On 'Code-speak'

[Six &Twenty]

 

[Chucktshoes]

Not bad. I’m currently involved in a debate with a bunch of anti-gun folks. I’m just trying to get them to drop the code speak. Be honest about what you want. I am. Even if we will never see eye to eye, we can at least understand where the other is really coming from because the code words mean different things to them and us. 

[Wheelgunner]

I'm all for using simple, straightforward vocabulary in the national dialogue on this issue.   However, the left's euphemistic terms are merely a symptom of a more fundamental problem.

The reason that I don't engage folks on the left anymore in firearms conversations is their blatant unwillingness to adhere to logic.

I'm talking about logic in the classical sense - causation, in particular.  Example: As Wayne LaPierre said,  "the only thing that stops a bad guy with a gun is a good guy with a gun."  The efforts of the left to disarm the American people are despicable on general principle (that's a different discussion) - but worse than that, they're not logical.  When someone can show me how a law prohibiting me from having the means to defend myself can magically shut down the central nervous system of a determined attacker, then I'll be willing to talk to the left.

When you get down to the core of the leftist position, it simply does not make sense.  Consequently the left must intentionally avoid engaging in direct, logical debate.  "Code-speak" is one technique they use to hide the logical fallacies of their platform.  Another is the art of emotion-based arguments.  

[Erik88]

10 minutes ago, Wheelgunner said:

The reason that I don't engage folks on the left anymore in firearms conversations is their blatant unwillingness to adhere to logic.

 

That's basically where I'm at right now. If someone wants to have a rational discussion I'm willing but some of these people are just not accepting even basic facts.

I even took the time to validate some of the numbers I've heard. I went on the FBI's website, copied their data into Excel and totaled up their figures. I tried sharing these with my anti-gun coworker and he really didn't care. He doesn't think we should be allowed to own anything like an AR-15. I mentioned that the VA Tech shooter killed twice as many people with a 9mm handgun and he dismissed that as well claiming it was "rare". I mentioned mass shootings in general are rare. Didn't matter.

True story, in 2016 nearly twice as many people were killed by fists than rifles. Nearly 5x more people were stabbed to death than killed by a rifle. 

 

[Chucktshoes]

I admit to a second purpose in my debates with folks on the other side. I also plainly state what the consequences of ‘success’ very possibly may be. Then I was just accused of making veiled threats and I had to apologize because I thought I was being quite explicit. I liken my position to that of someone yelling at kids playing in a busy street. If they persist, it will end very badly in a way that nobody wants to see happen. 

[peejman]

We have to continue to engage in the debate, regardless of the lack of logic.  If we don't, we'll lose by forfeit. 

They won't accept the logic the first time or the second time.  Keep going. Maybe the light will come on  the 22nd time. Its said to take 10,000 repetitions to for a skill to no longer require conscious thought.  We can't get angry or frustrated, and we can't relent. As my old wrestling coach used to say... constant pressure, never let up, never give them a moment to breathe and recover. Use their own tactics against them. 

Edited March 30, 2018 by peejman

[Erik88]

18 minutes ago, peejman said:

We have to continue to engage in the debate, regardless of the lack of logic.  If we don't, we'll lose by forfeit. 

They won't accept the logic the first time or the second time.  Keep going. Maybe the light will come on  the 22nd time. Its said to take 10,000 repetitions to for a skill to no longer require conscious thought.  We can't get angry or frustrated, and we can't relent. As my old wrestling coach used to say... constant pressure, never let up, never give them a moment to breathe and recover. Use their own tactics against them. 

You're right. I don't think we're going to convince those that just simply hate guns though. It's the reasonable people in the middle that we stand a chance to engage with. 

[Links2k]

My suggestion would be to constantly engage on a civil level on an ongoing basis. I’ve been watching both sides calling names and being reactionary after every crisis. Try engaging when there is no crisis. Emotions are high right now, and no one wants to hear what the other side has to say.

There are people totally opposed to guns, and no amount of fund raising or reasoning is going to change their minds. I’m the forum liberal and I’ve had “friends” mock me about gun ownership.

I don’t think it’s anyone that I know on this forum, but when we have supporters of the Second Amendment having rallies and open carrying, which is their right in some places, it terrifies hippies.  They don’t want to see anyone with guns except the police and military.  My opinion is that if we ever get to that place, we may as well be prepared to surrender all of our rights.

 

[gregintenn]

14 hours ago, peejman said:

We have to continue to engage in the debate, regardless of the lack of logic.  If we don't, we'll lose by forfeit. 

