How likely is civil discussion to occur here on THR with anti-gunners?

[Vector]

For that matter, how likely is it that the powers that be would allow opposing points of view from those who think differently than most of us do?

The reason I want to have this discussion is because I've noticed that people who are not in lock step with the majority here tend to be labeled trolls, or trying to stir the pot. In reality some posters are genuinely trying to guage how others feel, how strong their convictions are, and trying to understand why some have over the top and intractable views on the 2nd Amendment (i.e. private citizens owning WMD's).
For instance I consider myself very pro 2nd Amendment, have owned a gun since I was a teen, been a member of the NRA, have a CCW, etc.
Yet there have been a few times I've had a different take on a subject and started a thread to discuss the matter. In a couple of instances I've had the thread closed down and been told the thread had "run it's course". This after less than 12 hours of starting it. Funny enough in the thread I reference I had left for a few hours and when I returned a post was made that helped me see a point of view I had not considered. Yet I could not respond or delve into it more because the thread had already been locked.
I clearly had the impression that since I did not agree with the majority, my point of view was marginalized, and some considered my position to be that of a troll, so it was shut down. So if that can happen with a pro-2nd amendment guy, what chance does a luke warm pro-gun person have, or even worse, an anti-2nd Amendment poster

Now of course this thread could be considered "stirring the pot" by someone and be locked as a result. Needless to say I hope that is not the case.
The fact of the matter is I like this forum for the most part, and lurk much more than I post. However I'd like to think my point of view is just as valued as the next person regardless of how I perceive things. I'd also like to think that someone who has an opposing point of view should be allowed to come here and have a discussion with me/us without fear of having their posts/threads shut down despite being within the confines of the written rules.

So what is your take on the aforementioned?

 

[SSN Vet]

I'm sure the Zom Politz will be along shortly to offer remedial training. Good luck with it.

 

[kaferhaus]

This is obviously a pro gun, pro 2nd amendment site. I like it that way. I have little to no tolerance for anyone's view that doesn't 100% support that.

And that doesn't mean I have no tolerance for "liberals". I know several that are very liberal (some are close friends) but they're not anti 2nd amendment, anti CCW nor are they for registration or "amnesty" for illegal aliens.

THOSE people I can have friendships and political discussions with.

Now if you're talking about guys that think they should be allowed to own a M1 Abrams or rocket launcher etc..... well, we've got some nuts on our side too....

A couple years ago I got into a heated debate on this board about where CCW was appropriate.

The jist of it was they felt it was entirely appropriate to carry their piece into a home where they'd been invited for dinner. That would be the end of our friendship....

My counter to that was "if you feel you could be in danger in their home, why go there?"

I would never enter a friends home carrying a weapon. In fact in the situation mentioned above I've removed my pistol and locked it in the truck on too many occasions to remember.

So yes otherwise like minded people can agree to disagree.

 

[King Solomon Hill]

I'm Canadian...I wish we had a second amendment to argue over!

 

[kaferhaus]

I'm Canadian...I wish we had a second amendment to argue over!

Amen brother!

 

[ServiceSoon]

This board is very heavily moderated, always has been, always will be. It's the main reason why I don't visit it as frequently. This rule is especially ironic considering the RKBA's connection to freedom and liberty.

 

[Birddog1911]

Hmm, if my friends invite me over, they know that I will be carrying. If they are uncomfortable, I have no problem leaving it in the truck. But they know I carry, and no one expects me to disarm.

 

[BeerSleeper]

If I go over to my friends house for dinner, and don't have a gun, most of my friends will offer me one of theirs. I guess it depends on what sort of people you associate yourselves with.

 

[Tim the student]

Depends on the anti in question.

There was a really long thread that used to be a sticky in which a guy came with questions. It was generally very civil from all sides.

Check it out

Others do come to stir the pot, and that doesn't go over well.

