Jan '05 - Apr '07
architecture students with guns...dunno why bu that sounds dangerous!
make sure u clench your butt before you fire.
ah...one of my favorite pastimes....just remember your four rules, fellas and enjoy the stress relief.
oh, how appropriate to post this on columbine shooting and the anniversy of hitlers birth.
20 april 1889 - hitler
20 april 1999 - columbine
good one lads! keep it up! is woodbury a junior college? you guys look like real fun guys!
having grown up on the prairies where lotsa kids (including myself) learn to hunt i understand practicing with rifles. but pistols? what the fuck? looking to pop someone?
shouldn't you guys be blowing up your models or something?
TED, I'd really like to hear how you think college students' shooting sports hobby, the birthday of a dead fascist and a crime perpetrated by criminals with stolen firearms are somehow interelated. You must be a whole smarter than i am, because i fail to see some intellectual connection. Enlighten me, would you? And to the fellas from Woodbury, I'm sorry that this thread has shifted. PM me TED, I'd love to chit chat.
If i may jump in, it's obviously about power. You feel powerful shooting a gun (c'mon, why else is shooting a gun still a hobby in this day and age, for marksmanship? If you aren't military or police you don't need marksmanship). The Dead Fascist had a twisted need for power. Those boys had fantasies of revenge and power (and chose to act on said dead fascist's birthday). I would go further and say it is a very male trait that we are all guilty of, and it is usually borne out of resentment, a fear of being perceived as or discovered as weak, or just plain old alienation.
That they all coincided on this one day is probably just random chance. But if you were one of those who lost someone you loved on that day you'd find it upsetting to come across this post, on this very day....wouldn't you?
InstrumentOFaction, surely you can empathize with that possibility.
the columbine boys choose intentionally the day of hitlers birthday to do their 'hobby' in colorado -- they too used to be sports shooters. is it only chance in this case of this post or is it intentional?
i dont find the sport in acts of violence. in any manor.
TEDDY just feels that he has to win an argument somewhere, no matter what the topic.
Bill-nyc and TED,
obviously? Until i hear that the Boys from Woodbury decided to do some skeet and target shooting to commemorate any of those three bastards, i will give them the benefit of the doubt and say they didn't post this intentionally to worry your consciences. Hell, i went to the range that day too and there was no increased number of people shooting so i doubt that there was a wave of violence across the nation's shooting ranges because of the date.
I don't imagine you are actually grouping the large population of gun owners, sport shooters, and hunters in America with Hitler or the criminals at Columbine, right? If you are or even tend to agree with that statement then i really feel sorry for you. I doubt you really think that millions of Americans who enjoy shooting sports do it for some glib power trip.
My father is a 30 yr veteran of the Military, Local and Federal Law Enforcement and a Prize Winning Marksman. He taught me the sport and the responsibility that goes along with it. I grew up learning a skill set and have continued the hobby into adulthood. I am a target shooter and enjoy the challenge just like anyone with any active hobby that demands practice, precision and patience to achieve positive results. I also know that a firearm can protect me and my loved ones from predators intent on doing them harm. This is why I practice and why I am a gun owner and a gun rights activist. This is also why i try to engage in dialogue with intelligent people like yourselves since you seem to have such a twisted interpretation of people like me.
Lets say you are a football fan. Say you watch ESPN every night during the season looking for indepth coverage on the weekend's games and all you got was shoddy, lazy reporting, filled with innaccurate facts and figures, innacurate scores and all this reported by the women on TV's "the view"? Tom Brady threw for 3000 yards in the superbowl? sure. Touchdowns get a team 9 points now? sure. You'd know better, right? Well, if somebody is reporting it on TV it must be true, right? somebody watching believes barbara walters when she reports on Tom's stellar performance, right?
Hey InstrumentOFAction, the army doesn't throw footballs. Policeman don't catch criminals with tennis rackets. Forgive me but for me guns will always be weapons that neutralize a threat at best, cause death at worst. Sometimes within mutally agreed upon moral law, sometimes outside of it.
I wouldn't consider myself swayed by the media, perhaps it's living in NYC for 35 yrs. We don't have much shooting for sport around here. Shooting in the urban context is usually about power, bragging rights, and the commision of crime.
I appreciate your heritage, lord knows if I grew up around guns I would probably feel differently.
But put me firmly in the gun-control column. It's not a sport to me, but an unfortunate necessity, because of our collective inability to evolve beyond violence. We need the threat of reciprocal violence to maintain order.
So as I said, for me guns are for the military and law enforcement.
Regarding our right to bear arms to protect ourselves from an unjust government? Sadly that is an anachronism. It was valid when everyone had muskets. The US government has tanks, air support, and smart bombs. What can citizens do with guns? We barely vote.
