1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

New arguement for the anti's

Discussion in 'Legal' started by Dbl0Kevin, Sep 24, 2004.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Dbl0Kevin

    Dbl0Kevin Member

    May 26, 2004
    So I've been thinking a lot lately about the times I've tried to argue with an anti-gun person using statistics and facts. I would usually end up wanting to beat my head into a brick wall. So I've been thinking of a new tact to take and think I finally came up with something.

    Keep in mind this will only be effective on people who are ignorant of guns and simply "scared" and probably not hardcore anti's who know the agenda is really about "control" and not "guns".

    In starting we need to assume that the anti and us are really basically the same, being that we both want to protect the safety of ourselves and our families. We just choose different methods. For the pro-gun people we choose to concentrate on our own personal actions, and what WE can do to protect ourselves. On the other side, the anti's choose to focus on the actions of OTHER people and seek to prevent them from doing things and having objects that can harm themselves and their family.

    Now here comes the good part. Tell the anti that you just want to ask him/her only 2 questions and get their honest answers. Then ask them the following:

    1. What is the most important thing to you personally? It's pretty safe to say the answer will be the lives and health of themselves and their family.....if they can't figure that out a little prodding can be used and I doubt anyone could argue with this being the answer.

    2. Why on earth would you want to trust the safety and security of the most important things in the world to you, to someone else that is a complete stranger? (aka the police/government)

    If they begin to protest then give them this simple example. If I was a criminal who wanted to hurt/kill you right now, you could be severely injured or dead in seconds. There is NO police response time anywhere in the country that would respond quickly enough to save you. If there was a police officer in the next ROOM he could most likely not be quick enough to save you.

    If they continue to protest I would ask them if it's their belief that they are too incompetant to be trusted with a firearm and is that your arguement for gun control? If that IS their arguement then who are they to decide that just because they feel they are not competant enough to defend themselves with a firearm no one else is either.

    I have yet to try this arguement on someone, but I plan to on the first opportunity. Anybody think they can improve it or find a hole in my logic?
  2. Spot77

    Spot77 Member

    Apr 1, 2003
    There are no holes in your logic.

    Logic however, is rarely understood by the gun grabbong crowd.

    Headlines, soundbites and other sensationalism......that's a different story.

    Sarcasm aside, you have very well thought out points, and I hope they're effective on at least one person.
  3. Standing Wolf

    Standing Wolf Member in memoriam

    Dec 24, 2002
    Idahohoho, the jolliest state
    Leftist extremism is founded on the belief that a small, elite vanguard not only knows better than the commoners, but is entitled to inflict its will upon us.
  4. ClonaKilty

    ClonaKilty Member

    Dec 3, 2003
    Pacific NW

    Good arguments. I think you are 100% right in that the anti-gun crowd is basically two crowds: the Leftist extremists, and the ignorant masses who just want to be safe.

    What the extremists have done successfully over the last 40 years or so is to publicize guns as strictly tools for criminal behavior; objects that only take lives, and not tools that save lives. I strongly believe the more we can prove to normal Americans that guns do indeed save lives -- in fact they save many more than they take -- that we will sway public opinion to support RKBA.

    I see a changing attitude toward guns in the US, from somewhat anti- to neutral or somewhat pro. What I mean is that among most people, gun control is much less of a hot button issue than it used to be. I chalk it up to the dropping crime rates, and the simultaneous success of the CCW movement. People may not be making the connection that more guns = less crime, but they aren't seeing the "bloodbath" scenarios being played out either.
  5. ReadyontheRight

    ReadyontheRight Member

    Dec 28, 2002
    Minnesota - nine months of ice and snow...three mo
    Excellent approach! Follow it up with an invitation to the range.:)
  6. jefnvk

    jefnvk Member

    Jun 3, 2004
    The Copper Country, Michigan
    My logic:

    'You feel that guns should be banned because it would make you feel safer. What do you say when I tell you that I feel safer if I own a gun?'

    Either forces them to consider your side, or point out that they care for themselves, and then conversation is done with.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.

Share This Page