Question of the Day: How Do You Make Antis Feel Good About Guns?

After a close encounter of the nearly violent kind with a couple of drunken antis, I’m gun-shy about talking to strangers about firearms freedom. I’ve discovered that facts have about as much impact on pro-gun control types as Mayor Bloomberg’s 16-ounce soft drink limit has on Sapir Yakir (when she’s in The Big Apple). Thirty-round ammunition magazines must be more lethal than 10-rounders. Way too lethal for non-military types. Military-style weapons? No one needs an AR. They just don’t. I’m perplexed. How do you convince non-gun owning liberals that they should reconsider their position; that they need to defend and extend their Constitutionally protected right to keep and bear arms? Taking an anti to the range would be ideal, but getting them there makes Robert Scott’s Terra Nova expedition seem like a quick trip to a McDonald’s drive-thru. Ideas?

avatar

About Robert Farago

Robert Farago is the Publisher of The Truth About Guns (TTAG). He started the site to explore the ethics, morality, business, politics, culture, technology, practice, strategy, dangers and fun of guns.

142 Responses to Question of the Day: How Do You Make Antis Feel Good About Guns?

  1. avatarduke nukem says:

    almost all of my friends are antigun …. i took a couple of them to shoot some of my ar’s and ak’s and they became pro gun. this was BEFORE the colorado incident. atrue story.

    • avatarensitu says:

      My friends are either Pro-gun or not my friends

      • avatarduke nukem says:

        really? so you would alienate friends just because they arent progun??

        • avatarKnowWhatIamTalkingAbout says:

          Yes, you need to. Remember the recent Paul Markel Article – know who your enemy is.

        • avatarduke nukem says:

          no … thats a rather bleak thinking. why would alienate someone that ive known for 20+ years just because doesnt think the way i do? we have discussions but never to that point.

        • avatarRopingdown says:

          Two neighbors must approve your initial carry permit in PA. My two? Both members of the Million Mom March. It’s a slow walk to persuasion. It is important, though. Even if you don’t convince them to take part in firearm use, you can soften their anti stance. In politics, that matters. Sometimes we can actually get support, but other times we should be happy simply to reduce active opposition.

        • avatarBlinkyPete says:

          +1 to Duke (you’re right, proton breath!), and excellent work on the part of Ropingdown.

        • avatarjbarr says:

          He said that his friends are pro-gun, he cannot alienate his friends if they are already his friends, and they are pro-gun? Your logic is very flawed.

      • avatarBob says:

        Same here. I just really know many anti gunners. The ones I do are acquired family and I keep him at arms length. I don’t think there is any fixing him so I don’t try and he no longer tries to change me. Like Catholics and Islamists; they can get along as long as they don’t discuss religion.

        • avatarSammy says:

          My problem with antis is not how I feel about them it’s their attitude towards us. Ah, let’s review:

          Shoot NRA chief in the head
          Shoot NRA members
          Drag NRA members behind a truck
          Deprive me of by God given (Sorry Constitution) right to self defense
          We are racists
          Turn me into an instant felon quicker than Tang

          I think there are a few more, but I’m a tired old white guy. Bleak feeling as well knowing that for whatever agenda or fear strangers to whom I have made no threats wish to harm me and my fellow gun owners because……………

    • avatarShire-man says:

      I’ve experienced the same except they became “pro-gun” with the caveat that they were now “special” and could be allowed guns but most other people were still not to be trusted with them.

      That’ll teach me to have ivy league friends. They just became elitist pseudo pro-gun rather than blanket anti-gun. Probably see them run for office someday.

      • avatarduke nukem says:

        lol. thats why most of my friends are blue collar workers… i have no respect for elitist type people

      • avatarRopingdown says:

        Yes, pseudo-pro. Yet, I bet they no longer write to their representatives or talk so much anti among their friends.

      • avatarBlinkyPete says:

        That’s still an important move forward. We will never convince everyone of any one thing. We need as many moderates and doubters on their side as we can get, and as much unity and steadfastness as we can get on our side.

    • avatarMamba says:

      +1 duke….
      The wife and I, both of whom are NRA and CHP card carriers, hit the range each weekend. This coming Sat she’s bringing along a female friend who I’ve not met but was cautioned that she’s an Obama-worshiper….so stay on topic (range safety & fun). My wife did not recruit her, rather once her friend learned about our regular range trips she expressed interest in tagging along… so I’ll be playing the instructor role yet again.
      Domino theory — small steps can lead to big results.

  2. avatarWilliam says:

    I’ve frankly lost interest in making them “feel good” about BUPKISS. And Sapir Yakir drinks SIXTEEN-OUNCE SODAS? You sure?

    • avatarMatt in FL says:

      I think the point was that she probably doesn’t drink 16 oz sodas, so banning ones bigger than that would have zero effect on her.

      It’s not as fun when you have to explain it.

  3. avatarAlphaGeek says:

    One of my favorite recruiting techniques is to organize a small-group camping trip to an area where open-range shooting is an option, but not mention at all that doing some shooting is part of the planned activities. After we arrive and get camp set up, there’s the inevitable conversation about what we’re going to do the next day, and I’ll mention that I’m going to do some target shooting with the Winchester 9422 since we’re in an area where that’s cool.

    It’s very, very rare that someone will turn down the opportunity to do some plinking in the wild with a Winchester 22LR levergun. It’s just too damn American to resist, and so non-intimidating that everyone wants their turn. The scope also makes it pretty easy to hit the large-ish targets I set up for them.

    When pressed, I’ll admit that yes, I may have brought some of the other toys as well. Would you like to try the Mark II? Or perhaps blow up a cow pie with the Weatherby 20ga? :)

    • avatarTeutonicTenifer says:

      I would love to do something like that, except that shooting on public land is a no-go where I live (and even the state over).

      • avatarAlphaGeek says:

        Plan B: go camping within ~10 miles of a skeet/trap range and plan an outing as part of the day’s activities.

