Fed up with being typecast

In a good many of the high profile shooting that have occurred over the past few years, someone has usually stated “The person had 1000s of rounds of ammunition and a vast collection of guns”. (Usually said in very negative tones and usually by a Police Chief or hot shot news reporter with no experience in firearms.
Don’t know if this bothers others but it does me. I am a legitimate licensed Firearm aficionado and collect rarer variants and also do a lot, and I do mean a lot of shooting.
I am also a long time re-loader and consequently have lots of ammo, powders, bullets and primers on hand.
It would appear that if the news media, for whatever reason, learned of my collections, I would be labeled as a firearms nut and a danger to society. I resent this and bet a lot of the forum members feel the same way. So what do we do to change perceptions?
I have taken quite a few of my friends, (non-shooters) to the range and after a basic safety course, let them shoot any of the firearms I have with me that particular day. In most cases, the guest has left with a very different view of the shooting sports. (Usually excited and very positive).
Anyone else have any other ideas on how to ally the negative spotlight that we serious shooters are constantly labeled with?

 

You ARE allaying the negative bias - you take new shooters out and they get to burn your ammo for free.

Debating with the anti gunners won't do it - you are getting more done than simply arguing with people who won't ever be convinced.

Keep up the good work.

 

We change biased perceptions by being upstanding, ethical, law abiding, sane, calm, reasonable and decent people. Its blows the bias apart and collapses their attempts to demonize all of us.

 

I tire of hearing about these 'arsenals' in the media. I imagine the criteria to qualify for said arsenal would put many thousands of sportsman in the 'domestic terrorist' community.

Of course now that msm and our politicians have scared an entire country into hoarding ammo there are now more arsenals than ever before. Ironic.

Exposure is the best way to persuade but I have also encountered people, including a family member, that feels John Q. Public doesn't need a semi auto gun, especially a rifle yet this person owns a semi auto handgun. When I asked her about this hypocracy all she could tell me is she bought the gun for self defense and that she wanted it so it's reason enough because SHE isn't part of the group we should worry about.

Emotions are how these folks navigate these conversations so statistics and facts don't matter as much. If they want to feel safe they should hang around gun free zones all day. Don't tell them the statistics that show gun free zones to create victims at the hands of murderers though. It doesn't give them a warm fuzzy feeling. And don't dare mention a massacre requires an armed party and an armed/defenseless party.

 

There's little sense in worrying about semantics.
The anti's will still be anti's even if the called these "arsenals" something else.

Technically it's the correct term.

 

I just ordered some ammo for the upcoming shooting season. 1625 rounds of 22LR.

That was all Gander would let me order.

It might be enough to get me through the season. I'd feel a lot better is I had enough that I could practice some too.

I don't get too worried about people who are not shooters and their strange ideas about how much ammo is enough.

Trap shooters routinely shoot 100 rounds at a time a couple times a week. Unless you want to be going to the store for more ammo all the time it is best to get it in bulk as a convenience and to save a few bucks.

 

You should NOT be allowed to have 1625 rounds of ammo!!!!!!!!
The MAXIMUM number you should have is 1624!!!!!!!!!!

 

1625 rounds? Something amiss here with this statement....because it's a pretty arbitrary number to set as a maximum. And a really high number if you're antigun and want to limit "arsenals".

Actually, I just tried the website. They limit you to 5 boxes of 325 Federal Automatch (1625), probably just because of the 22LR shortages. It allowed me to order 20 boxes of 250 Remington 9 mm cartridges (5000).

 

Every time I shoot .22lr by myself, I shoot a box of 325 rounds. When I go with someone lose, it's a box of 525 or 555. This happens at least 6 times per year.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk

 

One tenth of my .22LR ammo alone would put me on the media's list of people with an "ammo cache."

One third of the firearms I have in that caliber alone would qualify as an "arsenal."

I'm media-doomed should there ever be a reason for them to get wind of it.

 

Well, when you're dealing with people who don't think you should have any guns, more than one is an arsenal. Same for ammo, why would you need more than one "clip's" worth? Makes sense to me.

 

The reporters have been saying the Dallas shooter had "an arsenal" at home. Tonight I read he had a .22 rifle and a pound of Tannerite (the "explosives"). That's some arsenal.

 

I wouldn't get too caught up on that. What he had and what he used has changed several times since the incident. That being said I believe EVERY reloaded has 'explosives' at home.

 

Typecast? Try being a cop for a day. A handful of people will tell you to your face how they hate or love you.

 

Gee. Arsenal. The inferred definitions being used allow me to stand proud (or be rated as terrorist) even with my little collection.

 

Being an antisocial hermit and avoiding spotlights and radar works for me.....

 

I prefer the term "propellant".

 

Misinforming the masses is what the media does.

 

Technically, the primary definition of "arsenal" is: "an establishment for the manufacture or storage of arms and military equipment."

I doubt that definition fits, as most people aren't an establishment that manufactures or stores arms and military equipment.

The secondary definition is: "a collection of weapons."

Which begs several questions.

1. How many guns are needed to constitute an "arsenal"?

2. Why does the news media choose to use "arsenal" in lieu of the more benign word, "collection," which is a far better word to use as it more accurately describes "a group of interesting or beautiful objects brought together in order to show or study them or as a hobby."

 

1. On one of the political boards I'm on, anti's take "guns" literally, meaning they consider 2 an arsenal.

2. For the same reason every rifle is an "assault weapon"