Compare and contrast

You want to know the real reason why the pro-gun side is winning the battle for hearts and minds in the US – why over 70% of Americans believe that the 2nd Amendment confers and individual right to keep and bear arms, and why the Supreme Court upheld that?

A big part of it is that pro-gun people are willing to have open debate, right out there in the air. You can compare and contrast the fact that the Students for Concealed Carry’s first annual convention featured Paul Helmke. That’s righ, SCCC invited Helmke to be on one of their panels; admittedly he spent most of the time getting his ass handed to him by John Lott, but that’s okay. The fact that pro-gun people aren’t afraid of our positions and are more than willing to invite anti-gun activists to argue the issue on its merits speaks a lot about our movement.

Meanwhile, anti-gun people ban pro-gun activists from commenting, delete comments from their blogs, and generally avoid open debate like cockroaches avoid the light. I will give Paul Helmke props in that he was willing to attend that function, that was pretty out of character for an anti-gunner to do that.

That’s the big difference though – anti-gun people will constantly and consistently attempt to turn the argument about guns into America into an emotional issue, citing X,000 people killed with guns every year, or talking about blood in the streets, etc. Meanwhile, we argue with facts, statistics; our debate thrives in the open because it’s based on logic and reason, and not on appeals to emotion.

Update: Hello, Instapundit readers! If you’re interested, tonight at 11pm Eastern time, check out Gun Nuts Radio!

30 thoughts on “Compare and contrast”

  1. That’s amazing that Paul Helmke bothered to show. I’ve commented on his garbage at HuffPo more than I care to admit, and not once have I ever seen a response from him.

  2. Isn’t this ALWAYS the result of any issue between leftists and normal people? Leftists only smear, hide, change the subject, act emotionally, etc. It is remarkable that they have gotten away with this as long as they have.

    If you don’t want to argue with a leftist and merely want to reduce them to tears, simply show them this funny, superb picture.

  3. TO: Caleb, et al.
    RE: Typical Behavior….

    “Meanwhile, anti-gun people ban pro-gun activists from commenting, delete comments from their blogs, and generally avoid open debate like cockroaches avoid the light. I will give Paul Helmke props in that he was willing to attend that function, that was pretty out of character for an anti-gunner to do that.” — Caleb

    ….of ‘Progressives’.

    Unfortunately, there are a number of people who consider themselves ‘conservative’ who do the same on their blogs. There’s an interesting correlation of beliefs and behaviors between them and the so-called ‘Progressives’.

    Regards,

    Chuck(le)
    [Progressive is a one-word oxymoron.]

  4. I think gun controls fails because overtime it becomes impossible to disguise it intrinsic elitist nature. People support gun control because they believe their fellow citizens to stupid and irresponsible to keep and bear arms safely. That sneering elitism inevitably comes out in their rhetoric and people feel justly insulted.

  5. believe their fellow citizens to stupid and irresponsible to keep and bear arms safely

    Actually, I believe that many people are indeed stupid and irresponsible. I just don’t think that this means they forfeit their rights.

    I would love a magic wand that made bad stuff not happen, which is how I think pro-big brother types think of legislation, and if I was stupid enough to believe that refusing others the right to speak was an argument for my side, I might support that, too. I try not to deceive myself any more than is avoidable, though.

    The biggest problem ‘lefties’ have is that they really believe that controlling the narrative is the same as controlling the truth.

  6. “The biggest problem ‘lefties’ have is that they really believe that controlling the narrative is the same as controlling the truth.”

    Sadly that HAS worked for decades at a time, before the truth comes out. Historical examples include :

    1) Nazi Germany
    2) Mao’s China, which to this day, has successfully prevented most Chinese from learning about Tianenmen Square, etc.
    3) The Left’s narrative about Iraq, which many ordinary people have accepted as the truth (lies about WMD’s, no UN approval, no ties to terror, etc.).

  7. TO: Dave Eaton
    RE: Control of Information

    “The biggest problem ‘lefties’ have is that they really believe that controlling the narrative is the same as controlling the truth.” — Dave Eaton

    As an old colonel once told this, then young, captain….

    There are two ways to exercise power.

    The first is to make decisions for people who would be better off making them for themselves. The second is to withhold information from people that would allow them to make better decisions for themselves.

    Regards,

    Chuck(le)
    [What they ARE telling can be important. What they are NOT telling you can be vital. — CBPelto]

  8. Broadsword-

    This echoes a conversation I had in the last week when someone said that I had no feelings. I countered that I do, but I just don’t make decisions with them when I can help it.

  9. Don’t underestimate the role of pacifist belief, of both the religious and secular varieties, on the anti-gun side. That would explain their unwillingness to debate the matter – you can’t have a real debate between a position of reason and a matter of conviction and faith.

    Not to mention that devout pacifists have a vested self-interest in imposing that same pacifism on the rest of society. In an environment where people are generally free to defend themselves from violence with violence, conscientious objectors to this are by definition much easier targets for criminals than the rest of us. Even “free-riding” on their armed fellow citizens is not an acceptable solution for such people, because that would amount to benefiting from those fellow citizens’ evil, sinful conduct. A disarmed society may not be any safer from crime overall, but it does distribute that risk evenly among pacifists and non-pacifists alike.

  10. TO: Joshua
    RE: I Think….

    “….you can’t have a real debate between a position of reason and a matter of conviction and faith.” — Joshua

    …you are VERY mistaken in that. If you doubt that, visit MY blog.

    Regards,

    Chuck(le)
    [Question with boldness even the existence of a God; because, if there be one, he must more approve of the homage of reason, than that of blind-folded fear. — Thomas Jefferson]

  11. TO: Joshua
    RE: Disarming ALL the Sheeple

    “A disarmed society may not be any safer from crime overall, but it does distribute that risk evenly among pacifists and non-pacifists alike.” — Joshua

    True. At least amongst the sheeple. The wolves, on the other hand, have a target-rich environment.

    Regards,

    Chuck(le)
    [Among other evils which being unarmed brings you, it causes you to be despised. — Niccolo Machiavelli]

  12. Honestly, I think the biggest reason the left doesn’t engage in open debate is because, well, they’re getting pounded – they can’t stand up to facts when all you have is dick jokes and lies.

  13. “Don’t underestimate the role of pacifist belief, of both the religious and secular varieties, on the anti-gun side.”

    – – –

    The essential pacifist – and I get this from a friend who claims to be an “essential pacifist”, so it must be true – holds that the offensive use of force should be quelled, stifled, stopped, banished – but that any reasonable use of force that is aimed at stopping someone’s offensive use of force against anyone else is entirely allowable, and does not fall within their prohibition. So, you can stop the bully beating up the kid by punching the bully, and you can send an army into a country to kick out the neighboring army that invaded for conquest, and you can kill killers if that’s the only way to make them stop.

    And it’s a very tricky, very manipulable line that seems to just beg for overreaching and mis-defining and . . . which is why I think that it’s ultimately the best philosophy, because simple, bright-line tests are mostly known for their unjust failures.

  14. It’s not just guns. The default approach of the Left is to suppress disagreement with their positions. When Rush first came out, they attacked his advertisers and tried to shut him down. During the Democrat convention in New York, they picketed Fox News. They attack conservative speakers at college campuses. Ann Coulter points out that liberals use people to convey their radical views who can not be politely challenged, like the Jersey Girls and Cindy Sheehan. The Democrats are trying to pass laws to shut down right wing talk radio.

    The Left is simply against free speech for anyone but themselves. In this, they are thoroughly anti-American.

  15. Hi there brave folks! I have lived under that s***t (communofasism) for the best part of my life, so i have no ilusions what is it all about, and how it works. Lefitsm is all about stealing other people’s money. If you are wondering why Leftoids supress free information, stifle open exchange of views, I have a question for you: Since when a thief is actin in an openness? Since when a burglar is trying to enter you house vie a front door? Since when a pick-pocket is informing you that he is attempting to grab your purse? Since when a back-stabber is signalling his intention to stab you? Since when a tape-worm is prone to a rational argument which would pusrue it to leave your digestive system? And finally, tell me; since when the democracy means that two drug addicts, or two alcoholics, or a dole-bludgers, or a drug addict, an acloholic, a dole-bludger and his “caretaker” have right to believe that because there are two of them, they can outvote you and take your money?

