Do Anti Gunners Really Think This?

[OneArgus]

I was having a pretty civil conversation in group of people whom are mostly John Stewart fans. And follow his ideology.
So after talking with a few of them, I thought hmmm on what they thought.

So I can maybe count one time I open carried a AR, it was on my way to target shoot.
Now I always CC 24/7 when I am out anywhere. Yet that doesn't seem to bother the anti-crowd as much as
the AR or AK I might own.

I am also willing to bet out side of employment by some here. That 99.9% of you do not open carry a rifle each day over CC for defense?
Not only this. But the time most would use that style rifle is if you enter our private domicile? But the rarity of this is huge.
I own a large truck, beefy suspension, solid older truck. If I was a nut and hopped a curb, I could easily take out a few dozen obstacles in seconds.
yet no one is banning cars or trucks. Yet the rifle that may be use in rare instances is a problem.

I think the reason we can not have civil conversations about firearms with Antis, is they arm themselves with the view all gun owners are Call Of Duty Snipers.
And wait with their ARs on street corners take down those whom did not vote for Trump. Which is a whole other conversation that they assume Trump is progun.
And all firearm owners vote for him.
Quite the level of chaos out there.

Argus.

Read More

 

[RVTECH]

I think the reason we can not have civil conversations about firearms with Antis, is they arm themselves with the view all gun owners are Call Of Duty Snipers.

The biggest problem with ANTIs is like nearly all liberal concepts - they follow them with a 'groupthink' mentality.

They believe the opinions, thoughts, actions of a few 'leaders' of the cause and follow it to wherever it goes.

As I have said many times before - gun control is purely 'conceptual' with antis. They stand to loose nothing while WE stand to lose a lot - and nothing to lose is a pretty powerful position to be in.

 

[RX-79G]

Most of the people favoring banning AR15s are largely having a visceral reaction to their occasional and seemingly preferred use to mow down children, and how efficiently they seem to do so.

They don't see what upside makes that connection to the worst mass shootings worth protecting that kind of gun.



I'm sure other people with more devious agendas look for the support of people who just want to school shootings to stop, but that doesn't mean that the majority of those anti-AW folks have any complex rationale for their revulsion.

 

[Dozer99]

Most Anti's and especially the John Stewart crowd are taught to have trigger words or trigger que's (ie. AR or AK weapons). They don't rationally think through their thoughts nor do they use logic to understand that neither an AR or AK are the best close in weapons choices. They only see them as evil black rifles and as such should be banned. Your truck would do far more damage at a parade and a 12 gauge Shotgun with a mag extension and 00 buck would do far more damage in a crowded room. However your truck and Grandpa's shotgun are not viewed as objects of hate and thus do not create a trigger. So for what it's worth, the Anti-crowd is illogical in their thinking and it is hard for us to change that mentality.

 

[RX-79G]

a 12 gauge Shotgun with a mag extension and 00 buck would do far more damage in a crowded room.

Yet that doesn't seem to happen with any regularity.

 

[msgriff]

 

[RX-79G]

View attachment 1449795

Imagine, if you will, a pro-2A advocate tired of the nonsense other pro-2A tell each other as they lose ground, year after year.

 

[CamoDeafie]

Rhetorical Questions. Are the States that ban the likes of ARs also Constitutional/Permitless Carry States?

I have to say.. no.

Are the States that ban ARs run by a Party that has a letter R in them?

Also.. no, not to my knowledge. Name at least one?

Have any of these States followed/obeyed Bruen to the letter?

Now this is going to be interesting


In 1991, only one State had Constitutional/Permitless Carry..

It's 2023 now and there are 26 more States with some form of Constitutional/Permitless carry on the books.

In 1994 the Federal AWB went into effect.

In 2001 it sunsetted.


In 1995 there was 266,278,393 people.

in 2020 there was 331,449,281 people.


The estimated number of guns of all types overall in the United States right now is over 400 million.



I have a question.

Do anti 2A advocates think the number of civilian owned firearms ought to go down to only the number of LE officers/personal security? IE, a drastic reduction to a few million.

 

[RX-79G]

Do anti 2A advocates think the number of civilian owned firearms ought to go down to only the number of LE officers/personal security? IE, a drastic reduction to a few million.

It's silly question, because there isn't one kind of "anti 2A advocate".

 

[Martini_Up]

Imagine, if you will, a pro-2A advocate tired of the nonsense other pro-2A tell each other as they lose ground, year after year.

If pro-2A advocates don't start a more "unrestricted / without limits" concept of the 2A, then it will go away along with the feast of the BOR.

Didnt Newsome of CA just propose the most restrictive controls on the 2A recently then claim, "while still maintaining the full rights of the 2A"? That's the kind of BS 2A have to look forward to, a 2A (and other BOR amendments) which actually have no freedoms of anything.

