Garand Illusion
New member
This is a long winded post, but I've been thinking about this a lot with all the high profile multiple shootings recently. California, Texas, Atlanta, Wisconsin ...
It's interesting how people react. For those of us who believe in personal self defense it's just another reason why citizens need to be able to defend themselves and be as well armed as the killers. For the anti's, it's another reason to take the guns away. I have a number of antis as friends, and I think I understand them.
People are antis for different reasons. Some have just never been around guns and/or think owning one is a sign of a redneck and someone certainly below them (the liberal genteel types). Some would never consider using deadly force and bet their lives on being passive and letting the police deal with trouble. Others have bought into the false belief that guns in the home are only dangerous to the homeowner and his family.
People who will never own guns are suspicious of those who do. They don't like us having a kind of power they don't. They hate the thought that they might get into a simple argument, have some "red neck" brandish a firearm and then feel powerless. And they don't want to think the world is a place where people HAVE to carry guns to be safe.
Now ... having spent some time in Europe, I understand the concept of a (mostly) gun free society. There's a lot of crime in Europe, but it's mostly non-violent and is considered an agravation more than a threat. So it's quite likely you'll get your pocket picked or your purse snatched, but it's unlikely anyone will stick a gun in your face. And if you end up in the wrong part of town late at night ... well, you're worried about losing your wallet, but you're not concerned about losing your life (these things happen, of course, but rarely).
Whether or not it's better to have a society with or without guns is a subject that intellegent men can differ on.
But the bottom line is ... as a nation we are no where near to have a gun prohibition/take away. And even if we did, it would be years before enough guns were out of bad guys hands before it made a different (being as it would only be law abiding citizens handing them over in the first place).
I think what we need to do with the antis is face their fears and try to get them over to our side.
1. Since guns aren't going away, people need the ability to defend themselves.
2. There's nothing magical about LEO's and guns.
3. Allowing civilians to carry guns is not some kind of radical experiment.
4. People who are already "on the edge" of becoming killers are already carrying guns irregardless of laws.
5. The Israeli's discovered long ago that having armed civilians increased their security.
6. Every state I know of with CCW doesn't allow for brandishing a concealed weapon.
7. Anti's say the notion that an armed citizenry can keep a government from turning into a tyranny (as our founding fathers believed) is quaint, old fashioned, and out of date.
Some people you just can't convert. But for those that at least try to be logical, you can usually win them over to the CCW side.
I like taking my anti friends to the range whenever I can talk them in to it. I've converted a few to gun owners over the years. I think that's the best way of all.
How do you try to convince anti-gun people that guns aren't the root of all evil? The "because it's the consitution, damnit" thing just doesn't work too well.
It's interesting how people react. For those of us who believe in personal self defense it's just another reason why citizens need to be able to defend themselves and be as well armed as the killers. For the anti's, it's another reason to take the guns away. I have a number of antis as friends, and I think I understand them.
People are antis for different reasons. Some have just never been around guns and/or think owning one is a sign of a redneck and someone certainly below them (the liberal genteel types). Some would never consider using deadly force and bet their lives on being passive and letting the police deal with trouble. Others have bought into the false belief that guns in the home are only dangerous to the homeowner and his family.
People who will never own guns are suspicious of those who do. They don't like us having a kind of power they don't. They hate the thought that they might get into a simple argument, have some "red neck" brandish a firearm and then feel powerless. And they don't want to think the world is a place where people HAVE to carry guns to be safe.
Now ... having spent some time in Europe, I understand the concept of a (mostly) gun free society. There's a lot of crime in Europe, but it's mostly non-violent and is considered an agravation more than a threat. So it's quite likely you'll get your pocket picked or your purse snatched, but it's unlikely anyone will stick a gun in your face. And if you end up in the wrong part of town late at night ... well, you're worried about losing your wallet, but you're not concerned about losing your life (these things happen, of course, but rarely).
Whether or not it's better to have a society with or without guns is a subject that intellegent men can differ on.
But the bottom line is ... as a nation we are no where near to have a gun prohibition/take away. And even if we did, it would be years before enough guns were out of bad guys hands before it made a different (being as it would only be law abiding citizens handing them over in the first place).
I think what we need to do with the antis is face their fears and try to get them over to our side.
1. Since guns aren't going away, people need the ability to defend themselves.
How many situations could have been ended by an armed civilian? The Tyler, TX situation was affected by an armed civilian who saved lives. In about any othe situation where the BG didn't have armor he would have ended it right there.
Armed civilians have defended themselves and others in MANY incidents. Even if you're unarmed, if you're living in a CCW state and a nut starts blazing away indiscriminately at a McDonalds, there's at least a chance someone will stop him before he gets to you/your family.
Armed civilians have defended themselves and others in MANY incidents. Even if you're unarmed, if you're living in a CCW state and a nut starts blazing away indiscriminately at a McDonalds, there's at least a chance someone will stop him before he gets to you/your family.
2. There's nothing magical about LEO's and guns.
Leo's get from 16 - 80 hours of training (highly differential, from what I've seen) but most of that is unrelated to what a private citizen needs to defens himself. The training most CCW programs entail -- coupled with the lifetime of shooting experience most holders have -- is more than sufficient to make them a viable threat to the bad guys AND a force to protect other bystanders.
Having armed and trained civilians on the streets reinforces our civilization and makes streets safer.
Having armed and trained civilians on the streets reinforces our civilization and makes streets safer.
3. Allowing civilians to carry guns is not some kind of radical experiment.
It's been allowed for many years in many states. What makes the people of all of those states civil enough to defend themselves but not the people in CA or NY? Is there something wrong with the people in those states?
4. People who are already "on the edge" of becoming killers are already carrying guns irregardless of laws.
How many times have you been randomly searched? Couldn't you have been carrying a gun all these years anyway? A CCW law ONLY allows law abiding people to carry; muderers could care less about the minor infraction of carrying illegally.
5. The Israeli's discovered long ago that having armed civilians increased their security.
That's why they have suicide bombers intstead of mass shootings. While none of us want to be in a constant state of war like Israel ... what makes a people under constant threat of terrorism more secure can also make people under a far lesser threat of assault more secure.
6. Every state I know of with CCW doesn't allow for brandishing a concealed weapon.
A person who has had a weapon brandished at them for no reason still has full recourse of the law. But in any case ... historically it just doesn't happen. And people who would do such a thing ... well, they're in the group of people who probably carry guns anyway.
7. Anti's say the notion that an armed citizenry can keep a government from turning into a tyranny (as our founding fathers believed) is quaint, old fashioned, and out of date.
There is an old quote, "he who fails to learn from history is destined to repeat it." Within the 20th century we have seen a number of democracy's turn to agressive tyranny's, the most obvious of which is Nazi Germany.
The jews in the Warsaw Ghetto struggled to fight back with only a handful of pistols they'd managed to steal (all other firearms had been legally seized). Imagine what they could have done if they'd been an average American neighborhood with the kind of firepower that entails! Certainly there would have been many more who would have been able to break free and get away.
I just can't imagine an anti-gun dad saying, "Well my son ... we are being carted off to a death camp ... but AT LEAST there were no school shootings or accidental shootings this year!"
The jews in the Warsaw Ghetto struggled to fight back with only a handful of pistols they'd managed to steal (all other firearms had been legally seized). Imagine what they could have done if they'd been an average American neighborhood with the kind of firepower that entails! Certainly there would have been many more who would have been able to break free and get away.
I just can't imagine an anti-gun dad saying, "Well my son ... we are being carted off to a death camp ... but AT LEAST there were no school shootings or accidental shootings this year!"
Some people you just can't convert. But for those that at least try to be logical, you can usually win them over to the CCW side.
I like taking my anti friends to the range whenever I can talk them in to it. I've converted a few to gun owners over the years. I think that's the best way of all.
How do you try to convince anti-gun people that guns aren't the root of all evil? The "because it's the consitution, damnit" thing just doesn't work too well.
Last edited:
