View Full Version : This is what we fight against.
The mother of a very close friend of mine has been posting a lot of anti gun feel good stuff on facebook lately. Overall she is a very intelligent woman that I really respect.
I have been trying to use logic to debate with her and make her think outside of what she thinks she knows.
However today she posted this gem
And the first amendment says...pursuit of life, liberty and happiness..that got taken away from those kids..and the second amendment is NOT part of the bill of rights.
How can we debate or argue with people that have such a fundamental lack of understanding of our countries founding documents and ideals.
...
How can we debate or argue with people that have such a fundamental lack of understanding of our countries founding documents and ideals.
And then get pissed off when they are proven wrong, oops sorry non-PC term there, insert "proven to be not correct" and bury their head further into the sand, or other such non-sun shiny places. Answer is we can't. Even if they were attacked by a thug and saved by someone with a firearm, they'd still side with the criminal and say that he became what he was because of misguided youth, social inequity and the financial policies of Ronald Reagan and that the armed citizen had no right to intervene.
Most anti's can't be reasoned with. It's hard to argue with someone so irrational.
Sent from my DROID X2 using Tapatalk 2
And then get pissed off when they are proven wrong, oops sorry non-PC term there, insert "proven to be not correct" and bury their head further into the sand, or other such non-sun shiny places. Answer is we can't. Even if they were attacked by a thug and saved by someone with a firearm, they'd still side with the criminal and say that he became what he was because of misguided youth, social inequity and the financial policies of Ronald Reagan and that the armed citizen had no right to intervene.
Why I am afraid to use any gun for HD here in the People's Republik.
The people who listen to Barry and Biden, and actually believe them, are a lost cause. I have never heard anything more stupid come out of the mouth of a human being than listening to these "Progressives," or whatever they are labeled, speak.
Most anti's can't be reasoned with. It's hard to argue with someone so irrational.
Sent from my DROID X2 using Tapatalk 2
Some are quite irrational indeed, although at least she isn't a hypocrite that will call the police that carry GUNS.
http://gunssavelives.net/blog/video-anti-gun-woman-says-she-would-rather-die-than-use-a-gun-to-defend-herself/#
She is running her statements on emotion.
If you want to break through to her, I think that you should also re-frame your point on that emotional level.
Here, this random blog post (https://alphaisassumed.wordpress.com/2013/01/28/example-of-a-technique/) explains it better than I can. I hope it makes sense.
Straight Shooter
03-02-13, 15:38
Yall have got to someday realize.....you cant.
There are people who you will NEVER EVER EVER change their minds.
Now, that takes a second to sink in. "IF I just say this....or do this...or, I bet she doesnt know this or that".
Gents...listen to me now....THERE ARE PEOPLE, RIGHT NOW, IN GOVERNMENT NO LESS, WHO WOULD ARGUE WITH JEFFERESON, MADISON,ADAMS, WASHINGTON, ect, ect, IF THEY COULD COME BACK ALIVE FOR A TIME. THEY WOULD TELL THEM THEY ARE WRONG, THATS NOT WHAT THEY MEANT.
Just like the Bible says too...there will be people shaking their fists, cursing and STILL denying Christ when He appears out of the parting clouds in the east.
It is hard to accept you cannot make them understand, but you cant.
Most anti's can't be reasoned with. It's hard to argue with someone so irrational.
Sent from my DROID X2 using Tapatalk 2
Considering the educational indoctrination and media propaganda is creating a majority of the voting public that think irrationally, what are we to do?
sure she also says the sequester was %100 the republicans and obama had nothing to do with it !
Moose-Knuckle
03-02-13, 16:17
"You can't fix stupid." - Ron White
ICANHITHIMMAN
03-02-13, 16:20
just keep telling her she is wrong or cut her off from your facebook
The mother of a very close friend of mine has been posting a lot of anti gun feel good stuff on facebook lately. Overall she is a very intelligent woman that I really respect...
Why do you hold her in such high regard? Does she save kittens or something?
