PDA

View Full Version : Argument with antis


SAR_boats
07-24-2012, 1:29 PM
I have been in plenty of arguments with anti-gun types, especially in the wake of the Colorado shooting. This is the best argument I have come up with so far. I have yet to have an anti one up me when I use this:

In 2008 there were an estimated 9,369 Homicides with firearms. There are approximately 270,000,000 privately owned (not gov't owned) firearms in the united states. In 2009 there were 73,448 forcible (not statutory or any other type) rapes with a male aggressor. There are 151,781,326 males in this country per the 2010 census. Sooooooo: The chance that any firearm you see will be used in a murder is: 0.0000347%. The chance that any random penis will be used in a rape is .0004839%. Thus: any random penis is 14 times as likely to be used in a rape, as a gun in a murder. Obviously we should outlaw penises in this country since they are 14 times as likely to commit violent crime as guns. Or at least have to license and regulate their use. Or, we can realize that both guns and penises are tools, and the person wielding the tool is the one who commits the crime, not the tool itself.

What say ye.....?

Renaissance Redneck
07-24-2012, 1:38 PM
.... "random penis" ..... LOL

Wiz-of-Awd
07-24-2012, 1:44 PM
All this talk about dick is disturbing...

A.W.D.

Untamed1972
07-24-2012, 1:50 PM
Obviously we should outlaw penises in this country since they are 14 times as likely to commit violent crime as guns. Or at least have to license and regulate their use.....?

Dont give them any ideas....the feminazis would be all over that.

And BTW.....who are you calling a tool? LOL :p

Cain murdered Able with a rock, and from that point on their has always been murder with everything from bare hands up to the most modern weapon available at any given time. Banning any particular item will not eliminate murder. As long as there are those murderous intent in their hearts, tools to carry that intent out will always be available.

The truly heartless thing is those that take away the ability of the innocent to protect themselves against another's murderous intent.

Kappy
07-24-2012, 1:51 PM
I'm going to make a separate thread which will be probably the most powerful argument.

Kappy
07-24-2012, 2:17 PM
Meh. I'll just post it here:


I believe that it is incumbent upon every citizen, especially those of us who have accepted the responsibility of owning firearms, to be capable of discussing the facts. In the wake of certain incidents, I figure this is a great time to bring up a very important set of facts which a pro-2A citizen can bring up in order to establish* the importance, necessity, and even sanctity of the 2A.
1. "You aren't in a militia." Look... regardless of how you want to define a militia, the bottom line is that the SCOTUS has agreed that the 2A is an individual right. The militia clause is not the reason for the 2A; it is a supporting reason. Still, we, as citizens, must always have recourse and redress. We must be able to take back democracy. But let's move beyond that. We don't need a reason. We have an unlimited and unfettered right to bear arms.

2. One of the more common arguments concerning the 2A is that we do not need "powerful firearms" like AR-style rifles. You supposedly cannot use them for hunting (a ridiculous notion, as they are used all the time). They cannot be used for self/home-defense (which must be why every police officer has one in their vehicle). There are many other purposes for firearms. First, relaxation and enjoyment, like long range target shooting. Second, sports like two and three-gun competitions. Then there's training for the military. And collecting.

3. Don't think we need guns for protection from the government? Research Hurricane Katrina. That will be all.

4. This is perhaps the most powerful argument. Columbine? Aurora? Virginia Tech? Sure, they all have guns in common, and sure I could argue that having a gun in the hand of a good guy could have saved lives, but there's no proof of that. How about this...

THE WORST PUBLIC MASSACRES IN THE UNITED STATES HAVE NOT INVOLVED FIREARMS!

1. 9/11-- Airplanes-- 2996 killed, 6,000+ inured.
2. Oklahoma Federal Building-- Bomb -- 168 killed, 680+ injured.

Sure... these are extreme examples, but how about the worst school massacre?

3. Bath Michigan School Massacre-- Bomb-- 45 people killed, 58 injured.

Yeah... 45 and 58. That's worst than VT and Columbine... almost combined!

So let's not claim that guns are the problem. The problem is that there are evil people out there. The problem is that the human body is frail. The problem is that we like to jump on the easy fix which doesn't get a damned thing done. If these wackos don't have guns, they will use bombs. I'd rather someone go crazy with a gun than get funny ideas about fertilize bombs and home-made plastique.





*Note that I do not say to "protect." I believe that a "right" needs no protection. It is a fact of life. Arguing against the 2A is like arguing against the necessity for gravity.

Rossi357
07-24-2012, 2:20 PM
I guess it follows that all women should have their female parts banned because they may become prostitutes.
This will also cause a large part of the male population to go blind.

Untamed1972
07-24-2012, 2:35 PM
4. This is perhaps the most powerful argument. Columbine? Aurora? Virginia Tech? Sure, they all have guns in common, and sure I could argue that having a gun in the hand of a good guy could have saved lives, but there's no proof of that.



All of those and others were also "gun free zones".

Librarian
07-24-2012, 4:37 PM
4. This is perhaps the most powerful argument. Columbine? Aurora? Virginia Tech? Sure, they all have guns in common, and sure I could argue that having a gun in the hand of a good guy could have saved lives, but there's no proof of that.

... but we DO know what happened when there were no guns in the hands of the good guys.

One might expect folks to get tired of making the same mistake.

Bill Carson
07-24-2012, 4:43 PM
Statistics usually do not sway anti 2a's point of view.

ja308
07-24-2012, 4:45 PM
Happy time nightclub NYC 93 dead wih gas bomb -------------apparently guns are about the least lethel way of committing mass murder .

Guns are however very effective at discouraging an out of control govt . See JPFO.org for examples .

Nyanman
07-24-2012, 4:47 PM
Seriously, I responded to a tweet saying that crazy people were a bigger issue than firearms, only to have the person say I wanted to lock up all crazy people, and that that was a slippery slope.
Then the other person said anyone should be able to have whatever guns, just all ammo should be prohibitively expensive.

jwkincal
07-24-2012, 4:53 PM
Seriously, I responded to a tweet saying that crazy people were a bigger issue than firearms, only to have the person say I wanted to lock up all crazy people, and that that was a slippery slope.
Then the other person said anyone should be able to have whatever guns, just all ammo should be prohibitively expensive.

He's riffing on Chris Rock's "bullet control" bit.

Anchors
07-24-2012, 4:55 PM
My main point is that car crashes kill more people than shootings a year.
And people say "we need cars, we don't need guns".
Then I point out that even if we didn't need guns (obviously false) more people drink and drink and kill innocents than people with guns do every year. And that drinking alcohol is not a necessary for any reason, yet no one wants to ban it because we tried and not only did it fail but we got the mafia out of it.
And even if you don't believe in banning guns or alcohol outright, no one is calling for mandatory interlock ignition devices. Why?
There is inherent risk living in a free society.
We shouldn't punish people for the mistakes of others.

Also, according to the FBI in 2010 rifles of any type were used in only 358 of the 8,775 murders committed with a gun. Comparatively, 745 people were beaten to death with bare hands that year. Clearly AR15s aren't the problem here...

Holmes also had enough explosives to level his apartment complex and as rapper IceT pointed out even if he couldn't get a gun it wouldn't really make it harder to kill people because you can strap explosives to yourself.

Feel free to regurgitate that argument if you like it.

Mendo223
07-24-2012, 4:58 PM
HAHAH AWESOME MAN! im seriously tempted to facebook that..

ive been i a TON of arguments as well....even had one with my mom today. i want to smash a brick into james holmes face for what he caused...



also another thing i want to bring up...

MOST CELEBS/POLITICIANS are calling for a ban on assault weapons. well assault weapons are ALREADY BANNED...and the weapon used was NOT AN ASSAULT WEAPON.

most massacres "va tech, hood, gabby giffords" a GLOCK PISTOL WAS USED...

assault weapon homicides are extremely rare in this country...most gun homicides from from handguns..

Nyanman
07-24-2012, 5:02 PM
I have to thank Kappy though, as soon as I mentioned the Bath Schoolhouse Massacre that seemed to have shut them up.
Although a new tweet a couple minutes after with no reply name attached did say 'if the point I was making was a bus, you showed up at a train station.'
But it didn't have my name on it, so it was merely probably addressed at me without directly stating me.

jwkincal
07-24-2012, 5:04 PM
Also, according to the FBI in 2010 rifles of any type were used in only 358 of the 8,775 murders committed with a gun. Comparatively, 745 people were beaten to death with bare hands that year. Clearly AR15s aren't the problem here...

This is one of my faves.

sirgrumps
07-24-2012, 5:24 PM
Ask this simple question,

"Before declaring that gun control is the answer, name a gun-control policy that actually could have made a difference? in Colorado

Ask if they remember the Appalachian School of Law shooting (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Appalachian_School_of_Law_shooting), where two armed students were able to stop another school massacre?

