OK everyone, let's clear the air here about the word "tote"

[Starboard Tack]

Apparently, there are some who feel the term "tote" or "toter" is in some way derogatory when it comes to carrying a gun on one's person. I use the word often because I think it is applicable. It is the most applicable word I can think of. Does anyone find this word offensive?
I have never considered it offensive in any way. It is a word I grew up with. A perfectly innocuous word, meaning to carry something by hand, or on one's person. A very simple, economical and descriptive word. It truly baffles me why anyone would ever find it insulting.

[Common Sense Party]

1. How about the word "grab" or "grabber"?

[Starboard Tack]

3. Huh? Since when did grab mean tote?

[Common Sense Party]

4. Huh? When did I say it did?

I was merely asking how YOU felt about THAT word.

If you're fine with the word "toter" you must also like the word "grabber."

[Starboard Tack]

5. Why wouldn't I be? What does it have to do with the OP?

Neither word is offensive. They are words that describe actions. Ordinary verbs.

[petronius]

2. I think the word 'tote' has a negative connotation: like 'lug',

'drag', and perhaps 'haul' - it suggests a dreary, laborious, mindless act of transporting a burden, perhaps something that holds back the actor. I don't think it has the same implication when used as a noun (tote or tote bag), but in those cases there is a suggestion of trivialty; a tote bag is something in which you carry your inconsequential property (sunblock and beach reading, for example)...

It's fine if you consider it equivalent in meaning and implication to a word like 'carry' - but if you see no difference, why not defer to the feelings of other DUers (even if at the cost of typing an extra letter)?

[Starboard Tack]

6. I see no negative connotation with the word "tote"

I don't know where you get the idea that it suggests "a dreary, laborious, mindless act of transporting a burden, perhaps something that holds back the actor". What basis do you have for that?
Why should I "defer" to the feelings of those who have limitations in comprehending every day words? Tote is a far more apt word, when it comes to the carrying of a gun, than the generic word "carry".
Look it up in any dictionary and you will find that it is a word often used specifically to describe the carrying of a personal firearm. Find me a better word and I will consider using it.

[petronius]

7. You asked a question, and I answered it. And despite your transparent disingenuousness

and snide mention of "limitations" you know my answer is correct. The reason you should defer is common courtesy; what you actually choose to do is up to you...

The better word, as you know perfectly well, is carry.

[Starboard Tack]

8. If you can demonstrate how the word is, in any way, offensive, I shall be happy to defer

If not, I will not be bullied into using less descriptive words, chosen by those who do not understand the language they claim as their own.

[petronius]

9. Again: you asked a question, I assumed you were sincere, so I answered it

I don't really care what words you use, and how you choose to behave online is your own business. But if you really want to know how some people interpret the word "tote" (IMO) then refer to my previous post. And make use of the information as you will...

[PavePusher]

42. There is a poster here who has repeatedly linked the word to a variety of negative conotations....

via insinuation, assertion, accusation, hyperbole, disinformation, stereotyping, bigotry and outright lies.

If you can't figure it out, you haven't been paying attention.

[Starboard Tack]

46. No, sorry. Toter is a word used by many toters.

To me it's the same as biker, or boater.

[ManiacJoe]

55. No, "toter" is a word used by the anti-gun folks.

It is used by Hoyt as a slur, as has been pointed out to you many times now. The only time the pro-gun folks use that word on DU is in mocking Hoyt.

The word you are looking for is "carrier".

[iverglas]

64. "It is used by Hoyt as a slur"

That makes no more sense than saying that saying that someone who is a nascar fan is a nascar fan is a slur, if you follow that.

If someone thinks that being a nascar fan is a bad thing, then saying that someone who is a nascar fan is a nascar fan may amount to pointing out something the speaker considers bad, but it's still just simple truth. Even if someone else thinks "nascar fan" is used as an insult, and even if it is used as an insult.

(That is the analogy that came to mind because the other day I had to adjudicate an alert having to do with nascar fans being broadbrushed or some such noise. Yeeeeesh.)

"Gun-toting" is a time-honoured USAmerican catch-phrase.

"Golden Age Western Comics is a collection unlike any other and is sure to delight fans of rootin-tootin, gun-toting, adventure of all ages!"

tote/tōt/
Verb:
Carry, wield, or convey (something heavy or substantial):
"help him tote the books"; "a gun-toting loner".

Maybe we should insist that it be written out in long form: "gun toter". Seems unnecessary.

One really is allowed to use accurate terms to describe people, even people one disapproves of, you know.

If you disapprove of ex-lawyers, feel free to use that term as an epithet to describe me.

[ManiacJoe]

79. Educate yourself on Hoyt and "toter" by

reading the last few months at DU2.

[iverglas]

91. read what I said and reply to it

As long as we're issuing orders around here.

To use something as a "slur", one applies it to someone with the intent that someone else will infer nasty things from it, in a situation where it's actually irrelevant.

If you said to me "you ex-lawyer you", in a conversation about the relative merits of apples and oranges, hoping that your audience would understand and agree with you that ex-lawyers are untrustworthy, devious, dishonest people, and they should thus not listen or give credit to what I had to say, you would be using it as a slur.

So I suppose if Hoyt went around calling people "toters" for that purpose, to discredit or incite dislike of someone, it might qualify as a slur. Don't believe what he says, he's a toter. Hold your nose when she comes over, she's a toter. You don't want your kid marrying a toter, do you?

I don't know, it gets too dumb for me.

If Hoyt or anyone else thinks that people who promenade around in public festooned in firearms -- to use my well-loved own phraseology -- are rude, then "rude toter" might seem redundant, but it's just an opinion.

Some pretty silly stuff around here, is how it seems to me. If somebody can come up with an epithet for stringent firearms control advocates that is actually accurate and wants to apply it to me, feel free. Readily (if not intentionally) misunderstood and over-broad terms like "gun-grabber" won't make the grade.

The one so-called word that I find offensive and am glad is unacceptable is "hoplophobe", given that it ascribes an abnormal mental condition and irrational thought process to the target. If there are such people as hoplophobes in the world, they're quite rare. And, of course, there are some who may have anxiety responses to certain things or situations that are not "irrational fear and dread" at all; fear and dread that derive from experience aren't irrational ...

Now, "gun fetishist" -- well, rare enough, I'm sure, that it shouldn't be assumed.


I just have to note one I encountered in some googling just now: "gunsexual". C'mon now; that's so way out there it's funny.

Okay, the challenge: come up with an equally funny one for my "side". Then we could all just agree to use those and only those in future and nobody could complain.

maximum5roundhead ...

... okay, you get the "maximum 5 rounds" part; you may need some English Civil War history for the rest ...

http://www.spartacus.schoolnet.co.uk/STUroundheads.htm

"The term Roundheads was applied to soldiers who supported Parliament during the Civil War. It originated as a term of abuse and refered to those Puritans who had their hair cut very short."

(I love spelling mistakes on educational websites.)



Oh heck, how about just the Cavaliers (you) and Roundheads (us).

Pick your side.

[ManiacJoe]

103. What part has left you confused?

You seem to understand what a slur is.

You seem to be in denial that Hoyt is using the word has a slur. Go back and read for yourself. Stop arguing from ignorance.

Maybe some clarification is needed on the Hoyt and "toter as slur". Hoyt is the only one using the word this way. No one else. After being repeatedly mocked for it, Hoyt seems to have stopped.

No one else except Hoyt attempts to use the word as a slur. No one else seems to think it is a slur. Never mind that Hoyt tends to be the only one that uses the word at all, outside the mocking of him such, as "rude toter" in various posts.

Hoyt may or may not be a gun owner; however Hoyt is definitely not a "toter" according to Hoyt.

I don't disapprove of ex-lawyers; I would not attempt to use term as a slur against you or anyone else.

[PavePusher]

164. You are arguing with the Jello. Don't waste your time. n/t

[Starboard Tack]

70. Really? Better tell these guys.

Gun Toters Supply | Rohrbaugh Firearms
www.rohrbaughfirearms.com/node/93

Gun Toters Supply in Eynon, PA 18403 - [phone]
directory.the570.com/gun+toters+supply.9.16224042p.home.html
Information on Gun Toters Supply in Eynon

Apparently they aren't aware in PA that they are insulting their own customers.

[spin]

68. I have never heard one person who has a concealed weapons permit...

say that he "totes". I know a hell of a lot of people who have carry permits.

The common phrase I often hear is "carry" or "carries".

For example a local cop asked me, "Are you carrying?" He had responded to a report of a prowler in our neighborhood and was about to check out the property surrounding a vacant house. He knew I had a carry permit as we were friends and since he was the only cop on duty, he wanted me to accompany him as a backup. I also had a six cell maglite which was far more powerful than his flashlight.

Your use of the words "tote" or "toter" doesn't bother me in the least. But the term is not commonly used in Florida where I live.

[Starboard Tack]

71. I'm relieved that it doesn't bother you

As I'm sure it's also a relief to the makers of Toters Jeans and the various stores that advertise Gun Toter Supplies.

[spin]

120. I have never heard of either company...

I buy my concealed carry clothing from LAPolice Gear or Duluth Trading Company.

Toters Jeans advertises jeans designed by Blackie Collins who was primarily known for his assisted opening and automatic knife designs. Gun Toters Supply appears to be a small gun store in Archbald, PA.

Merriam-Webster defines gun toting as:

: the carrying and use of a gun usu. for criminal purposes <stiffer punishment for gun toting — W.T.Brannon>
http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/gun%20toting

Since I do not carry a firearm for criminal purposes, I don't qualify as a gun toter.

[Starboard Tack]

127. Does the fact you haven't heard of them invalidate them in some way?

If so, maybe you should call them and let them know that a crime novelist and journalist who died 30 years ago has been quoted by Merriam Webster as saying "gun toting means carrying a gun, usually (not always) for criminal purposes".
All that googling and we've found ONE quote in a dictionary that says ONE guy says USUALLY.

I respectfully disagree with Mr. Brannon.

[spin]

135. No as I said the term "toter" doesn't bother me in the least...

so I would have no problem dealing with either company. However I don't wear jeans and I have found LAPolice Gear and Duluth Trading Co. to be a great sites to buy clothing from. I buy knives made by Bark River Knife and Tool, Benchmade Knife Company or ESEE knives and I buy my firearms and shooting supplies locally. Therefore I doubt that I will ever do any business with either of the companies with Toter in their names.

[Starboard Tack]

194. Now cops in Fla. are using armed citizens as backups?

Damn, you guys get funnier by the day. Do you get special badges for that? I'm sure it's a great help in these times of economic strife. Kind of a win-win situation, as it will definitely help control the population numbers.

[We_Have_A_Problem]

195. Did you read the entire post?

If you did, how did you arrive at that conclusion?


Once again, blatant misrepresentation of someone's statements in a lame attempt to advance your cause.

[Starboard Tack]

198. Lighten up there WHAP

It's Monday morning. Time for coffee and the gungeon funnies.

[We_Have_A_Problem]

199. It would be easier...

...to recognize such a post as humor were you not to ever do such a thing seriously.

[Starboard Tack]

200. Ah, but not on a Monday morning.

Of course, it's not morning everywhere, is it?

[spin]

196. I'm sure this was a rare incident in a small town...

and as I pointed out he was probably more interested in my Maglite to spotlight the way than my presence. Also remember that we were friends and we sometimes went shooting together.

[Starboard Tack]

197. I know. Just couldn't help myself.

It conjured up such funny images of old codgers from the mid-west backing up Florida cops with their pocket pistols and Maglites. And I must admit, your Maglite is way bigger than mine.

[spin]

201. I once witnessed an accident...

when an police officer arrived he was trying to read the license of one of the people involved with a cheap plastic flashlight. I brought over my big Maglite and he said, "They used to let us carry those."

[Wistful Vista]

192. and the N word is a word used by many N people.

Now I see.

[Starboard Tack]

193. Enjoy your experience on DU

[Wistful Vista]

202. I was simply pointing out that just because some people use a word without rancor, does not mean

it's not a pejorative under other circumstances. I assumed you would grasp the point, obviously I was much too optimistic.

[Starboard Tack]

203. Really? And who would "N" people be?

[Straw Man]

10. I'm plumb tuckered out from totin' my shootin' iron all over tarnation.

[div class = excerpt]Tote is a far more apt word, when it comes to the carrying of a gun, than the generic word "carry".
Find me a state or municipality that issues permits to "tote a concealed weapon" and I'll buy that. Otherwise, I will maintain that the standard verb for what one does when one ventures forth with a firearm is "carry."

Oxford considers tote to be informal and of "of dialect origin."

http://oxforddictionaries.com/definition/tote

My impression is that it is used by gun-controllers for the archaic and rural sense that it conveys, and is meant to be pejorative. That may not be your intention, but please be aware that many here interpret it that way.

Is the air any clearer?

[Hoyt]

34. I think the majority of DUers have a much harsher view of people who carry/tote/strap-on, etc.

I suspect the vast majority of DUers -- not just the ones who huddle here -- view gun proliferation and "carrying" as an issue society needs to deal with at some point. Unfortunately, when we get around to it there will be another 100 million guns polluting our society.

Finally, where I live -- in the South -- those who carry guns are stuck in some "gun culture" mentality and often carry them primarily because of their bigotry. It's just a fact and one of the main reasons I take issue with guns, particularly in public.

I'd like to see guns become like wearing a swastika, smoking in public, spitting chewing tobacco, etc. -- something good people try not to do, even if they really want to.

[Common Sense Party]

35. Do you have any proof to back up your "suspicions"?

Regardless of what you'd like, my gun is NOTHING like wearing a swastika, and to even suggest such a thing is ridiculous.

[Hoyt]

44. Yes.

[Common Sense Party]

63. So, no. Got it.

[rrneck]

37. You took an off ramp by mistak there dude. Jump back on at the next exit. nt

[Tuesday Afternoon]

62. good lord

"in the South -- those who carry guns are stuck in some "gun culture" mentality and often carry them primarily because of their bigotry"

thanks for perpetuating that myth.

[Hoyt]

84. Not a myth at all.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

94. if you say so -- --

right.

[Starboard Tack]

75. Hoyt - you are absolutely correct.

I happen to be spending the weekend with three of our DU brethren, all from different parts of the country. All are former mods from DU2. None of them ever participate in the gungeon. They question my participation, as their past experience as mods convinced them that this was not the healthiest of environments. They think voicing their opinions here would change little. I argue that it would. Fact is, most people find guns and the gun culture so distasteful, that they tune out. They are unaware of what is happening in this country. Most people don't have a clue about the proliferation of CC and if you tell them only one state still holds onto it's sanity by a hair, they are dumbfounded.
If I hadn't participated here, I would be one of them. By chance, I popped my head in one day and was stunned. But better to learn about this phenomenon from fellow Dems, as I believe most here to be, than from those we have little respect for.

I think most of our friends here genuinely believe that more guns being toted by the right people is the answer to reducing violent crime in this country. I find the notion absurd, as do most of us, but that does not make them dishonest.

[Hoyt]

88. I stumbled in here as well and was disappointed to see folks promoting more guns.

Some even compared their gun plight to the real Civil Rights movement.

In any event, I wish more Democrats would come here.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

96. wtf

what the hell do you think is posting in here.

why don't you just go ahead and call out who in here that you think are not Democrats...

[Hoyt]

110. I said that I wish more Democrats like Starboard Tack posted about would come here.

Your anger over nothing is a good reason folks shouldn't carry guns. What happens if you misinterpret a "situation" so easily when carrying a lethal weapon in Chuck E Cheeze?

[Tuesday Afternoon]

112. no that is not what you said. You have rephrased it in your subjectline. As for the rest of your

post...you are speaking to something which you know nothing about. You may think you know me but, you don't.

Righteous indignation is not anger but, may appear akin to it when pixels on a computer screen is all you have to judge my mannerisms.

on edit: In any event, I wish more Democrats would come here. <----this is what you said.

[Hoyt]

113. I responded to S Tack, so holster your gun.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

115. you replied on a public message board for all to read and reply to as they see fit

?holster my gun you a cute little thing when you're skeered.

