Story #1:

 

A man is traveling through the city at night with his wife and teenage daughter on their way back from a visit with grandma and grandpa.He is an installer with the regional cable company, his wife works at a day care center and their daughter is a junior in high school.

 

They stop at a light behind an old beat-up Junker; the man doesn’t notice that the car behind him is just a little too close. Suddenly two young men approach his car with guns drawn. They force the man out of the car at gunpoint; shoot him in the head killing him instantly. Later that week, the bodies of his wife and daughter are discovered in the basement of an abandoned building*.

 

*Author’s note: I deliberately skipped over the really bad stuff here.

 

Story #2:

 

A man is traveling through the city at night with his wife and teenage daughter on their way back from a visit with grandma and grandpa. He is an off-duty police officer, his wife works at a day care center and their daughter is a junior in high school.

 

They stop at a light behind an old beat-up Junker; the man doesn’t notice that the car behind him is just a little too close. Suddenly two young men approach his car with guns drawn. He draws his off-duty sidearm from his holster and shoots one of the attackers in the head killing him instantly. He wounds the other attacker as he attempts to flee the scene. The man and his family are severely shaken by the experience. They return home and hold each other for a very long time.

 

—

 

There is no doubt in my mind which story had the better outcome. Yet after describing these two scenarios to my anti-gun acquaintance, he remained steadfast in his statement that “Guns are bad; they are only for killing people”. He could not understand that in New Jersey the only difference between these two stories is that the cable installer is proactively disarmed by the State. “Guns are bad; they are only for killing people”. He was quite able to sit there and deny that self-defense and defense of your family is a legitimate purpose for carrying a firearm. “We need to help these people so that they do not have to resort to crime”. Once again, the victim becomes responsible for his own victimization. As I patiently tried to point out the difference between self-defense and random violence, my acquaintance stated that he did not have to listen to this “stuff”, and blustered off to find conversation more suited to his already preconceived ideas.

 

____________________________________________________________________________________________

 

Frank Jack Fiamingo is the co-founder and current President of the New Jersey Second Amendment Society, the most active independent 2A rights group in New Jersey - www.nj2as.com.

 

I have hd that some conversation many times and it never ceases to amaze me the people that fall into the ostrichs vs lemur mindsets. Ostrichs stick their heads in the sand as everyone knows, Lemurs watch everything, listen intently and adapt to any challenges or threats.

One dark and spooky night, follow him until he stops at a light behind a beat-up old junker, then pull up very close behind him, open your door.... and scare the crap outta him.

Reality escapes anti-gunners, plan and simple. Good post Axeman!

Most of the anti gun people I know have that belief under a sincere concern for public safety. This is based on misunderstanding and lack of information. Remember, most people here in the northeast have zero experience with firearms and all they know comes from movies, video games and news reports. But since most are reasonable people at heart, there is opportunity to change their minds through facts, logical RESPECTFUL discussion and just plain setting a good example as a gun owner to replace the image they already have in their minds.

 

This is why I don't like the confrontational attitude from many in our community, calling anti's "sheeple," "fascists," or worse. If you're having a discussion with an "anti," it won't always go your way but please don't give up and let your frustration get the better of you.

I have hd that some conversation many times and it never ceases to amaze me the people that fall into the ostrichs vs lemur mindsets. Ostrichs stick their heads in the sand as everyone knows, Lemurs watch everything, listen intently and adapt to any challenges or threats.

 

Hence the reason I have eaten Ostrich meat, but have never to my knowledge partaken of lemur. :-0

You can't use logic and reason to argue someone out of a position that wasn't reached by logic and reason.

One dark and spooky night, follow him until he stops at a light behind a beat-up old junker, then pull up very close behind him, open your door.... and scare the crap outta him.

 

Yeah - now that WOULD be funny!

You can't use logic and reason to argue someone out of a position that wasn't reached by logic and reason.

 

DAMN! Why does that have to make so much sense?

Most of the anti gun people I know have that belief under a sincere concern for public safety. This is based on misunderstanding and lack of information. Remember, most people here in the northeast have zero experience with firearms and all they know comes from movies, video games and news reports. But since most are reasonable people at heart, there is opportunity to change their minds through facts, logical RESPECTFUL discussion and just plain setting a good example as a gun owner to replace the image they already have in their minds.

 

This is why I don't like the confrontational attitude from many in our community, calling anti's "sheeple," "fascists," or worse. If you're having a discussion with an "anti," it won't always go your way but please don't give up and let your frustration get the better of you.

 

Yes, there are people like the ones you describe, Lorenzo. In this particular case, he was not one of them. Before he got up from the table, he said "You people just want to have guns so that you can KILL people". To which I replied "How can you say that, you don't even know us". His response "I can say anything I want".

 

Of course, he is correct. He *CAN* say anything he wants, because in HIS world fantasy trumps reality. But as you correctly state, sometimes you just have to accept that the conversation won't always go the way you expect.

