How do you argue with someone like this?

[WhoKnowsWho]

I can't even say if she is Anti or Not, she is kinda like the middle roader, but wouldn't deny taking all weapons away... but anyways...

She doesn't fear guns she says, she fears what they can do.
But doesn't like being around them, doesn't understand why people "like" something that was only made to kill kill kill.
She doesn't believe I can have fun and think of it as a sport even though we have ISPC, IDPA, shooting on the Olympics, etc.

Once in the wild, she says she would have liked her boyfriend to have his gun on him.
But doesn't think you should need one everywhere.
Examples of random rape, murder, kidnap, in normal city areas means nothing to her.

If her life was threatened she couldn't shoot someone.
But threaten someone she loves, (relative, etc) and she could use a gun to stop the threat.

I think she has a simple fear of people and what they are capable of, but she doesn't agree. Examples of said unstable people using cars, knives, pipes, and that an armed private citizen could stop it means nothing to her.

Also, she agrees her thoughts are probably affected because she lost someone close to gun violence. And admits, if they had been able to save themselves because they were armed, she might think the opposite and want to arm herself with protection. But since that wasn't what happened...

She thinks guns are too easy to kill from a distance. And I told her how bad some people shoot, but she just cares that there is a chance of being hit from a distance or close in. I told her I would be more afraid of the kitchen knife in close which led to...

She is afraid of knives. But doesn't think a 3500 pound car at 50 mph is even comparable as a weapon, since it is "mainly" used for transportation.

I need some argument help. Or is this a lost cause?

 

[hillbilly]

You don't argue with people like that.

You stay positive and hope for opportunities to educate her in the future, which might happen at some time.

But so long as she cloaks herself in her irrational positions, you don't argue because you'd only be beating your head bloody against a brick wall.

hillbilly

 

[BigG]

A person like that is under the influence of emotions. No appeal to reason will get thru. As Hillbilly said, like talking to a brick wall.

 

[Leatherneck]

Ask her: "When do you plan to be attacked? When do you plan to have an attack inflicted on your loved one?"

She doen't sound like a lost cause to me, but simply a nerotically fearful (as well as ignorant, or maybe unthinking) person. Give her a book or two. Invite her to the range. Offer to explain handgun function and safety.

But the trick will be to get her to try shooting, under safe and controlled circumstances.

You can't force education on anyone.

TC
TFL Survivor

 

[Mr Jody Hudson]

Tell her you are not trying to be confrontational and you DO understand the source of her thinking, as she does... from the bad incident.

However, ask her if she would be interested as a way of focusing her mind, if she would be interested in putting a sign on her yard, a nice big sign that says there are no firearms in this house!

Ask her if she allows that people LIKE to do things that are NOT reasonable to other people. For instance having more than two or three pairs of shoes as that is all that is needed and more shoes than that are unreasonable from a sensible standpoint.

How about a larger engine in a car than what is needed to gradually get up to 55. Or a larger car that is larger than one person needs. Or about people who drive with only one person in a car when car pooling and mass transit is so much more sensible...

Explain that you are seeking to have her think a little more about the rationality of her decisions and positions... And tell her you don't expect her to change her mind about guns or the number shoes, dresses, cars, size of cars, ammount of dinnerware or nick-nacks she has... whatever seems irrational to you according to YOUR decisions and positions. OR, will she allow that freedom of choice in all areas, with responsibility of personal use is paramount.

Personally, I don't think most drivers should be authorized large cars, or large engines. And, how about cell phones being used for non-emergencies?

Meanwhile explain that you don't expect her to change her mind about your personal choices or to enforce your positions on her - nor she on you.

 

[WhoKnowsWho]

"When do you plan to be attacked? When do you plan to have an attack inflicted on your loved one?"

She said she would take anything as a weapon that she could or use her bare hands... I am thankful her husband has a gun and shotgun. He truly will have to be the one there to save her if something does happen.

Invite her to the range. Offer to explain handgun function and safety.

She has gone to the range, she knows the rules because she has been told them by someone she knew. She has no interest in going back, she doesn't understand what the draw was. Maybe she had no targets or hard targets to shoot at.

 

[FPrice]

WhoKnowsWho...

"I need some argument help. Or is this a lost cause?"

It may or may not be a completely lost cause but I think you might want to begin developing some counter-points to some of her points.

For example, when she talks about "fear" tell her that people seldom develop logical thoughts and responses from fear, but when people "respect" what something can do, they are capable of thinking more clearly about it. For example, most people on this forum do not "fear" what a gun can do, but the "respect" what a gun can do and so are able to master then gun rather than having the gun (and hence their fear) master them.

I would also ask her why she feels that other people are worth defending but she is not worthy of self-defense? After all, is she not as valuable as others? I detect some self-esteem problems here.

I would not try to argue with her or convince her, but I would try to give her some things to think about.

An added benefit, as you develop ways to address and verbalize more and more of these concepts, you gain an increased ability to talk "off the cuff" and counter much of the more common anti-gun hogwash.

