At the time of the Second Amendment, a trained Continental soldier could load and fire his musket no more than four times a minute. It was too inaccurate to bother aiming beyond close range. The ball's exit velocity was less than a quarter of an AR-15 bullet's velocity.
https://www.propublica.org/article/uvalde-police-gunman-ar-15-delays
@maxkennerly At the time of the First Amendment, a stagecoach could carry a written message halfway across the country in no fewer than 25 days. It was too slow to bother with urgent communications. Printing machines for mass distribution were unaffordable to the common man.
Its revealing to argue that more speech means more murders.
@Spicewalla It's revealing that you read that into my argument when I never said anything of the sort...
@Spicewalla Or, if you don't understand someone's argument, you could ask them to clarify.
But that wouldn't let you get your jollies off by lecturing people for slights you've wrongly perceived on the internet, now, would it?
If you want to feel outraged and pick fights, go to Twitter. Because that bullshit isn't adding anything to the conversation over here.
@LouisIngenthron
Yes, plausible deniability is the benefit of not actually making an argument at all. The downside of not actually making an argument is that everybody else is free to frame it for you in the least charitable fashion.