One of the most common mistakes in arguing with someone is to lose reason and intellect and drop down to personal attacks on the person. Arguing anything at the personal attack level will neither convince the other person that you are right or educated. If the other person starts in with personal attacks, side-step the attack and continue with your well-thought out and rational arguments.
One of the ways Pro-2nd Amendment people can lose the fight is to let the Anti's see out dark side. Once we start with personal attacks on the other person, we end up being viewed as crackpots, nutcases, mental, redneck, or any of a plethora of other demeaning adjectives.
The key to converting someone who is on the fence about owning a gun or a persons freedom to own a gun is not to call the Anti's bad names or say they are stupid, it's to rationally work through the other sides issues and reinforce your beliefs.
I call the Brady Campaign the "Brady Bunch." This is a dig at their name, which I should not demean myself into doing, but yeah, it's funny. It's an in joke about the low brow, cheese comedy that was the 1970's TV show and aimed at the a group who has a real platform and, in their minds, a valid right to pursue banning of guns. Personally, they are wrong. With Pro-gun people, like the majority who read this forum, I can say Brady Bunch and no one would be offended. If I used that same term with a person who was unsure what to believe, and i was attempting to sway them to the Pro-2nd side, using an ill meaning term like that would probably not garner me any points.
The Brady Bunch does have valid concerns. I should address those concerns with whomever i am debating or persuading and alleviate that persons fears, concerns, and uncertainties. Rather then saying "The Brady Bunch is filled with membership of brainwashed, idiot lemmings who cannot find their way out of a paper bag with a map and a string to follow or come up with a new coherent sentence, even with Daniel Webster helping them... I should nod my head at the person I am speaking with to show them I understand what they are saying and then confer reason, proof, insight, and more proof that their fears are unfounded.
For example... the Anti-argument: "If guns were banned then criminals would not have them and murders and crime would go down."
The bad answer: "Yeah.. right.. like it did in Canada and Australia. Those dumbasses must be using the flip side of their Facts for the Day Toilet Paper. What a bunch of freakin ass clowns."
The better answer:
I can see you concern, but think about this...If criminals are disobeying the law as it is, and they are since they are criminals, then only the law-abiding citizens would be the ones to lose the right to own guns and thereby the right to protect themselves. Let me give you and example...in the past 30 years since handguns were banned in Great Britain, the murder and overall crime rates have more then doubled for the country and tripled in some areas.
Taking away guns from peaceful, law-abiding citizens doesn't affect criminals, but it hurts the guy with the family of three who can no longer protect his family for the 4 guys who just broke into his house, or the 22 year old nurse who is walking to her car in the parking garage when a guy in a ski mask starts chasing her. Sure, they can call the police, but the police average 5 to 9 minute response times. Who knows what would happen to the nurse or that guy and his family in those 9 minutes.
It's been 30 years since Washington D.C. banned all handguns. It is still the murder capital of the U.S. and violent crimes have risen over 50% in that time while the rest of the U.S. cities that allow handgun ownership have seen double digit decreases in those same crimes over the same time frame. Take a look at states like Florida and the nosedive their crime rate has taken since they started issuing concealed weapons licenses. The bad guys do not know who is carrying a gun these days and they are finding other ways to get money. Despite what all the naysayers said, carrying concealed guns in that state has not led to one shootout between a licensed carrier and law enforcement, but there have been many times when that licensed carrier was able to assist police officers in apprehending a bad guy. Guns in the right hands are as beneficial as a plow in the hand of good farmer."
