Even New Jersey "gets it"

http://www.nj.com/times-opinion/index.ssf/2011/08/opinion_norway_killings_show_i.html

Gun control results in giving control of guns to those who should never have them.

Click to expand...

and

Outlawing guns is supposed to make us all safer. In Norway, with its incredibly strict gun laws, 500 people are killed by guns each year. It seems a mere drop of blood in the bucket compared to the United States, which suffers 10,000 gun casualties annually. But look at the number: Norway has only 5 million people. In their “gunless society,” one of every 10,000 people dies from a gun. In the U.S., with its patchwork of gun laws, the rate of gun deaths is less than one-third that of Norway. Norway, where even police don’t bear arms, boasts one of the highest gun death rates in the free world.

Click to expand...

If folks in a place like NJ where the possession and carry of handguns is highly regulated and restricted can "get it" there just might be hope after all. It's worth a :lol: if not a :banana:.

stay safe.

That is what is great about the facts.

It is always just a matter of time before the facts will trump the anti's emotionally driven drivel!

It is nice to see that more and more people are realizing that Gun Control does not work.

Perhaps the people of NJ will find it easier to change their laws as more wake up.

Posted to FB. Thanks for the link to the very good article, skidmark.

NJ - No Way!!!

I am from NJ. Believe me, NJ does NOT get it. Gov. Christie is good in many ways, but he is not gun friendly. The latest was when someone who was beaten and threatened applied for a concealed carry permit. The judge said the applicant did not prove a "need" to carry. I thought it was the bill of rights, not the bill of needs. Anyway, there is no hope for NJ unless the US Supreme Court weighs in or the Congress/Senate passes a reciprocity law between and among all the States. I am trying to get out of this State, but the real estate market is very bad. If I do sell, Virginia is the State where I will be heading.

fjpro2a - I agree that the entire population of NJ does not get it, and may never get it. But for one person to see the light and turn around is in fact a gain.

rscottie - as I see it, it is not the facts overcoming emotions. It is a change in emotions -- the way this person sees and feels about things. Facts will never overcome emotions. If that were the rule then all the folks whose emotions led them to the wrong conclusions would have changed their mindsets long ago.

stay safe.

One grain of sand at a time

skidmark said:

fjpro2a - I agree that the entire population of NJ does not get it, and may never get it. But for one person to see the light and turn around is in fact a gain.

rscottie - as I see it, it is not the facts overcoming emotions. It is a change in emotions -- the way this person sees and feels about things. Facts will never overcome emotions. If that were the rule then all the folks whose emotions led them to the wrong conclusions would have changed their mindsets long ago.

stay safe.

Click to expand...

Nothing is wrong with changing one person at a time. But, let's say it takes one year to change one person's mind. During that year, 10 new "minds full of mush" will spring up. That is a net change of -9. It reminds me of Ron Kuby, an activist extreme liberal lawyer who just loved deer, and couldn't understand why anyone would want to kill them. He eventually moved to a rural county in NJ (yes, we have a few) where the deer ate all his precious flowers and bushes. Now, he hates deer, and wants to kill all of them. It only took about 10 years for him to change his mind, and only on this one issue. This, in my opinion, is an example of "one person at a time." It doesn't move the ball forward. Don't get me wrong. I am for changing one person's mind no matter how long it takes, but we should always pick our battles and move forward in a quantum leap if the possibility arises. I know I am preaching to choir. You are and have been an inspiration to all of us.
The best.

One guy changed his mind. And he has the power and ability to discuss that with thousands of readers and try to get them to understand why he changed his mind. Many of those readers actually believe that the guy has valuable stuff to say, and that even this "sudden" change of heart might be valuable. So they look at their own views and try to see if there is something there that might line up with what this guy went through. And some of them change their mind, too.

It's not one every 10 years. It's most of them never bothering to think about it one way or another - until someone or something gives them reason to think about it. And history and experience tells us that when they actually think about it most people come down on our side.

Somewhere between 2% and 10% of folks are even minimally involved in the gun-rights "movement", and somewhere between 2% and 10% are involved in the anti-gun-rights "movement". That leaves between 80% and 96% who are not thinking about it one way or another.

Sure. many will spout off whatever they have heard, but do so without really ever considering what is behind what they've heard. We know from sad experience that folks are never moved by facts and statistics, but by emotions and feelings. If that were not so, advertising would be an utter failure, as would political campaigning. So when we get a new person feeling that "our" side has the answer, and they tell other folks about that discovery, we get a whole lot of folks at least thinking about it. And when they get to thinking about it the majority start asking questions and feeling the anti-gun side has been lying to them all along.

It's not the chior I'm preaching to - it's the 96% who currently don't care one way or another.

stay safe.

Fair enough

skidmark said:

It's not the chior I'm preaching to - it's the 96% who currently don't care one way or another.

stay safe.

Click to expand...

We are basically saying the same things. It's just that you emphasize one aspect, while I tend to emphasize a different aspect. You have way more experience than I, so here is my current slightly amended position:
It is important to change one mind at a time, as that person could have a spill over impact on others. Nipping away a little at a time is productive. At the same time, I believe there doesn't have to be one way to "win" people over. We don't have to hit singles all the time; occasionally, a home run isn't a bad idea. Maybe my position has been tainted by living in the Socialist Republic of NJ. I envy you Virginians. Soon, I hope to become one.