TOM THE DANCING BUG: When Gun Proponents Go Ballistic

[johncwoo]

@anon50609448

This comic is what is called a “logical analogy”. We take an argument - a real argument that someone made, not something that we just made up - and replace the thing they are talking about (guns) with another thing (ballistic missiles). Then we say, “look, your argument would also support ballistic missiles, so unless you actually support ballistic missiles, you have to admit there is something wrong with your argument.”

I think the comic is a little more inflammatory than a “logical analogy”. Sure, I get it, it’s satirical. But I don’t agree with your argument because guns and missiles are not the same thing. It’s like saying because I can come up with a stance which supports vector control and the logical analogy of that stance could also be used as a justification for extermination of all rodent species (by simply replacing the terms) then my argument for vector control is invalid.

@anon50609448

People assume that other people are like them. So people who oppose all gun regulation assume that people who are for regulation as just a ideological as they are. It isn’t true. People who want gun regulation, on the other hand, can’t understand why people who opposed it won’t meet them halfway, won’t make any kind of reasonable compromise.

This is a simplistic dichotomy. There are some shaky assumptions being made here.

@anon50609448

I’m pretty sure that if someone says there is no rational middle ground in the gun control debate, you can be about 99% certain they are against gun control. Saying there is no rational voice in a debate when you actually take a stance in it is practically admitting that your beliefs are irrational.

I will admit that I’m a bit cynical over the entire debate because there is so much vitriol spewing from both sides. But I don’t see how my belief that there is a lack of civility and compromise and that I am on one side of the debate is an admission that my beliefs are irrational.

For the record, I do believe in background checks, licensing and closing of loopholes. However, I also believe in CCW and that firearms are a viable means of self defense.

I had a discussion with a co-worker about all this and he said “neither you nor I are wrong, we just have differing opinions” and left it at that. There was no debate regarding who was or was not being rational because we both know each other as rational people.