"Gunsplaining" is apparently offensive to liberal gun grabbers.

As the name indicates, this is the place for gun-related political discussions. It is not open to other political topics.

Moderators: carlson1, Charles L. Cotton

User avatar

Topic author
Vol Texan
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 2
Posts: 1775
Joined: Mon Mar 12, 2012 2:18 am
Location: Houston
Contact:

Re: "Gunsplaining" is apparently offensive to liberal gun grabbers.

#16

Post by Vol Texan » Wed Mar 07, 2018 11:33 pm

AndyC wrote:
Vol Texan wrote:One great retort in the comments section was as follows:
Well, we shouldn't HAVE to be anal about terminology, but ever since the Left deliberately lied about terminology (in order to confuse the ignorant into supporting bans on what they honestly think are machine-guns), we've had to fight back:

"Assault weapons' menacing looks, coupled with the public's confusion over fully-automatic machine guns versus semi-automatic assault weapons --anything that looks like a machine gun is assumed to be a machine gun-- can only increase the chance of public support for restrictions on these weapons." - Josh Sugarman of the anti-gun Violence Policy Center.

So yes, facts matter - tough that you don't like them, but we're going to keep hammering them home so that we're all on the same page, despite the attempts from anti-gun people to control the narrative.
Thank you - that was me :mrgreen:
Actually, I thought it was, but I didn't want to be presumptuous. I recognized the first name, last initial, and the common-sense approach.
Your number one option for personal security is a lifelong commitment to avoidance, deterrence, and de-escalation.
When those fail, aim for center mass.

www.HoustonLTC.com: Texas LTC Instructor & NRA Pistol Instructor | www.Texas3006.com Moderator | Armored Cav. | Tennessee Squire

User avatar

Liberty
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 2
Posts: 5745
Joined: Mon Jul 03, 2006 8:49 pm
Location: Galveston
Contact:

Re: "Gunsplaining" is apparently offensive to liberal gun grabbers.

#17

Post by Liberty » Thu Mar 08, 2018 6:39 am

The thing is that the banners want to ban something they have to be specific and technical to describe exactly what they want to ban. The "I know it when I see it" doesn't work well in our legal system. The Mad Mommy and company goals aren't to eliminate a single rifle platform but to eliminate as broad of a base as they possibly can. The current democratic gun ban bill is proof of this scope creep. Which basically strives to eliminate every modern gun. except mouseguns, and ancient designs like 1911s and revolvers. Soon they will go after those.

If they are going to call for the elimination of something they need to explain what the features are that they want to eliminate. How does a shroud or adjustable stock make a weapon more dangerous to the public? Why is a Glock 17 more of a public threat than a 1911 platform? To understand all this and the targets of the banners we need to get technical. They certainly have in their bills.

I wrote a post in my blog, that does 'gunsplain' a little about the AR15 and I try to dispell some of the mistruths about the AR-15 and related platforms.
Liberty''s Blog
"Today, we need a nation of Minutemen, citizens who are not only prepared to take arms, but citizens who regard the preservation of freedom as the basic purpose of their daily life and who are willing to consciously work and sacrifice for that freedom." John F. Kennedy


chasfm11
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 3255
Joined: Thu Apr 15, 2010 4:01 pm
Location: Northern DFW

Re: "Gunsplaining" is apparently offensive to liberal gun grabbers.

#18

Post by chasfm11 » Thu Mar 08, 2018 8:55 am

Liberty wrote:The thing is that the banners want to ban something they have to be specific and technical to describe exactly what they want to ban. The "I know it when I see it" doesn't work well in our legal system. The Mad Mommy and company goals aren't to eliminate a single rifle platform but to eliminate as broad of a base as they possibly can. The current democratic gun ban bill is proof of this scope creep. Which basically strives to eliminate every modern gun. except mouseguns, and ancient designs like 1911s and revolvers. Soon they will go after those.

If they are going to call for the elimination of something they need to explain what the features are that they want to eliminate. How does a shroud or adjustable stock make a weapon more dangerous to the public? Why is a Glock 17 more of a public threat than a 1911 platform? To understand all this and the targets of the banners we need to get technical. They certainly have in their bills.

I wrote a post in my blog, that does 'gunsplain' a little about the AR15 and I try to dispell some of the mistruths about the AR-15 and related platforms.
In my recent experience in discussing the school shootings with gun banners, they have no interest in the specifics of anything. I tried to talk about the difference between .223 and .308 in lethality. They don't care. They see that the ARs have been used in crimes and that is all they need. Ban anything that has been used in crimes. When I brought up that handguns were use significantly more in crimes than rifles, their response was "ban those, too." Their wishes are being carried out by the introduction of the semi-auto ban in the US Congress. When I suggested that the Connecticut ban on ARs was less than successful, the response was that the National Guard should have been sent door to door. They are rabid. They want the 2nd Amendment repealed. When I reminded of the processes to amend the Constitution, they had no interest in that information either. Congress should be able to do away with the 2nd Amendment. Reality is not strong in that group.
6/23-8/13/10 -51 days to plastic
Dun Spiro Spero

User avatar

Liberty
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 2
Posts: 5745
Joined: Mon Jul 03, 2006 8:49 pm
Location: Galveston
Contact:

Re: "Gunsplaining" is apparently offensive to liberal gun grabbers.

#19

Post by Liberty » Thu Mar 08, 2018 1:32 pm

Our mission isn't to convert the gun banners, Their minds are all ready made up. I just hope to explain to our side, the truth and the unreasonableness of the banners
Liberty''s Blog
"Today, we need a nation of Minutemen, citizens who are not only prepared to take arms, but citizens who regard the preservation of freedom as the basic purpose of their daily life and who are willing to consciously work and sacrifice for that freedom." John F. Kennedy


BBYC
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 2
Posts: 378
Joined: Mon Sep 11, 2017 12:32 pm

Re: "Gunsplaining" is apparently offensive to liberal gun grabbers.

