Bloomberg Anti-Freedom Commercial will Fall Flat

[Dean Weingarten]

Anti-freedom politicians have a history of overreaching on guns. They think they can fool the stupid country rubes by picking up a shotgun and asking "can I get me a hunting license here?", the image of Diane Feinstein with her finger inside the trigger guard of an AK47 variant, and various political figures picking up guns just prior to elections.

Mayor Bloomberg Bloomberg is attempting to do the same with his 12 million dollar buy of commercials pushing for universal gun registration (also known as Universal Background Checks) in 13 states.

Here is one of the advertisements.

In the advertisement, you see many cultural referents designed to create a link to the rural gun culture. There is a pickup truck, a beard, a plaid shirt/jacket, children in the background playing on a tire swing.

But all that is undercut by the body language of the actor who is transmitting the message. It is clear that the gun is merely a prop. It is hard for me to pin exactly what screams "fake" to me from the screen. Maybe it is the time of year. Maybe it is the way he is positioned on the truck. Perhaps more alert viewers will be able to explain it better.

I do not think that Mayor Bloomberg is going to be able to fool many people in the gun culture with this message, and I do not think he will convince many outside of it to action.

Link to "can I get me a hunting license here?" discussion

Link to discussion with picture of Diane Feinstein with AK47 variant

Link to article about Bloomberg ad campaign

Link to YouTube of advertisement

Dean Weingarten

http://gunwatch.blogspot.com/2013/03/bloomberg-anti-freedom-commercial-make.html

 

[H.m.B]

I do not think that Mayor Bloomberg is going to be able to fool many people in the gun culture with this message, and I do not think he will convince many outside of it to action.

You're absolutely correct about not fooling us ... but we're not the target audience ... we're the target. Those outside this community are the ones that don't know any better and are more susceptible to the deceitful messaging.

 

[ApacheCoTodd]

I'm intrigued by the stated message.

Apparently it will be a united statement from "mayors against illegal guns".
Hmmm...
Guns he/they want to be made illegal or the ones which already are illegal?

Watch for the "Joe the Plumber" expose of the shotgun toting hunter in the add supporting background checks and of course supporting this ad campaign.

http://www.nydailynews.com/news/politics/bloomy-takes-aim-guns-meet-press-article-1.1297779

 

[jamesbeat]

If the guy in the ad wants to protect his family, the first thing he should do is take his finger off the damn trigger.
I inderstand what you mean, he looks like he never held a gun before.
He looks about as comfortable holding it as I would look if I was holding a Starbuck's coffee.

Interesting observation that just occurred to me, don't know if it's significant or not, but here it is:

I live in NY, and when he tried to ban large sodas, he didn't try to use adverts as a method of persuasion. He just went ahead and tried to pass the law.

I wonder if he sees that he has a difficult time ahead of him if he is going to the trouble of having adverts made?


As an aside, he's now trying to make it illegal for retailers to display tobacco products, and he's doing some campaign to teach people not to turn their ipod up too loud because it can cause hearing damage.

I read a blog post about the latter, and the blogger said 'he's worried that if people damage their ears, they won't be able to hear him telling them what to eat and drink'

 

[Kiln]

Why is it that anti gun videos always have comments and ratings disabled while pro gun videos welcome feedback?

Probably because pro gun videos normally have lots of positive feedback while anti gun videos generally have lots of negative feedback and facts in the comments. Facts are the enemy of emotion.

The reason that anti's always disable comments and ratings is because they're not popular, despite their claims that 98% of Americans agree with them. Lots of Americans see right through their bs and they don't want the ones fooled by it to be swayed by logic or negative ratings on their videos.

 

[MachIVshooter]

Will the average non-gunner be deceived by this commercial? Probably

Will the average non-gunner be inspired enough by it make phone calls or write emails to their representatives? Highly doubtful. Most people don't even know who their senators and congressmen are.

This fight is, always has been and always will be between us serious gun rights folks and the dedicated antis. The other 90% of the country really doesn't much care. The exception to that is when the gun grabbers overstep big time and piss off 2/3 of the electorate, like they have here in CO with the magazine ban.

 

[toivo]

That guy is an actor. Who do they think they're kidding? Whoever designed this ad campaign is an idiot. They're not going to sway an actual gun owners with this clown. He probably doesn't even know which end of that shotgun the pellets come out of.

The best thing they could do to advance their cause is pander to fear. They can't play up fear of gangs without being accused of racism, so they'd have to gin up fear of spree killers and right-wing militias. Who knows? That might be their next step.

 

[Ignition Override]

Is the NRA planning to create a tv commercial(s) to try to neutralize Bloomberg's deceptive ad info by coordinating with other pro-2A groups, if needed to raise similar funds for the ads' production costs?

Whether they can match the cash spent by the Bloomberg crowd or not, maybe a huge pro 2nd amendment coalition can feature a calm factual ad in the same markets.

 

[ApacheCoTodd]

Why is it that anti gun videos always have comments and ratings disabled while pro gun videos welcome feedback?

Probably because pro gun videos normally have lots of positive feedback while anti gun videos generally have lots of negative feedback and facts in the comments. Facts are the enemy of emotion.

The reason that anti's always disable comments and ratings is because they're not popular, despite their claims that 98% of Americans agree with them. Lots of Americans see right through their bs and they don't want the ones fooled by it to be swayed by logic or negative ratings on their videos.

That's an interesting observation there.

 

[Mulk]

Well they showed one of the commercials Friday on the Fox affiliate of all places, and those who all saw it that I know were pointing out the folks were all Police Chiefs, and not County Sheriffs. Not sure why they spent the money down here on a commercial, but if they wanna waste more money go for it. Inside I-285 is 500k heavily Democrat/somewhat anti gun versus 7-8 million within 50 miles of I-285 mostly pro gun.

Burn that money here I say. After what Bloomberg pulled on some of the local gun stores a few years ago his name in permanently mud before any of the stuff he is pulling now. He lost then, so he can lose again.

 

[Kiln]

That's an interesting observation there.

Just pay attention next time you see an anti gun video. I'll give you good odds that the video has comments and/or ratings disabled.

 

[Shadow 7D]

Of course they comments/rating are disabled
What do you think, that an anti would be about to let their 'free speech'
be impinged?:banghead:

The lies don't stand if they are all pointed as false in the comments....

 

[Twiki357]

Bluebut's anti-gun, universal background check advertisements slamming Senator Jeff Flake for his no vote have also inundated all the local TV channels here in Arizona for the last two weeks, mostly on the noon and evening news casts. I don't know how much of his $12 million went into the Arizona ads, but it has to be a pretty big chunk.

 

[Deanimator]

You're absolutely correct about not fooling us ... but we're not the target audience ... we're the target.

That's not strictly true.

As has been seen here, anti-gunners have a strong compulsion to hoodwink actual gun owners with false front. THAT is going VERY badly.

 

[gc70]

Some of Bloomberg's ads have been run in my state and everyone I have encountered had a negative opinion of the ads.

To the OP's point of fooling people, everything in the ad is too perfect and screams staged and contrived. Part of the population is offended because the ads portray the people of the state as rednecks and the other part of the population is offended that the ads suggest that the actor is in any way authentic.

If the current ads are the best that Bloomberg can do, I hope he doubles down on his ad spending and thoroughly alienates everyone in my state.