57
   

Guns: how much longer will it take ....

 
 
Glennn
 
  -2  
Reply Tue 24 Dec, 2019 08:20 pm
@InfraBlue,
Quote:
So, what do grenade launchers, flash suppressors, bayonet mounts and barrel shrouds have to do with pistol grips making a rifle especially dangerous?

Those are the other things on the list of items that allegedly turn a semiautomatic rifle into something that should be banned. I've already established that you are unable to show that a pistol-grip makes a rifle especially dangerous. I'm just looking to find out if you also hold the same false ideas about barrel shrouds, flash suppressors, bayonet mounts, and grenade launchers. If you do hold the same ideas about those items as you did about the pistol-grips, I'm curious about the last time you heard that someone fell victim as a result of those items.
Quote:
That doesn't address the fact that pistol grips make a rifle especially dangerous.

Now you're reverting back your unproven claim. You have nothing to show that a pistol-grip makes a rifle especially dangerous.
InfraBlue
 
  3  
Reply Wed 25 Dec, 2019 01:36 pm
@Glennn,
Glennn wrote:
I've already established that you are unable to show that a pistol-grip makes a rifle especially dangerous. I'm just looking to find out if you also hold the same false ideas about barrel shrouds, flash suppressors, bayonet mounts, and grenade launchers.

One thing is establishing that I am unable to show that a pistol grip makes a rifle especially dangerous, another thing is declaring them "false ideas." You haven't established that they're false ideas.

Glennn wrote:
If you do hold the same ideas about those items as you did about the pistol-grips, I'm curious about the last time you heard that someone fell victim as a result of those items.

My ideas about pistol grips have nothing to do with someone falling victim as a result of pistol grips. You're unable to grasp that that's your straw man argument.

Glennn wrote:

Quote:
That doesn't address the fact that pistol grips make a rifle especially dangerous.

Now you're reverting back your unproven claim. You have nothing to show that a pistol-grip makes a rifle especially dangerous.

The claim that pistol grips make a rifle especially dangerous for which I have nothing to show has nothing to do with people falling victim to rifles because they have pistol grips. That's not my argument. That's your straw man argument.
InfraBlue
 
  2  
Reply Wed 25 Dec, 2019 01:54 pm
@Glennn,
Glennn wrote:

Oh, so you agree that an animal-hunting rifle can double as a human-hunting rifle?

While an animal hunting rifle could be used to hunt humans, it wouldn't be as effective as a human hunting rifle would be, as that is the purpose of a human hunting rifle.
Glennn
 
  -2  
Reply Wed 25 Dec, 2019 07:18 pm
@InfraBlue,
Quote:
While an animal hunting rifle could be used to hunt humans, it wouldn't be as effective as a human hunting rifle would be, as that is the purpose of a human hunting rifle.

That's just a belief of yours. And it is a stubborn belief, as you have demonstrated over and over again that you cannot show that the pistol-grip or flash suppressor, or both, makes a rifle especially dangerous. Therefore, according to what you have been able to prove concerning function, distinguishing one rifle as an animal-hunting rifle is baseless.
Glennn
 
  -2  
Reply Wed 25 Dec, 2019 07:35 pm
@InfraBlue,
Quote:
One thing is establishing that I am unable to show that a pistol grip makes a rifle especially dangerous, another thing is declaring them "false ideas." You haven't established that they're false ideas.

I most certainly have established that your idea that a pistol-grip on a rifle makes it especially dangerous is false. And it will remain false unless, or until, you show it to be true.
Quote:
My ideas about pistol grips have nothing to do with someone falling victim as a result of pistol grips.

Nonsense. You've made the claim that a pistol-grip makes a rifle especially dangerous. You would have to provide something that would show that to be true. The only thing that will show that to be true is a side-by-side comparison between a rifle without a pistol-grip and a rifle with a pistol-grip to find out if your unfounded claim concerning increased in accuracy and rate of fire is true. Thus far you have failed to do so.
Quote:
The claim that pistol grips make a rifle especially dangerous for which I have nothing to show has nothing to do with people falling victim to rifles because they have pistol grips. That's not my argument.

Ah, so your new position is that even though a pistol-grip increases accuracy and rate of fire, it will not result in more deaths. I see. But since you now admit that you have nothing to show that a pistol-grip makes a rifle especially dangerous, perhaps you'll stop making that claim.
InfraBlue
 
  2  
Reply Wed 25 Dec, 2019 11:05 pm
@Glennn,
Glennn wrote:

Quote:
While an animal hunting rifle could be used to hunt humans, it wouldn't be as effective as a human hunting rifle would be, as that is the purpose of a human hunting rifle.

That's just a belief of yours.

Ok.

Glennn wrote:
And it is a stubborn belief, as you have demonstrated over and over again that you cannot show that the pistol-grip or flash suppressor, or both, makes a rifle especially dangerous.

Your conclusion is illogical. Not showing that the pistol-grip or flash suppressor, or both, makes a rifle especially dangerous does not disprove that an animal hunting rifle wouldn't be as effective as a human hunting rifle in hunting humans.

Glennn wrote:
Therefore, according to what you have been able to prove concerning function, distinguishing one rifle as an animal-hunting rifle is baseless.

I'm not distinguishing animal hunting rifles. I'm distinguishing human hunting rifles, those assault weapons as defined and specifically banned by the Federal Assault Weapons Ban, Public Safety and Recreational Firearms Use Protection Act such as the AR-15.

InfraBlue
 
  2  
Reply Wed 25 Dec, 2019 11:15 pm
@Glennn,
Glennn wrote:

Quote:
One thing is establishing that I am unable to show that a pistol grip makes a rifle especially dangerous, another thing is declaring them "false ideas." You haven't established that they're false ideas.

I most certainly have established that your idea that a pistol-grip on a rifle makes it especially dangerous is false.
No you haven't.


Glennn wrote:
And it will remain false unless, or until, you show it to be true.

That is incorrect seeing as how you haven't established that my idea that a pistol-grip makes a rifle especially dangerous is false.

Glennn wrote:

Quote:
My ideas about pistol grips have nothing to do with someone falling victim as a result of pistol grips.

Nonsense. You've made the claim that a pistol-grip makes a rifle especially dangerous. You would have to provide something that would show that to be true. The only thing that will show that to be true is a side-by-side comparison between a rifle without a pistol-grip and a rifle with a pistol-grip to find out if your unfounded claim concerning increased in accuracy and rate of fire is true. Thus far you have failed to do so.

Repeating you fallacious logic does not make it any less illogical. That's what's nonsense.

Glennn wrote:

Quote:
The claim that pistol grips make a rifle especially dangerous for which I have nothing to show has nothing to do with people falling victim to rifles because they have pistol grips. That's not my argument.

Ah, so your new position is that even though a pistol-grip increases accuracy and rate of fire, it will not result in more deaths. I see.

No, you fail to see. My position hasn't changed. That a a pistol-grip increases accuracy and rate of fire would not necessarily result in more deaths, it would increase the probability of more deaths.

Glennn wrote:
But since you now admit that you have nothing to show that a pistol-grip makes a rifle especially dangerous, perhaps you'll stop making that claim.

You continue to fall back on your illogical conclusion.
Glennn
 
  -1  
Reply Wed 25 Dec, 2019 11:33 pm
@InfraBlue,
Quote:
Not showing that the pistol-grip or flash suppressor, or both, makes a rifle especially dangerous does not disprove that an animal hunting rifle wouldn't be as effective as a human hunting rifle in hunting humans.

Look where you've driven yourself.
Quote:

I'm not distinguishing animal hunting rifles. I'm distinguishing human hunting rifles, those assault weapons as defined and specifically banned by the Federal Assault Weapons Ban, Public Safety and Recreational Firearms Use Protection Act such as the AR-15.

Now look what you've done. If you're going to distinguish a human-hunting rifle, I'm afraid that you necessarily have to distinguish if from something else. And in the context of this discussion, you are distinguishing it from an animal-hunting rifle. So . . .
Glennn
 
  -1  
Reply Wed 25 Dec, 2019 11:47 pm
@InfraBlue,
Quote:
you haven't established that my idea that a pistol-grip makes a rifle especially dangerous is false.

I suppose that technically I haven't, since it was your failure to prove your claim that established that it is false.

You'd make a hell of a scientist. You'd make a claim. Then someone would ask you to prove it. You would fail to prove it and then inform the one who asked you to prove your claim that your failure does not establish your claim as false, and that their question amounts to a claim that they can't prove.
Quote:
That a pistol-grip increases accuracy and rate of fire would not necessarily result in more deaths, it would increase the probability of more deaths

I think we're making progress here. You've gone from claiming that a pistol-grip makes a rifle especially dangerous by increasing its accuracy and rate of fire, to claiming that it would probably cause more deaths. But you don't even have proof of that claim either.
Quote:
You continue to fall back on your illogical conclusion.

