Site icon The Truth About Guns

How to ‘Win’ a Debate About Guns: The Hoplophobic Argument Tree

I HATE GUNS DEAD KIDS

Shutterstock

Previous Post
Next Post

[ED: Our friends at Handwaving Freakoutery provoked some interesting responses with this tweet, debunking California Governor Gavin Newsom’s provably false claim that, “Permitless carry does not make you safer. States that allow concealed carry have higher gun homicide rates.” The results are…instructive.] 

By BJ Campbell, Handwaving Freakoutery

Today I’m going to present a bookmarkable example of how to use the HWFO material, which is largely mathematical in nature and not emotional or ideological, to “win” a debate about guns. Please be aware, this will not change anyone’s mind. People’s beliefs about guns are emotional, not rational, so persuading someone that guns aren’t evil takes an entirely different approach. To change someone’s mind, you have to build from shared core values (we all want to reduce deaths) and build a consensus with baby steps, and is a much more noble and beneficial endeavor.

But if you wanted to simply beat someone to death on Twitter with irrefutable math, here’s how you’d do it.

The Opener

This is how basically all modern anti-gun people open the discussion.

On HWFO we always respond with this.

From here we go different directions depending on how they respond. Rocky Mountain Views was kind enough to go many different directions at the same time, allowing us to showcase many of the different argument branches.

Path 1: Doubling down on “if no guns.”

There’s not any real direction we can go from here except to repost the fact that there is no magic gun evaporation fairy, or post the link (below) to the firearms ownership visualization article.

Path 2: Other Countries

This is part two of a two part response. Either you go with “there is no magic gun evaporation fairy” which means that comparisons to other countries literally don’t matter, or you go with the “guns are the bulwark against tyranny” argument, where you put them on their heels repeatedly pointing out what a shithole Europe actually is when it comes to gun deaths (if we also include genocide as a gun death). Or, perhaps, go with both.

Path 3: The self righteousness of not owning a gun.

Here you ask them to actually read the article linked, since it literally talks about that, and see what they do.

Path 4: Yes, but suicide is bad.

We obviously can’t go any further from here, but if his response was more on-topic you’d also point out that gun control laws don’t have any impact on suicide, on a multivariate analysis, using this link.

Path 5: I just hate guns.

We obviously can’t go any further from here.

Rocky Mountain Views then blocked me so I couldn’t run any more argument trees off of him/her, but let’s highlight one more from the past few days.

Weaker Gun Laws create more gun deaths

Note the weaseling in the headline. It’s phrased as if there’s an association with higher rates of both homicide and suicide, but that’s not true. There’s an association with higher rates of [homicide+suicide]. In other words, it’s the same old trick yet again. So open by pointing that out.

To be explicitly clear, Everytown’s analysis actually showed that areas with more gun ownership vote for fewer gun control laws. And areas with higher gun ownership have higher rates of gun suicide and lower rates of suicide by other means, since guns are a very convenient way of committing suicide. The causality chain is backwards.

This is a pretty unhinged response from someone who’s bio claims to be a Folio Award Winner. Let’s see where this goes.

Poisoning the well fallacies are apparently all you need to win a Folio Award nowadays.

At this point we could go back to the beginning, since this entire thread was spawned off of the “everyone’s lying about the relationship between gun ownership and gun homicide” article, but that would just be circular woozling.

You’ll notice a theme at this point. When you hold someone’s hand and carry them to the mathematics, they attack your value as a person because it’s all they have left to attack.

But Spree Shooters

Any time spree shooters come up, run these three in succession.

Reduce the incidence of spree shooters by 30% by making it illegal to carry them in major media outlets. Reduce the body count by 79% by going nationwide constitutional carry and getting as many people to carry concealed as possible, so there’s always someone on site ready to return fire. Now the anti-gun crowd may not like those two things, for various reasons, but those are the two things that would help.

 

This article originally appeared at Handwaving Freakoutery and is reprinted here with permission. 

Previous Post
Next Post
Exit mobile version