FUDDS the disease of the shooting community

[BBJ]

Elmer Fudd is right.

Only cares about their one specific discipline and not the bigger picture.

[happyhunter]

I was pretty sure that fudd is - Elmer Fudd. That is, a dude or dudette who cares about their thing - in this instance, for example, hunting rifle, but nothing else, like handguns or semi-auto rifles, etc. Pretty much the Australian shooting community in the past. Well, I don't shoot this, so I don't care rather than having a united front.

This is different to FUD https://tails.boum.org/news/index.en.htmlwhich is an IT acronym for 'fear, uncertainty and doubt', another name for a scare campaign.

You got it arse about. The FUDDS were membersof the target/clay shooting fraternity. It was hunters who had their guns confiscated. The clay "pidgeons" got to keep their self loaders.

Fist time I heard the term FUD was in reference to the negative proganda generated by microsoft agains free operating systems. That was way back.

[pajamatime]

Elmer Fudd is right.

Only cares about their one specific discipline and not the bigger picture.

Yep that's the one.

[Heckler303]

As an IT acronym about 20 years ago Fear Uncertainty and Doubt (the spreading of)
Basically a negative form of "Spin”
Just another way to sway others to your point of view.
But the Elmer reference works for me to.

I thought a fudd was like the sound a useless cartridge makes when you fire it.

Guess fudds really are useless

I was shown this recently and if you watch the whole thing you come to realize that it was the Fudds that caused our problems to begin with and if that makes you mad at their behavior then you have ever right to be but its probably best you politely tell them that you won't tolerate what they are doing to gun rights in this country.

Exactly. Put into a different scenario, here is an equivalent scenario to what fudds in the shooting community are like:

Imagine you have a favourite restaurant you like eating at, it serves really good food and fine drinks, so you go there to have some really great dishes. Some people like spicy food, others like the deserts, some stick with juicy steaks, but then you get to the ones who only decide to eat the one dish everytime, and it as basic as basic can be, so bland and uninteresting, but they don't want anything else. Lets say its just a plate with one bit of tofu on it, and a glass of water.


Suddenly, the restaurant's rivals and people who dislike the restaurant start to file complaints. Saying stuff like the spicy food is too spicy and dangerous to be given to people. Restaurant now can't sell the spicy food, so everybody who liked suddenly go without it. Guy with tofu doesn't even try to stop it from happening, he keeps on being stuck in his own universe eating tofu. He might even be supporting that dish off the menu.


Now we have a batch of those in the restaurant still who want to keep going there, they join up with the desert crew, and really enjoy their cakes and ice cream. Suddenly, rival companies and people who dislike shop start up again and spin yarns that the deserts cause diabetes and rot kids teeth. For public safety, they take all the deserts off the menu. The people who liked the deserts protest, but to no avail, the cakes are gone. The guy with his tofu still doesn't care one bit.

So suddenly, we find the last group enjoying the juicy steaks that , mixed in with people who still really want to keep going there are one of the only ways this restaurant can make a profit and keep going. Rivals and the people who dislike the shop come in again, then complain about how the steaks cause heart disease, bringing up biased evidence and literally junk so that they can have the steaks removed from the menu. Then, the store takes off them too. Even after all the protests to keep them up there, they no longer can produce them to the public that really like the shop. This goes on and on, removing this drink, this bread, this cracker, down and down, while the guy who only eats tofu still gos there and sits in the corner, watching as the place turns into a hollow shell. Yet, he still couldn't give a damn about it.


finally, he goes to the restaurant, when no one else is there, only to find out it has been closed down due to bankruptcy. He sits at the doors and screams that he can't get his own way, shouting at passing people that they never helped stop this from happening. So whatnow? He realises his selfishness cost him everything, because he never understood that really, they all were in it together. This is the reason our gun rights have been stripped away, because selfish asshats never stood up and fought. They only care when its their firearm that is in the eyes of big brother. Then we all have to gang up with them to stop it from happening, though they never did it for us.

excellent post m8! Thank you.

