Now Fear This
Most of us know that there is a cause-and-effect relationship between mass murders and access to guns, and we are also aware that nothing is being done to deal with both the violence and the ease in which any nut anywhere can get his (and it is almost always a him) hands on a gun. So while they march like tin soldiers (but with powerful weapons) around Starbucks,Target, and Home Depot frightening average citizens with impunity, they know that Congress won’t do anything because they’ve intimidated them.
And now Larry Pratt and his pals are directly threatening members of Congress. Pratt’s group, Gun Owners of America, is to the right of the NRA, if that is even possible.
You should do your job in constant trepidation that:
* Should your constituents disapprove of your job performance, you will be publicly criticized from the soap box;
* Should you enact unconstitutional legislation in violation of your oath of office, you will be voted out via the ballot box;
* Should criminal charges be brought against Americans for crimes which are not authorized by the U.S. Constitution, these prosecutions will be nullified in the jury box; and
* Should you attempt to disarm Americans the way the British crown tried 240 years ago, the same sovereign people who constituted this government using the cartridge box someday may need to reconstitute it, as clearly anticipated by the Declaration of Independence.
These comments by Pratt and pals are not meant to make anyone feel protected from dictators or mass murderers. They are directed at us. The ammosexuals want us to know that they are not afraid of legislators. Make no mistake: that was a shot across the bow of our entire form of government. They have declared themselves in charge, and frankly, they may be right.
Click here for reuse options!Copyright 2014 Liberaland
By: Tengrain
Fully caffeinated with twice the sugar, unabashedly liberal. Award-winning Americans United blogger, blogs at Mock Paper Scissors, and sometimes at Crooks and Liars.
You can follow @Tengrain on Twitter, or you might see him enjoying coffee somewhere in Seattle at any given moment of the day.
112 responses to Now Fear This
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
R.J. Carter July 28th, 2014 at 16:07
I’m really having a hard time finding anything wrong with those four bullet points.
fantagor July 28th, 2014 at 16:21
One bullet point for each head of state the NRA wants dead. And that’s just today.
Eric Trommater July 28th, 2014 at 16:25
Not a big fan of articles that condemn NRA scare tactics and then add in “Most of us know that there is a cause-and-effect relationship between mass murders and access to guns, and we are also aware that nothing is being done to deal with both the violence and the ease in which any nut anywhere can get his (and it is almost always a him) hands on a gun,” ya know, just to scare us.
R.J. Carter July 28th, 2014 at 16:32
Yep. Way too absolutist with talk like that. Someone says something that there’s a “cause-and-effect relationship between mass murders and access to guns,” all it takes it to point out that the largest mass murders didn’t use those things. The worst school massacre on American soil didn’t use a single bullet, and Jim Jones killed a whole town with Kool-Aid.
Eric Trommater July 28th, 2014 at 16:44
Mass shootings are actually a relatively rare way to die in America. I have a huge problem with the hype machine using them to instill fear in the population while they ignore the several hundred things that kill far more people. Maybe I’m jaded.
ChrisVosburg July 28th, 2014 at 17:44
Eric, what’s the bar chart describing? Needs legend.
Eric Trommater July 28th, 2014 at 17:46
Dark blue is the number of mass killings each of those years and the light blue is the number of mass shootings.
ChrisVosburg July 28th, 2014 at 17:49
Thanks!
Jeff Allen July 28th, 2014 at 18:50
If there was a double thumbs up button I would be pushing it. Well stated, properly documented.
ChrisVosburg July 28th, 2014 at 17:42
The “Jonestown Massacre” was more of a mass suicide, wasn’t it?
Eric Trommater July 28th, 2014 at 17:49
Guyana is also not on American soil as far as I know but I get his point.
R.J. Carter July 28th, 2014 at 17:53
It could be–and is–termed that way. It depends on whether they knew the brew was poison, or if they cared.
Tengrain July 28th, 2014 at 19:31
Hi Carter –
Thanks for reminding me of Jonestown, 38 years ago and during the Carter Administration. You kinda help me make the case about the rarity of non-gun mass killings.
