You are viewing a single comment's thread from:
RE: Let's Play "False Dichotomy"!
I agree, false dichotomies are the worst.
Noticed a flaw in your corollary argument though
(except that, in the off chance that something really bad happens in my area, I may have the means to stop a psycho and save lives).
just as valid to say, "on the off chance that a child steals your AR-15 and shoots up the area it'll be there for them to take". You can get into it with me about how well secured your weapon is, etc etc, but this is not a solid point regardless, it's a baised "if then".
Fair enough, although that leads into a discussion of likelihoods and probabilities. Not everything is equally likely. But, at BEST, that leaves the gun-grabbers with the argument: "I want agents of the state to forcibly disarm you, because I don't know what might happen otherwise." They are advocating certain coercion based on a wild guess about a hypothetical.
Very true, which is an area I presume you don't want to veer into with a solid argumental point already in place.
In terms of the hypothetical itself the best thing would be to look at similar situations in history right? I think that'd be the way to go.
if a child steals his Ar15 I hope someone with an AR15 is handy to stop him before it becomes a mass shooting.