I'm speaking to how we routinely disparage and make fun of folks in our community for how they choose to exercise their 2nd Amendment rights.
If a tactic has disadvantages, people should be told that it does. Sharing important information about owning and using firearms is what this forum is all about. I'm not advocating disparaging people, but pointing out that a practice is foolish in some circumstances is certainly warranted if that's the truth about it.
For what it's worth, if you go back through the thread, you will see that while there have been comments about how the practice of OC is stupid in some circumstances, no one has explicitly called other members dumb or stupid. Smart people can do stupid things, particularly if they are uninformed or misinformed. Which is why it's important that people be properly informed by discussions like this one.
You keep trying to make this discussion into something it's not because your original argument was too weak to support. First it was people attacking other people's rights, (that wasn't what was happening), so then it was that the antigunners could take something that was said and use it against us, (but we routinely discuss things on THR that could potentially be spun by the antis), then it was members calling other members stupid even though that's not been done. Why do you think that it's necessary to keep changing your argument and creating strawmen and red herrings instead of just sticking with the facts of the matter?
Good grief. Have you ever read anything I've posted here in the past 20 year friggin' years.
Yes I have. That's precisely why I used that specific example. I KNOW that you understand why it's important to let people know why certain practices are inadvisable, EVEN when it's possible that someone could take that information and try to twist it into an anti-gun agenda.
Why do you persist in trying to make it appear that I'm making an argument that I absolutely am not making?
Go back and read the thread. I've been carefully addressing the arguments you've been making, but you've been changing your assertions as the discussion progresses because they are unsupportable.
I do agree that there are ways to respectfully disagree, and that's precisely what's been happening here, in spite of how you've been attempting to mischaracterize the exchange.