So we need a term to acknowledge your irrational cowardice & irresponsibility towards self defense.
Lo! Jeff Cooper hath delivered.....
"Hoplophobe"
Hoplophobia - Wikipedia
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Dick's and Hypocrites
- Thread starter Wirey
- Start date
Lo! Jeff Cooper hath delivered.....
"Hoplophobe"
Hoplophobia - Wikipedia
Cute.
If you want me to explain why I think your position is irrational, I'd be happy to do it.
You've been trying to all along.
And I've reciprocated for all the hoplophobes.
Can you point to what you think is straw?
You probably noticed the poll I did regarding gun stance. The truth is that people mainly want “reasonable” restrictions and that’s both conservatives and liberals. Your hoplophobe argument is like the “it’s cause they look scary” argument, it’s strawman. I just saw a video this morning being spread on social media making that same argument. Most people advocating reasonable restrictions are actually gun owners, I did a poll on that too some time ago.
No, it really is a problem that hoplophobes dislike "scary looking" weapons.
This is supported by their fixation upon the AR-15, while entirely overlooking
guns which function similarly, but look less military, eg, Ruger Mini 14, M1A.
But even so, it's not a "straw man" because it's not an argument. It's just
an explanation for the hoplophobe's mistaken focus. And it's an admonission
to look at an entire class of weapons based upon function, not brand & model.
I've advocated a lot of reasonable additional gun regulations. But they go
largely unnoticed by liberals, who want something more confiscatory, thus
avoiding all middle ground.
Not it’s not that’s straw.
No not really, most, like I said, own guns and are for reasonable restrictions. Also a lot of the “liberals” are from UK Canada and Australia giving opinion on US policy.
Most liberals ignore reasonable gun control in my experience here.
Very few show any willingness to entertain measures which support
both gun control & gun rights.....other than @favlun & a couple others.
Well the RF poll suggested most liberals want reasoanable reatriciton not a ban. Even those who said they want a ban, many come from countries that already have gun bans and or reasonable restriction. Though admittedly the numbers for ban was higher than I expected but it was still a much lower percentage.
What is "reasonable" to a liberal might include a ban which is little less than total.
So while you find your poll significant, I find conversations with others more so.
Of course because your strawmans that people just don’t want guns that look scary. I don’t know how many times it’s been suggested I’m anti-gun and it’s not true. Your even talking to gun owners but calling them hoplophobes. There is only a couple who want an ban. The whole “they want to take r guns” argument is hogwash. Trump has said more to that affect than most liberals would ever say.
I'm diagnosing a problem with (most) liberals....not basing any argument upon that observation.
For your edification.....
Straw man - Wikipedia
I suggest less strained effort to apply a label, & more trying to understand.
Even gun owners can have a phobia about anything more capable than a small gauge shotgun.
And yet, there are those who argue for a near or total ban.
You claim they don't exist, but we see them here on RF &
in the media & in politics.
But this is your straw man. I don't base anything I advocate
based upon the rantings of banners.
Have you ever addressed any of my gun control proposals?
esmith
Veteran Member
Could we not say that the opposing side is irrational? I say yes.
I've said repeatedly that I have no issue with hunting, competitive shooting, or gun collecting as long as they're done responsibly. It's only when guns are kept or carried with the intent to use them against people that I have an issue.
Aye, your opposition to self defense strikes me as entirely unreasonable.
I'm not going to lie just to make you happy. The whole idea of a typical person keeping defensive guns "to keep their family safe" is fundamentally irrational.
There are other reasons to keep "defensive" guns that aren't fundamentally irrational (e.g. "I just like 'em and I don't care about the cost in human life that comes with them"), but I barely ever hear gun afficionados using them.
esmith
Veteran Member
Why do you have an issue with someone that has decided that they are willing to provide for their own self-defense. As much as I support the law enforcement community they do not have the manpower to provide everyone's defense. Why do you think that the personal security companies are doing such a great business with the "elites" of the world? Very simple answer, are you willing to give it a go or by doing so negate your own argument.
To a rational person, keeping a weapon that's more likely to kill a member of your family than to stop an intruder has nothing to do with self-defense.