Perspective from someone who was anti-gun

[Fastattack]

My sister would say "I agree, but we have to DO SOMETHING!"
Back to square one.

[Trail Teams]

I flipped a multitude of anti gunners when I was a California resident, simply by not being a douche bag when talking to them and taking them to the range on my time and dime and educating them. They are all adamant 2a supporters, recreational shooters, and collectors now. It can be done, but it takes effort. If everyone on CG would take one neighbor who is neutral or just propaganda media ignorant/anti gun to the range this year, be nice, respectful and helpful, think of the new support you could garner in the state.

If Ca gun shops would demand their employees to be nice, helpful, and respectful, especially to new shooters and potential buyers, think of the support you could ad.

If public ranges would ****can every old codger who treats people like crap (Richmond & Livermore I'm talking to you), and provide a place of learning for new shooters, think of the support you could get. My wife used to REFUSE to go shoot at Livermore because of a couple RSO's that used to "work" there. It takes effort from everyone in the fight. The gun owner, the ranges, and the stores. Provide a welcoming learning environment for new people or curious people, or continue to watch as fewer and fewer people join in or think gun owners are a bunch of dicks.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

Great post. I can totally relate to this, and I wrote about this in post #25. I thought I was the only one who thought like this, and that's why I'm implying that there is an image problem. The first time I went to the range, I didn't feel welcome. I even tried asking about a gun they had on display, and the employee gave me that stank eye and basically ignored me lol. Who knows, maybe he was having a bad day. And another gripe I had was how unsafe I felt. The people next to my lane were obviously new shooters, and I felt like they were constantly flagging me. I had to inform the front desk about the situation and they finally talked to them. But since then, I've also had good experiences in gun stores and other ranges. But I agree with you, I think that this is a problem that can be easily resolved with management and training.

[hunterb]

Thanks for the response, and I failed to define terms. I considered myself "anti-gun" because 1.) I thought that if there are no guns, there would be no shootings. 2.) I don't want to risk hurting someone accidentally. Accidents do happen. 3.) I lived in Australia for 5 years, and no one had guns. Same with Japan. If other countries can do it, why can't we? My point is that the term "anti-gun" is applicable to a wider demographic. I would argue that anyone who votes for gun control, or anyone who thought the way I did, and even those who say they just don't care, can be considered "anti-gun". And it goes both ways. Just because someone owns a gun does not automatically make that person "pro-gun".

As for your issue with #1, I hope you can follow the rest of this thread because I'll be writing more about that.

Comparing the United States with Japan is such a tired, stupid, ILLOGICAL argument I cannot even begin to address how utterly illogical and stupid that is.
Next are you going to compare a shark and a dust pan? A car and abstract thought?


Explain why we suddenly have an issue with shootings though we have always had LOTS of guns? ANSWER: The immigration act of 1965 AND Libtard social policies--like Welfare which destroyed the family unit.

[Trail Teams]

OP and others---I have found that the real strong anti people will not change. This is because they only use emotional responses and not thinking and will not hear/accept logic, facts and figures or take the time to think thru things.

Thanks for sharing that story about your neighbor. The funny thing is that a few years ago, I could've easily been that neighbor. I was lucky that I saw the light by acknowledging how little I knew about guns. But it looks like your neighbor learned the hard way, or maybe she didn't learn anything at all. I agree, not everyone will learn. And unfortunately, their population is growing. That's why I wrote about a different approach in post #25. Maybe we can try something different. But if you don't mind me asking, did you ever try to talk to your neighbor after that incident? I'm really curious how she clearly knew there was a real threat, and the threat could return at any time, but she still reverted to her old way of thinking.

[Trail Teams]

Comparing the United States with Japan is such a tired, stupid, ILLOGICAL argument I cannot even begin to address how utterly illogical and stupid that is.
Next are you going to compare a shark and a dust pan? A car and abstract thought?


Explain why we suddenly have an issue with shootings though we have always had LOTS of guns? ANSWER: The immigration act of 1965 AND Libtard social policies--like Welfare which destroyed the family unit.

Totally agree. It is an illogical argument, and that's how I use to think.

[Steves32]

I have a lot of friends & must say most would be considered anti gun. A few are pro gun but they never shoot. Just have guns in a safe that hasn’t been opened in years. My other friends would never own a gun or have one in their home. However, here’s where I see a difference. Not one of them thinks I’m some crazy gun owner- in fact- every one of them supports my right to own firearms, it’s just not for them. I’m good with that & respect their right to choose to not own a gun. Most people I know feel this way. I’ve even gotten a couple of them to the range & BLM to let them try my guns. While they had a big smile on their face after they got past the fear, it didn’t change them into being a gun owner. If it did anything- they understood I was having fun & not harming anyone & why I do it. I find it hard to believe my cross section of California residents is unique & I strongly feel we are being manipulated by a few in office for their own political power agenda.

[Scratch705]

the issue is, do these friends vote no on new gun control laws, or do they vote yes because "of the children"?

that is the main issue of why gun control laws and politicians keeps getting voted in. they use mis-information and prey on the ignorant to make guns the boogeyman so they will vote for Yes on gun control.

my few friends that don't own guns but enjoy shooting, they know to vote no on anything for more gun laws. i informed them enough and also i let them know they can ask me for clarification on what the law is trying to do instead of believing the lawyer speak.

[Trail Teams]

Thanks for this post. I really need to find some good BLM spots. It's just been difficult for me to find time lately.

And I think that is a good segue to what you've observed. From my personal observation and from someone who was anti-gun, for a lot of people, guns are not a priority. And I'm arguing that that's fine, it's their choice. But as I mentioned in approach #1 and #2, I realized that I was uneducated about guns and I was being manipulated for political gain. But even with that realization, I can say that a lot of people still don't care. And I'm arguing that we can't change everyone or convince them otherwise. What we can do is focus on the things that we can control. And I wrote about this in post #25. It's about finding solutions that can be beneficial for everyone. And I'm arguing that if we can stress that current gun-control laws are fiscally destructive, and if we can somehow propose our own fiscally beneficial solutions, then it'll get people's attention. Money talks and history backs it up. Guns can become fiscal assets, so much so that anti-gun rhetoric gets ignored.

[Trail Teams]

the issue is, do these friends vote no on new gun control laws, or do they vote yes because "of the children"?

that is the main issue of why gun control laws and politicians keeps getting voted in. they use mis-information and prey on the ignorant to make guns the boogeyman so they will vote for Yes on gun control.

my few friends that don't own guns but enjoy shooting, they know to vote no on anything for more gun laws. i informed them enough and also i let them know they can ask me for clarification on what the law is trying to do instead of believing the lawyer speak.

Thanks for this post, and for making a difference. I may be naive, but I really think that this makes a big impact. Shortly after posting this thread, I thought about deleting it, because I had second thoughts that I might not be in the position to make a meaningful post. But after ready posts like yours, I think that it's something we can really build on.

Congressman Trey Gowdy responds with a similar approach: https://townhall.com/tipsheet/katiep...ntrol-n2390792

I think we can build on this by going a step further, as I mentioned in post #25. We have representation who are in a position to propose meaningful solutions.

[Thoughts]

But it's amazing what education can do, and I argue that the majority of people who may be considered "anti-gun" are just misinformed or they simply just don't care.

I agree that education is important, but I think it's going to be a big uphill battle. People who think guns are fun to shoot still can be anti-gun, because they don't care about shooting sports and don't think they'll ever need self-defense capabilities, and so on. It will take a long time to undo decades of propaganda.

[TurboS600]

This approach is moot on lefty Brady Bunch. They will not, can not, must not listen to reason and logic. Their arguments are all based on emotion and theory. They cannot get past their emotional instinct that gun=bad.

Where they get my ire is there insistence that everyone conform to their way of thinking. I don't try to force my views upon them. If they don't want to own guns then I'm not going to try to convince them that they should. They need to respect my gun ownership as it is my RIGHT.

I appreciate the OPs candor and his attempt to educate us on tactics with the anti-2A crowd. I just think that OP is more open minded and wiser than most antis.

[Rogerbutthead]

I have argued with anti's and the most ardent of them just tell me that someone should kill someone you love with a gun and then you'll change your mind.

So facts mean nothing to them, emotions as stated by others rule the day.

[smittty]

You know when someone is extreme left when they are ok with their spouse getting stoned and screwing their best friend, but if one brings a gun home its grounds for divorce!

Good luck having a constructive discussion about guns with people like that!

And I understand them. They're too loose to responsibly own a firearm and they can't fathom you not being like them. So, I have to agree with them, in their homes, guns would be very bad!

[SkyHawk]

I have argued with anti's and the most ardent of them just tell me that someone should kill someone you love with a gun and then you'll change your mind.

So facts mean nothing to them, emotions as stated by others rule the day.

Funny though, you never hear anyone who lost a loved one to a DUI driver arguing for a ban on cars or alcohol. The anti's are brainwashed.

[kemasa]

They argue based on emotions and agenda, not facts.

Anyone who says that someone killing someone you love with a gun will change your mind should talk to Suzanna Gracia Hupp.