The safest way to ski is not to ski.
The safest way to sky-dive is not to sky-dive.
The safest way to have sex is not to have sex (I like the last one the most as it is touted by various groups).
That logic is absolutely broken.
The safest way to sky-dive is not to sky-dive.
The safest way to have sex is not to have sex (I like the last one the most as it is touted by various groups).
That logic is absolutely broken.
If you mean that foregoing experiences for safety's sake isn't your cup of tea, that's one thing; but claiming it's logically broken is simply false.
p | q | p ∧ q → ¬q
--+---+-----------
T | T | F You can't be safe and own a gun.
T | F | T You can be safe and not own a gun.
F | T | T You can be unsafe and own a gun.
F | F | T You can be unsafe and not own a gun.
p | q | p ∧ q ↔ ¬q
--+---+-----------
T | T | F You can't be safe and own a gun.
T | F | F You can't be safe and not own a gun.
F | T | T You can be unsafe and own a gun.
F | F | F You can't be unsafe and not own a gun. p | safe (p) | ¬p | safe (p) ↔ ¬p
--+----------+----+--------------
T | F | F | Owning a gun is unsafely owning a gun.
F | T | T | Not owning a gun is safely owning a gun.
edit: I think we can legitimately fix the confusing sentence to read "not owning a gun is safely not owning a gun".