Converting ANTIS

[PILMAN]

I'm just curious about the success of actually converting antis to become gun owners?

Seems like almost every anti I talk with, it is nearly impossible to get them to understand my view on firearms.

I get the average

"Guns kill people" and "Your 12 times more likely to kill yourself" or "Your more likely to shoot a family member during a home invasion or have it used against you" arguement. I've disputed these with the statistics only to be told that these statistics are used in favor of gun owners and are biased. How on earth do you debate with these people? Seems like most of the debates are actually from people in England, liberal citys, and Canada. I have had some cool people in Canada and England who agree with gun ownership but it's very rare.

My most common ANTI believe it or not are the religious.

A friend of mine who is a messianic Jew, she asked about a picture in my profile and where I got a M16 from saying they were illegal. I attempted to explain to her it was a semi automatic rifle and not fully automatic, this in turn lead to responses like "guns represent death!" in a very angry voice, very difficult to debate with her. She went on saying that a gun won't save me from a mob of angry people and only God can save me and prayer is more power than any peice of steel. She went on to say when her messiah returns that he will melt I quote "those horrible metal peices of death".

I've only had luck converting 3 ANTIS to pro gun but even now they speculate quite a bit about firearms.

I run a chat room on paltalk called "Gun Control Unconstitutional" and we get a lot of pro gunners in there, however we get the annoying anti and liberal. Most of the time it's a middle age woman living in San Francisco, ironically the one woman in there said she was going out for a smoke and I mentioned something like "smoking kills more people than guns do".

Other liberals include a few pacifists and hippys who think only cops should own guns, most of them keep saying the same thing like "Americans are too stupid and incompetant to own firearms" whenever I bring up the switzerland arguement.

Sadly the majority of the ANTIS that come in our room are actually gun owners, many are hunters and say that there is no need for a semiautomatic rifle or what they refer to as military rifles or handguns because they claim they are specifically used to kill. Most of the stuff I'm reading to these guys are from gunfacts.info to debate them and this generally leads to them either going in circles repeating the same thing or leaving in frustration saying we're ignorant and idiots.

Any general opinions about this? Am I just waisting my time or am I preaching to the choir?

 

[mountainclmbr]

Most of the anti-gun folks I have met are the "people can't be trusted and should be taken care of by the government" types. I think it is projection on their part so it is probably best if they don't have a gun.

 

[benEzra]

You probably won't get a hardcore prohibitionist to see the light, but someone who is on the fence, and has simply fallen for the Bradyite propaganda but isn't idealogically committed to the issue, is reachable.

 

[tinygnat219]

I am proof that you can convert an anti into a pro-2nd amendment person. It just takes time and constant assault with the obvious.

I typically don't bother, it's a lot of this: :banghead:, which leads to this: and sometimes the wall will bash your head in.

Just keep doing what you are doing and use fact, not passion to defend the views. If nothing else, offer to take them to the range so they can learn how to handle a firearm. Some folks I have taken have been astounded at the level of seriousness that firearms safety is taken and it "opens their eyes" to how things really are.

 

[Glockfan.45]

By anti do you mean hardcore Obama worshiping, tofu eating, tree hugers or mild fence setters? Trying to convert a radical anti (the type that donates to the Brady Foundation) is pretty much a lost cause, and continuously trying to do so will make you look like a nut job. You will have as much luck swaying that type to our side as they would swaying us to theirs. In either case the only thing that can change their mind is a personal tragedy that really hits home IMO.

Dont buy into to the conservative, religious stereotype about gun owners as it just isnt true. While quite a few people here may fit that bill not all of us do. I am about as big of a "gun nut" and pro 2A as they come, however I am also rather atheist and a libertarian.

I have had some luck in swaying fence setters over time. A coworker of mine who fits the leftwing liberal image to the letter actually came out shooting with me and later bought a firearm of his own with my assistance. He wasnt radical anti just rather uncomfortable around firearms and one range trip and some trigger time on the 10/22 followed by a few mags through the AR changed that . Dont be overbearing on the subject as you will likely turn them off completely to your viewpoint, dont try to scare them with doom & gloom visions of what can happen to unarmed people. Offer to take them shooting sometime and you will see that nothing converts better than range time.

 

[PILMAN]

Taking them to the range wouldn't really be an option as this is mainly an online commitment. Most of us idle in a chat room during the evening on a Monday night and talk about anything regarding firearms. It's mainly voice and video chat. The antis I have converted, one was a coworker who had heard a lot of halftruths.

I feel there are a level of degree of antis.

