I agree, although that's almost always how arguments like this go. It doesn't have to be about guns specifically, it's just that a common (wrong) argument is that if you can imagine a situation where allowing or prohibiting something would be good, that means it should be allowed or prohibited in all situations.
Like I said, this definitely comes up with other topics, but the gun debate seems particularly bad in this regard. The big problem is that people seem to like or dislike guns for reasons that really have nothing to do with the rationalizations produced by either side, so the number of people really trying to find an honest conclusion aren't significant enough to affect the debate. And when your goal is simply to win, manipulative arguments are easy to excuse.
The other problem is that good data is hard to come by when it comes to firearm ownership and how it fits with crime. Comparisons are often made between places like Washington DC, with very restrictive gun laws, and places like Goat Rope, TX, where everyone and their brother has 10 guns. Clearly there are differences other than gun ownership, and finding comparisons that control for every other variable seems to be quite difficult.
Facebook
Twitter