Democrats push to make gun control a 2018 issue

[tomndebb]

@RTFirefly

Oh, you poor dear, having to endure such remarks!
. . .
There, there, lie down and I’ll put a cold compress on your forehead.

Let’s keep the discussion focused on the issues, facts, and philosophical positions and leave the personal baiting to the BBQ Pit.

Knock it off.

[ /Moderating ]

[Johnny_Ace]

@Johnny_Ace

OK, a caution to both sides here:

There’s more; unfortunately, there isn’t a direct link to it. You have to go to
https://www.ucrdatatool.gov/ranking.cfm

and click on the link near the upper right labeled ‘Caution against ranking.’
Note: UCR is what the wiki page uses, not sure what statistics the Giffords Institute is using.

Sorry, the link is toward the upper left, not the upper right.

[GIGObuster]

@D_Anconia

A term coined by a blogger on Mother Jones is not a legitimate thing.

Actually it is not legitimate to wilfully avoid what the site is using to report that that remains a fallacy:

Nutpicking combines elements of several other fallacies; it primarily relies on guilt by association by seeking to tarnish a movement’s reputation by associating it with what the “nut” is saying or doing, knowing that these statements or actions are generally considered to be unacceptable, if not outright reprehensible. Secondly, it is a type of ad hominem as it attacks an opponent’s character (via the negative association), rather than countering the opponent’s actual views or arguments.

The advent of the Internet (especially in conjunction with Sturgeon’s Law) has made nutpicking far easier due to the massive expansion of recorded, publicly available and searchable material. Similar to Skarka’s Law it’s practically always possible to find some random whackjob whose opinions can be associated with your opponent’s school of thought, and it’s certainly much easier than it would have been in ancient Greece.

So we have to add another fallacy that you used in your post here, that was a “killing the messenger” one.

@D_Anconia

Also, why don’t you call out the crazy loudmouths on your side, rather than giving them a pass?

Because those are not in power, nor I do see them gaining power soon, far more likely it will be that the ones that do get to positions of power will be very modest on what they do regarding guns in the end.

OTOH:

All those Republican rascals in congress that are doing the three monkey act and continue to see nothing wrong? They do need to be thrown out ASAP.

NRA, Russia and Trump: How 'dark money' is poisoning American democracy

[D_Anconia]

@GIGObuster

Because those are not in power, nor I do see them gaining power soon, far more likely it will be that the ones that do get to positions of power will be very modest on what they do regarding guns in the end.

What does being in power have to do with being a crazy loudmouth?

[GIGObuster]

@D_Anconia

What does being in power have to do with being a crazy loudmouth?

The reason why your point is fallacy and the other is reality.

[D_Anconia]

@GIGObuster

The reason why your point is fallacy and the other is reality.

Cite? How is my point a fallacy, when you think that “our babies! are being slaughtered!!!” is not?

[GIGObuster]

@D_Anconia

Cite?

Already offered and ignored, the crazies of the right are running the congress asylum. While I can grant that some positions from the left are crazy, they are positions that try to do something against gun violence, the right and the NRA are very busy making sure that the situation gets worse.

NRA national spokesperson Dana Loesch lied to Stoneman Douglas student Emma...

Emma Gonzalez, a student at Marjory Stoneman Douglas High School, had a simple question for National Rifle Association (NRA) national spokesperson Dana Loesch during CNN’s gun violence town hall: “Do you believe that it should be harder to obtain the semi-automatic … weapons and the modifications for these weapons to make them fully automatic, like bump stocks?”

Instead of providing the NRA’s well established positions on these questions, Loesch gave a series of dishonest explanations that sought to hide the NRA’s fringe absolutism against gun regulation.

After some niceties, Loesch purported to answer Gonzalez’s question by saying, “I don’t believe that this insane monster should have ever been able to obtain a firearm, ever. I do not think that he should have gotten his hands on any kind of weapon. That’s number one.”

According to Loesch, “This individual was nuts and I, nor the millions of people that I represent as a part of this organization, that I’m here speaking for, none of us support people who are crazy, who are a danger to themselves, who are a danger to others, getting their hands on a firearm.”

Loesch was lying.

The NRA opposes adding prohibiting categories to the gun background check system that could have included the Stoneman Douglas gunman. As the NRA’s website states, “NRA opposes expanding firearm background check systems, because background checks don’t stop criminals from getting firearms.” It also opposes a policy called a “Gun Violence Restraining Order” or a “Red Flag” law that has been widely cited as a policy that could have stopped the gunman from having access to firearms. These laws allow family members and law enforcement to petition courts to temporarily remove people’s access to firearms who are a danger to themselves or others.

Loesch’s dishonesty didn’t stop with that claim. Moments later, while talking about the National Instant Criminal Background Check System (NICS), Loesch said, “It is not federal law for states to report convictions to the NICS system. It’s not federally mandated.” Loesch also argued that the states can convict a person, they “can adjudicate the mentally unfit,” but “if a state does not report it to the National Crime Information Center, when you run that form, this individual – this madman passed a background check.” (NRA CEO Wayne LaPierre also used this talking point in his February 22 speech at CPAC.)

What Loesch failed to mention is that states can’t be required to report disqualifying records because of the outcome of a 1997 NRA-backed lawsuit Printz v. United States.

The lawsuit was the NRA’s attempt to invalidate the entire national background check system in court before it could be implemented. While the system eventually went into effect, the outcome of Printz damaged its effectiveness, as the Supreme Court ruled in a 5-4 decision in favor of the NRA’s argument that requiring states to perform background checks for a federal system violated the 10th Amendment.

[D_Anconia]

@GIGObuster

Already offered and ignored, the crazies of the right are running the congress asylum. While I can grant that some positions from the left are crazy, they are positions that try to do something against gun violence, the right and the NRA are very busy making sure that the situation gets worse.

https://www.mediamatters.org/blog/2018/02/22/nra-national-spokesperson-dana-loesch-lied-stoneman-douglas-student-emma-gonzalez/219465

Is “our babies are being slaughtered” an appeal to emotion fallacy, or not?

[GIGObuster]

@D_Anconia

Is “our babies are being slaughtered” an appeal to emotion fallacy, or not?

Since that is a nut pick, why continue to press on? Oh right, I forgot, of course the fallacy has to rule the day… /s
Of course, that is indeed easier that dealing with what the NRA and the Republicans in power are doing.

[D_Anconia]

@GIGObuster

Since that is a nut pick, why continue to press on? Oh right, I forgot, of course the fallacy has to rule the day… /s
Of course, that is indeed easier that dealing with what the NRA and the Republicans in power are doing.

There’s no such thing as a nut pick. Libtards from Mother Jones can’t just invent new phrases.

And it’s sad that you would try to adopt those terms.

[Jonathan_Chance]

@D_Anconia

Is “our babies are being slaughtered” an appeal to emotion fallacy, or not?

That’s the third time in a page you’ve asked a variant on this question, D’Anconia. And in other threads you’ve had that habit as well. It’s not good debate practice and you should stop it.

Also, in a general sense for everyone: One more example of sniping and I’ll close the thread while believing this one is irreparably ruined.

[GIGObuster]

@D_Anconia

There’s no such thing as a nut pick.

Dictionary.com | Meanings & Definitions of English Words

noun
1.
a thin, sharp-pointed table implement or device for removing the edible kernels from nuts.

Of course, it is duly noted that this is the second tome you do aboid dealing with what the NRA and the republicans in power are doing right now, so I guess the point stands.

[D_Anconia]

Sorry, never mind.

[JohnT]

@D_Anconia

Cite? How is my point a fallacy, when you think that “our babies! are being slaughtered!!!” is not?

What is it that bothers you about this quote? Is it that the kids being killed are not, specifically, hers? Or is it because, as a mother of two stepchildren, she calls them “babies”?

Do you not know any mothers? Any women?

The moral and intellectual corruption of the middle-aged and older American male is highlighted by your greater anger over a quote than by the death of children. Seriously, guy, you need to go to a silent place and think about where you are on this. Talk to a priest. Work with children who have been shot, or families that have lost their children to guns. Because you have named yourself after a character in a novel which has as its central theses that “A is A”, that existence exists, and the world about you has a reality which cannot be ignored or tortured into existence by ideology… and yet torturing reality in the service of ideology is exactly how you are reacting. Drop the ideology of “guns = freedom”, accept the fact that “an ocean of guns leads to mass killings”, and do your namesake proud.

[D_Anconia]

@JohnT

The moral and intellectual corruption of the middle-aged and older American male is highlighted by your greater anger over a quote than by the death of children. Seriously, guy, you need to go to a silent place and think about where you are on this. Talk to a priest.

Please don’t tell me what to do, or even think. It’s highly inappropriate.

[tomndebb]

You folks are getting way too close to the sniping that Jonathan Chance already advised you all to quit.

Stop it.
No more arguing over “fallacies.”
No more telling other posters what they should or must do.
No more telling other posters what they must not or should not do.

[ /Moderating ]

[Kolak_of_Twilo]

So,

First National Bank of Omaha has announced they will be dropping their NRA branded VISA card.

Enterprise, Alamo and National car rental companies will no longer give NRA members a discount.

I don’t recall any businesses being willing to risk incurring the wrath of the NRA previously. I’m sure the rabid gun fetishists and Fox will hand wave this away but I suspect these companies may well smell blood in the water.

Or have morals.

[Hentor_the_Barbarian]

@Kolak_of_Twilo

So,

First National Bank of Omaha has announced they will be dropping their NRA branded VISA card.

Enterprise, Alamo and National car rental companies will no longer give NRA members a discount.

I don’t recall any businesses being willing to risk incurring the wrath of the NRA previously. I’m sure the rabid gun fetishists and Fox will hand wave this away but I suspect these companies may well smell blood in the water.

Or have morals.

No. Nor has a GOP donor ever before announced that he will cut off funding as long as the GOP keeps this shit up. Nor has there been a time of viral videos of.people destroying their AR-15s before.

I’m glad that idiot GOP leaders keep trying to take on teenagers on Twitter. “We should rename the AR-15 the ‘Marco Rubio’ because they are so easy to buy,” one tweeted today. Awesome.

I’m also glad that CPAC hosted.LaPierre and Loesch, so that they could double down on crazy talk right there at the big right wing event.

It’s undoubtedly different right now.

[BobLibDem]

When this first happened, I thought it would go the way of all other mass shootings. Outrage, obligatory thoughts and prayers, “this is not the time…”, inaction, wait for next massacre.

This time is different. This is now a movement. I don’t know if it will succeed, but it seems to me that the pro-gun side isn’t as terrifying anymore. The NRA can’t simply threaten to flex a muscle and force politicians back in line. Some gun owners are saying “You know what, who needs these kind of weapons?” Unthinkable a month ago. We now have legions of new voters and energizing of older voters. What it looks like to me is a left version of the Tea Party. The intensity is the same, though they are different in that the Tea Party was just a visceral reaction to the notion of a black president. This new movement has legs and I think it’s unwise to dismiss it.

[Kolak_of_Twilo]

…and now add MetLife to the list of companies ending discounts to NRA members.

It will be interesting to see if this continues to gather momentum.