Nice arguments for gun ownership?

[NeverReady]

So I am still in research mode for the type of gun I want for concealed carry, and I mentioned this to a friend of mine which upset her. She first gave me this cocked look and said, "Why?", then I told her that I believe in being prepared, and before I could udder another word she says, "Prepared for what?" in a sharper tone. Now I actually have a half dozen experiences to back up my reasons, and after I told her of the bad things people have either done or tried to do she stopped and asked me if I thought she should get a gun. But the problem arises, how do I talk to my friends and family in a nice way. Some people I can tell to piss off, but the rapid fire questions that try to prove I am just trying to either start trouble or will find it if I am looking for it seems like an inevitability. So how do I avoid alienating my family and friends while they try to alienate me?

[polliedes]

Don't mention it to them. Actions speak louder than words and after you have had it a while and nothing has happened, they can not say you are looking for trouble if they find out.

[Regular Guy]

Ask them if they believe in self defense. If they say no, then stop talking, it's worthless to continue.
Ask them if they believe in effective self defense. If they say sure, continue.
Ask them if they believe you could you a tool such as a hammer or pipe for self defense. If they say yes, then ask them this.....
If you believe in effective self defense with tools, why does the tool matter?

[raptor]

Ask them if they believe in self defense. If they say no, then stop talking, it's worth less to continue.
Ask them if they believe in effective self defense. If they say sure, continue.
Ask them if they believe you could you a tool such as a hammer or pipe for self defense. If they say yes, then ask them this.....
If you believe in effective self defense with tools, why does the tool matter?

^Best answer so far.^

Don't waste time on the subject if the mind is already made up.

The logic I use is to compare the firearm to a fire extinguisher. It is no different than a fire extinguisher.

A fire extinguisher is:

1) A tool nothing more. It is not a macho ornament or glamorous...it is a tool, nothing more.
2) A device that you hope you never use.
3) May actually sit in its bracket (holster) and never be needed...which is good.
4) If a fire breaks out you have the option of using a tool to deal with it or run away..or both.
5) If a fire breaks out and you need a fire extinguisher and do not have one, you may die.
6) Cheap insurance in case of fire. It is health insurance of a different sort.

[Doctorr Fabulous]

Keep it concealed, don't talk about it.

[ausher]

its better to have it and not need it than to need it and not have it. its hard to argue with that saying.

[RickOShea]

[MrMendigo]

If someone denies your presupposition then you can only answer their questions. (Thomas Aquinas)

That has kept me out of a lot of useless arguments.

[Bearcat]

When a situation like that happens I follow this dialogue;

"Do you have a fire extinguisher at your residence?"

"Yes?"

"Well, are you planning on setting your house on fire?"

"No?"

"Exactly. I don't plan on having a fire, but I'm prepared to put one out."

That usually works for me. However, people can be set in their ways and only want to hear themselves talk. To the people who absolutely oppose firearms and I can't get through to I say, "That's fine, I respect your views. You don't have to own or like guns, but I ask that you respect MY views and decision to follow a constitutionally protected right."

[Krustofski]

Ask them if they believe in self defense. If they say no, then stop talking, it's worthless to continue.
Ask them if they believe in effective self defense. If they say sure, continue.
Ask them if they believe you could you a tool such as a hammer or pipe for self defense. If they say yes, then ask them this.....
If you believe in effective self defense with tools, why does the tool matter?

This. The question to start is "Do you think self defense is a human right?". Whatever their view of the world, in general the answer to this will be "yes". Work from there.

Also, don't get all butthurt if they won't listen, interrupt you, or call you a maniac who's out to kill people. Most people can't be bothered with rational arguments about an emotional topic. That's a problem. Their problem.

[PackLemming]

You could have the most vulgar yet factual news-media you can find made readily retrievable as a personal means of ethical justification and as resource to cite from, should you feel the need to do so to loved ones. Such an archive, sparing nothing when it comes to documenting the truly violent world in which we are all stuck is what keeps some people from nodding off into delusion and it too sadly can also push some people to the edge of despair. So I would advise caution using this effective methodology that literally dwells upon the negatives of life. Keeping such an archive active relieves you and much the rest of the woken world of seeking out excuses.

[Finch]

I've been using the fire extinguisher example lately too.

I then ask them what it is they plan on doing if a man with a knife comes into their home at night

then if i'm feeling sporty i call them negligent for not having a gun to protect their family

[PackLemming]

I've been using the fire extinguisher example lately too.

Analogy is a useful teaching aid but only suitable for a select type of character. They will also be prone to have their minds wander, and no doubt avoidance of the subject regarding the need for personal civilian access to firearms will cause the enlightened student to consider that there maybe other ways around the probable threat of house fires. For instance they may end up insisting that the fire-brigade is understaffed underpayed and should at the least have access to skeleton keys that would allow entrance to every household in the city....

