The Millennial Point of View

[Cosmoline]

I, for one, would support a tiered addition of semi-automatic firearms with detachable magazines onto the NFA registry, in exchange for constitutionally-guaranteed carry, ammunition, and acquisition protections for all firearms on a federal level.

You're falling into the trap of blaming the tool. If you're shooting up a grade school you can use any firearm. They can't fight back. You can use an axe. And while some psycho killers like to use one type of weapon, others like to try different things. Trying to craft nationwide policy based on their preferences is fruitless. They can be inspired to kill by their breakfast cereal's noises. That's not a sound basis for public policy.

How appropriate that these words, written in 1998, have come to pass

? Actually he was way off the mark. We didn't create a generation of killers. Violent crime rates have continued to drop since 98, with a small recent uptick since the recession. The big danger to video games is they lead to eating too many snacks. Grossman's science was off and his conclusions were bogus. Also there is no such thing as "killology".

The OP is correct that the video game debate was over long ago. Grossman and Tipper Gore lost. My condolences. To revive it NOW, using rhetoric at least 20 years old, has struck me as extremely ill-advised. But it may be that the NRA has some scheme here to throw in something so bizarre that it distracts the antis. They are easily distracted. And indeed this past week they seem to have lost much of their momentum.

So heck, if it helps get things off rails then I'll retract my claim that Wayne needs a halibut slap. But we definitely need to remember that the video game wars are long over. There's no real point in arguing anymore. The games won! They won in the legislatures, they won in the courts and they won in the marketplace. Not a bad model for us to follow, come to think of it.

 

[Ragnar Danneskjold]

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.

Rocketmedic, thank you for answering my question and revealing yourself. If anyone had any doubts about whether you were truly a statist and an anti before, I think you just cleared them up.

You pretty much just stated that you do not trust the American people with the very weapons they would need to preserve their own liberty. And that you do not truly believe that the Constitution should be our guide on determining gun rights. Your ideas are the very antithesis to the Constitution you swore to preserve protect and defend. Rocketmedic, in another time your uniform would be red.

 

[kwguy]

To OP

Two phrases come to mind right now:

1. Those who do not learn from the past are doomed to repeat it.

2. Some people can't see the forest for the trees.

To dismiss those that are older than us out of hand, simply because of some percieved "old guy" nonsense is plain silly. Granted, there are some older people out there who are clueless, just as there are (clearly) some of the younger generation who are clueless as well. To blow off older people, just because they are older is silly. We can use their knowledge and historical insight. To ignore it is to repeat the same mistakes.

I love it (not really) when people try to parse the words and thoughts of the people who wrote the second amendment. Who CARES about the weapons used at the time? Heck, there were multi-barreled flintlocks back then. And large cannon. Compared to the matchlock of prior generations, or the bows and arrows prior to then, each improvement in weapons technology was more destructive than the last.

Do you really think these guys (founders) didn't know about the march of technology? I mean, Ben Franklin was a scientist. They were ALL extremely intelligent. I would LOVE to see one of them match wits with the clowns we have in office today. Of COURSE they knew that technology would march on. In ALL things, including weapons. It didn't matter. It's a matter of context.

The founding fathers intent was that the people could protect themselves, even from the tyrannies of a hostile government. Types of weapons don't matter. They didn't mix crime into the equation, because they KNEW crime was always there anyway. It's not like 18th century America, or Europe before that, was devoid of crime.

Even before firearms, tyrannies limited the weapons of their subjects (swords, bows, arrows, etc). Even the Greeks knew that disarming the people was a method of subjugating them. Even though there were no internet blogs in the 18th century, we know what they (founders) thought. How? They published all of the debates and thoughts on the subjects at hand. The Federalist Papers would be a good place to start reading.

This was nothing new, historically, and it still isn't anything new today. Centuries ago, freedom lay on the edge of a blade, then the head of an arrow. Now it's in the barrels of a gun. Don't believe me, look at the middle east right now (Egypt, for what THAT'S worth). Do you really think you can win independence with FACEBOOK / TWITTER, and not weapons? And guess what? Murders were commited with swords, arrows, flintlocks, rocks, and now guns. And they will be with particle weapons as well. We have a judicial system to deal with that, if only we would actually USE it.

Those that want to limit arms only want control. How do I know? What person in his right mind would actually outlaw large soft drinks? WOW! Only a control freak would do such a thing. How is protecting our kids with armed security somehow "crazy", but outlawing soda is not?

Give the "old guys" some credit. We are not any different today than we were 200 years ago. It's all a matter of context.

 

[larryh1108]

But we definitely need to remember that the video game wars are long over. There's no real point in arguing anymore. The games won! They won in the legislatures, they won in the courts and they won in the marketplace. Not a bad model for us to follow, come to think of it.

Substitute guns for the word(s) video games and you have the same situation, yet they continue to try to take away the guns....

 

[76shuvlinoff]

kwguy, the OP should print that off and frame it, hell I think I will too.


I won't bother with my race, education, or financial background. I'm just one of those guys that aren't qualified to protect myself because a younger brighter sort is out there that feels totally at ease making my decisions for me (and everyone). I can't be trusted with things that go boom or have sharp edges.

Reminds me of the oxymoron,

I'm from the government and I'm here to help



.

 

[LNK]

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.

I am pretty sure you said you voted for the current President. So it looks like you will be fixing your own problems....

LNK

 

[Hacker15E]

This is precisely the type of thing that is going to divide America to the point that a slim majority will vote to suppress/infringe the rights of all of us.

 

[Ragnar Danneskjold]

Hacker, they have been doing so for quite some time. We're just so close to losing everything that we're finally really starting to notice.

 

[76shuvlinoff]

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.

I wasn't going respond directly to this but what the hell.

Are you serious? There has never been a more apathetic "me first" time than the era we are living in now. I will leave it there.

Have a great Christmas.

 

[Ragnar Danneskjold]

Well it's typical Leftism at it's finest. "My ideas are better because they're my ideas. But if you say your ideas are better because they're yours, you're just being selfish."

 

[meanmrmustard]

I am pretty sure you said you voted for the current President. So it looks like you will be fixing your own problems....

LNK

I think he means our kids will be paying to fix HIS problems.

In which case, probably right.

 

[meanmrmustard]

I wasn't going respond directly to this but what the hell.

Are you serious? There has never been a more apathetic "me first" time than the era we are living in now. I will leave it there.

Have a great Christmas.

That's why Millenials were thusly and aptly nicknamed the "Me First" Generation.

One thing that has never changed for Boomers, Gen X, or the like is that more government equates to less liberties.

I love age discrimination, it keeps old guys on their toes trying to keep up, and has the young guys learning from the past.

Right up until you get to Millenials; foolish notions of a suit clad savior sitting in the White House ready to grab guns, tax those that create the jobs, and is ironing his socks in preparation for his next golf outing that is going to save the world. His speeches inspire the figuratively blind while that right-hand thumb he waves around so much is trying to hitch a ride to Realityville. The bus never shows up, though.

I say to you, Rocket Medic: There was no crushing landslide. But there was a defeat. We've defeated our own country, our chance at greatness by allowing a crooked man back into that office. The young are partly to blame, because they are fools and do not listen in History 101. When you voted, made your choice for your second election, you voted for regression and failure.

When Obama asked if you would help change this nation with him, he really meant for you and the other lemmings to help destroy it. In which case the herd answered back:

"Yes We Can!"

 

[freyasman]

to the OP...

Rocketmedic, earlier in this thread, I spoke up to defend your right to post and share your views; I'm regretting that now. You have continued to disrespect the other posters and in doing so have lost any chance that anyone here will seriously consider anything you say. It took me a long time to learn it, too, but.... "Attitude is Everything"!!! Now go sit somewhere and be quiet, grown folks are talking.

 

[larryh1108]

My kids will still be fixing your problems.

...from their skills acquired by playing video games with you.

Seriously, every generation has said the same thing about the previous generation. However, the man you voted for president has probably done the most damage to the current state we are in than any other in our history.

 

[LNK]

Heck, my oldest is 25, and she is in the Air Force and doesn't have this attitude. Next one is 18 and he is in the Marine corps, and doesn't have this attitude. I wonder where the OP got his? A little too much disrespect for me. Needs a good whippin' with a switch...

LNK

 

[meanmrmustard]

Heck, my oldest is 25, and she is in the Air Force and doesn't have this attitude. Next one is 18 and he is in the Marine corps, and doesn't have this attitude. I wonder where the OP got his? A little too much disrespect for me. Needs a good whippin' with a switch...

LNK

Gotta be a green one though!

 

[Atbat82]

I don't really have much to add that hasn't already been stated. But I did want to chime in and say that I'm a 27 years old white guy (though no one would put my mug on a poster for anything) and I do not share the OPs view. To say it is the "millennial" view is to ignore a large section of us who vote against Obama twice, who demand smaller government, and who have read and witnessed enough history to know what "compromising" on gun control really means.

Merry Christmas!


Sent from my iPhone

 

[Ragnar Danneskjold]

Well I just turned 29, I'm also in the Army, in law enforcement, LOVE video games (just finished another play-through of the Mass Effect trilogy) and I disagree with everything the OP said except for his defense of gaming. His views do NOT represent our age group as a whole.

 

[Steve CT]

"I love age discrimination, it keeps old guys on their toes trying to keep up, and has the young guys learning from the past."

Well, I'm on my toes, and the OP isn't learning from the past.

He is batting .500 in this respect, and in baseball that makes him a Superstar, but baseball IS a game, and Constitutional Rights (all of them) are NOT a game

 

[jim243]

Rocketmedic, here's my suggestion (from one of the old guys (me)), get yourself a clip board and print up what's called a nominating pettion and start going door to door to get signatures (must be of registered voters) so you can run for the House of Representitives in 2014. You may just be of age by then to hold that office, you are not now old enough if you are just turning 24. Then go out and start getting donations of funds for your campaign. Spend the next two years trying to get support for your election to office, research your opponent's point of view and policies, go to teas, schools and public meetings and talk with the people to get their's. Get yourself put on the ballot then start advertising. State your case why you should be elected over and over and over and over again.

Then get elected. At that point you can tell me what I can or can not do with my guns.

If I could do it so can you, and yes I was elected to public office and did serve as a representitive of the people. Talk is cheap, get off your butt and do something about it, just make sure you know what you are getting yourself into.

Jim

 

[meanmrmustard]

"I love age discrimination, it keeps old guys on their toes trying to keep up, and has the young guys learning from the past."

Well, I'm on my toes, and the OP isn't learning from the past.

He is batting .500 in this respect, and in baseball that makes him a Superstar, but baseball IS a game, and Constitutional Rights (all of them) are NOT a game

Then only one of you is paying attention. Judging by your post, you obviously understand that our rights are not a game, not something to be taken lightly or just given away. Look up the definition of Millenial, and you'll see that they, as a whole, respect authority. Even an authority that abuses its power.

Congrats on being the 50% of that conversed upon that's in the know!

 

[Resist Evil]

Aaahh, the arrogance of youth.

Liberty is useless without virtue. American virtue has been on the downswing, in earnest, since the Vietnam War. And we've yet to see its nadir. This thread has been an exercise about how and why to restrict Liberty from an immature point of view. Adults (reaching adulthood is not strictly limited to those of a certain calendar age, IMO) have spoken up and have received careless disrespect in return.

Some people only learn practical lessons of life by being burned by the fires they set in the ignorant enthusiasm of youth. The unfortunate part is that so many others get burned in the process sometimes. Of course, as in video games, they are dismissed as merely collateral damage.

It must be a terrible burden to be the hero of your own game.

 

[redneckrepairs]

" There are three kinds of men. The one that learns by reading. The few who learn by observation. The rest of them have to pee on the electric fence for themselves." Will Rogers

Clearly born out on this thread .

 

[Kansan]

A few comments in response to the OP:

1. I agree with you that we should stop accepting bigots and fools into our ranks. Considering your attitude towards your elders, I hereby do not accept you into our ranks.

2. I agree with your comments on the failure of mental asylums of the past century but I think your credibility as an advocate for effective treatment is weakened by your usage of the word "retard" as a pejorative.

3. You mentioned that militias are no match for the US Army. I too am a veteran and I'm writing this from Afghanistan. I hate to break it to you, but there are dudes out here running around in sandals and robes with AK-47s who are showing no signs of leaving after 11 years of getting punched in the face by the US Army. I bet some of the older generation could tell us something similar about the Vietcong, if we take the time to listen.

4. Speaking of old timers,

Give my generation a reason to respect your opinions and you'll have our support

Who are you talking to? Are you talking to the generation that saved Western Civilization from Nazis and Communists and invented sliced bread? Maybe you're talking to the generation that fought the Korean war or the Vietnam war? Or the generation that sent a man to the moon and defeated the Soviet Union? Or maybe you're talking to the generation right before yours who were fighting in Iraq and Afghanistan while you were still in middle school playing video games that an older generation invented for you. You're welcome. Respect is a two way street, young pup. Some of your generation have done real well, but I wouldn't put voting in Obama and "breaking" Mitt Romney on the top of your list of achievements.

5. One mass killing that I haven't seen mentioned is the Rwandan Genocide. One of the largest mass killings in recent history, somewhere between 500,000 and 1,000,000 people were killed, mostly with machetes. People don't need AR-15s or semi-automatic weapons to kill large numbers of their fellow human beings, they just need to act on their evil nature. I wonder how many would have been saved if every Tutsi had had an AR-15 in their house...

 

[SuperNaut]

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.

And the false flag cycle is complete.