I need help supporting a Pro Gun argument!
- Thread starter SC4006
- Start date
CurlyQ.Howard
New member
Since firearms cannot be uninvented, those who wish them to be eliminated as the weapon criminals select have only one possible hope: the creation of a superior weapon. If this is done, then eventually firearms, which will always be with us, will perhaps be seen as only being as dangerous as rocks or sharpened sticks - something in the museum exhibition room next to lances, pikes, swords and such. Yes, firearms will still be everywhere, but the superior weapon will change the at large perception of firearms - rarely will they even be considered as the weapon of the day - perhaps only to be used as a last resort.
David White
New member
This link is full of facts and supporting data to help you out.
I think all gun owners should have a copy of it on their computer or as a print out....
http://gunfacts.info/pdfs/gun-facts/6.1/gun_facts_6_1_screen.pdf
I think all gun owners should have a copy of it on their computer or as a print out....
http://gunfacts.info/pdfs/gun-facts/6.1/gun_facts_6_1_screen.pdf
It's nearly impossible to communicate with someone who has irrational beliefs. But, here's how you can best deal with it.
Ask her which of these should be taken away in the Bill of Rights:
First Amendment [Religion, Speech, Press, Assembly, Petition (1791)]
Second Amendment [Right to Bear Arms (1791)]
Third Amendment [Quartering of Troops (1791)]
Fourth Amendment [Search and Seizure (1791)]
Fifth Amendment [Grand Jury, Double Jeopardy, Self-Incrimination, Due Process (1791)]
Sixth Amendment [Criminal Prosecutions - Jury Trial, Right to Confront and to Counsel (1791)]
Seventh Amendment [Common Law Suits - Jury Trial (1791)]
Eighth Amendment [Excess Bail or Fines, Cruel and Unusual Punishment (1791)]
Most likely, she will only choose the Second Amendment.
Then ask her why the Second Amendment was created. She won't know, I'm pretty sure. So explain it to her. You should know the answer before addressing the argument.
Then proceed by letting her know that the government can violate all of her other rights if the "people" are disarmed.
"A free people ought not only to be armed and disciplined, but they should have sufficient arms and ammunition to maintain a status of independence from any who might attempt to abuse them, which would include their own government."
- George Washington
"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety."
- Benjamin Franklin
"I prefer dangerous freedom over peaceful slavery."
- Thomas Jefferson
"The Constitution of most of our states (and of the United States) assert that all power is inherent in the people; that they may exercise it by themselves; that it is their right and duty to be at all times armed."
- Thomas Jefferson
"To disarm the people is the most effectual way to enslave them."
- George Mason
"Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are ruined.... The great object is that every man be armed. Everyone who is able might have a gun."
- Patrick Henry
If she doesn't "get it" after that, I wouldn't argue it any further. Like I said in the beginning, it's nearly impossible to communicate with someone who is irrational.
.
Ask her which of these should be taken away in the Bill of Rights:
First Amendment [Religion, Speech, Press, Assembly, Petition (1791)]
Second Amendment [Right to Bear Arms (1791)]
Third Amendment [Quartering of Troops (1791)]
Fourth Amendment [Search and Seizure (1791)]
Fifth Amendment [Grand Jury, Double Jeopardy, Self-Incrimination, Due Process (1791)]
Sixth Amendment [Criminal Prosecutions - Jury Trial, Right to Confront and to Counsel (1791)]
Seventh Amendment [Common Law Suits - Jury Trial (1791)]
Eighth Amendment [Excess Bail or Fines, Cruel and Unusual Punishment (1791)]
Most likely, she will only choose the Second Amendment.
Then ask her why the Second Amendment was created. She won't know, I'm pretty sure. So explain it to her. You should know the answer before addressing the argument.
Then proceed by letting her know that the government can violate all of her other rights if the "people" are disarmed.
"A free people ought not only to be armed and disciplined, but they should have sufficient arms and ammunition to maintain a status of independence from any who might attempt to abuse them, which would include their own government."
- George Washington
"Those who would give up essential liberty to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety."
- Benjamin Franklin
"I prefer dangerous freedom over peaceful slavery."
- Thomas Jefferson
"The Constitution of most of our states (and of the United States) assert that all power is inherent in the people; that they may exercise it by themselves; that it is their right and duty to be at all times armed."
- Thomas Jefferson
"To disarm the people is the most effectual way to enslave them."
- George Mason
"Guard with jealous attention the public liberty. Suspect everyone who approaches that jewel. Unfortunately, nothing will preserve it but downright force. Whenever you give up that force, you are ruined.... The great object is that every man be armed. Everyone who is able might have a gun."
- Patrick Henry
If she doesn't "get it" after that, I wouldn't argue it any further. Like I said in the beginning, it's nearly impossible to communicate with someone who is irrational.
