Unfair association with guns


PDA






Charleo0192
May 19, 2011, 02:29 PM
I was having a chat with a friend of mine about going to the range. He had never been but I asked of he'd be interested in going sometime. He said sure and asked what kind of guns I had. I got through the "traditional" rifles when I got to my ar-15. This was "un-traditional" to him.

Now there are differences between an ar-15 and that of a Remington 700, but they are both still guns. Each are used in war, but both earn different
associations.

I realize the media has a part in this as guns similar to an ar-15 are called "dangerous automatic assault rifles. "sniper" rifles are given a similar image; "silent weapon that could kill from miles away".

So why is it that I can own a "traditional" rifle without being questioned for owning it, but once I go to the "untraditional" I'm interrogated. If yu ask me they both get a bad portrayal and both are deadly but one seems to get the spotlight (not the good kind).

This is mainly a discussion as to why certain guns are singled out.

If you enjoyed reading about "Unfair association with guns" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!
hermannr
May 19, 2011, 02:38 PM
I own a 700 that I purchased new in 1964. I love it, and shoot it well.

Our oldest daughter (who is over 40) has an AR 15, loves it, and shoots it well.

I own a 90 year old .38 Colt Officers Model. I love it and shoot it well.

Oldest daughter owns a FiveseveN...and shoots it well.

different strokes for different folks, even within the same family.

Probably the real difference is, I like Her weapons, too...she does not like mine. (they kick too much)

rocky branch
May 19, 2011, 02:59 PM
Part of the arsenal of the antis is "military style." Equals no justification for civilian ownership.

It helps them and potential allies in part to justify their fuzzy logic.

Even some NRA backers and sportsmen have supported this thinking.

KodiakBeer
May 19, 2011, 03:02 PM
Dat's one of dem assault rifles!

ShroomFish
May 19, 2011, 03:21 PM
I deal with the same thing with my grandfather....

Me: AR-15
Him: M1 Carbine

Me: Mossberg 500
Him: Iver Johnson

Etc etc

He has the old, I have the new... Now I do have a lot of old guns also and I love his old guns, but he don't like my new ones...

Each to his own I guess..

henschman
May 19, 2011, 03:28 PM
Something like a Remington 700, with its traditional wood stock, might as well be a flintlock musket to somebody who doesn't know anything about guns. The AR on the other hand is high tech and mean looking (even though its design is 50-some years old).

The Remington may have a longer maximum effective range, better accuracy, better penetration, more ability to defeat body armor, and could be at least as effective of a killing machine in the right hands, but it just isn't as scary looking.

Plus like others have said, the AR looks like a military rifle (even though it's not), and the Remington doesn't (even though it is).

You have to look at things from the perspective of a total noob. When I didn't know anything about guns, I figured AKs and ARs must be the most bad ass because the look the most bad ass, and similar variants are used by militaries.

jiminhobesound
May 19, 2011, 03:32 PM
I agree with the unfair press association of military style weapons being the problem. I do not hink I would ever try to relate the fun of shooting a military style gun to a non gunner. To me the fun part of shooting nonhunting guns can be categorized into, target shooting. rapid fire and shooting big booming kicking guns. Target shooting may be the best way to introduce folks to shooting.

klutchless
May 19, 2011, 04:27 PM
And the old mausers and enfield that have actually killed somebody sit quietly in the corner.

Mule
May 19, 2011, 05:16 PM
Every family around here has their "Civil War" rifle. So.....

is a three band Enfield evil?

is a trapdoor Springfield evil?

is a 03A3 evil?

is a Garand evil?

What makes that black rifle evil?

The Second Amendment doesn't say a darn thing about "sporting purpose".

Them that don't like it better stock up on Depends.:cuss:

Shadow 7D
May 19, 2011, 05:28 PM
Just make them explain WHY
WHY don't they like it, most won't have a reason and try to tell you it's
"evil"

They you ask why the insist on 'Humanize' the gun by assigning an impossible attribute to it.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pathetic_fallacy

Owen Sparks
May 19, 2011, 05:46 PM
I prefer the term modern rifles.

HGUNHNTR
May 19, 2011, 05:48 PM
Its just human nature to make associations.

Owen, I wouldn't call a car designed in the 60's modern...so why a gun?. JK dude, I hear ya. :p

DoubleTapDrew
May 19, 2011, 06:02 PM
Just think, in 50 years guys on the high road will be asking the same questions with different rifles..."He's fine with my old traditional rifles like my AR-15, AK-47, or P90, but as soon as I mention my phased plasma rifles he gets all bent outta shape and doesn't see the need for something with a 40-watt range"

:D

relentlessknives.com
May 19, 2011, 06:55 PM
Well: I don't think it's the gun it's self that is being singled out.
I believe the gun in that configuration is the easiest target for those who would have
the American public disarm them selves.....way easier than dis arming them.
Your friend is 1/2 way there.

For instance......we need to get those evil guns off the streets.
Nothing new here, the tactic has been used throughout history to dis arm a populace, and, then destroy them.
Seem a bit harsh. Well yes because it is harsh, and so is human nature.

How often do you see tigers eating other tigers, or wolves eating other wolves.
Nope it just doesn't happen.....yet, both of the above eat all kinds of weaker creatures.
Why....because it's quick easy and fun rather than a great risk to their own health and safety.

The politically correct attitude is a fallacy that has been perpetrated by rather cowardly
people with criminal intent and long range plans.

For example.....England......supposedly a free country.

During WWll when they were attacked and as a result, the USA was nice enough to drop large amounts of personal firearms
via air into the country so that the people could defend themselves.
Why....because they had been disarmed.....supposedly by their own volition....but really.
The country was ruled by often viscous monarchs for a thousand years until the Magna Carta.
The Magna Carta was imposed on the Monarchs by force of arms taken up by the rank and file demanding freedom.
The crafty monarchs agreed.......yet today......weapons are extremely hard to get and their use is highly restricted.
There are cameras watching all these free men's every move....and, check out some of their knife forums....the word "Combat knife" is un allowed......the owners of knives and swords live in fear that their possessions will be confiscated.

So yeah......who is kidding who. Your AR15 is a weapon, and you should have it to protect your self.

When the founders of the USA started this country, they were armed with the most modern weapons of the day,
and took steps to insure the the right of the people to keep and bear arms should not be infringed.

Define "Infringe".....it's mostly employed by stealth.

Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves. By: William Pitt

So when your friend dislikes your AR15....let him know that YES it is a modern weapon, and great equalizer designed to do damage to human beings. It is safely in your hands to protect you both from predatory human beings.
And, if he doubts the need for such things, invite him to a tour of places on earth where people with ill intent through the use of arms, have decided that life liberty and the pursuit of happiness is a privilege under their exclusive control and afforded to only those who do the will of the armed.

Of course it has other uses, like target shooting, and hunting, and is not all that different from a sharp stick under the correct circumstances.

Check this movie. It is a real good illistration
http://74.6.238.254/quickapps/netflix/index.php?pg=1&q=September%20Dawn&mov=http://api.netflix.com/catalog/titles/movies/70067841

armoredman
May 19, 2011, 08:05 PM
http://i16.photobucket.com/albums/b13/armoredman/CZ%20posters/Commoncaliber.jpg

And they shoot the exact same caliber...

12131
May 19, 2011, 08:08 PM
Part of the arsenal of the antis is "military style." Equals no justification for civilian ownership.

It helps them and potential allies in part to justify their fuzzy logic.

Even some NRA backers and sportsmen have supported this thinking.
Sadly.:mad:

Heretic
May 19, 2011, 08:35 PM
Just explain to them that you've taken your "evil" black rifle to a priest to have it exorcised, and it's not "evil" anymore. That, or you could say "I'm not a racist, I don't care what color my rifle is."

leadcounsel
May 19, 2011, 08:46 PM
It's actually a clever "divide and conquer" tactic of slowly eroding gun rights, from the least common to the most common. In the 1990s, the gun community was asleep at the wheel when those "uncommon assault rifles" were banned. Who needed a bayonet lug, anyway? NObody but up much a fuss. Now we are wiser.

Ignition Override
May 19, 2011, 09:36 PM
klutchless:
Maybe most owners' Enfields sit in the corner for months on end.
One of my Enfield "Jungle Carbine"s went out today.

These types helped to defeat an evil empire, and being bolt-action, they are not evil, like ARs :evil:etc.

