Diversity and Inclusion in the 2A Community

[TGO David]

Regardless of gender, race, religion or sexual orientation, the Second Amendment is an acknowledgement of a base right that all people have to defend themselves against aggression. 

Last week, I had the chance to sit down with our very own @Tiffany Johnson and Aqil Qadir from @Citizens Safety Academy to talk about what it really means to be welcoming to more folks in the 2A Community.

The voter demographic is changing dramatically in the United States.  Even if you set aside partisan politics, you can see a change in the things that are important to the younger generations coming up behind us.  Corporations hiring for jobs are already seeing the shift in values among Millennials and Gen-Z'ers, who care less about how much money they make and more about how much their employer does for the community and what social programs they support. 

These "kids" take those values with them to the voting booth and very few of them are being raised to appreciate and respect firearms.  Many of them view guns negatively.  A few might become supporters of gun rights after a negative experience opens their eyes, but others will be galvanized against guns as a result.

Racially, the United States is visibly becoming less white.  Is that blunt?  YES.  But the Caucasian demographic is no longer the majority the it was for the first 200 years of our nation's history.  The failure to see that sets-up Second Amendment supporters for larger failures with significant missed opportunities and jeopardizes fundamental freedoms. 

If you have any doubt of that, consider how many of our nation's restrictive gun laws have origins in 1968 California where legislators began tearing away the right to bear arms because of the civil rights movement.  Or how many laws in states like Illinois and New York and New Jersey hurt the inner-city residents the most.  You  know... the ones who statistically need access to firearms the most for their own protection.  You might also be surprised to hear what role the NRA played in that.

This is a pretty heavy subject and one that I suspect a lot of folks either (a.) assume we're already doing a fine job with, or (b.) haven't really given a whole lot of thought to.  Tiffany and Aqil are hilarious, brilliant and fearless and are passionate about breaking down barriers and busting up stereotypes.  I had a BLAST talking with them and think you all might enjoy listening to the conversation.

At the very least, I hope that it challenges you. 

 

https://www.shootersnation.com/podcast/016-tiffany-johnson-on-widening-the-2a-tent-diversity-and-inclusion-in-the-firearms-community/

 

 

PS:  Yep, that's totally a spectrum of paracord for the background.  Tactical Diversity.

[MacGyver]

A shift in mindset - running towards inclusion and diversity instead of away from it - may be the single most important thing we can do in the coming generation to concrete the rights that the last generation has fought to obtain.  

[Grand Torino]

https://www.commdiginews.com/politics-2/millennials-understand-constitution-they-dont-care-65322/

One of the most troubling trends that this age group is currently dealing with is the idea that a guy like Bernie Sanders, who once boasted that no one deserves to make more than a million dollars and routinely defends communism, somehow has a legitimate case to be president of the United States.

Why could that be?  What in the world could be driving all these impressionable young minds to believe in policies that are not only destructive but are completely antithetical to the foundation of the country and what makes it great in the first place?

Well, it’s actually quite simple.  There have been a million articles out there about how millennials are uninformed as a result of not paying attention or not caring.  In fact, it is more likely that millennials know what makes America great and just don’t care.

A Pew poll says that 40 percent of young people apparently think that the First Amendment, one of the most important if not the most important pillars of our freedom, should not apply to speech that minorities might find offensive.

 

This clearly implies that young people are familiar with freedom of speech, they know it’s a part of the fiber our country, they just don’t care.  Feelings are more important, which leads to the obvious conclusion that feelings have the power to trump any aspect of the Constitution, which is of course extremely troubling.

The last poll doesn’t have anything to do with the Constitution and the idea of changing our founding document in order to not hurt anyone’s feelings, but it speaks volumes about the mental fortitude of the millennial crowd.  According to a poll taken this past January, 10 percent of college grads (yes, graduated from college) believe that Judge Judy is a Supreme Court Justice.  Just let that sink in for a few moments.

Young people today believe that socialism is cool, our founding document should be altered in order to not hurt anyone’s feelings and that a television star is a member of the most powerful governing body in the land.

If that doesn’t sound a deafening alarm in your head, then I don’t know what will.

