"Marginalize Gun Owners"

[Ripon83]

Was listening to a local talk radio guy this morning, and I don't have a link to a story nor can I find one.

This guy was saying that Sara Brady and company were seeking out the advice of "GLAD" a leading organization in the fight for gay marriage. The advice they were seeking was how to "marginalize" gun owners or especially gun advocates in the same way the homosexual lobby marginalized anti gay marriage people as zealots, racists, etc.

He concluded it took the gay and lesbian communities less than 10 years to marginalize those who oppose them as racist and hateful. This was done with a concerted effort in the media and hollywood which "was successful" as they now view it.

[yellowfin]

They've been doing every bit of that already in CA, NJ, IL, and NY for decades with the same means and often the same message bearers.

[Gray Peterson]

Was listening to a local talk radio guy this morning, and I don't have a link to a story nor can I find one.

This guy was saying that Sara Brady and company were seeking out the advice of "GLAD" a leading organization in the fight for gay marriage. The advice they were seeking was how to "marginalize" gun owners or especially gun advocates in the same way the homosexual lobby marginalized anti gay marriage people as zealots, racists, etc.

He concluded it took the gay and lesbian communities less than 10 years to marginalize those who oppose them as racist and hateful. This was done with a concerted effort in the media and hollywood which "was successful" as they now view it.

Please tell me what station & time. For obvious reasons.

[SilverTauron]

They've been doing every bit of that already in CA, NJ, IL, and NY for decades with the same means and often the same message bearers.

The Marginalization Strategy only works if gun owners are a very small minority of the population being influenced. Good luck convincing the millions of firearm owners nationwide that they should consider themselves racist bigots.

As a biracial gun owner , the very thought that gun ownership is equal to racism is offensive.

[kaligaran]

Seeking and receiving are two very different things.

I'd be EXTREMELY surprsied if GLAAD were even remotely interested in being affiliated with Brady, much less 'helping' them. Not only because it could impact some of their base but also becuase it's not related at all to their cause in the slightest.

FWIW, the pro-gay organizations didn't have to do much to show the extreme anti-gay people as crazies... they do a good job of that themselves.

[NotEnufGarage]

I think we'd have an easier time marginalizing the anti's as racist, classist and anti-freedom bigots, since they are....

I don't think the gay lobby has been all the successful marginalizing their opponents. I do agree they've gained a lot of support, but its from segments of society that are easily ignored, like the media and entertainment industry. The harder they push, the more those who oppose them will marginalize the supports by not buying their products, watching their films, etc... Just look at the revenue difference between "mainstream" movies and "family friendly" movies. When the returns on investment are compared, family friendly is the clear winner.

[IVC]

I think we'd have an easier time marginalizing the anti's as racist, classist and anti-freedom bigots, since they are....

This. Since Heller and McDonald, it's the antis who are bigots since they are actively working to undermine a civil right. It's just a matter of time. There is much less "collective right" arguments from lay people these days as they are getting actively educated by the ever more active 2A rights groups.

[Gray Peterson]

I think we'd have an easier time marginalizing the anti's as racist, classist and anti-freedom bigots, since they are....

I don't think the gay lobby has been all the successful marginalizing their opponents. I do agree they've gained a lot of support, but its from segments of society that are easily ignored, like the media and entertainment industry. The harder they push, the more those who oppose them will marginalize the supports by not buying their products, watching their films, etc... Just look at the revenue difference between "mainstream" movies and "family friendly" movies. When the returns on investment are compared, family friendly is the clear winner.

It's wider than that but that's besides the point.

Seeking and receiving are two very different things.

I'd be EXTREMELY surprsied if GLAAD were even remotely interested in being affiliated with Brady, much less 'helping' them. Not only because it could impact some of their base but also becuase it's not related at all to their cause in the slightest.

FWIW, the pro-gay organizations didn't have to do much to show the extreme anti-gay people as crazies... they do a good job of that themselves.

The above is correct. There are two organizations that he may be talking about.

GLAD: gay and lesbian advocates & defenders. They are essentially a legal service organization. Similar to CGF for gay issues in New England.

GLAAD: Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation. They monitor media for negative & defamatory depictions of gay people.

This person misunderstands the organizations.

[yellowfin]

The Marginalization Strategy only works if gun owners are a very small minority of the population being influenced.

Which sadly is the case in NJ, NYC, etc. which allows the antis to control the huge voting blocks that they do.

Good luck convincing the millions of firearm owners nationwide that they should consider themselves racist bigots.

