Sad Sight at the Library of Congress

That's just disgusting. Is there a way to have public influence over a display like that? After all, I pay for it to be there, so I (as a people) should approve of what it is, right?

This is not how I want my tax dollars spent.

In the White House the painting of James Audubon shows him carrying a gun.

He had to shoot those birds before he could paint them!

You might want to let the NRA and other pro-gun groups know about it, in addition to complaining about it yourself. The director of the National Air and Space Museum was actually fired because of the <removed> storm he caused with an apologetic display of the Enola Gay in 1994.

http://www.airforce-magazine.com/MagazineArchive/EnolaGayArchive/Pages/default.aspx

Tim

In service, our lower level NCO's are selected and recommended for promotion within the Battalion, and the Battalion CSM is responsible for selecting the topics of study. One of the CSM's I worked for included our constitution as a topic of study.

Comedy ensued...

Me, being the resident gun guy, would ask the candidate which amendment he felt was most important to him. This in turn, would draw a variety of answers ranging from the importance of being able to speak freely, worship as you please, secure in your person and home etc...

At that time I would laugh and tell them "...this is the NRA portion of your promotion board..." and explain to them how NONE of their rights are guaranteed without the 2nd. I would discuss how various segments of societies faired around the world when they lost the right of arms, such as the citizens of Jewish descent in Germany back in the 30's etc...

At that point the CSM would look at me and shake his head with the "here he goes again..." look.

Too many of our citizens fail to realize the significance of that amendment, and the consequences of giving it away. Without arms to back them up, "rights" aren't worth the paper they are written on...

Ok, why don't they talk about how freedom of speech has KILLED PEOPLE!! What about how Tim McVeigh killed a bunch of people using fertilizer and fuel. He got the information on how to do this because the information was avalable. What about how the kids who masterminded Columbine found information on the net on how to create bombs.

Or how about the fools who masterminded 9/11. They practiced flying using Microsoft Flight Simulator.

Why don't we just roll the Bill of Rights into a huge doobie and smoke it!! That would make the gun prohibitionsts in California happy. MORONS!! If you give up one right, you threaten to tear the whole document to pieces.

Sorry. I am done now.

had a bad experience at the Library of Congress also...was on a trip to DC and was staying literally next door to it- i was all excited, knowing one of the greatest collections on the earth was right there, and was a public library!
so i walk in and start looking around-all i wanted to do was go look around and find some interesting books to read. i went up to the giant Reading Room-the door was locked. there were people inside reading at tables, but i couldnt get in.

right then some security guard yells at me 'what are you doing there!? you need to come down now!' so i walk down the stairs. half a dozen security guards with nothing to do but harass me start telling me i 'need to stay with a tour group' and basically that i couldnt even go anywhere. i say 'isnt this a public library?' and they just act all angry.

so much for it being a public library...

its more like a damn fortress, an ordinary american just going in to look at books is dicked around and blocked form going anywhere. good luck trying to actually find a place to go read a book in america's 'greatest' 'public' library

You see, that is a flintlock muzzle loader. That is what we are really supposed to be limited to. The Founding Fathers had no idea that technology would advance....

Click to expand...

That's OK, with Audubon's fowler you could buy fifty primo AR's.

the 2nd amendment was created because the founding fathers wanted people to be well-armed, and well trained, and to assemble into militia's, they knew that when people have guns and militias.. they have the power. Take the guns away and arrest the militias and people have zero power. People overlook the fact that not only was the 2nd amendment about the right to own firearms but also the emphasis on the militia to keep a free country free... meaning we have the right to get to gether with like-minded gun owners to prepare for revolutuions if we need to.

Americans today have no idea what its like to live under oppression, we are just now feeling the effects of the Obama administration. Imagine what it was like living in nazi germany or the eastern block.... when the politicians don't listen, a revolution becomes necessary

That is how they potrayed one of your rights...

Click to expand...

Outrageous. Disgusting. Outdated.


It is time for a complete overhaul based on the Heller and McDonald decisions.

piece of meat said:

had a bad experience at the Library of Congress also...was on a trip to DC and was staying literally next door to it- i was all excited, knowing one of the greatest collections on the earth was right there, and was a public library!

...........

its more like a damn fortress, an ordinary american just going in to look at books is dicked around and blocked form going anywhere. good luck trying to actually find a place to go read a book in america's 'greatest' 'public' library

Click to expand...

Well see, at least the OP STAYED IN THE AUTHORIZED ZONE... you, you're just, well, a piece of meat.... (please note unseen levity)...

In all honesty I can understand why they keep some decent security on the nations largest repository of written material... I don't know what hoops you might have to jump through to get in that room, but my bet is most of those people are employees finding things for people who put in requests for material... and then I doubt you just fill in the blanks for a library card either,.......

Your tax dollars at work.

No, Churchill is not a mod. Let's not stray too far from the topic, ok? This is too important to see it get locked.

The NRA HQ isn't far from DC and I know folks who work there. I'll drop them a line.

Keep something else in mind as well. You don't just want to contact the library, you also want to contact the maker of that film. The LoC didn't film, edit and license that movie, they've only decided to show it and may only have ignorantly been doing damage.

Instead of letting them know how the 2nd has been conveniently edited to certain specs let them know that the documentary is biased and historically lopsided.

Ask when the video was filmed and edited and argue that its production and outdated and the information in whatever video they choose to replace it with needs to more historically correct and unbiased, etc.

If your argument is that you're offended by the portrayal of the 2nd ammendment there's a chance they may brush it off as a slight complaint. However if you argue the inaccuracy and bias of a video that's supposed to portray the unbiased freedom in America and it's historical inaccuracy then you might gain more of their ear.

My film for the First Amendment freedom of expression video (using that LoC work as a hideous negativity guide):
"... an establishment of religion ..."
o Torquemada and the Spanish Inquisition from History of the World, Part I
"... the free exercise thereof ..."
o penitents flogging themselves with whips
"... the freedom of speech ..."
o Hitler at Nuremburg from Triumph of the Will
"... of the press ..."
o covers of Marquis de Sade's 120 Days of Sodom et alia
"... of the people peaceably to assemble ..."
o the mob outside the palace in Marie Antoinette

Do I think that BoR video sounds biased on 2A from the description?

You mean they didn't give tons of bad examples for the First Amendment?

Entertainment based on the worst of things?
No books promoting genocides highlighted?

A lot of things many in society would dislike are protected by the First Amendment.


Yet the 2nd Amendment has most of its time spent citing examples of the worst uses of firearms?
And the few positive things are connected with hunting? (Which has nothing to do with the reason for the 2nd.)


Really sickening.
I guess they should show the worst known criminals who have used the 4th, 5th, 6th, and 7th to successfully beat prosecution too? Maybe highlight all those who committed a horrible crime on bail to highlight the 8th?
Why highlight all the good when they can certainly highlight many clips of the
worst possible outcomes?

The rights in the Bill of Rights are meant to protect the people. We are better off because of them, but all limits on government have consequences. Some good and some bad.

Selectively touting some as great things and demonizing others is wrong.
It is certainly a misuse of tax dollars to intentionally manipulate the people touring the capitol to turn them against certain rights.

Just in case no one knew this, but a big chunk of your federal civil servants are Democrat/left wing/anti gun types....sure, not all, but in some of the smaller agencies it has worked out that way.
I work for DoD which is mostly center to right, esp in Oklahoma.. actually here its mostly right and most are pro-2A.
Also, feds have two big unions that Democrats love (NFFE, AFGE-AFL/COI,) and many of these agencies are stocked with college grads and live in the DC area, which outside of Virginia is not gun friendly.

Not to make excuses for this situation, it really pizzed me off to read it, maybe the NRA-ILA can get this fixed.

Just in case no one knew this, but a big chunk of your federal civil servants are Democrat/left wing/anti gun types....sure, not all, but in some of the smaller agencies it has worked out that way.

Click to expand...

Smaller? No, most of them support that agenda. Even many who don't agree with it vote for it because it is the left that takes care of the unions, and most government employees are union members.
I know many union members who get voting guides and almost everyone they are advised to vote for to increase their wages, benefits, job security, etc is from the left. In places like California that is almost all anti-gun people.
With those union members who are further to the right or libertarian in ideology they get to decide between better living standards, job security, and benefits, or rights they feel are important. Most pick the paycheck.
Union members are one of the most mobilized voting blocks.

As the government gets bigger it votes for itself in bigger blocks too. Meaning as the percentage of people who work for the government increases, the number of people that vote for additional benefits for the government and its employees increases, and they turn out to vote more than the average person.
Even if they logically know the result is less efficiency and requires progressively increasing tax dollars, few people are going to vote against their own paycheck, for fewer dollars in their pocket, or vote themselves right out of a job. The same goes for gun rights. If their union assures them anti-gun candidate A will take care of them and pro-gun candidate B will cut spending and trim all those who are excess right out of a job, most vote for their job.