Winning hearts and minds

Winning hearts and minds

This is a discussion on Winning hearts and minds within the The Second Amendment & Gun Legislation Discussion forums, part of the Related Topics category; This is the mindset we have to overcome. And a perfect example of what "antis" think; and perhaps, the way they think... Daily Vanguard The ...

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 22

Thread: Winning hearts and minds

  1. #1
    VIP Member Array oakchas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Tennessee
    Posts
    7,569

    Winning hearts and minds

    This is the mindset we have to overcome. And a perfect example of what "antis" think; and perhaps, the way they think...

    Daily Vanguard

    The PSU Vanguard is a student run newpaper in Portland Oregon (I assume Portland State University).

    Here we have (probably) an aspiring soon-to-be-professional-journalist, opining that despite the arguments over 2A rights (individual right vs. state (and/or militia) right), the right to bear arms is not a good idea.

    How do you argue against this?... No, you don't have to argue against it... but not arguing against it, reasonably, quietly, and carefully does nothing to help the coming generation(s) toward understanding and protecting the rights (both natural and granted) enumerated by the Constitution... Thereby putting those rights at risk.
    Last edited by oakchas; July 7th, 2010 at 01:08 PM.


  2. #2
    Distinguished Member Array tangoseal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Near Hotlanta!!
    Posts
    1,341
    I tried time and time to post this as a comment but the site keeps making me reenter it over and over... I gave up...


    (Do not use my opinion as a good combative point rather im just venting, really would have no proved any point).

    Why do you college brain children not think for your own selves? I do not understand.

    Why don't you write an article citing specific cases and statistics where LEGAL gun owners, especially ones that carry concealed or openly legally, have committed atrocious crimes of violence.

    Let me ask you this... Can you show us or list examples of where criminals have said "OH MAN they made guns illegal for me to use in crime, this stinks, now I have to leave my gun at home and rob someone using harsh language"?

    When has your utopian liberal gun laws ever enforced peace and security on law abiding citizens when criminals could give a crap less?

    Police officers getting shot by criminals is the least of my concern. I carry a gun because I DO NOT want to be bothered, not so I can bother others.

    I think you need to retire from writing papers until you learn to think for your own individual self. You have NO substance in this article other than biased liberal talking points forced down your throats by really smart intellectual idiots.
    Last edited by tangoseal; July 8th, 2010 at 12:13 AM.
    "I believe that the right of the citizen to keep and bear arms must not be infringed if liberty in America is to survive." - Ronald Reagan

  3. #3
    Distinguished Member Array tangoseal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Near Hotlanta!!
    Posts
    1,341
    Look at this person record of writings.... wow this person is brainwashed. I bet she is 22 years old and has a "Coexist" bumper sticker on her car.

    Daily Vanguard - Search
    "I believe that the right of the citizen to keep and bear arms must not be infringed if liberty in America is to survive." - Ronald Reagan

  4. #4
    VIP Member Array oakchas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Tennessee
    Posts
    7,569
    Okay, so you would start your argument by hurling insults; and finish by critiquing the "substance" of the article and the people the author hears every day?

    Thanks for your input.

  5. #5
    VIP Member
    Array DaveH's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    SW Virginia
    Posts
    5,036
    Quote Originally Posted by oakchas View Post

    How do you argue against this?... No, you don't have to argue against it... but not arguing against it, reasonably, quietly, and carefully does nothing to help the coming generation(s) toward understanding and protecting the rights (both natural and granted) enumerated by the Constitution... Thereby putting those rights at risk.
    Well for starters check out:

    http://www.defensivecarry.com/vbulle...tion-here.html

    or

    Janq's great post on http://www.defensivecarry.com/vbulle...s-negroes.html

    at

    [QUOTE=Janq;1690992]

    or

    Raging Against Self Defense: A Psychiatrist Examines The Anti-Gun Mentality, By Sarah Thompson, M.D.

    There is a good deal of ammunition here or cited on this forum to show the facility of the control mentality. Just read what's here and if you don't overload check out a few other sites [but IMHO this is the best.].

    Welcome to the fight for rights. BTW -- don't expect it to be easy or quick. if you are in, you are end for a long haul.
    Μολὼν λαβέ

    I'm just one root in a grassroots organization. No one should assume that I speak for the VCDL.

    I am neither an attorney-at-law nor I do play one on television or on the internet. No one should assumes my opinion is legal advice.

    Veni, Vidi, Velcro

  6. #6
    VIP Member Array oakchas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Tennessee
    Posts
    7,569
    Welcome to the fight for rights. BTW -- don't expect it to be easy or quick. if you are in, you are end for a long haul.
    I've been in for the long haul for more than thirty years.

    I know there is a great deal of information on this and other SD 2A forums...

