New Years party at my favorite liberal's..

[Concerned Citizen]

She is loud and loves to argue, And is completely anti gun. And yes I will be packing.
1 argument I don't have a lot of answers for, Is the need for Hi capacity magazines.

Can you quickly give me several arguments I can use against her?

 

[Jarhead77]

1) Range time costs...spend less time reloading mags and more time practicing...
2) Bad guys can show up in groups....
3) You are a bad shot and need as many chances as possible to stop the bad guy...SEE # 1

 

[hacksawfg]

If you haven't broken any laws, so who gives a rat's behind what you own? They don't ban Corvette's because people speed in them, and you can still drive one even after you get a ticket.

It's not about "need", it's about not restricting rights of law-abiding citizens.

Alternatively, you could wait until she takes out her cell-phone, yank it from her hand and tell her that if she desires to restrict you to weapons in use when the Constitution was written, then she could either send them a letter or take a horse-drawn carriage to go talk to them as was also the norm in that era. Might get you kicked out of the party though.

 

[armedindy]

i was thinking about it, and im no professor, but when "they" ask (as they inevitably will) "why does anyone need a 30 rnd magazine?" im pretty sure that is some sort of fallacy.. its not addressing the actualy argument and is basically irrelivent to the whole situation...i hope that someone more scholarly than myself will come by and piece that response together better!

 

[rockhopper46038]

I wouldn't bother to engage. You won't change their mind anyway. You might try something along the lines of "Pray God, woman - why do YOU need to speak more than 30 words to me tonight?"

 

[Sausagecake]

To me the definition of high capacity seems arbitrary. Why is it that anything above a 10 round magazine considered high capacity in the first place? What is the basis for the cutoff?

 

[femurphy77]

It's your right to carry as many rounds as you want, just as it is her right to be an annoying. . . .

 

[FMJ]

Its not about "NEED" its about RIGHTS as a free born, law abiding citizens to keep and bear arms...ANY and ALL arms that we see fit.

Our rights are NOT granted by the government. These are NATURAL rights. Rights EVERY human is born with, among these are the right to feel safe and secure in ones home, property, possessions and country.

EVERY nation that has been disarmed has been subjected to tyranny.

Do NOT fall for the England or Australia arguments...we are in America and have more than enough evidence HERE to shoot down ANY flimsy anti argument about safety.

If these people want to act so educated, ask them to begin reading the works of Jefferson, Franklin and Madison. Arm yourself with quotes from these champions of liberty.

Federalist papers and the Virginia and Kentucky resolutions from Jefferson are awesome.

 

[SPUTTER]

Sounds good rockhopper, but must will not change unless something happens in there life time and usually that would be bad. I know people whom would never pick up a gun until something happened then all of a sudden, i have my license and a gun and ask now what, CRAZY.

 

[FMJ]

I wouldn't bother to engage. You won't change their mind anyway. You might try something along the lines of "Pray God, woman - why do YOU need to speak more than 30 words to me tonight?"

i LOVE to engage the antis....always use use sound reasoned arguments... Debate, NEVER argue. Newver get mad, never let emotion win out.

YOU Have the facts and figure on YOUR side...USE them!

They dont use logic, they use emotion and feeling...use THAT against them.

This is easy for me to say tho, since its one of my favorite past times and passions is creating liberal GUNNERs out of liberal ANTI gunners and have been doing it for over 2 decades.

 

[teddy12b]

The arguement I usually use for high cap mags:

Depending on the source usually properly trained police make about a 20% hit ratio for every bullet they fire. Assuming that you could equally as well as a properly trained cop it would take you 5 rounds to make one hit. Most of the statistics show that you'll need more than one hit to put down a violent attacker, so right off the bat that puts you at needing a 10rd mag for a single bad guy. If you are going to have the misfortune of facing two bad guys you're looking at dumping 20 rounds of ammo to make the 4 hits needed. At this point you could tell your favorite liberal that you're doing them a favor by only carrying a gun that holds (xx) number of rounds.

After saying all of that ask them to do some scholarly google searches for police shooting statistics and keep reinforcing that these numbers are averages for properly trained police.

The best way I have found to stump the anti's is to absolutely keep a clear and well thought out attitude. Speak in numbers that indicate having done research on your part and challenge them to find better statistics. It's one of those discussions that your really have to restrain your passion and tendency to get upset and just layout facts. Also make a point of listening to their arguements and countering with facts.

 

[iwearcowboyboots]

She is loud and loves to argue, And is completely anti gun. And yes I will be packing.
1 argument I don't have a lot of answers for, Is the need for Hi capacity magazines.

Can you quickly give me several arguments I can use against her?

The only thing that comes to mind is "Thank you for inviting me into your home." or maybe explain to everyone that your aren't having any drinks tonight because 8 to 10 times as many kids are killed each year in DUI accidents each years as compared to the number children who die because of firearms.

 

[JollyMon]

Why do police carry Glocks with 17+1 capacity and extra magazines? Because you might need to defend yourself against multiple moving targets. Same reason for civilians. One bullet doesn't always mean a neutralized threat.

 

[ViperJock]

I usually just respond with; "It's still a pretty much free country so **** off." Of course, I've never been known for my tact...

 

[Rsmith]

first they will take hi capacity mags.
then standard capacity.
then revolvers.
Then we will all have single shots.

 

[IndyTacoma]

No matter what you say you will not change the mind of a ultra liberal. I worked with one and nearly everday we had talks and he never changed my mind and I never changes his no matter the facts or statistics I had to back my thoughts. You never know the size of the threat you will encounter or what kind of drugs they could be on.

 

[Concerned Citizen]

Oh, I have to engage her. It's one of my favorite pastimes. And its never just the two of us, there's usually 5-8 people listening in. They will sometimes get a comment in, but usually just listen. I generally smash her arguments with reason. I will never change her mind, but it's the people listening in that I'm going for.

 

[Hookeye]

Emotionalist excusive mindset people tend to form violent mobs.

 

[FortWayneGunfighter]

She is loud and loves to argue, And is completely anti gun. And yes I will be packing.
1 argument I don't have a lot of answers for, Is the need for Hi capacity magazines.

Can you quickly give me several arguments I can use against her?

Cost too much to replace them with "low capacity" non standard mags, especially when the pistol comes standard with those "high capacity" mags.

 

[Apistoman]

Define "high capacity". For an AR 30 round are standard capacity.