Internet 2A Evangelism

Not open for further replies.


Apr 6, 2003
It would be good if the THR had a board or at least a sticky, in general discussion, where we could go for help in debating the 2nd Amendment on the Internet.

What would, in your opinion, be the number one point to get across, in debating antis on the net?
I think the main thing to remember is that many more read a post than post so it is important to remain civil and keep using logic... for the benefit of onlookers.
What would, in your opinion, be the number one point to get across, in debating antis on the net?

One of the most common statistics you hear from antis is how a gun is 43X more likely to be used against you, in a study that is flawed in its methodology(the author did a second study and greatly reduced the ratio), and only counts "use" as someone being shot. So I think the best response would be to compare number of defensive gun uses versus number of gun deaths, armed robberies, and armed assaults. Or the closest statistics to that that are available. Along with this, be sure to point out that a legitimate defensive gun uses by a civillian is usually nothing more than brandishing--no one gets hurt.
I think the activist forum was just made for direct action, not really debating. For example, This paper is wrong, we need to contact the following or, this guy is trying to do this, show your support by. More of a contact and tell them directly rather then debate.. At least that's how I read it, my opinion only, I could be 110% off the mark.

To the OP, I've been attempting to gather statistics on fire-arm related crime and what percentage of those crimes were commited by a LEGAL weapon. IE someone with a CCW walking in and robbing a gas station with HIS firearm. Unfortunately media doesn't disinguish and it's hard to find records.

I've always been of the opinion that people just look at firearms as a whole. They don't see that Joe Crackdealer has allready broken a law by stealing or purchasing an illegal weapon, and won't care for other laws he breaks. I use this to further push that the only way a gun law will work is if you get the criminals to follow it. I've had mixed success with it but it makes a few sit back and wonder
It is a great idea to stickie the best arguments to use on undecides, but it belongs in General and not Activism.

These discussions often occur between individuals or before informal small groups. In those settings you can use the extensive facts and the short emotional arguments to sway another person or a small crowd. In the activist setting you have to keep it short and sweet with solid hooks for people to grab before the loose interest and turn the page.
The following is from another board where I have joined another THR member in sticking up for the 2nd Amendment. I offer it for criticism, advice and as an example.

I cant believe Party Boy used China as an example in support of Gun Control.

China established gun control in 1935. From 1948 to 1952, 20 million
political dissidents, unable to defend themselves, were rounded up and

History has proven that power corrupts and that absolute power absolutely corrupts. In 1776 a new nation emerged upon the world stage. In this nation, power was to be regulated by a system of checks and balances recognizing a fatal flaw, this new nation amended its Constitution and instituted the ultimate check and balance; freedom of the press AND the right of the PEOPLE to keep and bear arms.

During the last century over one hundred seventy million unarmed civilians were killed by government troops. And Seeing as how this century began with UN troops raping unarmed women and children in Africa, I say all people everywhere should enjoy their right to keep and bear arms.

I have searched in vane for estimated non-war gun deaths world wide in the 20th century but I did find an estimate on a anti web page for America

"National statistics on gun homicides have been collected since 1933. Between 1933 and 1997, 591,528 Americans were murdered with firearms. Even the number of gun homicides since 1933, taken by it self, exceeds the total number of Americans killed on the battlefield during this century. In 1933, the first year for which national statistics are available, 7,863 Americans were murdered with guns. While we will never know the exact number of people murdered with firearms in this century, the total would likely approach 1.5 million. "

Only 1.5 million (using their numbers) for the most incorrigible country in the world, that would mean that you would have to increase the number one-hundred fold, for the rest of the world, to even get into the ballpark with the one-hundred and seventy million killed world wide, who were unarmed and murdered by their own government.

I would love to find some estimates from the UN

Party Boy said:
"Are China and the United State similar countries with similar governments? Not at all...* *you cannot even compare the two."

You are the one who compared China and the said... "I love the people who are pushing for the ABOLISHING of gun laws after something like that...* ****ing retards. How anyone can think that more guns will solve this problem is beyond me. Take a look at nations around the world that have gun control...* *Uk is 130ish, China is in the teens I believe (with a population of 1 billion), yet the United States is well beyond 20,000 gun deaths a year...* Hmm...* *yes, abolishing gun laws is the key."

BTW would you mind giving the source for the 20,000 gun deaths pr year figure?

PB said: "Look at China now..* * How many gun deaths a year?"
are you kidding??? How many forced abortions, how many abuses of power?, how many people forced into slave labor?

PB said:
So basically now PEOPLE have the POWER to kill...* * *I guess if the United States government were to ever try and round up and exterminate us, we would easily defend ourselves. Thank God, too, because that is extremely likely to happen....

Nothing easy about it. hopefully the knowledge that the people would fight back, is enough to prevent it from happening. Picture the face of a clock; the power begins at 12 and is with God. God delegates the power to man at 3 and the people delegate the power to government.
At 6 the government takes all the power and at 9 the People take it back and Give it to God at 12. In other words... a revolution.

PB said:
"LOL! I cannot believe horsesense used Africa as a reason to abolish gun control. I don't know if you know this, but Africa is ****ed. Women and children are shot and killed in broad daylight.. families and communities ruined because the lack of gun control. If only those unarmed civilians had guns...* oh wait, now they do! And the ones who do use them to kill women and children! Nice d00d."

I guess that explains how millions were hacked to death with machetes, by government sanctioned hit squads and why a woman is far more likely to be raped in South Africa (total gun control) than in Mogadishu (everybody has guns).

PB said: "But the United States government is not planning on murdering the people...* *Had all these civilians had guns, it would have just been more bloodshed. Unfortunately we can never know what would have happened if all these poor, hopeless people had owned guns, maybe they'd still be alive...* * * Not likely."

Look at world history, an unarmed populist proceeds mass murder by power mad dictators. also look at recent history in the US, armed citizens have stopped mass killings, by deranged killers in the mall shooting and a recent event in another collage, when two students ran to their cars and retrieved guns to stop a killing spree. The elitist media don't report on happenings that because it goes against their agenda.

From: Brian T. Halonen <[email protected]>
The following are taken from the Oxford English Dictionary, and bracket in time the writing of the 2nd amendment:
1709: "If a liberal Education has formed in us well-regulated Appetites and worthy Inclinations."
1714: "The practice of all well-regulated courts of justice in the world."
1812: "The equation of time ... is the adjustment of the difference of time as shown by a well-regulated clock and a true sun dial."
1848: "A remissness for which I am sure every well-regulated person will blame the Mayor."
1862: "It appeared to her well-regulated mind, like a clandestine proceeding."
1894: "The newspaper, a never wanting adjunct to every well-regulated American embryo city."
The phrase "well-regulated" was in common use long before 1789, and remained so for a century thereafter. It referred to the property of something being in proper working order. Something that was well-regulated was calibrated correctly, functioning as expected. Establishing government oversight of the people's arms was not only not the intent in using the phrase in the 2nd amendment, it was precisely to render the government powerless to do so that the founders wrote it.
Not open for further replies.