How to debate with anti-gun relative

[Old krow]

To the OP.... good luck

There are a lot of very valid points in this thread. I have a tendency to agree with the lot that says "cut your losses." However, there is this side of me that likes to hear the argument whether I like it or not. It's a "know your enemy" thing I guess.

Here's some interesting statistics that I found, I believe it was nationmaster

We should be focusing on fixing them not killing them.

Total Crime per capita: #2 New Zealand, #8 US

Keep up the good work and let me know how it works out I'd like to know when they perfect it, but, for the moment they're nearly dead last.
NZ is 105 per 1000
UK is 85 per 1000
US is 80 per 1000

It is not the gun ownership laws that determine crime rates it is society's general attitude to crime and in NZ at least wider gun ownership would never help to reduce crime or make people safer.

See above statistic. We have guns, we have less crime per capita, they have no guns, they have more. I agree with the poster that said it's the criminal that determines the crime rate.

The fact is in the USA you have far more people shooting people in 'self-defense' to prevent things like robberies rather than murder attempts

In murder per capita, the US is #24
The number of murder was 16,204.
Of those committed with firearms was 9369.

I come up with around 1500 self-defense shootings and almost 10k murders. He needs better numbers, I need better numbers, or he needs to come to terms with "far more" can never mean less than 20% of.

Of the total crimes committed (I rounded to 12,000,000) in the US the total death by all firearms was .00227 or .227% (CDC). Suicides made 56.5% of all firearms death (DOJ) I extrapolated the number of self-defense shootings by finding the remainder of the death by firearms. I come up with around 1500. Factor in a margin for error and it's still ridiculously small. His statement is false, that is not the case at all.

ridiculously rare in any society

Remind him that NZ is second in total crimes in the world

therefore carrying weapons of any kind is completely unjustified.

In the US there were 95,136 rapes. What about them? Still no rights to self-defense? The perpetrators have the same rights?

NZ is #12 of the world on that list. Thailand has fewer rapes per capita than NZ.

Self-defense shootings in the US are less than 2% of that one crime statistic.

What is the percentage of repeat offenders? Compare the total number of self-defense gun deaths to the total number of only violent crimes. I don't know those numbers off of the top of my head, but I remember it being over 50% (higher if I remember correctly). It wasn't a robbery and they weren't stealing food.

The comments about duties and permissions, and nobody having human rights... I dunno. He has no kids? I think that'd be a fair assumption.

 

[swinokur]

Arguing with an anti is like wrestling a pig. You both get dirty. But the pig likes it.

Why bother wasting your time?

 

[Odd Job]

Duns

There isn't anything you can do for your relative...he is that far gone that no amount of debating will help. Perhaps only a personal experience will set the wheels of logic in motion for him.

Your relative's position reminds me of an incident explained to me by an acquaintance in South Africa. He was walking on the sidewalk in a residential area and a woman in her fifties was walking ahead of him about 50 yards or so. She was smartly dressed and had a handbag. I can't remember where the robber came from, but the bottom line is the woman's bag got snatched and the robber took off at a good pace away from the scene.
Well, this acquaintance of mine took off after the bag-snatcher and managed to catch up with him and tackle him to the ground. In the process of separating the bag from the criminal, the criminal collected a few choice slaps and a vigorous shaking, along with several pieces of verbal advice about the rights of persons to retain their handbags.
Anyway, the woman soon caught up to them: the samaritan was standing with his right arm extended, offering the bag back to the lady, and he still had a grasp of the bag-snatcher by his collar in his left hand. You would think at this point that the lady would take the bag and be grateful.

No!

She was angry at the samaritan for treating the bag-snatcher so badly. She proceeded to give the fellow a lecture on what is decent and what is moral.
The guy listened intently, didn't argue back, and when the woman was finished speaking he nodded sagely.
"I can see I was wrong to do what I did" he said. Then he handed the bag back to the robber, let go his collar and said "Run!"

 

[Dulvarian]

Odd Job,

I love that. It is hilarious how people feel that criminals should be protected, but that they have no rights to defend themselves. But would the lady have been as indignant had it been a police officer that stepped in?

