Some folks on this forum question why I, an ardent supporter of the 2nd Amendment and gun-owner's rights, use the term "Assault Weapon" and "Assault Rifle" when talking about semi-automatic guns. I wanted to explain my reasoning a little deeper here. I do this because I recognize the trap the knowledgeable Antis are setting for us.
We should all be familiar with Saul Alinsky's 12 Rules for Radicals. The Antis have studied them and religiously use them in their fight against gun ownership. Here are a couple that I think come into play when the Antis brand phrases on guns, and as a result gun owners:
RULE 5: “Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon.” There is no defense. It’s irrational. It’s infuriating. It also works as a key pressure point to force the enemy into concessions.
When we shy away from terms like Assault Rifle, trying to disown it as if the term could bury our cause, we embolden the Anti's weapon of ridicule. I am well aware of the origin of the terms "Assault Weapon" and "Assault Rifle". This history is boring and irrelevant to most people who have never even fired a gun. This is their trap!
RULE 9: “The threat is usually more terrifying than the thing itself.” Imagination and ego can dream up many more consequences than any activist.
The Antis want us, gun-owners advocates, to fear the terms Assault Rifle and Assault Weapon. This allows them to equate this fear with their twisted depictions of harm they want people to think flows naturally from certain kinds of firearms.
RULE 11: “The price of a successful attack is a constructive alternative.” Never let the enemy score points because you’re caught without a solution to the problem.
The Antis' goal - the elimination of all guns. Their Solution? Eliminate categories of weapons one at a time. Their solution to mass murder is the elimination of Assault Weapons. Once they have been eliminated, they will quickly forget the "compromise" and move on to eliminating handguns by labeling them something like "Personal Executors" (remember Saturday Night Specials); and labeling shotguns something like "Lead-Sprayers".
So, when I use the term Assault Weapon or Assault Rifle here or on other forums, I do it with the knowledge that the Antis want me to fear using this term. Obviously using terms the Antis want me to fear using is not going to defeat them. We have to think bigger than that; beyond arguing semantics and definitions. That's a matter for a different discussion. But, when I embrace using Assault Rifle to describe an AR type rifle, I move the discussion to what I want to discuss and not get entrapped arguing about definitions and origins of terms. The term loses its punch.
We should all be familiar with Saul Alinsky's 12 Rules for Radicals. The Antis have studied them and religiously use them in their fight against gun ownership. Here are a couple that I think come into play when the Antis brand phrases on guns, and as a result gun owners:
RULE 5: “Ridicule is man’s most potent weapon.” There is no defense. It’s irrational. It’s infuriating. It also works as a key pressure point to force the enemy into concessions.
When we shy away from terms like Assault Rifle, trying to disown it as if the term could bury our cause, we embolden the Anti's weapon of ridicule. I am well aware of the origin of the terms "Assault Weapon" and "Assault Rifle". This history is boring and irrelevant to most people who have never even fired a gun. This is their trap!
RULE 9: “The threat is usually more terrifying than the thing itself.” Imagination and ego can dream up many more consequences than any activist.
The Antis want us, gun-owners advocates, to fear the terms Assault Rifle and Assault Weapon. This allows them to equate this fear with their twisted depictions of harm they want people to think flows naturally from certain kinds of firearms.
RULE 11: “The price of a successful attack is a constructive alternative.” Never let the enemy score points because you’re caught without a solution to the problem.
The Antis' goal - the elimination of all guns. Their Solution? Eliminate categories of weapons one at a time. Their solution to mass murder is the elimination of Assault Weapons. Once they have been eliminated, they will quickly forget the "compromise" and move on to eliminating handguns by labeling them something like "Personal Executors" (remember Saturday Night Specials); and labeling shotguns something like "Lead-Sprayers".
So, when I use the term Assault Weapon or Assault Rifle here or on other forums, I do it with the knowledge that the Antis want me to fear using this term. Obviously using terms the Antis want me to fear using is not going to defeat them. We have to think bigger than that; beyond arguing semantics and definitions. That's a matter for a different discussion. But, when I embrace using Assault Rifle to describe an AR type rifle, I move the discussion to what I want to discuss and not get entrapped arguing about definitions and origins of terms. The term loses its punch.
