Popular Posts

8/01/2013

Are you too right to talk guns with the left?

By Gabby

talk to a liberal about guns today
I was once told that eventually my "moderate" political view, would eventually change... That I would lose the ability to reason and discuss with anti-gunners and gun-controllers and my views would migrate further and further right. I hope this doesn't come to pass, because I like the deep thoughts that come from debates with those who think differently.

I also think that we pro-gunownership people, may need to convince those in the middle to come join us, some day. What do you think? Will I be able to keep my open minded ways? Do you attempt to chat with those who's political views differe from yours? Or do you find it too frustrating?

©2013 ArmedCandy,LLC

11 comments:

Gary Griffiths said...

I'm always up for a sincere conversation with those who disagree with me, but frankly am frustrated by the left's constantly ignoring facts in favor of emotion. The recent Zimmerman-Martin case is a good illustration. The media and the left continuously portray Martin as an unarmed teenager innocently walking home, when, in reality, evidence indicates he was a murderous thug who attacked and seriously injured Zimmerman. "There is none so blind, as he who will not see."

tomrkba said...

There is no need to be either Left or Right. There is liberty, which is where gun ownership falls on the spectrum. The statists in both parties want to end the common ownership of firearms so they can implement their policies without effective resistance. If a person is not capable of understanding this, then they're either suckers or benefiting from the current system.

ArmedCandy said...

I completely agree, I just wish more people could see/admit that!

kkg35girl said...

I agree with the first comment from tomrkba.

MrSatyre said...

I have had hit and miss (wait, was that a pun?) with the statist lefties. Some have actually listened to my use of hard facts to counter their illogical emotion-based beliefs, and have come to recant their views, even if none of them have ever gone on to be gun owners. However, there are still those I've debated with who are adamant that certain guns must be banned "because they look like military guns and military guns are meant to kill people" (and that's a direct quote, by the way), and then proceed to go to their local range and shoot full-automatics. Those latter ones are the ones who really make me short of breath. But, I've never shied away from talking guns and civil rights with anyone. I try to follow the old practice of taking a breath before answering any question or attack so that I come across as the rational one. But it IS tough sometimes!

MrSatyre said...

No matter what their differences are, both parties are united in maintaining the status quo of power over the people.

Jefe said...

I think this is something a lot of people need to ask themselves. There are way too many people who are so passionate about firearms, when someone questions their 2A rights, they become infuriated beyond the ability to hold a calm, rational discussion. This only perpetuates the "crazy gun nut" stereotype. I've seen this happen first hand. It's embarrassing when the guy you were just agreeing with throws a tantrum and storms out of the room because somebody else questions his beliefs. Everyone is entitled to their opinions. There's no reason to get so angry about it when the person has no power to actually take your rights away from you.

Teresa Rosche Ott said...

This is a very good question, and I think the answer in too many cases is yes.


I'm compelled to point out that while many on the left would be quick to hobble firearm ownership in any way possible, entrenched politicians on the right are just as quick to cut deals that undermine firearms liberties.

Too many individuals on the right seem to concern themselves only with firearms-related liberties while ignoring countless daily assaults on liberties in equally important areas. God forbid they should step back and wonder why police should be able to force you to stop and search your car (or burst into your home) at any time, or question the negative effects of excessive business regulation (or whatever other anti-freedom things the right tends to be less worried about).


Gabby, if you continue your discussion and thoughtful reasoning you will probably not move rightward, because that's just a different flavor of big government. Hopefully, given additional reading, listening and pondering you will see that the most important thing about firearms is their role in the preservation of liberty...something far more important than firearms.

Hope to see you at the GCO convention next weekend.

crew jones said...

When I speak with people of different political persuasions, I try and not convince them of my views. It has taken me a long time to let go and try instead to understand someone else's, even if the likelihood of their changing my mind is slim. That way you can at least walk away from the conversation agreeing to disagree and learning something in the process. When political views are held very strongly, there is something deeper at play than the strength of debate. Persuasive talents can only go so far, and much of what we believe we justify with logic but believe so strongly as to make our views impervious to counter-logic. It's best to treat the exercise as a form of political understanding. Research of sorts. Anthropology.

Mark O'Connor said...

It's difficult because many sites on the web, comments are disabled or deleted once it's discovered as factual.

Dave Frye said...

I also enjoy a good discussion with folks who see things differently. Unfortunately a good discussion requires two people willing to listen. Most folks just want to spout talking points and are not interested in understanding a different perspective.

Post a Comment