# Obama to Seek New Assault Weapons Ban

**URL:** <https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-to-seek-new-assault-weapons-ban/487475>\
**Category:** Great Debates\
**Created:** [February 26, 2009, 3:45am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-to-seek-new-assault-weapons-ban/487475 "2009-02-26T03:45:47Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Showing post:** 483

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![YogSothoth](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/y/8edcca/32.png) [@YogSothoth](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/YogSothoth)\
**Post date:** [March 20, 2009, 11:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-to-seek-new-assault-weapons-ban/487475/483 "2009-03-20T23:33:42Z")

</div>

> [@Todderbob](#):
>
> Try [reading the stickies at the top of the forum](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=448632).
> 
> Good luck skewing _that_ to defend your position, it’s pretty blunt.

Hmm, never been to a place where calling someone a liar is forbidden. Color me surprised, but ok, my fault. Seriously though, who reads the TOS of any website before posting? 😛 I’ll admit laziness on my part, but I’m not buying a house here, I’m posting on a message board

> [@FinnAgain](#):
>
> Also, as a point of fact, I correctly stated what your own words were, and that you’d shifted the goalposts and added additional rationalizations after your first argument was shown to be absurd. That was the truth. That is the truth. That will be the truth. Calling the truth a lie is about as effective as your tactic of claiming that hand guns and shotguns or hand guns and high powered long range rifles are fungible. Reality remains impervious to your distortions. Go figure.
> 
> Your original risible rationalization for violating the Bill of Rights was “necessity”, only.  
> Once when you realized how poor a metric that was, you added in additional rationalizations. And then started claiming that since you shifted the goalposts once you were caught, that it was somehow a lie to point out what your original argument had been.

And here is where your critique of me is flawed. Do you want to quote me on my first post in this topic? I asked a question, with a simple 2 sentence elaboration. Should I have launched into a nuanced, thousand word essay on every aspect of gun control? I gave a simple response to the topic about a hundred posts in, that’s it. I wasn’t looking to articulate my entire stance on guns and for you or anyone else to take that as anything but a beginning is an intellectually dishonest debate tactic.

Then people questioned that premise. Should I have nitpicked them and assumed that those replies were their ONLY objection with gun control? Your reply included _"Assault weapons also have no functional definition and the term is a meaningless scare phrase. "_ Shall I assume that is your ONLY objection to the AWB? You didn’t mention anything about incompentent writers of the bill at all, yet you use it as a foundation for your later objections! And you’re criticizing me for that? Your entire post mentions nothing of the DoJ, additional research, or anything else except what I posted.

Just as you are attributing my supposed moving of the goalposts, you have done exactly that. I was not ignorant enough to assume that your reply was your only position, kindly do not assume the same with mine. And if that was insulting, then pre-emptive apologies. However your debate tactic of falsely attributing a single, 3 sentence post as my **entire** argument is nothing short of extreme strawman and a sad waste of what could have been a decent debate, beginning with insults you decided to hurl first. Again, apologies if pointing that out is against forum rules

---

_[View the full topic](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/obama-to-seek-new-assault-weapons-ban/487475)._