Erica Scott: Life, Love and Spanking

Ruminations, opinionated observations, darkly humorous blathering and the occasional rant from an outspoken spanko and unapologetic attention wh–, um, hog.

Epic rants — yes, plural

You lucky people. I have two things that are pissing me off right now. No, it’s not anything about the holidays, and it’s not stupid gross food. One issue is on topic, and the other is not. But both have gotten under my skin lately and it’s time to release a bit. Warning: controversy ahead. If you’d just as soon skip it, I understand.

Last Friday, I saw two pictures that had just been put up on FetLife. The first was an extreme closeup of one butt cheek, with the skin broken and bleeding. The caption read: “Results of a proper caning.” Really? And then the next photo was the same butt, mercifully a little farther back but still pretty damn close up, so you could see both cheeks, which were not just red, but had white spots, the beginnings of bruises, and two spots that were bleeding. And that caption read: “A proper bare-bottom belting.”

Proper? According to whom, pray tell? And of course, we viewers are left to infer that anything less than a spanking/strapping/caning resulting in blood is somehow less than “proper.”

I know, I know, I’ve talked about this before. I’m sick of death of the comments, the implication that bottoms who don’t get trashed beyond recognition are wimps. “That’s not red enough.” “I could have done a better job.” “Looks like a decent warm-up, now bring on the spanking.” Fuck these people! When did it become not enough to simply have a nice red backside? Why is it that with some folks, bottoms that look like they’d been plunked on a George Foreman grill, turned up high, are the holy grail??

Hmm. I’ve been caned dozens of times over the years, by many tops. But I’ve never had a cane break my skin. What a shame that I’ve never had it done properly, huh? (massive eye roll)

This follows along with the issue that John Osborne and I felt compelled to shoot a harsher, more intense video, because viewers were bitching and snarking about our last two being “too light.” What is with this freaking blood-lust going on with spanking video watchers? So OK, we shot a video where John was punitive, and I shed tears. It was well done and I trust John, and I felt comfortable going there with him. Still, it’s irksome that we had to go there, to cave in and cater to the damn barbarians out there. I get it, though. If you’re in the business of selling video, you need to do what sells. But for God’s sake, stop criticizing people’s work. If you don’t like a video because it’s lighter than you care for, then go watch something else. But don’t try to shame and ridicule people’s efforts just because they fall short of your desires for rear carnage.

Here’s my gripe, in a nutshell. You want to play hard? Have at it. You want to bleed? Knock yourself out. If that floats your boat, then you can deal with the aftermath, and more power to you. But goddammit, don’t try to make others feel like what they’re doing isn’t good enough, or “proper” enough, because their flesh isn’t ravaged to your liking. What happens when newbies see these photos, claiming this sort of extreme is “proper”? I can see it now: inexperienced tops thinking they’re pussies, and they need to up their game in order to create these torn-up asses. And naive bottoms thinking they are “less than” because they don’t take this degree of punishment, and therefore should feel some sort of scene shame. Ridiculous.

Can’t we just play like we want to play, and leave words like “proper” and “real” and “true” out of it?

Ugh.

OK, that’s one. The next one is bound to piss some people off, and I’m sorry but not sorry. I don’t go out of my way to offend, but sometimes, you know, I just can’t avoid it.

Found this little gem on Facebook, of all places:

gunsvag

It’s true. The NRA and the 2nd Amendment advocates fight to the death (literally) against gun controls/stricter gun laws, but when it comes to women and what they do with their own bodies, oh, that’s everyone’s effing business.

I am not anti-gun. I don’t think guns should be eliminated. But clearly, with so many psychos out there shooting people, with terrorists killing groups of innocent folks, things are out of control. There needs to be something, and I don’t know what it is, but we can’t keep going on like this. But for everyone who says something needs to be done about guns and the fact that far too many nuts can get their hands on them, there’s another who says gun control is not the answer, and we just need more guns. That the people in Paris should have had guns. That the Jews in the Holocaust should have had guns, for Christ’s sake. That we should have guns in school classrooms.

This kind of killing goes on and on and on, and somehow, it’s left unregulated. Men, women, children. Fathers, mothers, sisters, brothers, spouses, all manner of loved ones. Meanwhile, women are vilified and shamed and criminalized because they choose to expel a tiny splotch of ectoplasm that is undeveloped and completely unviable. This is a sin. This is murder. This must be eliminated. Yeah, that makes a lot of sense.

