Help me educate someone why civilians need guns.

[accessbob]

The one thing that is usually missing from these discussions are actual writings from the Founding Fathers around the Amendments. I plan on researching and building up a cache of quotes from actual writings (not relying on someone else's statement that they wrote it but actually reading their writings) and hopefully that will help. Most people get caught up in the arguments over language, whether it is two separate items, etc. But reading what they said about it is likely more telling than anything.

[DefensiveCarry.com]

[gasmitty]

You need to look past the specific implement when considering mass murders such as today's. "How soon they forget" applies when I hear newscritters talk about this being the worst or one of the worst school shootings; but over 40 students and teachers were killed at the hands of another madman in Michigan in 1927 - Bath School disaster - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

One of the most grievous unintentional consequences of gun control as implemented in the U.S. is that we have created "criminal empowerment zones" by way of "gun free zones." It's a short-circuit of human nature to think that by restricting where guns can be carried, that will keep people safe from being harmed by guns in those places. Unfortunately, the reality is that rules like that demonstrate that laws are for the law-abiding. Clearly, today's shooter was not deterred by the fact that he was carrying weapons into a gun-free zone.

The fact remains that Harris and Klebold atColumbine, Seung-Hui Cho at VA Tech and similar mass murderers were bent on evil, and no laws could have prevented them from committing the mayhem they did. What we should not overlook is that armed civilians have successfully intervened to stop tragedies from getting worse in Pearl, Mississippi, Trolley Square in Utah, the Appalachian School of Law in Virginia, and at the New Life Church in Colorado Springs. Those very positive events are trivialized and dismissed by the "antis", but they ought not to be.

[Anubis]

Rawah, suggest your friend read "The Founders' Second Amendment" by Stephen Halbrook. It can be found in libraries or bought. It gives tons more info than we can put in this thread.

[Maximpactguns]

You can't convince the unconvincible if that makes sense. They will always stick to their views and it's kinda like talking to a rock if you've ever tried that. It gets you know where and makes you look like a fool. IMHO you either "get" firearms or you don't. There shouldn't be no in the "middle" type of people around firearms. Education is key. Our public school systems are brainwashing our children into believing weapons and guns are terrible. For example, my buddy has a teenager almost in HS. I try and help him on his American History or Social Studies sometimes when it's something he knows I can get all the real facts on. I've proven his teacher wrong on several occasions because the books he's bringing home are NOT accurately teaching our American Heritage. The 2nd amendment in itself is very confusing for some people. It can and always will be interpreted in different views. The biggest point I still cannot get over is if "We the people" have the power to overthrow our current government and make a new one, why hasn't this happened yet? I think most people are afraid of being locked up forever or made missing. I dunno thats my 2c.

[Rob99VMI04]

Colorado shooting Church of new life. that guy i believed had two Aks and he was shot by one of the church security members....i'm pretty sure she wasn't an actual security guard.

How about the Texas bell tower. Civilians shot back with their hunting rifles to keep the guy pinned for Le. I believe one the guys who assisted the cops was actually a civilian.

Umm Katrina.......Hurricane Sandy.

i believe the school was Bluemont..That's where the school principal ran to his car grabbed his person gun and stopped a massacre.

[mwhartman]

You can't convince the unconvincible if that makes sense. They will always stick to their views and it's kinda like talking to a rock if you've ever tried that. It gets you know where and makes you look like a fool. IMHO you either "get" firearms or you don't. There shouldn't be no in the "middle" type of people around firearms. Education is key. Our public school systems are brainwashing our children into believing weapons and guns are terrible. For example, my buddy has a teenager almost in HS. I try and help him on his American History or Social Studies sometimes when it's something he knows I can get all the real facts on. I've proven his teacher wrong on several occasions because the books he's bringing home are NOT accurately teaching our American Heritage. The 2nd amendment in itself is very confusing for some people. It can and always will be interpreted in different views. The biggest point I still cannot get over is if "We the people" have the power to overthrow our current government and make a new one, why hasn't this happened yet? I think most people are afraid of being locked up forever or made missing. I dunno thats my 2c.

Our education system is failing! America has been dumbed down. As to History -- On a recent interview, David McCullough author, historian, and pulitzer prize winner reports that a college student said to him that she did not know that the original thirteen colonies were all on the East coast. He continued by saying "our students are historically illiterate".


If something does not change America will fall off more than a fiscal cliff!

[CanuckQue]

There's a bit of room for psychological strategy. I wouldn't rely on using the Second Amendment, and the words of the founding fathers. Frankly, I don't care about their arguments very much, and so I don't see why other people should. It was a different world when they engaged in their philosophical musings. Much like Mohammed's statements regarding pork and gay sex: sure, there might have been some social wisdom at the time, but things are different now.

I mention this mainly because if they intrinsically don't care about the argument, they'll tune you out. This means that you'll lose the opportunity to convince or persuade using arguments that they might care about. Think about organisations like PETA: you know, they probably have some good data and some good arguments. They just never get the chance to discuss them, because we roll our eyes due to our over-exposure of their more stupid ads.

[ccw9mm]

An aquaintenace sent out a mass message asking" can someone please explain to me why civilians need guns again?".

Whether your discussion with the person will yield any results will depend largely on whether that person's mind is open to reality, and to the simple logic involved. Not everyone is.

Why, in short? Because violence is a real occurrence, and it can occur anytime, anywhere. It occurs in small towns, in rural areas, in cities, and everywhere in between. It occurs at the hands of people we know, strangers, and people passing through. Ignoring it or criminalizing citizens for daring to refuse to be a victim doesn't solve a thing.

Criminals are lawless, opting to ignore our restrictions upon such actions that harm others. They ignore pretty "No Guns signs just as they do prohibitions against firearms and knives in the hands of felons. They ignore laws and punishments related to murder, robbery, rape and other violent crimes.

"Gun" laws criminalize this or that, yet basically it's the upstanding, "law-abiding" citizens who follow such prohibitions, avoiding being branded a criminal. But criminals simply go about their business, acquiring whatever weaponry they want via whatever means they can (including robbery, theft). Point is, such laws basically don't impact criminals ... which, ostensibly, is the whole reason for such restrictions.

Crime can occur anytime, anywhere. Police across town are all well and good, but they're across town. They're NOT right there at the moment violent crime occurs. And it's the rare violent criminal who's going to allow a person to make an urgent 911/emergency call to request the cavalry to come running. In the end, a person has one responsibility in such a situation in which violent crime blows sideways right there: to survive the situation, sufficiently long for the cavalry to help clean up the situation. If a person can't survive the encounter, what's the point?

And that's the whole point of being armed. As citizens, we each hold primary responsibility over our own lives, including security and safety. While it's fine to have police, security guards, firemen and other first responders nearby, it's exceedingly rare that any of them are capable of helping from across town on the instant something violent blows up in front of us.

Having the right to be armed was acknowledged as a basic right of every citizen, at the time of the founding of this country. The governing few were prohibited from ever infringing upon that right. Those who have experienced crime realize that being armed during an encounter is one of the few things likely to effectively withstand a violent attack, particularly one that involves deadly weaponry used by the criminal(s).

At the end of the day, disarming victims ahead of time merely clears the path for criminals to be able to prey upon innocents devoid of any meaningful resistance or likelihood of stopping their predations.

Yes, there are criminals who misuse the various tools available to them, to commit their crimes. Yet those tools are used by millions of people properly and effectively, for all sorts of "upstanding" purposes ... including defending their very lives. BTDT, myself, once. Had I not been armed, it's a certainty I'd have had a hard time surviving the two-on-one attack that I was able to stop.

Here are some links to information that help:

• Gun Facts -- debunking gun-control myths
• GunCite -- various supporting information, stats
• Examples: The Failed Gun-Control Experiment in Australia, England and Wales.

[Brad426]

I'd be more succinct or you'll loose your audience.

[Rawah]

I'd be more succinct or you'll loose your audience.

Thanks for the advice. I will see about trimming it up. I have a close friend who is an English professor that I am going to have help me edit it.

[ccw9mm]

I'd be more succinct or you'll loose your audience.

Ditto. Need to tailor it to your audience.

And many of the standard platitudes aren't likely to go over well. If you can put those things into simple "street" perspective, in terms of what it means to the average person who has to deal with protecting the family, guarding against a mugging/assault, etc, then many points will make far more sense.

For example: "when seconds count, police are only minute away." That's a great sound byte, and it works well on a forum like this, where we're generally preaching to the choir on such things. But to a "deaf" ear, someone who's trying hard to not be convinced by such things, putting into simple perspective can really help. Such as, pointing out that police are across town, a phone call away, and when a violent criminal's in your face it's not as though you're going to be able to call a time-out for that much-needed phone call, as though the killer's going to allow that to happen; you've gotta survive long enough in order to call police, and for them to arrive.

[archer51]

" can someone please explain to me why civilians need guns again?".

Because criminals don't follow the law, that's why they are criminals.

At best the police are only minutes away when a crime takes place. Other than in rare instances, the most they are able to do is file a report and hope a lead will come to light that allows them to arrest the criminal.

Most important reason though, is that is not only your right, but your responsibility to protect yourself and your family from harm.

[Happypuppy]

Try Kathy Jackson piece on the Hero at Clackamas Mall. He was getting ready to take out the shooter when he did himself in. He carried in a the " no carry mall"


http://www.corneredcat.com/a-hero-in-clackamas/


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk HD

[Rawah]

I am remembering why English was always my least favorite subject. My friend just handed the rough draft back to me. I have lots of things to revise. Give me a couple days to make the needed changes and add examples with citations. I will post the 2nd draft up when I can.

I am really hoping we can educate others willing to learn the importance of the right to bear using this when it's finished. I've personally learned a lot already myself just doing this and i myself find it intrieging the more I read and learn. Thank you to all that have posted as well as the links provided. The article on "Japanese gun control" from www.gunsite.com was a great read!

[Patti]

It was George Washington who said ~ Guns are the "teeth" of the Constitution.

I carry a gun because I can't carry a cop with me everywhere I go.

From a woman's viewpoint, carrying a gun is an equilizer. If I was up against a 200 pound man, there is no way I would win. Put a gun in my hand and now I have more power.

It's just that simple.

I REFUSE TO BE A VICTIM!