LogFAQs > #887736011

SushiSquid posted...

Zeus posted...

Which is like saying you can't justify car insurance "as a protection" because the number of people who get into crashes each year is almost-infinity smaller than the total number of people who drive insured.

Zeus that comparison is unrelated. It's like you came in saying, "Sure, but what's that got to do with the price of beans?" We're not going to play stupid, intellectually dishonest games in this topic. Be honest, be plain, and make real arguments.

Oh? So arguing that one thing is ineffective because you only need it when shit happens isn't like another thing you only need when shit happens? Is that really the defense you're going to try to use today?

A gun is effectively an insurance policy. It's there to protect you IF or WHEN you need it. The reality is that you likely won't need it, just like actual insurance policies, but that doesn't diminish the fact that it's EXTREMELY useful when you do need it, especially because police can take hours to respond to burglar alarms.

SushiSquid posted...

Then you edited and added in the classic, "the solution is more guns" argument, which is stupid and demonstrably wrong. Adding guns increases violence. Don't pretend and act stupid here.

Then you edited and added in the classic, "Adding more guns increases violence," which is stupid and demonstrably wrong. Guns don't create violence, they either carry out or defend from violence.
---

(\/)(\/)|-|
In Zeus We Trust: All Others Pay Cash