Im of the mindset that

"You can't put the genie back in the lamp"

All the while Medi-Eval England urges

"Be careful for what you wish for, you may just get it"

[Finch]

you'll never convince the "we'd be better off without guns" folks. Cognitive dissonance is hard to overcome... some will litteraly die before admiting they could be wrong.

for what its worth the same goes for the "guns everywhere" crowd

I just happen to think one side is right and the other is not

[PackLemming]

you'll never convince the "we'd be better off without guns" folks.

As I have grown to understand such people with fairly regular interactions, they tend to be extremely conceited individuals that often gravitate towards power entrusted institutions with ulterior intentions. For example oriental martial artist nuts turned into Cops only after they have purchased a black belt from sensai. Habitual pothead/methheads that seem to some how reform and then sell clever clogs advise to Government agencies and influential think tanks on anything inclusive of counter terrorism preparations but somehow always end up excluding the arguments for the control of illicit substances flooding the streets, even after they had personally lost close friends to street drug abuse in the past.

Cognitive dissonance is hard to overcome... some will litteraly die before admiting they could be wrong.

The trouble is Finch, the likelyhood of those who make life difficult ending up to feel the consequences of their enforced standards are slim. Its always that other guy's story that shows the bigger, whole picture. And that often requires the other guy having to pay a very high price for the detention class's lesson.

[duodecima]

The trouble is Finch, the likelyhood of those who make life difficult ending up to feel the consequences of their enforced standards are slim. Its always that other guy's story that shows the bigger, whole picture. And that often requires the other guy having to pay a very high price for the detention class's lesson.

You realize this is exactly how the "we'd be better off without guns" folks feel as well, every time they read of family murder/suicide and accidental childhood shootings? I agree with Finch's original statement - there are folks on either side of this equation who are never going to change each other's minds - and there are good, smart people in both groups. Listening to each side call the other side idiots isn't pleasant, enlightening, or likely to help the OP briefly explain his CC in a useful way.

To the OP - one way NOT to go is to get self-righteous about it. I think the better example is from this thread (viewtopic.php?f=32&t=87584&start=24 ) which is a sterling example of why I like ZS...

[snip] and it is my duty IMHO to be a rational, nice, affable guy who also owns firearms for defensive purposes, and wont hide or apologize for it.

[jamoni]

Show them this.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Y9R25xv ... ure=relmfu

[Einher]

Anytime I've ever been heard the words "prepared for what?" I think about the boyscout motto that was drilled into me over a decade.

BE PREPARED

Unfortunately it can be difficult to articulate why it's important to 'be prepared' for those who never received that instruction.


By the extension of the logic that owning something is unnecessary because you will almost never have to use it, it would be pointless for me to own the tire iron I keep in the trunk, or maintain and change the batteries of the several smoke alarms in my house, though they have never gone off nor do I expect them to.

Just because I'm prepared for something that I hope will never happen and very well may never happen doesn't mean it's not worth having.


Electrical generators, firearms, umbrellas, fire extinguishers, tire iron, snow chains, road flares, family emergency planning, packing spare clothes when I go on a vacation trip or camping outdoors; these are all tools that I hope will never have to be used for situations I will never encounter.

I have them because when I need a tool for something I hadn't intended to encounter, I have my doubts that I'll have a convenient opportunity to obtain one.

ninja edited for grammar.

The trouble is Finch, the likelyhood of those who make life difficult ending up to feel the consequences of their enforced standards are slim. Its always that other guy's story that shows the bigger, whole picture. And that often requires the other guy having to pay a very high price for the detention class's lesson.

You realize this is exactly how the "we'd be better off without guns" folks feel as well, every time they read of family murder/suicide and accidental childhood shootings? I agree with Finch's original statement - there are folks on either side of this equation who are never going to change each other's minds - and there are good, smart people in both groups. Listening to each side call the other side idiots isn't pleasant, enlightening, or likely to help the OP briefly explain his CC in a useful way.

To the OP - one way NOT to go is to get self-righteous about it. I think the better example is from this thread (viewtopic.php?f=32&t=87584&start=24 ) which is a sterling example of why I like ZS...

[snip] and it is my duty IMHO to be a rational, nice, affable guy who also owns firearms for defensive purposes, and wont hide or apologize for it.

I completely agree, there is nothing to be gained from preaching to a deaf audience, or from being rude.

There is definitely a stigma attached to the perception of firearm ownership, and understanding that some people simply won't be swayed no matter what evidence or arguments are presented is valuable information.
Sometimes, the only thing you can do is appear to not fit their preconceived stereotype of what a firearm owner is.

[Paladin1]

I've been using the fire extinguisher example lately too.

I then ask them what it is they plan on doing if a man with a knife comes into their home at night

then if i'm feeling sporty i call them negligent for not having a gun to protect their family

^I like this^ and have used it before.