I was in the mood to write something down, no problem

[on_one_wheel]

I don't think it's fair to label individuals in the shooting community as " fuds " or " part of the problem "
We have 2 distinct players
Shooters and anti gun activists

Most shooters simply enjoy shooting and some are passionate enough and have the time to activity lobby in our favor ... most just shoot.

Anti gun activists have only 1 job to do ... activity campaign against us.

I think the real dease of the shooting community is anti gun activists.

[Heckler303]

I don't think it's fair to label individuals in the shooting community as " fuds " or " part of the problem "
We have 2 distinct players
Shooters and anti gun activists

Most shooters simply enjoy shooting and some are passionate enough and have the time to activity lobby in our favor ... most just shoot.

Anti gun activists have only 1 job to do ... activity campaign against us.

I think the real dease of the shooting community is anti gun activists.

Anti Gun activists are part of the problem, but fudds make it a whole lot worse. Shooters that actively agree to more restriction/banning certain types of firearms or believing gun control actually helps in any form is how the 96 NFA started and the pistol buyback happened. If you have somebody you know who is anti gun, try taking them out shooting with you, educate them and bring them up to speed that firearms are not the problem, whether they be semi, lever, pump, bolt or single shot.

The ones that will accept legislation willy nilly, argue against ownership of certain types of firearms e.t.c are the assholes that are just plain lazy. Fudds are what gun control advocates love, so naturally we should do our best to remove as many as possible.

[Title_II]

I don't think it's fair to label individuals in the shooting community as " fuds " or " part of the problem "
We have 2 distinct players
Shooters and anti gun activists

I think the large piece being missed is that they are not 2 distinct players. We have shooters that ARE anti gun activists. Fudds are not merely disinterested, the majority agree with additional legislation restricting our rights. I am disinterested in a lot of guns, types of gun collecting, and gun sports. Am I somebody else's Fudd? No.

[Wylie27]

I don't think it's fair to label individuals in the shooting community as " fuds " or " part of the problem "
We have 2 distinct players
Shooters and anti gun activists

Most shooters simply enjoy shooting and some are passionate enough and have the time to activity lobby in our favor ... most just shoot.

Anti gun activists have only 1 job to do ... activity campaign against us.

I think the real dease of the shooting community is anti gun activists.

The ones that will accept legislation willy nilly, argue against ownership of certain types of firearms e.t.c are the assholes that are just plain lazy. Fudds are what gun control advocates love, so naturally we should do our best to remove as many as possible.

Why would we remove anyone from our incredibly small user base???

Yes there are fuds, there are fuds in every day life for every hobby, sport and recreation.

So whether we have fuds or not is irrelevant as their number needs to be counted in our overall strength..

Where our problem lies is representation. Like the anti's keep saying the "gun lobby"

How can you expect shooters to be unified when our so called gun lobby is fractured.

We have the
SSAA
Shooters Union
NRAA
And then the Facebook groups
FOU
OSA
Vic firearms council
Etc

And not one of them speaks for ALL disciplines..
There is nearly 1,000,000 shooters in Australia politicians should be scared of that number but the reality is we are fractured so badly from the individual to our representation.

I don't know what the answer is. We need a clean out at the ssaa and they to start being more like the NRA as they already have the numbers and no one else is close to those numbers.

Removing fuds as I see it would hurt our numbers too much.

[Heckler303]

I don't think it's fair to label individuals in the shooting community as " fuds " or " part of the problem "
We have 2 distinct players
Shooters and anti gun activists

Most shooters simply enjoy shooting and some are passionate enough and have the time to activity lobby in our favor ... most just shoot.

Anti gun activists have only 1 job to do ... activity campaign against us.

I think the real dease of the shooting community is anti gun activists.

The ones that will accept legislation willy nilly, argue against ownership of certain types of firearms e.t.c are the assholes that are just plain lazy. Fudds are what gun control advocates love, so naturally we should do our best to remove as many as possible.

Why would we remove anyone from our incredibly small user base???

Yes there are fuds, there are fuds in every day life for every hobby, sport and recreation.

So whether we have fuds or not is irrelevant as their number needs to be counted in our overall strength..

Where our problem lies is representation. Like the anti's keep saying the "gun lobby"

How can you expect shooters to be unified when our so called gun lobby is fractured.

We have the
SSAA
Shooters Union
NRAA
And then the Facebook groups
FOU
OSA
Vic firearms council
Etc

And not one of them speaks for ALL disciplines..
There is nearly 1,000,000 shooters in Australia politicians should be scared of that number but the reality is we are fractured so badly from the individual to our representation.

I don't know what the answer is. We need a clean out at the ssaa and they to start being more like the NRA as they already have the numbers and no one else is close to those numbers.

Removing fuds as I see it would hurt our numbers too much.

What's the honest point of having them when they basically work for the enemy? Some you can teach and help stop their fuddism, but the hard set fudds are what hurt us the most. The SSAA is full of them, so if anything was to get done you would need to remove the top fudds and put in new people who know how to work with the public and also fully support firearms with no set limit, because then we would start getting some progress done, inch by inch.

[Heckler303]

I don't think it's fair to label individuals in the shooting community as " fuds " or " part of the problem "
We have 2 distinct players
Shooters and anti gun activists

Most shooters simply enjoy shooting and some are passionate enough and have the time to activity lobby in our favor ... most just shoot.

Anti gun activists have only 1 job to do ... activity campaign against us.

I think the real dease of the shooting community is anti gun activists.

The ones that will accept legislation willy nilly, argue against ownership of certain types of firearms e.t.c are the assholes that are just plain lazy. Fudds are what gun control advocates love, so naturally we should do our best to remove as many as possible.

Why would we remove anyone from our incredibly small user base???

Yes there are fuds, there are fuds in every day life for every hobby, sport and recreation.

So whether we have fuds or not is irrelevant as their number needs to be counted in our overall strength..

Where our problem lies is representation. Like the anti's keep saying the "gun lobby"

How can you expect shooters to be unified when our so called gun lobby is fractured.

We have the
SSAA
Shooters Union
NRAA
And then the Facebook groups
FOU
OSA
Vic firearms council
Etc

And not one of them speaks for ALL disciplines..
There is nearly 1,000,000 shooters in Australia politicians should be scared of that number but the reality is we are fractured so badly from the individual to our representation.

I don't know what the answer is. We need a clean out at the ssaa and they to start being more like the NRA as they already have the numbers and no one else is close to those numbers.

Removing fuds as I see it would hurt our numbers too much.

What's the honest point of having them when they basically work for the enemy? Some you can teach and help stop their fuddism, but the hard set fudds are what hurt us the most. The SSAA is full of them, so if anything was to get done you would need to remove the top fudds and put in new people who know how to work with the public and also fully support firearms with no set limit, because then we would start getting some progress done, inch by inch.

[Heckler303]

I don't think it's fair to label individuals in the shooting community as " fuds " or " part of the problem "
We have 2 distinct players
Shooters and anti gun activists

Most shooters simply enjoy shooting and some are passionate enough and have the time to activity lobby in our favor ... most just shoot.

Anti gun activists have only 1 job to do ... activity campaign against us.

I think the real dease of the shooting community is anti gun activists.

The ones that will accept legislation willy nilly, argue against ownership of certain types of firearms e.t.c are the assholes that are just plain lazy. Fudds are what gun control advocates love, so naturally we should do our best to remove as many as possible.

Why would we remove anyone from our incredibly small user base???

Yes there are fuds, there are fuds in every day life for every hobby, sport and recreation.

So whether we have fuds or not is irrelevant as their number needs to be counted in our overall strength..

Where our problem lies is representation. Like the anti's keep saying the "gun lobby"

How can you expect shooters to be unified when our so called gun lobby is fractured.

We have the
SSAA
Shooters Union
NRAA
And then the Facebook groups
FOU
OSA
Vic firearms council
Etc

And not one of them speaks for ALL disciplines..
There is nearly 1,000,000 shooters in Australia politicians should be scared of that number but the reality is we are fractured so badly from the individual to our representation.

I don't know what the answer is. We need a clean out at the ssaa and they to start being more like the NRA as they already have the numbers and no one else is close to those numbers.

Removing fuds as I see it would hurt our numbers too much.

[Wylie27]

If we got rid of the fuds from the ssaa then the shooters Union could potentially have more members.

It's apathy, it's protecting my interests etc. that's what drives fudism..

Ohh well it's a shotgun, I have no interest in that.. Insert your category of interest here.

I see it every day at my local and this is with NEW members..

i ask you this question because you are new to shooting.. How many fuds have you actually come across and why do you say they are fudds?

Not having a shot, I am seriously interested as you have formed strong opinions

[happyhunter]

Fudds and fuddism isn't the source of restriction. Having a sport that is controlled by the police is the problem. If there are any other sports that the police decide when and where you can play them somebody please let me know?

Most sports have there own administration body, even the dangerous ones... but the a gun sports have the police.

[Gwion]

Remove... teach... re-educate..... if they don't think like me, they shouldn't have the right to think or have an opinion.

Really??? And how is this attitude any different or more logical and reasonable than those that say all shooters are morons and blood thirsty sadists???

I agree with statements above, to the effect that it is factional, bigoted attitudes, from any angle, that is the problem with the whitteling away of firearms freedoms.

While there is a lot about firearms laws that i think is unreasonable, i agree with licensing and safe storage: i guess that makes me a FUDD???

[Title_II]

Remove... teach... re-educate..... if they don't think like me, they shouldn't have the right to think or have an opinion.

Really??? And how is this attitude any different or more logical and reasonable than those that say all shooters are morons and blood thirsty sadists???

I agree with statements above, to the effect that it is factional, bigoted attitudes, from any angle, that is the problem with the whitteling away of firearms freedoms.

While there is a lot about firearms laws that i think is unreasonable, i agree with licensing and safe storage: i guess that makes me a FUDD???

Yup.

[happyhunter]

While there is a lot about firearms laws that i think is unreasonable, i agree with licensing and safe storage: i guess that makes me a FUDD???

No, most reasonable people agree that securing your guns is a positive thing to do. It is your support of mandatory firearm and storage inspections by the state authorities that makes you a FUDD.

[Mr.Seacucumber]

After hang a look at the Victorian combined firearms page, they could really do with a website facelift so they do not look it was made in 2009. The shooters Union one though is nice.

[Gwion]

While there is a lot about firearms laws that i think is unreasonable, i agree with licensing and safe storage: i guess that makes me a FUDD???

No, most reasonable people agree that securing your guns is a positive thing to do. It is your support of mandatory firearm and storage inspections by the state authorities that makes you a FUDD.

Well that's your misunderstanding then. I don't support it, I just don't see the point of incessantly complaining about it. If police turned up unannounced I would tell them to come back. If that resulted in issues for me I would kick up a fuss about it in court. I have conviction in my beliefs and reasonable treatment by authorities is more important to me than some hassles with the cops.

Call me stupid, it would probably get me nowhere. Just because I don't complain about it does not mean I support it.

It's nothing to do with fear of being caught out because I keep all my gear safe. It's about not being unfairly and unreasonably put upon.

[Rifle realist]

Knowing I will be branded a FUDD I will go out on a limb here & say I agree with Gwion . I have no problem with locking up things I regard as valuable. As far as the registration and licencing it could be better. On the other hand having spent the last 10 + years working in the construction industry, in the boom times, I shudder to think of some of the cashed up bogans being able to walk into a gun shop and putting their not so hard earned cash down and picking up whatever takes their fancy.a lot of the pastoralists have enough trouble with illegal shooters as it is.

