HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Topics » Justice & Public Safety » Gun Control & RKBA (Group) » An anti-gun poster shows ...

Thu Apr 24, 2014, 01:38 AM

 

An anti-gun poster shows a complete cartridge being fired. Again.



So not only is this gun shooting a complete cartridge, but the finger on the trigger has returned to its non-firing original position only milliseconds after the [strike]bullet[/strike] cartridge has left the barrel! Man, I wish my revolver's action could cycle that quickly!

65 replies, 12640 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 65 replies Author Time Post
Reply An anti-gun poster shows a complete cartridge being fired. Again. (Original post)
Jgarrick Apr 2014 OP
villager Apr 2014 #1
Jgarrick Apr 2014 #4
villager Apr 2014 #14
Nuclear Unicorn Apr 2014 #22
lastlib Apr 2014 #24
Nuclear Unicorn Apr 2014 #35
villager Apr 2014 #46
Warpy Apr 2014 #55
Jgarrick Apr 2014 #56
NYC_SKP Apr 2014 #23
lastlib Apr 2014 #26
Lizzie Poppet Apr 2014 #30
NYC_SKP Apr 2014 #34
Lizzie Poppet Apr 2014 #29
oneshooter Apr 2014 #31
Lizzie Poppet Apr 2014 #33
melm00se Apr 2014 #59
rrneck Apr 2014 #2
VanillaRhapsody Apr 2014 #3
Straw Man Apr 2014 #6
VanillaRhapsody Apr 2014 #7
Straw Man Apr 2014 #8
VanillaRhapsody Apr 2014 #9
Straw Man Apr 2014 #11
VanillaRhapsody Apr 2014 #12
Straw Man Apr 2014 #13
VanillaRhapsody Apr 2014 #36
Straw Man Apr 2014 #44
VanillaRhapsody Apr 2014 #48
Straw Man Apr 2014 #49
VanillaRhapsody Apr 2014 #50
Jenoch Apr 2014 #51
VanillaRhapsody Apr 2014 #52
Jenoch Apr 2014 #53
VanillaRhapsody Apr 2014 #54
Straw Man Apr 2014 #58
Jenoch Apr 2014 #25
VanillaRhapsody Apr 2014 #37
Jenoch Apr 2014 #38
VanillaRhapsody Apr 2014 #39
Jenoch Apr 2014 #40
petronius Apr 2014 #5
Prophet 451 Apr 2014 #10
villager Apr 2014 #15
Jenoch Apr 2014 #27
Eleanors38 Apr 2014 #16
Niceguy1 Apr 2014 #17
mokawanis Apr 2014 #18
tazkcmo Apr 2014 #19
ileus Apr 2014 #20
SevenSixtyTwo Apr 2014 #21
CBGLuthier Apr 2014 #28
Jgarrick Apr 2014 #32
geckosfeet Apr 2014 #41
Jgarrick Apr 2014 #43
geckosfeet Apr 2014 #47
Nuclear Unicorn Apr 2014 #64
friendly_iconoclast Apr 2014 #42
sarisataka Apr 2014 #45
Skeeter Barnes Apr 2014 #57
clffrdjk Apr 2014 #60
derby378 Apr 2014 #61
Packerowner740 Apr 2014 #62
gejohnston Apr 2014 #63
Straw Man Apr 2014 #65

Response to Jgarrick (Original post)

Thu Apr 24, 2014, 01:39 AM

1. A pro-gun poster misses the point entirely and deliberately. Again.

 

n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to villager (Reply #1)

Thu Apr 24, 2014, 01:43 AM

4. Oh, I get its point, I assure you.

 

The poster implies that pro-gun activists are potential child killers.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jgarrick (Reply #4)

Thu Apr 24, 2014, 02:48 AM

14. Potentially, they certainly aid and abet.

 

n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to villager (Reply #14)

Thu Apr 24, 2014, 08:58 AM

22. Is it seriously your assertion tht anyone who is against criminalizing anything that kills children

aid and abets the killing of those children?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Nuclear Unicorn (Reply #22)

Thu Apr 24, 2014, 01:01 PM

24. well, they certainly aren't inhibiting it.

Certainly your buds in Georgia and other states are removing the barriers. I would definitely call it enabling.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lastlib (Reply #24)

Thu Apr 24, 2014, 01:45 PM

35. Let's define this --

"If a things kills more than _______ children annually it shall be _______ ."

Please supply a QUANTITY for the first blank and a LEVEL OF RESTRICTION for the second blank.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lastlib (Reply #24)

Thu Apr 24, 2014, 03:30 PM

46. Exactly. Precisely the same as buying booze for an alcoholic then feigning surprise when...

 

...the inevitable car wreck comes.

The bodies, for the proliferationists, are just acceptable collateral damage.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jgarrick (Reply #4)

Thu Apr 24, 2014, 05:23 PM

55. No, they just leave loaded guns around all over the place

and let the kids kill each other.

And you're trying to nitpick the art to death to make sure everybody misses that point.

Fact: kids are dying at a pretty good clip out there because adults in the house are stupid about their guns.

And that's what you're trying to nitpick away.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Warpy (Reply #55)

Thu Apr 24, 2014, 05:40 PM

56. The poster says nothing about unsecured firearms.

 

It says "We fear you'll take our children."

It's not speaking of a four-year-old shooting his sister. It's equating pro-gun activists (the "you" of the first sentence) with child killers (the "you" of the second sentence).

Which makes it a vile, despicable message while also being graphically inept. Quite the achievement.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to villager (Reply #1)

Thu Apr 24, 2014, 10:49 AM

23. The point is a lie, a logical fallacy, a false equivalency. So obvious. nt

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to NYC_SKP (Reply #23)

Thu Apr 24, 2014, 01:02 PM

26. kinda like the "cars kill more people than gunz" meme, huh?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lastlib (Reply #26)

Thu Apr 24, 2014, 01:12 PM

30. Very much like that, yes.

 

Both constitute "false equivalency."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to lastlib (Reply #26)

Thu Apr 24, 2014, 01:18 PM

34. Pretty much the same, a false equivalency that would make any researcher cringe.

 

"I love my children, therefore YOU can't have anything that might hurt them, even if you keep it in a safe or locked up. Because I'm a mom. With children."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to villager (Reply #1)

Thu Apr 24, 2014, 01:10 PM

29. Technical accuracy doesn't always matter...but sometimes it does.

 

In the case of gun control advocacy, being clueless about how guns work might or might not be relevant. If the advocacy is for something like universal background checks or better enforcement against straw purchasers, an advocate's ignorance about firearms technology isn't really germane. However, a lot of gun control proposals target specific features of firearms. It obviously behooves advocates of that sort of measure to know what they're talking about.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Lizzie Poppet (Reply #29)

Thu Apr 24, 2014, 01:15 PM

31. Kinda like "The shoulder thingy that goes up". n/t

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to oneshooter (Reply #31)

Thu Apr 24, 2014, 01:17 PM

33. That's the technical term.

 

Goes on the other end from the round thingy with a hole in the end.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to villager (Reply #1)

Fri Apr 25, 2014, 04:16 PM

59. i wouldn't say that at all

What I would say is that the creator of the ad lacks the attention to detail which immediately calls into question their attention to other details (like the ones that may, or may not, support their case).

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jgarrick (Original post)

Thu Apr 24, 2014, 01:41 AM

2. It doesn't have to be accurate. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jgarrick (Original post)

Thu Apr 24, 2014, 01:42 AM

3. what was "their point" were they trying to precisely accurately depict a gun being fired?

 

was that the "point" they were "missing" because how a gun looks when it shoots is not the message I took from that ad.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to VanillaRhapsody (Reply #3)

Thu Apr 24, 2014, 02:01 AM

6. It speaks to credibility.

Or more precisely, the lack thereof. It's very pertinent when much of the legislation that the prohibitionists would like to enact has to do hardware -- a topic about which they apparently know next to nothing.

Oh yes, and the "gun owners = child killers" meme is patently offensive and guaranteed to confirm gun owners of all persuasions in their opposition to any kind of regulatory compromises.

Can you say "culture war"? I knew that you could.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Straw Man (Reply #6)

Thu Apr 24, 2014, 02:08 AM

7. credibility? A gun being "accurately depicted" in an advertisement MUST

 

reflect precisely reality.....

Did I call anyone a "child killer"?

Can you say "hyperbolic"? There....I knew that you could....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to VanillaRhapsody (Reply #7)

Thu Apr 24, 2014, 02:16 AM

8. Yes, credibility.

A gun being "accurately depicted" in an advertisement MUST

reflect precisely reality.....

Ignorance is ignorance. Public displays of it tend to negatively affect credibility. It's really that simple.


Did I call anyone a "child killer"?

No, you didn't. However, the poster clearly does equate gun-rights advocates with child killers. The "you" in both sentences does that, plainly.

Can you say "hyperbolic"? There....I knew that you could....

I can say it all day long, but it does not apply. I merely stated a fact. Don't tell me you are going to try to deny the above equivalence as established in the poster. That would be an insult to both of our intelligences.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Straw Man (Reply #8)

Thu Apr 24, 2014, 02:17 AM

9. So McDonalds isn't "credible" because it uses a clown in its advertisements instead of a

 

normal person? I hate to think of your feelings on the Gieco gecko! Don't tell me....you think the E-trade baby is really trading stocks too!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to VanillaRhapsody (Reply #9)

Thu Apr 24, 2014, 02:27 AM

11. If you are suggesting that this ad has the same credibility ...

... as Ronald McDonald and the Geico gecko, I'm right there with you.

Cartoonish bullshit is cartoonish bullshit, no matter what it's peddling.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Straw Man (Reply #11)

Thu Apr 24, 2014, 02:33 AM

12. Yeah....Ronald McDonald has had ZERO impact....

 

and that Geico....sure is going bankrupt because of that lizard.

Who pays attention to THOSE guys....

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to VanillaRhapsody (Reply #12)

Thu Apr 24, 2014, 02:45 AM

13. So the clown has you convinced ...

... that Micky D's is the place to eat? And you buy your insurance from Geico because the lizard has a cute accent?

Please don't tell me that your political choices are similarly motivated. Please.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Straw Man (Reply #13)

Thu Apr 24, 2014, 01:50 PM

36. Not I....but he sure HAS sold alot of burgers....no realistic representation required

 

Please tell me that YOUR political choices are better than your apparent love for guns....You do realize that Common Sense Gun Regulations ARE a part of the Democratic Platform right?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to VanillaRhapsody (Reply #36)

Thu Apr 24, 2014, 03:01 PM

44. Sold a lot of burgers -- to children and idiots.

Please tell me that YOUR political choices are better than your apparent love for guns....

My belief in the right to keep and bear arms is one aspect of my political choices. My political choices are not driven by clowns, talking animals, or propaganda posters.

You do realize that Common Sense Gun Regulations ARE a part of the Democratic Platform right?

Yes. Where I believe you and I may differ is in what constitutes "common sense."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Straw Man (Reply #44)

Thu Apr 24, 2014, 04:15 PM

48. So???? This changes the point that creative license is always used as a medium in

 

advertising how?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to VanillaRhapsody (Reply #48)

Thu Apr 24, 2014, 04:18 PM

49. Creative license is supposed to be "creative."

What exactly is creative about technical inaccuracy? How does it enhance the message?

You're just making excuses for stupidity.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Straw Man (Reply #49)

Thu Apr 24, 2014, 04:24 PM

50. No creative license in advertisement....is meant to capture attention.....

 

it has nothing to do with accuracy....Do you still believe in Santa Claus? Because you know he was really just a marketing gimmick...

What do you have against Mickey Mouse? Are mice really 7 feet tall like they are at Disneyland? Do they wear clothes like Mickey does (after he got a little older anyways).

Its marketing....its all marketing

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to VanillaRhapsody (Reply #50)

Thu Apr 24, 2014, 04:32 PM

51. So far, all of the advertizing you have mentioned

 

has been the use of humor and fun. Tell me what about that graphic (again, not advertising) is funny or fun?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jenoch (Reply #51)

Thu Apr 24, 2014, 04:34 PM

52. What difference does THAT even make?

 

like I said before....then do you expect those that oppose gun ownership to just do "accurate depictions" of the horrible things guns do to the human body? Would you prefer that? Because that would also be "accurate" wouldn't it?

No you prefer them to be an advertisement FOR guns! And this is NOT that quite the opposite....they are selling what guns can do....therefore the gun doesn't NEED to be accurate....its not the gun that they are trying to sell!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to VanillaRhapsody (Reply #52)

Thu Apr 24, 2014, 04:38 PM

53. In each case in which you posted 'gun' I believe you meant "cartridge'.

 

I don't really care what that organization does in their graphics. Why do you seem to care so much that the inaccuracies are being pointed out?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jenoch (Reply #53)

Thu Apr 24, 2014, 04:40 PM

54. I don't even care ....what difference does that make to the overall message?

 

None that's what....the gun nor the "projectile" need to be accurate....its the DEAD part they are trying to sell.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to VanillaRhapsody (Reply #50)

Thu Apr 24, 2014, 11:52 PM

58. Capture attention?

How does a technically inaccurate picture capture the attention better than a technically accurate one? Again, you're just making excuses for an illustrator who was too ignorant and lazy to get the details right.

Mickey Mouse? When did I ever say anything about Mickey Mouse. You are very confused.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to VanillaRhapsody (Reply #12)

Thu Apr 24, 2014, 01:01 PM

25. When did you see a clown on a McDonald's television advertisement?

 

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jenoch (Reply #25)

Thu Apr 24, 2014, 01:52 PM

37. What difference does THAT make....this AD was not on TV

 

was it a literal representation of a man in their advertisements selling hamburgers or not?...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to VanillaRhapsody (Reply #37)

Thu Apr 24, 2014, 02:05 PM

38. They had a thief in their TV commercials too.

 

What was the point you are attempting to make?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jenoch (Reply #38)

Thu Apr 24, 2014, 02:07 PM

39. Obviously not a point you have been reading along with....

 

or you would get it....

My point is that in advertising.....creative license is regularly taken..nuff said.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to VanillaRhapsody (Reply #39)

Thu Apr 24, 2014, 02:10 PM

40. Technically that graphic is not an advertisement.

 

It is propaganda.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jgarrick (Original post)

Thu Apr 24, 2014, 01:47 AM

5. Google gives me other versions of this without the typo - I'm guessing

this was a first draft. Wonder how many milliseconds it took between pressing 'Post' and the "Oh, damn!!!"

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jgarrick (Original post)

Thu Apr 24, 2014, 02:24 AM

10. So?

Look, I'm not anti-gun but picking holes in a photoshopped image is the equivelent of dismissing Shakespeare for typos i.e. completely missing the point.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Prophet 451 (Reply #10)

Thu Apr 24, 2014, 02:50 AM

15. They're not missing the point. This is the type of misdirection that proliferationists are schooled

 

in.

They learned it at the propagandistic knees of their NRA forebears.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to villager (Reply #15)

Thu Apr 24, 2014, 01:03 PM

27. How can this thread be misdirected when the entire

 

point of this thread is to point out the fallacy of the reality in the image produced by those who wish to attack the U.S. Constitution?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Prophet 451 (Reply #10)

Thu Apr 24, 2014, 03:10 AM

16. There is sweeping accusation heavily & obviously implied...

 

in the poster's text; but what dignity that slur has is further undermined by a fart-in-church technical error. Poster art visuals are the story: a blunder in the focal point ain't no misspellin.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jgarrick (Original post)

Thu Apr 24, 2014, 03:19 AM

17. not many people

Buy the propaganda anyways. ..not from the nra or the prohibtionists...

Most americans are somewhere in the middle.

And the hammer is wrong, too. Lol

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jgarrick (Original post)

Thu Apr 24, 2014, 04:30 AM

18. Wait a sec...it happened again?

They've done it twice??? Man, that's outrageous! What if it catches on and other people start using unrealistic images in ads? I mean, it's only the anti-gun crowd that does that, right?


Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to mokawanis (Reply #18)

Thu Apr 24, 2014, 05:33 AM

19. Right?

Forget about all the pictures of food in ads, you wouldn't want to actually eat it because it has paint and lacquer on it, or it's actually raw, etc. Also, forget about the message because the picture is inaccurate. Or, or, or...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jgarrick (Original post)

Thu Apr 24, 2014, 06:45 AM

20. All regressives know is that "guns kill people"....what do you expect?

Is this even real? Or is there some new spelling for multiple children?

