🚀 go-pugleaf

Colin R. Leech (ag414@FreeNet.Carleton.CA) wrote:

: Rosco (Roger_Walker@CUEHere.Edmonton.AB.CA) writes:
: > Still further, what makes you believe that the minority of offenders who use
: > firearms in their domestic crime, won't turn to weapons that the majority
: > use, like knives, boots, fists, a stocking, etc.?

: I'd be quite happy if they did, because there is a *much* better chance of
: the victim being alive after such an attack. How can you ignore something
: so obvious?

: Hey, if knives are as lethal as guns, why don't you hunt a moose with one?


  Because moose are much bigger, stronger, faster and harder to kill than 
humans, perhaps?

  (although you can fairly easily take them with a bow and arrow, if you 
have the skill)

  That one wasn't even worth a "nice try", Colin...  ;)




: > This is not rocket science, but so many people let their emotions override
: > their ability to think rationally on the issue.

: Funny, I was just thinking the same thing about your weak arguments.


  Ah yes, all those "weak" numbers, statistics and other irrefutable 
evidence *from your very own government*...as opposed to your offerings: 
theory, conjecture, rhetoric, EVASION, etc.

  (or did you think it had escaped everyone's notice that whenever we 
destroy one of your 'arguments' by presenting the simple facts, you 
counter by IGNORING THEM COMPLETELY and jumping off in a different direction?
Sarcasm, misdirection and deliberate deceit are very poor debate tactics 
where the object is to *prove* your point; try coming up with some 
factual offerings of your own if you wish to be taken seriously in this 
discussion.  As I've said before, very few people are being fooled by 
your approach...)