    What I'm looking for here, is each individual's response to the editorial... We can all tout sites and citations, facts and statistics.

    But, let's say you and Ms. Grozina were at a function of some sort, and you happened to be assigned to the same table (eating the same rubber chicken or mystery beef plate), waitng for the featured speaker in about an hour. The conversation turned to the recent SCOTUS decision after the mention of some increase in gun crime made by someone else at the table. Ms. G. "spouts eloquent" exactly what she wrote... there are, say 8-10 people at your table.

    Your mission, should you decide to accept it, is to reasonably argue your convictions in a manner that might give the other 6-8 people at the table to realize your ideas make more sense than Ms. G's.

    GO!

  7. #7
    Distinguished Member Array MinistrMalic's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    Phoenix, AZ
    Posts
    1,414
    Well frankly the argument is not well presented, so I would probably just let it pass.

    The Supreme Court did not pass any laws, as the article says they did. What the court did is to buttress existing law, declaring that laws that had existed violated constitutional rights.

    My standard response is:
    1. Be polite. Thank the writer for posting their thoughts.
    2. Take the discussion out of this contentious issue. In this instance, I usually proceed to the first, fourth, and especially fifth amendment. Really, who needs the fifth amendment except people who are guilty of a crime and should be convicted and punished? By the logic displayed, the fifth amendment should be done away with. Likewise, the fourth amendment only protects criminals in reality and should be removed. I think that this line of reasoning is easy to see and then refute, that the amendment is in place to prevent governmental abuse of its citizens, and that removing the right established at the birth of the USA removes those protections. In the same way, removing the 2nd amendment removes the protection it affords to our citizens. I would also point to the US militia law and then cite some of the standard arguments.

    I would try to be irenic and thoughtful.
    "...whoever has no sword is to sell his coat and buy one." (Luke 22:36)
    Christianity and Self Defense from a Biblical Perspective

  8. #8
    Distinguished Member Array tangoseal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Near Hotlanta!!
    Posts
    1,341
    Quote Originally Posted by oakchas View Post
    Okay, so you would start your argument by hurling insults; and finish by critiquing the "substance" of the article and the people the author hears every day?

    Thanks for your input.
    Yup Good inputs are needed to combat the intellectuals. Get on a level that is not insultive but points them in the direction of self thought and discovery about the truth and light behind 2a. Don't use my response above.
    Last edited by tangoseal; July 8th, 2010 at 12:14 AM.
    "I believe that the right of the citizen to keep and bear arms must not be infringed if liberty in America is to survive." - Ronald Reagan

  9. #9
    Distinguished Member Array tangoseal's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Near Hotlanta!!
    Posts
    1,341
    Quote Originally Posted by oakchas View Post
    What I'm looking for here, is each individual's response to the editorial... We can all tout sites and citations, facts and statistics.
    Thanks for contacting me Oakchas.
    Last edited by tangoseal; July 8th, 2010 at 12:11 AM.
    "I believe that the right of the citizen to keep and bear arms must not be infringed if liberty in America is to survive." - Ronald Reagan

  10. #10
    VIP Member Array oakchas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Tennessee
    Posts
    7,569
    Quote Originally Posted by MinistrMalic View Post
    Well frankly the argument is not well presented, so I would probably just let it pass....


    ...I would try to be irenic and thoughtful.
    I agree that the argument is not well thought out, accurate, or presented... That's part of the problem...

    These kids... college students... are tomorrow's leaders.

    They may be liberal nut bags... but if we talk to them like they are, we will get about as far as radical terrorists get when trying to convert us to Islam by setting off IEDs...

    The 2A fight is a long fight. And one we have to keep up, even though we have recently won a couple of landmark cases. Because if these kids don't effect the laws we live with now, surely they will effect the laws our children have to live under...

    I'm looking for all the ideas out there. And we cannot stick our heads in the sand, nor our barrels up their noses to make them understand.

  11. #11
    Member Array loboleather's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Colorado
    Posts
    235
    "If one is not a liberal at twenty one has no heart. If one is not a conservative at forty one has no head." Sir Winston Churchill

    "The problem with you liberals is that so much of what you believe just ain't so". Ronald Reagan.

    "Liberalism exists as a means of permitting the self-perceived liberal to believe himself to be morally and intellectually superior to the common man. That belief in one's own moral and intellectual superiority requires that the liberal control the lives of others, for their own good". Old Lobo Himself
    Lobo Gun Leather
    serious equipment for serious business, since 1972
    www.lobogunleather.com

  12. #12
    VIP Member Array oakchas's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Tennessee
    Posts
    7,569
    Dave H,

    I forgot to thank you for the sources...

