CAPTAIN MIKE
Member
Seems like a common problem many of us face - dealing with 'Anti-' relatives and friends.
I used to approach it by letting them focus the discussion primarily on the Tools (the firearms). But then I learned that this often served only to reinforce the perception of the gun itself as eeeeevil.
Now what I do is take a different approach. I steer the conversation towards terrorism or encounters with enraged drivers or armed felons, then inquire something along the line of "Gee, if you're an innocent law-abiding person, how would YOU protect your spouse and your kids in that situation? I mean, after all, just because you're a good person who doesn't want to hurt anybody doesn't mean there's not real evil out there, right?? You wouldn't just passively wait and watch while you're family or you were slaughtered. What would you acutally DO in a situation like that?"
I "save" the info about my own self-defense capability, armaments, and training for "later in the discussion" AFTER the act of self-defense has been justified not by me but by the person I want to convert. As they answer my above inquiry, I ask them the same things that anti-gunners ask. "Couldn't you just call the police and wait?" "Aren't the police supposed to protect us?" "Why in the world would you use a gun rather than running away?", etc.
This seems to work pretty well. What I find is that by asking "What if" and "How about" questions (known in law school as The Socratic Method) the other persons actually convinces themselves that (1) There is Evil in the World (2) Bad Things can happen to Nice People (3) We are (as Osama bin Laden said in his videotape just before The Election) responsible for our own safety and security and (4) It might just be a better idea to "have it and not need it than to need it and not have it".
What approaches do YOU take?
I used to approach it by letting them focus the discussion primarily on the Tools (the firearms). But then I learned that this often served only to reinforce the perception of the gun itself as eeeeevil.
Now what I do is take a different approach. I steer the conversation towards terrorism or encounters with enraged drivers or armed felons, then inquire something along the line of "Gee, if you're an innocent law-abiding person, how would YOU protect your spouse and your kids in that situation? I mean, after all, just because you're a good person who doesn't want to hurt anybody doesn't mean there's not real evil out there, right?? You wouldn't just passively wait and watch while you're family or you were slaughtered. What would you acutally DO in a situation like that?"
I "save" the info about my own self-defense capability, armaments, and training for "later in the discussion" AFTER the act of self-defense has been justified not by me but by the person I want to convert. As they answer my above inquiry, I ask them the same things that anti-gunners ask. "Couldn't you just call the police and wait?" "Aren't the police supposed to protect us?" "Why in the world would you use a gun rather than running away?", etc.
This seems to work pretty well. What I find is that by asking "What if" and "How about" questions (known in law school as The Socratic Method) the other persons actually convinces themselves that (1) There is Evil in the World (2) Bad Things can happen to Nice People (3) We are (as Osama bin Laden said in his videotape just before The Election) responsible for our own safety and security and (4) It might just be a better idea to "have it and not need it than to need it and not have it".
What approaches do YOU take?
When I ask about saving her dog, though, she becomes a little more aggressive.
