Those people are either uninformed/ignorant or liars. The uninformed/ignorant don't know enough to know that "a more effective background check" is a canard for a mere stepping stone to civilian disarmament, and no nothing of the actual data showing that such checks have little to no effect on crime. There are already all kinds of laws re "crazies" and guns... the lie is that we need new ex parte laws to stop them... when in fact none of the murders they point to (Pulse, Las Vegas, Parkland, etc.) would have been stopped by such a law. They are dupes of the progressive socialists who have only one goal: total power and control which must include disarming the populace at large. The rest are the elite who have everything to gain (power) from the disarming, they know exactly what they are doing and know they must lie about it in order to achieve their goal through incrementalism, which now is being shelved by the boldest (and stupidest) of them in their beginning to call for bans on "semi-automatics". If you think either of these groups is going to be your friend, you are mistaken... if adults wanted to be informed they already would be. If they are the liars, they ain't gonna change stripes.
Ok, now if they are just uninformed or misinformed, what do you think is going to be more effective at getting them on our side? Calling them ignorant and insulting their current position or being civil, recognizing how they came to that position, and then presenting information to correct the misinformation.
BTW the background check was just an example of a topic for debate. I was not trying to focus on any particular topic.
Did you know the "spoiler" on the trunk of car isn't a spoiler but actually an airfoil? Maybe you did but if you didn't do you think you would be open to new information if I told you how ignorant you were by calling it a spoiler and that you were just duped? No! That would be counter productive.
If they vote, they are on one side or the other. If they don't vote, and are not "politically active" in any way, then they don't matter.
If you insist on this false dichotomy I think we will lose the war of attrition here. Ignoring them because they "voted" against us is just insuring they will continue to vote against us. Like I pointed out, even if you don't totally flip them, maybe you have tempered their position enough to change the outcome on a certain specific issue. For example, say you talked a lot to a liberal and you couldn't change their mind on universal background checks, but maybe you changed their mind on a magazine size limit. Are you going to say that isn't worth your time and effort, that it must be a complete change of mind or it doesn't count? No one is banning firearms outright, they are doing it step by step.
The people that don't do anything one way or the other don't matter. If they aren't involved at this point, forget about it. Or not. Go ahead and do what you're doing. Works for me. Useless, but works for me. Be sure to let us know how the liars and ignorant that you convert help our cause.
Those people who don't have strong opinions on the issue of guns still vote so they still matter.
[/quote]Feel free to show me how attempting to educate them or placate them or coddle them does anything good for our cause.
[/quote]
We need everyone we can get, don't disregard them because they aren't real gun enthusiasts or 2nd amendment enthusiast. I admire your idealism but it needs to be combined with some realism. If we get outvoted we can end up losing out rights, plain and simple. We will be right in theory but in real life we will lose. This is why we cannot disregard our opponents.