OK. Certainly interesting debate here. Let me state for the record that this posting/hitler's birthday/columbine anniversary is pure coincedence. We had just finished a busy week and wanted to blow off some steam. It was studiomates Brices birthday and he said that he had never shot a gun before. So we took him to kill some skeet.
So that's that.
I can see, Bill, why NYC has jaded your interpretation of the role firearms play in American Society. Luckily for most of us outside NY state and County we don't have a goverment that precludes us from defending ourselves. Ask yourself if the recent string of 'i dared him to shoot me' bs armed muggings in NYC would have even occured if thugs thought for just an instant if their prey were armed? its "an anachronism", i suppose. Around here, though, in flyover country, the occurrances of these types of crime have drastically subsided in states with CCW issuance.
as for the second amendment being about defending ourselves against an unjust government, i'm glad you see the second amendment as being partially about that. Most people on your side of the issue prattle on about the national guard which only shows their ignorance of simple dates and a study of Jefferson's historic writings on the subject.
That said, don't you think that even c.1800 the army had the power to defeat men with muskets in small bands or even when organized? this aspect of the second amendment is less about the power to overthrow government as it is setting up a challenge for the military to use that power against the constitution/land/people they are sworn to protect....
If the people are armed and are willing to resist, its not about who would win, but about facing off American Military Personel against Average Americans...knowing full well that soldiers will have a hard time fighting their countrymen and vice versa. I have always interpretted this as a kind of neutrality clause. Soldiers will abandon their posts and fight the good fight against a government that itself has voided the oath to defend the people. Its not about smart bombs and technology as much as the smarts to stay out of the realm of a government pushing the limits of their own power.
I'm sorry you feel that guns are only for the military and law enforcement. I only hope you are never placed in a position where a firearm could be utilized to defend the life of someone you care about. You may find your whole world turns around. What's NYPD's average response nowadays anyway?...i'm pretty sure its longer than the time it takes for someone to break into your home and rape/kill your family. I don't mean this to sound brash or heartless, Bill, only as food for thought....the government you depend on not to drop a smart bomb in your kitchen doesn't care to protect you, nor is the NYPD, as its agent of law enforcement, sworn to prevent crime from coming to your door. I feel badly if you'd rather see a criminal hurt you or yours to justify your moral superiority. That only makes it seem like you value their life over your family's.
as for the evolution beyond violence??? keep watching star trek for a perfect adaptation of the human species. Even Gorillas start wars...we cannot evolve beyond it and violence will always remain an issue and an agent of control...my idea of gun control? you control your gun correctly and I'll correctly control my own.
thanks for responding, Bill, I'd enjoy speaking more about this via PM if you'd reciprocate.
Great, King...i'm glad you fellas had fun. thanks for dismissing the assertion. again, sorry we hijacked your thread. I'll quit responding now via this thread and only respond via PM, ok?
instrument, i think its great thet treads debate issues outside of what school i got accepted to so and so etc. and lets be real, i will say things on a thread to some regard as an extreme to debate the issue and spark a conversation.
that being said, i am against acts of agression at any manor. there are lots of ways of blowing off steam and those 2 kids from colorado had the sporting attitude also. never raised a flag to their parents etc. not that thats the last word. those last guys felt the power at the highest level of what a gun could do, allowed it to influence their perspective on life, became very dark individuals.
if we were all sain, caring individuals id say -- great have your gun. but when life crisis happens to some individuals, be it uneployment, drugs, or what ever, that right to bear arms is a deadly weapon. we cant continue to build prisons at a rate that exceeds building schools. by not universally giving the right to bear arms to the able and the physcos you are putting my life at risk.
blowing off steam, eh? so when you were shooting, were you imagining that prick theory instructor who gave you a c on the last paper behind the target?
Good point about the army fighting their own citizens. That certainly would be a difficult situation. But since the trend in weaponry is killing at a distance, it may not be as difficult some day. Especially since the "rebels" woulld most likely be branded terrorists.
When did I say I would rather see my loved ones hurt in order to maintain my moral superiority? That sounds too much like a standard NRA line. Obviously you're way off.
I know we can't evolve beyond violence, I was merely stating/lamenting that fact.
Well we could just continue trading all the same old arguments and still not get anywhere. I'm deep in final review, gotta work on some architecture type stuff. No bad feelings guys. If we were all the same we'd be boring. I appreciate all your typing, and apologize for my brief responses. But If the criminals had no guns..ah well you know...
