And are they surprised?


PDA






armoredman
September 21, 2008, 04:10 PM
http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b13/armoredman/clinging.jpg

If you enjoyed reading about "And are they surprised?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
GTSteve03
September 21, 2008, 04:11 PM
I'm not sure about the "Governments Paralyzed" part. Personally, the less I hear our government doing, the happier I get. ;)

armoredman
September 21, 2008, 04:19 PM
Referring to the wrangling/arguing on how they'll spend more of our money. Needed filler. :)

Emfuser
September 21, 2008, 04:22 PM
How about those of us who enjoy our RKBA but don't care for religion?

scrat
September 21, 2008, 04:22 PM
kinda political but i like it.

armoredman
September 21, 2008, 04:25 PM
Emfuser, this is in referance to the famous Obama quote about bitter small town people clinging tight to thier guns and religion. If you are not "into religion", that is just fine - this is America, and you are free to believe or not believe in whatever. :)

TonyB
September 21, 2008, 04:27 PM
thanks for the new wallpaper......

Emfuser
September 21, 2008, 04:30 PM
armoredman, I am aware of the quote which your picture alludes to. I am merely highlighting a recurrent theme which I see in the gun owner community which may play into a sterotype
that could be undesirable.

I am curious about something, though. Do you belong to a gun club or range which is religiously biased? One that, perhaps, starts its meetings with a denominational prayer?

armoredman
September 21, 2008, 04:36 PM
Nope, no gun club, not even a church goer, really. :) I just have my beliefs. Sorry if it offended you.

Doggy Daddy
September 21, 2008, 04:37 PM
How about those of us who enjoy our RKBA but don't care for religion?

Those who fit that description are free to start their own thread. Probably best done at APS, if it's religion based.

In this thread, religion is merely referenced as being in a quote by someone else.

kingpin008
September 21, 2008, 04:40 PM
Those who fit that description are free to start their own thread. Probably best done at APS, it it's religion based.

What about threads based on the utterances of politicians? Don't they belong over at APS as well?

JImbothefiveth
September 21, 2008, 04:42 PM
Awesome! St John and Moses , and John Moses Browning! (Even though that's probably not a Browning he's carrying.)


What about threads based on the utterances of politicians? Don't they belong over at APS as well?
I believe it's on-topic, because that has become a classic pro-RKBA phrase.
Learn a little tolerance, I think guns and religion go together quite nicely!

kwelz
September 21, 2008, 04:43 PM
I could do without the Bible but I like the overall message of the Poster.

Emfuser
September 21, 2008, 04:46 PM
Perhaps you misunderstand.

While I am not offended at your poster, I can state that it does not accurately represent me, nor a sizable percentage of the RKBA community who does not believe the same thing(s) as you do, when it comes to the other half of Mr. Obama's quote. You know, the one that has nothing to do with RKBA?

I also am publicly questioning if playing so literally into Mr. Obama's utterance of a stereotype is harmful, even if it is meant as an act of defiance?

kingpin008
September 21, 2008, 04:48 PM
Learn a little tolerance, I think guns and religion go together quite nicely!

Tolerance, huh? How about tolerance of people on a GUN message board who aren't Christian, or don't want to deal with graphic based on the words of a politician?

JImbothefiveth
September 21, 2008, 04:49 PM
I could do without the Bible but I like the overall message of the Poster
Then make your own poster, I think it's good to reach out to the religious community, they are the most likely to vote for pro-gun candidates.


Tolerance, huh? How about tolerance of people on a GUN message board who aren't Christian, or don't want to deal with graphic based on the words of a politician
This looks like it caters to Christians, but it's not telling you to convert, and if you don't want to read it, don't! I think it sends a very good, pro-gun message!

The guy makes a pro-gun poster, and a bunch of people start criticizing him because they aren't his religion! It does no harm to you, and it helps you keep your guns!
Let's please not get this thread closed!

Mp7
September 21, 2008, 04:50 PM
i understand the gun part... but the Bible part
seems very obscured, unless you see chaos as a proof of
an existence of a deity.......


get the book out of there and
it will be a simple and clear ad
everyboday can understand in a sec.

( ..sorry, i do this for a living)

armoredman
September 21, 2008, 04:54 PM
I also am publicly questioning if playing so literally into Mr. Obama's utterance of a stereotype is harmful, even if it is meant as an act of defiance?

If it is, then you are distancing yourself publically from my statement, which is perfectly fine, and I accept that gun owners, like all groups of individuals, are, in fact, individuals, and not mindless sheep or rednecks. Even though I freely admit much of who I am fits into the redneck mould, minus the horse, pickup truck, or six hound dogs under the back porch.

http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b13/armoredman/urbanredneck.jpg

Yes, that is me. :)
MP7, the "book" is there deliberately, and is part and parcel of the message. And no, I don't do this as a living, would probably starve. :)

JImbothefiveth
September 21, 2008, 04:58 PM
I also am publicly questioning if playing so literally into Mr. Obama's utterance of a stereotype is harmful, even if it is meant as an act of defiance?
8o% or so of Americans are Christian, that's not even including other religions.
I think it helps them see guns as a normal, all-American tradition, like they see religion.
And this will get certain people out to vote pro-gun, especially in swing states, the states that decide whether or not the '94 ban will get passed again.

Prophet
September 21, 2008, 05:02 PM
I like it! I dont understand why everyone is making such a big fuss about the Bible, but I do see where playing yourself into a stereotype could come off as in-yo'-face to antis, whether that is good or not could be argued.

ibtl!

JImbothefiveth
September 21, 2008, 05:05 PM
You know, if you were to mail this out to 100 people in say, Ohio, and tell them to send it to their friends.....
Just a thought.

armoredman
September 21, 2008, 05:06 PM
Never, chain letters annoy the heck out of me, wouldn't foist it on anyone else.

JImbothefiveth
September 21, 2008, 05:09 PM
Maybe mail it out, and don't tell them to send it to their friends then?
Can I do so?

Emfuser
September 21, 2008, 05:11 PM
Jimbo, it appears that your are incapable of seeing that poster as also being potentially damaging to the cause of RKBA, and have instead chosen appeal to popularity.

Alrighty then.

Good day.

JImbothefiveth
September 21, 2008, 05:13 PM
and have instead chosen appeal to popularity.
Isn't appealing to popularity good for RKBA?

sd
September 21, 2008, 05:14 PM
I like. We're told we have to tolerate every freakish thing someone can think of until it comes to our Bibles and guns, and then lots of people get their panties in a twist.

JImbothefiveth
September 21, 2008, 05:17 PM
Exactly, it will make people say "enough is enough"!

armoredman
September 21, 2008, 05:23 PM
Thank you. :)

Emfuser
September 21, 2008, 05:25 PM
*sigh*

No, appealing to popularity is not a good thing when you're trying to advocate an idea. Logical fallacies are things to be avoided.

Maybe it's because I go outside of the gun community, online and IRL quite frequently, to do RKBA advocacy, that I see the potential for deleterious effects. When I have to face antis, or even more importantly, swing voters in the audience, negative stereotypes are something you absolutely do NOT want to play into. Also, tying together two contentious issues, one of which is much nastier to deal with than the other, does not help at all, EVER. The only people who posters like this appeal to don't need any convincing; you've already got their vote. HOWEVER, there are plenty of people out there who haven't made up their minds. Playing into stereotypes, and tying together multiple hotly contentious issues is always a BAD idea if you're trying to win a debate and forward an idea, but it's always a great tactic if you're trying to confuse people, stall an idea, or kill a debate. I've had it tried on me many many many times and it always makes me do ten times more work to get the RKBA message across when someone successfully introduces the "bible-beating, gun-loving redneck" stereotype into an argument.

So, the point I'm trying to make, which some unfortunately seem unable or unwilling to grasp, is that, while I know your intentions are good, that you are apparently unaware of just how much DAMAGE your picture can do when let loose onto the population at large.

JCMAG
September 21, 2008, 05:26 PM
A lot of people getting feisty over this...

I second the new desktop. I'm using the blank space on the right to place my favorite pictures of the guns I want to get next :D

I'm not a religious man, but I can certainly appreciate the value of the Good Book come good times or bad.

Excellent work armoredman!

armoredman
September 21, 2008, 05:30 PM
Emfuser, feel free to ignore anything else I post. BTW, guns and God was how this country got started.


PS, the liberals would get real mad at this one, too, wouldn't they.


http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b13/armoredman/legalimmigrant.jpg

Emfuser
September 21, 2008, 05:32 PM
I shall not, thank you, particularly since I enjoy debate, and am quite skilled at it. :)

armoredman
September 21, 2008, 05:34 PM
Congratulations.

AndyC
September 21, 2008, 05:38 PM
Some of you boys are wired too tight - I'm not religious and I still liked the poster. Then again, perhaps it's because I don't believe that the world revolves around me, so good job from me, armoredman ;)

armoredman
September 21, 2008, 05:40 PM
Thanks, Andy

pax
September 21, 2008, 05:42 PM
Nice poster, Armoredman.

pax

Doggy Daddy
September 21, 2008, 05:43 PM
AndyC
Some of you boys are wired too tight - I'm not religious and I still liked the poster. Then again, perhaps it's because I don't believe that the world revolves around me, so good job, armoredman.

I am religious. And I still recognize and appreciate wisdom from the non-religious. Very nice, AndyC!

meef
September 21, 2008, 05:48 PM
Geez....

Much ado about nothing.

:cool:



armoredman - you make some cool posters.

SCKimberFan
September 21, 2008, 05:51 PM
BTW, guns and God was how this country got started.

Amen.

Mrs. Armoredman
September 21, 2008, 05:51 PM
Emfuser, No one is trying to push religon in your face. No one is telling you to believe in something you don't want to believe in.No one is telling you to read the bible and believe in God the way armoredman does. I understand that your a 2nd ammendment believer and thats all well and good. I think you are going over board at little bit. I have heard some Judges say they can't do thier job without God in thier life.

If you don't like the poster armoredman put up just blow it off like it's not there. It is sending a clear message and it's a good one. Let's not get this thread closed because you are making a mountain out of a mole hill.

Treo
September 21, 2008, 05:55 PM
I like it. I don't understand why some of you are reacting as though Armoredman committed some kind of sin ( couldn't resist).

The quote was that we're all out here clinging to our guns & religion , the Bible was a good visual representation. Even people who obviously have no use for religion got the refference Good job.

Anybody that is turned off to RKBA by this poster probably wasn't gonna support us anyway

HeadlandRam
September 21, 2008, 05:56 PM
Armoredman, I love your posters. I think you need a whole gallery with your posters in it.

armoredman
September 21, 2008, 06:01 PM
Headlandram, thank's but I am just an amatuer, nothing more.

Treo - boo hiss.

Duke Junior
September 21, 2008, 06:01 PM
I believe it's on-topic, because that has become a classic pro-RKBA phrase.
Learn a little tolerance, I think guns and religion go together quite nicely!

This thread is plutonium because every single member is going to come away from the OP's poster with a different message.
But I think Jimbo's quote above is close to the case.
It's walking a fine line, but sometimes that's the only way to make a point.
I can understand some of the feelings of the naysayers who think it doesn't belong here.
But I believe it passes the test.

NukemJim
September 21, 2008, 06:02 PM
Armored man I like the picture. Good job technicaly (I have seen a distinct improvement since you first started posting, the quality of your work continues to increase.), estheticly IMHO , and good captioning (I love the emphasis put on "legal" on the 2nd Image:D ).

However please do not be offended but I think that Emfusor has a point regarding Also, tying together two contentious issues, one of which is much nastier to deal with than the other, does not help at all, EVER. The only people who posters like this appeal to don't need any convincing; you've already got their vote. HOWEVER, there are plenty of people out there who haven't made up their minds. Playing into stereotypes, and tying together multiple hotly contentious issues is always a BAD idea if you're trying to win a debate and forward an idea

I like the picture, I agree with it(I'd like it even better if you could work "legal" immigration in there, I am quite annoyed that because I am against "illegal immigration many people assume that I am against legal immigration.

But I agree it would probable be best for "In-House" use. It really depends on what we are trying to do make an image for ourselves or make an image to attempt to convert others.

Again I say please do not be offended, I like your work and hope you contiunue to produce such excellent images and I'll contiue to look at and enjoy them.

Best wishes

NukemJim

armoredman
September 21, 2008, 06:10 PM
Nuke, I am not offended at all, thank you. I am still working on a few angles, but I got started by being inspired by Oleg. I just don't have access to all of his cool toys and models!

Uh oh, just had another idea...

JImbothefiveth
September 21, 2008, 06:13 PM
When I have to face antis, or even more importantly, swing voters in the audience, negative stereotypes are something you absolutely do NOT want to play into

Emfuser, this poster capitalizes on the feelings of the average American right now. Most Americans, including me, are upset about the economy, and are religious.
I agree that you shouldn't bring in negative stereotypes (like the urban redneck poster, even though that one is hilarious), but connecting with people who are disgusted at the condition the world around them is in is very helpful indeed. Ever hear of the Moral Majority, who registered about 2 million new voters? Or the so-called "Reagan Revolution?(I don't want to discuss these here, but I'm pointing out that this can work.)

Wes Janson
September 21, 2008, 06:50 PM
For what it's worth, I find the image itself to be fairly well executed, and understand the message...but feel that Emfuser is absolutely right. There are a significant number of gun owners who don't believe in god(s) (or, alternative, don't believe in the Christian god), for whom that poster does not represent them.

armoredman
September 21, 2008, 07:18 PM
And they may represent themselves as small town Americans clinging to thier guns and...hmm, cabbages? Whatever get's them through the day, friend! :)
But, I can see this getting SO political it gets locked, so one last completely non-political poster...


http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b13/armoredman/glockerware.jpg

meef
September 21, 2008, 07:19 PM
There are a significant number of gun owners who don't believe in god(s) (or, alternative, don't believe in the Christian god), for whom that poster does not represent them.Well, I suppose that merely highlights the fact that no single poster, image or message is going to represent 100% of all gun owners - or any other demographic group.

That doesn't diminish the value or sense of identity this particular poster's message has for those it does represent. Nor does it in any way infringe upon those gun owners it does not represent.

Again - much ado about nothing.

:cool:

GTSteve03
September 21, 2008, 07:38 PM
But, I can see this getting SO political it gets locked, so one last completely non-political poster...
Haha, that poster makes perfect sense!

Why would you put a superior gun like the Glock in an inferior leather holster? Glocks and Kydex FTW! :cool:

armoredman
September 21, 2008, 07:40 PM
At least ye gots a sense of humor, matey!

JImbothefiveth
September 21, 2008, 07:41 PM
And, well, you have to balance between reaching out to people and not offending people.
If you were to say "legal full auto!" THAT would probably alienate too many people.
But this reaches out to maybe 80% of people, and a good portion of the other 20% probably won't be offended.

JImbothefiveth
September 21, 2008, 07:49 PM
And honestly, this is a mix of how me and my neighbors feel: the economy's in shambles, the public schools are producing teen pregnancies and gangbangers, my property values are going down, and here come these guys, wanting to take away my guns, so I can't defend myself from the afore mentioned gangbangers and take away my religion, pretty much the only thing that give me hope anymore?


People like those are probably who you want to show this too. They are most likely suburban or rural.
They are likely to vote against anyone who would take away either of those those.
I speak for many when I say I am just fed up with what this world's come to, and I most certainly don't want people to take away my guns and religion!

Maybe I should post that in activism.

SCKimberFan
September 21, 2008, 07:50 PM
And, well, you have to balance between reaching out to people and not offending people.
If you were to say "legal full auto!" THAT would probably alienate too many people.
But this reaches out to maybe 80% of people, and a good portion of the other 20% probably won't be offended.

And if they are, so what? We have to quit worrying about offending people. Someone is going to be offended by anything. So all I have to say to them is: Get Over It!

Prof. A. Wickwire
September 21, 2008, 07:53 PM
Armoredman,

I'm Jewish and think your poster conceptualized perfectly on the mindset of people (like myself) who were insulted my Senator Obama's comment.

Once again we are running in to the issue of opinions. Just like nostrils, everyone has a couple (cleaned up for Art's grandmaw).

If, like me, you appreciate the thought provoking aspects of the poster, great. If not, you are free to criticize in a positive manner (as other posters have, thankfully).

This does not need to turn into a holier then thou (or more secular then thou) thread. All that would accomplish would be to get the thread locked which would benefit no-one.

We all need to try and reach out to the undecideds in our communities however we can. Some attempts will be more successful than others. I think this one is very successful.

Sincerely,

Prof. A. Wickwire

Owens
September 21, 2008, 07:56 PM
Armoredman,

Nice poster. I agree with you. In these times, it's nice to have something one can believe in.
Good message in it. Keep up the good work.
Owens

modifiedbrowning
September 21, 2008, 08:02 PM
It doesn't matter if you are a non religious gunowner. The poster references an Obama quote that links gunownership with being religious and bitter.
You could be the most left wing, liberal person in the world, but if you own a gun you are painted as a right wing religious zealot.
I like the poster and I'm not very religious myself.

armoredman
September 21, 2008, 08:07 PM
Thank you for the kind comments.

Shung
September 21, 2008, 08:07 PM
I understand why people don't like to see the bible on gun posters (even though I am catholic) . but i appreciate the quality of the work on the poster.

just imagine the same posters with an AK and the Coran..

Mixing guns and religions often lead to bad things..

but that is only MY opinion... it worth what you think of it, nothing more..

JImbothefiveth
September 21, 2008, 08:14 PM
just imagine the same posters with an AK and the Coran
That would be just terrible!


Now that I think about it, I'm glad he picked a revolver as the gun.
If he had picked a glock or even a hunting rifle (people would think it was an "assault rifle") it wouldn't have sent a good message.

Mixing guns and religions often lead to bad things..
If you haven't been to America, you should know that religion is very widespread here, far more so than in most of europe.(Switzerland might be differant though.)

Edit: Shung, I see what you mean. We don't want people to run around thinking that violence is a good thing, or Christians are war-mongers, and we don't need another round of crusades.
Good point,and I now have a few doubts about that poster, although I still somewhat support it.

Poper
September 21, 2008, 08:29 PM
Quote:
Mixing guns and religions often lead to bad things..If you haven't been to America, you should know that religion is very widespread here, far more so than in most of europe.(Switzerland might be differant though.)I would like to add: It was precisely because guns and religion were well mixed, the American Revolution succeeded.
See also the Declaration of Independence.http://www.ushistory.org/Declaration/document/index.htm
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness....
...And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor.

Our Founders and their clinging to their religion and guns are exactly why this nation came to be.

JMHO, of course. ;)

Poper

Mrs. Armoredman
September 21, 2008, 08:36 PM
I think insulting people is wrong. Obama should not have done that. What makes him think he is better than everyone else?

jonmerritt
September 21, 2008, 08:51 PM
If my religion offends you, to bad. If you don't like our country, and all of our various faiths, to bad. If you don't like it that our rights allow us to have guns to defend our way of life, and all of our faiths, GET OUT!!

kingpin008
September 21, 2008, 08:54 PM
In the interest of keeping this thread from being too political, I'd not answer that. While I may not be a huge fan of ArmoredMan's poster*, this has been a good thread so far. If we start to get into why a particular politician did this or that, we may find ourselves locked out in short order.


*My earlier comments aside, I've always enjoyed his photographic efforts. There has been a definite improvement over time, and that does take time and effort to achieve. Just giving credit where credit is due.

kingpin008
September 21, 2008, 08:58 PM
If my religion offends you, to bad. If you don't like our country, and all of our various faiths, to bad. If you don't like it that our rights allow us to have guns to defend our way of life, and all of our faiths, GET OUT!!


See, this is the kind of thing that I think alienates so many. Part of what makes America great is that we all have the right to disagree, as well as the right to voice that opinion. Crowing for someone to "get out" if they "don't like it" is neither productive nor mature. It gives the appearance of ignorance, imho. we should be inviting differing opinions, and learning about what causes that difference, rather than pushing it away.

Loomis
September 21, 2008, 09:15 PM
Kingpin, you are way off track there. We all have the right to bear arms. Anyone that tries to do away with that right is a traitor. Anyone that sympathises with traitors is himself a kind of traitor.

3KillerBs
September 21, 2008, 09:23 PM
But the "right to disagree" does not mean the right to silence the one disagreed with by saying that he has no right to expose his religion in public as if religious belief were a sort of dirty underwear.

So it wouldn't appeal to everyone. Big deal. Those who don't like it can create posters that appeal to their personal tastes. Once they look at that first poster and determine that its not to their taste they are perfectly free to move on to another topic of greater interest.

No one will be taking the names of people who don't have positive comments for the purpose of stuffing their PMs full of tracts.

Attempting to silence and marginalize religious believers is the exact equivalent of the anti's attempts to shame gun owners.

FLA2760
September 21, 2008, 09:31 PM
Nice jab at Obama's remark re clinging to guns and religion. KUDOS

springmom
September 21, 2008, 09:45 PM
Aroredman..good job! As soon as I get my real intenet connection back (still thumb typing on my Treo, sigh...) it's my new wallpaper.

Y'all who keep criticizing...oddly enough, I don't recall seeing any of YOUR creative efforts....?

Springmom

yenchisks
September 21, 2008, 09:52 PM
1+++ SCKimberfan

kingpin008
September 21, 2008, 10:02 PM
Y'all who keep criticizing...oddly enough, I don't recall seeing any of YOUR creative efforts....?

Springmom

So if we're not creative, we don't get to have an opinion?

Poor East Texan
September 21, 2008, 10:26 PM
A-Man I fully support your right to post it!

I happen to also have been quite offended when O said it!!

And yes, while anyone has a right to be offended by it that does not give you the right to try and silence it. All we want as gun owners is to be allowed to buy and shoot what we want. All antis want is to TAKE IT ALL AWAY....

Kinda lopsided eh?

davepool
September 21, 2008, 10:50 PM
Armoredman, i liked the poster and in spite of not being a religious man i wasn't the least bit offended, but the tupperware/Glock crack ,well now i'm pissed :)

Mac45
September 21, 2008, 10:56 PM
I thought it was an excellent poster.
Saved the image to use in my screen saver.:)

murph50
September 21, 2008, 10:56 PM
Very good amoredman
I got the connection with the Obama statement right away
As far as the bible goes...well you needed that there to go along with what Obama said.
I'm not religious at all and I don't take any offense to it.
Freedom of religion means freedom of religion.
I really enjoy your posters

jlbraun
September 21, 2008, 11:03 PM
*sigh*

No, appealing to popularity is not a good thing when you're trying to advocate an idea. Logical fallacies are things to be avoided.

Maybe it's because I go outside of the gun community, online and IRL quite frequently, to do RKBA advocacy, that I see the potential for deleterious effects. When I have to face antis, or even more importantly, swing voters in the audience, negative stereotypes are something you absolutely do NOT want to play into. Also, tying together two contentious issues, one of which is much nastier to deal with than the other, does not help at all, EVER. The only people who posters like this appeal to don't need any convincing; you've already got their vote. HOWEVER, there are plenty of people out there who haven't made up their minds. Playing into stereotypes, and tying together multiple hotly contentious issues is always a BAD idea if you're trying to win a debate and forward an idea, but it's always a great tactic if you're trying to confuse people, stall an idea, or kill a debate. I've had it tried on me many many many times and it always makes me do ten times more work to get the RKBA message across when someone successfully introduces the "bible-beating, gun-loving redneck" stereotype into an argument.

So, the point I'm trying to make, which some unfortunately seem unable or unwilling to grasp, is that, while I know your intentions are good, that you are apparently unaware of just how much DAMAGE your picture can do when let loose onto the population at large.

This.

The poster, I think, damages the perception of RKBA overall by putting out a message that is representative of stereotypes that are difficult to dispel.

Rather, I would have a poster that kept to the "clinging to religion and guns" spirit of Obama's quote, but dispelled stereotypes as well.

For example, by having the book in the person's hand be Life of the Buddha.

gp911
September 21, 2008, 11:07 PM
Wow, we have the same grill! :D

The picture looks like my environment before I moved back to the sticks...

As for the original "cling" pic I think it's great. If one wants to omit one item or the other to suit their preference they can make their own, but the quote includes both. If someone wants to try and represent "antipathy towards people that aren't like them" in their picture they can do that too, thanks to the 1st amendment. That would be a bit over the top though... Heh. Changing the Bible to a Quran, now THAT might cause all sorts of confusion as to what to get mad about!

gp911

rfurtkamp
September 21, 2008, 11:10 PM
While I am not offended at your poster, I can state that it does not accurately represent me, nor a sizable percentage of the RKBA community who does not believe the same thing(s) as you do, when it comes to the other half of Mr. Obama's quote. You know, the one that has nothing to do with RKBA?

I'm as far from post-Nicene Christianity as you can possibly get, further than an athiest in a real sense, and I'm not offended one bit by the poster. Americans cling to their religious beliefs (or lack of them, as evidenced in this thread) and their guns, both things which the candidate in question seeks to take away in practice.

If you do not see a threat to your own belief or lack thereof and exercise of same in an attack by government on any religious thought, you are a fool.

If you do not see a threat to your Second Amendment rights...well, be offended by the poster too.

I do not have to agree with America's Christian citizens to be as agast as they are at Obama's comments.

There will be no room for my 'evil' people worshipping in their own ways with their 'evil' rifles in private or public if the man and his handlers got their way.

rfurtkamp
September 21, 2008, 11:12 PM
For example, by having the book in the person's hand be Life of the Buddha.

Then you'd have people arguing that Buddhism is not a religion.

I could demand my holy books be carried in the photo, but I doubt that it'd get my message out to the average American voter either - the Bible represents religious belief well enough even though I don't agree with huge portions of it.

I'm not going to win any votes putting my Crowley in, sorry.

armoredman
September 21, 2008, 11:37 PM
rfurtkamp, Alister Crowley's works aren't likely to be in this house! However, I do have Ozzy's song! :) Could carry a copy of the album art?? :) :)
jlbraun, a Buddhist tract would be a non starter unless I had immolated myself in protest, as Buddhists are pacifists. Christianity is still the largest religous group in my country, USA.
gp911, I will probably be replacing that old Char Broil with a newer model, but it has put paid to MANY steaks, burgers, brats and chicken peices.
Davepool, GLOCK IS EVIL! Just kidding, made that one quite awhile ago to needle some glockophile friends.

Mrs. Armoredman
September 21, 2008, 11:40 PM
Good Greif. What a H*** of a thread.

CrawdaddyJim
September 22, 2008, 12:06 AM
Good composition and exposure. Technically very good picture.

Accurate representation of target audience. Won't sell well on a college campus, but will move in fly over country nicely.

