Discussions with gun controllers

[Scarint]

Anyone got any advise? I've gotten myself (intentionally) into a couple arguments with gun control supports to try to find a tactic that will work for them.

What I've found is that they clam up whenever any of the following happens:
*Presented with facts counter to what they believe
*Presented with reasons their facts cannot be used
*Perspective is applied to their facts using something like car deaths vs gun deaths per capita
*Explaining the errors of the study and the bias (i.e. stats from the Assault Gun Ban)

They resort to name calling and insulting, and the worst part is they don't even realize they're doing it! Then they say that I'M name calling and insulting THEM! They get angry and swear...yet if I actually do any of that then I'M the sensitive emotional bad guy!

They claim my arguments are logical fallacies, and my facts are wrong, and I am misguided and immediately assume I belong in the "Dont Educate Me" group (his words)...but when I ask them to please educate me. Tell me of these logical fallacies, and correct my wrongs. They cannot do this, and they clam up.

Using classic arguments of facts and comparisons are deemed unfair logical fallacies, any common argument fails because they've heard them and ignored them already (if guns kill people, spoons make people fat; 2nd Amendment anything; guns don't kill people, people kill people; guns are just a tool; criminals don't obey laws; et al.)

Is there ANY way to get through to these people? Getting excited in the arguments only leads to them assuming I'm a fanatical, using words such as "ammosexual" to describe me (which is actually kinda neat, at least one of the definitions).

Read More

 

[IronMonster]

Your first mistake is thinking that they can be reasoned with

 

[Diamondback]

No, but what you can do is point out the hypocrisy of their leaders... "If *my* gun is so dangerous, what about Bloomberg's regiment of SS Stormtroopers or Paul Allen's SCUD missile?" Try to drive wedges between the leaders and followers that way.

The other option is, use them as "straight men" for a little impromptu street-theater... lol

 

[Riot]

What you will often see is that most of a gun control advocate's argument is based upon is EMOTION and the assumption that if there were no guns in the world then there wouldn't be murder.

"Save the children!"

That's the biggest argument I hear...more children die each year from poisoning from chemicals under the sink or drowning in the bath than they do from shootings, yet all we hear about is how bad guns are and how they need to be regulated more.

Most of their stats are skewed as well...anti-gun stats go by "homicides" instead of murders. Homicides include police shootings, suicides and negligence...hell if someone was shooting a firearm on the range and it blew up, flung a piece of the slide back and killed them- the Libtards would call it a homicide by a firearm and add it to their numbers.

The main thing is to stay on point, stay cool and remain mature about your topic. Don't get upset and resort to name calling- then they've won their argument (they'll just call you a psycho that won't reason).

I, personally, like to bring up an analogy about buying a pool.

Doesn't owning a pool increases your likelihood of drowning? Should owning a pool and having a child that has unmonitored access to the pool be a crime? Should there be a law requiring me to have to go through lifeguard training and water sanitation instruction if I want to own a pool? If I own a pool, does that mean I need to have a fence around and lock it to prevent people from having access to it? Or is having a pool a right since it's my property and I just need to simply be careful and teach my kids how to swim and be responsible since drowning is a danger?

If they won't meet you on this point, then there is no real point in talking with them anymore.

Getting cognitive thinking with someone pre-programed to think is difficult. However, if their argument is "yeah, yeah, we all heard about the 'spoons make me fat' speech" then throw it back at them.

"How about you shut off Rosie O'Donnell for a day and do some research, yourself?"

 

[IronMonster]

That is an excellent point. Facts dont translate well into feelings.

And I like the pool analogy

 

[Scarint]

The pool analogy is nice. I like that.

You're entirely right about it being emotional for them. It's entirely emotional, and an emotional dissenter will not listen to facts.Especially the same facts they've already heard and dismissed.