Unfortunatly the truly dire curcumstanes would be lost on him unless you shoved a gun in his face which of course you wont do.Untill he craps his pants his inbred philosophy wont change.

Very believable scenarios and unfortunate how the first turned out.If it was a level playing field at least he would have had a fighting chance. NJ carry laws are impossible

Very believable scenarios and unfortunate how the first turned out.If it was a level playing field at least he would have had a fighting chance. NJ carry laws are impossible

 

Unfortunately *TOO* believable. There were 236 confirmed carjackings in New Jersey in 2009 alone. Luckily, no murders were associated with those carjacking *THAT* year. I have not seen the statistics for 2010 yet, but with the downturn in the economy, I assume the number has increased. It is unlikely to drop anytime soon.

Part of the problem is simply that some minds cant come to terms with the fact that there are people out there that need killing.....

Unfortunately *TOO* believable. There were 236 confirmed carjackings in New Jersey in 2009 alone. Luckily, no murders were associated with those carjacking *THAT* year. I have not seen the statistics for 2010 yet, but with the downturn in the economy, I assume the number has increased. It is unlikely to drop anytime soon.

I work in the BX and I used to take my motorcycle sometimes to work but not anymore.you got these young punks that hang in the shadows and i just get this feeling that at a stop light I am going to be taken.

I work in the BX and I used to take my motorcycle sometimes to work but not anymore.you got these young punks that hang in the shadows and i just get this feeling that at a stop light I am going to be taken.

 

Decent people should not have to live like that. It is a very sad commentary.

[They stop at a light behind an old beat-up Junker; the man doesn’t notice that the car behind him is just a little too close.

 

 

How would anyone in NJ know if a car behind them was "too close?"

The entire situation could have been avoided if the father had not stopped to close to the car in front of him. Leave space to make a quick exit all you need is your gas pedal not a gun. I put as much blame on the driver.

 

Always avoid a confrontation if at all possible.

Oh boy, before this gets off on the situational awareness tangent, I think the point is its better to be able to defend yourself than be legislated into victimhood. So I submit that even the situationally unaware should have the ability to defend themselves.

 

Wolfy I cant really follow your logic here. Equal blame? To me thats like saying Im equally quilty of an accident going through a green light and getting hit by a drunk driver running the red because I didnt look both ways before ccrossing the green. You cant place equal blame on someone unless they volunteer to be the victim.

Part of the problem is simply that some minds cant come to terms with the fact that there are people out there that need killing.....

 

 

Shane... I always hate hearing or reading that expression, it makes me cringe, but it is very true. It is the reality of human existence, there are some people out there that are just evil to the core.

 

My wife had a friend in college, that was always slightly off beat. He was not the problem. His SO was. The SO was evil to the bone and tried to drag my wife into numerous scams and illegal activities through her relationship with his lover, her college friend. If this guy had put half his energy into running a legit business he would have made millions, he was that motivated, slick and intelligent. So as my wife manages to seperate herself from this situation is when it went bad, and it took some uninvited visits from him and subsequent conversations between him and me and Mr Louisville before I decided that his next uninvited visit was going end in him taking an extended dirt nap. He wisely never gave me the chance to ruin my life. He died two years later in a house fire. Somehow the fire started in the garage where someone had accidently plugged in a electric heater, with a rag drapped over it right near some paints. His bedroom was right next to that garage wall. I still hope and pray he was awake the whole time the house burned down on top of him.

 

Some people just need killing...

Yes, there are people like the ones you describe, Lorenzo. In this particular case, he was not one of them. Before he got up from the table, he said "You people just want to have guns so that you can KILL people". To which I replied "How can you say that, you don't even know us". His response "I can say anything I want".

 

Of course, he is correct. He *CAN* say anything he wants, because in HIS world fantasy trumps reality. But as you correctly state, sometimes you just have to accept that the conversation won't always go the way you expect.

I hear you, and it's frustrating. There are some people who are professionally, psychologically or emotionally invested in hating guns just like there are people with irrational prejudice everywhere. When dealing with someone like that, changing their mind is simply not possible nor should it even be the goal.

 

But what about the people who are not part of the conversation but happen to be listening? You might have an ability to influence their opinions even in just a small way, simply by behaving like a credible, calm and rational person. That image, in contrast to the crazed gunman image they might think of as a "gun person" goes a long way. And think of the contrast vs. the "anti" guy they thought they agreed with, but now are not sure becuase of the childish statements he makes.

 

I'm not always able to keep my cool every time, but I do my best. I'm sure you already hold this opinion, and I just like to take the opportunity to remind everyone now and then that this is a much better approach than getting into a lowbrow pissing match.

after describing these two scenarios to my anti-gun acquaintance, he remained steadfast in his statement that “Guns are bad; they are only for killing people”.

