| WIKI | FAQ | Tech FAQ | |
 http://csua.com/feed/ | |
| ||||||
| 7/26 |
| 2008/3/12-17 [Reference/Military] UID:49435 Activity:high |
3/12 "Laws that forbid the carrying of arms...disarm only those who are
neither inclined nor determined to commit crimes...Such laws make
things worse for the assaulted and better for the assailants; they
serve rather to encourage than to prevent homicides, for an unarmed man
may be attacked with greater confidence than an armed man."
-Thomas Jefferson
\_ Yawn. And misattributed.
\_ Right, Jefferson was quoting Cesare Beccaria
\_ "The said Constitution [shall] be never construed to authorize
Congress to infringe the just liberty of the press, or the rights
of conscience; or to prevent the people of the United States, who
are peaceable citizens, from keeping their own arms."
-Samuel Adams
\_ Thomas Jefferson also owned hundreds of slaves, fathered several
children with one of them, and then owned his own children as
slaves. So? Times change, thankfully. -tom
\_ And maybe fathered several grandchildren with one of them?
\_ revisionist liberal!!!
\_ What ramifications does Wagner's anti-semitism have for his
music, or Gogol's anti-semitism for his books? Stupidest
red herring ever. -- ilyas
\_ The Declaration of Independence is a statement of moral
principles; I think the moral principles of the man who
wrote it are entirely relevant. If Thomas Aquinas was
\_ Thomas Aquinas loved animals, not little boys,
isn't that right?
found to have been buggering altar boys, it would have an
impact on the value of his work.
Also, the underlying assumption is that because Thomas
Jefferson believed in individual gun ownership, that it's
a good idea today. Thomas Jefferson also believed in
individual slave ownership; that doesn't make it a good
idea today. -tom
\_ Thomas did some bad things, therefore all he did or said
was bad. Is that your point? Can we apply that
universally to all political figures or just ones who
wrote things you don't like?
\_ Nice straw man. Please try reading my post next time.
\_ They weren't considered bad things at the time, that
is the whole point. Moral standards and society
change over time. The rules for gun ownership for
a frontier society are probably not going to make
sense in an urban society. This is why I support
local gun control laws only, btw.
\_ This is all tapdancing around the real issue, which
is that "we" don't want to give guns to hoods and
gangbangers, but do want to give them to hobbyists,
and normal law-abiding folks. However, the
distinction is apparently very hard to legislate.
Plus I guess even pointing this out can get one
accused of racism since hoods and gangbangers are
predominantly ethnic. -- ilyas
\_ No, it is more subtle than that. It is not always
clear what a "normal law-abiding folk" is. What
about a guy with a DUI? Busted for smoking pot
20 years ago? And we already have laws on the
books to keep guns out of the hands of felons,
they are just really hard to enforce, when
everyone else can get a gun so easily.
\_ That doesn't make it a bad idea today either.
\_ I agree; what Thomas Jefferson had to say about
gun owernship 200+ years ago has pretty much no
relevance to whether it's a good idea today. -tom
\_ Thomas Jefferson 200 years ago or tom today... hmmm,
this is a tough call... who to side with? People
are still people, guns are still guns, etc. I think
I'll go with Jefferson, thanks. Simply saying time
has passed is not a reason to dismiss what he had
to say.
\_ Well, he gave an argument. He didn't just say,
"Gun ownership is good and I'm Jefferson." The only
real difference is that gun technology has advanced.
\_ Plus the small matter of the invention of the
tank. Guns are significantly easier for
lawbreakers to use and significantly less
easy to use in defense against the government,
relative to Jefferson's time. Orders of magnitude
different in each direction. -tom
\_ The insurgents have shown that small arms
can be effective against an opposing force
with tanks, planes, &c.
\_ Only if you fight them with kid gloves on.
\_ The operations in Iraq may not be "nuke
& pave" but clearly kid gloves is not
an accurate characterization. It is
likely that any domestic operation by
the government would be similarly
restrained (there are still red voters
in blue states).
Even if the operations in Iraq are being
fought with "kid gloves," this was not
the case in Vietnam.
\_ You are a complete fucking idiot if you think
you can use tanks against insurgency. Tanks are
for breaking frontlines, holding territory
you can use tanks against insurgency. Tanks
are for breaking frontlines, holding territory
against conventional armies, and defense a la
artillery. You cannot use tanks to suppress
a civilian population. Germans certainly didn't
artillery. You cannot use tanks to suppress a
civilian population. Germans certainly didn't
in World War 2 (and they pioneered appropriate
tank use in war). You should probably stop
talking about things you don't have a clue
about. A good modern example of a successful
uprising with guns vs tanks is israel vs
palestinians, btw. -- ilyas
palestinians, btw. -- ilyas [formatd]
\_ "successful"?
\_ The palestinians keep gaining land and
somehow the sympathy of the world. The
Israelis are under constant siege and
living in a permanent state of fear. I'd
say the palestinians are winning with the
world's help.
\_ what does that have to do with guns?
