Holy #$%^ some people are just beyond help

builtjeep · Mar 15, 2013

I just had the most insane conversation ever with a co-worker. We were talking about dogs, which turned to pitbulls (my 10 pound terrier mix darted out the door and attacked my neighbors pit bull, who was on a leash, totally my fault. My dog ended up with a couple of staples as a result of a warning/get off me bite.)

The pitbull conversation turned to "assault rifles". Which he believes should be banned (unlike pitbulls). I started pointing out statistics, less than 1% or murders committed with long guns, "assault rifles" being a small subset of long guns, so an all out ban/confiscation would stop a fraction of less than 1% of murders, and in reality those people would just use another weapon.

He asked where I got my statistics, I told him the FBI uniform crime report. Then he says "I believe those numbers are way higher, the FBI just doesn't want to report the number of people killed by assault weapons. The news makes it clear that children are being murdered every day with these things."

I just had to walk away at that point. How can someone be that willfully ignorant? I think I need to wrap ductape around my head before it explodes. The idea that a person can be totally ok with pulling bull$#it numbers out of thin air with no means to back them up, and hold them as a valid argument against provable statistics, to support curtailment of constitutional rights just makes my head hurt.

Edit: To clarify, I do not support bans on pitbulls, nor did he. I pointed out that the lunacy behind those bans is the same as the idiocy of wanting to ban "assault rifles".

eye95 · Mar 15, 2013

Some people cannot be reached. Don't try.

However, having conversations with them, you being rational, they being emotional, you citing facts, they denying them, within earshot of others, helps build your rational case and dismisses their irrational POV. Rarely is the person to whom you are speaking (or writing) the actual target of your efforts. It is those quiet bystanders whom you are trying to win over.

Keep the faith and don't worry about closed minds. Just use them as foils.

carolina guy · Mar 15, 2013

builtjeep said:
I just had the most insane conversation ever with a co-worker. We were talking about dogs, which turned to pitbulls (my 10 pound terrier mix darted out the door and attacked my neighbors pit bull, who was on a leash, totally my fault. My dog ended up with a couple of staples as a result of a warning/get off me bite.)

The pitbull conversation turned to "assault rifles". Which he believes should be banned (unlike pitbulls). I started pointing out statistics, less than 1% or murders committed with long guns, "assault rifles" being a small subset of long guns, so an all out ban/confiscation would stop a fraction of less than 1% of murders, and in reality those people would just use another weapon.

He asked where I got my statistics, I told him the FBI uniform crime report. Then he says "I believe those numbers are way higher, the FBI just doesn't want to report the number of people killed by assault weapons. The news makes it clear that children are being murdered every day with these things."

I just had to walk away at that point. How can someone be that willfully ignorant? I think I need to wrap ductape around my head before it explodes. The idea that a person can be totally ok with pulling bull$#it numbers out of thin air with no means to back them up, and hold them as a valid argument against provable statistics, to support curtailment of constitutional rights just makes my head hurt.

Edit: To clarify, I do not support bans on pitbulls, nor did he. I pointed out that the lunacy behind those bans is the same as the idiocy of wanting to ban "assault rifles".

Those bans would now be Unconstitutional.

(*SHRUG*) He is free to not own one, as you are free to not own a pit bull.

conandan · Mar 15, 2013

I agree with eye. Some people refuse to hear facts, the see something on tv or read in a paper as far as their concerned it's fact. Don't let them get to you or upset you. I personally feel if you won't stand up and fight for your rights you don't deserve them.

SFCRetired · Mar 15, 2013

What you folks are not realizing, and I have said this before, is that the other side is not working from fact-based logic. They are working from whatever appeals to emotions.

Unfortunately, the vast majority of our fellow citizens have been conditioned by years of media manipulations, sound-bites, and listening to athletes and celebrities with room-temperature intellects to respond to those emotional appeals. They are, in a word, too @#$%^&! lazy to search for facts and draw a conclusion from those facts. This despite the fact that less than ten minutes on the internet yields more facts in our favor than in the opposition's favor.

