I watched the video. Let's assume that the two initial statements made by conservatives are actually false:
guns make you safer
shooters choose gun-free zones
Let's assume that your statement near the end (7:30) is true:
the more guns that are around, the more likely you are to be shot.
Let's assume that your next statement is true:
the only way we are going to stop these types of massacres is to do something about guns.
Then you make a hypothetical:
if your goal is reducing injury by gun....
I'm interested in any common ground that you might have with conservatives or others. Specifically about any beliefs that about how an objective observer would look at your goals (reducing gun deaths), make the assumptions above, then look at the goals of others (e.g., maintain liberty and self-control) and conclude that you (or the state) have a legitimate claim to regulate access to guns.
I have three bullet points for possible common ground in the middle of this post. Do you see that as common ground... any modifications??? I'd like to hear from you.
Well I can say that the statement I make at 7:30 is backed up by several studies (example of one,) and I can also say there's plenty of common ground that people on both sides of this debate can come together on, for example roughly 90% of Americans support background checks (including the vast majority of NRA members.) The support for these policies are there, but the political will isn't.
two suggestions to help you uderstand. 1. stop watching Mocking Media for your "facts". 2. Q
I watched the video. Let's assume that the two initial statements made by conservatives are actually false:
guns make you safer
shooters choose gun-free zones
Let's assume that your statement near the end (7:30) is true:
Let's assume that your next statement is true:
Then you make a hypothetical:
I'm interested in any common ground that you might have with conservatives or others. Specifically about any beliefs that about how an objective observer would look at your goals (reducing gun deaths), make the assumptions above, then look at the goals of others (e.g., maintain liberty and self-control) and conclude that you (or the state) have a legitimate claim to regulate access to guns.
I have three bullet points for possible common ground in the middle of this post. Do you see that as common ground... any modifications??? I'd like to hear from you.
thx
HI there.
Well I can say that the statement I make at 7:30 is backed up by several studies (example of one,) and I can also say there's plenty of common ground that people on both sides of this debate can come together on, for example roughly 90% of Americans support background checks (including the vast majority of NRA members.) The support for these policies are there, but the political will isn't.