PSA: rules of the road
Aug. 10th, 2010 02:13 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
Hey. Can we talk about guns for a second?
Okay.
Guns, more or less, are for killing shit. Even when you're shooting targets for sport, that's a training activity related shooting accurately in case you actually want to kill shit.
And you know what? That's okay. Maybe you hunt. Maybe you're in law enforcement. Maybe you're military. Maybe you're learning to use a gun for self-defense. Maybe you just really enjoy target shooting or are a competitive sport shooter and it is, for you, an abstract exercise. Maybe you're trying to become familiar with guns so you can make your own decision about them.
All that stuff can be debated. Whether or not hunting is okay. Whether or not police should have guns. Whether or not we'll always have war. Whether or not guns are an effective means of self-defense.
But this post isn't about that.
This also isn't about gun control (which, btw, isn't about "Yes" or "No" but a range of legal issues surrounding gun ownership, use and sale).
This is about, CAN WE ALL JUST AGREE THAT GUNS ARE FOR SHOOTING THINGS?
And that generally, shooting things means harming/destroying them in some way?
Now, sure, guns don't kill people, people kill people. But a gun's purpose is, as reviewed previously, essentially for killing.
Of course, other things can kill people too and even be repurposed as weapons -- like cars and airplanes. But neither of those things are explicitly designed to be weapons or lack other uses. Guns, on the other hand, pretty much are just for shooting shit.
So here are a bunch of things that are not equivalent to guns, gun ranges, or gun instruction:
airplanes
flight schools
cars
driving school
mosques
Islamic cultural centers
To say otherwise is disingenuous and illogical, and no, "I'm just playing devil's advocate" is not an excuse to be offensive about this.
I have Christians, Jews, Muslims, Pagans, Hindus, Buddhists, and atheists reading and participating in this journal. Probably a whole bunch of other belief systems too. There are folks from all over the world, all ages, all races, playing along here.
So, if someone says to you "that statement is racist," they are not calling you a racist. They are saying you said something they feel is racist. Please debate with this in mind. Also, please refrain from calling people racists or what-have-you unless you are pointing out a systematic pattern of behavior.
Please also keep in mind that concepts and terms that may not be loaded where you live, may be deeply loaded where someone else lives. Sometimes people can say really offensive shit and not only have meant no harm by it, but really, have no idea it could cause harm elsewhere (i.e., acceptable uses of "Asian" and "Oriental" are different in the US vs. the UK and elsewhere and mean different things in various places; "English-only" as a policy in a multi-national corporation is different than "English-only" as a policy in a school district where 80% of the kids are recent immigrants; etc).
Also, I would appreciate it a lot if we could try to play by the rules of the subway. If someone says you've said something hurtful to them and you don't get it after going three rounds over it? Just fucking apologize and move on.
Because honestly? Sure, some people like to make a career out of taking shit personally. But most of the time if someone speaks up to go "wow, this made me really uncomfortable" it's because they're really uncomfortable, not because they want attention. Chances are they want anything but.
So if you wanted them to feel that way? Fine, own it. If you don't give a shit if they feel that way? Fine, own that. If you don't get it? Own that.
But don't tell them how to feel or that they feel too much. And if you feel those emotions are coming from biases, then suggest they examine them, but you can't tell people how to feel, mainly 'cause it doesn't work.
Now, of course, I'm no expert in any of these things. I fight and argue on the Internet where PEOPLE ARE WRONG all the damn time. And I've absolutely, and rightly, been called on for saying racist and ableist shit (I hope it's the sort of thing I keep learning from), and I've been incensed by other people's emotions and engaged in ad hominem attacks and been called on shit that I totally haven't gotten, maybe right or maybe wrongly.
But can we try? Because I try. I'd like it if you fucking tried.
I won't be policing the journal for this shit. I don't have the time, and I'm not interested in being a cop. When I ban people, which is rarely, it's because I've lost my patience and they've made it abundantly clear they do not view me as a human being. So bans: unlikely and at random. Live in fear, or, more rationally, don't worry about it; you're probably safe.
But try not to be assholes, okay?
And a mosque is not a gun is not a car.
Thank you.
Okay.
Guns, more or less, are for killing shit. Even when you're shooting targets for sport, that's a training activity related shooting accurately in case you actually want to kill shit.
And you know what? That's okay. Maybe you hunt. Maybe you're in law enforcement. Maybe you're military. Maybe you're learning to use a gun for self-defense. Maybe you just really enjoy target shooting or are a competitive sport shooter and it is, for you, an abstract exercise. Maybe you're trying to become familiar with guns so you can make your own decision about them.
All that stuff can be debated. Whether or not hunting is okay. Whether or not police should have guns. Whether or not we'll always have war. Whether or not guns are an effective means of self-defense.
But this post isn't about that.
This also isn't about gun control (which, btw, isn't about "Yes" or "No" but a range of legal issues surrounding gun ownership, use and sale).
This is about, CAN WE ALL JUST AGREE THAT GUNS ARE FOR SHOOTING THINGS?
And that generally, shooting things means harming/destroying them in some way?
Now, sure, guns don't kill people, people kill people. But a gun's purpose is, as reviewed previously, essentially for killing.
Of course, other things can kill people too and even be repurposed as weapons -- like cars and airplanes. But neither of those things are explicitly designed to be weapons or lack other uses. Guns, on the other hand, pretty much are just for shooting shit.
So here are a bunch of things that are not equivalent to guns, gun ranges, or gun instruction:
airplanes
flight schools
cars
driving school
mosques
Islamic cultural centers
To say otherwise is disingenuous and illogical, and no, "I'm just playing devil's advocate" is not an excuse to be offensive about this.
I have Christians, Jews, Muslims, Pagans, Hindus, Buddhists, and atheists reading and participating in this journal. Probably a whole bunch of other belief systems too. There are folks from all over the world, all ages, all races, playing along here.
So, if someone says to you "that statement is racist," they are not calling you a racist. They are saying you said something they feel is racist. Please debate with this in mind. Also, please refrain from calling people racists or what-have-you unless you are pointing out a systematic pattern of behavior.
Please also keep in mind that concepts and terms that may not be loaded where you live, may be deeply loaded where someone else lives. Sometimes people can say really offensive shit and not only have meant no harm by it, but really, have no idea it could cause harm elsewhere (i.e., acceptable uses of "Asian" and "Oriental" are different in the US vs. the UK and elsewhere and mean different things in various places; "English-only" as a policy in a multi-national corporation is different than "English-only" as a policy in a school district where 80% of the kids are recent immigrants; etc).
Also, I would appreciate it a lot if we could try to play by the rules of the subway. If someone says you've said something hurtful to them and you don't get it after going three rounds over it? Just fucking apologize and move on.
Because honestly? Sure, some people like to make a career out of taking shit personally. But most of the time if someone speaks up to go "wow, this made me really uncomfortable" it's because they're really uncomfortable, not because they want attention. Chances are they want anything but.
So if you wanted them to feel that way? Fine, own it. If you don't give a shit if they feel that way? Fine, own that. If you don't get it? Own that.
But don't tell them how to feel or that they feel too much. And if you feel those emotions are coming from biases, then suggest they examine them, but you can't tell people how to feel, mainly 'cause it doesn't work.
Now, of course, I'm no expert in any of these things. I fight and argue on the Internet where PEOPLE ARE WRONG all the damn time. And I've absolutely, and rightly, been called on for saying racist and ableist shit (I hope it's the sort of thing I keep learning from), and I've been incensed by other people's emotions and engaged in ad hominem attacks and been called on shit that I totally haven't gotten, maybe right or maybe wrongly.
But can we try? Because I try. I'd like it if you fucking tried.
I won't be policing the journal for this shit. I don't have the time, and I'm not interested in being a cop. When I ban people, which is rarely, it's because I've lost my patience and they've made it abundantly clear they do not view me as a human being. So bans: unlikely and at random. Live in fear, or, more rationally, don't worry about it; you're probably safe.
But try not to be assholes, okay?
And a mosque is not a gun is not a car.
Thank you.
no subject
Date: 2010-08-10 06:34 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-08-10 06:37 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-08-10 06:40 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-08-10 06:54 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-08-10 07:18 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-08-10 07:19 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-08-10 07:25 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-08-10 07:27 pm (UTC)My father did not actually teach me to shoot, because I did not show any interest at the time (and my relationship with my father is complex, and does not extend to comfort around him and guns), but he did speak on gun safety. When you have guns in a house with children, even when you keep them under lock and key and the kids aren't sure which key on your keyring is the gun box key, you still teach gun safety.
These were his rules:
1) The gun is always loaded.
2) Do not point the gun at anything you do not intend to shoot.
3) Do not shoot anything you do not intend to kill or destroy.
Other people have since advised me that the fourth rule is to be mindful of what is behind your target.