#20

Post by BBYC » Thu Mar 08, 2018 1:42 pm

Liberty wrote:The thing is that the banners want to ban something they have to be specific and technical to describe exactly what they want to ban.
Semiautomatic firearms capable of accepting a detachable magazine.

To start.
God, grant me serenity to accept the things I can't change
Courage to change the things I can
And the firepower to make a difference.

User avatar

rtschl
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 726
Joined: Thu Jul 02, 2009 1:50 pm
Location: Fort Worth

Re: "Gunsplaining" is apparently offensive to liberal gun grabbers.

#21

Post by rtschl » Thu Mar 08, 2018 4:41 pm

I saw someone on Twitter quote the following to one of the offended "journalists". It was attributed to someone else (popehat), so I searched for it and found it, but it does not meet our guidelines due to language. But a snippet of the quote is below and you can read the whole article if you want. Best analogy I have seen about wrong terminology and this is over two years old:

It's hard to grasp the reaction of someone who understands gun terminology to someone who doesn't. So imagine we're going through one of our periodic moral panics over dogs and I'm trying to persuade you that there should be restrictions on, say, Rottweilers.

Me: I don't want to take away dog owners' rights. But we need to do something about Rottweilers.
You: So what do you propose?
Me: I just think that there should be some sort of training or restrictions on owning an attack dog.
You: Wait. What's an "attack dog?"
Me: You know what I mean. Like military dogs.
You: Huh? Rottweilers aren't military dogs. In fact "military dogs" isn't a thing. You mean like German Shepherds?
Me: Don't be ridiculous. Nobody's trying to take away your German Shepherds. But civilians shouldn't own fighting dogs...


popehat.com/2015/12/07/talking-productively-about-guns
Ron
NRA Member

User avatar

Pawpaw
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 3
Posts: 5972
Joined: Sat Jun 19, 2010 11:16 am
Location: Hunt County

Re: "Gunsplaining" is apparently offensive to liberal gun grabbers.

#22

Post by Pawpaw » Fri Mar 09, 2018 11:24 am

In Defense of 'Gunsplaining'
Pointing out inaccuracies in your opponent's arguments is a cynical ploy to stop discussion. Or so I gather from Adam Weinstein, who just published a Washington Post op-ed taking gun control critics to task for "gunsplaining"—Weinstein's name for when one is "harangued with the pedantry of the more-credible-than-thou firearms owner" after one makes some incidental factual error about guns, such as calling AR-15s "high-powered" or confusing clips with magazines.

"Gunsplaining," Weinstein declares, "is always done in bad faith. Like mansplaining, it's less about adding to the discourse than smothering it." Were it not for those condescending gun snobs picking apart every rhetorical misstep, we would spend less time arguing over little details and more time having reasoned discussions over just which firearms restrictions we should implement next.
There's the problem. Laws need to be made with facts in mind, not rhetoric. :mad5
Facts are stubborn things; and whatever may be our wishes, our inclinations, or the dictates of our passions, they cannot alter the state of facts and evidence. - John Adams

NRA Benefactor Life Member


MechAg94
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 1584
Joined: Tue Dec 09, 2008 10:28 pm

Re: "Gunsplaining" is apparently offensive to liberal gun grabbers.

#23

Post by MechAg94 » Sat Mar 10, 2018 9:07 am

I was thinking that gun people correct each other on terminology all the time. People who are ignorant of guns getting upset about that is just funny.


nimravus01
Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 137
Joined: Mon Jan 04, 2016 9:26 pm

Re: "Gunsplaining" is apparently offensive to liberal gun grabbers.

#24

Post by nimravus01 » Sat Mar 10, 2018 9:15 am

MechAg94 wrote:I was thinking that gun people correct each other on terminology all the time.
True. That reminds me of a time I was at a commercial range shooting my M1 Garand. I was looking for one of the clips that got away from me after it was ejected. The RO asked what I was doing, and when I said I was looking for my clip, he smugly replied, "you mean magazine?" I said, "no, I mean clip."

User avatar

spectre
Member
Posts in topic: 1
Posts: 177
Joined: Sun Jun 18, 2017 11:44 am

Re: "Gunsplaining" is apparently offensive to liberal gun grabbers.

#25

Post by spectre » Sat Mar 10, 2018 10:48 am

It makes you wonder if they would correct somebody who called the morning after pill a partial birth abortion.
When plunder becomes a way of life for a group of men in a society,
over the course of time they create for themselves a legal system that authorizes it
and a moral code that glorifies it. - Frédéric Bastiat

User avatar

The Annoyed Man
Senior Member
Posts in topic: 2
Posts: 23669
Joined: Wed Jan 16, 2008 12:59 pm
Location: North Richland Hills, Texas
Contact:

Re: "Gunsplaining" is apparently offensive to liberal gun grabbers.

#26

Post by The Annoyed Man » Sun Mar 11, 2018 9:41 am

I’m beyond caring if my speech offends a liberal who is ignorant about what they’re talking about. For decades, they have not cared one whit if their speed offends me. Why should I give a cup of warm spit if educating them offends them?
Give me Liberty, or I'll get up and get it myself.—Hookalakah Meshobbab
I don't carry because of the odds, I carry because of the stakes.—The Annoyed Boy

Post Reply

Return to “Gun and/or Self-Defense Related Political Issues”