Reply #6: Strawmen?

[Wickerman]

Well, its gets off to an inauspicious start by showing its Right Wing leanings with the attack on the UN. I love we post trash like this on our leftist site

But, on to the body of work...


1: The more helpless you are, the safer you are from criminals.

One isn't helpless because they don't have a gun. That would be a, yep, you guessed it, a strawman. One could know martial arts, carry a knife, fuck, one could be invisible - that's a pretty good defense and makes you less than helpless, wouldn't you say? Also makes another excellent strawman.

2: An intruder will be incapacitated by tear gas or oven spray, but if shot with a .357 magnum will become outraged and kill you.

Er, strawman. If you miss that one, you are beyond hope, put the NRA kool-aid down, you have all the hyperbole memorized to such an extent you get the joke by just hearing the punchline. In other words, no one said "An intruder... shot with a .357 magnum will become outraged and kill you."

3: A woman raped and strangled is morally superior to a woman with a smoking gun and a dead rapist at her feet.

See #2

4: The Second Amendment, ratified in 1787, refers to the National Guard, which did not exist until 130 years later, having been formed in 1917.

This is a strawman, without doubt. On the side of the Anti's, albeit.

5: The phrases Right of the people to peaceably assemble, right of the people to be secure in their homes, enumerations herein of certain rights shall not be construed to disparage others retained by the people, and the powers not delegated herein are reserved to the states respectively, and to the people all refer to individuals. However, The right of the people to keep and bear arms refers to the state.

I think they have a point here. I did not search for said strawman.

6: Rifles and handguns arent necessary for national defense. This explains why the U.S. armed forces have tens of millions of them.

Strawman - who said that rifles and handguns aren(sic)t for the National Defense?

7: Private citizens shouldnt have handguns because they are not military weapons. Also, private citizens shouldnt have assault rifles because they are military weapons.

See item #2

8: A handgun, with up to four controls, is far too complex for the typical adult to use, as compared to an automobile that has up to 20 controls.

See item #2

9: Guns cause violence, which is why there are so many mass killings at gun shows.

Guns don't cause violence, idiots with unfettered access to guns make violence worse on some occasions. Gun shows, for this purpose, are strawmen.

10: A majority of the population supports gun control, just as a majority of the population supported owning slaves.

Yep, a majority of our population was stupid about slavery. A majority thought Bush did a good job as President after 9-11, too. Neither of which has a damn thing to do with a discussion of the pros or cons of gun control. That would be called, a, wait for it.... a



No, not a Wickerman, a strawman, dammit.



The straw man fallacy is a rhetorical technique (also classified as a logical fallacy) based on misrepresentation of an opponent's position. Its name is derived from the use of straw men in combat training.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man

Ok, I gave a half-hearted attempt at identifying about 1/2 of these as strawmen. Your mileage may vary. I'll leave it to more agile minds than my own to tear up my weak arguments.