Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Politics, Religion, Social Issues' started by rdowns, May 3, 2013.
I think he's going to make Wayne LaPierre look a like a <censored word for cat>.
That is one of the most greatest vision things I've read!
Luckily, literacy is not a requirement for gun ownership, or the Presidency of the NRA. You don't need to know your native language to lead one of the, if not the, most influential lobbies (read: them that bribe legislators legally) in Washington.
And now on to the content of that brilliant screed...
Looks like he'll do well. A load of patriotic rhetoric that gun owners will swallow unquestionably while he uses their membership money to protect the profits and interests of the gun industry. Including those that market weapons to children.
What a shame.
Who is marketing guns to children?
And I thought the previous guy was insane...
Well, unless people like this guy are reassured that tyranny can be preempted by means other than firearms, there is always going to be a hard core of people who will defend their right to own a gun as though they were fighting tyranny. It does little good to simply dismiss them out of hand without understanding why they are so attached to their weapons.
It looks like the NRA people still live in the 18th century. The only tyranny they should fight against is the coming dictatorship of Her Majesty Lady Honey Boo Boo and her Sass Squad.
One can marginalize without dismissing.
The NRA clearly has become a tool of gun manufacturers. Through the NRA, one can whip up a base of deluded people who point to a war 150 years ago as proof the U.S. government is going to round them up.
However this inflammatory rhetoric is dangerous. Timothy McVeight quit the NRA because he thought the NRA was too moderate.
Right. MvVeigh is an example of what happens when people feel marginalized - they become violent. Rhetoric can't radicalize people unless they are already feeling alienated from the rest of society. I am just saying it would be useful to understand the point of view of the people in the NRA even if one disagrees with them. There is far too much polarization in American politics now.
Yes, I know all about that tragedy.
I am probably one of the few members that has actually handled the model of firearm in question.
Making and selling a firearm for young shooters is 100% different from marketing to children.
Actually, I may be a little sick but why do I think such an arrangement would be highly entertaining? I'd love a position on the Sass Squad!
+1, to say otherwise is silly.
Most poisons and explosives have brightly colored labels, so by your logic those manufacturer are marketing to children as well.
How is that the same?
Are they pushing these on TV during kids shows on bill boards out side of schools/playgrounds?
I have never even seen an AD for one of these rifles so again how exactly are they marketing these to children?
You do agree that those rifles are made for a younger population. By definition, if a product is made for a certain demographic, it is considered marketing. Marketing does not only involve ads.
But then again, ads were made
Well if your definition of marketing is the simple production of an item for a young demographic then there are thousands of very dangerous things on the market that they need to stop selling from medication, food and even clothing.
As far as the ads you mentioned, it absolutely matters when it comes to intent on when and how it is displayed as to who they are trying to sell the item to.
I know I'm OT, and I don't mean this to be sarcastic. I've been trying to think of dangerous clothing...and I can't come up with any. I'm sure you had something in mind when you wrote that...
So...please give me an example of dangerous clothing.
Iron Man suits obviously... They have ion cannons and stuffs.
There are items on some clothing items like pull stings, buttons and some none breathable fabric that you would not want need a baby due the issue of chocking/asphyxiation.
Ok, I'll bite....
How about the use of cartoon characters and cute little titles like "My First Rifle"?
Not "My Daughter's First Rifle" nor "My Son's First Pistol".
But you already know this is being marketed to kids because you know how to fire up a computer, open a browser, and engage in mock debate.
So you think it is a good idea to stop selling things like antibiotics and baby food? Wow!
Prove to me they were advertising to "kids"
Where was this displayed? Was it ever even advertised in a magazine or other advertisement?
As far as I can tell this was only displayed on the manufacturer's website and gun stores where the rifles are being sold.
I do not know for sure but lets say it was in a magazine like Guns and Ammo. Can you please tell me that the readership demographic for 12 and under is? I would guess pretty low.
So once again even with the logo how was this weapon being marketed to children?
WARNING: Too many movies. Losing contact with reality. WARNING
Good point. I was thinking adult clothing. In theory, those clothes are regulated, and are not supposed to be sold. They can by required to be withdrawn from the market...but your point is a good one.
MR ate my reply!