TexasCHLforum.com

With the tragic events in Oregon, there are a lot of on-line news articles on various web sites. Most of those articles have a comments section following the news article. Of course, most of the comments are clearly divided between two groups: those who say we need more gun control measures and those who say we need more gun freedoms. Ironically, the voices on both sides of the argument claim to have a common goal: reduce or eliminate these mass shootings.

But as the people on both sides continue to try to persuade the opposite side by listing their statistics, quoting their experts, using logic, telling of first-person experiences, and using passionate pleas, a thought occurred to me.

For everyone here who has ever discussed, argued, reasoned or otherwise tried to persuade an "anti" of the "incorrectness" of their position, have you ever actually personally convinced that person that they were wrong? Basically, have you ever caused anyone "on the other side" to change their mind?

I personally have never seen it. And very seldom heard of it. I'm just beginning to wonder if all the time we spend in trying to effectively present our case just comes down to that much wasted time and effort. Maybe the time and effort we put into making our case would be better spent doing something else. I'm just not sure what that "something else" would be...

When I discuss this topic, I stress for measures that do work, and gun control laws have showed over and over again, that they fail all the time.

Short of eliminating all firearms in US and this would never happen in US for the obvious reasons. You could not say we can reduce so called violence by firearms. Criminals and sickos will always find a way to inflict havoc on un-armed citizens. Check with France and Hebdo attack. Check with Boston Bombing. Can you get a FullAuto firearms in France? Extremists Wahabists did. No Firearms, there is make it yourself kitchen kaboom.

If all the people on one side quit arguing with the other side, the effect would be to cede the battlefield to the other side. Therefore, continuing the argument until the other side gives up has value. For some people, it's a useless task better left to others. To others, it's a battle worth fighting. Perhaps it even gives them a sense of self-worth.

I have no illusions about winning over Liberals. But I refuse to allow them their unchallenged diatribes. Often, there are by-standers and a well-reasoned, calmly delivered response can bring out the worse in a hysterical Liberal for those by-standers to see. I try to make few statements and instead pose questions. I know that I've won when there isn't a response to my question.

The majority of Americans now reject gun control so yes, telling the truth does reach the undecided. We won't change the minds of true anti-gunners because they are either outright liars, or are too stupid to handle their own affairs. The facts told by our side, the FBI, and the Justice Dept. prove gun control is ineffective and no honest person can argue otherwise. Anti-gunners are not our audience.

Chas.

Charles, Do your comments apply only to gun related issues or to other issues as well. If not, why? I am concerned we have operated in our own echo chamber for too long and that's why we have seen the deterioration of values in other areas such as valuing life, liberty, morals, religion, economics and individual responsibility. Most of this has happened during our and the previous generation.

I am interested in your feedback as I am involved in a couple of pretty contentious debates.

If an anti-gunner is that way simply because they did not have guns in their house growing up and they do not know anything about them, you can win them over with a trip to the range.

If they had someone close to them murdered by someone with a gun, that is a little different.

If you know someone in real life who is anti-gun, challenge them to go to the range with you. If they decline, tell them that you thought that they were "open minded" and not "prejudiced" against gun owners (Use their buzz words against them). I have won two converts so far, one even keeps a pistol in his night stand now.

It is only my opinion, based on my limited exposure to persons who are "anti-gun", that these individuals suffer from less than well rounded personalities. One seemed to trend towards a Napoleonic complex, others seemed absorbed with or focused on personal titles or rankings.

Based upon this limited exposure and experience my personal hypothesis is this: "These individuals, in their rabid, unreasonable, and narrow views wish to subjugate as many individuals as possible to their whims, personal illusions of grandeur. That they are not completely balanced or matured in their emotions and personal make up."

With this I am always suspect of anyone who would take away my abilities to defend myself, put food on the table in difficult times, or complete my oath to support and defend the Constitution. I may not have worn a uniform in over 20 years, but after wearing one for nearly 23 years, old habits and values are hard to discard.

Yes. I dated a lady that was liberal (we all make mistakes). I've owned my own personal gun since I was 10. So I had a pistol in the house. Now I am rarely pushy towards trying to make someone do something. However the one area I am is guns. If someone is going to be around guns then they need to understand them, and have shot them at least once. Just so you know what is around. So I took her to the range and we rented a .22 pistol and bought like a hundred rounds. Not a very big bang, not any recoil, and cheap (before the ammo scarcity). She really enjoyed it and we went back in a couple of weeks with my 1911, and she enjoyed the .45 more than the .22. Got her to see that they are enjoyable to shoot, and it is a fun activity.

She still wasn't convinced of needing them for self defense though. Like many people, she thought she knew more than she really did (we all get guilty of this one). She had gone to a couple of self defense kind of workshop things before. So she bought into the only thing that matters is skill. Which it matters greatly, but so do size, aggressiveness, physical conditioning, speed, experience, and desire to win. It all goes in there. So I told her if she thought she could out fight a burglar why don't we have a little wrastlin' match. Needless to say it didn't go nearly as well as she had imagined it would. No bruises, nothing hurt, but I asked her, "Okay now what if I had hauled off and punched you in the face? How well could you have fought through that? When I had you down, if I had broken your arm? Now what if I had a club or a knife? Worse yet what if I had a gun and you never even got close enough to fight? I am one man, not in the best of shape, and very little training; I managed to gain control of you while taking care to not hurt you. You think a robber or rapist is going to care if you get hurt? Are you really willing to take that risk? Are you willing to risk your children on that?"