        It is surprisingly easy to find skeet/trap ranges near decent camping locations. For the 40-and-under crowd the videogame-like nature of the sport makes the light go on pretty much immediately for everyone who tries it. Just make sure to beg, borrow or (last resort) buy an appropriate skeet/trap shotgun that’s weighted to swing well.

        Some ranges will also offer an intro lesson for groups at a very low cost per person.

        • avatarKelly in GA says:

          Shooting skeet in my buddy’s back pasture got me hooked ~7 years ago. Now I have 5 rifles, 1 shotgun, and 3 pistols. Well, 4 pistols if you count an old Jennings .22 I was gifted by my grandmother. (I took it so she wouldn’t try to use it.)

    • avatarAlphaGeek says:

      I also organize “range lunches” to get co-workers out to shoot at least once per quarter, even (especially) those who don’t own guns themselves. I never, ever push people to acquire firearms, though, as it’s better to let them come to that conclusion themselves and ask me for advice on what to get.

      Left that out since RF was asking about options other than dragging the uninformed to the range for the first time.

    • avatarIng says:

      +1 for the lever-action .22! My son and I both got Henry .22′s last year, and we’ve had more fun with those…

      In places where the great outdoors can be an open shooting range, camping/hiking outings are a great opening, and nothing is more quintessentially American than a lever-action rifle.

    • avatarJoe says:

      Did that once years ago with a group of my wife’s friends and a Mark II. Carefully explained the safety rules. Shot soda cans off a woodpile. One gal was so excited she hit a can that she immediately turned and muzzled the group, finger on the trigger and all! After I carefully deflected the gun back downrange, we escaped without further incident. Next time I do this I’m bringing a single action .22 revolver instead.

      • avatarMatt in FL says:

        Someone mentioned this in another thread: Bring whatever gun you want, just give them (speaking of the totally or mostly gun-ignorant) one bullet at a time for the first few shots. That way if there is muzzling, you can correct it without worrying about getting shot.

        • avatarJoe says:

          “Someone mentioned this in another thread: Bring whatever gun you want, just give them (speaking of the totally or mostly gun-ignorant) one bullet at a time for the first few shots.”

          …And if someone had shared this wonderful tidbit with me 15 years ago it would have spared me the heart attack! Trust me, I’ve learned my lesson regarding newbies and semi-autos.

        • avatarBlinkyPete says:

          Not to mention show them why bigger mags are better.

      • avatarAlphaGeek says:

        Joe:

        And that, in a nutshell, is why I start people with the Winchester 9422. You can see the unsafe actions coming from a mile away, and the external hammer makes it crystal clear exactly what state of readiness the gun is in at any given moment.

        • avatarAPBTFan says:

          Spot on Alpha.

          Mine’s a Taurus repro of the Winchester 62 pump action. To work the pump between shots takes deliberate action on the shooters part and makes the noise I need to hear to know when the gun is hot.

  4. avatarTeutonicTenifer says:

    I’ve personally introduced at least 8 people to guns. Granted, none of them were particularly anti-gun beforehand (surprising, considering where I live), but a trip to the range was quite enjoyable for all of them.

    Of the 8, two got their own guns, and 3 others have pending Firearm Identification card applications. Another is an EMT and planning on attending the police academy. All are now moderately to rabidly pro-2A.

    Widening our base and de-mystifying guns is the best thing we can do to protect the Bill of Rights.

  5. avatarTex74 says:

    This one baffles me too. I’m interested to see everyone’s ideas. My in-laws are anti gun with a couple of exceptions (my spouse) and they’re beyond reasoning with.

    • avatarTeutonicTenifer says:

      My mother is a similar one. She just thinks guns are evil, period.

      Of course, she also admitted that she would rather be raped and killed rather than defend herself with a firearm, so I think she’s beyond reasoning with.

      • avatarensitu says:

        You know what a Liberal gun lover is?
        A Liberal

        You Know what a Liberal is?
        A Re-Branded Communist

      • avatarRKflorida says:

        Phew! That’s a strong anti-gun person. Scary. Nothing you can say after that. Of course, if the event were to take place (God forbid) she would definitely NOT feel that way but it would be too late.

        • avatarTeutonicTenifer says:

          I pointed out that she’s fortunate that both myself and my father would intervene with a firearm if we were in the house and anything occurred.

          Dad’s got 5 rounds of .45 ACP ready for any ne’er-do-well, and if I’m home from school, an additional 15 147gr JHP’s…

          … immediately followed by trial and public execution for defending yourself in NJ, of course.

      • avatarPascal says:

        Ask her this “Mom, if someone was going to kill me and you had a chance to kill him with a gun or have that person kill me, would you let me die? Would she allow one of her grandaughters /nieces to be raped versus stopping the person raping them?”

        If she has any mom instrinct the answer will change and you have an in.

        • avatarTeutonicTenifer says:

          Actually, I did ask her that and her answer remained the same. She said she’d do whatever she could expect use a gun, including beating the assailant to death with a lamp.

          I pointed out how much more cruel that is and she just said anything was better than using a gun.

      • avatarSee This Also says:

        “Of course, she also admitted that she would rather be raped and killed rather than defend herself with a firearm”

        She doesn’t really feel that way you know. She just doesn’t want to admit that firearms could possibly be used for good, because that would help further your argument and hinder hers.

        • avatarTeutonicTenifer says:

          She doesn’t care a lick about politics. She’s just a hoplophobe to the extreme. Somewhere in her life she decided that firearms are spawn of the devil and can never be used for good.

          She also falsely assumes that the police can adequately protect you, that nothing can ever happen to her, etc. When presented with facts to the contrary, she just resorts to “well I still don’t like guns.”

          She also supports disarmament of civilians as well as the police.

  6. avatarj says:

    Getting them to the range, ostensibly to educate them is not that difficult I have found. They just need to be surrounded by “friendlies”.

  7. avatarLxdad says:

    I grew up in NYC and was a total anti. I moved to Atlanta and some guys from work took me to the range. That started my new very expensive hobby. They really drill fear and mis-information into you in places like the north east. I live in CT now and I am amazed everyday at the ignorant things people around me say about guns. I have given up trying to reason with them, when they start to loose the argument they get angry and shut down. It’s easier to ban an object than to talk about the real issues. Some of them truely believe that crime and murder will disapear the moment guns are illegal, its sad. I am still trying to get one or two of them to a range. I honestly think range time is the best medicine.

    • avatarPascal says:

      Welcome and good luck especially in CT

      • I’ve converted a few CT antis by declaring their opinion invalid if they’ve never fired a gun. “You’ve never shot a gun?! Why, then what you say doesn’t count.” Drives ‘em wild.
        Don’t invite them–challenge them to go to the range. Nine times out of ten, once they start shooting, you can’t drag ‘em off the firing line.

    • avatarjbarr says:

      My story is similar. I grew up as a kid in Ohio, so guns weren’t foreign, but I moved to Chicago as a teen, and for the next 25 years became indoctrinated by the anti-gun mindset. My wife and I and some other family have since moved to South Carolina, and since then, I’ve goten my Concealed Weapons Permit (CWP), I’ve bought several guns, and my wife and her brother have CWP class scheduled for mid-February. We also joined a local shooting range, and just love it.

      I have come to realize that these forbidden, evil guns that I knew to avoid in Chicago are nothing more than hammers or electric drills in South Carolina. You may own more than one, you use them as needed, and if you don’t learn to use them properly for their intended purpose and treat them with respect, expect to get hurt or worse.

  8. avatarGov. William J. Le Petomane says:

    Most of the grabbers are blissfully ignorant (and not just about guns) and have no intention of allowing themselves to be educated. Tricking them into shooting is probably best. Shaming them for their ignorance might work, but it will probably just piss them off.

  9. avatarInBox485 says:

    Invite them out, shut up about politics, if they say no, move on.

  10. avatarJim R says:

    I am definitely interested in hearing what some have to say. I know a few antis myself who i believe are not beyond reason and I’d like to hear some good ideas. Range time is a good one but I don’tthink she’s quite ready for that.

  11. avatarTyler says:

    When confronted by facts, reason and logic it seems like a lot of anti-gun folks tend to shut their eyes, cover their ears and just keep repeating in a loud voice “No one needs an AR-15. No one needs an AR-15. No one needs an AR-15….” I think those people are beyond hope. Lately my final thoughts to people like that are to ask them why the police need ar-15′s. They’ll say it is to protect people from bad guys. To which I say, we have to deal with those very same bad guys whether we like it or not. We should have access to the same tools. For the rest, the best bet is to invite them out shooting. I’ve taken a number of people shooting and they have all come away saying something on the order of “Where can I get one of those?”

    • avatarRopingdown says:

      I really wish people would do as my PD does, and call them Patrol Rifles “with hunting and home-defense utility.” That’s what they are. Certainly they aren’t battle ready, and not purchased to assault anything. The gun sellers actually like calling them “assault weapons” to juice the young guy sales….right up until they get banned. We should be less short-sighted. “The military doesn’t have any of these. This is just a rifle a coyote hunter or small-town deputy might carry.” Works for me.

      • avatarAlphaGeek says:

        Small town deputy, hell. 95% of the officers in Fremont PD (4th largest city in Bay Area) check out an AR15 and a stack of loaded 30rd PMAGs every shift.

        The other 5-10% check out pump shotguns, of course.

  12. avatarmountocean says:

    Brought two to the range on MLK day (civil rights, baby). Started by getting them comfortable with a nice simple 10/22. Shot marshmallow peeps, upright sheets of ice and party baloons. Nice and simple. Neither of them were hard-core anti, but in their ingorance they would go along with all of Gun Control 2.0. After a little more shooting we can discuss how/why other guns are/aren’t different, it’s not an instant process. Both of ‘em had fun, one wants to buy her own rifle now. The only downside is now I’m out of (recreational) .22 ammo.

  13. avatarRalph says:

    People generally break down into three groups: pro-gun, non-gun and anti-gun. Non-gun people are merely ignorant. A few trips to the range or a plinking epedition or two educates them. Anti-gun people are idiots and should be avoided at all costs. They will never be converted or educated because they are thrilled with their own ignorance. They feel accepted by the community of idiots, which gives them the warm and fuzzies, and of course the real enemies of the people like Bloomberg and Soros just love their malleability. They are perfect fools, and perfect tools. Oh, well. If god did not want them wiped out, he wouldn’t have made them @ssh0les.

    • avatarMatt in FL says:

      Ralph’s got it. In the same vein as how I answered another question along these lines, my answer is that I don’t bother with “anti-gun” folks. I work on/talk to fence-sitters and gun-ignorant folks. It’s a much more pleasant use of my time. Think of it like an election. 40% are always gonna vote one way (pro-gun), 40% are always going to vote the other (anti-gun), and the election is decided by the 20% (or less) in the middle. Just like in an election, those people are your target audience.

    • avatarmountocean says:

      Yep, true dyed-in-the-wool hoplophobes aren’t worth the effort. I only engage them if there is a neutral bystander I hope to influence. I once wasted alot of good ammo teaching a former coworker how to shoot so he could qualify for a new position he wanted. Got over his irrational fear of guns just long enough to pass the basic qualifier then fail out of his on the job training. He’s still an asshole and even worse raging anti-gun self loathing bigot.

    • avatarBlinkyPete says:

      I agree with Matt that undecideds are the most (or 2nd most) important group, but as usual I disagree with Ralph’s characteristically broad, black and white view of people that don’t agree with him. In my experience (and I grew up in one of the most liberal states in the nation) at least half, and maybe more like 75% of strict anti’s can at least be shaken in their convictions and become less rabid. Some of them can indeed be converted and see, through a clinical, statistical presentation of evidence, that gun control is, and always has been, a lost cause at best. That’s obviously the end goal, but less rabid is a good move too. The less conviction they have the better.

      If you think that’s a waste of time, or it’s impossibly then you should re-evaluate your approach, not their politics.

  14. avatarDrVino says:

    Hate to say it, but these kinds of videos don’t help our cause.

    • avatarMatt in FL says:

      I would put this video in the category of “those that I might show someone while I was actively conversing with them on the subject.” That category is distinct from those that I would just send over and say, “Check this out.” This one is kind of “not good enough” to just send over for them to watch in its entirety, but it’s a good example of one that you could skip the talking parts and just say, “Watch this guy change mags so you have an idea how little mag size matters,” and then you turn it off.

  15. avatarBrian S says:

    I’m a relatively new shooter and most of my friends, on Facebook anyway, are on the anti side of this “debate”.

    I’m a little depressed at how easily a discussion turns into a mosh pit of name calling and emotion based arguments like described in this article. I’ve been told that…

    - my rights are derived from government
    - keeping “assault” rifles legal is as rediculous as legalizing tanks, fighter jets and anthrax
    - talking about liberty and and the spirit of the constitution is propaganda (when I hear nothing but mass media parroting from them)
    - 56 million dead in the 20th century linked to gun control & tyrannical government is ignored, or blown off
    - that owning a gun makes me 4.5x more likely to die by gun violence

    and so on, I’m sure I’m forgetting something, but I think my point is made. It’s like slamming your head against a brick wall, only the wall gets thicker the more you hit it. As Will Ferrell said in Zoolander… “I FEEL LIKE I’M TAKING CRAZY PILLS!”

    I try to keep things from escalating, but that can be hard. I try to stick to well researched facts, and nothing gets through.

    The worst part is these people are otherwise rational and intelligent people when it comes to most other topics, including other civil rights issues.

    • avatarmountocean says:

      Anthrax is a natuarally occuring bacteria in cow pies. Regulating natural rights is bullspit.

    • avatarIng says:

      If you said “Obey my dog!” they probably would. Or you could distract them by introducing Hansel (that Hansel…he’s so hot right now…).

    • avatarBruce says:

      Actually, I think tanks and fighter jets are legal to own. Without weapons, of course, but legal.

    • avatarAharon says:

      Brian S,

      Welcome to shooting. Those dialogues you’re having with those antis are not really discussions. The antis position has mostly been ingrained with emotional messaging that has been going on for sometime. If they resort quickly to name calling and labeling you just how much are they your friends? Bottom line: stop wasting your time and energy arguing with religious extremists especially on the Internet. BTW, 56 million is incorrect. The number of murdered citizens by their own governments, during the 20th century, because of gun control and tyranny is far higher.

      • avatarAccur81 says:

        I seen, in my basic research, of 260 million deaths as a result of government action between 1900-2000. That includes the Holocaust, USSR, PRC, and Japanese Imperialism. Feel free to correct me if I’m wrong.

    • avatarMamba says:

      “..that owning a gun makes me 4.5x more likely to die by gun violence”
      I hadn’t heard ^that one until recently, from a friend of the family who is also a liberalville (Boulder)-based lawyer; he mentioned it to my wife when she asked him about aspects of CCW law and insurance.
      That line originates from an ’09 U of P (as in PA) study where, “The research team concluded that, although successful defensive gun uses are possible and do occur each year, the chances of success are low.”
      Humph…I guess they weren’t reading the same DGU news stories that I read regularly which tend to contradict that finding.

      • avatarMamba says:

        …for the record, the correct study verbiage was:
        “The study estimated that people with a gun were 4.5 times more likely to be shot in an assault than those not possessing a gun.” The study focus? Investigating “…the link between being shot in an assault and a person’s possession of a gun at the time of the shooting.”
        Obviously the line’s context and composition has somehow strayed a bit over the years…

  16. avatarAharon says:

    Give an anti- a hand-dipped gourmet chocolate bar in the shape of a single action revolver.

    • avatarPascal says:

      True story, I found revolver candy molds on Amazon and for Xmas all my anti-gun friends and everyone else as well recieved dark chocolate revolvers for xmas as part of whatever else I was exchanging.

      One of my anti-gun friend’s has a daugher and saw the chocolate guns said “Oh cool” then asked if I would take her shooting (knowing it would piss off her mom). I said “Sure, soon as you turn 18 and then your mom can’t tell you no” She was pissed! But I almost wet myself laughing

  17. avatarTim says:

    There needs to be a strong committed effort from the pro gun community that speaks out against violence. At the same time there also needs top be a clear message that guns do not equal violence, and that gun owners are peaceful people.

    Lastly, gun owners need to accept the push for universal background check and accept their own responsibility to prevent guns from getting in the hands if those that should not have them. Thus also includes a campaign by pro gun organizations for safe storage of guns to prevent accidental shootings as well as theft if firearms.

    • avatarMatt in FL says:

      “. . . gun owners need to accept the push for universal background check . . . “

      Nope. Next.

      • avatarduke nukem says:

        this is were i put my feet down. NO to universal background check…. i take it tim is not a gun owner?

      • avatarPascal says:

        +1000

      • avatarBob says:

        How are some good ways to rebut the universal background check argument? I assume that means private sales need to have background checks.

        • avatarUS says:

          One possible way is to observe that private firearms sales are already regulated at the state level. Various states do require background checks on private sales that occur at gun shows for example. There’s no need for a federal law since those states that want to can exercise that authority.

        • avatarMike in NC says:

          Private sales within a state are solely a matter for states to regulate and only if they choose to do so. Private sales across state lines are already required to go through an FFL and have a background check.

    • avatarJosh says:

      There needs to be a strong committed voice from leftists against the family breakdown that has made more violence inevitable. But there isn’t, and there won’t be. They’d rather use the violence as an excuse to force us to give up our liberties, without ever thinking about why there is violence in the first place (hint: it’s not because someone owns a gun).

    • avatarmountocean says:

      You mean CRIMINAL violence, right? Justified force to counteract CRIMINAL violence is exactly what we’re defending.
      Universal background checks equals gradual eventual universal registration equals eventual confiscation. NO
      Safe gun storage is good, Safe gun storage LAWS are often too burdensome and the issue is already adequately covered with liability.
      I assume you’re a bit of a fence-sitter, I’m here to help.

      • avatarTim says:

        Of course criminal violence. There seems to be a perception that just because we are pro 2A that we are somehow content with mass shootings and accept them as the price for our freedoms. I don’t believe this to be true myself, I’m merely trying to describe what we are up against.

        Know your enemy.

      • avatarTim says:

        So I guess the next question of day should be “How many people only purchase guns FTF through private sales vs through a dealer with a NICS check?”

        At least 90% of my purchases are through a dealer and include a background check. Many are private purchases over the internet including Gunbroker.

        In fact, most of my sales are through the same dealer on consignment. Why? I don’t want the responsibility on my head for selling a gun to a known psycho that goes home to kill his wife and kids with his new gun.

        I support the idea of uni background checks. I would support them even more if the NICS background check system were made available to the public, not just dealers.

        • avatarUSMC says:

          Selling firearms to felons is already illegal, the seller is already liable under current laws. No more laws are needed, they are already implemented. Do your own check on the person you want to sell a gun to. If you are unsure about a person, DON’T SELL TO THEM! Simple as that; it’s called personal responsibility and doesn’t require any (more) government interference.

          Also, the current NICS system can barely handle background checks through dealer; it will totally and completely fail if EVERY purchase has to go through the system.

    • avatarPascal says:

      I will think about your idea once the anti-gun crowd stop trying to come up with every half assed idea to take away our rights. Whatever we give up, they want more, and more and more and more — you think the Brady Campaign is going to stop? I will believe that when they step up and support gun owners and speak up and against some of the dumb ass idea’s like liability insurance they want us to buy in CT.

      They DO NOT GIVE A CRAP ABOUT VIOLENCE it is about CONTROL and CIVILIAN DISARMAMENT — now you go think about that!

    • avatarRopingdown says:

      I actually agree with Tim. The “no background checks on transfers” has, indeed, led at the margins to an industry that supplies guns to criminals, though not at Gun Shows. The Supremes are likely to back mandatory background checks since they have already supported bans on violent felony/mental illness 2Am restrictions. What we should be fighting against is limitations on semi-autos, bans on gun owner databases, and gun registration: These three have a clear basis in the Founders’ arguments for the Right in the first place, the Tyranny basis. We should also fight against restrictions based on crimes which have no direct connection to gun safety. Why a tax felony should mean “no gun for you” is beyond me. A state DUI with two years’ probation counts under Federal law as a felony. Why? (This is currently being litigated.) The basis for restrictions should be narrowly crafted when a right is at stake. Dishonorable Discharges for cursing out an officer as a basis for losing a right? What does that have to do with gun safety? Nothing. I don’t hear pro-2Am people pushing these issues.

  18. avatarAharon says:

    A cosmic anomaly has occurred:

    “A Chicago man who was about to be evicted pointed an AK-47 rifle at his landlord earlier this week, officials said.”

    http://usnews.nbcnews.com/_news/2013/01/10/16448792-tenant-facing-eviction-pulls-ak-47-on-landlord-police-say?lite&lite=obinsite

    • avatarmountocean says:

      What unnaturel twist of the space-time plane allowed an AK-47 into Chicago?
      I’d like to hear from some astrophysicits before I believe THAT news report.

      • avatarAlphaGeek says:

        My immediate thought, after seeing this but prior to clicking on the link: bet it’s an airsoft toy.

        For those of you in more gun-literate areas, let me share for you what the endgame is once the common citizenry is on their second or third generation of being gun-ignorant: people here in CA are being robbed at the point of an Airsoft “weapon” because they can’t tell the difference between that and a real firearm.

        In this case, though, it was an actual AK-47 and a battle pack of ammo. But… but… I thought making stuff like that illegal meant that we’d never see a gun ever again in those areas?

  19. avatarJosh says:

    I make a standing offer to any unarmed and uneducated friend to join me at the range and shoot any of my guns for free (I pay the fee and provide the ammunition). I don’t try to persuade someone who joins me; I want him to feel relaxed and open, not defensive, and the experience speaks better than I could.

  20. avatarJLR says:

    I generally don’t have too much problem talking to liberals and independents about gun issues. It helps when you don’t start off with a right-wing rant, half of which is about issues that have nothing to do with guns, and don’t just throw out “the 2nd Amendment” as though it’s all the argument you need.

    Granted the liberals I talk to are of the more intellectual variety, and as such are more receptive to an intellectual argument. Obviously that won’t do any good against those for whom gun-control and the hatred of firearms is an article of faith.

  21. avatarLarry says:

    Remind them that these days, criminals typically show up well armed, often with friends, and sometimes wear body armor. We need our 30 round magazines for the same reason the police do – to defend against a serious threat.

    Also remind the antis that it’s not as easy to hit a bad guys at you as the movies would like to suggest – most bad guys are usually moving and firing back at you.

    The good guy’s ability to have high capacity magazines saves lives – ours and those we defend.

  22. avatarRandy Drescher says:

    Sapir is a honey alright….. what were we talkin about? Oh yeah, I’d take a brady to the range except I’m sure he’d find his way back. Seriously, I do try to talk to non gun friends & they listen more than expected, at times, Randy

  23. avatargloomhound says:

    Funny I’ve never been to a shooting range (that wasn’t work related) and I’ve never talked to anyone that I knew was anti-gun.

  24. avatarLazy Dave says:

    I live in Australia where gun ownership is a priviledge not a right.

    I try to let people understand that they do have the Right to be Priviledged.

    The more people who take up this priviledge the better for all shooting sports.

  25. avatarCoyote says:

    Just in direct response to the video above:

    Shouldn’t it be worthy of note that magazine capacity limits are a limitation on DEFENSE, not offense?