\_ The point is asymmetric warfare
against a government works, and the
second point is that the
palestinians would be toothless if
they didn't have portable rockets,
and bombs, and yes guns. If you
don't like this example, read up
on the successful partisan movement
in USSR during the second war.
-- ilyas
\_ Asymmetric warfare doesn't
require individual gun
ownership.
\_ Asymmetric warfare is greatly
aided by individual gun
ownership, as the ff's
pointed out. If you have an
"ideological" stance against
it, as tom likes to say, you
will need a better reason
than TANKS! though. -- ilyas
\_ The Israelis are living in a constant state
of fear? How do you think the Gazans feel?
What has been the Gaza vs. Israel casualty
rate?
\_ I'm not sure if this is more funny or
sad that we have palestinian
sympathizers on the motd. I figured the
motd would attract a smarter crowd in
general who wouldn't fall for that sort
of propaganda. Anyway, I'll answer your
question an old quote,
"When Arab Mothers love their children
more than they hate the Jews there
will be peace".
Ponder and gain wisdom.
\_ That quote is racist.
\_ Are you new here? On the motd
you're supposed to only say,
"\_ RACIST!" as a form of
anti-PC mockery. It isn't a
serious statement. It is one of
the lower forms of intellectual
laziness. Care to try again or
are you happy thinking the only
democracy in the middle east, the
only country in the ME that has
women voting, holding office, etc,
the only country that has minority
population voting and holding
offfice, etc, etc, etc, is somehow
the enemy while the people who
wrap their kids in bomb jackets
and send them into pizza parlors
are somehow freedom fighters and
heroic? Again, it is sad that
people who are supposed to be so
smart have sucked up the propaganda
like such useful idiots always do.
\_ Your quote wasn't serious
either and not worth addressing
seriously. Of course it's
racist, it's a blanket
denigration of Arabs, and it
implies that Palestinians commit
commit acts of violence merely
because they hate Jews and that
is all there is to consider.
If you are able to frame your
argument in a meaningful way
then I could respond more
meaningfully. You're now
ascribing beliefs to me that I
didn't say. It's probably not
worth having serious discussions
with people who do that: set up
straw men and employ vague
emotional "reasoning".
\_ There is nothing emotional
about it. How about you
respond to what I said
about women, minorities and
the rest? Those are cold
\_ What about them?
have facts yet in your reply
you toss around empty
accusations of emotionalism
because the truth is too
strong to deny so you go
personal. Reply to what I
said. You've said nothing
more than scream "RACIST!"
so far. That isn't the
most intellectually rigorous
response from someone who
claims to want intellectual
rigor. I can get better on
Kos.
\_ In this particular quote, Jefferson did not
mention the anti-government aspect but only the
anti-criminal. I'd guess the main criminal aid
today is concealability. This factor would
argue towards a ban on handguns, not guns
altogether. (I'm not advocating that though.)
\_ It is unclear that Jefferson actually fathered Sally Hemmings'
children:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sally_Hemings#DNA_testing
\_ As an aside, I find the 'America was a frontier society in the old
days but not today' argument amusing in a wishful thinking kind of
way. There is huge political resistance in America to outright
handgun bans. Clearly our society is 'frontier enough,' even today.
-- ilyas |
| 7/26 |
|
| en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sally_Hemings#DNA_testing DNA tests indicate that a male in Jefferson's line, possibly (but not conclusively) Thomas Jefferson himself, was the father of several of Sally Hemings's children. In 1787, Jefferson sent for his daughter, nine-year-old Maria (Polly) Jefferson, to come live with him. He asked that Isabel, an older woman, be sent as a companion for Polly, but because Isabel was pregnant, the teen-aged Sally Hemings accompanied her instead. Jefferson's daughter, Martha Randolph, then apparently gave Hemings her "time", a type of informal freedom, and Hemings lived out the rest of her life in Charlottesville. Richmond newspaper reporter, published the first claim that Thomas Jefferson was the father of Sally Hemings's son, Tom. Callender had a contemporary reputation as a scandal monger. Callender called the boy "President Tom," saying that he closely resembled the President and had been born upon Jefferson and Hemings' return from Paris. citation needed descendants of Thomas Woodson began to publish claims that he was Sally Hemings's son by Thomas Jefferson as printed by Callender, conceived in France and born at Monticello in 1790. Callender had written that Hemings' first child by Jefferson was named "Tom". Some have said that Callender's claim seems to be based mostly on rumor, since the reporter was aggrieved at not gaining the appointment as Postmaster, since Woodson was later found to not be descended from Jefferson through DNA testing and since Callender did not have any special connection to Monticello to gain information. The Thomas Jefferson Heritage Society noted that besides the first mention in 1802, and another brief one in 1805, none of Jefferson's political enemies chose to focus on the story of his possible relationship with a slave, and no mention is made again until Madison Hemings's report in 1873. John Adams said that anything Callender said was not worthy of belief. He wrote about Callender's charges, "Callender and Sally will be remembered as long as Jefferson, as blots in his character. Madison Hemings, one of Sally's sons, claimed in an 1873 report, published in an Ohio newspaper, The Pike County Republican, that Thomas Jefferson was his father and the father of all of Sally's children. He also notes that there is no evidence of any oral tradition predating these stories regarding the alleged affair, by other descendants of Monticello slaves or within the Hemings family. In his 1995 book The Inner Jefferson: Portrait of a Grieving Optimist, historian Andrew Burstein wrote in regards to Madison Hemings that it was "possible that his claim was contrived--by his mother or himself--to provide an otherwise undistinguished biracial carpenter a measure of social respect... Burstein later found the DNA test to be convincing enough to link Jefferson to Hemings. Madison Hemings says that his mother and Jefferson's affair began in Paris, and she had a child upon her return to America who died shortly afterwards. Monticello, at the time of the conceptions of all of her children, and no documented evidence has been found saying she was anywhere else at these conceptions; statements made by Madison Hemings and another former slave from Monticello who agreed with his account; claims that Hemings's children strongly resembled Jefferson physically; and the fact that Hemings's children were either manumitted or allowed to slip away from Monticello by Jefferson's descendants. Common refutations of the above arguments are the fact that many times Jefferson was at Monticello and Hemings did not become pregnant, and if a relative of his was the father, the relative would also have been more likely to visit when Jefferson was there; that the descendants of the Woodson family also made statements that their ancestor Thomas Woodson was Jefferson's son, and their arguments were later proven false by DNA evidence, coupled with the idea that many people might like to believe that they possess a famous or important ancestor. In a private letter, Jefferson's bewailed his small number of progeny; his apparent sincerity indicates he lacked any illegitimate offspring. June 25, 1804, Jefferson wrote to Governor John Page on the occasion of his daughter Mary Jefferson Eppes' death. edit Other claims An overseer at Monticello, Edmund Bacon, wrote in an 1862 letter that "Sally Hemings' daughter," presumably Harriet, was not Jefferson's, but censored the name of the father: "He freed one girl some years before he died, and there was a great deal of talk about it. People said he freed her because she was his own daughter. Two of Jefferson's grandchildren said long after Jefferson's death that the resemblance to Jefferson was because the Hemings children had been fathered by either Samuel or Peter Carr, the sons of Jefferson's sister Martha, who had been raised at Monticello as if they were Jefferson's own sons. One grandchild insisted all of the Hemings children were Samuel's; Grandson Jeff Randolph said that the children of Sally's were Peter's and Sally's sister Betsey Hemings's children were all fathered by Samuel Carr; DNA testing ruled out the possibility that the Carrs could have fathered Hemings's child Eston but confirmed that Eston Hemings shared the male line ancestry of Thomas Jefferson's uncle, Field Jefferson, and thus presumably of Jefferson also. Jefferson's daughter, Martha Jefferson Randolph, according to one of her children's recollection, had said that "Mr Jefferson and Sally Hemings could not have met--were far distant from each other--for fifteen months prior to the birth" of the child who most resembled Jefferson. Randall noted that Jefferson's doctor Robley Dunglison and friend Professor Tucker, "who lived years near Mr Jefferson in the University, and were often at Monticello," did not believe in any truth to a relationship with Hemings and had never heard it spoken of in Virginia. edit Academic debate Through most of the 19th and 20th centuries, biographers of Thomas Jefferson dismissed suggestions that he had fathered children by a slave, if they mentioned the issue at all. They generally called Callender's charges too politically motivated to be worth examining and derided Madison Hemings's published memoir as an attempt to puff up his status by claiming a famous father. In his monumental history of early American race relations, White Over Black (1968), Winthrop Jordan treated the Hemings-Jefferson link as plausible and worth consideration, noting that Jefferson was at Monticello every time Sally Hemings became pregnant. In 1997, however, law professor Annette Gordon-Reed published an examination of the arguments and available evidence, Thomas Jefferson and Sally Hemings: An American Controversy. She pointed out how most historians had used double standards to evaluate the evidence for and against the statement of Madison Hemings. oral history" while the tales passed down in the Jefferson family were treated as trustworthy even though they contradicted each other and the documentary record. Historians accepted statements about Sally's father being John Wayles based on little concrete evidence, but insisted on much more proof about Sally's children. Following the eventual DNA tests, critics of her analysis such as Eyler Robert Coates would say that the Woodson family also maintained a very strong oral history saying that Jefferson was their ancestor, Thomas Woodson's father, which was then proven false by DNA evidence. Gordon-Reed did not argue that documentary records proved Madison Hemings's claim, only that authors had unfairly dismissed it. As to the Hemings children's paternity, she wrote, the answer might lie in developing more evidence through DNA analysis. Y chromosomal haplotypes of four groups of men: descendants of Thomas Jefferson's grandfather; of Madison Hemings's brother Eston Hemings (who later took the name Eston Jefferson); Only in those lines did the original Y chromosomes survive. As a result, no direct descendants of Thomas and Martha Jefferson could be included in the study, nor descendants of Madison Hemings. No patrilineal descendants in those lines could be identified. The study's major findings were that the Y ch... |