how to counter this anti-gun argument?

This is a discussion on how to counter this anti-gun argument? within the Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions forums, part of the Defensive Carry Discussions category; Originally Posted by Chris17404 Hi all, As a result of the Virginia Tech shootings, I've been in a discussion with my very anti-gun sister. She ...

Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 31 to 45 of 67

Thread: how to counter this anti-gun argument?

  1. #31
    Member Array Son Of Vlad Tepes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    multi national
    Posts
    28
    Quote Originally Posted by Chris17404 View Post
    Hi all,

    As a result of the Virginia Tech shootings, I've been in a discussion with my very anti-gun sister. She wants all guns abolished in the US. I made the point that if all guns were removed from the US, then criminals would use axes. If axes were gone, then criminals would use knives. If knives were gone, they'd use bats, etc...

    An argument she made against this goes something like this:

    "An unarmed person is much more able to defend themselves against an ax than a gun. A gun can be used to kill multiple people from 50 feet away in a short amount of time. But an ax must be used up close and people have time to react and either stop the threat or run away. Yada, yada, yada..."

    While I disagree with her, I'm not sure how to respond to this argument. Can could someone please help me out? Thanks.

    Chris
    As others said, the flaw in her logic is that she's assuming the criminals will give up their guns. They just won't and then we will be helpless. You cannot magically erase guns from our society. You can't even erase them from societies with really tough gun laws like the UK, Australia, etc. And as a matter of fact in the US the States that have more liberal gun laws have less crime. Would your sister want to turn the whole of our society into that "gun free" campus where the only person with guns was a pathetic loser cockroach excuse of a human being that can massacre people at will? She better come to terms that guns will not be taken away from the criminals, and if the crazy are crazy enough, and motivated enough, they'll find a gun, build a bomb etc. Since you cannot control for that, the only thing you can control is how prepared you as an individual can become to protect yourself and the good people of the world. That's if the law allows you to do so. The way Israel deals with these sorts of terrorist attacks (and it is a terrorist attack, just a different type of motivation is all), is to have good and willing people around that are armed and that immediately act to destroy the threat. Terrorists there were attacking schools at will before the Israelis became wise and started arming teachers. And lastly, even if you were to magically erase guns from the world, all that you'll ensure is that the strong and evil will be able to pray on the weak, 'cause I just can't see the elderly, single women, non-Kung Fu expert men and the like to put up much resistance to hardened, strong, and evil criminals using just bare hands. And if she says that this is what police are for, well then remind her that by the time the cops show up, they come just in time to draw the white chalk outline around your body. The police isn't there to protect individuals, it is there to catch criminals after they have committed the crime and take them to justice. One thing is for sure, this human piece of feces Cho would have had a very different day if a few good people would have been armed, willing and able, on that scene. May those victims rest in peace and may that waste of space, murderer, burn in hell.

  2. Remove Ads

  3. #32
    Member Array robinsonre's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Reno, NV
    Posts
    173
    Point out that an unarmed elderly man, or weaker individual without a gun would surely be killed by a man with an axe. Point out that with proper training an individual with a gun is MUCH more likely to put down a man with an axe than one without a gun. Finally, point out that it's not hers, yours, or anyone else's choice how another individual chooses to defend himself, thats up to him.
    "Life exists at a level of complexity almost beyond our ability to comprehend. It's a well known fact that if you try to take apart a cat to see how it works one of the first things you have on your hands is a non-working cat" - Douglas Adams

    "All things are governed by law" - Hippocrates

  4. #33
    Distinguished Member Array Bob The Great's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Slidell, LA
    Posts
    1,688
    Quote Originally Posted by HOLYROLLER View Post
    Rodc13...chattel, despot? Bob The Great...I am obviously not for a ban on guns, but at the same time I dont believe we should deny that the primary purpose of the guns we carry, that is to kill.
    No worries. I'm reasonably sure you don't support a gun ban. I was simply pointing out that you are falling into a logical trap by accepting these unspoken assumptions and validating the anti-gun argument. If you point the assumptions out, the argument crumbles.

