The myth of gun control

[Beric]

The politicians who want to advance gun control, want to take your guns away. They are the worst kind of hypocrites because they are protected by armed guards with guns 24/7. Lt. Gov. Gavin Newsome is protected by a special unit of the CHP. The Billionaires who support politicians like Gavin Newsome pay millions of dollars a year to have armed security guards protecting them. They want to take your guns away because it is more convenient for them for you to be unarmed. They have no need to be armed because they can afford to have armed people constantly surrounding them. They don't care about your safety, only their own. Let's see if they are willing to give up their armed guards when they ask you to give up your guns.

[Cheezle56]

Preaching to the choir.

[neouser]

I've been slowly learning that the best way to argue against gun control is to offer sound alternate solutions. Simply saying, "They shouldn't be banned because of x, y, z, 2nd Amendment, yadda yadda yadda," does not win people over to your side.

It's give and take. We have to admit that there is a problem with gun violence, but the problem isn't with guns. It's a social problem. Not even mental health, but just a combination of a tough economy and lack of social values. The solution isn't a few swipes of the pen and dependency on the government to make the problem go away. It takes time, effort and sacrifices. Supporting local economy, creating jobs that can sustain a level of income where emphasis can be placed on time with one's family, spending time working in youth outreach programs in urban areas. Even improving foreign policy. All parts of the real solution.

Of course, there will be statistics and other research and studies to reference. (Preferably from non-conservative or pro-gun biased websites.) But everything needs to be presented factually and intelligently, and with patience. And we will need to listen to them as well and accept their input and acknowledge them when there is something that they are saying that is true.

Honestly, I really am concerned about the future of this country. I don't have kids and never want to have them, but if I did, I know that within the next century or two, they will be slaves of the government. We're creating a society where people are dependent on the government and will blindly follow.

The discussion needs to be broader than the pros/cons of gun control. I think more people understand when it's talked about from a broader perspective. I don't know if I've changed the mind of any pro-gun control people, but I know that, at very least, I've given them something to think about and consider.

[randomBytes]

The anti's have already taken far too much.
Their arguments are specious at best, time to tell them to simply f'ck off

[neouser]

What about the people in between? The ones on the fence? The ones that base their opinions on what the sensationalist media presents to them? Or what politicians say?

I don't think it's a lost cause. I think a lot of people that are on the fence have been misinformed. And I've even met "anti's" who were surprised to find out that some of their facts were wrong.

While I understand our anger about the whole situation, there are people who genuinely don't know better. A little bit of patience and kindness goes a long way when explaining things to people who have been lied to by politicians and the media.

[sfzombiegunner]

Concerning statistics, I think Alan Gura said it best when he said that guns are the leading cause of statistics and they are overwhelming for any argument, for or against. Our founding fathers included the 2nd amendment for a reason and the reason is an important one. When antis talk about more gun laws there is the simple fact that "Irish Democracy" has shown to be the go to for most people living in Connecticut and New York. Confiscating all firearms is neither realistic or sensible.