CONVERSATION WITH LIBERAL BUDDY ON CHL

[VeggieRonin]

The other side says the same thing - just swap "liberal" with "conservative" and you have a perfect flag waving "red vs blue" and "us vs them" situation. How's that working out for us all?

I don't want to get into politics, suffice to say I think there are a lot of people who are anti-gun who can be persuaded to be pro-freedom by using prominent liberal people as examples and arguments from a civil rights perspective.

[The Annoyed Man]

I liked this series of articles quite a bit: http://www.buckeyefirearms.org/Raging-A ... lf-Defense" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

I'm a "liberal" by the way - let's be careful we don't throw that word around and make the same mistake the anti-gun people do: come up with a nice convenient term for a very diverse group of people that is emblematic of just the things we don't like.
About now the terms "liberal" and "conservative" are about as useful as "gun-nut" and "hippie". Hoi Polloi's comment is just as true for people who use the term "liberal" in a pejorative way.

I heard once that people are entitled to their own opinions but not entitled to their own facts. If people want to THINK that increasing concealed carry freedom makes things more dangerous, they are welcome to that opinion. Just please acknowledge that the actual facts are exactly the opposite. You can think campus concealed carry will make things more dangerous, and I can think its safer to drive without my seatbelt on. But as long as we are adults we both need to acknowledge the facts don't support our position. Nothing wrong with emotional feeling about things, but realize that as a human society we need to let facts also into the equation.

Pointing out "liberal" support for gun rights helps too. Seeing someone they identify with that position helps:
http://www.newsweek.com/2010/02/25/gun-rally.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;
http://terriermandotcom.blogspot.com/20 ... rship.html" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;

Reminding them that gun control laws were the Klan's favorite law, that MLK jr and his contingent carried weapons legally for necessary protection, and that http://pinkpistols.org/" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false; exists for good reason often helps.

Does it help to add that the Klukkers were all democrats and MLK was a registered republican? (true)

I'm just twisting your tail a little bit for fun. Please don't be offended.

[KD5NRH]

Steveincowtown: Well that seems like a long time to watch a bad guy attack your wife and daughter before the cops get there.

My wife has watched me go through the whole drill while waiting for our average three-minute police response; draw my carry revolver, clear to the location of the 1911, transition to the 1911 (more ammo and faster reloads if needed) and holster the .357, clear to the bedroom closet, open the code lock, transition to the duck gun (Mossberg 835 with 28" barrel) leaving the 1911 on the top shelf, clear back through the house to the preferred HD shotgun, (Norinco Ithaca copy with 18.5" barrel, buttcuff of extra buckshot and slugs) transition to it leaving the Mossberg in its place, clear back to the bedrooms accounting for everyone who belongs there on the way, and get into a position in the side hall to cover the entryway, front windows, and the outside of the master bedroom door that she should be covering from inside with her 20ga. We still had time to chat for a bit before they showed up.

Later, out at our land, I prepped all of those guns and the ready reloads for them, then proved that I could have used up all the ammo readily available for all four guns in aimed fire in well under three minutes. 80 rounds sounds like a lot of ammo, and should certainly be enough for home defense against anything short of a zombie invasion, but if anything came down to a fight, that pretty much guarantees that it would be over - one way or another - before help arrived. (Assuming there aren't any pauses long enough to open boxes and re-stuff mags or speedloaders. Frankly, I'd probably transition to one of the bolt action rifles, fix the bayonet and grab a couple of stripper clips before trying to refill speedloaders knowing a threat is still around.)

[chasfm11]

I don't want to get into politics, suffice to say I think there are a lot of people who are anti-gun who can be persuaded to be pro-freedom by using prominent liberal people as examples and arguments from a civil rights perspective.

I'll believe it when I see it work. I'm sure that there are antis who will listen though, in my experience, they are in the minority. I don't care who is delivering the counter argument, most of the antis that I've dealt with did everything but stick their index fingers into their ears, close their eyes and chant "naw, naw, naw, naw," as soon as they realized that they were loosing the argument.

Using the civil rights approach assumes that the person with strong anti-gun feelings isn't conflicted in their thinking. That doesn't happen very much. To make an appeal for civil rights, the listener has to believe that there are rights and that those rights don't come from the government. That doesn't happen much in the anti circles either.

[VeggieRonin]

Does it help to add that the Klukkers were all democrats and MLK was a registered republican? (true)

I'm just twisting your tail a little bit for fun. Please don't be offended.

It absolutely helps TAM!
I've no allegiance to a political party so bash the Dems all you want. Obviously "liberal" /= democrat and "conservative" /= republican.

Chas-
There's a little thing called "cognitive dissonance" that makes it hard for everyone to accept new conflicting data. This is a well-demonstrated psychological phenomenon. But we should first realize that there are plenty of pro-gun people that applies to as well. There's quite a bit of psychological data on the approach to changing minds, and that is supposedly the best approach. I've rarely seen it as well - but keep in mind these are rare things generally speaking, not just for gun issues.

[The Annoyed Man]

Does it help to add that the Klukkers were all democrats and MLK was a registered republican? (true)

I'm just twisting your tail a little bit for fun. Please don't be offended.

It absolutely helps TAM!
I've no allegiance to a political party so bash the Dems all you want. Obviously "liberal" /= democrat and "conservative" /= republican.

Chas-
There's a little thing called "cognitive dissonance" that makes it hard for everyone to accept new conflicting data. This is a well-demonstrated psychological phenomenon. But we should first realize that there are plenty of pro-gun people that applies to as well. There's quite a bit of psychological data on the approach to changing minds, and that is supposedly the best approach. I've rarely seen it as well - but keep in mind these are rare things generally speaking, not just for gun issues.

VR, you're correct of course, which is why as both a conservative and a republican, I have become so disappointed with my party. Even mainstream republicans seem to have adopted the notion that the public trough is a jobs fair for the connected and that government employment is an entitlement. I'm more than a little fed up with most of them.

[Slowplay]

There's a little thing called "cognitive dissonance" that makes it hard for everyone to accept new conflicting data. This is a well-demonstrated psychological phenomenon. But we should first realize that there are plenty of pro-gun people that applies to as well. There's quite a bit of psychological data on the approach to changing minds, and that is supposedly the best approach. I've rarely seen it as well - but keep in mind these are rare things generally speaking, not just for gun issues.

Most people when they hear the term "liberal" are thinking of modern liberals/progressives. They normally don't think to themselves whether a person is closer to a John Locke liberal or a John Rawls liberal.

What is the objective of trying to make people believe that liberals support gun rights? I know what the danger is, if people believe that.

[Hoi Polloi]

What is the objective of trying to make people believe that liberals support gun rights? I know what the danger is, if people believe that.

I read this article the other day on circumcision that I think perfectly exemplifies why. A non-Jewish father was opposed to circumcision while the culturally Jewish mother identified circumcision as a part of her heritage. She really hoped she had a girl so she wouldn't have to face the issue. But she had a boy and had to face it. (Point one: she identifies with it, but really hopes to avoid having to really face it. Only when her own life circumstance forced facing it did she do so.)

She then sought out someone she thought would be most likely to be on her side of the debate and whom her husband would be likely to listen to, a female rabbi with a young son. (Point two: she is not looking to face the issue at all, but to win the argument by numbers and emotion by carefully choosing allies.)

A midwife friend of hers writes her and is adamant that she look up information on circumcision. The mother repeats to the midwife friend the same line about being Jewish that she has stuck with all along. The midwife points out information from Jewish mothers who chose not to circumcise. Now the mom starts actually listening. (Point three: the midwife is in a factually better position to know about circumcision and to give information on it, but she still would only listen to the rabbi because her counter-argument until this point was that she was Jewish. When the midwife points out that other Jews have made this choice, it completely destroys her argument and she seeks out how they thought and why they could call themselves Jews when their sons weren't circumcised. She would listen to facts from them because they also identified as Jewish moms.)

Once she read the accounts of Jewish moms not circumcising, then she would read the other information about the medical, scientific, and ethical debate on the topic and think critically on each and make an informed decision. (Point four: Her husband had made those same arguments many times before, but she didn't care then. Her counter was that this was the Jewish thing to do. Once that was broken down, then the others could be. So much so that she joined a very small minority within her faith tradition and now is encouraging others to do the same.)