Ask if someone was armed at VirginiaTech, would body count have been lower?

And remind them of the North Hollywood Bank Robbery, Post California AW ban, where the bad guys actually used Full Auto AK's, in violation of State AND Federal Law. How did those laws prevent the bank robbery?

And ask, "If a bad guy was asked to stop because the crime is is committing is against the law? Which would be more persuasive, a very well spoken celebrity espousing the laws being violated or a CCW permit holder pointing a Glock at the bad guy?"

2Bear
07-24-2012, 5:47 PM
This is a good perspective on the incident:

http://www.suntimes.com/news/otherviews/13970227-452/outrage-over-guns-is-irrational.html

<...> there is no reliable way to identify those people before the fact. “There’s nothing you can do to predict that type of crime,” former FBI agent Peter Ahearn told the Associated Press. “There’s no way you can prevent it.”

Best to have a responsible armed citizen or two or twelve in the mix.

neouser
07-24-2012, 6:15 PM
I will remember this thread and you're going to take a lot of sh1t from me if PRK suddenly introduces a bill that requires me to register my penis or enacts some sort of microstamping requirement every time I tap some @ss...

Intimid8tor
07-24-2012, 6:55 PM
I've been in a couple arguments lately. The person kept saying different things like he didn't and couldn't use knife to kill multiple people. So I pointed out the massacre in Japan done by one man with a knife. That was the last one she threw up. Then she stopped posting.

I like some of the points above and look forward to using them.

NoJoke
07-24-2012, 7:23 PM
Statistics usually do not sway anti 2a's point of view.

This.

I have a friend who I hold in high regard - but I just leave everything gun out of the conversation.

Very well educated.
Very successful in business.
Actually, the perfect target for a bad guy (small, light and high profile).

And the friend's last communication via e-mail regarding Aurora to me: "I have to tell you that my opinions on gun control differ dramatically from yours. I think you knew that."

Breaks my heart.

But....I won't give up. Maybe someday I can convince that guns are not bad.

Not sure if that day will ever come tho....:(

morfeeis
07-24-2012, 8:01 PM
I have been in plenty of arguments with anti-gun types, especially in the wake of the Colorado shooting. This is the best argument I have come up with so far. I have yet to have an anti one up me when I use this:

In 2008 there were an estimated 9,369 Homicides with firearms. There are approximately 270,000,000 privately owned (not gov't owned) firearms in the united states. In 2009 there were 73,448 forcible (not statutory or any other type) rapes with a male aggressor. There are 151,781,326 males in this country per the 2010 census. Sooooooo: The chance that any firearm you see will be used in a murder is: 0.0000347%. The chance that any random penis will be used in a rape is .0004839%. Thus: any random penis is 14 times as likely to be used in a rape, as a gun in a murder. Obviously we should outlaw penises in this country since they are 14 times as likely to commit violent crime as guns. Or at least have to license and regulate their use. Or, we can realize that both guns and penises are tools, and the person wielding the tool is the one who commits the crime, not the tool itself.

What say ye.....?
That is awesome, thanks!

command_liner
07-24-2012, 8:18 PM
Outlaw doctors...

I do not have the figures right here in my hands, but last time I did the
research, I found that any random person in the US was 10x more likely
to be killed accidentally by a doctor in a hospital than by a firearm for any
reason.

That was like 4 years ago. Probably has not changed much.

2Bear
07-24-2012, 8:32 PM
Outlaw doctors...

I do not have the figures right here in my hands, but last time I did the
research, I found that any random person in the US was 10x more likely
to be killed accidentally by a doctor in a hospital than by a firearm for any
reason.

That was like 4 years ago. Probably has not changed much.

Yeah, but, apparently too easily dismissed:

http://www.truthorfiction.com/rumors/d/doctor-deaths.htm

This article considers increasing armed security:

http://www.businessweek.com/articles/2012-07-23/instead-of-gun-control-more-private-security#r=related-rail

Yet it circles back to the inevitable practicality of a shall-issue carry policy for responsible, well-trained individuals.

SAR_boats
07-25-2012, 4:24 AM
The licensing, and ccw of a penis could get weird too.