  16. TO: Caleb, et al.
    RE: True

    “…they can’t stand up to facts when all you have is dick jokes and lies.” — Caleb

    Funny you should mention that. i’ve encountered a passel of this sort over at The Atlantic, discussing the idea that was floated about how Obama could be AntiChrist.

    Low and behold, they began waving that first part all over the place.

    Regards,

    Chuck(le)
    [The Lawyers Rule:

    [1] If the Law is against you, argue the facts.
    [2] If the facts are against you, argue the Law.
    [3] If the Law and the facts are against you, call the other side names.

    The Official Rules: A Compendium of Truths and Laws for Living]

  17. “A disarmed society may not be any safer from crime overall, but it does distribute that risk evenly among pacifists and non-pacifists alike.” –Joshua

    “The inherent vice of capitalism is the unequal sharing of the blessings. The inherent blessing of socialism is the equal sharing of misery.” –Winston Churchill

    “Ann Coulter points out that liberals use people to convey their radical views who can not be politely challenged, like the Jersey Girls and Cindy Sheehan.” –Tantor

    Let’s not forget Sarah Brady’s favorite pull-toy, Jim.

  18. One of the things I observed when blogging was new, before Kos and the rest, was that conservative bloggers sometimes invited liberal bloggers to join them on their blogs as co-bloggers. Not just guest-posts, but a regular forum for blogging.

    But I never saw a liberal blogger invite a conservative to join as a guest-host.

  19. TO: All
    RE: The ‘Fairness’ Doctrine, Anyone?

    If THISE is accurate, one would think that the so-called ‘liberals’ would be required to have conservative co-authors on their blogs.

    Personally, I find this approach ‘fairness’ reprehensible. BUT I suspect that the short-sighted ‘liberals’ may suddenly realize they’re about to let the dejinn out of a bottle, and that dejinn will make them VERY unhappy.

    Therefore, I doubt if this is going to come to pass….unless it is so contorted that anyone can make anything they want out of it. And that would render it useless.

    Regards,

    Chuck(le)
    [ When he [the so-called ‘liberal’] speaketh fairness, believe him not: for there are seven abominations in his heart. — Proverbs (updated and paraphrased)]

  20. TO: All
    RE: That Link….

    ….in my previoius item doesn’t stand out very well.

    Here It Is Again…..

    Sorry about that. Maybe the CSS for links should be tweaked to stand out a bit more than the regular text here.

    Regards,

    Chuck(le)
    [Good user interface is the hobgoblin of blogging.]

  21. TO: Caleb
    RE: [OT] CSS for Links

    I prefer bolded and highly contrasting colors. I avoid underlines as I think that styling is important for other uses on the blog; denoting section titles in a lengthy item.

    Regards,

    Chuck(le)
    [There is a method to this madness. Or there SHOULD be. — CBPelto ]

  22. TO: Caleb
    RE: [OT] CSS for Links, Part 2

    MUCH better.

    Thanks,

    Chuck(le)
    P.S. A bit more ‘brightness’ on the hover-over-link if you please; cherry red as opposed to dark burgundy.

  23. It’s disgusting how brain-washedly polarized you all are on political issues. Maybe you should look at things issue-by-issue instead of saying “REPUBLUCANS LIEK GUNS SO IM REPUBLUCAN LOL.” Defining your entire political stance based on a single issue is just moronic, and blaming the “elite left” for all your woes is equally dumb.

    My point is this: Both sides of the political spectrum have their idiots; it’s your duty as an American to NOT be blinded by partisan rhetoric. Quit being so goddamn right-wing JUST because you like guns!

  24. Leon,

    You’re the only one who said anything like that. Personally, I’m a Republican because I like guns, I am pro-life, I’m fiscally conservative, I don’t like government healthcare…but I guess I’m just another brainwashed zombie.

    Most of my readers don’t define their political stances based on one issue, they make the decision to be conservative or liberal based on an entire set of values.

    In fact, I don’t agree with my party all the time. I wish they’d stop trying to ban gay marriage, for instance.

Comments are closed.