TexasCHLforum.com

That list is another whole can of worms. Notice most of them are "xxx arrested for yyy, facing charges of zzz"

So, in essense, you could write:

"Fangs, of Texas, was arrested for first degree murder after a shooting that occurred at his house after himself and an occupant argued, the argument ending with a gunshot to the chest."

When, what really happened, was Fangs defended his wife, and his home from a rapist. He was later no-billed by the Grand Jury.

He's right, you can argue against facts and stats.
Here's exactly how you do it:

1) Make up your own "facts"
A good example is how, in one of Al Franken's books, he talks about how the AWB helped reduce crime. He shows a chart of crime rates during the Clinton presidency going downward, and credits this in part to the AWB, as well as increased policing.

What he doesn't show you is an increase in crime later on, while Bush is in office, and the AWB was still in effect.

2) Lie.
For instance, the Brady Campaign has this wonderful little nugget in their pamphlet "warning" businesses about the "dangers" of ccw.

The Brady Bunch wrote:Can businesses trust that the new wave of
CCW licensees are law-abiding, non-violent, well-trained citizens? Unfortunately, they cannot.
As this manual demonstrates, hundreds of CCW licensees have committed crimes both before
and after CCW licensure. See Section One. Many dangerous CCW applicants slip through
faulty state background checks, while others are marginal applicants who nonetheless must be
issued a CCW license because they do not fit within a narrow, pre-set list of excluded persons.

We all know this is Male Bovine Excrement.
The state of Texas publishes a report usually-yearly showing conviction rates for CHLers compared to the rest of Texas.

3) Tell 1/3 of the truth
The Bradys looked at the above report, too. They zeroed in on just one line in one report, about crimes that apply primarily to a CHL holder, i.e. carrying in an amusement park, a bar, under 30.06, etc) and then used that line to crucify CHL holders.

They also, in another report, go by arrests, and not convictions. We all know LEO's make mistakes, and might not know the law. This happened a lot in the early days of CHL.

4) Debate using logical fallacies.
If you've never been a debate nerd in school, first, you might want to read up on some of the most common logical fallacies here.

Now, lock away your gun, take a few shots of rotgut, and then read this. You'll need it.

http://www.bradycampaign.org/issues/concealedcarry/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Now, let's count the fallacies in this piece of writing!

1) Appeal to Belief:
"Many people say no to that question"

Many people thought that Black folks should be seperated from whites for years, too. All of 'em were wrong.

2) Guilt by Association
"To bolster its campaign to have more citizens carry concealed weapons, the gun lobby often relies on the faulty work of economist John Lott, who attempts to link liberal CCW laws with lower crime rates.5 However, several eminent criminologists have published peer-reviewed studies debunking this flawed research."

So what? Plenty of other facts and research support Lott's conclusion, even if some of his methods were flawed.

3) Bandwagon Fallacy

In April 1999, in what may be the most conclusive refutation of pro-CCW propaganda yet, Missouri citizens voted in the first-ever state referendum on this issue NOT to relaxing the state's CCW laws."

OH WOW! One legislature decided not to expand CCW laws! I'm sure we could count California in here, too! They decided not to expand CCW laws! We all know how populous California is! THEY MUST KNOW WHATS RIGHT!

Never mind plenty of other states have.

4) Appeal To Fear
he NRA is working to create a world where people carry guns into schools, bars, parks, courts, churches, and just about anywhere else they like.2 To see some examples of the behavior of permit holders, read our fact sheet, "Assorted Crimes and Misdeeds by CCW Licensees." These incidents are sure to make you think twice about the wisdom of ordinary citizens carrying loaded hidden handguns into public.

As previously shown, in Texas, it's PROVEN that chl holders are more law abiding than most people.
In fact, in some instances it can be argyed that CHL holders are more law abiding and careful than LEO's!

5) Circumstantial Ad Hominem
The NRA's not-so-hidden agenda: increasing gun ownership in general, and increasing the sales of concealable handguns – at a time when gun sales had gone flat – in particular. In the first year of its new campaign the gun lobby was successful, and many states changed their laws to allow the widespread carrying of hidden handguns.

Wow! The NRA lobbies for things that its members want, and might help the gun industry, and that's an argument? Not in MY debate class it wasn't!

I could go on, in this article. IT might actually make some great NRA publications, going through the Bradys' writings and picking out all the logical fallacies. I have to get back to work, so I'm done for now.

If you really want to make an anti's head explode when they say this, ask them to show you a chart showing murder rates rising in proportion to gun ownership.

What you'll get instead is something like this: