TexasCHLforum.com

jkurtz wrote:

I agree. However those on our side, with high media visibility, are not doing enough to get the truth out. I can't tell you how many times I scream at the TV when a pro gun advocate is on the news and says nothing when the moderator or interviewer uses terms as "automatic weapon," "assault rifle" or "weapons of war." They do NOT dispute the false labels at all, nor do they offer a challenge to the terminology. I think the only one I've seen do it on the MSM is Greg Gutfeld on Fox. Usually though, the majority let the host/interviewer continue to spew nonsense terminology. Also, I think the NRA needs to have a new media campaign doing so. The touchy/feely "America's safest place" ads are fine, but they need ads that specifically debunk the bogus terminology that is being used so much, that public opinion is turning against the law abiding gun owner, because they believe an AR-15 IS automatic, an assault rifle, high powered, and a weapon of war, because everyone from the media to the police are saying it, so it must be true. In another thread the Sky News commentator said it was an "assault rifle" because the police said so, so it must be true.

The first response by any pro 2A advocate to hearing such terminology should be to ask the questioner/interviewer to DEFINE assault rifle, DEFINE semi-automatic vs. automatic, DEFINE weapon of war, and when the silence occurs, explain and let the audience know they are being deceived by the media and anti-2A advocates. Just MHO.

I agree to an extent. Defining terms is important, not doubt about it. However, if you know you are only going to get 3 minutes of air time, would you rather use that arguing definitions or presenting statistics?

Right now, the antis are ramming "labels" down our throats, not statistics. In any case, there are 3 kinds of lies. "Lies, darn lies, and statistics." You can cite statistics till your blue in the face, and the other side will have their own set to counter yours. You tell them homicides are down, and they'll say suicide by firearms is up. But what will be their counter when you ask them to define something they know nothing about except the bogus labels the ant- 2A media and politicians are ramming down the throats of the American public by the minute, hour and day? Here are a few questions I'd ask in response to an interview:

1. What is the definition of Assault Rifle? You don't know, do you?

2. Name any military in the world that issues the AR-15 to its troops? Answer - none!

3. Why do you say " automatic and high powered" when the US Army definition of an Assault Rifle is "a short, compact, selective-fire weapons that fire a cartridge intermediate in power " The AR-15 and its clones are neither select fire nor high powered.

4. Are you deceiving the American public out of ignorance or is it willful? Again just MHO.

lfinsr wrote:You/he are preaching to the choir. We all know the facts and they're on our side. The problem is the media is on the other side and they continue to spout propaganda and lies. Say something often enough and loud enough, people start believing it. The question is how do you effectively combat it. We can all do it individually, and that helps, but they're yelling at the top of their lungs to 1000's at a time.

Aside from the hardcore antis such as the Brady bunch, I believe if the general population knew the true facts they would see through the "gun show loophole", UBC, and AW ban.

I agree. However those on our side, with high media visibility, are not doing enough to get the truth out. I can't tell you how many times I scream at the TV when a pro gun advocate is on the news and says nothing when the moderator or interviewer uses terms as "automatic weapon," "assault rifle" or "weapons of war." They do NOT dispute the false labels at all, nor do they offer a challenge to the terminology. I think the only one I've seen do it on the MSM is Greg Gutfeld on Fox. Usually though, the majority let the host/interviewer continue to spew nonsense terminology. Also, I think the NRA needs to have a new media campaign doing so. The touchy/feely "America's safest place" ads are fine, but they need ads that specifically debunk the bogus terminology that is being used so much, that public opinion is turning against the law abiding gun owner, because they believe an AR-15 IS automatic, an assault rifle, high powered, and a weapon of war, because everyone from the media to the police are saying it, so it must be true. In another thread the Sky News commentator said it was an "assault rifle" because the police said so, so it must be true.

The first response by any pro 2A advocate to hearing such terminology should be to ask the questioner/interviewer to DEFINE assault rifle, DEFINE semi-automatic vs. automatic, DEFINE weapon of war, and when the silence occurs, explain and let the audience know they are being deceived by the media and anti-2A advocates. Just MHO.