Couldn't we gather up the NRA or a general class-action from FFL holders and sue for slander? I doubt it would stick, but it may get the point across that they can't attack the owners, just the statistics, and that would leave them dead in the water.
Uteridge you had me in stitches laughing so hard.
Stop getting hung up on the semantics...
Without semantics, there can be no meaningful debate, full stop. Semantics are everything. Frame the definitions, frame the debate, win the debate.
The pro-gun side has always had logic in its corner, and a logical argument begins with agreed-upon and well-founded definitions for everything being argued. I don't want to see our side's argument devolve into the emotional drivel that we fight so hard against.
Can you imagine what would happen if some conservative group made an ad using a silhouette target of a little girl? The outcry from the left would be deafening. They might even suggest that the ad was responsible for a shooting somewhere.
Semantics do not matter in this context. Again they could call it a dodad and it will not change the message or its effect on people.
. Much more emotional than factual, just like the brady ad. When you use provocation to frame the discussion, it becomes harder to make rational decisions. If a side is mired in ignorance or bad faith, that may be all they have.Yea look back at some of the factual Right to Life adds that brought down huge criticism from the left.
I think it is illegal in MA to shoot at targets that look like people.