 

[WhoKnowsWho]

Ask her if she allows that people LIKE to do things that are NOT reasonable to other people. For instance having more than two or three pairs of shoes as that is all that is needed and more shoes than that are unreasonable from a sensible standpoint.

I tried the multiple cars point in comparison to numerous guns... but guns are not useful, at all. Shoes and cars are useful. Guns only kill.

Meanwhile explain that you don't expect her to change her mind about your personal choices or to enforce your positions on her - nor she on you.

We have both already said that, I am trying to help her see it from my angle, and me from her. But since her angle is skewed, it is tough.

but the "respect" what a gun can do and so are able to master then gun rather than having the gun (and hence their fear) master them.

Impossible for her to comprehend, I already told her how people understand the weapon and still respect what it can do. It's that main wall of "it's only purpose is death" it cannot be controlled/mastered/respected.

I detect some self-esteem problems here.

That's what I thought but I wasn't about to say it to her. One thing she said was she couldn't live with herself if the person she shot and killed wasn't armed with a deadly weapon (knife or gun, nothing else) so maybe when a few more are threatened, she would consider more of a "action right now" type issue?

but I would try to give her some things to think about.

That's been the tough part, how can she understand she might have a different viewpoint if situations were different in the past... but not understand why I believe I (and others) should have a gun at all times for all situations?

Other argumentative points taken... Car/house/renters insurance, for in case something happens = weapon, in case something happens. Response, everyone should have insurance for unexpected occurances, but there is no comparison to being armed to kill someone. Huh?

Maybe I should ask what she would do if she found an arsonist lighting up a movie theatre...

 

[RWK]

I suspect you are unlikely to change her mind, but I would offer a simple, logical “discussion chain†for your consideration:
1) Since the beginning of man’s history, there have been evil people who preyed on good people. The evil people frequently won -- causing considerable damage, injury or even death -- principally because the good people were unable or unwilling to successfully defend themselves.
2) As societies and nations developed, laws, customs, ethics and religions evolved in an attempt to reduce/eliminate the predatory violence cited above. Nevertheless, society was less-than-fully-successful in eradicating aggression.
3) Today, laws and law enforcement make NO claim that they can protect citizens. In fact, the courts and the policing agencies specifically refuse to accept accountability for individual’s safety.
4) Very bad things -- severe injury, death, and so forth -- happen very quickly during violent situations. The police are not omnipresent and they clearly do not accept either the legal or the moral responsibility for your security.
5) Therefore, self, family and innocent protection is logically an individual responsibility, since law enforcement expressly refuses to guarantee your safety.
6) Firearms are one of many tools that are useful to enhance your security. They are also recreational. It should be noted that many sporting and common household implements -- hockey sticks, baseball bats, bows/arrows, automobiles, hand tools, kitchen knives, and countless others -- can be extremely dangerous when improperly used.
7) Finally, all of us ardently wish that we are never confronted by a violent predator. Similarly, we all hope not to be involved in vehicular accidents, or to contract serious diseases, or to have our home/possessions destroyed by fires or natural disasters. However, we also prudently buy auto, health and home insurance to protect us against life’s catastrophes. Firearms are a similar safeguard, not unlike a first-aid kit or a fire extinguisher.

 

[WhoKnowsWho]

The police are not omnipresent and they clearly do not accept either the legal or the moral responsibility for your security.

She understands they can not be everywhere, but they should be. Well... "should" is not the same as "is". But she didn't want to expand on that line of thought...

hockey sticks, baseball bats, bows/arrows, automobiles, hand tools, kitchen knives, and countless others -- can be extremely dangerous when improperly used.

But she considers all of these "normal" items that were not made with the "explicit" intention to hard someone else. So the comparison falls flat to her.

However, we also prudently buy auto, health and home insurance to protect us against life’s catastrophes. Firearms are a similar safeguard, not unlike a first-aid kit or a fire extinguisher.

See above... already tried.

I need to ask her what she would want to make this world safe enough where we don't need to be armed...

 

[boofus]

I agree you don't argue with people like this. You can never convince them no matter how much data you dig up. The best response is 'If you have to ask 'Why be armed?', you wouldn't understand."

Or if they get militant on you. Come and get it, works good too.

 

[Waitone]

I sense deep seated psychological issue which long precede rational thought.

It is almost like the idea of violence against her personally is blocked from consideration.

Almost like she physically does not exist.

Seriously wierd. Don't mess with the logic thingy. It won't be recognized as worthy of discussion.

 

[R.H. Lee]

She's definitely not an "anti" by the definition I understand. She has made a judgement based on her own experiences, which is a legitimate process.
She is not likely to respond to ideological arguments or "what if" scenarios that she cannot reconcile with her own experience.

The great fact is that MOST people will never need or use a firearm for defense during the entire course of their lives. They can, however, be swayed to support anti gun legislation in reponse to the continual fear mongering hysteria and lies of the gun grabbers. The best you can do IMHO is to refute those lies with the truth and logic when they appear.

 

[Werewolf]

What the thread starter has described is the penultimate blissninny.

