What i posted on some other sites (anti gun sites)

[WHEELGUN357]

This is what i posted in replay on a few forum that people were in support of OUTLAWING GUNS.. its short sweet and to the point... what do you think....



"""""""""""""""WHEN GUNS ARE OUTLAWED,,, ONLY THE OUTLAWS WILL HAVE GUNS.....

THINK ABOUT THAT STATEMENT.....

let the government take away the guns and watch what happens.....


HITLER DID AWAY WITH ALL THE CITIZENS GUNS IN GERMANY... WHAT HAPPENED,, IT WAS SAFER, VERY SAFE.. SO SAFE THAT THERE WAS NO OPPOSITION WHEN THE NAZI PARTY HAD THEIR KILLING PARTY....

STALIN TOOK AWAY ALL THE PEOPLES GUNS... WHAT HAPPENED ,,, IT WAS SAFER FOR STALIN AND HIS BUNCH TO GO IN COMPETITION WITH HITLER ON HOW MANY THEY CAN KILL....
ENGLAND RECENTLY OUTLAWED GUNS.... GUESS WHAT... GUN RELATED CRIMES ARE UP UBER AMOUNTS...... THE SAME IN AUSTRALIA.......

SO I SAY LET THE GOV TAKE AWAY OUR GUNS.... AT LEAST WE WONT HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT BEING AROUND LONG ENOUGH FOR THAT SOCIAL SECURITY... RIGHT

[Garpman]

No offense, but that's exactly the tired old drivel that I as a gun owner am sick of hearing. It's also the kind of stuff that is not likely to spark any rational thought in the mind of an anti (maybe not an anti, but a fence sitter).

I was guilty of the same thing. We keep parroting the same old same old, even to each other.

What's the better way? Empathy, and a high level of persuavise oratory skills like this:

http://www.gunlaws.com/DuquesneSpeech.htm

[LittleRedToyota]

Originally Posted by Garpman

What's the better way? Empathy, and a high level of persuavise oratory skills like this:

http://www.gunlaws.com/DuquesneSpeech.htm

+1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000

i don't claim to have the oratory skills alan korwin (sounds like he did a wonderful job), but i have had similar experiences.

antigunners are generally driven by fear and emotion (they almost have to be given that the actual empirical evidence is so overwhelmingly against them).

if you use that fear and emotion, you can sometimes actually get them to "see the light".

personally, i have had success with playing on their fear of g.w., dick cheney, etc.

i've posted the whole spiel before, so i won't go into it again, but it isn't hard to convince *some* antigunners that we actually need "assault weapons" to defend against the very kind of government tyranny that the antigunners feel g.w., etc. are making a reality.

the key, though, is to, at the beginning of the conversation, *listen* listen, listen, listen. hear what the particular antigunner is afraid of. then, address that and use that fear to your advantage. (this requires understanding and being able to effectively discuss several lines of pro-gun logic, not just whatever your favorite one is...and it also requires being able to discuss it in their terms.)

in the duquesne case, it was fear of school shootings and criminals. so, mr. krowin addressed the reality of needing to be able to defend yourself.

i prolly would have addressed the VT case a little more directly in light of the whole "shoes" thing (using the "it was already a gun-free zone and there could have been many fewer victims" logic while citing the applachian state case and other similar cases where an armed civilian actually did prevent more deaths). i would have, of course, been extremely sensitive about doing so. (no "we told you so you morons" posturing).

in many cases, though, i have found my "liberal" friends and acquaintances to be more afraid of bush/cheney than of criminals. so, in those cases, i go with the whole "if the sitting government decides to indefinitely postpone elections, the power of the voting booth is gone. if, at that point, the people do not have military style weapons, who is going to stop bush?" line of reasoning. (obviously it is not as simple as that one sentence, but that is the message.)

believe it or not, it really does work.

[LorDiego01]

THE ALL CAPS RUINS IT FOR ME.

BECAUSE IF WE YELL STUFF, IT BECOMES TRUTH.

[D-FENS]

Originally Posted by LorDiego01

THE ALL CAPS RUINS IT FOR ME.

BECAUSE IF WE YELL STUFF, IT BECOMES TRUTH.

Completely agree. Anytime someone makes a post on teh INTERNETS in all caps, it's destined to be ignored. It's highly indicative of a troll and in this case it sounds like you were trolling their site. I'm not condeming that but it's no different than if I posted "ABORTION IS MURDER!!!1" on Hillary's website.

[NineseveN]

While I think Mr. Korwin is an excellent speaker, I highly doubt that he really changed anyone's mind with his speech. Maybe some fence sitters are sliding a little more over the hump towards our side, but not many.

