About that attitude (on guns in parks)

It used to be that law enforcement welcomed an armed populace as a backup and reinforcement. The idea was that the citizens would aid and assist in law enforcement.

No longer. These days the citizenship is seen as a threat and menace.

An example is from Bert Gildart in Rangers Do Not Want Guns In Our National Parks. If you read this, you will see a point of view supported by the straw man argument

“Say someone comes into a park with a .32 caliber pistol, sees a bear in the campground, decides it’s a problem, and shoots it. Now you and I both know a small caliber pistol will do little more than irritate a grizzly. As you know, we use large caliber pistols and prefer to use an .870 shotgun in bear management.”

and then there is the vox populi argument “Rick is not alone in his beliefs” and there are more such logical fallacies to find.

It is interesting that this point of view is also accompanied by the usual indications of irrational judgment and bias: “Bush’s most recent ineptitude” or “I’m inclined to believe this new ruling is part of a major political maneuver on the part of the NRA” or “I’m afraid that in the long run …” This is anticipatory fear based on judgment without logical basis.

It is one thing to disagree with either the right of citizens to bear arms or with the proper role of the citizen in supporting law enforcement. It is entirely another to express one’s opinions as judgments and to support those judgments with fallacious and created scenarios.

Comments are closed.