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

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 . . .

What i expressed support for was outlawing semi auto rifles. Period.

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.

Where have I driven myself?

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.

Yeah, I was distinguishing human hunting rifles from animal hunting rifles, not vice versa.

You still have it wrong. My failure to prove my claim does not establish that it is false.

I'm not claiming to be a scientist.

I haven't gone from the first claim to the second one. The first one is predicated on the second one.

What is illogical is your claim that a lack of proof shows a claim to be false.

Quote:

Where have I driven myself?

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.

You are admitting that you cannot prove that a pistol-grip makes a rifle especially dangerous. That's good. However, the rest of that sentence leaves much to be desired when it comes to making yourself clear.

You introduced the term "human-hunting rifle" into the discussion. I asked you whether or not an animal-hunting rifle can double as a human-hunting rifle. And I asked you that because you were attempting to create a distinction between the two.

Quote:

Yeah, I was distinguishing human hunting rifles from animal hunting rifles, not vice versa.

No matter which one you are referring to, the question remains that same. Can an animal-hunting rifle double as a human-hunting rifle. And if your answer is yes, then what was the point of the distinction you tried to create?

Quote:

You still have it wrong. My failure to prove my claim does not establish that it is false.

Your failure to prove your claim proves that you made a claim without first knowing whether or not it is true.
And after pages of being grilled, you concede that you cannot prove your claim. And now you are hoping to redeem yourself by suggesting that your failure doesn't mean that your claim is false. But the fact is that without a side-by-side comparison between a rifle with a pistol-grip and one without a pistol-grip, your claim can be dismissed out of hand.

Quote:

I haven't gone from the first claim to the second one. The first one is predicated on the second one.

Sorry, but much like your claim that a pistol-grip makes a rifle especially dangerous, your claim that it would probably cause more deaths is likewise unproven.

Quote:

What is illogical is your claim that a lack of proof shows a claim to be false.

If you make a claim, and I ask you for proof of that claim, and you fail to provide that proof, then your claim is false until proven otherwise.

The sentence speaks against your claim that lack of proof proves falsehood.

To elaborate upon my response, while an animal hunting rifle could be used to hunt humans, it wouldn't be as effective as a human hunting rifle would be,

And after pages of going on about you having proven that my claim is false, you've come to the realization that you, in fact, haven't proven that my claim is false

Sure. However, I was addressing the point that you tried to make that I had gone from one claim to another. That was incorrect.

Your claim, once again, is incorrect, as well as my assumption that you've come to that realization.

No you silly person. Notice pistol grips are not mentioned there at all. Those are purely your hobbyhorse.

as i keep telling you it is about banning the weapon and i was applauding the making of the banning easier.

Clearly we should learn from the eminently sane people of NZ. Its possible to outlaw pretty much all semi autos with mandarory buybacks and stop all these half measures.

Quote:

The sentence speaks against your claim that lack of proof proves falsehood.

You are correct in your claim that your statement might speak against my claim, but it is also true that your statement remains unsupported by any proof.

Quote:

To elaborate upon my response, while an animal hunting rifle could be used to hunt humans, it wouldn't be as effective as a human hunting rifle would be,

All rifles can be used for killing either humans or animals.

You have yet to show any proof that a pistol-grip on a rifle would increase its efficiency at killing humans because you have no proof whatsoever that a pistol-grip increases accuracy and rate of fire. You want to talk past that deficiency in your argument for banning the AR-15. But that's not how it works.

No you silly person. Notice pistol grips are not mentioned thderd at all.

the point I'm making, however, is that those made for hunting animals wouldn't be as effective in hunting humans because human hunting rifles were made for that express purpose.

That's not my argument for banning assault weapons such as the AR-15.

Quote:

And after pages of going on about you having proven that my claim is false, you've come to the realization that you, in fact, haven't proven that my claim is false

On the contrary, you had made a claim that a rifle with a pistol-grip increases accuracy and rate of fire. After asking you to prove it, you eventually said that you cannot prove it. Therefore, I have indeed proven that your claim is false by virtue of your inability to produce anything at all to support your claim.

Quote:

Sure. However, I was addressing the point that you tried to make that I had gone from one claim to another. That was incorrect.

Not true. You went from declaratively claiming that a rifle with a pistol-grip makes a rifle especially dangerous (and we know exactly what you were implying there) to claiming that a rifle with a pistol-grip would probably result in more deaths.

Quote:

Your claim, once again, is incorrect, as well as my assumption that you've come to that realization.

No. It is literally true that if you make a claim, and I ask you for proof of that claim, and you fail to provide that proof, then your claim is false until proven otherwise. And thus far, it remains unproven.