Things the Gun Community Need to Stop Doing

[BoringGuy45]

If we're to have a fighting chance to ever gain back the rights we lost, we need to appear to be the more intellectual, logical, and level headed side to the debate. While we have a very good group of people on this site in terms of intelligence and logic, beyond even the crazies and inbred dumbasses that make up the fringe of gun rights movement, there's a bunch of moderate, dedicated, well meaning people who unfortunately do more harm than good. I'd like to discuss what kind of things need to be changed in the gun community. Here's a list of things I've just thought of:

1) Be more careful not to repeat false quotes. Too often we repeat things as evidence of our cause without even checking to see if the quote is authentic. The favorite quote we use, for example, is Admiral Isoroku Yamamoto declaring that an invasion of the U.S. wouldn't work because "there would be a rifle behind every blade of grass." Unfortunately there's no written evidence that he ever said such a thing/. Yeah, maybe the false quote is a factually true statement, but we still look uneducated at best when we use false or wrongly attributed quotes, and dishonest at worst.

2) Stop comparing guns to cars all the time. This is one I'm really tired of. It can be used in some instances, but I'm tired of hearing "a car is more dangerous than a gun and we don't have to do a background check for car, why should we have to do a check for a gun?" It's too easily a beatable argument. If I were an anti-gunner, here's what I would say to that: "Cars were not designed as weapons, guns are weapons. No one has ever held up a bank with a car. Soldiers and police officers are not equipped with a car as their primary weapon. Though cars have been responsible for a few venison dinners, they aren't designed for hunting." Yes I know what people are getting at when they use the car analogy and I generally agree, but I think falling back on it is as overused as the anti-gun argument that you don't need a 30 round "clip" to hunt for deer.

3) Stop feeling the need to justify semi-auto weapons as "sporting" arms. When pro gunners call the AR a "modern sporting rifle", it's playing into the anti-gunner's hands. It's essentially admitting that yes, there is no reason to own a weapon that isn't designed for sporting. I don't own an AR for hunting or specifically for competition. I can use it for such things, but I own my AR for personal defense and for absolute worst case scenarios. The truth of the matter is there is very few, if any actively anti-gun people who truly believe in ONLY getting rid the scary looking guns, so there should be no need to try and be politically correct about our weapons; they want them all, we're not giving up a single one, and that's that. I've won a LOT of on-the-fence people over to our side by being prudent and diplomatic but honest about why a civilian should be allowed to own an AR-15 without having to claim that it's just a scary looking deer rifle. On a related note:

4) Stop feeling the need to play down the lethality of semi-automatic weapons and higher capacity magazines. This is another case of us playing into the hands of the anti-gunners. We feel like we need to claim that banning 10+ capacity magazines is pointless because a shooter will just carry more 10 round magazines. Well, if it makes no difference, why do so many of us want 30 round magazines for our AR and want standard 15-17 round mags for our 9mm handguns? We don't oppose magazine restrictions bans on semi-auto weapons because they make no difference. We oppose them because they DO make a difference and because law abiding citizens should legally be able to own weapons that criminals are using in order to give us a fair chance.

5) Stop stifling dialog within our community. There are some hard lines that I think that those of us fighting for gun rights don't cross. I think any talk of bans on ANYTHING should be tolerated for example. However, we need to major on the majors and minor on the minors and not go to personal attacks whenever so of the issues that don't include outright prohibition of any or all weapons is are discussed.

[duece71]

Agreed 100%. Increased talk in a positive direction would be good. Sometimes the gun owners can be their own worst enemy.

[markm]

The opposition will always revert to lunatic gorilla tactics, and thus force the pro 2A folks to step down at least a little from the high road.

[VIP3R 237]

We need to stop making youtube videos of petite women smacking themselves in the face with a desert eagle, and stop being so macho and think women can't handle anything more than a 22. Honestly the industry needs to focus on women in general, as they are the fastest growing group in shooting right now.

[hatt]

The gun community needs to just stop being so scared. The antis are never going to like you. The antis are few. Don't worry about them. If you're always on the defensive you're losing. If you want to beat an anti just take a non gun person shooting and show them a new world. The equivalent of curb stomping the anti.

[Dead Man]

The issue isn't guns, it's control. Don't debate the guns at all - stay focused on the control. You can argue guns and action and capacity all day long; in the end, you'll still lose, because, as we all know, it will never be "enough."

