First off, nice ad hominem (bolded above). That's a sure fire way to sway someone to your side of an argument.
Perhaps you are using too generic a definition of that term. You quoted a phrase you often hear and I commented on it as well as the typical failure and lack of skillful support in defending its misapplication as an argument. To deconstruct it further:
"Just because you can, doesn't mean you should" is almost always injected to imply that there are no valid reasons for whatever action is being discussed and further attempting to substitute the legality of the action as the only possible "reason" (which is an irrational notion and easily debunked). Anyone who uses it as an argument, rather than a quaint maxim, shows their lack of skill in fundamental reasoning. To point this out is not a fallacy, merely an observation.
Besides, you claimed that your stance would not change, so swaying you is clearly not my motive in refuting what you say.
Anyway, I'll put it in simpler terms, I guess. Openly carrying a long gun, specifically a "scary black" one, in public, in today's climate is a dumb idea. Do I look forward to the day when maybe it can be accepted by all? Sure thing. I hope I can see the day when I can drive from one end of the country to the other with a pistol taped to my forehead and no one gives a second thought. I don't presume to know why the person did it, and in front of God and everyone assembled, I'll admit that I pre-judged the gentleman based on what I've seen from some of the crazier OCT folks. Yes, I was wrong in that point. However, that does not preclude me from calling out the other yahoos that do this.
Your personal opinions of dumb are not instructive here. Nobody will stop you from calling out yahoos, just consider that you may be wrong about many of them as well. Actual facts tend to trickle in much slower than the shocking headlines crafted from early reports.
I never said he should be charged with anything, did I? I simply stated that what he did wasn't smart. Those are two wildly different outcomes.
I asked what sort of consequence you think he should face for his "stupid game"? Not necessarily charges, but some sort of consequence, right?
If stupid games don't really deserve stupid prizes, I have no idea why you quoted it or what point you were trying to make with it.
I look at the protection of our 2nd amendment rights as a group cause, in all of it's facets. The fight for the right to have a concealed weapon in Illinois, the right to carry openly in Texas, the right to defend ourselves and our homes, that is a fight that we all share as Americans. It's not simply a state by state issue.
See, our causes aren't even the same. I'm not fighting for protection of our 2nd amendment rights (whatever that means), I'm fighting against infringements. That difference in perception may be the root of disagreement regarding methods, tactics and outcomes.
I do understand the fight that the Texans are going through, and I would help them with their cause if I had the chance. That doesn't mean I can't call them out on it if I think their methods of fighting for their rights are either a) dumb in general or b) damaging to the cause as a whole.
They are fighting against a local infringement. You feel free to call out their methods in their local arena as a relatively unaffected and uninvolved observer, because you think they're hurting your cause, right? How are they hurting the protection of 2A rights you claim as your cause?
MLK and Malcolm X both understood the plight of folks in the Civil Rights movement. Both went about seeking change in very different ways. You don't think that either called the other out on their efficacy of their methods? Should I stand by and not point out that they are simply feeding ammo to the anti's to use against the rest of us? Why let one group sabotage what we've already been able to accomplish?
What have you accomplished? What have you earned of the rights which remain uninfringed? How many infringements do you still rally against?
What ammo are the antis going to use against us to tear down the protection of these 2A rights you hold so dear?
What is there for me not to understand? The Open Carry Texas folks have a noble goal. Their methods are dumb. I think I have a perfect understanding of what's going on there. Furthermore, great job ascribing your assumptions upon my understanding of the situation. When looking at things from different angles, it can be possible to see two different views of the same thing.
Obviously we have differing views. I see folks highlighting and seeking the redress of an infringement, you see "the Westboro Baptist Church of the gun rights movement."
...We are fighting a fight of the public's perception of guns and gun owners.
Maybe you are, I'm fighting against infringements of the right to keep and bear arms. Perhaps you could sway me to your cause if you explained why I should care about the public's perception on this matter (and didn't spend so much time calling folks of other causes dumb yahoos).
We can rally all we want, but if we don't change the general perception, we're still doomed. That's the sad part sometimes about dealing with the American public - facts don't matter at all, only people's perception of them.
Fact is, there's work to be done. I've no time for doom and gloom. Enjoy your cause.
Last edited: