How to Win an Argument With a Gun Nut EVERY Time!

[SecularMotion]

BASIC DOs AND DON’Ts

DO understand that there are lots of different types of gun owners. Some have them for protection, and some are gearheads who just like them as machines. Some people collect certain types of guns because they’re cool, and others just like stuff that’s loud, spits fire and blows holes in things. Often, a gun enthusiast is some combination of all of these.

DON’T lump the above gun owners in with the “Second Amendment” crowd. These 2A people own guns primarily because they feel inadequate, and live in fear because of it. They’re terrified of meeting an equal, and will almost always run from a fight if they don’t have a clear advantage going in.

DO remember at all times that these 2A people live in a state of constant fear, and they resent others who don’t. They’re going to do everything they can do to make others feel the same way they do.

DON’T bother with the “phallic symbol” thing. They don’t understand what it means, and the “inadequacy” they feel is a bit more layered than that. They might feel inadequate physically, but it may just as easily be mental or emotional. Often, they feel unprepared to compete in the modern world… because they are.

DO call them out on their fear, weakness and inadequacy…but BE EMPATHETIC. Be SYMPATHETIC about their shortcomings. It’s the one thing they absolutely cannot stand. Especially when you point out that the gun itself only proves their fear, weakness and sense of inadequacy. Make them face their demons, and force them to regard the gun itself as a symbol of their fear. Do that, and they’ll eventually come to hate it on principle.

https://aattp.org/how-to-win-an-argument-with-a-gun-nut-every-time/

[SQUEE]

1. How is learning new verbal conflict strategy going to bring about real change?

Both sides have talking points, and strategies to counter talking points...
I posit meaningful change has never been achieved by winning the clever quip Olympics.
I thought this was about change and meaningful actions, which demand compromise on both sides.
I thought this was about lives, not winning a gotcha showdown.

Again, come to the table, open and honest and prepared to actually deal with me as a human and not a stereotype, boogeyman, or a caricature, and maybe we can actually accomplish something.

[billh58]

2. Please read the SOP

for this Group before you post personal attacks.

[SQUEE]

3. This is not a personal attack

was anyone called a delicate flower, owner of a small penis or a criminal in waiting. I asked a valid question, how sophistry helps anyone who truly wants to fix these antagonism and striffe within our party.

[billh58]

4. From your RKBA history,

this is indeed a personal attack. You came here to pick a fight, and defy the SOP of this Group. Now go on back to your Gungeon buddies and brag about how you really told those grabbers off.

You people are so transparent...

[billh58]

5. K&R!

These suggestions appear to work...

[sir pball]

6. So you admit we aren't all "nuts"?

I already cheerfully, honestly, call myself a "gearhead who just like them as machines" - sure, very dangerous machines, but ultimately a precision inanimate object that I take immense pleasure in forcing to my will, in terms of accuracy and precision. And, funnily enough, I'm quite in favor of a lot of firearms regulation laws. But as with any double, or even single-edged sword there are a couple bits of "sensible gun control" I don't support.

I do NOT support "universal background checks"...because they don't go far enough.

I support universal FFL (Federal Firearms-dealer License) transfers instead. FFLs record every single sale on a paper form that goes in a bound book, kept on file for 20 years. That makes guns traceable, without being registered - assuming all legal transfers are via FFL, a crime gun's serial number should be tracked from the manufacturer through the sales chain to the last legal owner. Given the pooch that has been repeatedly screwed with even well-intentioned registration, I think it's the best option to give guns a chain of custody without an a priori database of who owns what - which is IMO overkill for criminal justice reasons, assuming the key issue is tracking a gun to its last legal owner. Combine that with a universal FOID card (if you have a CCW it's already a de facto FOID so stuff it) and you know who owns guns, and who was the last legal owner of a given gun...but not exactly who owns what guns, and IMHO that's something even the .gov has no pressing interest in knowing.

And the only other thing I can't ever get behind is an AWB. Principally on "gearheadedness" - the "greatest battle implement ever devised" is legal in (I think) all 50 states, while my heavier, slower-firing, long-range-ONLY deer rifle is illegal in NY, CA, MA, CT and NJ among others, because it has a pistol grip and reloads (just as fast) from the bottom instead of the top. Not to mention rifles are simply a vanishingly small problem for now. Once we all fix the handgun problem, I would be willing to sell-back my one rifle out of my four hunters.

PS - I do expect to be censured. I'm what, only 85% pure?

[billh58]

7. Please read the SOP.

This Group is for discussing HOW to implement gun control, and not for arguing the NEED for gun control. Your RKBA cold-dead-hands stance is not welcome here.

Again, you people are so transparent.

[sir pball]

8. Of course, I said we NEED more regulation, but we both know that's not the true "spirit" of the SOP.

As I said already, I know I don't pass your purity test - I own firearms, therefore I am The Problem.

You might want to take up with the OP for that opening statement that not all gun owners are unreasonable NRA-driven 2A maniacs; your opinion seems pretty clear that every single one of us are "cold dead hands" enemies that need to be strongly and clearly subjugated. Might suggest the SOP be changed to be a little more intellectually honest, too...IMO it seems to be more "A safe haven for those opposed to the general private ownership of firearms and discussion of means of curtailing it as much as possible." It is pretty apparent that's the group's general position and purpose...I'd say correct me if I'm wrong but I'm neither expect nor want a reply, I have no plans on trying to discuss this further. Ciao, bellas

[billh58]

9. The Second Amendment absolutists who

attempt to infiltrate this Group are the exception to most reasonable American gun owners, and yet you attempt to speak for ALL gun owners. You're not even close to being "representative" of Democratic gun owners, and yes you are a "cold dead hands" vocal minority NRA apologist.

I draw your attention to the second paragraph in the OP:

DON’T lump the above gun owners in with the “Second Amendment” crowd. These 2A people own guns primarily because they feel inadequate, and live in fear because of it. They’re terrified of meeting an equal, and will almost always run from a fight if they don’t have a clear advantage going in.

[CTyankee]

10. aw, and he didn't even get his Italian right...

bellas?

[billh58]

11. "Beautifuls?"

[CTyankee]

12. Presumably, he was trying for the feminine plural of bella

It is belle, pronounced bell-eh

Masculine plural is belli

So my guess is that it was a weak try to call us all "beautiful girls."

[billh58]

13. That makes sense

as we all know that only manly men carry guns.

[CTyankee]

14. Hey, a twofer...guns and misogyny...

That's my shocked face...

[billh58]

15. Wayne, Ted, and Rand

must be so proud.