[Edward64]

Somewhat tongue-in-cheek article on the gun debate that we here, at FOFC, have experienced.

https://www.nbcnews.com/think/opinio...gun-ncna886156

The debate’s results are now aggravatingly predictable: The boisterous neighbor shuts downs — or shouts downs — all arguments when the citified coworker demonstrates that they have little understanding of an impressively simple tool. (A clip isn’t a magazine, the “AR” in AR-15 isn’t an abbreviation for “assault rifle,” etc.)

The pedantic tactic, as perfectly described by firearm aficionado Adam Weinstein, is “gunsplaining.” For someone trying make a larger point about gun violence, gunsplaining can be infuriating but, for someone with a passing familiarity with guns, the audacity of a liberal trying to make a larger, sweeping point without knowing some of the basic concepts or having any hands-on appreciation can be equally so.

Pro-gun people ask why they should listen too hard about sensible gun reform — like fixing the abysmal background check system and criminal gun tracing, actually allowing meaningful research into gun violence — when not only are basic terms misused by gun reform advocates, but general facts about firearms are glossed over in favor of fear of the unfamiliar.
:
The issue of gun control and rights is complicated. Less complicated is just giving the actual shooting a shot. You may experience a funny, tingling sensation that its actually fun, and that’s perfectly normal! But shooting a gun also has the added benefit of giving you more of a leg to stand on the next time a gun debate inevitably comes up.
:
But it’s surprising how quickly someone learns what “semi-automatic” actually means when they fire off a few successive rounds of a 9mm; why some folks actually do feel safer when they have a loaded burglar alarm; or yes, why shooting can be a genuine “hobby” (if you can afford it).