I even had one guy getting so upset he wanted to fight me! He wouldn't just come out and say it, it was more along the lines of "I bet you want to fight me, and I won't back away from it. I live Here on This street, Blue house. If you can't find it, ask around the neighborhood for Mr. Bigshot"...interestingly, there was nothing in the discussion prior to even imply that I was angry...they see things that aren't there!

There's got to be a way around that emotional block.

 

[IronMonster]

I don't think there is, you're assuming there's rational thought involved


Do you think you could convince a diehard Obama supporter to vote for Ron Paul?

 

[Scarint]

IronMonster, I think you're right. I just don't want to give up that easily.

 

[Trailboss]

I've come to realize that a gun controller's beliefs are just part of a larger religious belief system. All their friends think like they do. Group belief dictates that guns are bad, abortion is good, conservatives are bad, ISIS is good. Members of this religion enforce each other's beliefs and reject anyone with alternate beliefs. The only way to change a religious members view on gun control is to get them to leave their church so to speak. Doubtful they will as they loose all their friends.

 

[Riot]

There's got to be a way around that emotional block.

A lot of times it's bait...

Libtards will bring race into the argument then call you the racist.
Libtards will call you names then say you're the immature one.

I've only ever had decent interactions with one Liberal. Ever. He was very careful about what he said and how he said it...although we dissagreed more than not, even on some points I had to concede with his side of the fence (but then again, I'm a Libertarian, not a Conservative).

Be prepared to get into a lot of arguments...even with family.

My father is a Vietnam vet (volunteered, not drafted). He's a former city councilmen. He's also a business owner who had to work from the ground up to earn a living for us and turn a profit from nothing but his own hard work. He's also a deer hunter and a concealed permit holder for his Ruger 9mm pistol.

He's pro-military.
He's anti-union.
He's anti-minimum wage increases.
He's pro-flat tax.
He's anti-illegal immigration.

Yet every election, without fail, he votes Democrat.

Luckily, however, my mother votes Republican and nulls his vote...so there's that...but my point is that my father doesn't shut off the TV and listen to Pod-Casts or AM radio...he doesn't get on the internet and searches for things, himself, or make his own opinion.

Why? I have no idea. It's easier? He trusts that the "news" stations are unbias? He refuses to look past the CNN logo and realize that they're bought and paid for?

http://theeconomiccollapseblog.com/...trol-almost-everything-we-watch-hear-and-read

The six corporations that collectively control U.S. media today are Time Warner, Walt Disney, Viacom, Rupert Murdoch's News Corp., CBS Corporation and NBC Universal. Together, the "big six" absolutely dominate news and entertainment in the United States. But even those areas of the media that the "big six" do not completely control are becoming increasingly concentrated. For example, Clear Channel now owns over 1000 radio stations across the United States. Companies like Google, Yahoo and Microsoft are increasingly dominating the Internet.

Things have changed over the years, that's for certain. Money has exchanged hands and the once powerful and wealthy are even more powerful and more wealthy...so listening and reading past a few "news" lines doesn't cut it anymore. You have to do your own research and make your own opinion- otherwise all you're doing is blabbing off stuff you heard an hour earlier to make yourself seem intelligent.

The real scary part is when people take the opinion as fact and spread it as truth...that happens a lot, now-a-days and people will go to blows over what they believe...simply since that is much easier to do than to actually fact check anything.

My father and I don't talk politics anymore unless it's something I know we both will agree on (like how Chris Christy will be disastrous for the nation if he runs for the 2016 GOP nomination). My brothers and I don't talk much either...it sucks, they're family but I won't stop speaking out against things that are wrong and bring us closer to a nanny/police state in the name of safety/security.

If they want to live in a society free of random gun violence, protection from terrorism and the government to make their decisions for them then they need to denounce their US citizenship and move to North Korea...it's just that simple.

[/rant]

 

[bnsaibum]

Perhaps you are focusing on the wrong group. It is helpful to learn from your arguments with Bliss Ninnies to help improve how you debate. Then you can use your improved argument to reach people who are open to rational discussion.

