Runner World run an anti gun article and...

[Skyrad 0]

Drop a bollock.

http://bit.ly/Hyc5Yv

The backlash is only just starting, their Facebook page has around 400 comments all negative. Really the Editor should lose their job over this, disgraceful.

When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy.
Lucius Annaeus Seneca

[grue 1]

Skyrad

Drop a bollock.

http://bit.ly/Hyc5Yv

The backlash is only just starting, their Facebook page has around 400 comments all negative. Really the Editor should lose their job over this, disgraceful.

You'd think they'd love guns, gives them a reason to actually run.

cavete terrae.

[yoink 321]

Skyrad

Drop a bollock.

http://bit.ly/Hyc5Yv

The backlash is only just starting, their Facebook page has around 400 comments all negative. Really the Editor should lose their job over this, disgraceful.

Why's it disgraceful? I don't see it?


They ran an opinion piece and are getting some backlash from 50% of the population. The other 50% probably like it.

Risky? Sure... but disgraceful?

[Boogers 0]

Quote: "I would gladly hand in all of my weapons if I knew that doing so would prevent any more gun-related murders in this country."

But it wouldn't...

And if he believes it would, then he should set the example by turning in his own, like that auto shotgun he's holding in his photo.

[Skyrad 0]

Its disgraceful that RW put a political opinion that has nothing to do with running into their magazine. I also dispute that 50% of the readers are pro and 50% anti, from the feedback so far there is an overwhelming negative response.

When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy.
Lucius Annaeus Seneca

[yoink 321]

Skyrad

Its disgraceful that RW put a political opinion that has nothing to do with running into their magazine. I also dispute that 50% of the readers are pro and 50% anti, from the feedback so far there is an overwhelming negative response.

You always hear more from dissenters. Fact of the internet...

They can put whatever they want into their magazine. You can choose not to read it... it's inelegant or crude perhaps, but you're making a big deal out of nothing IMO.

[DaVinci 0]

Quote

Why's it disgraceful? I don't see it?

Because it has nothing to do with running. It would be like the USPA coming out with an article against gay marriage. That too would be a disgrace.

RW could of run an article about legal concealed carry while running. THAT would be useful information that many runners would like to see.

But them putting out an anti gun piece is like the NRA rag doing an article about how to run a marathon.

Now that I think about it..... Either should do a "how to carry when running" piece.

[kelpdiver 2]

yoink

They ran an opinion piece and are getting some backlash from 50% of the population. The other 50% probably like it.

Risky? Sure... but disgraceful?

50/50 is problematic when none of them need to subscribe to your magazine. Which is why topic magazines rarely stray outside their subject. People pay to read about running, or photography, or whatever. Not to be preached to.

It's also a good example of the damage you can self inflict when you can blog instantly rather than spend some time thinking about it in the typical monthly magazine pipeline. His reaction wasn't even about the death that occurred, but because he got stuck walking for miles at LAX in the immediate aftermath. An emotional reaction leading to an emotional blog, with a proposal that would do nothing but take away people's ability to defend themselves.

Funny sidenote - at the expo for the NYC marathon, Runner's World was selling magazines for $4. No sample issues. Interesting strategy, imo. I didn't stop to look.

[regulator 0]

Running is only useful when escaping from the grasp of whatever is trying to kill you. Who the hell would create a magazine about running...what do they do? Try to sell you shoes on every other page? Perhaps a runners jock strap?

[Southern_Man 0]

kelpdiver

but because he got stuck walking for miles at LAX in the immediate aftermath.

Odd gripe for a runner.

"What if there were no hypothetical questions?"

[Skyrad 0]

LOL...True

When an author is too meticulous about his style, you may presume that his mind is frivolous and his content flimsy.
Lucius Annaeus Seneca

[quade 3]

Quote

People pay to read about running, or photography, or whatever. Not to be preached to.

Negative. People LOVE to be preached to . . . as long as it conforms to their previously held beliefs.

What people HATE is anything that challenges those beliefs.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[champu 1]

quade

Quote

People pay to read about running, or photography, or whatever. Not to be preached to.

Negative. People LOVE to be preached to . . . as long as it conforms to their previously held beliefs.

What people HATE is anything that challenges those beliefs.

I don't hate things that challenge my position on the world. Then again, I don't consider many opposing viewpoints particularly challenging. Consider the person who "challenges" your belief that the world is round and billions of years old with their belief that it's flat and 6,000 years old. Hate isn't the word you'd use to describe that. You'd probably say you find it tiresome.

Also, I almost universlly dislike people preaching "in agreement" with me because they're usually not in agreement with me over details of the issue I consider to be highly material. Indeed, there's little on here I dislike more than someone that appears to be "on my side" making a terrible and easily refuted argument.

[billvon 2,435]

>Its disgraceful that RW put a political opinion that has nothing to do with running into their magazine.

The next thing you know people will be posting political opinions on a skydiving website . . . Appalling is what it is.

[champu 1]

Setting aside the discussion of venue for a moment... from the article:

Quote

I love my Second Amendment right. I was raised in Boise, Idaho, and have been hunting the Treasure Valley for upland game and waterfowl since I was strong enough to carry a gun. I come from a long line of hunters who take pride in the time-honored tradition of stalking game, killing it ethically, and providing food for their families. I was raised to appreciate the awesome power of firearms and to treat all guns as if they are loaded. I own several guns and would be sad to part with them. All of that being said, I make this appeal to the members of the United States Congress: For the sake of your citizens, please pass some gun-control legislation.

Yeah, "Pass some gun control legislation" as you would the salt. Unfortunately, it would seem, that's how it is viewed by many: a faucet labeled "gun control" from which oozes a homogenous substance, that you can turn one way to make the country safer and the other way and it gets more dangerous.

So what gun control legislation does he suggest?

Quote

...here is the compromise I propose: Ban assault rifles and handguns for everyone except police and military personnel. These weapons are made to kill humans and should be strictly limited. At the same time, allow responsible citizens to own rifles and shotguns.

Oh, ban everything he's not interested in and let people keep the guns he likes. That's certainly compelling.

[quade 3]

champu

***

Quote

People pay to read about running, or photography, or whatever. Not to be preached to.

Negative. People LOVE to be preached to . . . as long as it conforms to their previously held beliefs.

What people HATE is anything that challenges those beliefs.

I don't hate things that challenge my position on the world. Then again, I don't consider many opposing viewpoints particularly challenging. Consider the person who "challenges" your belief that the world is round and billions of years old with their belief that it's flat and 6,000 years old. Hate isn't the word you'd use to describe that. You'd probably say you find it tiresome.

Also, I almost universlly dislike people preaching "in agreement" with me because they're usually not in agreement with me over details of the issue I consider to be highly material. Indeed, there's little on here I dislike more than someone that appears to be "on my side" making a terrible and easily refuted argument.

I was talking about people. Not you.

quade -
The World's Most Boring Skydiver

[champu 1]

quade

I was talking about people. Not you.

Fair enough.

[SkyDekker 1,147]

Skyrad

Drop a bollock.

http://bit.ly/Hyc5Yv

The backlash is only just starting, their Facebook page has around 400 comments all negative. Really the Editor should lose their job over this, disgraceful.

Yup, I cancelled my subscription. Running or Triahtlon magazines is ot where I want to read about guns...I'll got o a skydiving website for that

[wolfriverjoe 1,353]

Skyrad

Its disgraceful that RW put a political opinion that has nothing to do with running into their magazine. I also dispute that 50% of the readers are pro and 50% anti, from the feedback so far there is an overwhelming negative response.

I disagree that it is a 50/50 split too. But a bit differently.

I would guess that 50% simply don't care. Of the rest, 25% pro-gun and 25% anti isn't unreasonable.

And the Pro-gun people are far more vociferous about keeping their rights than the Anti people are about taking them away.

Look at the legislation that was proposed last spring here in the US. Polls showed 90% in favor. When it failed, the polls showed a much different response when asked "Are you happy it failed" with about 40% happy it failed. Another 40 were unhappy and 20 didn't care. (Those results were posted in one of the threads about it. I could be somewhat wrong on the numbers, I'm going from memory)

And the congresscreatures reported receiving far more mail opposed to the legislation than in favor of it.
Mainly because those opposed to it had more motivation to actually write letters and postcards than those in favor of it.

"There are NO situations which do not call for a French Maid outfit." Lucky McSwervy

"~ya don't GET old by being weak & stupid!" - Airtwardo

[kelpdiver 2]

Southern_Man

*** but because he got stuck walking for miles at LAX in the immediate aftermath.

Odd gripe for a runner.

well, there's a difference when your pace is dictated by a line in front of you. Runners gripe about this at beginning of races too, when fat walkers insist on putting themselves in the front, rather at the back where they belong.

[kelpdiver 2]

regulator

Running is only useful when escaping from the grasp of whatever is trying to kill you. Who the hell would create a magazine about running...what do they do? Try to sell you shoes on every other page? Perhaps a runners jock strap?

It's not Triathlete Magazine, but you got GPS watches, pre, during, post race food supplements and gels, socks (functional or pretty), race belts for carrying phones,gels,water, reflective vests for night running, and all sorts of clothing suitable for racing in all weather conditions.

Nevertheless, like most American interest magazines, you see every article type rotated every 6-9 months, so there's rarely a reason to subscribe for more than a year. UK magazines are a different lot. Much less about advertizers and much more about the actual interest.

[jakee 1,260]

Quote

It's not Triathlete Magazine,

And thank god for that. OCD gadget nerds and overweight wannabes the lot of them!

Do you want to have an ideagasm?

[kelpdiver 2]

jakee

Quote

It's not Triathlete Magazine,

And thank god for that. OCD gadget nerds and overweight wannabes the lot of them!

why lose 5 lbs when I could spend 5 grand on carbon fiber?

[DaVinci 0]

billvon

>Its disgraceful that RW put a political opinion that has nothing to do with running into their magazine.

The next thing you know people will be posting political opinions on a skydiving website . . . Appalling is what it is.

I hope you are joking... Or can't you see a difference between a forum and a publication?

[jakee 1,260]

kelpdiver

***

Quote

It's not Triathlete Magazine,

And thank god for that. OCD gadget nerds and overweight wannabes the lot of them!

why lose 5 lbs when I could spend 5 grand on carbon fiber?

Triathletes - they can tell you exactly how many seconds their new wheels will save over 40km but they don't know how to fit their cassette

Do you want to have an ideagasm?