Why I am an atheist – TD »« I get email

Comments

  1. Beatrice says

    They write on their page :
    “The right to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.”

    That t-shirt slogan doesn’t exactly endear their “right” to me.

  2. Happiestsadist says

    But they can’t be terrorists! They’re white, and thus don’t fit the very helpful profile!

  3. Sili (I have no penis and I must jizz) says

    The best of all systems of governance is despotism tempered by regular assassinations.

  4. Gregory Greenwood says

    Wearing a T-shirt like that really is a time saver – it advertises to all and sundry that yes, the wearer of this garment is indeed the violent, anti-democratic right-wing cretin they appear to be, and so there is no need to undergo the unpleasant experience of verifying the fact by actually talking to them.

    Of course, you will get hipster types who will claim that they would wear such a T-shirt ‘ironically’. Since talking to such pretentious twits is only marginally better than talking to the aforementioned right wing cretins, then avoiding anyone who wears a garment like that is going to be a win-win situation.

  5. Millicent says

    I wonder what would happen if someone tried to wear this horrible thing through US airport security?

    It’s repulsive. Such a basic disregard for the core tenets of democracy. Frightening.

  6. says

    billygutter01:

    What the fuck is wrong with people?!

    nigel waves his hand in the air

    Oh! Oh! I know! Pick me!

    Oh. Okay. Thanks.

    The thing that is wrong with these people is that they are no longer able to practice their privilege with impunity. They are now being called on some instances of their use and abuse of privilege, and being constantly reminded that they are privileged.

    Douchecakes hate being reminded they are douchecakes, to the point they are ready to pretend they are ready to shoot the people who remind them they are douchecakes.

  7. Beatrice says

    And those same right wingers consider Occupy Wall Street a violent mob.

    But voting from rooftops… *thumbs up*

    The hypocrisy is unbelievable.

  8. nomennescio says

    I strongly encourage people who feel so inclined to wear this t-shirt. I hope they sell thousands of them, and they’re worn constantly.

    Anybody stupid enough to wear something like that ought to be easily identifiable.

  9. Mattir says

    You could wear this t-shirt as pajamas, especially if you turned it inside out. But it’s probably not nice comfy cotton.

  10. joed says

    “Nonviolent refusal to cooperate with injustice is the way to defeat it.”—M. Gandhi

  11. says

    Okay, so we’ve got theocrats who admire radical Islamicists for their “moral superiority” because they’re willing to kill gays and establish an official government religion.

    We’ve got wingnuts (and many Democrats) who are perfectly fine with torture, invading people’s privacy, and generally trading in freedom for the illusion of security. You know, like radical Islamic dictators.

    And now we’ve got another chunk of wingnuts who are willing to emulate America’s enemies and commit violence and cause extreme fear to effect political change. What’s that called, again? Oh, yeah: Terrorism.

    For all the rhetoric they give out against Islam and terrorism, they sure seem to look up to them. Imitation is the highest form of flattery, after all.

  12. Suido says

    I wonder if they’re made in Merka, fuck yeah.

    Our rights to a free-market shall not be infringed. When all else fails, buy all the rooftops.

  13. imthegenieicandoanything says

    And no doubt that they demand even more that THIS “right” to vote be limited to only those males of like (deranged) mind. And color.

    And this sort of person is confused when I spit in his face!

  14. ericatkinson says

    I am wondering how many “Che” Guevara T shirts this fine leftist
    bunch owns.

    Murderous fuckwad he was.

  15. says

    @ericatkinson

    Baseless tu quoque? Well, now we know that you don’t have any firm morals with anything remotely resembling objectivity. All you care about is the subjectivism of red team versus blue team.

  16. ericatkinson says

    Still,I Wouldn’t buy a shirt like that. I certainly do not agree with the ideal of shooting random people from rooftops.
    I swore to uphold the constitution of the United States of America. There is no “shooting from rooftops” allowed.

    This is my shrt. http://www.rangerup.com/doubletap.html

  17. ericatkinson says

    Just saying Dog—-I bet PZ has a “Che” shirt laying around.
    I bet you do to.

  18. says

    @eric

    So, wait, why did your first statement here criticize us for criticizing the pro-terrorism wingnuts? What makes you think we’re radical pro-terrorism leftists, by the way?

    Methinks you’re backpedaling because you realize how ashamed you should be for offering excuses for terrorist sympathizers.

  19. ericatkinson says

    What makes you think we’re radical pro-terrorism leftists, by the way?

    Uh, duh. I don’t know. I just read Myers blog day. I really just don’t know where I got that idea.

  20. 'Tis Himself says

    ericatkinson,

    Please give a link to where Myers or the Pharyngula Horde showed pro-terrorism tendencies. Or admit you’re just being an asshole. Your choice.

  21. Beatrice says

    Yeah, being horrified by things like this shirt is a strictly radical leftist thing.

  22. says

    I don’t see a link to anything pro-terrorism posted by PZ, so I wonder if I should take that as an admission of being an asshole.

  23. 'Tis Himself says

    So Tis. A fellow bubblehead.

    MM1(SS) 3365 in the SSN615, a boat long out of commission.

  24. Happiestsadist says

    Nah, no fan of Che either, though I do lean radical. Racist homophobes of any sort are not my people.

  25. spamamander, more skeptical-er and rational-er than you says

    No Che shirts here. I do have an awesome “Evil Little Thing” shirt, purchased to help a brave young woman go to college. A young woman who didn’t get on any rooftops with a gun to affect change, just fought for Constitutional principles with words.

    Oh, and I lean pretty heavily socialist, at least as far as things like nationalized single-payer healthcare. I’m probably a nasty Commie then. -snorts-

  26. digitalatheist says

    @ericatkinson

    I can’t speak for the rest, but my sum total of Che shirts is 0 (zero).

    I can also promise you that I won’t be wearing a shirt advocating for armed violence just because a certain group doesn’t like the fact we have a President who is some other color than Aryan white.

  27. eigenperson says

    #23 ericatkinson:

    Just saying Dog—-I bet PZ has a “Che” shirt laying around.
    I bet you do to.

    Is that “bet” in the sense of “wager”, or bet in the sense of “not intended to be a factual statement”?

    Because if it’s the former, I’m up for it. Why don’t we go with Mitt Romney and make it a $10,000 bet?

    Oh, by the way, you lose.

  28. says

    You know, it’s been a long time since I’ve argued with a wingnut about terrorism. Thinking back, I’m wondering if it’s because they’re too ashamed. I can’t recall ever encountering one that took a strong or consistent stance against terrorism. Then again, caving into fear by allowing greater and greater loss of freedoms in the name of the illusion of security and causing purposeless panics whenever a brown-skinned person gets on an airplane.

    With the wingnuts causing internal destruction like that, who needs the terrorists to do anything at all?

    Full disclosure: No Che shirt, here, either. I did once think about getting that shirt with Cornelius from Planet of the Apes that spoofed the well-known Che image. Viva la Evolucion!

  29. says

    erikatkinson:

    This is my shrt. http://www.rangerup.com/doubletap.html

    Nice. No violence there.

    However, I notice this:

    1% of the population serves in the military.

    Another 1% or so serves as police officers.

    Everyone else falls into either of two categories:

    1) People who support them.

    2) People who judge them.

    Y’know what? We can support and judge simultaneously.

    Funny how the world is a helluva lot more complex than many fuckcakes imagine.

  30. says

    Edit to my previous comment: Then again, always caving into fear, yadda, yadda, could be considered a consistent stance, but it’s hardly a strong one.

  31. says

    I think Eric has a misconception that people really don’t believe in a representative form of government. Most of us here are non violent in our political realm. I am not a fan of Che,I was not a fan of Batista, Fulgencio either. Dictators are dictators, the chains they form are the same. When either left or right threaten the use of force to influance the outcome of an election or of policy, that is the definition of terrorism.
    The laws in place, which the right wing seem to love, can be used on them also. When it does they will become liberals weeping for a lawyer, but being denied.

  32. joed says

    This is part of the address @22 ericatkinson:
    “double Tap” is a method of shooting a person twice before they can fall to the ground. this is the fad of the gun nuts these days. It is a very serious fad, nothing funny about it. Hateful Extremism at its finest.

    A double tap or controlled pair is a shooting technique where two well-aimed shots are fired at the same target with very little time in between shots. Instruction …
    en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Double_tap

  33. raven says

    Since 9/11 two thirds of all terrorist incidents and plots have involved right wing extremists and/or fundie xians, according to the FBI. It’s certainly well known that right wing extremists are often violent. If Timothy McVeigh hadn’t been executed, you could just ask him.

    The nearest terrorist incident to me was someone trying to burn down the local mosque.

    The second nearest one was some guy who got in a shootout with the cops while on his way to bomb an environmental group.

  34. says

    This fine leftist actually hoped Ronald freaking Reagan would survive his assassination attempt in 1981.
    By the time I turned 22, there had been six attempts on the lives of Presidents or presidential candidates in my lifetime, resulting in one dead president, one dead candidate, another in a wheelchair, and another in the hospital. Oh yeah, and Martin Luther King, John Lennon, and the Pope.
    Fuck violence. Fuck guns. Political disagreement is what democracy is for. Tell me again who hates America?

  35. petejohn says

    Democracy!

    I had a friend of mine in college who was in ROTC. He told me with a straight face that he hoped someone shot President Obama. I asked “why do you want that?”

    “Because I don’t like him and I think he’ll do a bad job.”

    “Did you vote for him?”

    “No.”

    “Why?”

    “I wanted him to lose.”

    “Were you aware that it was possible he’d win?”

    “Well, yeah, of course. But I didn’t want that.”

    “Would you have been okay with someone shooting McCain?”

    “Well…. ”

    He realized where I was going with this, and abruptly said “Yeah, I guess shooting the guy is a bit far.”

    YA THINK?!?!?!?!

    Assassination in a democratic system is a sickening crime. It’s one jackass with a grudge and a gun deciding his (could be a she but every president who’s been shot in American history was shot by a guy) own personal opinion is more important than that of a huge swath of his fellow citizens. I disagree vehemently with many things Obama does, just as I disagreed with many of Bush’s policies, but killing the POTUS is simply not an acceptable action. Come to think of it, it’s downright cowardly, because an assassin is too scared to fight an issue out in the court of public opinion.

  36. raven says

    I swore to uphold the constitution of the United States of America. There is no “shooting from rooftops” allowed.

    Which most likely means the taxpayers pay your salary. Sounds like pure commie socialism to me.

    I’ll bet you have pictures of Lenin, Stalin, Mao, and Pol Pot hanging in your living room.

  37. mythbri says

    No Che shirts here. I do have a shirt that depicts Darth Vader trimming a hedge in the shape of the Death Star, though – does that make me a leftist or fascist?

  38. ericatkinson says

    Well.
    I am happy to learn that maybe I was wrong about this group and the “Che” T shirts.
    But there was a bunch of them being worn by the #Occupyfail movement.
    And I have always beeen an asshole.

  39. says

    @petejohn: folks like that are pretty fucking rare in most ROTC groups when I was going through them and within the officer corps in general now. Unfortunately, the noisy and idiotic few make the rest of us look bad.

  40. says

    Well.
    I am happy to learn that maybe I was wrong about this group and the “Che” T shirts.

    Are you happy to learn you’re not as smart as you think you are?

    And I have always beeen an asshole.

    Go floss with electric eels

  41. ericatkinson says

    raven.
    Yes the taxpayers paid my wages.
    But it was to be a Navy Nuke, or be drafted.
    I now have Homer Simpson’s job.

