient with guns than older ones?

as this topic is about guns and how dangerous they are, take an educated guess

I really don't understand what your problem is, other than an obvious misunderstanding when it comes to a part of the discussion you weren't involved in.

The study I linked contained a chart showing 79% of firearm injuries being non fatal. You somehow twisted that into 'youth are more proficient with guns.'