Chesty P,
I disagree about the "non-gun owning public's" reaction. How many non gun owners did you ever speak to about this. I have spoken to quite a few, as I have some limited but active interest in gun rights and promoting the shooting sports and gun ownership. The response as depicted on the media was usually the response given by the anti-gun crowd, not the non-gun ownership crowd, and there is quite a distinction between the two at many times. Many rabid anti-gunners actually own guns (Kerry for example, and Feingold has armed guards). Many non-gunowners are pro 2nd amendment and RKBA (please note there is a distinction but we need not discuss it in this thread).
The negative responses, that you saw on the news, were selected by the media as the responses the rabid left wing media would show. I have had non-gun owning associates and friends actually ask me about C.H. and that particular statement as an NRA slogan. When explained to them, they readily understood what it meant and most were not offended by it, not turned off by it, and were rather amazed that regular citizens would be willing to defend their own rights, and the rights of all U.S. citizens with such a degree of dedication. They also realized that people like Kerry are out and out hypocrites regarding their stances on firearms ownership, and that folks like Schumer, Clinton and McCarthy - here in NY are absolutely in outer space when it comes to such. As for the media and these rabid anti-gunners using all they can to try to take away our rights - they will continue to twist any argument we bring up to fit into their own attack of us simply because they are political wackos, seeking the votes of other wackos. That does not mean that things we say make us our own worst enemies, that means the other side will twist whatever we say and portray it to their own best advantage. Should we shut up altogether, or should we keep up the good fight while getting our message out to the public? I choose the second option.
Of course if we choose actions like those alleged actions of rock singer John Popper (see:
http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,257638,00.html), who was reportedly arrested after being stopped in a vehicle allegedly traveling 111 mph, that allegedly had illegal narcotics in it, and that allegedly had several secret compartments all with guns in them - well that is also something that defeats gun owners. Add to that that the vehicle was also allegedly rigged with emergency flashing lights, a siren, and a public address system - and maybe the public - even some very pro gun people - would see this as bizarre - not to mention possibly illegal.
So as to being our worst enemies, well maybe in certain ways we tend to be just that at times, but I think not through use of such a slogan. For example, when we think of non-gunners as anti-gunners, yes we are being self defeating. When we even think that all anti-gunners are our enemies and that we cannot explain ourselves and convert anti-gunners, then self defeating likewise. When we do not explain ourselves, our position, and firearms rights to non-gun owners, well same again. When we act irresponsibly while in the possession of firearms, or when we exhibit bizarre behavior, then same again in caps. Me - I prefer to do otherwise. I try to not seem to extreme while remaining adamant about the RKBA, try to explain my views to others, try to sway other folks to our side in the gun thing, and so on.
All the best,
Glenn B
By the way, just as an add on - once the movie '300' comes out, and people in general get a load of the phrase - Molon Labe (which by the way more correctly translates to "having arrived, take them" as opposed to "come and take them" but I guess sort of almost means the same thing as a taunt) what will happen to one of the more recent pro-gun slogans. My bet is the media may catch on and make a big stink over it. So let them, but explain the meaning in the way we mean it, to those who are easily confused by the media.