[Norton]

If there are any other sports that the police decide when and where you can play them somebody please let me know?

Someone will have to get hurt with a soccer ball and maybe they'll step in for the "public good".

New zone templates and field officers for soccer?

[pajamatime]

Knowing I will be branded a FUDD I will go out on a limb here & say I agree with Gwion . I have no problem with locking up things I regard as valuable. As far as the registration and licencing it could be better. On the other hand having spent the last 10 + years working in the construction industry, in the boom times, I shudder to think of some of the cashed up bogans being able to walk into a gun shop and putting their not so hard earned cash down and picking up whatever takes their fancy.a lot of the pastoralists have enough trouble with illegal shooters as it is.

I like keeping my guns locked up and secured if not in use as well. Your definition of "bogan" gave me a chuckle though lol. I hate tattoos, they make people look dirty and angry but does that mean they aren't a fit and proper and should be prohibited from obtaining a firearms licence based on my opinion and or personal preference on what should and shouldn't be on someone elses skin and why? I think its a lesson we all need to learn! Law abiding citizens come from all walks of life and as long as they are fit and proper and keep to the high standard we lafos hold ourselves to who are we to deny them? because its a extra slippery slope if we do.

[happyhunter]

If there are any other sports that the police decide when and where you can play them somebody please let me know?

Someone will have to get hurt with a soccer ball and maybe they'll step in for the "public good".

New zone templates and field officers for soccer?

.. yeah, and a yellow card gets you 2 years prison or 45,000 dollar fine, or both

[Rifle realist]

Hi pajamatime
It not so much about appearances , as attitude over here in the West the only places we are able shoot are registered rifle ranges or private property with the owners consent. Consequently a supporting letter from either is a requirement when applying for a licence. My point is most of these people have no interest in joining a club to to shoot targets and are unlikely to be able procure a letter from a landowner. If there were no licencing requirement, we would have them driving around in their SS Ute with the jet ski towed behind and the arm covered in tough stickers out the window, looking for something to shoot with whatever piece of artillery they managed to pick up.
Not being facetious the drivel I have listened to on those work sites in the Pilbara chose my name on this site. Examples are " I am going to get a .338 LM " M y question have you used a rifle much. Answer "My mate has a.22". To my Uncle has a .223 that shoots dead flat to 1000 meters. My mate head shoots Roos on the run at 300 meters. my favorite is the muppet whose dads mate has a fully automatic revolver. These are some of the reasons why I support a form of licencing, our system is draconian,but it is not going to change. It keeps firearms out of the hands of people who would give us a bad name.
Regards
RR

[lole]

Someone will have to get hurt with a soccer ball and maybe they'll step in for the "public good".

New zone templates and field officers for soccer?

Hmm, a range needs an 8km backdrop zone or something for shooting .50 cal.

How far do you need for lobbing around a 8.65 calibre "projectile" lol.

[Baronvonrort]

If there were no licencing requirement, we would have them driving around in their SS Ute with the jet ski towed behind and the arm covered in tough stickers out the window, looking for something to shoot with whatever piece of artillery they managed to pick up.
These are some of the reasons why I support a form of licencing, our system is draconian,but it is not going to change. It keeps firearms out of the hands of people who would give us a bad name.
Regards
RR

I haven't heard anyone here saying licensing is a bad thing I reckon most agree it's essential to try and keep guns away from the criminals and mentally ill along with those who are stupid enough to have an AVO taken out against them.

I support fairly strict licensing and safe storage regulations, once upon a time I was ok with gun registration until I saw the evidence it does nothing to prevent or solve gun crimes and the money spent on registries would be better spent putting more police on the streets, the NSW police minister recently said greater than 97% of gun crimes were done with unregistered guns.

