23 October 2021

I Deleted Them

The two commentors who're insisting that Alec Baldwin did nothing wrong or illegal, and being VERY verbose about it have had their comments deleted.

They want there to be an exception for the dancing monkeys to be careless with firearms and be immune to the consequences so bad they're dismissing a genuine legal analysis of someone who's and acknowledged expert in firearms law.

And using specious arguments to do so.

One of you has already been warned about trying to hijack my blog.

I acknowledge that you disagree, but I've decided to not subject others to your disagreement because you're arguing your points so damn poorly.

I can get it out in a (long) sentence instead of a massive wall of text:

It's OK for dancing monkeys to be careless with guns because they're not supposed to know any better therefore it's the responsibility of the organ grinder to make sure they don't kill anyone while being careless.

You want them to be indemnified from the consequences of their actions as long as there's at least one other person who touched the gun before them and assured their tiny simian brains that it was OK.

It's a parallel of an argument I've disallowed here for a long time, Cops being held to a different standard because they followed procedures and training which lead to people being shot unnecessarily because the procedures and training don't lead to any kind of restraint about shooting someone.  The only thing that matters in these procedures is the cops don't get hurt, so they can merrily fire away in situations where us common folk will get a murder rap.

"I followed departmental procedures and training" is a get out of jail free for cops.  Well, it was, that's starting to change because people like me have been bitching about it.

The same goes for dancing monkeys.  I hand you a gun and say, "It's OK, it's unloaded," and you shoot someone; YOU are going to jail for being stupid enough to believe me.  I'm going too, but on a lesser charge.

"I didn't know it was loaded," is absolutely NOT a positive defense for shooting someone.

Why do you want it to be a defense for an actor who hates you?

3 comments:

  1. Sadly, in Hollyweird and in the elite circles (imagine Venn diagrams,) common sense and responsibility don't matter one darned bit.

    It's how Fat Teddy could kill someone and get away with 'waitress sandwiches' and other acts of sexual deviancy in public, but us normal people can get jammed up just acting normally.

    It's how Alec Baldwin has gotten away with being a violent woman-hater with a history of physical and emotional abuse that would have put one of us normals deep into the prison system.

    And it's how normally sensible people use the excuse that the dancing-monkey isn't responsible because dancing monkey.

    Common sense. Personal responsibility. All too lacking amongst our elite leaders and some dancing monkeys.

    ReplyDelete
  2. You could tell if the gun was primed just by looking at the back of the cylinder.The gun was a black powder revolver.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I've heard various things about what it was. Generally I've heard "vintage Colt revolver", but I don't know if it was an 1860 cap & ball, 1873 Peacemaker, Frontier 6 shooter or SAA or what. You're right about the priming caps being obvious external if it was something like an 1860. Some accounts mention there being numerous "cartridges" left around the set... which would point to it being a black powder cartridge revolver like an SAA or Peacemaker... Other accounts say the bullet fired was a .44, which doesn't rule ouf a cartridge revolver since I believe Colt chambered quite a few in .44-40. These news articles are frustrating in lack of completeness or consistency. A lot of that of course can be attributed to most reporters/writers being utterly clueless about firearms in general.

      Delete

You are a guest here when you comment. Be polite. Inappropriate comments will be deleted without mention. Amnesty period is expired.

Do not go off on a tangent, stay with the topic of the post. If I can't tell what your point is in the first couple of sentences I'm flushing it.

If you're trying to comment anonymously: Sign your work.

Anonymous comments must pass a higher bar than others. Repeat offenders must pass an even higher bar.

If you can't comprehend this, don't comment; because I'm going to moderate and mock you for wasting your time.