Sunday, February 12, 2012

Bumpersticker Gun Nut Words of Stupidity and Violent Gun Culture Philosophy

The Gun Nuts expect us to trust them when they tell us how much they believe in not using deadly force if it can be avoided ---- except they appear to be almost drooling with eagerness when they comment on a situation where they could use their fetish object.  It rings hollow.  Here's why.

I saw a few of these bumper stickers today on  actual vehicles in my neighborhood.
Just to give you a few examples of how widespread the sentiment is.

There are more.  Many many many more versions.

So, WHY is it do you think that WE are less than persuaded when YOUtry to assure us how serious you are about not using lethal force if you can avoid it.

You can avoid it easily.  Don't use your gun INSTEAD of a cell phone or an alarm system or pepper spray or a stun gun or surveillance equipment or any of the many other possibilities INSTEAD of gun violence.

And don't exalt that gun culture of violence by advocating or yourself using one of these, or anything like it. It is as much your lack of condemnation as it is your glorying in this kind of violence which makes your assurances so very unconvincing.  Gun culture: long on guns, short on culture.

21 comments:

  1. DG said: I saw a few of these bumper stickers today on actual vehicles in my neighborhood.

    I'm curious, do you live in a safe neighborhood or is there a lot of crime?
    orlin sellers

    ReplyDelete
  2. Dog Gone, with bumper stickers around like that, you must live in a safe neighborhood.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. GC, Anonymous, JOB, I've lived in a lot of places, and I don't believe for a moment that these stickers or those who own guns make this a safe neighborhood.

      Many other aspects of life in the area do make it so.

      On the other hand, the falling down drunk guy who has firearms for hunting, who rented the proeprty next door when the older woman who owns the property moved to assisted living deeply concerns us for our safety including as regards his safety with his weapons. We have had to increase our safety measures, including the kinds of locks BECAUSE of the gun nut nearby who has proven himself to be unsafe and of dubious judgment in a number of respects.

      We have grave concerns because the guy goes on binges for days at a time, has black outs, lacks coordination and judgment when that drunk, and has already caused us property damage when in that condition.

      So, NO, the guns in the area give us grave concern for our own safety and for the safety of our animals and other property. I've heard firing on a regular basis when the amount of daylight available (or artificial light as well) is far too low for safe shooting. We also occasionally are aware of what appears to be hunting out of season, without respect for property rights, and without recognition or respect for safe distances.

      I live out in the country, but I've lived in inner urban areas as well in the past, and grew up in the suburbs. I think I can fairly say I've had a pretty broad spectrum of residential experience for comparisons.

      Guns do not make us safe. The cops do, our dogs do, neighbors cooperating with each other for their safety does as well.

      Delete
    2. And how much have the police or sheriff's departments done to get control over your dangerous neighbor? Not enough, apparently, which goes to show our point.

      Delete
    3. DG, Let me see if I have this straight. You live in the country and all your neighbors have bumper stickers that say "we don't call 911", so presumably your neighbors all have guns, but then you say: "the guns in the area give us grave concern for our own safety and for the safety of our animals and other property."
      You continue, "Guns do not make us safe. The cops do, our dogs do, neighbors cooperating with each other for their safety does as well."
      So, your neighbors, who have guns, and keep you safe because you cooperate with each other are concerned about their neighbors who have guns. That doesn't sound nutty to you?
      orlin sellers

      Delete
  3. Now this is on the extreme side of things,
    no doubt real cynical sense of humor.

    but Bumper-sticker are lowest form of expression
    and it did accomplish its goal.

    It made you remember it!

    If anything they may scare all but most deprived of criminal.
    something as much as a beware of dog sign,
    can have an effect.

    "drooling with eagerness when they comment on a situation where they could use their fetish object."

    but even you are prone to extremes,
    your maybe a little over zealous.
    but it all good.

    officer using Taser or OC spray have die because of failures in these devices mechanic
    or by relying on them to subdue a armed
    suspect.

    now if some one broke into my house they would always run a risk of being shot.
    remember breaking a entering is both violence,
    and illegal. running off police protocol your should always warn them. but if there armed/or could be and did not take the exit when confronted then for your own safety shoot.

    the first few minute are the most dangerous,
    when in a confrontation as seen in most,
    police shooting.

    But i find most people who really want to shoot
    someone ether join the military or the police as was the case with a few guys i knew from school, funny they use to all-so play football.

    ReplyDelete
  4. Dog- Out of curiosity, have you ever had a pistol pointed at your head by someone, demanding a piece of your property?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. JOB - I have had a very large calibre hand gun pointed at my chest at close range, not my head, but it was not by someone demanding property, it was a different threat. I have been home when there was a B&E (breaking and entering) and had property stolen, but not at gun point, but by a different threat.

      So, while that is a no to your specific question, I believe those experiences probably qualify as being similar to what you had in mind.

      Neither of those experiences was the worst threat I've ever experienced, or the most dangerous situations I have been in....so your point is?

      Delete
    2. Dog- No point. I was just curious. Thanks for answering, and I'm sorry that you had to go through that.

      Delete
  5. I never saw that last one before, I call 357. That's pretty funny.

    These bumper-stickers and signs on the front of trailer-park homes are indeed the lowest form of expression. This is the product of weak insecure men who need guns to feel equal. Then they pretend to be superior. It's an embarrassing joke.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Mikeb, Dog Gone said that she saw these stickers in her neighborhood. Are you saying that she lives in a trailer park? Are you also saying that people who do live in trailer parks are necessarily inferior to those who live in gated communities? Your biases are showing, Mikeb.

      Delete
    2. It depends on what you mean by "inferior," Greg.

      Education-wise, intelligence-wise, health-wise, which group of people do you think is superior?

      Delete
    3. You sound like an American, tacking -wise onto your words. . .

      But regarding superiority, the only thing superior about the intelligence of the people in question is their choice of parents. Having taught a number of these privileged whiny butts over the years, I can tell you that many of them are offered a good education, and many of them get the desired piece of paper at the end, but what actually penetrates into their skulls is in question.

      Delete
    4. Actually Greg, that is crap. The stickers were on an SUV on a major highway in the area, not anywhere close to my residence. From the context of the other bumper stickers, MikeB is correct; they were not well-educated or subtle, refined people. They were however clearly quite thrilled with the American gun culture.

      Delete
    5. MikeB IS an American, and this is a very informal forum where colloquial expression is appropriate.
      As to superiority?

      I doubt you have taught anyone of my caliber; people like me seek out better sources for our education, whether that particular effort is formal or informal.

      The errors, fallacies, and general sloppinenss you show wouldn't have gotten you out of the elementary school where I was educated. Look to your failings and inadequacy.

      I can claim my superiority on the basis of independent testing of both knowledge and ability to reason. It has nothing to do with privilege, it has a lot to do with hard work to develop that ability and potential. I doubt you've EVER had a student like me, because there just aren't many in the world.

      I rather doubt you have students you describe as privileged whiny butts who are self-starters, who can't learn fast enough, who want there to be MORE hours in the day available to them to learn, who never want to stop learning, reading, until they've mastered a topic, not just become minimally acquainted with it. Your privileged whiny butt characterization smells strongly of envy.

      You compared me once to the character of Hermione in the Harry Potter series. You'd be correct if you meant I learned everything I could, including material way beyond my age. You'd be correct if you meant that I wished for a device like the magical hour glass that allowed her to take more than one class at the same time.

      I was privileged, not because of money, but because of who I had as a mentor from an early age, who not only had me reading at the age of two, but learning physics.

      You are in no way comparable to the people who educated me. And I in no way resemble YOUR students.

      Laci on the other hand, I know to be a kindred mind, a person who like me sometimes thoroughly enjoys taking risks. Risk taking is another way I very much resemble Hermione from the Potter series.

      YOU Greg are a mediocre educator. YOU may have a piece of paper, but you are poorly educated, you reason badly, you are intellectually dishonest, and your research skills demonstrate that you are at best sloppy, and at worst, utterly incompetent.

      I've proven, over and over, to people far more intelligent and better educated than you are, precisely what 'penetrates my skull', and that I can take in large quantities of information, process it quickly and thoroughly. Tha includes in some cases, performing what Kahneman would term 'slow thinking' at an accelerated rate.

      All my life I've had the privilege of interacting with people who who were at the top of their fields, not because of privilege, but because of what I can do, because of my ability to think. Privilege doesn't get you as far as you seem to think it does, Greg. You have to prove you can think, analyze, understand and research, break new ground, hold your own when challenged by other gifted and accompished people.

      If I'd had YOU for a teacher, K-12 (it is incomprehensible that I would have had you after that), I would probably have had you fired for incompetence. FYI - my 5th grade teacher was forced to retire because she was becoming senile, and I had a major hand in calling that to the attention of the school authorities, in a manner which forced them to do something, although to be fair, I was hardly the only one to complain. I also was responsible for the departure of my 10th grade Enlgish Lit teacher, who 'left' for incompetence, much like what I see in you.

      You are a hack, mediocre at best.

      Delete
    6. And you really should learn that when you yammer on without evidence, you look like a fool. To my knowledge, you've never taken a class from me or even sat in on one period. That being said, you know nothing.

      But what you've shown us is that you make judgements about people on the basis of your biases. That is why we will never allow people like you to decide what rights we get to exercise. Enjoy your self-assessed superiority--that's all that you have, it seems.

      Delete
    7. Greg, you applaud LegalEagle's poor scholarship because you don;t know any better yourself.

      If you teach persuasive writing, I would imai9nge that you would reinforce my criticisms that LegalEagle does not back up his statements with facts that support his argument.

      In fact, it is quite obvious that neither LegalEagle nor yourself have actually read the material in question--in particular my writings and the primary source material.

      You both show a lack of understanding of the topic and the delineation between national and personal defence.

      I concur with Dog Gone that you show a marked inability to perform the task which you claim to perform.

      Likewise, LegalEagle has made claims about his credentials which he fails to support.

      I seriously question whether he actually has these qualifications based upon my above comments.

      Delete
    8. I find it interesting that someone who hides behind his doglet will at the same time criticize others for not giving out more and more information about themselves.

      Delete
  6. Mike b and others of his ilk can't get it through their heads that lawful citizens who are exercising their second amendment rights don't want to have to use their weapons for their intended purpose. But we also know that criminals don't obey the laws and will kill you and your loved ones to get what they want.

    We also know that the police are not required by law to provide protection for you or your family. The police will only come after the fact to investigate and write up a report.

    No one who legally owns a gun and has a CWP really knows how they will react in a situation where they or members of their family are threatened and no matter where you live, the police are minutes away when seconds count. Myself, I hope I never have to find out, but I know that if the situation arises, I will dispatch the criminal with little remorse. He chose to break the law and try to hurt my family and gets what he deserves.

    Lawful citizens who have CWP's don't go around brandishing their weapons, in fact, it's against the law for the public at large to even know you're carrying,( the meaning of concealed means that it can't be readily discernible by cursory examination.), unless one has to pull their weapon to protect themselves or their loved ones.

    A gentleman in Spartanburg County had to pull his weapon and dispatch a criminal intent on robbing the restaurant where he was eating, at gun point. He made the mistake of turning his weapon on the CWP holder after being challenged. The criminal was shot once in the chest and once in the head... Goes to show that...yes, you can fix stupid.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Thanks Mr. G Guy, but you really should consider finding another word to overuse. "Ilk" is getting tired.

    Last year it was "draconian." What's next?

    ReplyDelete