Attitude to Gun Control - split from Guns in the Classroon

[overtone]

Somebody taking revenge on people blamed for causing gratuitous pain, treating one badly, etc, by destroying what they care about and killing the ones they love, is not beyond all comprehension surely?

 

We live in culture and country in which the mentally ill, the outsiders, and similar people, are often lonely and abused; and in which revenge, even self-destructive backlash, has a place and a role. We cannot change that by force. And we are an armed people, which we can only change by force at a very heavy cost. So this shit is going to happen, as it has in the past, as long as its motivational roots are fertilized.

 

There is no way to coercively control and block flipped out and self-anointed revengers from lashing back, violently, without seriously coercing and similarly abusing (say: disarming) the legitimately motivated in our culture. We have to live with this stuff, as long as it takes to change the actual culture - same as the Saudis have to live with the nastier side of their misogyny, same as India has to live with the personal reactions to its caste system, until the changes have grown into the society from the childhood up.

[Moontanman]

Somebody taking revenge on people blamed for causing gratuitous pain, treating one badly, etc, by destroying what they care about and killing the ones they love, is not beyond all comprehension surely?

 

Beyond comprehension? No of course not but killing people who are not directly a threat to your life is not a sane action. Revenge is not an acceptable reason to kill or even harm another person.

 

We live in culture and country in which the mentally ill, the outsiders, and similar people, are often lonely and abused; and in which revenge, even self-destructive backlash, has a place and a role. We cannot change that by force. And we are an armed people, which we can only change by force at a very heavy cost. So this shit is going to happen, as it has in the past, as long as its motivational roots are fertilized.

 

So keeping guns away from insane people is not an option?

 

There is no way to coercively control and block flipped out and self-anointed revengers from lashing back, violently, without seriously coercing and similarly abusing (say: disarming) the legitimately motivated in our culture. We have to live with this stuff, as long as it takes to change the actual culture - same as the Saudis have to live with the nastier side of their misogyny, same as India has to live with the personal reactions to its caste system, until the changes have grown into the society from the childhood up.

 

Again, reasonable controls on guns would go a long way toward stopping these types of crimes, why is that not an option?

[ox1111]

Somebody taking revenge on people blamed for causing gratuitous pain, treating one badly, etc, by destroying what they care about and killing the ones they love, is not beyond all comprehension surely?

 

We live in culture and country in which the mentally ill, the outsiders, and similar people, are often lonely and abused; and in which revenge, even self-destructive backlash, has a place and a role. We cannot change that by force. And we are an armed people, which we can only change by force at a very heavy cost. So this shit is going to happen, as it has in the past, as long as its motivational roots are fertilized.

 

There is no way to coercively control and block flipped out and self-anointed revengers from lashing back, violently, without seriously coercing and similarly abusing (say: disarming) the legitimately motivated in our culture. We have to live with this stuff, as long as it takes to change the actual culture - same as the Saudis have to live with the nastier side of their misogyny, same as India has to live with the personal reactions to its caste system, until the changes have grown into the society from the childhood up.

I agree with all of this and believe we already have fine gun laws. What is next make gas or diesel illegal. Bad things happen, they don't always require change.

[overtone]

"Living with it" is something few of us can bear.

You've been bearing it for centuries now - and much worse. Priorities. The ugly nature of the public schools in the slums is far more serious - in dead children alone, never mind the rest of it - and can be addressed without Constitutional crisis.

We have to start trying to fix it now, as we always have. Reactionary at first, and then fix the unintended consequences next. As we have done in the past.

We've had experience with the unintended consequences of chucking the Constitution and/or coercing everybody - we don't have to make that mistake again, jsut to see what will happen.

 

We have many more serious problems with child care, education, and so forth. Mass murders like this are way down the list. And if they cannot be usefully addressed without damage to our civil liberties etc, then that lowers them still farther in the emergency response priority hierarchy.

