View Single Post
Old January 14, 2010, 12:24 PM   #2
Senior Member
Join Date: October 20, 2007
Location: Richardson, TX
Posts: 7,524
Let us operate on a few assumptions for a moment:
[admittedly these are from my own well-traveled experience]

1) The number of people rearing children to be responsible gun owners seems to have fallen.

2) The number of people who have actually held a gun--much less fired one or enjoyed gun ownership--seems to be shrinking at an alarming rate.
I'm not sure that I agree with either of these two assumptions, considering that firearms sales have recently been at an all-time high and public surveys show that Americans generally support the RKBA at a higher rate than anytime in modern history. Although some of the recent sales have obviously been generated by previous gun owners buying more guns, my experience shows that there are plenty of new shooters too, and it's encouraging that many of them are women.

That said, some degree of public education can't hurt.
3) We (gun owners) seem to have helped this trend along through over-sized machismo, grunting bravado, and occasional arrogance.
[Too many of my gun shop or show visits have included at least one individual (customer or employee) actively doing all they can to dissuade new (possible) gun owners by dismissing questions and concerns or just being rude.]
True, although I don't want this thread to degenerate into another "Stupid Gun Store Clerk" thread as seen in General Discussion.
4) We (gun owners) have also helped these trends along by behaving like bulls on parade in the few public ranges wherein new gun owners can go to practice and learn.
[Too many times at public ranges, an obviously inexperienced, new gun owner appears--only to be spoken to badly, ignored, or treated like an unwelcome newbie.]
I think a reasonable goal should be to reintroduce the shooting sports in a school setting, under strict adult supervision of course.
5) We (gun owners) have aided anti-gun organizations with our actions, inactions, and our money. As an example, see James Cameron's script notes for the movie Avatar:
I'm not sure I'm with you there. IMHO organized boycotts are only effective when a wide spectrum of society will participate, not just a small contingent of activists. If a boycott is pushed too hard by said small contingent, it can backfire by focusing public ridicule at them.

In this case, we've got a movie by a director who privately shows contempt for gun owners and possibly an anti-gun and anti-military attitude in general, yet the movie features shooting and military activity galore. (So do his past movies; "Aliens" springs to mind.) Like most in Hollywood, Jim Cameron is obviously willing to sacrifice his private feelings at the altar of the Almighty Dollar Sign. Yawn.

OTOH I'm encouraged that Jim Cameron implies that the NRA still exists in the year 2154 or whatever.
"Smokey, this is not 'Nam. This is bowling. There are rules... MARK IT ZERO!!" - Walter Sobchak
carguychris is offline  
Page generated in 0.03140 seconds with 8 queries