Tuesday, January 14, 2014

I'm not sure how I feel about this...

So, somebody or another had a link up to a provocatively-titled hit piece called "The Startling Paranoia of the Gun-Loving 'Armed Mommy'", and I followed the link, expecting to point and laugh at the anti-rights types getting the vapors over a woman daring to think her children were worth protecting.

The article is chock-a-block with Facebook internet "posters" of women holding guns variously captioned
  • "Don't be fooled by that sweet smile... She'll shoot you dead if you mess with her family"

  • "I don't call 911so there won't be anyone to save you if you break into my house."

  • "My gun is loaded with Christmas cheer... in case you had plans to break in this year."
Okay, anybody could go cherry pick a few posters to make it sound like these people spend an inordinate amount of time coming up with new daily variations on clever ways to talk about shooting home invaders. Let's go check the Facebook page for ourselves.

Let's see... Pictures of people with guns, political stuff, abortion and global warming, the usual background noise of the parts of the web I'm most often on... and... again:
  • "How do I feel about gun control? Break into my house one night and find out!" 
Pictures of people posing with targets, NFL playoff chatter, anti-Obama immigration jokes, and... again:
  • "Why a handgun that shoots shotgun shells? Because wrong house motherf***er". 
And... again:


Jesus wept.

Did George Zimmerman get horsewhipped through the public square in vain?

I mean, look... I own a pistol and have a carry permit. I carry that pistol with me everywhere I go. I have spent a not-inconsiderable amount of time and money learning how and when to use it, and I've spent a fair amount of thought on why. I would like to think that implicit in these facts is what I would do with it should someone threaten my life and/or limb. But I do have one or two other topics of conversation I sometimes touch lightly on, you know?

Conversely, well... Gosh, where could that liberal writer have gotten the idea that the author of that FB page was a little obsessed with the idea of shooting people breaking into her house?

In the end, I'm torn. I'm always glad to see more people taking their Second Amendment rights seriously and getting hip to the idea of taking responsibility for their own safety, but at the same time, I'm vaguely squicked, and I can't put my finger on exactly why...

102 comments:

GreatBlueWhale said...

God forbid she should actually have to defend herself. The prosecutor will eat her alive, and the jury will pass him the salt and pepper.

Scott J said...

"Did George Zimmerman get horsewhipped through the public square in vain?"

Not even giving any of your readers the chance to win the internets today, huh?

LCB said...

Great Blue Whale beat me to it. Mentally, there's no point in carrying if you're not going to be willing to defend yourself or your family. (Yeah, I know. None of us know how we'll react. But we should at least THINK about it.)

But when you put a sign on the door that says, "This house protected by my .44"...you're asking for a ton of legal trouble if you ever DO have to defend yourself.

Bob said...

I can't put my finger on exactly why...

Oikophobia, perhaps?

Ancient Woodsman said...

Your paragraph that begins with, "I mean, look..." says most all I'd want to say to someone about me being armed. Frankly, I'd prefer that most everyone not have a clue that I'm armed, and there are folks in the family that don' even know about personal arms - although they know about the work arms - or that work or play, I'm armed about 24 hours a day.

I guess where sites like the one you mentioned rub me the wrong way is that from my end, advocating for personal arms & responsibility among those who are scared of or simply hate such things for no reason (or their reason in nefarious) does not go well if I rub it in their face.

I do think that there are many who scream to the heavens that the, "only permit needed is the 2nd Amendment!!11!" who frankly aren't helping us at all.

Woodman said...

Why do people take pictures like that with the bipod down? Seriously, if you are in the prone taking a shot at 400 yards, is it home invasio/self defense time?

Its obvious they've never tried to do anything with it down, those damn things catch on things that aren't even there.

As far as the message, its no worse than Uncle Joe's shoot them through the door mentality I guess. But also keep in mind that the person in the picture likely has no idea what someone would put on it. So, who would be eaten alive in court? And if I like the picture bcause I like, guns, open carry, or hip hugger pants, does that mean I'm dead meat if I ever shoot someone?

Tam said...

Bob,

Are you fucking retarded?

Boat Guy said...

My squick (and suspect some of yours) comes from;
1. Unnecessary and
2. Arrogant
I'm all for folks BEING badass, but taking out full-page ads to show how badass you are is, at the least, in poor taste.

Tam said...

Woodman,

"As far as the message, its no worse than Uncle Joe's shoot them through the door mentality I guess."

Or, as we like to call it, a gross Rule 4 violation and possibly negligent homicide.

JD said...

"I'm vaguely squicked, and I can't put my finger on exactly why... "

Admit it, it's the belt isn't it.

Matt said...

If someone wants to post pictures like that on the public setting of their Facebook page I don't get my back up over it. I don't go looking for them and seldom chase links decrying offense about someone's facebook page. I do find them generally tacky and don't appreciate the profanity, but each to their own, I don't have to look. Even if these people don't seem to be serious enough about firearms or might not be well trained, they at least willing to declare their support for guns and the gun culture (opsec violations aside) even if it is in a tacky manner.

