Dionysusigma
Member
Well, in a move to get my life back on track after a year of just BSing around, I'm taking an English Comp II class in order to get myself ready for the fall, when I'll be going back full-time.
The next paper we have coming up is a position paper, and each student picks their own topic. I'll give you three guesses as to what I've picked, and the fist two don't count.
Here's the catch: From what I was able to gather, another paper will be due next week, only this time we argue the opposite side. This is going to be a problem, as any argument that the antis have is going to be unuseable b/c of the non-logic involved in all of them. Writing BS is something that I just do not do... I've tried it before, and the only good that came of it were the pretty flames it put forth when I later set it on fire.
Another thing--in today's "discussion" (more like an unmoderated fight) two things came along that I hadn't considered... waiting periods and police protection. I need facts on both; specific examples (the case where police are not obligated to protect you), the reasons why waiting periods don't work, etc. I kept quiet during the foray, with the saying "Don't argue with an idiot--people watching may not be able to tell the difference" in mind. Also, I didn't want to say something, have something interjected back, and not have a well-stated reply.
I want to blow them (figuratively, of course ) out of the water with this. Right now, the only course of action I can think of is to get the "+/- BS pro-gun-control" paper in first, then send in my true paper stating why gun control is a way-bad-freaking idea.
Any direction to court cases, published studies, etc. is more than greatly appreciated.
The next paper we have coming up is a position paper, and each student picks their own topic. I'll give you three guesses as to what I've picked, and the fist two don't count.
Here's the catch: From what I was able to gather, another paper will be due next week, only this time we argue the opposite side. This is going to be a problem, as any argument that the antis have is going to be unuseable b/c of the non-logic involved in all of them. Writing BS is something that I just do not do... I've tried it before, and the only good that came of it were the pretty flames it put forth when I later set it on fire.
Another thing--in today's "discussion" (more like an unmoderated fight) two things came along that I hadn't considered... waiting periods and police protection. I need facts on both; specific examples (the case where police are not obligated to protect you), the reasons why waiting periods don't work, etc. I kept quiet during the foray, with the saying "Don't argue with an idiot--people watching may not be able to tell the difference" in mind. Also, I didn't want to say something, have something interjected back, and not have a well-stated reply.
I want to blow them (figuratively, of course
) out of the water with this. Right now, the only course of action I can think of is to get the "+/- BS pro-gun-control" paper in first, then send in my true paper stating why gun control is a way-bad-freaking idea.Any direction to court cases, published studies, etc. is more than greatly appreciated.
