Very interesting article on Cracked.com

Status
Not open for further replies.
O

OptimusPrime

Member
Joined
Dec 9, 2012
Messages
573
Location
The Old Dominion
Here is the link to an article that I found enlightening on how gun rights are viewed by both sides.

http://www.cracked.com/article_20396_5-mind-blowing-facts-nobody-told-you-about-guns.html

Cracked.com is one of my favorite sites because it uses a very informal style (and quite non-THR language be warned) to get across a very good bit of learning. Also, I find it to be very well-researched (citations everywhere) and laugh-out-loud funny at times.
This particular article talks about some facts about RKBA that folks on both sides tend to over-state or sometimes get just plain wrong. At any rate, enjoy.
Here's what they covered:
- gun ads are pretty insane and over the top
- there is no "classic" shooter profile that applies to all major crimes
- suicide by firearms are twice as prevalent as homicides
- gun culture is quite American
- more guns has truly equalled less crime no matter what anyone tries to show to the contrary
 
Last edited:
I do frequent cracked. Some of the authors have been a bit anti lately, but this article seemed pretty balanced. Probably good to know about the website that just about anyone can submit an article that could get published so pretty hard to get a read on the editors.
 
Not sure if you read point 5 correctly OP, it seems to suggest that the decline is unrelated to gun ownership. Which is a fair point in the context of the article and the data cited

I love cracked, the article was mostly fair, but did get a thing or two wrong. The ar-15 and ammo prices that were cited seem to be from January when the panic buying was in full swing. I think the barbie doll collecting comparison was a bit unfair to everyone with an ar-15, but definitely applies to some.
 
I was fully expecting this to be a Sean Baby article. He's usually the pro RKBA guy. Entertaining article. Not a fan of them calling an AR a machine gun in the one caption but I get the sarcasm. Just hope others catch on to it.
 
I thought it was a great read.

EAA used to run some of the worst of the mysoginist's gun ads. HK ads used to look like a soldier of fortune cover. But you know that 'spirit of adventure' and 'sex sells' thing has been going on for well over 100 years. take a look at an old Remington or Winchester ad featuring a guy facing down a bear 2x actual size.
 
I kind of thought they treated gun owners as ridiculous collectors who simply want guns for the sake of having them, ignoring the usefulness of firearms for recreation and sport. They did at least touch on self-defense.

I believe the statements about suicide in the UK are misleading. I recently did some looking into suicide rates in industrialized countries and found that the per capita suicide rate in Great Britain is very close to ours. This despite the restrictions on firearms. Obviously (gun) access doesn't much matter to the Brits. While the article did mention Japan "fetishising" suicide, it failed to point out that Japan has around 30k suicides annually. In a country with a population less than half of America's, that's astounding. There are some indications that death is misreported there, and without getting into it, they either have a ridiculously high suicide rate, or restrictive gun laws don't prevent as many murders as people believe.


Posted from Thehighroad.org App for Android
 
By an interesting coincidence, I have just been thinking that the great interest in customized and accessorized tactical rifles is a lot like what we used to do with cars back before they became giant rolling computers with so much crammed under the hood that you have to drop the transmission and pull the engine just to change the spark plugs and you need a degree in diagnostic computing to do a tune up they we used to do with a strobe light and a screwdriver.

There is a lot of fantasy involved, even if it does revolve around something that has practical use.
 
I though it had a somewhat veiled condescending attitude toward gun owners, though, kind of a 'Rachael Maddowish' sort of snarky atmosphere to it...:scrutiny:
 
We pretty much know all this. And I still love gun ads!

I do like the way they/he wrote section 4 about the nutcases. Hey it's not the gun?

And yes some of it is kinda snarky, but that's pop writing 2013.
 
I guess that's a good way to describe it: Pop Writing. I couldn't find the right way to describe it.

The ads are ALL like that, for many products. Take a sports car ad, or something else. That's just kind of how it is.
 
Well I guess everyone takes their own version of it away with them. I found it as camouflaged sarcasm, condesending, possibly insulting.

But I'll stand up for their first amendment rights to do so.


.
 
If you folks think this was a "good" and "balanced" article then I wonder about your reading skills, or perhaps I somehow read a different article.
What a load of pretentious crap and a further push for the infantilization of Americans.

"It's all just porn and toys" indeed.
 
Last edited:
If you read some other articles on the site, you'll see that many of them are written in that same style, so I don't think that the writer set out to subtly bash gun ownership. Outside of the incorrect use of the term "assault rifle" I liked it.
 
It was a good article I think. It seemed based on facts. I think we all have to admit that poking fun at the whole "Get Your Man Card Back" thing is pretty much low hanging comedic fruit there...who wouldn't go there?

It seemed to me an honest attempt to just put some information out there. Whether they drew every conclusion correctly is question. Do we always?

So it was, in a rather odd way, a pretty good article. Dare I say it did contain at least some "common sense"...and seemed to offer no support (or opposition) to gun control.
 
I liked the article. Unfortunately, many believe that unless an article, news story or blog does nothing but support their world views it is biased. When it does offer only information and reviews that validate their positions its "well balanced".
 
I thought it was a stupid article. But, I think most Cracked articles are stupid anymore. They used to be good back in the day.
 
It was a juvenile, veiled trashing of gun owners. While it did have some valid points (and some not so valid), they were lost in the filth and obscenities.

I usually don't read such effluent, but some points "forced" me to endure the immaturity of the journalist (that's a questionable moniker) and finish the article.

If the writer had used some semblance of maturity and wisdom in his piece, his article may have been worthy of holding the attention of older viewers for a few minutes, instead of dismissing it at the first vulgarity.

After all the effluent, the writer equated men who collect firearms, to little girls who collect barbie dolls. A juvenile analogy, and I admit I laughed, but at that point I wished the article had been poignant, instead of vulgar, and abrasive; something that if printed, one would wad-up and throw in the trash, to take its honorable place by other wads of irrelevance.

I suppose being an adolescent online gamer, brings-out the worst character flaws when pushed to attempt a journalistic venture; a foul mouth indicates stunted oratory skills, no matter the age of the writer.
 
Last edited:
JRH6856 said:
By an interesting coincidence, I have just been thinking that the great interest in customized and accessorized tactical rifles is a lot like what we used to do with cars back before they became giant rolling computers with so much crammed under the hood that you have to drop the transmission and pull the engine just to change the spark plugs and you need a degree in diagnostic computing to do a tune up they we used to do with a strobe light and a screwdriver.

There is a lot of fantasy involved, even if it does revolve around something that has practical use.
Click to expand...


I think I agree with you one hundred per cent!

I have got a friend who used to trick up cars 30 years ago when one still could, now he outfits AR rifles and pistols with anything he can hang on them!

Me I like guns, but keep the customizing to a minimum, but then I still drive twenty to fifty year old vehicles that I can set the timing on, and fiddle around with.:D
 
I felt insulted at this very pop-culture, video game, 17-year-old-boy-mindset-oriented portrayal of gun owners. I felt It diminished and portrayed all gun owners as mall ninja's and gave no deference to any reasons to collect and enjoy firearms other than for ego, hubris, destructive tendencies, and juvenile power infatuations.
That said, it did raise some very valid points, that I felt were mostly overpowered, lost amidst the objectionable (to me) writing style.

I just came back from a historical tour of Boston, and was struck by the eloquence and verbal mastery of our forefathers, in reading the various letters from that period, even the ones describing everyday matters.
If that is how articles must be written these days to impress and capture the attention of the younger generations, I'm saddened by the state of literacy in this country....and I'm one of those younger generation. I realize its kind of the nature of that particular website, but I hate how dismissive, hacked, slashed, grammatically lazy, poorly edited, and "trendy" journalism has gotten in order to appeal to younger readers.....aside from the obvious bias and agenda's.

endrant
 
Last edited:
I felt insulted at this very pop-culture, video game, 17-year-old-boy-mindset-oriented portrayal of gun owners.
Click to expand...

Young male adults raised on first person shooter games are, I think, a growing part of the firearms market. I see a lot of 20-somethings in my LGS looking at evil black rifles with their buddies and discussing purchases not in terms of home defense, not in terms of wanting what they carried over across the water, but in terms of this or that weapon is great in Call of Duty or whatever.

This isn't a bad thing, though I think it's a two edged sword as was alluded to in the article -- like porn, the majority of the adult population can deal with violent video games and a tiny percentage it can be a trigger that puts them off the rails.

On the other hand, the anti-gun crowd tends to overlap with those who will scream the loudest about the notion of 1st Amendment issues if you want to talk about video games. And those video games glamorize gun ownership much better than television and movies, and provides a marketing route into households where nobody has any historical familiarity with guns. The article makes it out as creepy that games have evolved to just partnering with real companies and depicting real guns and accessories -- and that should creep out anti-gunners, because it largely means their kids are playing with the camel's nose under their tent daily.
 
silicosys4 said:
I felt insulted at this very pop-culture, video game, 17-year-old-boy-mindset-oriented portrayal of gun owners. I felt It diminished and portrayed all gun owners as mall ninja's and gave no deference to any reasons to collect and enjoy firearms other than for ego, hubris, destructive tendencies, and juvenile power infatuations.
That said, it did raise some very valid points, that I felt were mostly overpowered, lost amidst the objectionable (to me) writing style.
Click to expand...

I agree with that...and the others who posted similar remarks. It could have been a much better article. He had in his possession some decent points and interesting perspectives...but then threw it all away with his characterization of gun owners. It also doesn't help his point to suggest that gun owners would be out committing crimes if they weren't able to play online games much like a rapist doesn't rape if he's at home using the internet for porn.

Overall he did himself and the story a disservice by publishing that.
 
A couple of things that I found really spot on. First, I did laugh at the lampooning of the Bushmaster 'man card'. Advertising veers in pretty odd directions, like the notion that one might take on the burglar at 500 yards. I have to admit that I want the poster that says "You're probably never need to shoot a ton of guys, but ... y'know... maybe..." You know, the whole something hits the fan thing.

The other point that they raise is the one about suicides. I have several friends in public health/epidemiology, and from a professional standpoint, they think of guns similarly to cigarettes. That is, they bring enjoyment to many people, but they have downsides, and from a public policy standpoint, they see a rationale to making them less common. That is, the fewer households with guns, the fewer gun suicides and those are the ones that really work compared to OD'ing, etc. They understand (to some extent) that one can't outlaw them just like you can't tobacco, but they look at this very similarly to seat belt laws, and OSHA standards - basically ways of reducing the body count. (Again, I'm presenting this as characterized to me by one of them, don't confuse this with my position).

Thanks for the link, I should check cracked more frequently...
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top