Have you ever tried to have a calm, rational, intelligent discussion with an anti-gunner about gun control? If not, you may want to try it sometime. You may find it enlightening.
Because these discussions often don’t lead anywhere but to have that anti-gunner swearing at you and blocking you on Facebook because you have an opposing viewpoint on guns. Why? Because they don’t want to hear any opposing arguments, and they will twist the facts of a situation to fit their preferred analysis that guns are always wrong.
To give an example, a writer going by the name of J. KB discusses a recent article by Think Progress (the name should clue you into their cluelessness) which looked at recent situations in which a person onsite stopped someone who was seeking to injure people with a firearm. The writer of each situation reviewed in the Think Progress article had twisted thinking to “explain” why these examples of a good guy with a gun weren’t really examples of a good guy with a gun. J. KB writes,
This is the dishonesty of the argument:
- Armed civilians stop a shooter, but there could have been a problem, so no “good guy with a gun.”
- Armed civilians stop a shooter, but they were actually off duty military and/or ex-police, so no “good guy with a gun.”
- Unarmed good guy manages to survive an armed encounter and emerge victorious, so no “good guy with a gun.”
- Law Enforcement Officer is irresponsible and accidently shoots someone, so no “good guy with a gun.”
- A bad guy shoots up a gun free zone where there is no armed civilians, so no “good guy with a gun.”
Every scenario is twisted into proof why we can’t be allowed to carry.
There is no scenario that they will accept as evidence of a “good guy with a gun.”
J. KB really nails it. It’s difficult to sway anti-gunners from their foolish point of view because they don’t want to be swayed from that point of view. You’re better off spending your time sharpening your skills at the firing range than trying to convince these ignorant people to a different point of view.