• We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
  • The forum will be down for about an hour this weekend for maintenance. I apologize for the inconvenience.
  • If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
  • Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.

The Antis Tip Their Hand - Totally Ignorant - Zero Facts - All Emotion

since9

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 14, 2010
Messages
6,964
Location
Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
The antis are quite literally, totally ignorant on the subject. For them, it's all about emotions, not facts:

"Political commentator and comedian Steven Crowder wanted to see how much those calling for "common sense gun control" actually know about firearms. To do so, he set up a tent for the "Citizens Coalition for Common Sense Gun Reform" and asked his fellow concerned citizens about what types of guns the government should ban and why.

"What he learned: ALMOST NO ONE KNOWS ANYTHING ABOUT GUNS and all of their reasons behind which guns should be banned and which should be allowed are based off of how guns make them feel, not what they are actually capable of."

"Crowder asks Common Sensers to decide on a "sliding scale" which of the guns he is displaying should be banned and which should be allowed. The "experts" it turns out are utterly superficial in what weapons they believe the government should confiscate: If it was metallic and wood, people were fine with it. If it was black and "tactical looking," they wanted the government to ban it."

Linky.

Here's another beauty: "When Crowder makes the absurd claim that the AR-15 is used in upwards of "99.4% of mass shootings," most of the participants accept that statistic as true. In fact, only 3% of all criminal uses of guns actually involve rifles of any kind." I find this an abundantly clear indication of just how incredibly and grossly distorted mainstream media reporting really is on the use and misuse of firearms here in these United States.
 
Last edited:

Citizen

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
18,269
Location
Fairfax Co., VA
The antis are quite literally, totally ignorant on the subject. For them, it's all about emotions, not facts:

"Political commentator and comedian Steven Crowder wanted to see how much those calling for "common sense gun control" actually know about firearms. To do so, he set up a tent for the "Citizens Coalition for Common Sense Gun Reform" and asked his fellow concerned citizens about what types of guns the government should ban and why.

"What he learned: ALMOST NO ONE KNOWS ANYTHING ABOUT GUNS and all of their reasons behind which guns should be banned and which should be allowed are based off of how guns make them feel, not what they are actually capable of."

"Crowder asks Common Sensers to decide on a "sliding scale" which of the guns he is displaying should be banned and which should be allowed. The "experts" it turns out are utterly superficial in what weapons they believe the government should confiscate: If it was metallic and wood, people were fine with it. If it was black and "tactical looking," they wanted the government to ban it."

Linky.

Here's another beauty: "When Crowder makes the absurd claim that the AR-15 is used in upwards of "99.4% of mass shootings," most of the participants accept that statistic as true. In fact, only 3% of all criminal uses of guns actually involve rifles of any kind." I find this an abundantly clear indication of just how incredibly and grossly distorted mainstream media reporting really is on the use and misuse of firearms here in these United States.

I find it an indictment of the irrationality of too many with who I share this piece of North America. Mark Twain wrote a cogent piece on this subject. Corn Pone Opinions. It is definitely worth reading. Even if you disagree, you'll get a chuckle out of the first part of the piece. Here's the link. And, do slip in just to enjoy the classic humor of Mark Twain in the first couple paragraphs, even if you don't read the rest.

http://www.paulgraham.com/cornpone.html
 

TXOC16

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 4, 2016
Messages
111
Location
USA
I watched the video earlier and, quite frankly, I wish I had back the 15 minutes or so it took to do so. Although Crowder does do some decent stuff, this was not among it. Making ignorant, clueless hoplophobes look like ignorant, clueless hoplophobes is an easy task.
 

since9

Campaign Veteran
Joined
Jan 14, 2010
Messages
6,964
Location
Colorado Springs, Colorado, USA
I find it an indictment of the irrationality of too many with who I share this piece of North America. Mark Twain wrote a cogent piece on this subject. Corn Pone Opinions. It is definitely worth reading. Even if you disagree, you'll get a chuckle out of the first part of the piece. Here's the link. And, do slip in just to enjoy the classic humor of Mark Twain in the first couple paragraphs, even if you don't read the rest.

http://www.paulgraham.com/cornpone.html

Excellent resource, Citizen, and a wonderful explanation of the downward trend all societies tend to follow until beset by a perspective-changing calamity:

"A new thing in costume appears -- the flaring hoopskirt, for example -- and the passers-by are shocked, and the irreverent laugh. Six months later everybody is reconciled; the fashion has established itself; it is admired, now, and no one laughs. Public opinion resented it before, public opinion accepts it now, and is happy in it. Why? Was the resentment reasoned out? Was the acceptance reasoned out? No. The instinct that moves to conformity did the work. It is our nature to conform; it is a force which not many can successfully resist." - Mark Twain, Corn-Pone Opinions

But resist we must, for maintaining the high ground is an imperative in our very survival. Another had something similar to say, although his comment was more spiritual in nature. Nevertheless, the principal remains sound: "Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it. But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and only a few find it." - Jesus, Matthew 7:13-14
 

Lord Sega

Regular Member
Joined
Jul 10, 2010
Messages
311
Location
Warrenton, Oregon
One correction in the last paragraph of the OP.

Here's another beauty: "When Crowder makes the absurd claim that the AR-15 is used in upwards of "99.4% of mass shootings," most of the participants accept that statistic as true. In fact, only 3% of all criminal uses of guns actually involve rifles of any kind."

Yes, 99.4% is wack (on purpose), but the 3% comparrison is mixing apples / oranges... i.e. mass shootings / all criminal gun use.

I believe the 3% is from FBI statistics on homicides, but could be all gun crime. However that is not mass shootings.

From Gun-Facts: "A decade long study, covering 84 mass public shootings, found that pistols were used 60% of the time. Rifles were used 27%. But that is all types of rifles, and so-called “assault weapons” (such as the AR-15 or civilian versions of the AK-47) are a subset of these."
[United States Active Shooter Events from 2000 to 2010: Training and Equipment Implications, Advanced Law Enforcement Rapid Response Training (ALERRT),Texas State University, 2013]

From a Washington Post article: "Shooters brought an average of four weapons to each shooting; one carried seven guns."

So AR-15 types are a sub-set of the 27% rifles used in mass shootings, and then you have a mix of pistols and rifles brought and used in the mass shootings as well.
 

Freedom1Man

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 14, 2012
Messages
4,462
Location
Greater Eastside Washington
I watched the video earlier and, quite frankly, I wish I had back the 15 minutes or so it took to do so. Although Crowder does do some decent stuff, this was not among it. Making ignorant, clueless hoplophobes look like ignorant, clueless hoplophobes is an easy task.
You look at it the wrong way. He collected their names and addresses.

What better way to know the idiots than to know where to send informational pieces to.

Sent from my SM-G386T using Tapatalk
 

TXOC16

Regular Member
Joined
Feb 4, 2016
Messages
111
Location
USA
You look at it the wrong way. He collected their names and addresses.

What better way to know the idiots than to know where to send informational pieces to.

Frankly, I'm surprised some, if not most, of them didn't pass out at the mere sight of a "real" firearm.
 

Citizen

Founder's Club Member
Joined
Nov 15, 2006
Messages
18,269
Location
Fairfax Co., VA
Excellent resource, Citizen, and a wonderful explanation of the downward trend all societies tend to follow until beset by a perspective-changing calamity:
"A new thing in costume appears -- the flaring hoopskirt, for example -- and the passers-by are shocked, and the irreverent laugh. Six months later everybody is reconciled; the fashion has established itself; it is admired, now, and no one laughs. Public opinion resented it before, public opinion accepts it now, and is happy in it. Why? Was the resentment reasoned out? Was the acceptance reasoned out? No. The instinct that moves to conformity did the work. It is our nature to conform; it is a force which not many can successfully resist." - Mark Twain, Corn-Pone Opinions

But resist we must, for maintaining the high ground is an imperative in our very survival. Another had something similar to say, although his comment was more spiritual in nature. Nevertheless, the principal remains sound: "Enter through the narrow gate. For wide is the gate and broad is the road that leads to destruction, and many enter through it. But small is the gate and narrow the road that leads to life, and only a few find it." - Jesus, Matthew 7:13-14

Oh, my. Ain't that the truth. Some call it sin. Others call it harmful acts--whether against self or others. The irrefutable fact remains that, among all the possible actions in a given situation, only a narrow set of actions leads to life.

Ethics, mores, morals.

For example, support your friend by silence, and confirm him in his unethical course. You keep a friend, but pass up an opportunity to salvage his existence. Will you get another opportunity?

The number of options that leads genuinely to life for any given situation must necessarily be small.

The gate is small. I agree wholeheartedly.
 
Top