# Great gun control commercial **URL:** \ **Category:** Great Debates\ **Created:** [April 18, 2013, 4:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/great-gun-control-commercial/656010 "2013-04-18T04:52:50Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![Mijin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mijin/32/9369_2.png) [@Mijin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mijin)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2013, 1:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/great-gun-control-commercial/656010/41 "2013-04-19T13:01:42Z")
> [@HurricaneDitka](#): > > The Founding Fathers couldn’t have possibly conceived of the power that radio / TV / the Internet gives to individual voices to reach millions of people instantly. Given that the tools we use for free speech are so much more powerful today, shouldn’t we set aside the First Amendment protections and put reasonable limits on our constitutional rights. We shouldn’t automatically drop it, no. But I think it’s fine to revisit parts of the constitution to see if they still make sense in a radically changed world. Note that we’re talking about _amendments_ in the first place. Freedom of speech is still basically OK as is (I don’t agree with the exact rules and exceptions, but it’s basically there). The right to bear arms OTOH we debate even what the intention of it was in the first place, and clearly it does not work as is in the modern world, where, absent restrictions, any shmoe could acquire the means to kill thousands of innocents. ---
**Author:** ![carnivorousplant](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnivorousplant/32/3563_2.png) [@carnivorousplant](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/carnivorousplant)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2013, 1:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/great-gun-control-commercial/656010/42 "2013-04-19T13:11:30Z")
> [@Human\_Action](#): > > Black powder is very dirty, and such weapons must be cleaned often to stay operable. I have no idea how accurate it is, but the Sharpe novels have guys urinating down the barrels of Napoleonic War rifles to clean the gunk out in an emergency. ---
**Author:** ![carnivorousplant](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/carnivorousplant/32/3563_2.png) [@carnivorousplant](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/carnivorousplant)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2013, 1:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/great-gun-control-commercial/656010/43 "2013-04-19T13:33:24Z")
> [@Mijin](#): > > Freedom of speech is still basically OK as is (I don’t agree with the exact rules and exceptions, but it’s basically there). The right to bear arms OTOH we debate even what the intention of it was in the first place, and clearly it does not work as is in the modern world, where, absent restrictions, any shmoe could acquire the means to kill thousands of innocents. Glad you aren’t on the Supreme Court. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Mijin](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mijin/32/9369_2.png) [@Mijin](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Mijin)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2013, 5:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/great-gun-control-commercial/656010/44 "2013-04-19T17:26:14Z")
> [@carnivorousplant](#): > > Glad you aren’t on the Supreme Court. Why? What is wrong with what I just wrote? ---
**Author:** ![chorpler](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chorpler/32/2888_2.png) [@chorpler](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/chorpler)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2013, 5:30pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/great-gun-control-commercial/656010/45 "2013-04-19T17:30:33Z")
> [@carnivorousplant](#): > > I have no idea how accurate it is, but the Sharpe novels have guys urinating down the barrels of Napoleonic War rifles to clean the gunk out in an emergency. No way, that’s bizarre! Does anybody have any further info on whether this was actually done? ---
**Author:** ![Smapti](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/smapti/32/17938_2.png) [@Smapti](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Smapti)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2013, 6:21pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/great-gun-control-commercial/656010/46 "2013-04-19T18:21:36Z")
> [@Bricker](#): > > Didn’t get the memo from your own side? > > It’s no longer “gun control.” It’s “gun violence.” > > See, everyone should be against violence. > > But Americans like freedom, so they don’t support “control.” Where we would be without people like you to tell us what we believe, I don’t know. ---
**Author:** ![XT](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/xt/32/456_2.png) [@XT](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/XT)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2013, 7:47pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/great-gun-control-commercial/656010/47 "2013-04-19T19:47:38Z")
> [@astro](#): > > I think it’s quite effective. > > [http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LORVfnFtcH0&feature=player\_embedded](http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LORVfnFtcH0&feature=player_embedded) It’s only effective if you are already convinced that more and stricter gun control/gun banning is necessary, and you are ignorant of the fact that gun laws HAVE changed…quite radically…since the 2nd was written. Just like communications technology has changed since the days of broadsheets and town criers, and our laws have changed wrt the 1st Amendment as well. This video plays on ignorance and the meme that things, wrt gun controls and laws are exactly what they were 200+ years ago. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2013, 8:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/great-gun-control-commercial/656010/48 "2013-04-19T20:26:44Z")