So having voices who are liberal, women, minorities, homosexuals, students, professors, atheist, and whatever other categories people identify with as their reason for being anti-guns I think will have the same effect. It's just like that YouTube campaign the Mormons are running right now. Make it where people can see themselves in the "club" by showing them other people like them already there. They'll listen to what those people have to say on how they got there, even if the exact same information has been ignored 20 times over from other sources because the very presence of these people shoots holes in their theory.

[The Annoyed Man]

Slowplay makes an excellent point. There is a significant difference between a "leftist" and what is referred to as a "classical liberal" in the Locke-ian mold. There is a similar difference between a conservative and a "right winger." If we use the classical definition, then a self-identified conservative is a John Locke liberal, and therefore has much in common with some self-identified liberals. I have been guilty of carelessness in terminology myself, but let me make it clear that in my thinking, a hard core leftist is one who espouses class warfare and socialism and a fundamental remaking of America into something the founders never intended. As such they are no better than either National Socialists or Communists. I am not naive enough to think that describes the majority of self-identified liberals. Neither am I naive enough to think that their favored policies are correct. That is why we have politics.

[Slowplay]

What is the objective of trying to make people believe that liberals support gun rights? I know what the danger is, if people believe that.

I read this article the other day on circumcision that I think perfectly exemplifies why....

I should have been clear that I meant the objective in the political process and not for individual decisions. To advance your example of deciding on circumcision a few years, the story about Little Red Riding Hood may help demonstrate the point I was trying to make.

[Hoi Polloi]

What is the objective of trying to make people believe that liberals support gun rights? I know what the danger is, if people believe that.

I read this article the other day on circumcision that I think perfectly exemplifies why....

I should have been clear that I meant the objective in the political process and not for individual decisions. To advance your example of deciding on circumcision a few years, the story about Little Red Riding Hood may help demonstrate the point I was trying to make.

Ahhh. Sorry I misunderstood. I understand what you mean now.

[snatchel]

God bless this forum, and the SMART, WELL THOUGHT comments that are posted.

[Skaven]

This is what I think

On Sheep, Wolves and Sheepdogs
(From the book, On Combat, by Lt. Col. Dave Grossman)

“Honor never grows old, and honor rejoices the heart of age. It does so because honor is, finally, about defending those noble and worthy things that deserve defending, even if it comes at a high cost. In our time, that may mean social disapproval, public scorn, hardship, persecution, or as always, even death itself.
The question remains: What is worth defending? What is worth dying for? What is worth living for?”

- William J. Bennett
In a lecture to the United States Naval Academy
November 24, 1997

One Vietnam veteran, an old retired colonel, once said this to me: “Most of the people in our society are sheep. They are kind, gentle, productive creatures who can only hurt one another by accident.” This is true. Remember, the murder rate is six per 100,000 per year, and the aggravated assault rate is four per 1,000 per year. What this means is that the vast majority of Americans are not inclined to hurt one another.

Some estimates say that two million Americans are victims of violent crimes every year, a tragic, staggering number, perhaps an all-time record rate of violent crime. But there are almost 300 million Americans, which means that the odds of being a victim of violent crime is considerably less than one in a hundred on any given year. Furthermore, since many violent crimes are committed by repeat offenders, the actual number of violent citizens is considerably less than two million.

Thus there is a paradox, and we must grasp both ends of the situation: We may well be in the most violent times in history, but violence is still remarkably rare. This is because most citizens are kind, decent people who are not capable of hurting each other, except by accident or under extreme provocation. They are sheep.

I mean nothing negative by calling them sheep. To me it is like the pretty, blue robin’s egg. Inside it is soft and gooey but someday it will grow into something wonderful. But the egg cannot survive without its hard blue shell. Police officers, soldiers and other warriors are like that shell, and someday the civilization they protect will grow into something wonderful. For now, though, they need warriors to protect them from the predators.
“Then there are the wolves,” the old war veteran said, “and the wolves feed on the sheep without mercy.” Do you believe there are wolves out there who will feed on the flock without mercy? You better believe it. There are evil men in this world and they are capable of evil deeds. The moment you forget that or pretend it is not so, you become a sheep. There is no safety in denial.

