Political name calling... Just my opinion.

[shooter58]

Even a Pro 2A reader might not understand the intent of the statement.

Staying on topic, lately I have been seeing a lot of bumper stickers reading "Coexist". In theory that is a wonderful idea. In reality it is next to impossible. There is always going to be the extreme right winger and extreme left winger. The name calling piece just makes the person look foolish as those words roll out of their mouths.

Educating people can be very effective but it's like taking a slow boat to China to change the tide of the Anti 2A regime. You have to do it one person at a time AND you have to get them away from the other Anti 2A'ers to get them to see a different point of view. Even then the newly found view point has no roots in their previous beliefs.

Show me a person with a "Coexist" bumper sticker and I’ll show you a person who insists that you respect his beliefs but doesn’t care in the least about yours.

 

[CLT65]

Here is actually a great example:

Mikej

You just don't convince those people, it's too much like religion, I could talk 'till I have no voice to a church goer that there's no way a man got a whole sea to separate so his people could pass safely and he would NEVER come to believe it.

You talk about carefully talking to people, avoiding insults and name calling, then you go ahead and insult religious people, effectively labeling them as ignorant fools that can't be reasoned with. Do you realize that with that one statement you just enabled a whole bunch of people to write you off as just another God-hating atheist liberal, and tune out everything you say?

I'm not trying to get in a religion argument with you (far from it), just trying to point out how easy it is to alienate people by choosing our words and arguments poorly. We all do it. We all have strong opinions to one degree or another, but if you're trying to sway someone's opinion it's best to be careful what we say and how we say it.

 

[kumabear17]

Thinking about this series of posts today, and being retired with time to wonder, I am now beginning to think some of this emphasis is going the wrong way. Well at least in a pretty inefficient direction.

Does anyone really think we, as a Gun owning community, are going to convince enough hard core Liberals the 2nd Amendment means what it states and there by swing a vote? I commend those of you who are taking the time to work with these people. Anyone we can add to our side helps. My questions is where do we get the most bang for the buck, for the effort put out, to bring large numbers to our side as active voters. I don't think the hard Left is that target group. I would suggest it's both the middle of the road and to the Right Independents and also the sportsman who just doesn't see any point in voting or participating any more (we all know people like this).

And maybe each of these groups needs to be approached a little differently. Yes I agree someone like me, who can be a little gruff, has to practice hard when talking to a young college individual or someone with an Obama sticker on their car who asks for a conversation. At the same time if I talked that way to some of my Son's young former Army buddies - who still use the "F" word for a noun, adjective, verb and greeting – they would laugh me out of the conversation.

You need to talk the language of your audience. You need to research your facts, not stutter, and be comfortable saying, "...I don't agree with your position, I never will... and here's why...". If you don't know the answer, don't make one up. Be honest. You can say you disagree and then get back – if you can – to them with the answer. If you can't get back, you'll have the answer next time. I've become really good at looking up FBI statistics this way. It all takes practice.

I really do applaud the few younger people on this forum, and in this series of posts, for entering into what has to be a very difficult conversation. Many of them appear to have a leaning philosophically in a direction a majority of us aren't real comfortable. I have found gun owners and all sportsmen are usually willing to offer advice if asked. We often sound pretty gruff in answering and our smiles can look like snarls, but we are all willing to stand up and take personal responsibility in our actions and are sincere with our help. We're just frustrated so many sheeple now want the Government to make all the decisions.

 

[Stomper]

Phhfffttt.... Waterheads.

 

[MinnesotaORnewbie]

It is amazing how many people have a say towards others about every aspect of life when it is different than their own. We all could use some work on ourselves and in the end maybe it would calm others at the same time.

 

[kumabear17]

It is amazing how many people have a say towards others about every aspect of life when it is different than their own. We all could use some work on ourselves and in the end maybe it would calm others at the same time.

Not quite sure where you are coming from. You have a different religion, no problem. Want to drive a different car, brag about you house, your wife, you kids or your dog, I could care less. Tell everyone you live in the greatest State or you think I live in a crummy State, again don't care. Tell me that your interpretation of the Constitution, State or Federa,l means the Government has the ability to interpret a Right, that they have the legal ability to invade my privacy? Well then I care and quite simply you can go to H, almost said it didn't I. Okay you can go to D.C. or Chicago. It's probably the closest place on this earth that parallels what I where I would sugest someone could go. There isn't any discussion left in me to say it in a nicer way. This isn't and shouldn't be a debate among us. If you believe that the issue of Government restrictions, confiscation and home invasions is something needing to be debated, then I really just don't know what to say. I kind of think this is the wrong place.

 

[MinnesotaORnewbie]

Every aspect of life......., but if you want to turn my statement into something else, go for it I guess.

 

[kumabear17]

If I twisted your meaning I sincerely apoligize.
Would I criticize a Buddhist or a Quaker for what they believe? No. But if they or others tried to deny me a Right, such as we have been talking about here, there is no room for discussion. They are wrong plain and simple. If people expressed their belief calmly in words that contained no threat, I would respond in the same. If there are people who decide to built a group of simple minded people and then aggressively attack what I believe is my natural Right, I would resist and hopefully with enough force they would think hard before doing it again. I don't care if the issue is what my spiritual beliefs are, who I marry, how I live or - what we discuss here that being - guns. If you are simply wrong, you are wrong. Now what do you believe there is to talk about?

 

[pogi]

Libtards dish it out but can't take it.

Words are just words, they need to get over it.

 

[Bob D]

I bought an AR to protect myself from the people who think someone's trying to take their AR.

 

[DireWolf]

I bought an AR to protect myself from the people who think someone's trying to take their AR.

 

[Jamie6.5]

Hmmm, must be a Giants or Jets game you're referencing.

 

[CLT65]

I bought an AR to protect myself from the people who think someone's trying to take their AR.

I'm confused. A large percentage of Americans think that Dianne Feinstein, Joe Biden, et al., are trying to take away ARs (because they actually are, admittedly so). Are these people dangerous? Should I be scared of them too? Maybe we should take their guns away so they won't be so scary.

 

[Rotty]

I'm confused. A large percentage of Americans think that Dianne Feinstein, Joe Biden, et al., are trying to take away ARs (because they actually are, admittedly so). Are these people dangerous? Should I be scared of them too? Maybe we should take their guns away so they won't be so scary.

Yes lets take their guns away. But then they will hurt our feelings by calling us Terrorist. Oh wait a second, they're already calling us Terrorist, anyone with special training, military veterans, church going folks etc are already classified as terrorist.

Sticks and Stones

 

[Bob D]

I'm confused. A large percentage of Americans think that Dianne Feinstein, Joe Biden, et al., are trying to take away ARs (because they actually are, admittedly so). Are these people dangerous? Should I be scared of them too? Maybe we should take their guns away so they won't be so scary.

Your assertion that "a large percentage of Americans" are trying to take away ARs isn't quite accurate. There is a minority percentage that favor restricting the SALE of ARs. As far as taking them from people who already have them? Even those few who are in fact trying to take away ARs wouldn't have anything to do with it if we told them that they have to go house to house to get them. It will fizzle. Anyone non-delusional can see how completely impossible it is.

...anyone with special training, military veterans, church going folks etc are already classified as terrorist.

Whaaa? Do you have backup evidence for this?

 

[Jamie6.5]

Quote Originally Posted by CLT65 View Post
I'm confused. A large percentage of Americans think that Dianne Feinstein, Joe Biden, et al., are trying to take away ARs (because they actually are, admittedly so). Are these people dangerous?

Your assertion that "a large percentage of Americans" are trying to take away ARs isn't quite accurate. <snip>

I think you have a reading and comprehension problem Bob.

That is not what CLT65 is asserting at all. His assertion is that DF, JB et al. are attempting the takeaway, and that many Americans (a large percentage) rightly believe so.

Just because you believe your interpretation, doesn't make it correct!

 

[Bob D]

True enough. There are people that want all the ARs, and even all the firearms, taken away. It's a very small percentage though. At least, the way that I see percentages.