Imah gonna mosey along now. Y'all have a good evening now, ya heah.

[DanTex]

102. It was weird the first time in here to see Democrats spewing all the same right-wing...

...talking points you'd hear at an NRA convention. Comparing "gun rights" to civil rights and complaining about "anti-gun bigotry" and insisting that "guns don't kill people" etc.

I agree, most progressives and Democrats do feel the way you and Starboard Tack have described -- that the gun culture is pretty distasteful and often downright bigoted, and that this whole idea that safety is achieved by having people walking around everywhere carrying loaded guns is nuts. And this includes people who own guns and enjoy shooting. It's one thing to own a gun, quite another to carry one everywhere you go, always prepared to shoot whatever bad guy may turn up, and also to go on about how this is a "right" and without it there would be "tyranny" etc.

In my view, gun militancy is primarily a way for bitter and resentful teabagger types to say FU to the supposedly liberal elite that is supposedly turning America into a socialist dystopia. Obama got in trouble for saying this, but it was basically right. However, guns are a highly emotional issue for those sorts of people, and so Democrats have by and large made the political calculation to leave guns alone and not rile up the right-wing base.

[Hoyt]

108. Exactly. Well said.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

116. respectfully, I disagree.

[gejohnston]

124. That has not been my experience, and I respectfully disagree

but my explanation is not and is not meant to be.

What people heard (although I don't think he meant) and you agree with (I think you do mean it) is:
"we detest working class and rural Americans in fly over land as much as the Republicans, we are just more honest about it. Oh yeah, you Evangelicals are our Muslims."
The right does not have a monopoly on shallowness, narrow mindedness, and bigotry. It is equally despicable coming from the left as the right. In the past, I have referred to a couple of progressive sites as "freerepublic left" They are. As soon as Walker is ousted, those same workers and farmers who marched on Madison will go back to being "gun toting hicks, trailer trash, yahoos, hillbillies" in the minds of the many faux liberals that inhabit them.

[DanTex]

173. Just to be clear, you're accusing me of "detest(ing) working class and rural Americans".

What's really despicable is pro-gunners whining about "bigotry", because the whole concept of "anti-gun bigotry" is an insult to people who have been victimized by real bigotry.

Since I've said nothing about working class and rural Americans, this appears to be a smear that you just invented off the top of your head. I have nothing against gun owners (urban or rural), or people who like shooting guns, or whatever. In fact, I like shooting guns. It's fun.

However, I do think that the gun obsession is fueled by more than just recreation or self defense. I definitely think it's a way of say FU to a supposedly liberal elite, and I do think that, as Obama said, people cling to things like guns and religion and anti-immigration in the face of economic woes. And I think that a lot of people who carry loaded guns around are doing it for psychological or "gun culture" reasons rather than rational concerns about safety and self-defense.

But this has nothing to do with "bigotry". For example, I also think that most people who slam the gas pedal and screech away when the light turns green aren't doing that because they really need to get somewhere quickly. Is that bigotry too? Am I a vile "anti-gas-pedal-slammer"?

[gejohnston]

179. when they read between the lines

that is what they hear. I live there, I know.

The only people talking about liberal elites are talk radio heads. The average person does not give a shit. It is being blamed for problems they don't create. That is the real thought process. That is not meant to be a smear, simply an honest observation.

[Starboard Tack]

137. Very well said

[ellisonz]

139. It's incredible...

...to see someone get emotional about semi-automatic weapons and 33 round magazines.

Agreed, but gun militancy, but I will not deny the right of properly screened Americans to carry a weapon for self-defense. I don't think doing so at political events, schools, hospitals, churches etc. is remotely appropriate. My issue is with our failure to do any sort of real evaluation of competency.

[gejohnston]

150. As a church/state separation near absolutist,

carry rules in public buildings should be up to the level of government that uses/owns it.
churches should be up to the church, the same as any other business. Yes, they should pay taxes like everyone else

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

175. To the best of my knowledge...

...churches are treated the same as other non-profit orgs. They are required to file with the IRS and need to qualify for tax exemption.

[Starboard Tack]

169. I agree

and I don't think you mean that there are folk here who are not Denocrats, but rather most Dems don't pay much attention to the gun issues.

[mvccd1000]

157. I notice some dichotomy between your points.

1) "Fact is, most people find guns and the gun culture so distasteful..."
2) "... the proliferation of CC and... only one state still holds on to its sanity."

I'm curious why "most people" can find the gun culture distasteful, yet 49 of the 50 states allow CC, and most of them have adopted it within the last 2 decades.

There seems to be some disconnect within your argument. I'd say:
1) If most people find the gun culture distasteful, we'd see less CC.
2) Since we see more CC, I think most people do not find the gun culture distasteful.

[Starboard Tack]

168. I know. Makes you wonder, doesn't it?

Maybe most people aren't really paying attention to what happens in their state legislatures. That's my take. Could be wrong. Often am.

[AtheistCrusader]

161. By all means, go back and dig up the results of the survey in General Discussion.

I'll wait.

[PavePusher]

165. Post #42 confirmed. Thanks for your assistance. n/t

[SteveW]

180. I love NWA. And the airline as well. Isn't term-rehab wonderful? nt

[ellisonz]

11. How about "packer" - that's pretty innoucuous.

[petronius]

12. How about carrier? It seems to be what those who actually do it prefer...

[ellisonz]

13. Only with a couple conditions...

(1) Cessation of attacks on intelligence i.e. can we stop calling each other stupid.
(2) No more Grammar Nazi.
(3) No more questioning of thread content as long as its the ballpark - the pro-gun crowd thinks crime stories are spam and we think gun pics are porn. Basic level of engagement.

Get me 5 main pro-gun folks to sign off on that and you'll get a deal.

Edit: Good Luck

[petronius]

17. A deal? You misunderstand my purpose in this thread: as I told ST above I don't

care what terms people use. I took him at his word that he wanted to know why (some) people look askance at "toter" and so I told him. Your suggestion of a trade indicates that you know perfectly well that some DUers are irritated by words like "toter" and "packer" and the like and you use them to elicit that response - whether you (and ST) choose to continue that behavior is entirely up to you...

(And, to make sure it's completely clear, my goal here is purely educational. I'm not offended by obvious attempts to offend, and my only interest is to answer the OP's question and clear up any confusion if it really exists. This is my smiley )

[ellisonz]

19. Since some seem to take it as an offense...I'm offering compromise.

Last edited Sat Jan 7, 2012, 09:11 PM - Edit history (1)

If you're not interested in rounding up the troops, well then toter and packer it is...and my favorite gunner. As in, the gunner was toting his AK-47 at the mall, and the security guard took affront that he was packing.

(Education is one thing; the prevalence of ignorance of basic civility in this forum is quite another. This is my smiley )

[petronius]

21. If you need deals and compromises in order to show courtesy, I'd conclude

that basic civility isn't as important to you as you let on. But that's your business; how we all choose to behave online is ultimately a personal decision (and a reflection of our personalities). I personally don't care what words you use (or ST, or anyone else), but I'm glad you understand your motivation for using them...

[ellisonz]

23. There are levels of civility.

There's a difference between almost joking words like tote, pack, and gunner and more offensive words. I've never been uncivil unless I've been insulted repeatedly first. What can I say, it's leverage, but really would it kill you or some of the more sensible other regulars to reign some of the posters here in a bit; the tone is downright hostile, I think they like it that way, and it's really not what DU is about IMHO.

Just saying, an appeal for civility can't hurt.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

56. this is your appeal for civility ?!

as I see it, you are one of the worst offenders for setting that tone of hositility.

just saying there old chap

[ellisonz]

129. For disagreeing with a failing gun control policy...

...and wanting to see one that works?

Excuse me buddy

[Tuesday Afternoon]

131. this thread is about discussing policy civilly with fellow DUers.

you are excused.

sheesh.

[ellisonz]

138. And I'm talking about...

...the incivility on both sides. It's not a one way street. Do you concede that or are you just going to be patronizing?

