How To Talk To Anti Gun People

[NolanVoyd]

Well. We have your posts dude.
We have the posts from all the gun control advocates on this forum.
We can see what gun control advocates say in the media.

You are welcome to discuss how your opinions differ.
But...
We both know that I am spot on......

And I said none of that and believe none of that. Nor did anyone else....which is why you did t quote them.

You either don't comprehend what I say are you are lying because making something up is easier than dealing with my actual position.

Also known as a straw man.

That won't fly.

Care to try again?

 

[NolanVoyd]

Well. We have your posts dude.
We have the posts from all the gun control advocates on this forum.
We can see what gun control advocates say in the media.

You are welcome to discuss how your opinions differ.
But...
We both know that I am spot on......

By the way. I asked you simple question and you dodged and avoided it.

Was that intentional or did you just forget?

I'll give you another chance.

"Do you think gun control must be "all or nothing", or can it be nuanced?"

 

[RF667799]

By the way. I asked you simple question and you dodged and avoided it.

Was that intentional or did you just forget?

I'll give you another chance.

"Do you think gun control must be "all or nothing", or can it be nuanced?"

We have "nuanced" gun control. How much further do you want to nuance it, or are you satisfied with how it is? Or perhaps even, you want to nuance it in the direction of less gun control?

 

[NolanVoyd]

We have "nuanced" gun control. How much further do you want to nuance it, or are you satisfied with how it is? Or perhaps even, you want to nuance it in the direction of less gun control?

There is room for improvement.

Large majorities of Americans are in favor of various gun control measures that would tighten up the laws, get rid of loopholes etc.

 

[RF667799]

There is room for improvement.

Large majorities of Americans are in favor of various gun control measures that would tighten up the laws, get rid of loopholes etc.

Yeah right.

Which ones are you advocating for?

 

[NolanVoyd]

Yeah right.

Yep. Facts.

For example. Universal, no exceptions, background checks on all gun transfers and sales.

The Vast Majority of Americans Support Universal Background Checks. Why Doesn’t Congress?

iop.harvard.edu

 

[brianpatrick]

Yep. Facts.

For example. Universal, no exceptions, background checks on all gun transfers and sales.

The Vast Majority of Americans Support Universal Background Checks. Why Doesn’t Congress?

iop.harvard.edu

But but but Nolan, “the science has shown again and again that universal checks don’t work… why would we spend money on something that doesn’t work according to science?”

They’re not arguing because they really believe what they say or are willing to take responsibility for their dumb ideas. They are arguing to support their industry (the smart ones). The dumb ones are just dumb mouthpieces shooting themselves in the foot.

 

[jaeger19]

You should go back and read the whole thread. I already rebutted your arguments.

Nope you did not.
Not all in fact.

But you are welcome to show me how the background checks would have stopped the parkland and Uvalde shooters since they passed background checks..
And the Newtown shooter who killed his mother and stole her firearms.

 

[jaeger19]

By the way. I asked you simple question and you dodged and avoided it.

Was that intentional or did you just forget?

I'll give you another chance.

"Do you think gun control must be "all or nothing", or can it be nuanced?"

And I answered. You just don't like the answer.
Frankly other than age limits and prohibition of mentally incompetent and violent felons possession.
Gun control is a waste of resources better spent actually decreasing crime and suicide. Such as improving mental health.

 

[jaeger19]

But but but Nolan, “the science has shown again and again that universal checks don’t work… why would we spend money on something that doesn’t work according to science?”

They’re not arguing because they really believe what they say or are willing to take responsibility for their dumb ideas. They are arguing to support their industry (the smart ones). The dumb ones are just dumb mouthpieces shooting themselves in the foot.

The science does show that.
Again..the Uvalde shooter..the parkland shooter..heck many of the mass shooters passed a background check or got around it.
Explain to me your logic of how they work then.

 

[mrjurrs]

You can’t talk to anti gun people. Well, I mean you can talk all you want but the haters won’t listed.

Look in the mirror and see if you can detect any irony?