[hipower]

21 minutes ago, Grand Torino said:

https://www.commdiginews.com/politics-2/millennials-understand-constitution-they-dont-care-65322/

One of the most troubling trends that this age group is currently dealing with is the idea that a guy like Bernie Sanders, who once boasted that no one deserves to make more than a million dollars and routinely defends communism, somehow has a legitimate case to be president of the United States.

Why could that be?  What in the world could be driving all these impressionable young minds to believe in policies that are not only destructive but are completely antithetical to the foundation of the country and what makes it great in the first place?

Well, it’s actually quite simple.  There have been a million articles out there about how millennials are uninformed as a result of not paying attention or not caring.  In fact, it is more likely that millennials know what makes America great and just don’t care.

A Pew poll says that 40 percent of young people apparently think that the First Amendment, one of the most important if not the most important pillars of our freedom, should not apply to speech that minorities might find offensive.

 

This clearly implies that young people are familiar with freedom of speech, they know it’s a part of the fiber our country, they just don’t care.  Feelings are more important, which leads to the obvious conclusion that feelings have the power to trump any aspect of the Constitution, which is of course extremely troubling.

The last poll doesn’t have anything to do with the Constitution and the idea of changing our founding document in order to not hurt anyone’s feelings, but it speaks volumes about the mental fortitude of the millennial crowd.  According to a poll taken this past January, 10 percent of college grads (yes, graduated from college) believe that Judge Judy is a Supreme Court Justice.  Just let that sink in for a few moments.

Young people today believe that socialism is cool, our founding document should be altered in order to not hurt anyone’s feelings and that a television star is a member of the most powerful governing body in the land.

If that doesn’t sound a deafening alarm in your head, then I don’t know what will.

AMEN!!

[Erik88]

Nice work on this one. I've listened to 3 podcasts so far and this one is my favorite. 

I would encourage folks to listen before commenting. 

[n0rlf]

And inclusion and diversity is still not the problem. That is what most folks miss and the greatest issue facing the country. Educating people that different ideals does not have to be hateful and divisive is tough when there are a lot of youth posting that it is indeed the case. 

Millenials and others are wanting a utopia. They do not wish to compromise as they cannot fathom anyone not agreeing with them. Fix that and you fix a lot of things. Until then we can continue to reach out but it is the social media and their "SJW" types you really have to battle. Big thing is realizing it is just that, a battle. Sad and scary but a battle none the less.

[TGO David]

2 hours ago, Erik88 said:

Nice work on this one. I've listened to 3 podcasts so far and this one is my favorite. 

I would encourage folks to listen before commenting. 

^^^ YES! 

 

[MacGyver]

2 hours ago, n0rlf said:

 

Millenials and others are wanting a utopia. They do not wish to compromise as they cannot fathom anyone not agreeing with them. Fix that and you fix a lot of things. Until then we can continue to reach out but it is the social media and their "SJW" types you really have to battle. Big thing is realizing it is just that, a battle. Sad and scary but a battle none the less.

I’m long on Millennials. 

But, it’s worth thinking about - what if they just want something close to the same deal the Baby Boomers got?

How many Boomers do you know who graduated from high school - maybe went to college - but got a job, provided for their family, bought a house, took an occasional vacation, and was able to retire after working for one company their whole career?

I’m a Gen X’er and most of my peers would take that deal if it were available. 

The global economy is 25x what it was at the end of WWII - but all of that profit is going to management and shareholders today - and not taking care of the people building the company.  

I know what it takes to build a company - and I could do it a lot faster if I did it on the backs of my people instead of making them partners in the effort.  I may be leaving some money on the table - but at least I can sleep at night.  

But, I’m really tired of this argument Boomers make that Millennials should just suck it up and get to work - for most that ship has sailed.  And, Boomers running the companies they work for are mostly responsible for it.  

As for this thread, like Erik, I’d encourage you to listen to the podcast before commenting - and instead of turning this thread to the easy person to bash - “the liberal” - think about what it means for people who don’t look like most of us to own a gun?

Maybe ask yourself a question - is TGO a welcoming community to the black gun owner? What about the Hispanic gun owner? Maybe even the Muslim gun owner?

Think and discuss.

[bersaguy]

30 minutes ago, MacGyver said:

I’m long on Millennials. 

But, it’s worth thinking about - what if they just want something close to the same deal the Baby Boomers got?

