Welcome • User Guide
ToS • Privacy • Canary
Donate • Bugs • License

©2025 Poal.co

122

How do you explain it to people who're pro-gun but didn't grow up owning them? I've had some conversations with freedom lovers over the years where I'd describe something as perfectly normal and they'd look at me as if I just announced I like to paint myself blue and march around my yard. Not hostile responses, but confused responses.

e.g. I learned to shoot before I could read. Of course I had guns when I was four - didn't you? Preteens shooting guns unsupervised - sure, so long as they're strong enough to carry and shoot the gun (e.g. .22LR is great for youngsters, particularly lighter youth models). Leaving guns lying around the house is perfectly normal - you just teach gun safety the same as you'd teach kids not to play with knives or run in the street. Locking up guns is crazy unless you're worried about thieves while you're out of town - would you lock up a hammer or screwdriver? Taking kids hunting and cleaning game afterwards is great - that way they learn to appreciate dinner and aren't pansies who faint at the prospect of butchering an animal. Calling the cops is a joke - where were they the last time I got mugged? Doesn't everyone experience tragic boating accidents?

How do you explain it to people who're pro-gun but didn't grow up owning them? I've had some conversations with freedom lovers over the years where I'd describe something as perfectly normal and they'd look at me as if I just announced I like to paint myself blue and march around my yard. Not hostile responses, but *confused* responses. e.g. I learned to shoot before I could read. Of course I had guns when I was four - didn't you? Preteens shooting guns unsupervised - sure, so long as they're strong enough to carry and shoot the gun (e.g. .22LR is great for youngsters, particularly lighter youth models). Leaving guns lying around the house is perfectly normal - you just teach gun safety the same as you'd teach kids not to play with knives or run in the street. Locking up guns is crazy unless you're worried about thieves while you're out of town - would you lock up a hammer or screwdriver? Taking kids hunting and cleaning game afterwards is great - that way they learn to appreciate dinner and aren't pansies who faint at the prospect of butchering an animal. Calling the cops is a joke - where were they the last time I got mugged? Doesn't everyone experience tragic boating accidents?

(post is archived)

[–] • 17 pts

The concept is sovereignty. The gun isn't the issue. Although, despots and tyrants make guns the issue.

The only reason we own guns is to protect our sovereignty. Shooting an intruder is protecting your sovereignty.

Notice that the gun becomes the issue, not the person shooting the gun. It's like blaming a wolf's teeth for killing sheep. Then pulling out all the sheep's teeth to protect them.

The culture you speak of was a mindset of sovereignty. People owned guns and revered them for how they enabled personal sovereignty. Today, governments don't want you to be sovereign. They want you to be dependent. People who don't understand gun culture don't understand what sovereignty means, nor do they want it.

Godspeed.

[–] • 1 pt (edited )

Yup.right there. Great power comes great responsibility. Which i add that niggers lack

[–] • 1 pt

The right to bear arms is founded on the sovereignty of the individual. It is a sign that the person is free, and not a serf or slave, who were forbidden to bear arms.

[–] • 6 pts

There are two facts they ignore at their own risk. The SCOTUS has ruled that the 'police' are NOT required to protect the citizen and there is recent proof that they can't and Won't. The second is, ask them who they call when trouble comes? Answer, a man With a Gun....that may or may not show.

[–] • 3 pts

If there's any incident illustrating why you need to have a gun, it's Uvalde. The police could have resolved the problem immediately, yet did not, even after parents begged them to do so. Therefore, you need to he able to protect yourself. The best case is a police officer might show up in 10 minutes after you call. Your own bullets will finish the job in less than one second.

[–] • 1 pt

That is the 'recent proof'. I still do not believe that several dozen LEOs from several depts. actually did Nothing, which makes me believe it was not Real. My case is, NO ONE from the Texas Rangers, FBI or US. Marshalls are going to stand down, because a city flunky said so.

[–] • 2 pts

I understand, it's hard to believe. However, police are no longer protecting us. They protect the kleptocracy.

[–] [deleted] • 5 pts

As someone who did not grow up around guns, let me see if I can explain why they find it so bizarre.

Imagine a place that has fire extinguisher culture. They have a fire extinguisher in every room as well as just having some laying around the house. On the weekend they go to a 'fire range' with their kids where they build model houses, set them on fire and practice putting them out. They do this for fun.

How would you explain fire extinguisher culture for those that didn't grow up in it?

[–] • 3 pts

Ill try and explain. A fire extinguisher has no use other than extinguishing a fire. A gun, on the other hand, has uses ranging from decor, to defense, to entertainment and just being an all around good tool to have on a farm or something. If you live out in the country like me, it's just a tool that has become a part of life. For example, I carry a gun when on walks or checking the mail because there's a pretty good chance there will be a copperhead or rattle snake or something. There's is also nothing to do out here other than being outdoors. Shooting guns is an outdoor activity that is fun, simple and easily accessible for country folk. From here, a culture around guns develops, as everyone has one as a part of their daily life and entertainment.

