• Mossberg Owners is in the process of upgrading the software. Please bear with us while we transition to the new look and new upgraded software.

Question of the Month. October 2014

ripjack13

ripjack13

Resident Sawdust Maker
Staff member
Administrator
Supporter
"Philanthropist"
Howdy,
This is a monthly series of questions topic for everyone to join in on the discussion. Some of the later questions may have a poll, and some will not. Don't be shy now, go ahead and post an answer and vote in the polls...


How Would You Win the Gun Control Debate?



**Rules**
There is no minimum post requirement. :D
 
Oli....that is a great answer. If only they would...
 
I guess shooting the opponent would not be a good answer...I believe that arguing gun control with an avid controllist (a new word I just invented) would be like arguing eating meat with an avid vegetarian. You can't win. Those on the fence could be convinced but you would need to have all the facts and not let it become a heated argument. One-on-one discussion is better than a crowd...one of the best lines I've heard came from "Men in Black"--"A person is smart. People are stupid." The crowd mentality takes over.

You have to have a grasp on what the other side is arguing and be able to work around their "facts" without repeating yourself. They have all heard all the canned responses and are probably better schooled by the anti groups to rebut anything we bring up.

But you definitely need to have a cool head and discuss as opposed to fighting for your position. And you have to know when to walk away...
 
I tend to surround myself with like minded individuals.
MOSTLY when defending our side it is when talking with elected officials.
These talks never last that long since my points are ALWAYS falling on deaf ears.
That is unless they are on our side.
 
There is no debate. People either accept that with freedom there comes inherent risk or they don't.

I have discussed, debated and outright argued with many an anti over the years. I've yet to make a single one think outside their box.

On the flip side I have convinced many a fence sitter that guns aren't as bad as they think. There are a ones in the middle, they may be scared of guns but don't feel they should be outright banned. These are the people that are open enough to change if provided the right conditions. The best way to do this is take them to a range and let them shoot a .22 and work up from there. It's amazing how much their perceptions changes when they actually experience that which they question. For those that are so entrenched that they are unwilling to try this, there is no hope to change. I will note that handing a fist timer a 12 gauge or a .50 cal makes for good YouTube fodder but does not help the goal here)
 
The people that don't like guns are generally polar opposite of me on almost every political issue that I can think of. Others above noted the differences and divide.

To win the gun debate in my way would take a huge shift back to where I think we need to be as a nation. Education needs to go back to where it was and get the feds out. We need personal accountability. We need media that reports news and does not make everything political commentary. At a minimum the two major parties need their teeth pulled and reminded who they work for. At the maximum they need to be removed from operating. The administrative and legislative branches need spanked back to where they belong and it isn't making and choosing laws to enforce. That will win the gun debate as well as many others. If any liberals don't like it I am willing to part with some land mass for them to have their own country. They can have the southern 3/4 or so of California for their socialist paradise, my apologies to any CA members reading this but we will have some nice places for you to live too and no bullet buttons.

Good one for October Ripjack, you have outdone yourself.
 
Even gun owners are hard to get to sometimes. "Oh, I have a brand X pistol. I don't see why anyone needs an AR." Or I'm always busting their balls about supporting companies that don't support our rights, like B.W.W.
 
OhioArcher said:
Even gun owners are hard to get to sometimes. "Oh, I have a brand X pistol. I don't see why anyone needs an AR." Or I'm always busting their balls about supporting companies that don't support our rights, like B.W.W.
Click to expand...

When I proudly showed my dad the first AR I put together, his response was "Why the **** do you need something like that?" Pointing out the fact that functionally it was no different than the .308 he deer hunts with or the Rem 1100 he duck hunted with did little to change the mood. We no longer discuss guns .....or politics.

Ironically I just saw a list on another web site of all the archery companies that sell crossbows or crossbow accessories AND also support P&Y who refuses to allow crossbow kills in the or record books. Some have even worked to get crossbows removed from the archery seasons where they are allowed.
 
MikeD said:
When I proudly showed my dad the first AR I put together, his response was "Why the **** do you need something like that?" Pointing out the fact that functionally it was no different than the .308 he deer hunts with or the Rem 1100 he duck hunted with did little to change the mood. We no longer discuss guns .....or politics.

Ironically I just saw a list on another web site of all the archery companies that sell crossbows or crossbow accessories AND also support P&Y who refuses to allow crossbow kills in the or record books. Some have even worked to get crossbows removed from the archery seasons where they are allowed.
Click to expand...

I have little respect for P&Y and B&C for other reasons, mainly the good ole boy politics in whether or not to accept a certain trophy but that is for another thread. You're right, though. Why support those who do not support you?
 
MikeD said:
When I proudly showed my dad the first AR I put together, his response was "Why the **** do you need something like that?" Pointing out the fact that functionally it was no different than the .308 he deer hunts with or the Rem 1100 he duck hunted with did little to change the mood. We no longer discuss guns .....or politics.

Ironically I just saw a list on another web site of all the archery companies that sell crossbows or crossbow accessories AND also support P&Y who refuses to allow crossbow kills in the or record books. Some have even worked to get crossbows removed from the archery seasons where they are allowed.
Click to expand...

We often get the NEED word thrown in our faces don't we ?

My answer to those people is this................

I do not have to justify NEED of anything to anybody, especially to lying self serving politicians. If I WANT an AR15 or a new 180mph motorcycle I will go out and buy one with MY hard earned money.

NEED doesn't come into it !

People have to justify NEED to dictators like in North Korea or Syria, where you NEED a pair of shoes to walk to the factory to earn just enough money that you NEED to not starve to death.

China one child only, because you do not NEED more than one child.

Once we allow ourselves to be frogmarched down the "NEED ROAD" by politicians or anybody else where does it stop ?

Bloody hell NO............... STUFF THAT !!!!

We didn't fight two world wars to live in a country like that.

NEED.............................well BOLLOCKS to that. A British expression, look it up.
 
Last edited:
MikeD said:
On the flip side I have convinced many a fence sitter that guns aren't as bad as they think...The best way to do this is take them to a range and let them shoot a .22 and work up from there.
Click to expand...

Yup, I've done this plenty of times... :) Then the BUG will bite! :D (they become an eNthUsiasT!) ;)

Not to go OT too much but if you are curious where your elected (or wannabe elected) official stands, go to this LINK and look up your state. I have been using the NRA-PVF guide for years. If a candidate is rated "F" (bad), even the promise of a "chicken in every pot" OR just plain "pot" ;) will not make this person an acceptable candidate EVER! F-rated is someone who wants to take away your guns, plain and simple, and they CANNOT be trusted! :mad:
 
Last edited:
You can't rationalize with someone who has an irrational fear of something. You'd have to actually have an intellectual conversation to win a debate... these people want no part of an intellectual conversation.

Sorry to break it down like that.
 
LAZY EYED SNIPER said:
By first accepting that there is no debate.

There is only what IS and what some misguided souls want there to be. By engaging in debate one has already given the opposition power by acknowledging that the topic is up for discussion...
Click to expand...

Agreed. I have stated similar thoughts about many things that seem to be debated today. To engage in the discussion lends credibility to the question.

I often hear the something like, " I don't know if it is a good idea, but I would like to have the conversation". Many times I cringe inside when I hear this. I'm not against debate of issues, I just think that it is a slippery slope from conversation to consideration and later to compromise of things that shouldn't be compromised.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top