"This comes from a sci-fi novel and has no basis in reality. "
I first read of smart guns in a sci-fi novel released in 1981 called "Systemic Shock".
"Ted Quantrill is a survivor. If that means bearing arms for the religious fanatics who make up the new government, he'll do it. If it means ruthlessly hunting down dissidents and "unacceptables", he'll do it."
Of course in this book, like the Bond movie more recently talked about, he's a government man, and government men in real life seem to be spurning smart gun technology. No basis in reality indeed.
Sounds cool to me Laci. We just have to get people to stop quoting Heinlein and bringing up James Bond's Skyfall. I much prefer quoting real people like Jeff Cooper.
"Pick up a rifle and you change instantly from a subject to a citizen."
“The police cannot protect the citizen at this stage of our development, and they cannot even protect themselves in many cases. It is up to the private citizen to protect himself and his family, and this is not only acceptable, but mandatory.”
To say police cannot protect citizens, or even themselves is hogwash and just as fictional as this book. Of course gun loons grasp of reality is non-existent.
And there's absolutely nothing wrong with it. Someone's love of a genre is a matter of personal taste, Laci's tastes just run in other directions. I'm actually a Heinlein fan and enjoy his fiction and also his nonfiction. Many things in common use today have been written of long ago in science fiction. So to say that the genre has no basis in reality isn't really true. After all, what is the novel Frankenstein but transplant technology writ large.
"To say police cannot protect citizens, or even themselves is hogwash and just as fictional as this book."
While most officers do their best, they are constrained by being a reactive force which obviously insures there will be response time to deal with. Often that results in them arriving after much violence has been done. There is even case law saying that police aren't legally obligate to protect individuals, rather the public at large. If someone attepts to harm me or mine, I'm quite content for them to decide to leave and then let the police do the chasing. its just that pesky time till they get there I have to deal with.
It was a real person you quoted SS, not a fictional person. His statement is fictional, but as you said you love his statement. Which only proves the delusional world you gun loons live in.
TS, the concepts I am dealing with here are so far beyond your level of understanding that I am not sure I am able to try and explain what is going on.
Yes, Mayberry is fictitious, but even a person of subnormal intelligence could perceive that it was an idealised version of the time.
That gets to one level on which you could take this post, but I'm not sure you're intellectually up to it: which idealised version of society would you like to live in.
Given that the location of the quote in this book is toward the end, I doubt that you would have the time or intelligence to have actually read it, TS.
IOW, I don't think we would have a very deep discussion of this topic based upon your comment, but that is no surprise to me.
Course, the reasons there couldn't be a deep discussion is that you usually refuse to discuss things, and on the rare occasions you do you misconstrue people's arguments, distort precedent, and dissemble about everything from history to grammar rules.
Aw, did yer poor whittle feelings get hurt to the point of needing to come back with a manure-loader full of asininity? Try not being such a fragile little phag.
You mean like the Peace Prize President's wars or perhaps the Double Think we are fed daily? "We must celebrate our differences while vehemently denying that they exist." “Doublethink means the power of holding two contradictory beliefs in one's mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them.” - George Orwell, 1984
Is a comparison, both looking at how far we are from that, and how close we have come to it, helpful? Yes. Reminds us the direction we don't want to go in--maybe makes us properly shit our pants when we realize how close we are.
E.g. The two way telescreen is now in our pockets, on our desks, etc. It just isn't being used for constant surveillance. Maybe we see the utility in being able to skype and video chat with friends all over and are happy to have these, but the fact that we accept this technology that can be used to spy on us means that we need to watch the watchers much better than we've been doing lest we slip closer toward what will, hopefully, remain a boogeyman of what encroaching fascism/communism could become.
For another example, Orlin pointed out the idea of doublethink from 1984 as something we're seeing today. Of course, it isn't enshrined as a principle like it was at that time, but look at the most recent example--Obama gives his speech on the half-assed way he plans to fight ISIS; Kerry clarifies that we are not at war with them--merely engaging in a "counter-terrorism action"; some public outcry and confusion; then we are told that we are at "war" in the same sense that we are at "war" with Al Qaeda; we are assured that the president is not contradicting Kerry. Basically, we're at "war" but not at "WAR-war."
And no, I'm not accusing Obama of being the Party or some other entity from 1984--at least not on his own. Republicans do the same thing. We've allowed too much of this bull, just like we've allowed too much of other encroachments by which each party has enabled the other to greater and greater power grabs.
