Golden Hound
Member
- Joined
- Apr 26, 2008
- Messages
- 778
I got into a debate with my bass teacher (I play upright bass) earlier tonight about guns. He told me he had read a letter to the editor that I had written to the paper:
I told him that I believed in all of our constitutional rights, including the right to be armed.
Him: "I don't believe in guns, and I certainly don't think people should have handguns. A gun creates death - all it's good for is creating death."
Me: "Don't you think it's important to be able to defend yourself in case you are attacked or your house is broken into?"
Him: "We live in a very safe town. It's not like we live in New York or something - nobody's going to break into your house as long as you keep your windows and doors locked."
Me: "Well, first of all, if we did live in New York or somewhere dangerous, wouldn't it be especially important for us to be able to be armed? And secondly, how do you know that NOBODY is ever going to break into your house or threaten your life? How can you be sure?"
Him: "Well, if you point a gun at someone, you're just going to get shot."
Me: "What?"
Him: "Well, unless you shoot first. Then he gets shot. Either way, someone gets shot."
Me: "You don't think we should have a right to shoot back just on the off chance that someone might threaten our lives? A bank guard can legally carry a gun to protect a bunch of money - and that money is worth more than my life? Politicians (the same ones who support gun control) have bodyguards who carry guns - their lives are worth more than our lives?"
Him: "But banks and politicians are more likely to be targets of violence. Who is going to attack you or me?"
Me: "You never know who's going to attack. Especially Jews (me and my bass teacher are BOTH Jewish.) Jews are always going to be targets of violence. We should be especially supportive of the second amendment - it means that we can stop something like the Holocaust. What about the people in the Warsaw Ghetto? Don't you think they had the right to be armed?"
Him: "That was a different time. We're not living in World War II Germany. We're safe here. Our government is not going to harm us."
Me: "How can you be sure? Why are you so trusting of the government? Don't you think that we should be able to protect ourselves against the government if we need to? That's what the Second Amendment is for."
Him: "When the Second Amendment was written, the only guns available were muzzle-loading rifles. Nowadays you can get a semi-automatic weapon and kill everyone in the room."
(Is this the stupidest argument you've ever heard, or is this the stupidest argument you've ever heard? Like the Founding Fathers would not want us to be able to have the most effective weapons available? Like if they had semi-autos when the Constitution was written, the Second Amendment would not have applied to them?)
At this point his phone rang and he had to stop talking to me. Later I told him that I really didn't mean to offend him and that I really like him even though we disagree on this issue. He said it was fine, he wasn't upset with me and he didn't think any less of me because of my position, but he still "just doesn't like guns."
So I stopped trying to convince him. I figured I'd never win with someone like him.
Should I have done that? Should I have taken that opportunity to convince someone, because I know that I could have won the argument if I kept trying. All my responses just blew his arguments right out of the water - logically speaking, he had absolutely no legs to stand on. But I just couldn't bring myself to keep arguing with him, because he is my bass teacher and I respect him a lot and I feel like if I kept hammering at him, he'd just get angry and then it would be awkward whenever I had my next lesson with him.
Man, it frustrates me so much when people have such narrow minded attitudes about guns (just because they don't know anything about them and have no experience with them, in most cases.)
And it really bothers me when these people are Jewish, because Jews out of everyone in the whole world, should be the best-armed people. This particular guy actually lived in Israel and played bass in the Jerusalem Symphony Orchestra for a while, and at one point in our argument he actually said "In Israel I felt unsafe all the time, because there were all these young soldiers barely out of high school who were walking around on the streets with M-16s." This comment particularly baffles me. Why on earth would this make anyone feel unsafe? (Unless of course they were a terrorist.)
