Printable View
[QUOTE=OhNoTimNoSho]So 1 assualt rifle can do less damage than 1 handgun?
thats logic? thats what you claim to base your argument on? some bullshit strawman argument?
You ban the most powerful thing and then go downwards.[/QUOTE]
handguns killed 6,000 people last year...assault rifles 18
and logic tells you to focus on the rifles? :facepalm
you are an example of the problem...
it is the concealability of handguns that makes them so much more of a threat in this country than ANY semi-auto rifle
furthermore, why should we have to work upward or downward in any of this?...as though it is impossible to address both at the same time or something?
why do you think it is impossible to address handguns without addressing "the more powerful" rifles first?
high powered hunting rifles are "the most powerful"...so your "logic" says we start there and then work our way to BB guns?"...there is no logic in that at all, just address them all at once.
dude stop bullshitting can 1 assault rifle do more damage than 1 handgun, yes or no?
[QUOTE=OhNoTimNoSho]dude stop bullshitting can 1 assault rifle do more damage than 1 handgun, yes or no?[/QUOTE]
IDK what kind of handgun a .22 or a Desert Eagle?...why does it even matter when it is clear which one is ACTUALLY doing the most damage?
ANSWER: the one I can hide in my pocket
[QUOTE=-p.tiddy-]furthermore, why should we have to work upward or downward in any of this?...as though it is impossible to address both at the same time or something?
why do you think it is impossible to address handguns without addressing "the more powerful" rifles first?
high powered hunting rifles are "the most powerful"...so your "logic" says we start there and then work our way to BB guns?"...there is no logic in that at all, just address them all at once.[/QUOTE]
Logically no we should be able to address both at the same time, but people wont accept it that way. Because just as the way your dumbass is arguing 1 side there are similiar dumbasses arguing the other side.
I apoligize for my rudeness. but yes we should adress all at once, but we cant. so we need to do the next logical thing and address one at a time. starting from the top
[QUOTE=-p.tiddy-]IDK what kind of handgun a .22 or a Desert Eagle?...why does it even matter when it is clear which one is ACTUALLY doing the most damage?[/QUOTE]
SO a D Eagle is just as potentially dangerous as any assault rifle?
a d eagle is a magnum also and doesnt fall under the regular handgun category anyway
what a stupid thread.
[QUOTE=OhNoTimNoSho]SO a D Eagle is just as potentially dangerous as any assault rifle?[/QUOTE]
handguns have more potential damage than any rifle because you can conceal them...
and what a coincidence, they cause more actual damage as well...
[QUOTE=-p.tiddy-]handguns have more potential damage than any rifle because you can conceal them...
and what a coincidence, they cause more actual damage as well...[/QUOTE]
you can conceal anything, cmon man you know what i mean, i know you are intelligent enough to interpert what im saying stop dancing around it and answer me straight
[QUOTE=OhNoTimNoSho]you can conceal anything, cmon man you know what i mean, i know you are intelligent enough to interpert what im saying stop dancing around it and answer me straight[/QUOTE]
a rifle is more powerful (on average)...that doesn't mean it is the most dangerous
and IMO you are the one dancing around facts and ignoring the fact that handguns are 10x the problem of assault rifles
[QUOTE=OhNoTimNoSho]So 1 assualt rifle can do less damage than 1 handgun?
thats logic? thats what you claim to base your argument on? some bullshit strawman argument?
As long as you ignore shit like that you cant be taken seriously.
[B]You ban the most powerful thing and then go downwards.[/B][/QUOTE]
This is exactly why I brought up the atomic bomb comparison a few pages back.
Hey, A-bombs kill 0 people every year. Let's unban them.
[QUOTE=-p.tiddy-]a rifle is more powerful (on average)...that doesn't mean it is the most dangerous
and IMO you are the one dancing around facts and ignoring the fact that handguns are 10x the problem of assault rifles[/QUOTE]
There in lies the argument. The pro gun side feels rifles with high capacity magazines are needed for protection and hunting. Heres the flaw in this argument. It shouldnt take 60-90 rounds to kill a dear or pig. And only a fool would really feel theres a need for that kind of firepower to defend a home. And saying you need it to fend off the government is just beyond retarded. So what legitimate purpose could having a high capacity rifle have?
Handguns do more damage because THERES MORE OF THEM. They dont need to be banned, but sure as hell need to be more regulated as to help lower the risk of them falling into the wrong hands. Your chances of surviving a shot from a handgun are much better than a rifle. Rifles with big clips arent needed in civilized society.
[QUOTE=Sarcastic]This is exactly why I brought up the atomic bomb comparison a few pages back.
Hey, A-bombs kill 0 people every year. Let's unban them.[/QUOTE]
:facepalm
[QUOTE=97 bulls]
[B]Your chances of surviving a shot from a handgun are much better than a rifle.[/B] Rifles with big clips arent needed in civilized society.[/QUOTE]
The bold is just simply not true. It is well established on these boards that you do not have the knowledge necessary to participate in this debate. Go away.