National Poll: Poll: What Argument Do You Use To Persuade Middle 20% Of Legislators To Support Gun Rights?

[arakboss]

"Which of the amendments is most important, more important than the others?" "Can you name an amendment which guarantees your favorite amendment?" "With the sheer amount of hate speech, authorized political lies and fake news, is it not more important to license and regulate the first amendment first?"

They are all important but the 2nd is the only one that provides us with the ability to forcefully protect the rest. The 1st wouldn't do you much good if the people you were speaking out against could simply snuff you out.

 

[po18guy]

They are all important but the 2nd is the only one that provides us with the ability to forcefully protect the rest. The 1st wouldn't do you much good if the people you were speaking out against could simply snuff you out.

The blessing and curse of the citizen congress is that you end up with eggheads who have no concept of freedom versus responsibility. Emotion versus cognition.

However, I think that a feigned assault on the 1st would force them to see that all amendments are important or else they would not have been first recognized, then postulated, then argued - over the course of years - then reduced to writing, then voted on before supposedly being set in stone.

Those who see the constitution as a living document, at some level, either have or serve evil purpose.

 

[alv7722]

You're all wrong. Rational arguments based on facts dont reach lefties. Facts and reason only speak to constitutionalists. You must use emotional arguments because that is the language of the left, of liberals. There is no hope for progressives, but liberals can be swayed.

Only with emotion, though. Start using facts and ration and their eyes will glaze over.

I am trying to get gun owners to pivot to 'Civil Rights'. Somehow, I perceive that as an emotional propositions that 'may' have a chance to gain traction. Who can be against 'Civil Rights'???

 

[CHLChris]

@alv7722 To me, the problem with civil rights as an argument, if they already have an emotional connection to anti-gun arguments (i.e. fear of guns), then they will counter with, "Victims of gun violence have a civil right to their lives."

I think the only route is to go with is, for two examples, the single mother who is being stalked or the 70-year-old grandmother who lives alone. Guns are a force equalizer for those small, slight women who walk through parking structures with a fear of attack that able-bodied men just don't ever have to grasp. That fear, a very real concern for personal safety, is the only emotion that will counter hoplophobia.

 

[DB is Here]

I think the only route is to go with is, for two examples, the single mother who is being stalked or the 70-year-old grandmother who lives alone. Guns are a force equalizer for those small, slight women who walk through parking structures with a fear of attack that able-bodied men just don't ever have to grasp. That fear, a very real concern for personal safety, is the only emotion that will counter hoplophobia.

You're certainly on to something and maybe more PSA's from the NRA or gun manufacturers focused on the stories on Women that used a gun to defend themselves or their children.

 

[11Charlie]

We need education. People are in fear of there lives because they know nothing about guns or how they even function let alone how to handle one safely. What happened to DARE programs?

The more people are educated the more people will stand with us and understand that these laws will have no effect on anything. More people means more votes in our favor. When that happens it won't matter what they do it will get voted down.

My .02

 

[DuneHopper]

You're certainly on to something and maybe more PSA's from the NRA or gun manufacturers focused on the stories on Women that used a gun to defend themselves or their children.

This is our weakest link and also not one the opposition looks at, as surely would have an impact to switch gears. There is an area untapped, Women and on the fence voters.

 

[CHLChris]

Anybody who believes guns should be removed from society (because "gun violence") are also saying that only strong men should have any power. Physically weak means subservient and/or means victim. I don't know how someone can have a "Shred the patriarchy now" bumper sticker and also believe in powerful gun control measures. They seem exceptionally contradictory!

 

[WAW44]

Interesting thread. I'm an engineer, so I voted facts. Still, I'm curious about what you said here. OK, let's assume vast majority of people are educated about guns, and also let's assume they understand that any laws like bans and magazine restrictions have negligible impact. So what then? Are we, as a community, truly saying there is no need to do anything? There is no problem with guns? (before you flame me, this not a rhetorical question, I'm actually asking, if that's the position, than that's what we need to step up and say, do nothing)

When stuff like Parkland and Vegas and Aurora happens, we go back and see the red flags and ask why the current laws were not enforced. OK, so let's step up enforcement. That will automatically mean more false positives and people getting "harassed" by LEOs for carrying, or such. Red Flag laws supposedly have some teeth in this area, but again, there will be false positives, and people will get their stuff taken away and will need jump through hoops to get it back. Finally, we would need funding to improve enforcement, which means more taxes. Are we cool with all of the above? If not, then are we back to , no need to change?

We need education. People are in fear of there lives because they know nothing about guns or how they even function let alone how to handle one safely. What happened to DARE programs?

The more people are educated the more people will stand with us and understand that these laws will have no effect on anything. More people means more votes in our favor. When that happens it won't matter what they do it will get voted down.

My .02

 

[11Charlie]

Interesting thread. I'm an engineer, so I voted facts. Still, I'm curious about what you said here. OK, let's assume vast majority of people are educated about guns, and also let's assume they understand that any laws like bans and magazine restrictions have negligible impact. So what then? Are we, as a community, truly saying there is no need to do anything? There is no problem with guns? (before you flame me, this not a rhetorical question, I'm actually asking, if that's the position, than that's what we need to step up and say, do nothing)

When stuff like Parkland and Vegas and Aurora happens, we go back and see the red flags and ask why the current laws were not enforced. OK, so let's step up enforcement. That will automatically mean more false positives and people getting "harassed" by LEOs for carrying, or such. Red Flag laws supposedly have some teeth in this area, but again, there will be false positives, and people will get their stuff taken away and will need jump through hoops to get it back. Finally, we would need funding to improve enforcement, which means more taxes. Are we cool with all of the above? If not, then are we back to , no need to change?

In my opinion with education comes knowledge. With knowledge comes the fact that these laws are being broke by criminals and those criminals will still get there hands on something to do what they want to do if that is what they want. The laws now aren't being enforced to stop anything. So why make up more laws that are only hurting the law abiding instead of enforcing the ones we have.

Take the Texas church shooter he bought his gun legally and shouldn't have been able to. Has anyone been held accountable for that?

 

[CHLChris]

You see, I actually believe the mantra, "More guns, less crime." Thus, the way to reduce violence (I have no interest in separating out gun violence over just plain violence) is to have more people, more types of folks, more demographics own and carry guns safely. The more that bad people fear the populace the more that they will cease being bad, either through fear of getting shot...or by actually getting shot during their bad deeds.