"you are excused" = patronizing

[Tuesday Afternoon]

140. I realize that I am being hyperbolic in this thread in order to make my point.

[ellisonz]

142. That's not hyperbolic, that's disrespect.

Thank you for making my point for me, have a good night.

Edit: Disrespect is not the same thing as *disagreement*

[Tuesday Afternoon]

145. the OP was disrespectful from the start. good night.

[SteveW]

181. LOL. What do you expect from a [g-worder]? nt

[Common Sense Party]

182. The word is "grabber." He doesn't mind it at all.

[iverglas]

67. actually, I don't think ellisonz needs anything

The proposal was:

(1) Cessation of attacks on intelligence i.e. can we stop calling each other stupid.
(2) No more Grammar Nazi.
(3) No more questioning of thread content as long as its the ballpark - the pro-gun crowd thinks crime stories are spam and we think gun pics are porn. Basic level of engagement.

and I haven't noticed ellisonz engaging in any of those behaviours, myself.

So I'd say all the "you"s in your post are rather out of place, and might be apologized for.


Myself, I'd say there's still a little bit too much of "I don't care who started it" there. Gun pictures and gun fan letters ARE inappropriate content for this forum. News items featuring firearms, virtually no matter the content or context, aren't.

[petronius]

118. And I would say that your response demonstrates a failure to understand

this subthread, and your suggestion that I might have anything to apologize for would itself call for a retraction and apology (in the context of a civil discourse)...

[iverglas]

65. your smiley failed ;)

I wanted to see what it looks like.

I think what you typed was

: jester : )

without the spaces. There's a problem with parentheses being combined with punctuation to make unintended random idiotfaces. Twice, I have put a quotation in parentheses in jury reasons and had it come out as:

("blah blah&quot

and missed it on the preview, and it peeved me enormously to see the dumb winkies winking at me in the middle of my hugely serious comments ...


edit -- Oh right, NOW it won't make random idiotfaces for me. That was supposed to look like

("blah blah

and I have no idea why it suddently isn't. Hmm, maybe I've been typing :s instead of "s ... and now I wonder whether :s will make a stupidface ...

Had this problem at another internet site last year. They introduced smilies for the first time -- only it was set up so that if you ended a line with a colon (something very common there, where people often write an introductory line followed by a cut and paste of information), the colon combined with the html tag for a hard line return to make an idiotface ... and this was applied retroactively to thousands and thousands of posts on the boards. Took weeks to get the stupid admin there to fix the damned mess.

[ellisonz]

130. That shit is annoying. n/t

[Starboard Tack]

47. Carrier is more apt for an airline or a pigeon

And pigeons are really doves, so no, I think not.
You could use bearer as in the Constitution, but I can think of no better word than toter.
Just like these guys.
http://www.rohrbaughfirearms.com/node/93

[Union Scribe]

49. You clearly have no interest in settling this.

That ridiculous post about pigeons is ample proof.

[Starboard Tack]

53. I grew up raising carrier pigeons

and toting guns around the farm.

[Starboard Tack]

149. I have nothing to settle. I have made my position clear.

I do not use the word "toter" in a pejorative way. It is just a word that is a synonym for carry. Period.
I am not a purist/extremist regarding guns. I am a supporter of discriminate toting, but an opponent of indiscriminate, mindless toting. I use the word because of economy and accuracy.

[iverglas]

69. haha

http://www.rohrbaughfirearms.com/node/93

"Gun Toters Supply"

Somebody needs to have a word with those, uh, enthusiasts.

Helll, even the iconic opencarry.org seems to need chiding - check the search results for

site:www.opencarry. org toter

(w/o the space of course)

[gejohnston]

119. Thanks

I was looking for a pocket pistol. I like the Seecamp design, but the Ruger LPC is easier to find without special ordering. My only problem with the Ruger is that it is more common and popular, like Windows (I use Linux). I'll have to check these guys out.

[Starboard Tack]

122. Happy to help. Did you check out the Toter Jeans too?

I also use Linux, love it. Ubuntu rocks. Good to know we are both discriminating in our tastes.

[gejohnston]

126. If I actually get a pocket pistol I may.

Really don't have use for either since I am still too cheap to give Rick Scott $147 for the CCW application.

[Union Scribe]

48. Exactly. That is the word.

And they know that, because it's the term used by any serious journalist, legislator, etc.

[Straw Man]

14. Innocuous? I ask you...

[ellisonz]

15. So you're conceeding it's in common use? n/t

[Straw Man]

16. Well, it was in 1943, anyway.

Nowadays it sounds pretty corny, but I guess that's innocuous in a way.

I'll still look to the language of official documents for the neutral terminology: I have yet to see a permit to "pack a concealed weapon."

[ellisonz]

18. AP is still using it.

Even the gun people are using it:

See above, I'm willing to make a deal on names for the pro-gun control side if y'all are willing to make a deal on civility.

Otherwise packers it is...

[Straw Man]

20. AP headlines aren't good models of usage.

Just more cornball clichés from lazy journalists.

[div class = excerpt]Even the gun people are using it
Really? I didn't hear any of them use it. Maybe I missed it. The only person I heard utter the word was the TV reporter. See "lazy journalists" above.

[div class = excerpt]See above, I'm willing to make a deal on names for the pro-gun control side if y'all are willing to make a deal on civility.

Otherwise packers it is...
You do see the irony here, don't you?

[ellisonz]

22. "You do see the irony here, don't you?"

Nope, I'm irony impaired too

[Union Scribe]

51. Threatening people with language is uncivil

"I want x or else I'll be calling you y" is certainly not the way to garner progress toward "civil" discussion.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

99. +1

[ellisonz]

133. I really should make a list of all the nastiness that's been directed towards me in this forum...

In just a short span. I see no reason for unilateral cessation. I think I made pretty reasonable requests for civility. I've only ever said that some civility would be nice. I also don't throw them around except jokingly. I'm trying to be a peacemaker, but I can clearly see it isn't wanted.

[rrneck]

38. That might start a bunch of shit with some football fans.

There's been enough trouble in the sports forum.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

98. yeah, if this is Green Bay...

cheesus.

[rl6214]

141. Green bay Packers?

Love em, they are my team.

Go Pack Go

[one-eyed fat man]

24. Common use

So are gay and queer. But the brewers of Pabst have long since quit referring to their beer winning awards in the "gay Nineties" and the last time "queer" was used to mean a little odd or curious was in the long gone "Dick and Jane" primary readers.

Usage has given those perfectly good words a connotation which has made their use in their original context difficult.

One particular poster here has made "tote" his personal pejorative by his usage. His incessant portrayal of anyone with a concealed weapons permit who actually uses it as some kind of mouth-breathing moron, married to his sister, living in a trailer festooned with Confederate flags has become synonymous with his use of the word "toter."

It has become an insult because it was intended it as one.

[ileus]

25. Stop being obtuse.

How about baser?

or gunner?

or gunnut?

or rotten fuckass toter?

they're all just cute words used to describe legal citizens.


I like using them as much as the next anti...

[Tuesday Afternoon]

58. hey, I like that one: "rotten fuckass toter"

feel free to call me that anytime, especially when I'm totin!

[mvccd1000]

26. I don't find it insulting in the least, and I are one.

I may have thicker skin than the average bear, though.

Feel free to continue using it without fear of offending me, at least.

[Starboard Tack]

39. Congratulations! Someone who understands English.

You appear, so far, to be the only DU toter not offended by the word. I honestly don't get it.
Are they offended at being associated with what they do. Toting is a common word used by many toters.
Hey, check out these Toters Jeans, with their neat little toting pockets.
http://www.totersjeans.com/

[Tuesday Afternoon]

117. with the way you are reasoning this

the "n" word should not be offensive. You do follow this reasoning, right? I can spell it out for you, if need be, beginning with the origin of the word until its present connonation where it is not allowed on DU...

as I said in my first post in this thread: I am not offended by the word "toter" BUT because other fellow DUers are, I will refrain from using it out of respect for my fellow DUers.

To not do so would rightfully be considered disrespectful of my fellow DUers.

So, in essence, what you are implying is that you will continue to, willfully and with aforeknowledge, do things that are offensive to your fellow DUers.

right?

keep it up, dude.

I have seen this happen before on DU. It does not end well. not. for. anyone.

I know.

[ileus]

28. death spewer toter....

my new favorite.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

59. meh

I am still digging on "rotten fuckass toter"

I may come around to your way of thinking, though -- expecially when I'm totin

[ileus]

107. That's Imah totin'

[Tuesday Afternoon]

111. Imah so sorry.

[MicaelS]

29. It's a term used in a DELIBERATELY pejorative manner

Last edited Sat Jan 7, 2012, 11:15 AM - Edit history (1)

To disparage those exercising, or attempting their Right to Bear Arms.

"Tote" and "toter" started being used by a certain member to express that member's absolute contempt for anyone who legally carries a concealed weapon.

Just like the term "Militant" is used in a deliberately pejorative manner on both the Left and the Right to disparage those seeking to exercise their Freedoms.

"Gun Militant" is another term used by certain members to express their contempt for those who try to exercise and expand the RKBA.

"Militant" or "Militants" is used by Right Wingers in connection with the terms "Free Speech", "Atheist", "Homosexual", "Abortion", "Feminist" to disparage those seeking to exercise their Freedoms.

Since you are not a new member and have debated others on the issue of the RKBA before, your original post is deliberately disingenuous.

You want to use a term? Use "CCW". That is a simple shorthand everyone knows what you're speaking of.

[Fredjust]

31. I'm glad you like it

Haha, I see my phrase "death spewer" is picking up fans! I find it to be a far more...accurate... term for guns.

[ileus]

32. You're a rude toter aren't you.

Sorry I couldn't resist....


Great post and spot on.

Some people love faux stealth pot stirring, and this post is one of the best.

[DanTex]

54. "Gun militant"...

How else would you describe people like Wayne LaPierre, or Mike Vanderbough from Sipsey Street, or this guy:
http://movieclips.com/yHuD-bowling-for-columbine-movie-a-gun-under-his-pillow/

[Tuesday Afternoon]

60. if and when Wayne or Mike or that other guy post in this group feel free to use it on them

[DanTex]

82. And also, I'm going to keep "using it on them" even if they don't post here.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

85. as long you make the reference clear and don't use it on your fellow good and proper DUers.

that is the point of the whole thread, right?

to show some consideration of your fellow DUers.

truly, though ...

call me whatever just don't call me late for supper.

[iverglas]

78. oooh, it's moi!

"Gun Militant" is another term used by certain members to express their contempt for those who try to exercise and expand the RKBA.

No, sorry, you're wrong. And you're talking about me (and one other person at this site, independently, unless the practice has spread), so I know.

"Gun militant" doesn't express my contempt for anyone. It is an accurate descriptive term I use to describe people whom I happen to hold in contempt.

It doesn't express my contempt for them. It identifies them. What I then say about them might express my contempt for them, or might just report some facts about them; whatever.

I explained the term quite a while ago.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=118&topic_id=174189&mesg_id=174357

Wed Jun-04-08

... QUOTE: Most gun owners in America believe strongly in the "right to keep and bear arms". Therefore your term "gun militant crowd" would be an appropriate description of gun owners in the states.UNQUOTE

No. It wouldn't.

Don't get me wrong. I do not use the word "militant" as a pejorative. But I do use it as what it means, and it doesn't mean "anyone with strongly held views". So even if your characterization of most anyone who owns a firearm of a strong holder of the views you posit were accurate, it would not support a further characterization of those people as "militants".

A militant doesn't just believe in something, a militant adopts the promotion of the thing s/he believes in as a cause, and militates for it.

I have also pointed out:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=118&topic_id=233666&mesg_id=233855

<link to google search results>

"gun militants" used at DU, minus moi and Paladin.
<who will have no objection to being mentioned here>

Gets you exactly 14 results.

A goodly proportion of which are actually for "anti-gun militants".

(Eek! "Anti-gun militants"?? Who would say such a rude thing???)

(I also said, back in 2009: "not all firearms owners are gun militants - Not even all NRA members are. I knew that. Did you?&quot

I am, for example, a reproductive choice militant. A universal single public payer health insurance militant. As compared to, say, an anti-abortion militant or a private health insurance militant.

I could call an anti-abortion militant "anti-choice"; one can be anti-abortion without being a militant or being anti-choice.

"Militant" is not a pejorative term. I'm proud to be a militant for things I believe strongly in.

I should probably expand "gun militant"; in a sense, I'm a gun militant, just as both I and an anti-choicer are abortion militants: militant about abortion. It can be pretty hard to spell out just what gun militants are militant about, though. Especially since, as we all know I know, it usually hasn't got a lot to do with guns anyhow.

(And don't be telling me it's about "gun rights" or any similar blather. That's just question-begging.)

Note that in this post I have not referred to anyone here present as a gun militant, so there's no call for anyone here to get huffy about anything I've said as if I'd said it about them or some group they may self-identify as belonging to. I wouldn't know.


edit to add for info:

mil·i·tant/ˈmilətənt/
Adjective:
Combative and aggressive in support of a political or social cause: "militant Islamic fundamentalists".
Noun:
A person who is active in this way.

[rl6214]

144. Well said

[Tuesday Afternoon]

30. the word does not offend me but, out of respect of my fellow DUers who are offended

Last edited Sat Jan 7, 2012, 02:28 PM - Edit history (1)

I will not use it.

This discussion reminds me of one from the Lounge years ago inre: nice post, Hitler.

Does anyone, besides me, remember how that went . . .

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

33. How about "schlep"?

I often schlep things around in a tote bag.

[Starboard Tack]

40. Schlep is OK, but has the connotation of it being tiresome.

Like hauling something slowly. Where as tote has been used for a long time to describe carrying a gun on one's person. If you pulled it behind you in a cart then you would be schlepping it.

[JustABozoOnThisBus]

76. No matter, I usually use the word "carry"

So I don't distinguish between "toting" my little revolver, and "schlepping" the 1911.

[rrneck]

36. Just like every other word it depends on how you use it.

It is the signature word of derision from another poster who doesn't like carrying guns in public. Considering your equal dislike of the practice, the negative connotation rubs off on you either whether you care to accept responsibility for it or not.

[Starboard Tack]

41. I accept responsibility for using the word

Any negative connotation ascribed by some overly sensitive members who are offended by a word used by another member, is of no relevance to the meaning of the word. You can't suddenly decide that a word is insulting because it happens to be used by someone you disagree with. If that were the case, we'd run out of words fast.
If I were offended by words, I doubt I'd be talking to you right now.

I agree that it depends how you use it. If it comes with qualifiers like "death spewing" as mentioned above, then the meaning would be clear. However, the offense would be taken from the qualifiers. The word tote, or toter contains zero negative connotation. Toting a gun around indiscriminately, on the other hand, has considerable negative connotation.

[rrneck]

45. You accept responsibility for its use, but not for its intent.

I've already dealt with this issue elsewhere. I don't feel like typing it again.

Here's the subthread if you're interested.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/124023367#post23

[Starboard Tack]

52. And it's intent. How you interpret is up to you.

I use the word toter and some here get the vapors. I use the word "compulsive" and two or three go ballistic. I'm sorry, but I take no responsibility for the irrational hypersensitivity of those who cannot or will not bother to open a dictionary. One thing is clear, that if their sensibility is that fragile, they have no business toting a weapon of any sort, let alone a firearm.

You may doubt my honesty and integrity. That's your prerogative. That doesn't alter the fact that I mean no insult to anyone by either of those words. They are merely efficient descriptors of certain behavior and contain no prejudice.

[rrneck]

57. No, you're not sorry.

If you aren't interested in clicking the link provided, I'll cut and paste my posts in the subthread here for your convenience. The interpretation of a word is a two way street and not only dependent on how it is interpreted by the listener. We know the history of the term here and we know why you use it. Your protestations to the contrary are bullshit.

Please read this before you respond. You might learn something you already know and won't admit.

