I want to thank you Rrhain for showing just about as clearly as can be that we just cannot seem to communicate with each other. I'm not sure who you were addressing, but it was not me or my position.
You mean there is no difference between emotion-jerking with a true story and emotion-jerking with a fallacious one?
EXACTLY... that was the point I was making when one is talking about BAD TECHNIQUES WHICH IS WHAT I WAS TALKING ABOUT!!!!
Hello?
If you want to say one of the above is slightly worse than the other as far as truth-giving goes, then yeah the latter is worse. However they are BOTH equally bad as techniques... which was identified countless times as "emotion-jerking".
Of course if this is meant to suggest Moore never presents falsehoods, like I said, he does that as well. Not in as great an abundance, but he does.
I don't think anybody is saying it would. Instead, they're saying it will help us track down those who commit gun violence.
Actually they do say that. The point is that with great tracking people will be less predisposed to use guns as a weapon of choice because there will be a greater chance of being caught.
But I thought my criticism was reaching farther than this. If you missed it, I suggested it would also not work as an after the fact method either. I pointed out the barrel ID method (which is also after the fact) had already been pulled apart and bullets would be even easier to sideline.
The cost of such a method what far outweigh the minute benefits of detection. It'd be easier just to track a bullet to the barrel that did the firing (at the moment it was fired).
I don't recall anybody saying that it would have.
You didn't answer the question. Let me try again. How would this have helped the Columbine situation at all?
If the subject is violence, specifically the causes of gun violence in the US, then as a good doc the issue of "bullet control" should have been relevant. If not, it was as I already stated, an interesting piece belonging in a different movie.
So despite our best efforts, shouldn't we also come up with ways to track down those who commit violence?
Yes, too bad this was not the subject I was discussing at all, and even if it were Bullet tracking is not a worthwhile effort towards tracking violent offenders.
that's what "panacea" means...something that cures everything.
Someone has a problem with rhetorical speech. You know damn well that panacea is applicable in the way I used it. That is not as a LITERAL cure for everything, but a FIGURATIVE cure for everything.
Indeed, if you want me to isolate it to after-the-fact tracking abilities just to make things kosher I will. Bullet logging may make people FEEL that they have done something to improve the ability to track violent offenders, but that feeling stands in contradiction to evidence regarding its costs-benefits.
Me:
The first sentence (what effect did it have) we could have stats about right now
You:
How? Given that the K-mart statement was made pretty much right before the release of the film, how could the film have had any statistics to mention?
Can't you see the major disconnect with what I am saying? I said RIGHT NOW we would have the data, that means it would or might not have been available for release with the movie.
Godamn the movie. If he was right, then we should see the results NOW. Anything? Anything?
And then what's great is you then show that I said:
They might not have been able to be put in the movie
To which you reply:
But that's what your request was for.
If I just got done explaining what my request was actually about, how can you sit here and try an shove these words in my mouth?
Of course you follow this with a headscratcher...
Me:
The second sentence (what evidence was shown that it might have an effect) was more applicable to the movie and could have been shown.
You:
He did. Or did you miss the part where he pointed out the ridiculousness of being able to buy out a store of all the ammunition?
What on earth does one have to do with the other, much less the topic of violence in america which he had already distanced from the existence and ownership of guns?
I asked where was the EVIDENCE? Showing the absurd possibility of people being able to buy up a store's ammo is not evidence for ANYTHING, other than if someone wants to go hog wild buying ammo, they can.
You (and he) will need to do a better job providing actual evidence that suggests there is a link between the ability to buy bullets and the use of them in violent situations... and no a funny Chris Rock routine doesn't count.
holmes
"...what a fool believes he sees, no wise man has the power to reason away.."(D. Bros)
™ Version 4.2
