Thread: Video games and gun violence. Is there a correlation.

Originally Posted by i8pptuakamonstercam

Originally Posted by Ranger10

Yes!

Ok, just making sure we all agree that guns have and edge over knives.

Yes. Guns don't need sharpening.

Oh... I see what you did there! How clever!

You think that by saying someone with a gun could kill someone with a knife, is the same thing as saying a gun can kill an unarmed person whereas a knife couldn't kill that same unarmed person just as easily.

Truly. Impressive.

*slow clap*

Originally Posted by Ranger10

So we'll curb the second amendment instead?

You really don't have the slightest clue where I stand on this issue, do you? Typical. I've had discussions with far more reasonable people like Civil and I've made my views quite clear.

Originally Posted by Ranger10

Lets just go ahead and say you didn't really have a point with this portion of your argument shall we?

No, I made a point, and I'm good with it whether you understood it or not.

Originally Posted by Ranger10

Are you trying to be dense? How man deaths a year happen from knives? There are more people who die in prison from sharpened toothbrushes each year than in these mass murder/suicides you keep harping on. And on the same day there was a mass murder with nearly as many deaths as in Newtown, but in another country. But I supposed you think it helps your argument to qualify your comment by saying, "It hasn't happened here yet, has it." That MUST mean it can't happen here.

Weak.

There are more deaths a year from guns than knives every year. Even your silly sharpened toothbrush killings don't make up the difference. Once again, never said a mass stabbing couldn't happen here (I've given up on you not putting words in my mouth already), I said one hasn't happened. So to compare events that HAVE happened to hypothetical events that HAVEN'T happened is pretty disingenuous. Could it happen? Sure. Has it? No.

Originally Posted by Ranger10

Uh oh... more slippery slope logic. I use sound logic all the time. You don't like it, so your natural response is to call it "bad". That's up to you. If you think it helps your argument or strengthens your position, which you can't do any other way, then by all means, call it so. That won't change anything.

Delusions of grandeur now. Ranger, the man incapable of ever using bad logic! Not even once. That logic was flawed for the same exact reasons why the "man and dog getting married" logic is bad. Until you can see that, you're stuck.

Originally Posted by Ranger10

Contrary to what must surely go inside your head, I don't actually pour through TPG's forums reading every little comment you make. So perhaps I don't know where you stand on it. If it's not in this thread, then put it here. Don't assume that I should go reading everything you've ever written just to know your thoughts on this mattre. But then again, with you, its not hard to assume that your viewpoint is so far to the left on this, as well as every other issue, it would be a safe bet to think you want the same unrealistic utopian world you dream about at night. This is you, we're talking about here.

I know, that would actually require you to ASK where I stand on the issue if you didn't already know, and I never expected you to know, since I never once made any reference to banning guns at all. Anywhere. I haven't even commented in the latest gun control thread. It's just more of your making blind assumptions and putting words into people's mouths that we've come to know and love!

Originally Posted by Ranger10

Yeah... see... this is where reading comprehension is a good thing. I said stabbings vs. the mass murders like Aurora and Newtown Connecticut ("mass murders/suicides"; remember this part?), which, without these very few incidents, we wouldn't be having any gun control debates in the first place. But you didn't read that, did you? Didn't think so.

Ah, so if people had control over their guns and weren't out doing these things this wouldn't be an issue. You don't say? Shocking revelation!