Fallacies pt. 2 "NFL Player's death turned into a Political exhibit"

Caleb Calderon

After the recent passing of Colts player Edwin Jackson from a roadside crash, there was much anger relinquished from the matter on social media which then took to the attention of Donald Trump. Trump then took to his twitter platform to be as rambunctious as usual, throwing the situation out of porportion, by taking the tragedy into a politcal dillema. As the driver who had caused Mr. Jackson's death was not of US citenzenship, Trump then exploited the given point to elaborate to his siding of illegal immigrants continuing to be an issue for the US.

Article Link: 

https://www.nytimes.com/2018/02/06/us/edwin-jackson-undocumented.html?rref=collection%2Fsectioncollection%2Fus&action=click&contentCollection=us&region=rank&module=package&version=highlights&contentPlacement=2&pgtype=sectionfront

BROAD SCOPE:

On the groundworks of scope fallacy, the sub point of broad scope is at hand which I believe fits within the tweet that Trump had sent out. As Broad Scope is the part of the fallacy that completely "negates" the rest of the given matter because of one point in particular. For instance in this case, Trump negates the citenzenship of any immigrant in the US becuase in his perspective, they only engage in actions or notions of this measure that are so harmful to society. The argument made from Trump and received from the reader of the specific tweet is that all or at least most illegal immigrants in the country of the US are bound to make some decision or action that will put you in harms way, which would discredit the individual to be viewed as anything else. As the article goes on to state that decades of research should essentially exonerate the view of immigrants in the US as being harmful, this fallacy given from the tweet of the president is part of argument that would exempt the reasoning. Simply an extentsion of ambiguity that reiterates Trump's way of responding to most situations.


SUBFALLACY:

Under the realm of straw man, subfallacy suggests that one would take siding with the part that is at a stronger stand rather than the one that would be weaker in a sense, especially shown when losing an argument. In this case, Trump is not losing any argument as there was none created towards him on the specfic matter, but he is defenitly taking usage of subfallacy as he endeavors into bashing immigration once more by using a tragedy that has no direct interaction with the notion of immigration but can be used a force against all imigrants in his favor. This is the stronger side prior to this tragedy for Trump as he has already made vigorous acts to work against all immigrants in the US. Though touched upon from the straw man nature, by doing this, Trump is showing signs of weakness overall especially in this case as many agree from first hand standpoint at least that the tragedy does not pertain to the problem of illegal immigrants.