You will never "beat the Antis" but you might change a persons point of view through education.
I think it best to answer criticism with positive example and logic and on a one to one basis. The organisations are working on a different level but I can do my bit with the people I meet.
I have yet to meet any vegetarian who did not accept my moral stance on being a meat eater provided I was prepared to kill and butcher myself rather than delegate the nasty bits to someone else in order to buy a plastic wrapped joint from Tesco.
I argue the honourable status of the hunter gatherer and my natural kinship with such as the bushmen of the Kalahari.
We can only deal with people. By lumping them together as "Antis" and projecting negative stereotypes on to them, one is just running away from actual interaction which is the only opportunity we have to change any attitudes.
And we won't do it with the attitude that "they" are somehow sub-human.
The title of this thread is a case in point. And
@timbrayford 's intro underlines it. There are those opposed to shooting for a whole variety of reasons, so the only way to persuade any individual issue is by arguing against those particular reasons with appropriate arguments. The invective we witness on here is akin to joining in with the school bully taunting the weak kid...childish and pointless and does nothing for us or our position. How many times do we see posts on here just name calling people with a different point of view as Scum, Unwashed, Townies, Spongers, Do-gooders, Tree huggers and the rest...what is the point? It is just prejudice of the same sort that those railing on here are accusing the "Antis" of.
The fox hunting with hounds opposition includes my 95 year old mum who has, and had, many friends who hunted. But nonetheless she was opposed to it even before she had her fences broken down and hens scattered and some missing when the pack went through the village and her garden...how and why is she scum?
We must also be aware of making it a black and white "them and us" situation. There are some things which I cannot support from a logical point of view, and I know that many others on here have their own misgivings about some activities...quite rightly so. We should not accept that our enemies friends are always our enemies or that our enemies enemies are always our friends! Too many nuances.
Some "Antis" are opposed to killing any Badgers, but I have had no problem getting agreement from them when I have said that I too believe the current cull policy is flawed because it ignores the findings of the DEFRA trials 20 years ago. DEFRA found that reactive culls were the most effective. Most who were initially absolutely opposed to any killing, seem able to accept the logic....that if you remove the likely infected Badgers in the area surrounding the farms/herds with TB reactors, you end up with a healthy population of both Badgers and cattle. With just a random cull, although you will reduce the incidence of TB exchange it will take much longer and be less efficient because you may just be killing healthy animals and making space for infected ones to come in. Sure the badger numbers are generally too high in my view from the bumble bee and hedgehog damage...but by defusing the emotive element with logic and science you do not
create "Antis".
The increased complexity of the firearms licensing system is introduced in the wake of the media incited outcry after every misuse of firearms...but I have met no-one yet who is not able to appreciate that it is the person who commits the atrocity and not the implement. Ask why motor vehicles are not equally feared and ownership restricted after they are used to plough into a bus queue or Westminster Bridge pedestrians. And I argued that before the terrorists actually used them...I argue that while the politicians can divert public attention by creating further obstacles to legitimate gun ownership, they can ignore the need for investing in mental healthcare and disenfranchised communities which are creating the "them and us" situation exploited by the radicals.
There are as many factors and as many possible solutions as there are "Antis".
Our only hope is logic and persuasion on an individual basis, and for me like charity it begins at home.
Alan
sorry miss.