> [@chorpler](#): > > No way, that’s bizarre! Does anybody have any further info on whether this was actually done? I think I remember on some message board that urine was used as a solvent by Napoleon’s troops. Not sure at all if its true. ---
**Author:** ![mlees](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/ba8739/32.png) [@mlees](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mlees)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2013, 9:27pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/great-gun-control-commercial/656010/49 "2013-04-19T21:27:59Z")
I think some folks will conclude that this commercial suggests that anything more modern than a flintlock muzzleloader should be banned. It will only reenforce the meme [in the minds of those who believe it] that Obama wants to take your gun away. ---
**Author:** ![Fiddle\_Peghead](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fiddle_peghead/32/3506_2.png) [@Fiddle\_Peghead](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fiddle_Peghead)\ **Post date:** [April 19, 2013, 10:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/great-gun-control-commercial/656010/50 "2013-04-19T22:16:12Z")
> [@Gary\_T](#): > > The Constitution is often praised for its adaptability to changing times, and to a large degree that is due to intentionally broad language. Hence the right to bear arms, whatever they may be, and not just the right to bear muzzle-loading muskets. \ You’re ignoring the fact that adaptability can go both ways. Mustn’t you also give credence to the idea that the founding fathers would support limiting the right to bear arms if they were alive today and saw how much said arms have changed? ---
**Author:** ![Lumpy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/lumpy/32/446_2.png) [@Lumpy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lumpy)\ **Post date:** [April 20, 2013, 2:05am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/great-gun-control-commercial/656010/51 "2013-04-20T02:05:14Z")
> [@Fiddle\_Peghead](#): > > You’re ignoring the fact that adaptability can go both ways. Mustn’t you also give credence to the idea that the founding fathers would support limiting the right to bear arms if they were alive today and saw how much said arms have changed? Judging from their writings, I’d say they’d still be pretty dubious on political grounds of the idea of only troops and gendarmes having weapons, and the “body of the yeomanry” disarmed. ---
**Author:** ![John\_Mace](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/john_mace/32/185_2.png) [@John\_Mace](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/John_Mace)\ **Post date:** [April 20, 2013, 2:38am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/great-gun-control-commercial/656010/52 "2013-04-20T02:38:10Z")
> [@Fiddle\_Peghead](#): > > You’re ignoring the fact that adaptability can go both ways. Mustn’t you also give credence to the idea that the founding fathers would support limiting the right to bear arms if they were alive today and saw how much said arms have changed? I don’t really give a flying fuck what the FF would do if they were alive today. We agree that we live by the words in the constitution, and if we don’t like them, we can change them ourselves. If not, then so be it. ---
**Author:** ![Fiddle\_Peghead](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/fiddle_peghead/32/3506_2.png) [@Fiddle\_Peghead](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Fiddle_Peghead)\ **Post date:** [April 20, 2013, 4:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/great-gun-control-commercial/656010/53 "2013-04-20T04:28:57Z")
> [@John\_Mace](#): > > I don’t really give a flying fuck what the FF would do if they were alive today. We agree that we live by the words in the constitution, and if we don’t like them, we can change them ourselves. If not, then so be it. Hey, I’m all for that. I was just questioning the idea that you can’t interpret the Constitution one way, without considering other alternatives, the flying fuck. ---
**Author:** ![esmeralda2](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/ccd318/32.png) [@esmeralda2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/esmeralda2)\ **Post date:** [April 20, 2013, 10:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/great-gun-control-commercial/656010/54 "2013-04-20T10:01:24Z")
> [@Gary\_T](#): > > Effective at what? Dramatizing a specious argument? Maybe. Reassuring those who buy into that argument? Probably. \*\*Making a point that will persuade people to change their views? Hardly.\*\*Should our laws reflect that the right to a free press applies only to hand operated movable type presses such as they had in revolutionary times, and does not apply to modern printing machinery, much less to advanced technology like radio, television, and the internet? I don’t think so. The Constitution is often praised for its adaptability to changing times, and to a large degree that is due to intentionally broad language. Hence the right to bear arms, whatever they may be, and not just the right to bear muzzle-loading muskets. Commercials such as this really don’t add anything useful to the discussion of the topic. > > On preview, what **HurricaneDitka** said. Nothing will change the view of the vast majority of those who want guns. You cannot compare modern printing machines with modern weaponry. It is a logical fallacy; the comparison is not a logical analogy. There is simply no logical comparison. But the pro-gun people rarely use logic; it’s all a matter of emotion, like little children act when a toy is going to be taken away: they simply have tantrums and repeat the same set of cliche and non-logical reasons over and over again. This gun control ad presents an actual logical argument against ‘the right to bear arms,’ but the pro-gun side will never accept it. ---