Recently, our country’s Senate did two things: they refused to pass a bill that would prevent people on the no-fly list from getting guns. At the same time, they passed a bill that would defund Planned Parenthood. Yeah, that makes sense too. Let’s not control the crazies with guns that destroy lives, but by all means disallow women from choosing whether or not they give birth.

You know, I don’t even have a dog in this fight. I am way past the child-bearing age. And when I was that age, I made damn sure that I wouldn’t have any, because I knew I didn’t want them and I didn’t want to deal with birth control. But it still pisses me off that younger women out there might lose their freedoms, and if not those freedoms per se, then all the funds available to make their choices. Look…it’s not that I’m a big advocate of abortion. I’m much more of an advocate of people being responsible and smart with their bodies, and not getting pregnant unless they want to. But I have always felt strongly about the right to choose. And I also happen to think it’s a sin in itself to bring a child into the world when you’re neither financially nor emotionally equipped to raise it properly. When I was in eighth grade (a long-ass time ago), I wrote a school paper titled: “Abortion: Better No Life Than Unwanted Life.” I got an A. And I still believe that. How come it’s OK to go ahead and have the kid, just to abuse and neglect it, or not give it the opportunities it deserves because it has a passel of siblings that were also unplanned?

So here’s my solution for the gun-loving anti-abortionists: Every time you see a woman about to have an abortion, shoot her! That way, you 1. get to use your precious guns; 2. prevent an abortion; and 3. eliminate a killer. Win-win-win! Of course, you’re also killing an unborn baby along with its murderous mom, but hey, collateral damage, right?

Yes, that was written with tongue firmly crammed in cheek, and a series of swallows against vomiting in disgust.

Yeah, I’m pissed off. You know why I rant? You know why I blog and vent? Because I can. Because I choose to blow off steam this way, instead of going out and taking my frustrations out on innocent victims. Because I know how to channel my anger like a sentient and sane adult. I’m just so damn sick of people who kill and hurt and maim and do stupid shit to other people. And I’m sick of the people who cheer those fuckers on, one way or another.

(sigh) I know this writing isn’t going to change a thing. But sometimes, I need to do it anyway. Because if I keep it all inside, I just get depressed, and that really sucks. I am trying to keep my sanity during times where there is insanity all around me.

Rants over, for now. I will try to be entertaining next time.

Single Post Navigation

42 thoughts on “Epic rants — yes, plural

  1. I recently saw some pictures that had been juiced so the skin looked like raw hamburger. I commented that it was not everyone’s cup of tea. Of course, that brought forth the usual defenses. It’s not just the men who want the extreme. I am sure you know women who relish bruises and marks that last for weeks. I always told them they needed to find someone else to take them there.

    Like

  2. Anonymous on said:

    Rant away you never some cane gun toting blood thirsty idiot may listen

    Like

  3. I agree with you on both rants. I hate to see severe damage to a spanked bottom.

    The lack of gun control is absolutely unbelievable! What are the lawmakers thinking?

    Hugs,
    Hermione

    Like

  4. I definitely do NOT like seeing blood or anything too severe in videos, so I just move on to something else…I do not berate or judge what someone else likes (as long as it is consensual…otherwise I might have words to say). I just wish the same applied the other way around.

    As for the gun control issue, I’m more concerned with second hand weapons. If I go to the store, they can check my name and do a background check. But, if I buy a gun from say a market on Facebook, then all the seller might have from me is cash and a name that might be real or not. Now, I’m pretty sure you could meet at the police station and get a background check but honestly…who is going to do that? Then, we also have the problem of unregistered guns or guns still registered under the previous owner. It sure would suck to know that your old gun was used in a shootout. I could also see how some people would blame the secondhand seller of the gun…when the only reason they even sold the gun was that they needed money for family medical bills or something. Anyway, I really haven’t researched that much into it, but I would guess that a majority of guns used in crimes are probably stolen.

    In other news, your posts are still very thought-provoking, as always. My “recent” ones on the other hand aren’t so much anymore. Maybe I just need to focus on posting something at least once every other week, then maybe I’ll eventually find my groove again. I just don’t want to quit.