Seems like there are the confused who are not sure what to think and generally can be changed

There are the staunch headed antis who believe in being able to have hunting rifles but nothing else

Then there are the flat out gun haters who just want everything banned.


I have come across all kinds of people, generally as annoying as they are, I let them talk on the microphone to hear their views. Most of it is anti rhetoric. The most hard headed seem to be the ones who have never touched a gun.

I generally ask if they have ever shot a gun and most of them tell me they have never shot one let alone held one. Many of the Brits tell me they have never even seen a gun but some lucky ones have seen them wearing them in the holster.

We get 2 trolls in the room who drive us nuts, one goes by the name of peace-lover and the other as ukman88. I think they deliberately go in the room to tick all of us off. Both ramble on about Americans being incompetant. I normally use the "fast car analogy" (Why do you need a fast car? Shouldn't fast cars be regulated if guns are regulated?) get the typical "guns are meant to get to point a to point b crap. The other analogy regarding swimming pools, bleach killing more kids every year.

Generally guns receive far more blame than the individual for crimes. The gun owners that visit the room, a few of them are police and LEO so it's quite funny hearing an anti say "only police should have guns" in turn to have one of the police officers talk on mic and flat out state their opinion against that.

Other idiotic responses are "oh does that mean you should be able to own nukes? They are arms." questioning the 2nd amendment and that it doesn't say anything about ammunition, what type of guns can be used or regulation. Despite the fact I have mentioned gun control only helped let the holocaust happen and the communists killing their own people, this is not enough to persuade people. They feel that in this day of age that we are more civilized and evolved, therefore man should not have what they call "killing tools". Everytime some smartass liberal comes in the room, they commonly say "oh great a bunch of rednecks."

I'm starting to wonder if it's even worth debating with these people, I have yet to get an intelligent debate. I would figure someone would come up with statistics but instead it's just rambling about "their" personal beliefs on guns.

 

[Pilgrim]

I have had an enthusiast go the other way. My 17 year old granddaughter, who used to shoot with me frequently and enjoyed it, succumbed to the liberal speak in high school and announced to me that "guns scare her."

Pilgrim

 

[Declaration Day]

I took a future LEO to an outdoor range for her first shooting experience. Her family is mostly anti, she was a fence sitter. Like most antis / fence sitters, she simply had not been exposed to the true gun culture. All she knew of guns were the crimes reported on the local news.

At first, just being in the same room with my guns made her nervous. I worked on this through rational conversation and patience. Finally got her out to the range and she had a great time. We were there for three hours, and she shot several of my pistols until her wrist was worn out for the day.

I saved the punchline of all of those past conversations for the drive home. I asked her how many crimes involving guns were on the news each night. She estimated two to three. So I said "Today, in only THREE HOURS at only ONE range on ONE day, you saw more people using guns responsibly than you see criminal misuse in a whole month on the news." That really opened her eyes, and she's looking forward to purchasing her first pistol.

For the record, I don't think crime stats or the ratio of responsible gun owners to criminals should have any bearing whatsoever on our 2A rights. But hey, I converted a fence sitter.

 

[1911 guy]

Thinking anti or rabid anti?

There are two kinds of antis. There are people who are anti because that's the only reasoning they've been exposed to and don't know any better. Then there are the antis who have heard both side, yet are so caught up in pushing an agenda for whatever reason that they will not listen to common sense. The first kind is worth reasoning with. The second is a waste of time.

 

[Declaration Day]

She went on to say when her messiah returns that he will melt I quote "those horrible metal peices of death".

Assuming she's beyond hope of converting, I would photoshop a picture of my guns, making them appear to be red hot and in flames. I'd then send it to her in an email saying "Oh my God you were right! It's happening!"

 

[PILMAN]

By anti do you mean hardcore Obama worshiping, tofu eating, tree hugers or mild fence setters? Trying to convert a radical anti (the type that donates to the Brady Foundation) is pretty much a lost cause, and continuously trying to do so will make you look like a nut job. You will have as much luck swaying that type to our side as they would swaying us to theirs. In either case the only thing that can change their mind is a personal tragedy that really hits home IMO.

Dont buy into to the conservative, religious stereotype about gun owners as it just isnt true. While quite a few people here may fit that bill not all of us do. I am about as big of a "gun nut" and pro 2A as they come, however I am also rather atheist and a libertarian.

I have had some luck in swaying fence setters over time. A coworker of mine who fits the leftwing liberal image to the letter actually came out shooting with me and later bought a firearm of his own with my assistance. He wasnt radical anti just rather uncomfortable around firearms and one range trip and some trigger time on the 10/22 followed by a few mags through the AR changed that . Dont be overbearing on the subject as you will likely turn them off completely to your viewpoint, dont try to scare them with doom & gloom visions of what can happen to unarmed people. Offer to take them shooting sometime and you will see that nothing converts better than range time.

