PDA

View Full Version : Successful argument for guns!


Turo
11-09-2009, 9:32 PM
Today I was driving some friends to Home Depot to get supplies for a project we're doing. Casual conversation ensued and it turned to guns (how could it not with me in the car :D) Anyway, comments were made as to how a friend's school now has more students carrying concealed on campus. One friend is from Seattle, so I'm assuming the comment was about the school I heard about on the news here a few weeks ago in WA. The other friend said something to the effect of "I don't see why people need to carry guns in the first place."
I said "Really? You don't think people can prevent (or lessen the devastating effects of) these school shootings if some responsible people carried guns?" His response to this was that the likelyhood of somebody preventing a crime with a concealed weapon was very slim. I said "That may be true, but wouldn't it be better to have that slim chance as to none at all?"
I then asked "You're wearing your seatbelt, right?" "Yeah" was the response. I said, "What are the chances I'm going to get into an accident? Not very high right?" He responded with, "Right." I said, "So even though the chances of a school shooting aren't very high, some people want to give themselves the slight advantage in case the unspeakable happens."
He said, "Oh, I guess I never saw it that way" :D

I never thought there was such a thing as a successful argument, but when talking to an intelligent rational thinker (guy is going to school to be an engineer) that is just misinformed, you can at least show them the light.

Additional thoughts: The guy mentioned is a friend of mine that, until now, I've never discussed politics with. I'm thinking I'll invite him to the next range outing and bring one more over to the dark side. :43:

MrPlutonium
11-09-2009, 10:21 PM
Nicely done! It's nice you were able to convince him that way. He seems like a relatively intelligent fella. They usually only need a little nudge in the right direction sometimes I guess. Those are nice. :)

M I K
11-09-2009, 10:43 PM
That was a good talk with a good outcome.

Another good point to compare it with is Fire Extinguishers.

audihenry
11-09-2009, 10:47 PM
Today I was driving some friends to Home Depot to get supplies for a project we're doing. Casual conversation ensued and it turned to guns (how could it not with me in the car :D) Anyway, comments were made as to how a friend's school now has more students carrying concealed on campus. One friend is from Seattle, so I'm assuming the comment was about the school I heard about on the news here a few weeks ago in WA. The other friend said something to the effect of "I don't see why people need to carry guns in the first place."
I said "Really? You don't think people can prevent (or lessen the devastating effects of) these school shootings if some responsible people carried guns?" His response to this was that the likelyhood of somebody preventing a crime with a concealed weapon was very slim. I said "That may be true, but wouldn't it be better to have that slim chance as to none at all?"
I then asked "You're wearing your seatbelt, right?" "Yeah" was the response. I said, "What are the chances I'm going to get into an accident? Not very high right?" He responded with, "Right." I said, "So even though the chances of a school shooting aren't very high, some people want to give themselves the slight advantage in case the unspeakable happens."
He said, "Oh, I guess I never saw it that way" :D

I never thought there was such a thing as a successful argument, but when talking to an intelligent rational thinker (guy is going to school to be an engineer) that is just misinformed, you can at least show them the light.

Additional thoughts: The guy mentioned is a friend of mine that, until now, I've never discussed politics with. I'm thinking I'll invite him to the next range outing and bring one more over to the dark side. :43:

The seatbelt analogy is bad, because a rogue seatbelt can't have one too many drinks and start killing people left and right.

GundamCL
11-09-2009, 11:19 PM
The seatbelt analogy is bad, because a rogue seatbelt can't have one too many drinks and start killing people left and right.

Well I've never poured alcohol on my firearms before, but if I did, I don't think they'd start killing people left and right. :D

Cokebottle
11-09-2009, 11:30 PM
Another good point to compare it with is Fire Extinguishers.
That's the one that I normally use. The problem with the seatbelt analogy is that many people would not wear them if it were not the law.
Same for motorcycle helmets (which I actually don't wear when in a free state)
The seatbelt analogy is bad, because a rogue seatbelt can't have one too many drinks and start killing people left and right.
Actually, the seatbelt analogy is better than the fire extinguisher analogy, as one common argument against seatbelts is that they may trap a person in a car, or the seat shifting may result in the shoulder harness breaking their neck.

Yes, in a fire, an extinguisher may overheat and explode, but I don't think that amount of heat would be survivable for anyone close enough to be injured by the explosion.

