The NRA needs a face....

[all4soccer]

Julie G.

Julie G.

Speaks well to the women that we need to influence.

http://www.juliegolob.com

 

[HoosierQ]

These guys are a bit hypocritical though, they're living in my country, France, which has quite restrictive laws on gun ownership.

I wonder which shooting club Mr Pitt and Ms Jolie go to, because it's mandatory in France to be registered as a sports-shooter if you want to own smokeless powder firearms, unless you have a hunter's licence.

I think we needn't condemn them for living in France in this context. They're filthy rich, and can live wherever they want...so why not France. I wouldn't live there but...

Somebody like these two might be perfect. This is about image now. It really is. The people speaking on our behalf suffer greatly from image problems.

This thing is at a balance point. Prior to Newtown, most people in the USA would respond to polls by saying "no new gun control is needed". The numbers were pretty high. They fooled us because that was the image that a large number of these people held in their minds. A lot of these same people knew little about guns at all. Newtown has changed, it seems (hopefully not forever), the image of the gun in our society. No, none of "us" see them differently. America is a country where image is very important. Yes, there is substance behind that. But substance is more expensive in whatever currency you want to measure it...sometimes cash. In America image has come to be a shorthand for the substance that I believe there to be.

So Ted Nugent? No...the man has a little too much "personality" and way less support from "us" that a lot of us realize due to his draft dodging ways.

LaPierre? A very uninteresting character and not eloquent.

Selleck, JEJ, Pitt-Jolie? Now we're getting somewhere. Can you imagine Pitt, Jolie, and JEJ (or Sam Elliot or TLJones) standing up there together? Saying "WE are the NRA"? Saying "WE are the 2nd Amendment"? Then sure, you can have Uncle Ted and Wayne there in the background clapping or whatever.

Image. This thing is going to turn on image. The image of the NRA. The image of Newtown. The image of guns. The image of the 2nd Amendment. Then behind that image, much more boring people can be laying down the substance.

 

[Jim NE]

I think the NRA would do so much better with a "leader" like Charlton Heston. A man who could be identified, and liked, by folks who aren't necessarily gun enthusiasts or may be uniformed and don't have a solid opinion.

Tom Selleck would be a perfect face of the NRA.

Thoughts?

Um...have you guys forgotten the incredible amount of animosity directed towards Heston by the AG's back then?

The "Guns don't kill people, CHARLETON HESTON kills people" T-shirts?

The Bowling for Columbine movie?

My point is this - the statist gun control people are going to hate whoever gets that role. Even if it were Scarlett Johannsen or Brad Pitt.

And all of the people who hover around the periphery of the extreme left to absorb all of that Hollywood chic are going to echo those same anti-NRA sentiments, as well. I'm not saying that the NRA doesn't need new leadership (or that it does), just that it isn't the messenger they hate, it's the message.

 

[Isaac-1]

It is not about the antis it is about all those on the fence, they see a well spoken "compassionate" anti debating with a an NRA rep that is trying to read from note cards and they will likely side with the anti.

 

[HoosierQ]

It is not about the antis it is about all those on the fence, they see a well spoken "compassionate" anti debating with a an NRA rep that is trying to read from note cards and they will likely side with the anti.

Yes...and that's exactly the group where image is, frankly (maybe sadly) so important. This thing hangs in a balance that will tip not on fact, not on careful reason, not on substance, but on the image that the people in the middle...whether they be the folks who know little and are ambivilent about guns or those whose political views are centrist...have of guns, gun owners, gun rights, and the 2nd amendment. Yes there are those who "calculate" (Feinstein, Bloomberg) but this thing will tip on those who are swayed by the less tangible image of the whole issue.

I think we have this idea that the hard core antis, the "nobody should have any guns at all or darn few of them and registered" types are large in number. They are not. Yes, these folks are pretty dedicated. I doubt that there are nearly as many of these folks as there are of the "cold dead hands" types or even just the "what part of 'shall not be infringed' don't you understand?" types. No, the thing will be won or lost by all those millions and millions of people between them. The city folks that don't and just aren't ever going to own a gun because they just don't want to. "That guy" (plural) that we all profess to hate who wants to own his hunting rifle or his trap gun but really doesn't give a rip about handguns or SD, or HD, or 3-gun, or an AR-15. Or "that guy" plural who only owns a gun to literally keep varmints out of his henhouse and whose real passion is model trains or whatever. Just regular folks that may or may not belong to the NRA and if they do, they just do...they don't believe it all. Those are the people who exist in great numbers. Those are the people who voted "no" to more gun control before Newtown and some of who are voting "yes" now...the 2nd Amendment ambivilent legions.

These are the people who will tip this thing and, as per the OPs initiation of this thread, will respond favorably to the NRA having someone as its face that project the right image to win them back to the "NO" vote on gun control. We don't need them all to become passionate gun hobbiests, or even passionate 2nd Amendment supporters (although getting many of them is important long term). We just need them to vote no to more gun control.

