When I began reading the article immediately thought that this article was going to be opinion based. I constantly thought that some of the article seemed to contradict itself so, it lost some of my interest rather quickly. Kurtis Helena is the author of this article. Helena described that a person with autism would not be able to pull off a shooting rampage because they lack the focus it takes to do something like that in a single day (pg.3). After he stated this I started to become a little confused because then he goes on to describe that his brother who is autistic had the mental and physical capacity to operate a firearm although sound and look of it would have scared him (pg.3). His brother was also able to comprehend that he was not allowed to touch the firearm. My confusion was based on the authors use of sentence structure, more than often of the time his run on sentences or lack to delivering an organized thought allowed me to initially interpret this as his brother having the ability to comprehend that a gun was being categorized as “bad” but then he chooses to play with it otherwise. This author’s train of thought was every where it went from caring weapons, to politics, to autism, to dictatorship, to the banning of guns, then finally to drugs. His lack of caring out a single message caused him to not be a credible source. Therefore after reading the article i was able to make a distinction of the author’s creditablity based from his comments. For an example of an ad populum fallacy was created when the author noted , “On the far right we have people arguing that if we had god in the classroom this wouldn’t have happened. On the left the say ban all guns (pg.1). This statement was an example of a ad populum fallecy because it was comparing conservatives and liberals viewpoints through an emotional appeal. Another example of a fallacy would be a red herring fallacy was when he mentioned, ” There is way too much emphasis on saying ‘semi-automatic’ when describing the rifle that was originally found in the car….handguns were semi-automatic as well and had bigger bullets” (pg.2). Helena wanted to distract the audience to make us believe that he was creditable.
Helena, Kurtis. “OP-ED: CT School Shooting.” Examiner.com. 18 December 2012.Web. 22 April 2014.fallecies