 

[Tony50ae]

Vector,
I would like to think that such discussuions would remain civil, but with a forum as large as ours, well I am sure you have seen some threads here get carried away and get locked. I understand your point but I think the moderators try to nip such bad potential threads before they get bad. Is that the right answer? Maybe, maybe not.

Kaferhaus,
Your take on someone bringing in a CCW in your house is interesting. Meaning you would just end a friendship that easily over it? Would you end it cause he just brought his weapon and didn't think to remove it? Is it considered rude to do so? Serious questions as since my state really has no option to CCW I wouldn't know the proper etiquette. I guess I can see that as being rude to not ask first if its ok to bring my CCW in your home.

 

[Vector]

A couple years ago I got into a heated debate on this board about where CCW was appropriate.

The jist of it was they felt it was entirely appropriate to carry their piece into a home where they'd been invited for dinner. That would be the end of our friendship....

My counter to that was "if you feel you could be in danger in their home, why go there?"

I would never enter a friends home carrying a weapon. In fact in the situation mentioned above I've removed my pistol and locked it in the truck on too many occasions to remember.

So yes otherwise like minded people can agree to disagree.

That is similar to my way of thinking also. I clearly make distinctions in my everyday life where and when to carry. That is not to say I would support laws to prohibit others from carrying to places like weddings, their child's birth in a hospital, etc., but it certainly seems unusual to me to feel the need to carry 24/7, 365 no matter where and when.

That said, I like to get a better understanding from those on our side, even if I think they are a little over the top. My discussion about not carrying in Disney World was met with heavy criticism, so to my questioning why anyone would be armed during the birth of their child in a maternity ward. The trouble is it seems as if you cannot really express your point of view without fear of it being perceived as stirring the pot.

I've read where some folks on this forum will not go to places where they cannot carry. So naturally it makes me wonder why they would restrict themselves from some of life's pleasures such as surfing, swimming, going on cruises and/or vacations where firearms are prohibited. The trouble is that no matter how respectful and civil you are, the discussion is more likely to be shutdown even though it is not in violation of any written rule. Don't get me wrong, I understand forums need to be moderated as I administer a forum myself(non gun related). However I always encourage opposing points of view so long as the discussion remains respectful and civil.

I just question how well a person who is not pro-gun would be able to discuss their point of view, or be given the time to be persuaded to consider our point of view here.

 

[kingpin008]

This is obviously a pro gun, pro 2nd amendment site. I like it that way. I have little to no tolerance for anyone's view that doesn't 100% support that.

That's unfortunate, because one of the biggest missions of this site is to have tolerance for those who don't support the second amendment and gun ownership.

This site exists partly to educate and advocate safe and responsible gun ownership. That means that if someone has no experience with guns or gun culture, they can come here to learn. If we all had the same "zero tolerance" attitude that you seem to have, we'd be talking into a vacuum and doing nothing worthwhile for the shooting community at large.

 

[SuperNaut]

IMHO discussions that become repetitive or devolve into Right vs. Left are actively discouraged and correctly locked here. I think that the confusion is that some people think this is a debate board instead of a discussion board. That doesn't mean that debate doesn't occur, it just means that the emphasis is on discussion.

If there were a separate sub-forum for debate that actually followed debate rules and format I'd be all over it. But as it stands, the nature of internet db's encourages gratuitous and anonymous drive-by opinion spewing, and that is not the right recipe for reasoned discourse.

 

[kaferhaus]

Your take on someone bringing in a CCW in your house is interesting. Meaning you would just end a friendship that easily over it? Would you end it cause he just brought his weapon and didn't think to remove it? Is it considered rude to do so? Serious questions as since my state really has no option to CCW I wouldn't know the proper etiquette. I guess I can see that as being rude to not ask first if its ok to bring my CCW in your home.
__________________

No, I'd ask him to take it to the truck if he forgot to remove it. If he started the whole "I carry everywhere" thing, he'd be a ex-friend real quick.