Even though I don't care for it, I don't see it as something wrong ar as neccesarily damaging to the "cause." As far as it being used against them for future prosecution, depends purely on the jurisdiction and political climate at the time.

Reno Sepulveda said...

That whole penis substitute narrative overused as it is, is there for a reason. There's a ring of truth to it.

You look at the last 20 pages of most any gun magazine and you'll find ads all kinds of vaguely squickey stuff. Those ads are there for a reason too.

azmountaintroll said...

The overall impression I get is, "Trying too hard."

Robert Langham said...

I bet a vigorous defense lawyer could work with it. Fair warning not to trespass or assault, first amendment rights, A woman defending home and hearth. 2nd amendment rights. Still....I wouldn't suggest this approach.

And like they say in the Hunger Games....let's don't forget who the REAL enemy is.

Mike Gallo said...

She might be taking the ARfcom tact, and assuming that no one looking at that picture will see the writing or guns. Said otherwise: "Ayup, Tam is straight."

Farm.Dad said...

" but at the same time, I'm vaguely squicked, and I can't put my finger on exactly why... "
Possibly because you are fairly familiar with another " Armed Mommy" or in this case Armed Grandmaw here in Colorado who doesn't need the flamboyance and attention .

BryanP said...

Just once I'd like to see a variation of that sort of picture. Only this one will show safe gun handling and say something like "Please don't break into my house. Neither of us will have a good time, and personally I'd like to go to my grave having never pulled the trigger against anything more offensive than a B27 target."

LCB said...

Another reason it bothers me is OpSec. I don't WANT the bad guys knowing I have guns. And a certain element of bad guys DO search social media for places to hit. I have to yell at mey kids "Do NOT put on Facebook when you're going on vacation!" My kids aren't dumb...but still get that deer in the headlight look.

Tim D said...

@BryanP

So more along the lines of what Oleg does?

Tim D said...

@BryanP

So more along the lines of what Oleg does?

Paul said...

These things give me the squiks because they seem eager to take a life.

The other thing is that this is most likely a model, not a mom. Unless she had a c-section. So now we have to be concerned about who is making this message.

I would rather not think about these things, but sometimes you don't get to do what you would prefer.

Primitive Sam said...

l'd guess that she likes posting photos of herself in tight clothes and she thinks "sassy kick-ass grrl-power" slogans are "cute" and "fun" and "empowering".

I think she's playing dress up. If an actress in the movies can have fun playing the "kick ass babe" trope/character why can't she? Can't she have moxie too?


Maybe you're squicked because you're not retarded.

Anonymous said...

Again with the boots.

Why is nearly every woman in this country taking English riding lessons?

Shootin' Buddy

Tam said...

I don't know; it's complicated.

On the one hand, my roommate teases me because any time we're in a hardware department and she's looking at tools, she'll find me hefting some implement or another and muttering "Man, you could really f$ck somebody up with this thing."

On the other, I'm more than half-joking when I say it. I don't spend my days talking about how much I'm just itching to bust a cap in some dude's ass because frankly, I'm not.

Sport Pilot said...

I believe the Indicated gun packin mama FB page and its mindset is much akin to the self gratification of Open Carry. It’s feeding antigun paranoia as well as encouraging like behavior for the equally gullible pro-gun side. What’s absent is the common sense to choose words wisely, consideration of consequences and understanding gained through experience. Maturity doesn’t always equate with reasonability.

Woodman said...

I would think that an ass shot would be both difficult to make and defend as self defense anyway. Uncle Sam taught me center mass.

Though actually, I guess as people get bigger and bigger center mass could be an ass shot.

staghounds said...


Col. Cooper also said that a pistol gives its holder the power of Jove- to point the hand and destroy.

Of course it's both ordinary and squicky that some people are eager to use that power. Some people who just bought Porsches want to drive fast, too. That's not squicky because the fantasy isn't entwined with death.

Lots of fairly usual human desires are squicky, and most of them we have the good taste and sense to keep quiet to the general public about. I wish these people would, it gives our enemies a perfectly legitimate stick with which to hit us.

mikee said...

In the US, we aren't supposed to post "Beware of Dog" signs on our fence gates because if Dog bites someone, the sign can be used as evidence that you knew it was dangerous.

I will admit my dogs are stupid, but I've never seen them be violent. I'd like to warn folks they may be slobbered half to death if they go in my yard, and will definitely leave in need of a lint brush to remove the fur, but I have to let unannounced guests take their chances because lawsuits.

So it is with armed mommy. She is advertising something that is useful for her to say to herself, and maybe even fun/useful to say to strangers, but such things are just not done these days without enormous risk in the future.

Scott J said...

