Captive sheeple and an assignment

Hueco

New member
I have a very wonderful opportunity that I am going to take. For a final project in one of my classes, I have to give a 7 to 10 minute oratation on ANYTHING I WANT. Naturally I chose the Second Amendment. Those 19 people (plus the anti teacher) are going to have their first encounter with an...how should I say it? -- Agressive Patriot. I plan to first give them logic, then I will give them a statistic or two just in case some of the slugs do not understand logic, then I will wrap it up with a lovely statement that shows why anti's are as stupid as we know they are. And all the while...I will be of the utmost maturity and respectability. I will not give a single opportunity to be critisized negatively by any sheeple. I will give them the truth. At first 7-10 minutes seemed so long. But now that I think about all I have to say, it seems so short. The hard part will be condensing it down, but trying to retain the core values.

"Captive audience" plus "me" equals:

All hearing the truth
Some listening to the truth
Some thinking about the truth
Some changing their minds because of truth
Some getting offended

I am concerned about the fourth group. Truth offends, that is something I have learned to be so true. So be it, but I'll not compromise truth for the sake of comfort. They don't know what's about to hit them! :D


Hueco
 
Go get em ! I'm sure you'll do well, the only thing you could do to keep from offending some of them is to lie so I wouldn't worry about it. Let us know how it works out.
 
Good, use words that invoke an emotional response like "if your mother/sister/wife were being stalked by a weirdo". Make them think for once in there lives and remind them of the consitution. People tend to be apathetic about it sometimes. Let us know how it turns out.
 
scud brings up a good point. Open by saying, "I will probably offend some of you. The only way I cannot offend you is to lie. I cannot do that because I am not an anti-gun proponent."

I was thinking of using "liberal" (in the modern sense), but there might be a pro-gun liberal around. Or is "pro-gun liberal" an oxymoron? ;)
 
Hueco,

I wish you the best of luck, both on your grade and in changing some minds. If you don't mind sharing the text of your presentation, please post it. I'd love to read it.
 
Fellow gun owner.
I travel on a multitude of forums and BBS like this one all talking about the ever-volatile gun subject. My advice I'd like to give would be this:

NEVER use categorizations like "Liberal", "Conservative", "Democrat", "Republican", and the like in reference to either pro-gun or anti-gun people. I try to stick with terms like "Media-fed", or "Lied to (When using THIS one, you MUST provide proof of the lies to back your claims)" -- Ask for a gun headline that they heard and dispute it with the truth. Like the lie about the 5-14 (Notice that the number has dwindled since Columbine? Funny) kids killed every day with guns. Or the lie about all the other gun forbidden countries being safer than America -one of my favorites!

Use this opportunity to change the opinions of many. I envy you for having this chance. I rarely get the chance to debate folks about this -probably because gunhaters are SO rare except when they're hiding behind their computers, or surrounded by taxpayer-paid bodyguards.

Please keep us posted about how it goes.

Best of luck!

------------------
Going Nowhere? Join Me There! Enjoy your stay!
 
A good illustration regarding guns and our society ocurred recently when the media confronted Dick Cheney regarding his votes on "plastic guns" and "cop killer bullets". Two complete fabrications and gross distortions of the truth by the anti-gun side.

The "plastic gun" scare was created with the advent of the Glock pistol and its polymer frame. The anti-gun crowd seized the opportunity to cry that this weapon was invisible to metal detectors and airport security systems. The facts of course have been proven otherwise. The Glock still has a substantial amount of metal in it and it still looks like a gun on x-ray systems.

The "cop killer bullets" is another outright lie by the anti-gun forces and the media. These rounds, created by a company called KTW, were developed for law enforcement use to enhance pentration against hard targets such as vehicles. The typical police rounds such as full metal jacket and especially hollow point were not having good penetration qualities aginst windshields and car doors etc. Originally these bullets had a steel core and later used a solid brass bullet with a Teflon coating. The Teflon was used to eliminate the severe rifling abrasion caused by the brass.
ABC did a so-called story on the "cop killer bullets" even though asked to not do so by law enforcement.

The result was a hue and cry on the part of the anti-gun forces to ban these and any bullet that could penetrate a typical protective vest. Well it turns out that that just about every rifle round could penetrate a vest and the propsed legislation was so broad it would have banned most kinds of ammunition. Suffice to say that the laws that were passed were based, with the help of the NRA, upon the construction of the bullet and did not impact the typical ones used by most shooters.
However, rather than being any kind of a positive thing the whole affair was really a negative.
1. Bad people were made aware of ammunition that could defeat protective vests at a time when the mere wearing of these vest was not a widely known fact.
2. It had alwasy been illegal to sell armor piercing ammunition to civilians now it seemed as if a there was a ready black market.
3. KTW rounds were never sold in the civilian market -only to police and the military.
4. The so-called "Fourth Estate", the media, excercising their right to free speech, disseminated information to the population that had the potential to create harm for both law enforcement personnel and the public in general. I'm not sure why the people's "right to know" regarding specialized penetrations rounds overruled the safety of the police and the public. ABC aired the special twice by the way, they must have been really proud of themselves.
5. The Teflon coating was depicted as being an "evil secret" in helping to defeat protective vests when in fact it actually made it less effective.
There are other details that are illustrative of the point. Perhaps the most telling one being that this is all old news. The facts are widely know that both of these stories are really complete fabrications. You have to wonder why the Networks and media personalities like Matt Lauer would confront Cheney with his votes on these issues as a bad thing when the truth is easy to find. I won't dignify the folks who participated in this charade as journalists. A journalist would use the truth not hide or distort it.

As a lady on the gun newsgroup said "It isn't about GRAVITAS, its about VERITAS.

But of course it is much easier to give in to emotion rather that be forced to use energy and brainpower to divine the truth.

smileyshot22.gif


------------------
"The more perfect
civilisation is, the less occasion has it for government." Thomas Paine The Rights of Man 1792

[This message has been edited by Coyote 6 (edited August 09, 2000).]
 
Ok, gave that presentation this morning. The most widespread and common reaction from teh class was that they simply would not even look at me. Most simply looked down at their desk...or something like that. When others gave their presentations -- there was more eye contact in that room than in a press conference! I was deathly nervous for about the first minute or so. But in my usual fashion, when I am really "into" something and am excited about it, my voice tends to get a little louder, and a lot deeper. I swear, I have never been that calm when discussing this issue before. I had two questions after my conclusion. The first was from the teacher (an obvious anti). She asked what I would do about situation like the 6-year old killing the other 6-year old. I listened, stood quietly thinking for a few seconds. Calmly positioned myself back in front of the class (I had walked to my desk not forseeing questions), and gave a wonderful little number on education being the solution to that sort of thing. She was not showing staisfaction from my answer, but she had absolutely nothing to say in rebuttle. I had a follow-up question to the one the teacher posed. It was who should be held responisble for that kids actions. I did the same thing: Listened intently, stood quietly thinking, and then spoke calmly but in a very direct confidant way. I explained to her that in any case where a juvinile comitted a crime, the parent/guardian shoud be held responsible. And that responsibility should be a very good deterrance/encouragement to educate the kids fully. She was not satisfied either. I will try and organize my notes into a media that can be posted. Unfortunately, my conclusion I drew from my head, and was entirely un planned. I'll try to re-write that as close to the real thing as I can from memory. Offence was certainly the theme for those particular 15 minutes.


Hueco
 
Back
Top