I have already mentioned “circular reasoning,” or reasoning from premises. Most gun control advocates are happy to tell anyone who will listen that “Guns cause crime, so it follows that gun cuntrol must control crime.” But that assumes that the premise, “guns cause crime” is correct. But there is no evidence to suggest that guns cause crime, and the era before guns were introduced was a remarkably lawless time In fact, it is relatively easy to prove that th higher percentage of citizens who possess at least one gun there are, the lower the crime rate is, given reasonable economic equality between venues.
The second most common fallacyused to be called “Poisoning the well with personal attacks.” That is the tactic the Democrats used when they claim someone was victimized by a candidate for some position, as they did with justices Gorsuch and Kavanaugh and gave begun to attack Justice nominee Amy Coney Barrett. This gets completely off the subject of right or wrong and devolves into a show of ignorance and raises the question of whether the attacker was raised in a pig sty.
The third most popular fallacy among the gun ban set is an “Apeal to ignorance” by making some statement such as “Eurpe has had no mass shootings since WWII,” often backed up by an citing a supposed authority, such as “The Brady Campaign says violence has dropped by half since guns were banned.” Handgun Control, Inc. dba The Brady Campaign may have made such a statement, but both statements are simply a lie that succeed because the audience knows nothing of the facts and is not inclined to spend a few minutes looking up the facts.
There are many other logical fallacies used to convince the suckers that they need to turn in their guns. Most of them were used in the Soviet Unions early 1930’s gun confiscation campaign. The campaign that led to the horror the Ukrainians call the “Holodomor,” the deliberate starvation of up to ten million innocent men, women, and children. The campaign the New York Times Winchell described as “humane.”
Stranger