In gun debate, two sides are speaking different languages [Archive] - Glock Talk

PDA

View Full Version : In gun debate, two sides are speaking different languages


HerrGlock
01-01-2013, 05:30
http://www.news-herald.com/articles/2012/12/30/news/nh6383863.txt?mobredir=false

macville
01-01-2013, 07:53
Yeah, we are speaking common sense and they are speaking...well, not even sure what you call their craziness. The lady in the article who had her son shot and killed by a criminal with a stolen gun somehow thinks that by law abiding citizens not having guns will somehow prevent criminals from having them. That's not just a lack of logic, it's stupidity.

Rotn1
01-01-2013, 08:48
Common sense is not too common these days, unfortunately.

Those most ardent anti gun folks I know tend to be clueless and dont have any interest in getting a clue.

They have an agenda that cant be changed with facts. Facts to them are irrelevent and just an obstacle.

sigman69
01-01-2013, 09:06
No it is more like Whatever happened to common sense? The 2nd amendment is NOT just about hunting.

HexHead
01-01-2013, 09:14
The lady in the article who had her son shot and killed by a criminal with a stolen gun somehow thinks that by law abiding citizens not having guns will somehow prevent criminals from having them.

I'm sure she's thinking that if law abiding citizens didn't own guns, there would be less of them for criminals to steal.

rohanreginald
01-01-2013, 09:28
Yeah, we are speaking common sense and they are speaking...well, not even sure what you call their craziness. The lady in the article who had her son shot and killed by a criminal with a stolen gun somehow thinks that by law abiding citizens not having guns will somehow prevent criminals from having them. That's not just a lack of logic, it's stupidity.

I totally agree with you. However most antis I have talked to think that there shouldnt be any guns period. Then the criminals cant steal any guns. Take them all away from everyone and nobody will be killed anymore. Thats what I believe we are up against, there are people out there that dont understand the power citizens have over their government when the citizens are equally armed as their military and they dont think anyone should even have a muzzle loader much less an assault weapon.

posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire (http://www.outdoorhub.com/mobile/)

HarleyGuy
01-01-2013, 11:11
Elinimate, ban, outlaw ALL guns, right?

If any of you think that is even remotely possible, then we simply need to tell our government to ban:

Alcohol...that was tried once and it failed miserably.
Illegal drugs....yeah, that's working out really well.

Murder, rape, bank robberies.......there has always been a law that bans these crimes but they still continue, regardless of the punishment, even when the punishment is death.

We definitely need to prevent guns from getting into the hands of mentally ill individuals, those with a criminal history, and children.

Easier said than done, but this is much easier (and more effective IMHO) than taking the guns of law-abiding citizens who would never misuse their guns, leaving them defenseless.

Harper
01-01-2013, 13:00
I'm not a fan of the term "common sense". When used in an argument it often means "don't over analyze this, we all know it's true". It's a method of attempting to get people to not think about the issues. The Brady Campaign uses "common sense gun laws" as a euphemism for gun control. They're attempting to reassure people that their gut feelings are indeed "sound and prudent judgment based on a simple perception of the situation or facts". The reality is many things that used to be "common sense" aren't true - light needs a medium, the earth is flat, heavier objects fall faster than light objects, alcohol prohibition prevents alcohol consumption, gun bans mean less bad guys have guns, etc.

The two stand out characteristics I see from the anti-gun people is emotion based thinking and the lack of basic firearms knowledge; this includes the casual anti and the top spokespeople. Most people have been bamboozled into thinking assault weapons is an actual category of weapons.

The fallacy of misleading vividness is when the thought, imagery or reality of something is so emotionally potent – positively or negatively – that you begin to overestimate the likelihood and frequency of its occurrence. This is why many people are afraid to fly. They can understand intellectually that crashes almost never happen, and that airplanes are statistically the safest way to travel, but the idea of being torn apart mid-air, or knowing that they’re about to die for a full two minutes in freefall, or being dragged under the ocean while stuck inside the cabin is so vivid and disturbing, that they actually experience intense fear about a process that is safer than their drive to the airport.

This is what happens to us collectively as a nation when mass shootings occur. Yes, it is terrible, for both the person who was so disturbed and all the people they harmed. It puts on graphic display the absolute worst aspects of our culture, which is painful to watch.

http://kontradictions.wordpress.com/2012/08/09/why-not-renew-the-assault-weapons-ban-well-ill-tell-you/

janice6
01-01-2013, 13:07
Remember, after the guns were forbidden in England, they actually discussed banning knives with points recently. How's that for "reasoning".

I'm sure no one thought that a person could be killed with a wooden club....Ban trees?

Bren
01-01-2013, 13:11
I'm sure she's thinking that if law abiding citizens didn't own guns, there would be less of them for criminals to steal.

And if that guy had to stab her son, he'd be...less...dead.:upeyes:

Caver 60
01-01-2013, 13:21
I totally agree with you. However most antis I have talked to think that there shouldnt be any guns period. Then the criminals cant steal any guns. Take them all away from everyone and nobody will be killed anymore. Thats what I believe we are up against, there are people out there that dont understand the power citizens have over their government when the citizens are equally armed as their military and they dont think anyone should even have a muzzle loader much less an assault weapon.

posted using Outdoor Hub Campfire (http://www.outdoorhub.com/mobile/)

Ask the anti's how they plan to erase the knowledge of how to build a gun from everyones mind, after they eliminate all guns from the world. They are relatively easy to make. I could make one in my home workshop, and then I would have the only one in the world. It might not be fancy with all the bells and whistles, but it would shoot.

You can't put the Genie back in the bottle. Didn't someone famous say that once?

shotgunred
01-01-2013, 13:32
People want easy answers and ones that don't affect them. Last week a coworker was telling me that I need to give up all my guns for the safety of her kids.

The funny thing is that both her and her husband are functioning alcoholics, When I told her her kids would be a lot safer if we took away her beer and cars she just gave me a blank look. To her driving her car with her kids in it after she has been drinking is OK because she "can handle it". Yet my guns are the problem.

How do even have a conversation with someone that thinks like this much less come up with something that works?

janice6
01-01-2013, 13:56
You cannot argue against fear/control with logic. Can't be done.

GunHo198
01-01-2013, 14:08
Been debating back and forth with my son about what they could do to strengthen the Police's ability to enforce the laws that are already out there. What if the only way to purchase or own a firearm of any kind you would be required to have a Concealed Carry permit first? This would push more people to get there permit, eliminate waiting periods, and help ease the gun show loophole. Private sellers would only have to make a copy of the buyers DL, and CCP to make a sale. That way he clearly made a sale to someone who is legal to own a firearm. Everyone would be covered. Own a firearm? Lets see your CCP...

shotgunred
01-01-2013, 14:19
Been debating back and forth with my son about what they could do to strengthen the Police's ability to enforce the laws that are already out there. What if the only way to purchase or own a firearm of any kind you would be required to have a Concealed Carry permit first? This would push more people to get there permit, eliminate waiting periods, and help ease the gun show loophole. Private sellers would only have to make a copy of the buyers DL, and CCP to make a sale. That way he clearly made a sale to someone who is legal to own a firearm. Everyone would be covered. Own a firearm? Lets see your CCP...

Were do you live (state)? In Washington were I live is a shall issue state. So unless there is a legal reason the state cannot deny your CCP. In other states cal, ny, nj just to name a few a normal citizen cannot get a CCP. So unless you are for not allowing a large part of the law abiding citizenry to own guns your plan would not work.

dango
01-01-2013, 14:28
Remember, after the guns were forbidden in England, they actually discussed banning knives with points recently. How's that for "reasoning".

I'm sure no one thought that a person could be killed with a wooden club....Ban trees?

As history has taught us , (It worked for Hitler) ! :steamed:

GunHo198
01-01-2013, 16:05
Were do you live (state)? In Washington were I live is a shall issue state. So unless there is a legal reason the state cannot deny your CCP. In other states cal, ny, nj just to name a few a normal citizen cannot get a CCP. So unless you are for not allowing a large part of the law abiding citizenry to own guns your plan would not work.

I'm in Florida. Those (other) states need to vote better.:upeyes:

BobbyS
01-01-2013, 16:20
[QUOTE=Harper;19807159]I'm not a fan of the term "common sense". When used in an argument it often means "don't over analyze this, we all know it's true". It's a method of attempting to get people to not think about the issues. The Brady Campaign uses "common sense gun laws" as a euphemism for gun control. They're attempting to reassure people that their gut feelings are indeed "sound and prudent judgment based on a simple perception of the situation or facts". The reality is many things that used to be "common sense" aren't true - light needs a medium, the earth is flat, heavier objects fall faster than light objects, alcohol prohibition prevents alcohol consumption, gun bans mean less bad guys have guns, etc.

The two stand out characteristics I see from the anti-gun people is emotion based thinking and the lack of basic firearms knowledge; this includes the casual anti and the top spokespeople. Most people have been bamboozled into thinking assault weapons is an actual category of weapons.


Millions and millions of people think AR means "assault rifle".

m2hmghb
01-01-2013, 16:53
I'm in Florida. Those (other) states need to vote better.:upeyes:

:upeyes: The same could be said for your state voting in Obama. One person cannot control the entire state, but one city can.

GunHo198
01-01-2013, 17:16
:upeyes: The same could be said for your state voting in Obama. One person cannot control the entire state, but one city can.

Heyyyyy.... Didn't Jersey elect Obama too??? :dunno:

m2hmghb
01-01-2013, 17:32
Heyyyyy.... Didn't Jersey elect Obama too??? :dunno:

Not all of us, just like not everyone in Florida did. That's what I'm saying, blaming a person for where they live or were born is just stupid. My county and a few others are red.

VA27
01-01-2013, 17:38
Been debating back and forth with my son about what they could do to strengthen the Police's ability to enforce the laws that are already out there. What if the only way to purchase or own a firearm of any kind you would be required to have a Concealed Carry permit first? This would push more people to get there permit, eliminate waiting periods, and help ease the gun show loophole. Private sellers would only have to make a copy of the buyers DL, and CCP to make a sale. That way he clearly made a sale to someone who is legal to own a firearm. Everyone would be covered. Own a firearm? Lets see your CCP...

The problem with this thinking is:

1. By definition, criminals will ignore the law.

2. Like other well intentioned plans, you are punishing the law abiding for the acts of the lawless.

shotgunred
01-01-2013, 17:41
Remember, after the guns were forbidden in England, they actually discussed banning knives with points recently. How's that for "reasoning".

I'm sure no one thought that a person could be killed with a wooden club....Ban trees?

Actually they did ban knives also. Their reasoning appears to be sound as they only have twice as much violent crime per capita as the USA does.

M&P Shooter
01-01-2013, 17:44
The government is on to something here! If we ban rape, robbery, murder and drug use it will disappear, quick someone call Obama and let him know!