Wisdom of Gun Related Events shortly after a shooting

[Konstantin835]

It's fine if you just do it as a fund raiser but from the video it seemed that the people raffling it off were comparing it to the shooting and almost joking about it which is really, really stupid and insensitive, all political correctness aside.

 

[MikeNice]

This is AZ. For the most part, no one talks like that here. Even the anti's dont stretch it that far.

We're not CA, D.C., Chicago, NY/NJ.

People in Detroit, Washington, and CA are talking about it. Keith Olberman made it a point to slam them on an internationally televised show. He isn't from AZ and his audience extends far past Tuscon.

But, this thread wasnt a political discussion.

Its about " Wisdom of Gun Related Events shortly after a shooting ".

Is it appropriate or insensitive? Why or why not?

Did you read the rest of the post?

Repost:

It isn't about anybody being insensitive. It is about people that want us disarmed seeing this as a two way attack against guns and Republicans. The gun owners that are falling for it are simply empowering them.

It wouldn't be like showing up to the funeral in a red Mustang. It would be like the dealership not auctioning off a blue Mustang eight months later.

/Repost

 

[Soapy5]

who is the source for the line:
“Speaking of sensitivity - you have no idea how sensitive the trigger is on this sweet baby we're raffling! All the easier to fire those 36 bullets you'll get in those three magazines. Loughner only got off 32 shots. Think you can do better? Then give us your money.”

the guy makes it sound like the people in charge of the raffle said that.

 

[Shadow 7D]

Google: nazi propaganda big lie

And no I'm not calling anti's nazis, rather pointing out the propaganda technique they perfected, tell the big lie often enough, and everybody will believe you.

 

[mnrivrat]

who is the source for the line:
“Speaking of sensitivity - you have no idea how sensitive the trigger is on this sweet baby we're raffling! All the easier to fire those 36 bullets you'll get in those three magazines. Loughner only got off 32 shots. Think you can do better? Then give us your money.”

they guy makes it sound like the people in charge of the raffle said that.

Just some made up dribble by someone unable to recognize the value of not making crap like that up. Demonizing someone with redicule in order to try to improve an umprovable point.

 

[357 Terms]

I know that many of you dont perceive this as a potential political issue in regards to gun rights. That's a underestimation, it has become political. Let me say that again: it has become political!
Gifffords was a pro 2nd amnd. Democrat!.. now it is a potential hot point for anti-gunners.
once politics gets involved logic and facts don't always apply.
It has become a rallying point.
This has become much bigger than a small county in Arizona, and thats unfortunate.
Many people were killed by a psycho, that GOP office should have shown more sensitivity; and at the very least a LITTLE! political savvy

 

[FIVETWOSEVEN]

It's not even the same model, you might a well be opposed to all gun raffles as being in poor taste. I doubt there is a major brand of guns that has never been used in a crime. If I buy a mini 14 am I making light of the shootings in Norway? I sure don't think so.

Those that aren't into guns don't give a hoot about the number after its name. All they see is Glock. Did they really have to buy a Glock when they easily could have walked in and bought a Ruger, a Beretta, etc, etc?

The shooting being in Norway is your first clue right there, completely different country let alone a different state.

 

[BADUNAME37]

Funny how people can be so "sensitive" about one issue while, on the other hand, there are an infinite number of issues of extremely more importance that do not get addressed, mostly because of the extreme of "polital-correctness" that has become all so rampant.

 

[SharpsDressedMan]

The world doesn't stop skiing when a famous person hits a tree and dies (Sonny Bono and Bobby Kennedy's son come to mind). Why should a shooting event take any heat? Totally unrelated.

 

[Neverwinter]

What goes on as normal life to some seems to irritate others , and this happens all the time. Is it therefore insensitive to carry on with normal tasks or do we need to be sensitive of all things, at all times, in order to not offend anyone. Good luck with that.

This is a false choice. We do not have to be sensitive to all things, but that does not mean that we shouldn't be sensitive to the things that we are aware of.

Funny how people can be so "sensitive" about one issue while, on the other hand, there are an infinite number of issues of extremely more importance that do not get addressed, mostly because of the extreme of "polital-correctness" that has become all so rampant.

What amuses me is how effectively people who are so against political correctness use it as a crutch or shield.

Even if the Arizona GOP had raffled off a Glock 19, we'd still have the people who are clueless about why people would be offended.

 

[N003k]

Personally, I understand why some people would be offended, even if I think they shouldn't be. Being only human, I have no control over whether they are or aren't offended though.

I think it's fair to say that we as gun owners will ALWAYS offend some people, by the mere fact that we own guns. We should however try to minimize how much we offend others. I think that's fair afterall.

We should however still be reasonable about this, we obviously cannot collectivly walk on eggshells and attempt to never do anything ever to possibly offend anyone that isn't offended by our mere existance, no more than we should attempt to do so. So when and where do we draw the line in situations like this?

It's easy to say that they shouldn't have raffled off a Glock due to the Giffords shooting. However, isn't it unfair to say they should NEVER raffle off a Glock because of the Giffords shooting? When, as in at what point of time past the event, should we consider it to be acceptable again?

Obviously, certain things will always be in poor taste, for instance had they raffled a G17 with a 33round mag, and the date of Giffords shooting engraved on it. However, what if a raffle had been held for a G17 with the proceeds going to a charity that is helping the families of the shooting victims?

Like I said, it's easy for some to say that THIS was in bad taste...but, WHY was it in bad taste do you think? When will it no longer be in bad taste? Does it matter where the proceeds go?

It's hard for me to answer these questions personally, but if I could answer them, I wouldn't bother posting them on a forum.

 

[BADUNAME37]

What amuses me is how effectively people who are so against political correctness use it as a crutch or shield.

Could you please cite an example of that statement?

 

[Last Knight]

Hooooo boy.

The raffling of a Glock - gun used to shoot Rep. Giffords - to fund someone to replace Rep. Giffords is the root of the controversy. It very much smacks of "and do it right this time," whether or not that's the raffle organizers intention. Raffling a Glock for something that has nothing to do with the Tucson tragedy raises no eyebrows because - surprise! - it has nothing to do with the Tucson tragedy. Raffle a different type of gun, and it would probably garner outrage from the usual suspects, but nothing further. Raffling a Glock to defeat someone who was nearly murdered by a Glock is crass.

And for those who point out that it's a 23 and not a 19, well...

The 23 has more "stopping power."

Now, what kind of message does that send?

 

[stuckinsocal]

Exactly. It would not matter if they were raffling a Stoeger Coach Gun. Then they would be talking about how insensitive Republicans were to be raffling, "a highly lethal firearm that can be turned in to a weapon of mass destruction."

It isn't about anybody being insensitive. It is about people that want us disarmed seeing this as a two way attack against guns and Republicans. The gun owners that are falling for it are simply empowering them.

It wouldn't be like showing up to the funeral in a red Mustang. It would be like the dealership not auctioning off a blue Mustang eight months later.

Exactly. Remember the gunshow/NRA convention in AZ following the shooting? People were upset about that simply because it involved guns. Expecting an anti to be logical is like trying to pick up a turd by the clean end. It's not possible. They're the type who belive that it's morally better for me to let somebody attack me while I'm waiting for the police than to shoot him. They don't give a damn what kind of gun it is, the fact that it's a gun is what they hate. They could be raffling off a black powder flintlock and it wouldn't matter.

 

[SharpsDressedMan]

If it offends you, don't buy a raffle ticket. Seems to be the correct answer.

 

[BADUNAME37]

What he said! VVVVVVVVVVVVV

 

[MagnumDweeb]

Here I am drawn in two directions.

As a staunch and unyielding Pro-2nd guy I want to tell the antis to sit down and shut up and demonstrate nothing but disdain for their existence. I'm for ostracizing these.....people disregarding them entirely so they are seen for the worthless things they are. The more we ignore their "sensitivities" the sooner they'll go away. The more we stand up instead of backing down, the sooner they'll go away. When like quarantining them like Ebola in the figurative sense of media and compromise, they will go away with time as we have seen time and time again (read "Rise of the Anti-media"). There are two sides, black and white, right and wrong, we can't compromise because we are right.

Now as someone who wants to bring fence sitters and neutrals over to our side this does not look like a good idea. While I enjoy my Glock 23, it is in bad taste to associate the GOP with this raffle. If it was some grass roots types, even the Tea Party it wouldn't be so bad. But the antis got their panties in a bunch over Sarah Palin and her targets on the districts she wanted the Republicans to take. Now the antis are some whiney little worthless types so I realize they'll cry over a fart in their general direction but their tears still stand to get a hold of the fence sitters and neutrals.

In the interest of putting down the anti populations, I think this is a bad idea. The neutrals and fence sitters are typically rational people we should be trying to win over to hasten the extinction or its functional equivalent of the antis. For that we have to be sensitive to common sense and starve the antis of ammunition against us.

Now if they were raffling say some old police issued S&W revolvers that was preceded by a presentation maybe named "The Genocides Brought About By Gun Grabbers" or something more artsy thoroughly detailing the antis and their....blood on their hands, that would be smarter. It's always a good idea to blame the antis, they are usually to blame in one way or the other.

 

[TexasBill]

According to earlier published reports, Rep. Giffords owns a Glock 19 that she keeps locked in a safe. The Republicans could just as easily say the raffled pistol honors her own choice in of firearm brands. For that matter, they could point out that the Tucson police carry Glock 22 pistols.

I am a moderately liberal Democrat, but I certainly support the GOP's right to hold a fund-raiser with whatever prize they chose. For all we know, the GOP may have been given the gun to auction, either by a supporter or by a Glock dealer, or it received an offer of a very low price, allowing them to maximize the funds raised. I would certainly look to these explanations before accusing them of making light of a tragedy.

 

[fehhkk]

I believe liberals have the right to feel offended (freedom of speech), just as much as the GOP thought that raffling the Glock is within their rights.

It goes both ways.

 

[we are not amused]

How long before a gun related event can be held?

If the Anti's have their way, never.

If we respect their feelings on the matter, we would all have to turn in our guns.

I don't expect reasonable behavior out of them, and so far, I've not been disappointed.

 

[armoredman]

The raffling of a Glock - gun used to shoot Rep. Giffords -

The actual firearm in question remains in police custody as evidence, so no, they aren't raffling off a crime gun.

Raffling a Glock to defeat someone who was nearly murdered by a Glock is crass.

No, she was nearly murdered by a psycho who used a firearm. He was also wearing pants, should we avoid selling or speaking of pants due to this crime?

 

[BSA1]

The shooting has created a public relations nightmare for the anti's as he was one of their guys. Try as they may they can not link him to Conservatives or Tea Party wackos. This means imho the anti's will make-up and use anything gun related to paint gun owners as evil for as long as possible

p.s. Aren't Glocks commonly used by LEO's across the nation? What is wrong with auctioning off the gun our nation's police use every day?

 

[Neverwinter]

Could you please cite an example of that statement?

What goes on as normal life to some seems to irritate others , and this happens all the time. Is it therefore insensitive to carry on with normal tasks or do we need to be sensitive of all things, at all times, in order to not offend anyone. Good luck with that.

"Political correctness" is used as a shield to justify their actions. Other people are not allowed to be offended because they are simply over-sensitive. With that justification, it absolves them from all guilt for actions that they know other people are sensitive to.

On the other hand, I could be wrong and they could just be ignorant instead of willfully defiant.

No, she was nearly murdered by a psycho who used a firearm. He was also wearing pants, should we avoid selling or speaking of pants due to this crime?

By all means, suggest that the Arizona GOP raffle off a set of clothes matching those worn by Jared Loughner when he shot the Democratic congressmember. I can't wait.

How long before a gun related event can be held?

If the Anti's have their way, never.

I'm not sure why the GOP holding a gun-related event is critical to their operations.

 

[olivernelson]

I just think the timing was terrible. You can't be tone deaf in politics. Do they have a "right" to do it? Of course. But timing is poor.

 

[USAF_Vet]

Expecting an anti to be logical is like trying to pick up a turd by the clean end. It's not possible.

Best statement of the thread, sig worthy.

On topic: People try too hard to get offended by things that in the long run, simply don't matter.

Yes, people got shot, killed, maimed, etc. by a nutcase who slipped through the legal cracks. People who don't know any better will always demonize the object, rarely the user. Twenty years from now, a Glock could be raffled off and someone would be shouting down about the Giffords shooting.

A guy went on a rampage in Grand Rapids several weeks ago, killed seven people, including a little girl, his own daughter no less, held three more people hostage before blowing his head off. his weapon of choice, a Glock .40.
On the way to work the other day, local LGS put up a billboard featuring <gasp> a Glock!
Not word one has been said about the billboard. Why? Maybe no one cares, or maybe they, like me, are smart enough to know that guns don't kill people.