Reply #67: then here's some advice

[iverglas]

And for the record, I don't give a flying fuck what the NRA says about pretty much anything.

Since this thread is ABOUT what the NRA said, why don't you just give it a miss?

C'mon; let's have that reason.


Perhaps you can also post a link to an article that logically correlates CCW with the increase in gun crime...because you certainly didn't do that in your original post.

The fact that someone didn't do something that s/he did not suggest, imply, say, claim or otherwise indicate that s/he was doing or supposed to be doing is a REASON why s/he should attempt to PROVE the thing that s/he did not suggest, imply, say, claim or otherwise that indicate that s/he was doing or supposed to be doing?

That's novel. (Well, actually, it isn't. But there ya go.)

What you were saying (minus the dithering):

You should post a link to an article that logically correlates CCW with the increase in gun crime.
The reason you should do that is that you certainly didn't do it in your original post.

Id est:

You certainly didn't post a link to an article that logically correlates CCW with the increase in gun crime in your original post.
Therefore you should do it now.

Nope, not getting it, myself.

But what the hell, I'll play.

You certainly didn't post a link to an article that logically correlates rainfall with sales of tinned tuna.
Therefore you should do it now.

How's that. Did I do it right?