But yes. Guns are for destruction. Accurately targeted destruction, often, and target practice is a reasonable form of entertainment, but destruction.
no subject
Date: 2010-08-10 08:26 pm (UTC)And yes, I realize that the Scouts are pretty horrible when it comes to gay rights, but I've made sure both my boys understand that BSA's official policy is dead wrong on this issue -- and a refreshing number of adults in our local council disagree with National Council's policies on this. (There was one pennyfarthing rider in the BSA Grand Centennial parade who had a sign on his back that read, "Eagle Scout. Equality for all")
(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:no subject
Date: 2010-08-10 07:46 pm (UTC)Thank you.
no subject
Date: 2010-08-10 07:49 pm (UTC)"Guns don't kill people. People kill people... with GUNS!"
no subject
Date: 2010-08-10 08:31 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-08-10 07:51 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-08-10 08:05 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-08-10 08:19 pm (UTC)~Sor
no subject
Date: 2010-08-10 08:30 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-08-10 08:31 pm (UTC)Also, Islamophobia is racism and should never be catered to.
no subject
Date: 2010-08-10 09:56 pm (UTC)A memo someone should give our governor who just stepped into this mess big time.
(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:Whu-???
From:no subject
Date: 2010-08-10 08:32 pm (UTC)I've had a spot on the palm of my hand just ITCHING to smack some people...
no subject
Date: 2010-08-10 08:33 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-08-11 02:17 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-08-10 08:35 pm (UTC)Hell yeah!! Mind if i tweet this entry? It expresses so many things I have been trying to say for years.
no subject
Date: 2010-08-10 08:36 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-08-10 09:01 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-08-10 09:48 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-08-10 10:17 pm (UTC)Guns are a dangerous thing in the hands of people who can not effectively, sanely and rationally handle them. I feel that religion is similar to that , in the sense that if a religion teaches to go out and kill people, it's just as bad as putting a implement in their hand, such as a gun. they are both tools when put into the wrong hands can cause quite a bit of death. Inquisition(s), witch hunts, land grabbing, all things that have been done in the name of religion(s).
This can be deconstructed and debated and so on - because yes I get that a person has to have a motivation to pick up a gun and use it, and some do so without religion behind it. That's true, but not really the historical norm.
Teaching people that it's ok to go out and kill in the name of a religion , regardless if it's because the religion says that land and territory belong to them , or because the other people are 'wrong', or what have you is dangerous. It's a powerful hold over some people who derive their purpose in life from religion. A religious leader giving direction their followers can be just as dangerous as a loaded gun. The end results can be the same.
Also when I say that religion can be as dangerous as a gun, I don't mean any one religion - I mean any of them. Christians have killed for centuries in the name of what they feel is right. Catholics in Ireland have been at war for most of my adult life. People have been killing each other with religion as an excuse for centuries. Religious leaders have known this and used it to justify all sorts of horrible things.
A word form a religious leader can bring death and/or destruction. The same goes for a bullet fired from a gun. I think that both need to be handled with extreme care , and can be dangerous if not deadly if mishandled.
I admit that I made a sloppy statement earlier, and your writing here made me realize that. Likewise this is my opinion. No one need agree with it simply because.
no subject
Date: 2010-08-10 10:25 pm (UTC)Religions of all stripes have surely been, among other things, forces for violence in the world. If you would like to make an argument that religion, in general, is the same as a gun, I think it's a hard argument to make (because religions do have purposes other than violence engendered by extremism), but it comes with little of the inherent damage and bias present in your statements regarding Islam in general and the cultural center.
Despite the position the ADL took on this issue, I view anti-Islamic sentiments as my issue not just as a human being, but as a Jewish person. Anti-semitism is a key part of the biases two of the three Abrahamic faiths face in the US.
In my book, you were out of line on this one. And it is personal.
(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:(no subject)
From:no subject
Date: 2010-08-10 11:50 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-08-10 11:59 pm (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-08-11 12:10 am (UTC)no subject
Date: 2010-08-11 12:18 am (UTC)If I had a nickel for every time I've heard that . . .
no subject
Date: 2010-08-11 05:13 am (UTC)The first part of your post had me all primed for a good read and a healthy response! Now that I've read it -
I like it.
Things I might add, in the tone of how it's written (as non accusatory as I am able to put these into words) is for folks to recognize the difference between an opinion and a fact. We can disagree over opinions, and true it seems lately proving facts gets awfully muddied depending on where sources for 'facts' are drawn from, but we can have a disagreement without insulting each other.
And since I was primed to be the token 2nd Amendment advocate (heh!) my response is...absolutely, guns are made to shoot shit. Just as was written, that means anything...from circles on paper targets to animals to people. (some would combine those last two) More people die in car accidents and yes both automobiles and airplanes have been used as weapons but that was not their primary design function.
IF...there was any room to point out any difference in opinion in what was written here, perhaps it could even tread on 'fact' territory, is the comparison of two things that are constitutionally protected that seem to be at issue here - 1st Amendment and 2nd Amendment items - primarily freedom of religion and the right to keep an bear arms. Everything else is not a protected right, constitutionally, they are privileges.
I have my presumptions, but I am curious as to what spurred this?
no subject
Date: 2010-08-11 12:02 pm (UTC)