How to talk to "anti's" -- what logic do you use?

I haven't done anythign wrong, why are you worried about me? I don't tell you how to live your life, you don't tell me how to live mine. That's about the only two I use, I don't need to prove need to do what I can legally do, they need to prove why what I am legally doing is an immediate, direct threat to others.
 
Garand Illusion wrote:

Actually.....if your thought processes only go as far as the above, you're probably better off keeping your mouth shut. We need logical, intelligent, articulate people arguing our case.

Convert Sarah Brady to our cause and I'll reconsider my position. Until then I'm only reaching out to those who can be reached.
 
The thing is we have actual facts on our side; the other side just...put(s) people into the right state of mind to blindly accept their conclusion.
So doesn't that say something about what would be a more effective way of changing minds than argument and logic? Treat the person like they have some horrible disease which is worthy of sympathy and kindness but which you don't want to catch.
 
Convert Sarah Brady to our cause and I'll reconsider my position. Until then I'm only reaching out to those who can be reached.

Have Sarah PM me. Within a week her current site will be closed down and she'll be a contributor to packing.org.

Well ... I'd have no problem debating anyone on the merits of different kinds of gun control, especially since Sarah Brady is a public figure. In general I'd have some pretty good compassion for someone like the father of a Columbine victim (have a few of those around where I live, sadly) and I wouldn't beat a dead horse for too long with a coworker, but nonetheless ... it has to be done.

The logic and arguments are there. And we protect our rights or they go away. It's really that simple.

I've converted a number of wannabe "pacifists" and non believers over. I've made my quota -- y'all just need to make yours.

Or don't cry when we get a Canada/Australia/Britain type confiscation law.
 
when people question me about my love of guns, i ask them this question. if a drunk driver kills somone with his honda, are honda and the alcohol companies at fault?

it is just an irresonsible person who was breaking the law...so why are guns any different. usually that makes them pause and think.

armed samurai
 
As Mr. Spock would say "Illogical, Captain!" enough said. I think that while many of the anti-gun people are "smart", they either a) beleive way too much in what they see on TV, or b) are so affaird of what they themselves would do if they had a gun, that they do not want anyone else to have a gun thinking that EVERYONE thinks, and feels like they do...

Well that is what basic idea of what I think.
 
As Col. Cooper says, hoplophobia is a true phobia and sufferers are not open to reason or logic. They've already made up their mind and are closed to any arguments to the contrary.
 
It sounds like you have already made up your mind and closed to any arguments to the contrary.


Perhaps some people in this discussion suffer from a phobia, as well. Some sort of irrational fear of liberals? ;)
 
Handy lets back up a step. You know that I respect your positions on a number of matters but I've got to disagree with you on this.

Most "antis" I've spoken with quickly backed off their position when faced with facts and forced to think logically about it

I believe that what you may be doing when you "force" them to "face facts" is creating a situation where you don't change their opinion so much as frighten them into superficially agreeing with you to get you to leave them alone. They realize you have argumentation skills but don't necessarily recognize the facts involved. So they bow to your rhetorical skill but that's all. They go home believing that you're bright, aggressive guy and think to themselves that they'll redouble their efforts to hire more lawyers and politicians to help them articulate their arguments.

Irrational fear of liberals? Well no. More pity and sadness. :(
 
Back
Top