Jump to content

Recommended Posts

The insanity has reached my state. I thought I had a few more years.

 

http://www.idahostatesman.com/news/state/idaho/article135681468.html

 

The kicker of the whole thing is that it is not illegal to carry a gun on campus. I heard that verified on a radio interview with a school administrator this morning. He wouldn't have even needed a permit if it were a real gun in that case.

 

One of my earliest memories is going to a gun show with my dad there. The gun show was in the center of campus and there were people carrying guns everywhere. My dad gave me a tour of the campus and showed me his dorm and all his old haunts. He showed me the spot on the sidewalk in front of his dorm where they glued a half-dollar down and then waited up on the third floor to hoot and holler at the girls who bent down to pick it up*. The whole time my dad was carrying 2 guns and I had 1 on my shoulder. I don't remember a single person giving us a funny look. There were lots of college kids around and a few asked to check out the guns, but nobody seemed the least bit upset. What a difference 3 decades makes.

 

I get that we want people to say something if they see a situation that looks suspicious, but seeing a gun is not cause to dial 911.

 

* I of course asked him later on when he told that story (he is always telling the same stories) why they went all the way up there where they had no angle on the goods. He explained that getting a good view wasn't part of the game... weird game.

Link to post
Share on other sites
  • Replies 54
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Posts

At risk of getting flamed mercilessly, Im gonna say this anyway on behalf of the rest of the world. America's relationship to guns is retarded. I know you'll say "freedom" rah rah rah rabble rabble, a

Let's talk about this statement.

I hope that some of the girls kicked your dad in the nuts

At risk of getting flamed mercilessly, Im gonna say this anyway on behalf of the rest of the world. America's relationship to guns is retarded. I know you'll say "freedom" rah rah rah rabble rabble, and we don't get it. But we do. Its retarded.

 

Flame away.

Link to post
Share on other sites

At risk of getting flamed mercilessly, Im gonna say this anyway on behalf of the rest of the world. America's relationship to guns is retarded. I know you'll say "freedom" rah rah rah rabble rabble, and we don't get it. But we do. Its retarded.

 

Flame away.

Lots of people would say " this why we want to pull out of NATO and leave you to fend off the Russians yourselves". I will just say, some things are hard to understand from the outside. I don't understand screwing your friends in the bum, but there is a whole culture built around it (which people aren't allowed to mock, unlike gun nuts). Some people built cars with their dads, I built guns with mine.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thats fine, Im not mocking the fact you can (and did) own or build guns with your dad. You can do that in the UK to, if you live in the country. Farmers shoot things all the time here (mostly animals, mind you, not people as much) and over here you cant use a 50 cal or a Bren Gun to hunt foxes. If you catch my drift.

 

Firearms can be a useful tool. But that doesn't equate to the wholesale acceptance of recreational use M4s and combat shotguns. Its just ridiculous. And the fact most people cant seem to talk about it without getting hot under the collar is even more ridiculous. That was what I was more poking fun at in my initial post. Im not trying to shit on the times you spent with your dad assembling hunting rifles.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I don't understand screwing your friends in the bum, but there is a whole culture built around it (which people aren't allowed to mock, unlike gun nuts).

 

 

Let's talk about this statement.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Thats fine, Im not mocking the fact you can (and did) own or build guns with your dad. You can do that in the UK to, if you live in the country. Farmers shoot things all the time here (mostly animals, mind you, not people as much) and over here you cant use a 50 cal or a Bren Gun to hunt foxes. If you catch my drift.

 

Firearms can be a useful tool. But that doesn't equate to the wholesale acceptance of recreational use M4s and combat shotguns. Its just ridiculous. And the fact most people cant seem to talk about it without getting hot under the collar is even more ridiculous. That was what I was more poking fun at in my initial post. Im not trying to **** on the times you spent with your dad assembling hunting rifles.

You can't hunt with a .50 or fully automatic weapon here either.

 

Thing is, the M4s and assault shotguns are exactly what our 2nd Amendment was talking about, not hunting rifles. The idea is that we all have the freedom and responsibility to protect ourselves and our country/freedoms.That we don't hire mercenaries (or the Americans) to do our fighting because we find it distasteful. Many people think that a standing army changes the equation, but I don't. Having a large percentage of your population proficient with firearms, and experience sneaking up on animals doesn't hurt, is a big advantage when it comes to raising an army in a hurry. That was one reason we were able to raise an 11 million man army in WW2 (nearly 10% of our pop at the time) and bail out Europe when we only had an army of 174,000 in 1939.

