Home Forums Hunting & Shooting Hunter's Campfire What is a GOOD counter statement?

I have a co worker who is a raving libtard.

He is all over me about my lack of real argument over the magazine capacity.

He says there is absolutely no need for a large capacity magazine, and nobody should need more than 6-10 for any reason.

I told him it is not about need, but a right to own what we want to paid for in blood. He needs to stop blaming rifles and magazines for what people are doing with them...

So, what is a better statement to return fire with?

Nothing will work.

Don't feed his appetite for argument, you will NEVER change his mind.

Only help for him IE is a custom fitted neck-tie, and you're the tailor.

Gunner

Paracord? Or should i use a larger rope so we dont have a mess to clean up when its over?

Marty: In cases like this, I like to retort GFY.

Tightly wound cannon fuse, then light it and leave.

Gunner

Nah, det cord. Of course, then you have the mess.

to the OP. Most liberals don't want to hear about individual rights, or what it took to get them. to them, the Constitution is an inconvenience. He won't listen. instead, offer to educate him. Offer to take him shooting so he can either a) confirm his thoughts, and be able to argue from a defensible position instead of ignorance, or b) show him the reality. I've actually taken a couple of my miseducated/ignorant neighbors shooting and one of them is buying a 10/22 to have fun with (and some 25 round magazines) and the other is lamenting the cost of AR's and unavailable ammo now. They both realize that shooting is fun, and in the right hands, guns are not a danger now. On the other hand, I have a third neighbor that remians adamant that people aren't responsible, and inanimate tools are. Can't win them all.

Use a heavy dose of sarcasm while telling him that the assailant may be part of a gang. Remember the lady in GA who emptied a .38 on one assailant and he still drove away. What if there were 3 or 4 of them? Then when he doesn't get it tell him to GFY.

Ask him why he should not be trusted with either an AR or a mag. Keep after him to answer, because he will refuse to answer it directly. That is, after all, what he is saying with a ban. They think no one should be allowed to have one. Why not him? What is it about him that can't be trusted? I'll bet you don't get an answer.

Invite him to go shooting with you. I have yet to see someone who doesn't absolutely love to dump a 30 round mag as fast as they can pull the trigger. Most of these anti gun folks have no hands on experience with firearms at all, you never know, you may change his mind.

I like that one.

A different response might be something like this:

When I call the cops because someone is breaking into my house they will show up to face that threat, someone breaking into my house, with standard capacity magazines in their pistols (15-20) and ARs (30).

They are not showing up to "kill as many as possible". They are simply carrying the right tools to face an unknown threat.

I am an American Citizen and the 2nd Amendment allows me the right to keep and bear arms for several reasons. One of those reasons is self defense and I choose the same types of arms as my local police department because I face the same threats as my local police department.

Or you could just start screaming "Molon Labe" as you dance in a circle around him.

Just say,"I have no desire to educate someone with such limited understanding and closed mind." That would antagonize him in exactly the right way.

After reading Old70's and Miguel's posts about inviting non-gunners to go out shooting, it occurred to me that maybe that's what we all should be doing; taking our non-shooting acquaintances out to the range with some fun to shoot guns, a pile of ammo and some reactive targets. It might serve to educate some of those folks and maybe even convert a few into gun owners and 2A supporters.

Have him read this:

http://kontradictions.wordpress.com...e-assault-weapons-ban-well-ill-tell-you/

bruin I make a distinction between a "non-shooter" and an "anti" . A non- shooter is ignorant. We ALL start off ignorant. Then we learn if we have any interest. When one has an interest and chooses to remain ignorant, then they have upgraded to STUPID. That describes the anti quite well.

ET, I agree completely. It's those ignorant or ambivalent types who I was referring to and we have the best chance of winning over. As you point out, their position on guns often comes from having no experience with guns. Those are the types we can win over simply by doing what we already enjoy doing - going shooting.

Need has nothing to do with it.. a Right has everything to do with it...

Lefties Feel they have the need to abuse the 1st Amendment, while denying others the need for the second amendment... Lefties feel that is their right....

Lefties always want to ban something or deny to others, the rights that they personally don't think they need...

Reasoning with one, is like trying to talk to a fence post..

its a waste of time, just as their existence is a waste of time...

Actions always speak louder than words. What do we have to lose to try and get non-shooters interested in shooting? You can argue with someone who is set in their ways until you are blue in the face, but when you see that childlike smile come over someones face after firing a gun for the first time, you know that you have got to them.

Because, in the heat of the moment, I may miss.

Apparently these folks have never been in a stressful life and death situation.

It ain't the freakin movies where the good guy bust cranium with every shot.