    The kids who caused so much death at Columbine HS came armed with lots of spare magazines. The aggressors have the advantage of coming prepared.

    A woman defending her kids in her home is not so prepared, and probably won’t have anything more than what’s loaded in a single magazine.

  26. avatarThomas Paine says:

    shooting firearms are like LSD;
    you think you have a clue, until you actually go do it, and then you understand.

    i’d say 99% of anti-2a’s have never shot a gun seriously. besides giffords, but she got shot in the head, though that’s still no excuse.

  27. avatarNazgul says:

    With many anti 2A types, you would be wasting your time trying to convince or convert them.

  28. avatarIn Memphis says:

    I recently had my @&& handed to me by “responsible” gun owners. You know, the ones the antis say make up our majority and wants gun control. There were three of them and they were preaching that BS, “no one needs more than blah blah rounds, blah blah blah.”

    I followed up with the recent home invasion with the woman and her kids in the attic. That after multiple shots he was still alive and she would have had to reload if he wasnt alone. Well, I was wrong because she should have used a larger caliber and that I cant say “what if” when there was no other accomplices.

    I may be ignorant on a lot of things but not common sense. If I cant convince someone with common sense, then I dont bother. People may be smarter than I give them credit for, maybe they should actualy show it.

    • avatarRalph says:

      Fudds are worse than wingnuts. It’s one thing to get stabbed in the heart by the gungrabbers. It’s another to get stabbed in the back by Fudds.

  29. avatarm.ia says:

    Here is my question for the anti-gunners.

    Why do you need me to not have guns?

    • avatarMatt in FL says:

      That’s a good question. Make it personal. Make sure they answer the “me” part. Not the “crazy person” or the “criminal” or the “random stranger.” Me. “Why do you think that I should be disallowed the right to own a gun of my choosing?”

      • avatarTim says:

        Recently got into this discussion with my mother. She’s pro 2A but has been eating up the latest media vomit of how people don’t need “assault rifles with 30 round clips”.

        I told her how many of these types of rifles I owned myself, and then asked “Explain to me how society is at risk because I own these guns.”

        Her response “As long as they aren’t stolen and your kids can’t get to them.”

        My guns are stored in a safe, and I believe that storing guns responsibly (i.e. a safe) should be the 5th basic rule of gun safety.

        • avatarJosh says:

          Each person can weigh the advantages and disadvantages. Storing a gun in a safe might keep you from using it in an emergency. Sometimes victims don’t wake up until a criminal has entered their bedroom. A criminal probably won’t wait for you to figure out how to type the code into your safe in the dark and with a groggy brain.

  30. avatarKyle says:

    Took a relative to the range and was maybe a bit dishonest. Put a .22 conversion kit in the AR and put really big targets at 7 yards. She loved it! So I had her try a .44 mag using the tamest .44 Specials I could find. She loved that too. Afterwards I had to tell her the truth cuz I was afraid she would try out a .44 mag somewhere else with full power loads and hurt herself. But she admitted to me she was thinking about becoming one of us, an owner. I think it helps, though, if you can make the scary black rifles seem not so scary.

    • avatarMatt in FL says:

      Yeah, that’s another good point. Big targets at medium-short range. I’ve heard people say that bullseye targets are a lot of pressure for new shooters. They get discouraged if they’re not in the X-ring by the third shot. Start easy: paper plates or simply sheets of white paper. Very easy to see the holes in bright white paper. Maybe put a dot in the middle for a point of aim, but maybe not even that.

      • avatarMarc G says:

        Yes, started my anti gun wife at 2 yards with big target. Made it impossible to miss and lots of fun. With my wife and all my kids shooting, my in-laws converted quickly to our side

  31. avatarDarkstar says:

    Taking folks shooting is a great step. If done correctly (safely and fun) you can have a convert for life. Unfortunately a lot of hard core anti’s can not or will not be swayed. The only way to get tem to change is if they ever become a crime victim. I have seen this many, many times in the handgun carry permit classes I teach. I ask folks why they have decided to get a HCP and have had many tell me they hated guns, were against them, etc, etc until they became victimized. Sad to say this is the only way some people get it.

    • avatarCastle says:

      I so wish this wasn’t true, but unfortunately it really is. Both my parents are more or less antis, my dad (sometimes) works with laws involving guns, and appears to very much enjoy firing a gun – just not the gun existing outside of the range. I used to believe that no one needed “hi caps”, or ARs, or .50s or full-autos and that they should all be illegal. Now I believe in no laws against ownership or carrying (although I might not be opposed to some form of regulation for things like automatic grenade launchers and explosive rounds).

      What changed? I was on the wrong end of crime.

  32. avatarRokurota says:

    Here’s an article by my good friend and college classmate, who is the editor of Yahoo!’s Shine (women’s) blog.
    http://shine.yahoo.com/healthy-living/im-scared-guns-decided-learn-shoot-one-204900956.html
    She knows I’m a 2A (and 1A) absolutist, even if she’s not. But it was a damn honest thing for her to admit she liked shooting a scary “assault weapon.” Other of my friends think there’s no difference between me and Congolese warlords.
    Take your friends to the range, let them see how safety-obsessed everyone is, how it really is a sport same as archery, karate and fencing.

  33. avataruncommon_sense says:

    I believe taking people to a range is good.

    I also like personalizing like other commenters mentioned: you (anti) tell me why I (armed citizen) shouldn’t have a firearm.

    I believe we also need moving, emotional, personal testimonials from people — especially women — who were the victims of a violent assault who survived only because they were armed. (The story of the 18 year old mother and her baby in Oklahoma close to New Years Eve 2011 I believe is an outstanding example.)

    Use your discretion to determine which of those three approaches to use.

    Oh, don’t expect instant change. I know that is difficult in our fast-food culture. If someone has been staunchly anti-gun for a long time, it will take some time for them to evaluate and process these new experiences and knowledge.

    For reference I don’t think we will get much mileage from government tyranny arguments. Get them on board with firearm ownership.