Cop: Sir, I have reason to believe that you have a penis on your person.
Citizen: I do not consent to a search under my 4th amendment rights
Cop: Sir, you have an adam's apple, I have probable cause.
Citizen: s**t.
Cop: Ah ha! Just as I thought, do you have a permit to carry a concealed penis?
Citizen: No, I just figured I might get lucky tonight.
Cop: Sir, I am placing you under arrest under PC 216969: carrying a concealed penis without a permit, pc216969a: carrying a concealed penis with the intent to cause intercourse, and pc216969d: possession of a weapon of mass conception.
Citizen: What?!?!?! Why the last one?
Cop: Your penis is above a state specified size, sir.
Citizen: Since I am a responsible penis owner, I am complying and not resisting, officer.
Cop: Thank you sir. Your penis will be logged in as evidence and placed in the evidence room. You, however, are going to a holding cell. Now hold still....
Citizen: Eff this, NOW i AM am resisting......

Hopalong
07-25-2012, 5:31 AM
Well, one of two things happened

They either came around to your point of view

Or they think you are a little nutty

I don't argue with these people

AC89
07-25-2012, 7:06 AM
Honestly most anti's I come across are ignorant an stupid. They refuse facts and logical conclusions. They are capable of nothing more then fear, and ignorance. They are happy with living in there make believe world.

The saddest thing I know of is a good friend who is anti, and studying to become a US historian. He refuses to believe that any good can come from the gun, and that the 2A is needed. Even after trying to explain the reasoning behind, and the necessity of it.

Needless to say, I try to stay out of arguments of his sort as much as possible.

huntercf
07-25-2012, 7:14 AM
I've been in a couple arguments lately. The person kept saying different things like he didn't and couldn't use knife to kill multiple people. So I pointed out the massacre in Japan done by one man with a knife. That was the last one she threw up. Then she stopped posting.

I like some of the points above and look forward to using them.

Didn't the 9/11 hijackers use box cutters (a form of knife) to massacre thousands?

sandwich
07-25-2012, 7:30 AM
most massacres "va tech, hood, gabby giffords" a GLOCK PISTOL WAS USED...


Minor detail correction: Ft. Hood was FN 5.7, not Glock.

donw
07-25-2012, 8:38 AM
Honestly most anti's I come across are ignorant an stupid. They refuse facts and logical conclusions. They are capable of nothing more then fear, and ignorance. They are happy with living in there make believe world.

The saddest thing I know of is a good friend who is anti, and studying to become a US historian. He refuses to believe that any good can come from the gun, and that the 2A is needed. Even after trying to explain the reasoning behind, and the necessity of it.

Needless to say, I try to stay out of arguments of his sort as much as possible.

very noteworthy.

i, too, try to distance myself from such debates...however...one thing i like to voice IF i do engage in the debate is:

"If you allow the 2A to be removed/negated, which do you want to give up next? surely, your right to free speech is not that important is it? or what about your freedom of/from religion? and how about assembly? you really don't want/need that do you? as sure as we stand here today, they are ALL under attack in one way or another from Washington d.c./state/county/city legislators...without the 2A, there is NO WAY TO PROTECT THE REST.

you may, freely, choose to live in fear to defend yourself and loved ones by allowing only the police, at their discretion/ability to defend you and those loved ones, if you so desire...i choose to be able to defend myself and those i love when, and if, the need arises until the police arrive."

The War Wagon
07-25-2012, 8:43 AM
Just buy 'em a t-shirt... http://www.freesmileys.org/smileys/smiley-happy009.gif

http://thepeoplescube.com/images/TeaParties/Washington_Che_200.jpg (http://thepeoplescube.com/images/TeaParties/Washington_Che.jpg)


http://static.thepeoplescube.com/images/Joker_Che_Guevara_300.png

http://i212.photobucket.com/albums/cc305/The_War_Wagon/FOUNDERSHomelandSecurity.jpg

Tyson
07-25-2012, 8:49 AM
Statistics usually do not sway anti 2a's point of view.

This is so true, their arguments usually stem from an emotional point of view not

a logical one.

daveinwoodland
07-25-2012, 9:13 AM
This is a good perspective on the incident:

http://www.suntimes.com/news/otherviews/13970227-452/outrage-over-guns-is-irrational.html



Best to have a responsible armed citizen or two or twelve in the mix.
I sent off an email to the author commending him on a well thought, well written article. Thanks for posting that!

bulgron
07-25-2012, 9:23 AM
I like to point out that the vast majority of violent crime in the United States is driven by drug prohibition, and so if you really want to reduce the violent crime rate in the US you should be seeking to repeal the War on Drugs, instead of demonizing 120 million gun owners who are a threat to nobody. The War on Drugs is the real problem. Guns are just a symptom.

