A resource for political arguments on gun control - Tilted Forum Project Discussion Community

MSD · 12-12-2005, 06:32 PM

It has come to my attention that not once has anyone in this forum posted a link to the Gun Facts website or document. www.gunfacts.info is the home of the semi-famous gunfacts.pdf file, now in its fourth incarnation, which cites valid counterarguments to just about anything that proponents of gun control will throw at you. From the AWB to .50 rifles to concealed carry to myths about gun deaths among children, it has a little bit of everything in a concise, easy-to-unerstand format (although it has been criticized for being too "pre-digested" for the tastes of many scholars and serious debaters.)

The site (in case you already forgot about the link in the second sentence of my post):
www.gunfacts.info
The document:
http://www.gunfacts.info/pdfs/gun-fa...s4-0-Print.pdf

I'm using it to write a paper which I hope to use in a presentation for my communications final in order to convince a class of 14 bleeding-heart liberals (and one moderate Republican) with a Socialist professor* that gun control isn't all it's cracked up to be. I'm hoping for one or two conversions, five or six, "you do make a good point," and for the rest to at least her the opposing view from someone on their level who they trust as a reputable source of information.

* - the following conversation occurred between my brother and his daughter (firends in the same class, his statement was said jokingly, not maliciously):
Steve: Yeah, and your dad is a communist
Anna: No he isn't .... actually, he does have a picture of Karl Marx hanging in his office ... yeah, he's a Commie

SERPENT7 · 12-19-2005, 03:01 PM

I actually read the ENTIRE report. (All 87 pages worth.) It is pretty biased. Although on the one hand, i did not find anything that was innacurate, the 'report' certainly did present a very distinct slant. Also, there were several places that repeat the same set of stats, or re-use the same quote in order to re-inforce a position or point later on in the same document. The author also uses ad-hominim arguments, and plays to the emotional side several times, which weakens his argument. Which, btw was pretty well researched. (Especially the stuff on SC decisions.) However, i cannot help but wonder how many of the pro-gun surveys are flawed or biased. (Several anti-gun surveys have been shown to have serious flaws in how they were worded, or thier criteria...etc.)
Does that mean it was wrong, or bad, or not valid? No. I just mean to say a message should always be evaluated according to the messanger, and his agenda is all too apperent.

kel · 12-28-2005, 07:42 PM

guncite.org? Another nice place I believe.

12-12-2005, 06:32 PM	#1 (permalink)
MSD The sky calls to us ... Super Moderator Location: CT	A resource for political arguments on gun control It has come to my attention that not once has anyone in this forum posted a link to the Gun Facts website or document. www.gunfacts.info is the home of the semi-famous gunfacts.pdf file, now in its fourth incarnation, which cites valid counterarguments to just about anything that proponents of gun control will throw at you. From the AWB to .50 rifles to concealed carry to myths about gun deaths among children, it has a little bit of everything in a concise, easy-to-unerstand format (although it has been criticized for being too "pre-digested" for the tastes of many scholars and serious debaters.) The site (in case you already forgot about the link in the second sentence of my post): www.gunfacts.info The document: http://www.gunfacts.info/pdfs/gun-fa...s4-0-Print.pdf I'm using it to write a paper which I hope to use in a presentation for my communications final in order to convince a class of 14 bleeding-heart liberals (and one moderate Republican) with a Socialist professor* that gun control isn't all it's cracked up to be. I'm hoping for one or two conversions, five or six, "you do make a good point," and for the rest to at least her the opposing view from someone on their level who they trust as a reputable source of information. * - the following conversation occurred between my brother and his daughter (firends in the same class, his statement was said jokingly, not maliciously): Steve: Yeah, and your dad is a communist Anna: No he isn't .... actually, he does have a picture of Karl Marx hanging in his office ... yeah, he's a Commie

12-28-2005, 07:42 PM	#3 (permalink)
kel WARNING: FLAMMABLE Location: Ask Acetylene	guncite.org? Another nice place I believe. __________________ "It better be funny"

12-19-2005, 03:01 PM	#2 (permalink)
SERPENT7 Crazy Location: Gold country!	I actually read the ENTIRE report. (All 87 pages worth.) It is pretty biased. Although on the one hand, i did not find anything that was innacurate, the 'report' certainly did present a very distinct slant. Also, there were several places that repeat the same set of stats, or re-use the same quote in order to re-inforce a position or point later on in the same document. The author also uses ad-hominim arguments, and plays to the emotional side several times, which weakens his argument. Which, btw was pretty well researched. (Especially the stuff on SC decisions.) However, i cannot help but wonder how many of the pro-gun surveys are flawed or biased. (Several anti-gun surveys have been shown to have serious flaws in how they were worded, or thier criteria...etc.) Does that mean it was wrong, or bad, or not valid? No. I just mean to say a message should always be evaluated according to the messanger, and his agenda is all too apperent.