Monday, May 12, 2014

look at my gun!


salon |  Imagine you’re sitting in a restaurant and a loud group of armed men come through the door. They are ostentatiously displaying their weapons, making sure that everyone notices them. Would you feel safe or would you feel in danger? Would you feel comfortable confronting them? If you owned the restaurant could you ask them to leave? These are questions that are facing more and more Americans in their everyday lives as “open carry” enthusiasts descend on public places ostensibly for the sole purpose of exercising their constitutional right to do it. It just makes them feel good, apparently.  

For instance, in the wake of the new Georgia law that pretty much makes it legal to carry deadly weapons at all times in all places, parents were alarmed when an armed man showed up at the park where their kids were playing little league baseball and waved his gun around shouting, “Look at my gun!” and “There’s nothing you can do about it.” The police were called and when they arrived they found the man had broken no laws and was perfectly within his rights to do what he did. That was small consolation to the parents, however. Common sense tells anyone that a man waving a gun around in public is dangerous so the parents had no choice but to leave the park.  Freedom for the man with the gun trumps freedom for the parents of kids who feel endangered by him. 

After the Sandy Hook elementary school massacre, open carry advocates decided it was a good idea to descend upon Starbucks stores around the country, even in  Newtown where a couple dozen armed demonstrators showed up, to make their political point. There were no incidents.  Why would there be? When an armed citizen decides to exercise his right to bear arms, it would be reckless to exercise your right to free speech if you disagreed with them. But it did cause the CEO of Starbucks to ask very politely if these gun proliferation supporters would kindly not use his stores as the site of their future “statements.” He didn’t ban them from the practice, however. His reason? He didn’t want to put his employees in the position of having to confront armed customers to tell them to leave. Sure, Starbucks might have the “right” to ban guns on private property in theory, but in practice no boss can tell his workers that they must try to evict someone who is carrying a deadly weapon. 

9 comments:

woodensplinter said...

This would be hilarious if it weren't so sad. You've got active talibanization going on within the polity, including the brandishing of weapons (employers must absolutely love this) - meanwhile - there's the active insurgency still afoot in Nevada. http://bundyranch.blogspot.com/

Constructive_Feedback said...

Brother CNu:

Do you think that Salon.com is going to report on the MURDEROUS WEEKEND in Metro Atlanta in which a 9 month old Black boy was shot to death in a retaliation shooting?

http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-Hb-VIdvXaj4/U3CxKrsOScI/AAAAAAAA6NI/FIYG2alAKNs/s1600/Dekalb+Crime+Spree.png

woodensplinter said...

Boko Infamia "I also don't believe in drugs. For years I paid my people extra so they wouldn't do that kind of business. Somebody comes to them and says, "I have powders; if you put up three, four thousand dollar investment - we can make fifty thousand distributing." So they can't resist. I want to control it as a business, to keep it respectable. I don't want it near schools - I don't want it sold to children! That's an infamia. In my city, we would keep the traffic in the dark people - the colored. They're animals anyway, so let them lose their souls."―Giuseppe Zaluchi[src]http://godfather.wikia.com/wiki/Joseph_Zaluchi



How much did drugs and the illicit drug trade have to do with the destruction of the city of Detroit Constructive Feedback?

CNu said...

Where else have I heard this? Oh yeah..., http://youtu.be/yswEJ81hnWA?t=5m46s

Constructive_Feedback said...

Boko Infamia:

DRUGS IN DETROIT were no more prevalent than lets say "Drugs In Miami".

The point that you seem to be missing, sir, is that as the ESTABLISHMENT MUNICIPAL POWERS were confronted with certain ECONOMIC (not necessarily financial. Think the "SIMS" game of choices and opportunity costs) - they responded in a manner that was PLEASING to the short term affirmations of their congregation but which clearly had a long term detrimental impact.

The fact that the entire ECOSYSTEM of power in the machine RETAINED THEIR POWER AND INFLUENCE tells me that, despite your inference - the Black Rank & File went along with this overlay leadership when they should have regulated them.

I don't see Detroit as a "Black failure". It is a failure of the RANK & FILE to prevent their "Blackness" from being used to disarm them from providing necessary "CONFRONTATIONAL DELIBERATIONS" with those who have a best interest in pretending that they are "Of The People"


Listen to Sharpton's new commercial on MSNBC in which he says "WE have to decide together how our country will be".

HE KNOWS DAMNED WELL that when the shit blows up he is going to STAND AMONG THE CONGREGATION - making sure that they never take a NO CONFIDENCE VOTE against him and other embedded confidence men.

woodensplinter said...

How do you know how prevalent drugs have been in Detroit? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Detroit_Partnership Not looking to oversimplify here Constructive Feedback, but mafia leadership in Detroit has been continuous for generations with a specific focus on narcotics importation.

One wonders to what extent the timeline of Detroit's collapse coincides with drug transit through the area. http://subrealism.blogspot.com/2013/07/why-detroit-failed-peak.html

Obviously, a host of factors conspired to make Detroit a poster child for collapse and failure http://subrealism.blogspot.com/search?q=detroit

CNu said...

Embrace the Khyber states of Uhmurka http://subrealism.blogspot.com/2009/02/khyber-rifles.html

DD said...

Winner of the day. Always interesting to see what catches the knitting team's eye. Never the posts I like.

Socially, we are going into what Charles shows in this picture. I think "we," the paper pushers, are still winning handily.

http://www.oftwominds.com/blogdec10/lifecycle-bureaucracy12-10.html

CNu said...

I get to observe the lifecycle of uselessness at a "high-frequency trader" tempo and scale. Being responsible for carrier circuits, all switching and routing over both wide and local areas, what hangs off of and depends on the availability and integrity of that network, and providing services in real-time down to every last device in every last vest pocket and pocketbook of the top bureaucrats.

Let them be stuck in yet another neverending useless meeting, mobbing sixty devices to a single wireless access point and their online shopping, gaming, chatting, or pron surfing be disrupted for even a minute. You'd think that boko haram had showed up brandishing AK's.

Weather's giving HVAC in the old buildings a fit, but I have my own brand new and independent AC in the data center. So, yesterday at the crack of dawn, I go into a building that feels like the inside of somebody's mouth, my first stop is to check on the state of the data center. I swipe my badge and am greeted by that inimitable coolth that exists only where meat is hung or servers are chilled.

The amount of energy being squandered to support all those circuits, servers, switches and devices, and in turn, the useless, real-time pud-pulling subserved by all those circuits, servers, and switches and devices - is absolutely staggering. Bottomline DD - the question of unprofitable, food-powered, make-work almost always hits too close to home for folks to seriously examine it. Better we should distract ourselves with bonobo amusements that don't make us look too closely at the monkey in the mirror.

Master Arbitrageur Nancy Pelosi Is At It Again....,

🇺🇸TUCKER: HOW DID NANCY PELOSI GET SO RICH? Tucker: "I have no clue at all how Nancy Pelosi is just so rich or how her stock picks ar...