They won't accept the logic the first time or the second time.  Keep going. Maybe the light will come on  the 22nd time. Its said to take 10,000 repetitions to for a skill to no longer require conscious thought.  We can't get angry or frustrated, and we can't relent. As my old wrestling coach used to say... constant pressure, never let up, never give them a moment to breathe and recover. Use their own tactics against them. 

...or it may take guns to get their attention. I sure hope it doesn't come to that.

[Sunfish]

The liberal mindset is if you say something enough it will become reality. Some of them grow out of it or wake up in mid life others continue to exist in a fantasy land where everything is free and there are no consequences. Never give an idiot a audience and stop supporting what they care about. Right now they have momentum but soon enough they will realize no one cares what they think. They don't believe it anyway. Attention seeking behavior has never been very popular in the foot to mouth world          

[Links2k]

5 hours ago, Sunfish said:

The liberal mindset is if you say something enough it will become reality. Some of them grow out of it or wake up in mid life others continue to exist in a fantasy land where everything is free and there are no consequences. Never give an idiot a audience and stop supporting what they care about. Right now they have momentum but soon enough they will realize no one cares what they think. They don't believe it anyway. Attention seeking behavior has never been very popular in the foot to mouth world          

With all due respect, your opinion about the liberal mindset is one of the reasons that gun owners are getting trounced in the media right now.  

Pretty much every anti-gun person that I know with the exception of the youth are college educated and gainfully employed members of society. Underestimating them as “takers” is one of the reasons gun owners are getting our behinds handed to us by teenagers and media.  There are a lot of smart people with money behind this movement. Just like we raise our kids to appreciate the gun culture, anti-gunners are raising their kids to despise the culture. 

Never underestimate your adversary!

Edited March 31, 2018 by LINKS2K

[Omega]

6 hours ago, LINKS2K said:

With all due respect, your opinion about the liberal mindset is one of the reasons that gun owners are getting trounced in the media right now.  

Pretty much every anti-gun person that I know with the exception of the youth are college educated and gainfully employed members of society. Underestimating them as “takers” is one of the reasons gun owners are getting our behinds handed to us by teenagers and media.  There are a lot of smart people with money behind this movement. Just like we raise our kids to appreciate the gun culture, anti-gunners are raising their kids to despise the culture. 

Never underestimate your adversary!

You must run in a different circle, because this is what I see.

 

[Links2k]

1 hour ago, Omega said:

You must run in a different circle, because this is what I see.

Ok

Edited March 31, 2018 by LINKS2K

[Sunfish]

The media can't influence the people who don't listen to it or participate in it. You can also trust that when our guns are all gone these college educated gainfully employed anti's are not going to like it when the fascist's dictators show up with a whole new set of rules for them. At best they are near sighted and were not paying any attention in History class.    

[Garufa]

18 minutes ago, Sunfish said:

...and were not paying any attention in History class.    

What they call history class now has been so perverted with PC ideals and constant reinterpretations the simple recorded facts are quickly being lost.  My FIL is a retired history professor (and flaming liberal) and would be the first to agree.  Before he retired he constantly bemoaned the “new history”.

[Links2k]

On 3/31/2018 at 7:12 PM, Sunfish said:

The media can't influence the people who don't listen to it or participate in it. You can also trust that when our guns are all gone these college educated gainfully employed anti's are not going to like it when the fascist's dictators show up with a whole new set of rules for them. At best they are near sighted and were not paying any attention in History class.   

Edited April 2, 2018 by LINKS2K

[jgradyc]

I think our best approach is to engage those who have not made up their minds. I recently self-published a book on running. In it, I wrote a true and scary story about a woman who was followed late at night from the gym. Here's what I wrote:

Quote

 

The world has become an increasingly dangerous place, but that shouldn’t stop you from doing the things you love.

To be clear, I’m not advocating for or against the following actions, but some of my friends have handgun carry permits and have attended self-defense classes.

I was surprised to learn that women now outpace men in new handgun permit applications. Over one million women get their first handgun carry permit each year. New applications are soaring by about 1.8 million each year and are increasing at a rate of about 10% annually. Nearly 1 in 10 adults have carry permits in most states.

 

1

In my mind, the best approach isn't to confront the anti-gun activists. Their minds are made up. I think if we can get that 1 in 10 HCP number up to 1 in 3, we will win. 