How many Boomers do you know who graduated from high school - maybe went to college - but got a job, provided for their family, bought a house, took an occasional vacation, and was able to retire after working for one company their whole career?

I’m a Gen X’er and most of my peers would take that deal if it were available. 

The global economy is 25x what it was at the end of WWII - but all of that profit is going to management and shareholders today - and not taking care of the people building the company.  

I know what it takes to build a company - and I could do it a lot faster if I did it on the backs of my people instead of making them partners in the effort.  I may be leaving some money on the table - but at least I can sleep at night.  

But, I’m really tired of this argument Boomers make that Millennials should just suck it up and get to work - for most that ship has sailed.  And, Boomers running the companies they work for are mostly responsible for it.  

As for this thread, like Erik, I’d encourage you to listen to the podcast before commenting - and instead of turning this thread to the easy person to bash - “the liberal” - think about what it means for people who don’t look like most of us to own a gun?

Maybe ask yourself a question - is TGO a welcoming community to the black gun owner? What about the Hispanic gun owner? Maybe even the Muslim gun owner?

Think and discuss.

Well I know I am not smart enough to go very deep into this topic so I will tread lightly. I think that the Millennials are entitled to the same opportunities the Boomers had. I think that would only be fair. Thing is what I see is they are not and probably will never settle for what we boomers had or have. They want much much more. Thing I see is they want it but don't want to work for it.

Like I said I am not going to get any deeper than that because my high school education expired and went obselete about 35 to 40 yeats ago.

[TGO David]

59 minutes ago, MacGyver said:

Maybe ask yourself a question - is TGO a welcoming community to the black gun owner? What about the Hispanic gun owner? Maybe even the Muslim gun owner?

Think and discuss.

[SWCUMBERLAND]

I've said it before.. the weapon and the ammo don't give a tin weasel who wields them.

The NRA was originally founded (Wikipedia excerpt) "to advance rifle marksmanship, the modern NRA continues to teach firearm safety and competency."

If the TGO site charter could be posted or linked to, I feel certain the issue of welcoming by this group would be properly addressed.

The millenials and sjws and other such are perfectly within their rights NOT to own a firearm, and to say their say about those of us that do, within the limits of the law. Taking ours, after having acquired them through legal channels... THERE is where I have a problem.

I served my military service to protect ALL of the Constitution, not just the first amendment, but the second and the rest as well. AND their use of them, not just mine. I do not give a rancid lenin about the characteristics of a fellow gun owner, save that he obeys the same laws as I. Thaddeus Stephens' cornerstone, "Equal Under The Law" says it best.

[n0rlf]

3 hours ago, MacGyver said:

I’m long on Millennials. 

But, it’s worth thinking about - what if they just want something close to the same deal the Baby Boomers got?

How many Boomers do you know who graduated from high school - maybe went to college - but got a job, provided for their family, bought a house, took an occasional vacation, and was able to retire after working for one company their whole career?

I’m a Gen X’er and most of my peers would take that deal if it were available. 

The global economy is 25x what it was at the end of WWII - but all of that profit is going to management and shareholders today - and not taking care of the people building the company.  

I know what it takes to build a company - and I could do it a lot faster if I did it on the backs of my people instead of making them partners in the effort.  I may be leaving some money on the table - but at least I can sleep at night.  

But, I’m really tired of this argument Boomers make that Millennials should just suck it up and get to work - for most that ship has sailed.  And, Boomers running the companies they work for are mostly responsible for it.  

As for this thread, like Erik, I’d encourage you to listen to the podcast before commenting - and instead of turning this thread to the easy person to bash - “the liberal” - think about what it means for people who don’t look like most of us to own a gun?

Maybe ask yourself a question - is TGO a welcoming community to the black gun owner? What about the Hispanic gun owner? Maybe even the Muslim gun owner?

Think and discuss.

Interesting ideas. Should they expect the same thing their parents and grand parents had? Why? Fair? 

So as it was mentioned in the podcast coming out with an attitude will get you nowhere. Interesting outlook. 

They are correct when they talk about the pandering. So do we pander to the millenials? Nope. Do we tell them to suck it up? Nope

I think a big part of it is not so much that millenials want what boomers had. It is that they want it without working for it. That is why so many are behind Bernie. So the question is how do we get the message across to them when they do as Tiffany said and come out with attitude first and just shut down. 

As usual that seems to be the same, NRA should not have done this or that and how they have not really changed with the times. That is a valid point but maybe not all that popular. 

It was intereesting but to me a lot of the same old same old. I did like the stop labeling points! I agree that is a big part of the issues. Labeling. Not just racial, religion, sexual identity, political, or class but think of all of the other labels we box people into. Disabled, gun owners, gun haters, millenials, boomers, c-nex, stars, antifa, as well as a myriad of others. 

Funny you talk about not boxing it in and call it stupid even yet do some of the very same. I love the idea and think it is a great way to start getting people to think. There are a lot of us that are certified by  the NRA and have been for a long time. It is easy for me to sit here and say I have held classes and training that was very inclusive. As most of the classes I did were in Minnesota we did get a lot of variety. One point we heard almost every time was folks takinig classes for no other reason than to get a permit.

So we stuck to the NRA course but after the 2 day training we gave every single attendee the opportunity to join any club that was represented. We had a lot of takers on that offer. A lot of folks were introduced into shooting at those classes just so they could carry and are now recreational shooters.

So being an inclusive training program is more than ignore the NRA logo as mentioned. This podcast comes across as more NRA bashing then being inclusive. Not that it is wrong in this modern time and after the attacks on the NRA lately maybe not a bad idea. So again, without the NRA piece what is the solution? You asked their advice to people that are disenfranchised with the NRA. And the answer, build a bridge and discuss the history of it's message.

So here we are boxing and labeling again. Want to get further and advance gun rights and inclsiveness? Get away from the whole label idea and start fighting the battle with the same tools the advesary is.

And I do agree Uncle Ted and Dana need to go away. Very bad optics there.

As for reaching out to people I almost never include any discussion on the NRA or any other lobbying group. Which is indeed what the NRA has become and to Tiffany's point that there are 2 pieces, the training side and the political side.

 

 

[A.J. Holst]

I have one of them millennials in my basement.

Whether it's generational or how he was raised, I've never detected the first bit of exclusiveness based on sex, orientation, religion, skin color, heritage, etc.

He includes or excludes based on words and actions, individual by individual. I believes he subscribes to the notion that judging a person by the group is for peawits.

Edited June 19, 2018 by Gotthegoods

[TGO David]

3 hours ago, SWCUMBERLAND said:

I've said it before.. the weapon and the ammo don't give a tin weasel who wields them.

The NRA was originally founded (Wikipedia excerpt) "to advance rifle marksmanship, the modern NRA continues to teach firearm safety and competency."

If the TGO site charter could be posted or linked to, I feel certain the issue of welcoming by this group would be properly addressed.

The millenials and sjws and other such are perfectly within their rights NOT to own a firearm, and to say their say about those of us that do, within the limits of the law. Taking ours, after having acquired them through legal channels... THERE is where I have a problem.

I served my military service to protect ALL of the Constitution, not just the first amendment, but the second and the rest as well. AND their use of them, not just mine. I do not give a rancid lenin about the characteristics of a fellow gun owner, save that he obeys the same laws as I. Thaddeus Stephens' cornerstone, "Equal Under The Law" says it best.

 

You may not care who wields a weapon but do you care if everyone feels welcomed at the Second Amendment table?   What are your thoughts about blacks, Latinos, Muslims, gays, lesbians, transgenders and anyone else who doesn't look, talk, worship, live or vote like you grabbing hold of the Second Amendment and exercising it as well?  Do your actions bear out your feelings and thoughts?

A key point that *I* thought came of the conversation was the realization that the NRA and a lot of other groups are trying to make themselves more inviting and inclusive and then seem to be at a loss when "the other people" actually believe them, take them up on it, and show up.  You can almost see the, "Oh hell...  they actually showed up!" look on their faces.  It's both hilarious and sad at the same time.

I go to the shooting range a lot.  Pretty much weekly, if I can.  Maybe it's just the range I go to and the fact that it's squirreled away in a rural corner of my county, but the vast majority of the shooters there every single time are men.  White men.  There's one rough and tumble older black USMC vet that shows up and brings a variety of toys with him each time, but he's the exception to the norm.  He's probably the 1% as far as I've noticed.

