Which family is the most attractive to criminals?
- Thread starter Oleg Volk
- Start date
- Status
M.E.Eldridge
Member
- Joined
- Dec 11, 2005
- Messages
- 367
rmgill said:
Hmmm......I've got one of the Irish Contract No.4 Mk.2s but it certainly looks used. I heard that some of the Irish Contract rifles were used as drill rifles, is that true? The wood was pretty good and the finish about 85%, but the bore was like new, so maybe mine was stored with a little less care.
M.E.Eldridge said:
This one was in the gun store mummified in the wax paper wrap. I walked around the store and thought about it and thought about it. Decided not to get it that day. A few weeks later I was back and that rifle was gone. A few weeks later again, the rifle was back and it was unwrapped. Seems the owner bought it, unwrapped it and then had to bring it back. (Perhaps he washed one too many cosmoline parts in the diswasher and wifey got upset
) Anyhow, I snapped it up because that blonde wood just called to me. I had bought another one before that from the fellow that unwrapped it shot it once and then decided to pare down his collection. They sure do look nice. Those two, my good No5, a Lithgow FTR'd No1Mk III and my Ishipore SMLE Grenade launcher are the pride of my collection. I'd have more, but I switched to armor in 2001, haven't bought a new gun since.
Oleg Volk said:
I figured that out, but it didn't jump off the page and wasn't obvious. The other problem is that the violent criminal can't tell the difference between the phantom family and the happy CCW couple unless they hang a sign around their necks.
Oleg Volk
Moderator Emeritus
I could just leave off the A-family out for clarity...
Devonai
Member
I like Henry Bowman's idea of a dotted outline, just because it's typical ad copy for "insert yourself here."
I agree that you might be better off without family "A." For family "B," I would have the couple carrying MREs and a case of bottled water, rifles slung. It would help reinforce the idea that they were just minding their own business, but are ready to put up an effective resistance. I would add holstered sidearms to imply that even if they can't unlimber those gorgeous Enfields (ahem, excuse me) in time, they can certainly drop everything and clear leather.
I agree that you might be better off without family "A." For family "B," I would have the couple carrying MREs and a case of bottled water, rifles slung. It would help reinforce the idea that they were just minding their own business, but are ready to put up an effective resistance. I would add holstered sidearms to imply that even if they can't unlimber those gorgeous Enfields (ahem, excuse me) in time, they can certainly drop everything and clear leather.
cosine
Member
Oleg Volk said:
Don't. Leave them there. Handguns are tools that are just as neccesary as rifles for certain applications.
I like seeing handguns as well as rifles for that reason I just mentioned, because it forces one to think about the use of handguns. For example, I know some people who have no opposition to rifles, but they considered handguns to be the devil incarnate. Without two people carrying handguns, (concealed, no less!), this poster would not make them think about anything because they have no opposition to rifles. By mentioning handguns, it forces them to realize that handguns are just different firearm-tools for use in different circumstances. Furthermore, I like seeing the two types of firearms spread out over two different families because it reinforces the fact that what works for one family does not work for all families. One family may not be able to carry rifles for whatever reason. If you just have one family carrying both the rifles and the handguns, some people wouldn't be forced to realize that the handguns are important and would not be able to break out of their mindset that handguns are bad because the people in the poster are carrying rifles as well as handguns. Mindset: "If they have rifles, they don't need handguns!"
I love the overall concept of the poster, and the basic arrangement of it, but it does seem a little rough. There has to be a better way to communicate the question of how well one's own family is prepared (armed) for defense against trouble.
Edit: I just realized that the guy above "B" is wearing a sidearm. Personally, I'd lose that, if it is possible.
Last edited:
mrmeval
Member
On C) put a family with anti-gun T-Shirts but no caption.
cosine
Member
mrmeval said:
I don't know... I think this poster was meant for the fence sitters, not the rabidly anti-gun. Someone who's not fully anti-gun but is not fully pro-gun might take offense at being lumped in the same catagory as anti-gun folks, especially the (understatement of the year coming up) unusual (did you see it) anti-gun people who run the Brady Campaign or the VPC.
