Help with professor!

[n00b_71]

I am going to agree that you should put your grade in the class as your top priority. College is no place to stand by your principles.

Besides, even if you show up with stats that correlate gun bans with higher crime rates in isolated areas, he can always deny that its a causal relationship. I guess you would have to show that crime rates CONSISTENTLY go up when guns are banned.

 

[southeastshooter]

If he were skilled as an educator and rhetorician, I would think that he would be able to sway you over to his side with his facts and logic.

You have already won the argument. He just doesn't realize it.

gd

This is how I would handle it...

"Ultimately, regardless of statistical data out there....when there's a home invasion...and the criminals are seconds from harming you...stats mean squat. At that point, everyone becomes a believer in the 2nd amendment. The questions is ....do you want to wait until that moment to be a believer?"

Thanks and both of you are are good in book

 

[Jimineer]

I have a professor who is really anti-2nd amendment. He wants me to show him data that shows when guns are banned that crime rates rise. I am looking now but am having trouble finding any. Help me so I can set him straight!

Show data that proves crimes rates go down when guns are allowed. The opposite must then also be true. You only have to prove it once for it to be true. E.g., if its true in Kenneshaw (?) Georgia, then its true period. If its true in your neighborhood then its true.

Also, depends on where you are: E.g., if you are in NYC then apparently having a gun doesn't afford someone the same rights to protect themselves or their family as in TX. So maybe its more than just guns or banned or not, you also have to have the law behind you - like castle laws, etc.

 

[Waywatcher]

The route I would take is:

"Prove to me they should be banned, the burden of proof is on you to prove these are detrimental to society and individuals."

I always err on the side of liberty, and encourage others to do so.

 

[Deanimator]

Try Chicago also check statistics crime rates.

It's also a good example of how anti-gunners cook the books when things go the opposite of the way they claim.

In Chicago, if one guy standing on a street corner gets shot, that's counted as one shooting.

In Chicago if five guys standing on a street corner get shot, that's counted as... one shooting.

 

[MikeNice]

Ask him to prove that prohibition has ever worked.

 

[mnrivrat]

Perhaps the professor has some data he wants to present to back up his opinion ? Read this report !

97th Congress

2d Session COMMITTEE PRINT

THE RIGHT TO KEEP AND BEAR ARMS
--------

R E P O R T

OF THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON THE CONSTITUTION

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON THE JUDICIARY

UNITED STATES SENATE

NINETY-SEVENTH CONGRESS

SECOND SESSION


FEBRUARY 1982

Printed for the use of the Committee on the Judiciary

 

[MattTheHat]

Sounds like from your professor's point of view, freedom of religion shouldn't be protected either. Far more people have died in the name of religion than have ever been killed by firearms.


-Matt

 

[ROGER4314]

Please don't waste your time trying to convert a Higher Education Egghead. Talking to one of them is like mud wrestling with a pig. Sooner or later, you realize the pig enjoys wrestling in the mud and the professor enjoys being a jerk.

Flash

 

[Shadow 7D]

No way to win, if this was debate, or a ethic/thought class you might make a stand, but with most proffs, you already lost, any thing you say will run off his head like water on a duck, ain't going to stick, best bet is to part with differing opinions

Or
Just say you now understand how frustrating his job must be, here is all this information in front of his face and you still can't make him get it...


I had this conversation with a class mate, took a long time, really worked into a long discussion, I conceded that gun control would eliminate "gun" crimes, if there were NO gun, that means everybody, and he conceded that it wouldn't be the USA if there was a government that could do that, and that he probably wouldn't want to live under that type of government.

OH, and this guy is on the debate team that regularly beats Ivy League schools like Harvard and Yale, and last year placed first in one of the most prestigious international debate competitions.
I felt much better that I held up that well against the team captain. He still doesn't like gun, but did understand that some people will always like them. I just wanted to know why he hated a object.

Oh, and antigunners regularly assume that they can do a better job than any foreign country, so he tried to exclude such failed examples as Brittan and the Aussies, and made a huge issue of how 'nice' Swiss culture was...

 

[otblue]

www.melbourneinstitute.com/wp/wp2008n17.pdf

Keep in mind that the people writing this paper on the effects of the gun buybacks in Australia were trying to prove the opposite. Namely that the buybacks had succeeded in their alleged purpose of reducing gun crime.

They failed in their premise and conclude that the buybacks had no discernible effect. This of course is despite billions of dollars spent on the buybacks and huge continuuing waste of police resources, both monetary and manhours, in registration procedures.

Australia is clearly not a safer country because of the gun buybacks and anybody living in Sydney or Melbourne will tell you that.

Gang/drug wars are increasingly common, admittedly nothing like on the scale of some cities in the USA, but new to the Australian scene courtesy (to some extent) of our immigration policy.

The other thing that no published statistics will indicate as yet is the number of actual shootings in places like the UK and Australia.

I believe from anecdotal reports that there is a significant increase in these but as medical care and response times improve, survivability improves and this is reflected in reduced homicide rates. Any reduction in the latter is then claimed as a "success" by the antigun crowd.

The other factor becoming obvious in the UK and Australia is the dramatic increase in knife crime, again courtesy of our multiculturism.

However, I tend to agree with many of the earlier posters.

None of this has anything to do with 2A.

US citizens have a right to self defence and possession and carriage of firearms. That is what distinguishes you as citizens of a great republic. The rest of us are subjects of the State, relatively benevolent States in the case of the UK and Australia, but still subjects.

If your professor likes the idea of being a subject rather than a citizen, then perhaps he should be reminded that the US fought a war to be rid of the yokes of monarchy. He is of course free to leave the USA and enjoy the "safety" of walking down a London street at night, after all, they don't have any (legal) handguns any more.

 

[SaxonPig]

No, YOU ask HIM to document where gun control has REDUCED crime.

But if you want statistics check the work Dr. Gary Kleck.

 

[Sebastian the Ibis]

He wants me to show him data that shows when guns are banned that crime rates rise. I am looking now but am having trouble finding any. Help me so I can set him straight!

The problem with Data is that data doesn't matter as much as the person who interprets the data. Therefore, you cannot win the battle as your professor has framed it.

Shift the argument- There is a great quote in McDonald about more American's being shot in Chicago this year than Iraq & Afghanistan combined, or something to that extent. Find that quote and tell your professor "The Supreme Court this year examined X and overruled the Chicago gun ban, there is no reason to reevaluate the data. You can have an opinion to the contrary, but it is completely inconsequential legally."

Or, you can use your best example and appeal to emotion by saying "Take a look at Mexico, Do you really believe multi-billion dollar criminal smuggling organizations that hired government counter-terrorism teams to kill police officers so that they can machine gun the officers family at the funeral and give everyone from local politicians to the head of the military "Sliver or the Lead", will not carry a 9mm over a .380 because the government says it is illegal? All Mexican gun laws do is disarm honest citizens so that 73 of them can be executed when they refuse to work with the cartels."

 

[mustang_steve]

The thing is, he deliberately asked you a question you cannot prove.

He asked to show that the addition of guns to a society reduces crime. Guns were already here from the beginning, and there's no nationwide or even statewide stats to show that the addition of guns anywhere has helped. Closest we have are DC and Chicago, but those aren't usable either as they immediately worked to create another de-facto ban.

If anything, he was clever in trying to make you spin your wheels....I'd leave him be as he sounds like the kind that would doctor your grade. He's probably tenured too, which tends to be the moment a professor's biased side gets unleashed.

 

[JoeSlomo]

I have a professor who is really anti-2nd amendment.

Professor of what? Denial?

I guess he never had to study history. Citizens without the right to keep and bear arms didn't work out so well in places like Nazi Germany, Soviet Russia, Communist China, and Pol Pots' Cambodia.

Any "scholar", worthy of the title, can NOT deny the FACT that citizens without arms are far more likely to be violently victimized en masse than citizens WITH arms.

He wants me to show him data that shows when guns are banned that crime rates rise.

Washington D.C. is an excellent example. Compare the homicide rate in Fairfax County, VA (which is right across the river from D.C.) with that of D.C. before and after they instituted "gun control". The only thing "gun control" did for D.C. was make it easier for criminals to prey on their victims.

Help me so I can set him straight!

Not going to happen.

A home invasion, robbery, or mugging sometimes allows folks like this to see the light, however, sometimes even traumatic events aren't enough to change their minds.

 

[Mudinyeri]

As a professor, I'm sure he would enjoy books by Joyce Lee Malcolm like:

Guns & Violence: The English Experience and
To Keep & Bear Arms: The Origins of the Anglo-American Right

They are extensively researched volumes that should provide him with all the research and facts necessary to convince an objective individual of the truth. If, however, he is not an objective individual ... well, you know where you stand.

 

[southeastshooter]

Alright yall I have scored a small win. He responded to my reply. He said that although he might not agree with everything I posted he can certainly appreciate my argument. He said he appreciated me being willing to argue with him over this because most students won't. Furthermore he added that even though he wasn't thoroughly convinced that he was amazed at the data I provided him and that he needed to educate himself more thoroughly. But hey what do you expect? He even went as far as telling me I did a great job and that I was a good man So here's to all of you for helping, Thanks.

 

[General Geoff]

Your professor thanked you for standing up to him? Perhaps there is hope for him after all.

 

[Shadow 7D]

And can we get this one stickied, lots of good info here

 

[redneckdan]

Since the statistics seem to be pretty well covered I'll just jump in to say that I have been in your situation before, the class was Constitutional Law. Fortunately my professor was a little more level headed than most. She came out and admitted about halfway through the semester that she was having a hard time checking her politics at the door and grading my work fairly. For the final project she ended up giving my paper to one of her more conservative colleagues to grade. When she read my work it made sense to her even though she refused to agree with my conclusion and she would start into a debate about the topic (the debate being my written words against her red pen....) In the end she gave me an A because my arguments were the best supported out of anyone in the classes....I'll admit it was fun being the only engineering student in a pre-law class. Some day I will have to tell the story of my Institutions professor and his weekly threats about driving a Ryder truck full of ANFO into the admin. building.....

 

[mustang_steve]

Good job! I was convinced this was some professor trying to run you in circles...but hey I'm not the first nor the last to admit that I'm wrong.

If I had a beer right now, I'd raise it up to you for a job well done.

 

[sig220mw]

Glad you stuck to it, I wouldn't have had the patience. The sad part is that the evidence in our favor is all over the place. Even the main stream effete media types admit that in the last 20 or so years crime is down but they won't give credit to where it is due.

 

[southeastshooter]

Thanks guys. I am surprised with his response and glad I stuck to my guns. No pun intended. You all have helped me with this and I am very thankful.

 

[Lateck]

Glad to hear that your Prof was open minded.

I was going to suggest that you ask him/her to spend a week in Cd. Juarez, Mexico where guns and ammo are not legal.....

Lateck,

 

[doc2rn]

Guns are inanimate objects, merely tools. Its how men use them that makes the difference to deter crime by having that tool. It worked when America fought the British for independence, and has been a right ever since.