Gun Appreciation Day

  On 1/21/2013 at 4:54 AM, Smettingham Rutherford IV said:

  On 1/21/2013 at 3:10 AM, YO303 said:

I love the "Thomas Jefferson would not aprove" sign, like who gives a shit what a 200 year old corpse thinks, he was probably as morally corrupt as modern politicians.

 

American fascination with 1776 is getting in the way of progress.

 

 

well most people's understanding of the founders are incredibly flawed.

 

the guy holding that sign probably doesn't know that Jefferson was a deist who refused to obey and believe in the irrational parts of the Bible (which was like 80% of it according to him).

He's done more that in all likelihood - including vote in legislators from his district who will change textbooks to state as fact that Jefferson and the other writers of the Constitution founded this country on Christian beliefs and any other claim is a liberal conspiracy. Rural school districts in Texas are ripe with religious bullshit being taught in classrooms.

Hey C'mon, Jefferson was awesome, he's not part of the problem. The problem is putting words in his mouth.

  On 1/21/2013 at 6:10 AM, lumpenprol said:

Hey C'mon, Jefferson was awesome, he's not part of the problem. The problem is putting words in his mouth.

Except for the fact that he OWNED HUNDREDS OF SLAVES.

but that was the culture at the time, dude. you can't, like, hold people responsible for doing horrible things if it's widely accepted in their culture. it's just not very open-minded.

plus he fucked at least one of them. Like I said, awesome.

  On 1/20/2013 at 7:18 PM, Hoodie said:

  On 1/20/2013 at 9:21 AM, scones to die for said:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=5fWHFMQ8Wlk

 

i think this video has made me totally reevaluate my opinions on gun laws. like, holy shit, people are so stupid. i really try to be a positive person and i try to see the best in others, but goddamnit, when i look at this video i can't help but be disgusted.

I'm not sure if disgust is the right response. What I learned from this video is that guns are really delicate instruments and that they're hard to handle without training. If you don't take your gun etiquette seriously (empty the chamber, etc.) you risk hurting someone. Did you see the trained cop fuck up in a class room full of kids?

America:

  On 1/21/2013 at 7:03 AM, happycase said:

  On 1/20/2013 at 7:18 PM, Hoodie said:

  On 1/20/2013 at 9:21 AM, scones to die for said:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=5fWHFMQ8Wlk

 

i think this video has made me totally reevaluate my opinions on gun laws. like, holy shit, people are so stupid. i really try to be a positive person and i try to see the best in others, but goddamnit, when i look at this video i can't help but be disgusted.

I'm not sure if disgust is the right response. What I learned from this video is that guns are really delicate instruments and that they're hard to handle without training. If you don't take your gun etiquette seriously (empty the chamber, etc.) you risk hurting someone. Did you see the trained cop fuck up in a class room full of kids?

what i learned from this video is that there are people who don't have enough common sense to treat a weapon, something capable of blowing your head up with relative ease, with care and respect.

I have no understanding of how one gets a gun as I don't have much interests in owning one, however I would think that like driving car you need to get a license and you need to pass tests. These tests should be annual (yearly) and should also be conducted by psychologists to better evaluate the mental stability and root reason for wanting said license.

And finally when you are not using your gun it must be locked up. If you keep your guns under your bed or in easy access for someone else to steal them (when you might not be home) or someone in your family/household without a license is found using them then you lose your license and also suffer some sort of harsh penalty.

  On 1/21/2013 at 7:43 AM, compson said:

I have no understanding of how one gets a gun as I don't have much interests in owning one, however I would think that like driving car you need to get a license and you need to pass tests. These tests should be annual (yearly) and should also be conducted by psychologists to better evaluate the mental stability and root reason for wanting said license.

Yes!

Good idea, but what would happen if people were told they wouldn't be allowed to have a gun? I'm afraid it would even lead to more anger. People feel it's their right to have a gun (and to do with it as they please). It's going to be interesting to see what will become of the current plans on gun- control. And even more interesting how long the NRA will be as powerful as they have been. I suspect there will be a point where the NRA will have lost their credibility because of their intimate connections with the industry. (Instead of their members...)

Though I still own a Ruger 10/22, it's embarrassing to watch videos like these. Playing with guns while inebriated, neglecting the fact that a weapon is loaded, and lack of proper supervision in firearm use are all characteristic of irresponsible dipshit behavior.

My dad, a retired air force officer, taught me all the basics of proper gun use and care.

  On 1/21/2013 at 7:51 AM, goDel said:

Good idea, but what would happen if people were told they wouldn't be allowed to have a gun? I'm afraid it would even lead to more anger. People feel it's their right to have a gun (and to do with it as they please). It's going to be interesting to see what will become of the current plans on gun- control. And even more interesting how long the NRA will be as powerful as they have been. I suspect there will be a point where the NRA will have lost their credibility because of their intimate connections with the industry. (Instead of their members...)

If their root reason for wanting a gun that badly is just for the sake of having a gun, then they will find a way through the black market and have a gun. You are never gonna stop killing machines from killing, if they are determined, but setting up this kind of stuff will slow the rate of people who don't need a gun from having them as like the DMV--renewing a license won't be fun. And those that do go through the license tests, they will have clear instructions on how to use it and why it is important to always keep it locked up. Had Lanza's mom had them locked up or had Adam been required to take these tests to go to the shooting range, he might have just left it be.

Yeah, that's one of the things, but I was aiming for the willingness of people to cooperate in general.

There's actually going to be one or more people signing a document which says that person X is not allowed to own a gun, etc. I can see problems with the officials having to sign those documents. Perhaps they don't want to sign a document telling someone isn't allowed to have a gun? And if they did, what are the odds of repercussions?

Also consider the fact that even with this policy in place, things won't be perfect. Think of a situation where someone passed the test, but weeks later went into some public place and shot some people. Would the official behind the test carry some responsibility?

I think it may be harder than you realize to find some officials willing to put that law into practice. At least, not until there's a lengthy set of laws.

There's lots and lots of issues with making legislation like this.

  On 1/21/2013 at 8:16 AM, goDel said:

Yeah, that's one of the things, but I was aiming for the willingness of people to cooperate in general.

 

There's actually going to be one or more people signing a document which says that person X is not allowed to own a gun, etc. I can see problems with the officials having to sign those documents. Perhaps they don't want to sign a document telling someone isn't allowed to have a gun? And if they did, what are the odds of repercussions?

 

Also consider the fact that even with this policy in place, things won't be perfect. Think of a situation where someone passed the test, but weeks later went into some public place and shot some people. Would the official behind the test carry some responsibility?

 

I think it may be harder than you realize to find some officials willing to put that law into practice. At least, not until there's a lengthy set of laws.

 

There's lots and lots of issues with making legislation like this.

Well certainly you can make it a law that your guns have to be locked away. Might be hard to enforce that but its a start. And while I get your point about someone passing and then killing a bunch of people, I don't think thats reason enough to put the idea aside. Nor do I think I would lay responsibility on the official. Because atm there is no real procedure to educate and monitor gun owners. It's not like you hear this kind of backlash against gun sellers... Everything would be case by case basis and officials would record their interviews with owners so that if the official makes a incompetent error of judgement they can be put under review as would any employee who doesn't perform their job adequately.

amrica fuk yeh

http://www.inquisitr.com/489193/christian-oberender-convicted-killer-found-with-13-guns-ammo/

Freedom! God! Bald eagle! 'murcurh!

  On 1/21/2013 at 6:26 AM, Hoodie said:

but that was the culture at the time, dude. you can't, like, hold people responsible for doing horrible things if it's widely accepted in their culture. it's just not very open-minded.

well, Jefferson's situation is/was a little more nuanced than that. in his private papers he bemoans his "inheritance" via cultural means, that is to say, he became profitable off of an institution which he found morally abhorrent.

but the problem then becomes one of lesser evils...its hard to understand now, but some abolitionists had some fear of the end of slavery, either because of subtle racist tinges in their thinking, or because they had the impression that the slaves, uneducated, abused and beaten, would be released into a society that more or less had no respect for them, and would continue to take advantage of them for illegitimate means (vote rigging in Reconstruction South, Jim Crow laws, KKK, etc.)

Jefferson was a peculiar character, because he essentially wanted slavery to end (read about his first few drafts of the Declaration of Independence), but he feared a civil war between "vengeful" blacks and paranoid whites...some of his writings clearly indicate that a war would be fought over the peculiar institution at some point in time....it would be eradicated sooner or later...and I think Jefferson was an eternal idealist in violent revolution (until he became President, but that's another story :)

The Haitian Revolution scared the shit out of him and other members of the young American Republic, both slave owners and freemen, due to the same reasons.

He even wanted his estate and property (including slaves) to go to a well known abolitionist...due to some sort of legal legend it never happened...

does this exonerate him? absolutely not. but it does put things into perspective.

There's a lot, lot more to this, but I don't think you can merely brush away his contributions to modern democracy/republicanism simply because of a moral flaw or hypocrisy. We should hate Lincoln for essentially believing the same thing (slavery as moral evil, but the ability of freemen to continue the "traditions" of American society as very questionable and perhaps dangerous)