How to win arguments
Step 1: Make assertion that focuses on a small group of people or one of many points made by said group:
Such “insurrectionist” philosophy is common among a small but vocal group of gun rights supporters. Insurrectionists assert that unrestricted access to guns of every kind is an essential element of freedom.
Step 2: Apply said assertion about a small group of people or their position on a larger scale or to a larger group of people:
If this insurrectionist logic were to be embraced by the Supreme Court, however, our democracy would be severely degraded. Such an interpretation of the Second Amendment would make even the most modest gun control legislation unconstitutional.
In short, make argument. Then point out why that argument is bogus. And you can be a writer for HuffPo.
May 2nd, 2008 at 1:29 pm
Reducto Ad Absurdium
Reduce an argument to the absurd, then use it against the supporters.
May 2nd, 2008 at 2:07 pm
An insurrection with… handguns? I know they have and can be used in assassinations and such, but handguns aren’t going to do much against armored police and the military.
May 2nd, 2008 at 2:14 pm
Also known as the straw man argument
May 2nd, 2008 at 6:38 pm
Man, that thirdpower keeps knocking em’ down.
May 2nd, 2008 at 7:21 pm
Alcibiades McZombie:
Not so fast! Take a look at What Good Can a Handgun Do Against an Army?
This article was linked by Oleg Volk over at A Human Right, and I enjoy reading it sometimes. I especially like the section on the Liberator pistol; I got the chance to see one up close (though behind glass) in a museum this summer.
May 2nd, 2008 at 7:54 pm
Argumentum Pants-shittium Ad Hysterium (Attempting to infect others with your pants-shitting hysterics as a means of shutting down logical debate).
The Declaration of Independence and the U.S. Constitution are, by the way, in fact both anti-democratic (one person can void the wishes of 65% of Congress, for example) and insurrectionist (“…alter or abolish it.”). But don’t tell anyone (they’ll never read them anyway, and you’d just make them uncomfortable).
May 2nd, 2008 at 11:52 pm
I do like Volk,However the Bushies got the military commissions act and patriot act 2 through,and now “signing statements” are an accepted fact.Personally I would be happy to see GW and Hillary sharing a gibbet after a fair trial,I don’t see much difference between the Apparatchiks of the left and right,they all detest freedom and fear an informed and armed populace with good reason.
May 3rd, 2008 at 1:10 pm
Amen, Tom Stone!
May 3rd, 2008 at 5:26 pm
… And, as with all straw man arguments, they rapidly become burning man arguments when even your most modest of debators blows it apart and exposes it to the harsh, acutely focused light of day.
Anyone got some marshmallows?