monotonous_iterancy
Member
- Joined
- May 27, 2012
- Messages
- 915
Whenever I come across an anti-gun slogan like "You don't need an AR-15, etc." I tend to feel a reaction, and I realize such an argument is illogical, but why?
I think many of the people who say these things aren't hard-core gun-grabbers. They don't see their goal as disarming us - they seriously think they're being reasonable, moderate. Maybe they think we're being irrational by wanting an AR-15.
I think it can be helpful to examine the assumptions and logic behind anti-gun arguments so we can respond to them by refuting the worldview behind them, rather than countering with our own slogans.
For instance, "You don't need xyz gun". What assumptions are behind this saying? What line do we draw need vs. not, and what criteria do they decide what someone does or doesn't "need" something?
I think many of the people who say these things aren't hard-core gun-grabbers. They don't see their goal as disarming us - they seriously think they're being reasonable, moderate. Maybe they think we're being irrational by wanting an AR-15.
I think it can be helpful to examine the assumptions and logic behind anti-gun arguments so we can respond to them by refuting the worldview behind them, rather than countering with our own slogans.
For instance, "You don't need xyz gun". What assumptions are behind this saying? What line do we draw need vs. not, and what criteria do they decide what someone does or doesn't "need" something?