Logic versus Emotion

[nicki]

Our side has facts, logic, statistics, common sense etc etc to support our positions against any and all "gun control schemes".

The problem is human's operate and act emotionally. People act based on how they feel regardless of the facts and that is something we as gun rights activists need to adapt our strategies toward.

The 2008 elections will be decided by emotions, not logic. If people were logical, Ron Paul would be winning.

Our issue of gun rights is more than guns, it is trying to save and maybe even restore what is left of our freedoms.

Overall most people on this forum are probably either conservatives or libertarians. My gut tells me that most people on this fourm are also white protestant republican males.

Unless we can reach women, minorities and others all of our rights are in jeopardy.

The push for gun control as well as other government controls on our lives will be pushed to promote safety.

The truth is many of those who support gun control laws don't trust the government or the police.

What I would ask members of this forum to do is think how we could promote our message of freedom to those who don't own guns.

Many proponents of gun control do so to divert attention away from failed government policies.

They focus in on people's fear and even though gun control can't work, they propose it anyway becuase then they can step back and say I care and we have to do something.

Of course they will always say" we need to do it for the children."

We need gun bans because drug dealers who make huge profits because of a drug ban are in turf wars where they are shooint at each other.

People who make a living selling banned drugs are now going to stop shooting at each other if we just ban guns.

The major media has had field days about the evils of assault rifles, but how about those anti psych meds many of the shooters were taking?

Of course the fact that major pharmcy companies spend billions promoting drugs probably had nothing to do with the MSM not following up on the connection.

The members of this forum are very intelligent, so how about you guys sharing some ideas on how we can present out arguements in an emotional way.

Remember

The guns you save could be you own.

Nicki

 

[TCB in TN]

The members of this forum are very intelligent, so how about you guys sharing some ideas on how we can present out arguements in an emotional way.

The problem is that MOST people do not care about logic. You would better serve our cause by coming up with a completely emotional line of "reasoning" that those undecided and uninterested can "understand". I know that this goes against the grain but in all reality if logic worked then this would be a discussion that had already been put to bed.

 

[ksnecktieman]

Nicki? Do you want emotion? As our platform? When we can produce logic to make it undeniably right? You can have it.
Pick up your last, or your next NRA magazine, and go to "The Armed Citizen", Pull one out,,, any one, and send it to an anti gun person. If they are honest, it will evoke an emotional response in our favor.

I do not agree with you that an emotional plea will change their mind... their mind is made up. They can not quote logic to defend their position, so they are using emotion, as an excuse for their decision.

Their emotion goes back to Mommy and Daddy said it was this way. What we need to do is make them think for themselves. That is an uphill road.

 

[Henry Bowman]

I think Niki has a good point (though not an entirely novel idea). Many people have their mind made up by first impressions. There are many "fence-sitters" out there who really don't care one way or the other about guns and gun ownership. They are under a constant barrage of the MSM, but really have never had a reason to think about it.

Many of Oleg's posters that are directed to fence-sitters use emotion to catch attention and make some one think (with a bias) about something for the first time.

Using an emotional vehicle for a message doesn't mean that it has to be false or illogical. We have both on our side!

 

[rainbowbob]

The major media has had field days about the evils of assault rifles, but how about those anti psych meds many of the shooters were taking?

Of course the fact that major pharmacy companies spend billions promoting drugs probably had nothing to do with the MSM not following up on the connection.

Nicki - I'm not sure what you are implying here. Are you suggesting that antipsychotic medication is the cause of the shooter's aberrant behavior? The reality is that non-compliance with psych med treatment for persons with serious mental illness (e.g., paranoid schizophrenia) is one of the most common factors in these kinds of scenarios. The meds didn’t make them crazy – they were prescribed the meds because of their mental illness. When a person truly believes that the people around him are emissaries of Satan – and that God has commanded him to annihilate them – they need to be taking their meds!