  42. says

    ericatkinson:

    I am happy to learn that maybe I was wrong about this group and the “Che” T shirts.
    But there was a bunch of them being worn by the #Occupyfail movement.

    So? Most of them probably have no idea what Che really represented.

    It’s kind of hard to mistake the message of the design featured above.

  43. mythbri says

    Also, two of my most recently acquired T-shirts are based on hiking. One is a picture of someone jumping a gap in the trail, and is captioned “Confidence is the feeling you have before you fully understand the situation.”

    The other says “Bring a compass. It’s awkward when you have to eat your friends.”

    Don’t know what that says about my politics.

  44. ericatkinson says

    “double Tap” is a method of shooting a person twice before they can fall to the ground. this is the fad of the gun nuts these days. It is a very serious fad, nothing funny about it. Hateful Extremism at its finest”

    No. It is survival at its finest.

    BTW The back of the shirt:When in doubt,empty the magazine.

  45. Happiestsadist says

    The t-shirts I have with things on them: Batman logo, constellations (oooh, glow in the dark!), birds and a mushroom cloud, a squid saying hello, and my favourite tattoo shop. Not a Che in sight.

    Eric: Maybe you shouldn’t get all your info from Fox news and World Net Daily?

  46. mythbri says

    @nigelTheBold

    Found it in a gift shop just outside of a national park with some truly awesome hiking. It was one of those “must own at first sight” kind of things.

  47. says

    So, are we going to get any Republicans to unambiguously denounce the pro-terrorism shirt from the OP as shameful, evil, and anti-American?

  48. betelgeux says

    I still don’t see a link suggesting that PZ supports terrorism, Eric.

    Evidence, please.

    Funny how the boring trolls shy away from any demand for evidence. Any mildly entertaining troll would provide a link to a completely unrelated post and try to twist his words. It’s a pity this particular chew toy is so terribly vapid.

    I do have a Salvador Allende t-shirt that I’m quite proud of, by the way.

  49. Anri says

    I am happy to learn that maybe I was wrong about this group and the “Che” T shirts.
    But there was a bunch of them being worn by the #Occupyfail movement.

    Did them mean ol’ kids wear something that rustled your poor jimmies? I bet they were listening to loud Rock N Roll, too!

    Kids these days!

  50. Cipher, OM, Fighting Fucktoy says


    But there was a bunch of them being worn by the #Occupyfail movement.

    I’m afraid I have to give you some bad news.
    You’re an obtuse, irrelevant fuckhead.
    I’m very sorry. I hope you get better soon.

  51. says

    In answer to 61, probably not, unless they start throwing them in jail, like the 99%Rs. Just look at the out cry from arresting Zimmerman after he was arrested for executing an unarmed man.

  52. says

    No. It is survival at its finest.

    BTW The back of the shirt:When in doubt,empty the magazine.

    Once again someone who glorifies something and swims in a big old pool of it is trying to shame other people for what he perceives is also indulging in his wank.

    Because you know, if people actually were honest and not violent well then you’re not just some honest edgy rebel…you’re just an asshole. And we can’t have that! Biggest angst is that people are not as awful as you are

  53. says

    The insanity of this is that when their political faction is in power they advocate violence against others, and when their political faction is not in power they advocate violence against their neighbours. To some people, elections are just a means of controlling violence. As long as the out group is being brutalized, they could give a damn about policy.

  54. Loqi says

    @62

    Don’t hold your breath waiting for that evidence. I don’t think any is forthcoming. Despite “reading Myers (sic) blog daily”, he’s got nothing but assumptions and accusations.

  55. ericatkinson says

    “So, are we going to get any Republicans to unambiguously denounce the pro-terrorism shirt from the OP as shameful, evil, and anti-American?”

    Ok. I unambiguously denounce the pro-terrorism shirt from the OP as shameful, evil, and anti-American. It’s beyond the pale.

    I wonder what all those members of Move On, Daily Kos, and the DU will do when the US is took over by those rethuglican theocrats.

  56. Loqi says

    I wonder what all those members of Move On, Daily Kos, and the DU will do when the US is took over by those rethuglican theocrats.

    Try to campaign more effectively next time around? Challenge any unconstitutional laws they pass? I’m sure you’re trying to suggest something that’s not completely baseless here, I just can’t figure out what…

  57. Anri says

    This is my shrt. http://www.rangerup.com/doubletap.html

    Also from the site:

    “I (club) Hippies”

    “They’re Gonna Need More Virgins”

    Oh, and of course…

    “The Lord is a Man of War”

    So, shared sentiment, ericatkinson?
    Or are those shirts not for True Internet Tough Guys Rangers?

  58. says

    The insanity of this is that when their political faction is in power they advocate violence against others, and when their political faction is not in power they advocate violence against their neighbours. To some people, elections are just a means of controlling violence. As long as the out group is being brutalized, they could give a damn about policy.

    Yes yes yes, everyone is as awful as you. Don’t worry. You can sleep well tonight.

    I wonder what all those members of Move On, Daily Kos, and the DU will do when the US is took over by those rethuglican theocrats.

    Yes how horrible it would be if the thugs tooked over something.

    INT as dump stat.

  59. Azkyroth, Former Growing Toaster Oven says

    And those same right wingers consider Occupy Wall Street a violent mob.

    It’s not the “violent” part they object to, it’s the “mob” part.

    Or, more precisely, the “rabble” part.

  60. Sili (I have no penis and I must jizz) says

    No. It is survival at its finest.

    You do realise that zombies aren’t real, don’t you mr atkinson?

  61. Cipher, OM, Fighting Fucktoy says

    Obnoxious anti-leftist trolling asshole,
    <blockquote>quoted text goes here</blockquote>

  62. Cipher, OM, Fighting Fucktoy says

    INT as dump stat.

    :D

    Or, more precisely, the “rabble” part.

    Nailed it.

  63. says

    Ok. I unambiguously denounce the pro-terrorism shirt from the OP as shameful, evil, and anti-American. It’s beyond the pale.

    Yay. That’s one. How about you spread it among your friends and see how many are really anti-terrorism? How about you ask them to publicly announce that they’re Republican or whatever and that they also denounce it.

    The people who came up with it need to be shamed by their own because otherwise they’ll just dismiss strong anti-terrorism messages as just another pinko liberal stance.

    I wonder what all those members of Move On, Daily Kos, and the DU will do when the US is took over by those rethuglican theocrats.

    Most likely, the same sort of things they’ve been doing for the past decade.

  64. petejohn says

    I wonder what all those members of Move On, Daily Kos, and the DU will do when the US is took over by those rethuglican theocrats.

    Expose every bit of nonsense those rethuglican theocrats try to pass off as policy, with the goal of getting Americans to vote for someone else in the 2014 and 2016 elections. They will not advocate the murder of those rethuglican theocrats, and if they do they will be denounced by a rather huge portion of those on the left. You know, democracy stuff. Not print t-shirts advocating the murder of political figures of a different affiliation.

  65. truebutnotuseful says

    ericatkinson wrote @ #19:

    I am wondering how many “Che” Guevara T shirts this fine leftist bunch owns.

    No Che shirts in this fine leftist’s closet. But I do have this one.

  66. Azkyroth, Former Growing Toaster Oven says

    I now have Homer Simpson’s job.

    Why doesn’t that surprise me?

  67. chigau (女性) says

    I am happy to learn that maybe I was wrong about this group and the “Che” T shirts.

    Well, thank gods. I shall be able to sleep soundly, tonight.

  68. mythbri says

    I wonder what all those members of Move On, Daily Kos, and the DU will do when the US is took over by those rethuglican theocrats.

    Continue blogging, activism, campaigning, raising awareness, writing congresspersons, attempting to change minds one at a time, voting, get angry and burned out once in a while, bounce back and start all over again. Or move to Canada, as threatened.

  69. ixchel, the jaguar goddess of midwifery and war ॐ says

    So? Most of them probably have no idea what Che really represented.

    I wear a Fidel Castro shirt just so I’m not misunderstood.

  70. kayden says

    I understand the First Amendment and free speech, but if I saw someone wearing that t-shirt, would I be wrong to report them to the FBI? I read it as justifying violence if Obama wins in November. But perhaps I’m just being paranoid. This is no worst than that awful Trayvon Martin shooting target.

    Never seen anything like that from the left, i.e., t-shirts, other paraphernalia suggesting violence if Romney wins. I’d condemn it just as loudly.

  71. ericatkinson says

    I wear a Fidel Castro shirt just so I’m not misunderstood.

    I count one now.

  72. Cipher, OM, Fighting Fucktoy says

    I count one now.

    Thank you for figuring out how to use blockquotes! *applause*
    That said, LOL.

  73. autumn says

    I have to admit I used to have a Che t-shirt. However, it was a parody shirt in which Che is himself wearing a Che shirt. I thought it was a funny commentary.
    Also, it was a gift from my brother, who is both a Republican and a USN officer.

  74. ixchel, the jaguar goddess of midwifery and war ॐ says

    I count one now.

    What? No you don’t.

    I don’t have any Che t-shirts.

  75. chigau (女性) says

    My favorite t-shirt is worn-out and retired.
    (purchased in 1990)
    “Alaska. Where men are men and women win the Iditarod.”

    No. It is survival at its finest.

    You are very stupid.

  76. 'Tis Himself says

    I don’t have any Che t-shirts.

    Che, Fidel, same-same as far as the historically and politically illiterate are concerned.

  77. Happiestsadist says

    Well, not American, but I imagine they’ll keep doing what they have been when that actually happened some time ago.

    Do keep up.

  78. otrame says

    Yesterday I was wearing this t-shirt.

    WANT. That is the coolest fucking shirt I ever saw.

  79. ericatkinson says

    Thank you for figuring out how to use blockquotes!

    Are you not entertained?

  80. 'Tis Himself says

    I have a t-shirt I’m rather fond of which reads “I’m an economist so let’s just assume that I’m wrong”.

  81. ericatkinson says

    So Doubletap, you willing to pull the trigger yourself?

    I pull the trigger almost every day.

    If you are referring to killing another human, I hope I never find out.

    I also hope that I am ready if need be.

  82. says

    “I hope I never find out.”

    Psh. Liar. You’ve waddled in here with an almost fetish like glee of the idea of handguns and violence and insistent on defending your delusion that everyone is like you. You’re hoping for it.

  83. stevenbrown says

    I have a Che shirt.
    Got it in a random pack of shirts from TeeFury.

    Kinda like it actually.

    The shirt in the OP is rather sickening.

  84. RahXephon, Waahmbulance Driver for St. Entitlement's Hospital says

    BTW The back of the shirt:When in doubt,empty the magazine.

    Yeah, why should you ever think about who you’re shooting before you do it? If they didn’t wanna get shot, they shouldn’t have been in front of your gun, right?

    You’re a disgusting piece of shit.

  85. ericatkinson says

    Define “Need be”

    If I need to use deadly force to protect my life, a loved one, a member of the public, or my country from someone else using deadly force, I am willing to kill. I hope.

    Time for breaking bad!

  86. betelgeux says

    I also hope that I am ready if need be.

    You think you’re so damn tough, don’t you, eric? I’ve met your type before, people who migrate to the extreme right or left and embrace violence simply because it makes you look cool and menacing in an online forum like this. Quick clue: it doesn’t. It makes you look like a fool.

    People like you don’t actually care about the ideology, they just care about the fact that they can make pro-violence comments and wear t-shirts and hold guns.
    Which, if you think about it, is pretty scary.