 

[NoFlinch]

Your first mistake is thinking that they can be reasoned with

This is a simple, 100% accurate statement.

There are many I don't even attempt to attempt to open their minds. (NOT a mis-print)...

 

[Scarint]

Perhaps you are focusing on the wrong group. It is helpful to learn from your arguments with Bliss Ninnies to help improve how you debate. Then you can use your improved argument to reach people who are open to rational discussion.

This is actually my main goal. By KNOWING I'm going to "lose" then I can focus instead on the dynamics of the argument/discussion. See what does what; use that where I have a chance.

 

[RVTECH]

They claim my arguments are logical fallacies, and my facts are wrong, and I am misguided and immediately assume I belong in the "Dont Educate Me" group (his words)...but when I ask them to please educate me. Tell me of these logical fallacies, and correct my wrongs. They cannot do this, and they clam up.

You are describing my interactions with my very liberal cousin - to the point where we do not discuss ANYTHING political anymore because it always ends up this way. He takes it one step further however and always has to mention how FOX isn't 'real' news (even though I don't mention watching FOX - he assumes I do and am getting all my information from it) Like most libs however if it does not 'match' exactly what he thinks or believes he resorts to almost childlike tantrums and starts chastising anything 'right' or conservative, blames conservatives and republicans for everything - then clams up. The interesting thing however I have noticed is the double standard that exists - while most conservatives I know or have ever encountered seem to be open minded and WILL listen to and consider opinions both left or right but nearly ALL libs NEVER seem to listen to any 'right' or conservative views.

 

[BroncoFan]

I grew up on a hog farm in Idaho. My dad told me never to wrestle with a pig. You'll both get dirty and the pig will like it.

 

[Scarint]

I grew up on a hog farm in Idaho. My dad told me never to wrestle with a pig. You'll both get dirty and the pig will like it.

"Arguing with an engineer is like wrestling in the mud with a pig. After a few hours, you realize he likes it"

Well, I'm an engineer...and I don't mind getting a little dirty.

 

[Riot]

"When I buy pistachio nuts, I never waste my time prying open those nuts which are completely closed. It's more productive to spend my time with those that are partially open and willing to be opened further. And so it is with people's minds." - Michael Zarlenga

 

[IronMonster]

Screw that, I paid for the damn nut and will spend my last ounce of energy forcing it to bow to my will.

 

[defending fathers 1787]

It is important to engage all elements on the anti side. The glue that holds their belief system together is not the same for every demographic. One pillar can break the belief system even if it is not directly gun related. I have seen similar views in other parts of the country change. Plenty of New Yorkers who never drove a car or shot a gun have been enlightened once they were out of the bubble. It may be a little harder in the PNW, due to internal migration & bubble reinforcement from CA. For every diehard that you engage, you will be more prepared to inform more the rational people who are open to the facts. Any cause must move the numbers amongst all groups in order to have a long term victory.

***as far as FOX news goes...liberals need to be reminded that all networks have opinion based shows. Their real complaint is that is not admitted is that the other networks usually have a less politically diverse & smaller audience. ( The ratings show it)

 

[etrain16]

I enjoy a good discussion or debate with those that don't share my point of view - as long as they can keep themselves under control. Emotion usually gets the better of them. It used to get the better of me. Once I learned to control it, I had a much better time in those discussions. I try to be well prepared with facts, just like you mentioned, and that's what I present - facts and reason. When all they have to offer is emotion and insults, I know we're done. Some people won't be moved no matter how many facts they hear, no matter how many well-reasoned arguments are presented to them. When I meet those folks, I consider them a lost cause and move on in the hopes of finding people that will listen - they are the ones that are worth my time.

I think it's great that you want to stand up and fight for our rights. But it's also good to know when you're facing a lost cause. Save your best for those that are on the fence, and work to win them over. Good luck.