"Part of my responsibilities to my family is to protect them from harm. They wear seat belts, we have smoke alarms, etc. Having a gun and training to use it is just another way I protect them"

Or some version of the above.

For those who are just across the board anti-weapon, well..
"Those who beat their swords into plowshares will plow for those who do not" -Author unknown

Show me a time throughout the history of man that there was no conflict. It is simply our nature as a species. To deny that is an ultimate denial.

[Kutter_0311]

NeverReady, I've run into this with my friends and family, as well. It's never easy.

This very Thanksgiving, I had my Glock in the diaper bag. Wifey wasn't real cool with this, as we were going to her mom's, and mom is a historicly anti-gun vegan. I politely asked mom if it was cool with her, and she said it was. So, gun was with me, no big deal. Then grandma came, and eventually asked what was in the bag...

Never pegged grandma as nervous about guns, but the discussion was on anew...

My best advice, use the fire extinguisher line. With many, you'll be in for the long fight, so just be that responsible guy with a gun.

[PackLemming]

The trouble is Finch, the likelyhood of those who make life difficult ending up to feel the consequences of their enforced standards are slim. Its always that other guy's story that shows the bigger, whole picture. And that often requires the other guy having to pay a very high price for the detention class's lesson.

You realize this is exactly how the "we'd be better off without guns" folks feel as well, every time they read of family murder/suicide and accidental childhood shootings?

Sadly they read gun stories, not violent, insane or criminal testimony. Losing sight of the issue because of emotion, sentimentalism, phobia is the biggest threat to a civilisation they obviously so highly desire & wish to create or manage.

I agree with Finch's original statement - there are folks on either side of this equation who are never going to change each other's minds - and there are good, smart people in both groups. Listening to each side call the other side idiots isn't pleasant, enlightening, or likely to help the OP briefly explain his CC in a useful way.

I did'nt call either side idiotic. I said one particular group was conceited and are often found trying to over rule society from positions they are clearly unsuitable for.

[aus.templar]

Rape her, then ask if she'd carry a gun in the future.
Btw...DO NOT FUCKING DO THIS. However it's the point you're trying to get across.

[PistolPete]

Rape her, then ask if she'd carry a gun in the future.
Btw...DO NOT FUCKING DO THIS. However it's the point you're trying to get across.

If you aren't advocating it then don't type it.

I think this approach is a terrible idea. You're portraying yourself as a person with violent intentions and the person on the other side of the conversation is going to equate gun owners to immediately playing the rape card. You are using fear and intimidation to try to sway a person to your way of thinking. I think there are a lot more civil ways to engage the topic, not alienate people or play the rape card.

I have taught a firearms class a few times that I've subtitled "Firearm Safety for Pacifists". It's a introductory gun safety class that leaves the shooting portion as optional. Lots of people have irrational fear of guns, and it's my way to try to expose those folks to a positive experience. Guns stir a lot of emotion so we should expect they will get an emotional response from people. Just look at how much some people here love their particular firearm or platform. It's beyond reason, it's an emotional attachment.

So some people are going to have an emotional distaste of guns. That's perfectly ok and normal in our modern society. If nothing else the thought of needing to repel a violent attacker is distasteful. It's not polite, it's not PC. Lots of people ignore the bad things in the world and even in their life. If you want to reach those people then you need to come across as reasonable and understanding. It's not a situation where you're going to win anyone to your side by dominating them in conversation.

One of the big parts I focus on when introducing anti-gun people to guns is how they are safe. I point out things like transfer bars, inertial blocks, grip safeties, manual safeties, even those key lock safeties that have become popular. It's the "look, this gun won't go off by itself" talk. I spend a lot longer on that with people who are scared of guns than people who aren't. It gives them some warm fuzzies, the same way airbags and anti-lock brakes do in cars.

The other thing I focus on is how to unload guns. I want to empower them to feel in control. If they come across a gun and want to unload to put themself at ease, they can do that after my class.

Those two things are very effective at breaking the ice. The gun goes from something that can hurt them to a tool they understand better and know how to control. Only once that mental breakthrough is achieved have I had any success at former anti-gunners becoming gun owners.

When you argue with someone they tend to dig in and fight their position. I'll fully admit the world would be better if there were no guns, or no weapons at all. The world would be better with no disease, no hate, no malicious intent. Unfortunately it's not. And since it's a world with guns, it's reasonable that a person should know how to handle them safely and unload them if they are presented with one. That's a thought that seems to have success with people who have been historically anti-gun. That's been my experience anyway.

[Doctorr Fabulous]

Haven't seen this yet, but try taking them shooting?

A target gun, some paper targets of a reactive nature, and don't bring your biggest baddest round. I find a .22LR works for this, especially if I shut up, keep them safe, and just let the joy of things that go "bang" take over.

It's still 50/50.