David E. Petzal doesn't get it.

[CNYCacher]

Hey - that idiot Petzal drove the first public wedge.

We are in agreement on this.

My previous post crossed yours in cyberspace, we both used the term "wedge" independently.



My contention is that our use of the term "Fudd" will empower actual Fudds to bring EBR-neutral hunters to their side, by misrepresenting what "Fudd" means. "Look, they hate you, they compare you to a bumbling idiot in a cartoon!"

Can't we use a different term?

Step 1: Stop the conversion of EBR-neutral hunters into anti-EBR hunters.
- "Fudd" hurts us because EBR-neutral hunters may percieve that "Fudd" means them
- Even if they don't percieve that, or never hear of it, real Fudds with TELL THEm that is what it means, as we see with petzel
Step 2: Convert anti-EBR hunters to our side
- "Fudd" hurts us there because it is insulting to them.

 

[30 cal slob]

what else are we going to call these guys?

"the north american grizzled pot-bellied hunting gun-snob?"

elmer fudd is a beloved icon of american culture.

and it pains me to think that the compromisers amongst us have forever ruined this icon.

but the term "fudd" sticks.

i didn't invent it.

 

[kfranz]

The word "Fudd" is a wedge that the antis will drive between shooters and hunters. Mark my words.

You are not seeing the forest for the trees. The wedge is there, and it is is not about which guns are ok and which are not. It's about freedom or the lack thereof. Those that do not support freedom ought to be rooted out and exposed, regardless of the cosmetics of their firearm of choice. Those that support freedom ought to be applauded, regardless of whether or not they even own a firearm...

 

[bogie]

Hearts and minds, guys...

You are NOT going to further ANY group's overall cause by telling the guy at the next bench that he's lower than pond scum because he's shooting his choice of boomsticks.

You also have to realize that the media as a whole plays a great part in perception. If Bubba Hunter drags his .30-30 to the range for his obligatory half-box/year of sighting in/practice, and the guy next to him is shooting an AK, and the ONLY times Bubba has seen an AK has been in the hands of bad guys on TV, Bubba is gonna wonder if the guy shooting the thing is maybe a crook or something.

Bubba's not an NRA member. He doesn't get the magazines, and may read Outdoor Life or Field & Stream while he's waiting to get his hair cut. He's been deer hunting since he was eight tho... He's a hunter, but he's just not a gun person. And what he knows about guns other than his trusty Winchester is what he's learned from TV.

How can we influence Bubba? Education. And familiarity. If you see him lookin' kinda slantwise at you and your semi-auto boomstick with all the tacticrap you can find bolted onto it, invite him to shoot it. TALK to him. And you may learn that you're both in the same club.

 

[30 cal slob]

How can we influence Bubba? Education. And familiarity. If you see him lookin' kinda slantwise at you and your semi-auto boomstick with all the tacticrap you can find bolted onto it, invite him to shoot it. TALK to him. And you may learn that you're both in the same club.

I don't disagree with this at all, but I don't consider this an issue with the people I observe at the range, unless I'm bringing a streetsweeper to sporting clays.

As a rule I am very polite to people regardless of whatever they are shooting . It's not like I call someone "fudd" to his face because he has a lever-action 30-30. And if someone is curious about something I am shooting then I am more than happy to share.

Would it surprise you that I pack my Thompson Center Omega .50 with an AR-15 or a machine gun to the long gun range?

Fudd is a state of mind and a prejudice that gets more entrenched with age IMHO. People get set in their ways. Younger and new shooters tend to be more open-minded when they start, maybe they let go of their erroneous pre-conceived notions easier. My first gun when I turned 18 was a Remington 870 12 ga pump for trap. That grew into a passion for handguns and then EBR's and all sorts of NFA toys.

 

[General Geoff]

I don't think this is a problem with attitude, this is a problem with misinformation and FUD (fear, uncertainty, and doubt; please excuse the bad pun). On one side, we have mall ninjas who are pro-EBRs, but anti-hunting for no other reason than spite. On the other side, we have hunters who genuinely don't want, like, or think anyone should own EBRs. These two fringe groups are NOT the majority. I think a lot of the more public characters, especially the ones on the hunting side, are just misinformed about what the other side is thinking/doing, and thus go on the defensive automatically.

Instead of dismissing them, and disavowing their worthiness of being in the gun culture, educating them is a better solution.

