[Otis]

Might not be the right place for this thread, but.....
I have a large collection of true crime books, serial killer and horror movie memorabilia, I have all of Charles Mansons CD's and records, books, etc.

Do you think this will look bad for me if I'm involved in a self-defense shooting? If I have to defend myself with lethal force, the cops show up and I have my "FREE MANSON" shirt on, think that looks bad??

 

[rocky]

What do you think? I can think of only 1 way Manson should be "freed"

 

[David III]

I knew a guy once who carried a gun and wore a t-shirt that said "I hate everybody. @%&* off and die."
He's in prison now.
Free Manson? Interesting. No offense personally, but I'll have to go with Rocky on this particular subject.

 

[Euclidean]

It could. I wouldn't wear my artifacts for one thing. I understand that such a pursuit ultimately has a constructive purpose even if it seems a bit morbid to the sheeple, but if you give the appearance of sympathizing with these people you might come off wrong. You need to develop a self concept and stick to it.

Just remember to call a spade a spade. I.E. don't call it something it is not.

For instance I tell everyone who asks me I'm a firearms enthusiast. It's not a lie either it's the truth, and I'm not obligated to over explain myself to people who are namby pamby about it. Ultimately I realize my motive goes beyond self protection, so that's how I "style" myself.

Would you consider yourself for instance an amateur criminologist (thnk that's the right word) or criminal psychologist, or a collector of the grotesque, or a horror genre enthusiast? What is your purpose for doing this? Analysis? Thrill seeking? Fascination? The recording of folklore? You have to establish that somehow in some way.

 

[Otis]

Thanks for the input, not to get off topic here, but Manson never killed anybody with his own hands. His followers all have their own minds and they all knew exactly what they were doing. If you tell a perfectly sane person to go jump off a bridge and they do, does that make it your fault? Charlie's a bit strange but he's not a murderer. The media made people think he's a monster because they couldn't believe that these innocent looking young girls who came from good families were capable of such a horrific crime.

Now I'm way off topic, but you guys know damn well that the media makes sheeple think whatever they want them to whether were talking about 2a issues or Charles Manson. Get the facts, its just like gun issues, they want people to think a certain way about something and they'll tell whatever lies they have to.

 

[Bud White]

Well all ill say is no i dont think it looks good..

Also i could Care less about manson other than to say to bad he aint fried yet

 

[Gunnutty]

How can we blame the media for making people act or believe a certain way and not blame a charismatic leader like Manson for leading his followers to do what they did. Accessory!!! We live in country where we have to be concerned about what other people thonk to a great extent or we will lose the gains we have made in the last few years in enjoing firearms. Personally, I'm not going to defend someone like Manson. We, those who enjoy firearms are their representatives and good or bad what people think of us will also affect what they think of the firearms we advocate. Just my opinion.

 

[David III]

Otis -- you hit it by what you said - it is not the truth, it's the perception that something brings with it. As Euc put it, there's a self-concept. No matter the truth about Manson, that shirt will likely be a negative when the police arrive.
I'll see if I am able to give an example. If I'm sitting in a nice restaurant with a Harley t-shirt on and all my tattoos showing, I will be perceived a certain way if law enforcement enters the building.
But, if I am standing out in a parking lot, dressed the same way, next to my Harley, law enforcement barely glances at me. In fact, almost nobody notices. It's like people see bike - t-shirt - tattoos and they think "biker" and their world is fine. In a firearm situation in those conditions, I figure the perception of me would be the same: biker.
I don't know what it would be in a nice restaurant but it wouldn't be very promising.
Now, if you had your Manson shirt and the police asked and you said, "I am a ....." that explained it, maybe that would be good enough.
Euc: I hope I was smart enough to understand what you were explaining.

 

[P95Carry]

My own thinking is, these days sadly, we are all judged by many almost superficial standards. This includes T-Shirts, bumper stickers etc.

Best is IMO low key however much we may wish otherwise - diplomacy is better than stark statements however much we may want them.

Our interest in firearms is just that and our wish to carry is simply for defence of self and loved ones - any overt statement outside of that is probably only going to draw unnecessary and unwanted criticism from the bliss ninnies and, in the case of legal issues, almost certainly not help our cause - it might just hurt it.

Sad reflection on the present day.

 

[Gideon]

to each their own but if I ask someone to murder someone and they do it and I know they intend to follow my direction and don't stop them, then I'm almost as responsible as they are.

Hard to imagine anyone defending Manson. I agree he didn't perform the actual acts but he as good as did it.

My opinion on the shirts and other "stuff", I would guess that it could become an issue considering a lawyer is likely to look for anything that might create a certain perception in the eyes of a judge and jury.

 

[CleaningAccident]

I can only tell you that if I were sitting in the jury box at your shooting trial, and was presented with that list of political agenda, it would certainly impact my opinion.

 

[madmike]

Personally, I don't know if Hilter actually did any "hands-on" killing. But I pretty much agree that all the animosity directed his way is absolutely justified.

Same with Manson. His people were indeed sheep. And they truely loved being lead, even down that dark path. NO tears wasted on them.

We are all responsible for what we become. Don't look to place the blame elsewhere.

I'd advise against wearing that T shirt to court.

I've worn stuff like that, just for the "shock value." My sister is a tree-hugging, left-wing, died-in-the-wool Deamon-crat, whose just an inch away from being a Socialist. (She doesn't qualify, she has too much money.

I once went to her house for a familly get-together and had be warned against saying things "just to aggrivate her." (Yes, I tend to do that, at times.)

So, I was quite, kept the conversations short, but wore a T shirt that said, "I'd kill Flipper for a Tunafish Sandwich!" :image035:

As for the personal library, I've not seen anything along those lines mentioned in any self-defense shooting court case. I'd not say it couldn't happen, but unless there's something raising suspicions about the shoot, early on, I doubt an investigation would include a search warrent for your home.

Could happen, yes. Likely, I'd say not.

mm

 

[Euclidean]

Otis -- you hit it by what you said - it is not the truth, it's the perception that something brings with it. As Euc put it, there's a self-concept. No matter the truth about Manson, that shirt will likely be a negative when the police arrive.
I'll see if I am able to give an example. If I'm sitting in a nice restaurant with a Harley t-shirt on and all my tattoos showing, I will be perceived a certain way if law enforcement enters the building.
But, if I am standing out in a parking lot, dressed the same way, next to my Harley, law enforcement barely glances at me. In fact, almost nobody notices. It's like people see bike - t-shirt - tattoos and they think "biker" and their world is fine. In a firearm situation in those conditions, I figure the perception of me would be the same: biker.
I don't know what it would be in a nice restaurant but it wouldn't be very promising.
Now, if you had your Manson shirt and the police asked and you said, "I am a ....." that explained it, maybe that would be good enough.
Euc: I hope I was smart enough to understand what you were explaining.

Better stated than I said it myself.

The issue of what anyone thinks about Manson is not the issue here, it's a perception battle.

If you're going to have all of this stuff, make your purpose for it clear to yourself and have something to tell people.

Another off topic slightly but the same idea: I had a college professor who collected Nazi memorabilia; anything with a swastika on it. Had all these editions of Mein Kampf, etc. and lots of writings and propaganda. He had a good purpose for it however: he thought that it was important to preserve the memory of Hitler's Nazi party for posterity.

But he was also a little too keen on showing off some of his artifacts in his younger days, and like to share stories about how he'd wear his Nazi uniform and keep pieces of his collection in his office. It occurred to him one day that it was not prudent to keep doing this.

 

[David III]

Euc - thanks.
"Prudent" -- a great word. I like my tattoos, but it's more prudent that I wear clothing to cover them - because I don't want a negative first impression/perception to overshadow me saying that I am the 'good guy' and I was defending myself.
I guess had I wanted to bother or offend others, then I shouldn't have taken on the responsibility of carrying a gun.
An interesting thread..... years and years ago, I'd have said "to #[email protected]# with what anybody thinks" - but I didn't carry a gun then either.

 

[CLASS3NH]

I am always low key about my interests..
I don't go around with tee shortand such, .......I'd say to shy away from the stuff. You may be targeted for either being a Gangbanger type, punk, or murderer sympathizer type..
Just my 02 worth..The less hassle you get from people on your intrests, the better off you are
Ohhh as far as Chucky's concerned.......I'll throw the switch on him.. if I can..

 

[Hivoltage]

Well, I am confident that anybody finding them kinds of magazines would not help you any if you ended up in a court case.!!! I think we all can agree on that!!!!!

 

[Dog]

Thanks for the input, not to get off topic here, but Manson never killed anybody with his own hands. His followers all have their own minds and they all knew exactly what they were doing. If you tell a perfectly sane person to go jump off a bridge and they do, does that make it your fault? Charlie's a bit strange but he's not a murderer. The media made people think he's a monster because they couldn't believe that these innocent looking young girls who came from good families were capable of such a horrific crime.

Now I'm way off topic, but you guys know damn well that the media makes sheeple think whatever they want them to whether were talking about 2a issues or Charles Manson. Get the facts, its just like gun issues, they want people to think a certain way about something and they'll tell whatever lies they have to.

You say Manson couldn't make sane people do or think what he wanted to, then you turn around and say the media can make millions and millions of people think anything that they tell them.

 

[Bud White]

Lets keep it Friendly


Welcome

 

[Dog]

Sorry about that. I removed that part of the post.

Thanks for the welcome. I have been lurking awhile, didn't realize I have never posted here lol.

 

[Bud White]

Not a problem Make sure ya swing over to the new members part and introduce your self