Rgds,
Tengrain
R.J. Carter July 28th, 2014 at 20:49
No problem! The Bath Massacre — the largest school massacre in history, sans bullets — was 1927, under Coolidge. Remove the gun access entirely, people will get creative. Like the 168 who died in Oklahoma City in 1995, under Clinton.
R.J. Carter July 28th, 2014 at 16:34
And then makes the statement that “they are not afraid of legislators” — like we should be afraid of them?
jasperjava July 28th, 2014 at 16:46
What about the Sarah-Palinesque reading of “history” in which the American Revolution was somehow fought over gun rights against that gun-grabbing George III? Nothing wrong with that?
How about the fact that these gun-nuts consider ANY common-sense gun regulation attempt as an excuse to murder democratically elected government officials, and impose themselves as a dictatorial regime? No problem here?
R.J. Carter July 28th, 2014 at 16:56
You mean the Coercive Acts? The Powder Alarm? The Suffolk Resolves? That history?
As to your second paragraph, I have never seen that worded that way from anybody running the NRA, except when translated through a liberal fearmongering filter.
edmeyer_able July 28th, 2014 at 17:09
It is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.
And they way this is accomplished is thru the voting booth, what you propose is over throw by force.
R.J. Carter July 28th, 2014 at 17:17
Actually, the first three proposals indicate exactly making change through public opinion and voting. The last option is the last option for a reason — because it shouldn’t be the first option.
R.J. Carter July 28th, 2014 at 16:07
I’m really having a hard time finding anything wrong with those four bullet points.
fantagor July 28th, 2014 at 16:21
One bullet point for each head of state the NRA wants dead. And that’s just today.
Eric Trommater July 28th, 2014 at 16:25
Not a big fan of articles that condemn NRA scare tactics and then add in “Most of us know that there is a cause-and-effect relationship between mass murders and access to guns, and we are also aware that nothing is being done to deal with both the violence and the ease in which any nut anywhere can get his (and it is almost always a him) hands on a gun,” ya know, just to scare us.
R.J. Carter July 28th, 2014 at 16:32
Yep. Way too absolutist with talk like that. Someone says something that there’s a “cause-and-effect relationship between mass murders and access to guns,” all it takes is to point out that the largest mass murders didn’t use those things. The worst school massacre on American soil didn’t use a single bullet, and Jim Jones killed a whole town with Kool-Aid.
Eric Trommater July 28th, 2014 at 16:44
Mass shootings are actually a relatively rare way to die in America. I have a huge problem with the hype machine using them to instill fear in the population while they ignore the several hundred things that kill far more people. Maybe I’m jaded.
ChrisVosburg July 28th, 2014 at 17:44
Eric, what’s the bar chart describing? Needs legend.
Eric Trommater July 28th, 2014 at 17:46
Dark blue is the number of mass killings each of those years and the light blue is the number of mass shootings.
ChrisVosburg July 28th, 2014 at 17:49
Thanks!
Jeff Allen July 28th, 2014 at 18:50
If there was a double thumbs up button I would be pushing it. Well stated, properly documented.
ChrisVosburg July 28th, 2014 at 17:42
The “Jonestown Massacre” was more of a mass suicide, wasn’t it?
Eric Trommater July 28th, 2014 at 17:49
Guyana is also not on American soil as far as I know but I get his point.
R.J. Carter July 28th, 2014 at 17:53
It could be–and is–termed that way. It depends on whether they knew the brew was poison, or if they cared.
Tengrain July 28th, 2014 at 19:31
Hi Carter –
Thanks for reminding me of Jonestown, 38 years ago and during the Carter Administration. You kinda help me make the case about the rarity of non-gun mass killings.
Rgds,
Tengrain
R.J. Carter July 28th, 2014 at 20:49
No problem! The Bath Massacre — the largest school massacre in history, sans bullets — was 1927, under Coolidge. Remove the gun access entirely, people will get creative. Like the 168 who died in Oklahoma City in 1995, under Clinton.
R.J. Carter July 28th, 2014 at 16:34
And then makes the statement that “they are not afraid of legislators” — like we should be afraid of them?
jasperjava July 28th, 2014 at 16:46
What about the Sarah-Palinesque reading of “history” in which the American Revolution was somehow fought over gun rights against that gun-grabbing George III? Nothing wrong with that?
