• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Banned Super Bowl Add That Will Change Minds

Helix said:
my wife and i have discussed whether or not we want a firearm. if so, i would want to be trained in self defense first. while i'm a good shot, i doubt that i'm a good shot while half asleep and terrified.
Click to expand...
Of course be trained. Then keep it up. It's amazing what an adrenaline dump will do.
 
zsu2357 said:
Well I grew up around guns to,but not all gun owners are "hobbyist" as you put it. What is this single issue obsession you speak of?
Click to expand...

you already know.

zsu2357 said:
So when in doubt turn it about? Here's the thing. The video wasn't about a marital squabble it was about a home invasion.

Now that is fear mongering. Yeah it COOULD happen but the home invasion is more likely. Since most of us gun owners are responsible. Somebody is gonna jump on that "most".
Click to expand...

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_violence_in_the_United_States

looks like a significant percentage of gun related deaths are suicides.

zsu2357 said:
Do you really think quality matters? What matters is the message conveyed. But ask yourself would it have been banned if the guy accidentally shot his wife. No probably not because I don't think they aren't exactly pro-gun.
Click to expand...

i don't believe that this two minute ad was banned from the Super Bowl solely because it's pro gun.
 
Redress said:
Ah, the backpedaling begins. Still not accurate, but at least you admit now you where dishonest when you said they where disarmed. This is why it is impossible to have an honest debate on the issue of guns here, people on both sides have to exagerate, resort to hyperbole, and generally throw out ad homs.



I never made that claim. I said they where not disarmed, which is what you claimed. Now you admit that is true.



You are not doing a very good job of demonstrating it.



Except they could own firearms. That is a big "except".



That has nothing to do with what I said. Why build all those straw men?



Difficult is not impossible, so again, not disarmed. Saying irrelevancies that are not in dispute does not make your initial statement any more accurate or honest.
Click to expand...

you want to try to contradict me with what is essentially trolling over semantics. If you cannot have a weapon ready for use when you need it you are effectively disarmed. Now in order to be contrarian, you pretend being able to own a gun that has to be disassembled or kept locked up and not ready for use is not disarmed. Your argument is as stupid as saying if you are out walking and you are not allowed to carry you really aren't disarmed if you have a gun in your closet at home.
 
NeverTrumpGOP said:
Why don't you want to talk about a dubious video (thread topic) that claims it's a so-called banned super-bowl ad, and it's only gotten 70K views??? According to their blog, Front Sight claims that they weren't even able to get these crappy ads that they created over to a reputable ad agency to try to sell them to the NFL, and even better, they claim that the reason why is because America isn't "ready." Whatever that means.

https://www.ignatius-piazza-front-s...-see-our-first-quarter-super-bowl-ad/#youtube

The truth? What likely happened is that this was just put together on the cheap, and they used the banned ad title to generate views, and voila nice business returns, although w/70K views, that's a pretty weak return on investment. We know that this is likely because NFL policy states that firearms, ammunition or other weapons companies may not be promoted during broadcasts, as we know from this even more famous case

NFL Calls Daniel Defense Super Bowl Ad Claim ‘Completely Bogus’ « CBS DC

Funny even with the Daniel Defense controversy of 2014, it only ranked up 300K views. It's hardly viral effective marketing. It's now known as "that 2014 ad that was "banned" by the superbowl." Not the Daniel Defense ad.

Seems like Front Sight would LOVE to recreate whatever success they think Daniel Defense garnered from that controversy back then, but failed to do so since that video both videos are from 2014!!

