1911 Firearm Addicts banner

This Makes Me Pull My Hair Out!

830 Views 21 Replies 15 Participants Last post by  TangoHotel
A state senator debates Jon Stewart and comes totally unprepared. He had ample opportunity to block Stewart’s traps … “guns make us safer,“ “with more guns, the deaths only go up,” etc. Guns do not make us ”safer.” They are tools that operate in accordance with the the volition and the competence of the people who wield them. They give the prepared mind and body better odds in the face of a lethal threat, but the mere possession of a gun itself does not make one safer. We had decades of increasing gun sales with a corresponding decrease in violence, including violence committed with guns. Correlation does not equate to causation, but a negative correlation certainly rules out guns as the variable in the violent crime equation. The senator didn’t challenge the false premises, and he got trapped.

In order to argue with a liberal, one must co-opt their language and their symbols. Liberals are the masters of making the emotional argument. Our primitive brains are receptive to emotional arguments from the outset, and then the higher processes of the rational mind take over (hopefully). That is why support is highest for gun control at the time of a mass shooting, and then that support quickly erodes as time passes. So, what is the one concept that a liberal clings to like a talisman these days? Equity. So, frame an emotional argument around equity. Gun control began in America as a racist construct with the Black Codes and Jim Crow laws to deprive blacks of the means to defend themselves from racist groups like the KKK. Martin Luther King, Jr. had multiple applications for a carry permit denied. In the 1970s, the call was to ban Saturday Night Specials because those cheap snubnose revolvers were the choice of “those people.” Then we had the outcry over those scary black plastic guns that the left claimed could get past metal detectors. Then we had that scary “Black Talon” ammunition that was so destructive that it had to be banned (paint hollow points gold and call them “Golden Saber” and no problem). And now we have the ongoing war against those scary black rifles. See a theme yet?

Microstamping ammo, pre-puchase license fees, psych exams, insurance, mandatory training fees, and every other hoop to jump through or cost-hiking measure move the right to keep and bear arms out of reach of the most marginalized in our country and relegate it to being a right only for the upper classes of society. That too translates to racism and discrimination.

This senator came armed with superficial talking points and got led by the nose through every false equivalency and straw man argument Stewart proposed. A truly embarrassing performance.

See less See more
  • Like
  • Helpful
Reactions: 5
1 - 20 of 22 Posts
Well thought out arguments.

Sounds like you could be our voice of reason.

When are you going to toss your hat into the ring?
  • Like
Reactions: 3
Well thought out arguments.

Sounds like you could be our voice of reason.

When are you going to toss your hat into the ring?
Me and my big mouth! All of that constant showering might be detrimental to my skin. I would be happy to prep some of these politicos before they walk into the lion’s den. Anyone who has studied Stewart’s debate style should have seen these questions coming. The 2A is a very complex topic and you have to immerse yourself in the history and know the 18th Century definition of “well regulated,” the role and composition of the militia (organized and unorganized), and also make the concession that no right is absolute, but that arms in common use for legal purposes are protected. You have to understand the right in order to debate it. And this dude did not have a deep understanding.
  • Like
  • Haha
Reactions: 5
Along the lines of equality…. My high school and college teammates laughed at me (in a good way) when I told them I’m getting a gun to defend my family because the police won’t come.

They said the police never went into their neighborhoods or was slow or made things worse and that is why they have been armed from the beginning. They are from Rockford, Flint, Aurora and Chicago. The cities should be a good clue as to what race they are.
  • Like
Reactions: 3
A “nails on a chalkboard” example of a very simple concept that before you debate anyone you might consider being prepared. It’s the same with the trial of lawsuits I would think, know your adversary, know what they are likely to say, and prepare yourself. To do otherwise is basic negligence.

There’s a simple rule of Internet etiquette, if you don’t know what you’re talking about, don’t talk about it. That might apply to the Stewart debate.
  • Like
Reactions: 1
Politicians going after law abiding citizens with such tenacity, If they clean the streets of drug dealers, Cartels and street gangs. There will be no debate about gun violence.
  • Like
Reactions: 1
One of my favorites..."if it saves just one life, isn't it worth it?"

Do you know how many distracted driving deaths there are each year? How many libs that use the above logic would give up their cell phones to "save just one life"? I'm guessing not many.
  • Like
Reactions: 4
All these politicians want to ban guns however, they have absolutely no issues whatsoever with the armed security that are around them often.

Biden sure as hell didn’t order the Secret Service to carry only double barrel shotguns
  • Like
Reactions: 5
Dude was under prepared and got carved up. To be expected I guess, all politicians are mentally deranged.
  • Like
Reactions: 1
What a head bobber.. who put this guy up there?
Oh well--Jon Stewart is a tool and is not convincing anyone new--just putting smiles on the faces of his loser patrons..
  • Like
Reactions: 2
Glad I'm not the only one thinking this way. Gun control is rooted in racism, classism, ableism, sexism, and trust in the government. Permitting requirements, fees, and taxes penalize the poor. Restrictions on concealed carry, and the argument that "real men don't need guns" ignores people who are weaker, sick, or disabled, as well as young people and women. Banning "assault weapons" disregards the real threats people, especially minorities and impoverished communities face from gang or mob violence, as well as the realities of rural America, where wild animals pose serious risks of harm. And it all is predicated on a mentality of "trust the government to keep you safe," when our government has a storied history of exploitation and mass murder. Never forget Wounded Knee.
  • Like
Reactions: 1
One of my favorites..."if it saves just one life, isn't it worth it?"

