The PO for Thursday...

[Z is for Zangie]

Sorry I am late, stuff again...sigh

[Mike]

Actually, what gets banned if trumpist candidate JD Vance has his way is…. PORN.

Let’s remember. Just a few short hours ago, the GQP was shrieking about how they are being censored because, while they can speak their seditious minds freely on so many major media types and channels, such private companies as Facebook have the nerve to hold them responsible for working within the terms of service to which they agreed when signing up for accounts on those services. Yet here they are, saying they would seek to prevent mass shootings by banning porn!!

One need not be a fan of porn to see the inherent issue here. You are arguing for free expression… while seeking to ban free expression.

Why exactly is it that the Right glorifies violence and weapons of mass destruction, while vilifying mere sexuality?

[Z is for Zangie]

Actually, what gets banned if trumpist candidate JD Vance has his way is…. PORN.

Let’s remember. Just a few short hours ago, the GQP was shrieking about how they are being censored because, while they can speak their seditious minds freely on so many major media types and channels, such private companies as Facebook have the nerve to hold them responsible for working within the terms of service to which they agreed when signing up for accounts on those services. Yet here they are, saying they would seek to prevent mass shootings by banning porn!!

One need not be a fan of porn to see the inherent issue here. You are arguing for free expression… while seeking to ban free expression.

Why exactly is it that the Right glorifies violence and weapons of mass destruction, while vilifying mere sexuality?

A lot of it is performative, I was married to and dated quite a few conservative men...what they say in public and what they want/do in the privacy of their home is completely opposite, they are playing to the more culturally conservative of their base...and I would bet many of them have indulged in porn...and even non missionary sex/kink...lol

I am annoyed today because the OH legislature just sent a bill to DeWine that allows teachers to arm themselves...sigh, I guess I should be happy it doesn't require them too, I am sure the overwhelming majority of them will not...they tried to do this last year and the OH Supreme Court said the way the law was written the teaches would need 100 hrs of training...this is shy I am not a fan of federalism re: states...I can't get rid of these assholes and they can pass all kinds of laws that we don't get to vote on, and even when we do vote and win ( we wanted no gerrymandering) they still just do what they want...GRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR

[GuideToACrazyWorld]

One need not be a fan of porn to see the inherent issue here. You are arguing for free expression… while seeking to ban free expression.

The Republican party is not the party of freedom. They are the party of fiscal freedom and social oppression. The rest is lip service.

[GuideToACrazyWorld]

I am annoyed today because the OH legislature just sent a bill to DeWine that allows teachers to arm themselves...sigh, I guess I should be happy it doesn't require them too

Why does this bother you? I would be alarmed at a requirement, but to allow the the choice doesn't seem so concerning to me.

[Mike]

I am annoyed today because the OH legislature just sent a bill to DeWine that allows teachers to arm themselves...sigh, I guess I should be happy it doesn't require them too

Why does this bother you? I would be alarmed at a requirement, but to allow the the choice doesn't seem so concerning to me.

I’m alarmed at the prospect of teachers carrying guns in class. To borrow from the SixSigma concept of corporate function: it allows far too many opportunities for error. As it stands now, for a school shooting to occur someone has to enter from outside. But when you examine the stats that the pro-gun side loves to quote, you find them claiming - as reason for not regulating guns - that a huge chunk of shootings are either suicides or accidental. Wellll… what could be more prone to accident than a teacher who is busy trying to hold the attention of two dozen children? Kids grab at things all the time. Teachers get distracted from lesson plans. So by putting firearms in the classroom, you no longer have to have some interloper to create a shooting. A shooting can occur almost spontaneously. And then do panicked teachers begin shooting into the classroom where the shot occurred?

It seems a serious training regimen becomes mandatory. Teachers already have all they can do, for very low wages compared to many other professions, to prepare lessons and hold kids’ attention and grade tests and lead extracurricular activities and review student performance and ensure they no longer talk candidly about race or gender… no, they would now also require (even in the “carry by choice” circumstance) major training to a) respond effectively in a crisis AND b) ensure no crises emerged because they themselves are armed.

[GuideToACrazyWorld]

what could be more prone to accident than a teacher who is busy trying to hold the attention of two dozen children?

I can't imagine any person with any level of intelligence pulling out a gun while trying to teach. A gun left alone doesn't simply go off. Accidental shooting do happen, but they happen when a person is handling a weapon not simply because it is present.

no, they would now also require (even in the “carry by choice” circumstance) major training to a) respond effectively in a crisis AND b) ensure no crises emerged because they themselves are armed.

That would be their choice to make. I certainly wouldn't blame them if they felt they couldn't safely handle the weapon or didn't have the time to learn or just didn't want the responsibility.

[Mike]

[A gun left alone doesn't simply go off.

[GuideToACrazyWorld]

[A gun left alone doesn't simply go off.

I'm not sure I understand the point here. I said that guns do not go off without being handled, you send me a picture of someone shaking a gun until it fires. He is literally handling the gun in the video.

[Tarmaque]

He is literally handling the gun in the video.

It's also clearly defective, and Taurus pistols are notoriously badly made.

I have a target rifle with an adjustable trigger. I have it adjusted so finely that if you put on the safety it will fire if you take it off safe. A quirk of the mechanism. I need to fix the adjustment so it doesn't do that, but for a target rifle it's fine. Doing that adjustment sucks too. It requires disassembling the thing.

[Mike]

Guns fall off of tables. They fall out of holsters. A kid knocking into a desk could cause a gun, placed for safety in the adjoining cabinet but left in slightly precarious position, to fall and go off upon impact with the next shelf of the cabinet.

1:10 in the following video:


It is not the only gun that will discharge if dropped and then hitting at a certain angle. No ‘handling’ at time of discharge required.

And then there is ‘cook off’ - but that’s astronomically unlikely in this scenario, so I mention it merely as a possibility and not a likelihood.

[Mike]

He is literally handling the gun in the video.

It's also clearly defective, and Taurus pistols are notoriously badly made.

I have a target rifle with an adjustable trigger. I have it adjusted so finely that if you put on the safety it will fire if you take it off safe. A quirk of the mechanism. I need to fix the adjustment so it doesn't do that, but for a target rifle it's fine. Doing that adjustment sucks too. It requires disassembling the thing.

Taurus pistols are not uncommon. And X amount of wear on the trigger group will cause a gun to become far more likely to fire spontaneously. I saw it with an SKS once. It had gone full-auto on the owner at the range, and he put it down and a few seconds later it discharged on its own.

Mechanical wear causes cars to malfunction, causes appliances to malfunction, causes wrenches and screwdrivers to malfunction. Why do people believe firearms are magically immune to these phenomena?

[GuideToACrazyWorld]

It's also clearly defective, and Taurus pistols are notoriously badly made.

I do know there are situations where guns can go off without pulling the trigger. But I'm not knowledgeable in why it happens exactly.

I have a target rifle with an adjustable trigger. I have it adjusted so finely that if you put on the safety it will fire if you take it off safe. A quirk of the mechanism. I need to fix the adjustment so it doesn't do that, but for a target rifle it's fine. Doing that adjustment sucks too. It requires disassembling the thing.

I'm mostly indifferent to guns, but regardless of the style that sounds very not fine to me. So, I think we need to ban adjustable triggers!

[Z is for Zangie]

I am annoyed today because the OH legislature just sent a bill to DeWine that allows teachers to arm themselves...sigh, I guess I should be happy it doesn't require them too

Why does this bother you? I would be alarmed at a requirement, but to allow the the choice doesn't seem so concerning to me.

Because I don't want guns in classrooms, period?

[GuideToACrazyWorld]

Guns fall off of tables. They fall out of holsters. A kid knocking into a desk could cause a gun, placed for safety in the adjoining cabinet but left in slightly precarious position, to fall and go off upon impact with the next shelf of the cabinet.

Yes, guns can go off unexpectedly but they don't simply go off on their own. The solution to everything you mention comes down to one thing, the responsible handling of a weapon.

And then there is ‘cook off’ - but that’s astronomically unlikely in this scenario, so I mention it merely as a possibility and not a likelihood.

I had only ever heard of cook-off as a military problem on high velocity aircraft mounted guns. I also, read an article a while back that it was resolved with some kind a seal change. Again I'm not an expert in this stuff so I could be mistaken.

[Mike]

Yes, guns can go off unexpectedly but they don't simply go off on their own. The solution to everything you mention comes down to one thing, the responsible handling of a weapon.

Right. Because human beings are noted for their extraordinary responsibility. They just always think about the long term effects of their thoughts and actions, and they… oh wait….. HAWHAWHAWHAWHAW

If gun owners were responsible, no guns would land on the black market. There would be no ‘accidental’ shootings. Guns would not get lost, and guns would rarely get stolen. Yet we see relentless gun proponents such as Madison Cawthorn ‘forget’ multiple times that he has a weapon on him as he goes to board a plane. If indeed he forgets, that’s utterly irresponsible. If instead he’s being deliberate, that’s worse than irresponsible; it is intentionally malicious.

Beyond guns, society routinely fails to maintain and/or secure important things. There’s no reason whatsoever to imagine your average gung-ho gun nut as being diligent about maintaining or securing his weapons. Thousands of reported firearms ‘accidents’ annually testifies to this reality.

[GuideToACrazyWorld]

Because human beings are noted for their extraordinary responsibility.

You would argue that teachers are responsible enough to take care of my kid for the day but not responsible enough to handle a gun? If I thought this was the case my son would be going to private school for sure.

If gun owners were responsible, no guns would land on the black market. There would be no ‘accidental’ shootings. Guns would not get lost, and guns would rarely get stolen. Yet we see relentless gun proponents such as Madison Cawthorn ‘forget’ multiple times that he has a weapon on him as he goes to board a plane. If indeed he forgets, that’s utterly irresponsible. If instead he’s being deliberate, that’s worse than irresponsible; it is intentionally malicious.

Yes, there are a lot irresponsible people and unfortunately some of them are gun owners. That is why I have always advocated for holding gun older legally accountable for irresponsible action that result in a shooting death or injury. I also think cases like the one you describe with Cawthorn should have legal consequences. Being irresponsible with a firearm is reckless endangerment by definition. If we simply slapped them with that it would be better then the nothing we do today.

Beyond guns, society routinely fails to maintain and/or secure important things.

You mean like power grids that are hooked up to the interwebz? SMH

There’s no reason whatsoever to imagine your average gung-ho gun nut as being diligent about maintaining or securing his weapons.

We aren't talking about "your average gung-ho gun nut" we are talking about Ohio teachers. Some of them are likely gun nuts, but I would hope they aren't average or at least not in the way you imply

[Tarmaque]

I'm mostly indifferent to guns, but regardless of the style that sounds very not fine to me. So, I think we need to ban adjustable triggers!

That just shows a fundamental misunderstanding of the mechanics of firearms in general and the purpose of a target rifle. In this case, banning adjustable triggers would only really be effecting the legitimate use of firearms: Shooting sports. Nobody is putting a 14oz balanced trigger with less than half a millimeter creep and overtravel on their AR-15. They have "match triggers" but they're more like a 3 pound 2-stage trigger with polished sears. Not ideal for sharpshooter competitions or long range groups, but good for "run and gun" style of competition. My target rifles stay in their cases until they are on the range at the bench, only loaded when I am ready and intending to shoot, and neither are semi-autos. My primary one is a single shot, and it has a great safety that completely disables the firing pin. Neither would be good for killing large numbers of anything.

External safeties are in general security blankets They are no replacement to good safe handling of firearms. On some firearms they are a necessity (Colt 1911) but many modern pistols don't even have external safeties. Like the Glock style pistols, or the Springfield HD. They do have safeties, but they are internal and automatic. Or the classic double action revolver, who's "safety" is the fact that the trigger pull is very long and heavy unless manually cocked. These are not safe to carry cocked.

[Mike]

Would you leave a 14 year old girl neighbor babysitter with your kids?
Would you trust her with firearms around your family?

[GuideToACrazyWorld]

That just shows a fundamental misunderstanding of the mechanics of firearms in general and the purpose of a target rifle.

It was a joke. I was mocking people who would say such a thing seriously. It happens all the time.

that being said... thanks for the education.

[Tarmaque]

It was a joke. I was mocking people who would say such a thing seriously. It happens all the time.

that being said... thanks for the education.

Sorry. I didn't pick up on it. I blame the heat. (It's 83° right now, which is about 20° hotter than I like it.)

[GuideToACrazyWorld]

Would you leave a 14 year old girl neighbor babysitter with your kids?

How well do I know this girl? How responsible is she? Chances are I would not. I don't leave my child with people I don't know out side of school. If I need a babysitter I use family or my wife or I stay home.

Would you trust her with firearms around your family?

Again how well do I know her? I grew up with a female friend who was an avid hunter. At 14 I would completely trust her with a gun. I also would let her 14 year old self watch my son. She was a very responsible kid.

[Slip Shod]

quote="Z is for Zangie"
A lot of it is performative, I was married to and dated quite a few conservative men...what they say in public and what they want/do in the privacy of their home is completely opposite, they are playing to the more culturally conservative of their base...and I would bet many of them have indulged in porn...and even non missionary sex/kink...lol
[/quote]
So now you've went and aroused* my curiosity comparing the conservative guys you may have dated as contrasted to the left leaning liberal guys or even libertarian types .
My take from what I read was that the conservative boudoir consists strap-ons & cross-dressing for starters. Many just talking the talk 7 to 5 -- 8 to midnight weez getting in on

[Z is for Zangie]

quote="Z is for Zangie"
A lot of it is performative, I was married to and dated quite a few conservative men...what they say in public and what they want/do in the privacy of their home is completely opposite, they are playing to the more culturally conservative of their base...and I would bet many of them have indulged in porn...and even non missionary sex/kink...lol

So now you've went and aroused* my curiosity comparing the conservative guys you may have dated as contrasted to the left leaning liberal guys or even libertarian types .
My take from what I read was that the conservative boudoir consists strap-ons & cross-dressing for starters. Many just talking the talk 7 to 5 -- 8 to midnight weez getting in on
[/quote]
HA, I will get this later, can't right now, I have a theory as to some of them and why they are like that...

[Slip Shod]

quote="Z is for Zangie"
A lot of it is performative, I was married to and dated quite a few conservative men...what they say in public and what they want/do in the privacy of their home is completely opposite, they are playing to the more culturally conservative of their base...and I would bet many of them have indulged in porn...and even non missionary sex/kink...lol

So now you've went and aroused* my curiosity comparing the conservative guys you may have dated as contrasted to the left leaning liberal guys or even libertarian types .
My take from what I read was that the conservative boudoir consists strap-ons & cross-dressing for starters. Many just talking the talk 7 to 5 -- 8 to midnight weez getting in on

HA, I will get this later, can't right now, I have a theory as to some of them and why they are like that...
[/quote]
Whatever you say . You willing and submissive slave, slipshod