So far, liberals have had a problem coming back on that one because they really, really want to end the War on Drugs. It changes the subject from gun control to the actual cause of violence in America, which is where we want the conversation anyway.

AeroEngi
07-25-2012, 10:41 AM
Great thread. Tagging for later.

1BigPea
07-25-2012, 11:05 AM
A lot of great responses, but the OP is hilarious and true.

SteveMartin
07-25-2012, 11:12 AM
The licensing, and ccw of a penis could get weird too.



Well, I'm certainly thankful that open carry became illegal. :D

AeroEngi
07-25-2012, 11:35 AM
Also, according to the FBI in 2010 rifles of any type were used in only 358 of the 8,775 murders committed with a gun. Comparatively, 745 people were beaten to death with bare hands that year. Clearly AR15s aren't the problem here...

Found the source for this if anyone is interested. The numbers work out.

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/crime-in-the-u.s/2010/crime-in-the-u.s.-2010/tables/10tbl20.xls

NYsteveZ
07-25-2012, 11:55 AM
Next time an Anti starts about gun control, bring this up-http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarin_gas_attack_on_the_Tokyo_subway
What kind of gun laws are there in Japan? James Joker of Aurora is a smart man, do you think he couldnt come up with a similar attack without guns? Oh yeah, he did-IED's in his apartment. They were made with gasoline-should we ban gas? How does the gun laws help in Norway? Mexico? One last fun fact-the crime rate in the US has actually gone DOWN since the sunset of the AWB in 2004. After this, go ahead and call them a random penis for good measure.
Stupid wiki link, here it is http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sarin_gas_attack_on_the_Tokyo_subway

highpowermatch
07-25-2012, 3:00 PM
Honestly most anti's I come across are ignorant an stupid. They refuse facts and logical conclusions. They are capable of nothing more then fear, and ignorance. They are happy with living in there make believe world.

The saddest thing I know of is a good friend who is anti, and studying to become a US historian. He refuses to believe that any good can come from the gun, and that the 2A is needed. Even after trying to explain the reasoning behind, and the necessity of it.

Needless to say, I try to stay out of arguments of his sort as much as possible.

A US historian who thinks "nothing good can come from a gun" Wow

AC89
07-26-2012, 7:17 AM
A US historian who thinks "nothing good can come from a gun" Wow

Yeah, first time I heard that I was dumbfounded. Even when I brought up that we the United States of America was founded essentially by the gun. He couldn't say any thing other than guns are bad. He holds more with the English than the US, swear he is a redcoat.

It rather frightens me that he thinks that way, to be honest. God forbid should he ever be teacher.

Mendo223
07-26-2012, 11:23 AM
I've been in a couple arguments lately. The person kept saying different things like he didn't and couldn't use knife to kill multiple people. So I pointed out the massacre in Japan done by one man with a knife. That was the last one she threw up. Then she stopped posting.

I like some of the points above and look forward to using them.

you forgot the mention that holmes had explosives and grenades and the knowledge to use them!!

controversial argument, but maybe his ar15 and gun use SAVED lives....because if he wasnt able to use an ar15 that jammed, and a shotgun that just sprayed bird pellet everywhere.....than he would have used explosives in the movie theatre and killed almost everyone...

just something to think about....

Mendo223
07-26-2012, 11:25 AM
A US historian who thinks "nothing good can come from a gun" Wow

feel free to PM me that historians contact info....i am a history major specializing in US and Chinese history...i would love to have a conversation with him.

2Bear
07-26-2012, 11:33 AM
I sent off an email to the author commending him on a well thought, well written article. Thanks for posting that!

Glad to be of assistance. ;)

Merovign
07-26-2012, 8:04 PM
You can't reason someone out of a position they didn't reason themselves into.

If you just love arguing, go for it. I used to debate this issue online and in person years ago, but it was like pounding your head against a wall. You could document everything and win every argument and the same people would go off to the NYT or NPR or HuffPo and "recharge" and then come back with the *exact* same talking points that were demolished a week earlier.

The only thing that works is overwhelming numbers, funds, votes, lawsuits. Let them become political "Flat Earthers."

As far as people you know and care about, don't get into an argument, just "be the change you want to see in the world" and let them see an example of people who defy their stereotype - and if you get a chance introduce them to your reality.

Some of them will never get it.