  87. betelgeux says

    And I have to admit, I’m a little insulted that ixchel’s Castro t-shirt was counted in your tally of Che shirts, and my Allende shirt wasn’t. The nerve!
    /snark

  88. jnorris says

    Why that’s just like the Republican Tea Party’s “Second Amendment Remedies” they pushed in 2010.

  89. otrame says

    No Che t-shirts for me either.

    See, this is the point. The ends do not justify the means. I agree that throwing the big sugar companies out of Cuba was a worthy goal. But, as Stan Rogers (peace be upon him) said, “All rights and all wrongs have long since blown away, for causes are ashes where children lie slain.”

  90. RahXephon, Waahmbulance Driver for St. Entitlement's Hospital says

    or my country from someone else using deadly force, I am willing to kill.

    Even if those people happen to be defending themselves because you’re in their country that you invaded. The US and its military has had an extremely fucking loose definition of “defending itself” for quite a long time, assflap.

  91. chigau (女性) says

    ericatkinson

    If I need to use deadly force to protect my life, a loved one, a member of the public, or my country from someone else using deadly force, I am willing to kill. I hope.

    Are you willing to kill with a hand weapon or your hands or do you need to be at a safe distance with your gun?

  92. Amphiox says

    If I need to use deadly force to protect my life, a loved one, a member of the public, or my country from someone else using deadly force, I am willing to kill. I hope.

    And do you also reserve, for yourself, the right to be the one who defines what “need” means?

  93. Amphiox says

    I am happy to learn that maybe I was wrong about this group and the “Che” T shirts.

    The standard Che t-shirt is just an image of man’s face. Irrespective of what that man may or may not be made out to represent, to compare that to the T-shirt in the OP, which DIRECTLY references lethal violence is utterly despicable and dishonest.

    There is no equivalency between the two.

  94. ixchel, the jaguar goddess of midwifery and war ॐ says

    The ends do not justify the means.

    That depends.

    I agree that throwing the big sugar companies out of Cuba was a worthy goal.

    And what is your alternative plan for doing so?

  95. robro says

    Double-tap is also a touchscreen gesture. I believe this use of “double-tap” represents the gamification of killing.

  96. says

    chigau:

    “Alaska. Where men are men and women win the Iditarod.”

    Closed tentacle salute

    As a sourdough, all I can say is, I ♥ Libby Riddles.

    What? You want me to say Susan Butcher? I ♥ her too. Met her once. An amazing person.

  97. says

    erikatkinson:

    If I need to use deadly force to protect my life, a loved one, a member of the public, or my country from someone else using deadly force, I am willing to kill. I hope.

    I was put to that test. I discovered I am willing to kill to protect a loved one.

    It’s nothing to hope for.

  98. says

    Seriously. The average person is perfectly capable and willing to bash their fellow mans’ skull in with a folding chair to defend their snickersbar. Preparing for that isn’t exactly something to be proud of.

  99. says

    billygutter01:

    I have no idea who this person is.

    Yeah. That’s my experience. They know he’s supposed to represent defiance in the face of oppression, at the most. Generally.

    I’m a bit confused by eric’s conflation of Che T-shirts with shirts that advocate, y’know, actual terrorism. It’s like he’s trying to strawman us, or something.

  100. ixchel, the jaguar goddess of midwifery and war ॐ says

    What was the Plan that worked for Hawaii?

    Seems to have involved submission to the United States.

  101. says

    @nigol

    It’s the ‘everyone has to be as bad as me because otherwise I’m not an awesome smart snowflake for knowing the truth and being honest about the harsh reality…I’m just an asshole who couldn’t actually be ethical and am a failure!”

  102. chigau (女性) says

    nigelTheBold
    Libby and Susan, yes amazing women. Amazing people.
    re: dogsled racing
    Have you read my lead dog was a lesbian or Honest Dogs by Brian Patrick O’Donoghue?
    Brian managed to Red Lantern in both the Iditarod and The Yukon Quest.

  103. says

    I have an ironic beret. I stopped wearing it because everyone wanted to know what it meant that I was wearing a beret.

    Now I stick to Hello Kitty. She’s a less subtle sort of irony.

  104. says

    chigau:

    Libby and Susan, yes amazing women. Amazing people.

    I met Susan Butcher after her fourth win. She did an interview which took place at the University of Alaska Fairbanks library, where I worked. There was a reception after, and she took the time to talk to all of us, personally. She had Granite with her.

    She was more than just open and cordial. She was the very definition of life itself. It was as if she wasn’t just pleased to meet us, honestly and truly. It’s as if her very life was made better by the meeting.

    I know mine was. I have met few people like her in the world, and in each case, I am left in awe of their ability to change the very reality in which they walk.

    I am sad I never got the chance to meet Libby Riddles. I can’t help but think she might’ve affected my life as well.

  105. left0ver1under says

    That shirt reminds me of the Israeli military t-shirt:

    “One shot, two kills”

    http://lawrenceofcyberia.blogs.com/.a/6a00d834522bcd69e201156e3f4eef970c-300wi

    which depicts a pregnant Palestinian woman in a crosshairs of a rifle.

    Meanwhile in England, their police state…I mean, state police, waste taxpayer money investigating and infiltrating groups who sell t-shirts at music festivals. Those who sell shirts promoting human rights over capitalism are labelled “XLW”, or “extreme left wing” and their privacy is violated and invaded.

    http://www.rawstory.com/rs/2012/07/15/uk-police-revealed-to-have-infiltrated-anti-capitalist-t-shirt-sellers/

  106. cartomancer says

    As a somewhat sheltered Englishman I have to say I find it difficult to get viscerally upset by that T-shirt. Though only because it is very hard for me to process it as a serious attempt at a political point. The sentiment it expresses is so egregiously far beyond anything you ever hear said in the political sphere over here that it seems like an obvious bad-taste joke. Not a terribly funny one I’ll grant, but that’s the register it immediately occupied for me. If I hadn’t seen the reaction here from all the US types I would have assumed that it was just a ludicrous comedic exaggeration. The same sort of joke as the crone to Blackadder: “if you don’t want to be found out, kill everybody in the entire world!”.

    I guess it looks rather different and a lot more objectionable in a culture where this sort of stuff finds admittance to genuine political discourse, albeit on the fringes. Very worrying indeed.

  107. says

    As a somewhat sheltered Englishman I have to say I find it difficult to get viscerally upset by that T-shirt. Though only because it is very hard for me to process it as a serious attempt at a political point. The sentiment it expresses is so egregiously far beyond anything you ever hear said in the political sphere over here that it seems like an obvious bad-taste joke. Not a terribly funny one I’ll grant, but that’s the register it immediately occupied for me. If I hadn’t seen the reaction here from all the US types I would have assumed that it was just a ludicrous comedic exaggeration. The same sort of joke as the crone to Blackadder: “if you don’t want to be found out, kill everybody in the entire world!”.

    I guess it looks rather different and a lot more objectionable in a culture where this sort of stuff finds admittance to genuine political discourse, albeit on the fringes. Very worrying indeed.

    I’m sorry did you miss that we had a senator fucking shot not too long ago?

  108. scrutationaryarchivist says

    Raven @46

    I expect that most of that remaining third of U.S. (?) terrorist incidents would be by Islamic supremacists. If so, I would also classify them as “right wing extremists and/or fundie”.

  109. says

    I expect that most of that remaining third of U.S. (?) terrorist incidents would be by Islamic supremacists.

    That’s a gross over estimate of Islamicist’s contribution to U.S. Terrorism.

  110. cartomancer says

    Senator shot? Yes, I think I did vaguely hear something like that. But that’s kind of my point, it’s something the political culture over there seems to regard as real and immediate. Over here it’s so far off the radar as to seem intrinsically ridiculous. It was a big deal over here when someone threw an egg at our deputy prime minister.

  111. Happiestsadist says

    Yes, cartomancer, it’s lovely that you’re sheltered. Good for you. Now you can’t feign ignorance.

  112. cartomancer says

    I wasn’t feigning ignorance, I was merely pointing out, by means of a cross-cultural comparison, how deeply disturbing this kind of US republican gun-nuttery really is. It’s something a lot of non-US people really struggle to get a grip on. We hear the reports of it, but the mentality that must be involved stretches credibility to a considerable degree. It’s difficult trying to think one’s way into such an alien cultural mindset, especially one that looks superficially so similar. The trappings do genuinely look surreal at first glance, until you understand the culture that produced them.

  113. Happiestsadist says

    cartomancer: Not all of us are American. I, for one, am not. BUT, there’s a lot of weird authoritarian BS in my country too. And yours. None of this shit is unconnected. The US just has a bigger gun fetish.

  114. karpad says

    I don’t own a Che shirt.
    I do own an Anaheim Electronics shirt. Which is arguably worse, since those assholes basically vomit evil around them. But fictional, so, there’s that.

    I’m still working on an AEUG design that I like to print up.

  115. cartomancer says

    Oh indeed. I never said right-wing authoritarianism or preening insecure machismo were unique to America. Far from it. And the UK is probably worse in that regard than almost anywhere else in Europe. But the guns are the key point. That very much does seem to be a US cultural speciality, particularly where guns and the idea of frontiersman-style self-determination meet. The imagery and trappings of that are what seem most surreal when one is not constantly presented with it as a fact of cultural life.

  116. Doug S. says

    No, no, you don’t vote from the rooftops with rifles! You’ll get blown up by drone aircraft! You need to vote from a basement with an IED triggered by a cell phone instead!

    More seriously… for a sufficiently stringent definition of “when all else fails”, the sentiment expressed by the shirt is pretty much correct. For example, would you condemn Georg Elser, who, having correctly deduced that Hitler was going to start World War II, nearly succeeded in assassinating him?

    On the other hand, most people who think all else has failed are usually just plain crazy – such as Charles Guiteau – or, at least, on the wrong side of history, such as John Wilkes Booth. (And any U.S. citizen who thinks that the current President of the United States should be assassinated almost certainly has beliefs about him that have no basis in reality whatsoever.)

  117. Doug S. says

    (Ugh, my fake “comically missing the point” faux HTML tags around the first paragraph disappeared.)

  118. Tony aka The Psychic Octopus [safe and welcome at FtB] says

    ericat:

    Well.
    I am happy to learn that maybe I was wrong about this group and the “Che” T shirts.
    But there was a bunch of them being worn by the #Occupyfail movement.

    Your happiness, to the extent that anyone cares is noted…
    …and negated since you chose to say “maybe I was wrong”.
    If no one says they own a ‘Che’ tee shirt, then the correct thing you should do is say :
    >>I’m happy to learn I was wrong about this group and the “Che” T shirts.<<

    Even if you don't admit your error, what does the Occupy movement have to do with commenters on Pharyngula? Are you really trying to say
    “group A wears ‘Che’ t shirts, so Group J does too” ??
    How in the world did you come to this illogical conclusion?

    Also noted is your disdain for the Occupy movement. Are you part of the 1%? Or do you just enjoy your class and privilege and feel that social justice will strip your rights away?

  119. naturalcynic says

    #48:

    It’s one jackass with a grudge and a gun deciding his (could be a she but every president who’s been shot in American history was shot by a guy)…

    It’s not from lack of trying. Two assassination attempts were made on Gerald Ford within 3 weeks in 1975, both by women: Lynette “Squeaky” Fromme pointed a handgun at Ford in Sacramento, but did not fire. She was a member of the Manson Family. Sara Jane Moore shot once at Ford in San Francisco and missed, because the sights were faulty. She was involved with some leftist groups related to the Symbionese Liberation Army.

  120. MFHeadcase says

    Heh, I wonder how much overlap there would be in sets including people who agree with this shirt, and people who scream “Majority rules!” when legislation that harms minorities pass.

    I suspect that it approaches unity.

  121. Subtract Hominem says

    It’s the little nooses hanging from a few letters in each word that make the shirt in the OP so charming.

    No, wait. Not charming. It’s the other thing.

  122. says

    naturalcynic #151:

    It’s not from lack of trying. Two assassination attempts were made on Gerald Ford within 3 weeks in 1975, both by women: Lynette “Squeaky” Fromme pointed a handgun at Ford in Sacramento, but did not fire. She was a member of the Manson Family. Sara Jane Moore shot once at Ford in San Francisco and missed, because the sights were faulty. She was involved with some leftist groups related to the Symbionese Liberation Army.

    And…what is the point of going out of your way to specifically mention these attempts?

  123. says

    What better example of “shouting ‘fire’ in a crowded theater” than the message on that t-shirt? Certainly better than the accusation leveled against a group of war protesters in 1919 who, Hitchens reminded us, really were shouting a very real warning; a warning designed rather to prevent harm.

    The person wearing this t-shirt actively advocates and promotes real violence to actual enthusiasts who have no business contemplating rooftops, firearms, or any combination of the two; they warn of no danger but spread panic: He could not shout “fire” any louder.

  124. getoveryourselves says

    #161, Setar: So, what is the context that makes that one okay? Is there any context that makes the other one okay?

  125. mudpuddles says

    Morbid fascination drove me to look at some of the other shirts those scumbags have on offer. One of them says “An armed society is a polite society”. Which is pretty ironic… and daft… and plain pig ignorant. And a bit scary, kind of admitting that people should be too terrified to be “impolite”, because jebus forbid they accidentally offend someone, they might get shot for their troubles.

    I’d like to see a shirt that says “An armed society is a society of disgusting redneck cowards.” That would have more truth to it.

  126. amoeba says

    These hypocritical wannabe terrorists don’t understand irony, democracy, or pretty-well anything else.

    Perhaps it’s time for mandatory testing for intelligence and suitable personality types being required for gun and car ownership.

  127. says

    It is also a “crime” against good typographic layout: The line break should be where the the sentence has its natural pause (with a comma, even?), between the complement and the main proposition:

    when all else fails

    vote from the

    rooftops

    and not

    when all else

    fails vote from the

    rooftops

    “Rooftops” being the (litteral) “punch line” and set in a larger face, is okay.

    (A couple of decades ago, in my cozy southern European country, some cultivated the notion that right wing people are prim and proper and care for good grammar, while left wingers not so much. This is now thoroughly both changed and debunked.)

    P.S.: WordPress doesn’t think we should be allowed to handle or BR tags on our own. Silly WordPress.

  128. throwaway, these are not the bullies you're looking for says

    #161, Setar: So, what is the context that makes that one okay? Is there any context that makes the other one okay?

    Answering for myself, I’d say it’s the complete absence of context in the first one. Is the person in the cross-hairs a Public Enemy? Or is the person aiming the cross-hairs the Public Enemy? Maybe it’s the person wearing the shirt drawing a target on themselves as a comment on how society will blame their problems on a convenient scapegoat. The problem with second one is it is too much in context – it’s a very clear message of violent opposition when shit didn’t go your way. I think Tuválkin sums it up nicely.

  129. throwaway, these are not the bullies you're looking for says

    Sorry, not Tuválkin, but Amateur Hour.

  130. rogerfirth says

    You could wear this t-shirt as pajamas, especially if you turned it inside out. But it’s probably not nice comfy cotton.

    You could use it as a paint rag, but it’d probably only work with white paint.

  131. puppygod says

    Well, to be honest.. While I don’t have Che t-shirt, my favourite one sports a victorian gentleman with top-hat and sideburns rising AK-47 with the caption “The Revolution will not be telegraphed”. So, I guess I’m steampunkist terrorist.

  132. frankboyd says

    Nice to see the privileged American’s sense of priorities is in good order. Please, save the world from the menace of loudmouth t-shirts! We thought we were in trouble there for a minute.

  133. Owen says

    If that’s a “vote”, then I reckon we should only allow gun owners one bullet.

  134. anubisprime says

    I am fairly sure Mizzy Palin would think she would look cute and sassy in one!
    One would assume that the T-Shirt slogan it is a tongue in cheek comment… that only works if the message is received by everyone that sees it as a rhetorical bit of ironic macho posturing.

    Unfortunately is fails in this context…because there are far far to many that would whole heartedly agree with the sentiment…and they are allied to the rethuglians in spirit and intent.

    Funny that their oppo’s and legions of evangelical supporters have nothing to say about the message?
    Presumably a bullet for Obama is in all essence a bullet from Jeebus!

    We shall know them by there works indeed!

  135. hyoid says

    @22 eric Americans Double Tapping funerals is a miserable fucking shame. Can’t even let the “enemy” bury their fucking dead and mourn the fucking loss of loved ones in fucking peace. Pogo was right.

    https://encrypted-tbn1.google.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcSbg2XpAyH-c9p3f2UOuK2FopnETTILZEo8BqG2298aBulBS-aL5A

    And then America gives awards of valor and makes heroes out of the bombers.

    America owes 2Lt William Calley and his Platoon a fucking apology.

    Pogo was fucking right.

    Rickey Miller

  136. says

    My favorite shirt, which is long dead now, is a plan black shirt with green lettering:

    “Blissfully unaware of my surroundings.”

    I needed about eight of those, to wear every day. Sadly, that shirt is demised and the company doesn’t sell it anymore.

  137. sundiver says

    My favorite t-shirt is “420-I don’t smoke pot. That’s my credit score”.

  138. says

    I have faint memories of the name “Frank Boyd” being associated with abject stupidity, but I forget the context. Is he a creationist or a cracker whiner, or is he upset at those uppity bitches not respecting his manhood?

  139. says

    @116:

    “GUNS GUNS GUNS GUNS GUNSdon’tlookatmypenisGUNS GUNS GUNS GUNS GUNS”

    Can we stop this sort of thing, seriously? Penis length does not correspond to masculinity. It’s a dangerous trope, and it’s a punch at the masculinity of a man is directly in reference to his genitals. We would not accept people evaluating the femininity of a woman dependent on whether she has or does not have big breasts, so we shouldn’t let this kind of thing continue.

  140. Louis says

    I don’t have a Che t-shirt or poster but I do have the recent 2- part film biopic, some books and assorted writings. Hell, I’ll even go as far as to say that based on what I have read there are a few things I admire about the guy and agree with him on.

    So?

    I agree with anyone who says something demonstrably sensible, reality ain’t a team sport. Even Maggie Thatcher made the odd note of sense, why pretend she didn’t? I might be ideologically opposed to her in my politics in general, but I’d rather amend my politics to reality (as far as is accessible) than deny reality to maintain some dubious political ideological purity. The same works for morals/ethics, given a pre-agreed upon set of priors, one can reason within those limitations as to what political solution will likely produce the results most in concord with those priors. Of course the tricky bit is “which priors?”. Even that can be informed by reasoned enquiry, even if sadly not ultimately decided by it.

    I don’t even begin to see how such a thing could be controversial. Whinging about some alleged allegiance of “where an idea comes from” might be a useful rule of thumb when weeding out idiots, a convenient time saver, but it’s no more an arbiter of accuracy and truth than is “Darwin kicked puppies therefore evolution is false”.

    Louis

  141. Louis says

    Katherine Lorraine, #183,

    We would not accept people evaluating the femininity of a woman dependent on whether she has or does not have big breasts, so we shouldn’t let this kind of thing continue.

    We wouldn’t? Oh oh right, erm, yeah we wouldn’t. {Shit! ;-) }

    You’re right as always.

    {Sigh} Excuse me, I have a metric fucktonne of dick jokes to go and dispose of (and there was much rejoicing). Some of them were really good too, proper wordplay, bathos, you name it, it was in there. I spent HOURS on some of those dick jokes, carefully hand crafting the nuance and references. You get no respect for old fashioned craftsmanship these days. It’s political correctnezz gorn mAHd I tells ya!

    Louis

  142. says

    The whole “Your penis isn’t big enough, so you’re trying to be more of a man by doing X!” formulation could be argued to be another example of our friends patriarchy and misogyny.

    The popularity of Che shirts is interesting given the suggestion I saw in a Guevara biography I read a few years ago. The idea was that Castro convinced Che to go on his ultimately fatal campaign to export revolution because he was too popular, and Castro thus saw him as a threat to his own position. If true it would be interesting to know if Castro would be bothered by Che’s popularity, or unconcerned by fetishisation of a dead rival.

  143. Rev. BigDumbChimp says

    I used to have a t-shirt in my punk days that said

    doo doo

    on the back.

    It was really fucking punk rock. No really it was.

  144. says

    @Louis:

    Sorry :( I should’ve realized that basic human decency would have some collateral damage, what with the ‘no rape jokes’ ‘no gay jokes’ ‘no penis jokes’ and such all gone, what are we left with?

    “So what’s the deal with airline food?” *shudder*

    @timgueguen:

    Yep, exactly my point. Patriarchy sucks, and it really sucks for men to have to worry about having a big enough penis to satisfy (is my understanding correct that smaller actually is better?)

  145. Louis says

    Katherine Lorraine,

    WON’T SOMEONE PLEASE THINK OF THE DICK JOKES?!

    {ahem}

    Anyway, I’m sorry I missed the recent humour thread, although Jadehawk was kind enough to send me a few PDFs from journals I have no access to on the matter. Humour fascinates me, it’s “misuse” as much as it’s “use”, so I’ve spiralled out of control into reference heaven by tracking back through papers/books etc and my Amazon spend has just increased…again. I am weak and like reading, sue me! I have to say as I continue my feminist/humanities type self education, it’s been great fun to find the topic of humour so engaging and accessible. Wish I’d thought of it sooner.

    Louis

  146. Gaebolga says

    @ #8:

    PZ Myers wrote:

    Yes, exactly. There are no possible situations in which that t-shirt is appropriate. Ever.

    Untrue; I would gladly wear this t-shirt in reference to American Idol voting.

    ‘Cause that shit actually matters, yo.

  147. says

    @Louis:

    *begin sad background music*

    “Hi, I’m Daniel Tosh. We in the comedy business spend our time and energy making people laugh for a half-hour to an hour every night. We’re there in your living room on situational comedies, we’re there on the stages in bars and comedy clubs. It’s our job to give people a bright spot in their days to forget their troubles.

    Unfortunately for most comedians, the landscape of comedy is changing. Where we could once point out the silliness of expecting a woman to be treated as more than meat, we’re becoming inundated by feminist ideology that asks us to respect them. When we could point out that a man’s love of a big SUV is really just a foil for his little penis, we’re being told it’s insensitive and portrays masculinity as directly related to the size of ‘Mr. Happy.’

    But you can help. For 10 cents a day, you can donate to the Politically Incorrect Comedy Fund. Comedians like myself, who make a job of pointing out the hilarity of a fat man trying to fit an unreasonable standard of living, need this money because fewer people are attending our shows and accepting our picking on people for being a minority.

    Think of a world without jokes that make the privileged feel more secure in the fact they’re better off than a woman in a wheelchair, or a black man struggling to make a few bucks at a low-paying job so he can feed his children. Think of a world where we wouldn’t be able to take the easy road of picking on a trans-woman with a little stubble, or a kid whose mental state leaves him making funny sounds.

    We need these jokes, we’re too lazy to think up better ones. Thank you.”

  148. Louis says

    Katherine Lorraine, #193,

    Okay I’m in trouble. Your post made me laugh so hard I woke up my wife who was napping on the sofa.

