I think this would be a good time to apply the
Toolkit against online trolls
That's part 1 of 3.
Rangerhalo said:
lets set this straight , at no time did i tell this individual he couldnt carry a loaded firearm
The OP didn't claim that you did.
He did say that you asked him to unload it, & repeatedly ridiculed him when he did not agree to your request.
I believe that's called a
Strawman Argument.
"The strawman argument occurs when someone misrepresents his opponent’s position and then attacks the misrepresented position."
But from your comments, it sounds like you did everything
but close down the class & actually tell him flat out that you didn't want him to carry & would refuse him sevice if he did.
i have a CCW... and am ex law enforcement. i am well aware of the laws.
That's called "
Appeal to Authority".
If you'd bothered to poke around the fora at all, you'd find that this is not the way to win our hearts, esp. when that authority is a LEO.
Far too often, we (collectively) have learned that LEO do not know the laws they're hired to enforce.
This clown... very insecure man... made a fool of himself... silly actions... ignorance... small mans syndrome... clown... next time maybe you can go to Chuck E Cheese and scare the mouse you just never know what he might pull on you
That's called an
ad hominem attack.
This seems to be a favorite of yours.
"The ad hominem is a way of discrediting a claim by attacking the character or beliefs of the person supporting the claim rather than disproving the actual claim itself."
I'll address a few of your fallacies:
- If a gun was a penis replacement, no man would carry anything with a barrel under 12".
- As for ignorance, sounds like he knows the law better than you.
- Insecure? Sure. I'm insecure too. I know most violent criminals are stronger & faster than I am. They choose when to act, I can only react.
You might also be interested in Kathy Jackson's essay titled "
Are You Paranoid?"
And here's her essay "
Compensating for Something?"
What next let his kid carry a nine milli into kindergarten for show and tell?
That's called a "
Slippery Slope" argument.
"The Slippery Slope occurs when someone argues that if A were to happen, then an unwanted outcome B is bound to happen, thus A should not happen.
If someone tries using the Slippery Slope argument against you, then the burden of proof lies on them to demonstrate the validity of the slope’s slipperiness."
Protection????!!!! FROM WHAT?
Well, the first thing
you thought of was rape...
carry a loaded firearm in a classroom to protect yourself
How about in the parking lot?
Can you guarantee his safety there, as you apparently can in class?
And can you guarantee that if he leaves his property in the car it won't be stolen?
Fish and game do not like loaded weapons in classes for very obvious reasons and if i have to go into that, well you need more education on firearm safety.
I think that might fall under "
Appeal to Ignorance".
"When someone appeals to ignorance, they are asserting that a claim is true until it is proven false. Sometimes this will manifest in the form of an argument that says something must be true because it is a “generally accepted” proposition.
...the appeal to ignorance is often used to shift the burden of proof from one party to the other... it is the responsibility of the claim-maker to prove their claim, not your responsibility to prove them wrong. The burden of proof lies on the one who is making the claim."
dangerous, it put every person in that classroom at risk, nobody knew this guy or his training
If the class were using or handling those pistols, that would be different.
But a pistol in a holster is no more dangerous than a pen sitting on a desk.
And if you'd kept up with research in your field, you would have been aware of this
2006 FBI study which says that criminals don't carry openly & practically never use holsters. (
Which yes, has little to do with concerns about safety, but does address the biggest one - this person might hurt someone.)
ill go make a statement as if it was a frikking fashion statement
He didn't say that's why he was carrying, did he?
You must think of that reason because that's why you carry, right? That's called
projection.
an attempt to defame a volunteer instructor
I saw it as an attempt to tell others in the 2A community about a problem he encountered with a person who acts as an agent/representative of the government, & was unaware of the law & attempting to enforce his opinion.
Looks like someone else at the agency is similarly unaware of the laws & wants to enforce his/her opinion, & doesn't care that it will cause an expensive legal settlement if it happens again, esp. now that they've been made aware of the laws.
Refusing a government service to someone because of the peaceful exercise of a protected civil right looks to me like a lawsuit payout waiting to happen.
Instead of a pistol, imagine if your object of derision were a religious symbol on a necklace?
poster child as to why we shouldnt be allowed to carry
Why would that be?
Because he was peaceful & educated? Because he was also trying to get safety education about bowhunting? Because he stood up for his rights?
ETA: it occurred to me that this might count as the "
No True Scotsman" fallacy.
"The No True Scotsman fallacy occurs when you appeal to a sense of purity or completion in the original claim to exclude all cases that may be possible but do not fit the claim."
all i was told was next time ask them to leave if they dont shut the class down.
i think that pretty well sums it up.
See above, about an expensive civil rights case.
Denying someone a government service because he's exercising a protected civil right is a losing proposition from the get-go.
ETA: And lest we commit the
Fallacy Fallacy, was there a part of your post that wasn't a fallacy, opinion, insult, etc. that we should pay attention to?
"this fallacy occurs when you completely discredit someone’s position simply because they used a fallacy when making their point."
I've tried to only point out & discredit your fallacies & explain why your opinions are not facts.