One of the founding fathers made a statement. John Adams

"We have no government armed with power capable of contending with human passions unbridled by morality and religion. Avarice, ambition, revenge, or gallantry, would break the strongest cords of our Constitution as a whale goes through a net. Our Constitution was made only for a moral and religious people. It is wholly inadequate to the government of any other." --October 11, 1798

pax
September 22, 2008, 12:10 AM
Mrs. A ~

Yes, Christians are so offensive that our very presence among the ranks of gun owners somehow threatens the RKBA movement ... :rolleyes:

Well, maybe that's overstating it. It's good that we own guns, that's a given. And it's okay that we have beliefs and things. But heaven forbid -- uh, no, I mean, .... well, something forbid, anyway -- that we should ever mention those beliefs in public. Belief is so disgusting that merely admitting that you believe in something really forces all the really tolerant people to tell you to shut up because your mere existence is distasteful and somehow bad for the RKBA movement.

Move to the back of the bus, now. ;)

I've quit being surprised at anything online, but if I were still capable of it, I'd be surprised by the vitriol on this thread.

Does anyone honestly doubt that Obama's comment was directed at gun owners who happen to be Christians?

pax

rfurtkamp
September 22, 2008, 12:21 AM
Does anyone honestly doubt that Obama's comment was directed at gun owners who happen to be Christians?


I think it was directed at anyone not in his urban elite bracket myself.

He's referring to that horrible wasteland you fly over between LA and NYC and the clueless yokels who live there ;0

Mrs. Armoredman
September 22, 2008, 12:24 AM
Pax no one knows the answer to that but Obama himself. I am not suprised what I read online either. Everyone has thier own opinion and they are entitled to it. I own a gun and the anti's would want me in jail because I can and will defend myself. Anti's want our rights taken away so criminals can break into our homes and take our possesions and our life in the process. I have news for them. I will fight tooth and nail for my rights.

armoredman
September 22, 2008, 12:37 AM
I remember a time when God, Guns and Guts were American core values, not a smudged out part of cultural diversity, aka the systematic destruction of the American Melting Pot.

MacTech
September 22, 2008, 12:50 AM
Here's my slight modification, no offense to the OP;

http://homepage.mac.com/mactechg4/.Pictures/clinging.jpg

As one of those "Godless Heathen" Atheists myself, I had no problem with the poster, religion ain't my kinda' thing, but if it gives you comfort, I have no problem with it

I lean towards Pastafarianism/Frisbeeterianism myself anyway....

Odd1
September 22, 2008, 12:51 AM
Nice poster, was very clear to what you were refering.


I see the point that some people may associate gun owners with Christians.

So what? Gun owners come in all religions or lack there of in this country. And frankly, that is how it should be.

When BHO made his comment he was not talking about Buddha or Wiccans, I think we know to who he was refering.

Who really cares if Christianity and guns look like they go hand in hand in this poster (I am not saying they do)?

I mean unless something has changed, the majority religion in this country is Christianity (add up all flavors and variants that use that base book). So American gun owners would have many Christians then.

rfurtkamp
September 22, 2008, 12:51 AM
I remember a time when God, Guns and Guts were American core values

Yeah, I do too, it's one of the reasons I've been an Idaho resident for a decade now.

None of these things are a dirty word here.

I keep waiting for the 1970s to hit locally. I'll cry when they do.

The America I remember is still here, but I see it fading even from the edges.

It's sad.

springmom
September 22, 2008, 12:52 AM
No, Kingpin, it does not mean that. but neithe does every othe person's creative effort have to suit you, either. There is more than enough intellectual elbow room for those of us who believe in God, and those who do not, in the RKBA fight.

It does seem over the top to suggest that a poster which directly answers Obama's disgusting comment will *harm* RKBA efforts by including elements of faith. To say so implies, as 3KBees said, that faith is an embarrassing anachronism which will cause any intelligent person to immediately discount the rest of it. You are free to think that it is, of course... but not to xpect that all such references be expunged from the public square.

I, for one, am bloody tired of the back of bus and I'm happy Armoredman has posted his work. Well done.

Springmom

Mrs. Armoredman
September 22, 2008, 01:07 AM
Springmom, Well said. I like the poster my husband did too. He has a creative mind and knows how to get the point across. I have been with him for 12 years now and he has always managed to blow my mind one way or the other. We are both RKBA believers and we believe in God. He blessed us in many ways and I always try to remember the comfort he gives to me.

I don't care what religion anyone is. They have a right to worship the way they choose. I respect that.

Mal H
September 22, 2008, 01:15 AM
My God! (I hope I didn't just offend anyone.)

Why in the world would anyone think that armoredman's poster must represent them? Stop me if I'm wrong, but didn't the bottom line of his graphic say, "Pardon me while I cling to something"? The 'I' in that phrase is armoredman and only armoredman.

I must have missed the part where he asked for opinions on the poster because he had taken out a full-page ad in USA Today and planned to show that poster along with the fact that it was how all gun owners feel today.

It is a good technical poster; it says what he wants to say; it doesn't represent anyone else, and I can say with certainty even without asking him, that he didn't plan for it to represent anyone else - period
(Well, with the possible exception of Mrs. Armoredman.)

If you wish to have it represent you, that's fine. If you don't, then rest assured it never did in the first place.

Far, far too much ado about nothing!

armoredman
September 22, 2008, 01:15 AM
Thank you, springmom. :) And my loving wife. :) :)
MacTec, Hitchikers' Guide to the Universe ain't really a religious tract, but I like it! :P
I agree with my wife; I don't care what religion you practice or don't practice - you can worship a head of lettuce if you like, but I might snicker when your "god" wilts...

Grizfire
September 22, 2008, 01:16 AM
This thread goes to show that....

you can only please some of the people, some of the time.

although, you can please some of the people, all the time.

you can even please all the people, some of the time.

But you can never please all the people, all the time.

armoredman
September 22, 2008, 01:24 AM
Thank you, PT Barnum. :neener:

Mal H
September 22, 2008, 01:30 AM
Actually, that's a paraphrasing of a quote by Abe Lincoln.

Mrs. Armoredman
September 22, 2008, 01:33 AM
Thank you Mr. Admin. He was not trying to tell everyone they have to believe as Me and Mr. A do. I appreciate the input on this thread. That was my Bible just incase anyone wanted to know. There are alot of paper clips in it.

Owens
September 22, 2008, 08:43 AM
Mrs. Armoredman,
The paper clips made me think of this: The Bible that's falling apart usually belongs to someone who isn't.
Owens

rc109a
September 22, 2008, 09:08 AM
Armoredman: I like all the posters. Keep up the good work. It would not make a difference what type of book you put in the hand, someone would be made or dispute it just for an argument (or debat as some have calledit). The point is taken and is very enjoyable. If someone does not like it, then good on them. It is a free country and you have your opinions. No one said you have to post it as your wallpaper or spread it around. You can always click the back button and look at another posting or thread. Why bash someone who has come up with a creative way of expressing their opinion? Many great ideas have sprouted from opinions that others took offense to or thought was stupid. Keep up the good work!

Emfuser
September 22, 2008, 09:19 AM
Emfuser, No one is trying to push religon in your face. No one is telling you to believe in something you don't want to believe in.No one is telling you to read the bible and believe in God the way armoredman does. I understand that your a 2nd ammendment believer and thats all well and good. I think you are going over board at little bit. I have heard some Judges say they can't do thier job without God in thier life.

If you don't like the poster armoredman put up just blow it off like it's not there. It is sending a clear message and it's a good one. Let's not get this thread closed because you are making a mountain out of a mole hill.

If you take what I have written in this thread as inferring that
-Someone is trying to push religon in my face.
-Someone is telling me to believe in something I don't want to believe in.
-Someone is telling me to read the bible and believe in God the way armoredman does.

Then you are grossly mistaken, and should re-read what I said. My point is, very simply, that the poster in question is great for preaching to the choir that is the guns n' jesus crowd, but could very easily be used by the other side, against the RKBA cause. If you don't understand that, then I don't know what more to tell you.

TheBluesMan
September 22, 2008, 09:35 AM
...could very easily be used by the other side, against the RKBA cause.

How? I am really missing your point here. How could this poster possibly be used against the RKBA? :confused:

http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b13/armoredman/clinging.jpg

hankdatank1362
September 22, 2008, 09:43 AM
Oooh! Ooooh! Obama was right!!!! They do cling to guns and religion!!! Vote for Obama!!!!


Seriously, I have no idea how a tongue-in-cheek poster could possibly damage RKBA. No worse that the "Extreme Shock" poster ;)


Good job Armoredman!

Emfuser
September 22, 2008, 09:48 AM
How? I am really missing your point here. How could this poster possibly be used against the RKBA?

You have to think outside of the RKBA mentality. Ask yourself, how would antis use this against us? How would moderates perceive this poster? Does this poster give too literal a fit to the negative stereotype that Mr. Obama used?

Just for grins, would you like me to drop this in some places outside of the sheltered RKBA community and see what they have to say? I'm sure the responses will be... amusing.

ShelleyB.
September 22, 2008, 10:07 AM
IMHO, the poster is far too limiting. Use it to present a broad spectrum of nationalities, and clothing range from casual dress as shown to boardroom business suits, medical garb, teachers, factory workers - a real cross section of America. Turn Obama's elitist comment against him as he has mistakenly focused on only a narrow band of people.

The original is only preaching to the choir. Make it something a lot of people can identify with instead of only one.

rfurtkamp
September 22, 2008, 10:13 AM
Use it to present a broad spectrum of nationalities, and clothing range from casual dress as shown to boardroom business suits, medical garb, teachers, factory workers - a real cross section of America.


I find this type of approach in advertising/pr to be even more offputting than just white people in photos - it's politically correct pandering IMO.

It's like every ad I see these days, it's always various obvious ethnicities with tattoos and whatnot displaying oddity as a badge. I say this as somebody you'd never see in the old GQ photo shoots, ever.

TheBluesMan
September 22, 2008, 10:27 AM
Ask yourself, how would antis use this against us? How would moderates perceive this poster? Does this poster give too literal a fit to the negative stereotype that Mr. Obama used?

What is the point of asking myself? I'm asking you.

You made the statement that it could be used against the RKBA - back up that statement and explain it to me, please.

Barack H. Obama may have meant it as a negative stereotype, but I think his words backfired. I embrace the stereotype and support armoredman's work as representative of a very large and very responsible group of gun owners.

Vermont
September 22, 2008, 10:38 AM
Wow, a five page thread about politics AND religion that didn't get locked. How did that happen?

Emfuser
September 22, 2008, 10:44 AM
What is the point of asking myself? I'm asking you.

You made the statement that it could be used against the RKBA - back up that statement and explain it to me, please.

Barack H. Obama may have meant it as a negative stereotype, but I think his words backfired. I embrace the stereotype and support armoredman's work as representative of a very large and very responsible group of gun owners.

*sigh*
I was hoping you'd be able to think in a wider circle than the RKBA community.

Please read post 29 and let me know if you are still unclear. If you are, I will explain things in more detail.

As I've said, if you want some first-hand examples, I can take that picture to some more general communities, of mixed political views, and post some of that feedback over here, just to show you examples of real people outside of section of the political spectrum that picture already appeals to.

It's really frustrating to me when the responses I get here can be summarized (in some instances) to "what...? you mean there are people out there who think differently than me?" YES, and it's a good thing to be aware of during an election year! Just because you think "hey, that's just like me and it's awesome!" doesn't mean that everyone who sees that has the same reaction.

Emfuser
September 22, 2008, 10:47 AM
Wow, a five page thread about politics AND religion that didn't get locked. How did that happen?

IMO, this has remained pretty civil. I've only seen a few "well, this is what 'merica was founded on, so you can get out if you don't like it" types of comments and nobody is doing any sort of name-calling or engaging in nastiness.

Vermont
September 22, 2008, 10:49 AM
IMO, this has remained pretty civil.

I agree. It's just very rare.

csmkersh
September 22, 2008, 10:58 AM
The government being paralyzed isn't a bad thing, IMNSHO.

Gentleman Ranker
September 22, 2008, 11:05 AM
I think Emfuser does have a point, though it may be a bit overstated in this case.

Without going on about it, think about the audience for the poster and just what message is embedded in it. If you had to translate what the poster is saying into one plain-English sentence, 25 words or less, what would it be? Now, ask yourself what someone who wasn't already on the RKBA side would say it was?

If the poster is for circulation "among friends", I don't have any problem with it. I myself am a non-believer (some Christian folks have told me that that's the polite word for it) and don't feel excluded, insulted, etc. etc. I myself don't see a message in the poster that says anything along the lines of "Only Christians are welcome to own guns."

However ... remember that messages delivered by poster or similar visual format don't so much make an actual argument as they create an emotional response. The key to good advertising (and good propaganda, btw) is to find out what the audience already feels good about and connect the New Idea (New Candidate, New Product) to that. If you accidentally connect the New Idea to something the audience doesn't like, it can blow up in your face.

If I have a criticism of the poster (and this is only valid "outside the family"), it would be that it may send a message that "The only alternative to our bad situation now is guns and Christianity." I don't believe that armoredman intends it to say that, but I think that some audiences, given their existing (if wrong) ideas about some things, could easily see it. Someone who is already nervous about guns and isn't Christian could see it as offering a choice between two situations that scare or exclude them.

Of course, some antis will not be convinced by anything whatever. We can write them off. There are lots of people who are on the fence, or at least reachable (I'm doing that with someone at work even now). It works a lot better to meet those folks where they are and gently bring them around rather than berating their ignorance or lack of patriotism.

Christian folk, think about this: is the most effective evangelism based on straight-up hellfire and damnation delivered in a self-righteous way? For some, maybe, but I am guessing that such an approach by itself will lose more people than it gains.