I didn't get her to be conservative, I didn't get her into being an armed citizen. I did get her to change her mind on being anti-gun though. I never did get her into being self-reliant which I thought was a much easier sell. "Why don't you have jumper cables?" "Someone around will have a pair." ... "Where is your first aid kit at?" "We don't have one, I have some bandaids. If anyone gets hurt too bad we'll just go to the emergency room."

Most of the people I hang with are like minded (pro-Gun). I did convert a non committed person (neither pro or anti gun and not originally from US) I explained the self protection, hunting and enjoyment aspects. He was very understanding and started inquiring about hand guns and how to get a CHL. He didn't understand why I had several different firearms until I used the tool box explanation and demonstrated the attributes of each then he understood.

Back in my college days and into my late 20's some of the people I spent time with were very much anti gun. I took several of the ones I thought were worth saving ( mostly women ) out shooting (always one at a time ) and all of them came away with a different attitude about guns and shooting sports. Not sure whether any of them are enthusiasts now, but I know one of them married a friend who was an avid shooter.

IMO, most anti sentiment comes from a place of ignorance. Educating those open to the experience will go a long way to protecting 2A.

Jago668 wrote:Yes. I dated a lady that was liberal (we all make mistakes). I've owned my own personal gun since I was 10. So I had a pistol in the house. Now I am rarely pushy towards trying to make someone do something. However the one area I am is guns. If someone is going to be around guns then they need to understand them, and have shot them at least once. Just so you know what is around. So I took her to the range and we rented a .22 pistol and bought like a hundred rounds. Not a very big bang, not any recoil, and cheap (before the ammo scarcity). She really enjoyed it and we went back in a couple of weeks with my 1911, and she enjoyed the .45 more than the .22. Got her to see that they are enjoyable to shoot, and it is a fun activity.

She still wasn't convinced of needing them for self defense though. Like many people, she thought she knew more than she really did (we all get guilty of this one). She had gone to a couple of self defense kind of workshop things before. So she bought into the only thing that matters is skill. Which it matters greatly, but so do size, aggressiveness, physical conditioning, speed, experience, and desire to win. It all goes in there. So I told her if she thought she could out fight a burglar why don't we have a little wrastlin' match. Needless to say it didn't go nearly as well as she had imagined it would. No bruises, nothing hurt, but I asked her, "Okay now what if I had hauled off and punched you in the face? How well could you have fought through that? When I had you down, if I had broken your arm? Now what if I had a club or a knife? Worse yet what if I had a gun and you never even got close enough to fight? I am one man, not in the best of shape, and very little training; I managed to gain control of you while taking care to not hurt you. You think a robber or rapist is going to care if you get hurt? Are you really willing to take that risk? Are you willing to risk your children on that?"

I didn't get her to be conservative, I didn't get her into being an armed citizen. I did get her to change her mind on being anti-gun though. I never did get her into being self-reliant which I thought was a much easier sell. "Why don't you have jumper cables?" "Someone around will have a pair." ... "Where is your first aid kit at?" "We don't have one, I have some bandaids. If anyone gets hurt too bad we'll just go to the emergency room."

The media has a lot to do with this.....movie after movie and tv show after tv show have ridiculous fight scenes where women easily vanquish all manner of men. The media is indoctrinating a lot of young women to believe that they are equal to a man in a fight. There are going to be a lot of women in for a very rude awakening at some point in their lives. Of course the media will never take any responsibility for their reckless disregard of reality.

There are different types of antis. The type that is active and joins anti self-defense groups like Moms Demanding Action have emotional attachments that are unlikely to be overcome with logic. A lot of the non-active types haven't thought things out and may be susceptible to logic. In any case, if for no other reason, responding to them, especially in public forums like comments after an article, can alert them to the fact that they're really in a minority, and that tends to have a wonderfully demoralizing impact on them.

VMI77 wrote:There are different types of antis. The type that is active and joins anti self-defense groups like Moms Demanding Action have emotional attachments that are unlikely to be overcome with logic. A lot of the non-active types haven't thought things out and may be susceptible to logic. In any case, if for no other reason, responding to them, especially in public forums like comments after an article, can alert them to the fact that they're really in a minority, and that tends to have a wonderfully demoralizing impact on them.

As a generalization perhaps.

My Yankee sister and her Hillary-loving clan came to visit us for the holidays last year. (Needless to say, we don't spend a lot of time together )
Long story short, in the end I sat with them in the living room and we had a very frank "lesson 1" about guns.
I probably didn't change their minds, but, I believe I changed their perceptions somewhat.

My favorite part was when I put a loaded gun on the kitchen table (holstered, empty chamber, just in case... they ARE Yankees, after all ) and said...
"Ok.... here's a loaded gun. Let's sit here and see how long it takes for it to go bang if nobody touches it."
I let that sink in for a solid 5 minutes before moving on.

I felt better that my nieces and nephews at least got a safety lesson.
Good luck getting lane time at a range the first few days after Christmas.