    Like

  5. Bogey — oh, absolutely, I know of a lot of women who love it.

    Anonymous — doubt it. Hence the rant. 🙂

    Hermione — I am learning to turn a blind eye to the pictures. But what I can’t ignore is when someone tells me that’s what is “proper.”

    Jay — I am fine with guns in the hands of legal, licensed, sane people who have been taught how to use the things. Really. I am not a “no guns” fanatic. Moderation. But yeah, it’s too easy for the crazies to get them in other ways without the proper checks and so forth. Wait… women’s bodies! What was that about guns?

    Like

  6. Anonymous on said:

    I always wonder how the commentators who rave about “it is not hard enough” would feel if the tables were turned. I wonder how they would like a bottom slashed and torn just so someone of dubious moral and intellectual stature can say that the spanking was hard enough. Yes….they are idiots. I will never, ever understand these morons who if they really did what they said would soon be on a GBH charge.

    As for gun control…..down here we have never quite understood the American obsession with guns, apparently the bigger the better. On television it is portrayed as if you don’t have a gun you are not quite human. So big guns in the hands of crazies makes for the expected horrific outcome. I don’t have an answer…there will always be guns and there will always be crazies so the next massacre is only days away.

    I guess I can only hope and wish you stay safe and well and don’t let that wonderful tush get too beaten up. End of rant.
    Downunder Don

    Like

  7. Don — I have many friends in other countries, who all express the same sentiment as you. No one gets it. I don’t know why people here can’t see the obvious.

    Like

    • Talking about second amendment rights is generally a lose-lose proposition as both sides are so polarized into their specific positions that no one is capable of learning. Despite that here I go. When you look at the current crop of big media gun violence events within the United States what you quickly discover is most of the crime is perpetrated by the severely mentally ill (SMI). Advocates for gun control ignore the underlying SMI issue because gun control is their favorite political rant. Pro second amendment people are all about protecting constitutional rights and ignore the underlying issue. What we really need to do it to increase mental health funding and develop a system that accurately reports mental health court adjudications to the FBI so the nation wide database when someone goes to buy a weapon is current and automatically updated. This is not the current case. In many states if someone is adjudicated mentally ill their status may not be reported for a long time if at all. I will leave my political beliefs out of this for now.

      By the way Erica, your recalcitrant demeanor has turned my crank for years.

      Like

      • Curtis — valid point, I’d say. By the way, I’m not sure how to take that last statement.

        Like

      • Erica, take it for its meaning. I have been a fan of yours for years. I am privately into the “scene”. It was more of a type A come on that I didn’t expect a reply on (smile).

        Like

  8. Weel, Erica , this WAS entertaining. Especially the gem. Like your point.

    Like

  9. While I may not agree with you on everything you wrote. I will defend your right to say it.

    I agree on you comments on spanking. When I want to see a spanking video. I want to see a spanking video that results in a pink or red ass with tears sometimes not blood with raised welts. If I wanted that I would go to something like SadistTube. All the videos I have seen of you have always been tastefully done.

    As for the rant both are the law of the land and all this passed bills will never go into law and are nothing more than showboating to get money and votes. The problem with choice is the lack of proper sex education, If complete sex education was taught and free birth control plus condoms provided. The amount of pregnancies and sexually transmitted diseases would drop dramatically.

    In my own experience a christian friends who decided that they were going to teach her about sex when they thought she was ready and no allow her to take sex education got pregnant at a coed sleepover and had no idea what the guy was doing to her.

    When they told me I held back what I really want to say

    Enjoy December in whatever you feel comfortable doing so.

    Like

  10. smuccatelli on said:

    Erica:

    Just want you to know that I agree very much with your first “rant”? What’s up with the severe tissue damage? Spanking (for adults anyway) is supposed to be fun!

    As for the second rant, I couldn’t disagree more but I feel that this isn’t the proper venue to discuss it. Like Thanksgiving dinner, there’s just some places where one doesn’t discuss religion or politics because it causes too many arguments and hard feelings. Some of the other comments indicate to me just how hard those feelings might be. I am both pro-life and an NRA life member and I just wanted you to know that there are other opinions out there. I am certainly willing to argue for my views but I don’t see the point of it here. A flame war benefits no one…

    Like

  11. MrJ — not sure what the gem was, but glad you liked it.

    Bob — yes. I agree, better education and access to birth control is necessary. Which is also what Planned Parenthood does… and the Senate wants to shut down funding for them. (sigh) I don’t get it.

