Nra And Kazaa

[insanebassman]

Much of my point was as much self control as it was a verbose way of saying "guns don't kill people, people do..." I came from a bizarre fucked up childhood, but those adults in my past who actually helped, made sure I could control myself. This discipline applies to emergency situations as well as violence. I have seen so many people panic and almost kill themselves in situations in which I acted with cool, yet intense, discipline. I know how to party, have fun and act a fool. Yet, I also know how to keep shit from going south even when I am in the throes of a good drunk or doing something chaotic. It has to do with the self control I learned. Someone would not pick up a weapon unnecessarily and randomly kill had they the will power and self control to reason thier way through. It is the modern "touchy-feely" school of parenting and permissivness that has everyone fucked. It is also the lieniency of the law on killers and sex offenders (and other violent offenders) that has helped, not caused, but helped in the break down of society. All of this combines with human stupidity to make the world dangerous.

Might as well blame the iron ore in the gun metal for the actions of some useless pig.

I am not bagging on you or anyone, I just do not connect with anyone who thinks removing something is the solution. Pretty soon, anything with the potential for harm will be illegal. No mor corners on walls... must be rounded. No more cars, they kill too. Forget swimming, you may drown. No more risk taking...

I would rather die than live in a benign world like that. (And I will fight a world order that wants to "protect" us in that way)

[clocker]

Originally posted by OlderThanDirt@9 May 2003 - 08:06

jtbuffer wrote:

the missile company was for non-violent civilian puposes???

Moore intones that the missiles with their "Pentagon payloads" are trucked through the town "in the middle of the night while the children are asleep." Moore asks whether knowledge that weapons of "mass destruction" were being built nearby might have motivated the Columbine shooters.

Well, after a few days away I see that this thread has mutated into a gun control/Michael Moore war. Not really my original intention, but there you go.

Just for reference- I live not 5 miles from Columbine HS, I grew up in Columbine Hills where all my neighbors worked at Martin Marietta. My father just retired from Martin a few years ago.
When someone refers to military satellites they are in fact talking about weapons. Maybe not the traditional high explosives type, or even ICBMs ( which Martin DID manufacture at the Waterton plant) capable of delivering nuclear payloads, but weapons of the new frontier battlefield.
EM weapons, LASER weapons, ultra sophisticated evesdropping and spy satellites- Martins builds boosters to deliver them all.
Moore may have overdramatized the effect this may/may not have had on Harris and Klebold, and he certainly overdramatized the nighttime movement of the missiles- after all, Denver is a fairly large city, you can't really shut down Interstate highways at rushhour to transport your Titan 3C.
Back in the early 60's while the rest of the country was practicing "Duck and Cover" ( if you're of a certain age you know what I'm talking about) no one out here in Jefferson County bothered. When you lived 3 miles from Martin and less than 50 miles from NORAD it pretty much was a given that you were toast in the event of nuclear war.
We figured we were the lucky ones.
When I was in elementary school, Martin used to test fire engines at the Waterton plant. If the wind was right the toxic cloud from the test would crawl towards Denver. Martin would casually call the city manager and suggest that it might be a good idea if maybe folks went indoors for a while "just to be on the safe side". Air raid sirens would go off and your beautiful summer afternoon was shot to hell.
If "somebody checked" and discovered that Martin doesn't build weapons missiles at the Waterton plant, I personnaly would be very skeptical.
My father found that highly amusing.
He won't/can't talk about a lot of the projects that he worked on, but you don't get Top Secret Air Force clearance while working on phone company satellites.
Just a thought.

[OlderThanDirt]

There could be a lot of things going on in "civilian" plants that we're unaware of. And perhaps Moore was privy to such information. But perhaps the most ludicrous suggestion of Moore is that living close to a defense plant causes children to become violent. If he could show definitively that kids living close to defense plants kill more often than kids living elsewhere, he'd make a valid point. But he didn't do this because he can't. Inner-city violence among youth gangs far surpasses any violence found in or near defense plants as far as I can tell.

But Moore is no less guilty than a lot of other people in engaging in the great American pastime of pointing the finger. Some people say video games or popular music makes kids violent. There's even a subgroup within the organization, Parents of Murdered Children, called M.I.N.E. (murder is not entertainment) that has proposed a ban on murder mystery novels because they believe reading them leads to violence. And some people picket Harry Potter movies because they say it leads to demonic possession in children. There's just so much finger pointing going on that one might believe everything leads to violence if one wants to believe it's true.

I think the greater truth is far simpler. It simply depends on an individual person's perception of anything. A hundred kids could play a video game without becoming violent. But then the next kid playing it might be a messed-up kid waiting for the catalyst to push him over the edge. A hundred teenagers could get behind the wheel and drive responsibly. But then the next kid driving a car might be a messed-up kid who's prone to drive irresponsibly. It boils down to a "which came first, the chicken or the egg" question ... but one I think we know the answer to. The "messed-up" part came before the act.

