Do we need to spruce up our image?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Can drives and other charitable events don't influence my opinion much. What influences my opinion is how those individuals who are part of any given group act on their own.

Therefore, I think it's more important that we display good character and citizenship, and generally be the good guys.

Secondly, be informed about Second Amendment/RKBA topics and be able to discuss them in "mixed company" in a manner that shows that we are responsible, well-informed,upstanding people.

Finally, if you choose to open carry, be conscious of your image and your bearing. I see some guys OCing with a nice looking holster, they are well-groomed with their hair/beards neatly trimmed, wearing nice button down clothes and carrying themselves in a proud but friendly manner. They look good and reflect well on responsible gun ownership.
 
Some of the proceeds of Friends of the NRA banquets go to charitable causes, but you'll never read about that in our local liberal rag. But, we still support the causes we believe in. It may help to tout what we do, but devout anti-gunners will never change their minds.
 
Go on NRA or NAGR or any of the large 2nd Amendment groups when they post about senators or Congressman, or Police chiefs making anti gun statements, the President blaming guns on whatever, or stories of guns being used to protect citizens.

They are FULL of idiots making comments about the politicians needing to be killed or "senators wives need to be raped by a burglar" or "Funk that guy, I hope his kids get kidnapped in front of him and he has no gun to stop it" or when a gun was not used in a home invasion its comments like "I would have shot him and let him bleed out before I called the cops"

YES, our imagine is often times tarnished by internet and couch commando's who have NEVER experienced ANY threat, have their $350 Tacticool SKS and $200 Jimenez Arms .380, are 200 lbs over weight and think they are Rambo's offspring just becuase they put on 5.11's in the AM and conceal carry 2 pistols.

It is disgusting and vile and it tarnishes the reputation of the good ones. Our reputation is mud to the left and murky to the moderates.

I have probably 30 guns, suppressors and SBR's. My mother, who has a gun in her house still to this day cannot fathom my "obsession" with guns and assault weapons" I grew up in NY and she is stuck in that mentality. BUT so are alot of people and they need to be worked into our mentaility. I moved to the south 18 years ago and have ZERO interest in NY EVER. My point is "we gun people" seem to often times have a very aggressive combative attitude that is"I have gunsto protect myself from the coming jihadist and FORGET you if you don't like it, I have no time for you or your opinion"

The other half is people cursing each other and calling names over M&P vs XD or something stupid like that. We can't even get along within our own group.

Even NRA has strayed away from guns and gotten into Right wing pro hunting, Christian type views".

I am a moderate-Conservative who doesn't care about hunting one way or the other as long as it is not done in waste, am pro- choice, don't care who gets married, animal lover, wants to protect the environment anddo my thing. I am not giving $20 to the NRA to find out they are suing the SPCA because the SPCA is trying to ban hunting on federal property AND I am not giving to the SPCA because they are funding anti gun liberals trying to fight concealed weapons laws because "people who carry guns are more likely to kill or abuse animals".

I am paying $20 here and $20 there so they can spend it on some greedy Dirtball lawyer to fight each other. The lawyers are the only ones that benefit.

My money goes to buying more guns, and saving elderly and disabled animals and buying food and supplies to local shelters.

Screw the "national organizations" they have lost their focus.
 
To add to that. Even NAGR and NRA have been arguing and spending money to attack the other one. "We" literally can't even find commonality amongst ourselves.
 
"It is disgusting and vile and it tarnishes the reputation of the good ones. Our reputation is mud to the left and murky to the moderates."
There's plenty of disgusting and vile to go around; it ain't like we (or anyone else) has a lock on that market. I will say that in 'neutral forums' --which is to say neither here nor the Brady homepage nor some random local newsrag page, but rather one of the large and well-respected news sites (not news aggregators which are typically heavily biased as part of their business model)-- discussion about guns is usually something approaching civil, at least for the internet. You have people on both sides calling "idiot," but apart from that and the trolls you are left with gun right supporters largely decrying the ignorance or false motives of the anti's, and anti's preaching righteous indigation --to put it very mildly.

Gun supporters really do tend to try to have a civil discourse, universally thinking their one pet fact or construction will 'wake up' the opposition. Even more often than degrading into troll-shouters, gunnies will get lost in the weeds debating which caliber or platform is most effective, even while in the midst of a discussion with opposition. Restrictionists really do tend to rely on poorly supported or emotional arguments appealing to shallow rationales that don't hold up under scrutiny, but sound definitive through frequent use of rhetorical terminations*. Gunnies really are often tone-deaf in how they present overly technical, 'callous', or distracting information, and restrictionists often put forth illustrations of utter ignorance regarding the issues as a point of pride.

My point is that we are clearly right, while they are clearly wrong (I know that's not a 'fair' position to debate from, but the anti's chose their position first), but we are very much prone to addressing them incorrectly, and get distracted by minutiae. That's a presentation issue, not so much an image issue. Our "image issue" is simply the result of intentional selection bias on the part of our opposition, and being the result of their actions, not something we can reasonably hope to control.

Complain about fat dorks all day long if you wish, but think about what good that is likely to accomplish. Every side of every issue has their share, already (Chipotle guys, "shoulder thing that goes up"), and there's nothing anyone can do about it.

***********************

FWIW, NAGR has some other stuff going on that I won't get into here. Suffice it to say there is a lot of evidence to suggest that activism is not their chief priority. Check out Google result number 2. Google result number one is their sponsored home page :rolleyes:. For that matter, check out Google results number three-through-infinity for similar experiences.

TCB

*there's some Debate Club term for these, I'm sure, but I refer to those declaratory phrases that can't be fairly defended against. The classic "so you stopped beating you wife, then?" constructions with no correct answer and "for the childrens" which primarily serve to indicate that debate has ended and no further arguments will be considered.
 
Last edited:
Far too many people in the firearms community puff out their chest and make gun rights a macho display of ego and testicle size. I hear far too much "Come and take it" or "From my cold dead hands", etc, etc. Self villainizing ourselves will not help, it just makes us sound like macho douchbags. We need to spread our ideals on the fact that whether or not an individual utilizes a right, whether it be freedom of speech, press, gun rights, etc, they should certainly not give it up or vote it away. I have voted for things like legalization of weed, even though I've no interest in using it. The more freedoms we have the better. People just need to stop freely giving them away.
 
Yep. For starters less bloodlust among the pro gun crowd - such as the "sports" of shooting animals for fun. Definitely a very black eye on the gun community.

I think you can get most people on board with the whole concept of self defense, human civil rights, etc. But brag to 1000 random people on the street about blasting 100 prarie dogs for fun, and you'll get 999 very offended people who think you're psychotic.

Varminting is something that should be done when necessary, not for sport, and certainly not posted and bragged about. On THR, about a year ago, someone literally posted pictures of a bunch of coyote pups he shot and killed while they were sleeping in a den. Extremely unhelpful for the pro-gun crowd.
 
The only public face they see is the NRA whose civic programs center around the shooting sports, understandably.

No, the NRA's 'civic' programs all involve lobbying. They quit caring about the shooting sports LONG AGO (e.g. the Cincinnati convention) and have left that to USA Shooting, who sponsors and helps our Olympic shooting team.

Just take one look at the state of the range at Camp Perry and you'll see that the NRA could care less about the shooting sports.
 
No, the NRA's 'civic' programs all involve lobbying. They quit caring about the shooting sports LONG AGO (e.g. the Cincinnati convention) and have left that to USA Shooting, who sponsors and helps our Olympic shooting team.

Just take one look at the state of the range at Camp Perry and you'll see that the NRA could care less about the shooting sports.
Perhaps so, in a very, very narrow definition of "shooting sports".
 
Perhaps so, in a very, very narrow definition of "shooting sports".

Well let's see...

