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; Chris, So have you had a chance to use any of the many excellent arguments provided here on your sister? If so how did she ...
So have you had a chance to use any of the many excellent arguments provided here on your sister? If so how did she respond. I think we need an update :)
See how quickly she rushes to do it.
Next, suggest that you try the same exact exercise, but this time suggest that you "attack" her with a WIFFLE BALL BAT.
When she again refuses, ask her why.
Ask her what could possibly be so difficult about stopping you from hitting her with a wiffle ball bat.
And then ask her again why she thinks people would fare so well if "all" a psychotic attacker had was an ax.
I'm sorry, but your sister doesn't sound too bright; the typical anti-gunner who has no clue what is real, and how the real world works.
Oh, and you might want to ask her what would prevent people from buying black market guns; from ambushing cops using fake 911 calls and killing them and stealing their guns; from manufacturing new guns after the ban/roundup.
Seriously, imagine that not one single gun existed in this country except for those belonging to cops.
Here's what would happen:
Criminals who want guns would place calls to 911, asking them to come because a home was broken into or some such. Some nothing crime, like a car window was broken. Then when one cop arrives, at a decoy location given (so as not to lead to the real residence of the caller), the criminal (and possibly his cohorts) bashes the cop on the head with a wrench, kills him, and takes his gun.
Then they do it again, but this time they can just shoot the cop. Then they have two guns, and can branch out.
The result will be that cops either will stop going to ANY calls, or every single call will be handled with a SWAT-like response, and "the People" will certainly not like that -- especially those who called for a gun ban in the first place. They'll all be trying to think of excuses to give when we accuse them and their idiotic gun ban of causing all this to happen.
Last edited by peacefuljeffrey; April 30th, 2007 at 12:15 AM.
‘The only thing necessary for the triumph [of evil] is for good men to do nothing.’ - Edmund Burke
Apt quote, even for the wordsmiths seeking the destruction of upstanding people (those attacking the rights of others).
Not acknowledging the barbarians at the gate results in the gate being burned to the ground. So, I lobby, I write, I learn ... and I keep my left up. But evil-minded people bent on controlling others have won with less ammo than those bandying such arguments today. Here we are with a mere shadow of the Constitution, dangling by its threads. Enough is enough.
my argument against gun control is always
"do you think criminals are for or against gun control"
I would ask her if she and her cronies were to get guns outlawed how much luck they would expect to have with bad guys just turning them over? Technically most folks with a criminal past are already banned from gun ownership so why don't she and her buddies just enforce the laws already in place if all we need are laws to accomplish this "wonderland" train of thought.
Seems to me that if laws that "prevent" repeat offenders from gun ownership don't currently work then you don't really have to argue with her much more. Her theory of merely puting laws in place for protection has already failed miserably.