The Millennial Point of View

Status
Not open for further replies.
excellent read. Anybody who is following this thread needs to read it. How appropriate that these words, written in 1998, have come to pass. I do respect the credentails of that old guy. He does understand the Millenial Point of View.
 
Last edited:
hillbilly said:
Of course, Lt. Col. Dan Grossman is just another "out of touch old guy" who fails to understand just how awesome and spiffy Millenial Know-it-Alls are, too, right?
Click to expand...

This guy again?
Dave Grossman is a shyster. It is amazing how far encouraging certain segments of the population to mythologize themselves will get you, even if your "science" is second generation B.S.
 
Dave Grossman is a shyster
Click to expand...

Really?
Which part of his resume is made up?

To make such a strong statement without showing why you feel this way makes your post look like you don't know what you are talking about.
 
meanmrmustard said:
I agree with you Sam.

I'm no a whole lot older than our OP here, and I am not really understanding the points trying to be made. It reads like a failed attempt at getting gun owners to roll over so we can take one in the rear.

OP: you are not the poster child for Gun Ownership; I'm a machinist for a metal fab shop in the Midwest, not married, divorced, divorced parents, have four kids, drive whatever runs, drink beer, play Super Mario, and do not have the chunk of disposable income you tout due in no small part to the president you are seemingly a fan of. I'm on no poster, nor should you be. Anyone believing that being able to spend a few thousand bucks for an AR and range time isn't a criminal, to me, seems elitist as eff. Your soapbox is wobbling to the left.

Also, you voted for a fool and a criminal. Obama is not stalling on gun issues for us, he's busy spending your hard earned dollars on vacations at a rate of 1.4 billion dollars A YEAR!!! The Royal family, as a whole, uses up 56 million dollars annually for travel and expenses pertaining to vacationing. But Oby and his gang use 20 times that in the same time frame! Matter of fact, while he could have been diligently hammering out the path of this nation's economic and 2A paths, he's been soaking up rays in Hawaii since Saturday.

I don't care about games. They'll always be violent, because some of them only aspire to mimic the world we live in. Your characters carry M4s and FN 5.7s, why can't you? On the flip side, Marylin Manson doesn't make me want to hurt people, nor do games. You can take the games, but when it comes to my firearms "molon Labe"! You are a combat veteran? Then how do you keep a straight face bringing "realistic multiplayer" into this forum, but roll your eyes at vocal gun owners willing to fight for their rights? Failure again.

Lastly, we are no match for the US Army? Because we've let it be so. We are 300 million strong if we'd ever band together. Unless POTUS decides to nuke his own country, we win for a cause worth dying for. As a soldier, Id figure you'd value that. But, there's a line being drawn that's been along time coming. One side believes in freedom and the willingness to defend it. The other stands to extinguish said freedom and rise to an unorthodox amount of power by means of policing and bullying. I know what side of that line I'm on, and I know what side you belong to OP.

Folks did ok fighting off tyranny with pitchforks against muskets. I'd say we'd do just fine in getting the point across that we haven't been a monarchy for several hundred years, and it ain't changing now.
Click to expand...
Couldn't have said it better myself, that's why I quoted you. Thanks!!

PS the antis will take what they can get now regulation wise, and wait for the next tragedy to get more. NOW is the time to stop them!!! Incrementalism is the term, I believe. Or the old frog in the slowly heating up pot of water analogy. Whatever you prefer..
 
Last edited:
I have heard this for years. Nothing has happened from Obama since he's been elected President to show he has a "pure hatred" of gun owners. It is all fear, and nothing but fear. What did FDR say about that? Let's all talk about learning from the past!

What makes me believe he has anything less than a pure hatred of guns and gun owners? How about the fact that the guy hasn't attempted to do anything to stifle or restrict our 2nd amendment rights as President? Even during past shootings. There have been panics that he would do something, but he never did.

So, since he's so absolutely hateful of gun owners, and wants to disarm us all at any given moment based on his past votes, etc. I'm going to ask YOU for something. Show me Obama's mighty legislation, or even attempt at legislation, that tried to disarm us all. If he has such a pure hatred of guns and gun owners, let's see it.
Click to expand...

He wanted to get elected to a second term, no use expending political capital prematurely. Obama has in the past written/spoken in favor of banning semi-auto firearms and handguns. As a member of the Board of Directors of the Joyce Foundation, he has voted to supply millions of dollars to concoct junk science "studies" supporting gun control. Senator Obama signed on to an amicus brief in the Heller case indicating that a total ban on handguns and laws that prohibit any kind of firearm being in a functional condition was constitutional and good policy. He told Sarah Brady he was working on gun control "under the radar". During the Presidential debate, he said he wanted to bring back the assault weapon ban and do something about "cheap" handguns.
 
The arguement about President Obama being pro2A is weak in my book. He took an initial majority and burned all of his powder on a healthcare plan that the average person didn't support, instead of focusing strictly on the economy. He had momentum and knew that, once the people lost their newfound buzz over him, he'd never get healthcare through. He wasn't going to ruin his chances of re-election in the second two years of term one by getting all of us energized on gun control. You don't get re-elected that way. As an Illinois legislator, he supported every crazy gun banning/regulation scheme that came down the pike, and was vocal about it. Why did he change? I'm betting he didn't, other than to avoid losing an election. "Never let a good crisis go to waste." That's what's happening right now.
 
"Lastly, old folks, you need to get with the times."

Make many friends in your day to day life with that attitude? I know you think you are smart, but you need the logic to back up your opinions.

Could you summarize your opening rant about your feelings on the NRA? It was a rambling monologue that wandered all over the place.

John
 
Give my generation a reason to respect your opinions and you'll have our support. Give us a reason to scorn you and we will break you like we broke Mitt Romney.
Click to expand...

You young sir, though eloquent, have damn little respect for the generations that bled and died so you can play your beloved video games and bust the balls of those that went before.

You are dismissed.
 
And you, old man, have no concept that the world has changed and that your era is gone, and that many of the troubles of today can be directly traced to your generation's shoddy, self-centered upbringing. My kids will still be fixing your problems.
 
"Lastly, old folks, you need to get with the times."

"And you, old man, have no concept that the world has changed and that your era is gone"

Seems like a consistent theme in your posts is that you don't like people older than you. I am 61, and I'd guess you won't like me either.

Maybe attacking people for being "old" is not so THR

From the THR Rules:
4. Spamming, trolling, flaming, and personal attacks are prohibited. You can disagree with other members, even vehemently, but it must be done in a well-mannered form. Attack the argument, not the arguer.

I disagree with some of what you say, but I respect your right to say it. I just don't think you gain much by insulting others.

Feel free to jump on me, I have had plenty of people tell me what they think of me, one more won't hurt.
 
OP... Rocket Medic....

I respect you for willingly to declare your opinions even though they are un-popular.

You also have my respect as an United States Serviceman. And it makes me feel horrible for being brutally honest with you.


To start with, you didn't need to give us your demographics. You tell us that you're a White male (Not relevant to your post), Drive a pickup (Not relevant), Listen to country (Not relevant), are fiscally conservative (Not relevant), live in the Midwest (Not relevant), and that you're married (Not relevant).

The big problem though is that you gave us your race. Everything else is relatively harmless until you throw in race.

By giving us your Race you immediately cause bias.

Me saying that I'm 19 and as foolish as a kid can be, Work through college as a criminal justice major, already have an EMT-B certification, Drive a Jeep, Work at a truck-stop, I don't drink, don't do drugs, don't sleep around, Live in Idaho, Go shooting in the desert, Have a Fiance, Have been brought up to be a respectable gentleman, RESPECT MY ELDERS, and frequent THR.

^^ Pretty harmless right?

OH WAIT! You need to know this! I'm half Vietnamese, and half Cuban. Both my parents escaped their respective countries before the communists took over. I was born in the states.

^^ That paragraph didn't need to be there.


Saying you're the poster-child of gun owners can be taken as a RACIST remark. We should be striving to not have a primary image, BUT to be in every walk of American life. By declaring that you're the perfect image of a gun owner you do nothing to help the "Gun owners are just a bunch of Rednecks with no education!" stereotype.

I've read every post up until now, TO ME IT LOOKS LIKE each time a THR member has brought up a valid argument you've shot them down with the same condescending attitude and arrogance that I experienced when I was getting my EMT-A certification.

Don't give me the: "I'm a type-A personality!" BS either.

*For those of you that don't know: the EMT and Paramedic field is riddled with the same attitude that Rocket Medic is lashing out with. Not everyone is that bad, but a great many are.*

And by saying THIS:
And you, old man, have no concept that the world has changed and that your era is gone, and that many of the troubles of today can be directly traced to your generation's shoddy, self-centered upbringing. My kids will still be fixing your problems.
Click to expand...

You've lost any respect I had. I can't stand to see that you've closed your mind to the advice that people who've had this happen before.

Not to mention that a Disrespect for those older and wiser than you is outright disgusting.

Sincerely, Someone who apparently isn't the Poster-Child for gun owners.

GOOD DAY SIR!

th?id=H.4512173251954511&pid=1.jpg
 
I would just like to add my opinion regarding video games as well. Violent games does not affect me either, having played most of the Resident Evil/Modern Warfare/GTA etc games. I even played with toy guns at a very young age with water pistols and BB guns. But it may affect other children differently.

As our society becomes more advanced and modern, so does gaming technology. I cannot say exactly how violent video games affect our youth today; I would say it would be on a case-by-case basis and also depend on other factors like the child's family, friends, environment, etc.

In my personal experience these video games may not necessarily turn a young child into a violent individual--granted he/she has positive family influence and upbringing. IMO that is more important. Basically having your parents around to raise you and discipline you. When a child lacks that, they will have a higher probability of becoming a problem child.

Do I support banning or regulating video games? No. But I do believe parents should monitor what their children play and watch on tv.
 
I'm a long time lurker, but after seeing this I had to respond. First of all, I'd like to say to the OP that not all of us millennials share your point of view. I, and most of my friends, voted for Romney. Furthermore, it could be the engineering major in me, but I'm not arrogant enough to think I can't learn from the older folks. "Get with the times" is one of the most illogical arguments known to man; it's essentially saying "ignore those who have gone before you."

Moreover, some of us can still recognise self-contradictory arguments.

When Wayne "Retarded Old Guy" LaPierre or whatever his name is started calling on some of my favorite antique games as indoctrination for murderers, it showed just how out of touch he and his supporters really are.
Click to expand...

Aiming at man-sized targets in a simulated 600-meter engagement and calculating shot placement based on reticles, windage and motion is actually pretty similar to doing it "for real" in terms of preparing you to aim at another human being.
Click to expand...

You're claiming that violent video games are harmless, and then claim that they prepared you to kill human beings "for real." In fact, you've even gone so far as to claim that they prepared you for a real battlefield. Clearly, if a game can make you effective in a battlefield, it can make you deadlier when shooting civilians, as in the recent events in Connecticut. So, which one is it? Are they truly harmless, or a sort of deadly training?
Finally, the comparison to sports like 3-gun fails based on the critical idea of discipline. Based on my experience, shooting sports teach responsibility and the importance of using guns only for legitimate purposes-such as self-defense. Other martial sports such as wrestling and submission grappling teach the same thing. Video games - especially those in the "GTA" genre - teach no such thing.
 
Ragnar Danneskjold said:
So...basically exactly how things already are. The ESRB video game rating system has been in place since 1994.
Click to expand...

Not that I have any problem with the current system, but the ESRB system is a voluntary one. Its there to educate parents, and many retailers enforce it, but they have no legal requirement to do so. IE, it can be against store policy to sell an "M" rated game to a minor, but it's not against the law.

One of the things that I find funny is that (ironically, like many younger people), the OP seems to think that they are the self-appointed spokesperson of an entire generation. I hate to break it to you, but you're not the lone young person that stumbled into a den of old-fudds bringing the knowledge to "set em all straight".

Realistically, gun ownership is a trend that spans all the age brackets. Particularly relevant given the whole AWB angle is the fact that it seems that the primary owner of those types of guns ARE the younger gun owners. Some old guys like them too, and most support the right to, but you'll find a whole lot of the older generations liking lever actions, bolt actions, and revolvers. If I see someone at the range with an AR15 there's about a 70-80% chance that they're 30 or under (a group that I just left a few months back, being 31 now).

Despite all your attempts at inflating your ego, you're not the poster child for gun owners, nor your generation. You're parroting the ideas not of the "millennials", but the same ideas that anti-gunners have been trying to peddle for over 50 years (certainly not a new idea). You're free to subscribe to those ideas, but understand, you do not speak for gunowners.
 
Last edited:
Rocketmedic, I've asked a number of times on different threads, but I'm not sure if you either haven't seen or are choosing not to answer.

What is the purpose of the Second Amendment? Why did the framers include it in the Bill of Rights?
 
I'm a 22 year old at a small liberal arts college. (And boy do I mean LIBERAL! I'm talking gender neutral bathrooms and everything). I also own multiple "assault weapons." I do my part by showing everyone I meet that I'm pro-gun as a matter of civil rights, but not some knuckle-dragging psychopath who thinks Obama is from Kenya, as is their perception of gun owners (many of these kids never having so much as SEEN a gun in real life).

I think the NRA is doing terrible PR, and if we all act like LaPierre did when he called for video-game bans and called the mentally-ill "monsters", we will go the way of anti-gay marriage types: seen as irrelevant, anachronistic, and frequently beaten in elections. Sorry, but that's just the way the tide is turning among young people. Thank Michael Moore, maybe? JPFO does the best job at convincing people, as far as I can see.

I think the best response to the Sandy Hook shootings is to do... nothing? Maybe tighten up NICS databases, cross-list them to addresses, flag those who refuse background checks for a face-to-face checkup from local LE (that would've stopped Lanza, if we want to talk solutions).

Honestly though, your children are more likely to be struck by lightning than die in any of these mass shootings. If someone gets to tell me I don't deserve a gun because I'll "likely never need it," then I surely get to tell them they don't get to worry about mass shootings. 2.5 million defensive uses of guns vs. maybe 2 big shootings this year? I'll take my unlikely scenario over yours, thanks.

FWIW, I also thought the only thing we should've done in response to 9/11 was to put locks on cockpit doors (and kill Bin Laden, I guess). Instead we have useless TSA, two wars we can't pay for, Patriot Act, NDAA that says the president gets to kill me from the air when he feels like it, etc. Knee-jerk reactions in the name of "NEVER AGAIN!!!" never work out.
 
An aspirin is offered to three people with a headache. The first gets relief, headache gone. The second gets no relief, headache present. The third person has an allergic reaction and goes to the hospital.

Whether its development of mental illness, personal response to violent videogames, resilience to, or concordance with your folks parenting skills as a child, each and every person will react differently to different external and internal stimuli over a short and/or longer period of time.

We will never be able to regulate human behavior the way we wish to by applying broad legal strokes which will fail many, and designing contingencies for every personal life situation will prove impossible.

So what do we do? We must charge ourselves with the duty of being critical thinkers and take care of each other as best we can. To my way of thinking the dissolution of the community, the family, and disconnectedness we now experience compared to times past in this country, is the crux of the problem.
If youre not close to someone, emotionally just like in physical proximity, you can't aid them. The community, the family that more than likely would have been around this young man 50 years ago, to offer assistance, wasn't there to help.
 
Last edited:
So what do we do? We must charge ourselves with the duty of being critical thinkers and take care of each other as best we can. To my way of thinking the dissolution of the community, the family, and disconnectedness we now experience compared to times past in this country, is the crux of the problem.
If youre not close to someone, emotionally just like in physical proximity, you can't aid them. The community, the family that more than likely would have been around this young man 50 years ago, to offer assistance, wasn't there to help.
Click to expand...

I wholeheartedly agree. The guns haven't changed, gun laws have only gotten more and more restrictive and less and less people are armed. What's changed is that the community aspect is gone. For all the communication technology, we're more alone than ever.

If you really want to stop mass shootings, get off the news, stop liking causes on facebook, and reach out to a troubled teen.
 
I think Trent said it best, "Nuts".

While my guts hurt when I heard of the kids in CT having been shot, I too wondered what in the world can we do to stop this kind of thing from happening. And up comes some ideas to try to stop this kind of madness, none of them good.

I can honestly say, "I have no idea what will work". But one thing I do know is that I live in an area that has the strongest set of "gun control laws in the nation", Chicago, Illinois and as of midnight today 12-24-2012 there have been over 436 killings and shootings. While that does not minimize those kid's death, it does prove that.

"GUN CONTROL DOES NOT WORK"

Give us the right to carry AND use our guns to protect our family's.

All else is meaningless.
Jim


By the way - MERRY CHRISTMAS.
 
Rocketmedic, thanks for posting - it got me to register so that I could respond. First, let me say your post had a lot of really good points. I do not pretend to be a good writer, but I believe that if you read the message of my post you might find it valuable.

I agree 100% with the following points:
1) The NRA is out of touch - to scapegoat video games is deplorable. Same goes with violent movies, etc. Freedom lovers should stand together instead not fight against each other.
2) Carry should be more generally accepted by society. I think it could alleviate some of the mass shootings that we have seen, I wouldn't call it a solution. If nothing else, you can protect yourself and your family.
3) I do believe that freedom lovers (not just gun owners) should tighten their ranks. There is no place for bigotry, un-educated dribble, or crazy loons.
4) I agree with your premise that I do not want to raise my children in a society of armed guards.

Having said all of that, I think it is unfortunate that even someone as bright as you, with the knowledge that you have of firearms has drawn the conclusions that you have. I think that you represent the ignorance of my (our) generation. Far too many of my friends and loved ones think as you do. I fear that at this point there will be no way to change the tide.

Here are some of my disagreements:
1) Semi-auto guns have been around for about 100 years. Why do we need to ban them now? I would rather have that armed citizen you speak of armed with an AR rather than a handgun. It is a lot easier to take down the bad guy with an AR than a handgun. (I know, it may not be as practical - but what is wrong with it? Would it really be bad for a trained principle to have one locked up in his/her office?)
-If you concede that AR's are more effective killing machines, why not allow the good guy to have one as well? It is nothing more than a tool.
-Not to mention, there are a lot of hunters / ranchers / plinkers who have valid uses.
-If a crazy guy wants to kill a bunch of people he will either get his hands on the illegal hard to get weapons, or use other means to accomplish the same task. (Reference your war on drugs)
-I hope you never find yourself wishing you had an AR. I won't have that problem.

2) I get your whole message on the Tin Foil hat thing - there are a lot of people who take it too far / look for conspiracies in everything. That being said, just look at the trend over the last few years, heck you could make a case for a constant trend since the country was founded. It is a constant struggle to preserve our rights - that battle has done nothing but accelerated. Gun Control is just one example - it's not about solving problems - it's about control. As you say, if they were trying to solve problems, they would have done it differently the first time.

BTW StoneCutter, FDR is no hero. He is directly responsible for a lot of the socialist garbage we deal with today. It doesn't matter if it was well intentioned - he is a joke.

Who ever said they were a fan of Nixon or Reagan? What brought that up? I think Reagan is probably the best we have had in a while, but even he had his faults. But seriously, why the love for Obama - what did he ever do for Gun Rights? Nothing. He has been busy screwing pretty much everything else, don't even get me started on fiscal issues. I would hate to hear your thoughts on Capitalism, Free Markets and the Federal Reserve. I know right, free markets are responsible for the mess we are in, right? We need more regulations to protect us poor middle class consumers. Right?

I have plenty of friends like you. You guys are smart, but you are missing the bigger picture.

3) I think the big problem with Americans these days is that everyone is looking for the easy solution. There is no pill that is going to solve this mass shooting garbage. You can probably make the situation better by eliminating Free Fire Zones. I will concede, gun control legislation may have some positive impact on mass shootings, but at what cost? I have had enough of this damn slippery slope.

4) A free man always has a choice when faced with totalitarianism / socialist garbage. Everyone has to make their own decision. I am not saying the US is there - but is something that a citizen should always be aware of. And no, I would never want to fight against the U.S. Army. That being said, the U.S. Army - and every other like it has always had issues with guerilla warfare. If the time came, I would hope that I would be on the right side of freedom. And no, I do not pretend to be a damn militia man, currently. I do not have any military experience, although I sometimes wish I had received some training. (Maybe part of the solution involves the Swiss / Israeli requirements to serve in the military. Never spent much time digging into this.)

5) I think it is time that Americans take a look at a lot more important things than gun control. Mass shootings are a symptom, it is not the disease. It is akin to a fat guy drinking diet coke, rather than going after the lifestyle solution.

6) I forgot one - who said Mass Shootings were common? Why are we trying to solve the corner case? As long as there is evil in this world, this will happen.

If you can't tell - I am not a fan of Bush (1 or 2) either - before anyone brings them up. The millennial point of view is garbage, and the older generation doesn't have a much better point of view either, in my experience. I guess you could say most people just don't get it. I guess it is not an age thing. The flaw of most young generations is thinking that there view of life is somehow better than the older. There is usually something to be learned from their experience. They have their own issues as well, such as not understanding newer technologies / getting caught up in an old mindset.

As a wise man once said, "Any society that would give up a little liberty to gain a little security will deserve neither and lose both." If you keep your mindset - I hope you lose both. I will continue to seek to preserve mine. The real epidemic here is your way of thinking.

I have spent way too much time on this post, so I am not going to go back through it. Take it for what you will.
 
Last edited:
sar1, Welcome to THR and thank you for your first post. I am sure it will not be your last.

Again Welcome.
Jim
 
The Second Amendment was originally intended to provide Americans with the real and effective means of rebelling against the government and maintaining the arms, ammunition and equipment of a de facto standing army without government intervention. This included private citizens, militia groups, and smaller entities (ie, a Washington politician couldn't disarm a state or local police force, nor a citizen, nor a milita led by a potential political rival). It also enabled effective self-defense.

Were the USA to not have a standing army, a formalized militia (the National Guard), or a complete dependence on our fellow citizens, rebellion could be viable and I would wholeheartedly support a 2nd Amendment as intended. However, we live in the 21st Century.

In 1787, a single man going through an emotional breakdown might be able to kill a few people with firearms. Honestly, a spree killer would do far better with an axe.

Today, without restrictions, some tin-foil-wearing ultraconservative could literally whip up a chemical weapon and nerve-gas a building, or acquire a heavy machine gun and lay waste to a school, or whatever they wanted.

Had the Founders known about modern weapons and their potential for misuse in the hands of a tiny fraction of the populace, I doubt that they would have been as quick to allow modern firepower to be easily owned on the streets of the Republic.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

M
  • Locked
If Anti-Gun $$$ was spent on mental health..
Replies
4
Views
629
Al Thompson
A
ol' scratch
  • Locked
Marcy Kaptur responses to my letter. She supports a ban.
Replies
13
Views
1K
dogtown tom
dogtown tom
A
  • Locked
Is this time different - is this a tipping point?
2 3 4 5 6 7
Replies
157
Views
9K
plinky
P
SSN Vet
  • Locked
a rare dose of common sense...
Replies
1
Views
470
c.latrans
C
B
  • Locked
Should gun owners now be advised NOT to seek mental health help?
2
Replies
43
Views
2K
backbencher
B
Back
Top