Good for Crowder

napalm4sd's picture

REAL CONVERSATIONS: I'm Pro-Gun | Change My Mind

I never really cared for this guy until recently. Apparently he has been going to college campuses and asking folks to change his mind about certain topics. To me, THIS is what college is about, and highlights why we should focus on changing minds rather than attack people with different opinions. 

 

I think the concept is super original and awesome. And I hope it inspires thoughtful dialog amongst spikers as well as anyone else.

 

For the record, this was the only of his series I agreed with, and thus why I opted to post it. I disagree with his other "change my mind," episodes. But thats just me. 

 

Enjoy!

3.75
Average: 3.8 (16 votes)

Comments

Dagambit's picture

this was really good, 5/5 no yelling and people listening to one another. 

+1
+3
-1
Vote comment up/down
Niscimble's picture

This is how to do it.  If you disagree with someone, talk with them.  Don't just hurl insults from afar.

+1
+2
-1
Vote comment up/down
magichands's picture

Hmm, the concept is decent. But he's still being a bit of a dick. I mean, he's asking people to change his mind but he has no intention of taking time to consider their thoughts and his default response is rebut instead of listen and ponder.

+1
-2
-1
Vote comment up/down
InsertCoin's picture

Agreed, the vibe I got is more about him “educating” kids on college campuses about his beliefs than really hearing anyone out.  And one could argue not many college kids will have well thought out responses.  It’s cherry picking.  

+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
Fullauto223cal's picture

Magichands, he's rebutting their statements because their statements are flawed and in need of rebuttal.  These people's beliefs, like all anti-gunners, are bassed on either ignorance or emotion.  He is listening, else he would not know what was in need of rebuttal.

+1
+2
-1
Vote comment up/down
sato's picture

emotion? what part of "if your gun is kept secure then you don't have time to get to it" was emotional? and his response wasn't even based on that premise. "my gun is easily accessible" is clearly different from the premise given about responsible gun owners keeping their firearms securely.

+1
+1
-1
Vote comment up/down
magichands's picture

I hear what you're saying. But his lines like "you tell me what you think a bump stock is" aren't contributing to the argument at all. It's the standard lobyists argument tactic. Don't argue that you're right, just argue that the other person is wrong. What a bump stock is or isn't has nothing to do with the arguments that gun control should or should not be modified.

+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
borgpunx's picture

I don't think that this guy was a dick.  The two people that tried to convince the guy obviously were not educated enough to prove valid arguements against the 2nd ammendment, so he was almost obligated to explain gun laws to them.

+1
+2
-1
Vote comment up/down
sato's picture

that's exactly not what an argument is though. no-one is saying the 2nd amendment doesn't exist, they're arguing about the validity of it. it's akin to arguing that drugs are bad because they're illegal.

+1
+1
-1
Vote comment up/down
acdc51502112's picture

" no-one is saying the 2nd amendment doesn't exist, " you're the only one mentioning this, the guy you're replying to doesn't even say that.

 

If they're arguing the validity of a part of the constitution, you would hope they've at the very least read it and come to some sort of understanding to base their arguments on. However, it seems that they base it on quick facebook images and outrage and not on reality.

+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
sato's picture

exactly. if the person's belief is rational ie based on evidence then it can be changed, but if it's based on emotion then it can't.

+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down
borgpunx's picture

.

+1
0
-1
Vote comment up/down