  34. avatarGreat Lenin's Ghost says:

    In truth there are very few people who are afraid of guns themselves. Useful idiots, but not real common. More people are swayed by statistics that prove guns in the home increase the incidence of lethal suicides and domestic violence. Which is a true fact, by the way, no use denying it–it’s why the NRA has lobbied to prevent such studies from being done here.

    But even that is not the real swaying vote in the culture war battles. So many gun owners are single issue voters, white, male and conservative, and when presented with possible threats to their single issue respond hilariously out of proportion to the possible infringement. Is a background check on weapon sales really that big a deal? Will mag limitations and a new AWB actually pass? Would either one really do anything? Probably not, but the extreme reactions make gun owners look like paranoid, white, male doomsday preppers and will almost certainly lead to headline-grabbing confrontations with authority. This has a bonus feature, since militaries and police forces are typically havens of weapon-toting, conservative white males. Creating fractures of mutual distrust within these organizations serves to destabilize them politically.

    So it really has nothing at all to do with guns and everything to do with fracturing conservative politics. And you guys keep falling for it every time like Pavlovian dogs.

    Cheers mates :)

    • avatarMatt in FL says:

      “…statistics that prove guns in the home increase the incidence of lethal suicides and domestic violence.”

      [Citation needed]

      • avatarTom WV says:

        When I see statistics like the one you mentioned I kindly assert that all a statistic is is way of compiling very specific pieces of data for the sole purpose of validating your own argument and calling it math. Statistics are often misleading.

      • avatarAPBTFan says:

        Having a pool skyrockets the chances of your kids drowning. How many people fill in their pool?

      • avatarMatt in FL says:

        I’m still waiting.

    • avatarUSMC says:

      “In truth there are very few people who are afraid of guns themselves. Useful idiots, but not real common.”

      They are idiots and are not useful at all, in fact, their irrational fears and illogical responses to their fears make things unnecessarily complicated for everyone else. These people are very common, they are everywhere and fail to understand that no one is forcing them to buy a gun or keep one in their home. If they don’t like guns, tough shit and deal with it.

      “More people are swayed by statistics that prove guns in the home increase the incidence of lethal suicides and domestic violence.”

      Yes, idiots who don’t know anything about the issue are swayed by whatever the main stream media throws their way, no matter how distorted they make it. For example, this chart that USA Today manipulated and published: http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2012/12/robert-farago/incendiary-image-of-the-day-why-does-this-chart-make-support-for-an-assault-weapons-ban-look-greater-than-opposition-edition/

      Of course suicide by gun in a country that allows citizens to own guns is going to be higher than suicide by gun in countries that have guns banned, but it DOES NOT “increase the incidence of lethal suicides”. Look at the graph in the link below. It clearly shows that for the OVERALL suicide rate the United States is right in the middle. What countries are at the top? Many countries that restrict or completely ban firearms for civilian ownership. My point is that if someone has the intent and desire to kill themselves, they will do so no matter what. http://www.gunpolicy.org/firearms/compare/194/rate_of_suicide_any_method/10,18,31,49,50,280,65,66,69,71,80,86,87,88,91,125,128,282,136,281,162,166,340,170,172

      ” Which is a true fact, by the way, no use denying it–it’s why the NRA has lobbied to prevent such studies from being done here.”

      Show me your source that backs this statement up.

      “But even that is not the real swaying vote in the culture war battles. So many gun owners are single issue voters, white, male and conservative,….”

      Politicians and others idiots have turned this into a “culture war battle”, not us. We are merely trying to protect our Constitutional rights; rights which every American citizen is entitled to regardless of race, creed, sex, political beliefs, etc. If you read the comments posted here on TTAG and the “I am a gun owner” TTAG posts, you can clearly see that American gun owners a a very diverse group of people from all walks of life. To say that we are all “white, male and conservative” is completely incorrect and clearly shows your own biases even when confronted with contradictory information about us.

      “…..and when presented with possible threats to their single issue respond hilariously out of proportion to the possible infringement.”

      “Possible infringement”? Seriously? It is infringement, period. The United States is the last bastion of freedom in this troubled world and we are forced to defend and uphold these freedoms each and every day. Our response is not “out of proportion”, it is appropriate for the preservation of liberty and freedom. It’s truly sad that we must fight to KEEP our Constitutional rights that have been in place since March 4, 1789.

      “Is a background check on weapon sales really that big a deal?”

      Yes, it is a big deal. I shouldn’t have to inform the government every time I want to buy or sell personal possessions and private property that are legal (Constitutional) for me to own. Selling firearms to felons is already illegal, the seller is already liable under current laws. No more laws are needed, they are already implemented. Do your own check on the person you want to sell a gun to. If you are unsure about a person, DON’T SELL TO THEM! Simple as that; it’s called personal responsibility and doesn’t require any (more) government interference. Also, the current NICS system can barely handle background checks through dealer; it will totally and completely fail if EVERY purchase has to go through the system.

      “Will mag limitations and a new AWB actually pass? Would either one really do anything?”

      Hopefully they will never pass, but they continue to be introduced, so gun owners must remain vigilant. Yes, any limitation or ban would do something, and that something is detrimental to our society. Just look at the charts here and you’ll see how private gun ownership makes our country a better place: http://directorblue.blogspot.com/2012/12/the-top-5-gun-control-graphs-their.html

      Also, according to the National Institute of Justice (NIJ), “We cannot clearly credit the ban with any of the nation’s recent drop in gun violence. And, indeed, there has been no discernible reduction in the lethality and injuriousness of gun violence.” And “Should it be renewed, the ban’s effects on gun violence are likely to be small at best and perhaps too small for reliable measurement.” Here is the source: https://www.ncjrs.gov/pdffiles1/nij/grants/204431.pdf

      These bans are just “feel good” laws, they don’t accomplish anything and infringe on our Constitutional rights while punishing law abiding citizens. For the record, so called “assault weapons” were ““rarely used in gun crimes even before the ban” (NIJ). Need proof? Here it is: http://bjs.ojp.usdoj.gov/content/pub/pdf/htus8008.pdf

      You should also read this so you might become more informed on assault weapon bans and their shortcomings: http://www.thetruthaboutguns.com/2012/10/foghorn/the-truth-about-assault-weapons-and-assault-weapons-bans/

      “Probably not, but the extreme reactions make gun owners look like paranoid, white, male doomsday preppers…..”