It varys.

Our ANTIS range from religious republicans to atheist liberals really. It doesn't really matter what race or religion they are.

We have many constitutionalists and liberterians who visit the room. In most cases, many of the members are conservative though. I have actually experienced an equal share of atheist and religious ANTIS, one side being concerned of the "evilness" of guns and death, the other claiming humans are too stupid and can't be trusted with anything including breathing oxygen from the earth without a respirator and we need to be extra careful not to walk the wrong way or we may break our ankles because we're stupid primates.

Generally the worst anti I have ever had a discussion with was actually a good friend of mine on paltalk. Politics has set us apart for the time being, he is a Jewish man (about 55 years old) who lived in South Afrika. He praised apartheid and left for England once the government ended apartheid. He felt that guns were a burden and responsibility, apparently had no problem getting rid of it and said it felt like all the stress was gone when he moved to England. We had a discussion about firearms and he also had the attitude that Americans were "incompetent and too stupid to own firearms". After a long discussion and calling my facts "rubbish" we narrowed it down a bit. His views went from completely anti gun to "how about a licensing system" and I explained to him that a criminal will not obtain a license to own a firearm. I also noted it didn't stop idiots from getting in car crashes even though they are required to have a license. We finished up the conversation with him saying something along the lines of "The problem isn't guns, it's the fact that Americans have a desire and need to own one. The feeling of needing a gun is not healthy, a gun is a tool and desire is a bad thing."

Overall I have not been satisfied with the general debates with ANTIS and I really feel like I haven't accompolished anything when they leave in frustration because they have nothing to respond to although it does do a good job at ruining their credibility and making them look like a fool especially when their spouse is in the background screaming. Most of the foreigners however claim they feel safe and see a firearm as "undesirable" and "confusing" to even consider, want, or need one. They feel that if Americans feel unsafe in this country that we would work towards better policing and have even critisized our police force for not doing a better job. Personally I feel safe and I own a firearm, I don't see what the problem is despite pointing out to most of the ANTIS that states with more guns have lower crime over time.

I have had a very good group of gun owners however and that does add to the room.

We have made a few jokes to this specific "peace-lover" guy as he constantly says he's going to confiscate our guns. We're all on watch for a undercover hippy van outside our houses.

 

[wacki]

I've had a LOT of luck converting anti's. One of the oddest things I've seen is that even somebody that is rabidly anti will smile and smirk when you take them to the range.

Some of my favorite ice breaking stats:
Buckets more dangerous to children than guns
http://wacki.wordpress.com/2006/12/16/buckets-more-dangerous-to-children-than-guns/

^sourced to places they can't argue with.

A swimming pool is 100 times more deadly than a gun
http://wacki.wordpress.com/2006/12/17/swimming-pool-is-100-times-more-deadly-than-guns/

But really take an anti skeet/trap shooting. That's a "gentlemen" sport that doesn't kill Bambi so it's easy for them to say yes to as opposed to the big scary "terrorist" assault rifle target shooting. I've never had any trouble getting an anti to go skeet/trap and they always have fun.

 

[Nitrogen]

Talk to an Anti much like you would want to be talked to. Be polite, listen to their arguments, and talk to them. DO NOT argue like Bill O'Reilly, Al Franken, or political talking heads on TV.

Let the Anti lead the discussion.

It's a lot like missionary work. The Anti has to see the light on their own terms, you can't shove it in their face.

All that worked for me, at least, as I have been a converted Anti for about 10 years now.

 

[Zundfolge]

Time to trot out my oft repeated breakdown of antis.

You have for basic classifications of people who support gun control:

• The Duped: The majority of people who say they support gun control or vote for anti-gun candidates ... these people have bought the lies told by the gun control movement. They honestly believe that gun control would make us safer. There is hope to turn these people to the truth as they are just lied too and not committed to believing the lies because of other personal reasons like groups 2 & 3 (and they are by far the largest group).
• The Partisans: They are Democrats/liberals/progressives ... and their party says "guns are bad"...or more to the point "those who support gun rights are our enemy" so they support gun control and vote for anti gun candidates. These people are pretty much unreachable unless Republicans became pro gun control. Most could care less one way or the other whether guns are legal, illegal, restricted, or whatever (although most are partially duped and I'm sure there are plenty Hoplolphobes among them too).
• The Hopolophobes: just simply people with an irrational fear of guns ... they are unreachable. Therapy for their phobia is required. (this is a somewhat small group ... smaller than 1 and 2).
• The Power Seekers: These are the Schumers and Feinsteins ... these are the leaders of the movement who know guns aren't bad but know they can't implement their other diabolical plans against us as long as we're armed (this is actually a very small group ... even most anti-gun politicians are just Partisans, Dupes and/or Hopolophobes, only a very select few are trying to enslave us).

