As simple as I could make it.

Status
Not open for further replies.

BigBore45

Member
Joined
Jun 27, 2014
Messages
1,368
Location
Kansas
This is a picture of what I posted for everyone to see. I couldn't make it simpler or shorter. Did I do Well?
 

Attachments

  • Screenshot_20180226-101841.png
    Screenshot_20180226-101841.png
    299.5 KB · Views: 174
Last edited:
The sports car analogy is accurate- unfortunately, many of the people you're reaching out to on Facebook would AGREE that sports cars should be banned because they are dangerous, harmful to the environment, and people can't be trusted with them!

I like the texting analogy:
You like texting, right?
I like my assault rifle.

You think you need a cell phone for personal security and peace of mind?
I think I need a firearm for the same reasons.

Why can't you just use some other kind of gun? No one needs an assault rifle?
Why can't you just make a call? It is a PHONE, right? No one NEEDS to text.

I'm not saying ban all guns, just assault rifles. Think how many lives could be saved!
I'm not saying ban cell phones, just eliminate their texting function. Think how many lives would be saved!

At this point, the person I'm debating usually is rendered speechless and walks away or logs off. Hopefully, it gives them something to think about.
 
Last edited:
many of the people your'e reaching out to on Facebook would AGREE that sports cars should be banned because they are dangerous, harmful to the environment, and people can't be trusted with them!
This is precisely why I have made a concerted shift to use dogs as an analogy,

First off, most of the anti's diatribes scan silly if one substitutes "lap dogs" for "AR" in their screeds. Particularly if someone wishes to rise in defense of poodles. Whihc allows you to ask them if they have a prejudice against "standard" poodles; or if they favor discriminating against Miniatures or Toys. You also get to create a simile in defining the differences between, say, Pommeranians, Maltese, and Poodles--even though they are all just lap dogs. Just my 2¢ f/b experience.
 
I, belive you did well in trying to explain things. Mite just as well save your breath trying to explain things. Some one or a group of some ones has in there mind to disarm America. How about trying to teach some history, and explain and show pictures of what happened in Europe, when the people were disarmed. I allways heard a picture is worth many words.
 
I, belive you did well in trying to explain things. Mite just as well save your breath trying to explain things. Some one or a group of some ones has in there mind to disarm America. How about trying to teach some history, and explain and show pictures of what happened in Europe, when the people were disarmed. I allways heard a picture is worth many words.

Good point. That's a better explanation for it.
 
I think I used the right one?

It should have been "too fast", but it isn't' a big deal in a FB post.

I always recommend drafting in Word or a similar document prep application and then copy/paste so the document goes through a grammar and spelling check (which does nothing for properly spelled incorrect words BTW) if what I've written is going to be more than just a few lines or going somewhere important. The inadvertent use of to/too in a social media post is easily overlooked.
 
In his FB post, "your finger" is correct. However "to fast" should be "too fast".
He was referring to the part where he said “your free to own what you want”. It should be “you’re”, as in a contraction of “you are”.

I normally wouldn’t harp too much on grammar mistakes, but I think it matters in this context. When writing a potentially controversial statement in a public place like Facebook, people who are inclined to disagree with you often will harp on your grammatical mistakes. It seems they’ll often use it as an excuse to discount your argument entirely. And comments from anti-gun folks with condescending grammatical corrections will distract from your point.

Back when I used to post similar things on Facebook (I quit FB over a year ago), I made double-sure my posts were free of grammatical errors so it would force anti-gun folks to actually address the content of my argument itself instead of harping on my grammar.
 
As far as the actual content of your FB post, I think it’s not bad. The only thing that might make it better is trying to explain why it’s a slippery slope. Since lots of things can increase the fire rate of a semi-auto (lighter triggers, for example), legislation banning bump stocks could easily be way too broad. And if it wasn’t, it could easily open the door for broader bans in the future.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top