    Smuccatelli — thank you for being nice! I’m serious. I knew some people would disagree with me, and I’m always a little nervous when I post these opinion pieces because I don’t want to deal with angry flamers. And usually, I try to leave politics out of this blog, because it’s not the place for it. But sometimes… arrgggghhh. I just get so damn frustrated. Some of the dearest people in my life are on the conservative side and I can agree to disagree.

    Like

  12. Ripley on said:

    I love your rants! I think they are very entertaining. And I usually agree with you as I do in both these cases.

    Like

  13. If you read the video descriptions on John Osbourne websites they are filled with terms like “hard wooden paddling”, “sore welts”, and “squirming in real pain”.
    However, I’ve seen many of his clips and they tend to be quite mild.
    People will get angry when expectations are not met.

    Like

  14. anonymous on said:

    The “complementary” critique disclaimers are annoying at all times. Great marks…for a beginning…
    Typically those comments come from people who are show offs or in some cases if they’re well know scene players they want to add to their conquest by one upping the person who provided the marks. Or they’re just pompous assholes. Who knows! 🙂
    I’m very self competitive and love having my limits tested for my spankings because they are very far apart. For me this means long lasting bruising/cane marks etc and deep muscle soreness from frat paddlings. But I don’t want blood drawn nor do I like to see that happen in videos or still pics.

    As for the social topics, I’m pro choice for both women’s rights and for gun ownership.

    Like

  15. Ripley — thanks! 🙂

    Ellen — interesting. Yeah, I reckon they do.

    Anonymous — I am competitive too, I admit it. I hate that I don’t color and mark the way I used to. But I’m not about to up the ante and go into territory that isn’t fun for me just so I’ll keep up with the Redbutts, ya know? 😉

    Like

  16. Michael in Texas on said:

    I agree with you on the first topic. I understand and to some extent share the blood-lust — I’ve always been a fan of the extreme (though not to the extent it’s taken in torture porn [which, ironically, isn’t even considered porn, “merely” violence]) — but I do worry about the models (are they doing it of their own free will? are they drugged to be able to tolerate it?) and would never criticize anyone for not wanting to do it. I think we have to recognize a difference between play and video-for-sale; the latter sometimes caters to our desire to experience vicariously things we’d never want to have happen (much less to experience personally) in real life (thus the love for war movies or stylized violence of any kind). But we also have to recognize that spanking videos are made by real people who actually experience what we see, with no special effects as are used in mainstream movies. I’m sure the same morons who carp about spankings not being hard enough would carp even louder if special effects WERE used (about inauthenticity) — did they expect men actually to have their arms blown off when Spielberg made “Saving Private Ryan”?? No, but they want someone to actually have HAD the brutal spanking that they want to see. It’s sick. I am also very sensitive to the complaint that newbies (and even veterans) can have their concept of personal play influenced by videos. Some of my old friends at Chastenwood felt that every video, whatever its other purposes, should be instructional — should never show anything dangerous, should demonstrate good technique, etc. I’m not sure I’m an absolutist on that, but I do believe we need to be very up-front about the difference between fantasy-catering video and what is applicable for private play.

    I partially disagree with you on the second, and unlike smuccatelli, I figure if you brought it up, this IS an acceptable place to discuss it. I see mass shootings (and all shootings, including accidental shootings and suicides) as part of the price we pay for freedom. I believe in freedom and allowing people to make their own choices. I emphatically do not agree that a committee of my neighbors (that is, society, or the government) knows how I should live my life better than I do. The price we pay for the freedom to own effective means of self-defense is that they are also effective means of offense, and some people will misuse them. Wrecks are the price we pay for cars. Lung cancer is the price we pay for smoking. Obesity is the price we pay for getting to choose what we eat. Any freedom will be misused. The leeway to act stupidly is the definition of freedom — if we only are allowed to act wisely (in someone else’s opinion), we aren’t free.