In summary, I don't see anything wrong with the poster as something to share amongst RKBA folks. It's nicely done and the message is clear, if not applicable to all of us. If the audience is the unevangelized non-believers (in RKBA ;) ), then I think the message might be clearer.

That's one thing I generally like about the work of Our Esteemed Host Oleg ... it emphasizes practical consequences that apply to everyone.

regards,

GR

hankdatank1362
September 22, 2008, 11:15 AM
As I've said, if you want some first-hand examples, I can take that picture to some more general communities, of mixed political views, and post some of that feedback over here, just to show you examples of real people outside of section of the political spectrum that picture already appeals to.



I'm sure some would freak. But the only reason they would freak out is because there's a gun in the picture, not because they are insinuating something that isn't there involving organized religion and the gun lobby.

The ones that would flip at the sight of a picture of a gun wouldn't be any more or less offended by this poster as they woud any other work by Armoredman or Oleg.

hdrk1955
September 22, 2008, 11:21 AM
Not only do I like it, I understand where it comes from

Emfuser
September 22, 2008, 11:22 AM
Well put, Gentleman Ranker. Thank you for expanding on what I've been getting at.

freebird60
September 22, 2008, 11:33 AM
+1 to Gentleman Ranker

springmom
September 22, 2008, 12:30 PM
Of course, some antis will not be convinced by anything whatever. We can write them off. There are lots of people who are on the fence, or at least reachable (I'm doing that with someone at work even now). It works a lot better to meet those folks where they are and gently bring them around rather than berating their ignorance or lack of patriotism.

Except that the poster does neither one. There is no lambasting of ANYONE in it (with the possible exception of Wall Street, I suppose). It is in first person, singular. It does not demand, preach, hector, or even invite. It is a first person singular statement, and as such, just flat doesn't fit any of the critiques that are being presented here.

If I say that *I* like venison medallions in port wine and cranberries, does that somehow alienate, offend, and upset everyone who likes venison but despises port wine and cranberries and thinks the combination an abomination?

And if it does, why on earth should I give a flip?

The lovely thing about freedom of expression is that it does not have to pander to universal tastes. He can say what he wants in his poster; Oleg can say what he wants in his posters, and y'all who are in such a tizzy about a Bible and a gun in the same pic can say what you want in your own posters.

There is no such thing as one single piece of creative art that is going to ring everybody's chimes. If this were offputting to some nonbelievers, well, there will be others who, like some of the posters on this thread, will get the point and think it well put. But just because a few people here don't like it does not in fact mean that it needs correction.

Springmom

Gentleman Ranker
September 22, 2008, 02:08 PM
springmom (#118 (http://www.thehighroad.org/showpost.php?p=4939488&postcount=118)) replies:

...around rather than berating their ignorance or lack of patriotism.

Except that the poster does neither one. There is no lambasting of ANYONE in it (with the possible exception of Wall Street, I suppose). ...

I did not express myself well, there. I apologize to armoredman for appearing to accuse him of these things. I was thinking of a conversation that I had with someone else at another time, and it leaked over into what I was writing. I should have been more careful. I do, however, stand by the general idea that I expressed, however poorly.

If I say that *I* like venison medallions in port wine and cranberries, does that somehow alienate, offend, and upset everyone who likes venison but despises port wine and cranberries and thinks the combination an abomination?

And if it does, why on earth should I give a flip?

Because there actually are people who consider your venison an abomination (PETA and the like). Fortunately for us all, they are a small, marginal group who are seen by most Americans as irrelevant lefty nut-jobs.

There are also people who want to take away your guns, all of them, if not all at once. They stand a good chance of taking the White House. That bothers me, and without intending the least infringement of your freedom of thought and expression, I think it should bother you also.

When I was young, guns were "normal" and more people had them. Urbanization and other factors are making guns less and less relevant to daily life for most people, which makes it easier for the antis to demonize them. If we don't take positive action to stop that, we lose. That's it in a nutshell.

IMHO, the best long-term response to this is to work to legitimize firearms, both for sport and self-defense, amongst the population at large. If enough people agree with us, they will rein in the politicians regardless of what the politicians think. If not, we lose. It is also MHO that the best way to bring people around is with friendly persuasion. To do that we need to find some kind of common ground with those we want to persuade. We don't need to give up our beliefs or compromise them, but we do need to make the message palatable to those we want to persuade. Otherwise we lose.

Most of the people I know who support more gun control are just ill-informed and frightened of them. Step one is to calm them down and educate them.

armoredman posted his work on a public forum, which usually implies that he expects (or at least, will tolerate) comments. I apologize to him again if he wasn't trying to do what I am commenting about. It just seemed to come up and I thought the comments would be constructive.

regards,

GR

Ragnar Danneskjold
September 22, 2008, 02:12 PM
How about those of us who enjoy our RKBA but don't care for religion?

There's a freeware program called Gimp that is basically Photoshop for free. Have at it.

armoredman
September 22, 2008, 04:27 PM
I understand anyone posting unsolicited work had better have a Nomex flame suit on, I am used to it, and have seen people here go after Oleg too, hammer and tongs. S'OK, I have posted many pictures here, never got QUITE this reaction before. :p
GR, everyone is entitled to thier opinions and feelings - I have seen works of high art go for millions of dollars that I wouldn't have shelled out a buck and a half for in any case.
But if causing controversy is a mark of advancement in the artistic world, hey, I'm moving up! :)

Gentleman Ranker
September 22, 2008, 05:20 PM
armoredman replies:
GR, everyone is entitled to thier opinions and feelings - I have seen works of high art go for millions of dollars that I wouldn't have shelled out a buck and a half for in any case.
But if causing controversy is a mark of advancement in the artistic world, hey, I'm moving up!
I think we both are, in different ways. :)

Seriously ... it wasn't about whether I liked the poster or not ... I do, actually. But I spent a little time in a PsyOps unit (Reserve) and wrote a thesis on propaganda analysis. That doesn't make me an expert (I wish it did), but I'm not just making this stuff up, either. My goal, however poorly achieved, was not to say what was good or bad, but what might work better for a certain purpose. Maybe that was not your purpose, maybe it doesn't matter if it was or not. I like to think that at the end of the day, we have the same goal in mind.

In whichever case, keep making posters, cousin ... and make 'em your way.

regards,

GR

kingpin008
September 22, 2008, 05:26 PM
Seriously, I have no idea how a tongue-in-cheek poster could possibly damage RKBA.

Because not everyone will get the "tongue-in-cheek" part.

JImbothefiveth
September 22, 2008, 05:45 PM
For example, by having the book in the person's hand be Life of the Buddha.

However ... remember that messages delivered by poster or similar visual format don't so much make an actual argument as they create an emotional response. The key to good advertising (and good propaganda, btw) is to find out what the audience already feels good about and connect the New Idea (New Candidate, New Product) to that. If you accidentally connect the New Idea to something the audience doesn't like, it can blow up in your face
Most people DO like Christianity, I think this poster makes guns seem normal. Having a Buddhist book likely WOULD alienate people, on the other hand.

How does this make guns seem normal? Well, some guy walking down the street with a Bible in hand, I can connect with that, most people can, it is seen as a wholesome activity, in contrast to all the crime and the like that goes on today. It ties in guns with this wholesome activity, giving guns a good image, while also connecting with any fears over the economy today.
I think using a normal size revolver was very important, it may be the one type of gun the general public doesn't see as "evil", it's what your Grandpa would use, or what that old lady used to defend herself.

And according to gallup polls, around 68% of americans are against a total handgun ban(or maybe it was a total gun ban), but it might be less if it was just a ban on semi-autos.

Tacbandit
September 22, 2008, 05:50 PM
"Then make your own poster, I think it's good to reach out to the religious community, they are the most likely to vote for pro-gun candidates."




Hey, ya'll look....I don't believe there was any offense intended by the picture.
I'm not really big on religion, but I am big on my relationship with my God,
who is my master. However, I don't try to impose that on anyone...We all have different beliefs, views and opinions...What we need to be concerned with here on this site, is what we have in common...RKBA...Let's try not to be so thin skinned about things just because it doesn't look exactly like we think it should...stick with the things we have in common...the common thread...:)

SCKimberFan
September 22, 2008, 05:59 PM
He's referring to that horrible wasteland you fly over between LA and NYC and the clueless yokels who live there ;0

That's only true if you consider PA that horrible wasteland between The Peoples Republik of NYC and the Peoples Republik of **********. He was speaking to a group of elistists at Cal Berkeley (I think) about the folks of PA.

3KillerBs
September 22, 2008, 09:48 PM
To say that putting a Bible and a gun together in the same image will be bad for RKBA is to say that Bibles and Christians are, in some way, substandard, perhaps even evil.

It exhibits the exact same attitude that antis have about guns.

Again, no one is forcing anyone to look at the thing.

There are countries where atheist have freedom from religion because their fellow citizens have no freedom of religion. Its possible that one of them might have gun rights but, as a general rule, once the government starts infringing on citizens' rights they don't stop with just restricting the rights you don't want others to have.

Religion is not a shameful thing that must be kept a dark secret and spoken about only in whispers.

Open carry is good for holy writ as well as for firearms.

JWarren
September 23, 2008, 08:21 AM
...it appears that your are incapable of seeing that poster as also being potentially damaging to the cause of RKBA, and have instead chosen appeal to popularity.


With greater and greater frequency, I read THR with eyes full of wonder and amazement.

Potentially damaging? How so? Let's cut through the rhetoric.

With pleasing regularity, we see posters by Oleg which often highlight those of various demographics which may not be generally associated with the firearms community being included into shooting, enjoying the practice, and/or exercising the rights of us all.

And we cheer. And I do, too.

You see, we are glad more and more responsible persons are coming into what has traditionally been a rural man's practice and perhaps more closely tied to religious persons (I question this.) With greater and greater urbanization, being a rural man's practice doesn't exactly have the promising future that it once did. And with decline in people practicing ANY religion, the same holds true.

But we are still here, too.

It seems that many make the mental seque that if there is ANY imagery of what could be called the "traditional" firearms community, it becomes exclusively and solely their (our) domain. It almost seems that the premise is that if such exists, it becomes a liability to us all. Frankly, I find myself less and less concerned those demonstrate their own version of fascism and intolerance.

You see, not EVERY image of the RKBA community HAS to represent YOU. If I held that view, I would be against MANY, MANY of Oleg's posters. I suggest that some of us demonstrate the same tolerance of imagry that does not represent YOU that those of the "traditional" community has shown FOR you.

I am reminded of that South Park episode where they tried to put on a "Politically Correct" Christmas production. It ended up as some New-Age, Interpretative Dance number that none of the various groups could relate to or identify with. It has lost all connective properties.

This is EXACTLY what many of our community expect from the "Traditional" firearms community.

More and more, I see comments suggesting that we MUST distance ourselves from certain imagery.

What you are saying is that we must alienate and render non-represented a great number of persons.

A while back, Oleg did a poster about the "Angry White Man" that prompted a thread that actually became heated. A person named "fishhook" suggested that I was racist because I didn't agree that it needed to have a person of another race in it to "tone it down."


I get it. Many cheer when we reach out to non-traditional groups. I do, too. But many of those same persons retch when they see ANY reminder of the traditional groups that have steadfastly supported and fought for those rights we are enjoying.


This isn't just about religion, or a multitude of demographic variances. It's about distancing from seqments of the community that YOU cannot tolerate or desire to be associated with. It isn't so much about stereotype as much as it that you may (gasp!) be lumped into a group you'd rather not be associated with.

In my opinion, we see a greater and greater demographic divide based upon regional, geographic, and lifestyle factors. It is no wonder that we often see "redneck" and "yokel" comments with impunity in our community. It isn't by accident that Obama chose his words. Who, exactly, do you think he was talking about?

It saddens me that the RKBA community isn't immune from sharing his viewpoint.



-- John

REPOMAN
September 23, 2008, 09:41 AM
I loved the poster..... I cling to my guns and religion 24/7/365 even when I'm not bitter..... KUDOS to Armoredman, Keep up the good work..... :what:

Emfuser
September 23, 2008, 09:42 AM
Hey, ya'll look....I don't believe there was any offense intended by the picture.
I'm not really big on religion, but I am big on my relationship with my God,
who is my master. However, I don't try to impose that on anyone...We all have different beliefs, views and opinions...What we need to be concerned with here on this site, is what we have in common...RKBA...Let's try not to be so thin skinned about things just because it doesn't look exactly like we think it should...stick with the things we have in common...the common thread...

*sigh*

If you take what I have written in this thread as inferring that
-Someone is trying to push religon in my face.
-Someone is telling me to believe in something I don't want to believe in.
-Someone is telling me to read the bible and believe in God the way armoredman does.

Then you are grossly mistaken, and should re-read what I said. My point is, very simply, that the poster in question is great for preaching to the choir that is the guns n' jesus crowd, but could very easily be used by the other side, against the RKBA cause. If you don't understand that, then I don't know what more to tell you.

Emfuser
September 23, 2008, 09:46 AM
To say that putting a Bible and a gun together in the same image will be bad for RKBA is to say that Bibles and Christians are, in some way, substandard, perhaps even evil.

I'm sorry, what? Please put away your straw man (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man).

It exhibits the exact same attitude that antis have about guns.

Again, no one is forcing anyone to look at the thing.

There are countries where atheist have freedom from religion because their fellow citizens have no freedom of religion. Its possible that one of them might have gun rights but, as a general rule, once the government starts infringing on citizens' rights they don't stop with just restricting the rights you don't want others to have.

Religion is not a shameful thing that must be kept a dark secret and spoken about only in whispers.

(I am getting good mileage out of this one.)

