Feedback The "gun" thread and gun related posts

Briar

All-Pro
Location
Scotland
The presence of the gun threads in this forum makes me uncomfortable and I will explain why.

Guns are a tool designed specifically to hurt or kill animals/people. I don’t own one, don’t want to and, if I did, I’d probably be found guilty of killing someone with it and be serving time in prison because they wouldn’t let me speak to the manager. I’m a Karen after all so I’d be found guilty these days even if I was completely innocent, had never even been in the shop (town, city, country) and it was actually some random Hannah who had gone bananas and pulled the trigger that day.

The thing with the gun threads is that they can be perceived as a celebration of a tool that has been designed to specifically hurt or kill animals/people in a most violent way. Conveying not just the message that hurting or killing is fun but also that hurting or killing for fun is okay. I don’t know about you but that’s not a message I want to see when I come to this forum. It’s not a message I want to be associated with at all. I have enough problems with my name these days.

So my question to you all - how do you want the gun threads to be perceived? What content is acceptable and what content isn’t, bearing in mind you have no control over the age nor the mindset of the people who might view the threads. That discussion might make those who are uncomfortable with the thread more comfortable with it. After all, you did say that the opinion of one group with one set of opinions shouldn’t override the other, yet by not having that discussion that’s exactly what is happening. In the spirit of Cameraderie might it be better to look for a middle ground.
 

Richard

All-Pro
Location
Marlow, UK
The guns thread isn't to my taste either, so I have decided just to stay away from it. I was going to get on my moral high horse about it a couple of days ago before remembering that I've posted pictures of several military aircraft here (including a nuclear bomber) and also a tank. I'm not now clear where the distinction lies between things like that and pictures of handguns and rifles.

There was a thread about knives a few months ago which I didn't much like either, but I've just searched for it and found that after a flurry of early interest, the last post was back in July. I've a feeling that the guns thread will go the same way. We have a fairly small pool of active members and once those who are interested in guns have posted their photos and passed their opinions the thread will probably fade away. Most of the specialist interest threads here are like that - a peak of early interest which dwindles away to the occasional post which is barely noticed.

-R
 
Location
Finland
Guns are a tool designed specifically to hurt or kill animals/people.
I don't want to come here to pick fights or even pick anyone's arguments apart. But since it doesn't come up in your post, I want to say that this definition of guns of yours is a valid definition but it's not universally accepted. It is biased, even. Not that having bias is categorically a bad thing. It's a valid definition and viewpoint but you must appreciate that there are other equally valid viewpoints about guns. What I am trying to say is that each and everyone has biases whether they know about them or not.

Posting a picture of a religious icon isn't about (forcing) religious beliefs,
nor is posting a picture of a handgun about making a statement about politics.
 
Last edited:

Briar

All-Pro
Location
Scotland
To be clear, I wasn’t making an argument. I was expressing my opinion. I am aware that there is both conscious and unconscious bias, and that my opinion is not universally shared. But that doesn’t mean my opinion is invalid. It’s why I suggested discussion to find a middle ground. At no point have I suggested not having a gun thread. I’ve looked at the thread and have a similar viewpoint to Richard. So the middle ground might not be as vast as you think.
 
To be clear, I wasn’t making an argument. I was expressing my opinion. I am aware that there is both conscious and unconscious bias, and that my opinion is not universally shared. But that doesn’t mean my opinion is invalid. It’s why I suggested discussion to find a middle ground. At no point have I suggested not having a gun thread. I’ve looked at the thread and have a similar viewpoint to Richard. So the middle ground might not be as vast as you think.
If time has taught us anything it's that some issues have almost no middle ground. I could name some of the other issues but most already know what they are and they'd likely violate forum rules. Suffice to say that those who like them do, and those who don't like them don't. I've never yet met anyone who's opinion was swayed one way or the other by a discussion, forum or otherwise.

I do disagree with your assertion about killing only. Many, many people enjoy time at the practice range and never kill a thing.
 
The thing with the gun threads is that they can be perceived as a celebration of a tool that has been designed to specifically hurt or kill animals/people in a most violent way. Conveying not just the message that hurting or killing is fun but also that hurting or killing for fun is okay.
There is not currently anything in that thread which conveys this message. Just photos of firearms and discussion around those photos. Anything promoting harmful behavior anywhere on this site will be removed and addressed. As it currently stands, nothing posted in that thread is in violation of the forum rules. Not just by my judgment, but by the moderators. We have been in group discussions and private messages discussing this and working to find the most fair solution.

I’m not directing this statement at anyone in particular, but to everyone taking a stance on either side of this issue. If you demand respect, empathy, and understanding for your opinions. Then you must give the same in return. No one is going to even want to understand an opposing view when they are not given the same respect and consideration.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

agentlossing

Hall of Famer
Location
S. Oregon Coast
Name
Andrew L
If time has taught us anything it's that some issues have almost no middle ground. I could name some of the other issues but most already know what they are and they'd likely violate forum rules. Suffice to say that those who like them do, and those who don't like them don't. I've never yet met anyone who's opinion was swayed one way or the other by a discussion, forum or otherwise.

I do disagree with your assertion about killing only. Many, many people enjoy time at the practice range and never kill a thing.
I don't actually think this is one of those issues with no middle ground, I just think that many of the people who are in the middle don't feel motivated to speak out about their, I guess you could say, moderate views. That's a bigger problem than just on this forum or about these particular items. Looking around both Europe and America I would say there's a long tradition of lifestyles which are partially supported by the hunting aspects of firearms, for example, and for whom the gun doesn't spark a reaction of violence or fear. That lifestyle is still predominant in large areas of the more rural US, for instance.

I personally think we'd all be better off having more friends from the other side of the aisle, so to speak. On both sides. But each person is not only entitled to their opinion, but can't be blamed for having an instinctual reaction to something.
 

gordo

Top Veteran
Location
Arizona
Name
Gordon
Firearms certainly are not the only issues with strong opposing points of view. But it is one of several that seem to elicit visceral reactions. And some feel so strongly that they cannot not pontificate on the issue. A lot of this easily crosses over into politics, and I'm going to do my best to stay out of that sandbox.

In my life I've lived in 9 US States (several times in several of those). I've spent time in 48 of the 50 States. I've traveled to and spent time in 50 countries and various provinces/ protectorates/ states within those 50 countries. I've lived in Germany. Twice. In my travels I've spent almost as much time in poor third-world locations as I have in the modern first-world. I'm sure that there are others on this board who have similar experiences, and even more.

In my travels, several things I found to be common. Average everyday people are alike enough we can always find common ground. Try to learn the customs and language of the place you are visiting, treat others honestly and respectfully, and average everyday people got along great. Exceptions to that were extremists of any flavor, government ideology, and the "ugly American" syndrome (which was easily applied to people we met from various other first-world countries).

(All of that was mentioned to reiterate that IMHO we all have enough in common that a single issue shouldn't be causing this much disruption to the board.)

I was taught firearm safety and how to shoot by my Dad in the early & mid 70's. Further firearms training in the USAF. In the last 41 years, I have carried firearms, openly and concealed. As part of my military duties. As part of post-retirement employment. And in my private life. I have not had to shoot another person, and I hope I never have to be put in a position to make that decision, let alone actually shoot.

I have lived in several States where open-carry is legal and common. I currently live in a State with Constitutional Carry (law-abiding citizens can carry openly or concealed, with certain minor restrictions). It is not uncommon to see handfuls of people throughout the day carrying pistols and revolvers while shopping, watching a movie, or going to a restaurant. No violence. No drama. Except from criminals, doing criminal things, and without firearms more often than not. In some places, like here, there are many people other than criminals, law enforcement and the military safely carrying and using firearms, with no issues.

I have family members who have been victims of physical violence, sexual assault, armed robbery. I have friends and ex-mil buddies who have been victims of physical violence, armed robbery, and several killed by criminals. I have several ex-mil buddies who committed suicide. Guns were used in some of those events, but not the majority. And that is here in a society many consider a violent one.

I understand people react to bad events in different ways. As for me, I don't blame guns for any of the events just listed. I don't want guns banned, or restricted to the point of effectively being banned. For me, here, it is easy to see that the problem isn't the inanimate object. It is people, and what they choose to do with that inanimate object. Be it a gun, or a kitchen knife, or a baseball bat, or a tire iron, or even a rock. Take all of those tools away, and someone who has it in their mind to commit a violent act will do so, even if their hands are the only thing left to use.

(All of that was mentioned to reiterate that there are other points of views that are relevant, and some of us have experienced bad things due to criminals being criminals.)

In real life and all across the web, there are many things going on that I don't agree with. Many things I believe should be done differently. There are subjects or thread topics I don't want to view. I can refrain from pontificating on what I think other people should do, or what they should post. If it is a controversial subject and one I know will spur a heated conversation, I just walk away if it is anywhere other than a forum for discussing such things.

Say we ban posts of guns. What's next? Knives have already been mentioned. And after that? Ooh - how about those threads with photos about martial arts? Those are combatives, are they not? Martial Arts. Originally designed for unarmed combat and self-defense? Where does it end?

Yes, I have a strong opinion. Getting into why would go over the line into politics.

IMHO and I know it counts for less than 2 cents, as long as a subject is being discussed from a photographic standpoint on a photo forum, and it doesn't violate existing forum rules, it should be allowed. If that means we aren't allowed to add any background context, so be it. But that will probably mean less participation.

Yeah, yeah I know - Holy Wall of Text, Batman, TL;DR, yada yada yada... :eek:

How about we get back to taking pictures and discussing GAS?
 

Kevin

Code Monkey 🐒
Where does it end?
A question that was part of the compromise solution we've implemented. I, for one, did not want to go down that precipice where it becomes a never ending debate of what is allowed or not. I believe that The Oasis forum gives a little bit to everybody and takes a little bit from everybody.

 

gordo

Top Veteran
Location
Arizona
Name
Gordon
A question that was part of the compromise solution we've implemented. I, for one, did not want to go down that precipice where it becomes a never ending debate of what is allowed or not. I believe that The Oasis forum gives a little bit to everybody and takes a little bit from everybody.


Just saw this announcement - seems like a simple and elegant solution. Well done.

That said, do you want me to truncate/ remove my wall of text?
 
Location
Finland
We have more to gain by bringing people with different views together over their commonalities - than to focus on the few things that set us apart...
Diversity - and diverse opinions - are always a benefit to a group as whole...
Diversity welcome, but too diverse opinions get shunned to the Oasis? :rolleyes:
 

gryphon1911

Hall of Famer
Location
Central Ohio, USA
Name
Andrew
Diversity welcome, but too diverse opinions get shunned to the Oasis? :rolleyes:

I don't feel like it is a "shun". More like a way to allow those that are not members a way to remove the thread for showing in their "What's New" and "New Posts" feed.
Not sure of the level of customizability of the forum software....and I wouldn't expect a photo forum team to be IT Support and code a custom solution. I think this is the best option when looked at from a holistic viewpoint. Everyone gets what they want without a massive effort on any parties part.
 
Top