 

[Dr. Dickie]

The problem is attitude, but the attitude problem is the attitude that you know better what someone else should want, need, or like.
The hunter who does not want to use an AR15 because he is old fashioned, no problem. The hunter who thinks no one should own, or use a AR 15 is a problem.
Someone who likes guns and doesn't like hunting, not a problem. Someone who owns guns, but wants to stop others from hunting, problem.

 

[orionengnr]

You are NOT going to further ANY group's overall cause by telling the guy at the next bench that he's lower than pond scum because he's shooting his choice of boomsticks.

Nothing I have read so far has any insinuation that anyone is calling anyone pnd scum; nor have I read anything judging someone on "his choice of boomstick"...at least not on the one side.

I understand your "why can't we all get along" outreach program. I try to let someone at the range shoot whatever I am shooting pretty regularly, especially if they so much as look my way.

But it's not always that easy, especially on the Internet. And if the guy is going to stake out an extreme position, he should expect some pushback. The fact that he is getting it comes under the heading "just desserts".

I don't expect you to agree. But thanks for taking the mega-font out of the equation, and thanks for keeping the discourse civil.

 

[acdodd]

In the Fudd verses EBR shooters there is only one winner.
The anti gunners.
I think a Fudd is anyone that will throw another gun owner under the bus to try and save his type of firearm.
AC

 

[Art Eatman]

The best thing to do is just forget the term even exists, at least in your own vocabulary. And don't even try to justify EBRs.

The deal is, "Anti-gun people are not bigoted; they hate all guns equally."

Gun control people who plump for such as an assault-weapon ban see no particular difference between an SKS, a Browning semi-auto hunting rifle, or a Bennelli or Beretta semi-auto shotgun.

And having said that to some hunter who has shown that he doesn't understand that we're all in it together, let it be. Say no more.

Art

 

[ArmedBear]

in his gun test of the new TC rifle he complained that the only road hunters need a detachable box magazine in a hunting rifle

That's two things:

1. NOT about the 2nd Amendment. It's about the weight, balance, simplicity and accuracy of bolt-action hunting rifles. It's not a political statement about detachable magazines or the Clinton Gun Ban, in the context of a review of the TC rifle.

2. A true statement. I am not a "road hunter" in that I do anything illegal. But I do scout, hop in a vehicle, and scout around farther down the road. Since it's not legal in my state to have a loaded rifle in a vehicle on a state-maintained highway, it can be convenient to pop the magazine in and out of the rifle, rather than handling and sweating all over loose rounds. Otherwise, the detachable mag serves little purpose other than increasing complexity and adding potential points of failure to a gun designed to be as simple as possible: the bolt-action sporter.

 

[Thylacine]

And having said that to some hunter who has shown that he doesn't understand that we're all in it together, let it be. Say no more.

And let it be 1994 again.


Not this time ART.

 

[JWarren]

EBR enthusiasts and elitist 'pat hunters in designer hunting clothes who only hunt 'pats on Saturday with a 28 gauge being compared to Jews and Nazi's sitting down and having coffee. Now that is an offensive characterization. Now I realize the above comment was not explicitly defined that way, but that is the characterization

.

grampster,

I fail to see why my comment was an offensive characterization. I used an example of opposing groups. I could have as easily said Palestinians and Jews, or Al-Qada and the Southern Baptist Conference, or ... you get the picture.

Was it offensive that I mentioned Jews? Or was it that I mentioned Nazis? Or was it that I mentioned both in the same sentence? I'm not Jewish, and I'm also not an advocate of National Socialism. Nor do I apply a value to either party in this example.


Franky, I don't disagree that we need to unite as a group. However, I WILL NOT DO SO AT THE EXPENSE OF APPEASEMENT. To extend my WWII theme, look where a policy of appeasement got Western Europe circa 1939.

Any shots across the bow came OVER OUR BOW. We were minding our own business when Zumbo had a mental hickup and wrote what he did. Petzal, like ALL Journalists, DESPISES the fact that a fellow journalist was held accountable for what he wrote. I've known too many journalists in my life, and they all share the elitist attitude that somehow they are above scrutiny for their opinions.

Sorry, I don't give free passes for journalistic license.


For the record, I AM A HUNTER, and have been since I was 7 years old. I am ALSO a "black rifle" enthusiast. I don't particulary care for non-hunting gunowners who condemn hunters, either.

The answer is NOT just saying "can't we all get along?" If you want us to come together as a united community, the anti-EBR hunters MUST be addressed. Likewise, anti-hunting gunowners MUST be addressed. Brow-beating and guilt-tripping either hunters or non-hunting gunowners is not productive, not educating, and not even ethically valid. It IS, however, putting a band-aid on a severed artery.

