Some Bradyite chicklet was tryin' to come off all pseudo-conciliatory, holding out a faux ami olive branch in the form of twenty loaded questions addressed to us poor, 'tarded gunnies.*
Many of the thunderhood have snapped at that bait, often with wit and grace. Many did so in comments on the anti-gun blog that asked the question, which quickly resulted in the "reasoned discourse" that typifies antis: she edited and removed comments. Yawn.
Pretty much biz as usual. But that's not what I came here to talk about. Nope. I came to discuss debate.
Did your school have a debate team? A debate class? Do you know how you get good at it? Takes two things: you must know your subject and you have to practice. (It helps to think logically, too; while some, perhaps most, anti's prefer feeeeling to thinking, there's an occasional boojum among the snarks).
When you go debating an anti, you are teaching them. Knock it off! Address their questions and concerns, if you must, on your own blog where they are unlikely to go. In the spaces they control, you've got to cut them off at the knees. Don't touch their asinine points, don't give them new factiods to miscontrue or practice at framing their hoplophobic, nannying notions. Instead, hit our hard truths -- ask them Joe Huffman's Just One Question, ask why it is they don't want skinny cheerleaders, grannies and gayboys to be able to fight back when baddies try to beat them up, why a retired African-American man should be denied the right to defend his home and family from thugs. Make them confront their wickedness because the antis are in the wrong; they are against human rights and they empower thug rule, bullies, beatings. And we need to call 'em on it. Every time. Every damn time.
Ask them if they're still beating up human rights.
Don't give them a free education. They're not going to do anything good with it.
* One of her commenters suggested, in smug seriousness, that "there ought to be an IQ test " (and presumably a minimum score) before one could own guns, chortling, "That would eliminate most of the gun nuts right there!" Yeah? Bring it on! --And let's see your score, witling.
BUILDING A 1:1 BALUN
2 years ago
My actual tested IQ is 148. I can't stand the whole anti-gun talking point that all gun owners are ignorant mouth breathers.
I also don;t think the IQ test linked in your other post is very valid.
It isn't. But for me, it wasn't far off. Your "IQ" will vary with the test; I'm usually near 150.
"Don't debate them, you are only teaching them how to counter you," is certainly a concern. But I look at it this way. While it was on their turf it still wasn't done in a vacuum. We aren't going to change a Bardy's mind, or vice versa, but there were bound to be neutrals reading that. The way I see it there are only 2 results. Brady's turn off debate because they can't win the argument, or they lose. And other people see that and it persuades.
We in the thunderhood (LOVE that term) are also teaching each other this way. It's our debate practice too.
But yeah, your way is effective too. A coup de grace single argument point every time an anti shows themselves in public is very satisfying.
All good points. I never argue IQ as some of the lowest scoring people seem to exhibit the ability to think critically. If common sense were common everyone would have it.
I've ranted and yelled a bit on this more because it was so defective and and obvious classic usenet trolling (remember usenet?) style playing on that site. It was clear how the game was to be played and those that pointed outside her park were not limited to her defective world view
it's a pity we can't somehow arrange matters so their houses are the ones that home invaders find so attractive.
After having some druggie thug try to beat their door down, to steal their toys, money, beat them up for a thrill, rape their women and livestock, (Ask me, I find a nice female warthog more attractive than a liberal lefty female, but that's just me!) I think they might come round to our way of thinking.
Question is, do we want them as comrades once the harsh glare of reality penetrates their rosy worldview?
I think they should have a probationary period. Wherein Bobby and Tam could teach them manners.
Hi Roberta X,
Good post, good points.
I think it was Ayn Rand who used to warn about accepting your opponent's premises, i.e., giving them the home-field advantage. Rand was quick and bright, but even she could only reach the choir.
I've never been able to change anyone's mind on any topic, no matter how passionately I argued. It might be said that I'm not quick or bright, sadly true, but I usually bring ammo to the discussion. All in vain, 'cuz humans are fairly stubborn. Maybe our stubborn-ness was a survival mechanism long ago.
I take a slightly different approach to the Antis anymore. I ignore them, just as I ignore the rants of TreeHuggers, Truthers and everything the Anointed One spews from his mouth. They are all BrainWashed Pseudo Marxists when you get to their Core Beliefs, and I treat them as such, Fools who have joined the Cult of a Workers Paradise. I vote to keep them out of office, and stay Prepared if they ever try to use force against me and mine when they are in office. This saves me valuable time that I could be spending on doing Useful Things such as trying new foods, playing with my Pets, getting chores done, and trying to keep the Missus Happy. I think they have lost fight to "Win Hearts and Minds" this past
year, yet they'll be flapping around like a Decapitated Chicken for awhile. I'm saving my strength for later, in case they do cross the line or the Islamo-Fascists make a Big Push onto the U.S. Until then, enjoy a Good Book, spend time with loved ones, get some Trigger Time in, have some Fun and Don't Let the Bastards Grind You Down!
You cannot "change a paranoid's mind." They are afraid to change.
For the same reason, you cannot change an anti's mind, because no matter how many facts you put in front of them, they are more afraid of guns than they will ever be of the consequences of gun control.
The real tragedy is that fear of guns is a learned fear. And the teachers should bear the full consequences.
Debate is good keeps us sharp too. The post for the 20 questions has been closed for responses today 9/26. The lady states there was too much incoming for her to keep up with. That is reasonable. I suggested to her to pick out the best responder or solicit other gun blogers to a one on one discorse of 20 questions each with 24 hours to responed for each question. on both sides. that would be more manageable. Joe Huffman's Just One Question. Could be asked and answered or not. Your 150 +or- IQ should be up to the task?
Yeah -- if I cared to. I don't. Self-defense, like privacy, freedom of association, freedom of conscience and freedom of thought, is an inherent human right. The only people who think it is a matter for debate are those who do not recognize that right -- and they are no better than book-burners, witch-burners and cross-burners.
I don't debate commies, klansmen, nazis or anti-gunners, 'cos there is no debate: they're wrong and I don't give a fig how many trains -- or sheep -- they make run on time.
Great post Bobbi!
My SAT scores from 1967 (before they dumbed the test down) would just barely get me into Mensa, I have found out. Yup, I R Smart and I <3 gunz. Might be a bit autistic, too. Make the most of it, libtards!
Post a Comment