[rigney]

You've been bearing it for centuries now - and much worse. Priorities. The ugly nature of the public schools in the slums is far more serious - in dead children alone, never mind the rest of it - and can be addressed without Constitutional crisis. We've had experience with the unintended consequences of chucking the Constitution and/or coercing everybody - we don't have to make that mistake again, jsut to see what will happen.

 

We have many more serious problems with child care, education, and so forth. Mass murders like this are way down the list. And if they cannot be usefully addressed without damage to our civil liberties etc, then that lowers them still farther in the emergency response priority hierarchy.

We have gotton totally away from good "Red Neck" answers to many of these problems. While they don't possess a total remedy for each and every case, they do bring a good likeness of sanity to the table for most.

 

http://setup.rightwingamerica.com/index.php?topic=10863.0

Edited December 28, 2012 by rigney

[john5746]

We have gotton totally away from good "Red Neck" answers to many of these problems.

That link appears to have a problem, but you seem to suggest in the other thread citing the same link that we need to be little terrorists, waiting to shoot our government if needed. I have lived around red necks, maybe considered one at some point, and I'll defend them against this remark.

 

They may be ignorant and bigoted and a few may be toothless and inbred, but I never heard one wanting to take up arms against their government. At least not during the Bush years. Maybe I'll have to go in the sticks and see what they're saying now.

[rigney]

I'm not quite sure where you got the impression I was, or am a "little terrorist" wanting to destroy our government? In post # 89 I pretty much summed up my early life, upbringing and instincts. "Redneck all the way". There is no doubt Mom and Dad both loved me, but also no doubt either of them would have "turned my liver into mush", had I disgraced them. While I am missing a couple of teeth, have a twang in my voice, remember the Lords Prayer, the Pledge of Allegiance and never gotten farther than High School, 6 of my 7 children have. But since my oldest son decided to make a career of the Navy, to retire as a Master Chief after twenty two years, I digress of my slothful ways. If you can digest hard facts, here is a slight preamble about how to assess "Rednecks"

http://voices.yahoo.com/whats-so-wrong-rednecks-487065.html

 

Secondly, if you get to feeling dejected; go out and look at how simple people actually live.

http://thecountryclassics.com/jukebox/music/americana-by-moe-bandy-revisited

Edited December 30, 2012 by rigney

[tar]

Rigney,

 

Just came back from W.Va. where I turned the New Year with my sister and her family. My sister is a transplant from NJ and my brother-in-law a transplant from PA.

 

There was some celebratory gunfire from the neighbors across the creek, while we made our New Years noise with children's percussion instruments.

 

Liquor was involved in both gatherings, but neither celebration resulted in any anger or injuries.

 

My brother-in-law has a couple rifles. You need a little something when you are miles away "civilization" out in a "holler" with only you and some widely spaced neighbors to maintain civilized behavior. And to scare the crows from eating your sweet corn.

 

I am of the opinion, in reference to this thread that each community in this great nation of ours, is smart enough, and good enough to decide for themselves, what is appropriate in terms of guns in the classroom.

 

One size, does not fit all. And weapons have their place, as long as we trust each other to use such power sensibily.

 

As hard as it is to stomach such power in the hands of someone insane or drunk or high that might be dangerous to our collective peace and order, it is hard for me to consider us having peace and order, if we don't trust one another to have individual power and capability. Somebody needs to be able to control the scene when required. And there is nobody but us, to do the job.

 

Afer 9/11 Homeland Security was concerned that some enemy cells might be hiding in the West Virgina hills and hollows. This was somewhat of a joke to the people that actually lived in the hills and hollows. The hills and hollows are their property and home, and they would know very well exactly what was going on in their backyard and would simply not allow such to occur.

 

It would be like suggesting that YOU were hosting Bin Laden in your guest room.

