Skip to comments.WashPost: Facts ‘Bully Gun-Control Supporters’
Posted on 03/07/2018 6:40:21 AM PST by rktman
And now, from the same people who see a need for 60 different gender options on Facebook, a complaint about gun defenders splitting hairs over word choice.
While debating the merits of various gun control proposals, Second Amendment enthusiasts often diminish, or outright dismiss their views if they use imprecise firearms terminology, writes Adam Weinstein in The Washington Post.
Has this happened to you? If so, youve been gunsplained: harangued with the pedantry of the more-credible-than-thou firearms owner, admonished that your inferior knowledge of guns and their nomenclature puts an asterisk next to your opinion on gun control.
Think of it as the counterpart to asterisk attached to everyone who dares contradict the pronouncements of the Parkland kids without having been in a similar situation. Creates a nice balance, dont you think? Anyway, we all know gun controllers' tactics are unimpeachable. Gunsplaining, though, is always done in bad faith, asserts Weinstein.
It can feel infuriating, Weinstein goes on, being forced to sweat the finest taxonomic distinctions between our nations unlimited variety of lethal weapons.
(Excerpt) Read more at newsbusters.org ...
non print version:
And for good measure, here is where they get there talking points:
Here is a typical example of where the anti-gunners get their info.
” Assault weaponsjust like armor-piercing bullets, machine guns, and plastic firearmsare a new topic.
The weapons’ menacing looks, coupled with the public’s confusion over fully automatic machine guns versus semi-automatic assault weaponsanything that looks like a machine gun is assumed to be a machine guncan only increase the chance of public support for restrictions on these weapons. In addition, few people can envision a practical use for these weapons.”
Plastic firearms with non xray detectable bullets. Cartridges could possibly have some metal. ;-)
“While debating the merits of various gun control proposals, Second Amendment enthusiasts often diminish, or outright dismiss their views if they use imprecise firearms terminology, writes Adam Weinstein in The Washington Post.
I would advise anybody engaged in a debate with anti-gun people to continue to correct them, because if they understand guns like gun enthusiasts do, then their opinion is more likely to change. Even if it doesn’t, at least then you know you’re having a fair and reasonable debate, rather than arguing with someone who insists on facts that simply are not true.
Two facts: (1) Strict gun control in Canada did, in fact, reduce the gun suicide rate in Canada. (2) The drop in gun suicides was not accompanied by any reduction in the overall suicide rate in Canada (jumps from tall buildings, from bridges, and from cliffs, and intentional high-speed car crashes increased - replacing one highly successful suicide method with another). Conclusion: People who want to kill will find an alternate tool even if we restrict access to their tool of choice. Similarly, gun laws leave law-abiding Americans disarmed without providing any protection from criminals intent on "gun violence".
The bottom line? No, it's not worth debating or discussing more restrictions on our rights. Criminals do not obey law. Many decent Americans do obey the same laws, even when they are obviously useless. The end result is that gun laws always do more harm than good. That's a feature if your goal is to disarm decent people, but normal Americans see that trait as a fundamental flaw in the whole "gun control" movement.
Celebrating ignorance, the left reinforces the concept that you don’t have to know what you’re talking about to be an ‘expert’. But we already knew that about liberals.
Nobody needs an assault weapon that fires 100 rounds per second from a 500 round clip. :)
And yet these same people who complain about being “gunsplained” to, also insist that if you do not possess a vagina, you may not comment on women’s issues. . .
These people are frickin clowns!
FACT: The murderer was a "Parkland kid" who also survived the shooting which makes him a "survivor" of the shooting. If he had been killed, the "media" would have counted him as one of the dead.
FACT: What the hell, beside the hatred of freedom and the Bill of Rights, are they "teaching these KIDS at that damn school?
I wonder if this writer saw the CNN report about about “full semi automatic” as shown by a former LT. General ?
Especially if it has that shoulder thing that goes up.
Now now. We know it has nothing to do with “need”. ;-)
It’s like me explaining to my girlfriend about her vag. Not a clue.
Nobody needs an assault weapon that fires 100 rounds per second from a 500 round clip. :
Its not the bill of needs, its the bill of rights.
In the hands of a law abiding citizen, no weapon is a danger.
Nobody needs 2000 bullet clips.
Let’s restrict movies, TV shows and video games that glamorize killing.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.