    If there were a magic way to know who will commit a crime with firearms and keep those people from possessing them, I might be for it, but there’s not. Half the time after a mass shooting the neighbors say “He was a loner; I knew there was something wrong with him,” but there are plenty of loners scorned by their neighbors who never shoot up anyplace. The other half, it’s “He seemed so normal and nice!”

    I do think we could make it more like cars — if you want to “operate” (that is, carry) firearms on public property, you need a license, registration, tax to pay for the policing of the system.

    As for abortion, the problem is, at SOME point, each of us becomes a legal human. When is that? Abortion proponents NEVER seem to say. Is it at birth? When the baby has entirely cleared the birth canal and taken a breath on its own? (Ironically, that might be the Biblical position — breath equals life.) To me, a baby one day before being born is almost identical, physically, in terms of its capabilities, as a baby one day after being born. I don’t see how it can be legal to destroy one and not the other. To me, pro-choice totally ignores this issue — the mantra of the woman’s choice about her body glosses over there being ANOTHER BODY involved.

    But where is the line? I don’t believe in god or the soul, so it’s not at fertilization (there’s no god to insert something called a soul in a freshly fertilized ovum). If we define the beginning of life with the first heartbeat (as we define the end with the last), that’s much too early in pregnancy for most abortions to be possible. Brain wave activity (another possible physical milestone) comes on in stages; it’s hard to say when consciousness starts (except that it’s definitely before birth). Quickening? Viability? (That’s a moving target, as medicine advances.)

    My point being, we need to draw a line somewhere between “part of the mother’s body just like a fingernail and just as much at her disposal” and “legal person.” One side of the line, yes, I believe in choice, totally. But other side of the line actually IS murder.

    And it can’t be up to the woman. Where else in the law do we let one person’s personhood depend on the opinion of one other person? If a Klan member thinks blacks aren’t people, is he allowed to murder them without consequence on the basis of his belief? Protection of the right to life is the fundamental duty of government. Taking of life must be punishable.

    As for the rest of the Puritan agenda, I have no sympathy with it at all. Sex education should be factual, value-free, age-appropriate and widespread. Contraception should be easily available. Anyone who disagrees is free to remain ignorant and vulnerable themselves, but not to inflict their prejudices on others.

    Sorry this is so long.

    Michael In Texas

    Like

    • smuccatelli on said:

      I very much agree with all your points. I’ve had arguments ad infinitum on editorial comment boards with both pro-choice and anti-gun people and I find the end result is a lot of back-and-forth, devolving into name-calling and nothing really settled and I just didn’t want to do that here. I’d like to point out regarding your remark on freedom, that “freedom isn’t free”. There’s always a price to be paid for everything, one way or another…

      Like

  17. I entirely agree with you about harsh treatment that damages the bottom.

    There is another thing about that I’ve never understood. It takes time to heal, lots of time. Even if they agree to such harshness, and will play that way again as soon as they can, that will be quite awhile between sessions.

    That is no fun. They’ll be limited to maybe a dozen sessions per year. It would get in the way of other things too.

    Even if the top has some sort of a harem to keep him content in the meantime, the bottom will get awfully lonely and restless.

    Damaging our fun just seems stupid. I don’t see how they would keep doing that to themselves.

    Mark

    Like

  18. Michael — thanks for your thoughts, and no need to apologize. I welcome all civilly and thoughtfully stated opinions here. Me? I personally believe that if a fetus isn’t developed to the point where it could survive on its own outside the womb, then it’s not fully alive. I agree there are a lot of gray areas in this debate. But people who point-blank claim it’s a sin when a woman is just a few weeks pregnant and the “person” is a speck of goo, well, I do have a problem with them.

    Mark — everyone has their reasons and desires for the way they play. If that’s what they want to do, it’s their body and their choice. But what I can’t handle is the shaming of people who don’t want to play that hard. You’re right about healing; I once spoke to a former model who did super-hard caning scenes. She said it would take her six months to heal from a shoot. Which is why she retired early, even though she was extremely popular; her body had had enough.