23. It seems fairly simple to me.

1. Chew people out for what they do, not for who they are.

2. Don't insult fellow DUers.

I think there are grey areas though, as well there should be. For some reason I don't mind calling Michelle Bachman an "idiot". But I wouldn't call her a "retard" here.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Idiot
An idiot, dolt, or dullard is a mentally deficient person, or someone who acts in a self-defeating or significantly counterproductive way.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mental_retardation
Mental retardation (MR) is a generalized disorder appearing before adulthood, characterized by significantly impaired cognitive functioning and deficits in two or more adaptive behaviors.


There is a much greater difference between the way those two words are understood than between the two words themselves. In everyday use, one is worse than the other when used as an epithet. Our use of language should depend on our sensitivity to those hearing it. Since this is a public forum we have to take into consideration the wide and largely anonymous number of people who will read our words. That awareness will tend to make our discourse a bit more sanitized than it might otherwise be among intimates.

I think it is incumbent on those speaking and those listening to exercise sensitivity and pay attention to exactly who is being lambasted and why. For those speaking, only insult people outside of DU. For those listening, try to remember that if someone is being insulted it's not about you, so try not to take something personally that wasn't intended to be so. Of course if you want to call our president something unfortunate you take your chances. I don't think it's a good idea to pick on the friends of friends either.

Liberals tend to reflexively go to bat for the underdog and insulting even a douchebag, scum sucking, piece of shit, ass licking, reject from the slop bucket bottom of the gene pool like G.W. Bush will strike a sympathetic cord in the hearts of people around here.

There are no bad words. And there are no good words. There are only words. They are tools we use to communicate ideas. Words themselves do not have magical properties that give them power. The ideas they transmit are what do the damage. I have always held that you can say anything to anyone under the right circumstances. Of course the operational envelope for some words is extremely narrow.

Is the color red a bad color? Is #b a bad note? Is a polka a bad dance step? Okay, I'll give you that one. But it's not the form itself that is evil, but the ideas that are transmitted by the form. For example, I'm currently working on three paintings that contain a swastika. And I don't mean there's one in there somewhere either. The shape of each work is based on a swastika. The paintings are about the erosion of the commons, corporatism and corporate influence on government at the expense of the people, and the brutalization of people through the elimination of cultural alternatives to the profit motive. So a swastika, the universal symbol of fascism, is a perfectly appropriate symbol to include in the work. The formal challenge is how do I include this very powerful symbol in the work and not have it overwhelm it at the expense of what I'm trying to say. A large part of that challenge involves the viewer. My Jewish friends spot it right off while others don't find their way to it nearly as quickly or not at all. That's the challenge; how do I, as an artist, use the tools of the visual arts to convey a message to people with widely differing opinions and experiences, say anything worthwhile and make them understand it?

There will always be stigmatizing language because there will always be people willing to stigmatize others. Make one word verboten and they will just gin up another. Unfortunately, the effort expended to control language will be wasted on a Pyrrhic victory that won't significantly change anyone's mind. Just because they can't say it doesn't mean they won't think it. Take a look at how this grinning fucker handles the problem of language usage to spread his bullshit. To really appreciate it turn down the volume and try to pretend you don't know who he is.

(video of Pat Robertson, if you want to see it follow the other link)

You put all that work into language control and some asshole like this can just step right around it and continue to spew his message of hate without missing a beat.

Liberal ideology is nurturing by nature. We leap to empathize with the travails of others. That's how caring and supportive communities get formed. But liberals are human too and subject to the same foibles as anybody else. Sometimes we use our empathy for others as an excuse to exercise our umbrage to satisfy our ego and sense of self righteousness. When we are tempted to use the misfortunes of others for our own selfish ends we should remind ourselves that it's not about us. The impulse to guard our own sense of affected empathy is a good way to divide us and create circular firing squads. We are so busy lambasting each other we can't pull together to get anything done.

You can't tell people how they feel, and you can't legislate how they should feel in Washington or at DU. The most we can hope for is to pay attention, try to give people the benefit of the doubt, try to work it out if there is a misunderstanding and if you think you're skating close to the edge be extra clear and extra careful.

And if you fuck up, apologize and try to do better next time.

Indeed words are used to communicate and frame ideas

View profile

Last edited Fri Jan 6, 2012, 07:58 PM USA/ET - Edit history (2)
and it doesn't matter what words are used. That's the point.

How to retask a symbol:





The image on the left is a Torah cover. The center image is a Jewish woman in Nazi Germany. The image on the right is from a recent protest in Jerusalem.

Words mean exactly what we want them to mean, and we can change the meaning through the way they are used. The definition of a word is determined primarily by descriptive means with prescriptive annotations.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dictionary
Lexicographers apply two basic philosophies to the defining of words: prescriptive or descriptive. Large 20th-century dictionaries such as the Oxford English Dictionary (OED) and Webster's Third are descriptive, and attempt to describe the actual use of words.

The prescriptive/descriptive issue has been given much consideration in modern times. Most dictionaries of English now apply the descriptive method to a word's definition, and then, outside of the definition itself, add information alerting readers to attitudes which may influence their choices on words often considered vulgar, offensive, erroneous, or easily confused.


I had a friend once who insisted on using the made up word "murpin" in place of another. I found it annoying and told him constantly, "Look, I know you mean motherfucker, so why don't you just say motherfucker". If you call someone a fornicator of swine with undetermined parentage you have still called him a pig fucking son of a bitch. Demanding people sanitize language to suit our sensibilities is an exercise in futility and just leads to mendacious insinuations that drive hate and bigotry underground where it's harder to fight.

The ideas that are communicated by language are at issue, not the language itself. Language is plastic and can be stretched around any kind of hate and ugliness that can be dredged up from the worst mankind has to offer. Changing words doesn't change minds. Minds change words.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

61. excellent post, rrneck

deserves its own thread in GD imo. I wish I could k&r.

[Starboard Tack]

66. You are correct. I am not sorry.

Doesn't change the truth one iota. I don't attach any negativity to the word and neither does any dictionary that I can find. In fact, I find the word "toter" used by "toters" all over. Are you now claiming that it has suddenly been elevated to it's own PC category and only toters, themselves, are allowed to use the word. If so, your claim would be way over the top. If the word toter had any history of bigotry or insult apart from that claimed in this forum, I would buy your argument.

The real truth is, that bigotry is being implied on my part and the on the part of others who use the word "toter". That, in itself, is insulting and ignorant. Your references to anti-semitism is beyond inappropriate and a cheap shot, at best. To compare the labeling of a race of people with using a word that describes an action or behavior is not what I expected from you. A tad grandiose.

Feel free to cite any evidence you may have beyond your own imagination, or the imagination of other members of this board.
I'll be waiting.

[rrneck]

74. I guess you had a little trouble reading there.

Quote the reference to anti antisemitism.

The truth is that you would shift responsibility for the use of the word to those hearing it to avoid assuming any yourself. Your flight to the dictionary definition doesn't obviate the fact that you are creating a situation where you can use any term any way you want and blame others for it when you get busted. You started this thread and you can't defend your assertion because we all know how the term is used in this group, period.

You may notice I have not once complained about the use of the term, nor do I plan to. Anyone who reads post #57 will understand my reasons for not doing so and will also understand the foolishness of your OP.

Christ, it's like asking the only kid in the house how the lamp got broken.



ETA In post #52 you said you were sorry, and now you say you're not sorry. Do you know what sorry means, and does it mean the same thing in both posts? If it means the same thing what was it? If it was an expression of genuine remorse then you were either lying then or lying now. If it was a colloquialism you cannot be justifiably accused of lying, but you will have to admit that you used a word beyond its dictionary meaning, which makes your original assertion bullshit.

Take your pick.

[Starboard Tack]

77. Sorry, but I'm not sorry I was sorry about being sorry.

[rrneck]

80. That's what I thought.

You got nothin' and you can't support the bullshit you trotted out in the OP.

:rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl::rofl:

[Starboard Tack]

86. You couldn't be more correct. I'm so sorry.

Sooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo Soooooooooooooooorrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrrryyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyyy!!!!!!!!!!!!!

So having said all that. What's wrong with the word "TOTER"?

