PDA

View Full Version : let's beat them at their own game!


robtech
01-07-2013, 8:02 PM
so after seeing alex jones on piers show tonight it dawned on me...he always has the extreme right on his show...not that i disagree with them at all, but to his shows audience it just perpetuates the "crazy gun owner" idea that they seem to have. so i went to his shows official fb page and posted a lil challenge to have real, everyday American firearms owners on the show for a lil debate...now i kwwo he doesnt run his own facebook page but someone who works for/under him certainly does and if it gets abig enough response there's a chance it could happen...to show we're just normal everyday people who want to protect our families and enjoy a sport, etc...so please, if you have a fb page at least go like the post or comment or something and lets try to get some mainstream media coverage where we can show our side in a positive light.

also if they go for it i'm going to stock up on facts/info/stats/etc to back our case up

http://www.facebook.com/PiersTonight/posts/586998584649463?notif_t=like

HUTCH 7.62
01-07-2013, 8:07 PM
good luck

robtech
01-07-2013, 8:14 PM
thanks...it's worth trying...i've written everyone i can but we need to sway the aqntis public opinion...if it worked it could potentially be one avenue to help with that

Carnivore
01-08-2013, 12:04 AM
Really? wow this has epic fail written all over it. It would be so much better if NO PRO GUN people went on his show, ever. No one will watch a bunch of idiots agreeing they only want to see the fighting, bickering and name calling. Make it boring and no one will ever tune in to it. Seriously this is not helping at all.

dchem
01-08-2013, 12:38 AM
OP, Piers Morgan is a media pro. Going against pro in any arena requires serious education and training.

You can't expect average American gun owner to be able to counter all the talking points on the terms that we want. Gun control nuts will always try to cast a negative light on anyone with a gun. We need TRAINED media professionals to fight this battle for us.

A more interesting idea might be to bring to public's attention more hysterical people on gun control side - something like this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=06Lw7xa6lHU
In that video, you see the crazies (or are they merely ill-informed?) on the gun control side. This is the reason why Piers won't put people like Penn Jillette on the show at this critical juncture. Penn is too rational and calm to be able to be provoked.

WE NEED PROS TO FIGHT OUR WAR.

DCVR
01-08-2013, 1:29 AM
if you ask for a "normal gun owner" on the show, they will likely respond (if even at all) with one of those "i'm a hunter and i think ARs should be banned" types.

IMO alex jones did no wrong. yes he comes of as extreme and like a 'nutcase'. but think about it for a second, why pander to a group of people whose opinions are nearly impossible to sway? it is a massive stretch of reality if you think average joe liberal will ever embrace gun owners as anything more than lunatic extremists. jones accomplished what he set out to do - plant seeds into young minds by spitting out very unpopular, yet very curious, anti-establishment ideas. this is 100x worth the sacrifice of appearing as nuts to those who already made up their mind that we are nuts LONG before he even appeared on the show.

you have a MUCH better chance appealing to younger more pliable blood. there are plenty of early-20-somethings/college kids who are only liberal because all the cool stuff in the media is liberal slanted. but you would be surprised to actually find that these people are more likely to lean Libertarian than mainstream liberal. these people grew up on video games are are perfectly willing to accept guns. this is the perfect demographic to go after if we want to play a game of numbers. alienating this huge audience by damning game violence is possibly the worst thing you can do right now (not to mention completely hypocritical).

the pipe dream of common middle-aged americans openly accepting guns back into society is a lost cause. our best bet is to turn the liberals against themselves by hitting them where it hurts the most - their next of kin.