    Like

    • Well, even if you can take a given thing doesn’t mean you should do it. I analogize the laborer who pushes ones self for twenty years. They might be able to take the abuse when they are young, however, the body has a way of catching up with you as you age. Erica, I suspect I know of whom you refer. She may have been able to physically and psychologically take it. And while I respect her personal decision it doesn’t mean she should have have gone to that extreme. The woman could still be working today if she had taken it a bit easier on herself.

      Like

  19. Regarding severity in videos, I’m going to step out on a limb and into controversial waters here as well, and hypothesize that this bloodlust is largely driven by men with stereotypically simplistic male attitudes that if a thing is good (e.g. a red bottom), more of it is better (e.g. a bruised or cut bottom). It’s the kind of thinking that is behind the whole “extreme ” trend. Because of my own experience personally processing my kink, what turns me on, and how I express it, it took me more time than I like to admit to come to an attitude of acceptance about what my preferred level of severity is in what I like to view and how I like to play (some differences between the two). Of course I’m a firm believer in YKIOK, and if others want to see broken skin, then as you said, Erica, they should go for it and not shame or pressure others.

    I don’t think anyone can be truly happy until they accept themselves for who they are. And to accept yourself, you have to actually get to know yourself as if you wanted to have a true and authentic relationship with yourself. Then you can really see what gets you the most aroused and where you have the most fun. Ignore the temptation and taunting to join in some kind of pointless competition. I’m curious whether women are as prone to this as much as us men.

    Like

  20. As far as guns, xenophobia, misogyny, and general stupid fears, Erica, I think you put it quite well. I’m quite liberal/progressive on most things except for the 2nd Amendment (“A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”) On that I feel like I’m centrist and reasonable. There’s nothing in the Amendment that defines “Arms” and also doesn’t state the requirements for citizens exercising that right. That’s where being sensible comes in. Is a nuclear weapon an “arm”? Certainly it is. But, thankfully, we can’t just go over to Walmart and buy one. There have to be consistently applied, logical restrictions on weapon types, access, background checks, and waiting periods. Countries like Canada, and as I heard recently on NPR, Switzerland, have plenty of access and ownership of guns, but have really low murder rates. That goes back to sensible regulation and having a mature culture. Our culture here in the U.S. is clearly not a mature one – witness the Donald Trump phenomenon. Enough said?

    Like

  21. Quai — thank you for your thoughtful comments. Re. women being as competitive as men? Oh, you bet. Maybe not for the same things, but indeed we are. Not something to be proud of, but it’s one of those human things, I think.

    Re. arms — my usual argument about the 2nd Amendment is that when it was written, “arms” were simple muskets and the like. I don’t think we need to eradicate the amendment, but I do think it needs to be revisited, considering the sophistication and huge dangers in today’s arms. Yeah… the U.S. is not behaving like a culture of sane adults. It’s rather terrifying. 😦 Although it seems (I hope) that Donald Trump has shot himself in the foot lately, and only the extremist of the extreme are on his side now.

    Liked by 1 person

    • smuccatelli on said:

      (Sigh). OK, when the Constitution was written, “arms” were muzzle-loading, single-shot, black powder, flint-lock muskets and cannon. Of course, that was all the government had too. Does that mean that the First Amendment’s protection of “freedom of speech” only includes actual speech and maybe yelling? No broadcasting of “speech”? No megaphones, no loudspeakers, no radio, no TV, no internet? And “freedom of the press” only pertains to actual words printed on paper, like a newspaper or broadsheet or pamphlet or book? No TV news? No 24-hour cable news? No movies? No animation? No internet? If the First “evolves” with the times, so does the Second and all the others too, no?

      Like

      • Smuccatelli — excellent point taken. But even the amendments have their limits. Even with free speech, we’re not allowed to yell “Fire!” in a crowded venue when there isn’t one, just to terrorize people.

        Like

  22. Exactly, Erica. There are limits placed on our speech in the protection of others, regardless of the mode or medium of our speech. Our point is precisely the opposite of what smuccatelli is suggesting. We are pushing for an evolution in the interpretation of the 2nd Amendment (as the 1st has( to include the new and more effective ways we have to cause extreme violence to one another.

    The purpose of the Constitution is to guarantee the protection of rights that it spells out. It’s not that those are the only rights we have. It’s only that it was decided that the ones laid out, especially needed protection. They didn’t want King George making some pronouncement and having all their arms taken, as the protection of the people would be threatened. I haven’t ever heard anyone of any political stripe speak against that right of the people to protect themselves. The argument has always been about what counts as arms, what the process should be to obtain one, and what limits, if any, there should be on quantities.

