Why are gun forums so vitriolic?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Keep in mind that the 2A issue strikes at the core of the statist, coercive government philosophy. Those who support such a philosophy just can't stand anyone being free to tell them that their wrong on any particular issue.

I've become convinced that much of the conflict is contrived and stirred up by anti-2A trolls that pose as happy, experienced shooters. Look at the post history of some of the most vitriolic members here. They never post about the guns they're shooting or projects they're working on. They just slam the NRA and try to make gun control sound reasonable and main stream.
 
We are in a paradise, we have very acknologed members, with years of experiences in several subjects firearms, training and reloadind.
We have them since the get to start, and that was the main idea and promulgue the use of firearms as sport and defense use.
We had our bad apples too, as everyone's in life.
Just visit, glocktal., Hk or AR15.c and will perceived the difference.
 
Keep in mind that the 2A issue strikes at the core of the statist, coercive government philosophy. Those who support such a philosophy just can't stand anyone being free to tell them that their wrong on any particular issue.

I've become convinced that much of the conflict is contrived and stirred up by anti-2A trolls that pose as happy, experienced shooters. Look at the post history of some of the most vitriolic members here. They never post about the guns they're shooting or projects they're working on. They just slam the NRA and try to make gun control sound reasonable and main stream.

very true. on other forums, this was often countered by the "do you even shoot, bro?" meme, which had a quite humorous beginning.
i think that a lot when i read posts in general the past few days of people supporting gun control, when i can't recall seeing any posts about them actually shooting.
 
very true. on other forums, this was often countered by the "do you even shoot, bro?" meme, which had a quite humorous beginning.
i think that a lot when i read posts in general the past few days of people supporting gun control, when i can't recall seeing any posts about them actually shooting.

Are you implying that your opinion on gun laws is more valid than someone else’s because you shoot more?
 
very true. on other forums, this was often countered by the "do you even shoot, bro?" meme, which had a quite humorous beginning.
i think that a lot when i read posts in general the past few days of people supporting gun control, when i can't recall seeing any posts about them actually shooting.
Are you implying that your opinion on gun laws is more valid than someone else’s because you shoot more?

No, I think the point taliv is making is that someone who shoots at all, is probably more valid than the opinion of someone who doesn't shoot at all, doesn't own any firearms in reality and is just an internet troll.
 
No, I think the point taliv is making is that someone who shoots at all, is probably more valid than the opinion of someone who doesn't shoot at all, doesn't own any firearms in reality and is just an internet troll.

Is it?

So unless you’re involved in shooting you can’t inform yourself on the topic? Does this apply to all things? Taxes, healthcare, education, etc, or just shooting?

If someone has an uninformed opinion, educate them. But just because someone sees something differently than you doesn’t mean you’re right because you pull a trigger more often than they do.
 
Locally we have an AM talk show personality who has recently stepped into the gun control debate with comments supporting an AWB. I'd love to debate him and try to point out that it's pretty hard to ban something you can't accurately define, but that's not the nature of his show. The thing is he admits to being uneducated about firearms but has become one of those who cry "We need to do something!"
 
What frustrates me are the absolutists that will accuse anyone who disagrees with them in the slightest of being anti 2A, anti-gun and most certainly anti- American.

Choose 100 issues, and if you only agree with them on 99, you're a commie.
 

Yes. Please note the word "probably"

So unless you’re involved in shooting you can’t inform yourself on the topic? Does this apply to all things? Taxes, healthcare, education, etc, or just shooting?

You can inform yourself but as the saying goes, experience is the best teacher. And as for your examples, not sure I know anyone who is over 21 who has no direct experience with paying taxes, receiving health care or education.

If someone has an uninformed opinion, educate them. But just because someone sees something differently than you doesn’t mean you’re right because you pull a trigger more often than they do.

You keep focusing on "more often" when I said at all. Difference between the two is vast.
 
You can inform yourself but as the saying goes, experience is the best teacher. And as for your examples, not sure I know anyone who is over 21 who has no direct experience with paying taxes, receiving health care or education.


You keep focusing on "more often" when I said at all. Difference between the two is vast.

To the first part, experience with shooting doesn’t make you an expert on how to prevent crimes with a firearm, mass shootings, etc. It may make you an expert on how to shoot.

To the second, fair enough.
 
What frustrates me are the absolutists that will accuse anyone who disagrees with them in the slightest of being anti 2A, anti-gun and most certainly anti- American.

I supported the idea of a background check that could quickly and accurately give me an approved/declined decision on the person's eligibility to purchase a firearm before there were background checks. I felt that if I could determine in seconds someone's credit was good enough to purchase something (run their credit card) I should somehow be able to check their eligibility for firearm purchase. It didn't seem like that strange a concept.
Having been involved in the process now for a few decades, I find that the two adverbs "quickly" and "accurately" are often missing from the reality.

Choose 100 issues, and if you only agree with them on 99, you're a commie.

I don't 100% agree with anyone because no one agrees 100% with me. And I'm good with that.
 
If dumb is the same as stupid, welcome to my one prejudice, stupid people. Mother nature must love them, She made so many.
There's a huge difference between stupid and ignorant; most of the antis are simply ignorant because of either their upbringing, or the public education system or the MSM and their agenda. If you can find some that have a rational thought process and approach this in a calm, logical manner with facts, many can be persuaded to at least see and understand our side of things.
 
