Help Me Demolish My Anti-Gun Aunt's Gun Control Scheme...

Liberals often close their minds, akin to sticking their fingers in their ears and going "LALALALALALALA". Once they no longer are interested in discussion or logical debate, any effort you make will be fruitless. They are regarding you as foolish, uninformed (only the liberal doctrine is valid, in their opinion), and you are speaking outside of their permitted train of thought. The correct response to someone that denigrates your beliefs, way of life, posture of patriotism and the value of the Second Amendment as she did (by your words) deserves a response not allowed on THR. She is basically saying you are a fool, and doesn't want to hear anything from someone whom she puts so low on the smart list. As stated above, go shooting and/or move on to someone who will treat your argument with respect.

Put her points right back at her, but reference the First Amendment.

Or just ignore the old biddy.

Drop her off on the South Side on Friday night........

The REAL Cost......

First, let me admit that I've changed very few minds that were already "set" in their own opinion.

Maybe you could recommend to your aunt that she go visit a V.A. hospital and ask those of us who have been mutilated, burned, mangled, traumatized and/or simply injured that the reason their/our lives were "Trashed"
......" are irrelevant"
__________
Another argument that works for me (Re: "but who needs a 30 round" blah, blah "weapon of war"
is:
"When it's 3AM, your door has been kicked in, glass broken, , cops dozing at Krispy-Kream (etc etc) what would YOU want your hubby to be armed with while you cower under the bed?"

"When the Secret Service starts using Flintlocks to protect our Coungress-scoundrels, I'll THINK about giving up my "ugly gun"....Maybe

Best Wishes,
Gray

Solo said:

If a gun is an extension of a penis, what is a purse?

Click to expand...

Bwhahahaha

Call her a rapist.

Guns prevent an estimated 2.5 million rapes per year (google it, some Florida professor). Only rapists would want to stop rape prevention. Therefore, people who want to ban guns, must be rapists.

Oh, and AR-15s shoot really small bullets, so people who use them must have giant dicks. Just don't tell Lance Corporal Michelle that she has a giant dick, or she might just shoot you. Some of them bolt action rifles shoot some Gawd aweful big bullet, but don't tell them hunters that they got tiny dicks, because they have rifles that shoot Gawd aweful big bullets . . .

Finally, give her a giant sign to post in her front yard that says, "I am female and don't have guns. I have a great paying job and think the Constitution is a worthless piece of paper."

She is the kind of person that deserves to get fruit cake for christmas.

I wouldn't waste a moment of my time arguing with this woman. Her "plan" is a crock, from beginning to end, and is based on profound ignorance of guns and their place in our society. Fortunately, people like her don't have the requisite political clout.

gazpacho said:

Finally, secretly place a giant sign in her front yard that says, "I am female and don't have guns. I have a great paying job and lots of cool stuff in my house, and think the Constitution is a worthless piece of paper compared to dialing 911 and hiding in my closet while you rob me."

SEND her a fruit cake for christmas with ex-lax in it(because she's so full of xxxx).

Click to expand...

Changed it a little just to make myself smile for a second during a time that we've not had much to smile about lately. No offense meant.

"Fortunately, people like her don't have the requisite political clout." ............................................................................................................................. Recent political activity in NY and CO would indicate otherwise.

Some people can't be reasoned with. The smarter they are, the harder they are to sway the other way. They feel they are right so it has to be right. She needs to spend a day at a victim of crimes group therapy session. Obviously she feels "it" can never happen to her because she is smart and she is right. You may as well be talking to the wall.

Years ago I had a discussion with my FiL and his wife about guns. They were Psychologists. Both wanted to bash me about my conservative views on Guns, crime, etc. Of course one of their main points being that guns cause crime, and it was our (gun owners) faults that it happened.

After that discussion I went and pulled several widely accepted published studies on recidivism rates of violent offenders and went after them telling them how it was Psychologists and their programs that was responsible for letting those felons out on society, they were enabling violent crime etc. Of course they argued that it wasn't the Psychologist's fault that it was the felon's fault. After which I pointed out the inconsistency of their arguments.

They didn't agree, but they never brought the subject up again. Some times you are not going to win the debate, but at least you can get the other person off your back.

Find and introduce her to some folks that spent some time in pre-WWII Germany and Poland.

Have them tell her some stories.

A lot of good points made... maybe a couple more:

Don't defend your viewpoint. Make her defend hers.

First, talk about the fundamental logical error that many make. They see that X% of homicides and Y% of suicides involve a firearm, and assume that if firearms were eliminated, that percent of the homicides and suicides would go away. The best evidence is that they would not. People simply find other means. Japan is practically gun free, but their suicide rate is twice ours. Obviously, they are coping quite well with their lack of firearms. Malaysia has practically no private firearm ownership, and their homicide rate is about the same as my home state, Utah, which is practically awash with firearms. As nearly as anyone can tell, if you eliminated all the firearms in the US, it would have no good effect on crime rates. More than likely, it would make things measurably worse. It's not the firearms that are the problem. It's us. Nobody has yet found a positive correlation between the strictness of gun laws and the homicide rate.

If she's a CPA, talk in terms of balancing risk and reward.

