Bad thing?

[Gerald Martin]

Or, people will buy them for their kids and just go shooting. mtmuley

I have no doubt that is exactly what folks who buy these will do.

I am talking about PR and marketing.

 

[mtmuley]

I have no doubt that is exactly what folks who buy these will do.

I am talking about PR and marketing.

Wish I had a crystal ball to determine a companies intention. If that same logo was on a Chipmunk .22, it would sell like hotcakes. My crystal ball says so. mtmuley

 

[Don Fischer]

You mean like the Barrett M82A1?

Not so sure what that is but probably! Non gun people don't know squat about guns, they are told what to believe by people like themselves that have their own agenda. This deal with guns being bad is caused by those that shoot other people with them, nothing more. Military guns are designed to kill people so in their minds any gun that looks like a military gun is designed to kill people. M-1 carbine doesn't seem to bother many people mostly because they don't have a clue what it is. Change that to M-2 and they will figure it out all to soon. These same people don't seem to realize that what holds on to their freedom is soldiers with guns they hate! Imagine a 10-22 with a bump stock! I don't think it would fly.

 

[Don Fischer]

Wish I had a crystal ball to determine a companies intention. If that same logo was on a Chipmunk .22, it would sell like hotcakes. My crystal ball says so. mtmuley

If a Chipmunk looked like an AR-15, even if it was a single shot, it would cause problems. One of the nicest 22 rifles I ever saw was, not gonna believe this, a mod 98 Mauser. Scaled down version to 22 LR I was told some were made for training guns by Mauser. 98 doesn't have the stigma of being called an assualt rifle though, simply a military rifle, you know, like the Springfield 1903!

 

[OntarioHunter]

If a Chipmunk looked like an AR-15, even if it was a single shot, it would cause problems. One of the nicest 22 rifles I ever saw was, not gonna believe this, a mod 98 Mauser. Scaled down version to 22 LR I was told some were made for training guns by Mauser. 98 doesn't have the stigma of being called an assualt rifle though, simply a military rifle, you know, like the Springfield 1903!

Go on GunBroker and you'll see WWII issue Springfields selling for $1K and up while the sleekest sporterized ones with a scope can barely fetch $500. Is it the paramilitary assault fans or collectors driving up the price of war guns ... or both?

I let my grandson shoot a full length Marlin .22 at targets with me. It's not easy for him to use because it is an adult weapon. Thus he knows when he is using it, shooting is primarily an adult thing to do. And I am fine with that. It's not a kid's toy. Similarly I don't have military looking guns in my arsenal because I'm no longer in the military. I have hunting guns because I hunt. Appearances can be deceiving ... or by design they can be a purposeful reflection of one's true identity and moral values. My grandson will always know where his Papa stands on guns and violence. It's displayed in the guns I own.

 

[Gerald Martin]

Wish I had a crystal ball to determine a companies intention. If that same logo was on a Chipmunk .22, it would sell like hotcakes. My crystal ball says so. mtmuley

It is possible to understand that guns are guns regardless of how they look. It is also possible to understand that not all guns provoke the same emotional reaction among folks who don’t under my first sentence.

Trying to change the tone of national conversation about guns isn’t affected in a positive way when gun manufacturers use provocative marketing as their “go to” strategy.
“Just because I can, doesn’t mean I should”, seems appropriate in these cases,IMO.

 

[Hammsolo]

I am a teacher, gun owner, and obviously a hunter. My Dad, piles of uncles, and my best friend are vets. I am a very utilitarian person. I generally buy purpose built items.

What does “JR” stand for? Shouldn’t it be a JAR? What is the purpose of a JAR? Why’s it called a “JR?” Why is it marketed the way it is? Should JARs exist?

Click Wee1, and check it out. Hmmm…

Wee1

 

[drexal]

I think this type of marketing keeps the antis distracted with the "shiny new object". Absent their fascination with "ghost" guns, "black" guns, "military-styled" weapons, they are NOT going to disappear into oblivion. Their focus will be at next thing they can ban, and then the next and then the next, until they come for the one's that YOU believe in.