Do you know how many distracted driving deaths there are each year? How many libs that use the above logic would give up their cell phones to "save just one life"? I'm guessing not many.
How many people would be dead if they didn't have a gun to defend themselves? How many people would have died if Mr. Dicken over in Indiana hadn't been armed?

"Well if the shooters never had guns to begin with..." BUT THEY DO. Every country, even those with the strictest gun laws, have guns, and have shootings. And if they don't have guns, they use knives, or bats, or axes, or crowbars.

Gun controllers also like to ignore the fact that every country in the world has armed police, security, and military. If guns are the problem, why aren't we seeing proportional levels of gun violence in China, which has 4x more people in its military as we do? The fact of the matter is they want to blame anything other than the root cause, which is that we as a country have an unusually high violent crime rate. And we have it because of a lack of robust healthcare, an abundance of poverty, and the proliferation of gangs offering protection and a sense of belonging. You want to see "successful" gun violence prevention, look at Oakland pre-Covid pandemic. They were able to drastically reduce their violent crime rate through community outreach and services. It had nothing to do with prohibiting guns - they're already in California. If gun control worked, California, New York, and Chicago IL would be the safest places in the country.

To be clear I'm not advocating that we raise taxes to pay for healthcare or other social security nets. But I do think we should re-address what we spend money on. How many billions do we spend annually funding social services and healthcare as foreign aid in other countries, when we won't do the same here?
See less See more
  • Like
Reactions: 2
We received the blessing of the FOID (gun owners' registration) card thanks to King Richard Daley I, who in the late 60's pushed it through the state legislature for the actual purpose of keeping Blacks from legally buying guns (the main thrust of the theory being that they didn't trust government and wouldn't voluntarily apply for it). The funniest part is that he owned one of the largest gun collections in Illinois, and left it to his son, King Draconian Gun Ban Daley II. You never hear this in Illinois gun control "debate."

It's hard, in any event, to debate seasoned liars, which 99% of these gun control nuts are. Asian guy with a pistol shoots other Asians at a Chinese N.Y. party, becomes stopping White Supremacist hate crimes/mass shootings with "assault weapons." Black gangbangers shoot other Blacks with handguns, one is caught with a Glock with an auto sear, and instantly they cry that law abiding suburbanites must give up their "assault weapons." Most shootings are committed by urban criminals with illegal handguns, but taking away middle class suburbanites' lawful weapons will surely solve the problem. And, they're speaking to a receptive audience full of idiots and loons. Don't even get me going on their creative interpretation of the Second Amendment. So, yeah, being completely unprepared just makes it worse, and makes it look as if there are no valid arguments in favor of Second Amendment rights.
See less See more
  • Like
Reactions: 1
And do you think that any "talk show host" is going to have someone effective in these arguments arrive and destroy their host? It is always going to be a propaganda festival. It does make one wonder why we are having seemingly more "mass shootings" around the same time as the big push for legislation, stupid emphasis from the ATF on braces, threats from Biden on executive orders. Is it just the efficiency of the 24/7 news cycle? The triaging of the stories to make any story involving the use of a gun more prominent? Even the "Idaho College Killer" search of his family's house turned up a Glock.
I'd gladly help any pro-gun politician with their talking points if they'd be receptive.

That state senator is a moron and is so far out of his depth it's embarrassing.

He wants to ban drag shows where kids are present? Just another guy who wants to the state to be your parent on half of the things. The dems want to be you parent on the other half.

I want back the time I spent watching it.
I'd gladly help any pro-gun politician with their talking points if they'd be receptive.

That state senator is a moron and is so far out of his depth it's embarrassing.

He wants to ban drag shows where kids are present? Just another guy who wants to the state to be your parent on half of the things. The dems want to be you parent on the other half.

I want back the time I spent watching it.
There's unfortunately a large overlap between the groups supporting parents' rights in education and also supporting banning drag shows/other LGBT stuff. I'm all for protecting children, but not if it means turning the state into parents. We need people who are willing to put together well-articulated arguments supported by facts. Problem is, those people tend to want to steer clear of politics.
this individual was not prepared..
the only way to stop an armed shooter....IS WITH A PISTOL/RIFLE!
I'd gladly help any pro-gun politician with their talking points if they'd be receptive.

That state senator is a moron and is so far out of his depth it's embarrassing.

He wants to ban drag shows where kids are present? Just another guy who wants to the state to be your parent on half of the things. The dems want to be you parent on the other half.

I want back the time I spent watching it.
I agree. The first question that should be asked by any politician considering an issue is: Is this a legislative issue or a ballot box issue? More likely than not, it will be a ballot box issue.
1 - 20 of 22 Posts
Top