Gun Owner Image

Image is often times more important than reality.

GAF said:

Image is often times more important than reality.

Click to expand...

That is why the anti gunners portray hunters as Mario Cuomo once said "drunks that go to the woods and cheat on their wives" or words to that effect. Why editorial cartoonists portray NRA members as fat sloppy guys in camo with a bottle in one had and a AK in the other.
Which version gets the most media play?
The well dressed gentleman or the slob in camo?

Trent said:

The overall state percentage is 12,882,135 people, with 1,792,220 gun owners - or 13.9% of the population.

Click to expand...

All that tells you is that Illinois has 13.9% compliant gun owners. Chicago is one of the murder capitals of the country. You can't tell me that those shooters have FOID's. It's obvious that there are more guns than there are FOID's.

Replace alot of what's said in this thread with activism for First Amendment rights. Nobody in that debate was arguing, "you need to say nice things, and paint nice things, and make movies about nice things.". They pushed the envelope with the most vulgar, vile, indecent, and morally reprehensible "speech" ever created by human beings. And what was the answer to all this in the end.. you need to suck it up and quit being offended.

But that battle is still brewing even now in the US, and has taken a terrible turn in Canada. And what's even stranger, is that it's the LEFT that is destroying that right was well.

I think the problem is much much larger than guns themselves. Swaying a few minds here and there isn't going to change the fact we have a serious divide in the fundamental underpinnings of the US. The gun debate is just the tip of the iceberg.

Yes, we should live our lives and outward perception based on what we want leftists to perceive. You're living in fantasy. Yeah, go tie your shoes just how a leftist wants you to so you can get on their good side.

I don't really care how many memes a person posts, other than it clogs up my facebook feed. I don't really care how they assemble and re-assemble what someone posts so they can form their own delusional mental image.

IF you wanna make your arguments sharper, I could see having these discussions, but I'm not gonna give up poking and prodding and making fun of just how ridiculous and dangerous I think the left has become.

Calls for dignity in the discussion and in our comportment don't make us look weak. They simply make us look dignified. Insisting on throwing rhetorical left hooks doesn't inspire respect or confidence in our message. It shows us to be the bullies the left wants to paint us as. We need to resolve to be firm, but intelligent in our message. The Parkland students are getting more strident and are beginning to overplay their hand. Let's not help them by being loose cannons. The more restrained and firm we are (measured in our rhetoric and responsible on our tone), the more we look like the responsible gun owners that we are. The more militant the Parkland students become, the more they look like they are playing the blame game, externalizing the blame to the gun and covering for the fact that authorities and administrators did not act to intervene in Cruz's delusional and dangerous behavior. All their arguments are purely emotional. Using purely emotional arguments without any rational plan or comprehensive policy recommendations will collapse under the weight of scrutiny and the fullness of time.

We simply need to avoid being irrational and playing the blame game ourselves.

Trent said:

I'm not sure if you are implying that being vulgar and offensive is the answer to how we should promote the right to keep and bear arms, or just swinging off on a tangent here?

I don't think there will be any argument that the divide in America goes much deeper than the gun rights issue; however, that's a topic of discussion for another place. One of the larger points I am trying to make here is that by linking in other issues instead of focusing on one issue at a time, turns any potential audience you may have off of your message if those other issues don't happen to coincide with their belief system.

The right to keep and bear arms, to protect life and liberty from those who would seek to deny such, is an issue which crosses all religions and all demographics.

It is a universal right.

If you are promoting the right to keep and bear arms, and then link this concept to something on a tangent; such as "... because the Muslims are killing Americans!" (to throw out one possible example), now you've expanded the RKBA to that of part of a larger religious doctrine discussion. Unfortunately I see this ALL the time from gun owners, and it dilutes and pollutes the primary message. (Or taken conversely, if your main message is that of an immigration issue, and you later toss in gun rights, now you've diluted your other primary message.)

Even if you do this in, say, separate posts, folks are absolutely going to attribute and link your views together; and the more they disagree with these alternate issues, the more they will also disagree with the RKBA message you are trying to present, because overall you come off as a religious hardliner, or whatever, and the overall message that is getting across might be something much more than you thought or intended; perhaps even to the point of "only white male Christians who believe the Government is out to get us should own guns."

It's natural for people to "connect the dots" and draw conclusions like that, even if it wasn't the intent on the poster's part.

Consider these last 4 images posted on one of my gun owner friend's facebook timeline *today*, back to back.

#1 (most recent)
View attachment 783309

Yeah, ok. I get that. Underneath the bigger problem of school shootings is why they happen today; but didn't happen back when this guy was a kid. No problem.

#2
View attachment 783310

Images of Hitler surrounded by kids pushing a political message. Yup, now we're getting deeper.

#3
View attachment 783311

Next up we have a crowd of armed children around a armed parents. And not just armed, armed to the teeth with faux M203's under the barrels, suppressors, SBR's, and skulls on the magazines. Stark contrast to the previous image.

#4

View attachment 783312

Well then.

Connect the dots between those back to back posts from this morning, on my friend's timeline.