"personally I'd like to go to my grave having never pulled the trigger against anything more offensive than a B27 target"

This! I told someone once who asked about my carry in light of my Christianity and how I should rely on God's protection.

I said I carry every day and pray He always steers me away from situations where I might have to shoot anything other than paper (or steel :) )

Goober said...

I’ve spent the vast majority of my time as an armed American praying that I’ll never have to use my weapon to effect.

I like shooting at the range. If I die having never shot at anything but game and targets, I’ll die happy.

I can’t imagine people being that damn itchy to shoot somebody, even justifiably, that it takes up that much of their thought process and requires a facebook page. I think that’s why you’re squicked, Tam, because you recognize that these folks don’t even understand what they are talking about.

Look at what happens to people that use their weapon to defend themselves. This is not something that you should aspire to. My father in law ended up having to sell his house and move away because they managed to catch the guys that broke into his house and tried to kill him. FIL didn’t have anything to do with it. The only part he played was to stand there dumbfounded after they held the gun to his head and pulled the trigger and it didn’t go off (they’d forgotten to chamber a round). They ran away because they couldn’t get the gun to work, and FIL picked up a hatchet and went after them with it. The police caught them days later, and the thugs’ friends and family blamed FIL and harassed and threatened him to the point to where he had to move out of fear for his life.

Imagine what they’d have done if he’d actually killed one of them!

perlhaqr said...

I'm thinking at least in part it's because you've been friends with Oleg for N years, and have thus got a tremendous background quotient of "pointed advocacy done well", which this compares very unfavorably towards.

Also, it's sick when the antis dance in the blood, and no less sickening (and possibly more so) when one of 'ours' gives the impression of lacing up the dancing shoes?

Chas Clifton said...

Oleg Volks' photos work better, I suggest, because he creates more realistic, if imagined, scenarios — a female Russian partisan in WW2 or whatever.

This photo, as noted by Woodman, is completely unrealistic. So what we are getting is that sex/death borderland, which can be fascinating, taboo, transgressive, and "squicky."

There are entire, often NSFW, websites devoted to that women-and-guns theme, as you probably know!

Joseph said...

I feel like this sort of thing eludes to the person's feeling of inadequacy. Much like the pro athlete who mocks his opponent by mimicking the rival's signature celebration.

Or like The 'Schofield Kid' from Unforgiven, who kept boasting about killing while you could tell William Munny (Clint) was loath to talk or boast about the deed? Yeah, that.

Ancient Woodsman said...

Something else about this causes the squickage in me, and it comes from the same place as the following which also causes great squick:

Seeing a firefighter's vehicle with a large rear-window decal that shouts, "I fight what you fear,," or "I dance with dragons," along with the $1700.00 Whelen Edge bar on his $1200.00 used pickup.

The off-duty police officer who wears the, "Some heroes wear capes. I wear Kevlar," tee-shirt to the church picnic, or who has the, "My other car is a police interceptor," license plate frame, and not only open carries off duty but has his handcuffs openly carried off duty, too.

If one is to flame the above, fwiw I've been full-time state LEO for 22+ years and one time (long ago) was the most highly trained firefighter in my state for six years running.

These people exist, just as the mommies who post such drivel on Facebook or the Cletii who have the, "Insured by S&W," window clings. I'm sure they serve a purpose beyond making me cringe, but I haven't quite figured it out yet beyond the fact that there is always a far left side to any bell curve.

LCB said...

Scott,
I said I carry every day and pray He always steers me away from situations where I might have to shoot anything other than paper (or steel)

I used to struggle with this to the point were I don't think I would have defended myself if it meant taking another life. My family, yes! But I don't see my life as more valuable than someone else’s.

But then it occurred to me that if I didn't stop a young punk when I could have, any crime he commits later on would be partially my fault for taking "the easy" way out. That's just my code, not necessarily my Christianity!

So I've decided that I'll go down swinging no matter what. And I also know it will probably mess me up real good inside. But I'll deal with it if I have to. I just hope and pray that I never have to.

Earl said...

I spend too much time looking at Facegbook, but.. the posers with the firearms I look first for the arm, then the person and then discount the whole effort unless the firearm is worthy, the person of interest... which normally means I don't read deeper. I like seeing pictures of hunters, and shooters at ranges, with smiles or targets they like.

But the ones trying to make a point about how bad they are - reminds me of Generals that make an entire army wear berets, thinking that was what made Rangers special... looks don't win wars, defend homes, nor scare the really bad guys. Pictures posted are poor art at best.

There is no living with a killing.

Anonymous said...

I completely understand how you feel. Part of me says she is a gun owner and proud of it and that's cool, the other part feels unease about the message. It is just seems unnecessary to me.

Like your story about thinking of alternate uses for hardware, it's harmless among friends who are in on the joke, but sketchy when you throw it in the face of strangers.

Corey

Boat Guy said...

"... much akin to the self gratification of Open Carry. It’s feeding antigun paranoia as well as encouraging like behavior for the equally gullible pro-gun side. "

Ah, jeez; Again? Still?
To quote the bard - but for SportPilot
"Are you fucking retarded? "

Woodman said...

I've always had an issue with terms like "goblin" for the bad guy. This isn't the military where I'm at war with someone just because they don't dress like me, I don't need to dehumanize anyone here to get over defending myself, they've already done that themselves.

OTOH, its shorthand for bad guy, attacker, assailant, whatever, and most people know what someone means when they say it.

Woodman said...

Is a hot chick, or dude, with a sword squicky?

Joseph said...

LOL, of course I meant allude, not elude. Dammit Tam! Aren't you supposed to edit these things?

Tam said...

Woodman,

"Is a hot chick, or dude, with a sword squicky?"

Depends. Is it captioned "I'm dyin' to see if this thing'll really decapitate somebody, so you better not be thinking about breaking into my castle!"

Then it's not only squicky, but also kinda sad in a goofy SCAdian way...

Sport Pilot said...

No BG I haven’t any mental impairments, how so yourself? That Open Carry is legal in many locations is a non issue so long as those who choose to do so in fact do just that. It still doesn’t make it prudent or tactically correct. I spent the largest part of a law enforcement career training in, researching and instructing officer survival, defensive tactics and conflict management.
LEO’s are every bit as bad as the general public about showing off that pistol on their side when off duty. Often as not in defiance of departmental policies to keep their off duty handgun concealed. I’ve seen many a HCP openly wearing a handgun not attracting notice. I’ve also observed HCP holders attempting concealed carry draw attention to the fact they are armed.
How you carry yourself, what you’re carrying and how it’s carried go a long way towards normality. Audacity can derive from inexperience, compliancy or hard won self confidence of long experience. Choose wisely and bear in mind another thing Tam wrote a while back pertaining to wearing a gun and wearing a gun at someone.

Scott J said...

"I've always had an issue with terms like "goblin" for the bad guy"

That never has bothered me because as you point out once they have elected to cross that line to prey on fellow humans they IMO declare themselves to be other than human so we need a term to sum that up.

Keith said...

I'm not sure if goblin is better or worse than it's often used counterpart "tango". Unless you've got Al-queda in your living room your not going to be "engaging" any "tangos"

Sean D Sorrentino said...

I don't see the problem. It looks like this is a big fat middle finger to the anti-gunners. Does anyone here question the need to give the anti-gunners a big fat middle finger?

Why do we demand that everyone who "represents" us be just like us or use the same approved tactics as us? The reason the antis hate her is that she is telling them "GFY." It has nothing to do with the gun, but everything to do with her refusal to let them control her. She is waiving her gun in the (would be) tyrants' faces.

And they need to see that.

Matthew said...

"...we'll put a boot in your ass; it's the American way"

Same same, braggadocio just like the cop/firefighter/military moto tee-shirts and decals mentioned above. Designed to make your lizard brain say "fuck yeah!"

The problem comes when the singer/wearer/decal-er doesn't realize the proper context and audience for such things aren't everywhere and everyone, respectively.

Out of context that stuff lacks dignity, but I trend toward supercilious and snooty.

texas rodent said...

All those photos just remind me of a bunch of refugees from the Dillon catalog covers. At least those gals at Dillon got paid for posing.

Tam said...

Sean D. Sorrentino,

"Why do we demand that everyone who "represents" us be just like us or use the same approved tactics as us?"

I do not, and you misunderstand me if you think I do.

Let me ask you an honest question: Are you dyin' to try out your gun on an intruder?

Sean D Sorrentino said...

Tam: It wasn't you specifically that was directed at, but more at those in this thread who seem to be making more of a "class" and "she's not one of us" sort of argument. She doesn't bother me. I think it's funny. I also really like the fact that she's giving the middle finger to the antis.

Am I dyin' to off someone? No. But I'm also not afraid to let people know that if they try my door, I'm going to give them the good news.

Matthew said...

Just over at Bitter and Sebastian's; might this also be a side effect of the "new normalcy?"

We have tens of thousands of new gun owners and shooters who are in the "enthusiastic but ignorant" phase, who start out with all the rights those of us who have been doing it for a couple decades fought for all at once.

Literally kids in the candy store or teens with the keys to their folks car and a shiny new licence, and every bit of social media available for yhem to trumpet their learning curve and missteps.

Glocktalk, High Road, TFL and my local gun stores were where I did my socializing into the gun world, when I showed my ass it was only to other more experienced gunnies, not the world and particularly not a bunch of anti-gunners on the defensive culturally just looking for "bad examples" to trumpet as the norm.

Tam said...

I understand that you enjoy going to Joyce-funded sites and arguing with retards, and anything that makes them uncomfortable makes makes you happy, and that's cool.

What I am very specifically discussing here is a person who has constructed a web persona that any wet-behind-the-ears law school grad could hold up in front of a jury and paint her as a loony who positively gets off on the idea of hopefully having to shoot someone.

It's the difference between a blog recording DGU incidents, and a blog that startes every day off with "Nobody better **** break into my house today or I'll ****in' kill 'em!"

One is about self-defense and the other sounds like that creepy dude with the switchblade from Stripes and makes me want to say "Lighten up, Frances; nobody's gonna touch your stuff."

neal said...

It is just a person with a gun. Maybe I would have included children, and neighbors to be protected, for some context. Stripping self preservation out of context is just another glamour shot. Marketing people are all about unenlightened self interest, works for cars, and makeup, but weapons need to have the greater good to be understood for what they really are.

Tam said...

neal,

"It is just a person with a gun."

I am running out of different ways to say this:

It is not just a picture of a person with a gun. It is not just a picture of a woman with a gun. I could care less about all that. For Christ's sake, there's a picture of a woman with a gun right to the right of this comment. See?

It's a picture of a person with a gun that is captioned "I'm just dyin' to try this thing out."

Could that be described as malice aforethought?


LCB said...

Tam,
Yes!

Next question!

I wonder if some of our differences, those of us that an issue with this, and those who are all "F' yeah, you tell 'em." has to do with age (mental, not physical.) I don't need to beat my chest to be a man. But as John Wayne once said, "I will not be touched!"

LCB said...

Oops...for shame...I got the quote wrong:
I won't be laid a-hand on.

Woodman said...

Is there a way to express confidence and a willingness to defend oneself without coming across as bloodthirsty? Especially if you are enthusiastic about it?

Is getting pumped up about your ability to defend yourself and others a valid technique to prepare for doing so? Though, if that's the point why plaster it all over the internet.

Is this just the flip side of the cold dead hands comments?

Sport Pilot said...

Point well made Miss Tam...

Scott J said...

"there's a picture of a woman with a gun right to the right of this comment"

Actually on my phone it's on the left.

Just keeping your Indian name fresh in your mind :)

Tam said...

Woodman,

I believe I'm well on record as to my opinions of those who seem to get a chubby at the idea of a civil war in this country, like it'd be some fantasy Red Dawn summer camp for big boys.

staghounds said...

The answer is YES. Or if not malice, certainly as probative of a reckless state of mind about death of others, and by extension to the tools and behavior that cause it.

I had an "accidental" homicide case once. Bunch of fools, one had a gun and started showing it off, then started pointing it at the others. One said "You don't have the balls to shoot me", at which point "the gun went off" in an "accident".

Shooter had one of those "serenity prayers" in the refrigerator, ending with "And the wisdom to hide the bodies of the people who piss me off."

He plead guilty, but that funny little note would not have helped him at trial.

And,

"She is waiving (sic) her gun in the (would be) tyrants' faces."

Waving a gun at would be tyrants just inflames them.

Waving a gun at the undecided scares them. Middle fingers are for childish losers.

Be Rosa Parks not Malcom X.

LCB said...

Woodsman,
Is this just the flip side of the cold dead hands comments?

I'm not comfortable with even THAT saying. I support everything the Gadsen flag stands for...but won't put it on my bumper sticker or fly it in front of my house.

When I see a Gadsen flag I'm 99.9 percent sure the person has a gun in his vehicle. If I'm a crook that makes that car a target. Maybe the person carrys. Or maybe that person just keeps it in the glove box. Worth a smash and grab to check it out, eh?

I looked up the full J. Wayne quote from The Shootist. Now, I'll let anyone insult me all they want cause in the end what matters is what I think of myself, not what anyone else thinks. But lay a hand on me with intent to do harm...and people will be surprised if at all possible.

“I won't be wronged. I won't be insulted. I won't be laid a-hand on. I don't do these things to other people, and I require the same from them.”

Woodman said...

As if any of those dreaming about "rebelling" have gotten past the pissing in the radiator and camping in the woods part?

I suppose the closest I could get to wanting to use a gun to defend myself is to say that I'm willing to. Not that I'm wanting to, or even unafraid of using one to defend myself.

Hell, if I can get away with it I'll use every other method I have to defend myself first. I'm looking forward to surviving.

Anonymous said...

You don't obey every urge of your sexual instinct. Why do you allow your empathy instinct to tell you the proper attitude towards lethal enemies is pacifism, submission, and self-loathing? This produces your squick. Instead, you should be looking forward to destroying the enemies who threaten your life by any means available, including personally shooting them, and be satisfied afterwards.

OldTexan said...

I tend to agree with Woodman, use of a gun should be your very last resort and before that you use common sense to avoid being in the bad places, late at night, etc. You avoid being a target by your body language and actions and you avoid arguments with crazy people, and if necessary and possible you run like hell.

Then and only then you use your gun to stop the person putting life in danger.

Marc Pisco said...

I think if anybody can get "pumped up" at the thought of a mangled intruder bleeding out in pain and gurgling his last on their Congoleum, he's a damn nut case, and if he never thought at all about how that's what you sign up for when you decide to own a defensive gun, he's not thinking very much. Just taking selfies with a gun while the breeze whistles from one ear through to the other. Wheee!

Millions of people that dumb own guns all their lives without ever doing any harm, though.

Tam said...

"Why do you allow your empathy instinct to tell you the proper attitude towards lethal enemies is pacifism, submission, and self-loathing?"

Are you fucking retarded? Or just not too good at reading?

Sigivald said...

Is a bipod "the barrel thing that goes down"?

I think it should be.

From now on.


(Tam: re. your immediately previous question, can't it be both?

Internet is glorious place of unending possibility!)

alex. said...

Damn! Tam's got her "are you fucking retarded?" hammer out! And justly, because anybody who is stupid enough to broadcast his desire to kill someone may well be hoist by his own petard after the shit hits the fan.

Patrick said...

I got issues with people talking about how much they want to shoot/kill someone. Don’t care whether it’s because they are truly evil craven murderous sociopaths, internet mall ninjas, or “mommies” who talk tough about shooting people for self-defense.

Tam said she couldn’t put her finger on the thing bugging her about the Armed Mommie site. For me, it’s the idea that nobody should be celebrating the idea of shooting another person. It’s one thing to be able to do so if forced; quite another to brag about doing it if the opportunity would just present itself. Gleeful contemplation of shooting a person is not something to be proud of.

I think the disconnect in this thread (and elsewehre) might be coming from the idea that this is a black/white issue. Gun Controllers like to see us as a single unit of "bad", and sometimes we fall into the same trap.

This is not about Gunnies versus Deniers. This is a case where it feels unseemly to speak of killing someone else as gratifying. I don't see anyone here saying that the right to force - even lethal force - to defend oneself and family is a Bad Thing(tm). Nope. The "squishy" among us just don't like the idea that some really, really seem to want to do it.

So put down the petards and stow the pitchforks. Nobody is calling for censorship (or worse). Just talking about something that looks dumb.

Steve Skubinna said...

I guess what bothers me the most about pictures and stickers like the ones under discussion is the swaggering braggadocio. If you are compelled to explain to everyone how badass you are, then I am surely not the only one who is going to discount most of what you say.

Yeah, I can understand the urge to get in the hoplophobes' faces and flash a big middle finger. But it's not going to convert them, it won't even garner you any respect, and it will make you look like a jerk and play to their stereotypes. Why act out their sad fantasies of what you are?

And finally there's the issue of prior intent. I once thought a neat "no trespassing" sign would be a long range rifle target with a tight group and the legend "Shot at 500 yards. You are 75 yards from the house. Think about it."

It still amuses me. But it isn't what I want a prosecutor to show a jury at my trial for murder or negligent homicide.

Ancient Woodsman said...

This 'advertise your desire for action' phenomenon is nothing new, either. E.B. Sledge had a very good narrative about a "Gonna get me a Jap!" new officer who graced the presence of K/1/5 for a while. That guy didn't impress the veterans at all.

And it's not always the 'new guy' either. Sledge - like Leckie in H/2/5 - even when new had no such desire to slay the dragon, only to do their part when asked and suppress the inner fear of not being able to do that part when needed. It was only later that they developed a deep seething hatred for the enemy - it wasn't something that they showed up with.

Clearly the element of "Look at me! I'm gonna go get some!" is a part of society. Doesn't mean we have to like it, and certainly doesn't mean we have to tolerate it, either.


staghounds said...


Few people who have had to shoot someone want to do it again.

If I am stuck in a violent encounter, there will be lots and lots of things I won't be able to control.

I CAN control what public statements I might have to explain to a jury.

Don't give them a stick to hit you with.

staghounds said...

P. S.-

The original author misunderstands or misuses the word paranoia.

And "Lighten up, Frances"- ISWYDT.

Anonymous said...

Several commenters above said they had to talk themselves into the idea of defending themselves from lethal harm. That attitude is pacifism and submission towards lethal enemies. The words "pacifism" and "submissive" have dictionary definitions, which match this fact pattern. I think self-loathing is what you get if you crank empathy up too high, you value others over yourself. This seems to fit, too.

I agree the likely results of these posters for a self-defense court case are analyzed correctly. However, in moral terms, this is a low-level consideration. If you were Jewish and in a German court, you should give zero credence to whatever blather the judge says. I don't care much about what the court will conclude, I already know it's evil. I care a lot about why good people hesitate and get squicky and are unclear that it is morally proper to destroy a clear and immediate evil to save their own lives. Such hesitation seems liberal and postmodern.

Tam said...

So, basically you are fucking retarded and don't read so good. Cool.

We're done. You may go.

Anonymous said...

Do these pics count as brandishing, the kind of brandishing that gets CCLs taken away?

If the gals in the pics were replaced by say, a 'roid raging- 1911 loathing- ex-private contractor turned firearms instructor', would these pics be any more or any less more disturbing/cool/classed as a good reason to get your guns taken away?

Cheers- Rusty

Tam said...

As Shootin' Buddy is so fond of wondering, where did the internet come up with the "brandishing" thing?

A quick check LexisNexis search says that the word "brandish" does not even appear anywhere in the Colorado criminal code.

Sean D Sorrentino said...

I think Anon 3:53AM phrases things very poorly. Let me try.

We are socialized to respond to the question with a "It's not a good thing that bad people are killed." But is that true? I am not interested in seeking out any situation where someone ends up dead. Partially because that person might be me or someone I care about, and partially because I've been taught that killing people is a bad thing.

Thing is, I'm not sure that's actually true. While I'm not going to set out to make it happen, I am always happy that a criminal departs this earth. Like the old joke sign says, "Everyone improves this place. Some by arriving, some by leaving."

I expect that different people feel different ways about this, but honesty compels me to tell you that I believe that killing bad people is a good thing. It would be nice if the bad people would learn and improve, and return to the path of righteousness, but if their choices lead to them catching a bullet, I'm going to celebrate the world getting just a little bit better.

I don't think, however, that I'm in a moral position to require you to do the same. Same goes for those who "deplore all violence." Screw them. I'm not going to feel guilty or upset that some dirtbag got ventilated. And hopefully, if I am stuck in a situation where it's him or me, I will do what is necessary and not feel bad about it later.

Anonymous said...

OK, I heard of the Brandishing thingy when in Ohio...Try this.

Cheers- Rusty


2941.145 Firearm displayed, brandished, indicated that offender possessed the firearm, or used it to facilitate offense specification.

(A) Imposition of a three-year mandatory prison term upon an offender under division (B)(1)(a) of section 2929.14 of the Revised Code is precluded unless the indictment, count in the indictment, or information charging the offense specifies that the offender had a firearm on or about the offender's person or under the offender's control while committing the offense and displayed the firearm, brandished the firearm, indicated that the offender possessed the firearm, or used it to facilitate the offense. The specification shall be stated at the end of the body of the indictment, count, or information, and shall be stated in substantially the following form:

"SPECIFICATION (or, SPECIFICATION TO THE FIRST COUNT). The Grand Jurors (or insert the person's or the prosecuting attorney's name when appropriate) further find and specify that (set forth that the offender had a firearm on or about the offender's person or under the offender's control while committing the offense and displayed the firearm, brandished the firearm, indicated that the offender possessed the firearm, or used it to facilitate the offense)."

(B) Imposition of a three-year mandatory prison term upon an offender under division (B)(1)(a) of section 2929.14 of the Revised Code is precluded if a court imposes a one-year or six-year mandatory prison term on the offender under that division relative to the same felony.

(C) The specification described in division (A) of this section may be used in a delinquent child proceeding in the manner and for the purpose described in section 2152.17 of the Revised Code.

(D) As used in this section, "firearm" has the same meaning as in section 2923.11 of the Revised Code.

Amended by 129th General AssemblyFile No.29,HB 86, §1, eff. 9/30/2011.

Effective Date: 01-01-2002

Tam said...

Sean,

I feel no worse about hearing that a criminal has received his or her just desserts than I do about putting down a rabid dog.

I don't necessarily feel any better about it, either.

It is what it is.

Tam said...

To expand on that, tomorrow I am going to take the trash cans to the curb. When I am done doing that, I am going to come inside and do other, more enjoyable, things. I am not going to dance around on the curb yelling "w00t! The trash is taken OUT!" ;)

Sean D Sorrentino said...

*LOL*
I, however, feel an immense satisfaction that I have removed trash from my and my wife's living quarters. Not something to dance about, but still, a nice warm satisfaction.

Becky S. said...

So you claim to be pro-second amendment, but then you bash people for being pro-second amendment? What's your stance, exactly - that we should all carry but on Facebook we should pretend like we don't? That we should all be ashamed of the fact that we'd die to protect our families? I don't think you really get to claim to be pro-gun if you're so obviously anti-gun.

Juliet Amy said...

Perhaps you are repulsed because you would rather see women as victims. Just saying

Woodman said...

Becky, at what point does she say she has any problem with carrying a gun?

The issue is the level of excitement implied by the statements made. Big difference between "I will defend what's mine" and "I can't wait to kill someone".

Lisa said...

Her site is just fine. Some people post pics of their food, or pets, or whatever. Armed Mommy is passionate about the Constitution and especially the 2nd Amendment. She is also current military and is an Afghanistan vet. Her personal page shows a great many other aspects to her personality, but the Armed Mommy site is mostly for gun rights.

Tam said...

Did you people bother to read what I wrote, or even look around before just banging on your keyboard like enraged rhesus monkeys?

Yeah, I totally am against people posting pictures of guns on the internet, especially on Facebook pages.

Here's mine!

Kevin said...

The difference between "squicky" and "amused" is whether the poster is serious or snarky. This woman appears to be serious. I think the comment on CCW licenses - "I don't have a license to kill, but I do have a learner's permit!" - is a funny finger in the face of the anti-gun crowd, but if someone said that in seriousness, I'd back away from them slowly.

connie said...

"Perhaps you are repulsed because you would rather see women as victims. Just saying [sic]."

Jesus. In what world does that comment even make sense? How does being slightly creeped out by somebody's Facebook page indicate that one would rather see women as victims?

I think it's great that Armed Mommy is so passionate about her 2nd amendment rights. However, if her goal is to actually educate/enlighten others (as opposed to titillate), there are probably far more effective ways to message that.

George said...

Also, her 1911 is pointed at her knee.

Anonymous said...

When I first saw the pictures I thought they were put up by an anti that was trying to be completely over the top and make gun enthusiasts look like idiots.

I was laughing at first. Really. Nobody would believe they were put up to be taken seriously.

It isn't that funny now.

Mal

global village idiot said...

First, I want to congratulate Tam - it's not every writer who inspires so many of her readers to rush out to use her new word in their sentences. It's pretty cool and speaks to her capability as a wordwright.

As to the subject matter, I take as an example the guy I passed the gavel to at my Lodge late last year. He recently finished training as a volunteer fireman. Hardly a day went by that there wasn't some badassery posted on his Facebook page about the badass things that badass firefighters do in a badass, badass way. For not-badasses like YOU.

He's been to a few call-outs now and I notice that the badassery has largely ceased.

I note from my own experience that while you see plenty of "Been There Done That" type t-shirts on a military base (I have several), you never see anyone above the pay-grade of E-4 wearing the t-shirts with things like "Kill 'em all and let God sort 'em out" and "Mess with the best/Die like the rest" and other such chest-thumping sloganeering.

I also note that few E-4s with patches on their right shoulders wear them either.

It's the uneasiness of seeing someone who is putatively "of our tribe" but representing the tribe poorly. Of understanding that certain things, certain choices, certain modes-of-living, oblige us to act with a little bit more class than is expected of the average schlemiel.

gvi

P.S. How do you pronounce SCAdian?
1) SKAH-di-en
2) ess-see-AY-di-en

Yeah, out of all that sound and fury, THIS is my takeaway...

Sean D Sorrentino said...

It's pronounced Skyay-di-yen

Phillip said...

So... Am I the only one who wonders why she's using such a puny belt for a full size pistol?

Just wondering.

Tam said...

No, but my thing isn't about any tactical fashion critique.

GreatBlueWhale said...

All these comments, and no one even mentioned the atrocious font selection.

Greg said...

As someone who values substance over appearance, I find all that just *tacky*.

But looking more deeply, as someone pointed out, there is a difference between saying "I will do anything to defend my loved ones" (good, I agree) and "I really look forward to killing someone" (WTFF?).

Anyone found saying something like the latter is either a pathetic poser, posturing like a badass on the Internet, with little to differentiate them from larval bangers posting gang-sign selfies, OR a self-announced sociopath. Neither is really good, each possibility is squick-worthy.

Mike_C said...

>no one even mentioned the atrocious font selection
Was thinking the same thing this morning. But if you read it out loud with volume and cadence varying according to the font then you get a scarily William Shatner-like delivery.

After all this sturm und drang I had to take a look at the Facebook page in question, and it's not all good looking women carrying at people. There's pictures of families and of people teaching their kids to shoot and other benign stuff like that, but the overall theme does seem to be "in your face" which, although it can be satisfying on one level, probably isn't strategically sound behavior. Plus, a commentator on the FB page said something to the effect of Tam/VFTP commentors "confusing Facebook with real life." Such naivety would be almost charming were it not so foolish. That imaginary firewall between FB and real life will disappear mighty damn quick if the police have to get involved in a DGU, much less actually having to shoot someone.

>"...we'll put a boot in your ass; it's the American way" Yeah. I never liked that either. Both that song and the FB stuff in question come across like this. From 0:28-0:56 is the relevant part.

Otherwise Steve Skubinna and GVI have said it all better than I could.


Beaumont said...

@Bob, "oikophobia" is an excellent, incisive article. Thanks! I'll be social-media-ing the crap out of it, so that the minority of people who actually matter will have a chance to read it.

Beaumont said...

@Sean D.: I also do a little happy dance when I hear that a deserving goblin has gone to his reward down below. I just don't post it to social media.

Beaumont said...

"Enraged rhesus". I like that. I'm stealing it to use as a commenter's handle when annoying the lefties on their own sites.