dagblog - Comments for "Civilization and Its Armed Discontents"

It is hard to stand firm and

Resistance — Sun, 07 Apr 2013 10:05:49 +0000

In reply to I am similarly perplexed. I

It is hard to stand firm and resist, when many of our brothers and sisters, have put faith in our current leaders, who lie and betray us.

There it is. Policy based

moat — Sat, 02 Feb 2013 02:03:57 +0000

In reply to Research uber alles is what I

There it is.

Policy based upon changing why certain bad things keep happening.

Hear hear

Michael Wolraich — Fri, 01 Feb 2013 16:52:55 +0000

In reply to Research uber alles is what I

Hear hear

YOU LIE! Sorry, strong coffee

Michael Maiello — Fri, 01 Feb 2013 14:09:26 +0000

In reply to Research uber alles is what I

YOU LIE!

Sorry, strong coffee this morning.

Love ya!

Research uber alles is what I

artappraiser — Fri, 01 Feb 2013 06:08:17 +0000

In reply to It's possible, sure, but I

Research uber alles is what I am telling my Congresspersons I want.

It would be nice if they could get it at the same time as a much bigger database of licensed/registered gun owners, but if that's not possible, and it's probably not, then still research uber alles with what they've got, unrestricted by NRA nonsense. No more dumb gun laws that were some kind of compromise which started out with emotional irrational reaction to another event, ending up basically doing shit or being evaded in legal ways..go for the data uber alles.

Use the data later to enact smart laws, and do that through promotion of the results, which will also assist in actual cultural change that will make those laws respected. Right now everyone just plays "he said;she said," and "you're lying; no you're lying," and "you're absurd; no you're absurd." There is little real data, but our knee-jerk reaction cup runneth over.

It's possible, sure, but I

Michael Wolraich — Fri, 01 Feb 2013 02:18:20 +0000

In reply to I think the difference really

It's possible, sure, but I don't think it's a good idea to drive public policy according to unsupported assumptions.

Frankly, I am tired of

NCD — Fri, 01 Feb 2013 00:12:35 +0000

In reply to Civilization and Its Armed Discontents

Frankly, I am tired of hearing from responsible gun owners as if non-gun owners are somehow unpatriotic neophytes who have no intelligence or skin in the game of murder by gun. Some non-owners may have owned a gun, shot a gun and got rid of them as a lethal hazard.

The lesson I take from Kirn's 'gun owner' blather is never to rent a storage unit across from the Mint Bar in Livingston, Montana. And if a meth-head guy stares at you outside of the Mint, ignore him, don't egg him on by staring back, just so you can point your gun at him and feel like Dirty Harry.

Kirn's baloney that "guns alter your reflexes, your neural pathways', is not true, unless you are a sociopath, or find yourself on the wrong end of one.

The gun culture will not give up military style weapons because of some theory that it 'provokes crazies', which it very well may do. That is a theory. Like evolution or climate change. What's worse, it denies them the God given freedom to buy those guns. They flocked to buy them after the school slaughter by the tens of thousands.

And then they will say, as usual, this rationale is just another slippery slope to gun confiscation anyway.

Yesterday, a woman testified before the Senate that a woman needs a "scary-looking gun” (as it) deters violent male criminals during home invasions. She needs an Ar-15 to protect her 6 kids. These folks and their GOP rep's are not rational people.

At the Fatal Gaps website, the number of felons/adjudicated mentally ill individuals who have been submitted to the FBI is listed by state. Oklahoma has sent 3, Mississippi 3, and Louisiana 2. California is over 700,000. Some parts of the nation don't give a crap about keeping guns out of the hands of those who shouldn't' be able to buy them,

The only thing one needs to know about the gun culture is they will not change. They will no more give up scary looking guns, 100 round magazines, or agree to background checks at gun shows then they will agree to outlaw 'assault weapon style' weapons.

It will only happen when enough of those who want to reduce gun violence stop the blather and the talking and demand, and vote for, action.

GOVERNMENT and Its Armed

Resistance — Thu, 31 Jan 2013 21:27:21 +0000

In reply to I'll wait. In the meantime;

GOVERNMENT and Its Armed Discontents." or "GOVERNMENT and Its DIS Armed Discontents”

Which one do you prefer?

Look around; everyone knows; we have the best government money can buy.

The rest of the world is rebelling against corruption in government and we continue to bury our heads

The Government of, for and by, the people, is an illusion.

(Listen to Diane Rehm show with Al Gore, explaining how Congress doesn’t listen to the little people anymore.)

Congress follows the money and the money corrupted Congress.

Kirn wants the gun community to willingly give up certain truly meaningless things.

SO WHAT? Maybe kim likes exercises that include, touching his toes (in a stock) or kneeling exercises (with a yoke on his back).

Maybe Kirn wants to visit one of our countries rendition hot spots or Guantanamo for a vacation?

I don't, do you?

Welcome to the collective

Resistance — Thu, 31 Jan 2013 21:05:48 +0000

In reply to I am similarly perplexed. I

Welcome to the collective owned by the Corporation; the end of free will and self determination?

Can you find a picture of the first ape with a club and the erect man with one?

Until you get to the root cause of the violence, it'll never end.

We were warned "Safeguard the heart"

I think the difference really

Michael Maiello — Thu, 31 Jan 2013 20:43:13 +0000

In reply to Great article, and I

I think the difference really is in terms of style. If, and I know this assumes a lot, we're dealing with people for whom the Rambo stylings of the assault rifle are important or who are incited to violence by the Tech-9, the Uzi or a paid of millimeter pistols fired Matrix style, then Kirn is saying "call the NRA out on this."

Obviously, I respect DF's intellectual honesty, but the NRA has made the same argument. If one rifle can kill as easily as the AR-15, then why ban the AR-15 based on its looks alone? You have to suspect, as Kirn does, that a substantial number of disturbed individuals will not, in fact, "find a way to kill," but that style is somehow important to the ultimate decision.

It's going to be tough to find a lot of evidence for that though I believe some have argued that neutral school uniforms did actually curb gang violence during the height of the "colors" years. Partly, that just made it harder for rival gangs to pinpoint members they hadn't yet met. But it also kind of changed gang violence into just plain old violence, removing some of the motivtion.

People are weird, right?