[Title_II]

If there were no licencing requirement, we would have them driving around in their SS Ute with the jet ski towed behind and the arm covered in tough stickers out the window, looking for something to shoot with whatever piece of artillery they managed to pick up.
These are some of the reasons why I support a form of licencing, our system is draconian,but it is not going to change. It keeps firearms out of the hands of people who would give us a bad name.
Regards
RR

I haven't heard anyone here saying licensing is a bad thing I reckon most agree it's essential to try and keep guns away from the criminals and mentally ill along with those who are stupid enough to have an AVO taken out against them.

It's a bad thing and I'm not most, apparently

[happyhunter]

If there were no licencing requirement, we would have them driving around in their SS Ute with the jet ski towed behind and the arm covered in tough stickers out the window, looking for something to shoot with whatever piece of artillery they managed to pick up.
These are some of the reasons why I support a form of licencing, our system is draconian,but it is not going to change. It keeps firearms out of the hands of people who would give us a bad name.
Regards
RR

I haven't heard anyone here saying licensing is a bad thing I reckon most agree it's essential to try and keep guns away from the criminals and mentally ill along with those who are stupid enough to have an AVO taken out against them.

It's a bad thing and I'm not most, apparently

I agree, because licensing fails to achieve it's purpose. I'd like to see evidence where licensing

keep guns away from the criminals and mentally ill along with those who are stupid enough to have an AVO taken out against them.

when every day in the news is a new story that proves otherwise.

http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/polic ... nfm3e.html

Guns, he said, are more readily available through thefts from homes, manufacturing and the internet. He said police have been finding firearm moulds in homes they have raided.

We already know theft from homes is a load of crap. Manufacturing is the new black.

[Gwion]

From Happyhunter's link above:

A Fairfax Media analysis has found the apex of the state's gun crime is an area of about 10 square kilometres around Broadmeadows, where 12 shootings have been recorded in less than 15 months.

A third of all the shootings this year have occurred in the area, which is loosely bordered by Sydney, Camp, Pascoe Vale, and Barry roads.

How so extraordinarily unsurprising.

Licensing keeps a legal restraint on criminals and the unstable from legally obtaining firearms. Of course, if they choose to pursue more nefarious means of obtaining firearms; having both the connections and the means; then licensing won't stop them.

Motor vehicle licensing does nothing to stop car thieves, either; i guess we don't need vehicular licenses, then.

Laws against murder don't stop the contract killer or enraged domestic dispute; so i guess they are pointless; let's strike them from the books as well.....

Assault laws don't prevent bashings, both in public and domestically; useless, let's abolish them!

[Baronvonrort]

If there were no licencing requirement, we would have them driving around in their SS Ute with the jet ski towed behind and the arm covered in tough stickers out the window, looking for something to shoot with whatever piece of artillery they managed to pick up.
These are some of the reasons why I support a form of licencing, our system is draconian,but it is not going to change. It keeps firearms out of the hands of people who would give us a bad name.
Regards
RR

I haven't heard anyone here saying licensing is a bad thing I reckon most agree it's essential to try and keep guns away from the criminals and mentally ill along with those who are stupid enough to have an AVO taken out against them.

It's a bad thing and I'm not most, apparently

I agree, because licensing fails to achieve it's purpose. I'd like to see evidence where licensing

keep guns away from the criminals and mentally ill along with those who are stupid enough to have an AVO taken out against them.

when every day in the news is a new story that proves otherwise.

http://www.theage.com.au/victoria/polic ... nfm3e.html

Guns, he said, are more readily available through thefts from homes, manufacturing and the internet. He said police have been finding firearm moulds in homes they have raided.

We already know theft from homes is a load of crap. Manufacturing is the new black.

The Americans in this forum can say the 2A is their gun license and any gun regulation is an infringement of their rights.

Licensing only stops criminals and the mentally ill from buying guns in gun shops, I think it would be near impossible to abolish licensing in Australia.

[Aussier]

I think it would be near impossible to abolish licensing in Australia.

We went without it once. We could do again.

Not saying we will, but we could.