      Again with your personal biases. We are not paranoid, we know that the anti’s are doing everything they can to disarm the civilian populace of this country. Look, here’s proof: http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d113:s.2:. It’s not paranoia when un-Constitutional laws are being shoved down our throats on both the Nation and State level.

      Also, how about the extreme reactions coming from the anti’s? How about sports columnist for the Daily Beast, Buzz Bissinger, saying “The only reason I think you’d need it is, Piers, challenge Alex Jones to a boxing match, show up with a semi-automatic that you got legally and pop him.” How did Abby Huntsman (Huffington Post) and Piers Morgan respond? Huntsman – “I’d love to see that… [laughter] in uniform.” Morgan – “I’ll borrow my brothers uniform.” Death threats on CNN. And not to mention all the death threats to Wayne LaPierre and members of the NRA. Hypocrisy much?

      The irrational threats of violence from these people are one of the many reasons we own guns – for our protection.

      “…..and will almost certainly lead to headline-grabbing confrontations with authority.”

      This statement is purely hypothetical, but anti’s would love for it to happen so they can waive a bloody flag, again, still, and continue to trample on our Constitutional right.

      “This has a bonus feature, since militaries and police forces are typically havens of weapon-toting, conservative white males.”

      Of course they’re “weapons-toting”, that’s part of their job! Most of the Marines I know who are conservative vote Republican because they believe that this political party will increase defense spending and their own pay; the rest of us are Libertarian, and believe in unalienable rights, freedom and liberty.

      “So it really has nothing at all to do with guns and everything to do with fracturing conservative politics. And you guys keep falling for it every time like Pavlovian dogs.”

      Nice of you to force a red herring upon us, but it has EVERYTHING to do with guns, and our Constitutional right to keep and bear them. YOU might be conditioned to think a certain way, but we are free thinking individuals who continue to disprove antis like you through discourse and logic.

      “Cheers mates :)”

      I am not your “mate” and never will be.

    • avatarBlinkyPete says:

      I actually agree with some of the last statement, particularly in the way some gun owners react.

      More important note – please call Japan and South Korea and give them the good news: since they don’t have guns, most of their suicides aren’t fatal. They’ll be stoked… particularly since their rates are more than twice ours.

  35. avatarSilver says:

    You can’t. It’s not about guns, these people suffer from deeper-rooted psychological issues. They’re not anti-gun, they’re anti-freedom. That which they can’t control, they hate.

  36. avatarMichael B. says:

    I don’t. I don’t discuss guns with antis because I feel like they’ll turn informant in a heartbeat if some tyrannical regime ever shreds the second amendment.

    If they’re on the fence and they’re my friend I’ll take them plinking with a 10/22. Antis, however, can stay that way for all I care.

  37. avatarSGC says:

    The question I have is how someone who is pro gun gets turned into an anti…?

    Long story short, had a friend I’ve known since high school…he was a Browning HP / HK rifle owning hardcore shooter! Flash forward twenty odd years…we’re trading jabs on Facebook now. He’s a left wing gun control fanatic now living in the great state of NY with all the other liberals.

    Just don’t understand…

  38. avatarSwobard says:

    I got no ideas to offer. I’m just here for Farago’s links….

  39. avatarmike marriam says:

    I know one way it can happen because I saw it happen. An in law was rabidly anti gun. All the usual libtard arguments. Than the in law got called for grand jury duty. The prosecution went to great lengths acquainting the jurors with the defendant’s life history and associates. As the in law explained afterwards it dawned on him that where ever you go people like the defendant are all around you. He now carries a 40 s&w. We have to pop their bubble and make them realize that evil exists and should they encounter it the police won’t be able to help make up for their inability to protect themselves.

    • avatarGreat Lenin's Ghost says:

      Most people see evil in conservative white men with guns though.

      We are winning this culture war, little by little, with feminism, with multiculturalism, with liberal professors and liberal schools and liberal judges and liberal public television. They don’t even see the red dawn rising :)

      And it involves disarming conservative white men :)

      • avatarMatt in FL says:

        0/10

        Try again.

        • avatarGreat Lenin's Ghost says:

          Sweetheart, if you don’t think we are winning the culture war, just look around :)

        • avatarBadger 8-3 says:

          If “you” were winning the culture war, firearms ownership would be in decline, and firearms themselves would be disappearing as a matter of course. Neither is happening…quite the opposite in fact. Instead, “you” are drafting laws to forcibly disarm otherwise law-abiding folk. Winning? Hardly. Rather, “you” all are losing, scared, and lying your collective asses off in order to push through legislation that even the FBI has stated doesn’t work.

  40. avatarBrian says:

    After 13 years of marriage, I finaly got my wife to the range. She had a great time. It is about small steps. She saw I was always safe with guns and wanted to try what I did. She shot my 22 bolt rifle and even.enjoyed my service 40 cal, even though it frightened her. It is all about small steps. It took her awhile. She is European and came from a generally antigun background

  41. avatarCrunkleross says:

    I watched the movie “Thank you for Smoking” for the first time this morning. It seemed appropriate to the discussion in some ways.

  42. avatarTheSleeperHasAwakened says:

    I don’t need an AR-15 any more than Rosa Parks needed to sit at the front of that bus.

    If that doesn’t put it into prespective, nothing will.

  43. avatarjoe says:

    Stupid question.What do I care about making antis feel good?They have two choices-they can stay out of my life or lose theirs-simple

Leave a Reply

Please use your real name instead of you company name or keyword spam.