 

[FTA84]

As a previous fence-sitter (and probably even almost over the wrong side of the fence) and a professional mathematician (i.e., a professional logician). I will say two things:

People don't want to think hard, especially in America. That is why America doesn't produce near as many scientists as it produces middlemen. Developing flawless logic is a skill that takes practice to perfect, though, in real life, it is more difficult because one may pick and choose their own axioms from which to derive conclusions (i.e. philosophy). This is something I've thought a lot about because of the failure of this country to provide students with even the most basic scientific (read logical) training.

On the other hand, of the people that do think, I think that the gun grabbers have done a great job of twisting the issue. I think that because not one person in my family is a gun owner, I really had no experience with guns until I was introduced to them by my in-laws.

It was not until a few years later that I realized my ignorance, that I had unknowingly bought into the anti-gun movement. They had tricked me. I had only really seen two sides of the gun issue: Crime and Hunting. As Barack always says about respecting the down-state gun culture. Since I have no real desire to kill animals for sport, I saw no real issue here. Take away the handguns from the criminals and let the deer hunters be. Why not permit and restrict guns? You don't need a machine gun to kill deer and you already need a hunting permit.

What turned me, and has turned any anti that I have talked about is the thing that I think ALL Americans hold most sacred. The bill of rights. To get people to realize it is a severe infringement of the right that protects all the other rights. For most Americans, this invokes an emotional response. I bet someone could make quite a political scandal by making a video showing any anti-gun canidate burning the constitution.

The only flaw with this approach is the 'modernist' view that many people have today. That somehow people think that modern man (and his scientists, engineers, politicians, ect.) is more intelligent than all previous generatations. They think that the rules have changed. I guarantee that if Thomas Jefferson or Ben Franklin were alive today, they would have the same views, and be worthy of endowed professorships at the most elite universities.

 

[White Horseradish]

They think that the rules have changed

People should read more Mark Twain. Not a damn thing changed since his time, and he was dead on in his descriptions.

 

[Grandpa Shooter]

The truth is many of those who support gun control laws don't trust the government or the police.

Why blame mistrust on the anti's? Those of us who are far right of conservative don't trust the government or police either. That one isn't going to get pro gun arguments anywhere.

 

[RP88]

don't play someone else's game. If you get emotional, then they'll just say "oh, see? They dont need guns; they're just emotionally attached to them like a bunch of conservative rednecks" despite their own emotional side. It's better to turn their argument against them, but not doing so by acknowledging or embracing it.

All an emotional side will do is boil it down to both sides being one step above from flinging our crap at each other on the senate floor. Remember that not all of the people on the anti-gun side are idiots, and neither are the justices that repeal and uphold laws and cases

 

[anygunanywhere]

PLease oh please let me have my gun.....for the children!

If any anti is oing to be swayed by emotion, if this can not sway them then they can not be swayed and must be assumed to be evil and must be destroyed:

"Why do you carry a gun?"
American Handgunner, July-August, 2005 by John Connor

It has been posted on here before and is a classic.

Anygunanywhere

 

[k_dawg]

IMHO:

The message needs to be pushed: those who would prevent a woman from carrying a firearm, is allowing a rapist to have easy prey.

Those who would prevent an old grandmother her firearm, is allowing a home burglar to have easy prey.

 

[Basura Blanca]

Hard sales don't work. Using emotion-laden rhetoric to appeal to those who're fence-sitters is exactly the wrong direction to winning people over to our common cause; any cause, for that matter.

Where facts will suffice, why resort to hype? It's an insult to the intelligence of the targeted person too.

The worst part is, it seems to be the direction to which a lot of folks on our side tend to take the discussion. And those that arer advancing these specious arguments for our cause (the example of the "Armed Citizen" being a good one), don't usually seem to realize that they're hindering us more than they're helping.

...and sadly, this is the crux of what is wrong with the pro-gun movement.

 

[rainbowbob]

If any anti is going to be swayed by emotion, if this can not sway them then they can not be swayed and must be assumed to be evil and must be destroyed.

Here is another good example of the kind of thinking that gives the pro-gun movement a black eye. To "anygunanywhere": If your joking when you say this, perhaps you should include one of these emoticons: Some folks might take you seriously otherwise!