The Gun Control Debate, there are actually THREE sides
The problem with the gun control debate is that there are THREE sides, not TWO.
The other problem is that the major arguments are feelings vs facts.
And it takes someone of high intelligence/strong emotional control to override their emotions merely with facts.
Freedom
Safety
Control
Freedom
The arguments of the freedom lovers are irrefutable and logical.
Banning guns has always lead to tyranny. And often times the most horrible wars ever fought. The state goons vs the people, delivering the largest body counts compared to any war.
The reasoning is sound. The facts, pat.
But, why can't the opposition see that this is true?
Safety
Safety is an emotional desire. And without enough safety, people go insane, and/or die. (usually of exhaustion)
The statement:
If there was no guns, there would be no gun crime (deaths)!
is absolutely factual. However, it is also meaningless. You could counter that, since there are no blaster rifles, no one is dying from blaster wounds. And if, guns were completely gotten rid of, (by an act of god, or advanced alien race) then we would use knives, sticks, boards with nails in them...
But, these factual arguments do not work against an emotional plea.
I want to feel safe!
Which is a good desire, and can't be argued with. However, reality is a harsh mistress.
Gravity doesn't care about your safety when you fall off a ladder.
So, an emotional argument needs to be met with an emotional argument,
because an emotional argument always wins against logic. An emotion keeps hammering away, whereas the truth just sits there.
The only thing that beats emotions is bigger emotions. Such as, if we give up our guns, the wolves are going to eat us.
Control
The third actor in this play is those psychopaths who are hell bent on control (but i repeat myself).
The psychopaths in power want only more control. They want an unarmed, easily manipulated, easily controlled group of sheep. Too bad for them that the people will never be unarmed enough, or gullible enough. It is a never ending struggle to gain more control.
This is also why the rational, logical argument doesn't work.
We are dealing with a group of people that will never stop trying to gain control. NEVER.
Not even at their son's death bed. They will continue controlling even unto your death.
This group of people is why the term "assault rifle" is demonized so much in the media. It is the weapon that they are truly afraid of. The people rising up and forming a militia to eradicate those in capital hill.
And this must be stopped at all / any cost, short of causing the people to form a militia and...
So, we are having this discussion incorrectly.
Of course, the thinkers and those who are able to coral in their emotions, understand the logic of giving up their guns. And we should continue on with the memes and the posts about the facts. Because we need to know that we are not alone.
However, our fighting tactics need to change. We need to fight emotions with emotions.
"I don't feel safe with guns" - "Well, i don't feel safe without guns". Sure, they can think you insane for holding the opposite view, but they cannot argue against your feelings, without discrediting their feelings. And if they ever turn to logic, then, of course, you win.
Now, the real fight. Is against the psychopaths in power.
First step is to spread the word far and wide about what a psychopath is. (Not Hannibal Lecter)
Second is to identify these people, and then vote them out of office.
Third is to remove the office completely. Our pyramid structure is tailor made for psychopaths, and completely against any empathic person.
| And to any who really wish for guns to go away, the way, the only way, is for each person to give them up willingly because they no longer need them. And, it will be generations before this happens. You must make each and every person feel safe; safe enough to give up their crutch. (and this means actually getting rid of the bullies in the schools, like the teachers, the bell, "no child left behind") |
|---|
The only type of gun control and confiscation that make since is gun control that limits what type of guns the government can have. We need gun confiscation and it is the people standing up and taking the guns away from the terrorists that call themselves government.
I agree with you in spirit, but not in execution.
What we need is an actual responsive govern-cement.
Such as, when we pay our taxes, we send in a form that says which departments get funding.
If a department doesn't get enough funding, it is closed immediately.
This would be real control.
The police should be paid directly from the community.
And if the people of the community do not like what they are doing, they can just stop supporting them.
An opt in system is the only way to work this.
Curated for #informationwar (by @openparadigm)
Relevance:Gun Control
Our Purpose
It is such a strange situation and debate with not much of a solution that I can see. The gun owners I know are the safest and most responsible folks following the rules to the letter. I would feel 100% confident of not getting shot in their company with a loaded weapon.
But there are still shootings that wouldn't happen without guns.
So you tighten the laws around gun ownership and purchasing.......and the gun owners follow begrudgingly, and the criminals just continue to ignore those laws.
Well that didn't work.
So you try and get rid of them completely like Australia and then you have a mutiny on your hands because of an amendment to the constitution that was written when there were only muskets and the "hunters" want to keep their ARs.
I am neither for complete freedom or complete governmental control but there seems to be no middle ground that would work.
Fantastic post and good food for thought!
