People misunderstood what I intended
That happens a lot though so I'd really check if the problem might be with the way you're phrasing things, instead of with the way people are reading them.
When I read through your speech patterns it feels extremely slippery, like I am reading a story without a point, and when I try to deduce the point of the story, I get told "I never said that, you're putting words in my mouth".
And yes, I am, I have to, because I don't know what you're trying to accomplish with your replies. In order to do you the courtesy of responding to your questions, ideas, etc, I first have to do labor myself by actively trying to discover what it actually is you're arguing for/against.
It feels like instead of stating your case upfront, so people know what you're trying to say with your replies, the way you respond to replies makes it hard to figure out what you're actually trying to say, and then when people do their best to figure out what you're saying, and apparently fail. You tell them they're putting words in your mouth instead of clarifying your position. Then, when people try to get back on topic, you keep diverting to other topics that are of no meaning to the actual conversation, which again, makes it impossible to actually HAVE a conversation.
In a conversation, both parties should do their best to state their case, and inquire about the other persons case, in such a way that even if they don't agree, that they're at least on the same wavelength, but the way you respond to replies effectively makes that impossible because instead of focusing on one point of agreement or understanding it instead causes the conversation to slip into random directions.
My entire last reply to you was an example of me desperately trying to piece together some concrete framework that could be used to get the conversation back on track. If it's incorrect, clarify your position.
What I was saying also is that she seems to have been singled out here by some people because they apply IRL standards to a possibility for her that they don't apply to other characters. That's the double standard.
How is any of that relevant to whether or not Jessie would have dual wielded guns? It's not, it's just derailing. Who cares if people have a double standard? They might, they might not, but that's not what we were talking about, we were talking about Jessies gun. And if we instead move on to whether or not it's a double standard that people don't think Jessie can dual wield then we'll never get any clarification on anything ever because during that conversation, something else will come up.
Like that the conversation will spiral down until the end of time, without there ever being a consensus reached on anything.
People in here have made claims about her ability to do that, actually
Again, who cares? Those people also never said that if Jessie were to duel wield, it would be bullshit, or anything, they just tried to point out that dual wielding is generally difficult, and that therefore it's not weird if she can't do it. None of those people actually care about whether or not she can dual wield, it was just an aside in the story of whether or not Jessie could have two guns. But by going off on that tangent you are making it feel like you are slippery and conversations with you don't go anywhere.
It's simple.
"IRL, dual wielding doesn't work for shit".
"in FFVII, some people have weird abilities".
"Jesse might not have the weird ability to dual wield".
"Yes, she could have had that, but we don't know that she did so we can't make deductions based on it".
"It's also possible that she simply couldn't, that's not a double standard".
Now in my mind, I am already dreading that you might read that, and start a discussion saying something like "in real life people CAN dual wield because ....."......I don't care, it's not the point of my post, that entire tangent has lost any relevance to whether or not Jessie would have dual wielded guns if she had more than one. That argument should NEVER have gone beyond "some characters don't dual wield, so Jessie simply might not dual wield period".
Anything beyond that is you purposefully or accidentally derailing the conversation, and people going along with it in the hopes that if they simply follow your train of thought, they might be able to eventually tie up all the loose ends so that they can get back on topic.
Why are you opposed to clarity and a single sentence in the game specifying it's non-uniqueness?
Again, derailing, you say I put words in your mouth, but now you're putting words in mine, or thoughts in my head if you want to be pedantic (and I actually HAD to make that distinction because I was honestly worried that you might reply with "I never said you said that I just questioned why you're against it"), can you see how tiresome it could be to have to be that careful when talking to you?
Let's break that question down shall we? So I can explain why you don't talk to people like this.
"Why are you opposed to clarity and a single sentence in the game specifying it's non-uniqueness?"
You are already assuming I am opposed, let's remove the assertion and make it an actual question.
"are you opposed to clarity and a single sentence in the game specifying it's non-uniqueness?"
This would have been a better question, but you're already making a dishonest question here, you are already linking "being against a single sentence" with "being against clarity". This is NOT a good faith way to ask a question, it's a form of begging the question".
Instead you could have asked me "Would you be opposed to single sentence in the game specifying it's non-uniqueness for the sake of clarity? If so, why?".
That question would have felt like an actual attempt at us clarifying our positions, instead of an attack.
And I would respond with "I am not necessarily against it, if it's done naturally, I just don't think it's needed since it's already perfectly clear. He has a new coin later, therefore, it's clear that he has multiple coins. I also think that certain things are so trivial that explaining them all would be a bad idea since it's unnecessary and would bog down the game".
Every FF character is by and large superhuman through some means or dimension. They're not living in a reality where those limits are hard and fast rules. They're fluid. And it's not just VII, it's every Final Fantasy. 