They've unfortunately had a great deal of success in getting a huge percentage of those millions to not stand up for themselves against the cultural influences that affect the millions of non gun owners to refute that idea. There are far too many workplaces, schools, churches, and social affiliations even not in CA, MA, or NJ where an individual who happens to be an active gun owner and 2nd Amendment advocate is not 100% well received to talk about what he or she enjoys. CT, CO, DE, and some parts of PA come to mind immediately. In many, MANY places Fuddism is sadly an accepted norm: tell them you went out and shot clays and it's conversation as usual in the free world, but tell them you shot your Bulgarian AK and your Beretta at the range and the response you get sounds like you're back in San Francisco or Berkeley.

[SilverTauron]

They've unfortunately had a great deal of success in getting a huge percentage of those millions to not stand up for themselves against the cultural influences that affect the millions of non gun owners to refute that idea. There are far too many workplaces, schools, churches, and social affiliations even not in CA, MA, or NJ where an individual who happens to be an active gun owner and 2nd Amendment advocate is not 100% well received to talk about what he or she enjoys. CT, CO, DE, and some parts of PA come to mind immediately. In many, MANY places Fuddism is sadly an accepted norm: tell them you went out and shot clays and it's conversation as usual in the free world, but tell them you shot your Bulgarian AK and your Beretta at the range and the response you get sounds like you're back in San Francisco or Berkeley.

You would be surprised who supports the RKBA .

For proof of that statement, I take you to a time when I purchased a pistol at my local gun store. Every time I set foot into the family owned business its an occasion to socialize, and it was no different on this day.Given that I live in a college town, I stated odds were I was one of the few people who CC'ed consistently in the area.

At that, the owner chuckled. He said Id be surprised at the business he gets from professors on campus packing heat. I left it at that, but it planted a thought in my head-just how many people strap on a gun daily to go about their lives at work and school without ever letting on they're armed to anyone?

It is not as if all of us have Superman's X-ray vision. It isn't beyond the realm of likelihood that everyone in Church, School , work etc. could be packing and nobody would know because everyone carrying in the building is scared the guy & gal next to them is a Brady Freak. Eventually the cultural fear will subside , and in 20 years strapping on a gun to go shopping won't provoke any more drama than talking on a Bluetooth headset.

[guntrust]

We marginalize ourselves by carrying concealed, rather than openly.

Welcome to the ghetto.

[ZombieTactics]

It's difficult to use one group (gays) against another group (gun owners) when there is even a small chance of overlap. I'm a fairly conservative christian type, but I have far more in common with gay gun owners than straight anti-gunners. I have no problem disagreeing with my gay friends about a great many things, but this issue is where I gladly lock arms with them to form a line which is not to be crossed.

I like guns, I like my life and I have a right to protect it. Guess what? Gay people do too!

[sholling]

This bit of satire sums up the Progressive media's campaign to marginalize gun owners perfectly:

The Journalist's Guide to Gun Violence Coverage

Making sense of spin in the news

by Dr. Michael Brown

Guns are a sad fact of life in American culture and are a major topic
in modern journalism. A good Journalist has a duty to get involved
and make a difference in this important societal debate. By following
certain guidelines, the concerned Journalist can be assured of having
the maximum impact on this shameful problem.

The first principle to remember is that subtle use of terminology can
covertly influence the reader. Adjectives should be chosen for
maximum anti-gun effect. When describing a gun, attach terms like
"automatic," "semi-automatic," "large caliber," "deadly," "high
powered," or "powerful." Almost any gun can be described by one or
more of these terms. More than two guns should be called an
"arsenal."

Try to include the term "assault weapon" if at all possible. This can
be combined with any of the terms above for best results. Nobody
actually knows what an assault weapon is, so you cannot be criticized
for this usage. Your local anti-gun organization can provide you with
a list of the latest buzz words like "junk guns," "Saturday Night
Specials," and "the criminal's weapon of choice."

Don't worry about getting technical details right. Many a reporter
has accidentally written about semi-automatic revolvers or committed
other minor errors. Since most people know little about guns, this is
not a problem. Only the gun nuts will complain and they don't count.
The emotional content of your article is much more important than the
factual details, since people are more easily influenced through their
emotions than through logic.

Broadcast Journalists should have a file tape showing a machine gun
firing on full automatic. Run this video while describing "automatic"
weapons used in a crime or confiscated by police. At the least, a
large graphic of a handgun should be displayed behind the on-air
personality when reading any crime story.

Do not waste words describing criminals who use guns to commit crimes.
Instead of calling them burglar, rapist, murderer, or repeat offender,
simply use the term "gunman." This helps the public associate all
forms of crime and violence with the possession of guns.

Whenever drug dealers are arrested, guns are usually confiscated by
the police. Mention the type and number of guns more prominently than
the type and quantity of drugs. Include the number of rounds of
ammunition seized, since the number will seem large to those who know
little about guns. Obviously, the drug dealers who had the guns
should now be called "gunmen."

