- Messages
- 320
- Reactions
- 266
That's exactly what I came into the discussion believing.I think you missed his point, and @IronMonster is a guy you can count on to have your back. Trust me.
My point was that someone makes a statement using hyperbole to make a point, and it's a good for that instance. Later, other people seize that exaggerated statement and make it doctrine. These exaggerations do no make us safer.
For example, some people take the rule, "Treat all guns like they are loaded until you confirm it is not" and dumb it down to, "All guns are always loaded". This dumbed down version of the rule is hyperbole to express the importance of checking the gun, and to emphasize the danger. But some people have made the dumb version the "rule". If I'm teaching a new shooter this "rule" and they later see me dry-firing or function checking the gun, then they can only conclude the "rule" is not a rule because only a total maniac would dry-fire or function check a loaded gun. A rule must be inviolate or it's not a rule but a suggestion. In the case of a new shooter, the hyperbole expressed as a rule makes them less safe, not more, because they are led to believe the rules can be ignored when they're inconvenient.
Likewise, unloaded guns do not go off; period. Yes, people who believed their gun was unloaded found out otherwise but repeating this exaggeration does not make us safer or advance our cause. You wouldn't deny that there are people who believe that guns 'just go off' and those are the people that side with the anti-gunners because of it.
IM might be a great guy, but preferring to ignore vs trying to understand says his mind is closed. Or maybe he doesn't know what hyperbole means? I found his reaction odd nevertheless.