General Discussion

Edweird

(8,570 posts)

34. OK

Sat Jul 21, 2012, 07:34 PM

Jul 2012

A straw man is a type of argument and is an informal fallacy based on misrepresentation of an opponent's position.[1] To "attack a straw man" is to create the illusion of having refuted a proposition by replacing it with a superficially similar yet inequivalent proposition (the "straw man&quot , and refuting it, without ever having actually refuted the original position.[1][2]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man

For your response not to meet the criteria of "strawman" you're going to have to show me where I advocated for :
"unlimited and unrestricted gun (and accessories) rights"
and
"I need to start petitioning for grenade launchers and anti-aircraft weaponry to legally be installed on my roof"

I did no such thing. There are already numerous restrictions and limitations including, but not limited to, your beloved grenade launchers and anti-aircraft weaponry. If you have a serious question I will happily engage you.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

88 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

A message to those in cities who love guns: It's a sad world you live in. [View all] lindysalsagal Jul 2012 OP

Given how subjective that is, I feel free to tell you that you are sadly mistaken. Edweird Jul 2012 #1

+1,000,000,000,000 n/t GarroHorus Jul 2012 #15

So if I am not in favor of unlimited and unrestricted gun (and accessories) rights, Ruby the Liberal Jul 2012 #24

I believe that is what is called a 'strawman'. Edweird Jul 2012 #29

Actually no. It is a question. Ruby the Liberal Jul 2012 #30

OK Edweird Jul 2012 #34

I'm more interested in your purity test Ruby the Liberal Jul 2012 #36

There already are limits. Edweird Jul 2012 #37

You confuse me with a gun grab proponent. Ruby the Liberal Jul 2012 #38

Here are Federal Limits Edweird Jul 2012 #39

Oddly, I posted just that below in this very thread in response to someone arguing Ruby the Liberal Jul 2012 #42

Hey, we don't want to end abortion, we just want some limits. Edweird Jul 2012 #45

I just realized you aren't the OP. Edweird Jul 2012 #46

Would you prefer if she asked the question? Ruby the Liberal Jul 2012 #48

No, nothing like that. Edweird Jul 2012 #52

What I'd like to see: REP Jul 2012 #49

You mean like something similar to being licensed to drive a car? Ruby the Liberal Jul 2012 #53

Well, not like CA's DL program where you can fail the road test and drive on a learner's permit REP Jul 2012 #68

I don't see a problem with that. Edweird Jul 2012 #54

I think it's reasonable REP Jul 2012 #66

It's the proliferationists who truly live in fear... villager Jul 2012 #33

That's pretty disconnected from reality. Edweird Jul 2012 #35

so's your reply villager Jul 2012 #63

What 'mad scramble'? You're the minority on DU. Even more IRL. Edweird Jul 2012 #65

Yes, Edweird. Keep imagining this is an NRA discussion board villager Jul 2012 #67

Post removed Post removed Jul 2012 #69

Wow -- Stephen Baldwin can see this issue more clearly you than can!? villager Jul 2012 #70

Actually, I've always felt that gun OWNERS live in fear frazzled Jul 2012 #43

Nope. Not afraid. Edweird Jul 2012 #50

I always felt this way Texasgal Jul 2012 #57

What good will a gun do if you are asleep? blueamy66 Jul 2012 #83

LOL bongbong Jul 2012 #60

Yep. Gun Grabbers live in fear. They lie to try and spread their fear. Edweird Jul 2012 #64

Yep bongbong Jul 2012 #73

Unlike gun nuts who live in perpetual fear of weekly home invasions Scootaloo Jul 2012 #76

Gun religionists fear posts like yours bongbong Jul 2012 #87

Wow. Speaking of a sad world. Brickbat Jul 2012 #2

What about police and armed guards? bluerum Jul 2012 #3

I agree. JeepJK556 Jul 2012 #4

Yep, next step, NO PROTESTS WITHIN CITY LIMITS GarroHorus Jul 2012 #14

What part of the Constitution still applies? RC Jul 2012 #32

So you want the urban people disarmed Shankapotomus Jul 2012 #5

Urban usually vote anti-gun mayors=blue safeinOhio Jul 2012 #6

Gun control has racist and classist roots, especially in places like NYC ProgressiveProfessor Jul 2012 #7

