PDA

View Full Version : From a PR point of view?


erikdjs
04-22-2011, 9:18 AM
I feel that we don't gain as much ground simply because RKBA supporters aren't at good at marketing as the anti's. We brand ourselves as "pro GUN" and "pro RIGHTS" which is all true, but it's not the whole story. The right to carry "arms" (whatever the best available arms at the time happen to be, currently guns) is about self defense from harm and from tyranny. So why do we not focus on that more?

We always say, don't ban the "gun". "Guns" don't kill people. Yet we put the word "gun" in everything we do.

IMO, anti's shouldn't be called "anti-gun" because that automatically makes us "pro guns". They should always be termed "anti-self defense" which makes us pro self defense.

Just look at our organization names - they're only about guns. CalGUNS, N.RIFLE.A, CA RIFLE & PISTOL assoc. Not that we need to change the names, but It makes me wonder what kind of ground we could have made being called the National Self Defense Association or California Self Preservation Foundation.

We say it's not about the guns, it's about criminals and law abiding citizens, but we make it about the guns when it's all we mention in our marketing campaigns.

Guns just happen to be the current version of arms that provide the highest level of self defense of self and country.

New pamphlet: "The Brady Campaign: why they hate self defense" or "Self preservation without vigilantism"


Meh, just some ramblings. :willy_nilly:

The Shadow
04-22-2011, 10:17 AM
I feel that we don't gain as much ground simply because RKBA supporters aren't at good at marketing as the anti's. We brand ourselves as "pro GUN" and "pro RIGHTS" which is all true, but it's not the whole story. The right to carry "arms" (whatever the best available arms at the time happen to be, currently guns) is about self defense from harm and from tyranny. So why do we not focus on that more?

We always say, don't ban the "gun". "Guns" don't kill people. Yet we put the word "gun" in everything we do.

IMO, anti's shouldn't be called "anti-gun" because that automatically makes us "pro guns". They should always be termed "anti-self defense" which makes us pro self defense.

Just look at our organization names - they're only about guns. CalGUNS, N.RIFLE.A, CA RIFLE & PISTOL assoc. Not that we need to change the names, but It makes me wonder what kind of ground we could have made being called the National Self Defense Association or California Self Preservation Foundation.

We say it's not about the guns, it's about criminals and law abiding citizens, but we make it about the guns when it's all we mention in our marketing campaigns.

Guns just happen to be the current version of arms that provide the highest level of self defense of self and country.

New pamphlet: "The Brady Campaign: why they hate self defense" or "Self preservation without vigilantism"


Meh, just some ramblings. :willy_nilly:

I have taken it upon myself to play the word game just like the antis do. When referring to the Brady's or VPC, I always find a spot in my correspondence to use, antigun extremist, antigun lobby, or antigun zealot(s). From time to time I will even use "hoplophobe" as an identifier for Helmke, Henigan, Sugarman, or Brady.

Words mean something, and if you can hang those tags on the anti 2A people and their organizations, when speaking about their extreme propaganda and disinformation, I think you can get a lot of mileage out of your words.

hoffmang
04-22-2011, 10:29 AM
The only flipside issue is that you don't get acceptance for something that you don't make plain.

"Gun" should be equivalent to "book" (and is in like 2/3 of the American population.)

-Gene

erikdjs
04-22-2011, 11:01 AM
The only flipside issue is that you don't get acceptance for something that you don't make plain.

"Gun" should be equivalent to "book" (and is in like 2/3 of the American population.)

-Gene

Granted. It should be. But currently it's not. I think carefully crafted messages are a big step towards changing that.

Here's some quick mockups I made. Keep in mind, I'm not a graphic designer.

http://img833.imageshack.us/img833/7186/selfdefense1.png

http://img638.imageshack.us/img638/8910/bradye.png

Dreaded Claymore
04-22-2011, 11:09 AM
Here's some quick mockups I made. Keep in mind, I'm not a graphic designer.

Yeah, but you darned well should be. These look good!

M. D. Van Norman
04-22-2011, 12:23 PM
From a PR point of view, we gun owners are our own worst enemy. Our “conservative” Republican majority alienates far too many potential allies.

sanjosebmx
04-22-2011, 12:26 PM
'Radical' is the word of the moment...

madmike
04-22-2011, 12:36 PM
The only flipside issue is that you don't get acceptance for something that you don't make plain.

"Gun" should be equivalent to "book" (and is in like 2/3 of the American population.)

-Gene

It is, when Ruger makes it...

rivraton
04-22-2011, 12:39 PM
From a PR point of view, we gun owners are our own worst enemy. Our “conservative” Republican majority alienates far too many potential allies.
Oh, really? are you suggesting we embrace the "progressive" philosophy?

M. D. Van Norman
04-22-2011, 1:16 PM
No, but not burning Korans would be advised.

http://www.calguns.net/calgunforum/showthread.php?t=424236

We don’t have to embrace those we dislike, but we shouldn’t work so hard at alienating them when we are trying to win hearts and minds for our cause.

rivraton
04-22-2011, 1:39 PM
Do you seriously think he is a representative example of conservatism?

hoffmang
04-22-2011, 3:07 PM
Granted. It should be. But currently it's not. I think carefully crafted messages are a big step towards changing that.

I know what you're getting at but I think you may be missing my point.

"Guns save lives." is a powerful message.

-Gene

M. D. Van Norman
04-22-2011, 3:09 PM
Do you seriously think he is a representative example of conservatism?

To people who are not “conservatives,” almost certainly yes.

Then there are the “conservative” gun owners who seem to relish in their hate of “illegal” immigrants or homosexuals or public employees. We could do much better on the PR front, if they could stay quiet on such lesser issues for now.

Until Heller, I thought this problem would ultimately ruin us. Now, I think it will just slow us down. :o

rivraton
04-22-2011, 3:59 PM
To people who are not “conservatives,” almost certainly yes.

Then there are the “conservative” gun owners who seem to relish in their hate of “illegal” immigrants or homosexuals or public employees. We could do much better on the PR front, if they could stay quiet on such lesser issues for now.

Until Heller, I thought this problem would ultimately ruin us. Now, I think it will just slow us down. :o

I don't hate anyone... What does "illegal"(with the quotation marks) infer? that we should have open borders? We have immigration laws that should be enforced. (That statement has nothing to do with hate)...someone else's lifestyle choices are none of my business... I think public employees should be treated on equal footing with private sector employees. Revenues are down so layoffs or cuts in benifits are in order...again nothing to do with hate, just simple economics...