Do you honestly think liberals have ANY interest in appealing to middle-aged conservatives? none whatsoever. that is why they market exclusively to youths. right now we are in a position that may have a better advantage. currently, "the establishment" = liberal government. there are a lot of fed up americans out there, a huge portion of which are Ron Paul supporters. Even if you hate Ron Paul, it would be stupid to concede this entire demographic. If I am willing to put aside my differences with conservative republicans (I am anti-2 party) and pro-gun democrats and stand shoulder to shoulder to fight a common cause, i sincerely hope some of you out there are willing to put aside differences and at least stand together on pro-2A issues.

look up the definition of 'divide and conquer'. dont think for a second the liberal anti-gunners arent fully versed in this tactic.

robtech
01-08-2013, 7:41 AM
All valid points

robtech
01-08-2013, 7:49 AM
Im just sick of being demonized or being shown as some tinfoil hat wearing crazy person

major burnout
01-08-2013, 2:55 PM
We don't need to march on the capital we need to march on the media.

thefitter
01-08-2013, 5:01 PM
Im just sick of being demonized or being shown as some tinfoil hat wearing crazy person

Exactly, everyone knows aluminum foil stops the mind control waves better!;)

vincewarde
01-08-2013, 5:38 PM
Do you honestly think liberals have ANY interest in appealing to middle-aged conservatives? none whatsoever. that is why they market exclusively to youths. right now we are in a position that may have a better advantage. currently, "the establishment" = liberal government. there are a lot of fed up americans out there, a huge portion of which are Ron Paul supporters. Even if you hate Ron Paul, it would be stupid to concede this entire demographic. If I am willing to put aside my differences with conservative republicans (I am anti-2 party) and pro-gun democrats and stand shoulder to shoulder to fight a common cause, i sincerely hope some of you out there are willing to put aside differences and at least stand together on pro-2A issues.

look up the definition of 'divide and conquer'. dont think for a second the liberal anti-gunners arent fully versed in this tactic.

Exactly. BTW Ron Paul's appeal is wider than many believe. I think he is gaining traction among traditionally "socially conservative" groups such as evangelicals and LDS (Glenn Beck doesn't hurt a bit). I'm a retired evangelical minister and I can support Ron Paul on virtually all domestic issues, including gun rights.

You are 100% right on standing together. For instance, this is not the time for other gun rights groups to slam the NRA for meeting with Biden in an effort to poach members. Politics is the NRA's strongest suit - let's remember that.

We should also remember that the NRA knows a whole lot of information that we do not. For instance, they know which senators and representatives have told them that they will stand firm, which are 100% behind DiFi and which are in between. They also know which of them have said, "I have to vote for something."

It could be that we need to give them that something - perhaps by offering a concession in return for something we want. For instance, if the anti-gun forces want universal background checks - and it appears that they are going to win on that issue - it may make sense to say fine, we will sign on to that, IF we get universal shall issue CCWs. This could be accomplished by requiring states to recognize permits from other states - including for out of state permits if the person's state of residence is "may issue". Why would this be a smart move? Simple - there is a great deal of support for "shall issue" in the 41 states that have it. Even many people who want universal background checks, also want shall issue CCW. Many senators voting against shall issue with reciprocity, would get a lot of heat from their home state - and they could use that to say, "I can't vote for any bill that doesn't include it."

Another thing we need to do is tell the story of Nick Meli (http://reasonedpolitics.blogspot.com/2012/12/what-national-media-left-out-of.html) - a CCW holder who disobeyed a "no guns allowed" sign and entered an Oregon mall with his Glock. A few minutes later he stopped a mass shooting without firing a shot. We need to do everything we can to let people know about this - because this incident runs counter to so many anti-gun narratives,

robtech
01-08-2013, 8:37 PM
we should also remember that the NRA rolled over and let the first AWB pass

im all for supporting them and other political organizations to tackle that forum but we, ALL OF US, need to be very pro-active about this...WE need to get out there...WE need to talk to people...WE need to do everything we can to preserve our RIGHTS...for some that stops at giving the NRA a check, for others it never stops

CDFingers
01-09-2013, 7:49 AM
Jones' appearance did nothing, nothing to advance gun rights.

But it did provide the anti's with some great footage. I can't wait for the screen grabs of spittle flecks at the edge of his mouth from folks with HDTV...

That was a lame appearance. He did us a disservice.

Facts are the best weapon in the battle for gun rights.

