Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
No, but I suppose anyone who was planning to kill a bunch of people and die in a hail of bullets sometime in the next few months could read that payment plan add as "hey! Get your murder weapon for free!"Does anyone seriously think that someone who was "on the fence" about committing a mass-shooting would be pushed over the edge by reading this advertising? And if not, then what the hell is/was anyone worried about?
If we weren't both such pushy, self-righteous, MFs we might talk more about our points of agreement.I can't BELIEVE WE AGREE
No, but I suppose anyone who was planning to kill a bunch of people and die in a hail of bullets sometime in the next few months could read that payment plan add as "hey! Get your murder weapon for free!"
But it's more like I said: it's tone deaf. It ignores how what they're selling is perceived. It's a bit like this campaign from Bud Light:
It continues to work for Trump."I have my customer base; screw everyone else" doesn't work as a strategy indefinitely.
The store owner apologized and said he wasn't encouraging violence.
I think people assumed it was a distasteful joke. People say things all the time that can be taken the wrong way. Other people often assume the worst intent.Does anyone seriously think that someone who was "on the fence" about committing a mass-shooting would be pushed over the edge by reading this advertising? And if not, then what the hell is/was anyone worried about?
Pretty tone deaf, however you look at itValley gun store criticized for “back to school” wording in promotion
The store is called Tombstone Tactical.
The store owner apologized and said he wasn't encouraging violence.
Actually, it was the phrase "shoot now, pay later" which struck me even more.
I think it's a manifestation of the wide chasm of opinion on this issue.
Wait...am I a usual suspect?To the Usual Suspects falling over themselves to apologise for and excuse this promotion, I wonder if any of you would similarly argue for an adult store, brothel or drug paraphernalia store, holding a "back to school" sale? Somehow I doubt it.
Did it ever occur to you that you too are one of theTo the Usual Suspects falling over themselves to apologise for and excuse this promotion, I wonder if any of you would similarly argue for an adult store, brothel or drug paraphernalia store, holding a "back to school" sale? Somehow I doubt it.
I think one of the problems is that our culture is stuck seeing these things. Like we're hyper-sensitive, and just looking for "rape" or "murder" in everything. Seriously... it is a bit screwed up if you ask me. People see it and complain about it in all sorts of things where the intent was none but innocuous. Oops... can't string that set of words together, because then I think what you're really saying is "rape is okay." Oh really? Why not try NOT putting words in people's mouths for a change? People all over the place complain about that kind of behavior from others... but it is apparently okay to put words in the mouths of anyone displaying anything publicly.No, but I suppose anyone who was planning to kill a bunch of people and die in a hail of bullets sometime in the next few months could read that payment plan add as "hey! Get your murder weapon for free!"
But it's more like I said: it's tone deaf. It ignores how what they're selling is perceived. It's a bit like this campaign from Bud Light:
Bud Light apologizes for 'removing no' label
The whole part of marketing and advertising is to put great care into eliciting a desired response from the person seeing or hearing the ad. If they can't anticipate how the ad will be received, this really is a failure on the part of the people who crafted that message.I think one of the problems is that our culture is stuck seeing these things. Like we're hyper-sensitive, and just looking for "rape" or "murder" in everything. Seriously... it is a bit screwed up if you ask me. People see it and complain about it in all sorts of things where the intent was none but innocuous. Oops... can't string that set of words together, because then I think what you're really saying is "rape is okay." Oh really? Why not try NOT putting words in people's mouths for a change? People all over the place complain about that kind of behavior from others... but it is apparently okay to put words in the mouths of anyone displaying anything publicly.
Somebody: "I can't believe you're saying rape is okay!"
Me: "I can't believe you survived childhood with the intellectual capacity that comment seems to expose."
But I believe there was a time when no one even would have batted an eye at these words being used in advertising. What's changed is that we now have people who go in and shoot up schools. So now we're super-sensitive to the word school and anything gun-related being used anywhere near one another. This is irrational, anyway you cut it. It is akin to blaming the words. Or, not necessarily blaming, but acting as if the words contain some terrible magic, which could, at any point, summon another horrific act into existence. It displays a wild immaturity emotionally and intellectually. And it is a large part of our culture.The whole part of marketing and advertising is to put great care into eliciting a desired response from the person seeing or hearing the ad. If they can't anticipate how the ad will be received, this really is a failure on the part of the people who crafted that message.
We aren't just talking about an accidental mis-statement from someone speaking off the cuff.
There was also a time when casual allusions to domestic abuse in advertising wouldn't have batted an eye, either.But I believe there was a time when no one even would have batted an eye at these words being used in advertising.
This isn't exactly a change. Columbine was more than 20 years ago now. School shootings have been front-of-mind for a long time. Don't pretend like this gun shop just wasn't on the cutting edge of public consciousness.What's changed is that we now have people who go in and shoot up schools. So now we're super-sensitive to the word school and anything gun-related being used anywhere near one another.
No, it's blaming the people who wrote those words for being careless.This is irrational, anyway you cut it. It is akin to blaming the words. Or, not necessarily blaming, but acting as if the words contain some terrible magic, which could, at any point, summon another horrific act into existence. It displays a wild immaturity emotionally and intellectually. And it is a large part of our culture.
To those of us who shoot, it's at targets or food.There was also a time when casual allusions to domestic abuse in advertising wouldn't have batted an eye, either.
Completely different case. This is openly condoning violence. Please display to me how the gun-store ad matches up.There was also a time when casual allusions to domestic abuse in advertising wouldn't have batted an eye, either.
As if you didn't realize the timeline I was referencing here. 20 years is a drop in the bucket. If "being on the cutting edge of public consciousness" means "being hyper-sensitive to normal, everyday word use, looking for any sign of reference to something to wage war on" then the current "cutting edge" is worthless.This isn't exactly a change. Columbine was more than 20 years ago now. School shootings have been front-of-mind for a long time. Don't pretend like this gun shop just wasn't on the cutting edge of public consciousness.
What do you mean misrepresenting? These people ARE looking for these things. Otherwise, like me, they wouldn't see them. And they ARE granting the words a power they do not have. They are. How can that be a misrepresentation of the situation? Do you believe the words of the ad in question are going to cause another mass shooting? Can you seriously claim that? And you are sitting here saying that "it's blaming the people who wrote those words for being careless" - as if this is a noble cause! Blaming them for what, exactly? What would you blame these people for? You can blame them for nothing more than WRITING THE AD. You can't blame them for school shootings or mass shootings - otherwise you're only further providing evidence for my point that this crap is out of hand. And what did writing the ad do? I ask you? What did it do? Besides hurt some overly sensitive people's feelings, what did it do? Careful now... because we aren't talking about open displays of a husband spanking his wife. We're talking about a gun-shop ad mentioning a fact that kids are going to be going back to school.No, it's blaming the people who wrote those words for being careless.
Is there a reason you're misrepresenting the position of the people who are critical of the ad? You've done it twice now (that I've noticed).