Don't engage a debate about guns.

[BoringGuy45]

We need to stop making youtube videos of petite women smacking themselves in the face with a desert eagle, and stop being so macho and think women can't handle anything more than a 22. Honestly the industry needs to focus on women in general, as they are the fastest growing group in shooting right now.

Big HELL YES on this! It drives me nuts, guys come in our store with their wives, girlfriends, sisters, etc and what do they go for? LCPs, J-Frame .38s, or P22s. Too often the woman will insist that they want a 9mm and the patronizing boyfriend/husband will insist, "No, it's too big for you. You want something easier to shoot." The funny thing is, it always seems to be the "I carry a .45 because they don't make a .46" guys who do this.

[SteyrAUG]

3) Stop feeling the need to justify semi-auto weapons as "sporting" arms. When pro gunners call the AR a "modern sporting rifle", it's playing into the anti-gunner's hands. It's essentially admitting that yes, there is no reason to own a weapon that isn't designed for sporting. I don't own an AR for hunting or specifically for competition. I can use it for such things, but I own my AR for personal defense and for absolute worst case scenarios. The truth of the matter is there is very few, if any actively anti-gun people who truly believe in ONLY getting rid the scary looking guns, so there should be no need to try and be politically correct about our weapons; they want them all, we're not giving up a single one, and that's that. I've won a LOT of on-the-fence people over to our side by being prudent and diplomatic but honest about why a civilian should be allowed to own an AR-15 without having to claim that it's just a scary looking deer rifle. On a related note:

You do realize this is directly related to the 1968 Gun Control Act and the "sporter clause" qualification for import within that legislation don't you? Basically if the ATF finds that a given firearm is "not particularly suitable for sporting applications" they can reclassify it as "non importable" or in the event of another domestic manufacturing ban "not suitable" for domestic production.

10 years of being told your "flash hider is a felony" has made some folks a bit gun shy when it comes to declaring their firearm "has no sporting application."

The most important thing we could ever do is strike the sporter clause from the 68 GCA.

[streck]

The most important thing we could ever do is repeal the 68 GCA.

FIFY.

[yellowfin]

On points 3 and 4, actually I've found that to be very constructive to talk about it that way, downplaying their absurd fears, because their absurd fears for the most part misinformation and caricature. It so happens that my rifles ARE versatile and I DO buy them for all kinds of different purposes, and percentage of use of one versus the other is mixed. My 30 rd PMags and whatever the capacity is on the pistol I happen to be using because it's an advantage for MULTIPLE uses, so why deny that? I'm thankful to say that most of the rounds I've fired have been at paper or cardboard and not into human flesh--should that change? I hope not. Whether I like it or not I do have to talk in ways they'll understand--it's clear they DON'T understand the need for emergency protection or guess what they'd be doing it themselves. That isn't handing the antis a win, it's neutralizing their tactics. You have to dismantle the case they make to win permanently. We have to win permanently or this will continue to be a contest of interest balancing, us with what they think of as unnecessary toys versus their imaginary cause to not have people be brutally killed because of things they see as having no social value at all much one worth dying for. Guess what, while what they believe is total bullshit, they'll act on it just as if it were real, and they do. You have to cure the idea, and first you have to expose it for what it is as it occurs. Otherwise you might as well be speaking German to a Chinese person or Thai to someone in Denmark.

If you want babies to grow you do have to feed them baby food until they can chew solid stuff. I'm not a moderate by any means on much of anything but I have learned enough to know that much. My wife had never known anyone who was a gun owner nor been in the room with anything gun related until meeting me, and didn't shoot until three or four years later. She had grown up in the Philly area in a Catholic liberal family with a creampuff down-and-out no career dad (loving, charitable, friendly guy just no money or ambition or direction...and died of a heart attack 4 years ago w/ life insurance barely covering debt), preschool teacher mom, unsuccessful stage actress sister with an expensive theater degree from a school in NYC that has her working at Starbucks, and an almost entirely female and beta-is-being-generous male urbanized extended family. Now she shoots somewhat regularly and is a voice of reason among her friends, family, and colleagues, and I hear from her often about how hard that is and what nonsense she has to put up with in their midst. You think I got anywhere saying "Yeah it's better for fighting in an emergency or war, so what?"