It's clear that they talked to no one but FUDDs!

Firearms related political discussion forum

It's clear that they talked to no one but FUDDs!

Postby Greg on Sun Mar 03, 2013 11:25 pm

Last edited by Greg on Tue Mar 05, 2013 12:32 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Diesel Boats and tube radios forever!
User avatar
Greg
 
Posts: 358 [View]
Joined: Mon Jul 30, 2007 8:24 am

Re: It's clear that they talked to no one but FUDs!

Postby St. Olaf on Sun Mar 03, 2013 11:31 pm

I don't know what a FUD is, but it's easy to see that there's a problem with the questions asked on the survey and the information given to the people who took the survey.

As Tony Cornish says, I wouldn't give it much credibility.

Keep talking to your legislators.

:flag:
Those who beat their swords into plowshares will end up plowing for those who didn't.
User avatar
St. Olaf
 
Posts: 420 [View]
Joined: Wed Feb 06, 2013 12:08 pm
Location: The Woods

Re: It's clear that they talked to no one but FUDs!

Postby Lights on Mon Mar 04, 2013 6:17 am

Total Star BS.
NRA Life Member
NRA Certified RSO
User avatar
Lights
 
Posts: 366 [View]
Joined: Tue Jan 29, 2013 10:14 pm
Location: Hastings, MN

Re: It's clear that they talked to no one but FUDs!

Postby JJ on Mon Mar 04, 2013 7:07 am

Actually that would not come as a suprise to me. In recent talks with my family (all gun owners), They almost all said they supported universal background checks. The reasoning being, "what do I have to hide?".

It was not until I brought up the fact that any such law would be unenforceable, without a full blown registration, that the light clicked on.

For those of us that see this for what it is (backdoor registration scheme), we need to do a better job of exposing it for what it is. We need to actively target the casual gun owners, and spell this out very clearly.
"a man's rights rest in three boxes: the ballot box, the jury box, and the cartridge box." Frederick Douglass
User avatar
JJ
 
Posts: 3541 [View]
Joined: Wed Sep 16, 2009 9:43 pm
Location: Princeton

Re: It's clear that they talked to no one but FUDs!

Postby xd ED on Mon Mar 04, 2013 7:23 am

Not that the strib ever has much credibility in a discussion of firearms, as their opinions tend to set the reporting agenda, they might at least get some of the principle facts correct:

Background checks now are conducted only for sales of handguns and semiautomatics by licensed dealers


That will come as news to all the FFLs that have handled bolt gun transfers for me.
User avatar
xd ED
 
Posts: 9216 [View]
Joined: Fri Jun 18, 2010 6:28 pm
Location: Saint Paul

Re: It's clear that they talked to no one but FUDs!

Postby greenfarmer on Mon Mar 04, 2013 7:54 am

xd ED wrote:Not that the strib ever has much credibility in a discussion of firearms, as their opinions tend to set the reporting agenda, they might at least get some of the principle facts correct:

Background checks now are conducted only for sales of handguns and semiautomatics by licensed dealers


That will come as news to all the FFLs that have handled bolt gun transfers for me.



They must be "assuming" all criminals can pass background checks then, because it's always evil black rifles and handguns used in crimes.

The strib is such a crappy newspaper. So one sided about every aspect they ever report on. My parent's cancelled their sunday subscription when i was a kid, and i never subscribed. I refuse to! Won't even pay to read their online crap.. It's all spewed from their agenda driven, and biased opinions. But they have to charge for everything because of having to pay those overpaid and overhyped fools like senile sid hartman.
greenfarmer
 
Posts: 343 [View]
Joined: Fri Feb 08, 2013 11:43 am
Location: kinda by the SW Metro, but a little further out in the sticks.

Re: It's clear that they talked to no one but FUDs!

Postby St. Olaf on Mon Mar 04, 2013 9:24 am

Keep in mind that most people see no problem with universal background checks and even express surprise that we don't already have it.

They are actually puzzled as to why we would have background checks on some sales and NO background checks on other sales.

This includes legislators.

That's a fact.

It's going to be a tough fight to keep it from being passed, so we need to increase our polite, reasonable but firm communications with legislators.

:flag:
Those who beat their swords into plowshares will end up plowing for those who didn't.
User avatar
St. Olaf
 
Posts: 420 [View]
Joined: Wed Feb 06, 2013 12:08 pm
Location: The Woods

Re: It's clear that they talked to no one but FUDs!

Postby Holland&Holland on Mon Mar 04, 2013 9:26 am

I dunno, maybe a dumb suggestion but do you think maybe we should quit calling them Fuds? I mean if we want them to vote against it maybe coming up with an insulting moniker is not the most productive stategy. Just saying...
User avatar
Holland&Holland
 
Posts: 12661 [View]
Joined: Mon Jan 12, 2009 9:17 am

Re: It's clear that they talked to no one but FUDs!

Postby St. Olaf on Mon Mar 04, 2013 9:40 am

What IS a FUD anyway?

If it's a derogatory, it surely shouldn't be part of a discussion like this.

Can the macho stuff......it will work against us.

:flag:
Those who beat their swords into plowshares will end up plowing for those who didn't.
User avatar
St. Olaf
 
Posts: 420 [View]
Joined: Wed Feb 06, 2013 12:08 pm
Location: The Woods

Re: It's clear that they talked to no one but FUDs!

Postby grousemaster on Mon Mar 04, 2013 9:44 am

St. Olaf wrote:What IS a FUD anyway?

If it's a derogatory, it surely shouldn't be part of a discussion like this.

Can the macho stuff......it will work against us.

:flag:



Exactly. Name calling and outrageous claims have no place on this forum.
01 FFL
NRA Life Member
NRA Business Alliance
User avatar
grousemaster
 
Posts: 3493 [View]
Joined: Sat Feb 12, 2011 1:44 pm
Location: Waconia

Re: It's clear that they talked to no one but FUDs!

Postby tletourneau on Mon Mar 04, 2013 10:53 am

FUD stands for Fear, Uncertainty and Doubt. It is a standard method of swaying individuals through fear mongering, half truths and other distortions. It is a time honored method for moving a discussion away from the facts and to cloud objectivity. :razz:

Sent from my EVO using Tapatalk 2
Tom

----------------------------------
Springfield XD-40 Service
Taurus PT-111 Pro (3rd Gen)
Desert Eagle .50AE Mark VII
User avatar
tletourneau
 
Posts: 158 [View]
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2011 11:28 am

Re: It's clear that they talked to no one but FUDs!

Postby Mn01r6 on Mon Mar 04, 2013 10:57 am

I believe the OP was actually trying to reference FUDDs (not FUDs).
User avatar
Mn01r6
 
Posts: 1233 [View]
Joined: Fri Sep 28, 2012 9:01 pm
Location: Playing Devil's Advocate

Re: It's clear that they talked to no one but FUDs!

Postby St. Olaf on Mon Mar 04, 2013 11:02 am

Thanks for the info.

Never heard of that before.

Probably best to never hear of it again.

:flag:
Those who beat their swords into plowshares will end up plowing for those who didn't.
User avatar
St. Olaf
 
Posts: 420 [View]
Joined: Wed Feb 06, 2013 12:08 pm
Location: The Woods

Re: It's clear that they talked to no one but FUDs!

Postby xd ED on Mon Mar 04, 2013 12:02 pm

Mn01r6 wrote:I believe the OP was actually trying to reference FUDDs (not FUDs).



Yep. FUDD, as in Elmer
Image
User avatar
xd ED
 
Posts: 9216 [View]
Joined: Fri Jun 18, 2010 6:28 pm
Location: Saint Paul

Re: It's clear that they talked to no one but FUDs!

Postby tletourneau on Mon Mar 04, 2013 1:23 pm

Ok, my bad. :sad:

Sent from my EVO using Tapatalk 2
Tom

----------------------------------
Springfield XD-40 Service
Taurus PT-111 Pro (3rd Gen)
Desert Eagle .50AE Mark VII
User avatar
tletourneau
 
Posts: 158 [View]
Joined: Wed Apr 27, 2011 11:28 am

Next

Return to Politics

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests

cron