The NRA Political Victory Fund Ad

1
The NRA Political Victory Fund Ad

• Analysis by
• Avi and Lucas

2
Introduction to Advertisement

• Who Funded the Advertisement?
• National Rifle Association Political Victory Fund
  www.nrapvf.org
  
• Established in 2000 to analyze local, state and
  federal officials on the issue of
  
• gun control. Offshoot of the 501(c)4 NRA as a
  Political Action Committee
  
• - NRAPVF receives all of its income from NRA
  General Fund
  
• - Capable of 527 like independent political
  advertising that does not endorse
  
• a specific candidate
• - NRAPVF has been running a series of ads about
  Kerry since April of 2004

3
(No Transcript)
4
Claims Made by the Ad

• 1. Kerry and Edwards support lawsuits by
  individuals against gun
  
• manufacturers for the crimes of
  individuals
  
• 2. Such lawsuits are causing firearms
  manufacturers to lose business
  
• and face eventual bankruptcy
• 3. If gun manufacturers are sued into
  bankruptcy, they will not be able to
  
• provide weapons to US soldiers in the
  field
  
• 4. (Implied Claim) If weapons makers cant
  supply weapons to US soldiers in the field they
  will be without firearms and our way of life
  could be lost.

5
The Big Claim

• Following the series of 4 claims made by
• The NRAPVF
• If Kerry and Edwards are elected, then
  soldiers in the field will be without firearms!
  

6
Applying Our Ethical Standard

• Veracity of the Truth
• Likelihood of occurrence

7
Claim 1

• Kerry and Edwards support lawsuits
• -Both Kerry and Edwards voted against S 695
  which would have immunized gun manufacturers from
  lawsuits
  
• - Is voting against one side of an issue
  necessarily mean you are for the other side.
  
• OUTCOME This statement is partially true by
  inference

8
Claim Two

• Gun manufacturers are being sued into
  bankruptcy.
  
• Outcome Not true, cost of defending lawsuits is
  far less then total sales

9
Claim Three

• If firearms manufacturers are sued into
  bankruptcy then they cannot provide weapons to
  soldiers
  
• OUTCOME Since they are not being sued into
  bankruptcy this claim is not even valid

10
Claim Four

• (Implied Claim) If gun makers cannot supply
  weapons then our soldiers can not defend our
  American way of life.
  
• Outcome Assuming the parent companies didnt
  come to the rescue, there are other firearm
  companies.

FN F2000 w. M203 Launcher
AR-15
11
Is It Ethical?

• No, the ad is not ethical because it makes claims
  not based on truth and prevents future scenarios
  that have an extremely little likelihood of
  occurring.

M-4
M16
12
How do we make it ethical

• Instead of implying that the future scenario is
  the case, the ad should imply that the future
  scenario could occur.
  
• Advertisement should use sources for facts that
  it implies or claims.

13
The End