Guns and Whatnot.

Music, books, movies, TV, games, hobbies, food, and potent potables. And forum games! Pour a drink, put on your smoking jacket, light a pipe (of whatever), and settle in.
User avatar
JasonL
Posts: 25475
Joined: 05 May 2010, 17:22

Re: Guns and Whatnot.

Post by JasonL »

There are two ideas that sometimes mingle - one is assuming the will to use them are privately held weapons capable of deterring direct acts of force by a vastly superior armed force. I think this is obviously true. Afghanistan, Vietnam etc etc, plus the strain of maintaining political will to wage war on your own citizens en masse.

The other idea is are such weapons useless because there would under a range of scenarios not be enough people willing to use them. This is much more plausible to me, but the versions of it I often hear are not great, namely the one like “it already should have happened”. That view does not in my estimation take seriously enough the differences between Russia, North Korea, China, Iran, large government democracies like Sweden and more permissive democracies like the US. People who yell about fascists here would not be confused about the difference if they woke up in an actual fascist dictatorship.

So there’s a very fuzzy margin where things get incrementally worse and enough people get mad enough - maybe that’s like Russia or maybe it’s not until nearly North Korea. Whatever the point is, armed populace raises costs of crossing that threshold, potentially by a dramatic amount but at least in some amount. Some people think that difference is trivial, but at least for now I don’t.
User avatar
D.A. Ridgely
Posts: 20439
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 17:09
Location: The Other Side

Re: Guns and Whatnot.

Post by D.A. Ridgely »

JasonL wrote: 10 Aug 2019, 12:09 There are two ideas that sometimes mingle - one is assuming the will to use them are privately held weapons capable of deterring direct acts of force by a vastly superior armed force. I think this is obviously true. Afghanistan, Vietnam etc etc, plus the strain of maintaining political will to wage war on your own citizens en masse.

The other idea is are such weapons useless because there would under a range of scenarios not be enough people willing to use them. This is much more plausible to me, but the versions of it I often hear are not great, namely the one like “it already should have happened”. That view does not in my estimation take seriously enough the differences between Russia, North Korea, China, Iran, large government democracies like Sweden and more permissive democracies like the US. People who yell about fascists here would not be confused about the difference if they woke up in an actual fascist dictatorship.

So there’s a very fuzzy margin where things get incrementally worse and enough people get mad enough - maybe that’s like Russia or maybe it’s not until nearly North Korea. Whatever the point is, armed populace raises costs of crossing that threshold, potentially by a dramatic amount but at least in some amount. Some people think that difference is trivial, but at least for now I don’t.
I don't, on balance, disagree. But I don't think wholesale confiscation of firearms would, by itself, be perceived by the population as "waging war" on that population any more than any of the varying draconian measures imposed since 9/11 have been perceived even as threat to or reduction in liberty. They were just written off after some initial grumbling as inconveniences probably necessary for public safety. Sure, not by you or by thousands, maybe millions of other gun owners, but on balance sheep remain sheep. And there wouldn't be an all-out sweep door-to-door of SWAT teams breaking into Joe Bob's split level searching for guns. It would start smaller, maybe even with minorities in the inner city whom we already know the NRA will stand mute to witness with acquiescence if not tacit approval. The gun shops would close. The firearms manufacturers would be impounded, nationalized, the state would become a firearms monopsony . The so-called mentally ill; that is, people with any history whatever of violence would come next. There'd by buy-back programs. It would be incremental, at least at first. Schools would encourage students to turn in their parents just as with drugs. Two, maybe three years down the road, there'd still be people with secret stashes and gun owners in remote locations too small a threat to bother with for the time being but the supply of ammo would reduce to a trickle and the total number of guns would be halved, then halved again, etc. The media would publish a flood of approving reports about the reduction in gun suicides and single-victim homicides, etc.
User avatar
thoreau
Posts: 30410
Joined: 06 May 2010, 12:56
Location: Back to the lab again

Re: Guns and Whatnot.

Post by thoreau »

One genuinely good thing about liberal societies is that by the time people are willing to accept violence it's already too late.

Suppose that the next massive ICE raid was met with armed resistance. The internet would be flooded with "I Stand With Law Enforcement" memes. A whole lot of people who privately think "Serves the bastards right" would also understand that acting on that impulse takes us nowhere good and would join in denouncing the violence. Trump would be tweeting that everyone wielding a gun against ICE is in MS13 and Antifa. Every Dem running for office would stand with ICE and support a budget increase. (Except Marianne Williamson, who would call for spiritual beings to come and aid them.) The suspects would get the "Unarmed black male" treatment, not the "White guys taking over a government building for several weeks" treatment.

