General Discussion

friendly_iconoclast

(15,333 posts)

107. Didn't read the links or the excerpts, did you? Once again:

Fri Dec 21, 2012, 01:16 AM

Dec 2012

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_Eichmanns

Little Eichmanns

"Little Eichmanns" is a phrase used to describe persons who participate in society in a way that, while on an individual scale may seem relatively innocuous even to themselves, taken collectively create destructive and immoral systems in which they are actually complicit — comparable to how Adolf Eichmann, a Nazi bureaucrat, unfeelingly helped to orchestrate The Holocaust. Anarcho-primitivist John Zerzan used the phrase in his essay Whose Unabomber? in 1995.[1] The phrase gained prominence in American political culture four years after the September 11th attacks, when an essay written by Ward Churchill shortly after the attacks received renewed media scrutiny. In the essay, "On the Justice of Roosting Chickens", Churchill reiterated the phrase to describe technocrats working at the World Trade Center. The Ward Churchill September 11 attacks essay controversy ensued.[2]...

And, btw- I've been called worse by better.

You were so busy directing spittle-flecked invective at those whose views dare to differ from
yours that you forgot (or perhaps never knew) that your mindset is far from original.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

113 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

"Regulate" does NOT mean "take them away" [View all] Taverner Dec 2012 OP

okay then... what regulations are you in favor of? a geek named Bob Dec 2012 #1

Psych Evals every year to keep your guns sounds good Taverner Dec 2012 #6

No way. GreenStormCloud Dec 2012 #9

Hire government Psychiatrists Taverner Dec 2012 #11

There aren't that many psychs to hire enough. GreenStormCloud Dec 2012 #28

Look, we can do this a lot of ways without Psychiatrists Taverner Dec 2012 #30

You haven't thought it through. GreenStormCloud Dec 2012 #38

Doesn't work that way Taverner Dec 2012 #55

There will still be good prep books, even for adaptive testing. N/T GreenStormCloud Dec 2012 #78

Prep books and answers to the test are two different things Taverner Dec 2012 #80

what other right is reserved for the rich forthemiddle Dec 2012 #60

In capitalism, rights are only for those who can afford them Taverner Dec 2012 #61

So you are satisfied with that forthemiddle Dec 2012 #71

That is what IS Taverner Dec 2012 #81

Psychiatrists won't risk the liability if they pass somebody who commits a crime... sanatanadharma Dec 2012 #57

+100 Taverner Dec 2012 #62

sounds good on the face of it... a geek named Bob Dec 2012 #15

Make it a peer review process Taverner Dec 2012 #18

err... a geek named Bob Dec 2012 #20

You're trying to throw the baby out with the bathwater Taverner Dec 2012 #24

the ones that bother people like you Skittles Dec 2012 #51

Some wish to do just that but would like to hear what regulate means to you. former-republican Dec 2012 #2

I am not certain what should be done Taverner Dec 2012 #3

I agree with you because it seems (at least on this board) former-republican Dec 2012 #10

Just a note on psych eval former-republican Dec 2012 #12

I don't know - I wish we had an "empathy test" like in Blade Runner Taverner Dec 2012 #13

ummm... a geek named Bob Dec 2012 #17

Well, yeah but they work enough Taverner Dec 2012 #21

Post removed Post removed Dec 2012 #23

"...mighty white of you... " WTF is that???? Taverner Dec 2012 #26

And yes, I would be happy to compromise EVERYONE'S stuff Taverner Dec 2012 #27

I'm listening, too... derby378 Dec 2012 #4

I was all "take them away" right after the shooting Taverner Dec 2012 #5

immediate and crippling tj_crackersnatch Dec 2012 #7

Not a bad idea - how about government run gun stores Taverner Dec 2012 #8

Extreeme taxes would be thrown out by the supreme court Travis_0004 Dec 2012 #56

so lets not do anything eh? tj_crackersnatch Dec 2012 #59

Because only the 1% should be armed! Lizzie Poppet Dec 2012 #110

Can't fool me. They're trying to take retread Dec 2012 #14

LOL - for some folks, it really is like that Taverner Dec 2012 #16

Louisville Slugger might work. Then again! retread Dec 2012 #25

The LOTR references are way beyond tiresome. Bake Dec 2012 #42

What's wrong with showing geekiness? white_wolf Dec 2012 #83

Registration..huge penalties for failure to register to start. There are 300,000,000 cars in the US libdem4life Dec 2012 #19

Registration would be a must. Taverner Dec 2012 #22

logistically impossible former-republican Dec 2012 #47

It's done elsewhere. laundry_queen Dec 2012 #52

We have around 2000 special agent investigators in the ATF that specifically deal with firearms former-republican Dec 2012 #58

Forget psych eval and school renovations..We are not going to be victims of the NRA and gun industry libdem4life Dec 2012 #85

I'm not arguing the fact that some new laws could be implemented former-republican Dec 2012 #94

OK...I've said on other threads...if we can't approximate the laws on motor vehicles as a start, libdem4life Dec 2012 #99

How about another approach...as we're all learning here...a gun owner/parent of an libdem4life Dec 2012 #45

Taverner, stop taking the bait maxsolomon Dec 2012 #29

Well you know their stock answer: "ARM EVERYONE TO THE TEETH" Taverner Dec 2012 #32

Oh yeah, let's just threaten gun owners with jail like they did in Australia derby378 Dec 2012 #36

Note that I didn't even say that we should do what Australia did! maxsolomon Dec 2012 #43

Oops! derby378 Dec 2012 #84

Yep. janx Dec 2012 #37

The burden is on the regulators to propose the regulation. Bake Dec 2012 #44

Gun owners are the experts. They have knowledge that non-gun owners don't. maxsolomon Dec 2012 #49

I'm willing to go for an assault weapons ban. Bake Dec 2012 #50

step 1: confiscate bake's s&w 9 mm. maxsolomon Dec 2012 #70

I wouldn't try taking mine, really. Bake Dec 2012 #112

yeah, i know what semi-auto means. maxsolomon Dec 2012 #113

Oh, BULLSHIT. Gun owners are the most biased population you could choose. Taverner Dec 2012 #68

then at least they're being honest maxsolomon Dec 2012 #79

ban means 'take them away'. that's what i suggest. no slippery slope. spanone Dec 2012 #31

I don't know if that's possible Taverner Dec 2012 #33

absolutely. spanone Dec 2012 #40

And that will NEVER HAPPEN. Bake Dec 2012 #46

I wouldn't either - but I would vote for smart regulation Taverner Dec 2012 #66

An alternative to guns for self defense FrodosPet Dec 2012 #34

Take them away means take them away. byeya Dec 2012 #35

I will pose this question to you: how do we "take them away"? Taverner Dec 2012 #65

Cost is the key XRubicon Dec 2012 #74

I am all for taxing them Taverner Dec 2012 #75

I see your point but XRubicon Dec 2012 #77

This makes sense nt Taverner Dec 2012 #82

A person shall be put to death quickly if convicted of a crime while in possession of a firearm. MrYikes Dec 2012 #39

And here I thought liberals were opposed to the death penalty. Bake Dec 2012 #48

I'm consistently in favor of the death penalty. aquart Dec 2012 #108

I don't agree with the DP Taverner Dec 2012 #64

From the Federalist Papers: bighart Dec 2012 #41

Honest question here: Did everything in the Federalist Papers make it into the Constitution? patrice Dec 2012 #54

Agreed. & Concealed carry is not "well regulated" because what is concealed could be anything, could patrice Dec 2012 #53

Exactly. Not well regulated at all. Taverner Dec 2012 #63

It has always been illegal for criminals to carry concealed hack89 Dec 2012 #67

The fact that a gun-nut's son went on a killing spree proves it is not regulated enough Taverner Dec 2012 #69

That has nothing to do with concealed carry. hack89 Dec 2012 #95

What does that have to do with concealed carry?? Lizzie Poppet Dec 2012 #109

My point is that because it IS concealed, ordinary people in the social environments of their OWN patrice Dec 2012 #72

You can make CCW illegal hack89 Dec 2012 #93

Why dont we make concealing them be against the law, so when I go into public patrice Dec 2012 #96

Criminals will still carry concealed hack89 Dec 2012 #98

And where do criminals get their guns? baldguy Dec 2012 #100

Most of them through straw purchases by friends and family hack89 Dec 2012 #101

Proud "law abiding gun owners" all. baldguy Dec 2012 #102

So all gun owners are evil - got it. nt hack89 Dec 2012 #111

If gun owners want to preserve their supposed "right" to own a gun, baldguy Dec 2012 #73

Yes - the NRA has run the show for too long Taverner Dec 2012 #76

I have found them inspiring as someone who has not ever had to Get In Their Faces for decades. libdem4life Dec 2012 #87

If they don't agree with you, they're guilty? friendly_iconoclast Dec 2012 #86

It's not me, it's reality. baldguy Dec 2012 #88

In other words, "Little Eichmanns"? friendly_iconoclast Dec 2012 #90

So, anyone who disagrees with YOU is a Nazi? baldguy Dec 2012 #91

I'm saying your attitude strikes me as *very* much like Ward Churchill's: friendly_iconoclast Dec 2012 #92

When all else fails, accuse your opponant of being a Nazi. baldguy Dec 2012 #97

Point out where I did. $50 to the Brady Campaign says you cant. friendly_iconoclast Dec 2012 #103

Like you don't know who Eichmann is? baldguy Dec 2012 #106

Didn't read the links or the excerpts, did you? Once again: friendly_iconoclast Dec 2012 #107

No, they need to come up with an appropriate alternative...seriously lacking in the run of the mill libdem4life Dec 2012 #89

Maybe they should be investigated for their political beliefs? friendly_iconoclast Dec 2012 #104

There could be required liability and yearly license for every gun which is rapid fire. Thinkingabout Dec 2012 #105