If you take what I have written in this thread as inferring that
-Someone is trying to push religon in my face.
-Someone is telling me to believe in something I don't want to believe in.
-Someone is telling me to read the bible and believe in God the way armoredman does.

Then you are grossly mistaken, and should re-read what I said. My point is, very simply, that the poster in question is great for preaching to the choir that is the guns n' jesus crowd, but could very easily be used by the other side, against the RKBA cause. If you don't understand that, then I don't know what more to tell you.

Emfuser
September 23, 2008, 09:49 AM
I am surprised that so many people have come in here fielding similarly poor English comprehension and accused me of attacking their religion. No, that is not meant to be offensive or derogatory at all. It just appears that some folks are either ignoring or simply not understanding what has been written.

If you READ CAREFULLY what myself and Gentleman Ranker have written, what we are trying to say is made very clear. If you read what we've said and somehow see it as an attack on religion, then I don't know what to tell you. That's not what we're doing.

Emfuser
September 23, 2008, 10:03 AM
Potentially damaging? How so? Let's cut through the rhetoric.

Please re-read the thread, particularly posts 29 and 113.

With pleasing regularity, we see posters by Oleg which often highlight those of various demographics which may not be generally associated with the firearms community being included into shooting, enjoying the practice, and/or exercising the rights of us all.

And we cheer. And I do, too.

That's nice... and not really relevant to this thread.

You see, we are glad more and more responsible persons are coming into what has traditionally been a rural man's practice and perhaps more closely tied to religious persons (I question this.) With greater and greater urbanization, being a rural man's practice doesn't exactly have the promising future that it once did. And with decline in people practicing ANY religion, the same holds true.

But we are still here, too.

It seems that many make the mental seque that if there is ANY imagery of what could be called the "traditional" firearms community, it becomes exclusively and solely their (our) domain. It almost seems that the premise is that if such exists, it becomes a liability to us all. Frankly, I find myself less and less concerned those demonstrate their own version of fascism and intolerance.

And you accuse ME of being rhetorical? :uhoh:

You see, not EVERY image of the RKBA community HAS to represent YOU. If I held that view, I would be against MANY, MANY of Oleg's posters. I suggest that some of us demonstrate the same tolerance of imagry that does not represent YOU that those of the "traditional" community has shown FOR you.

I am reminded of that South Park episode where they tried to put on a "Politically Correct" Christmas production. It ended up as some New-Age, Interpretative Dance number that none of the various groups could relate to or identify with. It has lost all connective properties.

This is EXACTLY what many of our community expect from the "Traditional" firearms community.

Boy, I sure am getting good use out of this one today.
If you take what I have written in this thread as inferring that
-Someone is trying to push religon in my face.
-Someone is telling me to believe in something I don't want to believe in.
-Someone is telling me to read the bible and believe in God the way armoredman does.

Then you are grossly mistaken, and should re-read what I said. My point is, very simply, that the poster in question is great for preaching to the choir that is the guns n' jesus crowd, but could very easily be used by the other side, against the RKBA cause. If you don't understand that, then I don't know what more to tell you.
(again, read post 113)

More and more, I see comments suggesting that we MUST distance ourselves from certain imagery.

What you are saying is that we must alienate and render non-represented a great number of persons.

I'm sorry, what? Please put away your straw man (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man).

A while back, Oleg did a poster about the "Angry White Man" that prompted a thread that actually became heated. A person named "fishhook" suggested that I was racist because I didn't agree that it needed to have a person of another race in it to "tone it down."

That's nice. Can we please keep the discussion relevant to this thread and this picture in question?

I get it. Many cheer when we reach out to non-traditional groups. I do, too. But many of those same persons retch when they see ANY reminder of the traditional groups that have steadfastly supported and fought for those rights we are enjoying.

This isn't just about religion, or a multitude of demographic variances. It's about distancing from seqments of the community that YOU cannot tolerate or desire to be associated with. It isn't so much about stereotype as much as it that you may (gasp!) be lumped into a group you'd rather not be associated with.

Nice try with another straw man (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Straw_man). I love it when people tell me what my positions are. Too bad it's logical fallacy, and totally invalid. :D

In my opinion, we see a greater and greater demographic divide based upon regional, geographic, and lifestyle factors. It is no wonder that we often see "redneck" and "yokel" comments with impunity in our community. It isn't by accident that Obama chose his words. Who, exactly, do you think he was talking about?

It saddens me that the RKBA community isn't immune from sharing his viewpoint.

That's a nice opinion you have there, Mr. Warren.

Please, no more accusations of being overly rhetorical. Or, if you're going to point that finger, please don't do so and then immediately go into a fallacy-ridden, rhetoric-heavy reply.

springmom
September 23, 2008, 10:04 AM
I don't think anyone's ignoring what you wrote, Emfuser. I do think that we're stuck with responding to statements that you have yet to back up with solid arguments. Several people have asked you to clearly state why this is going to damage the RKBA community. Yes, we've read your past posts. What we are telling you is that you didn't make your case. You're stating things as facts and expecting that we'll simply take your word for it because you're such an expert. Prove your points, back them up, or stop talking down to us about how we just don't get it.

As an aside, all the lofty *sigh*ing and comments about others' inability with the English language isn't doing much for bolstering your argument, either. You can think we're a bunch of idiots, of course, but making the point over and over again isn't doing much to further the discussion. Just sayin'.

Springmom

MakAttak
September 23, 2008, 10:12 AM
If you READ CAREFULLY what myself and Gentleman Ranker have written, what we are trying to say is made very clear. If you read what we've said and somehow see it as an attack on religion, then I don't know what to tell you. That's not what we're doing.

Then perhaps you don't know what you are doing.

You suggested that this image is detrimental to the right to keep and bear arms.

You then said:

I am merely highlighting a recurrent theme which I see in the gun owner community which may play into a sterotype that could be undesirable.

followed by:

While I am not offended at your poster, I can state that it does not accurately represent me, nor a sizable percentage of the RKBA community who does not believe the same thing(s) as you do, when it comes to the other half of Mr. Obama's quote. You know, the one that has nothing to do with RKBA?

I also am publicly questioning if playing so literally into Mr. Obama's utterance of a stereotype is harmful, even if it is meant as an act of defiance?

Here is the suggestion that the association of religion and the right to keep and bear arms is harmful.

Now:

Maybe it's because I go outside of the gun community, online and IRL quite frequently, to do RKBA advocacy, that I see the potential for deleterious effects. When I have to face antis, or even more importantly, swing voters in the audience, negative stereotypes are something you absolutely do NOT want to play into. Also, tying together two contentious issues, one of which is much nastier to deal with than the other, does not help at all, EVER. The only people who posters like this appeal to don't need any convincing; you've already got their vote. HOWEVER, there are plenty of people out there who haven't made up their minds. Playing into stereotypes, and tying together multiple hotly contentious issues is always a BAD idea if you're trying to win a debate and forward an idea, but it's always a great tactic if you're trying to confuse people, stall an idea, or kill a debate. I've had it tried on me many many many times and it always makes me do ten times more work to get the RKBA message across when someone successfully introduces the "bible-beating, gun-loving redneck" stereotype into an argument.

So, the point I'm trying to make, which some unfortunately seem unable or unwilling to grasp, is that, while I know your intentions are good, that you are apparently unaware of just how much DAMAGE your picture can do when let loose onto the population at large.

You just called someone who is a christian and enjoys the rights to keep and bear arms a "negative stereotype."

I'm sure you think you're being tolerant and open minded. Most people who hold biased views are unaware of their bias. The reason you are seeing so much backlash to you "innocuous" statements is that they are not. Such bigotry is shameful whether it is for non-traditional beliefs or for christianity. (Disclaimer: In the United States, where the vast majority of us live, any belief not christianity is "non-traditional.")

The fact is, not only should a gun on your hip be seen as a normal part of people's lives, so too should religion.

In this case, armoredman HAS rejected the negative stereotype of gun owner's: we're not bitter. In this poster, I see a normal person worried about the future. His suggestion is it is not bitterness that drives us to guns or to the bible.

Emfuser
September 23, 2008, 10:19 AM
I don't think anyone's ignoring what you wrote, Emfuser. I do think that we're stuck with responding to statements that you have yet to back up with solid arguments. Several people have asked you to clearly state why this is going to damage the RKBA community. Yes, we've read your past posts. What we are telling you is that you didn't make your case. You're stating things as facts and expecting that we'll simply take your word for it because you're such an expert. Prove your points, back them up, or stop talking down to us about how we just don't get it.

As an aside, all the lofty *sigh*ing and comments about others' inability with the English language isn't doing much for bolstering your argument, either. You can think we're a bunch of idiots, of course, but making the point over and over again isn't doing much to further the discussion. Just sayin'.

Springmom

I don't think it's going to damage the RKBA community at all. The criticism I have is that such posters fuel the fires of the antis and get used by them as political ammunition. Mr. Obama used his statement to convey a negative stereotype. Stereotypes are not things that are used to garner rational support, they're meant to draw an emotional response because that's a big part of politics on nearly any scale.

What too many people here are assuming is that I'm disparaging their religion or their lifestyle. That is NOT the case at all. What I am considering is representation of the RKBA cause that comes from within our community and is seen, and thus judged by the greater population at large. You know, people who may very well NOT share your lifestyle.

As Gentleman Ranker said back in post 113, this poster ties together two things that REALLY get the left incensed: guns and religion.
However ... remember that messages delivered by poster or similar visual format don't so much make an actual argument as they create an emotional response. The key to good advertising (and good propaganda, btw) is to find out what the audience already feels good about and connect the New Idea (New Candidate, New Product) to that. If you accidentally connect the New Idea to something the audience doesn't like, it can blow up in your face.

If I have a criticism of the poster (and this is only valid "outside the family"), it would be that it may send a message that "The only alternative to our bad situation now is guns and Christianity." I don't believe that armoredman intends it to say that, but I think that some audiences, given their existing (if wrong) ideas about some things, could easily see it. Someone who is already nervous about guns and isn't Christian could see it as offering a choice between two situations that scare or exclude them.

You have to STOP thinking that you're dealing with a small group of rational people who you can calmly explain the meaning and intended audience that poster was created for. The audience for anything that gets out is EVERYONE. Tying together two hot-button issues, one of which is much easier to argue for sans emotions (guns) than the other (religion) may seem totally awesome to the guns n' jesus crowd here in the RKBA community but it may very well be extremely off-putting to those outside of it, and used against the RKBA cause instead of for it.

As I have repeatedly offered, if you want a non-formulated example, I will gladly take that picture and drop it into a politically mixed, non-topical forum and see what sort of responses I get, so I can post them here.

Now, I apologize if you are offended by my periodic "*sigh*", but on more than a few occasions I have been obliquely accused of attacking religion, clarified that I most certainly am not, and yet again been obliquely accused of attacking religion. It is very frustrating.

Emfuser
September 23, 2008, 10:32 AM
You just called someone who is a christian and enjoys the rights to keep and bear arms a "negative stereotype."

What? NO!
No no no no no no no! :uhoh:

Do you even know what a stereotype is?

Stereotype: something conforming to a fixed or general pattern ; especially : a standardized mental picture that is held in common by members of a group and that represents an oversimplified opinion, prejudiced attitude, or uncritical judgment.

Now, "bible-beating, gun-loving redneck" is, on a national scale, used as a negative stereotype. Do you understand that? That is something that is used against a christian who enjoys the rights to keep and bear arms to portray them in a negative light.

Again...

Correct representation: "christian who enjoys the rights to keep and bear arms"

Nationally recognized negative stereotype: "bible-beating, gun-loving redneck"

PLEASE tell me you can understand that difference, and how that matters when used by political organizations and politicians? Do you understand that, on the political stage, that embracing that negative stereotype is harmful to the cause? Going out and representing yourself, saying "I'm a christian who enjoys the RKBA" is GOOD because it clearly and correctly represents you and your beliefs. Going out and saying "I'm a bible-beating, gun-loving redneck!" is NOT GOOD because it invokes those negative feelings people associate with the stereotype. Remember, I'm talking about interaction on the political stage, not just little sheltered corners and communities. Politics is a GAME.

I'm sure you think you're being tolerant and open minded. Most people who hold biased views are unaware of their bias. The reason you are seeing so much backlash to you "innocuous" statements is that they are not. Such bigotry is shameful whether it is for non-traditional beliefs or for christianity. (Disclaimer: In the United States, where the vast majority of us live, any belief not christianity is "non-traditional.")

I am sorry that you could not correctly comprehend my message and have thus incorrectly labeled me as a bigot.

The fact is, not only should a gun on your hip be seen as a normal part of people's lives, so too should religion.

In this case, armoredman HAS rejected the negative stereotype of gun owner's: we're not bitter. In this poster, I see a normal person worried about the future. His suggestion is it is not bitterness that drives us to guns or to the bible.

I understand what the poster means, I have stated my reasons why I think tying the two together can be more hurtful to the RKBA cause than helpful.

Emfuser
September 23, 2008, 10:49 AM
In the mean time, while many of you are writing PO'd responses at me, I'll be posting this picture in a few places and gathering feedback.

springmom
September 23, 2008, 10:55 AM
Maybe that's because when your initial responses were not based on this argument at all. You simply asked, in post #4,

How about those of us who enjoy our RKBA but don't care for religion?

and in post #14 you finally open the topic of the last 5 pages....but not until strongly reinforcing your original point,

Perhaps you misunderstand.

While I am not offended at your poster, I can state that it does not accurately represent me, nor a sizable percentage of the RKBA community who does not believe the same thing(s) as you do, when it comes to the other half of Mr. Obama's quote. You know, the one that has nothing to do with RKBA?

