{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
2/12/2015 3:44:14 PM
14
Are both of these statements equally illogical?
Statement 1:
[spoiler]A person firing a gun into a crowd of unarmed individuals will have the same effect as if said shooter was using a knife/axe/bat/other similar item.[/spoiler]
Statement 2:
[spoiler]A person firing a gun into an unarmed crowd will have the same effect as if the same person was firing a gun into a crowd of people who were also armed with guns. [/spoiler]
Inb4 Replies are exactly the same as those of every gun control debate ever.
-
Wow 7%... The second is more illogical because an armed man shooting into an armed crowd would be shot down quickly and such would do much less harm than an armed man shooting into a helpless crowd. The first is also illogical as the gun would kill a lot quicker than a bat or axe and would be safer to the killer as he has distance. But the first example is much worse for logic. Not an opinion. Simple fact.