How about the fact that these gun-nuts consider ANY common-sense gun regulation attempt as an excuse to murder democratically elected government officials, and impose themselves as a dictatorial regime? No problem here?
R.J. Carter July 28th, 2014 at 16:56
You mean the Coercive Acts? The Powder Alarm? The Suffolk Resolves? That history?
As to your second paragraph, I have never seen that worded that way from anybody running the NRA, except when translated through a liberal fearmongering filter.
edmeyer_able July 28th, 2014 at 17:09
It is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness.
And they way this is accomplished is thru the voting booth, what you propose is overthrow by force.
R.J. Carter July 28th, 2014 at 17:17
Actually, the first three proposals indicate exactly making change through public opinion and voting. The last option is the last option for a reason — because it shouldn’t be the first option.
Eric Trommater July 28th, 2014 at 16:49
The NRA is the lobbying arm of the gun manufacturing business. Their job is to get more people to buy guns by scaring them. By hyping mass shootings as if they were a health hazard that every American has to deal with on a daily basis, you are doing their job for them.
bahlers July 28th, 2014 at 21:46
I’m sorry, but where do you get your info? The NRA prevented a student in my area from being expelled for having his hunting shotgun in his truck off of school property. So how exactly is this promoting the sale of guns?
Pick6 July 28th, 2014 at 22:29
Your anecdote notwithstanding, if you can claim with a straight face that the NRA is something more than the propaganda and lobbying arm of the gun and ammo manufacturers, then you haven’t been paying attention to what the NRA leadership has done to the organization over the last several decades.
bahlers July 28th, 2014 at 22:33
Sure they are, but I’m not saying that the NRA doesn’t have the gun lobby in their back pocket. There are many different aspects to the NRA
Pick6 July 28th, 2014 at 22:48
The business end of the NRA has long trumped the representation of responsible gun owners. Sure, there are the coupons and the tips, but that’s where their connection to members ends. Since they keep their membership secret, we will never know how many long time members have given up their memberships in response to the absolutely insane pronouncements of LaPierre, Pratt, Nugent, and other lying fearmongers. We do, however, know their enemies list, one that is so extensive that it fills pages and includes groups like the American Academy of Pediatrics – and they are not ashamed to post it online. I cannot be convinced that the membership at large agrees with the that list, or supports the comments of a person like Nugent.
bahlers July 28th, 2014 at 22:39
And there are numerous examples across the nation.
Eric Trommater July 28th, 2014 at 16:49
The NRA is the lobbying arm of the gun manufacturing business. Their job is to get more people to buy guns by scaring them. By hyping mass shootings as if they were a health hazard that every American has to deal with on a daily basis, you are doing their job for them.
bahlers July 28th, 2014 at 21:46
I’m sorry, but where do you get your info? The NRA prevented a student in my area from being expelled for having his hunting shotgun in his truck off of school property. So how exactly is this promoting the sale of guns?
Pick6 July 28th, 2014 at 22:29
Your anecdote notwithstanding, if you can claim with a straight face that the NRA is something more than the propaganda and lobbying arm of the gun and ammo manufacturers, then you haven’t been paying attention to what the NRA leadership has done to the organization over the last several decades.
bahlers July 28th, 2014 at 22:33
Sure they are, but I’m not saying that the NRA doesn’t have the gun lobby in their back pocket. There are many different aspects to the NRA
Pick6 July 28th, 2014 at 22:48
The business end of the NRA has long trumped the representation of responsible gun owners. Sure, there are the coupons and the tips, but that’s where their connection to members ends. Since they keep their membership secret, we will never know how many long time members have given up their memberships in response to the absolutely insane pronouncements of LaPierre, Pratt, Nugent, and other lying fearmongers. We do, however, know their enemies list, one that is so extensive that it fills pages and includes groups like the American Academy of Pediatrics – and they are not ashamed to post it online. I cannot be convinced that the membership at large agrees with the that list, or supports the comments of a person like Nugent.
bahlers July 28th, 2014 at 22:39
And there are numerous examples across the nation.