.
Spats McGee
Administrator
Just for fun, I thought I'd address RuchardU's three main arguments, as I would direct them at a hypothetical gun control activist.
That's why the police use them. They kill bad people, too, you know.RichardU said:
Ever hear of the Bill of Needs? Me, neither.RichardU said:
And my chances get even worse if I'm not allowed to have a gun.RichardU said:
Spats McGee
Administrator
One other argument that I picked up here on TFL* is this: There's a difference between those rights that I, personally, need, and those which society needs for me to have. The prime example that I have used with this is our 4th, 5th, and 8th Amendment rights. I have never needed to move to exclude evidence in a criminal trial because my house was searched without a warrant and in an unreasonable manner (A4). Nor have I ever, personally, needed to invoke my A5 right against being compelled to testify against myself (A5). Nor has torture ever been used against me, personally, to get the aforementioned confession. Thus, I have never, personally, needed my Fourth, Fifth, or Eighth Amendment rights. As a society, however, we need to keep those in place. Without them, it becomes perfectly permissible for police to kick in doors, and torture confessions out of whomever they find there.
In my Walter Mitty moments, I imagine the conversation with an anti-gunner going like this:
AG: Nobody needs 30 rounds.
Spats: Has your house ever been searched without a warrant?
AG: No, of course not!
Spats: Then you've never needed your Fourth Amendment rights, have you.
AG: Umm, no.
Spats: Good. We'll just do away with that pesky A4.
AG: Wait!
. . . .
*= I truly wish I had articulated this before I saw it here, but, alas, cannot claim credit.
In my Walter Mitty moments, I imagine the conversation with an anti-gunner going like this:
AG: Nobody needs 30 rounds.
Spats: Has your house ever been searched without a warrant?
AG: No, of course not!
Spats: Then you've never needed your Fourth Amendment rights, have you.
AG: Umm, no.
Spats: Good. We'll just do away with that pesky A4.
AG: Wait!
. . . .
*= I truly wish I had articulated this before I saw it here, but, alas, cannot claim credit.
Every argument against guns involving hunting, sport shooting, or what is "needed" completely circumvents the one true purpose of the 2nd amendment. We are meant to keep them to protect ourselves from an unbearable tyrannical government. It is our last best hope to guarantee our freedom.
So "You don't need an assault weapon to hunt" irrelevant.
"Don't need hi cap mags to target shoot" irrelevant.
"You don't need 30 rounds or they kill too easy" Spot ****ing on, that is the point. If we could defend our freedom with potato guns life would be good, but they would come for those as well.
Keep the real target in your sights. Don't get entangled in irrelevant distractions. We were meant to keep and bear arms for our personal and national defense.
So "You don't need an assault weapon to hunt" irrelevant.
"Don't need hi cap mags to target shoot" irrelevant.
"You don't need 30 rounds or they kill too easy" Spot ****ing on, that is the point. If we could defend our freedom with potato guns life would be good, but they would come for those as well.
Keep the real target in your sights. Don't get entangled in irrelevant distractions. We were meant to keep and bear arms for our personal and national defense.
Spats McGee
Administrator
As for the need argument, I've also heard a very catchy phrase about the 2A: The beauty of the 2A is that you'll never need it until the government tries to take it from you.
doofus47 -- I don't think it was copyrighted.
doofus47 -- I don't think it was copyrighted.
I have a few
1.Ask her.....If someone kicked in your door this very second what would you use to defend your family.
2. Inform here of the average 911 response time for where she lives.
3. Explain to her that recoil implulse in a semi auto such as an ak or ar is much less than that of a bolt action firearm in the same caliber.
4. Inform her that a firearm with an adjustable stock and pistol grip such as an ar is more easily adatped to a variety of shooters.
5. Ask her why in the world she could possibly believe that a criminal would obey a law regarding guns. We all know how well they obey laws regarding rape, murder, prostution, theft, and a whole host of other laws that are broken on a regular basis.
There is no point on discussing constitutional freedoms with antis it is better to beet lack of logic with logic.
Regards, Vermonter
1.Ask her.....If someone kicked in your door this very second what would you use to defend your family.
2. Inform here of the average 911 response time for where she lives.
3. Explain to her that recoil implulse in a semi auto such as an ak or ar is much less than that of a bolt action firearm in the same caliber.
4. Inform her that a firearm with an adjustable stock and pistol grip such as an ar is more easily adatped to a variety of shooters.
5. Ask her why in the world she could possibly believe that a criminal would obey a law regarding guns. We all know how well they obey laws regarding rape, murder, prostution, theft, and a whole host of other laws that are broken on a regular basis.
There is no point on discussing constitutional freedoms with antis it is better to beet lack of logic with logic.
Regards, Vermonter