TexasCHLforum.com

I saw someone on Twitter quote the following to one of the offended "journalists". It was attributed to someone else (popehat), so I searched for it and found it, but it does not meet our guidelines due to language. But a snippet of the quote is below and you can read the whole article if you want. Best analogy I have seen about wrong terminology and this is over two years old:

It's hard to grasp the reaction of someone who understands gun terminology to someone who doesn't. So imagine we're going through one of our periodic moral panics over dogs and I'm trying to persuade you that there should be restrictions on, say, Rottweilers.

Me: I don't want to take away dog owners' rights. But we need to do something about Rottweilers.
You: So what do you propose?
Me: I just think that there should be some sort of training or restrictions on owning an attack dog.
You: Wait. What's an "attack dog?"
Me: You know what I mean. Like military dogs.
You: Huh? Rottweilers aren't military dogs. In fact "military dogs" isn't a thing. You mean like German Shepherds?
Me: Don't be ridiculous. Nobody's trying to take away your German Shepherds. But civilians shouldn't own fighting dogs...


popehat.com/2015/12/07/talking-productively-about-guns