 

[longbow51]

I know several young ladies with accurized pink 10/22s who are pretty deadly on gophers. so nothing wrong with pink stocks if it gets girls into shooting/hunting.

Agree, though, this is a "poke the bear" move.

 

[VikingsGuy]

I think this type of marketing keeps the antis distracted with the "shiny new object". Absent their fascination with "ghost" guns, "black" guns, "military-styled" weapons, they are NOT going to disappear into oblivion. Their focus will be at next thing they can ban, and then the next and then the next, until they come for the one's that YOU believe in.

It’s not about the 10% most extreme on one side poking the 10% most extreme on the other side that will decide the issue, it is what the 80% in the partially disinterested middle ultimately decide is “acceptable and normal”. And the 2A will mean nothing if 90% of Americans find guns scary and dangerous.

 

[VikingsGuy]

Some days my cynical self wonders if it is Bloomberg behind the hyper enthusiasm for bump stocks, rare breed FRT triggers, DIY “solvent traps”, 80% lowers and “kiddie ARs”. These fringe items are doing more harm to long term gun owner interests than anything Mothers Demand Action could ever hope to do.

 

[Gerald Martin]

It’s not about the 10% most extreme on one side poking the 10% most extreme on the other side that will decide the issue, it is what the 80% in the partially disinterested middle ultimately decide is “acceptable and normal”. And the 2A will mean nothing if 90% of Americans find guns scary and dangerous.

STOP MAKING SENSE.

We all know the 90% will understand the wisdom of our logic if we say it often enough and are provocative enough in our displays. Uncle Ted showed us the way.

Or maybe it was “Fred Bear showed us the way.”?

 

[mtmuley]

Wow. mtmuley

 

[drexal]

It’s not about the 10% most extreme on one side poking the 10% most extreme on the other side that will decide the issue, it is what the 80% in the partially disinterested middle ultimately decide is “acceptable and normal”. And the 2A will mean nothing if 90% of Americans find guns scary and dangerous.

I wonder if this is how California got to where they are? I wonder how the stats stack up. The scare tactics do not stop at the "scary" guns... but it might end up with you needing a bullet button on your 10/22 that had to be converted to bolt action and can only legally hold a 5-round magazine. But that's cool since you can still lend it to your son as long as you log it in with an FFL following a background check...

 

[VikingsGuy]

I wonder if this is how California got to where they are? I wonder how the stats stack up. The scare tactics do not stop at the "scary" guns... but it might end up with you needing a bullet button on your 10/22 that had to be converted to bolt action and can only legally hold a 5-round magazine. But that's cool since you can still lend it to your son as long as you long it in with an FFL following a background check...

Not sure what all that is supposed to mean, but Cali got where it is because the middle 80% no longer had any interest in fighting this issue and abdicated to the anti-10%. Our job in other states is to engage the 80%, not antagonize it. Engagement does not result in bans on 10/22s it results in the 80% realizing 10/22s present them no risk and that would mean left of center politicians need to find a different wedge issue to win in the suburbs. Winning for the 2A means making guns a non-issue for suburban soccer moms. Losing 10/22s will be casued by extreme positions that lose the 80% and result in in giving Bloomberg carte blance with draft these things.

Just ask the anti-LEO folks in Minneapolis how this works - they went to the extreme and got their beloved "de-fund" ballot initiative destroyed in a city that absolutely would have bought into the kumbaya lingo of the "Health and safety dept instead of police dept" if done quietly. Now there is actually funding for more cops than before in the budget and the city council got removed from any element of police oversight.

Absolutists rarely prevail long term in democracies.

 

[CowboyLeroy]

I think the marketing is tacky, but I'm mostly upset that kids aren't being started on bareback mossberg slug guns like I was.

 

[drexal]

Not sure what all that is supposed to mean, but Cali got where it is because the middle 80% no longer had any interest in fighting this issue and abdicated to the anti-10%. Our job in other states is to engage the 80%, not antagonize it. Engagement does not result in bans on 10/22s it results in the 80% realizing 10/22s present them no risk and that would mean left of center politicians need to find a different wedge issue to win in the suburbs. Winning for the 2A means making guns a non-issue for suburban soccer moms. Losing 10/22s will be casued by extreme positions that lose the 80% and result in in giving Bloomberg carte blance with draft these things.

Just ask the anti-LEO folks in Minneapolis how this works - they went to the extreme and got their beloved "de-fund" ballot initiative destroyed in a city that absolutely would have bought into the kumbaya lingo of the "Health and safety dept instead of police dept" if done quietly. Now there is actually funding for more cops than before in the budget and the city council got removed from any element of police oversight.

Absolutists rarely prevail long term in democracies.

Cali got the way they are because they guilted enough people into thinking that guns have more to do with violence than bad human behavior. At the same time, they gas-lighted anyone sitting on the fence or pro-2nd into submission. There will always be another fight for the antis, and they will not give up until we end up like the UK.

 

[lifesupport4u]

No issue with rifles for kids. Marketing them like any other child’s toy should cause some pause and doesn’t sit well with me. Hopefully those who purchase it will not disregard the responsibility that comes with gun ownership - no matter what color the stock, caliber, mag capacity or action.

 

[Gerald Martin]

Cali got the way they are because they guilted enough people into thinking that guns have more to do with violence than bad human behavior. At the same time, they gas-lighted anyone sitting on the fence or pro-2nd into submission. There will always be another fight for the antis, and they will not give up until we end up like the UK.

How do you propose to keep the rest of the states in the US from having the same thing happen there?

Very few people make decisions based solely on logic about any issue. We are generally more motivated in our decisions by how it affects us emotionally than pure logic.

Most folks absolutely certain they won’t accept restrictions of their 2nd Amendment rights aren’t intellectually honest with themselves that they already have accepted restrictions because they agree that restrictions concerning felons owning firearms and certain military weapons and weapons of “mass destruction” should be off limits for everyone to own.

Personally, I don’t identify with the 10% on either end of the pro-gun/anti-gun spectrum. I am unwilling to associate with either extreme.

Maybe I am just a snowflake or something, but I have to think if I as an avid hunter and unapologetic gun owner am uneasy being around “Tacticool Chad” and the folks carrying around AR’s at public rallies and protests, how do others with much less exposure to guns and gun owners feel about guns after seeing those kinds of displays?

I am convinced the 80% do not come away with a feeling of solidarity and support for gun owners and everyone’s 2nd Amendment rights after seeing that type of “proud gun owner” behavior.

Personally, I am convinced that a lot of gun owners don’t understand or maybe don’t care that we are losing the “culture war” when it comes to the general public’s view of black guns and guns in general.

Gun manufacturers’ methods of marketing of black guns and tactical gear aren’t doing gun owners any favors when it comes to actually protecting our 2nd Amendment rights from legal challenges.

They might be doing gun owners a favor by ensuring everyone has enough ammo and weapons to keep the gubmints “jack booted thugs” from prying our weapons from our “cold dead hands” when the supposedly inevitable civil war requires gun owners to shoot their fellow Americans to protect their rights. But, if it gets to that point…., didn’t we learn our lesson from the first American Civil War?

 

[FairWeather]

Why can’t people just be happy with the cricket, or other youth 22lr? I think the ultimate issue with the JR-15 is that it’s designed to familiarize young children with the functions and ergonomics of the AR platform. Any other rifle platform, perhaps save for the AK, and this wouldn’t be an issue. No body is arguing that a 22lr mauser would be bad for kids to learn on. The problem is the AR platform has been used by numerous children to gun down their classmates. In light of that, teaching them how to use one from a young age doesn’t seem like such a good idea. If the parents are irresponsible gun owners, and let their AR fall into their troubled youth’s hands, ignorance maybe the last/only thing keeping the kid from doing irreparable damage to the whole community. For the record, I am an army combat veteran and AR owner, and I do not think “black rifles” are evil. I just think there is such a thing as age appropriate firearms, and that goes beyond weight, LOP, and recoil. I’m sure I’m in the minority on this forum, but that’s my 2¢.