-smallbore and centerfire benchrest have their own organizations and rulebooks.
-IDPA and USPSA have their own organizations and rulebooks.
-3-gun has their own organizations and rules.
-trap, skeet, and sporting clays all have their own organizations and rulebooks.
-3P and 4P position rifle is done by USA Shooting and/or the CMP.
-Appleseed is governed by RWVA.
-international pistol and rifle is governed by USA Shooting

The NRA governs:
-NRA Conventional pistol (aka Bullseye), which is rapidly losing shooters
-F-Class rifle
-High-power rifle matches (partially covered by the CMP)
-smallbore silhouette

I would argue the amount of money the NRA spends from its enormous budget on the above activities is disproportionately small compared to the ILA wing. Have you ever been to Camp Perry? The only way anything gets done is through the very generous work of volunteers who keep the ranges running. There is much discussion about moving bullseye out of the hands of the NRA and into a new organization. Camp Perry needs new targets and a major make-over and the NRA isn't going to fund it; they've said so.

So Camp Perry is the 'Super Bowl' of the NRA-sponsored shooting sports and yet they barely even pay for their own championships?

Please let me know if I've missed any shooting sports; it's hard to cover them all.

Anyway, some of us would rather that the NRA tell us the rules of competition and help facilitate and sponsor competition, rather than telling us who to vote for (not that much of this matters to me anymore since I moved to PR and can't vote anyway....but that's another story).

NRA-ILA has it's place. But as far as I can tell, it's basically taken over the organization.
 
Last edited:
I really don't think 'gun people' showing how charitable they are will do a thing. Just my opinion. I don't believe folks in general care a bit about what 'gun people' do. Folks who believe that it's someone else's job to protect them from evil, who believe only law enforcement should be armed or who believe it's not the citizen who has the responsibility to defend and protect are the people leading this charge to abdication of responsibility and accountability.

They are the weak, the pathetic, the scared. They are the folks who not only want to avoid violence (uh, we all do), they are the people who think they have a RIGHT to avoid violence. The people who have a fantasy that if they only pay enough to their governments, they can totally avoid violence. These are the common retards we deal with everyday--those who make no distinction between defense against violence and violence itself.

What I do here in Colorado is vote them out of office and have their sorry pathetic liberal selves recalled for the public and national safety. Fight.

If you're really fighting, it should hurt. If you think you're dealing with people who 'just need some education' or who 'just need to understand' we're normal people, I think you're wrong. 'Education'? Nope. Are you serious?

Kill them in elections, my friends. You may have to actually vote to do this, and you may actually have to spend money.

I'm not saying there's any downside to doing good services in the name of people who simply recognize their right to defend themselves. I'm saying it might be far more effective to make it clear: "You don't have a job here anymore, Mr Politician."

The weak, pathetic and hopeful masses who simply cling to the belief it's someone else's job to do the dirty work of defending against the Bad Things of reality will just never 'get it', no matter what. They will always Want life to be good and free of problems. They will always prefer to pay taxes to a government they hope will free them of these little annoyances, and will always abdicate any ownership of the cost of freedom. It will always be the job of the 'authorities', the 'professionals'...whom they universally despise, to save them from threats they feel shouldn't exist. Not their job to fight, not their area of expertise. And when the folks on the front line are faced with decision, they will bitch about that, too, because when someone gets hurt they feel life is unfair and they've paid for others to make decisions...and they'd prefer happy decisions that are all 'fair'.

Good luck wit dat.
 
Last edited:
After all of that I probably should have highlighted the fact that I'm really quite a 'people person'. I love people, bear no animosity toward anyone, am perfectly adjusted and comfortable, and really am not a sociopath at all. Not whatsoever. In fact, I like people. I may not have conveyed that sentiment at all earlier, but I want to clear up that potential misunderstanding. Gosh, what would I do without the valuable contributions of a colorful, diverse social palette such as the one we are so blessed to enjoy right now in this Golden Age of awareness, appreciation and social growth? I dunno...I am not a smart guy.
 
Those are excellent examples but, do they ever make the local news rag, radio, TV? If not, they are invisible.

Most charitable donations ARE "invisible", when push comes to shove. I donate to the local food bank. I give to our church. I've volunteered time. I donate to the Navy/Marine Corps Relief Society.

