Robby Soave's Excellent Strawman Adventure
The Hill columnist discovers Democrats were actually on the same page as the NRA this whole time, but that would ruin a perfectly good headline
Robby Soave recently published a piece in The Hill titled “Democrats exposed as hypocrites on gun rights after fury over Alex Pretti killing” (Soave, 2026). The headline alone tells you exactly what Soave wants you to believe before you read a single word. Here is the thing about that article. It is a masterclass in constructing a strawman so the actual facts never have to get in the way of a good narrative.
Let us start with what actually happened in Minneapolis on January 24, 2026. Alex Pretti, a 37-year-old ICU nurse and licensed concealed carry holder, was shot and killed by federal Customs and Border Protection agents. Video evidence verified by multiple outlets including the New York Times shows Pretti holding a phone, not a gun, when he was killed (Howard, 2026). The Washington Post’s analysis of the footage indicates agents had already secured Pretti’s weapon before the shots were fired (Politico Staff, 2026). So much for the administration narrative that his gun somehow justified his death.
Within hours of the shooting, Trump administration officials fell over themselves to explain why Pretti deserved what happened to him. FBI Director Kash Patel went on Fox News and said “You cannot bring a firearm, loaded, with multiple magazines to any sort of protest that you want. It is that simple. You do not have a right to break the law” (Howard, 2026). DHS Secretary Kristi Noem tweeted that she did not “know of any peaceful protester that shows up with a gun and ammunition rather than a sign” (Howard, 2026). White House press secretary Karoline Leavitt said carrying a gun raises “the assumption of risk and the risk of force being used against you” during police encounters (Howard, 2026). Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent and Border Patrol chief Greg Bovino joined the chorus (Reuters Staff, 2026).
Now here is where Soave’s logical gymnastics become worth watching. Rather than address the fact that Republican officials attacked the core principle that Americans can exercise their Second Amendment rights at protests, Soave pivots to an entirely different argument. He spends his column accusing Democrats of being “2A hypocrites” for generally supporting gun control legislation. This is a classic strawman move. The controversy was not created by Democrats. The controversy was created when Trump officials suggested that legally carrying a gun at a protest makes you fair game for getting shot.
The National Rifle Association, an organization that has been aligned with Trump for years, did exactly what Soave claims they did not do. They pushed back. The NRA called a Trump-appointed federal prosecutor’s statement that people with guns can expect to be shot “dangerous and wrong” and called for a full investigation instead of “making generalizations and demonizing law-abiding citizens” (Howard, 2026). Gun Owners of America was even more direct. “You absolutely may walk around with guns, and you absolutely may peacefully protest while armed,” the group’s senior vice president Erich Pratt told CNN (Pequeño IV, 2026). “We have the First and Second amendments to protect the right to protest while armed — an American historical tradition that dates back to the Boston Tea Party.” The Minnesota Gun Owners Caucus called Patel’s comments “completely incorrect on Minnesota law” (Reuters Staff, 2026).
Soave writes that “I have actually mostly seen criticism of Kash Patel et al from Republicans.” This is true and it directly contradicts the premise of his own article. If Republicans are the ones criticizing Patel and the administration, then what exactly are the Democrats being exposed for? Perhaps Soave needed to manufacture hypocrisy on the left to avoid acknowledging that the right is eating itself alive over this issue.
Then there is the claim that Soave cannot find where Democrats stand. This is willful blindness. California Governor Gavin Newsom responded to Noem’s comments directly on social media. “The Trump administration does not believe in the 2nd Amendment. Good to know” (Howard, 2026). Representative Dave Min of California posted on X, “Joining the gun lobby to condemn Bill Essayli was not on my bingo card but here we are. Lawfully carrying a firearm is not grounds for being killed” (Howard, 2026). Maybe these Democrats support gun control in other contexts. Maybe they do not. What they clearly support in this specific context is the right to bear arms at protests, which is exactly what the NRA and GOA support, and exactly what the Trump administration questioned.
The factual record keeps getting in the way of Soave’s narrative. Pretti had a license to carry a concealed weapon. The Minneapolis police chief has said he has seen no evidence that Pretti brandished his weapon before he was shot (Reuters Staff, 2026). Video evidence shows he was recording with his phone when agents knocked him to the ground. He was pepper sprayed. He was pinned down. His gun was removed. Then he was shot four times in the back (Pequeño IV, 2026). The Department of Homeland Security has blocked Minnesota state investigators from reviewing evidence linked to the killing (Pequeño IV, 2026). Internal reviews have contradicted the White House narrative (NPR Staff, 2026).
Soave devotes part of his column to obsessing over whether Pretti had his ID on him, which Minnesota law requires gun owners to carry. He notes that officers did not ask to see it and that the fine would have been only $25. He calls this a “non sequitur” and he is right. But then why mention it at all except to plant doubts about Pretti in the reader’s mind? Why does Soave feel the need to attack the victim when the victim is dead and cannot defend himself?
The technique is clear. Find an outcome you want to explain, work backward from that conclusion, and arrange every statement to support it. This is not analysis. This is advocacy dressed up as commentary. It invokes anger rather than thought. It asks readers to accept that Democrats are the real villains here without ever explaining why the NRA and Gun Owners of America spent the last week criticizing Republicans.
There is a word for when you create a fake opponent to fight instead of addressing what is actually in front of you. That word is strawman. And Soave built one that would make a carnival sculptor jealous.
If you want to see what happens when a Wikipedia article on "strawman arguments" gets trapped in a feedback loop with a thesaurus and a chipper-shredder, read Robby Soave’s absolute crap here: https://thehill.com/opinion/robbys-radar/5710803-gun-control-debate-pretti/
---
Works Cited
Howard, A. (2026, January 27). Gun rights groups blast Trump over Minnesota response. *Politico*. https://www.politico.com/news/2026/01/27/gun-rights-groups-blast-trump-over-minnesota-response-00748217
NPR Staff. (2026, January 27). Internal review contradicts White House narrative of Pretti’s death. *NPR*. https://www.npr.org/2026/01/27/g-s1-107608/alex-pretti-death-internal-review-immigration
Pequeño IV, A. (2026, January 27). Trump says “You cannot bring firearms” after NRA blasts criticism over Alex Pretti carrying gun. *Forbes*. https://www.forbes.com/sites/antoniopequenoiv/2026/01/27/trump-says-you-cant-walk-in-with-guns-after-nra-blasts-criticism-over-alex-pretti-carrying-gun/
Politico Staff. (2026, January 28). Killing of Alex Pretti scrambles Second Amendment politics for Trump. *PBS*. https://www.pbs.org/newshour/politics/killing-of-alex-pretti-scrambles-second-amendment-politics-for-trump
Reuters Staff. (2026, January 26). Republicans face election risks in clash with gun rights groups over protester’s killing. *Reuters*. https://www.reuters.com/world/us/republicans-face-election-risks-clash-with-gun-rights-groups-over-protesters-2026-01-26/
Soave, R. (2026, January 28). Democrats exposed as hypocrites on gun rights after fury over Alex Pretti killing. *The Hill*. https://thehill.com/opinion/robbys-radar/5710803-gun-control-debate-pretti/