 

[RX-79G]

If pro-2A advocates don't start a more "unrestricted / without limits" concept of the 2A, then it will go away along with the feast of the BOR.

I disagree that advocating for the most extreme version of anything is the best way of achieving lasting popular support for it.

 

[CamoDeafie]

If pro-2A advocates don't start a more "unrestricted / without limits" concept of the 2A, then it will go away along with the feast of the BOR.

Didnt Newsome of CA just propose the most restrictive controls on the 2A recently then claim, "while still maintaining the full rights of the 2A"? That's the kind of BS 2A have to look forward to, a 2A (and other BOR amendments) which actually have no freedoms of anything.

Maybe in more of those 27 States that have Constitutional/Permitless carry, there ought to a popular, expansive, push to repeal NFA and GCA and Hughes Amendment of FOPA?

Pipe dream I know... because "I dun wanna crazies with F-15s and nookes everyware"

 

[red442joe]

Anti-gun people are mentally ill.
You know it, they know it, it's a fact.
They know they are mentally ill, and therefore "know" YOU are mentally ill.
You own a gun, openly carry a gun, and since they "know" you are mentally ill, know you are going to hurt people with your gun.
They know they are mentally ill, and would hurt people with a gun, therefore they "know" you WILL hurt people with your gun.
This is a fact, and it is indisputable.

Joe

 

[OneArgus]

Jon Stewart, says more children ( and thats under 18 as defined ) die due to firearms.
He is quoted as saying this.

Yet this is not backed by any documentation.
The number of child deaths per population is down the last 13 years and adds up to about 150,000 child deaths.
In that time about 35,000 died from gun related deaths. Of those less then 1% were school shootings.
Most shootings were gang related, and domestic, not school shootings.
However, if we only look at the deaths over population growth. ( what antis do) then more are dying from guns.

However when it comes to death of children by firearms, and percentage we are number 5 not number one.
The problem is that stats alone do not support pro- or anti positions. Simply because the information is tainted by those documenting it.
Hence they say that 53% of all children under 5 are now children of color. Meaning withing the next 20-30 years.
White population will be less then all other races combined. Is this true or not? Who knows.


I 100% think that children should never have access to firearm, unless under direct supervision.
When I was a kid the Sheriff came to our schools and taught safety. Id ride around with a 22lr strapped to my handlebars.
In California and no one cared.
Now we have no education at all. Therefore we need to restrict all access to children until or if we have training on safety.

I also would support banning all firearms, if I thought it would save the lives of all people. But as we know human history shows,
humans are violent, petty, lying sneaky, and evil. That will not change anytime soon. History is always written by the victors. And is also written by those with the most arms, and military. Those who usually lose were unarmed civilians. Yet. In our arrogance. We think disarming citizens makes us safe. It makes us subjects.

Argus.

 

[Longwalkhome]

It's just my opinion, there are a lot of folks out there that are told what to think and are just too lazy to think for themselves. Not just guns but a whole lot of subjects. It's easier to follow the crowd they want to be a part of.

 

[CLRTR999]

gun control is purely 'conceptual' with antis. They stand to lose nothing while WE stand to lose a lot - and nothing to lose is a pretty powerful position to be in.

Very good point

 

[Member 53328]

I could care less what they think or how they feel.

 

[coreymet]

Nice that it was a civil conversation. HOWEVER, did you invite any of them to go shooting with you so they are more informed about their "anti" stance? Start them with a .22 and work up from there. If you have one start them with a M&P 15-22. Show them that it is the same bullet a shoots from your standard .22 rifle. Just a "scarier" looking rifle. Then advance them to .223. Same with handguns, start low, work your way up.
Who knows, you may convert some into at "liberals with guns".

 

[Caveman Jim]

Nice that it was a civil conversation. HOWEVER, did you invite any of them to go shooting with you so they are more informed about their "anti" stance? Start them with a .22 and work up from there. If you have one start them with a M&P 15-22. Show them that it is the same bullet a shoots from your standard .22 rifle. Just a "scarier" looking rifle. Then advance them to .223. Same with handguns, start low, work your way up.
Who knows, you may convert some into at "liberals with guns".

How is that going to help protect our remaining 2A rights? Not flaming just a question.

 

[Member 53328]

How is that going to help protect our remaining 2A rights? Not flaming just a question.

It won't. Cause we have liberals on this forum who still vote for democrats/liberals/progressives who run on a promise of limiting access or removing firearms from society.

It's not a gun issue. It's an ideals issue. Until you can change the thought process on ethics/morals/rights putting a gun in someone's hands won't change a thing.