Idea to turn public opinion in favor of firearms

Status
Not open for further replies.
Vector said:
Taking that attitude would mean that any time the anti's were successful in suppression of our 2A rights, we should be hesitant in standing up for them in the future.
No, it means that we should learn from the experience and look for ways to be more effective. It's not about "standing up for our rights." It's about standing up for our rights in ways that are well calculated to further our interests.

Vector said:
...On this we could not be in further disagreement. I do not need studies or examples "relevant to gun rights" to know desensitization works in many aspects of our lives...
And you've thus given me no reason to pay the least bit of attention to your opinions. What you think you know is irrelevant. It's what you can support that matters.

A lot of people have "known" things that turned out to be wrong. Things you think you know without adequate support are a lousy basis for taking action.

To some extent this is all about the questions of how we know things, what we really do know, or can know or can't know, and how well we know things. This is whole area study in itself, and it's called "epistemology."

During the course of my career I've seen a lot of people get themselves into trouble by not knowing what they don't know; and by thinking they knew things they really had no reason to believe, having relied on bad data or unsupported opinion.

Vector said:
...Heck even if it were just a notion or belief that a 2A supporter had without proof, should not preclude it's discussion...
Phooey. I gave up on drunken midnight dorm room bull sessions over 40 years ago.

This might be the Internet, and things here, we tend to think, don't really mean anything. But it's still a bad idea to get in the habit of jumping to conclusions, relying on assumptions based on tenuous data or guessing about things. It might work for the unimportant things in life; but if one gets in the habit, he might deal with something important that way too.

Being critical of information given to you, asking where it's from and what it's based on, expecting evidence, etc., are all good habits.

All opinions are not equal. An opinion backed up by solid evidence, relevant education, knowledge and experience is one thing. An opinion snatched out of thin air is another.

Vector said:
...The way to deal with the anti-2A types is not to just sit back and wait to play defense. Rather a lawful exercise of our OC rights in a calm and routine manner is a pro-active way to educate the general public that they do not have anything to fear from lawful gun ownership.
The way to further the RKBA may not be to sit back and just be defensive. We do need to be proactive. But we need to be proactive in ways well calculated to serve our purposes, and in deciding what strategies may be well calculated to serve our purposes we need to rely on evidence, not imagination.

Some of the things I've seen be effective in my own dealings with people have been:

  • Being a good ambassador for gun ownership. Are you the type of person, in your manners, tastes, interests (aside from guns), about whom someone might say, "Gosh, I would never have expected you to be a gun owner"?

  • Being a multilayered, well rounded person; active and contributing to society in a variety of ways and spheres -- our careers, our communities, local charities, the arts, etc. We're not just "gun nuts." We're active, participating members of our communities, and we just happen to own firearms and are interest in, and knowledgeable about, them. The points are (1) to break down stereotypes; and (2) to increase our credibility.

  • Actively promoting shooting and responsible gun ownership -- training and bringing new people into shooting. I'm an instructor in a group that puts on monthly NRA Basic Handgun classes. Almost all of our students have no prior experience. We introduce about a hundred people a year to guns.
But as far as exercising:
Vector said:
...our OC rights in a calm and routine manner is a pro-active way to educate the general public that they do not have anything to fear from lawful gun ownership.
that is mere conjecture.

As Carl Sagan said, "Extraordinary claims require extra ordinary evidence."
 
A firearm is a tool, and like any tool it needs to be learned how and when to use it; what it is good for and what it is not good for. Just having people wandering around with a set of wrenches is not going to make people comfortable about working on their cars...

The problem you have is that most folks do not want to be burndened with taking care of themselves; really sucks, don't it...

I was given an SKS years ago and have had it since before I married. It is always been loaded and has never been thought of otherwise in my house; we have no children. My wife has never shot it, but it has been shown to her and she probably could not use it if needs be. The rifle has never been a though or even bothered her being here and loaded.

I figured well, the woman needs something she can use if I aint around; so I bought a lever gun. We have all seen cowboy movies, even her; anybody can rack the handle and pull the trigger. It don't get any more simple than that.

I bring it home and have her load it up and put it where she wants. What does she do now when I am gone? She locks the bedroom door when I am not home... Untill she takes it out and learns what it is, how it works and what it is good for there will be nothing anyone can do to get her to use the bloody thing if needs be.

You can lead a horse to water, but you can't make em drink,
CC
 
0to60 said:
Without some form of background checking, violent criminals CAN buy guns legitimately.

No, by definition they cannot. You might benefit from reading the definion of "legitimate". It's good to know what words mean before you use them.

Frank has some excellent points. All ideas are NOT created equal. Doing "something, anything", while it might be briefly satisfying, does not automatically help our cause.

You want to use psychology? Fine, let's do that. If there are objects that some people have a violent emotional reaction to, we are most likely to have positive results by giving people the opportunity to experience these objects in safe and controlled environments. Vector, your thought process has some serious flaws. Seeing a biracial couple or two gay partners may be emotionally upsetting for some, but who consenting adults choose to have sex with is not going to be immediately fatal to a bystander. Being shot may. One is a purely social issue, while one is at least partially a safety issue.

I think this one is about done~ I'll give a brief space of time to see if anything contributory can be added.

John
 
No, by definition they cannot. You might benefit from reading the definion of "legitimate". It's good to know what words mean before you use them.

Frank has some excellent points. All ideas are NOT created equal. Doing "something, anything", while it might be briefly satisfying, does not automatically help our cause.

You want to use psychology? Fine, let's do that. If there are objects that some people have a violent emotional reaction to, we are most likely to have positive results by giving people the opportunity to experience these objects in safe and controlled environments. Vector, your thought process has some serious flaws. Seeing a biracial couple or two gay partners may be emotionally upsetting for some, but who consenting adults choose to have sex with is not going to be immediately fatal to a bystander. Being shot may. One is a purely social issue, while one is at least partially a safety issue.

I think this one is about done~ I'll give a brief space of time to see if anything contributory can be added.

John

I want to make a preemptive objection. I will PM you on this in a moment.

In the mean time I'd ask others to weight in on their views.

`

`
 
I'd ask those who think exercising ones right to lawfully open carry is the wrong thing to do, to then explain what good having OC in the state is?

I mean if a pro-2A state like Florida, which has a bunch of people walking around CCing were to change it's law allowing OC, why shouldn't people make a concerted effort to do so.

On this subject, there are plenty of Youtube videos where LEO's are called to investigate legal OC. Most turn out ok, but it is still an inconvenience for those trying to exercise their lawful rights. As a matter of fact, even though I'm advocating for greater OC, I might be deterred if I know I might be unduly delayed if time were an important factor. Additionally I would not want to have a run in with a LEO having a bad day or on an authority kick no matter how within my rights I was.
However when enough people who are not use to seeing OC start getting use to it, then they are probably less likely to call the police every 20 minutes.

BTW - Another example of being desensitized to something is carnage in the EMS field & emergency rooms. I've seen people want to hurl at the sight of blood when they are rookies doing their clinicals. Yet as time goes on, they get use to it and will eat lunch right after cleaning blood or brain matter off the floor.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top