Interesting rebuttal for use on anti-gun folks

The #1 community for Gun Owners in Indiana

Member Benefits:

  • Fewer Ads!
  • Discuss all aspects of firearm ownership
  • Discuss anti-gun legislation
  • Buy, sell, and trade in the classified section
  • Chat with Local gun shops, ranges, trainers & other businesses
  • Discover free outdoor shooting areas
  • View up to date on firearm-related events
  • Share photos & video with other members
  • ...and so much more!
  • Chance

    Expert
    Rating - 100%
    2   0   0
    Sep 25, 2009
    1,052
    129
    Berne
    Saw this today and thought it was very appropriate:


    When there is a bombing and people are injured, we blame the bomber.

    When someone is killed by a drunk driver, we blame the driver.

    When someone is injured/killed by a gun, we blame the gun.



    How is this logical in any thinking person's mind?
     

    jwh20

    Master
    Rating - 100%
    28   0   0
    Feb 22, 2013
    2,069
    48
    Hamilton County Indi
    There is absolutely no logic involved. It's an entirely emotionally-based fear generated by constant media and political lies. Every day kids are indoctrinated into this way of thinking in public schools.
     

    No2rdame

    Master
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Aug 8, 2012
    1,637
    38
    Noblesville
    Yep. It's illogical thought but it's what has been indoctrinated into the minds and hearts of every liberal today. Many of them truly believe that if guns were banned criminals would cease to have access to firearms. We see how well that works by banning heroin and crack from drug abusers.
     

    Scarecrow

    Sharpshooter
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Nov 25, 2009
    646
    18
    Grissom
    "Their" response would probably go something like... Building a bomb is illegal, drinking and driving is illegal...blah blah.
     

    Mark 1911

    Grandmaster
    Site Supporter
    Rating - 100%
    12   0   0
    Jun 6, 2012
    10,941
    83
    Schererville, IN
    Saw this today and thought it was very appropriate:


    When there is a bombing and people are injured, we blame the bomber.

    When someone is killed by a drunk driver, we blame the driver.

    When someone is injured/killed by a gun, we blame the gun.



    How is this logical in any thinking person's mind?

    And you expect a liberal to be swayed by logic????? Not a chance. ;)
     

    No2rdame

    Master
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Aug 8, 2012
    1,637
    38
    Noblesville
    "Their" response would probably go something like... Building a bomb is illegal, drinking and driving is illegal...blah blah.

    That's about the best they can come up with, which is why they parrot it. They also like to regurgitate the same outdated "facts" from pollsters who interviewed only liberals in the northeast and claimed the results represent all Americans.

    I have a philosophy on gay marriage and abortions. If you don't agree with either of them, don't do it. Same thing with guns. If you don't like them don't own one.
     

    Sling10mm

    Expert
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Mar 12, 2012
    1,117
    38
    When one suggests that gun control laws don't work because criminals won't obey them, the retort is typically a nonsensical, emotional response, asking if we should repeal laws against murder and rape because criminals don't obey those either. Those folks often miss their own point that murder and rape are already illegal, whether a firearm is used to commit it or not.

    Common sense would suggest that we should punish behavior, not inanimate objects, but this country isn't being directed by common sense at the moment.
     

    ratames

    Sharpshooter
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    Mar 14, 2012
    427
    43
    My dughter was killed by a drunk driver in a pickup truck while she was riding a bicycle . Using their logic, pickup trucks, alcohol, and bicycles should all be banned. How far do you think that will fly?
     

    EdC

    Expert
    Rating - 100%
    8   0   0
    Aug 12, 2008
    965
    18
    Speedway, IN
    So many more people drink than use firearms. There's no problem banning or restricting something if you are not the one being affected.

    The National Transportation Safety Board recently recommended dropping the blood alcohol level for drunk driving from .08% to .05%.

    There's no political stomach to do that: "So lowering the legal limit would turn a lot of responsible social drinkers into criminals. More important, it probably wouldn't do much to reduce drunken driving deaths" said some opponents. See the similarities?
     

    JasonB

    Marksman
    Rating - 0%
    0   0   0
    May 30, 2013
    177
    16
    Pittsboro, IN
    Saw this today and thought it was very appropriate:


    When there is a bombing and people are injured, we blame the bomber.

    When someone is killed by a drunk driver, we blame the driver.

    When someone is injured/killed by a gun, we blame the gun.



    How is this logical in any thinking person's mind?


    But you see with "Gun" you have an armed population that eventually will realize how corrupt both sides of our current Political System and their backing News Agencies (That swear they are so unbiased) have become...

    If you take the "Gun" out of the equation how would that population have the ability to truly voice their opposition and as our founding fathers did 237 years ago forge the beginnings of our great country?

    Ron White best summed up the current Gun Debate with his famous quote "You can't fix Stupid"

    That's exactly what the Gun Control Side of these debates is trying to do... If a criminal wants a gun they will find it regardless... Punishing Responsible gun owners that follow their rules by adding more rules that don't work isn't the answer...

    Just My :twocents:
     

    WawaseeHoosier

    Plinker
    Rating - 100%
    1   0   0
    Mar 11, 2013
    36
    6
    Fishers and Wawasee
    Well it should be obvious by now that b/c so few people use firearms (compared to cars, booze, etc) that their notions and opinions are based on complete and utter ignorance of firearms in a technical, cultural, and legal sense. There is only one way to combat ignorance and that is to expose these people to firearms. There is one HUGE problem here though; these people won't touch a gun. Bottom line; they are not willing to lift the veil of their own ignorance even if you put the tool right in front of them.

    You can't argue with willful ignorance. Period.
     
    Top Bottom