Some day we'll look back on gun ownership the same way we look back on slave ownership

[Hugabear]

I don't know how long it will take - 50, 70, 100, 150, 200 years - but I do believe that we will eventually get there. There is already a growing groundswell of support for limiting gun violence. The public can only take so many mass shootings, so much violent gun crime, before they say enough is enough. If it weren't for the NRA and their rabid gun nuts, we'd already be well on the way to getting guns off the streets in this country.

I can only hope that I live long enough to see the day when the notion of owning a gun is as repulsive as owning another human being.

[zappaman]

1. This makes no sense to me.

Are you saying we will be freeing the guns and treat them like we treat all people?
They will be able to vote, amongst other things?

[Hugabear]

3. I see the point went sailing right over your head

My point was that nowadays, we look back on the notion of slave ownership with disgust and revulsion.

Someday, I think we'll look back on the notion of gun ownership the same way.

Obviously there will still be those on the fringe who want guns - just as there are still those today who think slavery wasn't really that bad.

[zappaman]

7. Ahhhhh

Got it.
Although I hope you are right, I am not nearly as optimistic...

[quinnox]

2. I can't go that far

to me, that is a ridiculous comparison.

[Bluenorthwest]

4. Humans are not objects, objects are objects. The comparison is odious.

nt

[Enrique]

5. to me it's a safety issue n/t

[villager]

6. Exactly. I've been saying this all along. Gun apologists are already relegated to history's dustbin

...but in "dead man walking" mode, just don't, or can't, realize it yet.

[cali]

12. what exactly is a "gun apologist"?

Are all gun owners "gun apologists"?

[Puzzledtraveller]

20. I'm not a gun owner and don't feel the need to be

but I've spoken in defense of sensible arguments in favor of the 2nd I guess I'm an apologist.

[villager]

27. A huge majority of them are, yes.

n/t

[1StrongBlackMan]

31. I read, somewhere, ...

that by the time the issues that we are battling come to the fore-front of the populace's attention, e.g., Gay Marriage/GLBT Rights, Income Equity, 2nd Amendment, etc., the issue is already decided in the direction of change ... It just takes awhile for those fighting for the status quo to give up the fight.

[villager]

37. I think that's exactly right. And there will of course be the usual resistance to history's flow

...on this issue, as well.

[GreenStormCloud]

8. I think you will see everyone packing.

As humans, we are not immune to the biological laws that govern all species. We have already exceeded the Earth's sustainable carrying capacity for humanity and will begin to have a massive die-off. In one generation, possibly faster, we will lose 80% to 90% of humanity. The remainder, after civilization partially rebuilds, will be so spread out that they will routinely be armed for their personal safety.

[cali]

9. I don't see the comparison as being valid

and I don't see anyone ever as looking at gun ownership in the same way as owning another human.

[Hugabear]

10. You don't think people can look at gun ownership with extreme disgust?

That's funny, because myself and many others already do

[cali]

11. nope. I think you'll remain a small minority.

furthermore, there is no evidence that most people look upon gun ownership with disgust. Many look at the NRA with disgust but most people, I suspect, look at gun ownership in a far more neutral manner.

[derby378]

15. A very tiny minority, at that

An enlightened society demonstrates a certain measure of tolerance. We may be discussing the parameters of tolerance concerning guns in the hands of civilians, but that will never approach zero.

[Matariki]

13. Ugh. You should really rethink your OP.

Comparing the 'ownership' of another human being to owning an object? That's just wrong and incredibly insensitive to the millions of people who suffered being enslaved.

[Hugabear]

14. Not just an object. An object whose primary purpose is to kill.

And no, I stand strongly by my OP. However, feel free to alert on it if you think it violates the TOS. I'd say that you have about a 50-50 chance of getting my OP hidden.

[Throd]

19. Which is why I own one.

[Hugabear]

21. So your primary purpose is to kill?

How very interesting and telling.

[Throd]

25. No. But you know that.

I have a firearm for the sole purpose of home defense should somebody try to break into my house. In such an event , I will shoot that person, and possibly kill them. I have no desire to kill another human, even if that person intends to harm me. Willingness to shoot an intruder and desire to kill someone are completely different things.

I also have a fire extinguisher in my home. I hope I never have to use it as well.

[cali]

23. yes, just an object. no matter how heinous one thinks guns are they are indisputably

just objects. they do not think or feel. they are objects. And by the way, a bow and arrow's primary purpose is also to kill.

[Matariki]

32. I'm not going to alert on your post.

I just think you are being inadvertently insensitive. Even if a gun is an object meant to kill, comparing it to enslaving human beings is just a bad and insensitive metaphor. Kind of like when Peta compared chicken farms to the Holocaust.

Personally I think you could have made your point better with a different metaphor. I can't ever imagine a time when people will think of owning a gun in the same way they think about the horrible misery of enslaving another human being. Perhaps at some time in the future the idea of gun ownership will seem crazy or even reprehensible (I'm not agreeing or disagreeing) but comparing that to slavery? Terrible metaphor my friend.

[Bake]

16. Not until/unless the human race becomes much, much more evolved.

And not until humans have dealt with/eradicated the issue of limited resources, poverty, limited food supply, and oh yeah, WAR.

And I don't see that happening.

IF (and that's a big if) there is some kind of societal cataclysm (perhaps due to climate change), you'll see a whole lot more people with guns.

Bake

[marions ghost]

17. I think I understand your meaning

I would put it more like -- one day guns will be obsolete. They already are, in many ways, but people who want to manufacture and own them are still obviously legion.

Guns must and will, become obsolete. They are primitive tools, primitive solutions. One day they will no longer be needed or effective. They will certainly not be part of a civilized society, or a society no longer based on wars and killing. We will be fighting to survive, and that will take technology and ideas far more advanced than guns. Guns will come to be thought of like maat'a--the spears and daggers--of the early Easter Islanders. The solutions of primitive war-like peoples of a bygone era.

This too, shall pass. One day. But people have to have a lot of imagination to believe that there can be anything better than what they know.

[Throd]

18. No we won't.

[closeupready]

22. lol

[Dr. Strange]

24. Maybe someday we'll look back at Che Guevara that same way too.

Good idea to change your avatar.

[Puzzledtraveller]

26. Bravo Dr. Strange!

[Throd]

30. I found that avatar a bit puzzling myself.

[Hugabear]

38. Actually I'm going back to it.

I decided I'm not going to let some gun nutters cause me to change my avatar.

Anyone who can't understand the difference between a revolutionary and Joe Schmo just doesn't want to see it.

[cali]

40. lol. anyone who can't see the inherent and blatant hypocrisy that you're exhibiting

is denser than fruitcake.

and btw I'm not even remotely a "gun nutter". don't own them. don't like them.

[quinnox]

42. you are giving me whiplash, my friend

[Hugabear]

36. Apples and oranges, but I'm sure you know that

Last edited Fri Jan 18, 2013, 03:44 PM - Edit history (1)

There's a difference between fighting for one's people, and keeping guns around after your freedom has been won.

Last I checked, the US won its freedom over 200 years ago.

[Dr. Strange]

41. Awesome.

The reason I changed my avatar is because gun nuts like you can't quite seem to comprehend that, and try to hijack my posts

I've never held a gun, much less killed a human being like Che did. But I'm the gun nut, eh?

If you're okay with putting a bullet in someone's head in the name of "fighting for one's people," then you're more of a gun nut than I.

[Lizzie Poppet]

39. hit.nail.head

Noticed that absolutely priceless bit o' irony a while back...

[Demo_Chris]

28. I think you mean well, and I get your point, but NO

[WooWooWoo]

29. this is disgusting

and you should be ashamed of yourself for putting black people on the same level with innanimate objects.

[Hugabear]

34. I never said 'black people'

I was talking about the concept of owning another human being.

Apparently some people just can't fathom the notion that some people look at guns with similar revulsion.

[cali]

35. oh I think people understand that you and others like you feel that way

we just think you're a very tiny minority and that you'll remain a tiny minority. I don't much care for guns but I sure as shit don't think gun ownership is in any way in any degree akin to owning a person.

[slackmaster]

33. FREE THE GUNS! GIVE THEM THE RIGHT TO VOTE!!!