Are we making a rational argument?

[BaiHu]

Hard to have a rational conversation with people like Piers Morgan. He's an unreachable sect of the mainstream media who can only debate with the use of ad hominem attacks. Unfortunately, he's the tip of the iceberg.

http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sh...#ixzz2FVObHNAH

[ford.304]

It's for killing cops, and other agents of the government, when they come to take my AR.

That's the real problem. The 2nd amendment protects AR's not because we need them to defend ourselves from muggers or rapists or murderers, but because of this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Genocides_in_history and this http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dictato...n_modern_times.

But most people think that world can intersect with theirs. If you say that real reason in public, you're paranoid. So we try to justify it a dozen other ways, which are only sort of true, and sound weak compared to dead children.

Thing is, the founding fathers didn't expect to use this right any time soon, either. Hell, they put down rebellions themselves. But they thought it was important to have it there for some unspecified time in the future when the government they built was put to a bad use.

Which, maybe that's the angle to try. I think it's important not because I *expect* government agents to be coming for me. But I can't see fifty years into the future, and who knows who might be coming after my grandchildren. If we have military-level small arms around, at least they'll have a fighting chance. But a tyrannical government isn't ever going to re-distribute those arms that a well-meaning one took away.

[guymontag]

These may be re-posts, and they only deal with firearm rights as a whole:

Bill Whittle on Gun Rights - Video

The case for gun rights is stronger than you think

Rational, and not too incendiary.

[Tamara]

I don't need my AR15 to defend my home from criminals. I don't need to provide reasons for my understanding of my obligation to K&BA, because shall not be infringed, but if you parry that and make me prove the positive, I don't need an AR for that. I can defend a house as well with a pump 12 gauge as an AR, and if you can't you need more training. That's not what it's for.

It's for killing cops, and other agents of the government, when they come to take my AR.

The reason I need it is because it's what they have. In theory mine should be select fire and have an M203, and then we'd really be all square, but it's good enough that it's functionally analogous to the typical soldier and cop's weapon.

We have guns to enable us to defend ourselves from tyranny large and small -- concealed pistols help defend against the tyrant who would take our life over our wallet, and ARs help defend us against the tyrant who would take away our country.

Word.



People get killed with guns in America.

People get killed with guns in Europe, too.

It's just that here they get killed in onesie-twosies and not by the hundreds of thousands every other decade, kneeling by a roadside ditch...

[BaiHu]

Liberal cat fight b/w Jake Tapper and BO that manages to only politicize each of their agendas. What's their agenda? It's not my fault, it's yours

http://www.businessinsider.com/jake-...a-guns-2012-12

[BaiHu]

Presented w/o comment:

http://www.businessinsider.com/us-ma...school-2012-12

[Tamara]

Arguments You Will Never Hear, #475,193:

Attachment 1219

[BLR]

Thinking this through a little, a few things:
1. Erik's point is well taken. However, I'd say we intellectually beat the hell out of the Michael Moores of the world. We can't convince them, but we can convince the low information, "simple" thinkers by illustrating how child like the Michael arguments are.
2. Tam's right, we need to man up and start hitting our weight. Now dumbing down and hitting below our weight.
3. We need to make an example out of Piers, Mathews, Moore, Candy, and the rest. But how?

And I assume everyone on the forum had the good sense to call their Congressman.

[RoyGBiv]

And I assume everyone on the forum had the good sense to call their Congressman.

I also wrote my local school Superintendent, the School Board President and VP, head of Security and the several Principals I have a relationship with. In Texas it is within the discretion of the local school boards to allow teachers (and anyone else they choose) to conceal-carry on school premises.

Our Governor would approve...

I'll even link MSNBC just to spite them: http://tv.msnbc.com/2012/12/18/rick-...-their-school/

“In the state of Texas, with our concealed handgun license, if you have been duly backgrounded and trained and you are a concealed-handgun-license-carrying individual, you should be able to carry your handgun anywhere in this state.” Teachers should have “access to weapons in their school,” Gov. Perry said, provided they have the proper training and license, and it should be left up to local school districts to determine their own policies in allowing firearms on their campuses.

[Tamara]

In Texas it is within the discretion of the local school boards to allow teachers (and anyone else they choose) to conceal-carry on school premises.

From a federal standpoint, that's how it is in every state. The Gun-Free Schools Act of 1994 only applies to students.