[bersaguy]

Well, I only have 1 issue with talking to anti gun people and that is I don't know any. Every person I associate with or that I just know occassionally own guns. I can't truly name one person I know that does not own at least 3 to 5 guns or more and either have an HCP or working on getting one. A buddy of mine took me with him to do some yard work for his pastor one time that lived in the country and the man had a range set up in hs back yard and was packing everytime he was in church preaching or for any other reason. This was not a small town church but probably had 200 to 300 in attendence every week. He also has told his church members that if they want to carry then carry while in church. I even needed to buy something at a store that was posted so I went in the store. I saw 3 different employees and 2 or them were printing quite well and I finally asked one of them why they were packing in a posted store. I was told by the store manager the the signs were Corporates idea and not his but he was going to be able to defend himself in the case of bad guys showing up and so where his employees.

When I think I might get to talk with an anti gun person they end up better armed than I am many times..................... 

 

[Hershmeister]

I just politely ask the antis what exactly do they mean by “common sense gun control”

Usually you find they want the very things that are already in the 4473 background check. Because they are not gun owners they have no clue what the current laws are

And yes, they often are exposed as wanting to eliminate the Right - because often they do not believe it is what it is. For that group I Say Heller and McDonald and wish them good luck in their efforts for a constitutional amendment

If they are really clever they will say Scalia wrote in Heller that you can’t own ANY gun and regulation is allowed (used as an excuse to ban “assault weapons”)

To those smarty pants I remind them that Scalia also wrote in Heller that weapons in “common use” are guaranteed - and the ar-15 is the most commonly used rifle in the usa.

As mentioned above - if they are completely illogical and emotional basket cases I just stop the convo and wish them good luck in their amendment overhaul effort.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Cruel Hand Luke]

The majority of "anti gun people" actually know as much about guns as I do about how to crochet. If your guess is "next to nothing" then you win the prize. They simply are repeating the code speak they have heard or read and cannot carry on an informed intelligent discussion.....because they largely do not care to be educated or to have an exchange of ideas. They want to push a political agenda that they really have not thought through to the logical progression of where these actions will lead. 

Does the typical American believe that disarming young single women so they cannot effectively protect themselves from home invasion is a good idea? Most would not. Yet that is exactly the unintended REAL consequence of raising the age to buy a gun to 21. 

Does the typical American believe that the elderly and the weak should have the most effective means of defending themselves against home invasion stripped from them? Most would not yet banning semi auto .223 rifles would do just that. While we can argue the relative merits of shotguns vs carbines, we cannot argue that the .223 carbine is much easier to control buy the small statured, aged, or infirm than a shotgun. 

For any kind of "universal background" check to work ALL guns would have to be in the registry so that ALL transactions could be monitored. Otherwise it is essentially "honor system". Seriously...if you want background checks on ALL transactions you have to know where ALL the guns are much like the NFA registry. Do you REALLY think that the Average american thinks that is a good idea ? 

Justice Stevens aside, does the typical American REALLY want a repeal of the 2A ? Good luck getting 38 states to ratify that. And even if they do..... Are they going to then send the police to confiscate those semi auto firearms?

What happens when a significant # of people simply say "NO"?

 What is a significant amount? There are 100 million + gun owners in the USA. What if just 10% said "no". You would have a 10 million man armed force which would be the largest guerrilla army in the world. As it stands now the cops just have to worry about garden variety criminals and BLM kooks taking a potshot at them ....if "all out war on gun ownership" is implemented those same cops will have to worry about the largest army of "snipers" in the world. They will also have to worry that while they are at work seizing guns (which will be EXTREMELY costly in police lives ) they will come home to burned down houses since they live in the same communities they will be oppressing. I have a feeling you'll see a lot of cops simply refuse to do their job. 

Does ANYONE really want to see a return to the days of Missouri and Kansas during the civil war or South Carolina during the Revolution? For those not clear on the history it was a time of extreme violence between neighbors over political affiliation/allegiance . Does anyone think that is impossible today? You think the peace you have enjoyed your whole life can't spiral into something else?  Look at Yugoslavia between 1984 and 1990. They went from a vibrant country where the 84 Olympics were held to a war zone with mass killing at a genocidal level...... 