    Like

    • This little rant of mine has turned into quite the interesting discussion. I really appreciate all of you keeping it civil, despite varying opinions. Thank you!

      Liked by 1 person

    • smuccatelli on said:

      MY point was that people who think the Second Amendment only protects primitive, single-shot muzzle-loaders want that requirement to be frozen in time, but certainly not the protections afforded by the other Amendments. They weren’t worried about King George III as the Treaty of Paris in 1783 formally ended the Revolutionary War and secured the independence of the United States from Great Britain (the Constitution and the Bill of Rights wasn’t written until 1789), they were concerned with the new Federal government possibly oppressing the States, so the Second Amendment’s intent was to make available to “the people” (NOT “the States”) the kind of arms “in common usage at the time” to forestall such incursions against the people’s liberty. “In common usage at the time” would suggest that the people were entitled to arms comparable to what the government (military and law enforcement) have. The Supreme Court has ruled that the Second Amendment guarantees an individual right to keep and bear arms to all Americans (and not limited to membership in a militia). I haven’t heard anything by anyone of any political stripe suggesting limits on any other Constitutional rights regarding quantities, or process or licensing or permits to obtain said rights. No license required for freedom of speech. No limits on the number of times one can invoke one’s right to remain silent or to have an attorney available if accused of a crime. No “waiting periods” to petition government for redress of grievances. And, on the contrary, I’ve heard many people denigrate the right of people to protect themselves, usually from progressive/liberal types who equate that desire with “fear” or “paranoia”. Very often “tinfoil hats” and “black helicopters” and “teabagging” are mentioned too. No, I’m not “moderate” on this issue. Sorry…

      Like

  23. OK — I think it’s time for me to close the comments on this. Thanks to all for your contributions.

    Like

  24. smuccatelli on said:

    I TRIED not to put my two cents in but I just couldn’t do it… 😉

    Like

  25. It’s OK. 🙂 No worries.

    Like

  26. Personally pictures and videos showing extreme damage are the biggest spanking turnoff that I have. I love spanking, with or without implements, but at a sane level.

    Oh, and on the gun control/abortion rant – I thought that was a relatively calm post actually.

    All the best

    Tim

    Like

  27. Anonymous on said:

    Hi Erica,
    I agree that no one has the right to dictate what is true or proper for anyone else. I, personally, don’t like to play that hard 99% of the time. However, I have done it and most probably will again. A lot of people on the net are absolutely intent on forcing their sense of right and wrong on others because they cannot see beyond their own existence and cannot imagine that life could possibly be lived another way also. However, I think it’s also true that a lot of times captions such as a “proper this or that” are simply and solely from the poster’s point of view and posted with no intention to dictate a dogma. I’ve posted things with qualifiers like that before without a thought because they only applied to my life and experience and I did not intend in any way to imply that they were world standards. I was simply titling my picture the way I felt about it. I understand it can be grating to see “a proper belting” written below something you disagree to be proper in any way. However, it might be that it was meant only to imply proper for the couple in question. Of course, you probably know the poster and are speaking with background information on the person. Anyway, just thought to throw in my two cents on behalf of people who use qualifiers without disclaimers or ill intent.
    Thanks for your spirited posts 🙂

    Like

  28. Anonymous — thank you for the voice of reason on this. I think perhaps I (and others) have grown hypersensitive to terms like “proper” and “real” and “true,” when sometimes, they are NOT meant as a judgment.

    And to Curtis above — thank you for clarifying! I was afraid “turning your crank” meant that I’ve been irritating the hell out of you. 🙂

    Like

  29. Nothing wrong with a good ol’ rant every now and then, I tend to keep politics or anything negative off my blog nowadays too… but every now and then it just happens. I agree with both points by the way.

    Oh… and Ellen, I just checked the first 20 descriptions on the front of AAA and nothing misleading about any of those, every one has a clip and a pretty accurate description of what happened.

    PS. Only 10 Mass Shootings til Xmas! (sigh). xxx

    Like

Come on, you know you want to say something.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: