NRA Commercials

[jcwit]

Been watching "The Five" on FOX News, anyone else notice the new NRA Commercials.

Pretty good I'd say.

[Wild Bill 7]

Has to be driving the libs nuts.

[yancey]

I just saw one last night. ( The one i saw was great)

[Larry Gibson]

Nice commercials but they need to quit preaching to the choir and get the message over on ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN and even MSNBC........I'd rather they spend their advertising dollars fighting those networks in court to get their advertising there (that news would be good advertising in itself) than to tell me they support the 2nd Amendment.......duh! Most who watch Fox already understand and have their minds made up on the 2nd Amendment. They need to get their message out to ignorant mass that watch the other networks.

Note I am a Life Member of the NRA so I have a little wiggle room to criticize and make suggestions.

Larry Gibson

[jcwit]

Wish I had spent the dollars to become a life member years ago.

At this point in time I go 5 years by 5 years.

Now it will have to wait till my daughter settles up our estate.

[oldred]

Nice commercials but they need to quit preaching to the choir

I couldn't agree more and while I think the money may not be totally wasted I doubt very much it's going to do anything constructive, it could have been much better spent IMHO. I doubt the networks mentioned would allow such ads which is a real shame because they would reach the right people but then maybe we have it wrong and the NRA did their homework before spending the money, however as already said it appears to be a classic case of simply preaching to the choir.

[jcwit]

Well I see it another case where they are damed if they do and damed if they don't.

No way to win, why do we need to be such a divided nation, even here, I seriously doubt the NRA did not study as to where to spend the money.

Mayhap some here need to run for office at the NRA.

[Freightman]

Advertisement works been proven for at least 100 years, that is the way to fight ABC, NBC, CNN ,MSN or what ever ignorance of facts just breeds ignorance. MHO the squeekie wheel gets the grease!

[waksupi]

Fox is actually a pretty good place to run them. I saw recently even the liberals go to Fox for news, more than any other network.

[Larry Gibson]

Not "damning" the NRA at all. Just saying we need to broaden the audience. And a discussion amongst ourselves is not divisiveness at all. I think as a Life Member I am entitled to my opinion on what the NRA does?

Larry Gibson

[jcwit]

No more so than my yearly "5 years at a time" does.

It just seems that every time the NRA is brought on any forum, some speak out how they never handle their whatever they're doing as wrong.

It seems to be a never ending battle they fight even with their own members. I just don't get it.

[DCP]

I like them. NRA life has been as low as $300.00 so that's when I jumped

[462]

The NRA has been instrumental in California, of all places, in helping get some very onerous anti-gun laws overturned.

Fox is the most widely watched cable network and some of its programs have more viewers than the major networks. Put the money where the advertising dollar reaches the most people.

The NRA, regardless its warts -- perceived or real -- is the most proactive pro-gun organization.

[mongoose33]

The NRA has been instrumental in California, of all places, in helping get some very onerous anti-gun laws overturned.

Fox is the most widely watched cable network and some of its programs have more viewers than the major networks. Put the money where the advertising dollar reaches the most people.

Preaching to the choir.

I have always had mixed feelings about the NRA (I'm a member). Big on 2nd amendment, but the problem is that issue doesn't resonate with anti-gunners or, more importantly, the people in the middle who swing every election. Many view the 2nd amendment as a constitutional mistake allowing thugs to intimidate them with guns. In fact, IMO, by focusing so much on 2nd amendment and not on asking good questions, I wonder if they might be shooting all of us in the foot, i.e., focusing people on whether our society should amend the constitution to restrict it.

I wish they would focus more on asking questions and allowing the part of the electorate who can still think to draw conclusions. Things like "Chicago has some of the most strict gun laws in the nation; how has that worked out for them?"

Or "How does making laws which take guns out of the hands of law-abiding citizens affect criminals who already have indicated they won't follow the law?"

Or "Why is it that places with the strictest gun laws have the highest rates of crime?"

Or....there are a lot of them. Preaching to the left is a waste of time. Preaching to the right is a waste of money. It's in the middle where elections are won.

[Larry Gibson]

Or....there are a lot of them. Preaching to the left is a waste of time. Preaching to the right is a waste of money. It's in the middle where elections are won.

My point exactly, well said. Thank you

Larry Gibson

[Smoke4320]

Or....there are a lot of them. Preaching to the left is a waste of time. Preaching to the right is a waste of money. It's in the middle where elections are won.

My point exactly, well said. Thank you

Larry Gibson

I agree as well.. we really need a way to get to the swing voters .. make it about "Why is it that places with the strictest gun laws have the highest rates of crime?"
Continue to talk about how many crimes are stopped by law abiding citizens... ect ect..

[dtknowles]

I agree as well.. we really need a way to get to the swing voters .. make it about "Why is it that places with the strictest gun laws have the highest rates of crime?"
Continue to talk about how many crimes are stopped by law abiding citizens... ect ect..

The places that have the highest rates of crime have the strictest gun laws because they had such high crime rates to begin with and the crooks all had legal guns. The laws were passed so that Law Enforcement could haul you in for just having a gun even if they could not connect you with another crime. Cops liked that. Can anyone show that the crime rate rose more than it would have if the strict gun laws were not passed?

You can work on moderates but you will have to over come the group of moderates who would never consider arming themselves for self defense. Most moderates just move before they get to the point where they think they would need a gun to defend themselves. Why do you think they moved out of the cities and into the suburbs. Arming yourself and preparing for self defense is not a simple task, a lot of it is mental. Just going and buying a gun should not be the first step.

Does anyone have good data on how many crimes are stopped because someone (not a cop) had a gun? Can't make that argument without supportable nonbiased data.

As many have pointed out in the forum, the second amendment is not about self defense it is about a deterrent to tyranny. Even with the great lack of faith in our government nobody has any stomach for armed insurrection. Talking up the second amendment will not win you any moderates.

If you want to win swing votes, leave off with the gun control debate and focus on political reforms, conservative values, bringing down the deficit, fair taxes, ending corruption. Politicians who run on these issues will not be in favor of gun control so we will have achieved our goal without making it the focus (distraction from) of our main political motives. Do not divide, unite. When you divide you get smaller, when you unite you get bigger. Do not focus on the issues that divide us, focus on the issues that unite us. Try this focus on the issues that divide the opposition and focus on the issues that will bring some of them over to our side.

Tim

[thxmrgarand]

Perhaps in part what is intended is to motivate all of us pro-gun people to help right now in the campaigns of pro-gun people running for elected office. If you live in or near a state that has a chance of putting a Democrat US Senator out to pasture so that the senate can be controlled by someone not in line with Obama for the last 2 years of the Obama administration then please work on that campaign. Obama court appointments will be with us for a long time if Harry Reid remains in charge of the senate!

Democracy is not majority rule, it is rule by the majority who show up. It is not enough to only vote. Campaigns need people writing letters to editors, placing yard signs, going door to door, helping with mailings, and putting together candidate events. If we are not there representing our interests then our interests will not be a high priority or might not be represented at all.

[Recluse]

Nice commercials but they need to quit preaching to the choir and get the message over on ABC, CBS, NBC, CNN and even MSNBC........I'd rather they spend their advertising dollars fighting those networks in court to get their advertising there (that news would be good advertising in itself) than to tell me they support the 2nd Amendment.......duh! Most who watch Fox already understand and have their minds made up on the 2nd Amendment. They need to get their message out to ignorant mass that watch the other networks.

Note I am a Life Member of the NRA so I have a little wiggle room to criticize and make suggestions.

Larry Gibson

Several things:

• The networks you listed above often refuse to air NRA advertising. They especially do if they deem the ads "offensive" or "controversial" or "not in line with network values."

You can go to court all day and all week and you'll still lose. Been there. Done that. When I worked for AMc (NRA's agency in the 80's/90's), we took USA Today to court when they refused to run some of our full-page ROP ads. We lost.

Now, if you want to really push the Fairness Doctrine, that might help get your ads on television, but even then, doubtful because advertising is not considered journalism (although many consider journalism to be advertising). But do you really want Jon Stewart and Bill Maher and others getting free equal time on Fox or other conservative venues?

• Why not focus heavy with Fox viewers? Hell, we already know that around 90 percent of gun-owners are freeloaders when it comes to ponying up dues to ANY pro-gun/pro-2A organization or association. Why not continue to try and light a fire under the butts of those who already own guns and get them aboard rather than trying to convert the Philistines?

• The political spectrum where elected officials congregate is a numbers game--not an ideological game. Liberals are idealogues, but they speak in significant numbers, especially considering most politicians are liberals or liberal-leaning. See: RINO to prove my point.

Elected rats pay attention to numbers. We have a huge number of gun-owners, but obvious damn little conviction among us because only five or six of us out of every one hundred care enough to physically and fiscally show our support for the Second Amendment, and instead work overtime looking for excuses why not to join or support NRA or GOA or SAF or whomever.

We best rally those we have the best chances of rallying before we spend/waste money going after the lost causes who are perpetually addicted to CNN and MSNBC, et al.