What it all boils down it that there IS a difference between a warplane/warship/sword/firearms aficionado who appreciates fine design, historical value, and in the case of firearms appropriateness for specific function (hunting/target shooting/self defense), vs. the person who is indeed “glorifying violence”.
As long as the person IS conscientious of the terrible capabilities of the hardware and of how this imposes on him/her a moral duty to make sure they are only used properly; and in the case of the historic weaponry s/he uses it as an opportunity to reflect on the state of the world that led to its creation and how that affected later history, there is really no element of immorality in it. It’s the person who thinks that because he has access to the firepower he’s hot sh*t, that the hardware makes him invincible, that he is unaccountable to any authority for its use, or in the case of a historic plane that it would be rad to drop incendiaries on a city just to see the “kewl” bursts, that you should worry about.
Otherwise it’s their hobby and their money, as long as they don’t blow the kids’ tuition on it…
I agree with JRD insofar as it is possible to imagine someone glorifying death under the guise of a hobby. For example, let’s say you had an Enola Gay shrine and lots of pictures of the Hiroshima explosion, the aftermath, etc. That would be weird.
If, on the other hand, you have about five reference books on military aircraft - in addition to about thirty other books on military aviation - well, then you’d be perfect. Now all you need is an internet connection. Although there are no ping or server issues with books.
Strafing runs on commuters are a bad sign. [sub]My wife got a G35 Coupe (manual). Tristan, does that make me a part-time “ricer” now? It comes with two huge coffee can exhaust tips! BUT, it is rear wheel drive. God help me, it is a really nice car. [/sub]
I’d say that it’s ok because of context. Guns are things that individuals use to kill other individuals. Military Aircraft aren’t usually things owned by individuals used to kill other individuals.
Since you’re an individual, I’d find you a bit nutty if you were “one who has a fascination with guns to the point of extreme,” but this is only an issue with aircraft if you’re a leader of a nation or large army - these being the type of people who were responsible for the aircraft killing large amounts of people.
Since I assume you’re not president of anywhere, it’s ok to be into your planes. But if you do become President, I’d be kinda nervous if your interest exhibited itself in certain ways. Y’know - buying large amounts of obsolete military aircraft and having your Air Force stay up all night polishing them… aquiring more planes than it’s reasonable for your average leader to possess, and really weird ones too. Like ordering a fleet of that ultra-rare red coloured B-666 that was roughly the size of Rhode Island, made of polystyrene and due to an inherent flaw in the design was never used - that sort of thing.
So, for now, I’d say you’re safe. Come back for a reassessment if you ever intend on running for office.
[sub] [hijack] Beagle, no, you’ve got a great car. Being a ricer would be putting a gigantic wing on it, and having a bunch of Nismo stickers on it. However, if I had your car and the money to do it, you can buy and put in a Skyline r35 engine into that car. Oh so fast… [/hijack] [/sub]
As long as we’re hijacking this thread as to what constitutes a “gun nut”, I’ll give my definition:
Someone who spends an inordinate amount of time collecting/handling/shooting/reading about guns to the point of obsession. This isn’t neccessarily a band this, as someone might happily describe himself as a “fishing nut” or a “football nut”.
Someone for whom guns are a touchstone for violent fantasies or extreme or paranoid political beliefs. When G.Gordon Liddy advised his listeners on shooting anticipated government officials coming to confiscate their guns (“head shots, head shots!”), he was being an uber gun nut.
I’d buy definition #2 as a reasonable definition of a gun nut; rearrange the wording a bit to be less gun-specific and I’d accept it as a reasonable layman definition for any person obsessed with a material object or subject.
With the caveat that Cowboy Shooting be exempted, of course.
Otherwise, I’m calling you out! High Noon tomorrow, on Main St! Git yer six-gun and get ready to hot lead, ya yella-bellied, grit-eatin’, horse-thieving son-of-…
Sorry. Where was I?
[sub]P.S.: I think (but cannot say for certain) the ol’ G. Gordon may have been speaking a little facetiously; he is the right-wing version of Howard Stern. At least IMHO. YMMV.[/sub]