I also am publicly questioning if playing so literally into Mr. Obama's utterance of a stereotype is harmful, even if it is meant as an act of defiance?

This brings me again to the point so many here have tried to make to you: you don't like it because you don't believe, and that's fine, but it doesn't HAVE to be something you like to be either good in its own right or useful in the public square.

You state in post #29 that,

*sigh*

No, appealing to popularity is not a good thing when you're trying to advocate an idea. Logical fallacies are things to be avoided.

But the fact that X is popular does not make it a logical fallacy. YOU see it as a logical fallacy. That doesn't make it one. You went on to say,

When I have to face antis, or even more importantly, swing voters in the audience, negative stereotypes are something you absolutely do NOT want to play into.

And here is where we come to an impasse. For you, the poster represents a negative stereotype. For others here, including myself, it does not. BHO certainly intended it as such, I'd agree with that. But it isn't. It is a response to his elitist attempt to ingratiate himself with his San Francisco audience. It is a reminder that the vast majority of persons in this country are both believers in God AND supportive of the RKBA. It states that the times are such that clinging to one's faith, and clinging to one's rights, is not a logical fallacy, nor a negative stereotype; but rather, for those who do believe and who are pro-RKBA, is a logically consistent and sensible response.

So, the point I'm trying to make, which some unfortunately seem unable or unwilling to grasp, is that, while I know your intentions are good, that you are apparently unaware of just how much DAMAGE your picture can do when let loose onto the population at large.

Once again...you have no data (or have presented none) to back this up. Were we to run a scientific study to discern whether your point has merit, we'd have to choose a representative cross section of American voters and have the poster displayed by individuals who were functionally neutral on the values displayed therein, within a body of other posters which would be similarly rated by the subjects...then run statistical analyses of the data that was collected. You, showing it around would only render anecdotal stories of individual responses elicited by someone who is not neutral on the poster in the first place. Either way, the plural of anecdote is not data.

I understand that you think this poster would be ill-received by some people who are either truly anti-RKBA or are fence-sitting on the issue. I expect you're right. But ISTM that you're running this argument into the ground, not because you actually think this thing's going to get loose and destroy all your hard work for RKBA but because, as you clearly stated in the first two posts referenced above, you just don't like the premise behind it.

About three pages ago, somebody said this was much ado about nothing. They're right.

Now, if anyone can tell me how to capture that image for a MacBook's wallpaper, I'd be grateful. Or if Armoredman can send me an email with it so I can get it out of my documents folder :)

Springmom

meef
September 23, 2008, 10:59 AM
So, the point I'm trying to make, which some unfortunately seem unable or unwilling to grasp, is that, while I know your intentions are good, that you are apparently unaware of just how much DAMAGE your picture can do when let loose onto the population at large.:scrutiny:

The Founding Fathers were a group of bitter (as some politicians might say) men clinging to their guns and religion - and apparently not too concerned with damaging their reputations or image in the process.

In the mean time, while many of you are writing PO'd responses at me, I'll be posting this picture in a few places and gathering feedback.That's meantime, Em. Not mean time. Nobody's being mean. Just expressing their opinions.

:)

3KillerBs
September 23, 2008, 11:05 AM
Quote:
Originally Posted by 3KillerBs
To say that putting a Bible and a gun together in the same image will be bad for RKBA is to say that Bibles and Christians are, in some way, substandard, perhaps even evil.

I'm sorry, what? Please put away your straw man.


Its no straw man. Its the plain reality of what those who object mean.

Shoving Christians and the Bible under the carpet and into hiding isn't advancing the RKBA cause in the name of "tolerance" and "diversity". Its adopting the attitude and practice of the enemy to run shrieking from the sight of a Bible as they run shrieking from the sight of a gun.

If you can't see the similarity you need some good think time in front of a mirror because it the antithesis of freedom to attempt to intimidate, shame, and shut-up those whose beliefs don't march lockstep with yours.

Emfuser
September 23, 2008, 11:14 AM
Ugh, the lack of a quote feature here is trying at times.

armoredman
September 23, 2008, 11:28 AM
Also, eschew obfuscation, clarity is paramount.

Emfuser, perhaps your message is the one in a confused state, as it seems relatively few here can peirce the veils of layered meanings you have draped it in, and seemingly far more enjoyed, and understood the relatively simple message I conveyed. That being as read, I move on to the superior attitude you deliberately convey, a, (dare I say it? ), holier-than-thou that comes through like a Louisville slugger through the left ear, if nothing else. No matter the message, cloaking your missive with superiority is a serious detriment to accurate decoding, as it provides a layer of noise between you and the intended reciever, aka, the rest of us in the general unwashed.
Or, to refer to another sterotype, "Ah kin hear ya, but I don't know what in tarnation you're sayin'!"
As for gathering information on my work in another setting, feel free, as you obviously already do, to post my work elsewhere, and gauge perception and reaction. To be personally and bluntly honest, I care not a fig for the Left's panicked and slobberingly invariable recoil from my images and message, I expect it.
And now, with that final adieu and sweep of the stage, perhaps this is a wonderful time to reflect on our inner beliefs, core vaules, and the underpinnings of society. Or, just grab another cup of coffee. :)

Emfuser
September 23, 2008, 11:30 AM
Maybe that's because when your initial responses were not based on this argument at all. You simply asked, in post #4 ... and in post #14 you finally open the topic of the last 5 pages....but not until strongly reinforcing your original point,


That's called a lead-in.

This brings me again to the point so many here have tried to make to you: you don't like it because you don't believe, and that's fine, but it doesn't HAVE to be something you like to be either good in its own right or useful in the public square.

I'm pretty sure that I had made clear, by that point in time, why I don't think the poster is necessarily good for the wider RKBA cause. You even quoted the statement where I made that very clear. If you choose to believe otherwise (which you obviously are going to do), then feel free. However, do not put words in my mouth. I have made abundantly clear that my objection is the tying together of RKBA and religion as a means of promotion of RKBA, in THIS particular poster in question.

But the fact that X is popular does not make it a logical fallacy. YOU see it as a logical fallacy. That doesn't make it one.

No, I see a logical fallacy when popularity (or perceived popularity) is used as justification of doing something.

And here is where we come to an impasse. For you, the poster represents a negative stereotype. For others here, including myself, it does not. BHO certainly intended it as such, I'd agree with that. But it isn't. It is a response to his elitist attempt to ingratiate himself with his San Francisco audience. It is a reminder that the vast majority of persons in this country are both believers in God AND supportive of the RKBA. It states that the times are such that clinging to one's faith, and clinging to one's rights, is not a logical fallacy, nor a negative stereotype; but rather, for those who do believe and who are pro-RKBA, is a logically consistent and sensible response.

I have explained in my previous post the difference between "christian who supports RKBA" vs. "bible-beating, gun-loving redneck." What their usage implicates, the emotional effects they are meant to elicit, and how that is used by our opponents. If you would like further clarification along those lines, or believe I misstated something, I will be happy to address your concerns.

Once again...you have no data (or have presented none) to back this up. Were we to run a scientific study to discern whether your point has merit, we'd have to choose a representative cross section of American voters and have the poster displayed by individuals who were functionally neutral on the values displayed therein, within a body of other posters which would be similarly rated by the subjects...then run statistical analyses of the data that was collected. You, showing it around would only render anecdotal stories of individual responses elicited by someone who is not neutral on the poster in the first place. Either way, the plural of anecdote is not data.

I am not intending to portray what I wrote as a study. It is meant for rational examination and consideration. I am, however, gathering some data at the moment, to be used informally, to further illustrate my point. I do not care to undertake a full-blown study to illustrate what is a relatively simple concept: that mixing two hotly contentious issues into one can be used against the one that is of relevance on THR: RKBA.

Conversely, you cannot offer any affirmative studies that specifically address this in order to back up your position vs. mine. There are effective limits to the discussion for both of us in that regard.

I understand that you think this poster would be ill-received by some people who are either truly anti-RKBA or are fence-sitting on the issue. I expect you're right. But ISTM that you're running this argument into the ground, not because you actually think this thing's going to get loose and destroy all your hard work for RKBA but because, as you clearly stated in the first two posts referenced above, you just don't like the premise behind it.

I argue for the sake of argument and enlightenment. I find it to be enjoyable and good mental exercise. If you are truly frustrated by this, I am sorry. I don't intend to cause anyone any sort of despair. I know full well that what I write will be offensive to some (though not intentionally), misunderstood by some, understood but disagreed with by some, and understood and agreed with by some. That's perfectly normal for these sorts of debates.

If you are tired of the thread and wish to withdraw, that's fine. I see you agree with my basic premise but have argument with the details. We can agree to disagree. I mean to do no harm here. :)

Emfuser
September 23, 2008, 11:34 AM
Its no straw man. Its the plain reality of what those who object mean.

A straw man, in basic principle, is when you take a statement of another and present it differently so you can attack it.

1 Person A has position X.
2 Person B presents position Y (which is a distorted version of X).
3 Person B attacks position Y.
4 Therefore X is false/incorrect/flawed.

You represented my position differently than I did myself, and then attacked it. That's commission of a straw man fallacy. Furthermore, I do not appreciate you telling ME what I mean with my own words. I have gone to considerable lengths to be very clear in what I meant. Please take the emotions out of it and allow me to represent myself and my own viewpoints with MY words. Thank you.

Shoving Christians and the Bible under the carpet and into hiding isn't advancing the RKBA cause in the name of "tolerance" and "diversity". Its adopting the attitude and practice of the enemy to run shrieking from the sight of a Bible as they run shrieking from the sight of a gun.

If you can't see the similarity you need some good think time in front of a mirror because it the antithesis of freedom to attempt to intimidate, shame, and shut-up those whose beliefs don't march lockstep with yours.

You grossly misunderstand my stance. I am sorry that your apparent offense over your own misinterpretation of my words is preventing you from seeing this.

3KillerBs
September 23, 2008, 11:34 AM
The thing is,

What you and Obama see as a "negative stereotype" is what we who ARE represented by that poster believe is a POSITIVE. Our believe in God and in the fundamental human rights endowed by our Creator (as opposed to privileges granted by our government), is the foundation of our identity.

The pointed humor of that poster drives home the elitism and condescension involved in the original statement by saying, "Yep, we're ordinary, everyday, normal, gun-toting, Bible-believing, blue-collar folks. What's your problem?"

Asking us to keep our religion under wraps and conceal carry our Bibles lest they "reinforce negative stereotypes" among the antis is like asking blacks to go around in whiteface makeup so as not to reinforce negative stereotypes among the racists.

Those who already believe that both guns and Christians are mean-scary and evil-bad will continue to do so. But the humor in this poster may crack open the shell of false-logic and expose the essential silliness for those not too deeply entrenched in elitist beliefs.

kwelz
September 23, 2008, 11:39 AM
Wow!.
I am anti Religion as is probably obvious from my previous post. However I don't see a problem with the image. I don't see the issue with it if that is how people choose to present themselves. I don't think it presents a bad or negative image. Why are some people so uptight.

Emfuser
September 23, 2008, 11:42 AM
The thing is,

What you and Obama see as a "negative stereotype" is what we who ARE represented by that poster believe is a POSITIVE. Our believe in God and in the fundamental human rights endowed by our Creator (as opposed to privileges granted by our government), is the foundation of our identity.

Please see my commentary on how the composition of your audience determines the basis of their perception. This is not something which we can control, it is merely the way things are. Yes, I realize that much of the RKBA community identifies with the poster, as was the intent of the creator (armoredman). What I am going to great lengths to do is challenge people to consider what effects the poster has on those outside of that demographic, particularly on the political stage.

The pointed humor of that poster drives home the elitism and condescension involved in the original statement by saying, "Yep, we're ordinary, everyday, normal, gun-toting, Bible-believing, blue-collar folks. What's your problem?"

That's how you see it. A point I've been trying to highlight is that it's not necessarily how it will be perceived by other audiences.

Asking us to keep our religion under wraps and conceal carry our Bibles lest they "reinforce negative stereotypes" among the antis is like asking blacks to go around in whiteface makeup so as not to reinforce negative stereotypes among the racists.

I'm not trying to tell you to keep your religion a secret. I'm questioning the wisdom of tying religion and RKBA together in the public political arena.

Those who already believe that both guns and Christians are mean-scary and evil-bad will continue to do so. But the humor in this poster may crack open the shell of false-logic and expose the essential silliness for those not too deeply entrenched in elitist beliefs.

Yes, there are those who will not be swayed, as always is the case. Again, my emphasis is on questioning whether people who are different from you will come to the same conclusion when they see that poster, or perhaps one directly opposing yours.

3KillerBs
September 23, 2008, 11:43 AM
You represented my position differently than I did myself, and then attacked it. That's commission of a straw man fallacy. Furthermore, I do not appreciate you telling ME what I mean with my own words. Please take the emotions out of it and allow me to represent myself and my own viewpoints with MY words. Thank you.

No. I merely showed you the clear meaning of the position.

To attack that poster and call it bad for RKBA is to attempt to shame Christians and keep them in their place at the back of the bus. It is buying into and promoting the idea that a Bible is a bad thing and that believers are bad people.

Anyone who thinks that poster should be suppressed believes that the appearance of Christianity in the public square is a bad thing. Anyone who believes that the association of Christianity with another idea is bad for the latter idea is guilty of anti-Christian bigotry.

All the rhetorical dancing around in the world won't change that plain meaning one iota.

3KillerBs
September 23, 2008, 11:48 AM
What I am going to great lengths to do is challenge people to consider what effects the poster has on those outside of that demographic, particularly on the political stage.