 

[brianpatrick]

Nope you did not.
Not all in fact.

But you are welcome to show me how the background checks would have stopped the parkland and Uvalde shooters since they passed background checks..
And the Newtown shooter who killed his mother and stole her firearms.

His mother wouldn’t have had firearms to steal and neither would you if it were my choice. There would be a much longer waiting period to get any guns also. This wouldn’t affect “good” gun owners because they are not buying them to go shoot some people.

But… it’s the gun culture that’s the problem. The country is as strong as it’s weakest link. It’s why we have mandatory insurance laws, speed limits, illegal drugs, and all kinds of daily restrictions. The current interpretation of 2A is bullshit and the gunners know it. But, they’ve built businesses around gun culture and are fighting to increase profits in that industry just like every other business is. I get it. But that doesn’t mean it can’t go too far and become a public burden. It eventually will because more guns = more gun deaths. There’s no hiding that fact. You can say it’s because we need to lock up more criminals, but how many more ****ing people are we going to incarcerate before the cost of that is beyond our ability to pay? And to what end?

 

[brianpatrick]

The science does show that.
Again..the Uvalde shooter..the parkland shooter..heck many of the mass shooters passed a background check or got around it.
Explain to me your logic of how they work then.

I’m not talking about mass shootings. Think suicides, gun accidents, your guns stolen by criminals, loose background checks that let whackos like Jared loughner buy a gun, the stockpile of guns and ammo stolen by the Parkland kid, the dangerous ideas that inspired the Uvalde shooter, the lies and irresponsibility posed by gun nuts trying to protect their gun businesses, and all the rest. I’m glad gun manufacturers are now having to pay for some of these crimes and expect it will continue to go that way. Most American gun owners don’t have a financial interest in guns, which is why most of them support stricter regulation. The nutters defending their industries will eventually run out of ammo.

 

[brianpatrick]

And I answered. You just don't like the answer.
Frankly other than age limits and prohibition of mentally incompetent and violent felons possession.
Gun control is a waste of resources better spent actually decreasing crime and suicide. Such as improving mental health.

I’d like to hear about your proposals to increase mental health care, and just how much money you’d be okay with spending on that. Run that by the republicans in congress. See what they say.

 

[NolanVoyd]

And I answered.

No. You didnt.

You told me what you think people you disagree with think.

Useless.

You just don't like the answer.
Frankly other than age limits and prohibition of mentally incompetent and violent felons possession.
Gun control is a waste of resources better spent actually decreasing crime and suicide. Such as improving mental health.

There you go. You are entitled to your opinion. A great many Americans don't share your opinion. And they are just as entitled to their opinions as you are to yours.

You agree right?

So we agree, right, that gun control is not an all or nothing thing and it is full of nuance?

 

[RF667799]

Yep. Facts.

For example. Universal, no exceptions, background checks on all gun transfers and sales.

The Vast Majority of Americans Support Universal Background Checks. Why Doesn’t Congress?

iop.harvard.edu

Yes, I support those, as I have said many times on this forum. The nuances have to be worked out so as not to make them an undue burden on peaceful citizens. Along with UBCs as a condition of possessing a gun, I advocate them as a condition of possessing a motor vehicle. I'm sure you will agree those are a good idea as well. After all, there are probably more motor vehicles utilized in crime than guns.

See? Common ground!

 

[RF667799]

I’m not talking about mass shootings. Think suicides, gun accidents, your guns stolen by criminals, loose background checks that let whackos like Jared loughner buy a gun, the stockpile of guns and ammo stolen by the Parkland kid, the dangerous ideas that inspired the Uvalde shooter, the lies and irresponsibility posed by gun nuts trying to protect their gun businesses, and all the rest. I’m glad gun manufacturers are now having to pay for some of these crimes and expect it will continue to go that way. Most American gun owners don’t have a financial interest in guns, which is why most of them support stricter regulation. The nutters defending their industries will eventually run out of ammo.

You're "not talking about mass shootings", and then you go on to talk about mass shootings.