Ask her how many times per year firearms are used wrongfully. Then, point out that by the most conservative estimates they are used more than 10X as often to prevent crime. For every crime committed with a firearm, 10 are prevented with one. If it saves just one life, isn't it worth it to have an armed society?

Criminals are not looking for a fair fight. They want an easy target. 93% of the time, if you show a firearm, your assailant will flee.

If she wakes up in the night and a large, foul-smelling rapist is just entering her bedroom, exactly what's her plan? What's the conversation to occupy the three minutes or so that it takes a good police department to respond? Those minutes tend to be violent and ugly.

I know what my wife would do. She'd put two rounds in his center of mass so fast it would make your head spin. That's the choice she has already made.

Your aunt is looking at something too narrowly, as mathematicians tend to do, i.e. 2+2=4. Your aunt needs to think bigger. The problem is that the world we live in is not simple. The gun debate here in the United States is very analogous to the nuclear weapon debate. If you look at only the fact that the U.S. dropped a bomb on Japan and killed 140,000 to 240,000 people it seems and is a horrible thing that happened. The problem lies in that acute perspective of the facts. Now, if we include that had we invaded and it was as difficult as that pacific island campaign. We would have projectively lost approximately 1,000,000 AMERICAN Lives. So by simple math at least 750,000 lives were saved by the bomb.

I know it was a long and simple argument and there are many more facts and arguments left out, BUT Guns in the United States including the black evil ones, when owned by responsible citizens save lives. Since 1812 the U.S. has not had a serious invasion into our territory, our government (until lately) has not become tyrannical, these among many other factors could be a direct result of the second amendment.

As for self-defense according to FBI statistics and surveys approximately guns are used in self-defense approximately 650,000 times a year. Now this does not mean that had they not been there that someone would have been killed, but still that is really high. I personally have had to draw a concealed weapon in self defense and in my work (armed security) multiple times. I truly believe that if I had not had the gun awful things would have happened.

The second amendment is not obsolete because it keeps government at bay, keeps citizens protected, and forces other governments to think twice about invasion. This is exactly why it was included in the Bill of Rights and continues to work today.

If a gun is an extension of a penis, what is a purse?

Click to expand...

A gun you hold in your hand and a purse you...put stuff in!

What's the point, outside of an academic exercise for entertainment purposes?

I suppose you could use her own arguments and do away with any number of other Amendments "because they aren't necessary".

Be sure you finish that debate up with why the First Amendment isn't necessary anymore, either.

Never argue with a pig. It just frustrates you and irritates the pig.

Not calling your aunt a pig, but sometimes you just can't fix stupid.

But to her credit, at least she didn't argue that we should look at how the civilized countries in Europe do things. Progressives my @ss.

I begin to twitch everytime someone mentions FOID. I'm assuming your from Illinois.

My thoughts on your post.

Your aunt is highly opinionated and made her opinions personal. You have to ask yourself what you hope to accomplish, education or antagonize. I'm afraid I have to agree with others that educating and changing her mind is futile.

I understand you think she's rational but some of her arguments are far from rational. Changing an irrational mind is hard but not impossible. Also, are you prepared for your relationship to become strained if you attempt this. I'm going to assume she's going to become emotional when you begin to discount her opinions. Which, is exactly what they are.

Your best options are to ask simple questions like how and why. Why did the civil war nullify the second ammendment. What guarantees the prevention of another civil war. Then how can the civil war nullify the second ammendment if another war cannot be guaranteed to be prevented.

All of her points can be dismantled in this manner. You must be methodical, deliberate, and not become emotional.

Good luck and I admire your passion.

Sent from my SGH-T999 using Tapatalk 2

I didn't read through the whole thread, but my advice would be to present to her a timeline of Hitler's (or any other dictators) rise to power; including confiscation of firearms....and if she says it couldn't happen today, ask her to explain how, in the 1920's, no one predicted WWII either. WWI was "the war to end all wars"

Solo

If such were the case...women would carry itty bitty purses.

Originally Posted by 1KPerDay View Post
Why bother arguing with her? She's a loon. Go shooting.

Click to expand...

Because she's not a loon... she's a very rational person (a CPA at that) she just believes those documents are less important than public safety... to wit:

"If I wanted to make the bubonic plague at my house the Federal Government would arrest me even though I'm not engaging in interstate commerce... how do they have that power? Because we let them have it for the sake of public safety."

She's wrong but she's not crazy.

Click to expand...

Just because she is educated doesn't mean she isn't a loon. The old doctor next door to me is bats%#t crazy and always has been. To me, it is crazy for an educated person to believe that the Constitution is irrelevant.

Oh, the federal gov't would not arrest her for wanting to make bubonic plague, they would only do so if she did make it.

Education doesn't equal sense. No offense, but it sounds like your aunt has the former, but is sorely lacking the latter.

All of her her assertions are emotion based drivel. Ask her for facts to back up what she is saying. Let the hilarity ensue.

Ratshooter said:

A gun you hold in your hand and a purse you...put stuff in!

Click to expand...

My wife let's me put my gun in her purse sometimes...

My wife let's me put my gun in her purse sometimes...

Click to expand...

Would that make it a man purse?