Arguing with members of the CODE. alliance only gets you into a never-ending morass of goalpost moving and verbal gerrymandering.
Their arguments tend to fall into what are called the 3 Ds of Internet Arguing: Dismiss, Deflect and Derail.
Dismissal entails denying that ganking exists at all in the first place, evidence be damned. This often involves long and tortured explanations about how CODE. really isn't ganking at all and is perfectly rational and egalitarian. Occasionally it involves explaining to miners how they’re completely misinterpreting things, they’re oversensitive or overemotional. This dismissal also includes the mysoginistic tactics of "Blaming the Victim". It is a maxim of the CODE schadenfreude to insist that it is the miner who is at fault, for a host of ever evolving yet ever dubious reasons.
Deflection is all about verbal judo and flipping the accusations around on the miner. In terms of arguing ganker privilege this usually appears as variations of “No! miners are the criminals” or “Miners steal ore and discriminate against us gankers!”
Derailing is the most common version of these arguments and serves to change the subject of the conversation, usually by the people in question. Suddenly, instead of discussing the ganker griefing/trolling culture’s dismissive role for miners, we’re discussing the hierarchy of asteroid oppression or why we’re talking about this instead of, say, racketeering and extortion (permits). Or dealing with assertions that, by extension, anyone who agreed with the anti-hisec ganking wants to ban all PVP.
CODE. is not a case of emergent game play that took CCP by surprise – it is simply a group of sociopathic gankers who decided that whenever and wherever a capsuleer mined or transported ore, henchmen and mafia-like enforcers would threaten and harass them with space violence.