 

[lionking]

Celebrities are fine, they help. But I think a good commercial with everyday people of a few backgrounds saying very calm and thoughtful things would show people of middle ground how many people use guns peacefully and are just as worried and caring about their kids as anybody.

A commercial that shows city people as well as rural, that shows target shooters as well as hunters. A commercial that shows people who had to defend themselves when the police weren't able to get there in time,

This latest speak by the anti's that "no law abiding citizen would want one" and the "there is no use for one but making war" needs to be counteracted.

 

[wow6599]

I feel some here are a bit naive. The people we need to win-over are plentiful.... and I'll take all we can get. Unfortunately, a great majority of Americans are ignorant. They vote for candidates who are attractive and well spoken......been that way for a long time now.

Put a "celeb" out there with a "title", and it will help win some public support - even if they don't care either way.

SHEEP

 

[Chuck Perry]

That's exactly it. There's a lot of people out there that form their opinions and beliefs on what poplar media tells them they should be. These are the people that could tell you the current marital status of every Kardashian, but have no idea about the Bengazhi scandal. But, their votes count just like everyone else. Heinlein had it right; there should be qualifications to be a voting Citizen of this country.

 

[2 Wild Dueces]

I also think we need a few faces of the NRA rather than just one person. I've seen W. La Pierre for many years....he has the right facts but does not "sell well" to the audience IMO.

Perhaps two or three spokes people that are well known. I also believe a woman may be a good spokes person for the NRA.

Gary Sinse or Fox's Hannity seem pretty good.

 

[lionking]

No don't use anybody from Fox news, use people that don't have a image so much of being partisan to one party.

I convinced someone I work with yesterday who is a Obama supporter because of healthcare , I convinced him after calmly showing the lies that people like Feinstein and Biden use and he is now taking a more pro gun stance. He didn't realize there are semi auto hunting rifles also, not being into guns so much but generally supporting them he was like many who thought a AR-15 is a machine gun.

There is no need to alienate someone you might not agree with on all issues because they could agree with you on some if you can in a respectful way discuss it with them.

Of all issues toward everyday people gun ownership is probably the least partisan.

 

[hak]

Ted's credibility is out. He got into trouble with Alaska Game Dept last year for some illegal misdemeanor when hunting black bears. He is out for sure. We need some new faces and voices that are respectable and has an impeccable records. One with very solid foundations on the 2A and articulate to boot. Kudos to the young guy batting P Morgan a few hrs ago. He did very well.

and I know from the Seal who has caught him in the act more than once: he has, ahem, misrepresented his supposed training and association of and with Seals, by active duty Seals that called him on it. To which his wife, the 2nd time he was confronted, smacked him in public and said: "I told you to stop with the lying". He kept peddling the lies and this Seal then caught him again, at a Shot show a year later. Ted recognized this hard ass operator who busted him out earlier and immediately stopped talking, and walked out of the scene before he was embarrassed again, leaving the congressman (?) he was schmoozing wondering what the heck had just happened. The Seal reported with Glee how all it took was a hard stare the latter times, whereas the first time, it was Q/A about "which ones he had over" ("oh you wouldn't know them") "try me, give me a name" (and you can see how that went)

we don't need a fake as the" face" of a movement

 

[DammitBoy]

I think we needn't condemn them for living in France in this context. They're filthy rich, and can live wherever they want...so why not France. I wouldn't live there but...

Somebody like these two might be perfect. This is about image now. It really is. The people speaking on our behalf suffer greatly from image problems.

This thing is at a balance point. Prior to Newtown, most people in the USA would respond to polls by saying "no new gun control is needed". The numbers were pretty high. They fooled us because that was the image that a large number of these people held in their minds. A lot of these same people knew little about guns at all. Newtown has changed, it seems (hopefully not forever), the image of the gun in our society. No, none of "us" see them differently. America is a country where image is very important. Yes, there is substance behind that. But substance is more expensive in whatever currency you want to measure it...sometimes cash. In America image has come to be a shorthand for the substance that I believe there to be.

So Ted Nugent? No...the man has a little too much "personality" and way less support from "us" that a lot of us realize due to his draft dodging ways.

LaPierre? A very uninteresting character and not eloquent.

Selleck, JEJ, Pitt-Jolie? Now we're getting somewhere. Can you imagine Pitt, Jolie, and JEJ (or Sam Elliot or TLJones) standing up there together? Saying "WE are the NRA"? Saying "WE are the 2nd Amendment"? Then sure, you can have Uncle Ted and Wayne there in the background clapping or whatever.

Image. This thing is going to turn on image. The image of the NRA. The image of Newtown. The image of guns. The image of the 2nd Amendment. Then behind that image, much more boring people can be laying down the substance.

Agreed, I can't get angry over rich people doing what they want with their money, it's no concern of mine. The fact that they are both wildly popular and powerful in hollywood and they are pro 2nd amendment?

It's a win/win