Today is logical fallacy day. This is a day where the logical arguments made by anti-gunners are brought to light. First we had Josh Horowitz claiming the gun confiscations in New Orleans were a conspiracy theory that never happened and now we have another idiot spouting off statements that are quite questionable. Arma Borealis called out a local (to me) Minnesota anti-gunner for the following statement (I’ll not link directly to the anti-gunner post as I have a strict policy against doing exactly that):
I give you the argument of the guys with the “man pants” on ladies and gentlemen-” We’re saying that we’d rather have more gun deaths and lower overall violent crime, than zero gun deaths and higher rates of violent crime if given the choice” And there you have it. Nothing more to say here except “Wow” and “unbelievable”
See an increase in violent crime is perfectly OK so long as guns aren’t used. If more women are raped that’s OK so long as there are less gun related deaths. If more people are murdered it’s OK so long as those murders were committed with weapons besides guns. The main thing needed according to these people is lowering gun related deaths at any cost including lives. I’m apologize for the fact I lack the cognitive dissonance required to make this argument seem like it makes sense.
It’s also interesting that I’ve found somebody who appears to be my opposite right here in my own state. I’d certainly enjoy a debate on guns with this person but it would likely devolve into her inserting fingers into her ears and yelling “LA LA LA” at the stop of her lungs until I left.