~z
Member
Am I to assume that "my family" has skipped town as the warnings preceding the natural disaster advised and therefor not present to be preyed upon by the criminal element? That sounds like something we might do, sorry we missed the photo op, good luck with the criminal element.
~z (sorry, just had to. I get your point)
~z (sorry, just had to. I get your point)
RaetherEnt
Member
As always Oleg, outstanding work! I think the NRA should buying and using YOUR posters to support RKBA.
I'm gonna be honest (and probably look stupid in the process). I don't get it.
Is the message supposed to be that "C. Your own family" needs to practice their 2nd Amendment rights? Or, is there some other message that I'm just not seeing?
EDIT: There I go again...responding before I read the rest of the thread. :banghead:
Is the message supposed to be that "C. Your own family" needs to practice their 2nd Amendment rights? Or, is there some other message that I'm just not seeing?
EDIT: There I go again...responding before I read the rest of the thread. :banghead:
Oleg Volk said:
Why not leave the A Family there, put OWB holsters on them with quality firearms and then lose B Family. The A Family looks non-threatening....so if you're an anti you would be much less disgusted by seeing the A Family wearing their sidearms than you would the B Family running around like nutcases with long arms and pistols waving in the air.
Then again...that's just me.
cosine
Member
Braden said:Why not leave the A Family there, put OWB holsters on them with quality firearms and then lose B Family. The A Family looks non-threatening....so if you're an anti you would be much less disgusted by seeing the A Family wearing their sidearms than you would the B Family running around like nutcases with long arms and pistols waving in the air.
Then again...that's just me.
I don't mean to be annying here but... I like both the sidearms and the rifles. Like I said above, rifles don't make some people bat an eye, even if they're carried around openly, but handguns in any circumstances or methods of carry are flat-out hated.
Okay, I'll stop now.
Not done yet...edit...
Edit: I just realized that the guy above "B" is wearing a sidearm. Personally, I'd lose that, if it is possible. Reasons stated here: http://thehighroad.org/showpost.php?p=2269441&postcount=33 , or above in post #33.
GullyFoyle
Member
I think you need to decide if it's a Katrina situation or just every day. During Katrina most people who were armed made it clear, with big, handpainted signs on the side their home or business advertising their state of readiness. Seems to me Couple A is targetted for the normal everyday and Couple B is specific to disasters. I think you need to decide which situation you are trying to make a point of. IMO, the message gets lost with both.
teknical
Member
Recommendation: Dichotomies work. Drop item C and change the following:
"...Which Family? ..."
"A. Your family."
"B. A family that takes their own protection seriously."
Make the sitting couple be the audience and make their non-visible guns be non-existant guns just by changing the wording.
"...Which Family? ..."
"A. Your family."
"B. A family that takes their own protection seriously."
Make the sitting couple be the audience and make their non-visible guns be non-existant guns just by changing the wording.
If openly armed people offer some kind of special temptation to criminals, the number of seemingly oblivious cops that wander around supermarkets etc ought to be especially attractive targets to gun grabbing thugs.
I would suffice to say that the couple in the middle are going to likely be the last choice of 99% of all criminals - even the most desperate - when there are apparently easier game to the left of them. Me and mine are to the right and will be similarly equipped as the two in center.
-----------------------------------------
http://ussliberty.org
http://ssunitedstates.org
I would suffice to say that the couple in the middle are going to likely be the last choice of 99% of all criminals - even the most desperate - when there are apparently easier game to the left of them. Me and mine are to the right and will be similarly equipped as the two in center.
-----------------------------------------
http://ussliberty.org
http://ssunitedstates.org
Oleg Volk
Moderator Emeritus
Thanks for the advice, I'll revise the poster this weekend.
- Status
Similar threads
- Locked