And if the people pointing guns at ICE said "Never Again Is Now" or quoted Anne Frank this forum would explode and the mods would be at wits end.

And you know what? Regardless of one's opinion on the applicability of "Never Again", it would be a very GOOD thing that the vast majority of America views inhumane immigration enforcement as something to resolve in a court of law rather than with shooting in the streets.

Now let's say we get to a point where people are OK with shooting at ICE. What would it take to get there? It would take state agents perpetrating unprovoked violence or other indignities against vast numbers of people from a wide range of backgrounds and getting away with it. And once we're at the point where that many people are that angry, it's already too late, because the state has built an apparatus that can do this stuff and continue to enjoy the support of enough people to continue functioning. The people who will work for that state will be from communities or sub-cultures that have not yet reached a breaking point, and probably never will. Or, at the very least, they will be people who never learned to live off the land and need their salary, benefits, and ability to avoid arrest while living in areas with electricity, running water, and internet access (critical for monitoring them).

Yes, even at that point, if tens of millions of people took up arms and engaged in coordinated, proficient action, the state would be completely fucked. But a state that can do that shit can disrupt their activities before they get that critical mass of people organized and trained. Trained men with guns can make mincemeat of people who know how to pull triggers and not much else. Remember, the Afghans are dangerous not simply because they own guns, but because key elements of their society spend their lives practicing mountain warfare in tribal squabbles against neighbors. The US is facing people who have already practiced fighting people who know the terrain, and have lived to tell the tale.

So, go on thinking that by the time it gets REALLY bad there will be people willing to shoot at ICE or whatever other acronym. By that point it will be impossible to organize a resistance, not least because some of the people most inclined to own guns and tactical gear will be in the handful of demographics that continue to support the state, or at least continue to argue that it "Isn't that bad."

Hell, by the time it's "that bad", the state will probably covertly fund lefty militias so that they can get authentic footage of armed lefties to scare their core supporters into staying in line. How many guys with guns, tactical gear, and rural land suitable for training exercises will want to join the Resistance after seeing footage of armed hippies saying that they want European healthcare after the Revolution is done?
" Columbus wasn’t a profile in courage or brilliance despite the odds, he was a dumb motherfucker that got lucky. Oddly, that makes him the perfect talisman for the Trump era."
--Mo
User avatar
Mo
Posts: 25725
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 17:08

Re: Guns and Whatnot.

Post by Mo »

I think the problem in the US has less to do with guns and more to do with US gun culture. We’re at all time national lows for the percentage of people that own guns, but a significant percentage of them are weird fetishists.
his voice is so soothing, but why do conspiracy nuts always sound like Batman and Robin solving one of Riddler's puzzles out loud? - fod

no one ever yells worldstar when a pet gets fucked up - dhex
User avatar
Painboy
Posts: 4649
Joined: 18 Feb 2013, 11:33
Location: Seattle

Re: Guns and Whatnot.

Post by Painboy »

I don't imagine the shooting starts in earnest, outside of a few radicals, until those aggrieved perceive their is no more political recourse and things will never get better without violence. So even if rights are being infringed bit by bit, until there is a point where there appears to be no way to politically recapture those rights, or halt any remaining infringement, I wouldn't expect any kind of violent insurrection.

The American Revolution only started when the it appeared to many Americans that no further political solution remained and continuing with the current arrangement with the crown was intolerable. The Civil War got going when the North refused to compromise over slavery anymore and the South refused to take steps to reform it and just stopped listening to the federal government. All political means were perceived to be exhausted.

Also I'm pretty sure you would need something else beyond the threatened rights to actually get people to start shooting (and be willing to get shot at). Representation in Parliament and taxes may have been what set off the American Revolution but it very quickly became about other more expansive concepts. I don't know if you could have a revolution purely to fight for the tools necessary to fight a revolution. That might be a little meta for most people.
User avatar
JD
Posts: 12189
Joined: 05 May 2010, 15:26

Re: Guns and Whatnot.

Post by JD »

What are you watching/guns and whatnot crossover: I was watching The Good Doctor the other night (I know it's dumb, don't judge me), and there's an episode with one character who discovers his new wife owns a handgun (a Walther PPK), and he hates guns and doesn't want it in the house and recites all these statistics about how you're more likely to be shot etc.etc. But in one scene where he unloads the gun, he looks quite competent and comfortable with it: he hits the mag release without even looking at it, grips the gun comfortably and racks the slide confidently, etc. I think this might have been a case of the actor being more comfortable with guns than the character is.
I sort of feel like a sucker about aspiring to be intellectually rigorous when I could just go on twitter and say capitalism causes space herpes and no one will challenge me on it. - Hugh Akston
User avatar
JasonL
Posts: 25475
Joined: 05 May 2010, 17:22

Re: Guns and Whatnot.

Post by JasonL »

If he worked the slide on a PPK without scraping his grip hand with the rails he no only knows guns but knows the inevitable curse of that particular gun. Possibly the least realistic Bond scenes are the ones where he shoots and doesn’t say “ouch I scraped the flesh off my hand”.
User avatar
thoreau
Posts: 30410
Joined: 06 May 2010, 12:56
Location: Back to the lab again

Re: Guns and Whatnot.

Post by thoreau »

I'd imagine that a lot of actors wind up being pretty comfortable handling guns, whatever their personal opinions, seeing as how common they are in TV and movies.

One of the dumber gun things I've occasionally seen on TV is when a character is pointing a gun at someone, trying to get them to answer questions or whatever, and when the person refuses to comply the guy with the gun racks the slide in a manner that's supposed to be intimidating. Yeah, I get that a person who knows nothing about guns would find that threatening, but it's an action show and the person he's pointing the gun at knows a thing or two about guns. All the main character is saying is "I'm dumb enough to not chamber a round before pointing my gun at you."
" Columbus wasn’t a profile in courage or brilliance despite the odds, he was a dumb motherfucker that got lucky. Oddly, that makes him the perfect talisman for the Trump era."
--Mo
User avatar
Eric the .5b
Posts: 15097
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 16:29

Re: Guns and Whatnot.

Post by Eric the .5b »

Do they still do the thing where the guns of spec ops types inexplicably make a few threatening clicks when someone aims them or turns quickly?
"Better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer."
Cet animal est très méchant / Quand on l'attaque il se défend.
User avatar
thoreau
Posts: 30410
Joined: 06 May 2010, 12:56
Location: Back to the lab again

Re: Guns and Whatnot.

Post by thoreau »

I believe it's standard protocol for Special Forces to cock the hammer to give their enemy a warning. That way it's a fair fight.

When necessary they will even discard their firearm, draw a knife, and then wait patiently for their adversary to do likewise.
" Columbus wasn’t a profile in courage or brilliance despite the odds, he was a dumb motherfucker that got lucky. Oddly, that makes him the perfect talisman for the Trump era."
--Mo
User avatar
JD
Posts: 12189
Joined: 05 May 2010, 15:26

Re: Guns and Whatnot.

Post by JD »

Eric the .5b wrote: 23 Oct 2019, 21:34 Do they still do the thing where the guns of spec ops types inexplicably make a few threatening clicks when someone aims them or turns quickly?
Spec ops, heck, it's almost everyone as far as I can tell. A bunch of characters are pointing their guns when someone or something else pops up; they all swivel to the new target and there's a flurry of clicks. What the hell are those noises even supposed to be, anyway? They're like the live-action equivalent of the pyow! noise when a cartoon character takes off running.

Although come to think of it, it may be getting less common. The Rookie (again, I know it's dumb) has a massive gun battle about every other episode, and I don't think they've ever done the mysterious-clicks thing.
I sort of feel like a sucker about aspiring to be intellectually rigorous when I could just go on twitter and say capitalism causes space herpes and no one will challenge me on it. - Hugh Akston
User avatar
Jasper
Posts: 3463
Joined: 27 Apr 2010, 07:56
Location: Newyorkachusetts

Re: Guns and Whatnot.

Post by Jasper »

JasonL wrote: 23 Oct 2019, 20:48 If he worked the slide on a PPK without scraping his grip hand with the rails he no only knows guns but knows the inevitable curse of that particular gun. Possibly the least realistic Bond scenes are the ones where he shoots and doesn’t say “ouch I scraped the flesh off my hand”.
I bought a PPK/S last year and quickly learned about the slide bite.
"i'd like to move toward not combusting except on special occasions like arbor day." - dhex
User avatar
JasonL
Posts: 25475
Joined: 05 May 2010, 17:22

Re: Guns and Whatnot.

Post by JasonL »

Only the resilient can serve in Her Majesty’s Service.
User avatar
Painboy
Posts: 4649
Joined: 18 Feb 2013, 11:33
Location: Seattle

Re: Guns and Whatnot.

Post by Painboy »

JD wrote: 24 Oct 2019, 10:24
Eric the .5b wrote: 23 Oct 2019, 21:34 Do they still do the thing where the guns of spec ops types inexplicably make a few threatening clicks when someone aims them or turns quickly?
Spec ops, heck, it's almost everyone as far as I can tell. A bunch of characters are pointing their guns when someone or something else pops up; they all swivel to the new target and there's a flurry of clicks. What the hell are those noises even supposed to be, anyway? They're like the live-action equivalent of the pyow! noise when a cartoon character takes off running.

Although come to think of it, it may be getting less common. The Rookie (again, I know it's dumb) has a massive gun battle about every other episode, and I don't think they've ever done the mysterious-clicks thing.
Sometimes I think the clicks are supposed to be people thumbing the safety off. There are guns like the AK that have rather loud safeties but most gun safeties aren't anywhere near that loud.

Of course Hollywood's history of handling actual gun sounds is pretty bad. For example I think like maybe 10 or so movies ever actually got the sound of a silencer correct.
User avatar
Andrew
Posts: 7110
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 21:52
Location: Vale of Eternal Fire

Re: Guns and Whatnot.

Post by Andrew »

Painboy wrote: 24 Oct 2019, 13:36 For example I think like maybe 10 or so movies ever actually got the sound of a silencer correct.
That many?

Edit - and let's not forget the removable silencers that somehow thread INSIDE the barrel. No, that would not cause any issues with a projectile exiting said barrel at high speeds...
We live in the fucked age. Get used to it. - dhex
User avatar
Painboy
Posts: 4649
Joined: 18 Feb 2013, 11:33
Location: Seattle

Re: Guns and Whatnot.

Post by Painboy »

Andrew wrote: 24 Oct 2019, 14:23
Painboy wrote: 24 Oct 2019, 13:36 For example I think like maybe 10 or so movies ever actually got the sound of a silencer correct.
That many?

Edit - and let's not forget the removable silencers that somehow thread INSIDE the barrel. No, that would not cause any issues with a projectile exiting said barrel at high speeds...
Or my other favorite the silencer on a revolver.
User avatar
Eric the .5b
Posts: 15097
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 16:29

Re: Guns and Whatnot.

Post by Eric the .5b »

Painboy wrote: 24 Oct 2019, 13:36
JD wrote: 24 Oct 2019, 10:24
Eric the .5b wrote: 23 Oct 2019, 21:34 Do they still do the thing where the guns of spec ops types inexplicably make a few threatening clicks when someone aims them or turns quickly?
Spec ops, heck, it's almost everyone as far as I can tell. A bunch of characters are pointing their guns when someone or something else pops up; they all swivel to the new target and there's a flurry of clicks. What the hell are those noises even supposed to be, anyway? They're like the live-action equivalent of the pyow! noise when a cartoon character takes off running.

Although come to think of it, it may be getting less common. The Rookie (again, I know it's dumb) has a massive gun battle about every other episode, and I don't think they've ever done the mysterious-clicks thing.
Sometimes I think the clicks are supposed to be people thumbing the safety off. There are guns like the AK that have rather loud safeties but most gun safeties aren't anywhere near that loud.

Of course Hollywood's history of handling actual gun sounds is pretty bad. For example I think like maybe 10 or so movies ever actually got the sound of a silencer correct.
I've thought now and again that the sound might be meant to be people taking safeties off, but they'll do it repeatedly. Someone comes into the room, everyone aims gun at them with a flurry of clicks...and then there's a noise, and everyone spins and aims at that, with another flurry of clicks. Like they have little metal tags hanging on the guns to clink when they move around.

(Hell, it might still be meant to be taking off a safety, without the writer or director being clear on how that works, how loud it is, or that you have to put a safety back on, etc...)
"Better that ten guilty persons escape than that one innocent suffer."
Cet animal est très méchant / Quand on l'attaque il se défend.
User avatar
nicole
Posts: 10862
Joined: 12 Jan 2013, 16:28

Re: Guns and Whatnot.

Post by nicole »

How do you make an ad for CCW sound like an ad for gun control?

Ask the Chicago Tribune:
4 people shot, 2 fatally, in South Side shootout as concealed carry holder tries to fend off attack, police say

Two people were killed and two others were wounded in a shootout on Chicago’s Far South Side as a concealed carry holder tried to fend off an attack Sunday, according to police.

Three men were standing in the 10000 block of South Avenue M, near 100th Street, around 3:45 p.m. Sunday when two gunmen pulled up, got out of a car and started firing, police said. All three men, ages 20, 27 and 39, were shot.

The 39-year-old, who had a valid license to carry a concealed handgun, drew his weapon and fired back, striking a boy who the Cook County medical examiner’s office said was identified as Michael Portis, 17, of the 7400 block of South Crandon Avenue. Police said the 17-year-old was pronounced dead at the scene.
(The 17-year-old boy was also one of the gunmen; this is not explicit anywhere in the article.)
"Fucking qualia." -Hugh Akston

"Sliced bagels aren't why trump won; it's why it doesn't matter who wins." -dhex
User avatar
Warren
Posts: 30164
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 17:03
Location: Goat Rope MO
Contact:

Re: Guns and Whatnot.

Post by Warren »

Counter Clock Wise?
Nobody, men included, wants a world where men treat women with the same respect they show to other men. - thoreau
User avatar
Andrew
Posts: 7110
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 21:52
Location: Vale of Eternal Fire

Re: Guns and Whatnot.

Post by Andrew »

nicole wrote: 06 Jan 2020, 15:09 How do you make an ad for CCW sound like an ad for gun control?

Ask the Chicago Tribune:
4 people shot, 2 fatally, in South Side shootout as concealed carry holder tries to fend off attack, police say

Two people were killed and two others were wounded in a shootout on Chicago’s Far South Side as a concealed carry holder tried to fend off an attack Sunday, according to police.

Three men were standing in the 10000 block of South Avenue M, near 100th Street, around 3:45 p.m. Sunday when two gunmen pulled up, got out of a car and started firing, police said. All three men, ages 20, 27 and 39, were shot.

The 39-year-old, who had a valid license to carry a concealed handgun, drew his weapon and fired back, striking a boy who the Cook County medical examiner’s office said was identified as Michael Portis, 17, of the 7400 block of South Crandon Avenue. Police said the 17-year-old was pronounced dead at the scene.
(The 17-year-old boy was also one of the gunmen; this is not explicit anywhere in the article.)
Even by journalism standards, that is amazingly mendacious.
We live in the fucked age. Get used to it. - dhex
User avatar
nicole
Posts: 10862
Joined: 12 Jan 2013, 16:28

Re: Guns and Whatnot.

Post by nicole »

In the interest of full transparency, I should note that it's not necessarily the greatest ad for CCW to begin with, because the CCW holder ended up dying as well.
"Fucking qualia." -Hugh Akston

"Sliced bagels aren't why trump won; it's why it doesn't matter who wins." -dhex
User avatar
JD
Posts: 12189
Joined: 05 May 2010, 15:26

Re: Guns and Whatnot.

Post by JD »

The Guardian comments on Don Trump Jr.'s AR-15 photo, saying "The picture showed Trump Jr holding up the weapon, safety-catch off (correct, I think) and finger on the trigger (wrong)." Seriously, how do they get the hard part correct (I didn't even know which position of an AR-15's selector switch was "safe" offhand) and get the simple part wrong (finger...trigger...look at them)?

I sort of feel like a sucker about aspiring to be intellectually rigorous when I could just go on twitter and say capitalism causes space herpes and no one will challenge me on it. - Hugh Akston
User avatar
Ellie
Posts: 13466
Joined: 21 Apr 2010, 18:34

Re: Guns and Whatnot.

Post by Ellie »

Can somebody with gun wisdom explain what's happening in this video? (Note: sound is NSFW - swear words)



link
"Yours is the much better comeback." -JD
User avatar
JasonL
Posts: 25475
Joined: 05 May 2010, 17:22

Re: Guns and Whatnot.

Post by JasonL »

Unless I'm missing something, the guy nearest was clearing his rifle and accidentally discharged it into the dirt. I assume this is a drill instructor yelling meaning that guy is about to get his butt kicked and much more florid language will be used in the process.
User avatar
Warren
Posts: 30164
Joined: 26 Apr 2010, 17:03
Location: Goat Rope MO
Contact:

Re: Guns and Whatnot.

Post by Warren »

JasonL wrote: 24 Jan 2020, 10:55 Unless I'm missing something, the guy nearest was clearing his rifle and accidentally discharged it into the dirt. I assume this is a drill instructor yelling meaning that guy is about to get his butt kicked and much more florid language will be used in the process.
Yeah, firing a round anywhere except down range will get you lots of attention.
Nobody, men included, wants a world where men treat women with the same respect they show to other men. - thoreau
Post Reply