My experience is that you just can't convince someone that believes something deep within their core (where the hate comes from) with words. The only rabid anti-gunners that I've known to change their stripes did so only due to some shocking, violent or terrifying personal experience (or a connection with one).

They don't realize that we need guns until they find themselves needing one...when they're being raped or beaten, or when the looters come to their home in the aftermath of a hurricane or when this happens to someone they know and that little light bulb just sorta jumps out at them.

But that's just my take on it. If we're hoping to win our rights back by winning the PR war and changing hearts and minds with words, we might as well get used to gun bans and the like. The only thing that can save us is an affirmative individual rights stance, a lot of winning legal battles fighting against gun control and a societal change occurring over time where more and more people are armed or own guns.

Introducing 10 new people a year to firearms will change more minds than even the most eloquent speech in the den of rights prohibitionists.

Educating current gun owners about liberty, tactics and the law will make us stronger than educating anti-gunners about things they would already know if they didn't simply dismiss them outright in favor of their closely held anti-gun dogma.

Speeches like Korwin's are important, you cannot allow the debate to go one-sided too often or for too long, but it's not going to help much yet.

[LittleRedToyota]

Originally Posted by NineseveN

My experience is that you just can't convince someone that believes something deep within their core (where the hate comes from) with words.

yeah, but my experience is that there aren't actually that many rabid anti-gunners out there.

rather, in my experience at least, most anti-gunners don't really care that much about the issue one way or the other, but have bought into the brady bunch line of crap.

these people, again IME, represent a far larger pool than the truely die-hard anti-gunners...and they often can be persuaded to see the light with the right arguments. and, imho, these are the people we need to be focused on.

i agree 100% with the concept of getting them hands-on time with guns, though. there is nothing more effective.

[NineseveN]

Originally Posted by LittleRedToyota

yeah, but my experience is that there aren't actually that many rabid anti-gunners out there.

Those that go to these kinds of events generally are rabid anti-gunners...as shown by Korwin's admittedly large showing of hands to the "who hates guns" question. People on the fence, people who don't really care that much about the issue don't hate guns in general. You're right, they don't much care, which is why they're off seeing a movie or playing in the park when these events go on.

rather, in my experience at least, most anti-gunners don't really care that much about the issue one way or the other, but have bought into the brady bunch line of crap.

these people, who, again IME, represent a far larger pool than the truely die-hard anti-gunners...and they often can be persuaded to see the light with the right arguments. and, imho, these are the people we need to be focused on.

i agree 100% with the concept of getting them hands-on time with guns, though. there is nothing more effective.

The trouble is finding an audience with enough of those people in it. It's not going to happen at an anti-gun rally or a symposium like this one was. People go to these things to give support to the side they've already chosen, nearly no one goes there to learn something. It's no different than a Ron Paul rally or the NRA banquet in all honesty. Now, in some other benign environment where the issue isn't already specifically framed, that's a different thing.

[LittleRedToyota]

Originally Posted by NineseveN

Those that go to these kinds of events generally are rabid anti-gunners.

yeah...i will grant you that.

but, you also aren't going to get these people to all go shooting.

so, i think his approach was the best possible approach...even if he wasn't going to change many minds. at least he may have planted a seed of doubt in a couple of minds to get by the stereotypes of guns and gun owners that these people have bought into.

and i do think that we can learn something from him that we can use in talking to anti-gunners...not on a mass scale, but just one-on-one in our everyday lives.

just sort of on the "grassroots" level...just another tool to add to the tool of actually getting them to come shooting with you...and one that is easier to deploy. and i have actually seen it work.

(ETA: i agree completely with your notion that we need to keep fighting i court, though.)

[NineseveN]

Originally Posted by LittleRedToyota

yeah...i will grant you that.

but, you also aren't going to get these people to all go shooting.

so, i think his approach was the best possible approach...even if he wasn't going to change many minds. at least he may have planted a seed of doubt in a couple of minds to get by the stereotypes of guns and gun owners that these people have bought into.

and i do think that we can learn something from him that we can use in talking to anti-gunners...not on a mass scale, but just one-on-one in our everyday lives.

just sort of on the "grassroots" level...just another tool to add to the tool of actually getting them to come shooting with you...and one that is easier to deploy. and i have actually seen it work.

(ETA: i agree completely with your notion that we need to keep fighting i court, though.)

I can agree with that, especially the bold part. I come down hard on ignorant gun owners because they should know better and it's not like I'm going to turn them off to gun ownership by reaming them out. But I use the kid gloves with fence-sitters, semi-anti's (always) and even rabid anti-gunners (for the most part).