Why are Anti-Gunners better at getting important Labels to stick?

[Aim1]

They may not invent the word, and the word may not initially have a bad connotation, but after anti-gunners get a hold of it, it is. And it stays in the American psyche and mainstream after that.



Let's look at some of these words:



1.) High Capacity Magazine:

Not high capacity, standard capacity. But High Capacity Magazine sounds much worse and unnecessary for your average civilian to have.


2.) Gun Show Loophole:

Your average person doesn't know what this is, but it's obviously a legal loophole that is bad, being used to skirt laws, and needs to be fixed!


3.) Assault Rifle:

It's not just a semi-automatic rifle, it's an 'Assault' Rifle! That's worse. It's a weapon of war that only the military needs, not your average citizen.

Don't mind that a portion of the 2nd Amendment is for citizens to have guns to protect against a tyrannical government and this is one of the type of weapons you'd need.

Surprisingly no one has used "Assault Pistol" or "Assault Shotgun" successfully in the mainstream yet.


4.) Cop Killer Bullets:

Most any bullet can kill a cop, but these ones are designed specifically to kill cops apparently! Where do they sell these awful bullets, Cabelas?


5.) Common Sense Gun Laws:

You mean gun control. Who wouldn't want common sense gun laws though, right?


6.) Gun Violence:

You mean violence with a gun? Do we call stabbings, "Knife Violence", attacks with a car "Car Violence", or baseball attacks "Baseball Bat Violence"?

No, sounds good though and has a nice ring to it.




So why are the anti-gunners so good at manipulating these words for their cause and making them stick?



And why can't Pro-2nd Amendment folks get the correct terms or better terms into the mainstream? (I'm sure it's largely the liberal media. I could be wrong.)


Have no doubt though, that these labels do work against us. When your average citizen sees: assault rifle, gun violence, gun violence epidemic, gunshow loophole, cop killer bullets and so forth they believe something needs to be done. And anti-gun laws get passed with the help of these labels.



I'm sure I missed some words, but that's all that I could think of now.

 

[Deanimator]

They get away with what they're ALLOWED to get away with.

I let them get away with NOTHING.

 

[230RN]

Because they have full-time dedicated staffs who are expert in word manipulation and the science of semantics/public relations to generate these word-snags.

These wordsmiths also have compliant and highly cooperative information channels (Hollywood, the MSM, "hippies"* et cetera) to propagate their propaganda, disinformation, and bull bleep.

We can only be "reactive" to this kind of propaganda effort once it gets into the channels of communication.

Terry, 230RN

* My personal generic term for low-information dreamers who rarely encounter reality.

 

[Sam1911]

The same basic phenomenon is why it is far easier to be an opposition party than the party in power, to be a guerrilla leader than to make the trains run on time, to criticize than create.

All it takes is words, repeated enough times in the right way to create perception. Come up with a catchphrase and really sell it and the general population will adopt it if it is an easy way to describe something. But reality is always harder, more complicated, more boring, less sensational, less catchy, less alarming, less headline-grabbing than buzzwords.

Anti-gunners have had success with some of this stuff (though a few of your terms have been used by pro-gun folks, anti-gun folks and subject matter experts for decades, though we now object to them). But all sorts of folks use it.

Why do we have a "Patriot Act?" Because the American people probably wouldn't have swallowed it if it had a name that actually described what it would DO.
Why do we yell derisively about "Obamacare"? Because it is easier to sneer at it (with plenty of reason, sure) than to stop each time you mention it and give its full name and the list of reasons you don't like it.
Why did so-called fiscal conservatives call the financial policies of liberals "Tax and Spend" economics since the 1930s? Because it was catchy and made the other side sound like filthy socialists. (As though every government everywhere does not literally tax the people and spend their money.)

And look, we're trying to do the same stuff with things like the daftly self-defeating, "Modern Sporting Rifle" barf name for ARs. No body seems to be listening, which is fine, but "we"'re trying.

Why do we adopt terms like "Castle Doctrine" or "Stand Your Ground," even though they're grossly misleading and fool our own side into thinking they do things they DON'T do? Because they sound great rolling off the tongue and it is hard for the other side to mount a simple sound-bite argument that denigrates them in the average person's mind.

 

[sherman123]

I absolutely despise the term "gun violence" as I feel it ignores all other forms of violent crime while focusing on an obvious anti freedom agenda. I did however read about the term "acid violence" to describe the act of acid being thrown on people in violent crimes overseas. And the British in particular use the term "knife crime" quite often which is another term I of course can't stand.

 

[OilyPablo]

Because the popular press is liberal and ignorant.

 

[TonyInFla]

OilyPablo got it exactly right.

 

[yokel]

The methods and teachings of Rules for Radicals by Saul Alinsky have been apparent in gun control activism, e.g., rule#7:

“Keep the pressure on. Never let up.” Keep trying new things to keep the opposition off balance. As the opposition masters one approach, hit them from the flank with something new.

 

[Sam1911]

Let's look at some of these words:

Ok.

1.) High Capacity Magazine:

Not high capacity, standard capacity. But High Capacity Magazine sounds much worse and unnecessary for your average civilian to have.

Ok...sure. Fine. But they are higher capacity than what came before them in firearms evolution, generally. After the M1 Garand, developers were looking for fighting arms with higher capacity magazines. The M14 and first version M16 magazines held 20, which was a big step up. But not quite as high capacity as the Soviets and Germans were playing with. So HIGHER capacity!!! Is a 30-round magazine a high-capacity magazine? Well, compared to 90% of other firearm designs, yes it sure is.

Do we sound a little silly arguing about it? Yes, we sure do.

2.) Gun Show Loophole:

Your average person doesn't know what this is, but it's obviously a legal loophole that is bad, being used to skirt laws, and needs to be fixed!

Agreed, of course. It isn't a loophole, it's just THE LAW. But when you want to change a law, the easiest way is to paint it in a negative light that overstates the case for you. I don't think the media invented this, I think it was introduced as a catchy term by the first Congrescritters who proposed a bill to change it in 2001.

3.) Assault Rifle:

It's not just a semi-automatic rifle, it's an 'Assault' Rifle! That's worse. It's a weapon of war that only the military needs, not your average citizen.

Don't mind that a portion of the 2nd Amendment is for citizens to have guns to protect against a tyrannical government and this is one of the type of weapons you'd need.

Yes, a real assault rifle is a select-fire (semi- and full-auto) weapon. No, "our" guns are not. Except that we'd like it if they could be and we fight to someday repeal the law that prohibits it. So we desperately want mainstream America to understand that OUR rifles aren't like these dangerous FULL-AUTO rifles ... which we also say we should have unfettered rights to.... wait, why are we drawing this distinction again? Seems likely to shoot us in the foot later, what?

And, GUN WRITERS and gun folks have used the term Assault Rifle for decades to describe the firearms we now get all prickly if anti-gunners call Assault Rifles. Sort of reminds me of other arguments over slang terms. "It's ok for US to use that word, but not for YOU people!"

Surprisingly no one has used "Assault Pistol" or "Assault Shotgun" successfully in the mainstream yet.

Oh? I have seen them. The guy who killed 12 people at the Washington Navy Yard was said to have used an "assault shotgun." And MD has a specific list of "Assault Pistols" you aren't allowed to own there.

4.) Cop Killer Bullets:

Most any bullet can kill a cop, but these ones are designed specifically to kill cops apparently! Where do they sell these awful bullets, Cabelas?

Wow, haven't heard that one much since about 1985. Back then it was a muddled mess that mixed up teflon coatings, armor-piercing handgun rounds, hollow-points, "Black Talon" ammo, and who knows what. Nothing much came of it. Then there was the recent flack over M855 5.56mm ammo and trying to equate it, but again, it didn't get a whole lot of traction and the issue was shelved.

5.) Common Sense Gun Laws:

You mean gun control. Who wouldn't want common sense gun laws though, right?

You want to make a list of proposed bills floated across this nation in the last 100 years and count how many of them their authors claimed to be "common sense?" Everything is common sense as long as you don't think to hard about it.

6.) Gun Violence:

You mean violence with a gun? Do we call stabbings, "Knife Violence", attacks with a car "Car Violence", or baseball attacks "Baseball Bat Violence"?

Yes, some groups also track "knife violence." 'Taint a whole lot of car violence around, comparatively speaking, and baseball bat violence would be impossible to track, I'd think. But sure, when the DOJ tracks killings by method, guns stand out as a pretty significant chunk. And they're scary.

Note, however, that "Assault Rifle Violence" hasn't become a catch phrase. There really isn't any, statistically speaking, while sure there is plenty of violence which involves the use of guns, predominately handguns. So it isn't like there's not SOME basis for the distinction.

Do Ford, Chevy and the AAA get bent out of shape when the press writes about "automobile accidents?" Do they decry that those should be only reported as part of a larger whole of "accidents?" There's lots of kinds of accidents! Many of them fatal! Why single out automobiles? It isn't fair!

Sounds kind of silly, to me. But if our grumbling about this can get the press and politicians to stop talking about "gun violence" I guess that's fine by me. I don't fancy our chances there, though.

 

[Captain33036]

Simple, they use the same tactic time after time.

1. Get in early, so that you can prep the field.

2. Create a lexicon that includes terms that are uninformative but contain highly negative, emotional elements.

3. Put forth an emotional argument. Emotional arguments are devoid of logic and thus, there is no debate or rational counter.

 

[Deanimator]

Simple, they use the same tactic time after time.

1. Get in early, so that you can prep the field.

2. Create a lexicon that includes terms that are uninformative but contain highly negative, emotional elements.

3. Put forth an emotional argument. Emotional arguments are devoid of logic and thus, there is no debate or rational counter.

Just refuse to play by their rules or use their terms of debate.

Doing that monkeywrenches their narrative.

As an added bonus, it sends them into an insane rage, frequently causing them to make "statements against penal interest".

 

[mnrivrat]

Because the popular press is liberal and ignorant.

Liberal certainly, but not stupid or ignorant.

The Media exists to influence minds (propaganda) . Wether they use their pulpit to sell you Viagra, or sell you the idea that guns are bad, they are good at what they do.

 

[OilyPablo]

Liberal certainly, but not stupid or ignorant.

The Media exists to influence minds (propaganda) . Wether they use their pulpit to sell you Viagra, or sell you the idea that guns are bad, they are good at what they do.

I actually agree with you. Their handlers are wily, smart and essentially invisible when the message is delivered by a fresh face who is largely ignorant.

 

[Sam1911]

Wether they use their pulpit to sell you Viagra, or sell you the idea that guns are bad, they are good at what they do.

Except they've been pretty poor at selling that idea to Americans for the last 20 years. If that's a goal of "them," then they suck at it.

 

[JSH1]

The Media exists to influence minds (propaganda)

Media exists to make money, no different than any other corporation.

 

[Elkins45]

Media exists to make money, no different than any other corporation.

Yes, but they have to be losing a LOT of it before they will jettison their deeply held idology. Witness the steadfast refusal of almost all leftist editorial boards to moderate their positions even when they know those positions are partly responsible for their decline in readership.

I'm pretty sure the Lexington Herald-Leader will continue to endorse policies and people vastly at odds with the values of the average Kentuckian right up until the day they close the doors for good. Given how dramatically the paper is shrinking I suspect that might be in my lifetime.

Those terms have gained traction because there is a giant media machine that wants them to.

 

[Deanimator]

Media exists to make money, no different than any other corporation.

Of course these days, they'll LOSE money to push an agenda, hence MSNBC and al Jazeera America.

 

[Deanimator]

Except they've been pretty poor at selling that idea to Americans for the last 20 years. If that's a goal of "them," then they suck at it.

As the saying goes, they've "saturated the market".

 

[GEM]

If you want to wah-wah about 'assault' rifles and weapons - go to Amazon and enter Gun digest assault - watch it fill in the terms and see all the nice gun world books.

That semantic battle is over. Defend the guns for their 2nd Amend. purpose and not bother to make them nice as you bend over for the antis.

 

[CoRoMo]

Surprisingly no one has used "Assault Pistol" or "Assault Shotgun" successfully in the mainstream yet.

They've coined those terms and more. But some will simply not stick.

Example from 3 years ago during their post-Sandy Hook honeymoon: http://twitchy.com/2013/02/08/anti-gun-left-coins-a-new-term-assault-magazine/

"Assault Magazine" didn't have the staying power that others have had. Point being; not all anti-2A labels succeed.