 

[brianpatrick]

Yes, I support those, as I have said many times on this forum. The nuances have to be worked out so as not to make them an undue burden on peaceful citizens. Along with UBCs as a condition of possessing a gun, I advocate them as a condition of possessing a motor vehicle. I'm sure you will agree those are a good idea as well. After all, there are probably more motor vehicles utilized in crime than guns.

See? Common ground!

It’s not just crimes we’re looking to reduce, it’s accidents, suicides, your guns in a place where kids or stupid people can get them, a culture of “fear of bad guys” which poisons social cohesion, and the threat that if individuals don’t like what the laws are they will use violence to settle the matter.

 

[RF667799]

It’s not just crimes we’re looking to reduce, it’s accidents, suicides, your guns in a place where kids or stupid people can get them, a culture of “fear of bad guys” which poisons social cohesion, and the threat that if individuals don’t like what the laws are they will use violence to settle the matter.

For some reason, nobody seeks a ban on chainsaws because of accidents, nor a ban on ropes because of suicides. Looks like a case of special pleading on the part of gun ban advocates.

"Culture of fear of bad guys poisoning social cohesion", just sounds like something you made up. Certainly not a great problem that demands the irrelevant step of banning guns.

Violence exists separately from guns. And the vast majority of gun owners are peaceful citizens.

The "we" who will join you in your call for a comprehensive ban on guns, is probably a minority on the order of pissing in the ocean and trying to measure the rise in sea level. It's interesting that is your response to a post advocating background checks.

 

[brianpatrick]

For some reason, nobody seeks a ban on chainsaws because of accidents, nor a ban on ropes because of suicides. Looks like a case of special pleading on the part of gun ban advocates.

"Culture of fear of bad guys poisoning social cohesion", just sounds like something you made up. Certainly not a great problem that demands the irrelevant step of banning guns.

Violence exists separately from guns. And the vast majority of gun owners are peaceful citizens.

The "we" who will join you in your call for a comprehensive ban on guns, is probably a minority on the order of pissing in the ocean and trying to measure the rise in sea level. It's interesting that is your response to a post advocating background checks.

Some people see a bunch of separate ideas that can be argued in isolation, and some me people know everything is connected. Sorry you can’t see the connections. Bless your heart. I’ll pray for you.

 

[dockside]

And yet in England police do have guns, police in special divisions.

Strict gun laws would go against the 2A in the United States.

Wrong.
They get them from the illegal market.

Your facts, not the real facts.

There's no debate that you're wrong, yes I know.

No we don't allow criminals to purchase guns. When you get something off the illegal market whether it be guns or whatever else, that means its not allowed, that's why its called the illegal market.

Nope, some of the most gun friendly states are also some of the states with the lowest crime rates.

And when the gun is traced back to the companion who bought it, the companion gets in trouble.

Most gun stores don't allow this and they've got surveillance set up to stop it.

I will admit there are some bad apple dealers but they make up the vast minority of gun dealers.

Lets face it, you're all fine and dandy with guns if they're in the hands of people who work for the government (police, military, ect.)

"
Nope, some of the most gun friendly states are also some of the states with the lowest crime rates. Citation or proof, please.

But, most of the non-friendly gun states have lower deaths by guns. https://worldpopulationreview.com/state-rankings/gun-deaths-by-state

 

[RF667799]

Some people see a bunch of separate ideas that can be argued in isolation, and some me people know everything is connected. Sorry you can’t see the connections. Bless your heart. I’ll pray for you.

If guns were banned, the unicorns would be free to appear.

Okay.

 

[zsu2357]

I meant when we outlaw them, you’ll turn yours in because it would be illegal not to. That was the whole point of my original argument.

I bet when you were a little kid you used to hold your breath until you turned blue if you didn't get your way. Hang on to that philosophy.

 

[brianpatrick]

If guns were banned, the unicorns would be free to appear.

Okay.

You a Brony?

 

[RF667799]

You a Brony?

I'm just trying to encapsulate your gun control ideas and the effects you claim for them, into something that doesn't require a myriad of vague posts filled with smoke and mirrors.