I will not be brow-beat or guilt-tripped for upholding my beliefs. I will not accept being passively demure for the sake of peace. I hold myself to principles-- and I expect the same of others. Disagreements can be dealt with in a public exchange, but not when one side is told NOT to express thier position.

For the record again, I accepted Zumbo's recant and subsequent actions. I trully belief he gets it and I am more than willing to welcome him back. Petzal hasn't earned that.






Len S,

I understand what you are saying. I've lived in several states over the last decade or so in following my career. I know attitudes vary GREATLY across the US. As I qualifed my statement:

While I may very well live in some mythical utopia, practically everyone around me hunts.

The more I read here and in the news, the more I realize that I DO live in that mythical utopia of Pro-Second Amendment Land.



John

 

[GEM]

The Barnes and Noble near me used to carry a slew of UK gun magazines. Reading this debate, I noted how they explicitly made fun of our use of humanoid like targets in pistol matches, such as IDPA. It indicated that we were blood thirsty nutsos. It wasn't indicative of a true sport to have a blood lust component.

Similarly, in Australia - the argument was made for guns not to be banned because they were used for sport. I have met a scholar - Abigail Kohn - who researched this thoroughly. Some Australian gun enthusiasts thought that since sports were such a main part of the Australia culture, that an appeal to sports would protect the weapons.

In both cases, draconian gun bans were put in place. Thus, the danger of 'sportsmen' denouncing a class of firearms that are military derivative and the core of the RKBA argument (self-defense, defense agains tyranny) can easily lead to the same gun of ban here with their cooperation.

While we may use some flaming rhetoric - the problem is the proactive attack on such guns as we have seen above. If the continued emphasis is that a gun to be owned only need to meet a sporting need - then there really isn't an RKBA. Hunters who propose such are really as dangerous as totally ban proponents because of the risk that they will be used to justify a ban.

So when Mitt and Tommy chortle about hunting - that must lead to our sensitivity. Mitt, as I said before, explicitly justifies his support of an AWB on GWB's support of one. That Mitt now is proclaiming he is the walking death of cute mouses and wabbits really doesn't do it for me.

On a similar note, but tangential, Mitt has been criticized for couching his faith in Southern Baptist terms which are really in variance with Mormon beliefs. It seems to be a pattern with him. Pandering to what he perceives to be the right wing of the GOP with statements that are easily criticized.

 

[Mannlicher]

Bogie

Bubba's not an NRA member. He doesn't get the magazines, and may read Outdoor Life or Field & Stream while he's waiting to get his hair cut. He's been deer hunting since he was eight tho... He's a hunter, but he's just not a gun person. And what he knows about guns other than his trusty Winchester is what he's learned from TV.

How can we influence Bubba? Education. And familiarity. If you see him lookin' kinda slantwise at you and your semi-auto boomstick with all the tacticrap you can find bolted onto it, invite him to shoot it. TALK to him. And you may learn that you're both in the same club.

now thats a pretty elitist pile of cow dung. Sophomoric, as well as dumb. Those that are wishy washy on the Second Amendment are part of the problem, not part of the solution.

 

[rust collector]

How 'bout we leave the name calling back at the playground, where many of us discovered that it wasn't terribly helpful?

Names such as Fudd have different meanings to different people, but you aren't likely to get your point across to someone who feels disrespected. The hoots and gestures may escalate in intensity, but nobody wins. Except those who have theories about firearms and intellectual maturity.

 

[JWarren]

Names such as Fudd have different meanings to different people, but you aren't likely to get your point across to someone who feels disrespected.

+1 rust collector.

I don't advocate any name calling. I also do not advocate when some people insist that we shouldn't express our disapproval with those writers who are SPEAKING THEIR MIND QUITE WELL.

That is where some on this thread miss the target. When the Petzals of the world are the only voices that are heard, we have ALL lost.


Frankly, I fail to see how a term such as "bubba" isn't equally derogatory as "fudd" is. It seems even those criticizing the use of "Fudd" can't escape using derogatory names.

Bubba typically is a derogatory term applied to rural (often Southern) persons. It rarely (if ever) has a positive connetation. I'd think we'd all have learned a few things from Imus this week.


In my posts, I have repeatedly used the terms "Anti-black rifle hunters", and "Anti-hunting gunowners." I perfer to use descriptive terms when I can. It identifies the problem issue and does not exploit some tired, used up stereotypes.


John