Yeah and we’re not talking about pilots or flying here so I don’t know what your point is.
Their claim is that having a gun to defend yourself from someone with a gun works (more guns reducing gun crime), but that facts clearly show that gun control is the way to reduce gun crimes and having a personal defence gun is a liability and increases your risk of being a victim of gun crime.
You’re unable to come up with a response to my argument so you try to discredit me by claiming I used AI to write it?
Can you respond to something without a strawman?
That is not what I said. I told you to ask ChatGPT to rephrase the initial point for you. Y’know so you could understand it instead of strawmanning it.
Why would I spend the time having a discussion with you when you accuse me of using ChatGPT then don’t even have the balls to stand behind your claim?
Yeah, I thought this was just bad faith, but now it’s clearly entirely malicious. I’m not a pro at phrasing, but I clearly said rephrase it FOR YOU.
You maliciously interpreted what OP said, where they never said anything about crime rates, just about ability to defend oneself. You maliciously interpreted the analogy about how a pilots license increases your risk of dying in a plane crash not because riding on a plane is more dangerous when you have pilots license but because of other behaviors that a pilots license correlates with.
No it is not, you are saying two completely different things.
Does having a pilots livense reduce your likelihood of dying in plane crash?
Vs
Does having a pilots license give you the ability to be responsible for your own safety in plane?
Two completely different things
Yeah and we’re not talking about pilots or flying here so I don’t know what your point is.
Their claim is that having a gun to defend yourself from someone with a gun works (more guns reducing gun crime), but that facts clearly show that gun control is the way to reduce gun crimes and having a personal defence gun is a liability and increases your risk of being a victim of gun crime.
No, it’s that it grants you the opportunity to defend yourself, not that you can.
That is not what that means. Nowhere is that claimed. Maybe ask ChatGPT to rephrase it for you.
You’re unable to come up with a response to my argument so you try to discredit me by claiming I used AI to write it?
That’s not just a lazy and unintelligent rebuttal but it’s just sad too.
Can you respond to something without a strawman?
That is not what I said. I told you to ask ChatGPT to rephrase the initial point for you. Y’know so you could understand it instead of strawmanning it.
Why would I spend the time having a discussion with you when you accuse me of using ChatGPT then don’t even have the balls to stand behind your claim?
Have a nice day, I’m not putting anymore effort into this conversation.
Yeah, I thought this was just bad faith, but now it’s clearly entirely malicious. I’m not a pro at phrasing, but I clearly said rephrase it FOR YOU.
You maliciously interpreted what OP said, where they never said anything about crime rates, just about ability to defend oneself. You maliciously interpreted the analogy about how a pilots license increases your risk of dying in a plane crash not because riding on a plane is more dangerous when you have pilots license but because of other behaviors that a pilots license correlates with.
Okay.