Just a little bit of insight as to the shady marketing practices these local defense companies go through to try to cause controversy and stir up business for themselves. At least the website is still operational.
Click to expand...

you don't read very well do you? go back and read ALL my posts on this thread and then apologize for missing a key point
 
Redress said:
This is the US. No one is disarmed except for certain people who cannot be described accurately with "honest citizens". AS I understand it, the law prohibs the following groups from owning guns:

1.Persons under indictment for, or convicted of, any felony crime punishable by imprisonment for a term exceeding one year
2.Fugitives from justice
3.Persons who are unlawful users of, or addicted to, any controlled substance
4.Persons who have been declared by a court as mental defectives or have been committed to a mental institution
5.Illegal aliens or aliens who were admitted to the United States under a nonimmigrant visa
6.Persons who have been dishonorably discharged from the Armed Forces
7.Persons who have renounced their United States citizenship
8.Persons subject to certain types of restraining orders
9.Persons who have been convicted of a misdemeanor crime of domestic violence

While those people could be "honest" in that they are not lying, they are all criminals, indicted, insane, kicked out of the military, or under a restraining order. Not what people think when the phrase "honest citizen" is thrown out.
Click to expand...
Those are not very good reasons with the exception of #3(iffy)#4 #9 and 9 is iffy.
I would guess you don't know many honest people in as much they weren't honest with you.
Kicked out of the military really?Just kicked out? How many ways are there to get kicked out?Tons. Dishonorable could be a multitude of things non violent.
This is the US. No one is disarmed except for certain people who cannot be described accurately with "honest citizens".
Click to expand...
Wouldn't be many honest citizens left.
 
TurtleDude said:
you want to try to contradict me with what is essentially trolling over semantics. If you cannot have a weapon ready for use when you need it you are effectively disarmed. Now in order to be contrarian, you pretend being able to own a gun that has to be disassembled or kept locked up and not ready for use is not disarmed. Your argument is as stupid as saying if you are out walking and you are not allowed to carry you really aren't disarmed if you have a gun in your closet at home.
Click to expand...
No, that is not what disarmed means. Pointing out your exaggeration, and your hyperbole, is not trolling, nor is pointing out the flaw with your claim stupid. It is not my fault you made a stupid claim. I don't make claims in excess of the facts. That is what you did, and that is what you got called on. Maybe, instead of telling people how much you know, you should learn to put together an argument that does not rely on exaggeration and hyperbole.
 
=Helix;1068429932]you already know.
Click to expand...
No I don't know. Some anti gun people(not saying you are)say we are trying to overcompensate for something some say we are wannabe tough guys or guys that didn't make it in the service we like dressing up tactical etc. etc. etc.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gun_violence_in_the_United_States

looks like a significant percentage of gun related deaths are suicides.
Click to expand...
I don't count suicides.Cold you say? Well if they are hell bent there is rope,razors,sharp knives, drugs. So what can you do?

i don't believe that this two minute ad was banned from the Super Bowl solely because it's pro gun.
Click to expand...
I don't see it that way but that's my opinion.
 
DebateChallenge said:
Here is a banned Super Bowl add that will perhaps change the minds of even the most extreme anti gun zealots.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bUd3YBrfoR4
Click to expand...



The commercial makes a very good point -- every person/family has a right to defend themselves and calling 911 is a good idea, but it's called "dial a prayer" for a reason.

That said, that commercial is not anywhere close to being Super Bowl quality, so it was never in the running for a spot.

It does offer a good message, however.
 
NeverTrumpGOP said:
That's silly. My life is not going to end up like that if I don't have a gun. It may, but it's highly highly unlikely.

So at the very, very best, it's misleading potential customers.
Click to expand...

Do you have fire insurance? Do you have smoke detectors and/or fire extinguishers in your house? Hopefully you never will have a house fire but the fact of the matter is you're three times as likely to have a home invasion than to have a house fire.
 
NeverTrumpGOP said:
WTF? Leaping to conclusions much? I live one town over from Newark NJ, but in a safe neighborhood. I never felt the need to own a gun. Also if you have your guns locked up and proper in the basement they aren't going to do jack S*** when these guys come barging through the front door.
Click to expand...

That's why you keep your defensive firearm close by.
 
TurtleDude said:
Oh I agree with you there. Front site or whatever isn't in the league of organizations that can afford Super Bowl ad times.
Click to expand...

Well right now they're working on building a hotel and a resort so their budget is quite tied up at the moment.
 
Helix said:
however, i could just as easily make a poorly crafted video in which a marital fight turns fatal with a gun
Click to expand...
Proper use of guns requires self control. If you have problems controlling your temper, and that obviously includes if you would shoot your spouse dead in an argument, than you shouldn't get a gun.

Helix said:
a five year old shoots his brother,
Click to expand...
That's why you keep guns out of the reach of five year olds just like you would medicine or other such poisons. Plain old common sense. You gun control advocates talk about common sense, well its common sense that guns are just like medicine in regards to small children, you keep them out of reach.

Helix said:
some idiot shoots off his toe,
Click to expand...
And how many people are hurt much worse or are killed in motorcycle accidents? Yet I don't see people running around screaming about more motorcycle control.

Helix said:
or a dark night of the soul turns into suicide.
Click to expand...
If somebody wants to do themselves in they will find a way, with or without guns.
 
TurtleDude said:
why would I lock my defensive firearms up in a house where the youngest individual is 20 (when he's home from school) and has had over 100 hours of formal defensive firearms training. I have a SIG MCX rifle sitting just to my right. When we are out of the home, most of the firearms are in commercial grade safes, some of which have wireless alarms but a few are unlocked but the home is alarmed with sophisticated anti intrusion systems.
Click to expand...

Right on. I was raised in a home with racks of guns and guns leaning in the corners of some rooms. Not sure it was always that way but it was as long as I can remember. We all knew they were loaded. And we all knew how to properly, and accurately, safely operate each and every one of them. (My family was full of cops.)

And, we didn't even own a safe. In fact, I don't ever even remember even owning a house key as our doors were never locked. Ever.

But times have surely changed.

But no two situations are the same. There are places where a gun owner needs to really worry about his/her guns falling in to the wrong hands.

Kudos on your responsible approach to home security. I kind of had you pegged as someone who might have picket towers on your property perimeters. And a moat with piranhas. LOL!
 
DebateChallenge said:
Here is a banned Super Bowl add that will perhaps change the minds of even the most extreme anti gun zealots.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bUd3YBrfoR4
Click to expand...

Anti-2nd amendment trash don't give two ****s about the individuals who have to face a home invasion.As far as they are concerned you should just run and hide if someone breaks into your home.The UK for example if you kill an intruder then you go to jail.They don't even want you making your property a hazard for crooks to break in.
 
Helix said:
how many untrained people would you trust to fire at a home intruder in the middle of the night with 95+ percent certainty that it isn't their drunk 17 year old sneaking in?
Click to expand...
That is why you keep your finger off the trigger until you are absolutely sure of your target. Until you know your target you keep your finger off the trigger and your gun down at the ready. Once you are absolutely positive there's a bad guy, it is only then your finger goes to the trigger.

Helix said:
i'm a pretty good shot, and i doubt that i'd be Johnny on the spot in that situation.
Click to expand...
Being a good shot at the range is one thing, being good with a gun in a tactical situation also requires tactical training which includes what I mentioned above.

Helix said:
as for gun laws, it's part of the culture, and i doubt that there's anything to be done about it at this point. i'd rather focus on helping people with job security and health care.
Click to expand...
But we are doing stuff about it. Although it is at a standstill we are still working on having national reciprocity for carry permits, we are working to get rid of gun free zones, but as for it being part of the culture I would say that you are partially right. Some states such as NJ or MA or CA are so anti gun I don't see much hope for them. The best thing to do in my opinion if you believe in gun rights is to simply not live in such states. As for job security, growth in the gun industry would certainly create more jobs.
 
DebateChallenge said:
There are few crowds as emotional as the gun control crowd.
Click to expand...

Nonsense man. "They're coming to get, get my family! I better have a gun".... is nothing but emotional drivel.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom