Obama calling for more gun control

Status
Not open for further replies.
Coming from a couple of people who rely on the freedom of media for their livelihood, that seems like a perfectly valid opinion for them to hold.
It's a valid (and incredibly unoriginally put) opinion, presented in a fashion trying to evoke some kind of "Oh, we're being serious here for a second." Fourth panel could have been Lilah's miscarriage and it would have been more useful.
 
Yeah, fucking funny-men, stop being serious and BE FUNNY.
It needed a starving African child swimming in a polluted oil tailings pool swarming with ducks with plastic baggies around their neck to really hit home its desperation to be serious.
 
Would you have preferred something where Gabe and Tycho are bitching about it and draw the characters blowing a gasket instead of the way it was presented? Is that where your disgust stems from on this?
 
Would you have preferred something where Gabe and Tycho are bitching about it and draw the characters blowing a gasket instead of the way it was presented? Is that where your disgust stems from on this?
I would have preferred something clever, yes.
 
Profound and original would have been better, yes.

It's not a bad point. Simply overwrought. Those pictures don't tell a thousand words - in fact the visual detracts from the message IMO, but the visual is all they've got. Only a fraction of their regular readers read and pay attention to the blog posts.

However, they are preaching to the choir - their audience is bristling at the NRA's attempt to shift blame to their preferred form of entertainment. This isn't anything different than what they've said before, and with Obama's call to arms (heh heh heh) they felt compelled to give their audience a voice on this particular topic.
 
Profound and original would have been better, yes.

It's not a bad point. Simply overwrought. Those pictures don't tell a thousand words - in fact the visual detracts from the message IMO, but the visual is all they've got. Only a fraction of their regular readers read and pay attention to the blog posts.

However, they are preaching to the choir - their audience is bristling at the NRA's attempt to shift blame to their preferred form of entertainment. This isn't anything different than what they've said before, and with Obama's call to arms (heh heh heh) they felt compelled to give their audience a voice on this particular topic.
And that's kinda why I didn't have a problem with it. The only thing the comic does is sum up the blog posts, really. Half the time you can't follow the damn comic without reading it first anyways.
 
And that's kinda why I didn't have a problem with it. The only thing the comic does is sum up the blog posts, really. Half the time you can't follow the damn comic without reading it first anyways.
As I said before, I don't have a problem with the message. It's the cloying sentimentality that grates. And it's going to show up all over now because PA's 'message' gets spread to the typical nerd haunts and everyone will all be HUR HUR I AGREE WID DIS.
 
so you're saying....the answer..... is somewhere...... in the middle????
As the person on the board who thinks the most in terms of moral absolutism, i find however you intended that post to be taken hilaious.[DOUBLEPOST=1356387242][/DOUBLEPOST]
As I said before, I don't have a problem with the message. It's the cloying sentimentality that grates. And it's going to show up all over now because PA's 'message' gets spread to the typical nerd haunts and everyone will all be HUR HUR I AGREE WID DIS.
It does have a very "next time on a very special episode of Blossom" feel to it.
 
Honestly, I'm starting to wonder if there might be a little too much violence in our entertainment these days. It's one of the reasons I really like the tenant and before seasons of Dr Who...

I've been watching Arrow recently and really, there is nothing heroic about the main character, he is a criminal pure and simple. I still enjoy the show but...
 

GasBandit

Staff member
I know you're gone for the day, so note this whenever. The point wasn't where one keeps them but that "militia" is not recognizable as part of the equation. Why not allow gun ownership only to those that actually ARE a part of a properly trained militia?
While not defined in the constitution, "the militia" was defined in the late 18th century as anyone capable of using a weapon who is not already in the military. IE, every single able-bodied person is potentially militia. Also, pay close attention to the wording of the amendment - it is not a single militia who is granted the right to keep and bear arms, it is the people, all of them, who retain the right, because if it were otherwise it would not be possible to have well regulated (well equipped and smoothly operating) militia.

(Sorry, forgot to tell you guys I'd be out of town from the 22nd-30th)
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top