Gun Control & RKBA

A. I don't care what your background is. It has no relevance to this discussion.
B. I don't care what your stance is on AR-15s, nor your opinion on what it does or doesn't do for democrats. It too has no relevance to my discussion with Marengo or you.
C. Yes, yes, & yes. to #1, #2, & #3. You can dig your heals in and double down that you didn't present a straw man, but it's okay to accept that you did. It may have been by accident, but it shows character when you accept it.

I said to Marengo. "If you are so certain that I am wrong, what is your source listing a quantifiable count to refute my original estimate?"

You rebutted with the straw man: Further, in #13 you imply that Marengo needs to prove that what 1)you asserted didn't happen. 2) You must realize that proving a negative is impossible.

In 1 you set up the straw man, implying something I didn't say or mean and in 2 you shoot down your straw man. I'll let you figure it out. A straw man is a common form of argument and is an informal fallacy based on giving the impression of refuting an opponent's argument, while actually refuting an argument that was not presented by that opponent,

No where in my proposition do I assert that he must prove something didn't happen. I'm more than well aware that you cannot prove a negative. That is why I worded my question the way I did.

Like I said, I'm asking him to provide basis for his rebuttal. I'm happy to admit where I may be wrong in over estimating or using fluffy language or if I was just talking out of my ass. But absent of evidence to the contrary, I'll stick by what I said.