Does this rhetorical technique have a name?

>breaking an ordinary concept down to redundant detail to make it sound foolish or obsessive

Adding humanities to board name that supposedly was to do with history to increase traffic results in thread being 90% worthless posts.

strawmanning
you really think retards would pass up this board if they had dropped &humanities?

No, but at least then threads would be about history and not meaningless concepts nothing to do with anything.

>have a right
>someone abuses that right
>right should be taken away from everyone
I can do it too, mom!

Humanities is only responsible for a fraction of worthless posts. Most worthless posts here come either from stormtards, from trolls, or from people who are just historically illiterate.

>muh stormfront boogyman
Meanwhile daily marxist threads about the virtues of communism are a-okay

I don't know, but the fact that the News is being so casual with its writing is starting to annoy me.

>reforming gun laws means revoking the 2nd amendment
Are you being as sarcastic as OP's picture?

What? Is it an iPhone accessroy or something? You can turn your iphone into a metal pellet shoter

Argument reduced to absurd level?

Yeah, if you put it in microwave for 50 seconds

Strawman. Any argument you have where you do something to make the opponent seem more retarded than they are, like in the OP or like this , you're dealing with a strawman.

That isn't by itself a fallacy. However, a strawman can be presented as a ad absurdum to hide the fact it's a strawman.

You're only supposed to do it for 30 seconds or you'll overcharge it and decrease battery life! Just wanted to help you out there.

Yeah, but you get a higher fire rate.

Historical discussions should be focused on past events, and not their contemporary consequences.

>Infringing right to bear arms means not infringing the right to bear arms
I don't get it. How is this supposed to work?

How Orwellian of you

Having some checks and safeguards to guns doesn't mean it is a complete ban. That would be strawmanning

Makes me think of Kants "things in them selfs"

This, not even American, seems to be a worldwide problem.

News are increasingly partisan, sensationalistic, poorly-redacted, poorly-researched, and in some cases just clickbait altogether