Mass Shooting in Vegas

Sorry - I was incomplete.
You offered a red herring fallacy.
You either do not know it was a red herring (appeal to ignorance) or do know and hope no one will notice (appeal to dishonesty).
And so, you're back to zero.

Fallacy: Post hoc ergo propter hoc.
You: Zero

 

I don't know about this. Been to Syria? How about South Sudan? The DR Congo? Indonesia? Mexico? I mean, there is quite a list these days...

 

You just called 273 mass shootings "sweet." Just so we are clear.

 

The United States has far higher rates of firearm deaths-firearm homicides, firearm suicides, and unintentional firearm deaths compared with other high-income countries. The US overall suicide rate is not out of line with these countries, but the United States is an outlier in terms of our overall homicide rate.

 

I am encouraged by most Americans supporting sensible reforms to prevent homicidal psychopaths from amassing arsenals, and hope that our representatives in our representative government represent, rather than pander to extremists of either extreme.

 

Well, there is your position on gun control, which can only be honestly described as bigoted...

 

Fallacy: Appeal to popularity.
You either do not know this...

 

We'd see more grieving in the media if this was an antifa meeting or a convention of college Democrats.

 

I was talking to someone who claimed that a majority of americans did not support these positions. How the **** else am I suppose to establish that a majority of americans do support those positions? I shouldn't "appeal to popularity?"

Seriously.

 

You have a right you own opinion .

 

I know that a 'conspiracy theory' angle is unlikely, but in my experience, hotels don't usually keep security cameras installed in guests' rooms. The hallways, yes, but videos from those are of typically poor quality. But you raise a good point... surely at some point investigators will release all security cam videos...(?).

Perhaps I have had too-limited conceptions of what the typical 'terrorist' might be like. Several posters in this thread have raised some very thought-provoking ideas about a "conspiracy theory" -- foremost among which is, WHO WOULD BENEFIT?

1. Organized Islamo-terrorist groups.

ISIS jumped up yesterday and claimed that Paddock was one of their converts and 'soldiers' -- but provided NO proof: http://thehill.com/policy/national-...rts-puzzled-by-isis-claim-in-las-vegas-attack . This 'claim' seems to have "bullshit" written all over it. Paddock's profile does not suggest that he would have been a convert to Islam, but he doesn't seem a likely fit for any of this activity anyway.... In this, as with all other things involving alleged human actions -- no proof = bullshit....

2. Groups radically opposed to ownership of weapons among U., S. citizens (2nd Amendment)

The hyperliberal Left didn't waste a moment jumping into this tragedy all the way up to their earlobes yesterday, and now we'll all be distracted for weeks with calls to ban ownership of this, that, and everything else that the self-defense haters want to get rid of -- if not the entire 2nd Amendment of our Constitution. Indeed, Rahm Emanuel's famous instruction to radicals that, "You never let a serious crisis go to waste. And what I mean by that it's an opportunity to do things you think you could not do before." is already well-applied in this situation. https://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/r/rahmemanue409199.html

One tantalizing thought... who have been some of the very most staunch supporters of self-defense, gun ownership, and the 2nd Amendment? Right-wing"ish" Republican Conservatives, many of whom greatly enjoy Country & Western Music.... Will this massacre 'soften them up' to the idea of more gun control in the future...?

Those are the only groups that I can think of who could get a big windfall to their agendas as a result of this tragedy. Did I miss anyone?

 

"Armory" is a subjective, pejorative term, of course.
People who have the right to keep and bear arms have the right to own however many guns they want, and they need not justify that number to anyone.

 

Which violates the constitution in exactly the same was a as a license to have an abortion system.

 

a war on guns would work no more so then the war on drugs works

both would cause more harm to society then they cured

 

Setting aside that the right to an abortion is part of the right to privacy and thus, wholly separate from the right to firearms...

How do you know that a license to get an abortion type system would be unconstitutional?

 

I'm not so sure.

http://www.cnn.com/2015/06/12/us/gun-law-homicide-drop/index.html
https://thinkprogress.org/gun-homic...i-repealed-background-check-law-6f13fd72b60c/

 

I wonder if NK had the right to bear arms if Kim would still be in power?

I think the child dictator would of stepped down voluntarily long ago, or been removed, he never would of obtained his God like status with his people

 

Can't be. Stealing guns is illegal.

 

Fallacy: Appeal to dishonesty.
You know the right to arms is not connected to service in the militia.

 

Every amendment violated the constitution.

 

Yea...maybe?

 

While I'm 100% on board with what you're saying, the people who would need to be convinced to do the amending are not generally "reasoned, thinking people". They are, however, people who seek re-election. For this reason, it is my sincere hope that democrats hang their hats on "gun control" as a primary platform in the coming elections. Nothing motivates conservative election-year-couch-sitters to the polls like gun control.

 

What is the type of logical fallacy appearing in this post?

 

It is tied to the right of the government to impose reasonable regulations.

 

I have no issue with people expressing their views on either side, people react to tragedies different, sure this poster feels his ideas would help save lives just as others may differ in opinions

that said, I think "this" exact incident 'may' of been prevented, but outlawing guns brings about other issues that makes it not a valid option imo

it's like outlawing cars, prevents Terrorists using cars, but has other issues to consider too