Even as groups, much of what is donated happens under the radar with no fanfare.

;)
 
Most charitable donations ARE "invisible", when push comes to shove. I donate to the local food bank. I give to our church. I've volunteered time. I donate to the Navy/Marine Corps Relief Society.

Even as groups, much of what is donated happens under the radar with no fanfare.

;)
That's certainly true but, out of sight, out of mind.

Unfortunately, guns have a sad cadre of "ambassadors" out there promoting them including violent criminals, mentally unstable soon-to-be Ex's and other miscreants who use guns to visit unspeakable harm to others. This coupled with the well-financed gun control crowd and their willing media accomplices rounds out the image the public gets to see day in, day out.

It really then comes as no surprise when the voting public is asked to approve "common sense" gun control that they find it easy to ignore any and all facts concerning it's efficacy or it's unintended consequences.

We in WA are now living that dream. And there's more to come.
 
Here in my home town we used to have a cancer society benefit shoot once a year. The last year I shot in it I think they raised a little over 3k, not bad for a town to small to have a mayor, or a red light.

But your right, we should do more and make sure we get the publicity for it.
Around here when someone comes up an idea they get put in charge of it, soooooo, if you feel lead why not get started........
 
Good gun deeds never make the news...it goes against the liberal narrative. They don't want to show the good that guns and gun people do.

That's just not true. Last summer my club had its yearly open house. It draws a large number of people but it could draw a lot more. At a planning meeting someone asked what we were doing with regard to local media? The person in charge of that (and a lot of other things) responded with words much like your own.

Someone fairly new to the club asked if they could take on the responsibility? They were told not to bother in a fairly direct manner. Finally the club president interceded and said something along the lines of "please, any help would be appreciated."

Attendance was nearly double this last summer than in years past. The person who picked up the task has a background in communications. They know how to write, release and follow-up on press releases. They're extremely organized. They know how to get on local radio talk shows, they know what to say once they are there and they talked about our open house at Rotary, Kiwanis and Elks meetings. They aren't negative, they don't give up and run and they are adept at "handling" people, even those who are hostile to the 2A cause.

Not all have the education, experience, personal connections, people skills, work ethic and temperament to get the message out and control it, but some do and it's a beautiful thing to watch.
 
Last edited:
It never hurts to spruce up one's image. Being an active part in the community is a good thing. This is especially true as where I live, where many people are moving into the area from less gun friendly areas and have been fairly thoroughly indoctrinated by the "less gun friendly".
 
Well let's see...

-smallbore and centerfire benchrest have their own organizations and rulebooks.
-IDPA and USPSA have their own organizations and rulebooks.
-3-gun has their own organizations and rules.
-trap, skeet, and sporting clays all have their own organizations and rulebooks.
-3P and 4P position rifle is done by USA Shooting and/or the CMP.
-Appleseed is governed by RWVA.
-international pistol and rifle is governed by USA Shooting

The NRA governs:
-NRA Conventional pistol (aka Bullseye), which is rapidly losing shooters
-F-Class rifle
-High-power rifle matches (partially covered by the CMP)
-smallbore silhouette

I would argue the amount of money the NRA spends from its enormous budget on the above activities is disproportionately small compared to the ILA wing. Have you ever been to Camp Perry? The only way anything gets done is through the very generous work of volunteers who keep the ranges running. There is much discussion about moving bullseye out of the hands of the NRA and into a new organization. Camp Perry needs new targets and a major make-over and the NRA isn't going to fund it; they've said so.

So Camp Perry is the 'Super Bowl' of the NRA-sponsored shooting sports and yet they barely even pay for their own championships?

Please let me know if I've missed any shooting sports; it's hard to cover them all.

Anyway, some of us would rather that the NRA tell us the rules of competition and help facilitate and sponsor competition, rather than telling us who to vote for (not that much of this matters to me anymore since I moved to PR and can't vote anyway....but that's another story).