The middle ground is actually very strange.
All the democrons need to go take shooting lessons.
And all junior gang members need to be given some puppy time.
The gun shootings are a direct result of thugs not seeing a way forward in life. Crony capitalism puts things further and further out of the reach of the common person. And, when it gets to hard to get it the "correct" way, then you get it the thuggish way.
This is a direct result of the central banks control of money.
So, destroy the debt and death paradigm of the criminal banking cartels, then get some real rough and tumble play between boys and men.
And then, most of the gun violence goes away.
Indeed! They can blame Ted Nugent and the NRA so that they can get back to fleecing the sheep and running profitable prisons.
One thing that is true everywhere, is that people who have personal arms are victimized far less than people who are disarmed. This is why the murder rate in London is now higher than the murder rate in New York City.
Law abiding gun owners use their personal arms millions of time a year around the world to prevent being victimized by criminals. That's why law abiding gun owners have guns.
Yes I enjoy contemplating the perspective and case from both sides. I am stuck on the points that making laws to somehow control the people who don't follow laws is not very productive, and that people needing an AR for hunting or a musket-originated amendment in the USA doesn't seem to make sense either.
I do remember, in all my time in Houston, them saying if you wanna shoot someone, just drag them onto your property ;) I bet store robberies and home invasions are less likely to happen in areas of concealed carry than not.
First, regarding muskets, recall that government's best tech was the musket. Since the right of free people to defend themselves is the basis for the Second Amendment, it is necessary that the right to possess arms reflects adequately the technology progression.
If civilians have similar arms to government, government is necessarily restricted to that to which it's subjects are willing to tolerate. When government--or any gang of thugs--possesses significantly more effective weapons than it's subjects, that government inevitably devolves into tyranny.
We see this happening now across the EU.
Free Tommy!
Ah well that makes sense. If the thugs/government is going to come at you with muskets, you defend with muskets. If, 200 years later, they are going to come at you with AR-15s, then you have the right to bear that.
Never occurred to me thanks!
This is one of the best posts regarding this issue. I am resteeming in the hope that more people take heed. Thanks for sharing!!
Thank you for reading and reSteeming.
I try to get to the heart of actual issues, because discussing our needs / desires with our fellow man is what will make us all better.
With all that is going on, I cannot imagine people giving up guns any time sooon. And the shooting at schools (choreographed or not) only make people dig in their heels.
I see all sides digging in their heals.
I guess the choreographers thought that people would just want to give up their guns after seeing them in such a bad light.
Or, maybe the 2nd unCivil war will be fought between the hold onto our guns group and the give up your guns group. I wonder how that is going to play out?
I can only guess that none of it will play out as the economy and having jobs, able to pay bills and what will happen might become more important. And more people will start to see thru the news (hopefully).
All of which are illegal in the UK and many parts of the EU. Heck a man in the UK was recently arrested carrying a potato peeler. They are called dangerous objects and you are only allowed to carry them if you are a socially acceptable cause.
Once they got your guns they come for your knives, baseball bats and finally potato peeler.
WeaponDangerous object control is one of the most slippery slopes there is. And the control freaks keep it well greased.And this thing
Most likely because it was hanging out with other dangerous objects.
Total insanity!
I'm totally fine with giving up firearms. They're damn near as old school tech as the pointy stick.
I'll trade mine in for recreational nukes, any time.
Some addenda to your categories. The true Freedom argument is that since I am a free man, I am free to have the means to defend myself. I am, in fact, responsible to defend myself, cuz no one else is, and firearms are the best means of doing that atm.
The best emotional argument is that if you don't feel safe, it's because you're not safe. You're in danger, and you should get armed and trained in how to use your arms. Then you'll be safer, and if you're reasonable, you'll feel safer.
As to the psychopaths, I believe they are fomenting civil war across EU now, and trying to do so in the US as well. The EU is largely disarmed, and would be helpless in an insurrection, letting the psychopaths impose terrible and draconian tyranny.
They want to do it in the US, but we aren't helpless. War would still be profitable for them though, so we need to avoid it at all costs. This is why we should be seeking to make the entire capitalist bankster system obsolete. Should we succeed, we can then just ignore the psychopaths while we take care of our business.
I am actually working on this atm.
Thanks!
Yep, if we do any of the things, psychopaths are as good as done for.
Get rid of the pyramid structure. Actually have elections (point, click, vote, click, unvote them out of office)
Start really using crypto currencies. Have real micro loans, real micro power plants and real micro manufacturing.
All of that says, stick a fork in the psychopaths. Its just... getting from here to there in one piece.