FACTS to Diffuse the Anti's . . .

[DHC]

I wonder if we might come up with a set if irrefutable FACTS that may be cited to address the emotional arguments of the anti-gun crowd?

This would be particularly effective if some key facts congeal into common denominators that affect/influence several of these mass shootings.

For example, here are a couple of things I was thinking about:

* Mental instability of the shooter
* Gun-free zone
* Existing laws worked properly

In the case of the CT shooting:

* Shooter was known to have some form of mental disorder in advance of the shooting
* The site of the shooting was a school that prohibits firearms
* The shooter was denied purchase of firearms several days prior to the incident

In the case of Aurora shooting:

* Shooter was clearly identified with serious and dangerous mental issues in advance of the shooting
* The site was a theater with a posted anti-gun message
* In this instance, it appears the purchases were all legal and there were no denials.

What about others?

I know I can, and probably will later, do the research to find similar fact patterns with recent mass shootings, but I throw this out to y'all to fill in any gaps and identify any other common characteristics that might be illuminating.

[spqrzilla]

How about the fact that Connecticut has most of the gun control laws that gun control advocates claim are the 'solution', including waiting periods and "assault weapons" ban.

[Byte Stryke]

How about the fact that he committed 41 crimes.
42 and 43 would have done as much to stop him as the first 41

[Sharpienads]

How about the fact that he committed 41 crimes.
42 and 43 would have done as much to stop him as the first 41

Reminds me of the joke about the guy that ordered 11 shots of whiskey to celebrate his first bj and the bartender offered to make it an even dozen. But I digress...

[Irving]

I plan to derail the conversation by pointing out that all these instances are carried out by males. Then ask for a gender specific solution.

[Great-Kazoo]

FACTS mean nothing to a person / government with an agenda. That's a FACT

[Irving]

FACTS mean nothing to a person / government with an agenda. That's a FACT

100% correct. Try telling your screaming wife what you actually said sometime. Same result. You lose.

[DHC]

FACTS mean nothing to a person / government with an agenda. That's a FACT

No, but they do mean something to a reasonable listener. If we do not take the time to develop the facts, then we are no better than those who respond reactively and emotionally to these incidents. As the debate progresses, sooner or later it needs to move beyond the raw emotion and delve deeply into the facts. I may be wrong, of course, but it seems to me that our best and only chance of success revolves around the hope our citizenry is more rational and reasoned than our politicians. Admittedly, my position is neutered at least a little by the fact the citizenry voted the current administration back into power - but it remains, I believe, our best chance of success in fending off the over-emotional zealots.

FWIW

[brutal]

FACTS mean nothing to a person / government with an agenda. That's a FACT

I tried using facts on twitter and got suspended inside two hours. Facts are lost on the gun-grabbers.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk 2

[BPTactical]

Facts and logic are inconvenient to those with a narrow mind and single vision.



Or in laymans terms: Talk to your ass and your head hurts.

[DHC]

I tried using facts on twitter and got suspended inside two hours. Facts are lost on the gun-grabbers.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk 2

Would you care to re-post those facts here? They may be helpful in developing the type of fact pattern I was suggesting upthread.

[DHC]

Facts and logic are inconvenient to those with a narrow mind and single vision.



Or in laymans terms: Talk to your ass and your head hurts.

Bert,

What's the alternative? If we simply stand on one side and shout down the other - with them in turn working to shout louder than we do - how does that advance anything?

Look - I posted this here in the hopes y'all might join me in developing these facts. Perhaps others have already done it - but I will do it myself even if no one else chooses to participate. I, for one, want to be certain we can win the debate based on FACTS. If not, we do not deserve to win.

FWIW

[brutal]

Would you care to re-post those facts here? They may be helpful in developing the type of fact pattern I was suggesting upthread.

It was the usual - lots of wiki links to definitions of assault rifle vs. Assault weapons. Links And the facts of the past gun laws 1934 act, 1986 ban, AWB, ETC. Death rates for auto and tobacco vs. Guns, crime rates in Chicago, NY, etc you know, all the gun free zones. Pointing out the hypocrisy of all their death threats.

Sent from my Nexus 7 using Tapatalk 2

[Zundfolge]

I wonder if we might come up with a set if irrefutable FACTS that may be cited to address the emotional arguments of the anti-gun crowd?
Facts don't generally work against emotional arguments as emotions close minds faster than anything. I find that arguing with antis is pointless if your goal is to convince the anti they are wrong. However, there are often third parties who haven't made up their minds watching the arguments.

So if you want some facts, go here: www.gunfacts.info (http://www.gunfacts.info)

[cstone]

What's the alternative?

μολὼν λαβέ

Be safe.

[eadgbe194]

http://www.justfacts.com/guncontrol.asp#1

[Adawg38]

Everyone I talk to are giving me headaches talking about Gun Control. They all want the same thing AWB, High Cap Mag Ban and all Semi Auto Gun Ban. They say it's not a 2nd A violation we don't want to take your guns, we just don't think people need Military Grade Weapons. WTF? Sounds like they want a Ban NOT Gun Control. They are Mornons! and YES trying to convince them otherwise is like talking to you ASS!

I keep telling them any of the above is not only a violation of the 2nd A but they don't realize guns are not the issue. The issue is so many F-ed up individuals and something is wrong with people. We need to address the people...the real issue. I don't believe any gun ban or so called gun control would prevent any of the shootings. Look at how many people are assaulted every year, sex crimes, vehicle deaths due to drunk driving and hit and runs.

