4 ms·
Because it doesn't fit the goal of the op. ed piece, which is what we are talking about. If anything, it says that mandated arming of large numbers of citizens
by dalke 10y ago
Because it doesn't fit the goal of the op. ed piece, which is what we are talking about.
If anything, it says that mandated arming of large numbers of citizens (conscription), and mandatory use of such weapons, leads to a higher number of mass killings.
That's a different conversation than the mandated disarming of large numbers of citizens.
- Turing_Machine 10y ago"Because it doesn't fit the goal of the op. ed piece" Translation: it wouldn't fit the political agenda of the op. ed piece.
- dalke 10y agoI'm glad that you agree with me that your definition is not relevant to the op.ed piece or to this entire thread.
- Turing_Machine 10y agoThat is quite clearly untrue, and you are no longer debating in an honest manner (if you ever were). Buh-bye.
- dalke 10y agoIf only more kibitzers were so polite.