NRA-ILA has it's place. But as far as I can tell, it's basically taken over the organization.

- Bianchi Cup

- Cowboy Action Shooting (SASS)

- Steel Challenge (same group as USPSA)

- National Muzzle Loading Rifle Association

- NSSF Rimfire Challenge

- Glock Sport Shooting Foundation Matches

I'm sure there are plenty more.
 
bikemutt said:
Unfortunately, guns have a sad cadre of "ambassadors" out there promoting them including violent criminals, mentally unstable soon-to-be Ex's and other miscreants who use guns to visit unspeakable harm to others.

And THAT is exactly what I was talking about before.
We must stomp out the notion that we* are represented by those people you accept as "ambassadors".

NO
I am not represented by those people.
If you, bikemutt, consent to be represented by criminals, then you don't represent me, and I'd like you to stop implying that those scumbags and parasites of society do represent me. I find it offensive.


Spider_Jerusalem_Version_4_by_BeYourOwnSaviour.png

I'm done being nice with the gun grabbers and well-meaning idiots. If I'm polite, they think I'm negotiating. I am not negotiating with that crowd any more, their idea of "compromise" is incorrect and unaccaptable.

Now, to get back to the original topic of a "public face", if we want to be a collective (do we?)
...Such efforts should be VISIBLE. So, who's doing an open-carry trash pickup or other public service in NW Ohio sometime soon? I'm in. I admit I felt like a jerk missing the Ohio Carry organized bottled-water handouts in the recent Toledo water crisis. (I was out of town)

I even know a local reporter - I'll invite her and you guys better look reasonably** presentable when she arrives.







*(if there even was a "we", which there really isn't)

**(outdoor work appropriate)
 
The RKBA crowd is always in need of new and better ambassadors. That's just the reality we face. When people see me in a suit and tie, and talking about guns in an eloquent and clam fashion, they can't believe I'm a gun owners (most judges in Florida own guns and so do most attorneys, not to mention doctors).

I just ordered my first Yamulke to start wearing at the gun range and when I'm about legal business. Given I've gone back to shaving my head and getting back in shape, I look like a dark-skinned Italian skin head (I prefer Vin Diesel's short Jewish cousin with bigger chest, shoulders, and biceps), I think it throw people.

I've been accused of being in the Klan by ignorant know-nothings so I always get a kick out of it.

It'd be nice if we could gather non-reloadable brass from gun clubs and donate the salvaged brass, to then use the money to stock local food banks. That'd be a good PR move in my book.
 
Yes, I'd say the firearms community can use a spruced up image.

The problem is the world is so polarized that people are either gun grabbers or gun nuts. There is no middle ground.

We don't need to show that the firearms community has a few good people that do charitable thing. What we do need to show is that the people next to you, that work with you, go to church with you, volunteer with you and are PERFECTLY NORMAL are firearms enthusiasts.

We need to invite others into our fold, welcome them, and show that we're not crazy at all. Even if they don't become one of us, a positive experience can show others that the gun guys and girls are a positive bunch of people.
 
The problem is the world is so polarized that people are either gun grabbers or gun nuts. There is no middle ground.

I have to respectfully disagree; there is a HUGE middle ground and that's where the problem lies. Even as a "gun nut" myself, I'll wager 90% of the people I know don't know about guns, never held a gun, never fired a gun and don't think about guns, ever. They don't want to grab our guns, nor do they want anything to do with guns, it's just not their thing. Whatever little they do know about guns is from the news headlines they see and hear every day.

So, it's time to vote. All these folks know is what they've heard; guns are bad. The picture was painted by the day-in, day-out news of mayhem, the Bloomberg gun grabbers, and maybe a pleading parent who lost a child in school shooting, or the sister of someone murdered by a crazy Ex. Remember, they don't care about guns, but they have a ballot in front of them. All they recall is someone, most likely a prosecutor or a policeman, on TV, assuring them that this new law will help to stop the carnage.

The only way to neutralize a negative is with a positive.
 
if you call a psycho killer a gun ambassador then you have fallen into the media narrative.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top