Red Mosquito

thanks, guys.

E.H. Ruddock wrote:

spike wrote:

verb_to_trust wrote:Why do me and Mac get to be openly swore at? I would also like to swear at people but I know how that would end up...

ellis isn’t a constant asshole

Quoted so verb can see

For agreeing it's not constant at least.

elliseamos wrote:You're not blundering into it, Burt. You posted a gif of people laughing at the idea that AR-armed people can't topple the full force of the US Military. Then Mac went off. And as so often happens, the 2nd man in has taken the brunt of the flack despite the real instigating post.

Now, as far as "permission to own ARs":

On the one hand we're discussing why someone would want to own them, to which "fun" and "defense against tyranny" were the offered reasons.

On the other hand is your point, "it doesn't matter why." I'm choosing not to go down that road because it's a different conversation and one I don't feel knowledgeable enough to consider a response. I'll defer to others and listen in on that episode.

In specifically talking about why we should all indulge your desire to own one of these killing machines, is it really worth the risk that "nutjobs" will get them? And by "get them" I mostly mean "so easily", because as you say, it's your stated position that it shouldn't matter if you has them. I'd say it's reasonable to say you can have "if." Or, you can have after providing "x, y, z." We would like you to have a little more accountability for this choice. It appears to me that the risk is all on us for not owning our own. I wonder if we could shift it to put more of the risk being on your side.

Here, Mac. Can you back up your position now?

I put "rewrite for clarity" on all my student papers

Mickey wrote:I put "rewrite for clarity" on all my student papers

"Good in parts B+"

"You can't just say 'perchance'."

Simple Torture wrote:

Mickey wrote:I put "rewrite for clarity" on all my student papers

"Good in parts B+"

Excuse you, I teach in the Ivy League. "Great insight" is a 97. "Rewrite for clarity" is a 95.

BurtReynolds wrote:Also, if the state is completely immune to the people it rules over, I would think that would raise some red flags in the minds of most people, but I am eternally disappointed.

Republics hate this one simple trick:

I actually parentheses very helpful.

So this was yesterday and the convo has taken a different direction, but I promised McP a response and I aim to deliver. Thanks for the thoughtful points, McP. I agree with a lot of what you said, so my response will just be a rewrite for clarity.

McParadigm wrote:

washing machine wrote:I think the key here is family. It helps me understand the "fetishism" in context, and by proxy, the average dues paying NRA member. The evil that is the NRA is an abstract to these people, I think. The community is the thing for them. This is something that is literally passed down from generations, like a tradition understood and cherished. And it all comes back to family.

I partially agree with this. I think what you're doing is recognizing a community bonding experience happening live and in front of you, and using that to consider the gun community and its culture outside the scope of the current political collision. I know that community exists. I grew up surrounded by it, and I think it is often very supportive and warm to fellow members. All of the men I would describe as role models growing up were gun owners.

But romanticization can become condescension very quickly, when it requires you to narrow how much of a person you're willing to see. And you are talking about NRA members at an NRA convention. It isn't abstract to them. That's impossible. The organization is too loud, effortful, and singular in its fixations. The real world ramifications of the status quo it protects are too present and horrific. It would be an insult to their intelligence to divorce NRA members that completely from the context of their own lives.

The other thing is: the firearms community exists outside the scope of the NRA. You can engage one without belonging to the other.

End of the day, it's not a Jimmy Buffett concert. There are two scenarios that put you in an NRA convention in 2022: one where you support the NRA's attitudes and efforts....and one where you do not, but are willing to buy in anyways if it gets you more of that community. It's not demonizing these folks to admit that. People are three dimensional. They can be kind, caring, champions of their community and also be willing to look the other way on a community leader who steals dues money, or policies they know cause harm, in order to maintain the comfort of that community. Both these things can be true.

I understand the mental health/broken home factor republicans talk about when something like this happens.

Mental health care in the United States should be free, destigmatized, and readily accessible to all. Nothing less than that is going to make it a partial solution to this trend of violence. I'm all for it.

My initial post that you were responding to was formed after reading this piece in The Federalist. I got to thinking about the constant theme of poor home life and lack of role models in all of these shooters. Looking at all these NRA attendees, I saw mostly the opposite. I saw community and family. The point I think I was making, probably poorly, is that I don't think your average card-carrying member of the NRA is the problem. I don't think there is anything inherently wrong with owning, shooting, bonding and teaching guns, hence my observation that it's good that there is such a strong community amongst the average ranks. This view is also why I'm willing to give the overwhelming majority of the laity in the Catholic Church a pass, by the way. However, you bring up a good point that you can subtract the NRA from this community entirely for the community to still exist and I'm glad you did. I'm inadvertently giving the NRA itself too much credit here and I would love to see NRA reform centered on a more nuanced celebration of guns and eradication of dark money from dues. Never gonna happen.

As you noted, I was probably too romantic in my idea that the idea behind this convention is all rainbow rides and lollipops, ignorant of the evil of the organization. I don't know anything about what a dues paid membership to the organization gets you, actually. In my mind, it's a fan club whose upper leadership courts politicians and gun manufacturers in some shady ways, and whose membership is really just there because they love their guns. There are very bad things happening through the NRA that these people support whether they understand it or not, and that's a problem. I would be interested to see if there were any sessions or speakers at this convention that covered anything remotely close to gun safety, responsible gun ownership, etc. It would give me happiness to learn that there's more to the NRA than "cold dead hands" liberty and firearm enthusiasm. Again, probably not happening nor will it ever happen.

But also, this weekend in Houston kind of is a Buffett concert. From where I'm standing as a bar industry pro just fly-on-the-wall'ing this NRA sing-a-long, things are jovial. Lots of Patron shots and margaritas going across the bar these last couple of days... You'll just have to take my word for it. Wish I had the skills of Hunter S. Thompson. There's a good gonzo piece about this weekend just waiting to be written.

