http://www.millionmommarch.org/images/activism/050902_lg.jpg
All guns are always loaded, you FUCKING IDIOTS. :rolleyes:
Even unloaded guns?
Huh? What am I missing here?
An organisation of concerned mothers, who apparently oppose the right to bear arms (I think?), use a baby with a gun as an image to get a point across.
Where’s the problem? Given your username, I think it’s fair to say you disagree with them, but why does this make them idiots, of the “fucking” variety no less?
How do you think those Moms became Moms?
When I saw the poster’s "Gunmaked are protected, was I the only one who thought of the Space Robot Bonaza?
Yep. A very large fraction of accidental shootings happen with an ‘unloaded’ gun.
The Number One Rule of Gun Safety is that you always treat any gun as loaded, and never do anything with a supposedly unloaded gun that you wouldn’t do with a loaded one.
Granted there are times when you just have to break the Rules out of necessity, but that wasn’t the case in that photo.
Even if that was a plastic toy gun, and the photogrAAPHER WAS SURE IT WAS SAFE, the picture was taken to convey a message - and the message gun owners get from it is, “we don’t actually know or care anything AT ALL about gun safety, we just don’t like 'em”
If their message was supposed to be “if you leave a gun around a child might find it” they could have had a gun lying on a table and a little kid’s hand reaching for it or something like that.
They are FUCKING IDIOTS because YOU DON’T POINT A GUN AT SOMEONE YOU DON’T WANT TO RISK KILLING.
YOU JUST DON’T.
How about a picture of the baby blowing away a criminal-type who was about to rape his grandma? That’d show responsible gun use!!!
Well how do you know it was a real gun? Maybe it was a toy. Or perhaps the picture was edited to look that way. They’re doing wonderful things with technology now.
I don’t see how it’s any different from those commercials against handguns featuring little kids accidentally shooting each other. Or actors on TV/movies shooting each other up. Why does this arouse your ire and not the fake guns in all the other parts of the media?
pssst … Kala hon …
THESE ARE NOT RATIONAL PEOPLE!!!
So what makes them irrational? Creating a poster with a baby or holding a gun? Or is it just the fact that they disagree with you?
ALSO, SHOUTING IS A GREAT WAY TO GET YOUR POINT ACROSS.
PSSSST!!
Yeah, because claiming that a picture meant to appeal to ambivilent or anti-gun people is inappropriate because it pisses off pro-gunners is the very height of rationality.
I will call them scum, because they are largely white middle class soccer moms that waited until school violence started killing the children of white middle class soccer moms, but didn’t care one bit when black children were being blown away left and right. If they really cared about their fellow humans, they’d have been around decades ago. Now they just appear to be a special interest group disguised as a bunch of moms, with the mission to eradicate guns in the US. All IMO, of course
Doesn’t matter if it was a toy or a faked image - would you support a politician who displayed pictures of himself doing something YOU consider wrong even though you knew the pictures were faked?
It’s not that a child somehow got ahold of a toy gun. It’s that some adult deliberately thought, “That’d be a good image for us to use in on our website”.
Many gunowners do get angry by all the unsafe gun handling that goes on on tv and in movies when it contributes nothing to the plot. Hand a gun to someone not familiar with them and what do they do - put their finger on the trigger. I’m sure this is partly due to seeing actors do it all the time. ( BTW, I was greatly impressed that Black Hawk Down did not do this and instead showed proper realistic gun handling - probably because the actors went through ‘real’ military training first).
Firearm accidents DO happen to actors, but at least they have professional gun handlers on the set to try and prevent such things. Also the actors aren’t claiming that they know anything about guns.
Coldfire, is my browser broken? It says this is “The BBQ Pit”.
Relax, I bet they photoshop’ed the image in.
When hyperbole is outlawed, only outlaws will use hyperbole.
It was either that or…
You can have my sensational, politically motivated ad campaign when you pry it from my cold, dead hand.
But I couldn’t make up my mind.
Photoshopping it in does not help.
The point is not “a child is holding a toy gun”
The point is “an adult who is apparantly claiming to know something about guns thinks that a picture that is apparently of of a child pointing a gun (toy or otherwise) at himself is a good picture to use on their site”
If an anti-child abuse group put an explicit graphic image of a man exposing himself to a child and the child touching his penis on the front page of their site would that be OK with you? Suppose the picture was photoshopped and/or used a very realistic looking dildo rather than a real penis, then would that be ok?
I’m not sure.
let me see the dildo first