“Then there are sheepdogs,” he went on, “and I’m a sheepdog. I live to protect the flock and confront the wolf.” Or, as a sign in one California law enforcement agency put it, “We intimidate those who intimidate others.”

If you have no capacity for violence then you are a healthy productive citizen: a sheep. If you have a capacity for violence and no empathy for your fellow citizens, then you have defined an aggressive sociopath–a wolf. But what if you have a capacity for violence, and a deep love for your fellow citizens? Then you are a sheepdog, a warrior, someone who is walking the hero’s path. Someone who can walk into the heart of darkness, into the universal human phobia, and walk out unscathed.

The gift of aggression

“What goes on around you… compares little with what goes on inside you.”
- Ralph Waldo Emerson

Everyone has been given a gift in life. Some people have a gift for science and some have a flair for art. And warriors have been given the gift of aggression. They would no more misuse this gift than a doctor would misuse his healing arts, but they yearn for the opportunity to use their gift to help others. These people, the ones who have been blessed with the gift of aggression and a love for others, are our sheepdogs. These are our warriors.

One career police officer wrote to me about this after attending one of my Bulletproof Mind training sessions:

“I want to say thank you for finally shedding some light on why it is that I can do what I do. I always knew why I did it. I love my [citizens], even the bad ones, and had a talent that I could return to my community. I just couldn’t put my finger on why I could wade through the chaos, the gore, the sadness, if given a chance try to make it all better, and walk right out the other side.”

Let me expand on this old soldier’s excellent model of the sheep, wolves, and sheepdogs. We know that the sheep live in denial; that is what makes them sheep. They do not want to believe that there is evil in the world. They can accept the fact that fires can happen, which is why they want fire extinguishers, fire sprinklers, fire alarms and fire exits throughout their kids’ schools. But many of them are outraged at the idea of putting an armed police officer in their kid’s school. Our children are dozens of times more likely to be killed, and thousands of times more likely to be seriously injured, by school violence than by school fires, but the sheep’s only response to the possibility of violence is denial. The idea of someone coming to kill or harm their children is just too hard, so they choose the path of denial.

The sheep generally do not like the sheepdog. He looks a lot like the wolf. He has fangs and the capacity for violence. The difference, though, is that the sheepdog must not, cannot and will not ever harm the sheep. Any sheepdog who intentionally harms the lowliest little lamb will be punished and removed. The world cannot work any other way, at least not in a representative democracy or a republic such as ours.

Still, the sheepdog disturbs the sheep. He is a constant reminder that there are wolves in the land. They would prefer that he didn’t tell them where to go, or give them traffic tickets, or stand at the ready in our airports in camouflage fatigues holding an M-16. The sheep would much rather have the sheepdog cash in his fangs, spray paint himself white, and go, “Baa.”

Until the wolf shows up. Then the entire flock tries desperately to hide behind one lonely sheepdog. As Kipling said in his poem about “Tommy” the British soldier:

While it’s Tommy this, an’ Tommy that, an’ “Tommy, fall be’ind,”
But it’s “Please to walk in front, sir,” when there’s trouble in the wind,
There’s trouble in the wind, my boys, there’s trouble in the wind,
O it’s “Please to walk in front, sir,” when there’s trouble in the wind.

The students, the victims, at Columbine High School were big, tough high school students, and under ordinary circumstances they would not have had the time of day for a police officer. They were not bad kids; they just had nothing to say to a cop. When the school was under attack, however, and SWAT teams were clearing the rooms and hallways, the officers had to physically peel those clinging, sobbing kids off of them. This is how the little lambs feel about their sheepdog when the wolf is at the door. Look at what happened after September 11, 2001, when the wolf pounded hard on the door. Remember how America, more than ever before, felt differently about their law enforcement officers and military personnel? Remember how many times you heard the word hero?

Understand that there is nothing morally superior about being a sheepdog; it is just what you choose to be. Also understand that a sheepdog is a funny critter: He is always sniffing around out on the perimeter, checking the breeze, barking at things that go bump in the night, and yearning for a righteous battle. That is, the young sheepdogs yearn for a righteous battle. The old sheepdogs are a little older and wiser, but they move to the sound of the guns when needed right along with the young ones.