 

Regards, TAR2

Edited January 2, 2013 by tar

[rigney]

Having spent most of my life in the city and on occasion going back to my roots, I still find it difficult trying to understand the difference between rural and city living. While most in the city are just as friendly as those from the sticks, if not more, country people seem a bit more reticent in reaching out too far until they have had a better look at you. Don't know if this has anything to do with our criminal or psychopathic problems, but it's a good place to start looking. Cheers, rigney

Edited January 2, 2013 by rigney

[tar]

Rigney,

 

It is probably an excellent place to start looking.

 

When we are in cities we rely on others for many things. We trust others to do their part and learn that on the whole they do the right thing, and it is to our benefit that they do, and we, as city dwellers, return the favor.

 

Rural people do more for themselves, and rely on "the city" only for technology and access to materials, that they do not find around the place. On the whole though do not need the city people to be walking around, causing any mischief or telling them how to be, or how to raise their children.

 

On the whole, I would say that someone living in a rural area is more self sufficient than your highly socialized city dweller. And what would be abhorent to one is common place and accepted by the other.

 

Take skinning a deer, for instance, or breaking a chicken's neck. For a city person.

 

I would guess that country folk find it disturbing that others might come in to their lives and take away any of their rights and powers as individuals, or tell them "the proper way" to be, with total disregard of what they and their parents have strived to build and maintain.

 

Then there are folks like me, caught betwixt and between, surrounded by woods with bear, deer and possum, and an hours drive from NYC, one of the citiest cities there is. My answers don't pass muster in either camp. My opinion of when and where people are "crazy" or are stepping on the rights of others, or are behaving inappropriately is alternately correct or incorrect, depending on who I am considering "they" and who I am considering "us", during any one consideration.

 

Would be nice if I could come up with absolute answers of exactly how everybody should be, but alas, the facts seem to point to the fact that it is only me that I have control of, in this regard.

 

Ivory tower thinkers have it wrong. Anarchists have it wrong. And neither camp can really make it, without the other.

 

But the idea of control, and the idea of who is we and who is they are probably two ideas that one should consider when studying the psychopath and the criminal. And figuring out the dynamics involved that differenciate the rural soul from the city soul...is probably an excellent place to start.

 

Regards, TAR2

 

 

[rigney]

Wish I could understand your entire philosophy on the subject a bit more Tar, but I just don't have the gift. While I'm almost sure there are those out there who have good and viable solutions to the problems we face, they are almost afraid to share them because of the ridicule they might suffer if one should fail. They are not Scientists or Philosophers but what one might called "Gentle Giants". Like one old timer once told me: Boy!, Maybe I can't teechya to make "Shine", but I sure as hell can show you how. Perhaps what we need today is a bit more showing rather than a whole lot of fancy teechin'?

Edited January 3, 2013 by rigney

[Moontanman]

I'm not quite sure where you got the impression I was, or am a "little terrorist" wanting to destroy our government? In post # 89 I pretty much summed up my early life, upbringing and instincts. "Redneck all the way". There is no doubt Mom and Dad both loved me, but also no doubt either of them would have "turned my liver into mush", had I disgraced them. While I am missing a couple of teeth, have a twang in my voice, remember the Lords Prayer, the Pledge of Allegiance and never gotten farther than High School, 6 of my 7 children have. But since my oldest son decided to make a career of the Navy, to retire as a Master Chief after twenty two years, I digress of my slothful ways. If you can digest hard facts, here is a slight preamble about how to assess "Rednecks"

http://voices.yahoo.com/whats-so-wrong-rednecks-487065.html

 

Secondly, if you get to feeling dejected; go out and look at how simple people actually live.

http://thecountryclassics.com/jukebox/music/americana-by-moe-bandy-revisited

 

 

Check out Buck Wild On MTV

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Buckwild_(TV_series)

 

This is literally where I grew up, I recognized some of the houses in the previews, planned as a redneck version of Jersey shore it should be interesting....

[overtone]

If you can digest hard facts, here is a slight preamble about how to assess "Rednecks"

http://voices.yahoo....cks-487065.html

 

Secondly, if you get to feeling dejected; go out and look at how simple people actually live.

http://thecountrycla...bandy-revisited

It's hard to tell which is the more sentimentally crap fantasy there - the self-deluded picture of redneck life presented, or the bizarre and clueless media derived image of cityworld.

 

Moe Bandy stroked the shoulder chip better, maybe, but this guy drew a truer bead: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joe_Bageant

 

While I'm almost sure there are those out there who have good and viable solutions to the problems we face, they are almost afraid to share them because of the ridicule they might suffer if one should fail.

Sure there are. They are called "liberals", and one of these days you should try paying attention to what they've been trying to tell you these past thirty years and more.

 

Because the people who elected W twice - - twice! - - - have had something about themselves demonstrated to them, in public, incontrovertibly, that should encourage self-reflection. It's never too late to grow the fuck up.

 

They may be ignorant and bigoted and a few may be toothless and inbred' date=' but I never heard one wanting to take up arms against their government. [/quote'] You're kidding, I hope.

 

Take another look at the last election map, superimposed on a map of the Confederacy. Then review the sales of guns and ammo in those areas beginning when the nigger put his hand on the Bible and walked into the White House without carrying anything. And put two and two together. It ain't rocket science.

[tar]

Overtone,

 

While it is true, that educated people move this society and innovate and improve our quality of life, I hang back a little from falling securely in your camp. I am usually wrong, when I think I know better than somebody else, about how to be.

 

I have over the past few months developed a view that "the bosses" are primarily correct and know what they are doing, but are too full of themselves to pay attention to the consequences of their actions and words. Though I do not have the credentials or talents to "play with the big boys" in business, or to successfully challange the findings and directions of the intelligent "elite" such as yourself, there is an important consideration that I believe should always be paid attention to. Consider the judgement of others as a real, valuable thing. That they indeed might know, better than you, what they are doing. It is, after all, their bed that they have to lay in. Not yours. You are responsible for your own area.

 

And if you are doing it exactly right, yourself, others might take your lead, if it suits them.

 

Otherwise, you come across to me, as an elite intellectual snob, that finds fault with what us stupid people do.

 

I, on the other hand, am so superior, in my own mind, I can point out YOUR flaws.

 

Regards, TAR2

[rigney]

Overtone, your last bit of rhetoric is hateful, bigoted, deceitful and mean as hell. Quote: Take another look at the last election map, superimposed on a map of the Confederacy. Then review the sales of guns and ammo in those areas beginning when the nigger put his hand on the Bible and walked into the White House without carrying anything. And put two and two together. It ain't rocket science.

Despicable, to say the least Overtone! I've never liked Obama from the get go, not because of his heritage, but his politics. If you are really looking for dragons to slay, make that same distinction of our larger cities,(cities states) if you will, where today people of all ethnicities are thrown together because of their inability to get out of those Calcuttaish stinking hell holes. No, it doesn't take rocket science to understand the perdictiment our nation is in, but it does take a bit more than common sense. If you are a powerful business man, regardless of race, creed or ethnic back ground and living the secure and good life, or a Hollywood Celebrity having armed guards around them for protection, it's easy to say: "Off with their heads, take their guns", normal people don't need them. Pray that the day will come when most people no longer feel the malevolent and unsafe conditions they are living now in the freest nation on earth. But until such a time comes when nuts and gang-banger are controlled, it ain't gonna happen.

Edited January 3, 2013 by rigney

[swansont]

Then review the sales of guns and ammo in those areas beginning when the nigger put his hand on the Bible and walked into the White House without carrying anything.

 

!

Moderator Note

It's disappointing to have to point out that such language is not acceptable.

[overtone]

Overtone, your last bit of rhetoric is hateful, bigoted, deceitful and mean as hell.

It isn't bigoted, or in the least deceitful. Whether it is hateful or not depnds on your degree of self-awareness. As far as meanness - maybe it's something I picked up from the people I've been working with and living among and going to family reunions with all my life, eh?

 

Because another thing it isn't is wrong.

 

If you are a powerful business man, regardless of race, creed or ethnic back ground and living the secure and good life, or a Hollywood Celebrity having armed guards around them for protection, it's easy to say: "Off with their heads, take their guns", normal people don't need them. Pray that the day will come when most people no longer feel the malevolent and unsafe conditions they are living with now, in the freest nation on earth. But until such a time comes when nuts and gang-banger are controlled, it ain't gonna happen.

So let's enter that as exhibit C, on this forum, backing my assertion that serious gun control in the US would involve an unacceptable level of coercion, an abrogation of civil liberties greatly in excess of any reasonably possible gain,

 

and in pursuit of a comparatively subsidieary or second level benefit - not that specifically gun violence isn't a problem, but even just counting dead children there are several significantly worse problems that can be handled at far less political cost and with far less dubious justifications for governmental coercion.

 

Consider the judgement of others as a real' date=' valuable thing. That they indeed might know, better than you, what they are doing. It is, after all, their bed that they have to lay in. Not yours. [/quote'] If I could avoid the bed the redneck conservative faction of the US has made and is right now attempting to make for me and my family and neighbors, I'd be selfish enough to do that, no problem - you wouldn't hear a peep out of me, from my little island cabin. I wouldn't even have a computer.

 

As far as the real, valuable judgment of others - - - the particular "others" in question voted for W, twice, four years apart (plenty of time for re-evaluation of that first mistake). They got rolled into the Iraq invasion without a hint of doubt, with full and enthusiastic cooperation (and the liberals trying to throw the emergency brake were treated pretty badly, if you recall). Somebody says tax cuts for rich people will create jobs, they shout hallelujah and start calling doubters envious and lazy. (Lazy, btw, is one of the top insults in redneck world; hard worker is.the ultimate compliment, making up for all kinds of character flaws and unfortunate behaviors otherwise). These people have left us a record of their large scale political judgment going back 200 years now, with clear dominance of US national politics and political discourse for the past thirty, and we are perfectly entitled to assess it on that evidence.

 

When the emperor has no clothes, pointing this out is not intellectual snobbery. The reverse, in fact - failing to consider the differences in judgment quality between some "others" and other others is a failure to take any of them seriously. It's a failure to take real lilfe consequences seriously, a failure to come down from the ivory tower and take a look at what's been going on, a failure to treat what these people do and say as if were of any importance.

 

I have over the past few months developed a view that "the bosses" are primarily correct and know what they are doing,

Which puts you into the "they're lying" camp, as opposed to the "they're stupid" camp. That's reasonable - I make that assessment contingently, issue by issue, myself, but the default of "they know what they're doing, they're just bad people" as a general background assumption can certainly be defended.

Edited January 3, 2013 by overtone

[tar]

Rigney,

 

I do not usually pick fights, as I have with Overtone. I do not know him or her, or what agenda he/she may be serving. In fact, I rarely have visited the Politics section, as I usually do not have an agenda of my own. In this case, although our discussion has been split from Guns in the Classroom, I do have an agenda. I do not want to see Biden come up with a plan that marginalizes and or demotes any large portion of our population. Overtone's characterization of gun owners as stupid rednecks, is exactly the kind of thinking that is completely unuseful in this regard. This is not a we vs them topic. It is an us vs Adam Lanza's actions debate.

 

The key is come up with a plan that we all pursue together.

 

The mere suggestion of Obama's that some sort of stricker gun control was in the offing sent hundreds of thousands if not a million or more of our fellow citizens out to the gun store, to get weapons while the getting was good.

 

Demoting "rednecks" to a hated unclass, as Overtone was doing, is not the way to come up with a consensus as to how we should together, as a nation, proceed. We have to bring everybody with us, wherever we go.

 

The majority of my extended family consists of educators, and public servants. Teachers, superindendants, fire chiefs, hospital workers and administrators. Some of us have found a niche in a business enterprise or provide a service of some sort or another doing some thing well, where others can use our services.

 

Other families might have a different trend...shop owners, farmers, factory workers, truck drivers, business leaders, international business, law, art, sports, government, tradesmen, metalworkers, or whatever.

 

Agendas might differ. Who we wish would do things differently and who we wish would continue to do it the same way, would probably coincide with what role we play in the various stories that thread their way through the fabric of our society, and which we consider our stories.

 

It is better, in this climate of polarization in Washington to remember that the worker can not be without the boss, and the boss cannot be, without the worker, and the worker should always consider the boss and the boss always the worker, so that they might be pursuing mutual goals.

 

So, to my agenda. I think weapons of war should be held publically and only publically. Any weapon, that a soldier would carry into battle, might be reasonable for certain law enforcement officials to have access to, but the same weapon, in the hands of private citizens might not make any sense or serve any "public good" purposes.

 

But its more of a suggestion than a demand. And more of an idea than a proposal. And I trust the rest of society to work the idea into their overall thinking on the matter of gun control, and I leave the decision to have or not have such a weapon in their gun case, up to the individual citizen. It is much better to police ourselves concerning such matters, than to "take away" these things from "others".

 

Regards, TAR2

 

P.S. I cross posted with Overtone. Had not read 17 while typing 18.

Overtone,

 

It remains a fact that "good" people can do things other "good" people disapprove of.

 

Just cause bosses might be looking at what I consider the "wrong" things, does not make them evil.

 

Regards, TAR2

Edited January 3, 2013 by tar

[Moontanman]

This statement is undoubtedly true

 

 

So let's enter that as exhibit C, on this forum, backing my assertion that serious gun control in the US would involve an unacceptable level of coercion, an abrogation of civil liberties greatly in excess of any reasonably possible gain,

 

 

Racism is only a meaningful part of it for racists

Edited January 3, 2013 by Moontanman

[rigney]

Quote Tar: The mere suggestion of Obama's that some sort of stricker gun control was in the offing sent hundreds of thousands if not a million or more of our fellow citizens out to the gun store, to get weapons while the getting was good.

 

I can only agree with your assessment Tar. Sadly, I don't find it strange at all that legitimately sane people want the secrecy of owning a fire arm. When overtone used the ruse of only rednecks in "Confederate" mapped regions were buying up guns to protect themselves from radical ethnic groups, I near crapped myself. When rational saneness, madness and brutish meanness are lumped together as a reason for gun control, the mistake is already manifest.

 

Since overtone thought Mo Bandys "Americana" was some sort of subterfuge on my part, thought he might like this one a little better.

 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z1UyQwtdKE4

Edited January 3, 2013 by rigney

[overtone]

When overtone used the ruse of only rednecks in "Confederate" mapped regions were buying up guns to protect themselves from radical ethnic groups' date=' I near crapped mysel [/quote'] See, this kind of ostensible incomprehension and personal insult is what these guys have become accustomed to throwing around without getting slapped for it.

 

There's no excuse. They aren't children, or mentally disabled, or some other vulnerable type of person we have to make allowances for. It's ivory tower irresponsibility, intellectual snobbery of the most offensively paternalistic kind, to treat that kind of shit with respect.

 

And it would wreck any actual discussion of the attitudes behind gun control. But that will continue to be evident.

 

Like this:

Overtone's characterization of gun owners as stupid rednecks, is exactly the kind of thinking that is completely unuseful in this regard.

I said no such thing.

 

And had I said it, which I didn't (and wouldn't, as it is quite different from my actual opinion), you would have been obliged to treat it with respect, and answer it as an honestly held and legitimate opinion - according to your other posting here.

 

But you didn't. Reread, and learn.

 

And yes, that kind of garbage is exactly how one picks fights as opposed to discussing issues.

Edited January 3, 2013 by overtone

[tar]

Overtone,

 

Perhaps I read between the lines. I tend to listen to what people mean, not what they say.

 

You assume everyone that voted for George W. is an ignoramus. I took offense.

You assume that it is agreed that we should not have chased Saddam's guard as we did. It is not agreed. We were expecting chemical weapons because he had used them, and had them at some point. When and where he hid or destroyed them is not something I am privy to.

 

And somehow you were equating voting for W. as proof of ignoramushood. I did not reread and learn.

Not interested. I already got your drift. Just did not find it a useful approach, and called you on it.

 

Regards, TAR2

[overtone]

Perhaps I read between the lines. I tend to listen to what people mean' date=' not what they say. [/quote'] You tend to make insulting errors, in consequence. Try listening to what people say - it's the first step in showing this respect you find so lacking in others.

You assume everyone that voted for George W. is an ignoramus. I took offense.

Reading between the lines again? That shoulder chip is well known to interfere with perception.

 

Rednecks are very' date=' very touchy about ignorance - they project all kinds of snobbery unto "elites" based on those elites thinking of them as ignorant. It's a factional trait, and one is advised to walk on eggshells whenever delivering a bit of information or contradiction of misinformation to a redneck. It's best if they can be manipulated into discovering it for themselves, so they don't have to react to someone trying to be superior to them.

 

But that's a digression: I provided no label for the colossal, obvious, and hopefully instructional failure of judgment evident in having voted for W twice - I never even said it was single factor. There are many possibilities besides ignorance. They're mostly worse, though.

 

In fact, I hinted that claiming ignorance would be a copout, and those worse ones were the likely blamed - I made reference to thirty years of liberal racket, leaving the implication that with all that liberal hootin' and hollerin' there was no good reason to be sufficiently ignorant to vote W in 2000 even, let alone 2004, and more intrinsic character traits had to be involved. I don't find ignorance to be that much of a flaw anyway - of all human shortcomings, the most familiar and most common and easiest remedied and least damaging IMHO.

 

We're all ignorant, one way or another. We're not all vulnerable to the kinds of propaganda that sold W to his benighted voters.

You assume that it is agreed that we should not have chased Saddam's guard as we did. It is not agreed.

Believe me, I'm not assuming any self-awareness or re-evaluation of anything actually having taken place. I'm fully aware that a lot of this faction of Americans is walking around in a state of delusion and retrofitted self-justification that would choke a camel.

 

I do think it's been long enough, though.

 

I'm just pointing out that you don't treat me or my posts with even the minimal courtesy of reading and responding to what is actually written in them. And then you lecture me on "respect". And you guys have been getting away with this kind of thing, making these kinds of posts about "liberals" and so forth, for so long you take the privilege for granted.

 

And so we would prefer to come around to the framing of gun control, the thread etc. But the next two or three posts from me would have to be devoted to correcting bullshit assigned to me by people who regard me as disrespecting them, and therefore harboring opinions regarding guns and gun owners and gun control I do not in fact entertain. Seems a hopeless business, eh?

Side note: if we are ever getting around to attitudes toward gun control:

 

this gun control issue has one unique feature taht provides hope - it is probably the only major political matter on the table now in which the problem actually is the existence of two factions of extremists wrecking the discussion and preventing the sane majority of centrists from haggling out something reasonable.

 

Normally that assertion is a rhetorical ploy intended to wrongfoot the opposition and conceal the misdeeds of some batch of Republican bagmen and incompetents.

 

But in this case,

 

if we can get the anti-gun sane to openly side with the obvious reading of the 2nd Amendment and all the implications thereof, to turn to the folks who think gun owners are troglodyte paranoids with no rights anyone need respect and tell them to shut up and sit down

 

and if we can get the pro-gun sane to openly recognize that a modern assault rifle does have some properties in common with sticks of dynamite and bottles of cyanide and other inanimate objects that should be kept carefully secured in the public interest, to turn to the folks who think we should arm schoolteachers in classrooms and patrol the streets with volunteers carrying Uzis to sit down and quit embarrassing them,

 

that a compromise zone is available, workable, in actual existence.

Edited January 4, 2013 by overtone

[tar]

Overtone,

 

OK, fight is over. Mostly.

 

Factions walking around are one thing. I like to retain the possibility of holding a dissenting opinion without being lumped into a made up, grossly overgeneralized bunch of evil idiots. It is possible to come to an insight, or to hold a position that has merit and validity that would satisfy most thoughtful judges, without having to, by default, have all the charactistics of an "outsider" group. (that is, to be an American one needs to alternately side with and against certain ideas, as they enter the public focus, and take ownership of and bear responsibility for, the outcomes.)

 

To illustrate, after 9-11 I was routinely on a now defunct talkboard Guardian Talk. There were a substantial amount of America haters, and Jew haters on the board. Any fault of the Jews was transferred to their staunch ally America, and thusly transferred to me. I defended myself, and America, and the Jews. An enemy of the Jews and of America was an enemy of mine. This does not mean that I was 100% happy with everything that every Jew or every American ever did or was doing then, but to be an American and reap the benefits of such association, one should take responsibility and bear the shame and take the hits as a solid member of the class. One cannot honestly cherry pick ones associations and disassociate from the class at will. Well one can, and many do perform this disassociation, but I don't think it is honest.

 

You cannot eat what you eat, without the farmers, you cannot drive what you drive without the factory workers and the oil. You cannot have your way of life, as an American, without associating with everybody that makes America, America. That includes the Army, and the CIA, and the oil magnates, the rednecks and the intellectual elite. They are not "they", they are us. By my reckoning, anyway.

 

Regards, TAR

[overtone]

OK' date=' fight is over. Mostly [/quote'] Uh, no, it isn't. You don't get to decide when other people are no longer being abused by you.

I like to retain the possibility of holding a dissenting opinion without being lumped into a made up' date=' grossly overgeneralized bunch of evil idiots. [/quote'] Start by not doing that yourself. Then you will better recognize when it isn't happening to you.

 

For example:

To illustrate, after 9-11 I was routinely on a now defunct talkboard Guardian Talk. There were a substantial amount of America haters, and Jew haters on the board.

Given your presumptions about me and my posts, your "reading between the lines" for what the person really "means", you have no credibility in assigning such labels as "America hater". I doubt you know what you're talking about - my guess is you would have labeled me an America hater, and a Jew hater, in a discussion forum in the wake of 9/11.

 

You cannot have your way of life' date=' as an American, without associating with everybody that makes America, America. That includes the Army, and the CIA, and the oil magnates, the rednecks and the intellectual elite. They are not "they", they are us. By my reckoning, anyway. [/quote'] So?

 

What a load of paternalistic, bigoted bs. Do you really imagine anyone here needs a lecture like that from someone like you? And what could you possibly mean by "associate with", in this context?

 

The liberals in the US are not responsible for the election and re-election of W, for example. They fought very hard to prevent it, provided accurate and timely assessments and predictions showing why it was a bad idea, worked to reduce the damage being done during and afterwards, and in every way opposed what you were insisting on doing. There is no "we" in that tragedy - that was you guys, and it was your fault, and you are to blame for the obviously predictable and clearly foretold horrible, stinking, all but irrecoverable mess that resulted. You didn't "associate with"the people who were "associated with" reality, if I can borrow the term.

 

I could certainly have my way of life as an American without the political doings of W and his associates - it would be much improved, in fact. I haven't needed the political doings of the political faction supporting that disaster for anything - they've been consistently worse than worthless for my entire adult life.

 

Which brings us to gun control, where we discover the need for a more complicated political calculation than "oppose whatever those demonstrated fools favor". The left libertarians and the right libertarians have common cause here, as with seat belts and drug laws and a host of similar issues, and the left libertarians have long recognized this. We're ready to "associate", have been for a generation now. Writing off the righwing authoritarians (regardless of their self-description), how long will it take the right libertarians to figure it out?