1911Tuner
May 20, 2011, 08:38 AM
The mindset is more prevalent than you think.

As we move further and further from our rural roots, the more we think like people of the the European nations. The British, for example, can't understand our "Gun Culture" any more than we can understand their almost sheep-like acceptance of subjugation because they're so far removed from the days that they had a similar culture.

Case in point:

My brother in-law. Career Navy vet...West Virginia born and raised until age 12...avid deer hunter...raised by a father who believes strongly in RKBA...was mortified when he discovered that I keep a pistol on my person or close at hand, even at home. When I say that he was visibly shaken when he saw me remove it and place it on top of the refrigerator before we all settled down for a rousing night of Gin Rummy...I'm not exaggerating. His eyes were actually wide with fear. Up to that point, I'd spent very little time in his company because when he left the Navy, he lived in the Charleston/Goose Creek area for many years before relocating to NC.

He said that it just seemed "wrong" to him for anybody to be armed without a defined reason. When I asked him why he felt that it was inherently wrong, he didn't have a plausible answer...other than:

I don't know. It just doesn't seem right to me for anybody to carry a pistol unless they're a cop."

So, yeah. It's there.

RX-178
May 20, 2011, 08:49 AM
My response to that? Offer to let them shoot it.

I get reactions so good I wish I were videotaping (and will in the future!)... sometimes they get this deer-in-the-headlights look, and go 'Are you sure? Is that okay?'

Then gingerly shoulder it as if the thing could rear up and chomp their head off.

Then they start shooting. Some of them can't resist and start blasting off as fast as they can without even trying to hit anything. Others start hitting things and look surprised when I tell them they just shot off 30 rounds from an 'evil assault clip'..

lizziedog1
May 20, 2011, 09:00 AM
Part of this is the anti's strategy of divide and conquer. Sadly, this often times works all too well for them.

I was in California when their EBR ban was going through. I knew shooters that actually were in favor of it. Some were trap shooters that felt that EBR's don't have a place in civilian hands. Besides, their Perazzi's and Browning's were safe. Many deer hunters felt that there bolt actions and lever actions were also safe.

Then when they went after high-capacity magazines, some revolver guys were not all that concerned. Their six-shooters were not on the chopping block.

Now the Golden State has a "approved gun" list. They have a one handgun per month limit. It ain't going to get better.

When us shooters bicker about each others choices of weapons, guess who wins?

HGUNHNTR
May 20, 2011, 10:19 AM
s we move further and further from our rural roots, the more we think like people of the the European nations. The British, for example, can't understand our "Gun Culture" any more than we can understand their almost sheep-like acceptance of subjugation because they're so far removed from the days that they had a similar culture.

I grew up in very rural Nebraska, and I can tell you that anything other than a levergun or bolt action was looked at with suspicion as well. As for European countries, it is unfair to make such sweeping generalizations, I encountered a vibrant and accepting gun culture in France and Switzerland during my year there. GB is another thing all together.

And the truth is: If some maniac really wanted to harm large numbers of folks, there are MUCH more effective means that a rifle with a 30 round mag for accomplishing such a heinous task.

relentlessknives.com
May 20, 2011, 11:24 AM
As we move further and further from our rural roots, the more we think like people of the the European nations. The British, for example, can't understand our "Gun Culture" any more than we can understand their almost sheep-like acceptance of subjugation because they're so far removed from the days that they had a similar culture.

I honestly believe we are being PROMPTED further from our rural roots with the goal,
the acceptance of subjugation. the more we think like people of the the European nations.

Prompted might be better.....possibly through the power of suggestion.

Figure this......there are as many types of criminals as there are human beings.
Stupid criminals end up in jail etc. The more intelligent i.e. Bernie Madeoff types
usually don't.
The "European nations" have never acknowledged the right to life liberty and the pursuit of happiness as
an inherent right of all people born on earth. Throughout history the strong and aggressive have taken what they wanted from the weak. The only difference, is that now, strength and aggressiveness is not necessarily physical strength, or even strength of arms.
Psychology can easily be used to get even large groups of people to destroy themselves.
It has nothing to do with rural roots but everything to do with basic human nature.
A phased approach to accomplish the same subjugation, with never a shot fired or an arm raised.

