Ammo For Sale

« « Help me out here | Home | That’s a tough one » »

Conversion

People say to me Hey, Uncle how do we win this gun battle? And by gun battle, they don’t mean a gun fight they mean winning the political war over gun control. There are two ways, generally, and they depend on who you’re dealing with. For those on the fence or who generally haven’t thought much about it (and who likely still think the media is credible on the issue), it’s easy: take them shooting. Really. They’ll see we’re not all knuckle-dragging rednecks and they’ll, barring something strange, have a great time.

The second type is the hysterical anti-gunner. They’re almost beyond reason. To deal with them, just calmly refute their false claims by stating facts and do so without scaring your average white person with your crazy talk of revolution and the awkward stage. Use self-defense statistics and other things that won’t freak a soccer mom out. You’re not targeting the hysterical anti-gunner, you’re targeting any passers-by who can be reasoned with.

On occasion, an anti-gunner can be converted. Hats off to guav and friends for that one. If you’re ever my way, I’ll buy you a beer. If I’m ever your way (which will mean Hell just froze over), I’ll buy you a beer.

For those who want the short version, the creator and moderator of a gun control community was convinced he was wrong.

One at a time, my friends, one at a time.

3 Responses to “Conversion”

  1. tgirsch Says:

    As a mostly-pro-gun moderate and ex-fence-sitter, I feel I’m qualified to remark on this.

    For the first type, I’d also strongly suggest keeping them away from the hysterical pro-gunners (i.e., that crazy talk about revolution you mentioned in the next paragraph). It’s going to make a very big difference to the on-the-fence person if their first experience is someone like Sebastian-PGP or someone like straightarrow. First impressions matter, and PR matters!

    For the second type, your analysis is essentially spot on. Going all apeshit (like many commenters have done to, say, KTK on our blog) is exactly counterproductive. I’d also recommend that, while sticking to calmly citing facts, you try to avoid getting into Kevin Baker-esque verbosity. 🙂 (Sorry, KB…)

  2. straightarrow Says:

    I don’t know Sebastian PGP, are we good or bad according to tgirsch. I couldn’t tell.

  3. BadIdeaGuy Says:

    Excellent points. I’ve come to think about it that the person I’m speaking to who states an “anti” perspective is unlikely to change their mind there and then and say “yeah, you’re right,” and that’s important to remember. True persuasion will take time to settle in. Anyone who switches ideas instantaneously probably doesn’t have any conviction on the subject.

    I consider myself like a Johnny Appleseed of these ideas. My blog is where I’m most open about my views, but with friends/co-workers/family, I just spread little seeds. Sometimes with people the ground isn’t fertile or properly tilled, and the seeds won’t take. Think about Hurricane Katrina’s aftermath (as reported): that did more to “till the soil” for pro-self-defense gun ownership arguments than you’d think. The seeds planted during that time for me with some of my friends yielded tangible results.

    Rather than saying “I have 25000 rounds for my main battle rifle and my house has razor wire, a minefield, and snarling hounds around it” after Katrina, “boy it’s nice to have a shotgun or 45 sitting around” should suffice.

    Then that person gets home and has to think: man, if that (again, as reported) happened in my area, what would I do?

    I usually avoid saying “the end is neigh” in these types of conversations as well.