i never watched any star wars movies, never read a harry potter book or watched any of the movies, and still i know a shocking amount about both universes, just through cultural osmosis.

and both those franchises have not aggressively advertised to me over decades to buy their products, have not lobbied politicians to the tune of billions to proliferate their products, they are not items inextricably linked with a certain distorted self-image, or been in the political focus for decades after having directly impacted the life and death of millions of individuals and families over the years.

suggesing that the only way to perceive the image gun manufacturers love to give their products is to constantly watch / read / hear their advertising directly, and then have your lawyers confirm that in court, is asinine.

they don't, but that's not the point. gun manufacturers and their advocate proxies DO know that firearms (especially tacticool looking ones) are appealing to insecure, mentally unstable individuals, cosplaying as law enforcement / soldiers / vigilantes. they deliberately pander to that demographic specifically with design and imagery choices, in development directions and ad campaigns. they lobby against thorough background checks.

the "they can't read people's minds" argument is dumb and boring if you look at this issue in an honest context.

Oh yeah those horrible murder weapons. Nevermind the fact that it's not about the guns, it's about the person holding it.

People like you would love to be disarmed and on your knees, forced to accept whatever insane dictates the elites come up with. And the elite would love it too.

Really blows my mind how many people out there would voluntarily choose to enslave themselves for the benefit of a handful of psychopath billionaire elites. Truly slaves that love their chains.

gun manufacturers know that a percent of their products are sold to those people and used for nefarious people, you're not wrong there. but they also know that a percent are sold to sportsmen, hunters, people interested in self defense, etc.

that is not analogous to selling a nuclear warhead to a terrorist organization.

even in the groups you list as problematic the vast majority do not commit violent crimes with the guns, they're more likely to form hacky militias and open carry in a subway.

a better analogy would be selling a nuclear warhead to a terrorist group to selling a pistol to the bullied kid in class. you know what they're using it for.



do you think as an american i have been exposed to more gun advertisements in my lifetime than star wars and happy potter?

This post was edited by thesnipa on Feb 16 2022 11:42am

and gun manufacturers have done everything in their power to make their product appealing to "the bullied kid", and make sure that they won't be excluded from purchasing guns. again, they spent billions to lobby against any kind of regulation, even to prevent research(!) into the impact of their products. portraying them as the victim in this is laughable from a non-american perspective.

ive been in the gun culture for my entire life, i mean i literally am a part owner of a gun store. do you have examples of what you're referring to with this?

had you made an honest attempt at addressing that whole paragraph and its context, specifically me pointing out how guns represent a much more impactful and direct element on someone's life than movie fiction, have been the subject of political discourse and lobbying efforts for decades, i might have considered giving that question a proper thought, maybe considering what kind of media you most likely consume, and how those franchises advertise in america.

seeing as this is obviously but a cheap attempt to dismiss the whole cultural osmosis argument by suggesting an unverifiable claim, i'll just say: it's irrelevant on its own. context matters.



sure:

im incredibly critical of the gun lobbying industry and our store does not sell any tactical type weapons in long guns. you're putting a motivation on my line of questioning that simply isn't reality. i was asking if you had examples of the gun industry trying to market guns to school shooter type people, rather than lumping them in with the likes of vigilantes and wannabe badass types that think open carrying a gun into a govt building is a protest. i dislike both of those groups and think they're bad for gun owners everywhere with what they do. paramilitary gun owners and i regularly have disagreements on what a good gun owner is, and what a good gun lobby should do in america.

i personally havent seen an ad for gun sales on tv, on the radio, or in print since like the 1990s. school shootings all but purged them. but if i spent a few days looking online on guns cookies will send me some in the sidebar of websites via google ads from time to time.

i mean, obviously they don't openly advertise to school shooters directly, lol - so i don't really know what you'd expect there. they do, however, market specifically to the fragile / compensating male crowd by invoking images of masculinity and power. they also do everything in their power to prevent that mentally unstable people could be excluded from obtaining firearms, and that gun violence could be researched sufficiently. you don't strike me as the person who genuinely needs help to put two and two together, and apparently you've already drawn similar conclusions and made according choices for your own store - which i find extremely commendable btw, considering it's a moral choice that hurts your own bottom line.

the main distinction i see is that you're trying to pry apart those groups, while i consider the venn diagram between wannabe badasses, law enforcement cosplayers, and insecure (bullied) kids that would turn into mass shooters largely a circle - at least when it comes their general psychological makeup and what type of imagery would appeal to them. that and the acknowledgement of centuries of political lobbying and the responsibility resulting from that.

Wasn't there another German gentleman who advocated for gun bans?