Problems with dirtbags

Bawanna said:
David I for one respectfully suggest that you took that post totally out of context. I didn't read one letter advocating taking on a herd of elephants. It was just an analogy. Yes it can be done and back to the title a dirtbag would do it. It's another thing on the list that defines a dirtbag.
Click to expand...

I know it's an analogy, but in the analogy the wielder of heavy weaponry is protrayed as the superior being, and the elephants are nothing more than an abstraction rather than the intelligent, emotional beings that they are. As you say, only a dirtbag would gun down a herd of elephants. The problem with military imagery is that it blurs the distinction between dirtbags and heroes by putting the focus on the weaponry. Along the same lines, anyone who would machine gun a herd of elephants would likely slaughter humans with the same feeling of superiority.

Perhaps I'm reacting to an attitude that I have seen (only occasionally) on the forum, that the group with the best weaponry or the most fighting prowess is necessarily on the side of the angels. Ironically, this goes hand in hand with the concern that the "dirtbags" out there are heavily armed. Regardless of how one views reality, there is a point of diminishing returns, as when one imagines a crowded movie theater with good guys and bad guys blasting away at each other with machine guns.

Evidently this does relate to the dirtbag theme of the thread, but again I apologize if I have expanded the topic beyond recognition.
 
David, I don't think you expanded it beyond recognition. Expended certainly but I don't feel too far out of context. The reality is that you are correct, and Ndog hit the nail on the head with his comment. Hollyweird certainly does bear a lot of the responsibility for the image you present. However, I do not necessarily agree with you that most folks think of the best armed best trained ect necessarily being on the side of God. I instead personally choose to believe in myself as being on the side of God, so choose to attempt to be the best armed and trained I am able to be so that I can provide what support I can for the side of the righteous (at least the ones I consider so, I am human so susceptable to falacy though I do my best.) I also do not envision a theater crowded with innocents with good guys and bad guys blasting away through the masses. However I do conceal carry on the off chance I find myself in a theater crowded with innocents and a bad guy blasting away. Then if I have a clear shot and can make him stop shooting people I will. Now before you go off onto the would I endanger 1 person standing behind him to stop him from shooting 3-4 or 13-14 more... The answer depends on a number of things including am I the only one there with a weapon or would someone else have a better chance without endagering anyone yada yada (don't think it is possible to honestly determine until actually there, too many variables)

As for the elephants... I LOVE elephants and think poachers should be poached gently in a court bouillon and fed to tigers.
 
Shavru said:
David, I don't think you expanded it beyond recognition. Expended certainly but I don't feel too far out of context. The reality is that you are correct, and Ndog hit the nail on the head with his comment. Hollyweird certainly does bear a lot of the responsibility for the image you present. However, I do not necessarily agree with you that most folks think of the best armed best trained ect necessarily being on the side of God. I instead personally choose to believe in myself as being on the side of God, so choose to attempt to be the best armed and trained I am able to be so that I can provide what support I can for the side of the righteous (at least the ones I consider so, I am human so susceptable to falacy though I do my best.) I also do not envision a theater crowded with innocents with good guys and bad guys blasting away through the masses. However I do conceal carry on the off chance I find myself in a theater crowded with innocents and a bad guy blasting away. Then if I have a clear shot and can make him stop shooting people I will. Now before you go off onto the would I endanger 1 person standing behind him to stop him from shooting 3-4 or 13-14 more... The answer depends on a number of things including am I the only one there with a weapon or would someone else have a better chance without endagering anyone yada yada (don't think it is possible to honestly determine until actually there, too many variables)

As for the elephants... I LOVE elephants and think poachers should be poached gently in a court bouillon and fed to tigers.
Click to expand...

Thanks, Shavru.

I pretty much agree with you on all the essential points. In my last post I didn't say "most folks" think of the best armed and trained people being on the right side. On the contrary, I said that I've seen this attitude only occasionally on the forum. Also, I have no problem with the movie theater scenario that you describe. Self defense and the defense of victims is a right recognized almost universally throughout history, even in relatively peaceful societies. The exceptions are repressive systems: peasants could be punished for defending themselves against aristocrats; slaves did not have the right to defend against their masters, etc. One of the features of those systems is that the people at the bottom were legally denied the right to arm themselves, though they often did anyway. Only the samurai class could lawfully carry the two swords in medieval Japan, but sometimes gardening implements proved effective for defense if wielded with skill and with an element of surprise.

I recognize that sometimes people exaggerate to make a point (as I often do myself) or use analogies that rub other people the wrong way. So if I misinterpreted KJ, I regret it.

I wish I could find the text of the story about elephants in the Roman arenas. The original source is from a contemporary Roman writer, but the story has been quoted in other places. What happened is that a family of elephants -- a big bull, some adult females, and some youngsters -- were herded into the arena and attacked by archers and spearmen. The big bull tried to defend the others, all the elephants were trumpeting and screaming in terror, trying to find a way out of the arena. It was an unexpected display of human-like emotions that completely captured the crowd. There was so much hostility to this slaughter that the use of elephants as targets in the arena was discontinued. What makes the story more poignant is that these crowds were quite hardened to the usual kinds of killing of slaves, military captives, gladiators and as I mentioned, Christians.
 
Crowds at arenas are unpredictable lots you never can tell what will happen when you get a group of humans together. I once saw a crowd at a bullfight all stand up and turn their backs on the matador with crossed arms. They felt the Bull had won and the matador only beat him because of extra assistance of the Banderilleros and Picadors. They did not want the bull killed they felt he deserved an indulto but the presidente had not responded to their waving handkerchiefs and so the matador completed the estocada killing the bull.

