Forum on Common Sense Gun Laws to Reduce Violence

[Coyote33]

So, how come the pro-rights side is not having this forum? It seems there are two or three a week held by the other side, with all the press announcements, etc.

It would sure be nice to be having a "conversation" where actual facts are used.

Just wondering.

 

[Tyke]

So, how come the pro-rights side is not having this forum? It seems there are two or three a week held by the other side, with all the press announcements, etc.

It would sure be nice to be having a "conversation" where actual facts are used.

Just wondering.

Because trotting out facts automatically sets them off into "OMG YOU BOUGHT INTO THE NRA PROPAGANDA YOU CHILD MURDERER YOU". Evidently facts don't matter.

 

[Coyote33]

No, you bill it and run it in stealth mode, so they really think it is more pat on the back, feel good crap. Then slowly reveal that they have been hooked up to the matrix all along, and offer the right colored pill at the end.

 

[sieveboy]

What annoys the shit out of me is that the "conversation" is never informed. I have yet to encounter an anti who speaks intelligently on any aspect of firearms; or has bothered to learn basic terms which are crucial to the "conversation", such as: automatic, semiauto, magazine, clip, bullet, cartridge, caliber, rifle, shotgun, stock, barrel and muzzle. It's as though they fear that any knowledge at all will lead to them switching sides. Any question is met immediately with talk of "feelings".

I think it is useless to have a "conversation" with these types. Better to spend your time and money taking someone who is on the fence, or is mildly pro-gun, to the shooting range.

 

[Tyke]

What annoys the shit out of me is that the "conversation" is never informed. I have yet to encounter an anti who speaks intelligently on any aspect of firearms; or has bothered to learn basic terms which are crucial to the "conversation", such as: automatic, semiauto, magazine, clip, bullet, cartridge, caliber, rifle, shotgun, stock, barrel and muzzle. It's as though they fear that any knowledge at all will lead to them switching sides. Any question is met immediately with talk of "feelings".

I think it is useless to have a "conversation" with these types. Better to spend your time and money taking someone who is on the fence, or is mildly pro-gun, to the shooting range.

What's even worse (and this happened at my office the other day) is when our own turn on us. One guy at my office just got a new AR. I asked what he thought about the proposed bills ... he then spewed on about how he doesn't need an AR and no one actually does...and he'd turn in his newly purchased preban mags because no one needs more than 10 rounds.

I tried pointing the stupidity and hypocrisy but he was obstinate and told me I was crazy and wrong and that no one needs that stuff so it's ok if they get banned/taken away.

- - - Updated - - -

No, you bill it and run it in stealth mode, so they really think it is more pat on the back, feel good crap. Then slowly reveal that they have been hooked up to the matrix all along, and offer the right colored pill at the end.

I've tried that. Doesn't work very well. Must be doing it wrong or something. The idiots don't care about facts...facts aren't sexy. You know what's sexy and in-vogue? Emotion. They love to stand on the graves of children. That's what's sexy to them.

 

[Bob P]

No, you bill it and run it in stealth mode, so they really think it is more pat on the back, feel good crap. Then slowly reveal that they have been hooked up to the matrix all along, and offer the right colored pill at the end.

Why? Like I said to you in an earlier thread, when a hostile media picks the soundbites you lose even if you win.

 

[Mr_Irritating]

You will never be able to legislate guns from the hands of criminals.

 

[milktree]

Don't talk about "gun laws" Really, just don't.

It supports the fallacy that guns are the problem.

Instead, talk about "public safety laws" or "laws to reduce violent crime". Don't say "prevent", because no law can prevent anything.

 

[MichaelJR]

Why even have a conversation? I don't get it, there isn't a problem. There's an extreme minority of evil people that can and will always do evil things. Why are we going to restructure anything? To prevent the unpreventable?

 

[MisterHappy]

Most of the local libraries have meeting rooms, open to residents, for informational purposes.

Set up a meeting. Have an agenda.

But, be prepared for the ignorance to come to you.

PLease let us know where, and when, and how it comes out.

At the Sudbury Gun Violence forum, I answered a question from the audience (that I was a part of), just to show that Jim Wallace was not alone on the Pro2A side.

The question was (spoken in a read-to-cry, breathy way) "Why would anyone want to shoot a semi-automatic weapon?"


I started out by objecting to the term "Weapon". Even the LTC does not use that word! It's onlty a weapon when it's employed against another..... and so on, from there.

It's' Reason v. Emotion. A friend tried to talk to a co-worker, and the response was, "I just want to feel the way I feel!"

That's the problem - they don't want to know, they just want to feel. It's hard to educate feelings.

 

[Rider]

So, how come the pro-rights side is not having this forum? It seems there are two or three a week held by the other side, with all the press announcements, etc.

