Reaching out to non-gun people...

[DuneHopper]

As you know @AndyinEverson I tried quite a few times in this forum to have such discussions. I actually took a few months off due to all the negativity perhaps now that you are staff you can get away with topics like these. I had tried and had solutions but even mods shut its down. Best of luck though hope this opens up discussions. Me I took it off this forum and have had great success doing what many said would not happen. There is a huge problem if I may be so bold, Antigunners have a pre-conceived notion of what gun owners are, and yes many many pro-gunner have a pre-concieved about how all those anti-gunners are. And until we can see that both sides are wrong we will never have discussions. Best of luck as I mentioned hope your position as staff is able to steer the logic God knows they ignored my attempts. But there is success where I am doing it at so it can be done.

 

[Andy54Hawken]

Thank you for your reply DuneHopper,
I remember and miss those threads...
All I can say is that I hope none of my posts in them caused any discord or were a contributing factoring in them being shut down...
Andy

 

[Member 34319]

@WWShooter makes a very valid point that lots here need to understand.

From the other side looking in, you look pretty silly making the point that a musket loader is the same as an AR based rifle. Yes they both can kill, and are equally dangerous. From the other sides perspective, one is much easier to kill with.

People like vehicle analogies on the pro gun side.

So I'll play devils advocate here.

Comparing a musket to an AR15 from the anti side is similar to comparing a push scooter to a motorcycle.

I'll add.

The anti and non gun owners don't understand the "other" uses for guns. Frankly, the biased media doesn't hep portray that side either. There is a large use of firearms for self protection, sport, and many other things. They simply see them as devices to kill, maybe to hunt. Understanding this is crucial to begin discussing firearms.

 

[Diamondback]

The only reason there weren't more weapons like Puckle Guns or the Austrian proto-assault rifles of the day being widely used is that in a pre-industrial age, they were difficult, slow and expensive to create.

Hand George Washington an M16 and he'd blow a load in his breeches imagining his army carrying 'em...

 

[Andy54Hawken]

I respectfully disagree ...please see my post #37 for my reasoning...or read me quoting myself..which is weird...
( Reno911 and WWShooter )
Andy

For the record I meant no disrespect to the poster who disagreed with me...

However I do not like the comparison of "How long would it take you to shoot 31 people using your rifles; now tell me how long it would take with a AR-15 and say 2-3 high capacity magazines?"

I dislike the comparison because it starts with the notion that I or someone else wants to shoot somebody or many people
It also can be seen as a assumption that the only reason to have a AR15 is indeed to shoot someone or several people...

Again my point was and is : A gun that is handled safely is no more dangerous or deadly than any other gun.
My view of a AR15 and my Hawken Rifle is the same...
Both are rifles...both are made to accurately place a projectile on a target...

As to one being more deadly , than the other... I say again...Dead is Dead...it makes no difference the size of the hole , a .223 or a .530 hole...in the right spot will kill you equally dead...there is no such thing as deader or more dead.

And as far as one holding more "shots" than the other...well , having been in a firefight or three...I have found that only hits matter most....suppressing fire advocates notwithstanding...
But even that doesn't really matter , since most AR15 owners will never use their rifle in such a manner.

This is part of the paradox I mention in my post that was quoted earlier....

No disrespect meant to any and all here who have been reading my thread.
Andy

 

[Member 34319]

I agree with your statement. All guns are equally dangerous.

If that is your only talking point, I can see people agreeing with you.

That is not the only talking point though, and that is possibly why you have issues understanding the other side.

I'll try to explain their perspective using knives.

Pictured are two knives, both dangerous if handled incorrectly, yes? Both safe if handle incorrectly, yes?

What about their design can you tell me makes them different?

 

[Andy54Hawken]

As for thinking that I have issues, with understanding that folks look at things differently than I do...
I assure you that I do not

that is possibly why you have issues understanding the other side.

I do understand that everyone will bring a different viewpoint to the table....and that their viewpoint needs to heard and understood...

I was asked the question of: How long would it take to shoot...in reference to my post...so any of my answers only reflect me and my experiences...
Which in my case and my case only is :
That there is no difference in the rifles in question...or the knives , that you have shown...
Others may feel differently ...that is on them...
That some may feel that one is more dangerous , just by how it looks is a given...I however disagree...
Looks do not harm or kill...misuse of any item can however do either...
Andy

 

[ma96782]

As I see it.......

The problem mostly lays with, "reasonable and common sense gun controls."

Rrrright. It's reasonable and common sense according to who? Hillary, Feinstein, Chucky, Handgun Control Inc, Mothers Against Violence, etc......

Once you allow THEM to control the verbiage (and/or the debate) you've lost. It'll be......if you don't agree with THEM......it's because you aren't reasonable and you have no common sense. Thus, they can dismiss you and your opinions. You have become: invisible, you don't exist, you are un-worthy, etc.....

Aloha, Mark

 

[Diamondback]

I was asked the question of: How long would it take to shoot...in reference to my post...so any of my answers only reflect me and my experiences...
Which in my case and my case only is :
That there is no difference in the rifles in question...or knives , that you have shown...

In other words, refusing to let the other team define the narrative.

 

[Andy54Hawken]

In other words, refusing to let the other team define the narrative.

I hope that is a good thing...my brain is hurting right now...
Andy

 

[Diamondback]

I hope that is a good thing...my brain is hurting right now...
Andy

VERY good thing--it's how Reagan and Trump succeed. Don't respond to the prattling Chattering Classes giving them soundbites to use against you, but talk AROUND them straight to the people.

 

[ma96782]

I hunted with a guy last year that thought all military style rifles should be banned. Tried to explain to him how that would eventually take away his hunting rifles but I'm not sure I got through to him. There are gun owners out there who are "anti gun" themselves.

Ask him if he is familiar with "incremental creep." You know, "How to boil a frog?"

if he has more time. I'm sure he's probably heard it before.....

-- by Martin Nimbler (with my additions for firearms)

First they came for the Socialists Hi-cap magazines, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Socialist had no Hi-cap magazines.

Then they came for the Trade Unionists Semi-automatic firearms, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Trade Unionist had no Semi-automatic firearms.

Then they came for the Jews shotguns, rifles and revolvers, and I did not speak out—
Because I was not a Jew did not own a shotgun, rifle or revolver.

Then they came for me—and there was no one left to speak for me real weapons left to put up a fight with.



Aloha, Mark

 

[Member 34319]

Thanks for thinking that I have issues, with understanding that folks look at things differently than I do...
I assure you that I do not


I do understand that everyone will bring a different viewpoint to the table....and that their viewpoint needs to heard and understood...

I was asked the question of: How long would it take to shoot...in reference to my post...so any of my answers only reflect me and my experiences...
Which in my case and my case only is :
That there is no difference in the rifles in question...or knives , that you have shown...
Others may feel differently ...that is on them...
That some may feel that one is more dangerous ,just by how it looks is a given...I however disagree.
Looks do not harm or kill...misuse of any item can however do either...
Andy

I didn't mean offense with that statement.

Just stated that others don't see it as you do, which you have already made clear. So I apologize for rewording it.

I've tried that same subject with non gun owners. Though they agree that all guns are dangerous, as do I. It is very hard to get them to understand the need for an AR15 using only that means for justification.

I will state, that I do disagree with the knives. They are designed with two completely different purposes. One is for making a meal, one is for protecting oneself against something or someone that can cause harm or death. Both can be used by someone to do so, one was designed to do so.

The rifles however are more similar than most anti gun folks think. The musket, at the time, was the best technology for defending oneself against everything, including tyrannical forces. It is however very hard these days to illustrate the need to protect our rights from tyranny. Which I find weird, and I think you may too? I may get flack for saying it, but yes an AR15 was originally designed for military applications, hence defending human life against those wanting to take it. Blur those words however you want, but that was its original design. Yes, it has evolved into a weapon used for hunting and competition, but like the knives above, there is a design conceptualized behind the AR platform.

We don't like saying guns kill, as it is the person pulling the trigger who is the actual killer, but we can't have conversations with the other side if we can't see that from their perspective, certain guns were designed to allow a soldier to defend themselves by shooting at others or actually shooting others more efficiently.

 

[Andy54Hawken]

Again We need to tread carefully ...

The point of my thread is:
Spreading the idea that gun owners are not to be feared...
That any gun handled safely is not dangerous...
That firearms and gun owners have played a important part in our nation's past and will play an equally important role in our nation's future...

Just how do we get those ideas across to non-gun people is what I had in mind with my thread...Nothing else.

I did not and do not want to create more dissension among us here in our forum or among gun owners in general...
Andy

 

[ma96782]

For a lot of people, the problem is that.....

They will gladly sell their freedom(s) for a promise of security.

They have no problem accepting the freedoms that they enjoy in America. But, they don't wish to fight others to preserve those same freedoms.

Some will fight. While some, will just let "others," fight for them.

Aloha, Mark

 

[Member 34319]

Again We need to tread carefully ...

The point of my thread is:
Spreading the idea that gun owners are not to be feared...
That any gun handled safely is not dangerous...
That firearms and gun owners have played a important part in our nation's past and will play an equally important role in our nation's future...

Just how do we get those ideas across to non-gun people is what I had in mind with my thread...Nothing else.

I did not nor do not want to create more dissension among us here in our forum or among gunowners in general...
Andy

Understood.

I wanted to portray my experience with discussions and conversations I've had with anti and non gun owners.

There is a lot to this puzzle, and I think I represented that in my posts.

If those are the only things you want to discuss, that is a hard thing to do.

Those points are very easily made understandable to someone willing to listen, but they will likely feel like you played gotcha because those three are fairly simple to prove correct.

The purpose of my posts was to help paint a better picture of all the stuff that comes with this conversation between sides, and without acknowledging that there is more, I see it hard to just discuss those 3 items you have listed.

Like I said in my first post in this thread, a huge part of any conversation with the other side, is understanding that side more affectively.

I'll sit back a bit and read for a while, poke in to see what others think.

 

[cigars]

No need to add my here. Lots of great points made by all above!

 

[Andy54Hawken]

My purpose for the thread was , what I honestly thought was a simple idea...
How to get some good ideas to spread the word that...boiled down simply:
Guns and gun owners ain't the evil incarnate that many folks would have you believe and that guns and gun owners have a long honorable part of our history and future.

Maybe me and my ideas are too simple...
Thinking of closing my thread..as I said earlier it was not my intent to cause dissension among us here...
Andy

 

[Andy54Hawken]

Thread is closed....it was not my intent to cause a fuss or dissension here on our forum...
If I have caused any hard feelings or ill will , then I apologize.
Andy