Comments on: Explaining The Gun Issue

By: RAH

RAH — Tue, 23 Dec 2008 12:32:46 +0000

I suggest that people go visit his blog. He indicated that Sean really did open his eyes and gave a really nice statement. This guy is teachable. Lets get him on our side.

Sean – Great Work!

By: scott

scott — Mon, 22 Dec 2008 13:46:49 +0000

It’s too bad the anti-gunners are not going to accept the “need” to have a semi-auto military type rifle to participate in “sporting” matches as a reason to support our right to arms.

They don’t care care.

By: J. Dock

J. Dock — Mon, 22 Dec 2008 00:34:25 +0000

I weighed in on that blog.

It was really difficult to keep my words from being pointy. I’m getting testy in my old age.

By: Sebastian

Sebastian — Sun, 21 Dec 2008 21:22:28 +0000

I think you need to make both arguments. You’re not trying to convince the hard core people who hate all guns, you’re trying to convince people who may not care much, or have thought much about what the Second Amendment means, but who might accept the idea that people can own guns for sport, hunting, or self-defense.

You need to make the rights argument too, but it doesn’t hurt to show there are lawful uses of these firearms, that have nothing to do with criminal activity.

By: Joe Huffman

Joe Huffman — Sun, 21 Dec 2008 21:17:33 +0000

It’s The BIll of Rights. Not The Bill of Needs.

(I think it was Alan Gottlieb that I first heard that from.)

By: Linoge

Linoge — Sun, 21 Dec 2008 19:55:38 +0000

The “need” argument is a losing one, for both sides. For us, the hoplophobes and anti-rights folks will never recognize any need for any firearm, so there is no common ground from which to start. For them, the “need” argument can be applied to everything from SUVs to big-screen TVs to four-eyed stoves, and thus quickly loses any and all merit in very short order.

Regardless, however, the Founding Fathers neither wrote, nor intended, a “need” clause into any of the Amendments… why is the Second one always singled out for this distinction?

By: Oscar

Oscar — Sun, 21 Dec 2008 18:12:09 +0000

Hey, you want a better story?

I have a co-worker who labels himself “libertarian”, yet advocates the banning of all guns.

After more extensive conversation, I found that he did not know the process for obtaining a legal handgun — i.e., didn’t know the myriad array of laws constraining the legal purchase of a handgun. After explaining all of this, he admitted that he thought gang bangers just walked into a gun shop and bought automatic rifles willy-nilly.

On a recent business trip, I took him to a nearby range. He shot a .22 Ruger MKIII, and enjoyed himself (his words). I don’t know if he will become a gun owner himself (I sure hope he does), but at least now he knows that pressing for laws to “keep guns out of the hands of criminals” is pointless since such laws are already on the books.

By: AntiCitizenOne

AntiCitizenOne — Sat, 20 Dec 2008 22:31:14 +0000

“should default to allowing everything unless it’s shown to be bad”

this sounds pretty hard, objects can’t exactly be shown to be bad, the only thing that makes an object bad is how it’s used by a person…but that’s pretty obvious already, the hard part is trying to actually convince people that people are the problem – not the object.

As Robb says, intent is non transferable.

By: Sean Sorrentino

Sean Sorrentino — Sat, 20 Dec 2008 21:09:46 +0000

well, i made the ritual offer of a trip to the range, and i’ll be damned. he emailed me his phone number and said yes. we had a great conversation that lasted over an hour this morning. this guy can be reached by reasonable argument. we will be going to the range early next year, and the place i have picked has an immense collection of different types of weapons. i can show him what exactly he is talking about. it seems to me that this guy is handicapped by the Brady Campaign info that is all he has access to. i may have to get back to you guys about some of the more esoteric stuff (.50 BMG) but the place in Chadds Ford has most of the stuff i would need to give him a basic gun familiarization course. i will, of course, start with the .22 rifle, or something of that sort.

By: Robb Allen

Robb Allen — Sat, 20 Dec 2008 14:08:41 +0000

Well, I’d hop in the conversation over there, but it looks like everyone else is handling themselves quite well.

I doubt you make it through the original author’s head as he’s invested in his writing, but with logical, well thought out comments, those who are sitting on the fence will be more easily swayed.

It’s times like this where my faith in our community is really strengthened.