Here is how the sheep and the sheepdog think differently. The sheep pretend the wolf will never come, but the sheepdog lives for that day. After the attacks on September 11, 2001, most of the sheep, that is, most citizens in America said, “Thank God I wasn’t on one of those planes.” The sheepdogs, the warriors, said, “Dear God, I wish I could have been on one of those planes. Maybe I could have made a difference.” When you are truly transformed into a warrior and have truly invested yourself into warriorhood, you want to be there. You want to be able to make a difference.

While there is nothing morally superior about the sheepdog, the warrior, he does have one real advantage. Only one. He is able to survive and thrive in an environment that destroys 98 percent of the population.

There was research conducted a few years ago with individuals convicted of violent crimes. These cons were in prison for serious, predatory acts of violence: assaults, murders and killing law enforcement officers. The vast majority said that they specifically targeted victims by body language: slumped walk, passive behavior and lack of awareness. They chose their victims like big cats do in Africa, when they select one out of the herd that is least able to protect itself.

However, when there were cues given by potential victims that indicated they would not go easily, the cons said that they would walk away. If the cons sensed that the target was a “counter-predator,” that is, a sheepdog, they would leave him alone unless there was no other choice but to engage.

One police officer told me that he rode a commuter train to work each day. One day, as was his usual, he was standing in the crowded car, dressed in blue jeans, T-shirt and jacket, holding onto a pole and reading a paperback. At one of the stops, two street toughs boarded, shouting and cursing and doing every obnoxious thing possible to intimidate the other riders. The officer continued to read his book, though he kept a watchful eye on the two punks as they strolled along the aisle making comments to female passengers, and banging shoulders with men as they passed.

As they approached the officer, he lowered his novel and made eye contact with them. “You got a problem, man?” one of the IQ-challenged punks asked. “You think you’re tough, or somethin’?” the other asked, obviously offended that this one was not shirking away from them.

“As a matter of fact, I am tough,” the officer said, calmly and with a steady gaze.

The two looked at him for a long moment, and then without saying a word, turned and moved back down the aisle to continue their taunting of the other passengers, the sheep.

Some people may be destined to be sheep and others might be genetically primed to be wolves or sheepdogs. But I believe that most people can choose which one they want to be, and I’m proud to say that more and more Americans are choosing to become sheepdogs.

Seven months after the attack on September 11, 2001, Todd Beamer was honored in his hometown of Cranbury, New Jersey. Todd, as you recall, was the man on Flight 93 over Pennsylvania who called on his cell phone to alert an operator from United Airlines about the hijacking. When he learned of the other three passenger planes that had been used as weapons, Todd dropped his phone and uttered the words, “Let’s roll,” which authorities believe was a signal to the other passengers to confront the terrorist hijackers. In one hour, a transformation occurred among the passengers–athletes, business people and parents–from sheep to sheepdogs and together they fought the wolves, ultimately saving an unknown number of lives on the ground.

“Do you have any idea how hard it would be to live with yourself after that?”

“here is no safety for honest men except by believing all possible evil of evil men.”
- Edmund Burke
Reflections on the Revolution in France

Here is the point I like to emphasize, especially to the thousands of police officers and soldiers I speak to each year. In nature the sheep, real sheep, are born as sheep. Sheepdogs are born that way, and so are wolves. They didn’t have a choice. But you are not a critter. As a human being, you can be whatever you want to be. It is a conscious, moral decision.
If you want to be a sheep, then you can be a sheep and that is okay, but you must understand the price you pay. When the wolf comes, you and your loved ones are going to die if there is not a sheepdog there to protect you. If you want to be a wolf, you can be one, but the sheepdogs are going to hunt you down and you will never have rest, safety, trust or love. But if you want to be a sheepdog and walk the warrior’s path, then you must make a conscious and moral decision every day to dedicate, equip and prepare yourself to thrive in that toxic, corrosive moment when the wolf comes knocking at the door.

For example, many officers carry their weapons in church. They are well concealed in ankle holsters, shoulder holsters or inside-the-belt holsters tucked into the small of their backs. Anytime you go to some form of religious service, there is a very good chance that a police officer in your congregation is carrying. You will never know if there is such an individual in your place of worship, until the wolf appears to slaughter you and your loved ones.