And what if those 10% (or even 1% would be a 1 million man and woman guerrilla force) take it a step farther and actively seek to eliminate those who brought this about?.....The level of unrest and lawlessness is simply mind boggling. Would Political assassination be on the table? If every time Feinstein or Schumer leaves their house they would SERIOUSLY have to worry about who is waiting for them would they still be "true believers"?  Would "ideological genocide" be on the table? While genocides tend to be along racial or tribal lines this could end up being ideological.  Do we ever really want to find out? I'd say that some doors are best left closed and never opened. But with each new call for "something to be done" that door gets knocked on......so the other side really needs to take an inventory of how important disarming 1/3 of the population is to them. Would they trade that for the potentially bloodiest time in American history? If this proceeds along the path that they now seem to be pushing that may be exactly what we see...and if it is then God help us all. 

Edited April 3, 2018 by Cruel Hand Luke

[bersaguy]

55 minutes ago, Cruel Hand Luke said:

The majority of "anti gun people" actually know as much about guns as I do about how to crochet. If your guess is "next to nothing" then you win the prize. They simply are repeating the code speak they have heard or read and cannot carry on an informed intelligent discussion.....because they largely do not care to be educated or to have an exchange of ideas. They want to push a political agenda that they really have not thought through to the logical progression of where these actions will lead. 

Does the typical American believe that disarming young single women so they cannot effectively protect themselves from home invasion is a good idea? Most would not. Yet that is exactly the unintended REAL consequence of raising the age to buy a gun to 21. 

Does the typical American believe that the elderly and the weak should have the most effective means of defending themselves against home invasion stripped from them? Most would not yet banning semi auto .223 rifles would do just that. While we can argue the relative merits of shotguns vs carbines, we cannot argue that the .223 carbine is much easier to control buy the small statured, aged, or infirm than a shotgun. 

For any kind of "universal background" check to work ALL guns would have to be in the registry so that ALL transactions could be monitored. Otherwise it is essentially "honor system". Seriously...if you want background checks on ALL transactions you have to know where ALL the guns are much like the NFA registry. Do you REALLY think that the Average american thinks that is a good idea ? 

Justice Stevens aside, does the typical American REALLY want a repeal of the 2A ? Good luck getting 38 states to ratify that. And even if they do..... Are they going to then send the police to confiscate those semi auto firearms?

What happens when a significant # of people simply say "NO"?

 What is a significant amount? There are 100 million + gun owners in the USA. What if just 10% said no. You would have a 1 million man armed force which would be arguably the largest guerrilla army in the world. As it stands now the cops just have to worry about garden variety criminals and BLM kooks taking a potshot at them ....if "all out war on gun ownership" is implemented those same cops will have to worry about the largest army of "snipers" in the world. They will also have to worry that while they are at work seizing guns (which will be EXTREMELY costly in police lives ) they will come home to burned down houses since they live in the same communities they will be oppressing. I have a feeling you'll see a lot of cops simply refuse to do their job. 

Does ANYONE really want to see a return to the days of Missouri and Kansas during the civil war or South Carolina during the Revolution? For those not clear on the history it was a time of extreme violence between neighbors over political affiliation/allegiance . Does anyone think that is impossible today? You think the peace you have enjoyed your whole life can't spiral into something else?  Look at Yugoslavia between 1984 and 1990. They went from a vibrant country where the 84 Olympics were held to a war zone with mass killing at a genocidal level...... 

And what if those 10% (or even 1% would be a 100,000 man guerrilla force) take it a step farther and actively seek to eliminate those who brought this about?.....The level of unrest and lawlessness is simply mind boggling. Would Political assassination be on the table? If every time Feinstein or Schumer leaves their house they would SERIOUSLY have to worry about who is waiting for them would they still be "true believers"?  Would "ideological genocide" be on the table? While genocides tend to be along racial or tribal lines this could end up being ideological.  Do we ever really want to find out? I'd say that some doors are best left closed and never opened. But with each new call for "something to be done" that door gets knocked on......so the other side really needs to take an inventory of how important disarming 1/3 of the population is to them. Would they trade that for the potentially bloodiest time in American history? If this proceeds along the path that they now seem to be pushing that may be exactly what we see...and if it is then God help us all. 

Great read for sure. Makes total sense to me but then I am a Pro Gun person and own guns. In all of what the anti gun folks think, do they honestly believe that gun owners will just walk up and turn in their guns and ammo without a fight? I wonder how many have actually given thought to the fact that it may turn into a war and they honestly believe that the police can or will protect them from 1 million armed citizens even if only half actually decide to fight which I do believe it would be a higher number. In all honesty I have figured that there are many people out there preaching anti gun talk and probably half of them own guns.