Obama has usurped more authority than anyone before him, but couldn't have gotten there without Bush. Bush usurped more than anyone before him, but couldn't have gotten there without the Zipper. Etc. until at least Adams and the Alien and Sedition Act (unless you're an anti-federalist born 200 years late and think there was something fishy about that whole constitutional convention thing).
Instead of making fun of Orlin for mentioning 1984 now, but mentioning it in the context of someone like W (Or republicans doing the opposite), we'd all do well to take the lesson to heart and watch for and fight against the encroachment regardless of whether we like the guy in office at the moment. Otherwise, we'll continue as we have been, and the only question left to be decided is, "Will the Republicans or Democrats be in charge when the encroaching fascism reaches supercritical mass?"
"Is it on that level? No." You should have shut up after that. Your passionate and lengthy defense of Orlin's nonsense is just more nonsense from someone who can't ever admit when he's wrong or when the opponent is right.
Thanks for providing such a stellar example of why our current political system is in the shape it's in. Conservative or libertarian tries to dialog with liberals and find common ground--"You don't agree with my whole progressive ideology! Shut Up!" Liberal tries to dialog with Republicans and find common ground on something--"You're just a pinko lib! Shut Up!"
And so the ratchet of encroaching fascism keeps turning as we ping pong back and forth between Democrats and Republicans.
Thanks again for your contribution to our trajectory.
Has been a farce since it was written! Road rage turns deadly father killed on his way to pick kids up from 1st day of school, Movie-goer texts and is summarily executed in from of wife, Woman has an accident goes to a house for help, is shot in the face. And on and on it goes
You forgot the tuxedo guy getting oral sex in the alley who was stumbled upon by a naples couple - he then open fire on them for interrupting his public BJ! Yeah our society is real real polite with its guns! LOL
So perhaps we should go back to teaching courtesy in school. It likely shows my age, but I can remember when deportment was something you were graded on in school.
Like the courtesy of not bringing a gun to the dinner table, or the old time idea that in a civil society citizens don't carry around guns just because they can. Was the old wild west a more courteous society because everyone carried guns? How about the courtesy of complying with rules; instead of the white trash attitude of finding any little loop hole to break rules. SS hasn't got a clue of proper courtesy, or what a civil society is.
Actually it would involve more than just "manners". We could always look at Laci's recent posts regarding Mayberry, a town of bygone days where everyone's sense of responsibility led to a very peaceful world barring occasional intrusions from people who didn't have that mindset. Even Otis, the town drunk was responsible enough to stagger to jail and lock himself in. I always wondered why he didn't just stagger home. I'm sure this will likely tweak Laci, but perhaps we need a class more like one written of by Heinlein in Starship Troopers, History and Moral Philosophy.
Right, lets base society on a Sci-Fi fiction. You already stated you live by the delusions of Jeff's statement. It's revealing that you think courtesy and manners is bringing a deadly weapon to a public dinner table where parents bring their children; and if a parent asked you to not display a deadly weapon in front of their children while they are eating you would tell them it's your right and just STFU.
"It's revealing that you think courtesy and manners is bringing a deadly weapon to a public dinner table where parents bring their children; and if a parent asked you to not display a deadly weapon in front of their children while they are eating you would tell them it's your right and just STFU. "
"This comes from a sci-fi novel and has no basis in reality. "
ReplyDeleteI first read of smart guns in a sci-fi novel released in 1981 called "Systemic Shock".
"Ted Quantrill is a survivor. If that means bearing arms for the religious fanatics who make up the new government, he'll do it. If it means ruthlessly hunting down dissidents and "unacceptables", he'll do it."
https://www.goodreads.com/characters/68597-ted-quantrill
Of course in this book, like the Bond movie more recently talked about, he's a government man, and government men in real life seem to be spurning smart gun technology. No basis in reality indeed.
And 2001 and 2010 posited that we would have interplanetary travel.
DeleteYour point?
Mine--you don't run gun policy on a fiction.
"Mine--you don't run gun policy on a fiction."
DeleteSounds cool to me Laci. We just have to get people to stop quoting Heinlein and bringing up James Bond's Skyfall. I much prefer quoting real people like Jeff Cooper.
"Pick up a rifle and you change instantly from a subject to a citizen."
“The police cannot protect the citizen at this stage of our development, and they cannot even protect themselves in many cases. It is up to the private citizen to protect himself and his family, and this is not only acceptable, but mandatory.”
Well, ss, you can't deny that many of your fellow gun lovers do use that quote.
DeleteTo say police cannot protect citizens, or even themselves is hogwash and just as fictional as this book. Of course gun loons grasp of reality is non-existent.
DeleteAnd there's absolutely nothing wrong with it. Someone's love of a genre is a matter of personal taste, Laci's tastes just run in other directions. I'm actually a Heinlein fan and enjoy his fiction and also his nonfiction. Many things in common use today have been written of long ago in science fiction. So to say that the genre has no basis in reality isn't really true.
DeleteAfter all, what is the novel Frankenstein but transplant technology writ large.
"To say police cannot protect citizens, or even themselves is hogwash and just as fictional as this book."
DeleteWhile most officers do their best, they are constrained by being a reactive force which obviously insures there will be response time to deal with. Often that results in them arriving after much violence has been done.
There is even case law saying that police aren't legally obligate to protect individuals, rather the public at large. If someone attepts to harm me or mine, I'm quite content for them to decide to leave and then let the police do the chasing. its just that pesky time till they get there I have to deal with.
It was a real person you quoted SS, not a fictional person. His statement is fictional, but as you said you love his statement. Which only proves the delusional world you gun loons live in.
DeleteBut Mayberry... that shit's real.
ReplyDeletehttp://mikeb302000.blogspot.com/2014/08/for-those-of-you-who-miss-good-old-days.html?m=1
TS, the concepts I am dealing with here are so far beyond your level of understanding that I am not sure I am able to try and explain what is going on.
DeleteYes, Mayberry is fictitious, but even a person of subnormal intelligence could perceive that it was an idealised version of the time.
That gets to one level on which you could take this post, but I'm not sure you're intellectually up to it: which idealised version of society would you like to live in.
Given that the location of the quote in this book is toward the end, I doubt that you would have the time or intelligence to have actually read it, TS.
IOW, I don't think we would have a very deep discussion of this topic based upon your comment, but that is no surprise to me.
Wow, big talk Mutt.
DeleteCourse, the reasons there couldn't be a deep discussion is that you usually refuse to discuss things, and on the rare occasions you do you misconstrue people's arguments, distort precedent, and dissemble about everything from history to grammar rules.
This comes from a sci-fi novel and has no basis in reality.
ReplyDeleteThat's the same thing the intelligence disabled, like you, said about Orwell's, "1984"
orlin
Orlin, if anyone is "intelligence disabled" it's you. I can see you are losing whatever cool you had in a desire to be recognised.
DeleteBut, I recognise you for a fool who cannot make an intelligent comment.
But, that never stopped you from wanting attention.
BTW, Morlon, if you are so afraid of big brother--why do you post on the internet?
DeleteAw, did yer poor whittle feelings get hurt to the point of needing to come back with a manure-loader full of asininity? Try not being such a fragile little phag.
Deleteorlin
Orlin, the descriptions in 1984 are quite different from the government interference you have to put up with today. Don't you think?
DeleteYou mean like the Peace Prize President's wars or perhaps the Double Think we are fed daily?
Delete"We must celebrate our differences while vehemently denying
that they exist."
“Doublethink means the power of holding two contradictory beliefs in one's mind simultaneously, and accepting both of them.” - George Orwell, 1984
Wake up, dude.
orlin
This from the same Mike who used to worry about the encroaching fascism of BOOSH!
DeleteI have often posted about the encroaching fascism but comparing it to Orwell's dystopia is just another silly exaggeration, which you guys just love.
DeleteIs it on that level? No.
DeleteIs a comparison, both looking at how far we are from that, and how close we have come to it, helpful? Yes. Reminds us the direction we don't want to go in--maybe makes us properly shit our pants when we realize how close we are.
E.g. The two way telescreen is now in our pockets, on our desks, etc. It just isn't being used for constant surveillance. Maybe we see the utility in being able to skype and video chat with friends all over and are happy to have these, but the fact that we accept this technology that can be used to spy on us means that we need to watch the watchers much better than we've been doing lest we slip closer toward what will, hopefully, remain a boogeyman of what encroaching fascism/communism could become.
For another example, Orlin pointed out the idea of doublethink from 1984 as something we're seeing today. Of course, it isn't enshrined as a principle like it was at that time, but look at the most recent example--Obama gives his speech on the half-assed way he plans to fight ISIS; Kerry clarifies that we are not at war with them--merely engaging in a "counter-terrorism action"; some public outcry and confusion; then we are told that we are at "war" in the same sense that we are at "war" with Al Qaeda; we are assured that the president is not contradicting Kerry. Basically, we're at "war" but not at "WAR-war."
And no, I'm not accusing Obama of being the Party or some other entity from 1984--at least not on his own. Republicans do the same thing. We've allowed too much of this bull, just like we've allowed too much of other encroachments by which each party has enabled the other to greater and greater power grabs.
Obama has usurped more authority than anyone before him, but couldn't have gotten there without Bush. Bush usurped more than anyone before him, but couldn't have gotten there without the Zipper. Etc. until at least Adams and the Alien and Sedition Act (unless you're an anti-federalist born 200 years late and think there was something fishy about that whole constitutional convention thing).
Instead of making fun of Orlin for mentioning 1984 now, but mentioning it in the context of someone like W (Or republicans doing the opposite), we'd all do well to take the lesson to heart and watch for and fight against the encroachment regardless of whether we like the guy in office at the moment. Otherwise, we'll continue as we have been, and the only question left to be decided is, "Will the Republicans or Democrats be in charge when the encroaching fascism reaches supercritical mass?"
"Is it on that level? No." You should have shut up after that.
DeleteYour passionate and lengthy defense of Orlin's nonsense is just more nonsense from someone who can't ever admit when he's wrong or when the opponent is right.
Because you have such internal contradictory opinions you don't even realize that doublethink is an everyday part of government bullshit.
DeleteThink about this:
"We must celebrate our differences while vehemently denying
that they exist."
orlin sellers
Mike,
DeleteThanks for providing such a stellar example of why our current political system is in the shape it's in. Conservative or libertarian tries to dialog with liberals and find common ground--"You don't agree with my whole progressive ideology! Shut Up!" Liberal tries to dialog with Republicans and find common ground on something--"You're just a pinko lib! Shut Up!"
And so the ratchet of encroaching fascism keeps turning as we ping pong back and forth between Democrats and Republicans.
Thanks again for your contribution to our trajectory.
Has been a farce since it was written! Road rage turns deadly father killed on his way to pick kids up from 1st day of school, Movie-goer texts and is summarily executed in from of wife, Woman has an accident goes to a house for help, is shot in the face. And on and on it goes
ReplyDeleteYou forgot the tuxedo guy getting oral sex in the alley who was stumbled upon by a naples couple - he then open fire on them for interrupting his public BJ! Yeah our society is real real polite with its guns! LOL
Delete"And on and on it goes"
ReplyDeleteSo perhaps we should go back to teaching courtesy in school. It likely shows my age, but I can remember when deportment was something you were graded on in school.
Yeah, let's teach courtesy in school, anything but restricting gun ownership.
DeleteLike the courtesy of not bringing a gun to the dinner table, or the old time idea that in a civil society citizens don't carry around guns just because they can. Was the old wild west a more courteous society because everyone carried guns? How about the courtesy of complying with rules; instead of the white trash attitude of finding any little loop hole to break rules. SS hasn't got a clue of proper courtesy, or what a civil society is.
DeleteActually it would involve more than just "manners". We could always look at Laci's recent posts regarding Mayberry, a town of bygone days where everyone's sense of responsibility led to a very peaceful world barring occasional intrusions from people who didn't have that mindset. Even Otis, the town drunk was responsible enough to stagger to jail and lock himself in. I always wondered why he didn't just stagger home.
DeleteI'm sure this will likely tweak Laci, but perhaps we need a class more like one written of by Heinlein in Starship Troopers, History and Moral Philosophy.
Right, lets base society on a Sci-Fi fiction. You already stated you live by the delusions of Jeff's statement. It's revealing that you think courtesy and manners is bringing a deadly weapon to a public dinner table where parents bring their children; and if a parent asked you to not display a deadly weapon in front of their children while they are eating you would tell them it's your right and just STFU.
DeleteAnon, I've said many times. I'm normally conceal. It isn't required in Minnesota, but I do.
DeleteAgain, we are not talking about you. That's a dishonest way to deflect from the problem.
Delete"It's revealing that you think courtesy and manners is bringing a deadly weapon to a public dinner table where parents bring their children; and if a parent asked you to not display a deadly weapon in front of their children while they are eating you would tell them it's your right and just STFU. "
DeleteYou are the one who brought it up Anon.
You are the one who supports stupid, deadly gun practices.
Delete