3 ms·

It is also random bullshit. There is an entire group of people convinced that if you are shot with a 9 MM round, it "blows the lung out of the body".[1] They

It is also random bullshit. There is an entire group of people convinced that if you are shot with a 9 MM round, it "blows the lung out of the body".[1] They also think that 9 MM is a high caliber round, and that the AR in AR-15 stands for "assault rifle". These lies are knowingly spread by the White House and the Democrats. Anyone who devoted 1 minute of thought and research would know they are all false, but we're in an agenda-driven world, where fact, truth, and reality are all secondary to political ideology. --- [1] https://www.newsweek.com/joe-biden-says-9mm-bullet-blows-lung-out-body-1711551 https://www.newsweek.com/joe-biden-says-9mm-bullet-blows-lun...

xpe 4y ago
> These lies are knowingly spread by the White House and the Democrats. This sentence appears an example of Brandolini's Law. The problematic phrases are "the White House" and "the" Democrats. I'll explain. - It is one thing to cite a source that shows a politician making an incorrect statement. That's fair and important. - It is quite another to claim that a group of people are knowingly spreading these incorrect facts. It is easy to claim <some group> is spreading lies without specifying (1) the members of the group involved; (2) the mechanism by which these people speak for the group; and (3) why one's definition of the group is reasonable in context. Not to mention (4) Why is this particular detail worth mentioning in isolation from the broader context? - Perhaps most importantly, when someone writes (or speaks) (5) is that person writing (or speaking) in ways that maximize the desired interpretation? And good luck with that, given the realities of your audience's background knowledge, reading comprehension, attention span, and biases. I'll posit an even more fundamental basis for Brandolini's Law that has nothing to do with intentional malice or deception: the imprecision of human language makes it inherently difficult to fact-check someone else's sentence, because one has to interpret the sentence before criticizing it. This leaves some room for the original author to deflect the criticism by saying "I didn't mean that" (and this might be genuine, fair, and reasonable!) ... but meanwhile no clarification was issued (seriously, WTF?, why aren't corrections better integrated in the source material?) and many people are still reading the original statement and interpreting it in some subjective way. Sometimes I think it is amazing human societies function at all.
- placebo 4y ago
  I also find it amazing that human societies survive at all. it would be interesting to find the answer to what is the minimum inefficiency required for a complex system to stop functioning. Of course, this question itself needs more precision, but you get the idea. For example, I've been in traffic jams in some cities with terrible infrastructure. Seems like a total hopeless chaotic mess, and yet at the end of the day everyone gets to their destination.
- xpe 4y ago
  typo: appears to be an example
cjohnson318 4y ago
The fact that people don't understand relative ballistics, or the acronyms and trade names of arms manufacturers, is totally unrelated to the fact that you shouldn't be able to buy an AR-15 for $600 in a strip mall. I grew up shooting, but I'm sick and tired of waking up to another mass shooting every couple of days. This never happened before Columbine and Aurora. You can nitpick this and that, but that doesn't mean anything to people praying their kids are safe at school, or their partner comes back from the grocery store.
lamontcg 4y ago
I thought "you called it a clip not a magazine, so your argument is invalid" went out of style a few years ago. I haven't seen that one used in the wild for a bit.
Gordonjcp 4y ago
And most of the world doesn't really care about what a 9mm round can do or what "AR15" stands for. America is a very sick and broken place, and we all hope you get better and grow up soon.
antifa 4y ago
> These lies are knowingly spread I'm not sure I understand why it's important that your average person has a completely accurate understanding of which guns blows out lungs and which guns only puncture them. Getting shot by any gun will probably result in a permanent injury of some kind, to say the least. And that's not a position on gun rights, I won't state mine just to keep this thread on topic. This sounds like a molehill being propped up as a mountain to distract and derail people from addressing actual topics.

xpe 4y ago

> These lies are knowingly spread by the White House and the Democrats. This sentence appears an example of Brandolini's Law. The problematic phrases are "the White House" and "the" Democrats. I'll explain. - It is one thing to cite a source that shows a politician making an incorrect statement. That's fair and important. - It is quite another to claim that a group of people are knowingly spreading these incorrect facts. It is easy to claim <some group> is spreading lies without specifying (1) the members of the group involved; (2) the mechanism by which these people speak for the group; and (3) why one's definition of the group is reasonable in context. Not to mention (4) Why is this particular detail worth mentioning in isolation from the broader context? - Perhaps most importantly, when someone writes (or speaks) (5) is that person writing (or speaking) in ways that maximize the desired interpretation? And good luck with that, given the realities of your audience's background knowledge, reading comprehension, attention span, and biases. I'll posit an even more fundamental basis for Brandolini's Law that has nothing to do with intentional malice or deception: the imprecision of human language makes it inherently difficult to fact-check someone else's sentence, because one has to interpret the sentence before criticizing it. This leaves some room for the original author to deflect the criticism by saying "I didn't mean that" (and this might be genuine, fair, and reasonable!) ... but meanwhile no clarification was issued (seriously, WTF?, why aren't corrections better integrated in the source material?) and many people are still reading the original statement and interpreting it in some subjective way. Sometimes I think it is amazing human societies function at all.

placebo 4y ago
I also find it amazing that human societies survive at all. it would be interesting to find the answer to what is the minimum inefficiency required for a complex system to stop functioning. Of course, this question itself needs more precision, but you get the idea. For example, I've been in traffic jams in some cities with terrible infrastructure. Seems like a total hopeless chaotic mess, and yet at the end of the day everyone gets to their destination.
xpe 4y ago
typo: appears to be an example

cjohnson318 4y ago

The fact that people don't understand relative ballistics, or the acronyms and trade names of arms manufacturers, is totally unrelated to the fact that you shouldn't be able to buy an AR-15 for $600 in a strip mall. I grew up shooting, but I'm sick and tired of waking up to another mass shooting every couple of days. This never happened before Columbine and Aurora. You can nitpick this and that, but that doesn't mean anything to people praying their kids are safe at school, or their partner comes back from the grocery store.

lamontcg 4y ago

I thought "you called it a clip not a magazine, so your argument is invalid" went out of style a few years ago. I haven't seen that one used in the wild for a bit.

Gordonjcp 4y ago

And most of the world doesn't really care about what a 9mm round can do or what "AR15" stands for. America is a very sick and broken place, and we all hope you get better and grow up soon.

antifa 4y ago

> These lies are knowingly spread I'm not sure I understand why it's important that your average person has a completely accurate understanding of which guns blows out lungs and which guns only puncture them. Getting shot by any gun will probably result in a permanent injury of some kind, to say the least. And that's not a position on gun rights, I won't state mine just to keep this thread on topic. This sounds like a molehill being propped up as a mountain to distract and derail people from addressing actual topics.