View Full Version : So lets just rewrite History???
Averageman
11-19-14, 12:52
http://kdhnews.com/news/politics/washington-gun-law-leads-museum-to-remove-rifles/article_43a6ea8c-2116-5457-a038-726678b3b0c1.html
A museum in Washington state is removing World War II-era weapons from an exhibit to avoid violating a new voter-approved law requiring background checks on gun transfers.
Lynden Pioneer Museum Director Troy Luginbill tells The Bellingham Herald (http://bit.ly/1tegZtA ) that it would be a violation of Initiative 594 to keep the 11 rifles past Dec. 4. The weapons will be returned to the collectors who lent them.
State Attorney General Bob Ferguson tells the newspaper that he can't interpret the law for specific situations.
I'm in awe, just in awe of the level of full on stupid these folks have achieved.
My state took a step towards full-retard with this initiative.
wildcard600
11-19-14, 13:00
Yeah, it stupid. but how is it rewriting history ?
I think the angle is that before this initiative went into law, history could be told more completely by showing weapons used during the time (or replicas) and now cannot because of the transfer provisions. Now, we are only seeing 85% of history, thus removing the weapons entirely from public view. They have replicas of Fat Man and Little Boy in museums but we cannot have small arms in Washington museums.
...
I'm in awe, just in awe of the level of full on stupid these folks have achieved.
Apparently they've put a great deal of time and effort into the "full on stupid" project so who are you to criticize? I'm sure there's still more to be done. ;-)
I think the angle is that before this initiative went into law, history could be told more completely by showing weapons used during the time (or replicas) and now cannot because of the transfer provisions. Now, we are only seeing 85% of history, thus removing the weapons entirely from public view. They have replicas of Fat Man and Little Boy in museums but we cannot have small arms in Washington museums.
Actually they can, but the museum would have to purchase or otherwise attain them as the owners of the weapons. They can no longer be "on loan." It still damn retarded and it will result in a less than complete picture because it is unlikely the museum will actually purchase weapons and I doubt anyone will completely donate a weapon to them.
Averageman
11-19-14, 14:16
Yeah, it stupid. but how is it rewriting history ?
Well if you decide to tell the story of the Allies in WWII and take the individual weapons out of the displays, one might begin to wonder if Grandpa charged up the beach armed only with love in his heart and the best of intentions.
And I'm sure the Libs would enjoy telling the story that way.
You truly can't fix stupid. Looks like Washington has a lot of unfixable stupid in charge of their state. :(
Actually they can, but the museum would have to purchase or otherwise attain them as the owners of the weapons. They can no longer be "on loan." It still damn retarded and it will result in a less than complete picture because it is unlikely the museum will actually purchase weapons and I doubt anyone will completely donate a weapon to them.
Exactly. The cost of these weapons only goes up with time so any collector that sells them would just be leaving money on the table since it would just sit in the museum under guard 24/7. It is free money if it sits in a safe or for the world to enjoy, so why not have it be viewable for future generations?
why couldn't the museum and the owner just establish a trust?
why couldn't the museum and the owner just establish a trust?
Because then the museum would become a "legal owner" of the weapons. There is a huge difference between having some of your rare guns "on loan" to a museum and making the museum part of your "trust" which gives them legal rights to your guns.
Well if you decide to tell the story of the Allies in WWII and take the individual weapons out of the displays, one might begin to wonder if Grandpa charged up the beach armed only with love in his heart and the best of intentions.
And I'm sure the Libs would enjoy telling the story that way.
Yeah, and they just held the NAZIs' hands and sang KumBahYah around the campfire together drinking Cokes while the rest of the world sang together in perfect harmony...
Although I no longer remember the source, which was reliable, I was appalled to learn that the British government required that modern weapons in museums be deactivated by using methods that would forever prevent any type of restoration--actually butchering pieces of history. I'm referring to firearms, of course, but am surprized that these idiots didn't grind edges from swords. I think that the Brits having lost almost 1.5 million men in WW1 and then having lost another 4-500,000 in WW2 caused the population to lose valuable genes from its gene pool. We see the result.
Everybody has to be politically correct these days. We need to stand up and turn the tide. Take a friend to the range.
davidjinks
11-19-14, 22:50
Deleted
MountainRaven
11-20-14, 00:28
Well if you decide to tell the story of the Allies in WWII and take the individual weapons out of the displays, one might begin to wonder if Grandpa charged up the beach armed only with love in his heart and the best of intentions.
And I'm sure the Libs would enjoy telling the story that way.
No. They'll still watch Saving Private Ryan, Band of Brothers, and The Pacific.
It's just that they'll believe that Theodore Roosevelt ordered General George Washington to lead the Normandy invasion in 1864 to free the Jews from the Confederate States of Nazi Britain.
You truly can't fix stupid. Looks like Washington has a lot of unfixable stupid in charge of their state. :(
No, Washington has a lot of unfixable stupid voting in their state.
Law was passed by voter referendum.
Moose-Knuckle
11-20-14, 03:30
It's just that they'll believe that Theodore Roosevelt ordered General George Washington to lead the Normandy invasion in 1864 to free the Jews from the Confederate States of Nazi Britain.
My grandfather is a WWII Veteran. About a decade ago a young woman came up to him at a community center and asked him if he was a Veteran. He told her yes he was, she replied by asking which war to which he answered WWII. The young woman had a puzzled look on her face at this and asked was that in Vietnam? :suicide:
They have replicas of Fat Man and Little Boy in museums but we cannot have small arms in Washington museums.
Not a very good comparison since they could have replicas of small arms too.
Now if they had actual live nuclear weapons on display but couldn't have WW2 rifles on display, you'd have a point.
Moose-Knuckle
11-20-14, 03:40
I think the good museum should take a page from the great libtard Steven Spielberg and just omit firearms out right and replace them with walkie talkies like he did in the special politically correct edition of ET.
The_War_Wagon
11-20-14, 05:21
Silly cro-magnon gun owner! Don't you know that wars are won with well wishes, good intentions, and HOPEY-CHANGEY?!?! :rolleyes:
gunrunner505
11-20-14, 07:08
My grandfather is a WWII Veteran. About a decade ago a young woman came up to him at a community center and asked him if he was a Veteran. He told her yes he was, she replied by asking which war to which he answered WWII. The young woman had a puzzled look on her face at this and asked was that in Vietnam? :suicide:
My dad is a biochemistry professor, retired now, but one day during a virology class they were discussing advancements in medicine and such during and since WWII. One of his students asked if that was the one they fought in black and white......
My dad assured her the colors were quite vivid for the men who were there.
Now on to a question about this law, and I'm not trying to stir up an anti LE gin mill here but does this law now make every gun in the police evidence lock up illegally possessed since there was no transfer etc or are we not supposed to ask that?
I don't think it is re-wrtiting history as it is omitting the truth on how the history was made.
Steel, wood and lead…
I think that is what terrifies the left/liberal/progressive.
Exactly.. They know at some point when they go too far, that the steel wood and lead will be turned on them.. and I think they know with a president whose about to start a firestorm over a number of issues, they're close to that point..
davidjinks
11-20-14, 10:05
Deleted
Moose-Knuckle
11-20-14, 18:31
My dad is a biochemistry professor, retired now, but one day during a virology class they were discussing advancements in medicine and such during and since WWII. One of his students asked if that was the one they fought in black and white......
My dad assured her the colors were quite vivid for the men who were there.
Just wow, when you think you have heard it all. Sadly academia is not immune to such morons. Fellow member Honu use to be a SCUBA dive guide in Hawaii. He had a client who was a medical doctor (IIRC) who asked him how deep they would have to dive in order to go underneath the island.
:lol: . . . . :suicide:
But if they omit enough history/truth then they won't have to worry about people using history as a lesson.
That's fine as long as there isn't anybody around who was a participant in said history.. And, starts telling what really happened..
Powered by vBulletin® Version 4.2.5 Copyright © 2024 vBulletin Solutions, Inc. All rights reserved.