posted by Caleb on Jul 23
In case you had to get the memo, Squeaky is, to use the vernacular, my homeboy. Since we’ve started doing the show together, in addition to working on that we’ve had some time to compare notes on other items of interest - which is why when she put her post up on what amounted to gross sexism from KdT, I decided to have her back 100%.
What kills me about the original post that started all this ruckus is that I, as a man who is also not a pig was offended by the implication that I’m standing around waiting to leer uncontrollably at women who are apparently running around ripping off their tops. So based on that alone, I would have backed up Squeaks - but then she sends me IM telling me that someone called her a “stupid Nazi cunt” in an email because she had the temerity to disagree with KdT.
UPDATE #2: To the guy who created one of those temporary email addresses JUST to send me an email calling me a “stupid Nazi cunt”: you know, if your point was to make me feel badly for linking to KdT because he just happened to be the one using the phrase I found offensive, you’d do better to, you know, post a blog about it and link to me so that others can share in your oh-so-sophistocated opinion on the subject. That’ll show me, right? Yeah, I’m going to pronounce your efforts as EPIC FAIL.
That pretty much put me over the edge on this one, and though while being a fantastic example of epic fail it also completely proved the point we were both trying to make. I mean, aside from the fact that whomever sent her that email is essentially a completely balls-less coward, the fact that he had that kind of knuckle-dragging neanderthal reaction to Squeaks pointing out the obvious sexism would have been funny if it hadn’t been directed at my friend.
The point of all of this isn’t actually to call anyone out - well, except for the chickenshit who emailed Squeaks - but rather to illustrate a point that just because a certain amount of boorishness is often tolerated in the shooting sports, it’s still a pretty fucking stupid thing to tolerate. You want to alienate women from the shooting sports? Make the insinuation that women who shoot are a bunch of trollops, and see how many new shooters you bring in to the sport.
posted by Caleb on Jul 18
Joe Huffman finds a veritable cornucopia of bigotry and hate towards both women and gun owners. Oddly enough, many of them are Euro, or at least claim to be. Here’s a sample:
Poor America ! Why do you need all these toys ? Is it that difficult to defend yourself with words ? Is violence the only language you understand ?
I like the pictures of the kids holding the guns… Bowling for Columbine… remember ??? Are you, americans (lowercase) shocked when a riffle occurs ? Well… you now know how it is so easily possible !
Dear americans, don’t be sad when you’re shot… America provides you with the guns !!!
NRA can be proud, they have made a good brainwashing ! And they make a good money on your back…
A European with a brain !
AMAZING
Pretty standard grammar and sentence construction for these posts. I never cease to be amazed at the levels of vituperation that gun bigots are willing to dispense, all while claiming to have the moral high ground. It would be funny if it wasn’t true.
posted by Caleb on Jul 11
I was at The Breda’s blog and found her post with a picture of two people holding 1911’s with their fingers in what is generally considered to be a “naughty place” - inside the triggerguard. I sort of vaguely recognized them as some kind of pseudo-celebrity from watching the guy on The Soup mock them, but couldn’t quite place them.
So what did I do? I followed the rabbit hole to the video of them shooting at some range in Beverly Hills. It was at the end of the rabbit hole that I found the godawful video of these two low-watt bulbs actually shooting firearms, and at that moment I died a little inside.
You see, my search for KNOWLEDGE had led me to discover just who these idiots are: the “stars” of the fake-reality show The Hills, who have apparently decided that in an effort to keep their faces in the limelight, are staging “appearances” all over LA. Their names are Spencer and Heidi (of course), and although their actions are marginally disturbing on their own, it’s even more off-putting that they decided to stage their most recent appearance at a gun shop and in so doing violate uh…all four rules of firearms safety is really messed up. My favorite moment in the whole thing is when the male idiot points the AR right at the cameraman, and right next to him the female idiot can’t figure out the slide release on the 1911, which when I think about it is probably a good thing.