[Benno]

Originally posted by OlderThanDirt@10 May 2003 - 00:13
I think the greater truth is far simpler. It simply depends on an individual person's perception of anything. A hundred kids could play a video game without becoming violent. But then the next kid playing it might be a messed-up kid waiting for the catalyst to push him over the edge. A hundred teenagers could get behind the wheel and drive responsibly. But then the next kid driving a car might be a messed-up kid who's prone to drive irresponsibly. It boils down to a "which came first, the chicken or the egg" question ... but one I think we know the answer to. The "messed-up" part came before the act.

I have to agree here.

[OlderThanDirt]

insanebassman wrote:

Weapons, knowledge and skill can all be used to hurt and destroy. It is our choices that can determine wether or not it happens. Not the devices, not the chemicals and not the providers of the weapons.

Yup. And one other thing. In the "Godfather Epic" movie collection, the "uncut" chronological version that can only be found in video stores (they stopped selling it in 1982), there was a scene showing a younger Don Corleone and Clemenza visiting a gunsmith to acquire weapons -- weapons that were built not bought. I think that's a fair description of organized crime activities then and am certain little has changed since then.

Banning the sale of guns in stores is no obstacle to organized criminals who make their own ... and sell some of what they make to lesser criminals who aren't part of the "family." It's just an obstacle that prevents law-abiding citizens from acquiring a self-protective weapon.

[MichaelS]

Originally posted by Nesseight@8 May 2003 - 15:31
If somebody breaks into your house, and has a gun, you don't really have time to call the police. Sure you could probably attack him with a kitchen knife or a ball bat, and maybe piss him off before he shoots you, and your entire family dead.

Hey, that's just your vote though, and is understandable if you live in some little town with no crime. Living near Phoenix AZ (imagine LA, but a slight bit smaller, and packed with Hispanics). My vote is to keep my gun at my side at all times, and if somebody threatens my life with a deadly weapon, then I will protect myself with mine.

I live in L.A., I'm a former gun owner, and I've been a crime victim. So let me respond to your rant.

Firstly, we have plenty of every kind of people, a few of whom commit crimes. Citing "Hispanics" as the source of crime sounds preposterous and racist to me.

Also I've been the victim of crimes, so I know of the anger and bitterness of having been robbed. I owned a gun, but it wouldn't have helped and arguably, a gun could have been stolen if I was less careful. Your grandmother example was interesting, but before my grandmother became ill, she used to drive from the Valley all the way to Bell Gardens to gamble at a card club. She never had a problem there. I've driven all over the worst parts of town in a modest looking car with no problems. I'm talking Downtown L.A. at day and night, South Central L.A. off Crenshaw Boulevard day and night, Long Beach along Anaheim Boulevard, East Los Angeles/Unincorporated county "islands," Van Nuys/Reseda, and I can tell you: the best defense against crime is AWARENESS and COMMON SENSE. If you discount hand to hand combat, let me tell you that within 21' a trained Law Enforcement Officer cannot adequately protect himself with a sidearm against someone with open hands, a knife or a baseball bat to do him or her harm (reference Sgt. Tueller's court backed findings, Salt Lake City, UT).

On the flipside, I've had my neighbor, drunk and in his underwear, stagger out into our carport the middle of the night for no good reason while I was out on my balcony (my friends smoke so I kept them company). He probably shouldn't have been drunk and walking around with a gun, but hey, it's a free country. Confronting him with another gun would've certainly started a gun fight. If he started shooting, I'd have beat a retreat and dialed the Sheriff's Department. By the way, he's a card carrying NRA member (or at least his car's window sticker says so).

As far as I'm concerned, the biggest criminals in my area are the electric utility companies and oil companies. They rob everybody of billions legally. They are above the law and that pisses me off.

If you want to protect yourself, learn to pay attention to your surroundings and work on your body language. Take self-defense courses that emphasize awareness as well as real, hand to hand skills. If you want to protect what's yours, get a dog to patrol your house. A barking dog discourages criminals from doing you harm or entering your home. They make great companions and I'm told they're man's best friend.

What does this have to do with filesharing?

I used to leave my PC on for filesharing; no more because I use a high-powered gaming rig with all the bells and whistles and because I'm being robbed every month by Southern California Edison, it's too expensive to leave on for the sake of filesharing.

[MichaelS]

If you're interested in a fun martial art that incorporates hand to hand weapons training, try eskrima/kali/Filipino Martial Arts. You will definitely be much more fit in about six weeks time.

Google a search with your city name and find an instructor with good credentials by drilling down on another Google with their name. Don't get locked into a contract and ask for an introductory class.

[OlderThanDirt]

Joel Rosenberg is a well-known writer in the science-fiction field. But, a real-life experience in his own home prompted him to write this essay about guns. It's well worth the read.