Unlike many people who CC that would intervene in a crime that they were witness to, I would never engage unless I felt that there was imminent danger. Yes, I would intervene if I saw someone about get shot. My conscience vs. yours, so no flames please, simply my own stance. (I would protect your wife and children, and I would like to think that there are others that would be willing to do the same. On the bright side, I finally convinced my wife to get her own CC license, so she might be the one doing the defending. And I am far more scared of a woman with a gun than a man with a gun, all other things being equal.)

 

[Sky]

Old Krow thanks for the post

 

[RimfireChris]

A little late to the BBQ here, but I'm in the "just leave it alone" catagory. I agree with those who say it's good to challenge your beliefs to a point, but it sounds like he's made up his mind for now. Like FriedRice said, you planted a seed, but it sounds like it might just take some life experience to water it. I hope he doesn't have to bury anyone he cares about learn it. Best of luck though, you're a more patient man than I, when someone tells me they don't believe in my rights, I tend to switch off.

 

[publiuss]

You can't debate someone that ignorant who refuses to even consider logic. Doesn't sound like he has the intellect to grasp the concept of logic anyway. "A gun that you secrete everyday" WTH? Genius. Forget the gun debate, figure out a way to keep him from breeding and out of the U.S.

 

[P.shooter]

For those of you who say to not debate the issue and write him off, I think you're missing a golden opportunity. Being able to effectively debate someone who is so blindly anti-gun will make your discussions with much more open and reasonable people that much more effective.

It is my opinion that a majority of people on the left who aren't pro-gun aren't necessarily anti-gun, they're just gun-apathetic. Since they often share many beliefs with a minority who's major issue is gun control, they buy in without a lot of research into the issue. I say this from experience, because this is exactly where I was not too many years ago. Now as an pro-gun progressive I am making an effort to educate friends and colleagues about the real facts of responsible gun ownership and getting as many of them shooting as I can.

That being said and back to the topic at hand, I think your cousin is off his rocker, lol.

One major point he seems to be missing is that his extremely sheltered and passive point of view is only made possible through the strength of the others who are protecting him. It's like I say to people who say "Violence never solves anything." - They are apparently oblivious to the majority of human history: violence solves a whole hell of a lot. I do not arm myself to commit violence, I am armed to prevent others from violently imposing their will upon myself or others.

Old Krow is right on. There is a lot of good data that you can use to debate his mistaken impressions about violence, crime and the responsible use of firearms. Don't forget to bring up fun facts like how long it takes to harm/kill someone or commit a crime vs typical response times for the police to get to you.

And remember, when all else fails just bring up Nazis.

PS. While typing this, "It's Time to Get a Gun" started playing on my iTunes, how weird is that.

 

[Apuuli]

If I could "secrete" a weapon everyday, I'd be in a lot of pain but it would be a great source of funds...

Of course he doesn't believe in human rights. Do you realise how difficult it is to believe in human rights and live in a country that was founded on the genocide of the original inhabitants? It's only possible with a complex view of reality and your relative has a very simplistic view that cannot deal with contradictions and injustices.

He clearly does not take motivation into account. If self-defense killing is just as wrong as murder for food or fun then an accidental or negligent death is also just as wrong and whoever caused it, just as culpable. There is a great difference between going out with the aim to kill someone for personal gain (or pleasure) and responding to a threat. If it is better to die than kill, clearly someone acting in self-defense did the attempted murderer a favor.

I've known many honest and gentle people who have grown up wracked with poverty and violence and many sleazoids who have grown up with more opportunity than most people can hope for. Even if it were possible to solve all the roots of crime, it wouldn't stop crime. Some people are just evil. Most are opportunistic. That's why when civil order breaks down, normally law abiding citizens wander around looting and behaving poorly.

Your relative seems to think that the nature of man is good. It's not. It's not evil either. It's much more complex than either. "Opportunistic" is a good word.

He may not be afraid of his government. How about in 20 years? How about the vast majority of the rest of the world's population who don't have the glorious opportunity to live under his shining example of the social contract? Perhaps they DO need to protect themselves against their governments. People keep mentioning Cambodia, China, North Korea, Stalinist Russia, but how about Idi Amin's Uganda? Has he never heard the cliche about power corrupting? Do your elected leaders a favor and remind them that they only have power granted to them by you.

