A New Theme for Refuting Gun-Control - Please Read

[45Doll 5,874]

I'm not putting this in the 2A Lounge because it should not be controversial.

It is, what I think, a good idea on reshaping the conversation for those of us who oppose gun control. The previous themes I'm aware of are, IMO, not making any significant headway with the general public; they only preach to the firearm choir. The Constitutional defense makes perfect sense to us, but how many of the public?

See what you think.

Republicans must reinvent their Gun Rights narrative - American Thinker

[Xtors 333]

Good article and completely agree. The problem, though, is that the left is appealing based on emotion and this strategy, while better, is more logic/fact based. It's hard to compete with people screaming "WE HAVE TO DO SOMETHING!" and "IF IT SAVES JUST ONE LIFE" at the top of their reeeeeeeeeeeeeing lungs. That said, NICS data over the last couple years along with some recent mainstream polls showing much lower support for gun control does offer some hope.

[45Doll 5,874]

38 minutes ago, Xtors said:

"IF IT SAVES JUST ONE LIFE"

How about "IF A GUN JUST SAVES YOUR LIFE?"?

[Xtors 333]

49 minutes ago, 45Doll said:

How about "IF A GUN JUST SAVES YOUR LIFE?"?

Won't argue with you there!

[father-of-three 243]

That was a good article.   Thank you.

There certainly needs to be some "Colion Nior"-esque thinking for anyone who wants to give a rational response, which can be very difficult when emotionally charged words are being used from the other side.

I like debates.  Not the Presidential debates that have little or no order to them, but actual debates with openings, rebuttals, cross examinations, and closing statements.  The ther thing that makes (or breaks!) a debate is an issue that is clearly and fairly defined and described by both sides.  

For starters, a debate on this subject is already flung from objectivity, and the opposition knows it thanks to their VERY convenient conversation stopper of "gun violence."  A pointed term that purposefully has no easily defended opposite.

The best I can think of is gun safety or gun securty, but at best, they are not opposites. 

The article does address this by having good and different responses to the "usual" talking points of the left.

[raz-0 1,259]

On 11/25/2022 at 8:26 PM, Xtors said:

Good article and completely agree. The problem, though, is that the left is appealing based on emotion and this strategy, while better, is more logic/fact based. It's hard to compete with people screaming "WE HAVE TO DO SOMETHING!" and "IF IT SAVES JUST ONE LIFE" at the top of their reeeeeeeeeeeeeing lungs. That said, NICS data over the last couple years along with some recent mainstream polls showing much lower support for gun control does offer some hope.

So make an emotional appeal. In the case of the wal-mart shooting, why did wal-mart once again fail to provide sufficient security to it's employees? Why did government policy continue to fail to address the root cause of XXX that lead to this violence. 

The main problem with this is it would require the GOP to possibly endorse some form of funding a functioning social safety net.