How likely is civil discussion to occur here on THR with anti-gunners?

[Frank Ettin]

In any case, Vector, I carry a gun whenever I legally may. I've made the decision to do so because I'm not clairvoyant and can not know when I might or might not need a gun. While in fact the odds are overwhelming that I won't ever need a gun, I'd feel pretty dumb if I wind up needing it and don't have it, even though I could have.

Sometimes something happens that has never happened before. Sometimes rare things happen. Two, three, four, or more standard deviations from the mean is still not zero.

Now that's my choice. And since I only do what I'm legally entitled to do, I don't have to justify my choice.

You're of course free to make a different choice. I do have to acknowledge that you have the right to do so, but I don't have to agree with your choice. Indeed, I'm free to hold the opinion that your choice is unwise, and I'm free to say so. You're entitled to make your choice, but you're not entitled to my validation of your choice.

I'm also not entitled to your validation of my choice, nor do I need it.

...I'd like to think my point of view is just as valued as the next person regardless of how I perceive things....

And this may be thr crux of things.

You are certainly entitled to your point of view and to express it. But you can't necessarily count on your point of view being valued. Indeed, no one can count on his point of view being valued. That's just something we all have to live with.

 

[chaplain tom]

The terms "over the top" and "rambo types" has already been used in this thread so my reference to those terms is not something I just did for the first time here.

I don't recall any threads I started being locked, however I have been posting to a few that ended up locked. I sometimes feel like vector, in that sometimes, make that many times, it seems that the "rambos" and the "over the top" members are given more leeway and allowed to go farther than someone who questions the "rambo" mentality. I don't feel like that leeway comes from the moderators as often as it comes from some of the other members here. Case in point - http://www.thehighroad.org/showthread.php?t=552182 on that thread I expressed serious concerns with the mentality that believes We the People should be armed with ANY ARMS the military has access to. WMD to be exact. While some posted similar concerns about such thinking and the interpretation that the 2nd Amendment allows for such ownership there were more who felt we SHOULD be able to own our own Nuclear Warhead. That thread began to get a little heated before it actually died on its own.

The OP's concern is felt by some...maybe more of us here than some might think. I personally don't think it means someone is anti 2nd Amendment for not seeing allowances of WMD by individuals in the amendment. Oh and heaven forbid someone use the term "common sense" when questioning some of the members here. Anyone who doesn't use common sense with firearms is in my book...an idiot. I've read posts not only here on THR, but on every Pro-Gun forum I've ever been on that actually do more to validate the old cliché used by anti-gun people that (all who own guns are uneducated, blood thirsty rednecks, who cannot be trusted with a gun) than ANYTHING the anti-gunners have EVER said or done. Let's face it, we all know people we wouldn't trust to go to the store by themselves let alone trust to shoot one of our guns.

For the most part we have a very level headed group of members here. But just like ALL other Pro-Gun/2nd Amendment sites, we have our share of what I call "arm chair commandos" who have NO tolerance for opposing viewpoints. (And by the way have NEVER been shot at or fired a shot at someone else, but seem to be obsessed with killing their attacker, IF THEY GET THE CHANCE) MOST of the Mods here are pretty fair to all in the way they moderate this forum though. Some have come to my defense when some member either implied or actually called me "anti" or what ever term, to indicate that he thought I was NOT the Pro-Gun/Pro- 2nd Amendment person I really am.

Some people get hung up on ONLY the 2nd Amendment rights of citizens while often ignoring the other Amendments in the Bill of Rights. I personally think it's healthy to hear opposing views on most everything. How else are we going to change the minds of those who are only anti because of ignorance? We need to know what they don't know or what they are afraid of to help them get over it. Does anyone else here believe as I do, that MOST people who are anti-gun are simply ignorant or mis-informed? We should choose our words carefully when talking to them so as not to make them even more afraid than they already are. Just my 2 cents.

 

[hso]

How likely is civil discussion to occur here on THR with anti-gunners?

For that matter, how likely is it that the powers that be would allow opposing points of view from those who think differently than most of us do?

That was the title and the topic of this thread, but it is apparent that doesn't seem to have been the purpose.

 

[oldbear]

to Larry Ashcraft

As somebody here said in just the last day or two, this is not needs based society. We don't need Corvettes, or filet mignon, or any of the other niceties that freedom allows us to pursue. If you are more comfortable in a society that is based on only what you need, Cuba is a nice alternative.

Larry thanks for the response, but both your comparisons are somewhat off. Neither the Corvette or filet migon were designed to kill, yes both can and do if not properly used. The purpose of any weapon is to inflict injury or death, and an automatic firearm is a very effective weapon.

I do find your suggestion that I might find Cuba “a nice alternative” insulting and hopefully beneath you. If the old saying is correct, “the only difference between a man and a boy is the price of his toys”, I have been lucky enough to fall into the MAN status for years.

I again will ask you to explain why the armed citizen needs a fully automatic weapon, other than the fun factor. If you’re best response is because of the cool factor, just say so I can understand that.

 

[esquare]

hso - I agree. The answer (as evidenced by this thread even) is that THR members by and large go out of their way to have a reasonable discussion - MUCH more than most other sites. Vector - it seems you have an ax to grind with several mods. Why don't you take it up with them instead of starting a thread to bait people into a fight?

If you don't like it here, why do you hang around?

 

[JShirley]

Egregious mopery with intent to troll.

Couch a complaint in a question and rely on our goodwill to take a mile? This one's done.

John