It will probably make you angry, but it's worth knowing what we're up against

D

doofus47

New member
I often see on numerous threads several ideas repeatedly rehashed:
1. I was arguing/discussing/debating X (my BiL, FiL, wife, mother, guy in cafe, et al) and I was stumped by his/her Anti-gun argument.
2. What are these guys thinking?
3. What will they come up with next?

So, I was browsing the interwebs and I followed some citations used by one Anti-2nd campaign related to Isla Vista shooting back to this site.
http://smartgunlaws.org/

If you want to understand (not the motivation), but the methods, studies and marketing that anti-2nd amendment debaters are going to use, take the time to browse.

This posting is the opposite of an endorsement of the website position. This is a research tool for you to use to know what is coming from a debate perspective. Then you can more effectively use the information provided by this website, including the law and civil rights forum, to checkmate these arguments.
http://thefiringline.com/library/

Warning:
This will NOT allay the REASON that your debate opposition is taking this position. Probably some mothers are afraid for their kids (aren't we all) and they want crazy tough gun laws. Maybe your BiL is just afraid of anything that goes bang since the balloons popped unexpectedly at his 6th birthday party. Be cognizant that you're simply taking the tools out of the hand of an anti-2nd amendment bigot; you might not be able to change their minds using this info. Be patient and understanding and recognize that somethings are just beyond the power of debate.

Don't mean to drive by so much as offer info, but if it's a drive by, feel free to close me down.
 
Although I keep trying, I really know that I cannot convince those opposed to the ownership or carrying of guns to change their opinion. And I know that the reason for this is that the anti-gun position is not one based upon facts but upon emotion and/or the desire to control others. There are those that truly believe that if the total banning of guns would save one child's life by avoiding a gun accident, then it is worth it, despite the thousands of innocent people who would become victims of gun violence by criminals and be unable to defend themselves. Its because the emotional response to hearing about that one innocent child killed by a gun in an avoidable accident is so great that it overwhelms any sense of logic, reason or proportionality.

I know a grown woman with children of her own who understands that guns are a reality in this world, and that her children should be taught what they should do if they encounter a gun, say at a friend's home. I have offered to teach the basics of gun safety to her children and she has accepted my offer graciously, recognizing the value of such training. Yet she keeps putting off the day and time for me to actually do this training. Her emotional dislike and fear of guns brings up such frightening images in her mind that she cannot seem to move forward despite her intellectual understanding that this is for her children's safety. This same woman was taught by me to safely handle a gun, and to shoot a gun when she was a young person herself.
 
When I was a detective I was assigned to the speakers bureau.
The idea of that was to give verbal presentations to civic groups about topics of interest to the populace, like illegal drugs, home security & such.
Home security was a popular topic and invariably someone would ask " when can I shoot someone that breaks into my home" and such.
I was giving the home security dog & pony show to a church group when the topic of using deadly force to protect the self & loved ones came up yet again.
Several women & a couple guys said they could NOT, under any circumstances, shoot an intruder no matter the threat to the faimly or the self.
I was amazed at that & quickly learned no logic will ever change that kind
of thinking.
Many of the church group I was speaking to didn't own a firearm & never would.
It wasn't my "job" to change minds, only give the best advice I could.
Often I'd leave these civic groups with a very dim view of the human condtion.:(:(
 
The idea that one should not take a life even under threat to yourself has quite a noble and respectable legal and philosophical history.

Some folks view life as sacred and taking one is aprior evil. It is justified or excusable in self-defense for some but never good. Some view as never good under any circumstance.

I would not disdain those who feel that way.

It is not a logic issue if one understands the use of the term logic. It is a value issues.

Also, if one studies the psychological and social processes in the immediate use of violence, one sees that we have a natural inhibition in some cases from using it.

It's more complex than proclaiming that you are a tough sheep dog and someone else isn't.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top