Women show up, but usually accompanied by a male shooter who is there to "instruct" them.  It's always the same old stuff, too.  The male shooter knows everything and runs his mouth the entire time.  The female shooter listens attentively, gets frustrated, and often leaves with a look on her face that I suspect means she's going to give up on learning how to properly use a handgun, let alone be accurate with it.  It burns my ass to the point I've said something to the guy on more than one occasion, and thought it was going to come to a fight the last time I did it.

The point I really want you to consider is this:   We're not as inclusive and diverse and welcoming as you think we are.

 

Even TGO, which is a small microcosm of the Second Amendment world, is insanely biased toward the male population.  We've got a few women who browse, and even fewer that post, but the statistics here favor the XY-Chromosome pair.  We shouldn't assume that it's because women don't know how to use computers.  We might assume that they don't have much use for the fact that they aren't treated as equals in gun circles.  Ever been to a gun shop?  Ever watched a female consumer get mishandled by the dope behind the counter?  Need I say more?

 

So back to your previous statement, I actually WANT YOU TO CARE about who owns a gun.  But in the positive way.  We all need to be ambassadors of the Second Amendment, not just indifferent to whether the black single mom who needs a gun to protect herself and her children from the drug dealers down the street feels safe buying a gun or asking for training gets what she needs.

I really want people to think about this.  Being inclusive isn't a passive activity.  And until we figure that out and learn how to do outreach, the pool of voters in favor of keeping the Second Amendment around is going to shrink with the passing of each generation.

 

[TGO David]

1 minute ago, Gotthegoods said:

I have one of them millennials in my basement.

Whether it's generational or how he was raised, I've never detected the first bit of exclusiveness based on sex, orientation, religion, skin color, heritage, etc.

He includes or excludes based on words and actions, individual by individual. I believes he subscribes to the notion that judging a person by the group is for peawits.

YEP.  The younger generations are increasingly blind to differences.  This is a good thing.

[TGO David]

1 hour ago, n0rlf said:

Funny you talk about not boxing it in and call it stupid even yet do some of the very same. I love the idea and think it is a great way to start getting people to think. There are a lot of us that are certified by  the NRA and have been for a long time. It is easy for me to sit here and say I have held classes and training that was very inclusive. As most of the classes I did were in Minnesota we did get a lot of variety. One point we heard almost every time was folks takinig classes for no other reason than to get a permit.

[...]

So here we are boxing and labeling again. Want to get further and advance gun rights and inclsiveness? Get away from the whole label idea and start fighting the battle with the same tools the advesary is.

Go ahead and show me where I labeled anyone.

Meanwhile I'm sitting here asking myself why you're barking so loudly against this.

[KahrMan]

That was a good listen. I think Tiffany is spot on about the NRA marketing. Looking forward to having her as a guest again. 

[MacGyver]

3 hours ago, SWCUMBERLAND said:

I've said it before.. the weapon and the ammo don't give a tin weasel who wields them.

The NRA was originally founded (Wikipedia excerpt) "to advance rifle marksmanship, the modern NRA continues to teach firearm safety and competency."

If the TGO site charter could be posted or linked to, I feel certain the issue of welcoming by this group would be properly addressed.

The millenials and sjws and other such are perfectly within their rights NOT to own a firearm, and to say their say about those of us that do, within the limits of the law. Taking ours, after having acquired them through legal channels... THERE is where I have a problem.

I served my military service to protect ALL of the Constitution, not just the first amendment, but the second and the rest as well. AND their use of them, not just mine. I do not give a rancid lenin about the characteristics of a fellow gun owner, save that he obeys the same laws as I. Thaddeus Stephens' cornerstone, "Equal Under The Law" says it best.

While the NRA has existed for 150 years - and did in fact start to advance marksmanship - the NRA of today was not the same as the NRA that existed before 1977.

That same Wikipedia article briefly lists the wholesale replacement of the board that happened in '77. There are some better contemporary descriptions out there that are worth reading.  At that time the NRA was supportive of more gun control - and was actually considering removing the 'rifle' from its name. The gun laws we have today are largely due to the post-'77 NRA. 

It's worth mapping these against the gun control laws that get introduced following the Black Panthers entering the California state capitol building armed in the Spring of '67.  

Like it or not - we have to acknowledge the racist nature of the responses we've often had to black folks carrying guns. Don Mulford - a GOP congressman introduced a bill following the '67 protests stripping Californians of the right to open carry. The NRA supported that legislation.

Think about the NRA convention - how many black folks do you see walking the show floor?

This isn't meant to be a specific critique of the NRA - rather the NRA might be a decent reflection of us at large.

More diversity may actually be what saves the next generation's gun rights. But, we're not going to get there by some magic.

It's going to take real work and conversation.

[n0rlf]

34 minutes ago, TGO David said:

Go ahead and show me where I labeled anyone.

Meanwhile I'm sitting here asking myself why you're barking so loudly against this.

For some reason my response disappeared. That has happened quite a bit from my phone. I did say we in general as gun owners are labeling and boxing. Not you in particular. I found the podcast a little bit hard on the NRA bashing myself but do understand why. The NRA like any organization has had it's ups and downs. 

Not barking at all and I do apologise if it came across that way. It was an interesting topic. Hard topic to discuss and make most happy or even open to listen. 

My constructive criticism, let the guests talk more, after all we can always hear you. Lol

 

[SWCUMBERLAND]

29 minutes ago, TGO David said:

 

-You may not care who wields a weapon but do you care if everyone feels welcomed at the Second Amendment table? 

Yes, and the law abiding ones are pretty much on board inasmuch as they bought a weapon in the first place.

-What are your thoughts about blacks, Latinos, Muslims, gays, lesbians, transgenders and anyone else who doesn't look, talk, worship, live or vote like you grabbing hold of the Second Amendment and exercising it as well?

Asked and answered.

-Do your actions bear out your feelings and thoughts?

-Asked and answered.

-A key point that *I* thought came of the conversation was the realization that the NRA and a lot of other groups are trying to make themselves more inviting and inclusive and then seem to be at a loss when "the other people" actually believe them, take them up on it, and show up.  You can almost see the, "Oh hell...  they actually showed up!" look on their faces.  It's both hilarious and sad at the same time.

Must disagree. The gun doesn't care, the ammo doesn't care, 2A doesn't care, why should I be so arrogant as to care?

-I go to the shooting range a lot.  Pretty much weekly, if I can.  Maybe it's just the range I go to and the fact that it's squirreled away in a rural corner of my county, but the vast majority of the shooters there every single time are men.  White men.  There's one rough and tumble older black USMC vet that shows up and brings a variety of toys with him each time, but he's the exception to the norm.  He's probably the 1% as far as I've noticed.

See above.

-Women show up, but usually accompanied by a male shooter who is there to "instruct" them.  It's always the same old stuff, too.  The male shooter knows everything and runs his mouth the entire time.  The female shooter listens attentively, gets frustrated, and often leaves with a look on her face that I suspect means she's going to give up on learning how to properly use a handgun, let alone be accurate with it.  It burns my ass to the point I've said something to the guy on more than one occasion, and thought it was going to come to a fight the last time I did it.

Which is regrettable. The guy should keep his mouth shut at the range and let the female shooter learn from someone without bias.

-The point I really want you to consider is this:   We're not as inclusive and diverse and welcoming as you think we are.

You didn"t throw me out for being a damn Yankee transplant.

-Even TGO, which is a small microcosm of the Second Amendment world, is insanely biased toward the male population.  We've got a few women who browse, and even fewer that post, but the statistics here favor the XY-Chromosome pair.  We shouldn't assume that it's because women don't know how to use computers.  We might assume that they don't have much use for the fact that they aren't treated as equals in gun circles. 

But again, AFAIK, you have not thrown anyone out without good cause.

-Ever been to a gun shop? 

I work at Walmart, sporting goods section. I SELL GUNS. I have done so down here and back in Nevada for the best part of the last decade.

-Ever watched a female consumer get mishandled by the dope behind the counter?

I >>>AM<<< the 'dope behind the counter". And I have been diligent when a couple gets (for example) a home defense firearm., to make sure that BOTH of them know usage of the piece and handling. If I get stupid about it, I could lose my job, and moreover am not being a good ambassador for the firearms community.

-Need I say more?

