debate

"edit: i could care less about statistics, i argue using logic, not facts." This is how you know it's going to be a good debate.

oh god i said something wrong didn't i xD well, ofcourse facts matter. i'm just not up for a debate which involves studies. because, studies - contrary to popular belief - always achieve what they're looking for because of the method they use. just as an example, veganism = bad? well because it lacks these and these nutrients and we've researched that blablabla. well ofcourse it's bad if you research it like that. veganism = good? well because you're actually on a diet instead of no diet, meaning you won't eat unhealthy food blablabla. ofcourse it's good if you research it like that. the thing with debating is is that if you set a specific ground to debate on, a specific platform on a ONE certain topic, there can only be one victor, because you're debating one topic which has to do with all of these other topics, but since you're only debating that certain thing, you're just taking everything else for granted. that's how steven crowder wins his debates for example. he sets a specific topic up for debate but once the opposing party says anything that doesn't really have to do with the topic, he says: "we're not talking about that, we're talking about this, so that doesn't matter" -or something. what i mean with logic is that you have to take both facts and feelings into account. see, because that's how people work. look at the martian for example. great movie, isn't it? << SPOILER ALERT but with all of that money that was spent saving just one human, all of that effort, couldn't they have saved thousands and thousands of lives? isn't that true? i know that's not the premise of the movie, but i'm 99% sure that if we would end up in a similar situation we'd also save that person. >> sorry if my story isn't coherent, i'm bad at explaining my thought process, but once i'm in a debate i'm usually alright.

Alright yestotally defend and explain your completely brainless statement. Im okay with a global instead of America specific debate. Why would we be better off if only police and military had guns and the general population completely disarmed. Since this proposition is completely impractical from the get go this should be good. I mean good not in like I'm going to feel all that challenged but more like I'm going to get one hell of a laugh. Also yestotally Im curious is that what you actually believe or are you just playing devils advocate?

On statistics as a whole I try to stay away from them but I once heard a pretty good quote while of all things watching Baseball (which for those who don't know is a very statistical sport and the stats carry more weight in things than in other sports) where one of the commentators said (I'm paraphrasing)... Don't let statistics be your point but you can use them to highlight or further give credence to your point. I don't tend to like most gun control statistics as they are riddled with logical fallacies and other nonsense. For example the most popular gun death per year totals include suicides which is approximately two thirds of the total. This overstates the "gun violence epidemic" numbers by 67% (rounding up) right there. Meaning while statistics can be misleading or incomplete and aren't an argument to themselves they can be useful and legitimate if used in conjunction with other logic, details and circumstances. For this reason I try to use statistics sparingly or ones with a smaller chance of a compiling error (some silly way the statistic is calculated - example one paragraph above). EDIT: I missed that nugget where yestotally gets at winning in a very specific platform on a specific topic. This is Lamby and Tabris all over it. Statements relating to this I completely agree with.

Well, guns kill, killing is bad, if we have no guns we can't kill anyone, thus resulting in less killing, thus resulting in less death and resulting in more life. (which personally i think is good) guns are the fastest and deadliest ways of killing a person, i mean all you have to do is aim and pull the trigger. this makes it easy to kill someone, i mean you can't kill 5 people in 20 seconds with a knife but you can with a gun, you have to get close to a person with a knife whereas you don't with a gun, you need to be able to cut that person with a knife once you're close which is not as easy as you might think (i've taken self-defense lessons) if someone just knows what he's doing, whereas with a gun you only have to pull a trigger. i know you called my STATEMENT brainless but can we refrain from using words such as those, i and possibly others take offense to those kinds of things, and i'm currently learning and trying to keep politics and friendships or whatever seperate to a degree, and if you start using words like that it gets a little harder edit: apparently html doesn't work on this site oops added a couple things

ill be the moderator lets not use words like "brainless" right off the start of the debate (AND YESTOTALLY IF YOU WANNA DEBATE VEGANISM IN RIGHT HERE MY BOI) *taps foot anxiously because wants to join in the gun debate* can i add my two cents in the debate against guns???

and yes, i am completely in favor of my statement. i'm not kidding, i am 100% in favor of guns not being used by civilians. i want the army and police to be able to use guns, because to stop illegal activity you sometimes need to do illegal things yourself (and in the case of guns this is especially true)

you're allowed to join in, anyone is. maybe you can't be the moderator AND join in on the debate, however xD

*passes yestotally a note that reads* since the invention of guns the death toll in wars has skyrocketed it was because of the invention of guns and distributing them to other countries that imperial japan began slaughtering all the cultures around them

i guess so, but i don't really care about facts like those. the thing is that we now have guns, and, no matter how hard you try, any government won't go back to swordfighting LOL it kind of proves my point of "with guns you can kill people faster than you can with a knife" though.