Re: [GUNS] a comment

Joe E. Dees (
Fri, 4 Jun 1999 22:03:42 -0500

Date sent:      	Fri, 4 Jun 1999 06:12:46 -0700 (PDT)
Subject:        	Re: [GUNS] a comment
Send reply to:

> Eliezer S. Yudkowsky [] wrote:
> >I'm curious. Have you ever once converted an anti-gun person to
> >pro-gun?
> Yes. I've had people mail me after discussions on mailing lists to say that
> they've looked up the facts and studies I've pointed out and that's changed
> their opinion on the issue. I can't think of any occasion when one of the
> people participating in such a thread has changed their mind, but several
> lurkers have. Nor can I think of an occasion when someone's admitted to
> starting out pro-gun and being convinced by the anti-gun arguments.
Did you lie to them, or about them (as you did about me, and I have yet to receive my justly deserved apology and retraction).
> The big problem with this idea that the pro-gun folks on the list should
> be nice, reasonable people and refuse to respond to irrational, unreasonable
> anti-gun posts is that when people who've never seen the pro-gun arguments
> continue to not see them because us nice, reasonable people refuse to point
> them out, they continue to believe the anti-gun arguments; you don't convince
> people by keeping your mouth shut. The correct response by those who don't
> like gun debates is for them to jump on the anti-gun posters as soon as they
> try to start one, not to complain about us when we respond; I can't think
> of any occasion when a pro-gun poster has started one of these debates.
I will not be silenced by blued-steel fundamentalism, and will continue to present the reasonable, rational and logical alternative to your message of universal armament. It is NOT rational or reasonable to insist, as you do, that violent criminals, kids and the certifiably insane should have free and unfettered access to purchase and possess the means to commit mass long-range homicide. If you do not insist on this, then say so. If you do insist on this, say so, and why.
> Mark