Posted on 08/17/2016 1:58:02 PM PDT by sally234
Guns are a tricky topic. Very rarely do you find voters ambivalent about gun violence, gun safety, etc. Someone is either strongly pro-gun rights or pro-gun control, which makes a civil conversation difficult to start or maintain. But the solution isn’t to avoid the topic.
As I mentioned in my last column, you may be the only conservative who tries to challenge a liberal’s worldview. No pressure.
It may sound like a heavy weight to bear, but not if you’re prepared. So, let’s talk guns.
(Excerpt) Read more at dailysignal.com ...
I find one of the most effective ways to counter the anti-gunner is to take him/her to the shooting range.
A petition is now actively seeking signatures for a measure to qualify for the November ballot in Kalifornicate to overturn the recent anti-gun laws the libturd politicians in Sacramento recently passed and Gov. moonbeam signed into law. If you live in that communist run state I urge you to sign the petition, it's the Patriotic American thing to do. Go to the NRA website for locations of where a petition can be found.
Gun control advocates are driven by feelings, not rational arguments. You will never “win an argument” by directly confronting someone’s emotionally held ideas. They have sharp detectors for “reason”, and will shut out anything you say, because they know that their world view is a house of cards.
But if after a few drinks they will engage in non-confrontational discussion, the only hope is to get them to discover the truth for themselves, Socrates style (and we know how that worked out for him). If they are not screaming LALALALA with their hands over their ears, I suggest working their conversation around to:
1) Their beliefs about civil rights. Are civil rights worth defending? Do they happen by themselves or do they have to be fought for? If there are no other options, does each person have a right to defend their own civil rights? How about their own life or the lives of loved ones and their children?
2) Are women ever victims of sexual assault? There sure seems to be a lot of evidence that a certain percentage of men are predators. Do women have a right not to be bothered, groped, drugged, put upon, raped, murdered?
3) If they answer “no” to these questions, there is no point in further discussion.
4) If they say yes, work the discussion around to scenarios where a person is confronted by armed criminals, or someone much bigger than themselves, with an obvious intent to cause them grievous harm. No policemen is standing by. Since they have admitted the victim has a right to self defense, ask how the victim can defend himself/herself. Etc.
Most emoters will smell the rat of rational thought, put up the shields, accuse you of patronizing them, etc. They do believe in self-defense against reason. Good luck.
A gun behind every blade of grass. The way it should be.
The way it IS out here in the boonies. - The Jihadists are
afraid of the forests? Well, now they know WHY they should
be afraid, very afraid. - Behave decent and they’ll be
treated decent. Act up; and it won’t go so good for them
in the forests or the fields, or in the meadow, or by the
river . . . . or in the Christian churches, or ANYWHERE!!
This is the one I use. If you want to stop gun violence, vote to close the borders! It's not just people and drugs coming over, it's illegal guns too!
Their response is either a deer in the headlights look or they immediately change the subject. Lol!
How Nelson “Pete” Shields proposed to destroy your gun rights from 1976.
Nelson T. ‘Pete’ Shields
Founder of Handgun Control, Inc.
“I’m convinced that we have to have federal legislation to build on. We’re going to have to take one step at a time, and the first step is necessarily — given the political realities — going to be very modest.
Of course, it’s true that politicians will then go home and say, ‘This is a great law. The problem is solved.’ And it’s also true that such statements will tend to defuse the gun-control issue for a time.
So then we’ll have to strengthen that law, and then again to strengthen that law, and maybe again and again.
Right now, though, we’d be satisfied not with half a loaf but with a slice. Our ultimate goal — total control of handguns in the United States — is going to take time.
My estimate is from seven to ten years. The problem is to slow down the increasing number of handguns sold in this country. The second problem is to get them all registered.
And the final problem is to make the possession of all handguns and all handgun ammunition — except for the military, policemen, licensed security guards, licensed sporting clubs, and licensed gun collectors — totally illegal.”
-Pete Shields, Chairman and founder, Handgun Control Inc., “A Reporter At Large: Handguns,” The New Yorker, July 26, 1976, 57-58
For those who may still doubt, back in the 1980s HCI decided to go after semi-auto military style rifles along with handguns.
Common ground? No. There are no “common sense” gun laws. All proposed gun laws in the United States are harmful, and all existing American gun laws except the one protecting gun manufacturers from frivolous lawsuits are also harmful. Our only common ground is that we both care whether I can defend myself against all enemies, foreign and domestic. They want me disarmed and dead, while I want to be armed and alive.
Examples? Liberals are irrational, and they are no more capable of learning from examples than a baby who has just learned the word “no”. It’s silly to reason with either liberals or small babies, or to treat them like sensible human beings.
Words? Unfortunately, those are not helpful. Words mean exactly what liberals want them to mean. No more. No less. The literal meaning of the Second Amendment simply doesn’t matter to them, not when they believe their “right” to get their way takes precedence over our individual, God-given human rights.
Change the narrative. Call gun owners pro choice on whether they want to own guns or not.
When the left yells that guns kill people, we can yell back, “so does abortion.”
“So you don’t like guns, huh? What does your wife look like? Is she hot? Is she home alone?”
My usual retort is to ask, “What gives you the right to tell me what I can own?”
DO
Politely remind the gun grabber that A2 is in the
Constitution to protect the populace against the
aggression of a tyrannical government.
DON’T
Offer to fire a warning shot into the gun grabber’s
torso.
I usually fantasize about pistal whipping the gun grabber, then I bear a grudge.
the very same people’who wnt armed cops to disarm us, belive onlycops should have guns because they are trained, and feel safe with cops with guns but notmlaw abiding citizens,
are the same people that think cops are hyperviolent and murdering black people with their guns.
they do not see their illogic.
“Change the narrative. Call gun owners pro choice on whether they want to own guns or not.
When the left yells that guns kill people, we can yell back, “so does abortion.””
Then I would add another previous point above, “slaves don’t have guns, for a reason”, and perhaps add, “did you know the NRA had a role in protecting the right of freed slaves to be armed??”
I merely ask them a simple question. Why do the most vociferous supporters of, ahem, “sensible” gun control laws tend to have serious ethical and/or legal issues of their own? Cong Corrine Brown (FL5), under indictment for fraud, the Clintons, Charles Rangel, fmr NY Assy speaker Sheldon Silver, who’s been sentenced to 12 yrs for corruption, Leeland Yee who was forced to resign from Congress to do time for..wait for it... GUN RUNNING. Oh, yeah remember Bernie Ward? He was gonna be the Rush Limbaugh of left wing talk radio. Guess what? He did time for kiddie porn. This is nothing new.One of the first gun control regs, the Sullivan Laws in NY from 1911. What the gun grabbers don’t tell you is WHO those laws are named for. Big Tim Sullivan a Tammany Hall operative even more corrupt than both Clintons combined. He wanted to make the streets of NYC safer, for him and his cronies as well as the gangsters and muggers in his back pocket. Around 25 yrs ago the Gun Violence death clock was put up near Times Sq. It was funded by Robert Brennan, a junk bond dealing scam artist who makes Bernie Madoff look like Mother Theresa. He had just gotten out of fed prison for securities fraud and other such niceties. I’m sure he had a pragmatic reason for performing this “public service”. Hey, if I scammed all those old folks out of their life savings I too would be scared sh!tless is they, their kids or grandkids had easy access to firearms. Just sayin’...
Then I proceed to unleash a bunch of brutal facts to beat up their answer and take it's lunch money.
Then I go to lunch.
Them: Guns should be banned!
Me: No.
Them: What?
Me: I said NO.
Them: *crickets*
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.