CNN Ghandi to Guns article

[eastmanwes]

https://www.cnn.com/2017/04/28/world/indian-immigrant-nra-convention/index.html

Hopefully not a dupe, anyhow I appreciate the author's effort of listening and trying to understand the RKBA - it's nice to read something on the mainstream media where the author isn't rabidly condemning the 2A.

What y'all think ?

-W

[Icypu]

Read it 40 mins ago. I liked that the author could make the connection between firearms restrictions and colonialism. Free people don't need restrictions.

Sent from my ASUS_Z01BDC using Tapatalk

[smle-man]

I felt it was very thoughtful and open.

[fiddletown]

The article illustrates one reason that I, and others, keep harping on the importance of us all being good ambassadors for gun ownership and, and through our ways of presenting ourselves to the world and relating to the world, trying to dispel the negative stereotypes of gun owners.

There will always be people who can not be moved. But the better we can be at dispelling the negative stereotypes of gun owners, increasing numbers of non-gun owners will find it increasingly difficult to dismiss the sorts of positive things the reporter in the article was saying.

We don't have to win over everyone. We have to win over enough. We don't need everyone to be solidly pro-gun. But we'd be a lot better off if more people were at least neutral on the subject and willing to listen carefully and with understanding to our side of the story.

[k1dude]

If she would look into her own ethnic history about guns, she would come across this little gem:

"Among the many misdeeds of British rule in India, history will look upon the act depriving a whole nation of arms as the blackest." - Mahatma Mohandas K. Gandhi

[MudCamper]

Considering the source, it's not too bad. She clearly thought, "guns are bad", and kept looking for evidence, but all she found was, "guns are good". And she published those findings. About as good an article as one could get from CNN.

[SoCal Bob]

I walk around with some trepidation, but I'm determined to strike up conversations. I begin with this question: "Why do you want to own an object that can kill another human being?"

I would like to think that my first question to her would have been to ask if she was talking about cars or firearms.

[fiddletown]

...I would like to think that my first question to her would have been to ask if she was talking about cars or firearms.

Which would be a needlessly snarky and antagonistic response and therefore counterproductive.

[eastmanwes]

Which would be a needlessly snarky and antagonistic response and therefore counterproductive.

Agreed, but I sure do understand the snarkiness tho. Here we are as law abiding, firearm owning citizens, minding our own business yet year after year the idealogues on the left infringe on our constitutional rights. I haven't even owned guns that long and I see the pull to the left happening...

-W

[jeremiah12]

I have a strong feeling that the author would be open to an invite to a range to shoot a few guns.

There are a significant number of antis and fence sitters whose view of guns and what they do come from movies. When they shoot a few and realize the gun will not blow up in their hands or blow up the target, they relax and start to enjoy themselves.

Then many realize it is the person behind the gun and not the gun that either has good or evil intent.

When I have a chance to engage those who want to take the time to listen, I make it clear, the only things that have to fear my guns are the inanimate objects I shoot at the gun range and anybody that is attempting to harm my loved ones or myself. I am as peaceable as others let me be.

[fiddletown]

Agreed, but I sure do understand the snarkiness tho. Here we are as law abiding, firearm owning citizens, minding our own business yet year after year the idealogues on the left infringe on our constitutional rights. I haven't even owned guns that long and I see the pull to the left happening...

Much of today's anti-gun sentiment is a byproduct of the continuing urbanization of America. California, New York, Massachusetts, Illinois, etc., are strongly anti-gun in part because the bulk of the political power in those States is in a few major cities. The rural parts of those States are much more pro-gun or neutral. And in States like Washington and Oregon which generally have decent gun laws, the urban centers area still hotbeds of anti-gun sentiment. And anti-gun urbanites will elect politicians who will represent and promote anti-gun policies.

In an urban milieu guns aren't the familiar, useful, everyday tools of most "regular" folks -- as they historically tended to be in more rural environments. In cities guns aren't about protecting the livestock from predation and putting meat on the table. The city dweller associates guns with crime and drug dealers and unbalanced people taking out their anger on innocents. The struggle for the RKBA is increasingly a matter of a clash of cultures.

That is the reality. We as advocates for the RKBA ignore that reality at our peril, but in many ways we've done a lousy job of facing and addressing that reality. We somehow can't, or won't, face the fact that many urbanites are afraid of guns, are afraid of people who have guns, and don't understand people who have guns.

We live in a pluralistic, political society, and not everyone thinks as we do. People have varying beliefs, values, needs, wants and fears. People have differing views on the proper role government. So while we may be using the tools the Constitution, our laws and our system give you to promote our vision of how things should be, others may and will be using those same tools to promote their visions.

The Constitution, our laws, and our system give us resource and remedies. We can associate with others who think as we do and exercise what political power that association gives us to influence legislation. We have the opportunity to try to join with enough other people we can elect legislators and other public officials who we consider more attuned to our interests. And we can seek redress in court. And others who believe differently have the same opportunities.

[monk]

I walk around with some trepidation, but I'm determined to strike up conversations. I begin with this question: "Why do you want to own an object that can kill another human being?"

I would like to think that my first question to her would have been to ask if she was talking about cars or firearms.

I hated that loaded question too. I'm surprised people didn't tell her to pound sand. If they had I imagine she would've reported it.

[geoint]

Considering the source, it's not too bad. She clearly thought, "guns are bad", and kept looking for evidence, but all she found was, "guns are good". And she published those findings. About as good an article as one could get from CNN.

lol happy endings do happen every once in awhile


I didn't read it cuz I refuse to give CNN ad revenue or traffic

[Milsurp Collector]

Which would be a needlessly snarky and antagonistic response and therefore counterproductive.

I agree with you. Being needlessly snarky and antagonistic is counterproductive.

I guess you didn't take Civics in school, or you didn't do too well.

Congratulations.

Of course, we can never know if anything you report is accurate, but no matter.

More hogwash from the wilfully [sic] ignorant.

The reality is that you have no training or real experience in law and are just making stuff up again. Your rants are just a type of magical thinking. Often folks who really don't understand things will resort to some type of "magical thinking" to explain what to them is unexplainable.

You apparently aren't capable of understanding the difference between getting away with committing a crime and doing things legally.

How do people come up with this sort of nonsense?

It looks like I'll need to address your wilful ignorance.

You're really a sad case. You've gotten everything wrong so far, and you keep getting everything wrong. You've gotten so much of this stuff wrong, how could we believe that anything you say might be right.

And those posts are just from this month. There are many similar ones before those, but there is a limit to the number of posts that can be quoted.

[TTT]