Barack Obama is an enemy of our second amendment rights. As a senator, he sought to ban the sale of all semi-automatic weapons in the state of Illinois. He is in favor of the re-institution of the notorious Federal Assault Weapons ban, which uses arbitrary characteristics such as folding stocks and pistol grips to designate said “assault weapons” – distinctions which are meant to deceive those who do not understand firearms with “scary” words. These so-called assault weapons are used in a tiny proportion of all gun crimes. Furthermore, Obama supports the banning of concealed handguns. In other words, he wants law-abiding citizens to be unable to carry a concealed handgun for self-defense, while criminals who have no regard for the laws whatsoever will go on committing crimes. Lawfully-owned, concealed handguns account for a miniscule percentage of gun crimes. Criminals typically don't bother applying for a carry permit. Obama’s position on guns is the typical ignorant far-left party line. Tell us, Barack, does your opposition to concealed handguns also apply to your bodyguards and security details? Wait, I already know the answer. What a hypocrite! No gun owner should even consider voting for this man.
I told him that I believed in all of our constitutional rights, including the right to be armed.
Him: "I don't believe in guns, and I certainly don't think people should have handguns. A gun creates death - all it's good for is creating death."
Me: "Don't you think it's important to be able to defend yourself in case you are attacked or your house is broken into?"
Him: "We live in a very safe town. It's not like we live in New York or something - nobody's going to break into your house as long as you keep your windows and doors locked."
Me: "Well, first of all, if we did live in New York or somewhere dangerous, wouldn't it be especially important for us to be able to be armed? And secondly, how do you know that NOBODY is ever going to break into your house or threaten your life? How can you be sure?"
Him: "Well, if you point a gun at someone, you're just going to get shot."
Me: "What?"
Him: "Well, unless you shoot first. Then he gets shot. Either way, someone gets shot."
Me: "You don't think we should have a right to shoot back just on the off chance that someone might threaten our lives? A bank guard can legally carry a gun to protect a bunch of money - and that money is worth more than my life? Politicians (the same ones who support gun control) have bodyguards who carry guns - their lives are worth more than our lives?"
Him: "But banks and politicians are more likely to be targets of violence. Who is going to attack you or me?"
Me: "You never know who's going to attack. Especially Jews (me and my bass teacher are BOTH Jewish.) Jews are always going to be targets of violence. We should be especially supportive of the second amendment - it means that we can stop something like the Holocaust. What about the people in the Warsaw Ghetto? Don't you think they had the right to be armed?"
Him: "That was a different time. We're not living in World War II Germany. We're safe here. Our government is not going to harm us."
Me: "How can you be sure? Why are you so trusting of the government? Don't you think that we should be able to protect ourselves against the government if we need to? That's what the Second Amendment is for."
Him: "When the Second Amendment was written, the only guns available were muzzle-loading rifles. Nowadays you can get a semi-automatic weapon and kill everyone in the room."
(Is this the stupidest argument you've ever heard, or is this the stupidest argument you've ever heard? Like the Founding Fathers would not want us to be able to have the most effective weapons available? Like if they had semi-autos when the Constitution was written, the Second Amendment would not have applied to them?)
At this point his phone rang and he had to stop talking to me. Later I told him that I really didn't mean to offend him and that I really like him even though we disagree on this issue. He said it was fine, he wasn't upset with me and he didn't think any less of me because of my position, but he still "just doesn't like guns."
So I stopped trying to convince him. I figured I'd never win with someone like him.
Should I have done that? Should I have taken that opportunity to convince someone, because I know that I could have won the argument if I kept trying. All my responses just blew his arguments right out of the water - logically speaking, he had absolutely no legs to stand on. But I just couldn't bring myself to keep arguing with him, because he is my bass teacher and I respect him a lot and I feel like if I kept hammering at him, he'd just get angry and then it would be awkward whenever I had my next lesson with him.
Man, it frustrates me so much when people have such narrow minded attitudes about guns (just because they don't know anything about them and have no experience with them, in most cases.)
And it really bothers me when these people are Jewish, because Jews out of everyone in the whole world, should be the best-armed people. This particular guy actually lived in Israel and played bass in the Jerusalem Symphony Orchestra for a while, and at one point in our argument he actually said "In Israel I felt unsafe all the time, because there were all these young soldiers barely out of high school who were walking around on the streets with M-16s." This comment particularly baffles me. Why on earth would this make anyone feel unsafe? (Unless of course they were a terrorist.)