(BTW-My oldest and best friend has an NRA sticker on his car...friendship is possible)
We should all vote our conscience, and we'll have to abide.
im a moderate myself cuz i grrew up in a culture of gun ownership but also saw enough violence (and knew a few people who were killed with guns) to believe that gun control is a necessity. Pistols and automatic weapons are for killing, end of story. And the right to bear arms was never about personal protection but a political response born from fear of what the british (or any organised military for that matter) might do if that right didn't exist. That political need is sort of gone now and the right is a bit of a dinosaur.
If you really believe guns protect you from violent crime then you might want to have another look at the statistics and stop complaining about misrepresentation from the other side. That kind of gun philosophy is based on a culture of fear and has nothing to do with the sport you began the argument with IOF. guns for sport and hunting are ok if controlled, but when you start going for the fear factor you embarass me and yourself. almost as bad m. heston challenging the world to pry his rifle from dead, cold hands. I respect the NRA and m. Heston but that kind of macho nonsense is entirely the wrong message.
Bill...no bad feelings here at all.
Like i said, i didn't mean to be harsh in those words. I lament the same facts you do. Best of Luck with Reviews!
TED, you have PM.
Jump, I'll send you a PM later. I'm trying to respect King's thread here. I hope you'll do the same. The facts and stats actually don't work for you as you'd hope though, i'm afraid.
I'm perfectly happy to have this debate in my comment thread. I agree with TED that it is interesting to have a different conversation.
I do take issue with your quote here though:
"there are lots of ways of blowing off steam and those 2 kids from colorado had the sporting attitude also"
To compare me and my friends to a couple of murderous psychopaths is something that I just can't let slide. I am a 31 year old man, well beyond my red-flag years. And in no way am I a gun fanatic. I grew up in Texas and hunted when I was a kid, but until we went to the shooting range it had probably been more than 15 years since I had touched a gun. Also in no way did I mean to promote guns/violence. It was harmless fun. Period. It isn't meant to be taken so seriously.
And. Yeah. We were blowing off steam. No, we weren't picturing our Theory instructor. We were blowing off steam the way we always do. By laughing and having a good time.
I appreciate the debate. I don't appreciate anyone drawing conclusions about me based on a harmless Friday night.
can i take my gun up to heaven?
u know she s always been right here by my side
can i take my gun up to heaven
i ll check it with saint peter at the gates
and if i had a woman who was faithful
or even kind some of the time
u know id take her up to the gates of heaven
or follow her on down to the gates of hell
so can i take my gun up to heaven
and when i get home from a hard day workin at the prison
and find my woman aiint around
she down at dahlies playin cards and drinkin
or sittin on the cars with the boys singin dixie
can i take my gun up to heaven?
i recieved a 'PM' from instrument that i am going to answer here. [i am not hip and didnt know what a PM was!!!]
you put 4 images of happy folks with guns on that day with no statements associated with it on the columbine day and we have the right to read the representation implied by that post[representation is one of the most difficult challenges in A-school and professionally]. we are not 'taking over the thread' -- by you putting it out there it implies the word 'discuss!'.
i am certain king, you are a decent bloak, but i [and probably wrongly] look at who we are by the whole package -- all our acts. guns have many messages; those advocated by instrument, right to bear arms, hunting or acts of violence are various paths one may conclude in those represenations.
perhaps a strong lesson in the power of the image and mis-representation.
TED, i wrote you that email before King said this discussion had a place in his thread and didn't mind. if you want to continue it here, so be it and since its cool with King, i'll respond here.
On second thought, though, you really didn't respond to my PM. (i'm not hip either TED, this one took me weeks to figure out too)
You speak about responding to the imagery King posted as a impetus for discussion. I think that this is what the school blog, photo rich as it is, is for...on that we agree...so i've got zero issue with you responding...
...but rather than this discussion being a "strong lesson in the power of image and misreprsentation" as you put it, i think it started only as a response to your outrageous claim, albeit now withdrawn, that King posted this out of some reverance for Hitler and columbine criminals.
Now, if you want to discuss the thought process that you experienced when initially viewing King's post...that of horror and disgust at someone's 'celebration' of such a wicked day...thats fine, lets discuss it...but your perception really has little to do with the issue of firearms, school shootings or fascist dictators but has much to do with the implications of imagery on perception. Obviously, there is plenty of Architectural significance to be placed on this issue alone.
I'd say its less a message of "misrepresentation" and more of MISINTERPRETATION.
ok. the PM comment is my ignorance and really not a jab at implying your hip. i always have to look up in my urban dictionary things like lol etc. just dont know if i am that out of it, its a text message thingy i dont do or what.
we will probably continue to disagree. i see agression of any sort leading to more violence and war of any sort continuing agression. i know i am being all encompassing but thats the way i feel.
the hitler connection is a real connection of the kids to columbine -- their act was specifically planned this day. and yes it was just by chance these guys posted these images unaware of what day. they are not the direct focus of the comments nor did i ever state they are facist; its the images-columbine-hitler coencedence. its a debate on the right to bear arms and violence leading to violence.
i live in an urban area with lots of nutters and violence of all sorts. should i get a gun to protect myself? should i carry it on the train just incase? or dis-arm those nutters? how do you stop the bad guys from doing more bad to innocent people. we cant build enough prisons to hold them all. i dont want to live in a police state.
if you have a solution for the violence/human aggressive aspect of guns i will listen. its not about the rural guy shooting the odd deer, using the skin, eating the meat. we could certainly debate it as a 'sport' but then again i really dont consider nascar racing and golf a sport either so thats a dead end direction also. its about all of those folks that i think all would agree shouldnt have guns. yet the nra agressively protects their rights to have that gun [loosing that right once they are caught doing harm].
and i still think it is mis-representation. those guys their photos out there with the guns proudly in their hands with smirks on their faces. that who they are telling us they say they are. you read sport. i just cant.
TED, I didn't see a jab, IÃ¢â‚¬â„¢m with you on not getting this new trend towards truncated language in text messaging...there are contests out there now for crying out loud...gone are the spelling bees for our youth and here are 'fastest text messenger'...yikes. But thatÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s for another time and discussion.
I think you are right...we will never agree. And thatÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s fine...thatÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s what makes this medium and this country so great...I may not agree with your opinion but IÃ¢â‚¬â„¢d die to protect your right to it.
Now...lets forget the early misunderstanding about why king posted...thatÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s in the past. They didn't mean it the way you first thought and we both understand that so now we can get to the topic you framed as "a debate on the right to bear arms and violence leading to violence".
So, lets discuss it if you'd like. You seem to make several claims or inferences. First, you assert that you live in a semi-hostile environment. Second, you infer that carrying a method of personal physical protection isn't about disarming the "nutters". I agree. A citizen does not train and equip him or herself, nor gain the proper legal documentation to carry a concealed weapon under the auspice of disarming random weapon wielding thugs without first being threatened with bodily harm. You then ask a question, TED that I don't quite understand.
You ask: "how do you stop the bad guys from doing more bad to innocent people. We canÃ¢â‚¬â„¢t build enough prisons to hold them all. I donÃ¢â‚¬â„¢t want to live in a police state."
It is against the law for someone carrying a legally concealed weapon to do anything but protect the lives of innocents when they encounter those innocents under direct threat of bodily harm. I don't get on the train looking for thugs to disarm. ThatÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s the job of the police. I protect me and mine...thatÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s my job. Now then, we come to the age-old argument of gun control...GUN CONTROL ONLY WORKS IF THE BAD GUYS DON'T HAVE GUNS. But, alas, they do. They won't give them up if laws get passed forcing them to turn guns in. They won't voluntarily give up something that provides for their livelihood, the tool they use to intimidate, steal and kill. Why would they? If a criminal is breaking the law by being in possession of a firearm illegally, carrying it illegally, using it illegally in commission of a crime do you honestly think that passing a law banning a weapon of some type will be effective in having criminals follow that law??? ItÃ¢â‚¬â„¢s a preposterous idea.
They won't lay their weapons down so neither can we! Even if we could get down to fists and sticks...what do you say to a physically challenged person being brutally beaten by a larger person during a mugging? The person in a wheelchair, the elderly, etc.what do you say to them??? How do you tell them they can't defend themselves because they are disadvantaged physically? What about a rape victim? How do you tell her she can't defend herself? How would you live with yourself?
shit, i just lost a bunch of text due to the post size cutoff....and my big mouth. sorry this seems more jumbled than normal.
back to your issue of building prisons. why can't we build more prisons, exactly? We are currently letting violent criminals out of jail short of their full sentences due, in part, to prison overcrowding. How does building more prisons relate to a police state? i see no direct connection.
TED, you are looking for a solution that does not exist...a solution to human violence and agression. Such Utopia does not exist. Accept it and try to focus on something you can control...like the well being of you and yours. Defend their honor and their lives with words, peace signs, a cross, a bible, waiting on 911, begging and pleading...WHATEVER, you defend you and yours in your own way and i'll defend mine in my own way.
Educate yourself on the facts, TED, Jump and others who are interested...there is a lot to be learned here:http://www.guncite.com/
I'll leave the debate of 'sportiness of sport' for another day.
Don't you guys have some final projects to be focussing on?
Are you sure you want to block this user and hide all related comments throughout the site?