What do you think the point of the antibiotics comment was?
I explained it in my previous post. It was the same as the point I was making by talking about bypass surgeries. It was in response to the implicit argument you made in the OP but have since abandoned (that something which doesn't remove any chance of a recurrence of the thing it's intended only to reduce is a bad policy).
In fact I wasn't sure what point you were trying to make (or Polaris--who I was responding to as well), which is why I asked what the significance of this purported concession was.
Polaris seems to be making the argument the antibiotics and bypass surgery comments were addressing. Polaris seems to think that prior to this statement of Biden's, proponents of Obama's proposals believed they would entirely eliminate the possibility of gun massacres.
But your answers to my question (what is the significance of this purported "concession") have been inconsistent.
No, the argument I was making was that Biden was in denial. Biden was quoted as saying; "Nothing we are going to do is fundamentally going to alter or eliminate the possibility of another mass shooting or guarantee that we will bring gun deaths down,"
Yes--you said he made a concession and that he is in denial. Those claims wrt this statement aren't consistent.
You also claimed that this "concession" was the same thing as claiming the policies in question will help reduce mass shootings (although you played fast and loose with the terms of the statement--swapping from the proposed policies taken collectively to the AWB only and from "mass shootings" to "gun deaths" or even "gun crime").
This second claim is consistent with the "denial" claim, but not with the "concession" claim.
If he is supporting the AWB, surely he thinks that it will have some positive affect on gun crime. I feel that when a person says they think a law will not eliminate crime, they are still suggesting that it will do some good. I think the AWB will do nothing and I also suspect Biden knows this.
Again, you're being sloppy with language. I'm fairly certain Biden doesn't know what you think.
I'm fairly sure that's not what you meant to say. I think you meant to say that Biden "knows" the AWB will do nothing. If that's what you meant, I believe you are wrong.
First, Biden is not precognitive. (I think you really mean "believes" and not "knows". Otherwise, you'd just be question begging wrt the effectiveness of the proposals. That is, your argument would depend on the premise that the proposals will have no effect--which really is the issue at controversy.)
Second, Biden spoke of the proposals collectively and didn't single out the AWB.
Third, his "concession" was only about gun massacres and not gun violence or gun crimes in general.
So now that it's clear that you're not claiming Biden has conceded anything, it seems you're only accusing Biden of not believing what he claims to believe. What evidence do you have for this strange position?
We can certainly discuss the merits of Obama's gun proposals or the AWB in particular, but you seem to be trying to do something else entirely.
But I really have no proof of what Biden thinks, just expressing my opinion based on how he was quoted.
Based on what exactly? You yourself said that what you called a concession is the equivalent of the claim that the proposals will have a positive effect (which, as I've pointed out repeatedly, is not a concession at all). Nothing there indicates that Biden believes they will not be effective.
[ETA: I would remind you that you yourself said, "I feel that when a person says they think a law will not eliminate crime, they are still suggesting that it will do some good." What you are saying now is the exact opposite. You're claiming that based on Biden's statement, he really believes it will
not do any good. This is what I mean when I accuse you of being inconsistent. You are making contradictory statements.]
That's an utterly worthless "opinion" since you can provide no support whatsoever for it. Additionally, it doesn't address the merits of the proposals at all. It's a wholly unsubstantiated claim that Biden is being insincere.