CDFingers

CitaDeL
01-09-2013, 8:00 AM
Jones' appearance did nothing, nothing to advance gun rights.

But it did provide the anti's with some great footage. I can't wait for the screen grabs of spittle flecks at the edge of his mouth from folks with HDTV...

That was a lame appearance. He did us a disservice.

Facts are the best weapon in the battle for gun rights.
CDFingers

I disagree with bolded. Alex Jones had facts, but he was too busy being an emotional twit for anyone to stop and recognize that at least some of what he was saying was true.

So, facts are utterly irrelevant in the battle for gun rights if you dont appear to be the most reasonable person in the room. This is where we would have an advantage over the anti-gunners- to both appear to be the most reasonable person in the room AND present the facts while the opposition is shouting over us all the emotional dribble about how assault rifles gunned down twenty children and the NRA is responsible for mass shootings.

Wherryj
01-09-2013, 1:27 PM
OP, Piers Morgan is a media pro. Going against pro in any arena requires serious education and training.

You can't expect average American gun owner to be able to counter all the talking points on the terms that we want. Gun control nuts will always try to cast a negative light on anyone with a gun. We need TRAINED media professionals to fight this battle for us.

A more interesting idea might be to bring to public's attention more hysterical people on gun control side - something like this https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=06Lw7xa6lHU
In that video, you see the crazies (or are they merely ill-informed?) on the gun control side. This is the reason why Piers won't put people like Penn Jillette on the show at this critical juncture. Penn is too rational and calm to be able to be provoked.

WE NEED PROS TO FIGHT OUR WAR.

Penn is also in possession of an IQ four times the magnitude of Piers'.

If he won't allow Penn, can we at least see if we can get Jeremy Clarkson? Clarkson is at least as intelligent as Piers, seems to at least have an open mind about guns, and has physically assaulted Piers on at least one occasion. There's a lot of potential in a rematch.

vfzu2ObrYzc

DCVR
01-10-2013, 2:49 AM
Facts are the best weapon in the battle for gun rights.


I'm not at all trying to be facetious here, but this would only be true if you were approaching a logical situation. there is nothing logical about gun control and facts do not matter to the majority of the american public.

the thing that matters the MOST to the majority of people is what other people think (everyone wants in on the 'popular opinion' - we are an incredibly insecure society)

the thing that matters most to the legislators is what the public think of them (as it directly applies to their chances of getting re-elected etc)

there is no coincidence that when politicians need the public opinion to tip in their favor they hire marketers and ad agencies. NOT fact-checkers.

CDFingers
01-10-2013, 7:07 AM
It is true that the possibility exists that emotions will drive potential gun laws. But to me it is a possibility that may be thwarted through the use of facts.

For example, when folks light their hair afire and run about aimlessly in fear of some hyped-by-Fox ideas that crime rates are rising, that illegal immigrants will bust into your house to shoot it up and steal your six pack of Corona, that Obama is going to come for your guns, facts easily rebut those false notions. Crime rates are falling; mass shootings more no more common now than ten years ago; some people are crazy and act out such that no law can stop them. Crud happens in a free society.

As a gun owner, many times I'm quite embarrassed by my fellow gun owners who take their marching orders from misinformed, sweaty pundits whose sole job is to create the fear in their listeners that the only way to defeat the coming Communist take over of America is to contribute to which ever organization is sponsoring the sweaty pundit.

Here is some footage to help folks understand.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O6_Dq_H1hA4&list=UU1yBKRuGpC1tSM73A0ZjYjQ&index=21

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qX4B0iJO6OA&list=UU1yBKRuGpC1tSM73A0ZjYjQ&index=29

Many more exist. The operative term is "follow the money". Folks like Limbaugh and Beck are paid to say what they say.

The best strategy is to read from all perspectives, make up one's own mind about things, and get out to the range as often as possible. Taking a non shooter to shoot for the first time is a plus.

Just pay attention and folks won't be so scared. Get the facts, and save your hair.

CDFingers