ChrisVosburg July 28th, 2014 at 17:49
Larry Pratt reads the riot act to Carolyn Maloney: Should criminal charges be brought against Americans for crimes which are not authorized by the U.S. Constitution, these prosecutions will be nullified in the jury box
Which crimes are authorized by the US Constitution, again? I forget.
bahlers July 28th, 2014 at 21:45
Any crime that is committed before a law is in acted is considered illegal. So I guess those would be authorized, lol. Their wording was a little awkward to say the least.
ChrisVosburg July 29th, 2014 at 09:50
bahlers writes: Any crime that is committed before a law is in acted is considered illegal. So I guess those would be authorized, lol.
Congratulations, you make less sense than Larry Pratt.
bahlers July 31st, 2014 at 18:27
Not saying that I agree with their policy, just trying my hardest to come up with something that could potentially be considered a rational thought to explain why they wrote what they did.
ChrisVosburg July 28th, 2014 at 17:49
Larry Pratt reads the riot act to Carolyn Maloney: Should criminal charges be brought against Americans for crimes which are not authorized by the U.S. Constitution, these prosecutions will be nullified in the jury box
Which crimes are authorized by the US Constitution, again? I forget.
bahlers July 28th, 2014 at 21:45
Any crime that is committed before a law is in acted is considered illegal. So I guess those would be authorized, lol. Their wording was a little awkward to say the least.
ChrisVosburg July 29th, 2014 at 09:50
bahlers writes: Any crime that is committed before a law is in acted is considered illegal. So I guess those would be authorized, lol.
Congratulations, you make less sense than Larry Pratt.
bahlers July 31st, 2014 at 18:27
Not saying that I agree with their policy, just trying my hardest to come up with something that could potentially be considered a rational thought to explain why they wrote what they did.
Jeff Allen July 28th, 2014 at 18:44
What is frightening is a collection od random generalizations, talking points, and loose relational pairings that pass muster for print. Like R.J. said, the first 3 bullet points are the very non-violent, gun-free, educated citizen rights and responsibilities we should all be standing behind AND using first to effect change in government. In fact, as just a recent example, the left is waging a campaign now on Twitter called #FixTheHouse in which they desire Boehner’s ouster. Isn’t that the very essence of points 1 and 2?
Jeff Allen July 28th, 2014 at 18:44
What is frightening is a collection of random generalizations, talking points, and loose relational pairings that pass muster for print. Like R.J. said, the first 3 bullet points are the very non-violent, gun-free, educated citizen rights and responsibilities we should all be standing behind AND using first to effect change in government. In fact, as just one recent example, the left is waging a campaign now on Twitter called #FixTheHouse in which they desire Boehner’s ouster. Isn’t that the very essence of points 1 and 2?
Pick6 July 28th, 2014 at 19:17
Am a long, long time fan of Tengrain and Mock, Paper, Scissors – the wit, the humor, the insights, always on target. Reading this piece, I got shivers up and down my spine. Of course, Tengrain is spot on. I think I’ve always known at some level where the gun lunatics really wanted to take things, but now, seeing it in print, all my alarm bells are going off. I want to hover over my family, friends, and colleagues with a magical shield, the danger is so real and near. The first three points are tossed in by Pratt as a ruse, an accommodation to avoid the outcry if he just posted the fourth point as a call to arms and sedition, his true intention.
Tengrain is right – open season on elected officials has been declared and sedition proclaimed, right out loud for all to see. And, they may now, or soon, be in charge. Thinking about that makes me aware that the dismal pictures of everyday life in war zones I’ve seen over the years with people trying to go about their business in the company of maniacs with long guns slung over their bodies . . . in charge . . . . and make note that our gun nutz demonstrating openly showing their disrespect for the rights of others in ways designed to intimidate look exactly the same. Chilling. No civilized person would ever compose what Pratt did. Killing our government officials for some perceived, subjective violation is never acceptable, or an option.
mea_mark July 28th, 2014 at 19:28
The Oligarchy ignores national boundary lines and lives and thrives on instability. Our enemy is the richest that manipulate us and use’s us like tools. We all need to become more educated and be on guard from the Oligarchy. The time to “eat the rich” is now.
bahlers July 28th, 2014 at 21:41
Sorry, but where did they post an “open season” on elected officials? Were we reading the same post?