[–] [deleted] • 2 pts

That's how op should be explaining it to someone who grew up in a city. There are threats from wild animals both to humans and to farm animals. Would it be accurate to say that if there are foxes or coyotes or owls going after your farm animals you really want to shoot them dead instead of scaring them off because they'll just come back otherwise? Is that an accurate statement?

[–] • 2 pts

Yes. Although I've never had trouble with owls and coyotes usually learn quick not to come back if one of them goes down. If a snake or a racoon realizes he can kill chickens or steal eggs without repercussion, he will continue to do so. Every time I've ever let an animal like a coon go he came back for more.

[–] • 1 pt

Yes

[–] • 0 pt

Owls? They eat rodents. Do you live on a rat farm?

[–] • 1 pt

decor, to defense, to entertainment

Are you saying that fire extinguishers don't make good decor and entertainment? If you were part of fire extinguisher culture you would think so. They are probably pretty good at defense too, spray to disorient, then hit with the heavy object.

[–] • 0 pt

You sound like a guy that would have this

[–] • 0 pt

To be honest, there are a lot of things your argument could be applied to. Knitting, cars, racing, tractors, anime, painting, etc.

Just because you aren't used to something doesn't make it wrong.

[–] • 5 pts

I would agree with what said in his to you. It's about sovereignty. To that I'd add that sovereignty requires personal responsibility; another thing tyrants despise.

As for the "culture" aspect of it, I equate it to being a 'car guy' or a "baseball fan.' Some families had guns as a part of their lives. Some prefer baseball to football. Some people actually prefer sailboats to power boats. I try to make it relatable by using an example they're more likely to have run into.

[–] • 2 pts

Yup, and, responsibility requires discipline. Basically a gun requires an individual to become fully actualized. Another way to say the same thing is people without guns are adolescents in adult bodies.

[–] • 1 pt

My dipshit neighbor who is twice my age has a sign in their window that reads "I HATE GUNS". Their entire family is pathetic. Whenever I see a political sign in their yard, which is basically all the time, I do the opposite.

[–] • 1 pt

Heh, that's funny. I need to modify my post to say that I am referring to white people only. The other species of humans running around are a whole other ballgame.

[–] • 0 pt

Basically a gun requires an individual to become fully actualized.

Well said. You can't handle guns safely and not be fully involved.

[–] • 3 pts (edited )

Ask them if they lock their doors on their private property and ask them if they just leave the doors and windows all open. Someone with an illegal gun will come in and either rob you or kill you and then rob you anyways. Explain that innocent people with guns prevent the minority of bad people and criminals who can a gun illegally or legally so it keeps the peace and the majority of innocent people safe.

[–] • 2 pts

The Wild West had the lowest crime rate in US History.

[–] • 2 pts

I don't. The Left and Right cannot reconcile, the physical structure of our brains is different. So I don't bother.

[–] [deleted] • 1 pt

You take them shooting.

That's the only way. They don't understand gun or car culture because they are ignorant. You know who they are because you can hear their cars a mile away. They also assume that in psycopath wonderland that they can pick up a fire arm survive. Yet they don't know about cleaning, clearing malfunctions, or adjusting sights.

[–] • 1 pt

There's a difference between growing up without guns and growing up in anti-gun culture. My wife grew up in an Asian country (inb4 weeb), and loves guns. She wasn't indoctrinated against them, so their natural coolness and necessity sold her just fine.

[–] • 1 pt

https://firearms-united.com/fr/interpol-chief-ronald-noble-on-armed-citizens/

Interpol Secretary General Ronald Noble suggested, that the best solution for defence in the face of rising global terrorism was – simply – arming the citizens of all democratic countries around the globe. The incident that led Noble to this statement was the last al-Shabab attack.

In an ABC News exclusive interview the Secretary General stated that we have only two options to choose from if we want to protect the so-called « soft targets » (i.e. unarmed citizens) from attack: Either to create secure perimeters around the locations, or rather to allow civilians extended access to firearms of their own, so they would be able to defend themselves in case a terrorist act occurs.

https://abcnews.go.com/Blotter/exclusive-westgate-interpol-chief-ponders-armed-citizenry/story?id=20637341&singlePage=true

In an exclusive interview with ABC News, Noble said there are really only two choices for protecting open societies from attacks like the one on Westgate mall where so-called "soft targets" are hit: either create secure perimeters around the locations or allow civilians to carry their own guns to protect themselves.

>"Societies have to think about how they're going to approach the problem," Noble said. "One is to say we want an armed citizenry; you can see the reason for that. Another is to say the enclaves are so secure that in order to get into the soft target you're going to have to pass through extraordinary security."

[–] • 1 pt

Tell them "It's like those shitty marvel movie but instead of Thor and Iron Man, it's guns."

Load more (5 replies)