 

Unfortunately, this type of attitude is all too prevalent. This person has rejected logic and accepted some drivel or pablum as "fact". These are the type of people (unfortunately) that go through life never considering that they may be mugged, murdered, raped, robbed or carjacked. For that reason, they cannot conceive of anyone AT ALL needing to defend their life. They also have bought into the whole "the police are there to protect me" bunk.

 

The police - increasingly today - are a reactionary force. They are not a preventive, but rather are there to take notes, write a report, and attempt to "pick up the pieces" after the acts of crime are already committed.

 

The irony of course is that many of these very same people are those, who when attacked, get all upset when THEY can't carry a gun. Society has become very selfish - this is just another sign of it.

there was an article i read once that describes the world into 3 categories. Sheep, Wolves, Sheepdogs.

 

"Most of the people in our society are sheep. They are kind, gentle, productive creatures who can only hurt one another by accident [...] or under extreme provocation. They are sheep."

 

"Then there are the wolves," the old war veteran said, "and the wolves feed on the sheep without mercy." Do you believe there are wolves out there who will feed on the flock without mercy? You better believe it. There are evil men in this world and they are capable of evil deeds. The moment you forget that or pretend it is not so, you become a sheep. There is no safety in denial.

 

"Then there are sheepdogs," he went on, "and I'm a sheepdog. I live to protect the flock and confront the wolf."

 

[...]

 

We know that the sheep live in denial, that is what makes them sheep. They do not want to believe that there is evil in the world. They can accept the fact that fires can happen, which is why they want fire extinguishers, fire sprinklers, fire alarms and fire exits throughout their kids' schools.

 

But many of them are outraged at the idea of putting an armed police officer in their kid's school. Our children are thousands of times more likely to be killed or seriously injured by school violence than fire, but the sheep's only response to the possibility of violence is denial. The idea of someone coming to kill or harm their child is just too hard, and so they chose the path of denial.

 

The sheep generally do not like the sheepdog. He looks a lot like the wolf. He has fangs and the capacity for violence. The difference, though, is that the sheepdog must not, can not and will not ever harm the sheep. Any sheep dog who intentionally harms the lowliest little lamb will be punished and removed. The world cannot work any other way, at least not in a representative democracy or a republic such as ours.

 

Still, the sheepdog disturbs the sheep. He is a constant reminder that there are wolves in the land. They would prefer that he didn't tell them where to go, or give them traffic tickets, or stand at the ready in our airports in camouflage fatigues holding an M-16. The sheep would much rather have the sheepdog cash in his fangs, spray paint himself white, and go, "Baa."

 

Until the wolf shows up. Then the entire flock tries desperately to hide behind one lonely sheepdog.

 

For the full article go here

 

 

After reading the article I am prepared to put myself in the sheepdog position for my family and friends, while they can live their lives as sheep. However, NJ won't give me my fangs outside the home.

How would anyone in NJ know if a car behind them was "too close?"

 

The entire situation could have been avoided if the father had not stopped to close to the car in front of him. Leave space to make a quick exit all you need is your gas pedal not a gun. I put as much blame on the driver.

 

Always avoid a confrontation if at all possible.

 

As true as that might be, that is a lot like saying a woman was "asking for it" because she was wearing a short skirt. I think we need to be careful about blaming the victim. I agree that it is always wise to be alert, but that doesn't mean that if you screw up you should be defenseless. That is kind of a dangerous mindset in my opinion.

Ok point taken but the father may not be equally responsible but at the very least he is responsible. I think any women who puts herself in a vulnerable position is partially responsible. I agree that we should feel safe in this world but there are evil people and it our responsibility to take reasonable measures for our protection and safety. Personal responsibility and safety start with the individual.

 

These are my opinion.

Ok point taken but the father may not be equally responsible but at the very least he is responsible. I think any women who puts herself in a vulnerable position is partially responsible. I agree that we should feel safe in this world but there are evil people and it our responsibility to take reasonable measures for our protection and safety. Personal responsibility and safety start with the individual.

 

These are my opinion.

 

Yes, I also believe in accepting personal responsibility.

Wolfy, no means NO brother

it our responsibility to take reasonable measures for our protection and safety. Personal responsibility and safety start with the individual.

 

These are my opinion.

 

This is the attitude of the sheepdog rather than the sheep...

The entire situation could have been avoided if the father had not stopped to close to the car in front of him. Leave space to make a quick exit all you need is your gas pedal not a gun. I put as much blame on the driver.

 

Always avoid a confrontation if at all possible.

 

I do the same whenever I drive through Trenton or Camden. I'm very alert and willing to take aggressive action. If in a "bad" area, if I got rear ended or something else went down, I'd drive away quickly.

 

More to the OP's point. The anti-gun person's argument makes a lot more sense if you disarm all the criminals first. Or better yet, eliminate all crime and then there really is very little to no reason to carry a gun or even worry about defensive driving habits/tactics. I don't see that happening any time soon.