My view about TFL and THR: Both have in the mission statement, "To promote RKBA".
Now, pro-gun folks don't need persuading. For 99% of anti-gun folks, any persuasive effort is a waste of time.
What's left are the fence-straddlers. They've been told, among other things, that gun-folks are knuckle-dragging Neanderthals.
If we post stuff that seems to support the idea of KDNs, how do we convince the fence-straddlers, the neutrals, as to our own true, good-guy nature? How do we promote RKBA if we--as a group--offend people by hostility, bad language and personal attacks?
"Attack ideas, not people" has been the rule for both TFL and THR since I first logged onto TFL in 1998.
It bothers me not at all if folks disagree with any idea I post. All anybody has to do is point out where my logic is flawed, or that what I presume to be fact is erroneous. That seems simple enough to me.
What I don't understand is some amount of emotional involvement in a subject which leads to an absence of self-control in a response, where the person is attacked in lieu of discussing the idea.
Heck, I could even tolerate the occasional insult, were there some imagination, cleverness and humor. Ready examples include, "Sirrah, I shall not engage you in a battle of wits, for I would never attack an unarmed man." Or, "Let's have a battle of wits. I'll give you half of mine, so we can start even." And, "When you get home tonight, I hope your mother crawls out from beneath the porch and bites you!"
Well, they're better than, "You disagree with me, so you're stupid."
, Art
