Friday, January 15, 2010

Signature challenge

One of the problems with dealing with the antis is that so much of what they think is true just isn't so. We are forced to break down these walls first, before we get to the actual meat on the bone.

So let's have some fun.

Most people I have met on Al Gores’ interweb tubes have signature arguments, unique writing styles and even individually identifiable punctuation/grammar structure. This applies to the pro and anti crowd alike. I feel confident that I could correctly identify both pro and anti commenters that I follow, even if their monikers were hidden to me. The most notable example is Joe Huffman’s “Just One Question.” When I see that, I know it’s Joe.

Well, I thought I would share my signature “argument” in the hopes that others will use it. I only frequent a few anti blogs and I would very much appreciate it if others would adopt my signature and spread it like Lyme disease.

Goes like this.

1. Engage an anti. The more elitist the better.
2. Tell them that if they can prove that poisonous snakes exist on planet Earth, you will videotape yourself cutting one of your guns(handgun, assault weapon, .50 cal…your choice) in half with a blow torch, post that video on youtube and then return to the thread and post a direct link to the video.
3.This is optional…make the condition that if they fail to prove that poisonous snakes exist on planet Earth, they must make a donation(I always say $1.00) to the NRA, GOA, JPFO, 2AA, CCRKBA, 2AS or whatever org you wish.

I have been offering this challenge for close to 3 years now and I have never even gotten a nibble.

Maybe you’ll have better luck than I.

Here’s why you can’t lose.

There is no such thing as a poisonous snake on planet Earth. Some snakes are venomous, but none are poisonous. Huge difference.

If something is poisonous(flora, fauna or fungi), it means that eating it will have ill consequences. It means that the toxins are more or less evenly distributed throughout the flesh of said flora, fauna or fungi.

Speaking from personal experience, you can eat any damn snake you want and have a right tasty meal. Pan fry a Diamondback Rattler and you have a cross between chicken and duck and fish oil. Roll that bad boy in honey and cornmeal before it hits the pan and you got yourself some eats.

For those who rely on the MSM to inform them about firearms and gun laws, they simply open their gullets and swallow like a baby bird. In a sick and twisted sorta way, this can work to our advantage.

Challenge what they think they know to be true.

Shatter their reality with a polite refute.

Show them that what they think to be true with every fiber of their being… is actually false.

Yeah yeah, I know I'm preaching to the choir, but that resulting melody always gets my ass shaking.

5 comments:

Dustydog said...

By the way,
"It means that the toxins are more or less evenly distributed throughout the flesh of said flora, fauna or fungi" is the stupidest thing you have ever written.

Puffer fish? Poison is only in the reproductive tissues.

Nightshade? Poison is only in the leaves.

Poison ivy? Poison is on the leaves and stem, but not the root.

Radish? Leaves and stems are highly poisonous, but the part we eat is fine.

kaveman said...

Decent attempt, the first so far, but no cigar.

1. I never mentioned anything about eating nothing but snake meat or protein or high protein diets.

2. If I was eating the rotting rodent inside a snake's belly, then I would be eating a rodent, not a snake.

3. I should have been more clear about "evenly distributed" but calling the statement stupid is not called for.

Grounghog said...

Interesting argument. It's a bit silly (to me anyway) that the first couple of responses try to pick apart your logic or argument. I find that's generally the problem with debating. It never attempts to sway or discuss, just win the argument using any means necessary. But I digress. Arguing with a hard core anti is about as useless as them arguing with one of us. All the arguments have already been laid out and hashed out over and over. Both sides have their favorites and both sides have some valid points. As a gunnie, we lose points just for not being on the cuddly heartwarming side of the argument. I hate those. Puts you in the hole right off the bat. Truth is, if everyone was nice, nobody would need a gun and communism would have worked as well as any other form of government. It always ends up boiling down to freedom and responsibility. Freedom is scary. It doesn't work if you are not responsible with it and for it. Most of the knuckle heads that run amok amongst us really don't handle it well. It's not for wimps. I'll always take freedom but I tell you, way too many people are more than happy to give it up at the drop of a hat. This is just going to be an eternal fight so stay vigilant and keep up the fight.

Dustydog said...

By your logic, nothing is poisonous.
"The dose makes the poison." Enough poison, under specific conditions, causes toxicity.

Saying "I never mentioned anything about eating nothing but snake meat or protein or high protein diets" can be applied to anything. Arsenic is a poison. Low levels of arsenic are present in chicken meat and in most municipal water supplies. That fact the water and meat are safe doesn't change the fact that arsenic is a poison.

Warfarin is rat poison. It is also a medicine. That fact that many people use it safely doesn't change the fact that it can be used to poison rats.

Meat is poisonous. Yes, only under certain circumstances. That goes without saying.

The terms of your proposal were "if they can prove that poisonous snakes..." For that matter, intravenous administration of rattlesnake venom is poisonous. I know you didn't say anything about iv dosing, but you didn't make it off limits.

You didn't place any conditions, it is bad faith to place them after you're proven wrong. Your argument is clever, but wrong.

The issue about distribution of poison is only important because you brought it up, in the context of trying to get other people to realize their own ignorance.

You can do whatever you want on your own blog, but you won't convince anyone of anything with deception.

Mark said...

Here is my Quibble,

Every time I've eaten rattle snake it has tasted like catfish to me. Now the one black snake did taste a little bit like chicken, but it tasted a lot more like frog.