I suppose i should be a little more clear when I say guns or not I don't believe it would have prevented any shooting because you guys know as well as I do Nutjobs will do what Nutjobs will do. Can't get a gun they will find something else. I tell people on the Conn school shooting that what if the guy couldn't get a gun and entered the school with an axe? How horrible would that have been?

[BuffCyclist]

First off, criminals don't follow the law. That is a fact and is certain, right up there with death and taxes.

Secondly, a fire ban during the fire season still doesn't stop man-caused forest fires. How many forest fires were started across the country due to people being stupid, careless, or just plain wreckless?

You can't put a ban on stupid.

I just explained to my supervisor how many misnomers there were in the news story. He's a Chinese citizen, so he can't own a gun. I explained what an "assault rifle" was, and what a "high capacity magazine" was. That 30rds is the standard capacity for AR15s. I then had to explain why I own guns (which was "because I can" along with self defense, and sporting/competition). His idea of a solution was to make it so that you HAD to submit paperwork to be able to buy ammo, in that you need it for a competition. That goes up there with only run ranges selling ammo and you can't take the ammo home with you, which I don't agree with at all, because you then can't use guns for home defense.

He was saying he was shocked how the shooter was able to get so many guns and ammo. I said that for the vast majority, it is cheaper to buy ammo online in bulk. Its the same premise behind Costco. You buy a 5gal bucket of Mayo because its CHEAPER to buy in bulk. Having multiple guns does nothing, you can't shoot them all at the same time. If the shooter was shooting with the rifle he supposedly had, and his pistol, he would just be spraying bullets. In the case of the Aurora shooting, having 6000rds of UNUSED ammo was all popular in the news. But if he had carried all of that ammo, he would be lugging around so much extra weight, not to mention 200 magazines (whcih there is no way to feasibly carry and use).

We then discussed the problem of mental health in this country and over-medicating people with drugs that have serious side effects if you go off them cold turkey. I brought up gun free zones and how much good those are doing. In the end of it, he completely understood my side of the story, that guns are not the problem.

[BPTactical]

Bert,

What's the alternative? If we simply stand on one side and shout down the other - with them in turn working to shout louder than we do - how does that advance anything?

Look - I posted this here in the hopes y'all might join me in developing these facts. Perhaps others have already done it - but I will do it myself even if no one else chooses to participate. I, for one, want to be certain we can win the debate based on FACTS. If not, we do not deserve to win.

FWIW

Not trying to shout down anybody and I wish I had an alternative.
Simply trying to illustrate that cold hard facts, common sense and logic mean nothing to those with a narrow mind.
Is there a way to broaden ones horizons when they are not receptive to it?

[brutal]

Its the same premise behind Costco. You buy a 5gal bucket of Mayo because its CHEAPER to buy in bulk.

Ban Mayo, it causes more deaths than guns.

Tobacco, more than guns.

And automobiles and ladders, more than guns.

I'm sure part of the diabetes stats are related to adult onset type II and diet.

Ban candy!


More Children die in auto accidents and drownings worldwide than any other reason. Ban Pools!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_preventable_causes_of_death#Leading_causes _in_the_United_States


Number of deaths for leading causes of death

Heart disease: 599,413
Cancer: 567,628
Chronic lower respiratory diseases: 137,353
Stroke (cerebrovascular diseases): 128,842
Accidents (unintentional injuries): 118,021
Alzheimer's disease: 79,003
Diabetes: 68,705
Influenza and Pneumonia: 53,692
Nephritis, nephrotic syndrome, and nephrosis: 48,935
Intentional self-harm (suicide): 36,909


http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/lcod.htm

[BuffCyclist]

Ban Mayo, it causes more deaths than guns.

Tobacco, more than guns.

And automobiles and ladders, more than guns.

I'm sure part of the diabetes stats are related to adult onset type II and diet.

Ban candy!


More Children die in auto accidents and drownings worldwide than any other reason. Ban Pools!

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_preventable_causes_of_death#Leading_causes _in_the_United_States


Number of deaths for leading causes of death



Heart disease: 599,413
Cancer: 567,628
Chronic lower respiratory diseases: 137,353
Stroke (cerebrovascular diseases): 128,842
Accidents (unintentional injuries): 118,021
Alzheimer's disease: 79,003
Diabetes: 68,705
Influenza and Pneumonia: 53,692
Nephritis, nephrotic syndrome, and nephrosis: 48,935
Intentional self-harm (suicide): 36,909


http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/fastats/lcod.htm

I agree, BAN MAYO! (I prefer Miracle Whip anyways... [Coffee])

The problem with those statistics though, is besides the vehicle deaths, they are all self-inflicted by diet, genetics, or stupidity.

Innocent people in cars killed by drunk drivers rank right up there with being shot to death by a mass gunman. Aside from being in a different situation, you couldn't have avoided it.

People look to ban guns, because banning cars is not possible. Alcohol is already 21 and up (like owning guns) and yet people still drink and drive. Guns are efficient at killing things, and people see an efficient tool used in a massacre like this as the root of the problem, so they try to ban them.

[Rucker61]

.
Is there a way to broaden ones horizons when they are not receptive to it?

Listen first. Let them talk first, without interuption. Then calmly state your points. Be prepared to fail, and accept that as a likely outcome.

[Adam]

I wish more people in power had logic...

[BuffCyclist]

I wish more people in power had logic...

Thats actually a pre-requisite. No logic allowed.