At one time it might have. safeinOhio Jul 2012 #8

It has similar impacts, even today ProgressiveProfessor Jul 2012 #9

Being urban poor minority means a greater risk of safeinOhio Jul 2012 #11

Some do ProgressiveProfessor Jul 2012 #17

Most urban folk michreject Jul 2012 #44

What about people who live in cities who hunt Blue_In_AK Jul 2012 #10

I don't think a city dweller cares about safeinOhio Jul 2012 #12

You are in the wrong here. Everybody has a guaranteed right to own a gun. nt GarroHorus Jul 2012 #13

Felons too? What about Children? Ruby the Liberal Jul 2012 #19

Here's a clue, the right to vote is guaranteed , but children do not have that right and felons can GarroHorus Jul 2012 #20

No, you said, "Everybody has a guaranteed right to own a gun" so lets explore that. Ruby the Liberal Jul 2012 #21

YEs, they do. James Holmes had a guaranteed right to own firearms GarroHorus Jul 2012 #23

Okay - so let me get this straight. Ruby the Liberal Jul 2012 #25

Legally, they are not mentally ill until a court declares them incompetent. GarroHorus Jul 2012 #26

That isn't what you said though. You said "Everybody has a guaranteed right to own a gun" Ruby the Liberal Jul 2012 #27

You're going around in circles for no logical reason. GarroHorus Jul 2012 #28

I don't blame you. Lets look at the Gun Control Act of 1968. Ruby the Liberal Jul 2012 #31

Funny reply! bongbong Jul 2012 #61

I've started putting them all on ignore. If I wanted to read RW swill, I'd morningfog Jul 2012 #82

Just realized - since you brought it up, Ruby the Liberal Jul 2012 #71

Holmes bongbong Jul 2012 #88

Yes, non-violent felons. Their right to vote should be restored also. Tejas Jul 2012 #77

What a load of crap. zappaman Jul 2012 #16

Prohibitionists: guns for me but not thee. Tejas Jul 2012 #78

I don't love guns, nor do I hate them. I live in a small city. Marrah_G Jul 2012 #18

I'm keeping my gun for protection in my home, thank you. Honeycombe8 Jul 2012 #22

All these armed trained secret servicemen couldn't prevent a bullet from hitting Reagan lindysalsagal Jul 2012 #80

Yes, it's not the guns involved that were the cause or the cure. It's something else. Honeycombe8 Jul 2012 #86

That ain't gonna happen michreject Jul 2012 #40

I don't think you realize just how insignificant this issue is, but here's a tidbit to keep you Egalitarian Thug Jul 2012 #41

I'm not a gun nut Texasgal Jul 2012 #47

for these situations you are better off with a 12 gauge pump action loli phabay Jul 2012 #51

The pistol was cheaper Texasgal Jul 2012 #55

yup my wife was the same, but she now likes the security of the 12 gauge loli phabay Jul 2012 #56

I came from a family of hunters. Texasgal Jul 2012 #59

You can get a basic .20 at Dick's for less than $100 obamanut2012 Jul 2012 #62

People who bring guns into cities out of fear create the very environment that makes them fearful. baldguy Jul 2012 #58

So killing OTHER animals is okay. flvegan Jul 2012 #72

I know a good reason to bring them in cities. Zax2me Jul 2012 #74

Thanks for the condescension. cliffordu Jul 2012 #75

The bodyguards for Mayor Bloomberg pack machineguns, they don't look very sad. Tejas Jul 2012 #79

At times the world I live in is pretty pitiful, but that has nothing to do with guns. hobbit709 Jul 2012 #81

Yeah...that has worked sooooo well in Chicago. guardian Jul 2012 #84

I live in the city but have country property... what do you propose belcffub Jul 2012 #85