 

[CapnMac]

Best way to debate with an "anti"?

Find out what else they are "anti" about (there's always something else they have a hate-on for).
Find someone who is anti what ever that second issue is.
Buy them both a Happy meal on the way to the range.

When they ask why you're leaving, merely say "I ain't got a dog in y'all's hunt, I'm off to the range."

Done.

 

[Old krow]

Old Krow thanks for the post

Thanks, but please don't quote me on those. The numbers need to be refined and my sources better documented.

For those of you who say to not debate the issue and write him off, I think you're missing a golden opportunity. Being able to effectively debate someone who is so blindly anti-gun will make your discussions with much more open and reasonable people that much more effective.

I call it practice

Here's a pretty good one too;

According to gunmap.org (I haven't checked each state individually) and statemaster's gun violence statistics, 60% of the top ten in most gun violence have gun restrictions or permits to open carry.

California represents 16% of the nations homicides per that data. CA = 2503 homicides, total US was 15,614.

California's population = 12% with 16% of the nations homicides.
South Dakota's pop = .26% and makes up .1 of 1%. of nations homicides.

The population to % of homicide ratios are.....
CA 3:4
SD 2.1:1

Unless SD has some gun laws that I don't know about? If they do, disregard, I'll find another state.

In a state with fewer gun restrictions (more guns) they have half of the homicides per capita. Gun control obviously isn't working there. If they say "well, they just get their guns else where (neighboring states that do control guns)" it merely confirms the logic behind "criminals will find a way to commit a crime regardless." This statistic is proof positive of that.

 

[Utah1]

Some people are just destined to be sheep. Can't do anything about that.

 

[kmcintosh78]

Drop it, smile nicely and hope that he is never victimized as he is a giant walking human target.

 

[richardh]

I believe more in a concept of duties and permissions

I think this shows him as being more of a follower. Someone that wouldn't try to help himself. In fairness, maybe his beliefs work were he lives. Unfortunately, here they don't. This reminds me of what kids are told in school when they are picked on..."just walk away" right, like if they would not be followed or chased.

I know some people like this. Even now, with our current economic situation, they believe everything will be OK. When told what could happen, their response is "...no, don't say that. You're just being negative." They don't want to believe in the bad things because they wouldn't know what to do. Everything is fine until it isn't. My suggestion is the same as what others have said. Don't bother. Even if you could prove them wrong, they won't see it. If the time comes when the situation proves them wrong, they will come to you for help because they won't know what to do.

 

[Sgt.Saputo]

Having extensive experience with firearms debates with anti-gun people I have devised an extensive but effective strategy on winning a debate with anti-gun relatives or friends.

Step 1. Walk away from the person and ignore them.

I hope my years of perfecting this strategy will benefit you and anyone else with this problem.

 

[Cosmik de Bris]

There's a lot in this thread, but please don't think that the views of of the original poster's relative are the views of the majority in New Zealand. I live here and most NZ'ers are very much interested in Human rights. We also have quite a few firearms of all kinds in our population, we are a hunting and sports mad culture. We have our antis just as any country does but on the whole I think the majority accept the hunting thing.

Our firearm ownership is about sport though, we don't own them for self-defense. I know some of you have presented all sorts of statistics but that's all they are. In general New Zealand is a very safe place. A lot of our violent crime is actually crime against young children perpetrated by one particular group in our community. I myself participate in 3-gun but I feel no need to carry a firearm in my day to day life. Even our police don't carry them on their person, they do have them in their cars. I think this is about to change though as there have been a few high profile cases of police being attacked with firearms. Having said that crimes involving firearms are very few in number.

Cheers

 

[GrammatonCleric]

I think that you should ignore this fool. He is entirely too stupid to understand logic and reason.

 

[Old krow]

I know some of you have presented all sorts of statistics but that's all they are.

"some of you" pretty much equals me. And you're correct, statistics are as accurate (or inaccurate) as the conjurer intended for them to be. They were posted as a rebuttal to the comment pertaining to "more self-defense shooting killing innocent people than murder attempts" or other violent crimes. That's simply not the truth. They were not meant to be an insult to New Zealanders, merely to point out the flaw in the statistics in the first place. They're only useful in their proper contexts.

Example: More marriages end in death in the US than all vehicle accidents, gun crimes, accidental discharges, drownings, suffocations, zombie attacks, and violent crimes combined.

To be perfectly honest about it, if it hadn't have been brought up I never would have thought twice about NZ's crime rate much less compared it ours or any other countries. If you guys make it work for you, then that's outstanding! That's the beauty of being a sovereign nation. You get to do what works best for you. I'll probably go on thinking that the relative in the original post, who's philosophy doesn't believe in human rights, is his own and not indicative of the entire nation's.

And yes, I agree. New Zealand is a pretty safe place. Especially compared to other places. In terms of firearms violence it's actually pretty low. Unfortunately or fortunately, however you chose to look at it, we live here in the US. We pretty much lead the charts in just about everything from car wrecks to overdoses. What can I say? American's are fragile And we have bad guys, as long as we have them, I want my g/f, mom, and sister to be able to defend themselves.

 

[Neverwinter]

He clearly does not take motivation into account. If self-defense killing is just as wrong as murder for food or fun then an accidental or negligent death is also just as wrong and whoever caused it, just as culpable. There is a great difference between going out with the aim to kill someone for personal gain (or pleasure) and responding to a threat. If it is better to die than kill, clearly someone acting in self-defense did the attempted murderer a favor.

He is likely a consequentialist and views all killing as being equally immoral regardless of the intent or qualities of the actor. Is a person stealing food for himself as immoral as a person stealing food for his starving family? As a society, would we punish the two differently in any meaningful way?

From that viewpoint, someone who kills an attacker in self defense is just racing the attacker toward an immoral end.

Once-upon-a-time, in my sleepy little college town...

There was an anecdotal example which I can keep flogging any time someone suggests that increased education and opportunity for upward mobility can improve crime rates.

We've had threads in S&T discussing how hardening can provide a significant benefit to your home defense by discouraging attackers. There will still be some who will forgo that protective measure in favor of using lethal force on an intruder. Those are probably the same people who prefer to keep guns and ignore the socio-economic factors which contribute to crime.

 

[azyogi]

FIRST 3 RULES FOR DEALING WITH THIS
#1"Do not argue with an idiot. He will drag you down to his level and
beat you with experience."
#2"Light travels faster than sound. This is why some people appear
bright until you hear them speak."
#3"Some cause happiness wherever they go, others whenever they go."

 

[Black Knight]

Why not take him on a road trip? You could take him to some major city like LA. Then drop him off in an area like South Central and tell him to meet you some where after you give him the directions on how to get there. If he makes then see if his mind has been changed.

 

[Old krow]

Those are probably the same people who prefer to keep guns and ignore the socio-economic factors which contribute to crime.

I'm slightly confused by this. Which socio-economic factors are you speaking of? And more specifically which crimes that resulted from the socio-economic factors are we talking about?

We've had threads in S&T discussing how hardening can provide a significant benefit to your home defense by discouraging attackers. There will still be some who will forgo that protective measure in favor of using lethal force on an intruder.

I'm all for layers of security, but they're not built in to save the criminal. I certainly do not ever intend on shooting someone over food, but when did the burden of crime get placed on the innocent?

 

[gym]

Don't debate religion ,politics, or guns with your family, it's a no win sityuation. Unless they are of the same view that you are.

 

[rocky branch]

Several very intelligent people have told you to back out of this fruitless venture.

Pay attention to them.
You are making a fool of yourself thinking any part of this will go as you want it to.

With some age and maturity you will see the point.

 

[quiettype]

Save your breath. Do not have any further contact with this person, he is apt to report you for something that he finds offensive. Debating a retard is beyond stupid. RETARDS ALWAYS WIN!
Go spend time with people who don't stress you out. Life is too damned short to waste time trying to help someone who does'nt want help.