Pick6 July 28th, 2014 at 22:39
I’m sure we read the same post. Seems you don’t mind seeing option #4 being put forth by a group of rabble rousing lunatics, but I do. There is no option 4 in a civilized society governed by an elected representative government. Elected officials shouldn’t be under the threat of death if they displease some nutters with a policy or vote or position. I gasped at the notion that the author of those 4 options and those who would agree with him would be the ones deciding Constitutional matters. They can’t even get their sacred 2nd Amendment right and, clearly, they are quick to anger and fauxrage. Scary stuff.
bahlers July 28th, 2014 at 23:00
I think we did read the same post. There is no open season as you claim. Just a statement of fact, that I think most people could agree would happen whether they would support such an action or not, if an outright ban and confiscation of guns would result in.
bahlers July 28th, 2014 at 23:01
And it seems that the courts agree more with Pratt then you on the issue of the 2A.
Pick6 July 28th, 2014 at 19:17
Am a long, long time fan of Tengrain and Mock, Paper, Scissors – the wit, the humor, the insights, always on target. Reading this piece, I got shivers up and down my spine. Of course, Tengrain is spot on. I think I’ve always known at some level where the gun lunatics really wanted to take things, but now, seeing it in print, all my alarm bells are going off. I want to hover over my family, friends, and colleagues with a magical shield, the danger is so real and near. The first three points are tossed in by Pratt as a ruse, an accommodation to avoid the outcry if he just posted the fourth point as a call to arms and sedition, his true intention.
Tengrain is right – open season on elected officials has been declared and sedition proclaimed, right out loud for all to see. And, they may now, or soon, be in charge. Thinking about that makes me aware that the dismal pictures of everyday life in war zones I’ve seen over the years with people trying to go about their business in the company of maniacs with long guns slung over their bodies . . . in charge . . . . and make note that our gun nutz
demonstratingopenly showing their disrespect for the rights of others in ways designed to intimidate look exactly the same. Chilling. No civilized person would ever compose what Pratt did. Killing our government officials for some perceived, subjective violation is never acceptable, or an option.mea_mark July 28th, 2014 at 19:28
The Oligarchy ignores national boundary lines and lives and thrives on instability. Our enemy is the richest that manipulate us and use us like tools. We all need to become more educated and be on guard from the Oligarchy. The time to “eat the rich” is now.
bahlers July 28th, 2014 at 21:41
Sorry, but where did they post an “open season” on elected officials? Were we reading the same post?
Pick6 July 28th, 2014 at 22:39
I’m sure we read the same post. Seems you don’t mind seeing option #4 being put forth by a group of rabble rousing lunatics, but I do. There is no option 4 in a civilized society governed by an elected representative government. Elected officials shouldn’t be under the threat of death if they displease some nutters with a policy or vote or position. I gasped at the notion that the author of those 4 options and those who would agree with him would be the ones deciding Constitutional matters. They can’t even get their sacred 2nd Amendment right and, clearly, they are quick to anger and fauxrage. Scary stuff.
bahlers July 28th, 2014 at 23:00
I think we did read the same post. There is no open season as you claim. Just a statement of fact, that I think most people could agree would happen whether they would support such an action or not, if an outright ban and confiscation of guns would result in.
bahlers July 28th, 2014 at 23:01
And it seems that the courts agree more with Pratt then you on the issue of the 2A.
bahlers July 28th, 2014 at 21:50
Is anyone else concerned with the blatant lie told by Tengrain? Mass shootings are not on the increase in recent years.
bahlers July 28th, 2014 at 21:54
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2012/12/17/graph-of-the-day-perhaps-mass-shootings-arent-becoming-more-common/
Carla Akins July 28th, 2014 at 22:02
I see nothing in the piece stating mass shootings are on the rise in recent years.
Eric Trommater July 28th, 2014 at 22:04
That’s because it isn’t there. It’s a fantasy straw man like the good guy with a gun argument.
bahlers July 28th, 2014 at 22:05
So by straw man, are you implying that such instances never exist? If so, you are grossly mistaken my friend.