I always root for the bull anyways, but this time at least I wasn't alone in that camp.

I have a confused balance in my beliefs about animals. I find them very tasty and I could never give up eating meat. However I want them treated right while they are alive and killed in as humane a way as possible. I don't care for the killing animals that I do not intend to eat, with the exception of an animal that is a danger to humans and domestic animals. And by danger I don't mean happens to be in the same area as, But actually is targeting those as a food source. Personally even then I might be less enthusiastic about killing the predator if it is chasing humans and not domestic animals.

But there are some animals that there just isn't a good reason to kill at all. And Elephants and Whales and dolphins ect. are way up that list for me. We don't need the meat and there really isn't any valid scientific study that needs to kill them to study them.
 
My apologies for putting that image in your head David. In attempting to prove a point about complex tool use making us the most lethal critter on the planet I appear to have hit a few nerves. My point is that we do things that nothing else on the planet even dares to do just to prove we can. And that means that if a person decides to prey on other people then you're dealing with something scarier than a charging herd of elephants (or a charging herd of wolverines for that matter).

I happen to despise African poachers in the extreme. From what I've read they create most of the serious friction with wildlife in Africa. One of the more terrifying types of friction is the "kali" (fierce) elephant herd. With enough harassment an entire herd of elephants will occasionally make a point of killing any poor schmuck they see. Usually a game officer is called in to deal with them when enough people have been widely and unevenly spread over several yards. I feel sorry for both the elephants and the man who has to shoot them to protect others.

As far as animals go I'm pretty much on the same page as Shavru. Killing them slowly for entertainment is unethical and twisted. Killing them because they're made of protein is the only way to get delicious meat. If you're going to kill an animal it should be done as quickly and painlessly as possible. Using an inferior tool or using the proper tool poorly is disrespectful to the being who created both you and the game you hunt.

And I'm glad that wolverines don't travel in herds. That's like something from a bad wilderness horror film. "THE 13TH TRAIL! IN THEATERS JULY 25!"
 
Thanks for that, KJ.

Wolverines are marvellous creatures that punch way above their weight. A wolverine will stand its ground against a much larger bear, or even dispute the bear over possession of a carcass. They eat everything they kill, including the bones. "Waste not, want not." I saw a documentary recently by a man who spent enormous time and energy to get videos of these secretive animals. Among other things, he found that not only do male wolverines sometimes have several mates within their large territory, but they travel between them helping to raise the young ones of all their families. That's pretty unusual even among humans.

So it could be said that there are fewer "dirtbags" among wolverines than among humans. I put that in so no one can accuse me of taking this thread off track again. :)

-- Dav
 
It's doubtful there are many dirtbags in the animal kingdom. That's a species dominated by humans.

Many fathers could learn a lot from the Male Wolverines it appears. Guess dead beats go hand in hand with dirtbags.
 
When a person is learned to have done a wrong and had a outstanding name it rattles us as humans.It seems to make us insecure and not want to trust anyone.However, there is a old saying that can be fell back on that we've all heard,"you can can fool some of the people all the time but nobody fools all the people all the time". Quote goes something like that,somebody saw through the guilty party, maybe even a stranger.How many times have we ourselves said "IKNEW IT" about a person that got caught in a devious act.A narcisist is a dangerous little vermen.I suppose it isnt a entirely incompassionate or inhuman reasoning to treat one such as not human as a part of their humanity dosent exist, they are simply a creature in some ways .They lack a conscious.I have debated the corporal punishment aspect within myself and wonder if its right or wrong or neither.It certainely serves as revenge(which is wrong) but also as a deterrent.It also serves as a filter considering the guilty parties can do no more harm.I lean towards the two out of three aspect is here. Wouldnt it be a wonderful place if people could control their greed.The wonder is all around us in nature. Some of the most beutiful land in the world has been marred by war.
 
The point stands. A single human is not as efficient as a group. Where did the guy get his machine gun from? Did he mine the ore, forge the barrel? Who taught him how to do it? While mankind is the strongest a single dude removed from it is pretty weak.
Btw a god who needs me to do his bidding must be very week too. The guy in space is probably laughing that we think we have to fight for him and spread his word. Kind of cute like when kids on the playground argue who's dad is the strongest. My god is stronger than yours he works out every day. But but my god drives a tank in the army. Do the dads care? They might think its cute and smile.
Now if the kids however kill each other about which god is stronger...
 
That's why I always found those survivalist doomsday prepper shows hilarious. Do you think you and your family are going to stand against thousands of determined hungry people no matter how well prepared you are? No way. You're just delaying the inevitable. Humanity's strength has always come from working together.
 
Bawanna said:
It's doubtful there are many dirtbags in the animal kingdom. That's a species dominated by humans.

Many fathers could learn a lot from the Male Wolverines it appears. Guess dead beats go hand in hand with dirtbags.
Click to expand...

Cuckoos are dirtbags. They throw other bird's eggs out of the nest and replace them with their own. Doesnt get more sleazy than killing someone's kids and tricking them to raise yours for you.
 
Wow CrystalEyes, That certainly DOES fit the title. I guess the animal kingdom has it's dirtbags too. I wonder if their percentage is similar to the human percentage or if it is just appears more because the media brings so much focus to the human dirtbags.
 
The cuckoos are certainly born dirtbags. If the mother cuckoo doesn't throw the eggs out, the cuckoo chick will do it promptly after hatching!

[video=youtube_share;SO1WccH2_YM]http://youtu.be/SO1WccH2_YM[/video]
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top