You said its "Likely" and "lack of Skill". What you wrote implies that most people that shoot them do so for the reasons stated.
No it doesn't.
Here's what I wrote.
"Ironically, I think it's likely that a person who doesn't train enough will often choose a larger caliber because they think it will make up for their lack of skill."
This is a statement about what I think is likely that untrained people often do. It doesn't make any assertions at all about "most people" who shoot/choose large calibers.
It doesn't mean that "most people" who choose/shoot large calibers are untrained.
It is incorrect to assume that the
converse of a statement is true; more importantly you can't take the converse of someone's statement and say that's what they said.
If I say that most cats are aloof, that doesn't imply that I think that most aloof things are cats--the two concepts certainly aren't equivalent.
The fact that the vast majority of prime numbers are odd, doesn't mean that it's true that most odd numbers are prime. In fact, the first statement is true (all prime numbers except for one are odd) but the converse is false (most odd numbers are not prime).
The fact that most dogs have four legs doesn't mean that most things with four legs are dogs. Cats are not dogs, spiders missing two legs are not dogs, 4 legged tables are not dogs.
In other words, my assertion that I think it's likely that untrained people often do a particular thing, doesn't mean that I am also asserting that the converse is true--that it's likely that people who do that particular thing are untrained people.
John threw out a blanket statement.
I stand by what I said. But your attempt to attribute its converse to me is not going to work because I didn't claim that the converse was true and because, in fact, I don't believe that the converse is true.
Look, maybe you really don't understand all this converse stuff and really think I said what you are claiming I said.
If that's the case, forget all that and just go with this:
I said what I said. It's clear. We can talk about what I said as much as you want.
I didn't say what you are claiming I said. I can't help it if you don't understand why that's true, but it is true. I've done the best I can do trying to explain it to you and if you want to keep talking about that, feel free, but I've spent as much effort in that direction as I'm going to.
From my last post, here are some very clear statements that I made and stand by and that may help straighten things out:
There are clearly people who choose large caliber handguns for reasons having nothing to do with lack of training.
There are certainly trained people who choose large caliber handguns.
There are certainly many reasons that people might choose large caliber handguns other than out of a hope that it will make up for a lack of skill.