[natedog]

I was watching a show on "The Seven Deadly Sins" on the History Channel. Pretty cool, until they got to "Anger". It shows the host at a shooting range and he comments while loading a 1911, " We all get angry (BLAM BLAM BLAM BLAM BLAM BLAM BLAM). Sometimes you act on the anger...But when someone keys your car, you might want to switch from a .45 to a HK MP-5". (Loads up MP5PDW) (ratatatatatat...blasts target).

I feel that this portrays gun owners as the type who would use a gun to strike out in anger. Comments?

[BHPshooter]

Yeah, I'd have to say I agree. I didn't get to see it since our TV is constantly monopolized and glued to the Disney Channel :barf: but I must say that the example is in very bad taste.

:rolleyes: *sigh* non-gunnies... :rolleyes:

Wes

[glockten]

I feel that this portrays gun owners as the type who would use a gun to strike out in anger.

Striking out in anger at a threat to one's life is one thing, but the misconception that responsible gun owners are likely to use lethal force over something relatively trivial is an idea I've encountered many times from non-gunowners: coworkers, relatives, even a friend or two who should know me better than that. It's always expressed jokingly, but I'm convinced that at some level they actually believe it.

My boss occasionally makes some lame jest to the effect of "don't tick him off or he'll cap you!" I just ignore him, which is my reaction to much of what he says.:)

[Sunray]

Write a nastygram to the History Channel, the sponsors and the producers. Portraying shooters as people who are angry is nonsense. You know it and so do all other shooters. Write the letter. An e-mail to the Histroy Channel is the same thing.

[Mark Tyson]

Don't just say what was bad - suggest something in its place. A better representation of anger would be a stressed out guy at the office, or a guy getting cut off driving, or two people arguing.

To tell you the truth I think they'll just roll their eyes anyway when they read it but go ahead and try.

[Justin]

Generally speaking, the History Channel has been quite positive of its portrayal of firearms. If you're going to write a message to them, I'd suggest highlighting that fact.

You might also consider writing a message directly to the production company of the show. (Realize that History Channel does not have a direct hand in writing, shooting, and editing their programs. Most of them are created by independent video production houses.)

[Standing Wolf]

The shooter must have been really angry at those targets he shot, right?

[280PLUS]

i had to swallow my pride and endure the wrath of some butthead who thought i had horribly wronged him because i left my car parked at the pump while i grabbed a coffee and paid up

musta took at least 2 minutes, and he had to wait, the poor thing,,,

so i'm getting the evil eyeball as im walking to the car, getting in it and driving away, got my daughter with me too,

naturally i was more than happy to return it but i could do nothing more with the gun in pocket,

i was probably wrong for even returning his glare

so here we have a situation where the gun prevented the situation from escalating because i knew if i DIDN'T have the gun i would be very tempted to discuss the situation with him and i'm sure there would have been problems

cause that guy REALLY ticked me off

but with the gun, even though he obviously "needed shootin'," the correct thing was to avoid best i could and just shine it on,,,

which is what a responsible CCW person has to do every time, as hard as that may be

keep quiet and just walk away and take the crap we're dealt,

not because we're scared and the guy is scaring us with the mean faces he's making at us,,,

but because we DON'T want to have to kill the SOB,

that's DON'T,,,

in other words, i coulda shot him, but i didn't because i knew the situation didn't warrant such action,,,

he didn't follow me so as far as i know, he still has no leaks,,,not from me anyway...

you might relate this example to THC, i think it means to say, just cause we get mad doesn't mean we're going to pull our guns and shoot the offending party, no matter how badly we'd like to,,,

or how badly they "need shootin"

but if that party pursues escalation of the situation and forces our hands,,,

does any of this make sense in the context of the thread?

if not, sorry, i thought it might,,,

plus i got to blow off some steam to people who can relate

thanx for listening,,,

:)

[1badmagnum]

they werent referring to gun owners as they stated they were at the range taking out some anger...
and that mp5 was pretty awesome,I want one.:cool:
the history channel has some awesome shows,and its the channel I watch most.
I dont feel slighted abit by the way they portray gun owners,I feel the channel is the best on television.