It is not illogical of me to suggest that you stop making the claim that a pistol-grip makes a rifle especially dangerous after you have admitted that you have nothing to prove your claim.
RABEL222
 
  2  
Reply Thu 26 Dec, 2019 12:14 am
@Glennn,
Coming from a guy who bases his pro gun argument on gun handles.
oralloy
 
  -1  
Reply Thu 26 Dec, 2019 10:25 am
@RABEL222,
We argue pistol grips because progressives make pistol grips the centerpiece of their efforts to violate people's civil liberties for fun.

If progressives didn't attack pistol grips, we wouldn't have to defend them.
MontereyJack
 
  3  
Reply Thu 26 Dec, 2019 10:40 am
@oralloy,
That is utter nonsense and always has been. You are the person who has tried For years to pretend it was all about pistol grips . Stop trying to b.s. the world
oralloy
 
  -1  
Reply Thu 26 Dec, 2019 11:13 am
@MontereyJack,
Here are a couple of posts where you called for and praised efforts to outlaw pistol grips.

http://able2know.org/topic/203766-209#post-5227079

http://able2know.org/topic/355218-2108#post-6598060

I don't know why you think that denying your own actions will fool anyone. But no one is fooled.

No one is fooled by these attempts to demonize the NRA either.
MontereyJack
 
  3  
Reply Thu 26 Dec, 2019 12:30 pm
@oralloy,
You are the one who started and has pushed for years the fallacious argumemt that it was somehow about pistol grips. Never has been. Its about semi autos with detachab!e magazines. Always has been.
oralloy
 
  -1  
Reply Thu 26 Dec, 2019 12:36 pm
@MontereyJack,
The boldness with which progressives deny reality is breathtaking.

"Who are you going to believe, me or your lying eyes" indeed.

Progressives must surround themselves in real life with mentally weak people that such tactics will actually work on, otherwise they wouldn't have such expectations that this tactic would actually work.


Sorry, but no. You are on record demanding to outlaw pistol grips. You are the one who starts and pushes the subject of pistol grips for years on end.

And when I counter your demands to outlaw pistol grips, there is noting fallacious about that.
MontereyJack
 
  3  
Reply Thu 26 Dec, 2019 04:46 pm
@oralloy,
What nnnsense. Tse posts dont say anything like what you say theysay. You have alwats been the one whointroduces and reintroduces pistol grips into every discussion in a pathetic attempt to deflect fromthe real topfic which is gun violence where the heihht of your contribution is your desire often repeated to ile the corpses of gun victims up so you can pisson them. Emblematic of the quality of your thought
farmerman
 
  3  
Reply Thu 26 Dec, 2019 05:01 pm
@MontereyJack,
His entire debate pprocess is to divert, lie, and misrepresent. Hes blamed me about his fantasy fixture. I dont know where he gets his thoughts bcause anytime I hear about th "grips" its he who is preemptively claiming that his opponent began it.

Hes a loon, but its Christmas I wish him a speedy recovery and a return to fcts and evidence.

Merry and Happy to you also, youve had more patience with these clowns than I.
oralloy
 
  0  
Reply Thu 26 Dec, 2019 05:04 pm
@farmerman,
You cannot point out anything untrue in any of my posts.

And you have clearly called for outlawing pistol grips on semi-auto rifles:
http://able2know.org/topic/131081-382#post-6940631
0 Replies
 
oralloy
 
  0  
Reply Thu 26 Dec, 2019 05:07 pm
@MontereyJack,
MontereyJack wrote:
What nonsense. Tse posts dont say anything like what you say they say.

Wrong. You clearly expressed approval for outlawing pistol grips on semi-auto rifles.

http://able2know.org/topic/203766-209#post-5227079


MontereyJack wrote:
You have always been the one who introduces and reintroduces pistol grips into every discussion in a pathetic attempt to deflect from the real topic which is gun violence

Wrong again. I only address pistol grips after progressives demand to outlaw them.
Glennn
 
  0  
Reply Thu 26 Dec, 2019 05:27 pm
@farmerman,
Quote:
I find that assault weapons should have been banned for any gun having just those two features.

And what two features would those be?
0 Replies
 
 

Related Topics

Obama '08? - Discussion by sozobe
Let's get rid of the Electoral College - Discussion by Robert Gentel
McCain's VP: - Discussion by Cycloptichorn
Food Stamp Turkeys - Discussion by H2O MAN
The 2008 Democrat Convention - Discussion by Lash
McCain is blowing his election chances. - Discussion by McGentrix
Snowdon is a dummy - Discussion by cicerone imposter
TEA PARTY TO AMERICA: NOW WHAT?! - Discussion by farmerman
 
Copyright © 2024 MadLab, LLC :: Terms of Service :: Privacy Policy :: Page generated in 0.07 seconds on 07/21/2024 at 05:20:20