I suppose the bottom line here is that I don't care what confirmed anti-Christian, anti-gun bigots think. They're a lost cause already.

Ordinary, blue-collar, "regular joe" people who may never have given a moment's thought to Second Amendment issues will respond positively to a poster that sends elitist condescension right back into the faces of those who sneered at said ordinary, blue-collar, "regular joe" people.

Emfuser
September 23, 2008, 11:48 AM
I see you cling hardily to your straw man despite my making abundantly clear that you are mis-representing me. That's a pity. I hate to see people cling to fallacy.

Hey, you even threw in a little name-calling at the end. BRAVO! :D

I suppose the bottom line here is that I don't care what confirmed anti-Christian, anti-gun bigots think. They're a lost cause already.

Quite correct, as I have stated and agreed to numerous times already.

armoredman
September 23, 2008, 11:50 AM
This is truely out of hand now, and you totally skipped my last post, but that's OK, I'm used to it. :)
This has gone on long enough.
I argue for the sake of argument and enlightenment.
AKA, let's stir up emotions with negative arguments and clealy superior attitudes, cause the pot to boil, add a few choice phrases and words periodicaly to keep temperatures hot, and smirk at the results. Sometimes this activity is referred to by the Internet word, "troll".

Claude Clay
September 23, 2008, 11:52 AM
WOW-- the bible truly is the mighty word--6 pages of them and growing.
like an editoral cartoon your picture has elicited both emotion and thought; good job
enough of the picking-nits; I'm back to contemplating my navel.

3KillerBs
September 23, 2008, 11:55 AM
If the shoe fits wear it.

But your time would be better spent examining the contradictions in your own words and the similarity of your tactics to the tactics of the anti-gunner as you attempt to shame people into regarding their Bibles as ticking time bombs that could offend someone at any moment.

Emfuser
September 23, 2008, 11:59 AM
This is truely out of hand now, and you totally skipped my last post, but that's OK, I'm used to it.
This has gone on long enough.

Sorry, I only saw your post when the entire contents was this:

Also, eschew obfuscation, clarity is paramount.

Let me go read the rest and I will respond.

Emfuser
September 23, 2008, 12:01 PM
AKA, let's stir up emotions with negative arguments and clealy superior attitudes, cause the pot to boil, add a few choice phrases and words periodicaly to keep temperatures hot, and smirk at the results. Sometimes this activity is referred to by the Internet word, "troll".

That's not fair at all and I object to the label. A troll generally brings up a hotly controversial subject in a purposefully vague manner in order to elicit emotional responses, and often steps out of the debate once the fire is burning. I have written quite a substantial amount here defending my viewpoints and making explanations of things along with attempting to clarify things to people whom I inadvertently offended.

Please do not label me a troll. Arguing simply because I enjoy debate does not make me one.

jlbraun
September 23, 2008, 12:02 PM
In my own view, the reason that this poster damages RKBA - or rather makes it easier for people to damage it - is because it is a canard, a stereotype that people can easily direct negative words at.

In my opinion, you have to make RKBA *hard to make fun of*. Mainstream left America finds it easy to denigrate gun ownership because it's associated with white, bible-thumping rednecks. Supporting that stereotype doesn't help the RKBA, especially if it's done in a confrontational way.

The way to make RKBA hard to make fun of is by doing the same thing that Oleg does with his posters - making firearms ownership reasonable, rational, and normal. Women with guns. Handicapped people with guns. Black people with guns. Goths with guns. Kids with guns.

Yes, there is an element of the RKBA community that is white, male, and Christian. What I'm saying is that others not traditionally associated with RKBA - the women, the atheists, the gays, and the Buddhists are starting to take over the heavy lifting from you, and taking the brunt of the left's attacks because we resemble the left themselves. In my opinion, this is the future of the RKBA movement.

While your poster is nice, it doesn't do anything for RKBA, makes it easy for the left to attack us, and turns off those on the fence.

M203Sniper
September 23, 2008, 12:03 PM
Edwards (J): Why the big secret? People are smart. They can handle it.

Kay: A person is smart. People are dumb, panicky dangerous animals and you know it. Fifteen hundred years ago everybody knew the Earth was the center of the universe. Five hundred years ago, everybody knew the Earth was flat, and fifteen minutes ago, you knew that humans were alone on this planet. Imagine what you'll know tomorrow.

:)

I welcome Government paralyzation.

Emfuser
September 23, 2008, 12:03 PM
Well put, jlbraun. Thank you for the additional insight.

Edit: "canard"... I have been trying to remember that word for days, thanks!

230RN
September 23, 2008, 12:09 PM
I cling to my guns and my Book Of Shadows.

jlbraun
September 23, 2008, 12:11 PM
I think I might get out my AK-47 and Deepak Chopra's Life of the Buddha to take some pictures tonight.

Emfuser
September 23, 2008, 12:11 PM
Emfuser, perhaps your message is the one in a confused state, as it seems relatively few here can peirce the veils of layered meanings you have draped it in, and seemingly far more enjoyed, and understood the relatively simple message I conveyed. That being as read, I move on to the superior attitude you deliberately convey, a, (dare I say it? ), holier-than-thou that comes through like a Louisville slugger through the left ear, if nothing else.

I understand that what I'm writing may come off that way because it asks people to view something from a perspective different from their own. Not only view it, but put yourself in the shoes of that person and try to understand how they might perceive it. That's why I keep taking the time to clarify things when I think my point(s) have been misunderstood.

No matter the message, cloaking your missive with superiority is a serious detriment to accurate decoding, as it provides a layer of noise between you and the intended reciever, aka, the rest of us in the general unwashed.
Or, to refer to another sterotype, "Ah kin hear ya, but I don't know what in tarnation you're sayin'!"
I don't think of myself as superior. The only advantage I may bear here over some is that I have spent considerable time outside of the RKBA community doing advocacy not just for RKBA, but for other ideas I agree with as well. I have years of experience interacting with people who are emotional, irrational, even hateful, and I regularly play in their home courts or other not-necessarily-friendly venues. I'm trying to relate what I have learned about spreading ideas, be it intentionally or unintentionally, and how things that are well-intentioned inside of a sheltered community can actually be used against them on a bigger political stage. This is something that is HARD to grasp if you've never engaged in such activity before. I do not hold a position of superiority because I engage in such things, it merely allows me to represent and call question to different perspectives to elicit consideration for the audience here.

As for gathering information on my work in another setting, feel free, as you obviously already do, to post my work elsewhere, and gauge perception and reaction. To be personally and bluntly honest, I care not a fig for the Left's panicked and slobberingly invariable recoil from my images and message, I expect it.

Hmm... you are correct I did not ask if I could share your work. I apologize for the misstep. :(

I understand that you don't care about disagreeing feedback, but I assure you it is relevant to what I'm talking about.

And now, with that final adieu and sweep of the stage, perhaps this is a wonderful time to reflect on our inner beliefs, core vaules, and the underpinnings of society. Or, just grab another cup of coffee.

Cya later :)

armoredman
September 23, 2008, 12:19 PM
I had to return to answer one last thing, and BTW, yes, you may post it elsewhere.
I have years of experience interacting with people who are emotional, irrational, even hateful, and I regularly play in their home courts or other not-necessarily-friendly venues....This is something that is HARD to grasp if you've never engaged in such activity before.
I've worked in several differant prison units for the last 7 years, maximum custody lockdown, close custody, medium custody open yards, general population, sex offenders, metal health, and violence control. I think I can relate to your area of expertese...:)
Faretheewell, I am off.

3KillerBs
September 23, 2008, 12:31 PM
In my opinion, you have to make RKBA *hard to make fun of*. Mainstream left America finds it easy to denigrate gun ownership because it's associated with white, bible-thumping rednecks. Supporting that stereotype doesn't help the RKBA, especially if it's done in a confrontational way.

On the contrary, there is nothing so ridiculous as a person/group/movement that can't stand to poke a little fun at itself. When someone/something takes itself with too much deathly seriousness it becomes vulnerable to anyone with a normal sense of humor.

The elitists of the anti-gun persuasion take themselves VERY seriously and this poster strikes right in the center of the X-ring on the target they present by doing so.

And long as they continue to pat themselves on the back for being so enlightened as to recognize the inherently evil-bad nature of the guns and religion that lesser beings "cling to" humor is our best weapon. Nothing lets the hot air out of puffed up condescension like a pointed joke.

jlbraun
September 23, 2008, 12:34 PM
3KBs,

I think that you're right, but I think the poster looks to me to be an example of what you're talking about - the poster looks to take itself entirely too seriously.

Oleg's posters do a good job at poking fun at the RKBA community, I think.

3KillerBs
September 23, 2008, 12:34 PM
I think I might get out my AK-47 and Deepak Chopra's Life of the Buddha to take some pictures tonight.

I look forward to the results.

MakAttak
September 23, 2008, 12:35 PM
I understand that what I'm writing may come off that way because it asks people to view something from a perspective different from their own. Not only view it, but put yourself in the shoes of that person and try to understand how they might perceive it. That's why I keep taking the time to clarify things when I think my point(s) have been misunderstood.

And the problem is you don't understand what your positions suggest.

You claim you have no problem with christianity (i.e. "religion"). You then say that in certain circles, associating the second amendment with Christianity will be detrimental.

This point is conceded. No one has argued certain circles will be put off by this.

The problem is you continue to argue this point. No one on the other side (my position) has said that some people will be offended by this.

What I am saying is that suggesting we should avoid any association of guns and religion is enabling prejudice. Most supporters of the second amendment are Christian. Period. Full Stop.

I can say this because most people in this country are professed Christians. This poster truly represents most supporters of the second amendment, then.

You, however, suggest we should hide these facts because they make some people uncomfortable.

You do not suggest that Oleg should avoid putting "goths" in his posters. Many people will be offended by this: in fact, some people may be frightened by this. Those "goth" people are EXACTLY the kind of "dangerous" individuals that we should keep away from guns! Instead, we make a poster celebrating this?! How foolish is that?

Yet, we support it because this is a representation that the second amendment isn't just for "normal" people.

So, too, the second amendment is also for Christians. Your argument suggests we should avoid pointing this out, which, as 3KillerBs has said, is tantamount to suggesting Blacks should hide their faces for fear of offending white racists.

3KillerBs
September 23, 2008, 12:38 PM
3KBs,

I think that you're right, but I think the poster looks to me to be an example of what you're talking about - the poster looks to take itself entirely too seriously.

Armoredman can clarify his intent if he wishes, but I read it as a beautifully understated, sarcastic "zinger" myself.

:)

3KillerBs
September 23, 2008, 12:40 PM
What I am saying is that suggesting we should avoid any association of guns and religion is enabling prejudice.

Well said. You've boiled it down into perfect, unambiguous clarity.

jlbraun
September 23, 2008, 12:42 PM
MakAttack,

What we're suggesting is that support for RKBA among white Christian men is already pretty good. We as the RKBA community don't need to get this image out there, the country already knows it. What we need to do is to bring more people into the RKBA fold - specifically leftists and Democrats - by putting images out there that look and sound just like them. The best way to get someone to join a group is to show how like them already the group is. And this poster doesn't do that.

The people that this poster might put off are exactly the people that the RKBA movement needs.

Should we avoid connecting guns and Christianity explicitly? Yes. Is it because the Bible is, on face, offensive? No.

Emfuser
September 23, 2008, 12:42 PM
And the problem is you don't understand what your positions suggest.

You claim you have no problem with christianity (i.e. "religion"). You then say that in certain circles, associating the second amendment with Christianity will be detrimental.

This point is conceded. No one has argued certain circles will be put off by this.

The problem is you continue to argue this point. No one on the other side (my position) has said that some people will be offended by this.

What I am saying is that suggesting we should avoid any association of guns and religion is enabling prejudice. Most supporters of the second amendment are Christian. Period. Full Stop.

I can say this because most people in this country are professed Christians. This poster truly represents most supporters of the second amendment, then.

You, however, suggest we should hide these facts because they make some people uncomfortable.

You do not suggest that Oleg should avoid putting "goths" in his posters. Many people will be offended by this: in fact, some people may be frightened by this. Those "goth" people are EXACTLY the kind of "dangerous" individuals that we should keep away from guns! Instead, we make a poster celebrating this?! How foolish is that?

Yet, we support it because this is a representation that the second amendment isn't just for "normal" people.

So, too, the second amendment is also for Christians. Your argument suggests we should avoid pointing this out, which, as 3KillerBs has said, is tantamount to suggesting Blacks should hide their faces for fear of offending white racists.

I suggest you read this post (137 (http://www.thehighroad.org/showpost.php?p=4942816&postcount=137)) and tell me if it does not sufficiently address your concerns.

If you find it insufficient, please say so, and I will expound upon the idea further and address your points more succinctly.

Emfuser
September 23, 2008, 12:45 PM
Well said. You've boiled it down into perfect, unambiguous clarity.

Not so fast there... killer. ;)

What I'm saying is that such associations must be either avoided, or made with careful consideration of their effects outside a staunchly pro-RKBA community. That's what I emphasized in post 137.

Generally, I wouldn't advise avoiding tying the two together, for reasons jlbraun stated. However I have previously stated how one may go about associating them in manners that are less likely to backfire.

springmom
September 23, 2008, 12:47 PM
I don't think of myself as superior.

Really??? :eek: You could have fooled me with statements such as

I hate to see people cling to fallacy.

Hey, you even threw in a little name-calling at the end. BRAVO!


and

I don't intend to cause anyone any sort of despair.

or

If you are tired of the thread and wish to withdraw, that's fine.

To add to armoredman's comments, you're talking down to people. Surely in all your vast experience outside the RKBA community, you have picked up on the fact that people don't take that well?

For myself, you couldn't cause me to despair if you worked at it. :rolleyes:

We do get your point. We simply don't care. Deal with it. I'm done.

Springmom

3KillerBs
September 23, 2008, 12:51 PM
Should we avoid connecting guns and Christianity explicitly? Yes. Is it because the Bible is, on face, offensive? No.

Those sentences contradict each other. If the Bible is not offensive then there is no reason not to connect guns with Christianity because it will not cause any problems. If you believe that it will cause problems then you believe that the Bible is offensive.

The main problem with the people you're saying we need to reach is their tendency to find offense in the mere sight (or even the thought), of something that they don't agree with.

Why validate that foolishness by catering to it?

Emfuser
September 23, 2008, 12:52 PM
Really??? You could have fooled me with statements such as (quoted posts regarding another poster)

I will gladly mock posts which devolve into fallacy and name calling because it highlights that someone arguing against me is using poor tactics. However you have to earn that when I'm around.

The other two statements are not condescending. One is a clear statement that I'm not trying to cause any sort of despair. I'm not sure how that could possibly be viewed as condescending. The other is acknowledgment of your statement that you are tired of this and do not wish to continue. Again, why is that condescending? I stated that I understand your perspective, that you have made your points, and that you have said you're getting tired of this. That means I bear you no ire or lack of respect if you thus choose to be done with the thread.

To add to armoredman's comments, you're talking down to people. Surely in all your vast experience outside the RKBA community, you have picked up on the fact that people don't take that well?

For myself, you couldn't cause me to despair if you worked at it.

We do get your point. We simply don't care. Deal with it. I'm done.

Ok then. Good day, madam.

3KillerBs
September 23, 2008, 12:57 PM
What I'm saying is that such associations must be either avoided, or made with careful consideration of their effects outside a staunchly pro-RKBA community. That's what I emphasized in post 137.

So you believe then that we should enable prejudice by catering to the bigots who run shrieking at the sight of a Bible?

Again, its the equivalent of saying that blacks should avoid offending racists by going around in whiteface makeup.

Poking fun at their bigotry and shaming their narrow-minded intolerance with our laughter is a better idea. It may harden those already confirmed in their anti-gun and anti-Christian bigotry but it will reveal their foolishness to the fence-sitters.

Emfuser
September 23, 2008, 01:22 PM
No, 3KillerBs, I am not saying you should enable prejudice by catering to the bigots who run shrieking at the sight of a bible. We already know that they're a minority whose minds are not going to be changed.

What I am saying is that you should disable prejudice by choosing carefully the words and images we use to represent the RKBA community. What that means is stepping outside of our own, comfortable, familiar shoes, and into those of others (not specifically anti-RKBA, anti-religion leftists) to see if the message comes across the same.

As jlbraun stated, advocacy is about reaching out and that means reaching beyond the comfortable confines of places like this. That means using clear, positive messages that appeal to broad audiences so that they may be brought into our fold.

Does your average person here on THR understand what armoredman means? YES It's a sarcastic jab. Does a well-thought, rational person, who is informed about politics understand what it means? Most likely, YES. Ok, sounds good so far, right?

Ok, lets enter the realm of politics. Now the audience is bigger, more varied, less rational, typically not very well informed about current events or history, and keenly susceptible to emotional influence and bias. That is standard fare for politics. Now what does that poster mean?

Here are some of the more interesting or negative response quotes I gathered in a brief time, in direct response to the picture. Yes there were positive and neutral ones. Nobody is denying that In the threads I created, I'd say the positive/neutral ratio to negative was about 50:50 one fairly neutral place and about 20:80 in someplace that tilts left.

(not sure if image tags will work)
http://www.cs.helsinki.fi/u/hprajani/phun/what%20would%20republican%20jesus%20do.jpg
(apparently jesus has the poor habit of putting his finger on the trigger of his AR)

its pretty pathetic to cling to either when a problem arises

I just find it a little oxymoronic. A weapon meant to kill along with the teachings of a man who preached of peace, understanding, and kindness.


The ad bothers me a little because the thought of people clinging to guns in the same way they cling to bibles in adversity seems a bad comparison. Of course, I don't believe in religion, so it tends to scare me when people use only opinion and fear to make decisions, which is how clinging to a bible seems to work. I would rather people used intelligence and reason with guns.

Fear and ignorance.

(Fear and ignorance.) this is how i feel when i see it. insecurity tends to make people run to their primitive instincts.

the bible represents tribalism and the gun means will to kill, which is how animals behave.
not a very civilized, mature or intelligent approach to the problem imo

I think its more of a statement on how people are more concerned about guns and religion than they are the state of our country. I have numerous friends who have said they are gonna vote for whoever lets them keep their guns. They don't give a **** about anything else. Sure its their right, but its terribly short sighted. Same with the people who only give a **** about abortion.

And its hardly an ad. Looks like someone made it in paint in 35 seconds and put it on the internet.

As a gun owner myself, i'm not a fan of the poster. It just reinforces the idea that all gun owners are religious nut jobs.

+1 my first thought is that it fits / reinforces the stereotype.

http://www.bartcop.com/xtreme%20Jesus.jpg

Edit: Oops, forgot the feedback! Poster looks good, though it's not hard-hitting enough for me. Also, I disagree with the guy who criticised his dress. I like the clean-cut, mama's boy look to his grooming, as it is in keeping with the message of hypocrisy, I think. That "shiny on top, ****ty underneath" kinda thing. Dig it.

I think it is fairly accurate for a percentage of our population. And is exactly what Obama was talking about. We have reasons to be bitter, it is just that some people like to see the trees and forget there is more to a forest than trees.

Well, at least the weapons may become useful.

"Those who live by the sword, die by the sword."
- Jesus Christ

I'm all about self reliance and rugged individualism, but this poster makes gun enthusiasts (like myself) look like raving loons. That sort of mentality is probably only embraced by a handful of gun owners.

It is a direct comment on something Obama said.

I guess I missed the raving loons part.

Right but it implies that the end is near and i'll need my guns and my god to get through whats coming next. Thats pretty raving loon-esk to me :idk:

I'm all for the gun part.
Don't give a **** about the bible, though.

So, my point is not to highlight the obvious that there are people who will disagree with it. It's not to disparage religion. It's not create a negative association between guns and religion or criticize the people who regularly associate them.

My point is that we ALL must be aware that there are perspectives out there different from our own, and that something we view as a good thing can be conveyed by others or merely interpreted by others in many different ways, including very negative ones. That's important to realize on the political stage, particularly during an election year.

I assure you, I am not the barbarian at the gates some of you respond to me as. ;)

Tacbandit
September 23, 2008, 01:28 PM
"I'm all for the gun part.
Don't give a **** about the bible, though."


That's ok...It's author still cares about you...

elChupacabra!
September 23, 2008, 01:42 PM
Man Emfuser... you sure have sparked one hell of an argument for somebody with just 59 posts here...

So here's something that I'm not sure if you've considered... I've read some of your posts how, regarding this poster, many RKBA folks essentially cling to their guns but not their religion, if you'll allow me to frame my response in the terms of everyone's favorite Presidential candidate. You suggest that, to reach a broader audience, the Bible be dropped, focusing only on the gun....

The problem I see there is that, if you did that, there would be an argument over whether he should be carrying a revolver or an autoloader. Or a Glock or 1911.

If we could settle THAT argument, there may be many many who are upset that the subject of the poster is white. It might be more appropriate to depict him as Black, or Hispanic.

Or as a woman. Surely many in the RKBA community feel that a woman would represent them better.

Do you see what I'm driving at? We are a diverse community that can't be summed up in any single depiction, poster, statement, etc. I think that focusing on what makes us different is a mistake... if we insisted on just ONE message to represent ALL of us, we'd never be able to settle on it.

So I think that the poster is good for what it was intended - to respond to a political comment. If you don't like the Bible or Religion, it would be great if you made ANOTHER poster with what you feel represents YOUR group best, and distribute that, as well.

I think Oleg does a good job of this with his posters, showing a variety of firearms, races, sexes, etc. in his posters. None of them (individually) represents the whole community, but as a body, they do a nice job.

I think armoredman is contributing to our cause and not detracting from it. I think we should all do our best to contribute, as well, instead of just criticizing another's contribution because it isn't just so, the way we might like it....?

This is my opinion, of course :)

Emfuser
September 23, 2008, 01:54 PM
Man Emfuser... you sure have sparked one hell of an argument for somebody with just 59 posts here...

This is definitely not my first rodeo, sir. :)

So here's something that I'm not sure if you've considered... I've read some of your posts how, regarding this poster, many RKBA folks essentially cling to their guns but not their religion, if you'll allow me to frame my response in the terms of everyone's favorite Presidential candidate. You suggest that, to reach a broader audience, the Bible be dropped, focusing only on the gun....

There are really two nested suggestions. One is preference for not associating guns and religion at all when doing advocacy, because it makes it easier for opponents to draw emotions and confuse issues. The other is to not play into negative stereotypes, because what is rightly perceived here as a sarcastic jab may be perceived elsewhere as merely playing into a stereotype that draws up negative emotions in many people. Associating yourself with bad feelings is never helpful.

The problem I see there is that, if you did that, there would be an argument over whether he should be carrying a revolver or an autoloader. Or a Glock or 1911.

Yeah, but would that be as interesting as this? :D

If we could settle THAT argument, there may be many many who are upset that the subject of the poster is white. It might be more appropriate to depict him as Black, or Hispanic.

Again, I think that discussion would be substantially less interesting than this one. Such criticisms are more easily addressed, as so done by Oleg.

Or as a woman. Surely many in the RKBA community feel that a woman would represent them better.

See above

Do you see what I'm driving at? We are a diverse community that can't be summed up in any single depiction, poster, statement, etc. I think that focusing on what makes us different is a mistake... if we insisted on just ONE message to represent ALL of us, we'd never be able to settle on it.

I sure do see what you're driving at. I do not, however advocate only one message. I simply advise against entangling topics that are easily drawn into fights of emotion (which are infinitely more difficult than single topic arguments), and can thus be used against the RKBA cause publicly.

So I think that the poster is good for what it was intended - to respond to a political comment. If you don't like the Bible or Religion, it would be great if you made ANOTHER poster with what you feel represents YOUR group best, and distribute that, as well.

I am an inept artist. :(

I think Oleg does a good job of this with his posters, showing a variety of firearms, races, sexes, etc. in his posters. None of them (individually) represents the whole community, but as a body, they do a nice job.

I agree :)

I think armoredman is contributing to our cause and not detracting from it. I think we should all do our best to contribute, as well, instead of just criticizing another's contribution because it isn't just so, the way we might like it....?

I think he may be doing both. That's where many here disagree with me.

This is my opinion, of course
Thanks for sharing it. I think these discussions are fun.

elChupacabra!
September 23, 2008, 02:02 PM
Emfuser,

Duly noted... here's another consideration: Perhaps not every message should be circulated to every audience... this message would probably do better in a church, in a Southern town, or at a religious university rather than at the Manhattan Socialist Party office...? And another message might do better around one's coworkers than this one, certainly.

I guess my point is, that the argument should be tailored to the audience. Not all will be effective at all venues. That is a given.

But I do see that this one can be very appropriate in certain areas.

Does that make sense?

ETA I think these discussions are fun too :)

Emfuser
September 23, 2008, 02:09 PM
elChupacabra!,

Yes, that makes sense. I agree that every message should be circulated to every audience. Were this pre-internet days, then such control is at least somewhat feasible, but in this day and age, it most certainly is not. You are quite correct that carefully-tailored messages will work best inside of the target audience. What I'm here to point out is that sometimes they'll be picked up as ammo by the opposition! :eek:

Good to have you here. I'm glad someone isn't sitting there getting all heated at me. I really don't enjoy it when people get upset at what I say.

elChupacabra!
September 23, 2008, 02:23 PM
Emfuser,

Of course. We can disagree and be civil - we know what's important that brings us together, which is why we're both members here. :)

More than anything I hate seeing the divisiveness among a group that desperately needs to be cohesive, or at least cooperative despite differing tertiary opinions & beliefs.

I may be a Christian... but I go to Church to agree with people about my religion... I come to THR to agree with people about guns ;)

MakAttak
September 23, 2008, 02:30 PM
Yes, that makes sense. I agree that every message should be circulated to every audience. Were this pre-internet days, then such control is at least somewhat feasible, but in this day and age, it most certainly is not. You are quite correct that carefully-tailored messages will work best inside of the target audience. What I'm here to point out is that sometimes they'll be picked up as ammo by the opposition!

There is a matter of putting your best foot forward. That point is well taken.

There is also a matter of being true to yourself. ANYTHING posted on the web can be used against the second amendment cause, even if not created by those who support the second amendment.

I believe your anecdotal evidence perfectly illustrated my point: this poster shows a clean-cut, not aggressive man with a bible and a gun. Those bigots who assume all Christians are fear mongering lunatics and all gun owners are uneducated survivalists immediately see the "Republican Jesus" poster instead of what is represented.

This poster has done nothing to cause them to believe all gun owners are raving lunatic Theocratic bible-pounders. They already believed it.

It may, however, show some people that owning a gun and a bible doesn't mean shoving either of them in someone else's face. It does mean that we have no reason to be ashamed of either.

Now, on a lighter note, where's that "You just sit there, sonny and let's have a little talk about Jesus while we wait for the police" poster?

Justin
September 23, 2008, 02:35 PM
...aaaaaaaaand we're done.

If you enjoyed reading about "And are they surprised?" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!