No I explained with properly cited material why madscience's claims were dubious, and even if they were true they run counter to his narrative. This is a common and effective argument tactic called modus tollens. I did not explain away the deaths of 2500 people because I found them to be ideologically inconvenient. I don't particularly care one way or the other about guns, I care about accurately reflecting reality.
I dunno I pretty much solely took issue with his dubious claim that gun control made violent crime worse to the degrees he mentioned.
You have presented a different interpretation of the available data.
Are we entering the realm of solipsism now? Or can you give me any feedback as to which data we are talking about? I have no interpretation of madscience's sources, because those sources are garbage.
no subject
no subject
You have presented a different interpretation of the available data.
no subject
You have presented a different interpretation of the available data.
Are we entering the realm of solipsism now? Or can you give me any feedback as to which data we are talking about? I have no interpretation of madscience's sources, because those sources are garbage.