Political discussions on gun control legislation usually involve
pro-gun organizations. Always refer to these organizations as "the
gun lobby." If space permits, mention how much money the gun lobby
has spent to influence political campaigns and describe their
legislative lobbying efforts as "arm twisting" or "threats."

Gun owners must never be seen in a positive light. Do not mention
that these misguided individuals may actually be well educated, or
have respectable jobs and healthy families. They should be called
"gun nuts" if possible or simply gun owners at best. Mention details
about their clothing, especially if they are wearing hunting clothes
or hats. Mention the simplistic slogans on their bumper stickers to
show that their intelligence level is low. Many gun owners drive
pickup trucks, hunt and live in rural areas. Use these details to
help portray them as ignorant rednecks. Don't use the word "hunt."
Always say that they "kill" animals.

Don't be afraid to interview these people, they are harmless even
though we don't portray them that way. Try to solicit comments that
can be taken out of context to show them in the worst possible light.

Never question the effectiveness of gun control laws or proposals.
Guns are evil and kill people. Removing guns from society can only be
good. Nobody really uses guns for legitimate self-defense, especially
women or children. Any stories about armed self-defense must be
minimized or suppressed.

Be careful about criticizing the police for responding slowly to 911
calls for help. It is best if the public feels like the police can be
relied upon to protect them at all times. If people are buying guns
to protect their families, you are not doing your job.

Emphasize stories where people kill family members and/or themselves
with guns. It is important to make the public feel like they could
lose control and start killing at any moment if they have a gun in the
house. Any story where a child misuses a gun is front page material.

View every shooting as an event to be exploited. Always include
emotional quotes from the victim's family if possible. If they are
not available, the perpetrator's family will do nicely. The quote
must blame the tragedy on the availability of guns. Photos or video
of grieving family members are worth a thousand facts. Most people
will accept the assertion that guns cause crime. It is much easier
than believing that some people deliberately choose to harm others.

Your story should include terms like "tragic" or "preventable" and
mention the current toll of gun violence in your city or state. Good
reporters always know exactly how many gun deaths have occurred in
their area since the first of the year. List two or three previous
incidents of gun violence to give the impression of a continuing crime
wave.

Little space should be devoted to shootings where criminals kill each
other. Although these deaths greatly inflate the annual gun violence
numbers, they distract from the basic mission of urging law abiding
citizens to give up their guns. Do not dig too deeply into the
reasons behind shootings. The fact that a gun was involved is the
major point, unless someone under 18 is affected, in which case the
child angle is now of equal importance.

Any article about gun violence should include quotes from anti-gun
organizations or politicians. One quote should say that we must do
something "for the children." Anti-gun spokespersons should be called
"activists" or "advocates." If your employer wishes to appear
unbiased, you can include one token quote from a gun lobby group to
show that you are being fair. The anti-gun statements should be
accepted as fact. The gun lobby statement can be denigrated by
including text like, "according to gun lobbyist Jones."

Fortunately, statements from anti-gun organizations come in short
sound bites that are perfect for generating an emotional response in
the reader or viewer. Gun lobby statements usually contain boring
facts that are easy to ignore.

Feel secure in your advocacy journalism. The vast majority of your
fellow Journalists support your activism. The nation will be a better
place when only the police and military have guns. Remember that you
are doing it for the children so the end justifies the means.

Eventually, the government will have a monopoly on power. Don't worry
about the right to freedom of the press, just contact me then for
more helpful hints.

Professor Michael Brown
School of Journalism, Brady Chair
Vancouver College of Liberal Arts

Political Satire, copyright 1999, Michael Brown.
May be reproduced freely in its full and complete form.
The author may be contacted at mb@e-z.net

Reprinted from here.

Note that the author's permission to reprint in full is included in the quoted text.

[Agent Orange]

So if someone is anti-gay they're considered hateful and racist? Really? When did that happen?

[wash]

This is hilarious.

The antis have been trying to marginalize gun owners for decades. It started with racism when they supported laws to disarm minorities with an unpopular skin color.

If anyone should be asking for help it's GLAD because the antis have been marginalizing people for a very very long time.

The important thing to take from this is that we gain strength from being single issue. Any anti-liberty issue mixed with gun rights is just a lever that the antis will use to marginalize us.

They already stereotype NRA members with all sort of un-truths. Don't give them anything else.

I'm sure the antis are disappointed and frustrated that the LGBTQ community understands and accepts the message of the pink pistols.

We gain strength by being inclusive and anyone who doesn't appreciate gay and minority gun owners doesn't really need to be a part of our fight.