    Still, she stepped in a (clean) potty as she got up to tell me off for being a noisy git, so I chalk that as a win for me. :-)

    Brilliant post, utterly brilliant!

    Louis

  149. thepint says

    Katherine Lorraine, #193

    I award you one giant shiny internets. You can trade it in to buy me a new keyboard to replace the one that was liberally splashed with iced genmaicha tea when I snarfled upon reading your comments while unfortunately taking a drink. And maybe a little something nice for Louis to give the wife for waking her up. ;)

  150. ginmar says

    If I need to use deadly force to protect my life, a loved one, a member of the public, or my country from someone else using deadly force, I am willing to kill. I hope.

    Yeah, I’ve heard that a lot. These are the assholes that hope that they’re at the scene of a school or Luby’s shooting, so they can be the big damned hero who stands up and….either gets shot by the cops, or by the offender, or manages to shoot other hostages by mistake, because being shot at and trying to aim is a lot different from shooting at paper target. But this is their favorite fantasy. They don’t know their hands will sweat, that you can feel bullets going by if they’re close enough, that the shooter will be far more likely to see you before you see him, that the cops will not see a hero, but another offender with a gun, and that when there’s that much adrenalin in your system, it’s hard for your physical functions to, well, function. Nope, these dudes think it’s going to be like a Bruce Willis movie.

    Or they find themselves claiming their huge gun collection is for ‘home defense’, when they’re just itching for a (minority) person to break into their house and give them a chance to be Clint Eastwood.

    If your home needs that kind of defense—-and it never does——you live in Syria, which is a quandary because these gun apologists like authoritarian rule.

    Stop re-living Red Dawn or whatever, Atkinson.

    Penis length does not correspond to masculinity. It’s a dangerous trope, and it’s a punch at the masculinity of a man is directly in reference to his genitals.

    Considering these guys worship penises, they’re pretty much hoist by their own petard. If you don’t have one—-say, you’re a woman—–then by their standards you ain’t shit.

    Women get judged by this, by not meeting an impossible standard. Men are also brought up to believe they’re better than they actually are. Men get rewarded whether they measure up to it or not: women get punished no matter how well and perfectly they match the standards. Men are always judged to be good, but women are always found lacking, so comparing the standards women face with the standards that find men to be perfectly fine almost all the time is what’s really dangerous here.

  151. Louis says

    Fear not for the nap-integrity of the Beloved. I had been Instructed to wake her at 4pm and I was a few minutes late. I will grant that a hearty bellow of laughter was not among the Approved Methods, but I have provided a cup of tea and been urinated on by my son, so equilibrium has been re-established and the Mrs is viewing me with her usual amused tolerance.

    Louis

  152. sundiver says

    Well put ginmar. Another thing these gunnuts don’t grasp is that the hand gun in the drawer for “home defense” is far more likely to kill them or a family member than it is to “defend their home”. And recall the armed man at the scene of the Gabby Giffords shooting. He did NOT draw his weapon because he thought that he might be mistaken for another gunman and shot himself. I love pointing out to the gunnuts that in a spot like the Giffords shooting untrained people with guns will make a bad scene far worse.

  153. Rev. BigDumbChimp says

    Penis length does not correspond to masculinity. It’s a dangerous trope, and it’s a punch at the masculinity of a man is directly in reference to his genitals.

    As a man of Irish descent, I fully support this.

  154. says

    I’ve seen “Vote from the Rooftops” bumper stickers around for…. christ, a quarter of a century, at least. This shit is nothing new, although governmental and societal denial that they’re advocating terrorism has definitely skyrocketed since 9/11/2001.

    The FB profile of Eric “Both Sides Are Just As Bad!!” MacEachern indicates he’s a Steven Pinker fan. Pinker, as I pointed out last week somewhere on this blog, is one of those sorts who only applies the term “class warfare” to situations in which the poor fight back and who thinks we’d all be better off with iPods instead. Tl;dr: MacEachern is a vapid privileged git.

    Ing:

    For fucks sake, you assholes had the Troubles! Don’t play this bullshit!

    And the people on their northern borders a few centuries ago were the ancestors of most of our current wingnuts.

    Mudpuddles:

    One of [the site's other T-shirts] says “An armed society is a polite society”. Which is pretty ironic… and daft… and plain pig ignorant.

    Quotation from the vastly overrated Robert Heinlein.

    Frank Boyd, two words for you: Stochastic terrorism. Go read.

    Ginmar:

    Considering these guys worship penises, they’re pretty much hoist by their own petard. If you don’t have one—-say, you’re a woman—–then by their standards you ain’t shit…Men are always judged to be good, but women are always found lacking, so comparing the standards women face with the standards that find men to be perfectly fine almost all the time is what’s really dangerous here.

    Agreed.

    Sundiver, in 2007 I wrote a furious post in direct response to several then-”friends” of mine who lambasted the VA Tech victims for not “standing up for themselves.” All of them were cut from the same cloth as Mr. Atkinson up there, and only one had military experience, which was non-combat.

    Rev. BDC, men of Irish descent vary w/r/t penis size. Just take my word for it.

    FWIW, I have a T-shirt with this image on it.

  155. Olav says

    timgueguen:

    The popularity of Che shirts is interesting given the suggestion I saw in a Guevara biography I read a few years ago. The idea was that Castro convinced Che to go on his ultimately fatal campaign to export revolution because he was too popular, and Castro thus saw him as a threat to his own position. If true it would be interesting to know if Castro would be bothered by Che’s popularity, or unconcerned by fetishisation of a dead rival.

    The latter. The worship of Guevara has always been actively encouraged by the Castro regime. The design being, of course, that some of Che’s popularity would rub off on Fidel.

  156. Rev. BigDumbChimp says

    Rev. BDC, men of Irish descent vary w/r/t penis size. Just take my word for it.

    yeah I know, was just feeding into some stereotype jokes.

  157. eclipsse says

    @Ginmar
    Excellent points. As I was reading, you brought a quote from Serenity to mind:
    “Do you know what the definition of a hero is? Someone who gets other people killed. You can look it up later. “

  158. eclipsse says

    Also realising that I have a miserably boring T shirt collection. No funny ones – not even a single politicising one. Now feeling a distinct failure in T-shirt sartoriality.

    Grump.

  159. ginmar says

    Handguns are dangerous partly because they have a shorter barrel and thus less accurate sights. With a rifle you can brace it against your shoulder. People also forget that knowing how to shoot paper targets does not give them any insight into keeping that gun should they fire it in self defense. There’s specific training needed for that. A well-trained unarmed person could disarm a badly-trained gunman.

    Guns in the home almost never get used on bad guys. Guns are a temptation that certain people simply do not resist. There’s lots of reasons guns are associated with macho; there’s almost no good reason to have one in the house because keeping the weapon safe renders it useless as a quick defensive weapon. The saying, “Guns don’t kill people, people do,” is stupid because guns sure make it a fuck of a lot easier for people to kill other people. You could kill somebody with a carrot, too, but it would take a hell of a lot longer and offer way more chances for the victim to fight back and/or escape. I forget how many hundreds of feet a bullet leaves the muzzle at, but that velocity and the explosive power of the projectile are designed to do one thing and one thing only: kill human beings. They’re not dual purpose. You can’t mix a cake with one, or draw pictures, or anything but kill people.

    #204 Never be around ‘that guy’ that wants to be in combat, and wants to or boasts of ‘kills’. I knew a guy who fought in Fallujah at the age of nineteen or twenty and his NCO boasted that this kid had ‘ten confirmed kills.’ This kid jittered and twitched and shook like a Chihuahua who’d had meth for breakfast with Red Bulls on the side. The same NCO called the BN CO a bitch, got busted down for it, tried to strongarm me into lying for him when I’d heard him call other women that, then killed my promotion when I turned him down with a fair degree of rather loud sarcasm. Significantly, he lost three members of his team the first week we were there because he wanted not to teach them, but because he wanted to show them who was boss. One killed, one permanently disabled, one injured.

    I have a TV from the JFK Special Warfare Center at Ft. Bragg,
    where I went to school with officers from other nations in a building without windows. It’s got the motto (in Latin, which I can’t recall right now) “In truth, victory” with my unit crest on it.

    I wore it to work one day and this asshole came in, looked at it, and said, “Did your boyfriend give you that?”

    He was totally serious, too. My boss happened to be standing there and he hissed, “We have no place to bury him and you’re the one doing the digging this time.”

    Usually, I say, “Don’t make me put the M-16 in PMS,” but that was to the Halliburton guys, who were incredible sexually-harassing assholes. Most civilians don’t know precisely what an M-16 is, which means they really shouldn’t have an AR-15, the civilian version of it, which wingnuts lust over. What the fuck do you need an AR-15 for, is what I want to ask these assholes. Home defense? Yeah, against what? And you can’t use that for hunting unless you want to make hamburger on the spot.

    I assume everybody here has seen the infamous ‘liberal hunting license’, right?

  160. says

    Ginmar, I always ask these “macho” men, “when do you shoot?” I have never received an answer. You are correct they all live in their little fantasy world.

  161. ginmar says

    Alas, my brother is one of these. He once confessed he hoped his house would be broken into—-the implication was by one of the two or three people of color who lived in his town, one of Michelle Bachmann’s bastions of buffoonery—–so he could use his gun.

    Instead, my apartment was broken into. While I was working as an armed guard. I didn’t even bother loading it, though it was a revolver. Catching shoplifters made me realize that many men fear women deep down inside and that that fear indicates they have done something for which they fear retribution. This guy that tried to rob my place had gotten halfway through the window before the old-fashioned sash window fell down on him, pinning his front half inside the window, his ass outside. I just cocked the weapon at the ceiling and told him he was the unluckiest motherfucker that ever drew breath for picking my apartment and that he looked Republican to me. Sarcasm: the best self defense. I wish to this day I’d said something about PMS, but let’s face it, with the guy in that position, I could have scared him with a wooden spoon and a cupcake or something.

    Of course, one time I also scared off a miscreant in my yard with a frozen Cornish game hen, so the argument that guns somehow keep your home safe ignores all the options that frozen poultry (or individually frozen hamburgers! throw them like frisbees!) provide one. Cornish game hens are great because they’re just big enough to be intimidating and hurt, but then they thaw fast so you can cook them for dinner the same night.

    Nobody’s going to fess up that somebody scared them with a baby chicken.

  162. ginmar says

    Argh. In 207, the TV should be Tee shirt, duh. I’d look pretty weird wearing a TV, motto or not.

  163. michaelpowers says

    I guess one man’s post-apocalyptic nightmare, is another man’s utopia.

    Sadly, many who subscribe to this sort of thing fantasize about violence constantly. All while telling you what good citizens and patriots they are. All they really want is an excuse to kill someone, anyone, without any consequences.

  164. David Marjanović says

    I am wondering how many “Che” Guevara T shirts this fine leftist
    bunch owns.

    *crickets*

    For better or worse, I don’t even own a “viva la evolución” T-shirt.

    Stop projecting. It is not normal to support violent dictatorships. I don’t think anyone other than ixchel does that here.

    http://store.theonion.com/p-4818-mens-che-wearing-che-t-shirt-t-shirt.aspx

    So full of win!

    I would wear a t-shirt with this image.

    That wins the Internet.

    It is also a “crime” against good typographic layout: The line break should be where the the sentence has its natural pause (with a comma, even?), between the complement and the main proposition:

    Also, there should be a comma after “fails”. You can bloody hear it.

    Stop re-living Red Dawn or whatever, Atkinson.

    I think he’s trying to relive The Russians Are Coming, The Russians Are Coming without noticing that it’s a parody…

  165. Gnumann, メンズ権利活動家国家の売国奴 says

    I don’t think anyone other than ixchel does that here.

    StevoR had some interesting screeds while you were gone, but I don’t know how regular he is (he managed to get very universally despised though).

  166. dysomniak, darwinian socialist says

    Is anyone else bothered by the fact that the Politically Active Citizen appears to be using an AR-15 type rifle with no optics? I mean surely if you’re going to vote from the rooftops there are better choices. Hell, you can get a Remington 700 with quality glass for a fraction of what you’d pay for a good AR. Much more effective for long distance ballot punching.

    Seriously, anyone who wears this shirt is either a posturing asshat or a dangerous sociopath. And yet I got complaints from my local Occupy group over the “violent rhetoric” of my “Eat the Rich” shirt.

  167. Cipher, OM, Fighting Fucktoy says

    I don’t think anyone other than ixchel does that here.

    Two Whedon scenes popped immediately into my head when I read that. Here’s one. The other one is from Firefly and not on Youtube. “Nobody’s saying that!” “Nobody but Jayne is saying that.”

  168. 'Tis Himself says

    Miss Daisy Cutter #201

    All of them were cut from the same cloth as Mr. Atkinson up there, and only one had military experience, which was non-combat.

    Atkinson has the same military experience as me. He was a nuke in a submarine. Definitely a non-combatant.

  169. says

    Is anyone else bothered by the fact that the Politically Active Citizen appears to be using an AR-15 type rifle with no optics? I mean surely if you’re going to vote from the rooftops there are better choices.

    I didn’t catch that. No good. The odds of casting your vote for the correct candidate are a lot worse. I guess that’s why they say “Vote early. Vote often.” Because it’s going to take several votes to be sure. But unlike Florida, you don’t get a recount.

  170. ginmar says

    212…Except even The Russians are coming! The Russians are coming!! showed that we had some things in common. Which, duh. When I was a kid and saw that movie for the first time my Dad got all sloppy and blew his nose in his big giant hankie, which meant he was going to try and claim he was wasn’t blubbing, he was going to claim it was ‘smoke’ in the air. Even though he’d quit smoking five years earlier.

    I don’t have anything in common with Baggers. They scare me more than any insurgent I ever talked to.

  171. Menyambal --- Sambal's sockpuppet says

    Yeah, the layout of that shirt was done by a`careless illiterate. Which is common in the T-shirt/bumper-sticker world.

    On a graphics note, somebody linked to a T-shirt that read, “Double tap. Repeat as necessary.” The background image was of a target riddled with multiple bullet holes. I thought two holes`would have been a lot better.

    “When all else fails …” What exactly is “all else” to these folks?

  172. ginmar says

    @221; well, he survived Jesuit school, and by the time I knew him he had five kids and a talent for sarcasm that deserved a place in the Olympics. We really need to have a Snark Olympics.

  173. ericatkinson says

    Atkinson has the same military experience as me. He was a nuke in a submarine. Definitely a non-combatant.

    For sure a not combatant. All I did was to run the Thermogoddamnynamics machine. Lots of very HOT watches.
    But due to the fact I was on a long hull 637 class, the whole of the “Северный флот, Severnyy Flot”, was trying to kill my ass because the boat was doing naughty things in naughty locations.

    The early 1970′s were a scary time. Unfriendly Active SONAR and RBU 6000 splashes scared every bit of the shit right out of me.

  174. 'Tis Himself says

    We spent so much time dogging around Polyarny that the joke was that we chopped to the Submarine Flotilla of the Red Banner Northern Fleet. We did something that was rather exciting. I was the ERLL watch at the time. We shut down the starboard side of the plant in less than a minute.

  175. 'Tis Himself says

    For those playing at home, Atkinson and I are engaged in a “my dick is longer than yours” contest. Pretty soon I’ll be telling the story about how I dived San 4.*

    *Sanitary Tank Number 4, the tank into which the engine room head dumped.

  176. ericatkinson says

    Ginmar @ [500+] 207 and 209 WINS THE THREAD! And a hat tip to her snarky boss!

    Not even close. All that Brady campaign agtiprop bullshit sinks to the bottom of the head where it belongs.
    Guns are tools. Certain kinds of guns are optimized for killing people. Having a gun does not make one a killer. Being proficient in the use of the weapon, does not make you a killer.
    It does get one a leg up if you are required to use deadly force.
    Look, I have a CCW and shoot most days. If someone wants to rob me, I’ll hand over my money clip and be glad to walk away. But if that person wants to try to hurt me or my wife, I’m going to light them up. Thats the plan,anyhow

    Guns are banned in the UK. So too will be knives,screwdrivers, cricket bats, and small sharp pointy sticks. As long as firearms are constitutionly protected here in the US, I reserve my right to bear arms,just like the rest of my rights.

  177. ericatkinson says

    For those playing at home, Atkinson and I are engaged in a “my dick is longer than yours” contest. Pretty soon I’ll be telling the story about how I dived San 4.*

    Nope. My dick is “just” long enough.

  178. ginmar says

    I think with 228, and the remark about the CCW, you officially won the ‘pick the guy who feels the need to strut around feeling macho’ dubious distinction award. Guys who feel the need to carry and then whine about how paring knives will be outlawed next are both insecure and untruthful.

    Guns are ‘not optimized for killing people.’ Handguns’ sole purpose is precisely that, along with the extended mag semi-auto weapons that fire three-round bursts. Optimized, my ass. They are for killing people. As you seem to be a civilian, you have absolutely no need to kill people. But you seem to want to. That alone should restrict people like you from getting their hands on them. The government regulates booze more than it does guns. It’s just a macho thing. Most of the gun nuts one sees braying about “Second Amendment solutions’ or whatever that idiot from Arizona said are men, but there are a few women in the bunch.

    In using all the gun nut fallacies, you’ve outed yourself. Stay away from Lubys restaurants and schools.

  179. 'Tis Himself says

    No, I never blew shitters on myself. But I have two Sanitary Tank stories.

    San 4 was pretty full and needed to be blown to sea. However the discharge valve which was in the tank (I understand this was changed in later classes of subs) was stuck in the shut position. I ended up having to fix the valve. I stripped naked, put on an EAB (Emergency Air Breathing mask), and went into the tank. Fortunately the valve was at the top of the tank but since I had to stoop I was literally neck deep in shit. It only took three or four minutes to fix the valve but those were some of the longest minutes of my life. I got out of the tank and went immediately into the decontamination shower. I didn’t take off the EAB for a couple of minutes and I used most of a bottle of shampoo cleaning my body. It was the only time I took a Hollywood shower and I had the Captain’s permission to do so.

    My other San story: I was the Inport Shutdown Roving Watch on the midwatch (00-04). I had to blow San 4 through a hose from our deck fitting to a fitting on the tender’s main deck. So I did my lineup, hung the sign, and pressurized the tank. I then opened the discharge valve (the same one I’d fixed about a year before) and waited for the tank to empty. About 20 seconds after I opened the valve I heard over the 1MC: “Secure blowing sanitaries.” I shut the discharge valve and went to Maneuvering to see if they knew what was going on. They didn’t, so I stuck my head out of the engine room hatch. There were the Duty Officer and the Topside Watch admiring the side of the tender which was covered with shit.

    The hose had split. The tender’s Duty Officer came down wanting somebody’s ass. He and I and our Duty Officer went to look at the pressure gauge, which was reading 18 psig. The EDOI (Engineering Department Operating Instruction) was checked and it said: “Do not pressurize over 20 psig.” So I was off the hook. The tender’s deck division was not pleased at having to wash the ship’s side and main deck at O-dark-hundred.

    Every sub sailor has a sanitary tank story or two to tell.

  180. A. R says

    dysomniak: I’d go with an AWC. That way you could get out with less of a chance of being stopped. /gun pedant

  181. says

    Wow, ‘Tis Himself, those stories are equal doses of fascinating, horrifying, and gross as all fuck out. Most importantly, more believable than someone’s wank fantasy of being the gun toting hero.

  182. ericatkinson says

    Ginmar. You live your life and I’ll live mine.

    Tis.I REALLY wish you didn’t remind me of such things.

    One story I can tell is that while I was running the super secret still not supposed to talk board, a O2 ran the boat into a sandbar, down South Carolina way. Talk about a cluster fuck.

  183. ginmar says

    Erict-too-long-name: No. You’re advocating stupidity that hurts people because you have dick issues. If that’s not selfish, I don’t know what is. Try therapy. You won’t wind up shooting somebody that way.

  184. ericatkinson says

    Wow, ‘Tis Himself, those stories are equal doses of fascinating, horrifying, and gross as all fuck out. Most importantly, more believable than someone’s wank fantasy of being the gun toting hero.

    Please learn some basic reading comprehension skills, also, show where in this thread I said anything about being a gun toting hero.
    You know, the usual Nerd robo response.
    Unlike you, I can and I hope never will defend myself.

    Bloody wanker you are.

  185. A. R says

    While we’re on the subject, does anyone have a cite for the “you’re more likely to be injured by your own firearm in a confrontation” bit? I’ve heard it several times and actually used it myself, but I don’t believe I’ve seen a study.

  186. ericatkinson says

    ginmar: I don’t have any “dick issues.” Neither does my wife. She has better eyesight than I, so she out shoots me most days
    with pistols that don’t start with a four.
    You go ahead on an be a pacifist if you want to. It works for the o’possum. Sometimes.

  187. says

    Please learn some basic reading comprehension skills, also, show where in this thread I said anything about being a gun toting hero.

    Start with each and every time you feel the need to go on about your skills with the big shiny boomsticks and go from there. It’s like you’re just waiting for someone bad guy to pop up so you can strut your stuff.

    But please, do wank on about it some more.

  188. ericatkinson says

    AR
    Well one day I had finshed cleaning a 1911 for a friend. It was really in rough shape before, so I test shot the damn thing and it bit me! Still have a small scar. So yeah, If you don’t own a firearm, it can’t hurt you.
    Unless somebody else hurts you in your undefended state.

  189. ericatkinson says

    All true pacifists and gun haters should have a sign on their body and property stating that they are unarmed.
    Good luck.

  190. Esteleth, Who Knows How to Use Google says

    All true pacifists and gun haters should have a sign on their body and property stating that they are unarmed.
    Good luck.

    Firstly: why? What would this accomplish?

    Secondly: I am a pacifist. I also know how to hunt (and I’m not bad, if I may brag). I do not hate guns. This is not a contradiction.

  191. Esteleth, Who Knows How to Use Google says

    What I do hate are morons who think that having a gun will protect them. When the opposite, 90% of the time, is true.

    I support very strict regulations for gun ownership. Like mandatory gun-safety classes, with mandatory refresher courses. And outright bans on assault rifles, which are useless for hunting and are impractical for one-on-one personal defense.

  192. says

    All true pacifists and gun haters should have a sign on their body and property stating that they are unarmed.

    Because disagree with you = pacifists and gun haters, who probably never touched a gun before in their lives, right?

    Wait, I know the answer to this one: Wrong.

  193. ginmar says

    238 My wife likes my dick, hur hur hur!

    Christ on a pogo stick, that’s pathetic.

    Hello, I’m a combat veteran. I’ve forgotten more about guns than you’ll ever know, and I’ve fired just about every firearm the US issues to its soldiers. When I talk about weapons, it’s from experience.

    You probably polish your knob more than your weapon.