As for most of the higher up elected officials that are pushng the anti gun agenda I am guessing all have armed body guards with guns anytime they are out in public. They will preach anti gun policies and then hide behind armed body guards. Something just is not fair about that..............JMHO

[Chucktshoes]

1 hour ago, Cruel Hand Luke said:

The majority of "anti gun people" actually know as much about guns as I do about how to crochet. If your guess is "next to nothing" then you win the prize. They simply are repeating the code speak they have heard or read and cannot carry on an informed intelligent discussion.....because they largely do not care to be educated or to have an exchange of ideas. They want to push a political agenda that they really have not thought through to the logical progression of where these actions will lead. 

Does the typical American believe that disarming young single women so they cannot effectively protect themselves from home invasion is a good idea? Most would not. Yet that is exactly the unintended REAL consequence of raising the age to buy a gun to 21. 

Does the typical American believe that the elderly and the weak should have the most effective means of defending themselves against home invasion stripped from them? Most would not yet banning semi auto .223 rifles would do just that. While we can argue the relative merits of shotguns vs carbines, we cannot argue that the .223 carbine is much easier to control buy the small statured, aged, or infirm than a shotgun. 

For any kind of "universal background" check to work ALL guns would have to be in the registry so that ALL transactions could be monitored. Otherwise it is essentially "honor system". Seriously...if you want background checks on ALL transactions you have to know where ALL the guns are much like the NFA registry. Do you REALLY think that the Average american thinks that is a good idea ? 

Justice Stevens aside, does the typical American REALLY want a repeal of the 2A ? Good luck getting 38 states to ratify that. And even if they do..... Are they going to then send the police to confiscate those semi auto firearms?

What happens when a significant # of people simply say "NO"?

 What is a significant amount? There are 100 million + gun owners in the USA. What if just 10% said no. You would have a 1 million man armed force which would be arguably the largest guerrilla army in the world. As it stands now the cops just have to worry about garden variety criminals and BLM kooks taking a potshot at them ....if "all out war on gun ownership" is implemented those same cops will have to worry about the largest army of "snipers" in the world. They will also have to worry that while they are at work seizing guns (which will be EXTREMELY costly in police lives ) they will come home to burned down houses since they live in the same communities they will be oppressing. I have a feeling you'll see a lot of cops simply refuse to do their job. 

Does ANYONE really want to see a return to the days of Missouri and Kansas during the civil war or South Carolina during the Revolution? For those not clear on the history it was a time of extreme violence between neighbors over political affiliation/allegiance . Does anyone think that is impossible today? You think the peace you have enjoyed your whole life can't spiral into something else?  Look at Yugoslavia between 1984 and 1990. They went from a vibrant country where the 84 Olympics were held to a war zone with mass killing at a genocidal level...... 

And what if those 10% (or even 1% would be a 100,000 man guerrilla force) take it a step farther and actively seek to eliminate those who brought this about?.....The level of unrest and lawlessness is simply mind boggling. Would Political assassination be on the table? If every time Feinstein or Schumer leaves their house they would SERIOUSLY have to worry about who is waiting for them would they still be "true believers"?  Would "ideological genocide" be on the table? While genocides tend to be along racial or tribal lines this could end up being ideological.  Do we ever really want to find out? I'd say that some doors are best left closed and never opened. But with each new call for "something to be done" that door gets knocked on......so the other side really needs to take an inventory of how important disarming 1/3 of the population is to them. Would they trade that for the potentially bloodiest time in American history? If this proceeds along the path that they now seem to be pushing that may be exactly what we see...and if it is then God help us all. 

That’s a great post, but your math is slightly off. You need to add a zero to your 10% and 1% totals. 10% would be 10 million and 1% would be one million. Think about that. If only 1% of gun owners sought to actively defend their rights by any means necessary, it would equal the size of the entire amount of US Army, active and reserve. 

[Cruel Hand Luke]

Crap...yeah I missed that....trying to post fast from work leads to typos....fixed the mathematical issues.....

Edited April 3, 2018 by Cruel Hand Luke

[Omega]

29 minutes ago, Chucktshoes said:

That’s a great post, but your math is slightly off. You need to add a zero to your 10% and 1% totals. 10% would be 10 million and 1% would be one million. Think about that. If only 1% of gun owners sought to actively defend their rights by any means necessary, it would equal the size of the entire amount of US Army, active and reserve. 

And some of those would be active and reserve people.

Edited April 3, 2018 by Omega
speeling

[Hershmeister]

And that is the entire point of the 2A


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk