What s gun owner does with their guns is irrelevant when they've been lost and are now in the possession of someone who shouldn't have them.

This isn't complicated, you just dont know how to be wrong.

The wild west had stricter gun control ffs.

I really don't. Someone else made a claim, and I responded with the same amount of evidence they had - none. Someone else, who believed their claim without evidence asked me for evidence (absurd). I pointed out that the burden of evidence isn't on me (burden of evidence is a debate term, look it up). Some 18 people who don't understand burden of evidence or confirmation bias decided to side with someone presenting no evidence for their position, while being displeased I refused to show evidence for the opposite position. Meanwhile both claims are largely unverifiable, making it a stupid thing to debate over in the first place.

I simply decided to short circuit a pointless conversation, about something unimportant, with morons.

Since you opened your mouth about debate, and clearly don't understand burden of evidence, you're with the morons. Happy Wednesday.

I'm not wasting my time reading that. Find a better use for your time.

No. If we want to play that game then the burden of evidence lies with the original claim, which I simply rebutted.

>But it's pretty obvious that someone was doodling on some other material that was sitting on top of them.

It's pretty blatantly obvious this is not what happened.

Have we argued the Galileo gambit at any point this episode? Better do it 5 times in 5 minutes.

Because the people writing the article did not intend for you to realize they weren't literally destroying millions of dollars of art.

Those are not the same thing and it's unclear why you're making that equivocation. Facepalm is right.