BS Summary: This article contains 14 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Emotion, Quote-first Misdirection, and Biased Writer Voice, with Unattributed Quote as the most egregious example at 32.6% saturation with 139 hits. Analysis detected 807 faulty-reasoning hits from 426 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 41.2% and a BS Rank of 32% (14,420 of 21,176 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 68.10% of the article peer group.

The U.S. 
Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit has struck down New Jersey’s ban on “assault firearms” and large-capacity magazines. 
The court ruled that the bans violated the Second Amendment. 
The Association of New Jersey Rifle and Pistol Clubs Inc., Blake Ellman, and Marc Weinburg had sued the New Jersey Attorney General, the Superintendent of the New Jersey State Police, the Officer in Charge of the Chester Police Department, and the Chief of Police of the Park Ridge Police Department over the weapons ban. 
The 192-page ruling released on July 17 consolidates three separate lawsuits under the Second Amendment. 
The court remanded the question to the District Court. 
The court wrote: 
“It determined that New Jersey’s ban on Colt AR-15s violates the Second Amendment. 
When it turned to the LCM Provisions, it held that the law does not violate the Second Amendment or the Takings Clause. 
Applying the framework announced in New York State Rifle & Pistol Association v. 
Bruen, 597 U.S. 1 (2022), we agree with the District Court that New Jersey’s ban on Colt AR-15s violates the Second Amendment. 
“However, because the record supports the same result for all semi-automatic rifles—not only Colt AR-15s—we will MODIFY the District Court’s order so that it deems the Assault Firearm Provisions unconstitutional with respect to the full class of semi-automatic rifles. 
We will AFFIRM that part of the order as modified. 
The LCM Provisions also violate the Second Amendment, so we will REVERSE the District Court’s order with respect to those.” 
The National Rifle Association's state affiliate, the Association of New Jersey Rifle and Pistol Clubs, was the lead plaintiff when the case was initially filed and later amended to include assault weapons. 
The NRA funded the lawsuit, and its counsel gave oral arguments before the Third Circuit. 
John Commerford, Executive Director of the National Rifle Association Institute for Legislative Action, welcomed the win. 
“Today marks a historic victory for the NRA, the Second Amendment, and law-abiding Americans," Commerford said in a statement. 
"The Third Circuit has struck down these unconstitutional so-called assault weapons bans and magazine bans in New Jersey, affirming what we’ve always known: the right to keep and bear arms, including commonly-owned rifles and standard-capacity magazines, is fundamental and cannot be infringed by politicians who prioritize control over constitutional freedoms. 
This ruling protects the rights of millions of responsible gun owners in the Garden State and serves as another benchmark in our efforts to dismantle gun control across the country.” 
Article reasoning-pattern comparisonThis article: 11.7%Scott McClallen: 2.3%Townhall: 5.2%Confirmation Bias11.7%This article: 0.0%Scott McClallen: 0.8%Townhall: 0.7%Anchoring Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Scott McClallen: 1.5%Townhall: 2.7%Availability Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Scott McClallen: 0.8%Townhall: 0.9%Representativeness Heuristic0.0%This article: 0.0%Scott McClallen: 0.4%Townhall: 0.7%Hindsight Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Scott McClallen: 1.3%Townhall: 1.8%Overconfidence Bias0.0%This article: 14.6%Scott McClallen: 7.4%Townhall: 11.3%Framing Effect14.6%This article: 0.0%Scott McClallen: 0.3%Townhall: 0.4%Loss Aversion0.0%This article: 0.0%Scott McClallen: 0.2%Townhall: 0.3%Status Quo Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Scott McClallen: 0.1%Townhall: 0.1%Sunk Cost Effect0.0%This article: 4.5%Scott McClallen: 0.8%Townhall: 1.5%Optimism Bias4.5%This article: 0.0%Scott McClallen: 0.9%Townhall: 1.9%Pessimism Bias0.0%This article: 7.0%Scott McClallen: 8.4%Townhall: 13.5%Negativity Bias7.0%This article: 11.7%Scott McClallen: 1.9%Townhall: 1.8%Self-Serving Bias11.7%This article: 0.0%Scott McClallen: 0.9%Townhall: 1.8%Fundamental Attribution Error0.0%This article: 0.0%Scott McClallen: 0.1%Townhall: 0.1%Actor-Observer Bias0.0%This article: 11.7%Scott McClallen: 2.9%Townhall: 4.6%In-Group