Eric Trommater July 28th, 2014 at 22:19
Sometimes I open a bunch of reply boxes under a person’s comments and then type like the alphabet or something in each box so they see the “one person is typing” under a bunch of comments and hang around thinking they are getting attention. In this box I typed this instead of the alphabet.
bahlers July 28th, 2014 at 22:31
So you decided to post this since you cannot come up with a rational response to my comment?
Eric Trommater July 28th, 2014 at 22:41
No, because you don’t know what a straw man argument means and you are posting on the internet with grownups. I find that odd. It’s probably past your bedtime.
( . . . for future reference a straw man argument is an argument that is set up by the debater deliberately to be knocked down, such as presenting a a hypothetical scenario where under perfect conditions a “good guy with a gun” could come in handy and starting the argument with “the only thing that stops . . . ” or in the case of your reading into this article, expressing out rage over a a statistic that wasn’t presented.)
bahlers July 28th, 2014 at 22:47
There are plenty of “straw men” that stop crimes from occurring each and every day. By conservative estimates by the CDC this number exceeds 500,000 per year. So, you are saying that 500,000 DGUs per year is a straw man argument?
And now you try and claim that the author stating a causal relationship between access to guns and mass murder is a statistic that was not presented? Take a look at the first sentence of the second paragraph.
Eric Trommater July 28th, 2014 at 23:05
In relation to the Sandy Hook massacre,”what if there was somebody there with a gun” is the definition of a straw man argument. DGU stats are mostly about the prevention of property crimes, something I’m sure you already knew.
bahlers July 29th, 2014 at 11:19
And how does straw man have anything to do with what I said? If you mean that the author is fabricating causation then you would be right.
Pick6 July 28th, 2014 at 22:50
hehehe ‘-)
bahlers July 28th, 2014 at 22:04
In the first full paragraph, Tengrain states “Most of us know that there is a cause-and-effect relationship between mass murders and access to guns”. If this is not a statement of mass murders being on the rise (as we all know there are record number of guns being sold each year of the Obama presidency) then I don’t know what is.
Carla Akins July 28th, 2014 at 22:08
I’m sorry, you can interpret any way you choose – its not my understanding of what he was saying.
bahlers July 28th, 2014 at 22:08
So what is your interpretation of what the author is saying? I don’t mean to be rude, just trying to understand your perspective.
Carla Akins July 29th, 2014 at 04:48
Only that the violence continues, in spite of recognizing the correlation between the two. If you are going to accuse someone of an outright lie – it had better be an outright lie, not something “read between the lines” as Pick6 indicated. You don’t have to agree with the piece, but you putting words into someone else’s opinion and then basing your accusations of lies on those assumptions would not be fair.
bahlers July 29th, 2014 at 11:18
It is an outright lie when the author states there is a causal relationship between access to guns and mass murder, how is it you and others cannot see that? If anything the Washington Post article clearly highlights that there is no relationship between guns and mass murder. How many times do I need to say it, correlation does not imply causation, not to mention the author completely fabricates the correlation that he wants and states it as causation.
Carla Akins July 29th, 2014 at 12:09
So now are you saying the “lie” is correlation/causation, or that mass shootings are on the rise?
bahlers July 29th, 2014 at 12:13
I’m saying what I said, that it’s an outright lie that there is a casual relationship between access to guns and mass murder (wich is what the author said). How is any of this even remotely true?
Pick6 July 28th, 2014 at 23:11
Jeez, you’re not doing it right. Let me help you out. First, take whatever device you are using and hold it out flat in front of you. Then, bring it right up close to your eyes. It will then be crystal clear as you’ll be able to read between the lines like bahlers. Lots of stuff can fit between those lines, you betcha’. ( snort, a la Lisa Loopner)
bahlers July 28th, 2014 at 21:50
Is anyone else concerned with the blatant lie told by Tengrain? Mass shootings are not on the increase in recent years.
bahlers July 28th, 2014 at 21:54
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2012/12/17/graph-of-the-day-perhaps-mass-shootings-arent-becoming-more-common/
Carla Akins July 28th, 2014 at 22:02
I see nothing in the piece stating mass shootings are on the rise in recent years.