I was training a group of police officers in Texas, and during the break, one officer asked his friend if he carried his weapon in church. The other cop replied, “I will never be caught without my gun in church.” I asked why he felt so strongly about this, and he told me about a police officer he knew who was at a church massacre in Ft. Worth, Texas, in 1999. In that incident, a mentally deranged individual came into the church and opened fire, gunning down 14 people. He said that officer believed he could have saved every life that day if he had been carrying his gun. His own son was shot, and all he could do was throw himself on the boy’s body and wait to die. That cop looked me in the eye and said, “Do you have any idea how hard it would be to live with yourself after that?”

Some individuals would be horrified if they knew this police officer was carrying a weapon in church. They might call him paranoid and would probably scorn him. Yet these same individuals would be enraged and would call for “heads to roll” if they found out that the airbags in their cars were defective, or that the fire extinguisher and fire sprinklers in their kids’ school did not work. They can accept the fact that fires and traffic accidents can happen and that there must be safeguards against them. Their only response to the wolf, though, is denial, and all too often their response to the sheepdog is scorn and disdain. But the sheepdog quietly asks himself, “Do you have any idea how hard it would be to live with yourself if your loved ones were attacked and killed, and you had to stand there helplessly because you were unprepared for that day?”

The warrior must cleanse denial from his thinking. Coach Bob Lindsey, a renowned law enforcement trainer, says that warriors must practice “when/then” thinking, not “if/when.” Instead of saying,“If it happens then I will take action,” the warrior says, “When it happens then I will be ready.”

It is denial that turns people into sheep. Sheep are psychologically destroyed by combat because their only defense is denial, which is counterproductive and destructive, resulting in fear, helplessness and horror when the wolf shows up.

Denial kills you twice. It kills you once, at your moment of truth when you are not physically prepared: You didn’t bring your gun; you didn’t train. Your only defense was wishful thinking. Hope is not a strategy. Denial kills you a second time because even if you do physically survive, you are psychologically shattered by fear, helplessness, horror and shame at your moment of truth.

Chuck Yeager, the famous test pilot and first man to fly faster than the speed of sound, says that he knew he could die. There was no denial for him. He did not allow himself the luxury of denial. This acceptance of reality can cause fear, but it is a healthy, controlled fear that will keep you alive:

“I was always afraid of dying. Always. It was my fear that made me learn everything I could about my airplane and my emergency equipment, and kept me flying respectful of my machine and always alert in the cockpit.”
- Brigadier General Chuck Yeager
Yeager, An Autobiography

Gavin de Becker puts it like this in Fear Less, his superb post-9/11 book, which should be required reading for anyone trying to come to terms with our current world situation:

“..denial can be seductive, but it has an insidious side effect. For all the peace of mind deniers think they get by saying it isn’t so, the fall they take when faced with new violence is all the more unsettling. Denial is a save-now-pay-later scheme, a contract written entirely in small print, for in the long run, the denying person knows the truth on some level.”

And so the warrior must strive to confront denial in all aspects of his life, and prepare himself for the day when evil comes.

If you are a warrior who is legally authorized to carry a weapon and you step outside without that weapon, then you become a sheep, pretending that the bad man will not come today. No one can be “on” 24/7 for a lifetime. Everyone needs down time. But if you are authorized to carry a weapon, and you walk outside without it, just take a deep breath, and say this to yourself… “Baa.”

This business of being a sheep or a sheepdog is not a yes-no dichotomy. It is not an all-or-nothing, either-or choice. It is a matter of degrees, a continuum. On one end is an abject, head-in-the-grass sheep and on the other end is the ultimate warrior. Few people exist completely on one end or the other. Most of us live somewhere in between. Since 9-11 almost everyone in America took a step up that continuum, away from denial. The sheep took a few steps toward accepting and appreciating their warriors, and the warriors started taking their job more seriously. The degree to which you move up that continuum, away from sheephood and denial, is the degree to which you and your loved ones will survive, physically and psychologically at your moment of truth.

[VeggieRonin]

Great article.
Funny it doesn't specify the religion or politics of the sheepdog. Wonder why that is?

[CombatWombat]

Did the pencil mis-spell the word