Anti gun Myth: “We’d be better off if no one had guns.”

FACT: “So, you want to institute a system where the weak and elderly are at the mercy of the strong, the lone are at the mercy of the
gang. You want to give violent criminals a government guarantee that citizens are disarmed. Sorry, that’s unacceptable. Better that we should require every citizen to carry a gun.”

============
antigun MYTH: “Those assault rifles have no sporting purpose. You don’t need a 30-round magazine fro hunting deer — they’re only for killing people.”

FACT: “Your claim that ‘they’re only for killing people’ is
imprecise. A gas chamber or electric chair is designed for killing people,
and these devices obviously serve different functions than guns. To be
precise, a high capacity military-type rifle or handgun is designed for
CONFLICT. When I need to protect myself and my freedom, I want the most
reliable, most durable, highest capacity weapon possible. The only thing
hunting and target shooting have to do with freedom is that they’re good
practice.”

==============
Anti Gun myth: “If we pass this CCW law, it will be like the Wild West, with
shoot-outs all the time for fender-benders, in bars, etc. We need to keep
guns off the streets. If doing so saves just one life, it will be worth it.”

==========
FACT: “Although no state has experienced what you are describing,
that’s not important. What is important is our freedom. If saving lives is
more important that anything else, why don’t we throw out the Fifth
amendment? We have the technology to administer an annual truth serum
session to the entire population. We’d catch the criminals and mistaken
arrest would be a thing of the past. How does that sound?”

Antigun MYTH: “I don’t see what the big deal is about a five day waiting
period.”

FACT: “How about a 24-hour cooling-off period with a
government review board before the news is reported? Wouldn’t that prevent
lives from being ruined, e.g. Richard Jewell? And the fact that this law
applies to people who ALREADY own a handgun tells me that it’s not about
crime prevention, it’s about harassment. Personally, I want to live in a
free society, not a ‘safe’ one with the government as chief nanny.”

Anti gun MYTH: “In 1776, citizens had muskets. No one ever envisioned these
deadly AK-47s. I suppose you think we should all have atomic bombs.”

FACT: “Actually, the Founders discussed this very issue – it’s in
the Federalist Papers. They wanted the citizens to have the same guns as
were the issue weapons of soldiers in a modern infantry. Soldiers in 1776
were each issued muskets, but not the large field pieces with exploding
shells. In 1996, soldiers are issued M16s, M249s, etc. but not howitzers and
atomic bombs. Furthermore, according to your logic, the laws governing
freedom of the press are only valid for newspapers whose presses are
hand-operated and use fixed type. After all, no one in 1776 foresaw offset
printing or electricity, let alone TV and satellite transmission.”

Antigun myth: “We require licenses on cars, but the powerful NRA screams bloody
murder if anyone ever suggests licensing these weapons of mass destruction.”

FACT: “You know, driving is a luxury, where firearms ownership is a
right secured by the Constitution. But let’s put that aside for a moment.
It’s interesting you compared guns and vehicles. Here in the U.S. you can AT
ANY AGE go into any state and buy as many motorcycles, cars, or trucks of
any size as you want, and you don’t need to do anything if you don’t use
them on public property. If you DO want to use them on public property, you
can get a license at age 16. This license is good in all 50 states. NO
waiting periods, no background checks, nothing. If we treated guns like
cars, a fourteen-year-old could go into any state and legally buy handguns,
machine guns, cannons, whatever, cash and carry, and shoot them all with
complete legality on private property. And at age 16 he could get a state
license good anywhere in the country to shoot these guns on public
property.”

“You know, I’m amazed at how little you care about your grandchildren. I would have thought they meant more to you than anything.”

antigunners SAY: “Huh?”

FACT “Well, passing this proposal won’t have a big immediate effect. I
mean, in the next couple of years, neither Bill Clinton nor Newt Gingrich is
going to open up internment camps like Roosevelt did fifty-odd years ago.
But think of your worst nightmare of a political leader. Isn’t it POSSIBLE
that a person like that MIGHT be in control here some time in the next 30,
40, or 50 years, with 51% of the Congress and 51% of the Senate behind him?
If that does happen, do you REALLY what your grandchildren to have been
stripped of their final guarantee of freedom? And do you really want them to
have been stripped of it BY YOU?”