Currently Browsing: How Not to Win
Jun 5, 2014
Noticing a picture displayed by OCT at Smashburger, Lagniappe’s Lair notes:
Now aside from the fact that about half of those unattended long guns appear to be “leaning with intent to fall”, A zoom on the AR to the far left, closest to the bald bozo in the Cabela’s shirt, reveals that the safety selector is vertical to the rifle, meaning that it’s set to FIRE. Two of the other ARs have their safeties obstructed by slings or camera angle, but I’m willing to bet that at least one of them has it’s safety disengaged, too; that’s just the sort of half-assed idiots that these half-assed idiots are.
Go have a look for the close up shot. A reader mentioned today that if OCT didn’t exist, Bloomberg would have to invent them. This is truth, so God help us. I can’t imagine what an ND would do to the movement if it happened in one of these “educational” events. These folks have demonstrated they are fundamentally without good judgement. My concern is that poor judgement will be exercised in more areas than just public relations. Just look at the photo from Lagniappe’s Lair; if you were intent on making off with a gun, how much would you bet you’d be out the door with one of those ARs before the people not paying attention to what’s going on behind them even notices?
Bob Ownes of Bearing Arms also looks at the safety violations committed by this group. He correctly notes that muzzle down on a concrete floor is NOT a safe direction. If a firearm discharges, the bullet will likely ricochet off the floor, while also simultaneously sending fragments of concrete out in random directions with enough force to seriously injure people nearby. The safe direction is up in this circumstance.
All this has me thinking I need to start a new category “Clown Show.” I hate putting this stuff in Gun Rights, or even Gun Rights Organizations. That gives them too much credit. Even “How not to Win” is generous.
Jun 2, 2014
For those of you who haven’t been following at home, both Chili’s and Sonic caved under pressure from Mom’s Demand Action. This weekend, Open Carry Texas held a rally outside of a local Home Depot. It would seem from the story that they were allowed, by Home Depot, to hold the rally outside on their property. Well, of course Shannon Watts jumps into action. I don’t blame anyone who suggests that these people have to be getting big fat checks from Bloomberg. It’s really hard to believe that even a small group of people like this could be as dense as these people are.
At this point even NRA, who I would normally not expect to comment on a matter like this, has issued a pretty strongly worded statement on OCT’s activities. I’m rather torn about how to continue covering this issue. On the one hand, it’s gun news, and we all have a stake in the outcome of these various skirmishes over guns in businesses. On the other hand, I think these people feed on attention, any attention. It doesn’t matter whether it’s good attention or bad attention; they are doing this for a reaction, and a reaction they are getting. So I’ve been wondering if we’re all only helping to feed the beast, if you will.
I am sincerely hoping that very shortly Shannon Watts will come across a business who will not be cajoled and bullied. That might take the wind out of her sails. We already have an example with Staples, and I’d be willing to bet that Staples is a lot more worried about losing business to Jeff Bezos than they are about losing business from Shannon Watts and her demanding moms.
UPDATE: Looks like it wasn’t just outside. Attention whores gonna whore.
May 18, 2014
After some open carry protesters in Texas organized an open carry walk in Victory Park, near American Airlines Stadium in Dallas, Moms Demand took notice. From the organizers of the walk:
For those who want to eat after the walk, there is a Chipotle and an Italian place just down the road that are fine with Open Carry.
Accompanied by a picture, Shannon Watts immediately zeroed in to Chipotle with the hash tag #BurritosNotBullets, and began bullying the company into following in the steps of Jack in the Box and Starbucks, presumably meaning, “Please make some vague statement about guns being icky, and not wanting them in your stores, so we can declare victory.”
But, to their credit, Chipotle isn’t budging so far. I say so far because the rifle OCers are doing their level best offer Shannon Watts another victory. This is exactly how OC activists “gave thanks” to Starbucks, and burned us. It wasn’t just in their stores, but all over social media as well. These companies don’t want their brands associated with open carry, gun rights, anti-gun hysteria, or gun control. Chipotle just wants to sell burritos and not be inserted into a contentious debate, just like Jack-in-the-Box wanted to sell burgers, and just like Starbucks just wanted to sell coffee. The problem is, many on “our side” don’t leave well enough alone, and keep taking actions that ignorantly draw the company further into a debate they want no part of.
Bitter and I went today and were sure to float a tweet that corporate would notice. I wore an NRA polo with a nice pair of khakis, but not AR-15. My pistol was concealed. The way to show Chipotle appreciation is to spend money there, and quietly let corporate know you did and why. I don’t think there’s anything wrong with sending them a tweet or two either (given that Chipotle markets organic, local food, to the kind of people who like that sort of thing, I couldn’t resist this tweet). But that’s going to be about the extent of our activism on this. I think we need to be very wary of attaching their brand to our cause.
Any reasonably high-profile company is well-acquainted with astroturf activist groups like Watts’s. That’s why they usually have the right instincts out of the gate in terms of telling them to get lost. Let us hope that Chipotle continues to stay out of the debate, but if they are to succeed in doing that, we have to let them out. If we show our “appreciation” by taking ARs and shotguns into their establishments, I think they will likely cave into Moms Demand, not because they really want to, but because they just want their branding nightmare to end.
Mar 14, 2014
I can’t help but laugh at this story that promotes all sorts of negative political stereotypes, and all because neither the writer nor the interviewees appears to have done any homework on the issue.
So a Colorado shooting range is having problems maintaining & improving their facilities on membership dues. Becoming a 100% NRA club will make them more likely to qualify for grants from NRA that can pay for some of these improvements. Not to mention, NRA sanctions many shooting competitions, they provide firearm safety training programs, club insurance, and they are a pretty helpful resource for information for gun ranges looking to expand or improve. All of this falls into the category of General Operations and/or the NRA Foundation. None of it is the territory of NRA-ILA, a separate political entity with its own funding and another separate political action committee in NRA PVF.
Yet, Democratic members are complaining to the media that with a new requirement to join NRA as part of your membership to the shooting range that they are being forced to join “a fringe right-wing political organization” without actually making any effort to learn about the apolitical side of the organization that the club is turning to for help. But the advocates of the membership requirement aren’t exactly working to educate people when they are touting that they agree with NRA on politics, so it’s all okay.
A little education on both sides would go a very long way in minimizing hard feelings on the decision…
Dec 28, 2013
I find it funny that you can’t drive 10 miles in the Nashville area without passing a billboard for some kind of gun shop or seeing a gun shop from the road.
Even if many of them are very simple with their graphics and their messages, it’s entertaining. It certainly reflects that the gun culture is healthy even in an urban area.
However, there’s one that drives me up the wall in all of the years I’ve been driving through from the East Coast to Nashville area. It’s Outdoor Junction at exit 290 off I-40. In all of the years they have been advertising on billboards along I-40, they have only catered to men. They bill themselves as a place to buy “Men’s Toys” with a picture of a handgun. It would be one thing if, somewhere in their advertising corridor, they included a billboard catering to women. They don’t. They have multiple billboards to promote how they appear to only sell things to men. I can tell you right now that I would never be willing to walk in because their advertising sends a message that they simply don’t even acknowledge women as customers shopping for themselves as opposed to shopping for their men.
When I see some stores so obviously go out of their way to embrace the shooting culture as being only meant for men, it makes me wonder how long places like this will manage to hang on and stay alive in the evolving community. I’d be curious to know if those of you in other parts of the country see these kinds of gun shops that go out of their way to frame their products as only appropriate for men sticking around. Do they manage to pull of a bustling business in spite of ignoring outreach to the largest growing portion of the gun owning community?
Oct 31, 2013
There is a modest goal of legalizing open carry in Texas. Maybe I’m crazy, or just don’t have a true appreciation for all the subtleties of the use profanity for making one’s point, but I’m going to suggest outbursts like this are doing nothing except helping move more sensible activists farther away from the goal of legal open carry in Texas:
What is the goal of this? The dispute seems to be over the fact that the officers are arresting people for carrying antique firearms openly, which as far as I know is allowed in Texas. But this is a reason we have civil rights lawsuits. The purpose of civil disobedience is to act in a manner that draws attention to your plight and gains public sympathy for it. Its purpose is also to rouse people to action, by showing there are others out there who not only believe in the cause, but are willing to risk prison for it. This is not going to rouse anyone to action. It’s likely going to just alienate people, discourage them from joining our cause because they don’t want to be associated with things like this, nor antagonize law enforcement unnecessarily. None of these things are a winning formula.
Had this been New York, I think a carefully arranged act of civil disobedience would be admirable and appropriate. But even for civil disobedience, this isn’t the way to do it. This is also Texas, and not New York.
Folks need to look at where this issue really is. One quarter of Americans are still perfectly fine with banning handguns, and we still have a plurality that would like “more strict” gun laws, with only 13% wanting fewer laws. We don’t need to be fighting our fellow citizens, and certainly not law enforcement, every step of the way when it comes to moving the ball forward. There is a time and place for civil disobedience, but that place isn’t Texas, and the time isn’t over trying to get open carry legalized.
Oct 14, 2013
I think politicizing the anniversary of the Newtown massacre is a mistake. Yes, I know the other side will do it too, but that doesn’t mean it’s a smart tactic for us. Whether it feels emotionally satisfying or not, there are things the other side can do that we can’t get away with, and this is one of them. This is the same impulse that made the Republicans go over the cliff with the government shutdown. That the Administration would play theater and make people suffer was predictable, and that the media would do everything humanly possible to blame the GOP was a fore-drawn conclusion.
I don’t like fighting on ground that’s favorable to my opponents, and that’s exactly what this is. Whether it’s right or wrong, waving the bloody shirt is always going to be a stronger tactic for them than it is for us. Our best counter-tactic is to argue this represents shady billionaires and DC-insiders preying on people’s grief and vulnerability for political gain. The best counter-tactic is not to snatch the bloody shirt from those very people, and start waving it ourselves.
Sep 25, 2013
How many kids, teachers, and school administrators were “educated” by this?
The district responded to the flood of complaints it received by revising its policy to require schools to go into immediate lockdown if somebody is openly carrying a gun nearby.
No state or city laws prevent the open carry of legal firearms in Hillsboro. Had the man been on school property, he would’ve been arrested.
Surely the parents of the children are now much more supportive of guns in public and around schools as well. All it took was someone OCing a shotgun near the school to convince them! My favorite part of this?
It turns out, his mother is a teacher at Century High. He said she doesn’t know it was him carrying the gun, and that she’ll likely be upset when she finds out.
No word yet on whether he was grounded.
Jul 3, 2013
Tomorrow, a new group claiming to represent America’s gun owners will launch that claims to be for “SANE” gun ownership policies. Their goal is to be an alternative to NRA on everything, including safety and firearms education. Yet, they also proudly declare that none of them are experts on firearms handling. That’s not their only disconcerting claim.
R + P CEO Waylan Johnson, a petroleum magnate, tells Whispers he hopes the group will also set itself apart by being more focused on members than the NRA.
“The NRA represents the firearms industry. There’s not a lot of membership input,” Johnson says.
This was a quote, presumably said with a straight face, by a man declared as CEO by an organization that, according to their own “Join” page, doesn’t appear to have a mechanism for the membership to vote on the leadership. Meanwhile, the supposedly firearms industry-run NRA sent out 1,718,786 ballots for NRA members to vote on the organization’s leadership this year.
There are so many over-the-top claims that this group is making, it’s really laughable that any reporter gave their PR girl the time of day. For example, their number one priority for use of member dollars? “Helping to Identify and Get Treatment for the Mentally Ill to prevent firearms abuse” So are they a mental health organization with professionals on staff to identify mentally ill people? Everything I’ve found about the leaders indicate that their backgrounds are in IT, energy, and other business ventures. How will these non-medical professionals designate appropriate treatment that will supposedly focus on preventing firearms abuse? They say the money will be spent on such treatment, so prospective members have a right to know about these programs they claim they fund.
This new American Rifle & Pistol Association says that their number two priority in using member dollars is to “Promoting Programs Aimed at Getting Illegal Guns off the Streets,” yet they tell us nothing about how they define an illegal gun or what those programs look like. Does that mean member dollars will be used to fund gun buybacks that often collect and destroy antiques and collectible firearms? Does it mean to support a registration system for all gun owners? There are all sorts of things such a broad message could mean.
The group wants you to know that they will give members “Representation before Elected Officials on behalf of the Voice of the R+P Membership,” presumably by the leadership team who have never made any donations of any kind to any officials as documented by OpenSecrets.org and the Texas Ethics Commission. In fact, the leaders want members to feel good about the fact that they have no background in lobbying and that they are NOT experts in the new field they will start lobbying in. Talk about convincing members that they are in the very best of hands…
For a group that claims to want to make sure that gun owners are trained in “SANE” handling, they so far refuse to share any information about their supposed “competency training and certification courses” that will presumably be developed by their non-expert leaders who are not actually elected or accountable to members. Unlike NRA-ILA’s library of resources on various issues that explain topics and give a general indication of their positions on the specifics of firearms policies, R+P provides no such information for prospective members. I guess their idea of “member-centric” is to keep prospective members in the dark about their actual planned lobbying efforts so that it’s all a big secret until you hand over the cash.
I’m curious how long the 15 minutes will last for this new astroturf group. I’m also curious as to how long they will continue the Horrible Capitalization Abuse on Their Website.
UPDATE: It turns out that the Enemies Of Proper Capitalization Use are also not such fans of gun ownership as they claim. (Thanks to reader Andrew for the tip.)
Here are the screenshots that show the Connecticut converted to Texan Chairman of American Rifle & Pistol Association who is an Obama supporter who is pushing Bloomberg/MAIG’s gun control campaigns while helping to promote Moms Demand Action, a group trying to pressure companies to ban lawful concealed carry so gun owners can’t carry in public anymore and convince gun retailers to stop selling the most popular guns in the country.
Mike Bloomberg isn’t the only gun control supporting New Yorker that Peter Vogt promotes, as evidenced by his repeated sharing of a NY-based website run by people who believe that Senators supporting Second Amendment rights deserve the label of child killers.
Vogt is also a fan of New York lawmakers who are more interested in name-calling against gun owners than actually trying to have a conversation about concerns for Second Amendment rights.
These are the publicly shared views of American Rifle & Pistol Association’s leader, and it certainly does not appear to reflect someone who is actually concerned with protecting the individual right to bear arms. These shared materials reflect an ally of groups that would take your guns without a trial, ban licensed concealed carry owners from even getting a cup of coffee at the most common coffee house around, and who thinks that gun owners with concerns about federal legislation are just little jackasses.
Just like the concept of “member-centric,” I don’t think that the leaders of American Rifle & Pistol Association actually understand the concept of being pro-Second Amendment.
Jun 27, 2013
I’m just going to say “not helping.”
It’s clear that Dudley Brown knows nothing about the political climate here in Pennsylvania. I haven’t seen any PA-specific approval ratings lately that indicate any kind of serious plunge or distrust of Obama, but aside from that issue, their messaging for a blue state is terrible. Brown chooses to focus on questioning whether Pat Toomey is a true conservative. Well, in a state like Pennsylvania, being less than perfectly conservative (or at least perceived as such) is a good thing. It’s clear that Pennsylvania doesn’t want hardcore conservatives.
Fortunately, according to PoliticsPA, the ad buy is small and limited to cable.
Don’t assume that this is a “support Toomey no matter what he does to us” kind of post. I’m really not a fan at the moment, and I’m not going to forget it when the next election comes about. But as a person who actually lives in the suburbs of Philly that make such a huge difference in Pennsylvania elections, I can say that this messaging is off. I’m just glad that it is years out from the election. Hopefully Brown will stay out of Pennsylvania politics again because he clearly doesn’t know how to message to voters here. Portraying Toomey as someone the right expects to be an extreme conservative isn’t the way to win votes of squishy GOP and moderate voters.