For me and my rather large circle of friends it's highly disrespectful to carry a weapon onto someone else's property without their prior consent.

it's only happened to me once and I asked my buddy if he minded leaving the pistol in the truck. He turned red faced, not because he was angry but only because he'd forgotten. In fact he was quite embarrassed.

I often have grand kids playing grab ass running all through the house, other friends over who don't even own guns etc. My home is for the enjoyment of my friends and guests and I don't need or want anyone feeling uncomfortable or a kid accidentally grabbing a gun while horsing around etc.

 

[rattletrap1970]

It will go badly because they are wrong. It's not an opinion and its not a privilege. It's a unalienable right granted in the bill of rights. It's like someone saying, in their opinion the sky is orange.. Well.. It's not.

 

[Tony50ae]

kaferhaus,

Thanks! You make good points!

 

[oldbanjo]

This week in, a 61 year old, answered her door and didn't know the person at the door so she didn't open it. The person at the door kicked it in and shot the lady in her head (killing her). They were looking for her son. What if you were eating Thanksgiving Dinner at that house? That can happen anywhere, wrong House may be. I went to Thanksgiving Dinner at my girlfriends daughters house, no one knows weather I had a couple of Guns or not. If someone had of kicked in her door they would have found out.

 

[Robert]

We have had admitted anti 2nd Amendment people come on the board and start threads before. In my experience it was the anti that became combative when confront with facts and figures that they could not refute. At that point they put their hands over their ears and shout at the top of their lungs, and the thread gets locked.

If you have had threads locked then I would say that it was not the topic but rather the discourse of those in the thread that caused it to be locked. Do you have links to your locked threads?

I'm sure the Zom Politz will be along shortly to offer remedial training. Good luck with it.

Very constructive...

I'd also like to think that someone who has an opposing point of view should be allowed to come here and have a discussion with me/us without fear of having their posts/threads shut down despite being within the confines of the written rules.

If it is within the rules then it will be left open until such time as the rules are violated. Sometimes a Mod will shut a thread down if the discussion has been had many times before and is known to end in flames.

So what is your take on the aforementioned?

People are entitled to their opinion, just as I am entitled to mine. Likewise if THR is not meeting your needs, and I am not saying that is the case just that it sounds as though you are not happy here, then start a forum where you can set the rules or frequent other boards that better meet your needs. Again I am not saying this is the case, just my opinion based on what I read.

 

[rattletrap1970]

I have only a handful of close friends (ones I would visit regularly). Now before you take your jabs at that statement, I'm relatively solitary and have more than enough hobbies and interests that I would just simply pursue them at my own speed. That said, all of my friends know that I carry. They know me well and they know how long I have been doing what I do. If any one of them said I had to disarm before entering their house they would be an ex-friend immediately. Because in their statement they would have proven to me that their views and mine do not jive. I have better things to do than spend my time with someone who is incapable of reading and understanding the 2nd Amendment.

 

[Robert]

How is all this talk about carrying on private property in anyway related to the OP?

 

[rbernie]

IMHO discussions that become repetitive or devolve into Right vs. Left are actively discouraged and correctly locked here.

This is a large part of why many of these sorts of threads just get canceled - because the folk that are posting cannot find a way to follow the forum rules and leave political commentary, party affiliation, or debates about tangential (non-RKBA) social ills at the door and simply focus on the real meat of the matter. There are those who claim that we cannot have dialog about RKBA issues without also allowing tangential and/or political debates. I disagree, and so do the forum rules. It's really that simple, at least as far as site moderation is concerned.

If there are examples where civil discourse is being overrun by boorish behavior - please use the 'report a post' feature to let the Mod Squad know about it. We can often salvage a thread if it's not gone too far off the rails, instead of having to close it down as a formal loss. Once it gets beyond a certain tipping point, however, it's simply too hard to edit out the inappropriate content and the only tool that we Moderators have left is to close the thread and hope that everyone just moves along...