 

Don't mistake me, I'm not saying you would be speaking German if it wasn't for America's gun culture, but you might be speaking Russian.

 

 

I don't understand screwing your friends in the bum, but there is a whole culture built around it (which people aren't allowed to mock, unlike gun nuts).

 

 

Let's talk about this statement.

 

What about it? Seems to have had the desired effect.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Firearms can be a useful tool. But that doesn't equate to the wholesale acceptance of recreational use M4s and combat shotguns. Its just ridiculous. And the fact most people cant seem to talk about it without getting hot under the collar is even more ridiculous. That was what I was more poking fun at in my initial post. Im not trying to **** on the times you spent with your dad assembling hunting rifles.

What do you mean by 'combat shotgun?' Specific models please. As far as an M4 goes, it's basically just a .22 rifle that looks scary. It's not exactly a M240B or something, which is already banned nation-wide by the Firearm Owners' Protection Act of 1986.

 

Look, I'm not a big gun nut or something, and it's fine if you wanna be pro gun-control and what not. But advice- you should learn what the silly arguments are, and what the best arguments for your side are, so you don't lose credibility next time. Focus on advocacy for increased background checks, licensing procedures, etc. Those are some of the stronger arguments for the pro gun-control side.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Thats fine, Im not mocking the fact you can (and did) own or build guns with your dad. You can do that in the UK to, if you live in the country. Farmers shoot things all the time here (mostly animals, mind you, not people as much) and over here you cant use a 50 cal or a Bren Gun to hunt foxes. If you catch my drift.

 

Firearms can be a useful tool. But that doesn't equate to the wholesale acceptance of recreational use M4s and combat shotguns. Its just ridiculous. And the fact most people cant seem to talk about it without getting hot under the collar is even more ridiculous. That was what I was more poking fun at in my initial post. Im not trying to **** on the times you spent with your dad assembling hunting rifles.

You can't hunt with a .50 or fully automatic weapon here either.

 

Thing is, the M4s and assault shotguns are exactly what our 2nd Amendment was talking about, not hunting rifles. The idea is that we all have the freedom and responsibility to protect ourselves and our country/freedoms.That we don't hire mercenaries (or the Americans) to do our fighting because we find it distasteful. Many people think that a standing army changes the equation, but I don't. Having a large percentage of your population proficient with firearms, and experience sneaking up on animals doesn't hurt, is a big advantage when it comes to raising an army in a hurry. That was one reason we were able to raise an 11 million man army in WW2 (nearly 10% of our pop at the time) and bail out Europe when we only had an army of 174,000 in 1939.

 

Don't mistake me, I'm not saying you would be speaking German if it wasn't for America's gun culture, but you might be speaking Russian.

 

 

I don't understand screwing your friends in the bum, but there is a whole culture built around it (which people aren't allowed to mock, unlike gun nuts).

 

 

Let's talk about this statement.

 

What about it? Seems to have had the desired effect.

 

Effect being me rolling my eyes at you because whether you believe it, or if you're trying to get a rise, either way your ignorance is on display? Mission accomplished.

Link to post
Share on other sites

No-- I'm saying you said an ignorant thing.

 

You're playing it off as if that was your intent, to get to those pesky ol' liberal SJW cuck beta snowflakes.

 

I'm saying either way-- it's still ignorant.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Look, I'm not a big gun nut or something, and it's fine if you wanna be pro gun-control and what not. But advice- you should learn what the silly arguments are, and what the best arguments for your side are, so you don't lose credibility next time. Focus on advocacy for increased background checks, licensing procedures, etc. Those are some of the stronger arguments for the pro gun-control side.

 

Not a gun owner / supporter, but that was a sensible reply to the usually all-over-the-place anti-gun argument.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Firearms can be a useful tool. But that doesn't equate to the wholesale acceptance of recreational use M4s and combat shotguns. Its just ridiculous. And the fact most people cant seem to talk about it without getting hot under the collar is even more ridiculous. That was what I was more poking fun at in my initial post. Im not trying to **** on the times you spent with your dad assembling hunting rifles.

What do you mean by 'combat shotgun?' Specific models please. As far as an M4 goes, it's basically just a .22 rifle that looks scary. It's not exactly a M240B or something, which is already banned nation-wide by the Firearm Owners' Protection Act of 1986.

 

Look, I'm not a big gun nut or something, and it's fine if you wanna be pro gun-control and what not. But advice- you should learn what the silly arguments are, and what the best arguments for your side are, so you don't lose credibility next time. Focus on advocacy for increased background checks, licensing procedures, etc. Those are some of the stronger arguments for the pro gun-control side.

 

No matter how well versed in an issue I could be, I'd still never stand a chance against you. You're a trained professional. My fault for stepping in the ring in the first place, I guess..

 

Part of the reason I don't give specific answers for this complicated issue is because I don't have the answers. I don't know. There you have it. We don't have this issue where I am from. THAT is my point. That the US even has this issue in the first place is what I was pointing to originally as being retarded. That it is an american tenet that firearms are integral to your freedom, you very sense of identity as a "democratic civilisation" is totally misplaced in the modern world. I get WHY that was an amendment, and the intention of it, and why it is held dear as a piece of narrative history. But to still cling to that in the modern age, when owning a few firearms is not even going to protect you from yourselves, let alone protect you from an oppressive government is ridiculous. No militia is going to be able to do squat against the industrial military complex and the government, were that to happen. (Which I am told is a fundamental reason the 2nd amendment exists in the first place). You can look at other countries who's civilian population is allowed to own firearms, who don't have the body count. I mean most western countries allow the ownership of firearms (in some form or other, often heavily restricted). Yet no country has the relationship with guns quite like America has. In 50 years your children will still be blowing their own and each others faces off, rouge snipers will still take out 30+ people in shopping centers, not one person will stand against the government with a firearm no matter what shape it will take, and people will continue to defend the 2nd as long as the USA is still a nation. That is whats fucked.

Link to post
Share on other sites

1- I see no reason to believe people are any more civilized or enlightened in these 'modern times' than they were when Thucydides said "Right, as the world goes, is only in question between equals in power, while the strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must."

 

2- You are missing a major purpose of 2nd Amendment. We don't have a warrior class made up of Lords and Knights who owe their allegiance (and privileged lifestyles) to the King. We are not hostages to our military, we are our military.

Link to post
Share on other sites

1- I see no reason to believe people are any more civilized or enlightened in these 'modern times' than they were when Thucydides said "Right, as the world goes, is only in question between equals in power, while the strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must."

 

2- You are missing a major purpose of 2nd Amendment. We don't have a warrior class made up of Lords and Knights who owe their allegiance (and privileged lifestyles) to the King. We are not hostages to our military, we are our military.

I wasn't referring to our civility or lack thereof when I wrote about the modern times "...is totally misplaced in the modern world"... I was meaning how futile owning a gun for self preservation is when the government (and any power your militia might be standing up against) has drones, smart bombs, and tomahawk cruise missiles.

Link to post
Share on other sites

My point was that it takes work to get an army to oppress it's own population. You have to create a distinction between them and the ones you want them to put down. Restricting membership to a political party or ethnicity is the most common in recent history. There are no such restrictions on military service or right to bear arms here. There is no distinction between the average American and the one flying that drone I am supposed to have to fight. How do they get him to bomb his own population?

Link to post
Share on other sites

To explain a bit further, I agree that if you wait till 1939 it's pretty hard to take on the Nazis with a rifle. The time for revolt is when they attempt to create the conditions that will allow them to use the military as a tool of oppression. Our military is not in that condition. It is a long way from it. I won't sleep through Gleichschaltung or the Long Knives.

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

Look, I'm not a big gun nut or something, and it's fine if you wanna be pro gun-control and what not. But advice- you should learn what the silly arguments are, and what the best arguments for your side are, so you don't lose credibility next time. Focus on advocacy for increased background checks, licensing procedures, etc. Those are some of the stronger arguments for the pro gun-control side.

Not a gun owner / supporter, but that was a sensible reply to the usually all-over-the-place anti-gun argument.

 

:)

 

Well thanks. This must be the first time you've agreed with a post of mine in at least.. like 5 years, right?

Link to post
Share on other sites

 

 

Firearms can be a useful tool. But that doesn't equate to the wholesale acceptance of recreational use M4s and combat shotguns. Its just ridiculous. And the fact most people cant seem to talk about it without getting hot under the collar is even more ridiculous. That was what I was more poking fun at in my initial post. Im not trying to **** on the times you spent with your dad assembling hunting rifles.

What do you mean by 'combat shotgun?' Specific models please. As far as an M4 goes, it's basically just a .22 rifle that looks scary. It's not exactly a M240B or something, which is already banned nation-wide by the Firearm Owners' Protection Act of 1986.

 

Look, I'm not a big gun nut or something, and it's fine if you wanna be pro gun-control and what not. But advice- you should learn what the silly arguments are, and what the best arguments for your side are, so you don't lose credibility next time. Focus on advocacy for increased background checks, licensing procedures, etc. Those are some of the stronger arguments for the pro gun-control side.

 

No matter how well versed in an issue I could be, I'd still never stand a chance against you. You're a trained professional. My fault for stepping in the ring in the first place, I guess..

 

Part of the reason I don't give specific answers for this complicated issue is because I don't have the answers. I don't know. There you have it. We don't have this issue where I am from. THAT is my point. That the US even has this issue in the first place is what I was pointing to originally as being retarded. That it is an american tenet that firearms are integral to your freedom, you very sense of identity as a "democratic civilisation" is totally misplaced in the modern world. I get WHY that was an amendment, and the intention of it, and why it is held dear as a piece of narrative history. But to still cling to that in the modern age, when owning a few firearms is not even going to protect you from yourselves, let alone protect you from an oppressive government is ridiculous. No militia is going to be able to do squat against the industrial military complex and the government, were that to happen. (Which I am told is a fundamental reason the 2nd amendment exists in the first place). You can look at other countries who's civilian population is allowed to own firearms, who don't have the body count. I mean most western countries allow the ownership of firearms (in some form or other, often heavily restricted). Yet no country has the relationship with guns quite like America has. In 50 years your children will still be blowing their own and each others faces off, rouge snipers will still take out 30+ people in shopping centers, not one person will stand against the government with a firearm no matter what shape it will take, and people will continue to defend the 2nd as long as the USA is still a nation. That is whats ****ed.

 

Oh gosh odine, I'm not saying you can't step in the ring or anything. I'm just saying, it helps bolster your arguments when you get smart on an issue first, instead of just spouting out stuff. In this case, you sorta fell into a classic liberal trap, one that often betrays when people have little actual firearm experience (or knowledge) and it becomes obvious their idea of what a firearm is like primarily comes from TV. But now you know. :)

 

As to your second point- no, your larger point wasn't lost on me. I get where you're going with this, I just think it's not a very sophisticated opinion. Yeah yeah, we know, the US has a different relationship with firearms than a lot of the world. You ever stop for a second and maybe think this has a lot to do with how the US was formed? Maybe this is silly to you, but the 'frontiersman' and hyper-individualistic attitude and culture is so deeply embedded in the national mythos at this point, that it is never going away, ever. And it has a lot to do with how the country was founded- basically a hodgepodge and random assortment of people who had little in common besides being dissatisfied with their life in Europe. And for at least the first 150 years or so, until colonial structure got more advanced, these groups largely had to fend for themselves in a state of anarchy. In some more remote areas, this was the case up until the late 1800s. Does that describe the modern US, well of course no. But if you don't live here or at least study the US, you're not going to understand how deeply embedded the experiences of those people have become in our culture.

 

Now compare to European countries. The modern European state, is for the most part, an area centered around a particular ethnic group, carved out of a collection of former empires, all of which can trace distant lineage back to essentially the Western Roman Empire. Depending on where you are in Europe, you can trace civilization back to antiquity. There haven't been pockets in Europe resembling early America's complete lack of societal structure since at least the High Middle Ages, and possibly all the way back to the age of Trajan (circa 117 AD). And certainly nothing like the frontiersman culture has pretty much ever existed in Europe throughout its entire history. You think that just maybe this is going to result in people who have a different conception of what rights are important and how they view the state and their culture? You fundamentally just don't understand American culture. Why would you expect it to be anything like Europe? European countries have a dominant ethnicity that forms their national traditions, the US doesn't. There is the German language in Germany. There is French food in France. There is such a thing as an Italian ethnic group in Italy. What is the American ethnic group? Or culture? Basically just a bunch of sh-t we stole from other places. That and Coke, McDonalds, football, guns, and blowing sh-t up in Jerry Bruckheimer movies. Yes, a lot of our culture is rooted in popular consumerism, and yes, guns are part of that popular culture.. but you'd get why this is, if you just took a minute to actually study some US history and compare it to European history.

 

No offense or anything, but when you go off on a screed like this and just announce that omg, it's "f-cked!" Well dude, you honestly sound like a douchebag. I lived in Europe for years and came to appreciate a lot about living there.. I ultimately moved back to the US, because this is my home after all. And I guess there were some things I'd consider "f-cked," or whatever.. like the fact that most European countries are much more restrictive on free speech than the US. But it makes sense to me how that happened- European culture has its roots in a more feudal system of patronage while the US' very founding was premised on rebellious speech. And trying to change either culture won't happen any more than changing water into wine, it's embedded in the culture. And it's very much the same way with gun culture. So I get it.

 

It sounds like you don't get it. Again no offense, but you could use a little worldly perspective.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Like I said, I get WHY america has it's gun culture. I understand the frontiersman spirit that is the heart that beats in American culture. And there are many things about American culture that I love. I was in California for over a month and in New York for some time too. I get that I missed everything in between, but the American psyche and culture is not lost on me. And america projects its own culture into pretty much every form of entertainment medium the rest of the world consumes, its a little hard not to "get it". I currently live in the UK, but have also lived in New Zealand and Australia for a spell. I'm fairly well traveled for a person of my age and socio-economic status. I don't really think a worldly perspective is whats required of me. Probably what could be is not trying to stir the pot for the sake of it would be a start. I don't particularly care deeply about this issue, but I do find this issue stupefying. Which is again, why the original post was made which was meant to also be taking with a little pinch of humour.

 

Tell me this, what decent reason could there be for NOT having restrictions and more regulations around gun access and ownership?

Link to post
Share on other sites

My problem is this. Firearms immediately escalate a confrontation into a life and death situation the moment they are bought into the equation. It's my belief that the vast majority of any civilian population doesn't have the capacity to make an informed decision around that judgement call. When a situation really should be life and death. When to pull the gun and fire. I don't even trust trained professionals to make the right call all the time, as they have proven many times, despite rigorous training in determining the nature of a confrontation, it's violence level and need (or lack thereof) for lethality. No Offense to Mark, but I certainly wouldn't trust him to make that judgement call were I with him and we were accosted by a group of potentially hostile but as yet only threatening looking people. I don't know that I would trust myself with such a decision. I'd like to think I'd never pull the trigger, but when the fear sets in people do reactionary things without much thought.

 

So in clarification, it's not guns themselves I have a problem with. Guns make things dead. It's people. People are much harder to predict. You say I'm not very worldly. Well I've spent the majority of my twenties doing various stupid things in some very stupid situations and generally had my share of exposure to life's reprobates (as well as many lovely, regular people.. Not trying to insinuate I'm a scumbag). I've also travelled around Europe, Australasia and parts of America. But in my lifetime I've never met a person professional or civilian that I'd trust with that judgement call. Granted I've only met a handful of soldiers or police officers in my life and only know one cop really well, who I probably WOULD trust with a choice like shooting someone or not. But he himself would say that I shouldn't.

 

So in my mind, when you (or anyone) say every citizen has the right to firearm ownership regardless of make or model, universally, once they hit 18.. You're really saying every individual over the age of 18 is equipped to make that judgement call and should be allowed to do so, should they feel the need.

Link to post
Share on other sites

On the "insanity"...

 

I think people expect to see guns / people carrying guns when they go to a gun show or are near one, and I don't think anyone wanting to commit mass murder with their gun(s) would go to or near a gun show to do it (unless they wanted to initiate a panic and be responsible for a mass murder via friendly fire).

 

So I don't think it's surprising that a sighting of an individual on a university campus with something that looks like a rifle case from a distance doesn't get ignored (even though it's not illegal to carry a gun on that campus) given the frequency of campus shootings and duties of care etc. Just another false alarm.

 

A friend of mine lives in Wisconsin and there's someone there (Bill Polster) who likes to exercise their carrying rights by turning up at public events with his AK-47 etc. He's often stopped by police (usually the ones that don't recognize him) and no further action is taken, but is stopping him insane?

Link to post
Share on other sites

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

By using this site, you agree to our Terms of Use.