    The first one from the daily Kos "some second amendment ammunition here" is an EXCELLENT article... and in our discussion with Ms. G, we could certainly use some of the information presented.

    The second link to Janq's post on "No guns for Negroes" is quite interesting, too, and could be shown to Ms. G. or the discussion could contain references to how gun control may have actually started as a means to keep black freemen from having arms.

    The 3rd link, I haven't read yet.

    Now, I'm just looking for a way to incorporate these into an discussion that a young liberal like Ms. G. might even listen to... At the same time, swaying the others "at the table."

    See, the problem is sort of like what Lobo said... Ms. G. and some other "self labeled liberals" do believe themselves "to be morally and intellectually superior to the common man."

    We are "the common man." And, while some of us may have liberal leanings, or be more moderate in our politics; and some are conservative, or even hard line "right wingers," We have to have a means to communicate with those who proselytize the "Anti-gun religion," especially in public.

    Most people in this world/country/city/village/neighborhood would tell you that they are moderate... they are not RED or BLUE.. they are "reasoning folks" who vote for the best man for the job, etc.

    Those people can be swayed. That's the mission here. Maybe you can't write an op ed like Ms.G. did... maybe if she sat down at your table and spouted her thoughts exactly as she did in the op ed, you'd be flummoxed and not say a word.

    It's my contention that: While many of us carry weapons daily to protect the lives and well being our loved ones and ourselves; and some of us train to use them and other methods of self defense for that purpose regularly; Many of us are ill equipped to face the more likely threat of having to discuss the reasons we do, and protect our right to "keep and bear arms" from those who would see that right diminished, or taken away entirely.

  13. #13
    VIP Member Array chiefjason's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Location
    Hickory, NC
    Posts
    2,867
    Tried to post this. We'll see if it comes up.


    Why is it that the 2nd amendment to our Constitution is the only amendment that we are willing to sacrifice? Why is it that the Bill of Rights is almost uniformly accepted to apply to the individual, oh, except the 2nd? At what point has disarming victims ever made them safer? The founding fathers and the framers of the Constitutions opinion on this is very clear. They were in favor of private ownership of firearms. You should also look into the US Militia code, it states clearly that everyone is a member of the militia with the exception of certain public positions. I have a God given right, and responsibility, to protect myself and my family. If the criminals are armed, my only option is to arm myself as well. And the criminals are, and will continue, to be armed. I don't carry a handgun because "I can". I carry a pistol because it is the most effective defensive option I have against another firearm. Please look into the murder rate of the town Mr. Daley runs. They are having a very difficult time with firearms in Chicago these days. And they are banned there. Gun control is not working very well for the citizens of Chicago. And if the mayor is worried about civil suits he should train his officers in how to properly deal with citizens instead of treating them like subjects. We do not have an issues with homeowners being shot in WNC. Instead of trying to justify your incorrect opinion on the 2A and our Right to Bear Arms, please to some research. Starting with Gary Kleck's research that states that guns are use defensively approximately 2.5 million times per year. You would not want to be responsible for making 2.5 million more victims by disarming them would you. Also, research the idea that the US Supreme Court has ruled that it is not the police, nor the state's, responsibility to protect you. It's yours.


    I hate typing in those little boxes. It's hard to proof read it.
    I prefer to live dangerously free than safely caged!

    "Our houses are protected by the good Lord and a gun. And you might meet 'em both if you show up here not welcome son." Josh Thompson "Way Out Here"

  14. #14
    Senior Member
    Array StevePVB's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Jacksonville, FL
    Posts
    1,195
    This is not a surprise. These are the type of folks that the "journalism" schools are turning out. Every year the new class increases the percentage of liberals in "media". Of course, since we are now well past 99% we can only hope they have already reached max damage.

  15. #15
    VIP Member Array shockwave's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Florida
    Posts
    2,050
    Good inputs are needed to combat the intellectuals.
    Then you're bringing a knife to a gunfight.
    "It may seem difficult at first, but everything is difficult at first."

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast

Remove Ads

Sponsored 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. Winning a confrontation
    By semperfi.45 in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
    Replies: 19
    Last Post: June 12th, 2014, 10:04 PM
  2. Inside the minds of gang members
    By LongRider in forum Law Enforcement, Military & Homeland Security Discussion
    Replies: 17
    Last Post: November 22nd, 2008, 09:07 PM
  3. We're winning?
    By katmandoo122 in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: February 14th, 2007, 06:23 PM
  4. Wandering minds are dangerous...
    By Euclidean in forum General Firearm Discussion
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: February 10th, 2006, 01:13 AM
  5. Nebraska CCW Bill lb454. Meeting of the minds after gun show.
    By OmahaNE in forum Concealed Carry Issues & Discussions
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: December 2nd, 2005, 10:41 PM