Gun Argument 101


January 30, 2013, 10:09 PM
A person who has suffered a gun violence tragedy (Giffords, Brady, etc) is not automatically given a pass on critique of their reasoning when they make a voluntary choice to enter into a public debate.

The critique of their reasoning is not an invalidation of their loss.

It is appalling that some legislators are inducing these emotionally vulnerable people to enter into the public fray at a terrible time for them. It confuses the emotional outlet. Those folks should be allowed to grieve in peace not be invited to emote in a political setting which demands vigorous debate of something they surely do not want nor are likely capable of debating in the neccessary rational manner.

When did we lose this simple truth?

If you enjoyed reading about "Gun Argument 101" here in archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join today for the full version!
January 30, 2013, 10:16 PM
When did we lose this simple truth?

As soon as they found out you can sway the simple minded by stirring up emotions.

January 30, 2013, 10:40 PM
Gabby Giffords is a gun owner, former legislator, her husband is also a gun owner. She was the victim if a shooting. I'm all for critique of her argument, but I see no problem allowing her to speak.

January 30, 2013, 11:16 PM
I do not know what gun stance G. Gifford had prior to her tragic attack. The reason for her current opposition I can only speculate; maybe she feels guns do more harm than good, maybe she is truly fearful of guns, maybe she believes that removing guns from society will truly reduce violence, maybe .

So now she forms an anti-gun group and uses her injury/status to make an emotional appeal to the public. Can I blame her for using this approach? No. If you truly believe in a cause, you will use whatever tools available to win your position.

I often thought of how facts & logic stack up against emotional appeal as a way to sway public opinion. A lot may depend on who is delivering the message; a personal pitch by Ms. Gifford herself surely enhances the message. An emotional appeal hits the gut immediately. Reasoning takes time and research, far beyond the patience of the average American. Emotions cool over time whereas facts stand the test of time. But when the emotional fires are continually stoked and the media paints the opposition as cold and heartless, you have a formidable foe in play. Logic is powerless in this arena.

Our best bet is to use the greed of the politicians who stand a chance of losing their job. Money and power have a big voice in Washington.

If you enjoyed reading about "Gun Argument 101" here in archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join today for the full version!