Becoming familiar with the ideas and things that make us uncomfortable or offended is the single best way to improve ourselves as human beings. If after making the effort, as I have suggested, you still feel the same or your aversion grows, then please feel free to ignore posts and discussions on this site that are related to firearms, as coldwater suggested.
If their reason for coming to this part of the forum is to troll and stir up trouble, no, they're not welcome.
If they are not actually interested in learning about us, our reasons, and our firearms, I presume they wouldn't come here in the first place.
I rest my case. 'If you don't agree with us then get lost'.
My statements that you quoted in no way said what you claim.
The out-of-context portions of my posts that you quoted address the appropriate way for visitors engage with us on this forum, not the content nor validity of their opinion. The context of my posts is important to that distinction, as I did explicitly encourage an ongoing discussion on the topic of firearms in EDC. Which, frankly, means that we're both in favor of a respectful discussion; as such, I'm not sure why you continue to express opposition to my statements.
I agree with you that coldwater's seemingly closed-minded terseness and off-putting tone are marginally worth questioning from the standpoint of civil discourse. I disagree, however, that his statements are unfounded given the specific tone of, and lack of justification in, Gren's post. I also fully understand coldwater's mentality when it comes to how these sort of discussions usually play out. My posts were written for the express purpose of diffusing any conflict between coldwater and Gren, and I can say confidently, based on a private message that I received from Gren, that I succeeded.
I can also find fault in your approach to this discussion, Ben, in that rather than taking the moral high ground and helping me guide the discussion to a productive end, you "called us out", so to speak, based on your preconceived notions. Such semantic bickering does not advance the cause of reasonable and open-minded discussion on the topic of firearms.
If the anti gun movement in the US wins this battle it will not be because they are correct or have a better position but because of the aggressive belligerence of the proponents rather than reasoned arguments. I believe the movement deserves more intelligence than the chest beating and anger that the rest of the world sees. Can you get it through your anger that I am not anti gun but very much anti the fight being lost stupidly? Being lost when it could have been won? Being lost due to the majorities revulsion for your kind of bar room brawler attitude?
Please correct me if I am misinterpreting this statement, but you seem to have a chip on your shoulder with regard to how pro-gun/anti-gun discussions have been had in the past. I wholeheartedly agree with you that all such discussions should be had respectfully and with an open-minded approach - to understand the specific concerns of each anti-gun individual, and work with them to find common ground based on reason and facts.
What you seem to be implying (if not outright stating) is that my posts somehow fall into the category of "chest beating and anger" that you oppose. That is what offends me. I have done my absolute best to ensure that my posts do not come off that way; and I believe that the portions of my posts that you quoted, in their original context, do not.