How to Talk With People Who Are Wrong About Guns, Part 1 | CCM

[Dawn]

I argue gun rights as a hobby, and I work hard to be a credible voice in the discussion and to help others along as I go. Although us gun-rights advocates are holding the line on gun rights in Congress, we seem to be struggling in overall cultural perception, which we will feel in future elections. We are up against a highly organized and disciplined strategic communications campaign, and we often aren’t getting our side of the story out.

---

This is a companion discussion topic for the original entry at https://www.usconcealedcarry.com/blog/listen-to-me-how-to-talk-with-people-who-are-wrong-part-1/

[Greg35]

You mean like this…

Handgun ownership is a ‘major risk factor’ for suicide

People who do not disseminate facts and analyze will actually take this pablum as gospel.
Instead of debating/arguing and correcting fallacies of logic with facts, there needs to be another angle to expose these falacies and manipulations.
I just dont know the answer just yet.

I do like the idea of watching these media outlets to see who advertises on them and informing them: It is the opinion of myself and my peers that the media you have chosen to advertise on supports views counter to the constitution of the United States. We/I will now intentionally avoid the purchase of your products as you are funding these anti-American views with your advertising dollars.

[Ouade5]

Like the article says, " People Have to Want to Listen."

We can spout all most significant, well-supported facts we want, but unless the audience cares, you’re wasting your breath. On one hand, this means you shouldn’t waste your time if the audience is hostile. Nothing good will come of it. On the other hand, it means you have to be prepared when you do find a receptive audience, and you have to check your own attitude at the door so that you don’t convert them into a hostile audience.

[Greg35]

In the end ‘right’ or ‘wrong’ will not decide the day.
Victory will go to the best organized and best funded…

[Brian139]

We as gun owners are facing an uphill battle because the enemy controls the media and in the vast majority of the time, we are arguing with people who have no experience with guns and firearms and thus have no vested interest in finding out the truth. It is “us” the responsible gun owner arguing against a person who probably really doesn’t care one way or the other deep down, but have been taught by the media guns are scary and the only people who have guns are game law breaking rednecks and criminals. The collective “We” can give all the real facts we want, but if that person is not interested in listening, then there is no point in arguing. In this day and age, too many people have been taught and conditioned to hold on to their beliefs, even in the face of facts.

So, how do you change the conversation to something constructive? Invite them to go shooting. Stop the argument, stop the rhetoric going back and forth. It will catch them off guard and will now reroute the conversation into something constructive because then you are no longer talking about if guns are good or bad, but if they say yes, it is now how to use it and be safe.

We know that most anti-gun people are just ignorant of the facts. On a side note, this is why we need to be very careful about new people we might see at the gun stores and ranges. Don’t belittle them, be helpful and constructive. Chances are, its a new shooter, especially in the last couple months when all these anti-gun people suddenly decided they needed a gun and were shocked to find out that the lies from the media regarding how easy it was for anyone and everyone to get a gun was total BS. Keep in mind that noobie probably got all their gun handling instruction from movies and the media. So cut them some slack and help them constructively. We need them to stay gun owners and have a positive experience. Now, to get out of this rabbit hole and back on topic.

Most anti-gun people just need an opportunity to face their fear and see and try a gun. And it is not a political thing. We can debate about the validity of the hate crime terminology in another conversation, but how in the world does a member of any group for instance, that can have a crime committed against them potentially considered a hate crime be against gun ownership? Media brainwash.

So call the anti-gun person out, invite them shooting. And don’t give them a .44 mag because you think its funny. Show them how to be safe, don’t overwhelm them with instruction, take your easiest to shoot gun and make it as fun as possible. The instruction will come later. Just let them satisfy their curiosity in a fun and safe way and you will be surprised how you can change the conversation. I shoot at least once a week, more if I can get the time, and am always looking for a chance to introduce someone new.

Also, this pandemic and the riots of the last week are also a perfect chance to potentially find an opening with an anti-gunner to change their mind.

[CascadiaNow]

I love the spirit of the article. I live in a deep blue state and have these conversations a lot. I would add a couple of other points to what’s suggested here:

1. There are many more than two sides. There is a lot of nuance between “pro-gun” and “anti-gun,” where polls show, for example, that most gun owners support things like universal background checks or carefully crafted red flag laws. Being careful about how we label each other helps us to find common ground.
2. In the same vein, how you label the “other” sets the tone for the conversation. I’d argue that “people who are wrong about guns,” is less productive than “people who have different views about guns.”. Labeling people who disagree with you as “the enemy” is not only not productive, in my mind, it is just plain wrong.
3. “If you want to be understood, seek first to understand.” This lesson from Steven Covey is endlessly useful. If you start these tough conversations by listening — really listening, from the heart — chances are you will be listened to in turn.
4. Start from shared values. Dividing us into “pro-“ or “anti-“ gun misses the point. All of us are “pro-safety.” Starting from that fundamental core value and establishing what we share then allows for a more productive conversation about where we might diverge on strategy for being safe.

I’ve said it before elsewhere: I’ve lived in red, blue, and purple states, and I’ve served with people of all political stripes. I’ve generally found good, thoughtful, patriotic people on all sides, and think that most people tend way more towards the center than folks on the extremes would have us believe. Finding common ground may feel like it takes more work, but it is ultimately more gratifying and longer lasting.

[William301]

I have a question if anyone knows the Illinois law a bit better there is only one sign to ban conceal carry from an establishment out side of common court municipal liquor operation and medical establishments among other things. If the business you work at has a weapon policy in their hand book against weapons such as guns knifes or blades. Yet do not use the proper signs to uphold the pursuant law 430 ILCS 66/65 with the proper size pistol and border. Can it be upheld or is it even legal to make someone sign the right away without following the proper process? The first sign is the company I worked for not the proper sign.

[Dawn]

Regarding sign laws in IL:

430 ILCS 66/  Firearm Concealed Carry Act.

For a less legalese version:
https://www.usconcealedcarry.com/resources/ccw_reciprocity_map/il-gun-laws/

And also: Image 2020-07-17 at 3.20.26 PM

If you’re asking if the company who states in their handbook that they do not allow weapons can fire you if you have these weapons, there’s probably a good chance they can fire you. I’m not sure what IL’s qualifications are for firing someone. Wisconsin is an at will state, they do not have to give you a reason to fire you.

Can you be brought up on legal charges? Not sure. Can they fire you for going against your employee handbook, there’s a good chance they can.

[William301]

Thanks for taking the time dawn again as everyone els I appreciate tour help. I’ve been looking more and more at the 430 act and listening to it while I’m doing other things. No legally so far I have not found a prosecutable reason but as everyone has said and I agree is that Illinois is also a hire at will fire at will wether or not I would get unemployment would be a question but as for my safety I think a pocket holster and a revolver may be my best options while maintaining state and federal laws here in Illinois while creating the least risk of visibility on a day to day basis. Although I’m still going to discuss this with my lawyer I just wanted to bounce the idea around and see what the community has to say on these issues.