**Author:** ![Nars\_Glinley](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/nars_glinley/32/8177_2.png) [@Nars\_Glinley](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nars_Glinley)\ **Post date:** [April 20, 2013, 11:28am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/great-gun-control-commercial/656010/55 "2013-04-20T11:28:02Z")
> [@esmeralda2](#): > > Nothing will change the view of the vast majority of those who want guns. > > You cannot compare modern printing machines with modern weaponry. It is a logical fallacy; the comparison is not a logical analogy. There is simply no logical comparison. But the pro-gun people rarely use logic; it’s all a matter of emotion, like little children act when a toy is going to be taken away: they simply have tantrums and repeat the same set of cliche and non-logical reasons over and over again. > > This gun control ad presents an actual logical argument against ‘the right to bear arms,’ but the pro-gun side will never accept it. Please provide the name of the logical fallacy employed. The one that you used is ad hominem. ---
**Author:** ![esmeralda2](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/ccd318/32.png) [@esmeralda2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/esmeralda2)\ **Post date:** [April 20, 2013, 11:31am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/great-gun-control-commercial/656010/56 "2013-04-20T11:31:52Z")
> [@Nars\_Glinley](#): > > Please provide the name of the logical fallacy employed. The one that you used is ad hominem. False analogy. There is no comparison between a modern printing press and a modern firearm. And I didn’t use an ad hominem. I used a simile in making a point about a thinking process. I didn’t address my criticism toward ‘the man,’ I addressed it toward a thinking process. You don’t know your logic, obviously. ---
**Author:** ![Nars\_Glinley](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/nars_glinley/32/8177_2.png) [@Nars\_Glinley](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nars_Glinley)\ **Post date:** [April 20, 2013, 11:50am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/great-gun-control-commercial/656010/57 "2013-04-20T11:50:03Z")
> [@esmeralda2](#): > > False analogy. There is no comparison between a modern printing press and a modern firearm. > And I didn’t use an ad hominem. I used a simile in making a point about a thinking process. I didn’t address my criticism toward ‘the man,’ I addressed it toward a thinking process. You don’t know your logic, obviously. Why is there no comparison? Because you say so? Please show your work. BTW, the actual analogy being used is for all types of mass communication, not just the printing press. Saying that the pro-gun side “throw tantrums” is attacking the man. ---
**Author:** ![esmeralda2](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/ccd318/32.png) [@esmeralda2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/esmeralda2)\ **Post date:** [April 20, 2013, 12:15pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/great-gun-control-commercial/656010/58 "2013-04-20T12:15:41Z")
> [@Nars\_Glinley](#): > > Why is there no comparison? Because you say so? Please show your work. BTW, the actual analogy being used is for all types of mass communication, not just the printing press. > > Saying that the pro-gun side “throw tantrums” is attacking the man. Simply comparing any two things on earth that are modern as opposed to their older, simpler versions is not logical. A modern weapon is many times more dangerous than an earlier one, as those at the time of the American revolution. A printing press and most other objects that have been modernized have not become more dangerous. Also, a printing press’s purpose is not to kill. A firearm’s purpose is to kill. You could just as well have used an outhouse and a modern flush toilet for your attempted analogy. There is no correlation. The point of the advertisement is that the modern firearm is more dangerous. The printing press and toilet are not, neither are they made for the purpose of killing. There is no correlation. I criticized a thinking process, not the man. Read more carefully. ---
**Author:** ![esmeralda2](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/ccd318/32.png) [@esmeralda2](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/esmeralda2)\ **Post date:** [April 20, 2013, 12:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/great-gun-control-commercial/656010/59 "2013-04-20T12:16:48Z")
> [@Nars\_Glinley](#): > > Why is there no comparison? Because you say so? Please show your work. BTW, the actual analogy being used is for all types of mass communication, not just the printing press. > > Saying that the pro-gun side “throw tantrums” is attacking the man. Simply comparing any two things on earth that are modern as opposed to their older, simpler versions is not logical. A modern weapon is many times more dangerous than an earlier one, as those at the time of the American revolution. A printing press and most other objects that have been modernized have not become more dangerous. Also, a printing press’s purpose is not to kill. A firearm’s purpose is to kill. You could just as well have used an outhouse and a modern flush toilet for your attempted analogy. There is no correlation. The point of the advertisement is that the modern firearm is more dangerous. The printing press and toilet are not, neither are they made for the purpose of killing. There is no correlation. I criticized a thinking process, not the man. Read more carefully, and look up the definition of Ad Homenim ---
**Author:** ![JXJohns](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jxjohns/32/469_2.png) [@JXJohns](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/JXJohns)\ **Post date:** [April 20, 2013, 12:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/great-gun-control-commercial/656010/60 "2013-04-20T12:59:00Z")
> [@esmeralda2](#): > > …This gun control ad presents an actual logical argument against ‘the right to bear arms,’ but the pro-gun side will never accept it. The ad implies that firearms have changed since the 18th century but firearm laws have not. That is simply not true. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/great-gun-control-commercial/656010.md?page=2) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/great-gun-control-commercial/656010.md?page=4)