The Dirtiest Anti-Gun Trick, EXPOSED!

By Dan Wos
Author – Good Gun Bad Guy

Scary Scarecrow Strawman Bogus iStock-1015388332
The Dirtiest Anti-Gun Trick, EXPOSED!

USA – -( The anti-gun crowd loves to distort the position of gun-owners. It’s most often the only way they can win the argument. Often times, the gun-conversation turns into a war of words and statistics. But when the anti-gunners put their Bloomberg funded “statistics,” that have been reported in Huffington Post and “fact-checked” by Snopes, up against FBI data, their argument takes nose dive.

So, what is a good anti-gunner to do when they know they need to recruit people, but they don’t have the facts on their side?

They use what is called a “Strawman” argument.

An anti-gun Strawman argument is a total distortion of what gun-owners actually think. It’s important to the anti-gun crowd to misrepresent the pro-gun position in a way that is easy to ridicule, mock and make look foolish. By distorting gun owners’ argument or position, it makes it easier to discredit. Here’s are some examples of distorted gun-owner’s positions or “Strawman” arguments.

The first one is a common argument, misrepresenting the pro-gun position for the sake of making gun-owners appear reckless. The second one is an actual posting found on Facebook for the purpose of making gun-owners appear irrational and fearful.

  • 1. “You gun-owners want every teacher to be armed to the teeth. I’m sorry, but making teachers carry guns against their will in the classroom is dangerous.”

The reason this distorted representation is so dangerous, is that is implies that gun-owners want to pass out guns and force people, who wouldn’t know how to use them, to carry them around all day. This couldn’t be further from the truth and the anti-gun crowd knows this, but the perception of those listening to the argument is the target. In other words, it doesn’t matter if the argument is honest, as long as it paints a reckless picture of gun-owners in the minds of those who are watching but not paying close attention.

  • 2. “I’m seeing so much on Facebook about Red Flag Laws. As it turns out, 100% of everything I’ve read on Facebook about Red Flag Laws is untrue. No, they cannot sneak into your house without your knowledge, search in the middle of the night while you sleep in your bed. This is false. The police will always make their presence known, and if there are people in the house, those people will be moved to one location or asked to leave the residence if not detained. They will not search your house while you are laying in bed. No, you are not subject to seizure of your guns for being a Trump supporter. This is false.”

This is a very clever “Strawman” because it implies that gun owners actually believe police will be sneaking around in their houses in the middle of the night while they sleep. Ask any gun-owner if they think like this and you will get a resounding no. This type of thought process is more likely a notion conjured up in the minds of anti-gunners. This statement paints a vivid picture of gun-owners being fearful, irrational and suspicious. Not a good look and the anti-gun crowd knows it. That’s why they do it.

When people are confronted with a Strawman argument, the natural inclination is to defend against it. The problem with defending against a false representation of your position is that it implies ownership of the position. That’s what the anti-gun crowd is trying to achieve. Because of our natural reaction to defend ourselves, the anti-gun crowd is able to position gun-owners the way they want, ultimately creating a false public perception. Unfortunately, gun-owners often fall into the trap when they defend the fake position the anti-gunner created.

By understanding this strategy, we are much less likely to argue a position that the anti-gunners fabricate. The best way to respond to the dishonest “Strawman” strategy is to avoid defending it while shining a spotlight on it for all to see.

A good response to a Strawman argument, may be:

“You either need to distort my position because you can’t win the argument with your lies, or you don’t really understand my position at all. Which one is it?”

About Dan Wos, Author – Good Gun Bad Guy

Dan Wos is an American entrepreneur, author, musician, and NRA member. He is the founder and President of House Detective Inc., a home inspection and appraisal company serving many markets across the United States. He is also an active real estate investor.

Most Voted
Newest Oldest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
Ryben Flynn

It will be a no-knock raid at 3AM and people have already lost their life over a “Red Flag” SWATing.


And THEY will have CNN coverage, does Roger Stone come to mind.


I took a logic course in college many years ago. It was a very useful course. People use strawman arguments all of the time. Once you start noticing them you can’t stop noticing them. Politicians use them all of the time. Don’t let them.


They speak lies because the truth is not in them.

Heed the Call-up

Yes, I do point out the straw man arguments and do not argue for or against them, only point out the fallacy of the argument and that if the antis had facts, other than from their biased sources, they would use them. However, they do not, and the unbiased sources prove them wrong. Unfortunately, that does not win “arguments”, since they are not debating, but posting emotional, inane, outbursts, which facts cannot defeat. The only reason to post statements and facts, in rebuttal, supporting our stance is to show the irrationality, and many times insane, or borderline insane, of the… Read more »


The recent troll using the pseudonym “Spammela” is a good example of this. Her favorite strawman was telling people how they need to go into a public space and threaten to kill everyone. The other tactic that often gets paired with it is redefining language, an example being “Gun safety” instead of saying they are trying to destroy individual rights. If you know what to look for, and you are well read enough on the evidence it is very easy to tear apart such positions and therefore keeping them off balance instead of what they intended. Exactly what I did… Read more »

Wild Bill

@Rev, Is she still around? I had thought that she might be a young person interested in the law, but I was quite wrong.


@Wild Bill

No, I think I offended her sensibilities when I turned the “Man-splaining” up to the tenth notch. lol Sometimes knowing just which buttons to press is the easiest method to drive them away.


In Washington, the west or “Left Side” of the State the tactic of telling all the teachers that they all would have to be armed with a firearm was used. Some teachers replied with, If they force me to have a firearm I will quit and get disability because they were scared of Firearms. My Daughter in law is a teacher over there. She has had tires on her car slashed at school and been ridiculed and threatened by other teachers for having a pro Trump sticker on her car.


Only mentally ill people resort to vandalism when they disagree or dislike opposing views. Conservatives always seem to be targeted by the left and that should tell you something.



No, that is terrorism you are describing. “Either comply with what we want, or we will destroy or ruin anything you have”

My property is my own. No one has a right to come onto my property and vandalize it because there is something they disagree with there. Should my Wrangler get keyed because I have bumper stickers on it that will offend someone? Do they have a right to demand that I remove offensive material?

The answer is no, and no again. Non Compliance is peaceful resistance, not the lawlessness you advocate.


Vandalism is not peaceful. Sabotage gets its name from the French word “sabot” or shoe.
Wiki “a kind of simple shoe, shaped and hollowed out from a single block of wood, traditionally worn by French and Breton peasants….”
The French weavers threw their shoes into the new looms used to weave fabric.


No, the founders were not terrorists. The only action taken that might fit the definition is the Boston Tea Party. But if you want to compare actions, how about stationing armed men in homes to spy and intimidate the citizenry? What the founding fathers did instead of terrorism was tell the king they would no longer comply with his rule, that they were leaving the kingdom of England whether he agreed with it or not. This enraged the king, and he sent his army to forcefully disarm and punish those who would dare say no to his authority. When they… Read more »


Also, I’m taking it as a win that as of 9:33 PM I have one negative to my initial response. Apparently @USA hated the fact that two people would say no and provide a fact based answer against his comment that he voted down each of our comments.

Poor guy. Well, if pettiness is all he has going for him so be it.

Get Out

She should get a couple of spy cams and record their criminal acts and at the next teachers meeting play it on the big screen for all to see and invite members of the school board to attend as well. Finish off by telling the school board she’ll be filing for criminal charges and restitution.


Anti-gun zealots are as passionate as pro-gun zealots, but what sets us apart is our Second
Amendment. Since schools no longer educate but indoctrinate, it isn’t hard to see how the people are so easily swayed into giving up their rights as evidenced by their stance. The trouble is they aren’t content just giving up their rights, they want you to give up yours.


quote: 1. “You gun-owners want every teacher to be armed to the teeth. I’m sorry, but making teachers carry guns against their will in the classroom is dangerous Respond with a concise but accurate description of the FASTER Saves Lives programme, developed in Ohio in the wake of the Newtown school massacre. Make sure you include the FACTS that NO teacher is ever asked to sign up for the programme… ONLY those teachers who volunteer, almost all of which already have their Mother May I Cards and already carry everywhere else they go EXCEPT school, sign up to take a… Read more »


A simple application of LOGIC helps. This of course requires that all concerned parties can think logically. Murder is a human issue that has been know of since the Garden of Eden. Clubs, fists and feet and hands strangle. They are still 20-30% of FBI reported murder statistics. The FBI statistics show that the murder rate and numbers of murders has decreased in the USA despite the increase of the number of guns. What is also seen is that there are basically two reasons involved with murders. Street drugs sold for recreation and intoxication. Turf wars and gangs will kill.… Read more »


@USA Of course, when your other arguments lose throw race and religion in as your reasoning. On top of that, you couldn’t even get the date right. The “takeover” has been underway since the 1890’s. This predates Russian and Chinese communism, so they have nothing to do with it. The Vatican was not a part of it, and islam had been leaving us be for the most part since Jefferson stomped on em about 80 to 90 years earlier. So what caused it. Socialist progressive views stemming from Marx. Teddy Roosevelt was a believer, Wilson as well during WW1 while… Read more »