The perpetrators are never identified as deviant, they are much to intelligent for that.
They move in gentle ways so as not to upset or aggravate. They use the strength of their opponent to their advantage, much like a Judo move were the larger is tripped and his own weight causes his demise.
In a free country were the rule of law is absolute, if one can gain the minds of a few to make laws that subjugate. The rest will obey out of respect for the law.

The founding fathers identified vigilance the price of freedom. In todays world perhaps a microscope
should be added to the toolbox of those who wish to maintain their God given rights.

1911Tuner
May 20, 2011, 12:35 PM
Quote:

>As for European countries, it is unfair to make such sweeping generalizations, I encountered a vibrant and accepting gun culture in France and Switzerland during my year there. GB is another thing all together.<

True enough, but from all I can gather, their gun culture is mainly sport centered...while ours is more diverse and overlapping. While we have our share of "Fudds" here, there are many more who keep an eye on what 2A really means even though most of their reasons for owning firearms is for sporting purpose.

A friend that I had several years ago spent a good amount of time abroad...and mostly in Europe. He reported that they were very much interested in our guns, but he definitely got the impression that they considered us as cowboys...and much of our country as depicted in westerns...gangster flicks...and things like the completely lame Charles Bronson "Vigilante" movies. The British especially tended to make little snide remarks disguised as humor.

Along the lines of:

"That bloke bloody well cut us off at that roundabout! Good thing for him that he didn't do that to us in Montana, or you'd have whipped out the old trusty .45 and set him straight, eh?

relentlessknives.com
May 20, 2011, 12:49 PM
I have a good friend in France.
His web site is http://www.M9M4.com
They are allowed silencers, and short barreled rifles.
No full auto without military clearance, but he owns a wide array
of ....non sporting guns, and says we are way worse off then them in the restriction dept.

He is not a cop or a soldier, just a good guy who appreciates guns and knives.

HGUNHNTR
May 20, 2011, 07:01 PM
True enough, but from all I can gather, their gun culture is mainly sport centered...while ours is more diverse and overlapping. While we have our share of "Fudds" here, there are many more who keep an eye on what 2A really means even though most of their reasons for owning firearms is for sporting purpose.


I agree.

Standing Wolf
May 20, 2011, 10:47 PM
It's actually a clever "divide and conquer" tactic of slowly eroding gun rights, from the least common to the most common.

You beat me to it, leadcounsel. Divide and conquer has worked for empires and tyrants for centuries.

Kliegl
May 21, 2011, 12:55 PM
That's one reason I really like the M1A. Without the mag in, it looks like a synthetic stocked hunting rifle, but you can load in 20 round mags and reach out and touch someone at 400 yards plus.

I like the not being a gun racist comment.

CraigC
May 21, 2011, 01:48 PM
So why is it that I can own a "traditional" rifle without being questioned for owning it, but once I go to the "untraditional" I'm interrogated.
Irrational fear derived from ignorance, pure and simple.

merlinfire
May 21, 2011, 01:56 PM
Its just this simple:

When you don't really understand how guns work, the first visual impression is all you go on.

medalguy
May 21, 2011, 05:35 PM
I have a neighbor, real leftie NPR type, never expressed any interest in guns and looked sorta bug-eyed when he first saw my reloading setup. Couldn't understand why I reloaded. Then I explained that I shot-- a LOT-- and that reloading was so economical it allowed me to shoot more often. I offered to let him go with me one day to shoot my 1921 Thompson and we did. He had a real good time, so much so that he asked if we could go again and let his wife come along. She is even more liberal thinking than he is.

We went a few weeks later and she accompanied us and even asked to shoot the Thompson several times. I also took my 1919A4 Browning and we shot it about 800 rounds.

Well before too long he informed me that a friend had given him a Ruger 10/22 and asked me to show him how to load and fire it. I did, and before much longer he asked me if I would help him find a shotgun that he could use for HD. Done.

A few weeks ago I was going to Sportsman's Warehouse and he said he needed some .22 ammo so we all piled into my car and drove over. As we emerged from the store later carrying heavy bags of ammo, his wife commented "My God, here we are stockpiling ammo! What will our friends think??"

So yes if you talk to your non-gun or anti-gun friends about guns and show them the fun side, and invite them to shoot with you, it can indeed change minds.

effengee
May 21, 2011, 10:51 PM
A gun is a gun here... Doesn't really matter to me, I like them ALL!
(Except for Jennings .22's)

HGUNHNTR
May 22, 2011, 10:56 AM
I have a neighbor, real leftie NPR type
medal guy--you may be surprised to find out that there is a huge contingency of folks like that out there, me for instance. These are exactly the types of people that we need to have take an interest in the shooting sports, since they will be tremendous spokespeople for it. Relating this to another thread, I believe you personally, medalguy, have done more to promote responsible gun ownership than Ted Nugent did by telling a reporter to suck on his machine gun. Well done sir.

guntech59
May 22, 2011, 08:47 PM
medal guy--you may be surprised to find out that there is a huge contingency of folks like that out there, me for instance. These are exactly the types of people that we need to have take an interest in the shooting sports, since they will be tremendous spokespeople for it. Relating this to another thread, I believe you personally, medalguy, have done more to promote responsible gun ownership than Ted Nugent did by telling a reporter to suck on his machine gun. Well done sir.
All due respect, Sir, but i could care less if people love "the shooting sports".

I am more concerned with how they feel about the Constitution in general, and the 2nd Amendment specifically. It was not put there so people could shoot deer or clay pigeons.

merlinfire
May 23, 2011, 08:54 AM
medalguy, that's the success story I like to hear.

As a side note, I listen to NPR too!

Nushif
May 23, 2011, 12:31 PM
Oh hey! I do too!

Grats on taking a nub shooting. The ones who you always think would hate it tend to be the ones who bug you the most after, too. The next step is to bug him about getting himself that. 22 pistol ... and the rest takes care of itself. My entry drug was a 12 gauge, but the .22 is easier to sell. >.o

Heretic
May 24, 2011, 01:32 PM
Could I suggest that from now on we refer to our "assault rifles" as "sport utility rifles".
Might go down a little better.

RX-178
May 24, 2011, 01:34 PM
That won't work.

The antis hate Sport Utility Vehicles already.

HGUNHNTR
May 24, 2011, 01:57 PM
All due respect, Sir, but i could care less if people love "the shooting sports".

I am more concerned with how they feel about the Constitution in general, and the 2nd Amendment specifically. It was not put there so people could shoot deer or clay pigeons.


Guntech, the shooting sports are a great way to introduce people to firearms, even if the 2nd was written around them. It is a lot easier to "sell" a fence sitter on firearms by taking them to the range and having a great day shooting targets, hunting, whatever, than telling them they better get prepared in case a benevolent dictator takes over and the citizenry needs to act.

The antis hate Sport Utility Vehicles already Well burning more fossil fuels rather than less is a negative unless you are an oil company.

Nushif
May 24, 2011, 02:07 PM
It is a lot easier to "sell" a fence sitter on firearms by taking them to the range and having a great day shooting targets, hunting, whatever, than telling them they better get prepared in case a benevolent dictator takes over and the citizenry needs to act.

Frankly that's how I treat my gun habit in the first case.

My guns are for me a hobby, a sport and a time sink. They just happen to make great weapons.

I mean, let's apply this fabled thing called Occams Razor here ...

How likely is it (in this reality, please) that a dictator takes over and we have to rise up and attack the dictator and his evil henchmen?
How likely is it that there's a great afternoon to be had popping clays with a semi auto 12 gauge?

While the second amendment arguably was written with the citizenry rising up in arms in mind, it was written in a different time. So I agree we should support the notion behind the amendment and maintain it, but realistically ... let's pop some clays, plink some cans and have some fun when we go to the range, instead of training for a possibility about as remote as it comes.

amflyer
May 24, 2011, 02:17 PM
It may be a truism to state that the Rem. 700 is a sporting arm that is used martially, and the AR is a martial arm that is used sportingly, but it is accurate.

You can enter a 1978 Ford stationwagon in an auto race, and you could probably pick up the kids from soccer practice in a Testarossa...but in neither case are you using the vehicle for its most likely use.

People do not like the fact that some guns are born and bred to be used as a tool for taking human life. If you think about it, that's probably a normal, if not rational, response. People fear a hypodermic needle because it is used in a painful situation...even though its use results in something generally beneficial to the patient.

A good defense would be to state:

1. The US constitution does not guarantee the right to hunt with firearms.
2. Sometimes, as a last resort, overwhelming violence is needed to stem violent
behavior.
3. This gun is no more inherently evil than is the aforementioned hypodermic needle: or
perhaps more accurately, than a surgeon's scalpel.

This should cover the legal, moral, and philosophical aversions, although there may be others.

Heretic
May 25, 2011, 03:09 PM
How likely is it (in this reality, please) that a dictator takes over and we have to rise up and attack the dictator and his evil henchmen?

I believe, if we didn't have guns, it would have happened already. Maybe before we were born.

mustang_steve
May 25, 2011, 03:20 PM
It's things like this that inspiring my vision for a custom AR build: Birdseye Maple furniture (fixed position M-16 style hardware) and polished metal abound. Let's see them freak out over the fancy-sporterized no-longer-black possibly evil rifle :)

Only thing holding me back is cash. I plan on getting the first few parts to start the build very soon though.

ZCORR Jay
May 25, 2011, 04:01 PM
Could I suggest that from now on we refer to our "assault rifles" as "sport utility rifles".
Might go down a little better.

The damage is already done. Thanks to the media and hollywood everyone that sees a black rifle assumes their only good for school shootings, combat use, or bank robbers.

dirtykid
May 25, 2011, 06:14 PM
I believe the "damage" can be un-done if we were to correct everybody who refer's to them as "AR's" and simply tell them Assault is a behavior,not a device and this gun is a semi-automatic rifle with no assaultive-tendencies in properly trained hands.
Interestingly enough we had a tornado strike downtown North Minneapolis (a rough neighborhood) and looting started before storm had even finished, so police were called out to protect fire-fighters responding to emergency-calls with "long-guns"
So my ears perk-up thinking ??? M1-garand's ??? musket-loaders ??/ Then camera pans to picture of LE officer holding a semi-auto "black-gun" ,,, sheesh they didnt even have Trijicons mounted on top or forward-handgrips,,, that gun couldnt assault a bunny-rabbit !!

amflyer
May 27, 2011, 12:22 PM
Dirtykid, I hope you were making a funny about the gun being less than , err, "assaultive", since it was missing a red dot sight and a funny handle on the forearm.

relentlessknives.com
May 27, 2011, 06:25 PM
3. This gun is no more inherently evil than is the aforementioned hypodermic needle: or
perhaps more accurately, than a surgeon's scalpel.

Well wait a minute......lets look a bit closer at the fine quote above to see the real dilemma we are facing.
The surgeon's scalpel.....if it is sharp on both edges, it is in many places
banned or illegal unless your a policeman or soldier on active duty.
The feared and terrible,double edged knife.
And the same goes for if it folds into the handle and is opened with the push of a button.
A .....Switch Blade......notably used as the preferred weapon of American street
gangs.....in a MOVIE.


Hard to believe we are a thinking society.
Also hard to believe how we allow certain individuals and groups to manipulate our language.
Your no longer ugly....just cosmetically challenged. Not so bad.

Worse.... our elected "representatives" and now "LAW MAKERS"....a big mistake.

Outfitter
May 27, 2011, 06:39 PM
I have always referred to mine as a "defense" rifle when somebody mistakenly calls it an assault rifle. I have no plans of assaulting anyone and I damn sure will be defending myself if I ever need to use it.

Heretic
May 27, 2011, 07:36 PM
I decided to put it to the test. I got out my AR and proceeded to insult it, hoping to produce a reaction. I called it names, insulted it's mother , even slapped it a couple times(ouch). No matter what I did, I couldn't get it to "assault" me.

mdThanatos
May 28, 2011, 06:39 PM
I think an experiment to try out on random people would be to take two photos, one of a "standard" AR, and by standard lets say an A2 config, no extra bells and whistles, in black and then the other photo to be the pink hello kitty AR. Do a side by side comparison and have people ask what is evil looking. They will all tell you the black one, unless they hate hello kitty, without even realizing that they both do the exact same thing.

If you enjoyed reading about "Unfair association with guns" here in TheHighRoad.org archive, you'll LOVE our community. Come join TheHighRoad.org today for the full version!