One Fantastic Argument Against More Gun Laws. (and using it as a template on other issues.) [krakatoa]

I was introduced to this link by one of the cobloggers I believe. Or it may have been in the headlines or part of an actual post.

Searching the blog's archives really isn't my strong suit though, and I simply wouldn't be doing it right if this weren't a duplicate post.

Written in 2007 by Marko Kloss, aka "The Munchkin Wrangler", (said munchkins apparently being "Iron Man and Cardboard Lass"), this essay distills in a few short paragraphs a very powerful argument against gun-control laws.

An excerpt:

Human beings only have two ways to deal with one another: reason and force. If you want me to do something for you, you have a choice of either convincing me via argument, or force me to do your bidding under threat of force. Every human interaction falls into one of those two categories, without exception. Reason or force, that’s it...

... People who argue for the banning of arms ask for automatic rule by the young, the strong, and the many, and that’s the exact opposite of a civilized society.

Please read the whole thing. I don't know how long it will remain online, as he moved to new blog-digs, and I wasn't able to find the post at the new site.

The concept of personal firearm ownership as a force equalizer for the weak or outnumbered is a powerful one; force equalization not simply against a tyrannical government that might one day exist*, but against those tyrants that will always exist at all levels of any society, who would dominate you with the leverage of superior force.

DrewM has been saying that we should be framing more Conservative arguments in ways that can appeal to those we wish to persuade on an emotional level.

That isn't to say we should abandon reason and logic and try to outbid the left, but that we should strive to find an emotional hook to put a human face on the more abstract arguments for our principles.

The Gun-Control argument is one that is absolutely loaded with emotional appeal on the gun-grabbers side, but very little hard data to support them.

We have a great many powerful anecdotes to counter the emotional appeal of the gun-grabbers though, and a great deal of hard data to support those appeals.

This is an argument we have won again and again over the past several decades.

I think DrewM would probably point to this issue as a template for use in our appeals on other Conservative issues as well.

Arguing the dry and detached philosophies of Conservatism that promise payoffs over generations rather than next week's dole check is a losing proposition in today's society.

We must be able to make those philosophies appeal on the emotional level if there is any hope for us to right this ship.

* and of course, some would argue that the government has already crossed the rubicon into tyranny. I don't think we are there quite yet, but it is certainly no longer a blurry dot on the horizon.

posted by Open Blogger at 12:00 PM

| Access Comments