An apology?

-So back to your previous statement, I actually WANT YOU TO CARE about who owns a gun. 

You only looked at half the statement.

-But in the positive way. 

See above.

-We all need to be ambassadors of the Second Amendment, not just indifferent to whether the black single mom who needs a gun to protect herself and her children from the drug dealers down the street feels safe buying a gun or asking for training gets what she needs.

Contariwise, we do not be needing to ram pro-2A down folks' throats like Hogg and his krewe.  with the anti-2A narrative.

-I really want people to think about this.  Being inclusive isn't a passive activity.  And until we figure that out and learn how to do outreach, the pool of voters in favor of keeping the Second Amendment around is going to shrink with the passing of each generation.

You are mistaking, I think, 'active' with that stupid CNN witch hunt, the above mentioned Hogg, etc. Outreach will have its time. as soon as Hogg etc. burn out. And not so much 'passive' as 'low-key'. Let him and his be cursing and be rude and undignified and patronizing. People will eventually get tired of his muck. THAT'S when we step in, civil, dignified, classy.

 

 

 

[Trekbike]

22 hours ago, MacGyver said:

Maybe ask yourself a question - is TGO a welcoming community to the black gun owner? What about the Hispanic gun owner? Maybe even the Muslim gun owner?

Think and discuss.

I haven't had a chance to listen to the podcast yet, but wanted to comment specifically on your comment.   Being that TGO is an internet gun forum, unless someone specifically revels it in some form, no-one knows what race or gender someone is.    We all start out on equal grounds and you are included or excluded by others in the forum by what you say in post comments.   

So to me, your inclusion into the group is for the most part, up to that individual.     Yes, from time to time you meet other members at gun shops, face to face purchases, range meets, etc. but that is going to be very limited.   This is kind of like a blind date over the internet, you get to know a little bit about the person first, then maybe at some point you learn what that person looks like.     Yes, you can make assumptions and generalizations about someone's race (gun forum = white male), but to me race plays no part in welcoming someone to TGO, because I don't know their race.   

[n0rlf]

18 hours ago, TGO David said:

YEP.  The younger generations are increasingly blind to differences.  This is a good thing.

Yet the bigger problem is while they are increasingly blind to differences they are increasingly requesting special rights based on being different. Not the same rights mind you but special rights. I find that sad and exasperating but it is none the less reality.

[Omega]

Well, I'm Hispanic and have not felt excluded in any way.  Heck for a long time I thought one guy here was black until he mentioned his avatar was not a reflection on his ethnicity (I'll let him chime in), and I bet many here thought so as well.   I don't feel that TGO excludes anyone, but face it, this is a majorly white male oriented hobby, not because it excludes anyone per se, but that is who gravitates to it.   This is not something that is a problem as I see it, what are we going to be "busing" in minorities and females in from other forums?  Until minorities and females WANT to be gun owners, AND join these groups the status quo will be maintained.  I personally don't care what gender or ethnicity a gun owner is, I just care what actions they take with their guns. 

As a gun owner, I talk to anyone who seems interested in them, I'll even invite them to go shooting with me.  I have spent many a round with friends and family and their friends at a few ranges.  I've encountered some that have started an anti-gun rant with me unaware that I was carrying the whole time until I mentioned it.  I've even had a few lean my way at the end.

[bersaguy]

Well I got my questions answered with out even asking it. I actually laid awake last night trying figure out why ethnicity was even mentioned in the discussions. I don't believe or cannot ever remember anyone here that has brought it up, not saying it has not been and I missed it.    

      To me all members are equal and have just as much right to be here as the next person unless they prove they do not or cannot follow the site rules and then it is up to the owner or moderators to handle that situation. I honestly don't care if you are from another planet. If you enjoy shooting and you enjoy talking about Firearms or anything else pertaining to them all I can say is welcome to the site................JMHO

[SWCUMBERLAND]

8 hours ago, bersaguy said:

      To me all members are equal and have just as much right to be here as the next person unless they prove they do not or cannot follow the site rules and then it is up to the owner or moderators to handle that situation. I honestly don't care if you are from another planet. If you enjoy shooting and you enjoy talking about Firearms or anything else pertaining to them all I can say is welcome to the site................JMHO

Perfect.