Staggering ignorance and bigotry

[cockercas]

is this going to run into night 2 tonight. i like them, there funny

[libs]

" Max Starkey And i bet they were all pompous twits,lets hope they all have an accident with their Guns!!! "

 

Wow, nice people. Don't hurt the fluffy bwunny wabbit but lets hope people fall on their shooters...

[leeds chimp]

grr wont let me comment now :lol:

[BRAD1927]

Forgot to mention I placed a comment saying Andy Murray has a SGC well done for praising him LOL

[Reece]

I can see the page again now but I can't comment.

 

I reckon ban ban guns needs a bit more than just birds with guns if you are seeking a serious platform of educating people!

 

 

I suggest garnering support from the USA too.

 

I agree to that. Whoever started the page should include more serious stuff.

 

" Max Starkey And i bet they were all pompous twits,lets hope they all have an accident with their Guns!!! "

 

Wow, nice people. Don't hurt the fluffy bwunny wabbit but lets hope people fall on their shooters...

 

It is a bit hypocritical. Apparently it's unacceptable to kill animals but they seem to think it is perfectly acceptable to shoot humans - did you see that post about someone who apparently threatened to shoot someone who was about to shoot a pigeon? Despite what the anti gun people say about us, I don't think we're the ones with "psychological issues".

 

Ban guns has responded with this:

We had a most entertaining evening on here last night. Scores of pro shooting types (gun junkies) descended upon our page to take pot-shots and attack our cause. They blasted us with their poisonous myths just as humans, animals and our dear countryside get blasted with their toxic lead shot. It was an organised attack which proves we are winning and getting under their skin – they have even in desperation started a Facebook page called ‘ban–ban guns’ – most amusing.

Their closed minds are not interested in facts, logic and in many instances the right to life. They are only interested in their RIGHT to shoot and in most cases kill and poison. Each one of them is a self-appointed expert demonising foxes, badgers and any one that finds their ‘hobby’ disturbing or repulsive.

Over two years this page has been going and a wealth of facts have been collected that render all the arguments we heard last night illogical or just plain wrong. Did any of them bother to research the page before they started to post with six guns blazing? No not a single one, if they had they would have tried to form new arguments instead of regurgitating the old decaying myths and garbage. Musing over their opinions leads you to believe the moon is more likely made of cheese - If only closed minds came with closed mouths…

We make no apology for deleting and banning 99% of the attack as this page in not and never has been here for the gun junky to air his or her propaganda, or to patronise and abuse us. This page is for free thinkers who will not be intimidated into thinking what a small minority (that need guns in their lives) would bully us into believing. We will continue to delete and ban those that demean, belittle or try to shout us down – WE DO NOT BOW OR ENTERTAIN BULLIES YOU WILL NOT SHOOT US DOWN!

Thank you to the members who stood up to be counted last night and messaged us that an attack was underway. I was out at a party and unable to get too involved other admin are on holiday.

 

They say we are not interested in facts, but I have not seen the anti gun activists post a single fact on that page. All the facts were from the shooting supporters. And it is the anti gun activists who seem to have closed minds - backing away from reasoned debate which wasn't even remotely offensive, and then having the cheek to call themselves "free thinkers". Of course, they'll always try to run away from the truth!

Edited August 4, 2012 by Reece

[Thunderbird]

 

It is a bit hypocritical. Apparently it's unacceptable to kill animals but they seem to think it is perfectly acceptable to shoot humans - did you see that post about someone who apparently threatened to shoot someone who was about to shoot a pigeon? Despite what the anti gun people say about us, I don't think we're the ones with "psychological issues".

 

Ever the paradox when it comes to animal rights mentals. :no:

[libs]

https://www.facebook.com/paultovey01?ref=pb

 

I'm almost certain that's the administrator for the page. Any super constructive social engineers or (mass)debaters fancy adding him and print-screening some hilarious messages for us all to read?

 

I bet he is a lot more reasonable when he is communicating under his own name..

[Thunderbird]

Christ he fell out the ugly tree and hit a few on the way down didn't he?

 

[Scully]

The quote at post 98 is even more rabid than the ones I used to encounter on the LACS site,and is almost comicallly like some fanatical loony cult,which will tolerate no opinions contrary to those of its own misguided beliefs.They can function as a group,so long as that group doesn't want to operate beyond the boundaries of its influence(in this case FB)which will only consist of the sort of rhetoric you see.To operate outside of these boundaries(to be taken seriously)means they would have to be willing to take part in reasoned and intelligent debate.In such a debate their arguments wouldn't survive scrutiny,and their 'facts' shot down in flames when they are asked to substantiate them,and they are well aware of this.Therefore they will spout their 'facts' on their forum,where they fell safe,but will not venture outside it,and can delude themselves,and through the method of censorship,their members.Hence the desperate repeating of their beliefs following your attacks on their forum.

I found on the LACS website that most of these 'facts' came from the popular press,and when subjected to close examination simply didn't hold water;the 'fact' that someone had told them of an incident they would then consider to be a 'fact',seemingly because it furthered their agenda, but they would constantly fail to produce the goods when I asked for factual details.

Frustrating.

[cockercas]

Scully, sounds like your favourite quarry to hunt is anti.

[Scully]

Scully, sounds like your favourite quarry to hunt is anti.

Mmmm...I used to spend quite a lot of time on the LACS forum.Quite sad really!

It's a no win situation really,because in the event you actually destroy their argument with reasoned debate or irrefutable,substantiated facts,they change the subject or just simply call you names! :blink: You just cannot reason with these people.

[cockercas]

Who's running the ban ban guns site? Your legend. I <3 KELLY. So knowledgeable

[MM]

they seem to now be joining the Ban BAN GUNS page and kicking off there.

[Thunderbird]

I think it's right that they don't get censored, it will **** them right off when every silly comment they make gets a nice reasoned reply.

 

Even the RSPCA supports the deer cull FGS....

[cockercas]

At least ban ban guns isn't just deleting all there comments.

[Cottonseed]

I was appalled by the ignorance of some of the comments, particularly that handgun crime is caused by the numbers of gun owners who didn't surrender their pistols in l998.

 

If you write posts against their message, you will only be censored as they are fascists.

 

The best tactic is to pretend to support their cause and provide disinformation. In that way they will become a laughing stock and completely undermined. If these tactics are good enough for governments, they're good enough for our fight. Save reasoned argument for avenues which allow all points of view.

 

Sadly, most of the dismal ***** involved in this ArseBook campaign have no knowledge of guns except for what they have seen on the so-called films emanating from Hollywood where almost all guns depicted are misused. The fact many of them believe only the potential oppressors of ordinary people at some future time--the police and military--should hold firearms is more frightening than anything. None of the posts I was able to access mentioned black kids with illegal guns aping the **** culture of hip-hop and rap heroes which is lauded in mediums such as MTV and ArseBook.

 

To attack that culture has the potential to derail the thrust of the arguments, if handled carefully. Try it.

Edited August 4, 2012 by Cottonseed

[englishman-in-wales]

I've tried to stay away from it to be honest, but reading some of the posts has made my blood boil, so i've added my two penny's worth and i'm either going to get banned or bombarded with abuse...either way, i dont really give a ****...they sound like most of them are inbred anyway...

[m3vert]

I cant believe the **** that is being spouted on that page! A page full of idiots!! Everyone is entitled to their opinion and I fully support their right to lobby to have guns removed from society but at least post up the truth and not utter ****!!! Raging!!!

[CheatingRabbit]

Hi all,

 

First post - so newbie alert! I've been reading the forum for a few weeks and this thread is the prime reason for signing up.

 

I've not been shooting long - a couple of years on and off but more seriously over the last few months. I'm enjoying myself greatly at the moment, smashing clays (sometimes...).

 

I've read this thread from the beginning and I like to express some grave concerns, but before I start, I'd like to confirm that I am not anti shooting in any way (that is I am not trolling)

 

I fully believe that the FB page is a travesty of the truth, with certain facts being distorted to "prove" a certain point of view. I also expect that the people who maintain this are rabid antis, who will not listen to a reasoned and cogent argument other than to call it lies. They may be split into 3 broad groups

1) Anti bloodsports / animal rights

2) Class warriors - out to give the toffs a bloody nose

3) Genuine anti-gun campaigners

 

Not that this really helps us, other than to "know our enemy"

 

However, whatever reason they have for being ant-gun, reasoned argument will not work - every attempt to enter into a debate has resulted in comment deletion and a repost of the same bigoted point of view. This is the problem with the "web zealot" they believe, wholeheartedly, that their position is right and we are wrong; far away from the grey areas of reality that we inhabit.

 

Some of their points are valid - Hungerford, Dunblane & Cumbria events were awful events and they have handed the anti a massive PR bonus. We moan when a FAC/SGC is revoked (usually because it is personal), we can't tell if a certain revocation would prevent an incident of course - but, assuming that it would do, I reckon most members here would be all for it)

 

Everytime, someone mentions one of these incidents, we must accept that the firearms used were held legally (at that time) and then point out that these events, however horrific, were caused by an individual who stepped outside the laws regarding Murder (and not just firearms law)

 

Animal rights - we must police ourselves in this respect - every raptor that is killed illegally, every injured bird left undispatched or any incident of percieved cruelty (even smacking misbehaving dog) is an own goal. We cannot afford to lose any more of the moral high ground.

 

However, I guess we all know this!

 

My real concerns are around the behaviour of people who are trolling the FB site. We are individually accountable for anything we say or do on-line, but more seriously, we (shooters) as a community will be judged by these actions. It will not take long for the antis to find this thread (if they haven't already) and it will be used against us.

 

In this case I strongly advocate dis-engaging from any campaign against the ban guns page (including the ban ban guns page) - we will not win! Sure a few complaints through the FB mechanism is a good thing, however there is no "right of reply" on FB so they can spout their **** unchallenged - Let them they'll end up looking like prize <insert word of choice>, but posting/trolling spamming/flaming the page is counter productive - we'll end up looking as bad as them.

 

Remember - never argue with an idiot, they will drag you down to their level nad beat you with experience!

 

Thanks for reading this far

 

Take care all

 

CR

[Cranfield]

I agree with the last post entirely.

By just posting the detail on here, you are giving them the much wider audience and breath of publicity they yearn.

Just ignore them.

[Paddy Galore!]

https://www.facebook.com/paultovey01?ref=pb

 

I'm almost certain that's the administrator for the page. Any super constructive social engineers or (mass)debaters fancy adding him and print-screening some hilarious messages for us all to read?

 

I bet he is a lot more reasonable when he is communicating under his own name..

now there's a face for radio

[Reece]

Hi all,

 

First post - so newbie alert! I've been reading the forum for a few weeks and this thread is the prime reason for signing up.

 

I've not been shooting long - a couple of years on and off but more seriously over the last few months. I'm enjoying myself greatly at the moment, smashing clays (sometimes...).

 

I've read this thread from the beginning and I like to express some grave concerns, but before I start, I'd like to confirm that I am not anti shooting in any way (that is I am not trolling)

 

I fully believe that the FB page is a travesty of the truth, with certain facts being distorted to "prove" a certain point of view. I also expect that the people who maintain this are rabid antis, who will not listen to a reasoned and cogent argument other than to call it lies. They may be split into 3 broad groups

1) Anti bloodsports / animal rights

2) Class warriors - out to give the toffs a bloody nose

3) Genuine anti-gun campaigners

 

Not that this really helps us, other than to "know our enemy"

 

However, whatever reason they have for being ant-gun, reasoned argument will not work - every attempt to enter into a debate has resulted in comment deletion and a repost of the same bigoted point of view. This is the problem with the "web zealot" they believe, wholeheartedly, that their position is right and we are wrong; far away from the grey areas of reality that we inhabit.

 

Some of their points are valid - Hungerford, Dunblane & Cumbria events were awful events and they have handed the anti a massive PR bonus. We moan when a FAC/SGC is revoked (usually because it is personal), we can't tell if a certain revocation would prevent an incident of course - but, assuming that it would do, I reckon most members here would be all for it)

 

Everytime, someone mentions one of these incidents, we must accept that the firearms used were held legally (at that time) and then point out that these events, however horrific, were caused by an individual who stepped outside the laws regarding Murder (and not just firearms law)

 

Animal rights - we must police ourselves in this respect - every raptor that is killed illegally, every injured bird left undispatched or any incident of percieved cruelty (even smacking misbehaving dog) is an own goal. We cannot afford to lose any more of the moral high ground.

 

However, I guess we all know this!

 

My real concerns are around the behaviour of people who are trolling the FB site. We are individually accountable for anything we say or do on-line, but more seriously, we (shooters) as a community will be judged by these actions. It will not take long for the antis to find this thread (if they haven't already) and it will be used against us.

 

In this case I strongly advocate dis-engaging from any campaign against the ban guns page (including the ban ban guns page) - we will not win! Sure a few complaints through the FB mechanism is a good thing, however there is no "right of reply" on FB so they can spout their **** unchallenged - Let them they'll end up looking like prize <insert word of choice>, but posting/trolling spamming/flaming the page is counter productive - we'll end up looking as bad as them.

 

Remember - never argue with an idiot, they will drag you down to their level nad beat you with experience!

 

Thanks for reading this far

 

Take care all

 

CR

 

You raise some good points, but I disagree with the part about disengaging with a campaign against "ban guns" on the grounds that we "will not win". This ban guns group is intent on spreading lies about guns and shooting, and through sheer ignorance seem to be winning. Ignoring this problem is not a good idea.

 

Also, how did libs find out who the group admin for "ban guns" is (or supposedly is)?

Edited August 4, 2012 by Reece

[MM]

It still seems to be a big talking point this one. they are spouting what they believe to be the truth, but most of it is just random facts plucked from the net. If we cant beat them, well i aint joining them. Lets just let them dig a big hole, and watch as they throw their arguments into it.

[Reece]

It still seems to be a big talking point this one. they are spouting what they believe to be the truth, but most of it is just random facts plucked from the net. If we cant beat them, well i aint joining them. Lets just let them dig a big hole, and watch as they throw their arguments into it.

 

Facts? You mean you found a fact on that page?

[CheatingRabbit]

Hi Reece

 

>You raise some good points

 

Thanks

 

>but I disagree with the part about disengaging with a campaign against "ban guns" on the grounds that we "will not win"

 

I understand your point, but lowering ourselves to "tit for tat" retaliation against such entrenched and frankly illogical views does us no good either

 

>Ignoring this problem is not a good idea.

 

Do you have any ideas on how communicate with such a closed minded group. I certainly haven't. At the moment, a dignified silence seems a better course of action.

 

CR