[rrneck]

89. Prove you're sorry. nt

[Starboard Tack]

97. Prove I'm not.

I'm sorry I didn't read all of your voluminous post. I have guests and I'm sorry about being rude to them. Maybe I'll come back later to spank and be spanked. But it's a beautiful day. The sun is shining. Not a gun in sight. Time for a row and a walk.

[rrneck]

104. Sorry, can't prove a negative.

Try again. If you have guests, see to your company and beat a hasty retreat from here. Anybody reading this thread will get a huge laugh at your flailing attempts to defend the absurd.

By the way, like I said I don't have a problem with the word "toter". Read post #57 and learn something.

[Starboard Tack]

143. OK I'm back and glad to know you don't have aproblem with the word "toter"

I know you're a smart guy. Probably a lot smarter than me. But I do like to make it clear where I'm coming from. I'm not into insults and don't like being the target of unsubstantiated insults.

[rrneck]

148. If you don't like unsubstantiated insults

don't be so evasive and insulting.

[Starboard Tack]

151. No personal insults intended. No evasion either.

I'll consider being more verbose in future when addressing individuals. I don't want to make anyone uncomfortable by my choice of words, unless they deserve it.

[rrneck]

152. More plauseable deniability. We'll see. nt

[Tuesday Afternoon]

90. not a thing, grabber.

[rrneck]

95. LOL!

Like Nitpick, Artful Dodger is a nimble and elusive Warrior. When faced with an attack he can't rebuff he maneuvers the discussion into an area where he feels he occupies the high ground. If, for example, in a moment of pique his opponent refers to him as a "sonofabitch", Artful Dodger will not only demand a public apology for his sainted mother, but will launch into a long harrangue about the sanctity of motherhood. Knowing full well that to stay on topic will assure his defeat, he is utterly impervious to counterattacks like, "that has nothing to do with this discussion".

http://www.politicsforum.org/images/flame_warriors/flame_59.php

[Tuesday Afternoon]

87. you were sorry about being sorry but, now you are not because

you are sorry.

right.

got it.

[rrneck]

92. Some people just don't know

that everyone knows they're busted. You would think that with the switch to DU3 he would make some effort to behave himself since it is sort of a pain to research his bullshit in DU2. Old habits I guess.

[Starboard Tack]

146. I don't think you are as mean spirited as you like to appear.

You know exactly where I'm coming from. Sanity, common sense and not catering to an irrational mindset.

[rrneck]

147. I am as mean spirited as I need to be.

You are coming from a position of plausible deniability.

[Starboard Tack]

154. That's your choice and your opinion

[rrneck]

156. Anybody that reads this thread

and frequents this group will see how accurate my opinion is.

[Starboard Tack]

170. I'm sure you are right

And you do have an insightful take on many things. Unfortunately, too many shy away from this group, but that's their problem. They don't know what they're missing.

[Starboard Tack]

100. Damn. Sorry about the confusion

[Tuesday Afternoon]

101. don't worry

I totally understand just how sorry you are, believe me.

[rrneck]

105. Gah!

[SteveW]

183. Ha! Well, I guess we see gun-g------s coming back in? "Sorry." nt

[MicaelS]

81. It is pretty obvious you're not the least bit sorry

Or else you would have not made the OP in the first place.

[Starboard Tack]

121. Of course I'm not sorry. Are you serious?

Those who are offended by words that describe them and their actions perfectly are the sorry ones. To be in such a state of denial is a sorry place to be. Tote on, but don't admit to yourself that you tote.

[ileus]

109. Well said, spot on.

[beevul]

83. To quote a former member: "What a steaming pantload."

"I use the word "compulsive" and two or three go ballistic. I'm sorry, but I take no responsibility for the irrational hypersensitivity of those who cannot or will not bother to open a dictionary. One thing is clear, that if their sensibility is that fragile, they have no business toting a weapon of any sort, let alone a firearm."

Still Pretending, I see. I'm mildly disapointed, but not at all surprised. It would have been fairly easy to predict such.

It both amazes and baffles me, that you think that those of us who have been around for any significant length of time, are going to buy any of this, rather than see what you're doing, for exactly what it is.

But hey, thats fine. Those of us who recogise what you're doing for what it is, can and most likely will deal with it and its employer in the apropriate way. Turnabout, and all that.

"You may doubt my honesty and integrity."

May?

"That doesn't alter the fact that I mean no insult to anyone by either of those words."

So when we point out, henceforth, every time when you use words such as those in an insulting or offensive or derogatory way, it -the defense - will be that it was purely purely coincidental, accidental, and totally unintended, and that it is our "delicate sensibilities" which are at fault?


M'kay.

"They are merely efficient descriptors of certain behavior and contain no prejudice."

Except in the case of "compulsive toter", you applied that phrase to at least one poster, before having ANY EVIDENCE of that poster engaging in behaviors to which it accurately applies.

And you still haven't come clean about that in any way shape size or form.

And that speaks to the "honesty and integrity" you mentioned...

[Starboard Tack]

93. Which poster are you referring to?

Who did I erroneously call a "compulsive toter". There are several. Haven't heard any hostile responses from them. Interesting. The only hostile responses I get are from you and rrneck, and neither of you tote. You just like to show what smartypants you are.

[iverglas]

106. google it at site:DU

Sorely missed.

(And in case anyone isn't aware and might want to surmise otherwise -- he was tombstoned as a result of nothing having the least thing to do with this forum; he was on the wrong side of the Lieberman-Lamont debacle; whichever side that was, it was ruled offside by Skinner.)

[beevul]

114. Ask and you shall receive.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/11723715#post141

"Comparing guns to fire extinguishers boggles a rational mind. One guy said he compares a gun to underwear. Is there anything compulsive toters don't compare there guns with?"

You obviously inintended the remark you made, to apply to the poster to whom you were responding.

And thats close enough.

[krispos42]

43. "tote" has the connotation of carrying something heavy and/or awkward.

A concealed handgun isn't heavy. A a bazooka is.

So I would carry a pistol and tote (or perhaps "haul&quot a bazooka.


The implication seems to be that because handguns are heavy and/or cumbersome, only fanatical people would bother to "tote" them around. Redneck, confederate-flag-waving, republican-voting, NRA-loving, non-thinking types of people worried about or obsessing over threats of a virtually fanciful nature such as roving gangs of black gay men rising up and instituting Sharia law in a communist economy. Or something.

[Starboard Tack]

50. Interesting. Where do you get the heavy/awkward thing from?

Do a Google search for "toters supply"

[krispos42]

123. Wikipedia, which I believe reflects current usage.

For example, I can go to a store and buy plastic bins called "totes", which are used for storage. I have about a dozen of the 16-gallon size in the garage.

I carry a wallet. I tote a backpack. I may carry a backpack, but I'll never tote a wallet. See?

Tote seems to be synonymous with "haul" or "lug", at least connotation-wise.



And "toters supply" seems to primarily be a store in Pennsylvania, which makes it anecdotal.

[Starboard Tack]

128. Good point. Maybe guns used to be heavier.

My plastic one is pretty light.

[oneshooter]

136. Haven't you repeatedly claimed that you owned no firearms? n/t

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

72. I personally...

...take no negative meaning from the term "toter". While it does somewhat sound as if the origination was somewhat geographically specific, it doesn't sound negative to me.

[Remmah2]

73. I don't mind any which way.

However if you use it, you should expect it in return. You hold your own and respond in a respectful manner. The input you provide is appreciated and respected by myself. Although opinions differ I suspect you consider opposing opinions even if they are a 180 of yours.

Some act offended yet love to dish it up. Pro and anti sides alike.

Some people have posted some excellent material here, some humor me and reinforce my position on the subject.

Keep an eye out for them pirates.

[rrneck]

125. Boy howdy, this thread really cleared the air.

Here's what we know:

The term "tote" is a word in common usage.

The OP lacks the imagination to concoct a sufficiently pithy pejorative that will insinuate the worst possible motives of those at whom it is directed and not get him banned, so he will just leech off the imagination of others more eloquent and evasive than himself.

The OP reserves the right to invoke the term in any context he sees fit and to change that context whenever he gets called on it.

If anyone doesn't like the way he uses that word, it's their problem.

When in doubt, the OP will claim the most benign use of the term until he feels that everyone has forgotten how he used it before whereupon he will resume using it as a pejorative (and hope everyone will either be struck blind or illiterate if they become suspicious).

Glad we got that cleared up.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

134. oh lord

got it.

clear as mud. yes, indeed.

[Simo 1939_1940]

158. Spot-on, and wonderfully eloquent to boot!! NT

[SteveW]

184. Wonderful summary of desiring a (concealed) license to murder-mouth. nt

[rl6214]

132. In response to my comment about the word "tote"

I feel tote is use the same way gunner, grabber, stuff a gun or two down the front of your pants, pack to name a few of the labels thrown about on this board. It is used to marginalize, demeane or otherwise put down the person or people they are describing. You and others could very well use carry instead of these buzz words made popular by the media or movies. Nowhere else will you hear someone using the term "tote" in normal conversation unless talking about a ladies handbag.

[Starboard Tack]

153. Fair enough. No toters. No grabbers or packers from now on.

Hopefully, we're all on board with that. What a civilized place we will have.

[rrneck]

162. No need to go overboard.

Nobody really cares about the word "toter". Hell, ilius has been having fun with it for months. I've called you worse than that on a good day. Nobody cares.

The irony is that you started a thread about your own use of an innocuous word and asserted the most benign motives for that use when we all watched you pick it up from Hoyt who coined it after any number of other pejoratives were outlawed on DU2. It's a buzzword in this group and everybody knows it, yet you deny exactly what everybody knows to be true and your own obvious motives for using it. In writing.

If you like the word, by all means use it. That's helps make conversation among people who know each other fun. It actually creates camaraderie even among adversaries. Hell man, one of the few things that ever changes about this issue is the fucking terminology. The secret is to try to be a little bit creative and entertaining about it without seriously pissing people off.

What annoys people is juvenile mendacity. Surely someone who has been around as much as you have can take a conversation somewhere besides "did not-did too". Nobody really enjoys chasing you around in circles. Good god, we've got over a hundred and fifty posts about the word "toter" here.

I say totin' guns is just fucking fine. It's so fucking fine Fanny Finnegan from Folksburg fills two T holsters with twin Thompsons totaling twenty nine talon tipped tracers to fuckin' flatten four flushing finaglers filching her begonias.

[Starboard Tack]

167. Oh alright. As long as we're all still friends.

But, honestly, cross my heart and all the rest of it, I did not borrow the word from Hoyt. No disrespect to Hoyt, but somehow it seemed liked the right word to use. Shame on me
I really do love all you guys. Even you, but especially Oneshooter, who is really a very sweet guy.
Let's face it, as silly as we are at times, we do have alot of fun here.

[oneshooter]

174. You would not think so if you had known me a few years ago.

I still hold against you the lies you wrote, sorry, the "misenterpretations" you wrote about my postings.

Since I retired from my previous occupation I have "mellowed out" somewhat.

Oneshooter
Armed and Livin in Texas

[Starboard Tack]

176. I'll own up to misinterpretations and some mean comments from time to time

But I don't think you are a bad guy. I'm sure will have some fights in the future and that's OK if we make them clean and friendly. I bear no animosity toward you or anyone else here. Peace.

[discntnt_irny_srcsm]

177. FWIW...

...I try (but frequently fail) in all circumstances to follow this advice when arguing for my beliefs: "Always be prepared to give an answer to anyone who asks you the reason for your beliefs. But do this with gentleness and respect."

Have a nice day.

[Starboard Tack]

178. Back atcha!

:cheers:

[Pacafishmate]

155. Proud toter reporting in.

[rrneck]

166. Welcome to DU!

Tomorrow we will be discussing the etymology of the term "protrude" with the objective of getting the thread locked and half the denizens of the guns forum banned.

BYOB

[mvccd1000]

159. Some of you toters/carriers/CCWers/packers need to get thicker skins.

Maybe it's because you carry concealed that you're so easily offended?

Open carry a few times and get used to the looks and responses you'll probably get, and you won't be nearly so offended by the descriptions you read on DU.*

(*Does not apply in Arizona, where open carry typically does not warrant a second look, unless it's to offer a positive comment or conversation about the pistol.)

At any rate, I don't care how I'm described by someone on the other side of the argument; if they have to resort to something derogatory (which I do not consider "toter" to be), it probably means they don't have facts to use instead of childish nicknames.

[AtheistCrusader]

160. Bullshit.

Not buying it for a second.

It's the second-stringer for 'Gun Nut'. Carry costs you one more keystroke. Tote or Toter is intended as an insult and you know it.

[Starboard Tack]

171. Haven't you heard. I have conceded and will no longer use that awful word.

Unless I think it absolutely necessary. BTW what is a "gun nut"? Is "gunslinger" OK? Just asking. I can't use "carry". Makes me think of waiters.

[X_Digger]

163. Any group sufficiently large, interactive, and historically cumulative will develop its own culture.

That's been true since before the internet, but this medium does tend to foster it. BBSs, usenet newsgroups, IRC chat channels, and now forums- all display a unique culture, given enough time and participation.

They will develop their own memes, taboos, and other boundaries.

Go ahead and start a topic about olive garden, fried chicken recipes, breast feeding, circumcision, pit bulls, or any other number of 'verbotten' topics in GD.

Regardless of how innocuous you intended a topic based on one of those subjects to be, you will be labeled an agitator spoiling to stir shit up pretty damned fast. You would have inadvertently stepped on a DU landmine. You may plead ignorance once and get away with it; I wouldn't suggest a second attempt.

Now in this particular instance, I don't respect Hoyt's attempt to turn it into an insult enough to be offended. It's been lampooned and mocked enough that whatever meaning he tried to attach to it is gone. I do find it funny that you have to borrow someone else's intended insult rather than come up with your own for your little, "Who, me?" game.

eta: Oh, one more thing. In the interest of educating you on other cultural no-no's associated with 'tote'- be careful asking an african american to 'tote' something for you. You may think it an appropriate word choice- but it isn't.

[Starboard Tack]

172. Believe it or not I didn't steal from or copy Hoyt

Sometimes great minds think alike. But I have caved on this and will offend thee no more with the t word. Regarding asking an African American to carry something for me - not something I'm in the habit of doing. Maybe something to do with the culture I was raised in.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

185. you might be interested in what is going on elsewhere in DU regarding words and meaning

Last edited Sun Jan 8, 2012, 04:39 PM - Edit history (1)

and the choices you make when selecting the words you choose to use.

links provided for those interested:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/101827277

http://www.democraticunderground.com/101827761


please note the locks.

on edit:
the discussion about the copycat threads that were generated:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/124025163

[Starboard Tack]

187. Yeah, I've been reading those threads. Very interesting.

And as I have already said here, I will not be using the "t" word in future around here, because it is offensive to some and I respect that. My purpose here is not to offend.

[Tuesday Afternoon]

189. thanks. weird, how stuff bothers some people and not others.

this group already has a bad enough reputation as it is. I, like others on here have already voiced, would like to see more DUers join in. Perhaps, this is a step in that direction.

Cheers to us all on the various opinions on this issue

[ileus]

186. So does this mean I can't say rude toter anymore? ???

[Starboard Tack]

188. You can say whatever you like. It's your choice.

I have never used that phrase. In fact I don't remember using any negative qualifiers with the word, unless "indiscriminate" has been construed as a negative, which I doubt.
Point is, we shouldn't be name calling. Get's us nowhere.

[Starboard Tack]

190. Thanks everyone for your input. I really appreciate it.

What started out as a simple question, at least in my mind, turned into quite a discussion and a considerable learning experience for me. I now realize that my interpretation of the word was not the same as everyone's. That is not conducive to a good discussion in an open forum. It is not the same as talking with intimates who know where you're coming from. So, in future, I for one, will be paying closer attention to my choice of words around here. It is far more important to convey one's thoughts and ideas when the recipients do not take offense at one's choice of words and misconstrue their intent. We should never discount our options.

[ObamaFTW2012]

191. While I feel that "rude toter" is a bit abrasive

I do not see "toter" as insulting in any way.