I need help with a (Semi) anti

[JKimball]

Other than finding a new job, how can I get him off my back?

Don't argue with him. Just tell him you understand what he is saying and you just see things differently. Tell him you don't see any point arguing about your differences.

Tell him if he is looking for people to convince, he can sign up on THR and start enlightening us. You may even send him a link to this thread and see if he wants to jump in.

 

[divemedic]

You can't argue with people like that. They are rabid anti gunners, and no amount of logic and facts will sway them, because their position comes from emotion, not logic.

In any issue in this country, there are 30% who take one side, 30% who take the other, and 40% remain undecided. When election time comes, the fight is on for the middle 40%. That is who we need to convince. That is how you stop the die hard anti's- by making sure they never have a majority. Don't waste good effort on idiots.

 

[FiremanBob]

If it comes up every day, who is raising it?

 

[Blackbeard]

Always frame the debate in terms of civil rights. Self-defense is a civil right. Owning firearms is a civil right. If you want to curtail people's civil rights you'd better have a damned good reason.

 

[catspa]

briancraig81:I'm at my wits end with this dude, I really don't know what to say to the things he says. I've been involved with the RKBA issue for only a few years now, so I'm still a novice although I've been around firearms all my life just about.

Brian, don't beat yourself up over this. It's entirely possible that your co-worker is such a media-fed blissninny that he is beyond the reach of facts and logic, whether presented by you or anybody else. Heck, for all we know, he might be posting on a blissninny website saying, "How do I convince my co-worker Brian, who believes in individual liberty, that America needs more gun control?"

He's living his life in fear. Fear of the mentally impaired, fear of criminals, fear of what could happen if the government doesn't protect us from bad stuff. When somebody makes their decisions based on fear, they frequently make poor choices, and that's where this guy is. Ignoring the benefits of freedom, he cries for stricter government control to lessen his fear.

He is also willing to impose the collective guilt of criminals and the crazy on ordinary gun owners, and punish them for the misdeeds of others. That right there is enough for me to dismiss anything that comes out of his mouth.

Don't make the mistake of gauging your success or failure in this situation by whether or not you can persuade this guy. You have chosen to cast your pearls before this particular swine, and he has snuffled them into the mud, because that's what swine do. He's choosing his own way, and you have no control over that. Even if you could, you wouldn't coerce him, because you believe in individual liberties.

What you can do, and it sounds like you are doing, is live your own life as a shining example. Enjoy the benefits of gun ownership, exercise your rights, and when this guy starts yattering away, parroting what the media talking heads have poured into him, just say, "You and I disagree on this. I've heard your arguments before, and they failed to convince me to change my opinion about freedom. They won't convince me this time either."

Live your life, man. Accept the fact that your co-worker has swallowed a media-packaged set of lies, and made it his own. You won't be working with him forever, and you're not responsible for his errors. You showed him the truth, he rejected it, done.

Just my pair-o'-Lincolns...

Parker

 

[Hungry Seagull]

catspa...

that would be great. If THAT side of the story is being pounded out on a internet forum that mirriors a parallel to this one.

 

[SpecialKalltheway]

I like the idea of inviting him here. Just tell him "I don't want to discuss or argue with you about this anymore, I did however find you people that do."

 

[MisterMike]

Always frame the debate in terms of civil rights. Self-defense is a civil right. Owning firearms is a civil right. If you want to curtail people's civil rights you'd better have a damned good reason.

I like that . . . maybe because that's become my mantra.

First, you need to consider whether it's worth arguing with this guy. If he's just preaching to you and is not interested in at least exploring the merits of your viewpoint, screw him . . . "No more gun discussions."

But, if you think there's a chance that he might come around, then, as suggested above, print off the "Gun Facts" primer and invite him to read it.

As for the question about selling to the mentally ill, that's a pretty thorny issue. I've been in law enforcement a long time, and most mental health professionals will tell you that it is very difficult to predict who will commit a violent crime (with the rare of exception of individuals with a known history of violence). Many people with no diagnosed mental illness commit violent acts, and many who have been diagnosed with conditions that would seemingly predispose them to violence never act out. How would be define "mental illness"? Is a person suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder mentally ill? How about someone who engages in mild obsessive-compulsive behavior? If someone smokes, eats, or drinks too much, does this weakness of personality equate to mental illness? I hate heights . . . am I mentally ill?

In earlier versions of the APA's Diagnostic and Statistical Manual, homosexuality was deemed a mental illness. Later, under political and social pressure, homosexuality was dropped. So, given your co-worker's criteria, a large group who would have been too dangerous to own a gun would have been considered no longer "mentally ill."

The whole notion of denying guns to "the mentally ill" sounds good as a sound bite, but when you start thinking about how this sort of prohibition would be applied, it becomes apparent that, in practice, it would be unfair to many and unlikely to prevent criminal acts.

 

[thepenismightier]

I've always had a bit of a problem with the analogies people (not just jack404 and bigione, I see the same comments a lot) keep making to car ownership and drunk driving, and how they kill more people and they're not restricted, etc. etc....

First of all, car ownership and driving rights aren't Constitutionally protected in the specific. Comparing them with gun rights actually hurts your case from a legal standpoint.

Second, I'm not sure how it is in Australia, but in the U.S. you do have to jump through a lot more hoops to own and drive a car than you do to buy a gun...the transfer of property must be filed, car registered, it's info and your level of use recorded, tags assigned, insurance, not to mention getting a license to drive it in the first place. If there were all those restrictions on transferring gun ownership, people would be freaking out. And as for drunk driving, the legal (and increasingly, social) penalties for that are pretty heavy, and make driving a car in the future much more difficult.

Third, there's the issue of intent that's left in the ditch when using this comparison. An automobile, while incredibly dangerous, is not a weapon as it's primary function. Neither is a bottle of alcohol. A gun, on the other hand, regardless of how it's going to be used, or even what subset of "legitimate use" [http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=443694] it's designed to support, is at its core a tool created to inflict lethal force.

If I sold a guy a car and he used it (even intentionally) to kill someone, I wouldn't feel nearly as guilty about it as if I sold someone a gun that was used for that purpose. The car was misused. The gun fulfilled it's design objective.

 

[thepenismightier]

As to the actual question of the thread (sorry for the tangent)...I have a coworker who I also spar with regularly, on this and other issues. But it's a mutually entered debate, and there are no hard feelings. In fact, we enjoy the discourse.

If this guy is foisting views upon you that you don't want to hear, or arguing with you when you don't want an argument, just tell him to stop. If that doesn't work, as others suggested, HR will be motivated to stop it for you before things escalate.