It would sure be nice to be having a "conversation" where actual facts are used.

Just wondering.

Because the people organizing these things are the local politicians or educators whose agenda is more gun control. You can organize whatever you want, but unless a politician or community leader headlines it and encourages people to come, it's just going to be you and a few NES-folk standing in the parking lot of a Dunkin' Donuts because no schools or towns will give you space.

 

[crazymjb]

Why even have a conversation? I don't get it, there isn't a problem. There's an extreme minority of evil people that can and will always do evil things. Why are we going to restructure anything? To prevent the unpreventable?

In some cases yes,

Things like our inner cities being war zones can be fixed though. It just takes a lot of work.

Mike

 

[seth72]

Common sense tells us that gun laws do not reduce violence. Thats why.

I don't think there is anything more to it than that.

 

[seth72]

Things like our inner cities being war zones can be fixed though. It just takes a lot of work.

Please tell us how. Because it seems that this has been a problem since mankind adopted the concept of society. And, it hasn't been solved in thousands of years. So, if you've got the answer, there is a whole hell of a lot of us waiting to hear about it.

 

[pernox]

*snip*

The question was (spoken in a read-to-cry, breathy way) "Why would anyone want to shoot a semi-automatic weapon?"


I started out by objecting to the term "Weapon". Even the LTC does not use that word! It's onlty a weapon when it's employed against another..... and so on, from there.
*snip*

All the credit in the world to you for taking on idiots in a public venue - and please don't take this personally, as it's not just you. I understand the viewpoint, but disagree strongly.

Why are so many people so scared to call a gun a weapon? That's what it is; a tool used to kill another living creature that needs killing. Clearly there are other uses, as I've shot all my guns a lot but never killed anything with them, and most here can say the same - at least as far as another human is concerned. Make no mistake, though; the purpose of guns and the right to own them is to kill another living being - another human, really. Hunting is secondary to the right to protect yourself, your liberty, and your family violently if need be.

Killing people is what guns were invented for. Pooh-pooh'ing the whole thing and making guns seem "less killy" to the idiots is sort of like a gun buyback; you legitimize the notion that it's okay to question the right of a man to take another man's life if in defense of family, life, or liberty. Also legitimized is the notion that the state can regulate your ability to do so by whatever means you deem appropriate. Frankly, I think the gun should be referred to as a weapon as often as possible if only to remind people what the purpose is of the tool in question. Guns at their basest element are not toys, hobbies, sporting equipment, or a means of gathering food. They're not wall-hangers, mantle decorations, or the thing you whip out and clean when Sally brings home her first boyfriend. Although they can fill these roles, that's not what they're really for.

They're a tool to make sure the bad guy eats it before you do.

 

[milktree]

Please tell us how. Because it seems that this has been a problem since mankind adopted the concept of society. And, it hasn't been solved in thousands of years. So, if you've got the answer, there is a whole hell of a lot of us waiting to hear about it.

It's not simple or easy, or it'd have been done by now.

The first step is to recognize that inner city violence and crime is an economic and social problem, not a gun problem, and that "more cops on the street" isn't the answer. It might include things that are distasteful for many on NES like improvements in education (which is publicly funded) and basic infrastructure.

 

[calsdad]

Most of the local libraries have meeting rooms, open to residents, for informational purposes.

Set up a meeting. Have an agenda.

But, be prepared for the ignorance to come to you.

PLease let us know where, and when, and how it comes out.

At the Sudbury Gun Violence forum, I answered a question from the audience (that I was a part of), just to show that Jim Wallace was not alone on the Pro2A side.

The question was (spoken in a read-to-cry, breathy way) "Why would anyone want to shoot a semi-automatic weapon?"


I started out by objecting to the term "Weapon". Even the LTC does not use that word! It's onlty a weapon when it's employed against another..... and so on, from there.

It's' Reason v. Emotion. A friend tried to talk to a co-worker, and the response was, "I just want to feel the way I feel!"

That's the problem - they don't want to know, they just want to feel. It's hard to educate feelings.

You need to be prepared to look people in the eye and say with utter seriousness: " I feel like you are an idiot and an a**h*** and your stupidity is making me uncomfortable".

 

[calsdad]

It's not simple or easy, or it'd have been done by now.

The first step is to recognize that inner city violence and crime is an economic and social problem, not a gun problem, and that "more cops on the street" isn't the answer. It might include things that are distasteful for many on NES like improvements in education (which is publicly funded) and basic infrastructure.

We've been trying that whole "improve education" thing for decades now - and the "problems" have only gotten worse.

If you were to say improve education by getting the government out of it entirely - I might take you seriously. But uttering the phrase "improve education" has just become a code-word used among liberals for "we're going to tax the shit out of you and piss the money away and accomplish nothing"