• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Are assault weapons more or less dangerous than pistols?[W: 207]

maquiscat said:
Obviously not irrelevant, except maybe in your own mind, since multiple people are making the point.

Logan's Law #6: Common Sense isn't

To you maybe, it is common sense to say that you are comparing all assault weapons (pistol, rifle, shotgun) to only non-assault pistols. To others it is common sense that the way your OP is worded that you are comparing a weapon type with itself, at least in potential since assault weapons covers pistols.

Simply because you feel that you made a clear context does not mean that it is so. And obviously it is not so. I have gone back and, while maintaining that my point stands, that I have not sufficiently worded my OP as to make my point clear. Are you too proud to do the same?
Click to expand...

That is what was implied, by the use of verbiage, you know that, you just want to dodge the question. If implication is a foreign concept to you, perhaps you should look that up.

But you are not really interested in this thread, you just want to play head games.

Little advice, in hopes to make this debate forum a debate forum instead of a remedial English class, if you don't understand the OP, don't post in the thread.
 
CLAX1911 said:
It wasn't.
Click to expand...
It was, because it compared a kind of firearm with something which isn't any kind of firearm.

A pistol is a kind of firearm An "assault weapon" isn't any kind of firearm, it's a style, exactly like a style of clothing.
 
Jerry said:
It was, because it compared a kind of firearm with something which isn't any kind of firearm.

A pistol is a kind of firearm An "assault weapon" isn't any kind of firearm, it's a style, exactly like a style of clothing.
Click to expand...

Are all pistols assault weapons?
 
Jerry said:
It was, because it compared a kind of firearm with something which isn't any kind of firearm.

A pistol is a kind of firearm An "assault weapon" isn't any kind of firearm, it's a style, exactly like a style of clothing.
Click to expand...

You didn't answer the question, you just barfed up some unintelligible dishonest spin.

Yes or no, are all pistols assault weapons.
 
CLAX1911 said:
You didn't answer the question, you just barfed up some unintelligible dishonest spin.

Yes or no, are all pistols assault weapons.
Click to expand...
Already answered in posts #313 and #363.
 
Jerry said:
Already answered in posts #313 and #363.
Click to expand...

Let me make this clear to people who don't understand English.

When I referred to assault weapons, I meant assault weapons (a rather meaningless phrase) when I refereed to pistols, I meant pistols, obvious to most folks with a basic understanding of diction, pistols revered to the non assault verity, being that I was using the phrase assault weapon to compare to another word that is not synonymous with the phrase assault weapon.

It's simple third grade reading comprehension.

Stop with your pathetic spin.

Your statement is meaningless because it was clear in the OP.
 
sangha said:
And hand grenades have no fingers
Click to expand...

drive ways don't drive anywhere. If you can't handle the English language perhaps a debate forum isn't for you.

You are not really debating anything, you're just doing some really tired shtick.
 
CLAX1911 said:
Let me make this clear to people who don't understand English.
Click to expand...
Says the guy who's about to make a run-on sentence....

CLAX1911 said:
When I referred to assault weapons, I meant assault weapons (a rather meaningless phrase) when I refereed to pistols, I meant pistols, obvious to most folks with a basic understanding of diction, pistols revered to the non assault verity, being that I was using the phrase assault weapon to compare to another word that is not synonymous with the phrase assault weapon.
Click to expand...

Let's clear that up a bit...
CLAX1911 said:
I meant to distinguish non-assault weapon pistols from non-pistol assault weapons.
Click to expand...

That may have been your intent, but your poor word usage and sentence structure failed to express that message.

CLAX1911 said:
Your statement is meaningless because it was clear in the OP.
Click to expand...
Clear as mud.
 
Jerry said:
Says the guy who's about to make a run-on sentence....



Let's clear that up a bit...


That may have been your intent, but your poor word usage and sentence structure failed to express that message.


Clear as mud.
Click to expand...

it's not clear to you because you have poor English comprehension. attend some classes in maybe you won't have to ask stupid questions
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom