Newtown shooting: Why are references to it criticized as “emotional hyperbole”?

[AlinPA]

When referring to the Newtown shootings of children and others to make a point about the need to do something to prevent such slaughter, the reference is sometimes called “emotional hyperbole”. IMO, it seems logical to use real events as references in this problem. What is so “hyperbolic” about using that shooting as an example of our need to do something? Hyperboles are used as exaggerations. The shootings at Newtown happened. It was slaughter. It’s not an exaggeration to say so.

As far as the “emotional’ goes, that works both ways: referring to the shootings or defending the weapons used in the shootings involves some level of passion or “emotion”.

It is also logical to refer to the many other shootings across the country in making a point about our need to do something to prevent them.

[graham4anything]

1. Because the gun lovers/NRA folk want to hide it and hope people forget.

It's why those who are Jewish (like myself and the older generations always say Never Forget
so it don't slide into obscurity.

[Recursion]

2. I haven't used those words, but I can tell you what I mean by similar phrases

Basically, when I point out that our party's flagship response to that tragedy (requiring that the rifle Lanza used be sold under a different name and with a differently shaped grip) is not a well-thought-through response, I often get a graphic showing the faces of the 20 kids that were killed, as if the problem were somehow that I didn't know or care that 20 kids had been killed, rather than that the law we are pushing for doesn't actually do anything about that. So it seems to me, at least, that the response to what I think is a pretty solid argument on my part is to try to make everybody so emotional that anybody who doesn't think the law is a good idea will get brushed aside.

[TheCowsCameHome]

3. Because gun humpers want to minimize and deflect the issue.

It's all they have to offer.

[Bay Boy]

4. The horrendousness of this act...

...was so awful that everyone can imagine what it would feel like if it had been one of their children at that school that day. No one really cares that the math shows what a statistical anomaly this event was.

[jmg257]

6. "Anomaly"? Yeah - like mass shootings and 26+ more dead people are such rare occurances.

More like the norm in the grand scheme of things in here gun fucker heaven.

[Melon_Lord]

9. Good example here of "emotional hyperbole"

Statistically, ya know... with math, mass shootings are very rare.

[jmg257]

11. Sure they are - what's a dozen or so massacres a year. Nothing to get excited about

as long we have our guns!

[marions ghost]

20. If you are relying on "statistics"

to gauge the emotional temper of a nation, you're way off. We are now conditioned to expect these horrific killings, hurry and "get over it" and wait for the next one.

Learning to live with this will kill us as a civilized nation.

But people who can go around saying "mass killings are very rare" will never get that.

[lapislzi]

21. Degrees of separation, Mr/s Melon Lord.

How many more gun massacres must occur before every single American is one degree or less separated from the event?

Every American (and many non-Americans) I know is one degree or less separated from a mass shooting. And my circle of friends and acquaintances extends far beyond the New York area. You could take Newtown and September 11 out of the equation, and it would still be a large number.

Does every single American need to be touched directly by one of these horrific incidents before citing statistics and displaying images ceases to cross the threshold of hyperbole?

While we're at it, who made you the custodian of hyperbole? I don't agree with you or your judgment at all.

[Bay Boy]

39. Remind me of

Reminds me off a survey done by a gun control group a few years ago.
The question was something like: "Do you know someone who was a victim of gun violence?"
You get a much bigger, much scarier percentage of respondents saying "Yes" that way.
If for example; one student at a high school was the victim of gun violence you are likely to
get 100% of the students at that school checking off the "Yes" box.

[jmg257]

5. Because fucking gun lovers will try ANYTHING to make the justifiable desire to have

new regulations seem unwarranted.

Emotional
Cosmetic
grip shape
Un-enforcable
2nd amendment
draconian
standard cap not high cap
not handguns
slippery slope
confiscation
bla bla bla


Fear and selfishness with extremely little emotion for the victims of their toys cause them to say all kinds of dumb-ass shit.

[Hoyt]

7. Yahoos in photo below should have been chased out of town.

Yahoos lined up to buy/fondle assault weapons at a lethal weapon show, just one week after Sandy Hook.

[Melon_Lord]

8. It comes across as...

"If you disagree with me then you hate children"

or

"Why don't you tell that to the parents of 20 dead children"

etc.. etc..

[LanternWaste]

15. I think you infer that sentiment, rather than that sentiment being implied.

I think you infer that sentiment, rather than that sentiment being implied, as relevant examples are just that... relevant examples.

[Melon_Lord]

18. Personal example...

Logic vs. emotion...



1. Reid is a realist...

He knows that bringing it up, just to have it lose big, would be a sign of weakness
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Response to Melon_Lord (Reply #1)
Wed Mar 20, 2013, 09:33 AM
spanone (71,238 posts)
2. bullshit


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Response to spanone (Reply #2)
Wed Mar 20, 2013, 09:53 AM
Melon_Lord (59 posts)
4. Deep thoughts...

Are you saying it wouldn't have lost?

Or that losing would not be a sign of weakness?


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Response to Melon_Lord (Reply #4)
Wed Mar 20, 2013, 10:02 AM
spanone (71,238 posts)
6. tell that to the parents and keep your 'deep thoughts' bs to yourself
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Response to spanone (Reply #6)
Wed Mar 20, 2013, 10:17 AM
Melon_Lord (59 posts)
10. Emotional hyperbole aside...

You would do well to apply some critical thought to the problem.

Something that makes you feel warm and fuzzy but does nothing to prevent a Sandy Hook style shooting and harms your own party is not worth it.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Response to Melon_Lord (Reply #10)
Wed Mar 20, 2013, 10:19 AM
laundry_queen (3,920 posts)
12. Is emotional hyperbole your new talking point?

I think I've seen 6 or 7 gun nuts repeat that verbatim over the last day or so. Y'all get together and decide that it's not okay to get upset over 20 kids being slaughtered in a murderous rampage or something?

[AlinPA]

16. On the other hand, calling the reference to Newtown hyperbole comes across as “you're exaggerating".

How does the sentence "The Newtown shooting points to a need to do something about gun violence" come across as "if you disagree with me then you hate children"?

[lapislzi]

10. Because, apparently, if I am not a ballistics or weapons expert

I will be bludgeoned with minutiae about this weapon or that bullet, as if all that makes some kind of substantive difference. Because the gun enthusiasts can't let you think too long about the victims, or else you would see the hollowness of their positions.

But when I describe in strong, but (imo) not hyperbolic terms, the time I spend with a Sandy Hook parent and how difficult this is for both of us, I am tacitly accused of lying. The "hysterical" moniker is not far behind.

I have a photo of my friend's murdered child on my desk. Goddamn right it's emotional. You want hysterical? Be glad there is no video of our office at 5:00 p.m. on December 14, when our CEO got the call. Be glad of that.

[Melon_Lord]

36. Only in the sense that if you are going to legislate something....

You should know about it, to include the details and minutia...

Otherwise you end up with the AWB of the 90s that did virtually nothing.

[Demo_Chris]

12. It is only hyperbole when victims are used to silence discussion rather than drive it

In this case, it's damn hard to accuse someone of hyperbole in the face of a couple dozen slaughtered children. Hard, but not impossible. An excellent example of just that is the newspaper using the children's faces to lament the defeat of Feinstein's bill.

[ljm2002]

13. It's another form of "mansplaining" things...

...and yes, I know there are women gun nuts too. But the syndrome is the same: these people claim to have "logic" on their side and they seek to prove it by citing technical definitions ad nauseum, just so they can avoid dealing with the very real issue of the results of gun violence, which are bloody and tragic and which do incite emotions.

Emotions are neither good nor bad, they are part of being human. We are not robots, nor should we strive to be robots. The gun nuts need to reminded of this as they seek to strip the issue of its human element and make it all about their beloved guns, while avoiding the very real tragedies that happen every day in part because of ridiculously lax gun laws.

[Bay Boy]

41. 'Emotions are neither good nor bad"

Wow! Interesting comment, that could be a whole nother thread.

[ljm2002]

47. The original Star Trek series...

...went into the idea a lot, if sometimes clumsily. But still they tried to get across the idea that to be human is to be both logical and emotional, and that our emotions add a dimension that is absent with pure logic.

I have never, ever met a human who is purely logical, even if they think of themselves as such. You will often see scientific reductionists make claims like "life and consciousness are nothing but chemical reactions", and then go on to yell and shout and get really worked up when challenged about it. I find it pretty entertaining.

[Bay Boy]

49. I find your story about the scientist

humorous also.

[Paladin]

45. Very Well Said. (nt)

[The Straight Story]

14. Well because we see how people acted after 9/11 - patriot act, Iraq war

Folks weren't thinking, they let emotions run over them like a train and it cost us all dearly.

[Generation_Why]

23. The Patriot Act didn't cost me anything.

My life is still the same as it was before it passed.

That was another piece of legislation people swore would bring an end to our civil liberties and I feel as free today as I ever did.

I actually have more freedom now, because I was only a child when it passed.

Iraq, however, was and is a tragedy of epic proportions.

[derby378]

46. I can't check a book out of a library without some government agent knowing about it

Before 2001, nobody cared what you checked out of the library, as long as you brought it back and paid any applicable late fees.

And don't get me started again on the abuses of the TSA.

[Crepuscular]

19. The hyperbole involved

is not the opinion that the event was tragic, or that something needs to be done, or that we have a problem with gun violence. The hyperbole involves the implication that an assault weapons bill would have in any way prevented this tragedy from occurring. A magazine cover showing pictures of dead kids with the statement that the AWB was removed from the gun control bill and as a result we have "failed" is complete hyperbole. Connecticut had an AWB in place that was virtually identical to the proposed Federal bill, yet it did nothing to prevent Sandy Hook. Using 20 dead kids as a vehicle for promoting a piece of legislation that will accomplish nothing but the illusion of security is morally repugnant.

[jmg257]

24. Would the AR Lanza used be legal under the new bill? nt

[Peter cotton]

25. I don't believe so, although the functionally equivalent Mini-14 is specifically allowed.

[jmg257]

28. Ok, AR would be illegal. Some Mini-14s would be, but with 10 round mags, not 20 or 30? nt

[Peter cotton]

37. Previously owned 30 round mags would still be legal,

although it would not be legal to purchase new ones. Of course, given that there are somewhere in the ballpark of a billion (not an exaggeration) high capacity mags out there already, such a ban would be ineffectual at best.

And in any case, the ban isn't going to pass.

[Crepuscular]

27. Rifles

Rifles of identical functionality and caliber would be entirely legal under the proposed AWB. The only major difference being that one would be labeled Bushmaster and the other labeled Ruger.

Will the name that is stamped on the weapon make a difference?

For that matter, the proposed AWB does not preclude the legal ownership of the identical weapon that was used at Sandy Hook, it just precludes the sale of newly manufactured rifles of that type.

[jmg257]

35. I understand the bans didn't/doesn't go far enough.

I'm just trying to square with the notion that if a typical ban was in place that kept Nancy Lanza from buying an XM-15 and numerous 30 round mags, it would not have made a difference. I see its because she could have just gotten a certain version of the Mini-14, and simply bought grandfathered mags for THAT weapon if she wanted to.

Thanks.

[Generation_Why]

22. Because it helps our argument and hurts theirs...

Gun nuts don't give a fuck about children being blown to pieces with assault rifles.

So don't let them give you bullshit about using those same children to fight for gun safety legislation.

[Melon_Lord]

38. At least you are honest about using children as emotional weapons...

Bravo...

[HangOnKids]

43. Better Than Lanza Using Children As Traget Practice n/t

[Kingofalldems]

48. Using 'emotions' eh? Now where have I heard that before?

[Bay Boy]

42. I'm a gun nut, I dare you to tell me to my face

that I don't give a fuck about children being blown to pieces with assault rifles (or any other weapon).

[malaise]

26. Because only second amendments rights matter

Life - not so much

[samsingh]

31. 'interpreted' second amendment rights

i'm seeing enough arguments to raise doubts on how the nra has spun these rights to promote gun sales

[malaise]

32. Yes - the interpretation of the gun manufacturers and

their paid hacks

[samsingh]

50. and those who have been brainwashed

[malaise]

56. True

[samsingh]

29. it's because gun lovers don't want to acknowledge anything that could delay their

love affair with guns.

innocent lives don't matter.

[Rex]

30. Only to the NRA trolls that live on and feed on emotional hyperbole.

They mistake it for the real thing, because they don't want to admit they are wrong. Like the GOP, the NRA never EVER makes mistakes. It is part of their general makeup.

[alcibiades_mystery]

33. Pure projection: the gunners' bizarro attachment to their toys is purely emotional

Their claims that "government tyranny" is always right around the corner is further emotion-laden hyperbolic bunk. They're hopped up fear-heads, or little brats who love love love their toys. The only way they can get around this is by pretending to be the "voice of reason," so they dress up their nonsense in legal stupidities and formal style in order to appear rational. Part of that is accusing others of being emotional, while they themselves are the rational ones. It's a lot of hokum from childish, selfish assholes.

[HangOnKids]

44. Very astute

Just today alone I saw a gunner calling other people:

unreasonable and emotional
scared
irrational

Of course this poster has been here 2 weeks and is still dusting off his troll manual. He doesn't seem to understand we have heard all this shit before.

[Arkana]

34. They shouldn't be.

There is nothing hyperbolic when you talk about a psychopath who decided to shoot up a school full of little kids. There IS no upside. Nothing they can point to that says "THIS ISN'T SO BAD!" That's why the NRA's pissed--they can't spin this one.

[CBHagman]

40. It's just a method used to distract.

Labels are a common device in that regard.

On edit: That is, someone who labels someone with an opposing view "emotional" is trying to distract from the subject of the debate.

[Scootaloo]

51. Here's my reply to another DU'er on exactly that...

Emotion and reason are not mutually exclusive, despite what shitty Sci-Fi tells you.

The notion that people who are "emotional" are also somehow "unreasoning" is one generally only taken by people who oppose whatever notion is at hand anyway. The denouncement of "emotion" or "sentiment" is a weasel way of denigrating the proponents of a position you dislike, without ever rising to the defense of your own position; the reader is meant to assume simply that your position is intellectually superior because "those people are emotional."

it's often taken by people who support an otherwise indefensible position.

[kudzu22]

52. Don't like being called emotional?

Then propose something that actually makes a difference. Bring up a ban & confiscation of all semi-autos, or even all guns. Then I'll know you're serious. If you bring up a bill that bans one rifle but leaves legal the exact same rifle with a different stock, I know you're not serious. The only explanations are that you feel need to "do something" to assuage some emotional pain, or derive some perverse pleasure from annoying gun owners. Either way, the emotional label sticks.

[AlinPA]

55. Whether one makes proposals to reduce gun violence or not, references made to real shootings are not

“emotional hyperbole”. Those are real events and not exaggerated rhetorical tools.

[apocalypsehow]

53. Because our "RKBA enthusiasts" (see sig line) don't want even the mildest or slightest of

sensible restrictions on their "right" to tote around military-grade weaponry or strut about town with a pistol perched in their pants: they are also well aware that the Sandy Hook massacre has moved much of the country into the pro-sensible gun control camp.

Quite a bit of ugly resentment of the victims of that horror on the part of the pro-NRA loons for being such high-profile victims, and focusing the nation's attention on the need for better gun laws.

[WinkyDink]

54. Who used that term? The whacked psychologists who've put a time-limit on "healthy grieving"?