The Smallest Minority on earth is the individual. Those who deny individual rights cannot claim to be defenders of minorities. - Ayn Rand
It's not like she can go to an anti-gun range and have a good time...
Nice to see that everyone in the photos keeps their fingers off the trigger.
That was my first thought.
Same reason not to try drugs where they are legal-
If she did like it, she couldn't do it at home!
Write her, and her boss, to thank them for the straight story.
Every time that I get into an argument with an anti, I ask them if they've ever held a gun or been shooting. 9 times out of 10, the answer is "no." I then let them know that they have no business talking about something of which they know nothing. Some of them I get to the range - and there they see that just pointing a gun in the general direction of the target doesn't get them a bullseye, contrary to what Hollywood would have us believe. It is especially fun to have them shoot a full auto - to see an anti with a Schumer-eating grin after shooting is simply priceless.
The problem with that argument is "You have no business talking about drug laws if you've never done heroin."
I've had that one thrown back in my face before. This indicates that you're not going to get ANYWHERE with this person.
"You have no business talking about drug laws if you've never done heroin."
It's possible to read some books and know quite a lot about heroin - more than almost all heroin addicts do. Maybe you won't know how the high feels, but everything else is well documented. But the Congressmen making laws about drugs either haven't read any of the scientific research, or they ignore it in favor of catering to their constituents prejudices. (There is a pretty good chance they've used cocaine...)
If Stephen Hawkings wanted to learn all about guns, his inability to hold one in his hands wouldn't stop him. There's plenty of information available to read. But for those with at least one functional hand, why just read about it? Unlike heroin, there's no downside to first-hand learning. (Assuming that you're not a mental case who is only keeps from perforating people by avoiding the perforating tools.) And unlike dopeheads, gun users generally know quite a lot about their own guns and guns in general. But the Congressmen legislating about guns don't...
This is not an argument that will be effective on everyone, there are a few who oppose drug laws and understand the nasty history of prejudice and ignorance behind them. That is, the first marijuana laws were pushed by out-of-work Prohibition cops, leveraging prejudice against Mexicans, blacks, and jazz musicians, and lying about the AMA's position to Congress. Nixon rejected a report from a scientific commission recommending the legalization of marijuana, because he could make political hay from prejudice against hippies. Crack is just cocaine chemically processed to burn - but Congress legislated a 100-1 difference between them legally once they figured out which one poor blacks used.
And the laws wanted by the "gun control" crowd have a similar irrational basis. The first gun control laws were used to keep blacks from owning guns, which would be dangerous to the KKK. The 14th Amendment was passed in part to ensure that blacks would be able to own guns to defend themselves, but prejudiced judges gutted the privileges and immunities clause. Our national gun control laws are mostly rational, but that's due to a century of the NRA, GOA, etc., convincing Congressmen that irrational legislation in this one area will be hazardous to their careers. In places like Chicago and Massachusetts, the laws aren't so sensible.