Eric Trommater July 28th, 2014 at 22:04
That’s because it isn’t there. It’s a fantasy straw man like the good guy with a gun argument.
bahlers July 28th, 2014 at 22:05
So by straw man, are you implying that such instances never exist? If so, you are grossly mistaken my friend.
Eric Trommater July 28th, 2014 at 22:19
Sometimes I open a bunch of reply boxes under a person’s comments and then type like the alphabet or something in each box so they see the “one person is typing” under a bunch of comments and hang around thinking they are getting attention. In this box I typed this instead of the alphabet.
bahlers July 28th, 2014 at 22:31
So you decided to post this since you cannot come up with a rational response to my comment?
Eric Trommater July 28th, 2014 at 22:41
No, because you don’t know what a straw man argument means and you are posting on the internet with grownups. I find that odd. It’s probably past your bedtime.
( . . . for future reference a straw man argument is an argument that is set up by the debater deliberately to be knocked down, such as presenting a a hypothetical scenario where under perfect conditions a “good guy with a gun” could come in handy and starting the argument with “the only thing that stops . . . ” or in the case of your reading into this article, expressing out rage over a a statistic that wasn’t presented.)
*edit: You also used the phrase “blatant lie” in place of “if you read deeply enough” which of course is classic straw man arguing.
bahlers July 28th, 2014 at 22:47
There are plenty of “straw men” that stop crimes from occurring each and every day. By conservative estimates by the CDC this number exceeds 500,000 per year. So, you are saying that 500,000 DGUs per year is a straw man argument?
And now you try and claim that the author stating a causal relationship between access to guns and mass murder is a statistic that was not presented? Take a look at the first sentence of the second paragraph.
Eric Trommater July 28th, 2014 at 23:05
In relation to the Sandy Hook massacre,”what if there was somebody there with a gun” is the definition of a straw man argument. DGU stats are mostly about the prevention of property crimes, something I’m sure you already knew.
bahlers July 29th, 2014 at 11:19
And how does straw man have anything to do with what I said? If you mean that the author is fabricating causation then you would be right.
Pick6 July 28th, 2014 at 22:50
hehehe ‘-)
bahlers July 28th, 2014 at 22:04
In the first full paragraph, Tengrain states “Most of us know that there is a cause-and-effect relationship between mass murders and access to guns”. If this is not a statement of mass murders being on the rise (as we all know there are record number of guns being sold each year of the Obama presidency) then I don’t know what is.
Carla Akins July 28th, 2014 at 22:08
I’m sorry, you can interpret any way you choose – its not my understanding of what he was saying.
bahlers July 28th, 2014 at 22:08
So what is your interpretation of what the author is saying? I don’t mean to be rude, just trying to understand your perspective.
Carla Akins July 29th, 2014 at 04:48
Only that the violence continues, in spite of recognizing the correlation between the two. If you are going to accuse someone of an outright lie – it had better be an outright lie, not something “read between the lines” as Pick6 indicated. You don’t have to agree with the piece, but you putting words into someone else’s opinion and then basing your accusations of lies on those assumptions would not be fair.
bahlers July 29th, 2014 at 11:18
It is an outright lie when the author states there is a causal relationship between access to guns and mass murder, how is it you and others cannot see that? If anything the Washington Post article clearly highlights that there is no relationship between guns and mass murder. How many times do I need to say it, correlation does not imply causation, not to mention the author completely fabricates the correlation that he wants and states it as causation.
Carla Akins July 29th, 2014 at 12:09
So now are you saying the “lie” is correlation/causation, or that mass shootings are on the rise?
bahlers July 29th, 2014 at 12:13
I’m saying what I said, that it’s an outright lie that there is a casual relationship between access to guns and mass murder (wich is what the author said). How is any of this even remotely true?
Pick6 July 28th, 2014 at 23:11
Jeez, you’re not doing it right. Let me help you out. First, take whatever device you are using and hold it out flat in front of you. Then, bring it right up close to your eyes. It will then be crystal clear as you’ll be able to read between the lines like bahlers. Lots of stuff can fit between those lines, you betcha’. ( snort, a la Lisa Loopner)