4 ms·
> Many gun owners do only have one gun for protection You keep using this logic, but it's just another strawman. I've never claimed these statements apply to e
by failTide 4y ago
> Many gun owners do only have one gun for protection
You keep using this logic, but it's just another strawman. I've never claimed these statements apply to everyone - that's a very weak interpretation, so I don't think you're arguing in good faith.
- hunterb123 4y agoYou keep using strawman incorrectly in this thread. First off, that response was not refuting your main point, but a secondary point. (I'm really not sure what your main point was as you changed it from profiling pitbull owners to profiling dog owners after I pointed out the flaw in your logic) I was simply disputing your statement that dog owners would have also have a gun because gun owners own multiple guns. That's not sound logic. Your logic is jumping around and you don't have a cohesive point. Would you like to rephrase your main point so we can add straw back to the man?
- failTide 4y agoI'm not using the term incorrectly. You're changing my argument's meaning from 'some' to 'ALL' - and then refuting the weaker argument. I feel like you're arguing from a place of emotion and clearly are offended, and I'm not interested in continuing that.