I can refute them, but unfortunately you were already being insulting.
The problem of acid attacks is just that. A problem. One that people are actively trying to fix. Nobody thinks acid should not be regulated. Only the weirdest kind of psycho collects different vials of acid based on their ability to stop humans.
Acid deaths is the worst countries are insignificant vs the number of deaths caused by gun crime and suicide. Never the less, I still think it’s an issue that needs regulation.
I do not think acid should be banned. I do not think guns should be banned. So you can throw away those arguments as far as I’m concerned. It your terms, you knocked down the straw man. I’m bored of arguments revolving around logical fallacies. They make me cringe because they remind me of myself in my 20s. Over 30 years ago now. Its doesn’t interest me to try to outlogic people.
Anyway, where we we? I believe we’ve covered a few mistakes with logic, but I’m happy to point out some more…
If there are plenty of other ways for people to hurt other people, and the other ways are so convenient, why are you so worried about not having a gun - simply use the other things to protect your family? Silly idea? Why?
The fact is, guns are used for few useful purposes that don’t involve hurting things. Either you’re target shooting, doing Robert Deniro impersonations in front of the mirror, or maiming and killing things.
Giving sources of incidences where gun control procedures fail is not helping me believe your critical thinking skills. Why? Because there isn’t just one path to take. There isn’t just one way to try and lower the number of injuries and deaths.
“I work in health care” Exhibits the intelligence of a ostrich
How so? Why don’t you have a real argument instead of hurling crap insults, acid man?
reread your stuff. if you can’t understand how it proves your own stupidity, then you really are hopelessly lost.
Only insults then? Ok.
only lack of logic then? ok.
You vastly overestimate your own skills in that department, acid man.
said the man who couldn’t refute literally any of my points (and clearly didn’t understand most of them in the first place)
I can refute them, but unfortunately you were already being insulting.
The problem of acid attacks is just that. A problem. One that people are actively trying to fix. Nobody thinks acid should not be regulated. Only the weirdest kind of psycho collects different vials of acid based on their ability to stop humans.
Acid deaths is the worst countries are insignificant vs the number of deaths caused by gun crime and suicide. Never the less, I still think it’s an issue that needs regulation.
I do not think acid should be banned. I do not think guns should be banned. So you can throw away those arguments as far as I’m concerned. It your terms, you knocked down the straw man. I’m bored of arguments revolving around logical fallacies. They make me cringe because they remind me of myself in my 20s. Over 30 years ago now. Its doesn’t interest me to try to outlogic people.
Anyway, where we we? I believe we’ve covered a few mistakes with logic, but I’m happy to point out some more…
If there are plenty of other ways for people to hurt other people, and the other ways are so convenient, why are you so worried about not having a gun - simply use the other things to protect your family? Silly idea? Why?
The fact is, guns are used for few useful purposes that don’t involve hurting things. Either you’re target shooting, doing Robert Deniro impersonations in front of the mirror, or maiming and killing things.
Giving sources of incidences where gun control procedures fail is not helping me believe your critical thinking skills. Why? Because there isn’t just one path to take. There isn’t just one way to try and lower the number of injuries and deaths.