Pretty easy to see how the overall image shifts from any individual one, to something entirely different.

Apparently only white folks with a well armed militant family with a bible should own guns, to overthrow the Hitlers of the world.

Or something like that?

Click to expand...

Photo #2 is right on IMO, this is exactly like the anti march except the children are younger.

I do strongly object to photo #3 -- besides the skulls on the magazines, the wife and daughters are dressed very unsuitably for shooting. Hot brass down one's cleavage or on bare arms or toes would not only definitely not be fun but could provoke a tragic accident if the recipient's finger was on the trigger at the time, and skimpy sandals that provide zero support are not an appropriate base for firing a deadly weapon. I also question whether the daughters, especially the youngest one, are even capable of shooting the firearms they are holding. A much better photo for promoting family shooting activities would be with everybody appropriately dressed and wearing eye and ear pro, and each one holding a firearm suitable for his/her size and likely skill set.

As for photo #4, like it or not the statement is true.

one of the worst things that some owners do ( luckily , a minority) to hurt our image are those open carry walks with a rifle strapped, going around the town with camera turned on, a script ready to be recited, with only intent to bait police and waist their time. Then, they post on YouTube something like "Arrogant cop schooled on 2A" ( while THEY actually look stupid and like total jerks).
When officer tells them that they have to respond and investigate when public complains, some of them would even say " I don't care what public thinks !"
That "hard s..." attitude does not do any good PR to us.
Also, I said in another post that we can ridicule those kids marching , but we are making a huge mistake by calling them "snowflakes" all time and dismissing them as a generation.
They will become elected officials /legislators in 10-15 years and they will remember this . We need to approach these kids carefully , even we may perceive them as irritating to our rights.
You don't have to be able to "survive" going to school, and unfortunately , a lot of school shootings across the nation happened during their growing- up.
Comparing gun deaths statistics vs. car death statistics ( "why we don't ban cars then ?"), politicians offering "thoughts and prayers" which is just a worn-out phrase / empty words, and other bs are simply not cutting it for them.

JSH1 said:

Polls that ask something like “Is there a gun in your home” show that only about 35 to 40% of people answer yes. The percentage has also been steadily dropping for decades. Despite this many claim the ownership rate is above 50% and climbing.

40% of households is a lot of people but still a minority.

Click to expand...

"Polls that ask something like “Is there a gun in your home” ..

^^^How many of these polled do you think would answer truthfully in this day + age??
I have owned a firearm (Or Two) since the age of 12, in 1966, and if I were ask on an independent poll, I doubt if I would answer in the affirmative...Bill.

"How do you think the >30% of America who aren't Christians feel when they see this?

"

You don't have to be a non-Christian be uncomfortable with this image.
If I have them around me, I would be extremely uncomfortable.
They look like a bunch of wack jobs that are members of the cult

Those pictures of the church goers, that has to be satire, right? I've seen it before but always just assumed it was staged to make gun owners look bad. Am I wrong in this assumption?

It's real.
Look, I believe people ought to be free to worship as they believe. I don't hold it against these people if they want to wear bullet-crowns and carry rifles at their places of worship.
It's called freedom.
But I don't bring my M4orgeries to my place of worship, and as for crowns, the closest thing I wear to "jewelry" might be my nice Bulova Accutron II wristwatch.
Most people will look at those pictures, including my cousins who own guns and hunt, and have a negative reaction. Despite my belief in religious freedom, the images still bother me, I just tell myself they're probably harmless and we have more important concerns.
But they still present gun owners in a negative light.
They become ... "ammunition" our enemies use in this national struggle.
It's really just that simple.

The image I portray to anti gun and non gun people is a position of being civil, respectful and polite. I want a discussion not an argument.
If I can`t convince them I invite them to go shooting.

old lady new shooter said:

As for photo #4, like it or not the statement is true.

Click to expand...

I hate to say it but this is exactly the point of the OP. There is no relationship between the Bible and gun rights. Making this connection is totally counterproductive not to mention makes us look like we don't know history. (BTW, totalitarianism existed long before Christianity. Or even monotheism.)

The issue of image, and of gun owners keeping that condition to themselves is a thorny one.

Ever since 1968, the gun owning community has been under an onus to be felony-free (conviction, arrest, or even accusation). Which is complicated by the sheer number of things which are felonies.

I will suggest that gun owners, over the ensuing decades resolved the dilemma of how to not commit any crimes, particularly as the number is almost not "know-able," is to fade into the background as it were. What we might call closeted. If you did not attract attention, you were left alone.

Of course, this de-normalization, leaves a vacuum of sorts. Into which any number of falsehoods might reside, and the lack of common experience to the contrary was not there to shine light upon the shadows cast.

Another issue is that our community is largely individualists and self-motivators; some even embrace social isolation, the comfort of the rural as a preferred lifestyle. It's extremely easy to divide a collection of individuals, particularly with people taught to group en masse by instruction, or social pressure.* "Our" very nature makes us very poor "joiners"--we show every sign of being all-or-nothing advocates. We, by way of perfectly normal human nature, preume our binary upon others. This is easy to twist by those experienced in twisting words, opinions, public opinions.