Bias11.7%This article: 0.0%Scott McClallen: 0.8%Townhall: 3.2%Out-Group Homogeneity Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Scott McClallen: 1.5%Townhall: 1.8%Halo Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Scott McClallen: 0.2%Townhall: 0.8%Horn Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Scott McClallen: 0.0%Townhall: 0.0%Dunning-Kruger Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Scott McClallen: 0.5%Townhall: 1.3%Recency Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Scott McClallen: 0.3%Townhall: 0.6%Primacy Effect0.0%This article: 0.0%Scott McClallen: 0.0%Townhall: 0.0%Blind-Spot Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Scott McClallen: 1.6%Townhall: 5.0%Ad Hominem0.0%This article: 0.0%Scott McClallen: 0.4%Townhall: 2.0%Straw Man0.0%This article: 7.0%Scott McClallen: 4.4%Townhall: 4.5%Appeal to Authority7.0%This article: 0.0%Scott McClallen: 0.8%Townhall: 2.0%False Dilemma0.0%This article: 0.0%Scott McClallen: 0.5%Townhall: 1.6%Slippery Slope0.0%This article: 0.0%Scott McClallen: 0.1%Townhall: 0.1%Circular Reasoning0.0%This article: 0.0%Scott McClallen: 2.2%Townhall: 9.1%Hasty Generalization0.0%This article: 0.0%Scott McClallen: 0.1%Townhall: 0.5%Red Herring0.0%This article: 0.0%Scott McClallen: 0.6%Townhall: 1.3%Bandwagon0.0%This article: 23.2%Scott McClallen: 10.3%Townhall: 11.3%Appeal to Emotion23.2%This article: 0.0%Scott McClallen: 1.1%Townhall: 2.3%Begging the Question0.0%This article: 0.0%Scott McClallen: 1.4%Townhall: 2.5%Post Hoc (False Cause)0.0%This article: 0.0%Scott McClallen: 0.0%Townhall: 0.6%Tu Quoque0.0%This article: 11.7%Scott McClallen: 0.7%Townhall: 1.5%Burden of Proof11.7%This article: 0.0%Scott McClallen: 0.1%Townhall: 0.1%Appeal to Nature0.0%This article: 0.0%Scott McClallen: 0.1%Townhall: 0.1%Composition/Division0.0%This article: 0.0%Scott McClallen: 0.2%Townhall: 1.4%Anecdotal0.0%This article: 0.0%Scott McClallen: 0.0%Townhall: 0.1%No True Scotsman0.0%This article: 11.7%Scott McClallen: 1.8%Townhall: 2.2%Ambiguity (Equivocation)11.7%This article: 0.0%Scott McClallen: 0.0%Townhall: 0.0%Gambler’s Fallacy0.0%This article: 0.0%Scott McClallen: 0.0%Townhall: 0.0%Middle Ground0.0%This article: 0.0%Scott McClallen: 0.0%Townhall: 0.2%Personal Incredulity0.0%This article: 0.0%Scott McClallen: 0.0%Townhall: 0.2%Special Pleading0.0%This article: 0.0%Scott McClallen: 0.0%Townhall: 0.4%Genetic Fallacy0.0%This article: 32.6%Scott McClallen: 2.0%Townhall: 3.4%Unattributed Quote32.6%This article: 20.0%Scott McClallen: 3.3%Townhall: 3.0%Quote-first Misdirection20.0%This article: 14.8%Scott McClallen: 5.3%Townhall: 16.2%Biased Writer Voice14.8%This article: 7.0%Scott McClallen: 3.9%Townhall: 5.6%Indoctrination7.0%This article: 0.0%Scott McClallen: 0.1%Townhall: 0.2%Politically Left Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Scott McClallen: 5.4%Townhall: 13.9%Politically Right Leaning Bias0.0%This article: 0.0%Scott McClallen: 3.6%Townhall: 5.1%Attempt to Sell a Product or S…0.0%

426 words analyzed.

Speakers

1speaker27%attributed speech311writer words
Voice mapSelect a segment to jump to its words
Writer's voice • 13 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 2 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 19 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 54 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 9 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 3 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 13 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 22 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 39 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 10 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 20 words • 100.0% coverageWriter's voice • 32 words • 0.0% coverageWriter's voice • 15 words • 0.0% coverageJohn Commerford • 16 words • 0.0% coverageJohn Commerford • 19 words • 0.0% coverageJohn Commerford • 50 words • 100.0% coverageJohn Commerford • 30 words • 100.0% coverage
Selected voice

John Commerford

86%flagged-word coverage
115 attributed words100% of attributed speech55% writer coverage
0%22.5%45.0%Unattributed Quote-44.7 ptsWriter: 44.7%John Commerford: 0.0%0.0%Biased Writer Voice+39.3 ptsWriter: 4.2%John Commerford: 43.5%43.5%Quote-first Misdirection+32.2 ptsWriter: 11.3%John Commerford: 43.5%43.5%Indoctrination+26.1 ptsWriter: 0.0%John Commerford: 26.1%26.1%

Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.

Loading…
Loading…
Loading…

Analysis

Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.