She has built a wall of ideas around herself that is now and forever will be inpenetrable. Using logic on her has failed and probably always will because if it did start to have an effect her world view would be shattered and the human psyche builds defenses to keep that from happening.

When I finished reading the original post I was reminded of the old saying:

"Don't wrestle with pigs. It gets both of you dirty but the pig likes it."

 

[Mr. Kook]

I get the impression there is really no way to convince her. She is so emotionally weak that she can't see beyond her fears. If she can't see beyond them she will never conquer them. Fear rules her.

About the only thing that would bring her back around would be another traumatic event affecting her directly that forces her to realize that she and she alone is responsible for her safety.

A Republican is a Democrat who has been robbed. A Libertarian is a Republican who has been arrested.

 

[TarpleyG]

She sounds young and confused from your post. Hopefully she is and she will grow out of it.

Greg

 

[Baba Louie]

Lions and Tigers and Bears. Oh my!
Don't try to sway her fears... she's comforted by them and even tho' she may know that evil lurks in the heart of man, it's easier to take it out on and fear the tools they use rather than draw up the courage to stop them with the proper tools and mindset.
If she has children, I wonder what she'd do if they were confronted with evil and she had the ability (and the necessary tool at hand) to protect them. More than likely, she'd do what needed to be done, then need counseling to reassure her that she was not a bad person for stopping an eevil-doer.
If I was the type to label a person, I'd label her type as dependant upon others to fight the good fight, consequences be damned... some call them parasites, but that's a bit harsh, doncha think?
Lions and Tigers and Bears. Oh My!
Nothing to Fear but Fear itself.

 

[halvey]

I need some argument help. Or is this a lost cause?

What a kook. Forget about it and move on.

 

[yy]

Does she vote?

If yes, then you need to do this: tell her she needs to vote FOR gun freedom so that HER husband can buy any and all weapons to protect her family, especially her children.

Besides that? Yeah, she's a lost cause. You cannot use reason to bring her out of her hole. Sounds to me she has already delegated her defense to her husband. She also thinks too highly of herself in a self defense situation. Do hit her with this reminder, "the next time you get mugged or raped, you will leave your husband wifeless because you would not defend yourself effectively against the evil out there. So you are responsible for preparing your husband for that eventuality"

 

[another okie]

The only lost causes are those who have locked themselves publicly into positions.

You don't "argue" with someone like this. Listen to them carefully, then try to rephrase what you hear them saying. "I hear you saying that guns seem dangerous to you and to have no other purpose than hurting people." Make sure she understands you respect her feelings.

Then make some of the points you have, then move on. She's not going to change her mind or admit that she has while talking to you. That would be admitting she was wrong, which no one likes to do. Just be happy with planting some seeds for the future. Show her that you are a rational and careful person and safe with guns, and over time her ideas may change.

 

[Kragman71]

Hello,
The Woman in question is vey much like my Mother was,when alive.
She had a bad experience that was gun-related,and it contribted to her views about guns for the rest of her life.
While still a young lady,her older brother,while'cleaning' his Savage '99 in his bedroom,had it fire a round.The bullet went through the wall,through the upstairs hall,through the opposite wall,and lodged in the opposite wall of that room.
Tht room was the bathroom,and my Aunt was sitting on the throne when the bullet hit a few inches above her head.
In a Family like ours,that was a serious event.My mother and her Sister never really got over it.
I heard about it many years later,when i asked permission to buy a single-shot 22 rifle,at age 15.
The general opinion of someone like that is that guns are OK,but not worth the trouble that they cause.
There is NO argument that you can present that will convince someone that a risk that you consider minor,is not considered major by him or her.
I suggest that you continue to stress the positive elements of having a gun,and pointing out that there are really less negative elements.
Good luck,
Frank

 

[carpettbaggerr]

Between 00Kevin's thread and this one, all I can say is

End Women's Suffrage Now!

 

[bogie]

What folks such as this are concerned about is _theory_. After all, that's what keeps academics happy.

Thing is, when it is explained that theory doesn't alway pan out in real life, sometimes they convert their thinking. They're not stupid. Just focused.

I mean, my favorite hole in the wall dive has a few folks who don't like guns. Here's the conversation...

"What would happen if several youts walked in and held the place up?"

"That wouldn't happen."

"Why not? We're on a major road, and it has happened in other places."

"Okay, but if they did that, someone would call the police."

"But it takes the police a long time to get here - what if the youts decided to become violent, when it turns out none of us has any cash on us, because we're all going to pay by credit card, and tip Chrissy quite handsomely?"

"Well, one of the off duty cops who are always here will do something."

"What if they're not here? I don't see any of them right now."

"Well, you'd shoot them."

"No, I couldn't - I can't carry a gun into here."

"But I thought you did!"

Theory works out that they're a lot less theoretically protected than they thought they were...

 

[Standing Wolf]

Or is this a lost cause?

That's the conclusion I draw. I've wasted enough time on irrational, irresponsible, immature people. I prefer to spend time with adults.

 

[Majic]

Why argue at all? We are all entitled to believe as we see fit, no matter what others may think.
Don't forget that god given right goes both ways.