I guess we know who to blame if there's an ink shortage.

Mickey wrote:

Simple Torture wrote:

Mickey wrote:I put "rewrite for clarity" on all my student papers

"Good in parts B+"

Excuse you, I teach in the Ivy League. "Great insight" is a 97. "Rewrite for clarity" is a 95.

At a state school, if a student gets a 97, they get tenure.

washing machine wrote:So this was yesterday and the convo has taken a different direction, but I promised McP a response and I aim to deliver. Thanks for the thoughtful points, McP. I agree with a lot of what you said, so my response will just be a rewrite for clarity.

McParadigm wrote:

washing machine wrote:I think the key here is family. It helps me understand the "fetishism" in context, and by proxy, the average dues paying NRA member. The evil that is the NRA is an abstract to these people, I think. The community is the thing for them. This is something that is literally passed down from generations, like a tradition understood and cherished. And it all comes back to family.

I partially agree with this. I think what you're doing is recognizing a community bonding experience happening live and in front of you, and using that to consider the gun community and its culture outside the scope of the current political collision. I know that community exists. I grew up surrounded by it, and I think it is often very supportive and warm to fellow members. All of the men I would describe as role models growing up were gun owners.

But romanticization can become condescension very quickly, when it requires you to narrow how much of a person you're willing to see. And you are talking about NRA members at an NRA convention. It isn't abstract to them. That's impossible. The organization is too loud, effortful, and singular in its fixations. The real world ramifications of the status quo it protects are too present and horrific. It would be an insult to their intelligence to divorce NRA members that completely from the context of their own lives.

The other thing is: the firearms community exists outside the scope of the NRA. You can engage one without belonging to the other.

End of the day, it's not a Jimmy Buffett concert. There are two scenarios that put you in an NRA convention in 2022: one where you support the NRA's attitudes and efforts....and one where you do not, but are willing to buy in anyways if it gets you more of that community. It's not demonizing these folks to admit that. People are three dimensional. They can be kind, caring, champions of their community and also be willing to look the other way on a community leader who steals dues money, or policies they know cause harm, in order to maintain the comfort of that community. Both these things can be true.

I understand the mental health/broken home factor republicans talk about when something like this happens.

Mental health care in the United States should be free, destigmatized, and readily accessible to all. Nothing less than that is going to make it a partial solution to this trend of violence. I'm all for it.

My initial post that you were responding to was formed after reading this piece in The Federalist. I got to thinking about the constant theme of poor home life and lack of role models in all of these shooters. Looking at all these NRA attendees, I saw mostly the opposite. I saw community and family. The point I think I was making, probably poorly, is that I don't think your average card-carrying member of the NRA is the problem. I don't think there is anything inherently wrong with owning, shooting, bonding and teaching guns, hence my observation that it's good that there is such a strong community amongst the average ranks. This view is also why I'm willing to give the overwhelming majority of the laity in the Catholic Church a pass, by the way. However, you bring up a good point that you can subtract the NRA from this community entirely for the community to still exist and I'm glad you did. I'm inadvertently giving the NRA itself too much credit here and I would love to see NRA reform centered on a more nuanced celebration of guns and eradication of dark money from dues. Never gonna happen.

As you noted, I was probably too romantic in my idea that the idea behind this convention is all rainbow rides and lollipops, ignorant of the evil of the organization. I don't know anything about what a dues paid membership to the organization gets you, actually. In my mind, it's a fan club whose upper leadership courts politicians and gun manufacturers in some shady ways, and whose membership is really just there because they love their guns. There are very bad things happening through the NRA that these people support whether they understand it or not, and that's a problem. I would be interested to see if there were any sessions or speakers at this convention that covered anything remotely close to gun safety, responsible gun ownership, etc. It would give me happiness to learn that there's more to the NRA than "cold dead hands" liberty and firearm enthusiasm. Again, probably not happening nor will it ever happen.

But also, this weekend in Houston kind of is a Buffett concert. From where I'm standing as a bar industry pro just fly-on-the-wall'ing this NRA sing-a-long, things are jovial. Lots of Patron shots and margaritas going across the bar these last couple of days... You'll just have to take my word for it. Wish I had the skills of Hunter S. Thompson. There's a good gonzo piece about this weekend just waiting to be written.

Focusing on the NRA is probably not helpful. They are a big name and have no real replacements as far as Federal lobbying goes, but there are smaller, more radical groups that are the ones moving the ball through litigation at the state level. I don't think the NRA has been particularly involved in the state level trend towards constitutional carry, for instance.

The NRA is viewed as too moderate by these other groups. They went along with the bump stock ban, for instance. If they get dissolved all you'll really notice is that the gun rights A-F grade scoring goes away.

hang on, do the smaller radical groups own high level politicians?

Simple Torture wrote:

Mickey wrote:

Simple Torture wrote:

Mickey wrote:I put "rewrite for clarity" on all my student papers

"Good in parts B+"

Excuse you, I teach in the Ivy League. "Great insight" is a 97. "Rewrite for clarity" is a 95.

At a state school, if a student gets a 97, they get tenure.

One time I read a paper where the entire analysis was based on the idea that Wordsworth might have spoken French (just a thing he made up!). I had to fight to give it a B-.

spike wrote:hang on, do the smaller radical groups own high level politicians?

The politicians aren't owned by the NRA. They fear pissing off the organic pro-2A voters the NRA represents (poorly).

Some give the NRA so much credit they seem to believe it's an astro turf movement.

Thank you, wash. And I did make the Parrot Head comparison exactly because the two communities have some real comparison points (including some wonderful coordinated volunteerism).

Peeps wrote:

But they live under tyranny now, so no thanks!