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jgarrick (Original post)

Thu Apr 24, 2014, 07:13 AM

21. Keep your children

 

out of trouble, out of gangs and out of my house at 2am and you'll have nothing to worry about.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jgarrick (Original post)

Thu Apr 24, 2014, 01:06 PM

28. Another Gun Lover has difficulty understanding figurative symbolism.

I imagine you also point out the inaccuracies of Elmer Fudd's shotgun loudly in front of children.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to CBGLuthier (Reply #28)

Thu Apr 24, 2014, 01:16 PM

32. So to defend this poster, you point out that it's as accurate a depiction of guns as a Bugs Bunny

 

cartoon? Far be it from me to disagree...!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jgarrick (Original post)

Thu Apr 24, 2014, 02:31 PM

41. Gonna get $50,000,000 worth of this mis-informed bs.

Maybe they will wise up afer a while but for now it seems that the desire create some type of emotional reaction is overiding any desire or need for technical accuracy.

Can't wait to see the kinds legislative proposals that this type of willing departure from reality spawns.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to geckosfeet (Reply #41)

Thu Apr 24, 2014, 02:42 PM

43. A prominent anti-gun activist has recently explicitly admiited that her side's arguments are based

 

on emotion.

http://abcnews.go.com/blogs/politics/2014/04/can-50-million-buy-michael-bloomberg-gun-control/

“Moms are afraid our children will be taken away and in the end, I think that’s the emotion that will win the debate."

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jgarrick (Reply #43)

Thu Apr 24, 2014, 04:01 PM

47. Admitted? It is obvious. There is nothing but fear, hate, disdain and paranoia.

Last edited Fri Apr 25, 2014, 05:04 AM - Edit history (1)

When one of your main talking points is focused on someones penis I'd say you are arguing from a weak position.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to geckosfeet (Reply #41)

Fri Apr 25, 2014, 10:27 PM

64. I would have made it look just as dumb for half the price. Bloomberg should call me. nt

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jgarrick (Original post)

Thu Apr 24, 2014, 02:40 PM

42. For those who are down with this sort of exaggeration for effect...

 

Two sides can play that game:

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jgarrick (Original post)

Thu Apr 24, 2014, 03:09 PM

45. I find it more offensive

that the implication is that any gun owner is out to kill childrren.

Nor do I miss the either/or paradigm that it is painting the issue; of course no one is actually talking about banning anything beyond "reasonable" bans...

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jgarrick (Original post)

Thu Apr 24, 2014, 05:43 PM

57. That is a ridiculously long bullet. Longer than the cylinder itself.

And the shooter should always follow through, so to speak, and hold the trigger back after firing while the gun is recoiling. Phenomenal recoil control on the part of this shooter, though. One handed, too!

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jgarrick (Original post)

Fri Apr 25, 2014, 04:37 PM

60. I was against the other add.

 

This one is accurate enough for me.
That is not a cartridge. That is a bullet that has been photo shopped to show forward motion.
The trigger being forward, meh it does not bother me.
The proper argument against this add is to show that my ownership of firearms has never harmed another person, and to show that what is true for me is true for nearly 100% of legal owners.
A secondary argument can be made for an increase in firearm education. ( abstinence only education does not do anything to reduce teen pregnancy/std transmission why should we expect complete ignorance to reduce accidental gun deaths) then maybe point out that removing a feature of a firearm could not possibly reduce accidental death, but that is weaker in that it invites greater restrictions.

This add is bad in that it accuses me of being a potential murder, not because it is inaccurate.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jgarrick (Original post)

Fri Apr 25, 2014, 04:41 PM

61. More dumbing down of Americans on display here

Moral: Science matters. If you're going to make an anti-gun poster, do it right the first time.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Jgarrick (Original post)

Fri Apr 25, 2014, 07:40 PM

62. Really what difference does it make?

A bullet is deadly, regardless of how it is illustrated.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Packerowner740 (Reply #62)

Fri Apr 25, 2014, 09:33 PM

63. here are eight good reasons

including this one
It undermines the group’s own cause, and betrays the trust and loyalty of contributors, members and allies. The ad makes gun control activists look like silly, unserious fools….which, sadly, a critical mass of them are.

you can read the rest here
http://ethicsalarms.com/2014/04/22/pop-ethics-quiz-whats-wrong-with-this-picture/

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink


Response to Packerowner740 (Reply #62)

Sat Apr 26, 2014, 12:18 AM

65. Quite a lot, actually.

A bullet is deadly, regardless of how it is illustrated.

Wrong. In the poster, one sees an intact cartridge. The bullet has not separated from the casing, meaning that the powder has not ignited. The only way for a cartridge in such condition to fly through the air would be propulsion from an external force: for example, being thrown by hand or catapulted from a slingshot.

Not deadly at all.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread