(no subject)

[fpb]

One person I met on someone else's LJ called Sarah Palin a Nazi. This person, luckily, is already banned from my LJ.

Another, at the same time, showed a picture of an eleven-year-old girl with an AK-47 and thought it cute. This person also suggested that the ability to use such implements should be a test of citizenship.

Needless to say, I defriended this person on the spot. I try to understand Americans, but there is a limit.

Comments

[xander25.livejournal.com]

Two points:

a) 11 year olds who are taught about guns from their parents are more likely to respect them, than if they learned about them from gang members

b) I took the voting/citizenship thing as a joke. He referenced Heinlein's "Starship Troopers". In the novel, you earn citizenship (particularly the right to vote) through military service. What he actually said was a logical extension of that: "If Robert Heinlein were still around, maybe he could write a story about the future where anyone who can field strip and function check his piece in 60 or less gets a vote; otherwise, not."

[fpb.livejournal.com]

There is nothing strange about military service being a feature of citizenship. For most male adults in Europe until recently, it was the nature of things, and I have served in my country's army and even been fired on during guard duty. I am still legally a soldier and could be recalled to arms if my government ordered, and I have taken an oath to defend my country and its constitution. The point however is not the weapons, but the citizen's duty (which is written in the Italian Constitution) to defend his native soil. To make weapons good in themselves, rather than an ugly necessity in an ugly world, is sick. And to find a child playing with them while she is much too young for any kind of responsibility anything but a repulsive image is even sicker.

[oscillon.livejournal.com]

"eleven-year-old girl with an AK-47"
Not that it matters but it's an AR-15, the U.S. military's primary rifle.

"This has been coming for a while. The video was the last straw."
I have debated the same thing many times with John. He doesn't seem to know where the line of polite discussion is.

"to find a child playing with them while she is much too young for any kind of responsibility anything but a repulsive image is even sicker."

(disclaimer: I don't mean any of this as sarcastic, angry, etc. It is meant as calm, sincere discussion. My email and blogs writing is often misinterpreted)
I can understand your view. The video doesn't bother me really. I am not a gun nut at all like John. I don't currently own one. I would like to see sensible restraints on them here in the U.S. (like requiring people to report them lost or stolen). I do support the right to bear arms.
I do not see the video in the same context as you though. I think it is because I spent so many hours doing exactly the exercise she is doing (on the same weapon) as a soldier. It is an exercise to create competency.
From the comments above, I assume you have no problem with an 11 year old using a rifle for hunting. I assume also you have no problem with them being trained to use it (that just wouldn't make sense). So I have to assume the line here is that this weapon is for defense (or offense) against people.
I'm not sure I have a problem with 11 year olds being trained to defend the house. Where is the line? 13, 15, 18?
Or if you are ok with 11 year old being trained on a weapon, is it the 'glorification' of the act the issue?

As an aside, I think the line about citizenship is just a joke.