When the aforementioned celebrities and athletes open their mouths, most of them cannot string together a coherent sentence. Yet, because they are paid ridiculous salaries, their pronouncements are treated as if they come from someone with knowledge. I won't name any names, but a certain washed-up former athlete who has made a spectacle of himself by visiting both an enemy nation and the Vatican in the search of publicity (which the media graciously gave him) immediately comes to mind.

Freedom1Man · Mar 15, 2013

Then there are some people who refuse to see the facts even when laid out before them. If the facts disagree with their beliefs then they get really mad and will refuse to see.

This is true not just about guns.

builtjeep · Mar 15, 2013

I kept my cool, but the amount of bafflingly illogical BS that came out of this guy was just astounding.

Some of his arguments:

"If you made them illegal, and mandatory life sentences for possession, criminals would stop using them to kill people."

"I'm not saying no one should be able to own them, just that they need to be registered and illegal to possess." -?!?!?!?! I just didn't know what to say......

"There are a LOT of people murdered that are unreported, those aren't in the statistics." I asked if he thought that every single one of these "unreported" murders was committed with an assault weapon. Couldn't answer other than there are a lot of people killed every day with these assault weapons, and that they're too dangerous, but he doesn't think all guns should be banned. Just the dangerous ones.

*sigh* This is a guy I actually get along with and at least used to respect. I just can't hold any respect for someone who is willing to refuse all logic. It all started as a casual conversation about how my dog was doing. He was in the office when my wife called in a panic.

SFCRetired · Mar 15, 2013

Freedom1Man said:
Then there are some people who refuse to see the facts even when laid out before them. If the facts disagree with their beliefs then they get really mad and will refuse to see.

This is true not just about guns.

I agree with you. It is far easier to go with emotions than it is to actually think. Pick your field, that is in the public eye, and I will guarantee that most people's opinions of that field are based on emotions, not facts.

Freedom1Man · Mar 15, 2013

SFCRetired said:
I agree with you. It is far easier to go with emotions than it is to actually think. Pick your field, that is in the public eye, and I will guarantee that most people's opinions of that field are based on emotions, not facts.

To make things worse, government agents pervert the law in the public eye. In the case of OC LEOs appear to question/harass people who exercise their rights. Thus causing the public to believe that carrying is not a right.

Tess · Mar 15, 2013

It might be interesting to ask your coworker why he trusts the FBI for domestic law-enforcement if he thinks they're lying about what they do (and in doing so, REDUCING their workload).

OC for ME · Mar 15, 2013

Tess said:
It might be interesting to ask your coworker why he trusts the FBI for domestic law-enforcement if he thinks they're lying about what they do (and in doing so, REDUCING their workload).

Very good point. Though, please consider the below:

"It might be interesting to ask your coworker why he trusts the FBI for domestic law-enforcement if he thinks they're lying about what they, and all the other domestic law-enforcement agencies do (and in doing so, REDUCING their workload)."

The Trickster · Mar 15, 2013

builtjeep said:
I just had the most insane conversation ever with a co-worker. We were talking about dogs, which turned to pitbulls (my 10 pound terrier mix darted out the door and attacked my neighbors pit bull, who was on a leash, totally my fault. My dog ended up with a couple of staples as a result of a warning/get off me bite.)

The pitbull conversation turned to "assault rifles". Which he believes should be banned (unlike pitbulls). I started pointing out statistics, less than 1% or murders committed with long guns, "assault rifles" being a small subset of long guns, so an all out ban/confiscation would stop a fraction of less than 1% of murders, and in reality those people would just use another weapon.

He asked where I got my statistics, I told him the FBI uniform crime report. Then he says "I believe those numbers are way higher, the FBI just doesn't want to report the number of people killed by assault weapons. The news makes it clear that children are being murdered every day with these things."

I just had to walk away at that point. How can someone be that willfully ignorant? I think I need to wrap ductape around my head before it explodes. The idea that a person can be totally ok with pulling bull$#it numbers out of thin air with no means to back them up, and hold them as a valid argument against provable statistics, to support curtailment of constitutional rights just makes my head hurt.

Edit: To clarify, I do not support bans on pitbulls, nor did he. I pointed out that the lunacy behind those bans is the same as the idiocy of wanting to ban "assault rifles".

Our only hope to cure the world of such stupidity is that your co-worker and others like him/her will continue to participate in natural selection at a pace that matches their levels of reproduction. Perhaps he/she will blow-dry their hair in the bathtub at some point in the near future?

KYKevin · Mar 15, 2013

SFCRetired said:
I agree with you. It is far easier to go with emotions than it is to actually think. Pick your field, that is in the public eye, and I will guarantee that most people's opinions of that field are based on emotions, not facts.

This come to my mind when I read this discussion.

This comes from an NLP source. It is called One Sentence Persuasion. Sadly it works very well on those in emotional distress and is abused by those who know how to use it.

People will do anything for those who encourage their dreams, justify their failures, allay their fears, confirm their suspicions and help them throw rocks at their enemies.

Hitler, Jim Jones, Marshal Applewhite, POLITICIANS and others have used this to their advantage. You will see a few years from now some of those from Newton will think differently. But there are those who will play on their emotions to get what they want while they are grieving.

SavageOne · Mar 15, 2013

SFCRetired said:
I agree with you. It is far easier to go with emotions than it is to actually think. Pick your field, that is in the public eye, and I will guarantee that most people's opinions of that field are based on emotions, not facts.

Like, Law Enforcement for example.

SFCRetired · Mar 16, 2013

SavageOne said:
Like, Law Enforcement for example.

While I will agree that there are certain law enforcement officers who act as described, I will, although I am not a Moderator nor do I pretend to be, respectfully remind all concerned that bashing LEOs is a violation of Rule 6. I would hate to see this thread locked or posters here reprimanded by the Moderators for such activity.

We would not want to be, as a group, stereotyped as redneck, overweight, angry, bible-thumping, middle-aged, Caucasian, or any of another long list of labels, so why do it to others?

Ladies and gentlemen, stereotyping others, for whatever reason, while objecting to being stereotyped yourself is known as hypocrisy. Please let us not be guilty of that.

robert1970 · Mar 16, 2013

unfortunately, my brother is one of those type of people. He just insists that Iam a coward, and scared for doing it. I guess there is no hope for some.

SavageOne · Mar 16, 2013

SFCRetired said:
While I will agree that there are certain law enforcement officers who act as described, I will, although I am not a Moderator nor do I pretend to be, respectfully remind all concerned that bashing LEOs is a violation of Rule 6. I would hate to see this thread locked or posters here reprimanded by the Moderators for such activity.

We would not want to be, as a group, stereotyped as redneck, overweight, angry, bible-thumping, middle-aged, Caucasian, or any of another long list of labels, so why do it to others?

Ladies and gentlemen, stereotyping others, for whatever reason, while objecting to being stereotyped yourself is known as hypocrisy. Please let us not be guilty of that.

I did not voice an opinion one way or the other on LE. I simply offered it because it offers a prime example of people using emotion over facts regardless of which side they take. Those who are anti will use the actions of a individual bad actor to denigrate all LEOs. Those who are pro will use the fact that most LEOs try to do their jobs professionally to cover for the fact that these same professionals will consistently turn a blind eye to the misactions of those said bad actors. Both sides seem loathed to move to a position in the center, which is were the facts would direct you.

Holy #$%^ some people are just beyond help

builtjeep

Regular Member

eye95

Well-known member

carolina guy

Regular Member

conandan

Regular Member

SFCRetired

Regular Member

Freedom1Man

Regular Member

builtjeep

Regular Member

SFCRetired

Regular Member

Freedom1Man

Regular Member

Tess

Founder's Club Member

OC for ME

Regular Member

The Trickster

Regular Member

KYKevin

Regular Member

SavageOne

Regular Member

SFCRetired

Regular Member

robert1970

Regular Member

SavageOne

Regular Member