  194. ericatkinson says

    Esteleth, you live in lala land. You would’t know an assault rifle from a bb gun. You can support all that crap you wrote due to the US constitution. I can own semi-automatic rifles for the same reason.
    I own about 2300 books on military history of the 19th and 20th century. Only I get to say how many is enough. Same thing with weapons.
    Use google to look up the term “The Right of the People … Shall Not Be Infringed.” This is a individual right.

  195. ericatkinson says

    238 My wife likes my dick, hur hur hur!

    ginmar. Are you truly THAT stupid? Can you fucking read?
    You would jump a ditch to hob a nob.
    But thats ok.
    NO reading motherfucker.

  196. ericatkinson says

    Hello, I’m a combat veteran. I’ve forgotten more about guns than you’ll ever know, and I’ve fired just about every firearm the US issues to its soldiers. When I talk about weapons, it’s from experience.

    So you say. Big dick problem indeed.

  197. ginmar says

    Well, now we know why his career apparently consisted solely of emptying shit tanks. At DLI they used to threaten us with 11 Bravo or cook.

    You know, brain trust, sometimes people reveal things they didn’t realize they were revealing. You’ve been doing that for quite some time.

  198. Esteleth, Who Knows How to Use Google says

    Esteleth, you live in lala land.

    Lalaland is nice! Few trolls.

    You would’t know an assault rifle from a bb gun.

    Citation needed.

    You can support all that crap you wrote due to the US constitution. I can own semi-automatic rifles for the same reason.

    Hello, Mr. Non Sequitur! Nice to see you again!

    I own about 2300 books on military history of the 19th and 20th century.

    And I own the complete works of Terry Pratchett and James Tiptree. And quite a few books on history, military and otherwise, from throughout history.

    Only I get to say how many is enough. Same thing with weapons.

    So, this is an ego thing for you then. Thanks for confirming that!

    Use google to look up the term “The Right of the People … Shall Not Be Infringed.” This is a individual right.

    Ever notice how a lot of “Second Amendment Absolutists” fail to quote the full text?
    A well-ordered militia being necessary for the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed.

    Grammatically speaking, this is referred to as an independent clause (the first part) and a dependent clause (the second part). That is, the truth of the dependent clause – the “rule” part of the Amendment – is dependent on the truth of the independent clause.

  199. ericatkinson says

    Grammatically speaking, this is referred to as an independent clause (the first part) and a dependent clause (the second part). That is, the truth of the dependent clause – the “rule” part of the Amendment – is dependent on the truth of the independent clause.

    You have it ass backward. See District of Columbia v. Heller

  200. ginmar says

    Big dick problem indeed.

    God, you’re such a troglodyte. And predictable.

    I know something you don’t know. Apparently you haven’t been keeping up on modern warfare, given your fixation on past centuries.

  201. ericatkinson says

    Well, now we know why his career apparently consisted solely of emptying shit tanks. At DLI they used to threaten us with 11 Bravo or cook

    And to show how stupid you can be, those coments were from Tis Himself Comment 231.

    You lose. Thanks for playing.

  202. ginmar says

    Oh, sweetie, I know those comments came from the other guy, but it’s obvious your attitude comes from Viagra and gunpowder. He relates his tales with self-depreciating humor and wit, while you just get more and more desperate. Whatever you say has to be adjusted for…..inflation.

  203. ericatkinson says

    I know something you don’t know. Apparently you haven’t been keeping up on modern warfare, given your fixation on past centuries.

    Dumb, Dee Dumb Dumb.

    What pray tell is it that youu think you know, that I don’t.
    Mind you that I was through being a swabbo a long time before you were probally born. Played a lot of HARPOON, still do. But thats Navy shit.

    Did play a lot of paintball back in the 1980′s Used a Nelspot 007.
    But I never claimed to be some “great warrior” as you imagined yourself.

  204. says

    Hey Eric, once you’re done with your ancestor worship maybe you’d like to join the adults who don’t feel that interpreting law based on the best guess of what 200 year old dead guys would want is a rational form of governance.

    Not supposed to be a necrotocracy.

    —————————————————

    Oh look more macho dick swinging. Looks like Eric just can’t go around without swinging his dick around the room

    *starts putting cacti plants up on waist high perches.*

  205. A. R says

    Militia vs. Individual Right: One has to recognize that at the time the constitution was written, there was very little difference, given the relatively unorganized and impromptu nature of militias of the time. Nothing remotely like the National Guard ever crossed their minds when they write the Second Amendment. So we have the issue of choosing to enforce original meaning, or impose new meaning based on what “militia” means in a governmental sense now. In Heller the court decided that the Amendment was to be interpreted in the original sense (which is why the opinion reeked of Scalia), rather then the most modern interpretation of a National Guard right (which, frankly, would be ridiculous, considering that no other nation needs a 225 year old constitutional amendment to maintain their reserve military forces.)

  206. ericatkinson says

    ginmar I do not use Viagra. It makes me see funny colors.
    For that matter, nor any of the other ED drugs.
    Yes, I take what you say with your troll’s load of salt.

  207. says

    Shorter Eric: I’m wank better wank than wank all wank of wank you wankers wank.

    Problem is, of course, why he seems to think we care other than for amusement’s sake.

  208. A. R says

    Ing: Yep, except for the fact that said conservative factions here have absolutely no fucking idea what those patriarchs actually believed (i.e. Paine the atheist, Jefferson the deist miscegenator (I love telling them that one!), Franklin the scientist etc.)

  209. says

    @A.R.

    It doesn’t matter for ancestor worship. Just put the prayer on the money under their visage and sacrifice some brown people to Jackson and they’ll be appeased.

  210. says

    The irony, of course, is that Che promoted rising up against unrepresentative governments. And he was killed by US backing while opposing a brutal authoritarian regime that was stealing land from poor people and indigenous peoples.

    Murderous? No. He was a would-be doctor, who encouraged people to participate in choosing their government – not an assassin. The regime he took part in didn’t do terrorist activities. It might surprise you, but it is true. They weren’t innocent by any means… But few governments are.

  211. ericatkinson says

    Hey Eric, once you’re done with your ancestor worship maybe you’d like to join the adults who don’t feel that interpreting law based on the best guess of what 200 year old dead guys would want is a rational form of governance.

    Not supposed to be a necrotocracy

    The Constitution and its amendments state what is written, and mean what is written. No such thing as a “living document”
    Maybe if you don’t like what the constitution states then lobby for a change, there is a process for that.

  212. says

    The Constitution and its amendments state what is written, and mean what is written.

    Which is why “to maintain a militia” clearly now means “no need to regulate cop killer bullets!”

    But hey we’ve already thrown out all the sections on Due process and cruel and unusual punishment with our legal and prison system so why stop now?

    We just have to remember to add “like the Founders wanted’ to all of our idiotic interpretations and try to to snicker about how idiotic the worship is.

    See some of us might consider it a necessary conversation on what an amendment clearly concerning a militia system means in a world where a standing army has made a militia as hilariously out dated as Jughead’s fedora crown hat.

  213. ericatkinson says

    Crissa. have you forgotton what happened after the revolution in regard to “revolutionary justice. ” Che was up to his ears in blood. Damn, crack a book, why don’t ya.

  214. says

    No such thing as a “living document”
    Maybe if you don’t like what the constitution states then lobby for a change, there is a process for that.

    If you have any shame at all you will look back to what you wrote, read it aloud and then commit penance by bashing yourself in the back of the head with a folding chair.

  215. says

    Crissa. have you forgotton what happened after the revolution in regard to “revolutionary justice. ”

    Well first there was the articles of confederacy and then…

    ” Che was up to his ears in blood. Damn, crack a book, why don’t ya.

    Do you just guzzle stupid pills?

  216. says

    Ok seriously stepping back am I the only one who finds it a bit…distorted to on one hand praise the system of government made by violent revolutionaries…while bashing violent revolutionaries

  217. ericatkinson says

    Which is why “to maintain a militia” clearly now means “no need to regulate cop killer bullets!”

    What the fuck is a cop killer bullit?
    Do you mean steel core pentrators like the cop use in their rifles?
    Or do you mean Polymer coated hollow rounds the cops use in their pistols?

  218. Cipher, OM, Fighting Fucktoy says

    Ok seriously stepping back am I the only one who finds it a bit…distorted to on one hand praise the system of government made by violent revolutionaries…while bashing violent revolutionaries

    Well, now you’re not! I lol’d.

  219. A. R says

    To me, reasonable gun control would still allow for the following:

    1. Hunting arms
    2. Recreational shooting arms
    3. Historical arms (most of the firearms I own)
    4. Self defense arms (pistols, not assault weapons and only for those who complete a course equivalent to a police firearms training module, not the oversimplified CCW classes taught now)

    but would prohibit or strictly regulate (much like fully automatic weapons are regulated now) the following:

    1. Assault weapons (as defined by operational use, not cosmetic features)
    2. Any other weapon that does not fall under the four allowed categories

    Combined with monitoring of illegal gun trafficking, and a detailed registration system (including fingerprinting and collection of ballistic data for each functional weapon owned), this approach should allow for maximal recreational use, and reduced violent use.

  220. dysomniak, darwinian socialist says

    What the fuck is a cop killer bullit?

    Zombie Steve McQueen in a doughnut shop.

  221. A. R says

    Oh, and as for “cop-killer” bullets, that’s a very ambiguous term that could mean anything from jacketed hollowpoints (which are standard defense rounds used by police) to AP rounds which have been illegal for years.

  222. ericatkinson says

    Well first there was the articles of confederacy and then…

    I know I’ve been bad with the typos—but Crissa wrote and I responded about the CUBAN revolution.
    Do try to stay on the same page.

  223. Cipher, OM, Fighting Fucktoy says


    Do try to stay on the same page.

    A paragon of self-awareness, let me tell you.

  224. ericatkinson says

    AR. I have no problem at all with what you said about reasonable gun control.
    But those who want to control guns, want things to end up like the UK. No right of self defense.

  225. says

    Oh, and as for “cop-killer” bullets, that’s a very ambiguous term that could mean anything from jacketed hollowpoints (which are standard defense rounds used by police) to AP rounds which have been illegal for year

    AKA ‘that which police would rather you not have because for some reason they take offense to rounds seemingly designed to pierce through body armor and that even though I only want it because I live on a nuclear waste dump and have an over population of Kevlar skinned jack rabbits to hunt’

  226. Cipher, OM, Fighting Fucktoy says

    I have no problem at all with what you said about reasonable gun control.
    But those who want to control guns, want things to end up like the UK.

    Wow.

  227. Iapetus says

    Here is a study that shows people who carry guns are indeed more likely than the general population to be shot, most likely with their own gun.

    Overall, Branas’s study found that people who carried guns were 4.5 times as likely to be shot and 4.2 times as likely to get killed compared with unarmed citizens. When the team looked at shootings in which victims had a chance to defend themselves, their odds of getting shot were even higher.

    I want to explain the concept of pacifism to our troll Eric.

    Pacifism has shit-all to do with guns. Pacifists are people who oppose war and violence as a means of solving problems. This does not preclude them from owning guns. The vast majority of pacifists I know do in fact own guns. Some of them even own *gasp* handguns!

    What you are doing here is not advocating for “rights”. You are advocating vigilantism, violence, and macho posturing.

  228. Wowbagger, Deputy Vice-President (Silencing) says

    But those who want to control guns, want things to end up like the UK.

    Yes, because the rate of death by firefirms of 10.72 people per 100,000 (what the US has) is so much more appealing than a figure of 0.46 per 100,000 (what England/Wales has).

    source

  229. Iapetus says

    But those who want to control guns, want things to end up like the UK an end to five year old children being shot and killed by a stray bullet while they nap on their Grandmothers couch.

  230. ericatkinson says

    Wow. A antigun group funded by other antigun groups, comes up with an anti gun result.
    Who would have thunk it?
    Note that the majority of the 667 cases were suicides.

  231. Wowbagger, Deputy Vice-President (Silencing) says

    Note that the majority of the 667 cases were suicides.

    And that makes it better…how, exactly?

    No violent crime in the UK.

    Strawman. No-one said there was no violent crime in the UK. And having readily available guns hasn’t reduced the rate of violent crime in the US to zero, has it?

  232. ericatkinson says

    Wowbagger uh, if you lump suicides in with the statisics of people using guns to defend themself’s, don’t you think that might cause the results to be skewed?

  233. Wowbagger, Deputy Vice-President (Silencing) says

    From your linked article:

    Researchers admit that comparisons of crime data between countries must be viewed with caution because of differing criminal justice systems and how crimes are reported and measured.

  234. ericatkinson says

    No-one said there was no violent crime in the UK. And having readily available guns hasn’t reduced the rate of violent crime in the US to zero, has it?

    Definition of Strawman shown above.

    With all these guns, the rate of violent crime is one forth that of the UK.

    Works for me.

  235. Wowbagger, Deputy Vice-President (Silencing) says

    Wowbagger uh, if you lump suicides in with the statisics of people using guns to defend themself’s, don’t you think that might cause the results to be skewed?

    As an argument against self-defence gone wrong, it’s not much use, no. But the point was ‘killed with own weapon’, which is still accurate.

  236. says

    @Ms Daisy Cutter
    RE:Stochastic terrorism, Bruce Sterling described the process exactly in his novel Distraction, written in 1998. He also described(it being scifi) a further process, whereby automated spambots create semicoherent lists of accusations against a particular person along with their itinerary/homeand send them off to mailing lists composed of people who frequent wingnutty websites/belong to fringe groups with violent rhetoric/etc., on the principle that a nonzero fraction of these people will actually be motivated to attempt violence against them, thus hindering their ability to do anything, and possibly getting them injured or killed. Very creepily plausible, actually.

  237. ericatkinson says

    From your linked article:

    Researchers admit that comparisons of crime data between countries must be viewed with caution because of differing criminal justice systems and how crimes are reported and measured.

    Ministers admitted that some police forces had not been recording offences of grievous bodily harm with intent as serious violent crime. When the offences were included violent crime figures immediately increased by a fifth.

    OK

  238. Iapetus says

    Wow. A antigun group funded by other antigun groups, comes up with an anti gun result.

    The University of Pennsylvania is an anti-gun group?
    Do note that the authors of the study (which you obviously did not read, idiot) are bio-statisticians. They just gathered the facts, and showed a correlation. Too bad for you that it does show that you are a lying macho fuck-wit.

    Note that the majority of the 667 cases were suicide

    You read the wrong study shit for brains. The study I linked to is specifically dealing with assault cases. Let me spoon feed you some more facts

    Conclusions. On average, guns did not protect those who possessed them from being shot in an assault. Although successful defensive gun uses occur each year, the probability of success may be low for civilian gun users in urban areas. Such users should reconsider their possession of guns or, at least, understand that regular possession necessitates careful safety countermeasures.

    At the bottom of the linked page is web address for the full study. Do try to read and comprehend it before shooting (heh) your foolish mouth off.

  239. ericatkinson says

    Ministers admitted that some police forces had not been recording offences of grievous bodily harm with intent as serious violent crime. When the offences were included violent crime figures immediately increased by a fifth.

    Sorry. Left out the damn quotation marks.

  240. stanton says

    Maybe if you don’t like what the constitution states then lobby for a change, there is a process for that.

    By “voting from the rooftops”?

    By the way, ericatkinson, you still never told us what post of Professor Myers’ gave you the blatantly wrong impression that he was a fan of Che Guevara, implying that Professor Myers supported left-wing terrorists.

    Why?

  241. Wowbagger, Deputy Vice-President (Silencing) says

    So, being 20 times more likely to be killed by gunshot – in a country with many guns – is worse than a country where you’re (allegedly) 4 times more likely to experience one of the broad categories of violent crime?

  242. ericatkinson says

    Case participants were also more
    likely to be located in areas with less income and
    more illicit drug trafficking

    I read the so called study.

  243. ericatkinson says

    So, being 20 times more likely to be killed by gunshot – in a country with many guns – is worse than a country where you’re (allegedly) 4 times more likely to experience one of the broad categories of violent crime?

    Why yes. It seems there are quite a few more gun in the US than the UK, so if you don’t care about stabbings and head bashings with no legal way to defend yourself, the UK sounds fine.

  244. tapetum says

    Apropos of the discussion, the headline on the newspaper today was about a local man, shot and killed by his three-year-old son. Much like it taking religion to make a good person do bad things, it takes firearms to turn a three-year-old into a killer.

    ericatkinson – I really wish you’d stop conflating firearms with self-defense. It’s perfectly possible to defend oneself effectively without a gun. I don’t (and won’t) have a gun in the house, but I do have a nice assortment of other weaponry – mostly Okinawan in origin. Seems like more effective self-defense to me. A gun is either not quick and effective (I.e., unloaded and locked away), or any idiot can use it – including whoever just broke in. OTOH, it’s pretty darned unlikely that a random attacker is going to know how to use a tuifa as well as I can, even if he finds it first. The first and absolutely vital weapon of self-defense is your brain. The second is your tongue. The third is your feet. Only then should you get to the gun question.

    If you’re not using your brain, none of the rest will do you a damn bit of good.

  245. says

    erticatkinson #309:

    It seems there are quite a few more gun in the US than the UK, so if you don’t care about stabbings and head bashings with no legal way to defend yourself…

    Your baselessly hyperbolic statements got tiring when you wouldn’t explain where the comment about Che Guevara shirts came from.

    Comment by ericatkinson blocked. [unkill]​[show comment]

  246. ChasCPeterson says

    I read the so called study.

    ’cause if ericatkinson disagrees with the conclusion, it ain’t even really a “study”.
    *eyes-a-rollin*

  247. dysomniak, darwinian socialist says

    Your baselessly hyperbolic statements got tiring when you wouldn’t explain where the comment about Che Guevara shirts came from.

    Well to be honest I think this troll has highlighted an important issue – what is the difference between a terrorist and a revolutionary?

  248. Khantron, the alien that only loves says

    I can’t believe people think that a handgun can defend their house. But an AC-130 gunship can save you from the MBTs robbers are going to roll up on you.

  249. Khantron, the alien that only loves says

    But in all seriousness, the only useful civilian weapons are cast iron pans and kitchen knives. Because you can use them to cook things.

    And dysomniak, a terrorist uses violence for subjugation, a revolutionary uses violence for liberation. In practice this is more of a spectrum than a just two opposing sides. It isn’t inconceivable to be both even with these definitions. Guevara probably was both a terrorist and revolutionary, as well as being ruggedly handsome.

  250. Louis says

    Violent crime in the UK is 4 times that in the USA?

    Please show me the citation for this!

    Louis

    P.S. Incidentally, news reports from the virulently right wing (for the UK) Telegraph obviously trying to score political points against the Labour government, that bury weak disclaimers about the reliability of certain stats =/= evidence. It’s pretty weak sauce.

  251. says

    ericatkinson – I really wish you’d stop conflating firearms with self-defense. It’s perfectly possible to defend oneself effectively without a gun

    THIS. So much this.

    Also, the poor doof seems to think that without unlimited access to firearms, those poor blokes in the UK just politely allow violent thugs to attack them. Because knives, pepper spray, fighting back, running away, etc. don’t exist. The point of getting away from a violent encounter is to get away from the violent encounter, not prove you’re the bigger man with your boomstick.

    Keep dreaming and wanking, dear. Your naivete stopped being cute a while ago.

  252. Rev. BigDumbChimp says

    All of you people who get attacked in your homes and are not firearms owners…

    It’s your fault.

    Had you owned a firearm and been a little more careful, you would have been less likely to be robbed and attacked.

  253. Louis says

    Rev BDC,

    So not owning a gun is the equivalent of wearing a short skirt?

    Interesting.

    Who knew my lack of gun ownership was so alluring.

    Louis

  254. says

    Really? Criminals fear two things more than the worry of an armed victim, Bright lights and Noise. Motion detectors that turn on the outside lighting, and a dog do more to protect a home than a gun in a lock box.

  255. 'Tis Himself says

    what is the difference between a terrorist and a revolutionary?

    Consider what distinguishes terrorists from ordinary assassins. Terrorists do not necessarily desire the immediate consequences of their violence. They kill people who they often regard as innocents. The terrorist strategy is to frighten societies into doing something the terrorists want society to do. An assassin shoots John Doe because they want John Doe dead. A terrorist shoots John Doe, whose life or death may be a matter of indifference to the terrorist, because they want society or the authorities to react in a certain way to the shooting.

    A revolutionary wants to supplant the government with a different government, usually with a different political/societal philosophy than its predecessor. Terrorism is a tool for the revolutionaries.

    The 9/11 terrorists didn’t expect to bring down the US government. They did expect American society to react in such a way as to modify the behavior of the US government. The Basque Separatists want to push the Spanish government out of the Basque region and establish a new country with its own government. The Basque Separatists are using terrorism as a means to achieve their goal.

  256. says

    Yes really. Most home invasions take place in the day time, 38%. Your house is probably unoccupied so the weapon you so cherish is now in the hands of a criminal. Unless you have an alarm service. Even then, how much you lose will depend upon how quickly the police can respond.

  257. Gnumann, quisling of the MRA nation says

    what is the difference between a terrorist and a revolutionary?

    It depends on your definition of terrorism. Personally I favour terrorism is acts of violence against the civil populace with the aim of furthering political goals. Under this definition a revolutionary might or might not be terrorist, just as a state might or might not be a terrorist state.

  258. carbonbasedlifeform says

    The Constitution and its amendments state what is written, and mean what is written. No such thing as a “living document”.

    That is two remarkably silly statements. People have been arguing over exactly what the Constitution means ever since it was written. Both Plessy v. Ferguson and Brown v. Board of Education were based on the 14th Amendment, yet say diametrically opposite things.

    The appropriate response to Eric’s ‘No such thing as a ‘living document’” is that apparently Eric prefers a “dead document”. The Constitution must be a living document, because the nation is a living entity.

    I am reminded that the actual definition of “activist judge” is “a judge who has issued a decision I don’t like”.

  259. Rev. BigDumbChimp says

    The appropriate response to Eric’s ‘No such thing as a ‘living document’” is that apparently Eric prefers a “dead document”. The Constitution must be a living document, because the nation is a living entity.

    Or more succinct, “Eric, get your head out of Scalia’s ass”.

  260. tapetum says

    @#328 carbonbasedlifeform – exactly. My linguistics class managed to come up with over 30 distinct possible shades of meaning for the sentence “He loves her cooking.” without even trying hard – the record is more than double that. Saying that something as complicated as the Constitution has one, simple, agreed upon meaning is simply ludicrous.

  261. A. R says

    Self-defense with firearms: If someone were truly serious about this, they would take a police-equivalent self-defense course. Which does include firearms, but it also teaches the value of running away, TASERs, pepper spray, etc.

  262. anteprepro says

    So, Eric Atkinson was still commenting well into this thread? Did PZ miss a cleanup or is this thread’s Eric a different one?

    Eric Atkinson Trolling ninny. Showed up to do nothing but snipe and sneer; too stupid to even be entertaining.

  263. thegoodman says

    If I believe in such things, I would say that this post was a premonition of the sad events that occurred in that Colorado theater.

    So sad.