Now, I am all about celebrities and all kinds of people getting educated and involved in the shooting sports and gun safety education - people like Tom Selleck and Charlton Heston have done a lot to help the cause and further advance the shooting sports. The problem I have with these pseudo-celebs is that they’re not getting involved in the shooting sports, they just wanted to play with loud toys and get their picture taken, and not only that they were irresponsible and unsafe about it. That really bakes my crust.
posted by Caleb on Jun 30
I love the God Not Guns blog. The latest post is called “Gundamentalism’s Day” (tinyURL to mess with pagerank), it is absolutely hilarious.
You know why it’s so bad? Because it reads like one of those really bad TV preachers combined with an After-School Special. I mean look at excerpts like this:
Rather than offering a vision of community in which we are bound together by our humanity, gundamentalism encourages fear, teaching us to see each other as “The Other,” a potential enemy, a threat endangering our family, our home, our person. Such fear blinds us to the image of God embodied in every human being. Even more it blinds us to our own connection to the Divine. How can we reach toward God with arms open wide if in one hand we are clutching a gun?
I honestly don’t know whether I should laugh or be insulted by the blatant attempts to essentially tell people that they’re bad Christians if they own a gun.
I will give the interns that write the blog some credit though, because they’ve gotten a little smarter. They’ve moved away from making poor, easily defeated Biblical analogies and have focused on the more nebulous “spiritual concepts” side of things. Of course, it hasn’t stopped them from, well, lying outright, but I guess breaking the 9th Commandment is okay as long as you’re doing it for a good cause, right?
So here are the quick hits of the different outright lies in today’s God Not Guns entry:
- Gundamentalism is a religious movement without spiritual grounding. Rather, it is rooted in the sale and promotion of violence.
- Rather than offering a vision of community in which we are bound together by our humanity, gundamentalism encourages fear
- Gundamentalism creates a culture of fear then offers a seductive promise: with a gun one can live with out fear.
- Gundamentalism cannot survive without the complicity of industries, citizens and law-makers
- With the gun as its icon, the 2nd Amendment as its creed, gundamentalism proclaims that nothing is as sacred as the right to own a gun
I guess I could cut them some slack, I mean they only had 5 statements that were nothing more than outright falsehoods, surely that’s okay since it’s for a good cause, right? Or maybe the interns Rachel Smith subscribe to the inverse of Romans 6:1, and believe that if they go on sinning, then grace will increase.
posted by Caleb on Jun 24
Oh my goodness, I actually laughed out loud when I read the latest post from the God Not Guns Blog (tinyURL used to weaken their googlefu). It’s called Gundamentalism, and it’s really, really bad. Basically, she’s comparing pro-gun groups to religious fundamentals, but the problem with her comparison is that it’s so loose that it could be applied to any group that is fanatically devoted to their cause, like, oh, I don’t know, anti-gun advocates. I took her entire post and changed just a few words, I call it “Anti-Gundamentalism”.
In her book,
Battle for God, Karen Armstrong says that fundamentalism in every religion encourages a sense of crisis among its believers, fostering the conviction that they are the first and last defense against the corrosion of crucial values. Armstrong says that because fundamentalism is rooted in a profound fear of annihilation, its adherents see themselves in a fight for survival against society at large. I believe that this is precisely how gun control proponents portray themselves.
I believe that
America’s anti-gun culture is marked by zeal closely akin to that of religious fundamentalism. The gun control movement is built upon a system of belief that is both absolutist and aggressive. It has its sacred text, its creed, its icon and its ideology. According to its doctrine, only the government offers protection against tyranny at the hands of criminals, foreign terrorists, even our own government. Its followers believe they are in a cosmic struggle to protect
America’s most cherished value: safety. I call this movement “Anti-Gundamentalism.” In my next several entries, I’ll be talking about this movement and its ideology.
I changed maybe three or four words, that’s how poorly written this post is. If she actually starts comparing pro-gun advocates to religious fundamentals, please make sure to come here the day after for my critique. What Rachel fails to understand is that while the pro-gun movement is undeniably passionate about our cause, comparing us to religious fundamentals fails on many levels, not the least of which is that the gun rights movement is predicated on logic and reason - if anyone could be accused of having a religious fervor about their cause, it would be the anti-gun crowd who believes that inanimate objects have some sort of malevolent will to cause violence.
posted by Caleb on Jun 13
I only wish that I were making this up.
At that link above, Sebastian has a full list of the guns that would be banned by the anti-gun bill that just passed out of committee in the New Jersey Assembly: the Brown Bess musket and replicas are on that list. But remember, Bryan Miller and New Jersey Ceasefire don’t want to target hunters and collectors, no, they want to go after eeeeeevvvviiiiillllll assault rifles like the Thompson Center Muzzleloaders.
If you’re in New Jersey, please contact your state Reps and tell them that you oppose this bill. It’s easily one of the most sweeping and poorly thought out gun bans I’ve seen since the Louisiana Assault Weapons ban.
posted by Caleb on Jun 12
These idiot teenagers are extremely lucky that none of them got killed.
Sheriff Dan Watts said the man heard noise in his backyard and went outside with a flash light and a gun. Several Ely teenagers who had been trespassing on the man’s property got into a vehicle and one of them shot him in the eye with a paintball gun as the car drove away. Watts said the man thought he had been shot with a real gun and returned fire striking the car but not injuring any of the occupants.
…
The man who was shot with the paintball has a detached retina and it was not known Monday afternoon if he would lose sight in one eye, according to Watts.
So, these stupid kids decide that it would be awesome lulz if they went around shooting people up with a paintball gun, and then they shoot a cop in the eye who rightfully fearing for his life, returned fire. He did not hit any of the kids because he had been shot in the eye with a .69 caliber paintball and could lose sight in one of his eyes.
Personally, I hope they do file charges against these idiots. Felony charges, give ‘em the book for assaulting a police officer - and yes, before you complain that I’m only saying this because it was a cop, I’d be just as pissed if it was anyone else that could be permanently maimed because of stupid teenagers.
The other lesson incumbent in this is don’t shoot people with toy guns. Having been shot with paintballs before, I can vouch that it’s an unpleasant experience if you’re not wearing protective gear - I can honestly say that in similar circumstances I would have likely shot back as well.
h/t Unclesaurus
posted by Caleb on Jun 10
It seems that Cafepress has selectively decided to yank some of Tam’s products down.
I’d say I’m surprised, but I’m not. The Disciples get really upset when you mock their Savior.
posted by Caleb on Jun 3
“And another one gone, another one down, another one bites the dust” could be the theme song for the God not Guns blog, as they’ve removed another post from their blog, this time taking down the Idolatry of the Gun post. Luckily, Thirdpower caught them in the act was able to screencap the post for all internets posterity.
What I can’t get is why take a post down to only put it back up later - did they think we’d give them a pass on repeating the same material?
posted by Caleb on Jun 3
The lawsuit against Adventure Outdoors - the last shop standing up to Mayor Bloomberg’s schoolyard bullying - has been forced to back down; primarily due to the antics of the anti-gun judge sitting on the case, Jack Weinstein. Judge Weinstein had made the decision that the case would be heard by an advisory jury, which would ultimately mean that the decision on the case was in the hands of the judge, and not the jury. By doing so, he essentially ensured that the case wouldn’t wind up in Adventure Outdoors’ favor.
According to the New York Daily News, Jay Wallace, the owner of Adventure Outdoors, plans to continue his fight elsewhere; I’ve also contacted him to see what his plans are for the future.
“We’re not cutting and running,” Renzulli [lawyer for Adventure Outdoors] insisted outside court.
Wallace will take his argument that Brooklyn federal court was not the proper venue for the suit, to the U.S. Court of Appeals.
It irks me to no end that Judge Weinstein was able to do this - personally, I feel like a case like this should be heard and decided by a jury. The whole point of jury trials is to eliminate the potential of bias to influence the case, sadly this appears to be a pretty clear-cut example of bias taking over for reason and logic.