The Duped are the largest and easiest to "convert" ... if what some of the so-called "Pro Gun Progressives" that post in these forums say is true, a shift in the attitudes of most Democrats would likely convert a lot of The Partisans (but I just don't believe the DNC will ever go pro-gun).

The Hoploophobes might be "convertible" with therapy (but they would have to want to change) ... and The Power Seekers ... we'll there's only one solution to them; remove them from power.


More often than not, debating with an anti will prove to be fruitless ... you're not going to change their mind. HOWEVER, a well put together, well argued case WILL plant the seed in the minds of those fence sitters that witness the debate (as will a poorly put together and poorly argued case)

 

[Declaration Day]

I think the root of antis' hatred of guns (and probably all weapons) is the notion that "violence is bad".

In fact, violence is morally neutral. Its overwhelmingly improper use, however, evokes the typical emotional response that violence is evil.

 

[PILMAN]

Something else I wanted to bring up, is it foolish to try to get in an antis head and make them try to question why they themselves hate guns to begin with? I think I was close to breaking ice with one lady in there.

I generally started asking her questions as to when her dislike for guns started and she had never really had an opinion about guns growing up until she had heard of the columbine massacre and thought guns were evil after hearing about the killings on the news. From there it sounds like she formed an opinion that guns were somehow "bad". She had said how gun control would have prevented it and I had responded that it happened while Clinton was in office during the AWB, laws were broken to obtain a firearm through a straw purchase and a gun was used in a gun free area. From there she just left the room, I don't know if it angered her that she was wrong or that she figured "Heh, I know what he's trying to do" and left, or what the deal was. She never came back to the room.

I respect anyone who wants to put up a debate even if I think they sound like morons, but people who doesn't respect facts or my opinion really anger me. Some of the feminists in particular have this mentality that they know everythin about the world and somehow have more knowledge than everybody because of something they read on the internet. Generally they put down all my facts and opinions as if anything I say is useless and nothing to them, makes me question why some of these people come in a debate room at all if all they want to do is spread bull****.

 

[ZeSpectre]

I've either converted, or at least neutralized several anti types over the years. I've found that the biggest trick is to figure out when you are dealing with a hoplophobe.

If they are anti because of lack of knowledge, fear instilled by the managed media, or whatever, then they can usually be reached and educated. They may never be fond of guns but the hatred (based on ignorance) can usually be quelled.

An actual, honest-to-God Hoplophobe, on the other hand, has a mental disorder and no amount of logical argument is going to affect their position one whit.

Work on the former, walk away from the latter.

 

[PILMAN]

I think the root of antis' hatred of guns (and probably all weapons) is the notion that "violence is bad".

In fact, violence is morally neutral. Its overwhelmingly improper use, however, evokes the typical emotional response that violence is evil.

Exactly, I think most antis are afraid that they may not be able to control themselves with a firearm or feel others cannot control themselves.

Why is it that the leftists feel that we are incapable of defending ourselves or taking care of ourselves and that somehow the government needs to be the ones to tell us what to do? Yeah there are idiots in our country no doubt, but not all of us are idiots and I kind of find it insulting that someone would say that all gun owners are somehow incapable of being safe.

I have talked to antis if they could use a gun if their life was in danger to take out the threat. Most responded saying "No, I could never kill someone" to "No, they'd have to kill me, I could never go through the process of taking another persons life" (This is coming from an atheist by the way, what ever happened to only getting one life?). Another had mentioned that they would fire a warning shot or shoot to wound and I explained that they put their own life in danger and end up pissing off the home intruder even more. I've had a few saying we should use less than deadly force like pepper spray (I mentioned it's ineffectiveness and not everyone responds the same, some people it works, others it doesn't) mace (I have no experience with it), Taser (Aren't civilian legal versions only capable of 15 feet?), and other things. I simply responded by saying a firearm is the most effective tool to protect myself and my family. We once again got into the debate "what if you shot a family member on accident during a home invasion?" and I had mentioned I always keep a light on, and a gun is a last resort, only if you are sure.

I somehow always get the comment that i'm compensating for a lack of something (last i checked my barrel is about 5") or that I think i'm macho with a gun and am just a ticking time bomb (out of honesty I hope the only thing my bullets penetrate are a peice of paper at a gun range).

