I'm been casually trying to convert a coworker/friend for some time now. I think I've finally figured out his point of view. Since the more we know about the opposition and how they think the better off we'll be, I thought I'd share my imressions with you.
First some background on the subject: This is a man in his mid to late twenties, who was raised by peace-loving, tofu-eating pacifists (not that there's anything wrong with that). He works in the information technology field, drives a fast new car, has all the latest electronic gizmos, and considers himself very intelligent. He gets his news from NPR. He doesn't like or approve of any form of violence, even pretend, and therefore disapproves of most popular video games and many popular movies/television shows. He doesn't approve of people wearing camouflage because he thinks it represents the military which he believes only exists to hurt people. He would like to live in a world without weapons, and votes accordingly.
Now, he's not a bad person, just very misguided. He doesn't like people getting hurt, or hurting each other, which I completely understand and respect. I've come to understand that he views weapons and the military as tools of destruction that inflict pain and suffering on people.
He's right part of the time. Some weapons and some militaries are used in that way. What he's missing is that most of the time weapons and militaries are used to protect people. If he had his way and the world's weapons were all destroyed and all militaries disbanded, the world would be ruled by the biggest, strongest, meanest, and quite possibly dumbest people around. Pacifist computer geeks like him would most definitely get the short end of the stick.
My point is, this particular anti genuinely means well. I think the problem is that he spends too much time thinking philosophically and not enough time looking at the real world and real human behavior. Perhaps if we can get a better understanding of how these people think, and can better point out to them the flaws in their logic, we can better argue our side, and we can stand a better chance of defending our rights and freedoms.
By the way, I'm taking him to the range the next time the weather is decent and I'm going to teach him to kill paper and clays. Maybe if he can learn to appreciate the sporting uses of firearms he'll be more open to the legitimate defensive uses of them as well.
First some background on the subject: This is a man in his mid to late twenties, who was raised by peace-loving, tofu-eating pacifists (not that there's anything wrong with that). He works in the information technology field, drives a fast new car, has all the latest electronic gizmos, and considers himself very intelligent. He gets his news from NPR. He doesn't like or approve of any form of violence, even pretend, and therefore disapproves of most popular video games and many popular movies/television shows. He doesn't approve of people wearing camouflage because he thinks it represents the military which he believes only exists to hurt people. He would like to live in a world without weapons, and votes accordingly.
Now, he's not a bad person, just very misguided. He doesn't like people getting hurt, or hurting each other, which I completely understand and respect. I've come to understand that he views weapons and the military as tools of destruction that inflict pain and suffering on people.
He's right part of the time. Some weapons and some militaries are used in that way. What he's missing is that most of the time weapons and militaries are used to protect people. If he had his way and the world's weapons were all destroyed and all militaries disbanded, the world would be ruled by the biggest, strongest, meanest, and quite possibly dumbest people around. Pacifist computer geeks like him would most definitely get the short end of the stick.
My point is, this particular anti genuinely means well. I think the problem is that he spends too much time thinking philosophically and not enough time looking at the real world and real human behavior. Perhaps if we can get a better understanding of how these people think, and can better point out to them the flaws in their logic, we can better argue our side, and we can stand a better chance of defending our rights and freedoms.
By the way, I'm taking him to the range the next time the weather is decent and I'm going to teach him to kill paper and clays. Maybe if he can learn to appreciate the sporting uses of firearms he'll be more open to the legitimate defensive uses of them as well.