==

ETA:

My discussion about not carrying in Disney World was met with heavy criticism, so to my questioning why anyone would be armed during the birth of their child in a maternity ward.

Yes, some folk did NOT comport themselves terribly well in that thread, and that's a door that swings both ways. If you want thoughtful and dispassionate dialog, you need to be willing to lay the appropriate groundwork for that. As far as I could tell, you were perfectly happy running the dialog around in circles while some folk took potshots at you and others tried in vain to steer the dialog in a rational direction.

 

[Deanimator]

I've got something like 20+ years of online discussions with anti-gunners.

One of three things usually happens:

• The anti-gunners become pro-gunners, or at worst neutral.
• The anti-gunners can't or won't back up their case and just argue in circles, even on points FACTUALLY refuted.
• The anti-gunners blurt some kind of obscenity or racial or ethnic slur and run.

I can't guarantee that'll happen, but then I can't guarantee that the sun will [apparently] rise in the east and set in the west tomorrow.

 

[Walkalong]

This board is very heavily moderated, always has been, always will be

I, for one, like it that way.

Threads where people are arguing get locked. Hmm. No problem there.

Threads that wander off the original topic and can't seem to stay on track get locked. Hmm. No problem there.

Many threads are kept alive with helpful suggestions by mods on how to get on track. Hmm. No problem there.

When, even after helpful advise from mods or members, a thread cannot stay on track or stop the bickering, it gets locked. No problem there.

There are many threads here discussing opposite views about guns, the 2nd Amendment, CCW, etc, etc, that stay civil and on track and go on for pages. Hmm. No problem there.

Let's see. Stay civil & stay on track. Seems easy enough (or at least clear enough) to me.

Now, what was the original topic?

 

[kaferhaus]

How is all this talk about carrying on private property in anyway related to the OP?

Easy if you read his entire post.

it was one of many prior topics that got way out of hand. Mostly from "rambo" types saying they'd carry where ever and when ever they liked and if it offended someone else's sense of private property or even their home that was pretty much tough. And then "name calling" when anyone else would mention that it may not be a very polite way to conduct yourself....

The OP, got it. See his reply

 

[Vector]

We have had admitted anti 2nd Amendment people come on the board and start threads before. In my experience it was the anti that became combative when confront with facts and figures that they could not refute. At that point they put their hands over their ears and shout at the top of their lungs, and the thread gets locked.

I'm sure there are some on the anti side who just will not be open minded nor even interested in discussion. However the same can be said for our side as well. The trick is finding an environment where everyones point of view can be discussed in a respectful and civil manner. I'd like to think THR can serve that purpose among other things.

If you have had threads locked then I would say that it was not the topic but rather the discourse of those in the thread that caused it to be locked. Do you have links to your locked threads?

I think you are assuming too much. I do not want this to become a bitch and moan thread as that is not it's purpose. As to locked threads, all you need to do is look up my profile and go into the stats and see the threads I've started.

If it is within the rules then it will be left open until such time as the rules are violated. Sometimes a Mod will shut a thread down if the discussion has been had many times before and is known to end in flames.

No offense, but you are giving way too much credit to all the mods here. Some forums feel like a Nazi concentration camp and others seem like it is run by hippies at Woodstock where anything goes.
Most of the mods here seem even keel and reasoned. But just like many forums there are some who inject their own person feelings into their decisions to moderate. To me, if a discussion is with the rules, and the spirit of those rules, it should be left to it's own devices and die a natural death.

People are entitled to their opinion, just as I am entitled to mine. Likewise if THR is not meeting your needs, and I am not saying that is the case just that it sounds as though you are not happy here, then start a forum where you can set the rules or frequent other boards that better meet your needs. Again I am not saying this is the case, just my opinion based on what I read.

As I started out saying, THR has more +'s than -'s. If I didn't like it I would not take the time to visit, and certainly would not post. So my observation and questions are geared to get the forum members opinions, and hopefully to raise awareness about civil discourse among other things.