Do you ever wonder if Gun Control Advocates lurk or even sign up on Gun Forums?

Echo40

Member
Joined
Sep 25, 2017
Messages
4,040
Reaction score
7,858
Lately, I'm beginning to wonder if certain gun forums have been infiltrated by Gun Control Advocates based on observation of users with strangely pro-Gun Control statements as well as a habitual presumption that their fellow forum-goers aren't responsible with firearms.

I've noticed a phenomenon in which certain users automatically presume that others are completely ignorant if not totally lacking in common sense when it comes to self-defense.

Honestly, it seems that in any given discussion, there's always a handful of users who speak to others in the most condescending way possible, treating them as if they're completely irresponsible without anything whatsoever to indicate that they don't know what they're doing.
They make all manner of statements as if the people they're speaking with aren't aware of their rights, how their firearms work, of basic firearms safety, despite the fact that obviously those who post here are Firearms Enthusiasts who otherwise wouldn't be here at all if they didn't know about these things, especially not posting from accounts which were created years ago.

For example, if someone starts a discussion on the topic of Home Defense, someone will start talking down to them about how they need to be aware of their local laws, be responsible for every shot that they take, to be mindful of the fact that walls don't stop bullets, that guns don't work the way they do in the movies, and every other presumptuous, condescending statement possible.
It would be one thing if the topic creator opened the thread by stating that they're new to self-defense and that they were seeking advice, but that isn't the sort of thread I'm referring to here. It's just users who seem to be under the impression that the majority of other users are negligent or incompetent to the point that they're a danger to themselves as well as everyone around them.

Unsurprisingly, these users also tend to make statements in favor of Gun Control and against the enactment of laws which uphold the Second Amendment such as Constitutional Carry.

So I have to wonder just who these users really are and what side they're on when they think so lowly of their peers that they treat every thread like it's an opportunity to instruct their fellow users on firearms safety, their rights, and everything else that's relevant to self-defense as if they're ignorant, irresponsible, or otherwise completely negligent of these things.
Furthermore, I cannot help but feel as if it's intentionally manipulative, as these presumptions are clearly never put to rest, nor do the users who make them ever appear to be reassured by their fellow users when they attempt to inform them that they know what they're doing, regardless of how informed they clearly are or what their service credentials would indicate to the contrary. They just keep right on responding to threads with their presumptuous, condescending rhetoric.

Regardless of intent, it's a very rude way to address others which isn't conducive towards civil discussion nor maintaining a friendly atmosphere to go full Mrs. Shields by arbitrarily responding every discussion they read on Firearms, Self-Defense, and the Second Amendment with comments which more or less equate to; "You'll shoot your eye out, Kid!"

In addition, I have witnessed the all-the-more suspicious activity which is essentially users attempting to scare other users out of using firearms for self-defense by bombarding them with horror stories of how they had better have a darn-good lawyer or they'll lose their money, their house, their job, and their freedom if they dare to shoot someone in self-defense.
Alternatively, they'll attempt to make others doubt in their ability to safely use a firearm under stress by telling horror stories of folks who forgot to switch off the safety or didn't keep a firm grip on it so it was snatched away by their attacker and used against them, or how someone unintentionally shot someone innocent because they panicked, or any number of other such cautionary tales which end in death or imprisonment.
As if that wasn't enough, there are always the horror stories of accidental death, betrayal and grisly murder by family and friends who were able to get their hands on firearms which either weren't adequately secured or otherwise left openly accessible to a third party.

I don't know about the rest of you, but that doesn't strike me as the sort of way that a Firearms Enthusiast speaks, but rather that of a Gun Control Advocate who is going out of their way to discourage people from exercising their rights by owning, carrying, and using their firearms for self-defense.
 
Last edited:
Register to hide this ad
True anti-gunners absolutely do, but usually get booted pretty quickly.

My biggest other hobby is fishing. Fly, ice, spin, whatever, I love it. I also discuss fishing online, and if Person 1 goes to one of those boards and says "fishing is murder, your hobby does nothing but torture poor innocent fish and you should feel bad", they'll get some discussion, then eventually likely the boot.

Person 2 might come on and say "use of these kind of worms or those types of bait fish can lead to the introduction of invasive species" or "that should be a fly only stretch" or "the water temp is too hot, we need to close this stretch until temperatures drop" or "we need bag limits or seasons to protect this resource". They find some disagreement, some agreement, and a general acceptance of the discussion.

On gun forums, the gun equivalent of Person 1 is gone, and Person 2 is run-off or gone. I support constitutional carry, disagree with the efficacy of most proposed and enacted gun control laws, and also think it's entirely reasonable for people to discuss limits on gun ownership or control even if I disagree with it. I've got friends, including some I hunt with, that own guns (including formerly some truly fun rifles and machineguns) that after whichever mass shooting or other tragedy changed their minds regarding the availability of ARs and similar, and especially after seeing the widespread online gun community's shouting down of anyone discussing the role of gun availability after the murder of innocents.

It's also entirely reasonable to discuss the horror stories, there's always something to be learned by the mistake of another that can help you not make the same mistake.
 
I agree with the OP and there is no doubt in my mind that you are correct. However, I more often see "pro" 2nd Amd. people with the attitude that if your not doing it my way YOUR WRONG. No constitutional carry because someone not as well trained as I think they should be can then carry a gun. Then there is the mine is better than yours crowd. gun, holster, school method of carry, etc. JMHO if ya want to lug around 3 guns, two knives, blunt force instrument, chemical agent, trauma kit, body armor... have at it. On the other hand slipping a mouse gun in your pocket as you walk out the door and calling it good,....cool. The anti's show their true colors mighty quick, it's those that are "on my side....BUT" that worry me.
 
Last edited:
Maybe there are some anti-gunners trolling these waters but I do have some disagreement, regardless.

Item:
For example, if someone starts a discussion on the topic of Home Defense, someone will start talking down to them about how they need to be aware of their local laws, be responsible for every shot that they take, to be mindful of the fact that walls don't stop bullets, that guns don't work the way they do in the movies, and every other presumptuous, condescending statement possible.

Have you ever noticed that some of our "Firearms Enthusiasts" around this campfire really do NOT understand the principles of self defense or the "impact", no pun intended, of using a firearm in self defense, home or otherwise? We see every manner of exceedingly powerful hand cannons and long cannons being advocated for defensive use with no thought to the impact of a miss, or an interior or, worse, an exterior wall penetration. So I don't think you should be SO hard on the members here who take a moment to be mindful of certain risks and remind other members accordingly.

Item:
In addition, I have witnessed the all-the-more suspicious activity which is essentially users attempting to scare other users out of using firearms for self-defense by bombarding them with horror stories of how they had better have a darn-good lawyer or they'll lose their money, their house, their job, and their freedom if they dare to shoot someone in self-defense.

I have less disagreement with that but, still, there are a great many firearms aficionados who have been sufficiently scared or at least badly influenced by various publications or, maybe, TV and movies, to NOT actually understand how the laws work, how the courts work, etc. So, again, let's not be too hard on our friends. Respectfully disagree and explain why; that's the job of anyone with better information.

Item:

Alternatively, they'll attempt to make others doubt in their ability to safely use a firearm under stress by telling horror stories of folks who forgot to switch off the safety or didn't keep a firm grip on it so it was snatched away by their attacker and used against them, or how someone unintentionally shot someone innocent because they panicked, or any number of other such cautionary tales which end in death or imprisonment.

On the assumption that someone on this Forum actually is aware of such an incident why is it incorrect to tell us about it? How does that diminish someone's love of firearms? It's silly to make up such a story, or to use something you saw on TV or in a movie, as an example, but a real life example in no way makes someone less of a Firearms Enthusiast.

As a matter of fact, one of the most important lessons we can teach anyone who keeps a gun for self defense at home or on his or her person is to understand the negative result of failing to shoot an attacker, etc.

Item the last:

As if that wasn't enough, there are always the horror stories of accidental death, betrayal and grisly murder by family and friends who were able to get their hands on firearms which either weren't adequately secured or otherwise left openly accessible to a third party.

I don't understand why telling firearms enthusiasts such grisly stories is a bad thing. We all need to remember what can happen if we are irresponsible with a firearm in the presence of children or unauthorized persons. And there is nothing anyone can do about someone who has bad intentions and knows where your firearms are because you thought you could trust that person.

And so it goes..........................
 
Lately, I'm beginning to wonder if certain gun forums have been infiltrated by Gun Control Advocates based on observation of users with strangely pro-Gun Control statements as well as a habitual presumption that their fellow forum-goers aren't responsible with firearms.

I am sure there are some that sneak in- they're mildly abrasive enough to cause a stir, but maybe not bad enough to get the boot. Some may join and lurk, you never know. The AFT and other agencies break laws all the time to promote agendas, why would it be any different on forums?
 
Last edited:
Guns....what guns....I don't need no stinking gun....

I'm faster than a speeding bullet...can leap over tall buildings and stop a speeding locomotive with my bare hands...

Books have been written about me I've been in the movies and on TV shows.....bring'em on. :D
 
Maybe there are some anti-gunners trolling these waters but I do have some disagreement, regardless.

Have you ever noticed that some of our "Firearms Enthusiasts" around this campfire really do NOT understand the principles of self defense or the "impact", no pun intended, of using a firearm in self defense, home or otherwise? We see every manner of exceedingly powerful hand cannons and long cannons being advocated for defensive use with no thought to the impact of a miss, or an interior or, worse, an exterior wall penetration. So I don't think you should be SO hard on the members here who take a moment to be mindful of certain risks and remind other members accordingly.

Not by any degree which merits the presumption that enough users are so incompetent without evidence nor warrants frequent replies to threads in such a condescending manner which implies negligence.

I have less disagreement with that but, still, there are a great many firearms aficionados who have been sufficiently scared or at least badly influenced by various publications or, maybe, TV and movies, to NOT actually understand how the laws work, how the courts work, etc. So, again, let's not be too hard on our friends. Respectfully disagree and explain why; that's the job of anyone with better information.

Granted, but I generally dislike those who just repeat stories they've heard ad-nauseam and are unwilling to accept alternative viewpoints of a less extreme nature which opposed their demoralizing commentary based on stories which obviously represent extreme situations.
Sensationalism sells, so most Journalists unfortunately report on things which are otherwise outlandish and thusly shouldn't be treated as average or common place by any stretch of the imagination.

Besides, who's to say that the writer of said story wasn't a Gun Control Advocate themselves and that the whole story was written/reported with a particular spin which serves to further their agenda, and now they're just mindlessly repeating it on raw emotional impulse?

On the assumption that someone on this Forum actually is aware of such an incident why is it incorrect to tell us about it? How does that diminish someone's love of firearms? It's silly to make up such a story, or to use something you saw on TV or in a movie, as an example, but a real life example in no way makes someone less of a Firearms Enthusiast.

As a matter of fact, one of the most important lessons we can teach anyone who keeps a gun for self defense at home or on his or her person is to understand the negative result of failing to shoot an attacker, etc.

Context is important here, obviously someone who otherwise spends the majority of their time discussing firearms in an enthusiastic manner, sharing range reports, pics, stories and posting positive comments about firearms for sporting/recreational purposes shouldn't arouse any suspicion in regards to their true feelings, as they're demonstrably fans with an overall positive attitude towards firearms.

Those which I find suspicious spend the majority of their time commenting on firearms strictly as weapons, with their commentary being of a decidedly negative, fear-mongering, and demoralizing nature.
In other words, practically all they have to say about firearms are reasons why folks shouldn't use them, cannot be trusted with them, how bad things will happen to those who use firearms, and how folks ought to require the approved written concent of an authority figure to own/carry/use a firearm.

I don't understand why telling firearms enthusiasts such grisly stories is a bad thing. We all need to remember what can happen if we are irresponsible with a firearm in the presence of children or unauthorized persons. And there is nothing anyone can do about someone who has bad intentions and knows where your firearms are because you thought you could trust that person.

There's nothing wrong with sharing cautionary tales of circumstances in which firearms have been misused, but it should always be in an encouraging way, not in an accusatory fashion, nor in a way which implies that one is better off not owning a firearm at all. It should strictly be used as a means to encourage responsibility and safety with firearms, not disarmament.

In addition, such cautionary tales ought to be counterbalanced with tales of how firearms were used lawfully to good effect to save lives by responsible individuals who were knowledgeable of firearms and did everything correctly. That's how teaching through example works, you cannot just tell people about the wrong way to do something, you have to tell them the right way as well, otherwise it's just half a lesson which only serves to discourage.
 
Last edited:
Of course the anti-gun crowd is here, in some form. I wouldn't be at all surprised to see recent comments posted to this forum used to say "See? Even former LEOs think there should be stricter laws!"
 
Is so, so what?

Its a big tent. If someone says something you don’t like, scroll on past.

We don’t need to engage in groupthink. Someone who disagrees with your viewpoint isn’t a traitor to the cause. Their cause is just different than yours.

I’d welcome a flat-out anti-gunner to join and post here. As long as they stayed within the forum rules, who cares?
 
Remember Polymath Pioneer?

He was like watching a building burn to the ground.

I had a front row seat.

Alas, he seems to have come and gone by the time that I arrived, and his profile/posting history appears to have been deleted because searching for him only turns up results in which others refer to him in the past tense.

However, from what I can gather, he was a Gecko45-esq Keyboard Commando who made all sorts of outrageous claims in regards to his shooting prowess, such as being able to score extremely tight groups after dark during a rainstorm and with his vision obscured by some means.

I'm not sure what he has to do with this thread in context, but then again this isn't the first time that some legendary poster from a bygone era was brought up in one of my threads, so I suppose that I should be flattered that my threads evoke memories of such amusing, larger-than-life characters who have been remembered long after they have gone.
 
Back
Top