Many lefties/liberals actually admit that they don't even trust themselves with a gun (though many own them) and they feel they would be unsafe with them or they simply couldn't take a life. I don't understand why they would think just because they own a gun that somehow they are going to go on a killing spree? All it is, is a way to defend themselves so they are not the ones that are killed in a home invasion.

Like said before, I respect everyones opinion in the room and have a pretty high tolerance. I have let some extremely anti folks on the microphone which generally ticks off most of the crowd in the room, but mainly to do it to be fair. Unfortunately they don't appreciate the fact that I let them speak their mind, they generally take advantage of this and that leads to insults.

 

[sloppyjoec]

you guys should read a short story by Nathaniel Hawthorne, Earths Holocaust


http://www.4literature.net/Nathaniel_Hawthorne/Earth_s_Holocaust/

basically the people start a huge fire and decide to burn all the evil things (weapons torture devices etc..) There are some great quotes in there



"Aye, aye!" grumbled he. "Let them proclaim what they please; but, in the end, we shall find that all this foolery has only made more work for the armorers and cannon-founders."


"When Cain wished to slay his brother, he was at no loss for a weapon."



"What but the human heart itself!" said the dark-visaged stranger, with a portentous grin. "And unless they hit upon some method of purifying that foul cavern, forth from it will reissue all the shapes of wrong and misery- the same old shapes, or worse ones- which they have taken such a vast deal of trouble to consume to ashes."




D

 

[ZeSpectre]

Wow, I'd completely forgotten that story. Must have read it 15+ years ago.

 

[PILMAN]

Ah yes there was one debate I had trouble with in the room, wasn't really sure how to handle it though I did go through statistics as she mentioned Japan being gun free and I mentioned the suicide rate there. I also brought up areas like DC, however she was intent on mentioning Philly having lived there.

There was a woman from Philly, she moved to New York City. Basically she had told me the crime in Philly was extremely high and the mayor was corrupt and an idiot. She explained that it was like a war zone and kids were packing guns there, many cases where a stray bullet would kill a kid and she said she felt unsafe there. I was unsure of Philly if they had gun control or not (I wasn't successful in finding anything). She felt the problem could be fixed by removing guns from the streets and putting cops on every corner. She expressed that there were cops on every street corner in New York City and it was one of the safest places to go. She was extremely anti-gun.

 

[General Geoff]

Philadelphia has very lax gun control, as Pennsylvania has state pre-emption. Anyone with a PA carry permit (very easy to obtain) can open- or concealed-carry anywhere in the state, including Philadelphia.

If it weren't so, I'd never step foot into that city. I was stopped by a cop once in Philly, and he asked if I had any weapons in the car. "Yes, I'm carrying it right now," and handed him my carry permit. "Why are you carrying a gun, sir?" "Would YOU travel through Philadelphia without a gun?"

We both got a laugh out of that, I was let off with a warning.

 

[PILMAN]

Philadelphia has very lax gun control, as Pennsylvania has state pre-emption. Anyone with a PA carry permit (very easy to obtain) can open- or concealed-carry anywhere in the state, including Philadelphia.

If it weren't so, I'd never step foot into that city. I was stopped by a cop once in Philly, and he asked if I had any weapons in the car. "Yes, I'm carrying it right now," and handed him my carry permit. "Why are you carrying a gun, sir?" "Would YOU travel through Philadelphia without a gun?"

We both got a laugh out of that, I was let off with a warning.

If Philly truely has as much crime as statistics say (I think it was like 2nd most violent city or something) then gun control would probably make it much worse in many cases. How does one argue that guns are not the cause of problems in philly? One way I tried to explain it is that most kids who grew up with guns are not going to go join a gang and buy a gun illegally if they are educated about it. (with one rare exception i'm aware of at a highschool in 97). Most kids that seem to be joining these gangs appear to be quite ignorant about firearms and do it as a "rebellious" type of act.

 

[General Geoff]

Guns are not the cause of problems in Philly, it's mostly due to gangs, and an overpopulation problem. Guns (pistols in particular) just happen to be the preferred weapon of choice for gang members.

Keep in mind that probably 99% of gang members are not legally allowed to own firearms under current law, so introducing stricter gun control will do absolutely nothing to stop crime.

 

[PILMAN]

Guns are not the cause of problems in Philly, it's mostly due to gangs, and an overpopulation problem. Guns (pistols in particular) just happen to be the preferred weapon of choice for gang members.

Keep in mind that probably 99% of gang members are not legally allowed to own firearms under current law, so introducing stricter gun control will do absolutely nothing to stop crime.

Good point, do you feel the womans recommendation of more police would solve the crime issue in Philly?