I'm not even going to touch the first part of that sentence about her being very intelligent.
Why do you hold her in such high regard? Does she save kittens or something?
I'm not even going to touch the first part of that sentence about her being very intelligent.
Actually yes she has kittens.. :P
She was a paralegal. And I have had discussions with her where she has proven to be extremely intelligent. She raised all 3 of her children well. And the family is overall pretty conservative. That is one reason I am so shocked to see all this from her.
But yeah on this topic she is just blinded... It amazes me.
I figure if she is this off by somethng you know to be true ! What else is she majorly off on!
Crow Hunter
03-02-13, 17:20
The mother of a very close friend of mine has been posting a lot of anti gun feel good stuff on facebook lately. Overall she is a very intelligent woman that I really respect.
I have been trying to use logic to debate with her and make her think outside of what she thinks she knows.
However today she posted this gem
How can we debate or argue with people that have such a fundamental lack of understanding of our countries founding documents and ideals.
Get her a copy of the Constitution and ask her to show you were you are wrong.
Then ask her, what she will do when a 200 lb guy kicks in her back door when she is home by herself.
Right after she posted that I put up the text of the bill of rights and a link to them. She hasn't responded since. Although her husband has since posted asking reasonable questions for someone not into guns about the definition of arms. (What defines an arm within the constitution, etc)
"You can't fix stupid." - Ron White
I would have just came back with "you're a special kinda stupid, ain't ya?".
montanadave
03-02-13, 20:00
She "was" a paralegal.
Now that part of the story makes perfect sense. :lol:
I would have just came back with "you're a special kinda stupid, ain't ya?".
You can't fix stupid. You can only numb it with a 2x4.
ETA: that probably still wouldn't help.
I wonder what these Jellyfish would rather do....
Take responsibility for their personal protection and well being, and take the time to train with a weapon in order to protect themselves in the rare event they are in a situation where it is warranted.
OR fall to their knees and beg for their life.
Well nevermind, I answered my own question. These people are JELLYFISH. Spineless, domesticated, piles of goop (who may or may not be wearing TOMS shoes and vibrant pastel colors). Incapable of mentally accepting that there is pure evil in this world that is more than happy to prey upon weak naive Jellyfish like themselves.
There is no changing them, they've been brainwashed since birth by both their parents and big brother. The only thing we can do is make sure they dont take OUR ability to protect ourselves away from us.
People do funny things sometimes.
I remember the zodiac killer found a couple and at gunpoint forced the female to tie up her boyfriend. He then tied her up. Keep in mind he promised them both if they did what he said he wouldn't hurt them. And of course they surrendered any opportunity to try and save themselves in the process.
He then raped the female in front of the boyfriend and then stabbed the boyfriend to death in front of the female. He then stabbed the female believing he had killed her. The zodiac killer didn't want to just "kill" people and he wasn't interested in shooting them. He was interested in torturing people (physically and psychologically) and prolonging their agony as much as possible.
She lived long enough to describe what happened to them when they were found.
Now logic would inform the average person that "if he has a gun" he doesn't need to tie us up unless he plans on doing something even worse than shooting us.
But not everyone has or uses logic. And sadly there are thousands of people who would be willing to tie up their boyfriend and then be tied up themselves, as long as you promise you won't hurt them.
Get her a copy of the Constitution and ask her to show you were you are wrong.
Then ask her, what she will do when a 200 lb guy kicks in her back door when she is home by herself.
I asked this very question to our departmental office manager in about 1985 when "stun guns" were all the vogue. She said "but what if I stunned him and he dies".. So, there ya-go.. Ron
Had an unfortunate situation with someone very close to me when they too posted some anti-gun posts not long after Sandy Hook. This person posted an article where Justice Scalia said the 2A doesn't protect "assualt weapons" and another about Gen McChrystal saying we should ban assault weapons. Anyways, I normally keep my facebook non-confrontational, non-political, but this was bugging the shit out of me, and I made a few quick replies before leaving for work about how there is no such thing as assault weapons, and the firearms they are referring to are very rarely used in crime, and furthermore criminals rarely obtain their weapons legally, so all these bans would do is punish the law-abiding citizens.
I didn't think much of it, knowing this person as a very well-educated individual and well-informed as well, my response wouldn't be a huge deal. Boy was I wrong. My posts were deleted with a "how dare you post on my page" attitude, and told that there was no place for ranting and repeating of Limbaugh and Hannity rhetoric based on complete lies. Furthermore I was told that this person has no objection to private firearm ownership, but these weapons are much too deadly and have no place on the streets of a civilized society. I was also told that I was making stuff up saying that Obama and Feinstein want to ban and confiscate all private firearms.
I was seeing red at this point, and I was quite hurt that someone so close to me, and whom I respect so highly thought so little of me and point of view. I remained calm however, and said I would be more than happy to back up all of claims and then some, if so desired, and would be looked at with an open mind. I was given a yes to this, and I got to work.
A few weeks later I emailed a 10+ page essay with full citations, expert opinions, FBI and DoJ facts, and so on. I gave a history of the AR-15, ballistic comparisons of 5.56 and other common rounds, the whole works.
I honestly don't think that my essay and the accompanying links were given a full review, as I rather quickly was given a reply that bashed the NRA, and I was told I was disrespectful for suggesting this person may be ideological on this issue, and not likely swayed from their position. I was also told that there was non interest in a political discussion, and we would just have to agree to disagree.
everyusernametaken
03-02-13, 21:27
It's possible for intelligent people to opt to be ignorant of certain things, especially when it's something they fear or which goes against their interests. This lady clearly has no reservations about "informing" like-minded individuals, regardless of the fact that she isn't knowledgeable or experienced with the subject matter. Those who want to vilify guns have no interest in educating themselves on any of the relevant issues. If they are speaking to a similarly-ignorant audience, it doesn't much matter whether their arguments have merit. They achieve their goal in spite of a complete lack of sound reasoning, so why would they bother to do any research of verify their facts?
Crow Hunter
03-02-13, 22:58
My sister-in-law told my wife that she didn't think that all guns should be banned.
Just "bad guns".
My wife, her sister, asked how she could just the moral character of an inanimate object?
Of course, this flew completely over the head of my, Dr. of Music Theory SIL....
Considering she has probably fired a grand total of 5 rounds out of any gun in her entire life, grew up and lived a 100% "white bread" life and been a teacher/Ivory Tower of Academia dweller most of her adult life, all guns are "bad".
I'm arriving at an important realization.
There really are some people who SHOULD NOT have guns. And anyone who thinks guns should be banned, or that there are "bad kinds" of guns...should NOT HAVE ANY GUNS AT ALL.
If you are stating that you are a "safe person" with a shotgun, but nobody needs an "AR15" then we must assume that an AR15 will make THAT PERSON a BAD PERSON TOO. As a result we shouldn't risk them becoming that potential BAD PERSON.
If you aren't ready to accept the responsibility of being a safe and good person with an AR-15, AK-47, MP5, Barrett .50, Browning M2, GE Mini Gun, etc. then you should NOT be allowed to own firearms at all.
If a "gun" can make you a "bad person" you shouldn't even have a butter knife. These are the people who should be precluded from owning any firearm.
People do funny things sometimes....
...Now logic would inform the average person that "if he has a gun" he doesn't need to tie us up unless he plans on doing something even worse than shooting us.
But not everyone has or uses logic. And sadly there are thousands of people who would be willing to tie up their boyfriend and then be tied up themselves, as long as you promise you won't hurt them.
I't what I like to call the "turn the other cheek mentality"- if we're nice to them they'll be nice to us. :rolleyes:
Had an unfortunate situation with someone very close to me when they too posted some anti-gun posts not long after Sandy Hook. This person posted an article where Justice Scalia said the 2A doesn't protect "assualt weapons" and another about Gen McChrystal saying we should ban assault weapons. Anyways, I normally keep my facebook non-confrontational, non-political, but this was bugging the shit out of me, and I made a few quick replies before leaving for work about how there is no such thing as assault weapons, and the firearms they are referring to are very rarely used in crime, and furthermore criminals rarely obtain their weapons legally, so all these bans would do is punish the law-abiding citizens.
I didn't think much of it, knowing this person as a very well-educated individual and well-informed as well, my response wouldn't be a huge deal. Boy was I wrong. My posts were deleted with a "how dare you post on my page" attitude, and told that there was no place for ranting and repeating of Limbaugh and Hannity rhetoric based on complete lies. Furthermore I was told that this person has no objection to private firearm ownership, but these weapons are much too deadly and have no place on the streets of a civilized society. I was also told that I was making stuff up saying that Obama and Feinstein want to ban and confiscate all private firearms.
I was seeing red at this point, and I was quite hurt that someone so close to me, and whom I respect so highly thought so little of me and point of view. I remained calm however, and said I would be more than happy to back up all of claims and then some, if so desired, and would be looked at with an open mind. I was given a yes to this, and I got to work.
A few weeks later I emailed a 10+ page essay with full citations, expert opinions, FBI and DoJ facts, and so on. I gave a history of the AR-15, ballistic comparisons of 5.56 and other common rounds, the whole works.
I honestly don't think that my essay and the accompanying links were given a full review, as I rather quickly was given a reply that bashed the NRA, and I was told I was disrespectful for suggesting this person may be ideological on this issue, and not likely swayed from their position. I was also told that there was non interest in a political discussion, and we would just have to agree to disagree.
You know, back when I was first starting college I had to do a research paper. I had always had an interest in guns, but didnt' really have a grasp on the big issues pertaining to it, such as the various laws and bans (still no expert), so I decided to do my paper on that topic and went out and did the usual bunch of research on the topic.
The thing that drove me to overwhelmingly support the "pro" side, was what you just described. The anti crowd just had no point.
They would come up with a plan/law/theory to "stop gun violence" or whatever their theme of the month was, and the "pro" crowd would show up with facts and logic (most of the time...:p ) and shoot it down.
And the anti response once proven wrong- EVERY time- was to immediately devolve into personal/emotional attacks, and name calling. There was literally no discussion to be had with them unless it was all their way.
Looking at it today, I wonder why with that quality of opponent the "pro" crowd hasn't handed the "antis" a solid drubbing- and then I realize it's because there's to damn many of them! :suicide2:
parishioner
03-03-13, 02:01
Have her read this. If she possess the ability to think rationally and considerably then she will have no problem comprehending this:https://www.m4carbine.net/showthread.php?t=125123
I asked this very question to our departmental office manager in about 1985 when "stun guns" were all the vogue. She said "but what if I stunned him and he dies".. So, there ya-go.. Ron
I'm no expert on tasers, but I was of the opinion that once you're hit, there is physically nothing you can do because it messed up your nerves.
Then I saw a video of Paul Howe hit by a taser, fight through it and 2 people holding him back to plant a rubber knife on the neck of the officer who fired the taser.
I mean Paul Howe isn't normal by any means, but I didn't know that was physiologically possible.
Had an unfortunate situation with someone very close to me when they too posted some anti-gun posts not long after Sandy Hook. This person posted an article where Justice Scalia said the 2A doesn't protect "assualt weapons" and another about Gen McChrystal saying we should ban assault weapons. Anyways, I normally keep my facebook non-confrontational, non-political, but this was bugging the shit out of me, and I made a few quick replies before leaving for work about how there is no such thing as assault weapons, and the firearms they are referring to are very rarely used in crime, and furthermore criminals rarely obtain their weapons legally, so all these bans would do is punish the law-abiding citizens.
I didn't think much of it, knowing this person as a very well-educated individual and well-informed as well, my response wouldn't be a huge deal. Boy was I wrong. My posts were deleted with a "how dare you post on my page" attitude, and told that there was no place for ranting and repeating of Limbaugh and Hannity rhetoric based on complete lies. Furthermore I was told that this person has no objection to private firearm ownership, but these weapons are much too deadly and have no place on the streets of a civilized society. I was also told that I was making stuff up saying that Obama and Feinstein want to ban and confiscate all private firearms.
I was seeing red at this point, and I was quite hurt that someone so close to me, and whom I respect so highly thought so little of me and point of view. I remained calm however, and said I would be more than happy to back up all of claims and then some, if so desired, and would be looked at with an open mind. I was given a yes to this, and I got to work.
A few weeks later I emailed a 10+ page essay with full citations, expert opinions, FBI and DoJ facts, and so on. I gave a history of the AR-15, ballistic comparisons of 5.56 and other common rounds, the whole works.
I honestly don't think that my essay and the accompanying links were given a full review, as I rather quickly was given a reply that bashed the NRA, and I was told I was disrespectful for suggesting this person may be ideological on this issue, and not likely swayed from their position. I was also told that there was non interest in a political discussion, and we would just have to agree to disagree.
Until recently I've always kept politics out of my social internet activity. Not anymore. The last shooting was a game changer. Before now there was a much smaller group of antis or at least they weren't nearly as vocal. Social media is helping them spread their half truths a lot faster than ever before. Now even people that you would've thought had a great deal of common sense have been blinded and guilted into feeling somehow responsible for this. If you don't want to pass laws to protect children you're somehow a heartless animal that doesn't deserve certain rights.
The Bath School massacre of 1927 was deadlier than Sandy Hook with 38 elementary school children and six adults killed and over 50 more wounded. The overall death toll was 45. You never hear about this because it was a bombing and doesn't fit a political agenda. The fallout and panic didn't create laws to stop McVeigh and Nichols. Why are people still not furious that "enough wasn't done" to stop them?
What bothers me is some of my family wonder why I'm so suddenly animated about this as if I'M the one who's suddenly had a knee-jerk reaction to current events. They don't see the harm in law makers doing SOMETHING. State after state is slicing away rights as we speak and it seems like the snowball won't slow down anytime soon let alone stop.
If you say or post anything in social media about the Bill of Rights or liberty you're looked at as an anarchist, secession, or dooms day prepper that's paranoid "they" are going to take all of your guns away. Travis Haley posted one of the calmest and well thought out videos I've seen in a while. I'd encourage anyone who hasn't seen it to watch it. We all need to keep our rage as focused on the enemy in times like these. As tiring and divisive as it may get, we have to keep fighting lies and cowardice with facts.
Magic_Salad0892
03-03-13, 06:16
Then I saw a video of Paul Howe hit by a taser, fight through it and 2 people holding him back to plant a rubber knife on the neck of the officer who fired the taser.
I wanna see. Got a link?
I wanna see. Got a link?
It's the combat mindset video by panteao. Let me see what I can do.
gunrunner505
03-03-13, 07:46
I like to ask the anti crowd what if the feds wanted to remove freedom of speech or the press? I hear a lot of they can't do that, it's in the bill of rights! No shit.....
Sent from my SCH-I510 using Tapatalk 2
I'm arriving at an important realization.
There really are some people who SHOULD NOT have guns. And anyone who thinks guns should be banned, or that there are "bad kinds" of guns...should NOT HAVE ANY GUNS AT ALL.
If you are stating that you are a "safe person" with a shotgun, but nobody needs an "AR15" then we must assume that an AR15 will make THAT PERSON a BAD PERSON TOO. As a result we shouldn't risk them becoming that potential BAD PERSON.
If you aren't ready to accept the responsibility of being a safe and good person with an AR-15, AK-47, MP5, Barrett .50, Browning M2, GE Mini Gun, etc. then you should NOT be allowed to own firearms at all.
If a "gun" can make you a "bad person" you shouldn't even have a butter knife. These are the people who should be precluded from owning any firearm.
I love this, I really think you are on to something.
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.