All of which is complicated. I like the rugged individualism in our community; I would not see it watered down a ingle drop. It really is our strength.

Now, where we might have to focus our attention within, may be upon all those people who have a gun, just the one, often just a revolver, who steadfastly aver that they are not gun owners. These are largely city folk. People whose social circles would rather admit to venereal disease than gun ownership. By "our" stanrads they are "poor" owners, in that they do not go to the range, they are not versed on SD ammo, and have never considered any sort of training on how to use their arm in SD--its intended, last ditch, use.

The enourmous social pressures of cities, of the huge urban metropolises are becoming the defining edges of "pro" and "con." I will reiterate that I believe AlexanderA entirely correct that we, our community, really need to reach out to the urbanized. I just don't know how. I'm not sure "we" know how, and we need to get, to hire, those who do.

We need people skilled at image control; at social/event/opinion organization. We need that sort of person working for us. Perhaps then we can make ownership a "normal" thing again, even work on rationalizing our ridiculous hodge-podge of pointless laws. Maybe. Perhaps.
__________________________________________
*This is all the more frightening after the revelations that the media/device/gaming industry has been using "psychological design" to make their products ever more indispensable, nigh unto addicting, for the last 30 years. Children are--and have been--conditioned to "need" their digital devices. Even to the point of addiction. This does not make them rational processors of information. If the device gives them information they tend to agree with, it is true, whther that data is factual or not.

roscoe said:

I hate to say it but this is exactly the point of the OP. There is no relationship between the Bible and gun rights. Making this connection is totally counterproductive not to mention makes us look like we don't know history. (BTW, totalitarianism existed long before Christianity. Or even monotheism.)

Click to expand...

The caption does not say there is a connection between the Bible and gun rights. The caption indicates -- accurately -- that religious freedom and the right to keep and bear arms are always early targets of dictators. The Bible is used to symbolize religious freedom because it is the most familiar religious symbol to Americans.

It's obvious why this should be the case, both threaten the would-be dictator: religion gives people the mindset that they do not exist to be used by a dictator, and the right to keep and bear arms prevents a would-be dictator from becoming an actual dictator.

Most of the time the only difference between me and my non gun owning neighbors is I own guns.
In the recent protest I`m thinking there are a lot of just plain followers who are being used as tools
to further an agenda . It sure is nice to have a wide selection of tools when one wants to start a project.

I was looking on google new just now and I did not see any story about the demonstrations.
It is fading fast.

I suspect a lot of people young and old alike think that that a Hitler can`t come to power these days, but when I look what is happening around the world I see that there are Hitler`s every where. Nothing has changed for most of the world and it is not going to change anytime soon.

It is being allowed to fade since the objective was met. Florida capitulated, and a massive triumph rally was held in DC with the clear message they are preparing the next assault for the next mass shooting.

They "only" achieved siezing yet another key population center from gun owners

old lady new shooter said:

The caption does not say there is a connection between the Bible and gun rights. The caption indicates -- accurately -- that religious freedom and the right to keep and bear arms are always early targets of dictators. The Bible is used to symbolize religious freedom because it is the most familiar religious symbol to Americans.

It's obvious why this should be the case, both threaten the would-be dictator: religion gives people the mindset that they do not exist to be used by a dictator, and the right to keep and bear arms prevents a would-be dictator from becoming an actual dictator.

Click to expand...

It might seem like there is a connection but the problem is that, historically, it is not true. It was not true during the days if the ancients nor is it true in any universal way today. Assad, Mubarak, and Saddam Hussein went out of their way to protect Christians. South American dictators have no special record of oppressing religious minorities. But yes some dictators have demanded it. Ferdinand and Isabella come to mind. Queen Elizabeth also. And yes, Hitler and Khomeini.

Modern dictators have cracked down far more on the free press and the right of assembly. And if we are trying to persuade folks about gun rights, those are clearly more universally related to the freedoms that dictators fear.

Note also that the image showed a Bible not a Torah. Which is actually more related to religious persecution and the need for self-defense? But which is more of a dog whistle for Christian fundamentalists?

If we are going to pursue a wider range of the American populus we need to be smarter and more inclusive.

On an individual level you have to discern your audience. If it is an ignorant or emotionally driven foot soldier you should use tact, humility and try and infuse reason and logic into the discussion. However, in the case of their leadership, you are dealing with people who are not ignorant, are paid or promised reward, and will verbal fence with you until you give up or they decide to leave the discussion.

The latter I would call them what they are to their face, and let them know that they are not going to win - regardless of any progress in their agenda. We are not going to be forced into a repeat version Bolshevik Russia, or light version like Europa. There will be a showdown, and they are going to lose.

AR-bossman is right on. This is just one major facet in an ideological war that is also moving to free speech.

These people have an agenda - the time to be polite with their leadership is long over. If you want to see where they want us to be, just look at Europa. I'm not going there, not any time soon, not ever. They can take that to the bank, and if you value your freedoms, you need to make that clear to them as well.

I have to delete several posts that started to wander into prejudicial areas about religion and ethnicity. I would strongly caution against that.

GEM