0
Anonymous Posted 13 years ago
Grammar
What type of fallacy is this?
"As usual, the ignorant criticisms of expanding Right-to-Carry fall flat when compared to reality. Every public university in Utah has allowed concealed handguns on campus since 2006, with no misfires, accidental shootings or incidents of any kind reported. Likewise, Blue Ridge Community College in Virginia has allowed concealed carry on campus for years with zero complaints."
Top answer
I don't see any fallacy. It seems a valid argument.
- I don't see any fallacy.
- It seems a valid argument.
Get the Weekly English Kit 📬
New words, one handy idiom, and a 2-minute quiz — delivered to your inbox to keep your streak alive.
6 Answers
0
0
Hi
I would call it over-generalisation. The fact that there are a few rather small communities of well-behaved people who can carry guns without hurting each other tells you very little about the consequences of allowing over 300 million people to have them
Dave
I would call it over-generalisation. The fact that there are a few rather small communities of well-behaved people who can carry guns without hurting each other tells you very little about the consequences of allowing over 300 million people to have them
Dave
00
dave_anon The fact that there are a few rather small communities of well-behaved people who can carry guns without hurting each other tells you very little about the consequences of allowing over 300 million people to have themSounds like a Democratic argument to me.
00
Hi
It is probably more English socialist: the basis of the democratic state is that we choose a very few people who can use force on our behalf. That limits the amount of bullying, robbing and murder that other people can do
Dave
It is probably more English socialist: the basis of the democratic state is that we choose a very few people who can use force on our behalf. That limits the amount of bullying, robbing and murder that other people can do
Dave
00
Hi
Or maybe not. The recent sources for the argument are probably John Rawls (born Baltimore 1921) and Robert Nozick (born Brooklyn 1938)
Dave
Or maybe not. The recent sources for the argument are probably John Rawls (born Baltimore 1921) and Robert Nozick (born Brooklyn 1938)
Dave
00
Hi
But I was trying to answer Bastian's question, before Mr M sent me off on that mazy dribble
Anther good phrase is:
- Cherry-picking
[= choosing only a few facts that support your argument, whilst ignoring all the ones that don't]
Dave
But I was trying to answer Bastian's question, before Mr M sent me off on that mazy dribble
Anther good phrase is:
- Cherry-picking
[= choosing only a few facts that support your argument, whilst ignoring all the ones that don't]
Dave
0
Related Questions