Isn’t it great when you make a new friend and they’ve never shot in their life? I love that. I immediately make plans to take them to the range.
Working at a range in Minnesota, the favorite and most fun part of the job is working with the new shooters. There’s just something about when you see that light bulb click on and it all comes together for them.
H45. Great youtuber. Good video attachment!
Mick is being remarkably rude here. First to Maria and then to Omar who is both an older relative and his employer. Snarky remarks about “Try not to get any Astroglide on the office chair.”! Frankly, were I in Omar’s shoes I would fire him right there for his failure to maintain elementary civility while at work.
Word. If Maria were a customer (hell, could be in the near future) Mick would’ve just lost her as one. And Omar would be completely in the right to verbally kick Mick’s ass around the shop, then fire him.
To be fair, there seems to be a bit of history to justify that attitude… Anyway, I’m sure Mick will get his come-upance in due time… and it will be hysterically amusing.
Yeah, it was sad to see Omar’s happy little grin disappear so fast.
“Isn’t it great when you make a new friend and they’ve never shot in their life? I love that.”
Unless the admission is followed up by a ‘guns are terrible, I hate them’ screed.
I’ve usually found that after determining whether they have an actual personal event that produced that statement or if it is just repeating the media rhetoric I can talk them around to trying it out.
Hopefully it’s just an upbringing/media brainwashing as opposed to a actual real reason. I’ve actually brought a few people from my company shooting with me, I set it up like an introductory to firearms class and spend about an hour or two on the history, different type of actions, and safety before we actually step foot on the range. Then they have the choice of scope, irons, bolt, semi-auto, lever action, and single shot .22’s.
In those “classes” have been a number of people who have never shot before, had been media brainwashed into thinking they were evil but willing to give it a chance. One of them has recently joined the SASS, another is currently saving money and jumping through the hoops so he can attend Knob Creek. Granted, not everyone is a success, had one person who enjoyed his time at the range, had fun but still doesn’t “Get it” and thinks it shouldn’t be allowed, but hey, to each their own.
He often wears paisley ties at work with pastel shirts, I don’t think that should be allowed either but hey to each their own lol.
My brother-in-law is a Quaker, and an avowed pacifist (which is amusing, as he’s also a rather skilled fencer). He married into a gun-owning and heavily-armed family, but has been remarkable low-key about weapons with us.
Finally got him to the range.
The dude is addicted! It was like watching a religious revelation taking place… His eyes kept getting bigger and bigger, and I thought the grin on his face was going to split his head in two. We’ve created a monster…
Neither shooting nor fencing contradict pacifism. Both certainly involve objects and skills that could be used for violence, but both are also sports in their own right. One problem I’ve found is that many people don’t make that distinction; their view is that if it’s related to something that could be used for violence, then it it’s inherently violent and thus evil. (Strangely, people holding this view usually still use kitchen knives and watch baseball.)
Oh, no doubt you’re correct. Just that most pacifists that *I* know are decidedly non-aggressive. My B-i-L? Not so much. Indeed, he can be remarkably aggressive – He’s just very very conscious of how he uses it.
Getting him to the range was still breaching a barrier for him, and more power to him for being willing to open his horizons. Especially since I think he’s going to wind up being a superior paper-puncher, once he’s had some training and practice. Certainly, he didn’t flinch when I mentioned reloading… Though my sister *did* give me a “Look.”
Of course, pacifism (depending on the degree it’s held to) does not exclude self-defense. Most commonly (in my experience) it simply precludes initiating violence except under exceptional circumstances.
My B-i-L’s flavor of Quaker is pretty hard-core in its rejection of violence; He resigned a position with a computer science firm rather than work on defense-related contracts.
That level of commitment does kinda make it difficult for the outsider (such as myself) to grasp & reconcile his innately aggressive approach to many things; he spends a LOT of time thinking about the ethics of various decisions and actions.
It’s probably just as well that this is so – I’d be a bit worried by the man he’d be if he hadn’t spent so much time thinking about how to reconcile his nature with the demands of his faith. As things are, he’s impressive enough already: Big dude, strong, smart, athletic, and naturally aggressive. My sister knows how to pick ‘em!
I’m going to have to spend a bit more time at the range, or he’ll surpass me in the not-so-distant future.
Competitive? Me? Naaaah.
I’ve met more than one pacifist who actually does consider pacifism to preclude self-defense. I find that attitude mind-boggling, but do not have a strong moral issue with it unless they are willing to allow a third party (eg, law enforcement) to commit violence for them. (I’ve met at least one of those, too.) That attitude I consider utterly morally reprehensible.
B-i-L’s flavor of Quaker (Liberal) generally follows the Peace Testimony; Issues of use of violence in self defense or defense of family / the helpless generally falls upon the individual and their own personal conscience.
Depending on situation and actions, use of violence may – or may not – lead to Criticsm, or even (in extreme cases) of being ‘read out’ of unity with their Meeting.
It’s an issue of much discussion; some insist on purest non-violence; others will go so far as to embrace the doctrine of ‘Just War.’ Still others have argued that universal non-violence constitutes taking sides.
One thing about Quakers: Their insistance on simplicity and integrity still doesn’t make them easy to pin down!
All that said, I’m pretty sure he’d use necessary force (and only that necessary) in defene of his family. Not entirely sure he’d fight in his own defense, though. OTOH, my sister would happily destroy anyone who threatened her family, or her husband. *shrug* They’re an unusual couple, but they work.
Well, considering she already knew that Omar owns the gun store, I don’t think her “virginity” is based on hate of the firearm…
I’m surprised Mick’s being such a DICK! Seriously, he should be quiet civil to someone who’s involved, I can say he can be suspicious because he might be worried that his uncle is thinking with his little head; rather than his big head.
On the other hand popping the cherry of a gun virgin is fun, I’ve done it a few times. I was actually surprised that a daughter of an Army officer had not been to a gun range. You’d think an Army officer would have trained them as soon as they’re able to have their first period.
Mick is being unusually dickish. Aside from the bit of advice, Omar has given him nothing but grief either.
My real question is: Don’t Omar and Maria look disturbingly…….. ‘familiar’?
I’m just saying.
In Mick’s defense, he’s probably seen enough of Omar’s weird shit(unlike us readers) to be kinda like “WTF ever Omar, you creepy sexual deviant”, but this will pass with a rude smack down via Omar and/or Maria or Mick waking up about situations a bit too late like usual.
Oh yeah, and Maria’s eye are creeping me the fuck out! You’re up to something, as usual…
People keep commenting on Maria’s eyes. How are Maria’s eyes any creepier than Omar’s?
I think they’re a matched set.
Maybe in their world, balck orbs are visual indications of folks as enjoy alternative play-styles. Hmmmm…
“How are Maria’s eyes any creepier than Omar’s?”
Combination of eyes and facial features maybe unsettles people. For me, the way her torso is drawn looks like a guy’s torso, albeit with boobs added, and that weirds me out. And also I’m thinking that her eyes never change shape either, whereas Omar’s will depending on mood (look at panel 2 in today’s comic versus the others).
I feel the need to go back into the archives and look at Alex’s torso in comparison to Maria’s torso to see if there’s similarities in the way they’re drawn.
Wondering how soon Omar will get Maria on the ‘casting couch’. Friday? Monday? Place yer bets…
I’ve known a few women built like that – It can be disconcerting. OTOH, they tend to bring their athleticism to bed with them.
“her eyes never change shape either”
How does that work, that she’s never fired a gun, but she said she’s been in his shop many times before? (IIRC)
Seems fairly clear to me that Mick is still so unsettled by his own suddenly-expanded relationship knowledge that he’s unable to spare any energy for being polite.
He’d best get his crap all in one sock soon, though, or he’s going to be shitting shoeleather.
Oh yes, and let’s hope Omar’s not a dick like some of the guys in yesterday’s video, and hands Maria the biggest caliber thing in inventory first just to see the gunnie virgin loose control of the weapon. Best way to loose a woman, and a new gunner.
I’m wondering if it’s possible that there was a picture of Heidi’s ex-roommate around her apartment, and Mick has seen it, and it’s her.
I can’t quite put my finger on it. Omar’s eyes seem to fit him just fine. Maybe James is going with the appearance of her having super dark brown eyes that also happen to be large, and if so, then I can understand that. If not, I doubt it will influence him to make changes(which is good in and of itself). As for her torso, I just took it as her having an athletic build from hell.
Comments are closed.
©2012-2014 Failure To Fire | Powered by WordPress with Easel
| Subscribe: RSS
| Back to Top ↑