    And if you want to get down to the nitty gritty of it, the purpose of a tool varies by who carries it. The purpose of my gun is not to kill, but to defend by any means necessary. A killing may result (god forbid), but that is not its purpose. To a thug commiting a robbery, the purpose of the gun is to induce submission by any means necessary. A killing may result from this also, but again, that is not the purpose of the gun. In a case such as VT, where an arguably insane individual is trying to murder as many people as possible, then the purpose of his gun is to kill.

    Delving a bit deeper, you could argue that the designed purpose of a gun is to act as a weapon (note, not "to kill"). What any one person does with that weapon determines its purpose of the moment. Kind of like how the designed purpose of a car is to provide transportation, but its purpose of the moment can be either to run from the cops or deliver someone to a hospital.

  5. #34
    Senior Member Array Timmy Jimmy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Location
    Austin, Texas
    Posts
    759
    We can not even keep guns out of prisons so how are we going to abolish all guns?
    Timmy Jimmy

    If it is not in the US Constitution then the Federal Government should not be doing it.

    "Carrying a gun is a social responsibility."

  6. #35
    VIP Member Array sgtD's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2006
    Location
    Kansas
    Posts
    2,292
    The premise of her argument is that "all guns" can be removed from society. It is a false premise.

    She is sadly mistaken. Criminals will always get guns, just like they get drugs.

    Banning guns only disarms the law abiding, which creates more potential victims.
    When you've got 'em by the balls, their hearts & minds will follow. Semper Fi.

  7. #36
    Member Array Son Of Vlad Tepes's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    multi national
    Posts
    28
    have your sister read this too..here is a prime example of how safe a no gun society can be...read about the great denizens of a socialist western democracy in action, in the gun free worker's paradise:

    http://www.brusselsjournal.com/node/1130

  8. #37
    Ex Member Array HOLYROLLER's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Spokane, WA
    Posts
    269
    Ill start by defining "We" as the fine folks on this forum, no sarcasm intended.

    We shoot at targets shaped like torsos and aim at center mass, maybe even head shots. We carefully choose our caliber of ammunition designed to inflict the most damage (although some of us may rethink our choice after VT). I havent run across a post where someone plans to "wound" their attacker, use their gun as a club or fire a warning shot for that matter. We dont carry handcuffs or mace do we? Why not?

    We carry/train to kill, all be it for the right reasons hopefully.

    A cars primary function is to transport although it could be used to run a person down. A guns PRIMARY function is to send a lethal projectile to or through an intended target, although I suppose it could be used for something else.

    God bless, HOLYROLLER.

  9. #38
    VIP Member Array SammyIamToday's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2006
    Location
    Oklahoma
    Posts
    2,087
    There's one fundamental truth about society. Prohibition of any wanted item will never work.

    Never.
    ...He suggested that "every American citizen" should own a rifle and train with it on firing ranges "at every courthouse." -Chesty Puller

  10. #39
    Distinguished Member Array Dakotaranger's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    North Dakota
    Posts
    1,858
    Go get a roll of wrapping paper or a stick and tell her to "en guard" if she can't stop the attack, then ask her why she didn't call for banning cars when that muslim ran over those in North Carlonia in a terroist attack,then ask her how she's going to ban rocks. Remind her that only God can do away with rocks and someone that would ban them automatically deams themselves god thus violating the perceived "Separation of Church and State."

    Ask her why we must allow criminals to violate our Right to life, liberty and pursuit of happiness? Why should a monster have more rights than a citizen?
    "[T]he people are not to be disarmed of their weapons.
    They are left in full possession of them."

    Zacharia Johnson (speech in the Virginia Ratifying Convention,25 June 1778)"The best we can hope for concerning the people at large is that they be properly armed." ~Alexander Hamilton

  11. #40
    Member Array Sam Douthit's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    Bowdon, GA
    Posts
    181
    I have heard this argument before. One example is a big strong man and a 90 lb woman in a fight. Given a gun she might defend herself. Bullies often use their size and strength to push people around. They don't do this to armed folks. Also, being armed often is enough to stop the situation and no shooting need take place. The old west and Dodge City actually had less senseless killings per capita than Washington, DC.
    Sambo74
    SI VIS PACEM, PARA BELLUM

  12. #41
    VIP Member Array rodc13's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    San Antonio, Texas
    Posts
    2,753
    Quote Originally Posted by HOLYROLLER View Post
    Rodc13...chattel, despot? Bob The Great...I am obviously not for a ban on guns, but at the same time I dont believe we should deny that the primary purpose of the guns we carry, that is to kill.
    Definitions:
    Chattel -- as a slave or property (in context, subjugated)
    Despot -- any tyrant or oppressor (in context, the strong holding power over the weak)

    A firearm allows a person of smaller stature or less personal strength to overcome the physical advantage of a larger or stronger person. A knife, an axe, a spear, a sword, even a bow and arrow, all are much more dependent upon the physical strength of the individual than are firearms.

    Any weapon is designed to inflict damage. And yes, in training, we seek to maximize the damage. The intent, however, is to defend; to stop an imminent attack or threat. The threat of deadly force may be sufficient in many circumstances.

    Most law (Texas included) considers force (or threat of force), justified in order to stop an attack, or threat. When the imminent threat does not exist, the application of force is no longer justified. It's this great distinction that must be grasped by any who choose to take on the responsibility of wielding deadly force.
    Cheers,
    Rod
    "We're paratroopers. We're supposed to be surrounded!" Dick Winters

  13. #42
    Senior Member Array jeep45238's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    Cincinnati, Ohio
    Posts
    708
    Quote Originally Posted by Chris17404 View Post

    While I disagree with her, I'm not sure how to respond to this argument. Can could someone please help me out? Thanks.

    Chris
    Short of using the same object the assailent is using, or a deadlier one, how exactly does she plan on having your average Joe stop that threat?

    Ask if she would have even the LEO's stripped of their guns. We walk the same streets they do, so why is it ok for them to have guns for self defense, but I can't?

  14. #43
    Senior Member Array Andy W.'s Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    KY
    Posts
    983
    She wants all guns abolished in the US
    Tell her to look at what happened when alcohol was abolished in the US. That didn't work did it?

  15. #44
    Member Array Chris17404's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2006
    Location
    York, PA
    Posts
    98
    Hi everyone,

    I really appreciate all of your thoughts on this. I'm going to take some time to digest all of it, and come up with a well thought out and honest response to her.

    Thanks again. I really love this forum. Long live the Second Amendment.

    Chris

  16. #45
    VIP Member
    Array Miggy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Location
    Miami-Dade, FL
    Posts
    6,258
    She might subconciously think about that having a gun is not fair as in "fair fight". I have seen this used before by others. I quote an armored officer during Gulf War One who was asked if the massive amount of M1 tanks and Bradleys against a seemingly smaller Iraqi force was fair. He responded (I parapharse): "In my book, fair fight means me and all my people go home alive."
    You have to make the shot when fire is smoking, people are screaming, dogs are barking, kids are crying and sirens are coming.
    Randy Cain.

    Ego will kill you. Leave it at home.
    Signed: Me!

Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast

Links

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Similar Threads

  1. Over the counter for Thyroid?
    By ArmyCop in forum Off Topic & Humor Discussion
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: December 17th, 2010, 11:06 PM
  2. Anti's "escalation" argument???
    By Agent47 in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
    Replies: 58
    Last Post: August 17th, 2009, 01:01 PM
  3. One Anti-Assault Weapon argument I find flawed.
    By Thanis in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 74
    Last Post: September 15th, 2008, 01:40 AM
  4. What is the "Anti" argument?
    By DasBoot in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
    Replies: 36
    Last Post: December 24th, 2007, 10:05 PM
  5. An anti-gun story and my argument
    By Kel-Tec2006 in forum The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: January 26th, 2006, 08:35 AM

Search tags for this page

anti gun counter arguments
,
anti gun wack jobs
,
argument to keep a gun
,
billy ferry fire
,

billy ferry winn dixie

,

billy ferry winn dixie fire

,

concealed carry arguments

,

counter anti gun argument

,
countering anti gun arguments
,
counters to anti gun arguments
,
how to counter gun argument
,
how to counter the anti gun arguement
Click on a term to search for related topics.