[UtahRSO]

First, Happy 4th of July! It's a bit more meaningful this year for me, since the SCOTUS decision in the D.C. vs Heller case recognized a basic right.

We went to a flag raising ceremony this morning, sang patriotic songs, and had refreshments after that. As we were enjoying our donuts, my wife and I were talking with one of our good friends, someone we've known for nearly 40 years. I was saying how grateful I was for the Heller decision, and how it recognized the individual right of gun ownership. Our friend acknowledged that's what the 2nd Amendment said, but I was surprised when she said that she saw no need to have the kind of guns that look so much like the kind the military has.

I tried to explain that the guns labeled "assault weapons" were no different or more powerful than others with less "scary-looking" stocks and grips, but I could see she was just shutting down as to what I was saying. It's a sad thing that the lies of the Brady Bunch have contaminated the thinking of otherwise intelligent people like our friend.

 

[Shaolin]

Sorry to hear this, maybe she will come around.

 

[divegeek]

I tried to explain that the guns labeled "assault weapons" were no different or more powerful than others with less "scary-looking" stocks and grips, but I could see she was just shutting down as to what I was saying. It's a sad thing that the lies of the Brady Bunch have contaminated the thinking of otherwise intelligent people like our friend.

When people stop listening, I think it works well to use the socratic method -- teach by asking questions. In this case, something like "So, if I replaced the black plastic on an assault rifle with beautiful polished walnut, should that make it legal? Going the other way, if I took my granddad's 30-30 and put an ugly black folding stock and a pistol grip on it, should that make it illegal?".

Sometimes they just don't answer, or give nonsense answers. If so, give up. But questions often make people think through things that they'd shy away from mentally if they didn't have to come up with an answer.

 

[emmaishappy]

I don't understand her thinking. I will admit that guns are a tad more scary for a woman and there is probably a touch of xenophobia there. So I can kind of see where she would think that the "mean" looking guns are a little more threatening. BUT in all honesty, most average citizens/sheep don't really CARE and aren't interested in educating themselves on this topic, they don't educate themselves on the construction of a firearm. The more technologically advanced guns may look different, but they have to in order to function the way they're made. Anyway, it's our job to educate as best we can as well as setting a good example. I'm very NON confrontational and probably would have shrugged her comment off with something like, "if it gets the job done, who cares what it looks like?" and then said, "have you tried the potato salad?" You're gutsy for even "going there" with her. Keep up the good work!

 

[Guest]

I think you both missed the point. The point: the second amendment exists to guarantee our access specifically to military type weapons.

 

[divegeek]

I think you both missed the point. The point: the second amendment exists to guarantee our access specifically to military type weapons.

Excellent point.