As far as someone having a few too many and killing people left and right... how many times has that happened in shall-issue states? Without looking up the stats, I'm pretty confident in saying that seatbelts have killed more people than unjustified shootings by legal CCW holders.

If I get drunk enough to start "shooting people left and right", I know where my gun is whether I'm carrying it or not.
I know where other guns are.
Heck... for that matter... a motor vehicle is a MUCH more effective killing machine than a gun in the hands of a drunk.

audihenry
11-09-2009, 11:43 PM
Well I've never poured alcohol on my firearms before, but if I did, I don't think they'd start killing people left and right. :D

Haha well said. :D

audihenry
11-09-2009, 11:45 PM
Heck... for that matter... a motor vehicle is a MUCH more effective killing machine than a gun in the hands of a drunk.

How often do you park your car in your pocket when you're drinking or sitting around with other people?

By your analogy, ANYTHING can be turned into a weapon, but a gun is already a weapon.

Lateralus
11-09-2009, 11:48 PM
a gun is already a weapon.

Wrong. A gun is an object. The person can use it as a weapon, but by itself it is harmless.

Cokebottle
11-09-2009, 11:53 PM
How often do you park your car in your pocket when you're drinking or sitting around with other people?

By your analogy, ANYTHING can be turned into a weapon, but a gun is already a weapon.
My keys are always on my belt, and some kind of vehicle is always available to me within a very short walk... any of two SUVs or four motorcycles.

Yes, that was exactly my point. Whether the gun is already a weapon or not is irrelevant. There are far more beatings and stabbings caused every weekend by drunks than there are unjustified shootings in a year.
CCW holders are among the most responsible of gun owners.

And BTW: You are prohibited from carrying when consuming alcohol, or (in many/most cases) even in an establishment which has the primary purpose of serving alcohol.
You can stop for dinner at Chili's and still legally carry, but watching MNF at a sports bar would be off limits.

So assuming that you are in compliance with the law when you are sober, the gun is going to be no more accessible to you than a car when you are drunk.

tlillard23
11-09-2009, 11:56 PM
... The problem with the seatbelt analogy is that many people would not wear them if it were not the law.
Same for motorcycle helmets (which I actually don't wear when in a free state)
.....

EVEN better reason to use the seatbelt or helmet law as your analogy. the law says I can't wear my gun, even though I think it would be mo-safer for me. If you don't want to wear a gun (or a helmet) great for you, but don't stop me from wearing one.

audihenry
11-10-2009, 12:00 AM
Wrong. A gun is an object. The person can use it as a weapon, but by itself it is harmless.

No, a gun is INTENDED as a weapon. It is NOT intended as anything other than that.

A lead pipe is something else, but it can be used as a weapon. It is NOT a weapon, but it can be used as one.

A gun has no other purpose. You'd be insane to think that it's not a weapon.

audihenry
11-10-2009, 12:02 AM
And BTW: You are prohibited from carrying when consuming alcohol, or (in many/most cases) even in an establishment which has the primary purpose of serving alcohol.
You can stop for dinner at Chili's and still legally carry, but watching MNF at a sports bar would be off limits.

So assuming that you are in compliance with the law when you are sober, the gun is going to be no more accessible to you than a car when you are drunk.

You are also prohibited from stabbing people, or driving over them, but if the circumstances are there, people do those things. That doesn't mean that a gun is not a weapon.

Cokebottle
11-10-2009, 12:12 AM
You are also prohibited from stabbing people, or driving over them, but if the circumstances are there, people do those things. That doesn't mean that a gun is not a weapon.
Call it what you like... but it's not illegal to drive a car to or carry a pocketknife into a bar.

Remember, we're talking about a situation where a responsible CCW holder or gun owner suddenly becomes irresponsible and homicidal after a few drinks.
The gun is not going to be readily available because the gun would not have been taken into the bar... or would be no more available than his vehicle (which is where it probably would have been secured... if he didn't leave it at home, knowing he was going to be drinking).

When people are drunk and a fight starts, they aren't likely to go get their gun... they're going to grab any weapon available and use that, be it a knife, fist, or a broken bottle.


Once again... take a look at the stats from states with liberal CCW and LOC policies (there's 38 of them out of 50 BTW). The facts do not support your paranoia.

Are you Canadian, British, or Aussie? I'm not trolling... I'm serious... because the only times that I have heard the arguments that you continually present on this forum, they are coming from someone who is a subject (yes, subject, not citizen) of one of those 3 countries.

audihenry
11-10-2009, 12:31 AM
Call it what you like... but it's not illegal to drive a car to or carry a pocketknife into a bar.

Remember, we're talking about a situation where a responsible CCW holder or gun owner suddenly becomes irresponsible and homicidal after a few drinks.
The gun is not going to be readily available because the gun would not have been taken into the bar... or would be no more available than his vehicle (which is where it probably would have been secured... if he didn't leave it at home, knowing he was going to be drinking).

When people are drunk and a fight starts, they aren't likely to go get their gun... they're going to grab any weapon available and use that, be it a knife, fist, or a broken bottle.


Once again... take a look at the stats from states with liberal CCW and LOC policies (there's 38 of them out of 50 BTW). The facts do not support your paranoia.

Are you Canadian, British, or Aussie? I'm not trolling... I'm serious... because the only times that I have heard the arguments that you continually present on this forum, they are coming from someone who is a subject (yes, subject, not citizen) of one of those 3 countries.

Not at all. I like guns, shooting, collecting, etc., but I don't like the idea that people can carry it on them in public. And let's be honest, just as the average citizen does not carry around a legal pocketknife, the average citizen will not CCW, but rather it will be overly enthusiastic gun people (the same kind who carry a gun on their side around their house), and I'd feel less safe knowing they are armed and potentially dangerous.

Just my 2 cents, you don't have to agree.

Cokebottle
11-10-2009, 12:36 AM
For one thing (depending on the county you live in), you might be surprised at the number of people around you every day who are carrying concealed... legally and illegally.
As far as pocketknives, they too are extremely common, to the point that I would actually say that the majority (>50%) of people are carrying some kind of cutting instrument.

And it's the "overly enthusiastic gun people" that you have the LEAST to worry about carrying concealed.
For one thing, a high percentage of them already are carrying.

audihenry
11-10-2009, 12:39 AM
And it's the "overly enthusiastic gun people" that you have the LEAST to worry about carrying concealed.
For one thing, a high percentage of them already are carrying.

I'm not talking about the CalGunner type, but the other kind who believes the world is out to get him and he has to protect himself against all ills of society. That sort of person scares the hell out of me and I'd rather he not have a gun on him.

So you're telling me a high percentage of people in LA or SoCal are already carrying illegally? I know a small percentage have CCW, but not a "high" percentage.

Cokebottle
11-10-2009, 12:50 AM
So you're telling me a high percentage of people in LA or SoCal are already carrying illegally? I know a small percentage have CCW, but not a "high" percentage.
Depending on the county. San Bernardino will issue for "personal protection".
Orange County was also very easy to get a permit when Carona was running the show.

Now, by "high percentage" carrying, I'm not saying 50% or more... I'm just saying "a LOT more than you would believe"

LA? In some neighborhoods, you'll probably encounter 60% unlawful CCW.
I'm not talking about the CalGunner type, but the other kind who believes the world is out to get him and he has to protect himself against all ills of society. That sort of person scares the hell out of me and I'd rather he not have a gun on him.
Again, take a look at other states that have relaxed their LOC and CCW requirements and have become shall-issue. The statistics do not justify the "paranoia" that liberal carry laws will increase violence.
The opposite is quite true, with an across the board drop in rape, robbery, and other violent crimes that typically involve an armed suspect attacking an unarmed person.

audihenry
11-10-2009, 1:07 AM
Again, take a look at other states that have relaxed their LOC and CCW requirements and have become shall-issue. The statistics do not justify the "paranoia" that liberal carry laws will increase violence.
The opposite is quite true, with an across the board drop in rape, robbery, and other violent crimes that typically involve an armed suspect attacking an unarmed person.

I have yet to see a politically unmotivated set of stats: usually it's pro or anti and I'm not interested in either. Further, whether or not it reduces overall crime does not change my personal preference vis-a-vis certain characters carrying guns.

bruceflinch
11-10-2009, 7:11 PM
Not to Threadjack the Threadjackers but, .....NICE JOB TURO!

Purple K
11-10-2009, 7:31 PM
The seatbelt analogy is bad, because a rogue seatbelt can't have one too many drinks and start killing people left and right.

What are you smoking?