To the first part, experience with shooting doesn’t make you an expert on how to prevent crimes with a firearm, mass shootings, etc.

At the risk of being accused of sado-necro-equine behavior (beating a dead horse) I'll revisit this once more. On the surface your statement is true. Mostly because being familiar with firearms doesn't make one an expert on the law nor human behavior. However, in the broader range of Things Discussed On Gun Forums, which kinda is the focus of this thread, one is likely to be more familiar with most topics if they have, at some point, pulled a trigger in a legitimate setting. than someone who never has gotten GSR on their hands.

Just as in your other examples of taxes, healthcare, etc. I would listen to someone's opinion on healthcare who has actually experienced the health care system over someone who has read about it. Someone who has direct knowledge of dealing with doctors, doctor's waiting rooms, waiting lists, prescription costs et. al. over someone who has never been sick.
And as for taxes, I studied them at length in school, taxation without representation yada yada.... Then I got my first paycheck and learned the difference between gross and net pay.

It may make you an expert on how to shoot.

May. Only. I've known people who have been shooting for years and can't hit the broadside of a barn. From inside the building.

To the second, fair enough.

Thanks.
 
There's a huge difference between stupid and ignorant; most of the antis are simply ignorant because of either their upbringing, or the public education system or the MSM and their agenda. If you can find some that have a rational thought process and approach this in a calm, logical manner with facts, many can be persuaded to at least see and understand our side of things.

I have no issue with ignorant people, they can be cured of their ignorance with a healthy does of knowledge. Stupid people cannot or will not learn, they cling to their beliefs because that's the way they feel about it. As you say, there is a huge difference between the two.
 
Piss off. :D

J/K, but seriously, if you find this forum contentious, then there are a LOT of other forums that you would NOT want to participate in. Automotive, and especially performance automotive, is generally much, much worse IME. Also IME, one of the most civil gun forums on the internet is RFC. Especially the CZ/BRNO forum. I think the membership tends to be older there, and by that point in life, a lot of people have gotten to a more "seasoned" age, and they've figured out that it's not worth the trouble to be an a$$ to their fellow members.

They are a cantankerous bunch of old farts. Civil? Not so much...
 
Are you implying that your opinion on gun laws is more valid than someone else’s because you shoot more?
while i wasn't specifically addressing gun laws, as the topic of this thread is more broadly decorum on gun forums (all topics), it seems obvious that not all opinions are created equal

If someone has an uninformed opinion, educate them. But just because someone sees something differently than you doesn’t mean you’re right because you pull a trigger more often than they do.
right, but my money would be on the person with experience.

as an example, on this forum and others, 10 years ago, i posted a lot and gave a lot of advice on ARs because i shot every day, attended several classes a year, competed in 3gun and high power, and built several ARs per year. (I also was active in improving gun laws in my state) in the past few years, i mostly keep my mouth shut unless i'm asking a question because my experience is dated and i there's no reason for anyone to value my opinion on, for example, why one mfg is better than another. i think the crux of the problem described in the OP is that most people think their opinion is worth a lot more than it really is, and they should listen more and post less.
 
while i wasn't specifically addressing gun laws, as the topic of this thread is more broadly decorum on gun forums (all topics), it seems obvious that not all opinions are created equal


right, but my money would be on the person with experience.

as an example, on this forum and others, 10 years ago, i posted a lot and gave a lot of advice on ARs because i shot every day, attended several classes a year, competed in 3gun and high power, and built several ARs per year. (I also was active in improving gun laws in my state) in the past few years, i mostly keep my mouth shut unless i'm asking a question because my experience is dated and i there's no reason for anyone to value my opinion on, for example, why one mfg is better than another. i think the crux of the problem described in the OP is that most people think their opinion is worth a lot more than it really is, and they should listen more and post less.


I really need to learn to split these posts...

Anyway, to your first point, that’s my bad for making the assumption.

To the second, I don’t discredit experience at all, but I think experience has it’s limitations. Just because someone has expertise in some areas (shooting sports, reloading, whatever) doesn’t make them an expert on all things gun.

Even if it did, using an appeal to authority is a poor tactic when debating a topic. People should argue the facts, not their opinions and expertise or the opinions and expertise of others.

To the bold part, I agree completely.
 
At the risk of being accused of sado-necro-equine behavior (beating a dead horse) I'll revisit this once more. On the surface your statement is true. Mostly because being familiar with firearms doesn't make one an expert on the law nor human behavior. However, in the broader range of Things Discussed On Gun Forums, which kinda is the focus of this thread, one is likely to be more familiar with most topics if they have, at some point, pulled a trigger in a legitimate setting. than someone who never has gotten GSR on their hands.

Just as in your other examples of taxes, healthcare, etc. I would listen to someone's opinion on healthcare who has actually experienced the health care system over someone who has read about it. Someone who has direct knowledge of dealing with doctors, doctor's waiting rooms, waiting lists, prescription costs et. al. over someone who has never been sick.
And as for taxes, I studied them at length in school, taxation without representation yada yada.... Then I got my first paycheck and learned the difference between gross and net pay.



May. Only. I've known people who have been shooting for years and can't hit the broadside of a barn. From inside the building.



Thanks.

Anecdotal stories aren’t evidence though. It’s a sample size of one (or a small sample size).

Two people can experience similar situations very differently and neither necessary give an accurate portrayal of the situation.

And of course we’re back to that appeal to authority logical fallacy.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top