Housekeeping: Should We Show Gun Gore?

Bullet holes in Peshawar school (courtesy huffingtonpost.com)

Peshawar School Attack: First Pictures Show Inside After Mass Murder the Huffington Post proclaims. The gallery of images show a shot-up school. No bodies. Not one of the more than 100 children slaughtered by Taliban terrorists. I understand the argument against showing the bloody result of civilian disarmament – especially when we’re talking about the slaughter at Sandy Hook Elementary school. But I also believe that our gun rights depend on an informed citizenry. How can you discuss gun control . . .

without looking in the face of evil?

Readers of borderlandbeat.com used to encounter graphic images of the atrocities committed by cartels and their government allies. Young men with their faces removed by gunfire. Bodies of people tortured, shot and hung from highway overpasses. Mass graves. All manner of evil acts.

Not anymore. I reckon the change makes it easier to ignore the carnage. Victims become words on a page. Statistics. Not people. bestgore.com is now the only website I know of that regularly shows the aftermath of firearms-related violence. [Note: they also have pornographic material.] Their murder category features the results of both individual attacks and military actions. It’s pretty heavy stuff.

Too heavy for the antis and the mainstream media. They wave the bloody shirt – but it’s a sanitized shirt. They propagate pictures of victims of firearms-related homicide as they were before the attack. Baby pictures. Pictures of victims enjoying life before they were killed. They never show the gruesome results of “gun violence.” It’s ignored, edited out or pixilated.

But it’s something we, America’s armed intelligentsia, should see. We need to see exactly what happens to a disarmed person or populace, so we can keep ourselves motivated to defend and extend our natural, civil and Constitutionally protected right to keep and bear arms. I will not let this happen to me, my loved ones or my community.

If I had a link to pictures of the dead children in Pakistan I’d want to post them, after the jump, with a warning. Am I wrong?

comments

  1. avatar Paul G says:

    We can’t even admit that these actions are fully supported by the quran, why would we even think of actually showing the aftermath of such actions.

  2. avatar Randall says:

    Link ’em but don’t show the pics on TTAG. I don’t want someone thinking I’m a nut bag when they peek over my shoulder and see carnage. (I browse TTAG on my cell in public).

    1. avatar Sammy says:

      ^^^^^ +1

      1. avatar Jeff the Griz says:

        +2

    2. avatar John in Ohio says:

      I agree about the link but for a different reason. I want to be able to choose to see the images at the time. I don’t really give a rat’s ass what others might think of what’s on my screen. They shouldn’t be looking at my screen anyway. If they see something that they don’t like then that’s on them.

      Are people really that concerned about what others might think? That’s pathetic.

      1. avatar Rokurota says:

        Yes. It is not pathetic. It is being aware of one’s environment. Some of us work in offices where looking at gun sites leads to uneasy questions. You could get SWATted by a self-righteous Action-Demanding Mom in a Starbucks, and so on. Being in the right doesn’t mean you don’t angle your screen for privacy or avoid sites with unsavory pictures. Or in this case, requesting the publisher to put the pix behind a link.

        1. avatar John in Ohio says:

          If I am going to view something on my screen that might reasonably be offensive or upsetting to another, I would position myself so that it was less likely that another would view my screen inadvertently. I wouldn’t do it because I care one bit about what they think of me. I would do it because I care about causing another unreasonable discomfort with extreme imagery. If they were to view my screen after I positioned myself to minimize such unintentional viewing then it would be the result of their own intentional actions and their own problem. I too support putting the images behind a link but not because I care about what others will think of me. Living life concerned about the internal opinions of another over something so minor is indeed pathetic and might be indicative of a low self-esteem.

    3. avatar beefeater says:

      If TTAG decides they just have to show gore, then I would hope they keep it behind a link with a warning (not just after the jump). Personally, I find those types of images extremely disturbing. I accidentally stumbled on a picture of a cartel victim a couple years ago, and it still bothers me. If I were to see something like this here (even if I accidentally clicked a link with a warning), that would be the last time I read a story here.

      I’d like to think that we can continue to use cold hard facts to fight the antis, instead of resorting to images that provoke an overly emotional response.

      1. avatar 2hotel9 says:

        “use cold hard facts to fight the antis” Yes, and images of the results of terrorists are part of those “cold hard facts”. Americans are a visually oriented people, if they don’t see it they don’t actually believe it.

    4. avatar rosignol says:

      Link ‘em but don’t show the pics on TTAG.

      Concur. If you must, set up a website specifically to host those pictures and link to them there.

    5. avatar Grindstone says:

      Or when browsing from work.

    6. avatar Chrispy says:

      Personally I need to see TTAG stay 99% SFW, this place is how I get through my day

    7. avatar Texas Anomaly says:

      I agree

  3. avatar davidx says:

    Islam and Judaism kind of mandate burial by sunset and apparently many of the deceased there have already been so taken care of.

    Paul G. is correct; those who bray about a ‘religion of peace’ and how the terrorists are anomalies and not in step with the right theology, etc., etc, are full of it, whether they know it or not. And this one was bad enough that even Taliban in other countries were condemning it as “un-Islamic.” They’re full of it, too. It’s a medieval cult of slavery and death with a billion adherents worldwide, from whom we mostly hear utter silence when these atrocities take place. And the usual suspects offer excuses for that, too.

    It’s sickening but we need to get out of those places once and for all and let those people solve their own messes; we’ve got more than enough on our plates right here at home.

    1. avatar LarryinTX says:

      YOU, sir, may consider that stolen.

      It is interesting how many American blacks manage to become devout muslims, given their supposed aversion to slavery.

      1. avatar ThomasR says:

        Well said. Many Muslim countries allow for the ownership of slaves even today.

        How ironic.

        And any Muslim that denounces any aspect of the Koran, Like slavery, is an apostate and is to be killed by all “good” Muslims.

    2. avatar Texas Anomaly says:

      Hey RF,
      A few days ago you asked if conspiracy theories should be deleted for the damage they incur to our cause. I propose that if you decide to take that route, the same action must be taken to the comments that attack the religions of others, and that have the smell of racism. Most, such as these, have no bearing on the question at hand, only serving to attack others. And where as most or the conspiracy types are quickly “b-slapped” down by other readers, here we have multiple post in support of this view. I am for free speech in any forum, but if you are concerned about damage control, 6 people posting that Islam (and as such about a quarter of the world population) is a evil, backward religion are far more harmful than one person saying that Sandy Hook didn’t happen.

      1. avatar 2hotel9 says:

        You can not accept reality? Then you are already lost. Good bye.

        1. avatar Texas Anomaly says:

          Do you care to elaborate how? Keep in mind that I am not trying to attack people for there opinion, in this case at least. But how is it that expounding on hatred for others helps the cause of the Second Amendment? I can only see ways that is hurts.

        2. avatar 2hotel9 says:

          No. Continue to to submit to islam, I have guaranteed the right for you to do whatever stupid sh*t you choose to do with my service. What comes of that choice is on your head, not mine. I do not submit.

      2. avatar Paul G says:

        First of all religion is not a race. So commenting on religion is not racist. Even islam has adherents of many races. One has to be pretty shallow-minded not to understand that.
        Secondly, it is not derogatory to point out the truth of a religion. If you wish to know more, you could always study the quran on your own. Of course, to avoid confusion brought about by the non-chronological nature of that book, one should also read the biography of Mohammed. It is a good start just to understand that unbelievers cannot be considered innocents. Especially so given the fatwas that are in effect at this time.

        1. avatar Texas Anomaly says:

          Thank you for the response. On the subject of racism I was calling into question Larry In TX comments on blacks being Muslim. All Abrahamic religions can be used to support slavery, Christianity included. But that’s beside my point. My point is, what does this thread of comments have to do with if TTAG should post pictures of gunshot victims? How are we helping the 2A by arguing over if the Qur’an, the Bible, the Tao Te Ching or any other religious text or Religion is evil? I fail to see how any argument over religion on a gun web site is constructive.
          Am I wrong? Can anyone explain to me how this helps protect our rights? I feel this only hurts us.

        2. avatar Paul G says:

          Christianity was the driving force behind the ending of slavery. Even Judaism had limitations on slavery, only islam promotes it. You are right, you should avoid arguing on topics which you are not prepared to discuss.

        3. avatar Texas Anomaly says:

          Paul G, Thank You. You have proven my point better than I ever could.

          The next time some fool shoots up a mosque, and we get a new round of gun control regulation, just remember, you asked for it.

        4. avatar Paul G says:

          Now that makes no sense at all. Since you have no idea what you are talking about in regards to religion, you posit a situation as a “what if” to claim a valid point? Calling that asinine is being nice. Oh my, and if they shoot up a mall, or a school., or maybe a Coney Island!?! Oh yeah, those have nothing to do with your point. Neither does shooting at a Mosque.
          When it comes to islam, it is best to treat its adherents the same way one looks at gun-handling or dealing with exotic pets. You know to treat all firearms as if they are loaded, to preclude dangerous surprises. You know that exotic pets (or animals in the wild) are dangerous, and need to be handled in a certain way. If one knows the tenets and demands of islam, one will not find oneself surprised when a muslim acts in accordance with those tenets and demands.

        5. avatar 2hotel9 says:

          I’m still waiting for an example of someone other than muslims shooting up mosques. Every time there is a report of such, upon further investigation, it turns out to be either faked or an angry “congregant” attacking some leader who has wronged them.

        6. avatar Texas Anomaly says:

          I don’t argue with fools, but I’ll give this one last shot, just to remove any and all doubt as to what we are dealing with.
          I could argue religion with you. And I feel that its likely that if you where open to any form of counterargument or thought, I could likely show you the error or your ways. I’m not going to do it here.

          Why?

          This is not the place.

          You have spent all of your time in this thread avoiding the question I have posted. So for the third and final time I ask it: How is any of this argument that your trying to conduct helpful? Can you name just one point?

          I look at the earlier posts and see this:

          Paul G. calls Muslims animals. Also he states that “Christianity was the driving force behind the ending of slavery” seemingly ignoring or unaware of the fact that for most of history slavery was supported by biblical teachers, the church and scripture itself.

          davidx calls Islam a “medieval cult of slavery and death with a billion adherents worldwide”

          Do not take this as a personal attack. I really and truly do not mean for it to be. But this is not the place for it. There are many other sites that thrive on this type of talk. But lets try to keep it off of TTAG.

          I know that my argument is in vain. I know I will not change your mind or that of TTAG staff. In fact today there was an story posted with the same mentality as your expounding. I beg, no plead with everyone here to remember that this is the internet. The comment section is not behind a wall. Literally anyone in the world can see them. So I ask everyone to think about what you say before you post.

          Shannon Watts and Mike Bloomburg would love to know what you think.

        7. avatar Paul G says:

          Boy are you full of crap or what? I am sure you could argue religion, anybody can argue, the key is to do so with an iota of knowledge, which you obviously do not possess.
          Where, in the first place, did you ask the question you claim to have asked? I have not seen it. Granted, I may not read everything thoroughly, but I have the right to read as I see fit, you are not my master. Perhaps you could point out where you directed such a question to me, I would be more likely to see it in that case.

          Also, why is this not the place? It seem to me I was not the person who broached the subject in the first place, why do you not address that person. Of course, you would be as complicit as anyone else, since you are discussing what you consider taboo. I said nothing that was not factual. Do you have a problem with facts? It seems maybe you enjoy the company of Shannon and the Bloomberg clan in that case. That seems especially true given your blatant lies and half-truths.

          Consider for example “Paul G. calls Muslims animals”….you are a liar. I said no such thing.
          Consider that Christians were the driving force behind the ending of slavery. For one thing, in OT days, and up until rather recently, slavery was supported by nearly everyone. Major parts of the population were slaves. People often contracted themselves into slavery. The religions did not create it, but if anything tempered it. We could go on and on about the realities of what the history of slavery is, but your responses are too infantile for me to believe you could comprehend facts, as you already have shown a disdain for them.
          Consider “davidx calls Islam a “medieval cult of slavery and death with a billion adherents worldwide”. Here you may have a point, since the actual date of commencement of the medieval period is open to debate. Still, most people put it in the 5th century, lasting until the 15th or so. Islam commenced in the 7th century, so your argument is pretty thin. The slavery and death parts, spot on though, sorry. No Judaic or Christian texts encourage believers to go out converting by sword or enslaving others. If you want to raise some of the OT texts as reproof, don’t. They were one time events, they are not valid as anything but history. The islamic commands are still in effect. Huge difference.

          What are you afraid of? The truth? Does it hurt that much? I know that the mainstream media, and our politicians, and their counterparts throughout most of the west are busy white-washing any atrocities committed in the name of islam, and that merely emboldens the jihadis. I guess if we just shut up about it and make up lies about how it isn’t “true islam” (I’ll let you borrow a copy of the quran if you like, the actions are very much in accordance with the quran), maybe they will attack us last? Oops, too late. I am also unafraid of condemning the Westboro Baptists in their actions, should we not talk about that either? Or is saying bad things about a Christian based group ok, just not islam?

          You can continue to wear blinders, and refuse to discuss current events and their root causes, the rest of us would rather understand the truth of the events going on around us. You cannot be prepared for things if you refuse to confront them. A certain religion seems to be getting a lot of press time lately for creating gore, (even slaying pregnant women). Not all muslims are engaged in such actions, true. Their religion, however, does call for them to do so. Look into it for yourself. Don’t take my word for it. Warned is better than ignorant and blind-sided. If you, or anyone, actually looks into the truth of the religion being discussed (see I am being PC) it will have been a great service to them. That is quite a valid point.

          Ok, mine was the first post to mention the quran, it was a valid point and completely factual. So sue me.

        8. avatar Texas Anomaly says:

          As you can not be bothered to read the posts that you are replying to, I can’t be bothered to respond further.

          But thank you for the offer to borrow your Qur’an, but it’s unneeded. My copy is setting on the shelf next to the bible.

        9. avatar Paul G says:

          I do read them. Obviously I either missed your question twice, or stopped reading for some reason, I can guess why. Nice try though. Go buy a quran, or download it. But be sure to correlate the verses to the historic timeline, it matters. All the peaceful stuff occurred early in islam, and was abrogated by the blood and guts commands that came later. Exactly the opposite of the OT versus NT. Besides, the OT stuff consisted of singular events, not perpetual commands. Hope you learned something.

        10. avatar 2hotel9 says:

          Who shot up a “mosque”? Link us some facts! Oh, yea, it is MOOOSLIMS that are shooting up mosques, raping and sodomizing and selling slaves and murdering innocent people every. single. day. F*ck you.

  4. avatar James in MO says:

    I don’t think it should be posted or linked to here.

    Posting it here adds fuel to the anti’s accusations that gun lovers are bloodthirsty and get a thrill out of seeing that. Linking… I don’t want to see it, and I don’t want to accidentally click it while scrolling on my phone. To look at those pictures, you have to be prepared for it, or it traumatizes you (and likely even after you’re prepared it could still traumatize you).

    1. avatar Logez says:

      Well said.

  5. avatar Shire-man says:

    I’ve always felt like Western civ is too far removed from the reality of death for its own good.
    Everybody just closes their eyes and drifts off to be made up like porcelain dolls and laid softly onto silken pillows.

    Folks claim it’s to protect innocence but to me it’s more about forgetting our own mortality and we forget we are mortal we do stupid, reckless and harmful things to ourselves and others.

    Life and liberty lose value if we forget that our own death can occur at any second of any day for any reason gruesome or otherwise.

    Stop selling the myth of Santa to your kids. Take this Xmas to remind them that their corpse will soon enough rot in the ground and they best not waste what little time they have. Or, since this story always ends the same way, maybe all of time is a waste regardless of how we fill it? Ho ho ho.

    1. avatar TheBear says:

      Good luck with that. Western culture is very squeemish about death and shies away from the topic even though technically we are a Christian nation and a great many people theoretically believe they are going to paradise after death.

      Hah.

      1. avatar LarryinTX says:

        Even the most devout frantically avoid going to paradise at all costs. Hmmm. Wonder why that is?

      2. avatar Carry.45 says:

        My idea of paradise is a tropical beach with an endless Mai tai. Why wouldn’t someone want to go there for the rest of time? Something doesn’t compute.

      3. avatar DrVino says:

        No. Westerners are, for the most part, squeamish due to the way the media sanitizes the news and their peace and prosperity insulates them from the realities of the rest of this planet.

        It’s a coddled “TMI” mentality in which we unknowingly wallow – as evidenced by our use of obfuscating euphemisms for bodily functions, fluids and death.

      4. avatar Grindstone says:

        Westerners are not typically “squemish” of death itself, but death by violence is actually relatively rare in the West. Life holds more value in the West where life expectancy isn’t in the mid-30s and infant mortality rate is incredibly low. Contrast that to some third-world countries were you’re more likely to die by age 3 than make it to retirement, which often doesn’t even exist.

        Of course Shire-man’s post takes things to a whole crazy level.

  6. avatar AllAmerican says:

    This wouldn’t sway antis or fence sitters. They’d use the pictures as ammo. They wanted the sandy hook ones released so they could scream “look at the power of these assault ghost machine guns!!! One bullet exploded this child’s head!!!! This will be your child if we don’t ban guns!!!” Of course that level of bloody shirt waving would backfire on them- I hope.

  7. avatar tank03 says:

    I think it’s in poor taste to show the bodies of murdered children. I can only speak for myself, but I would not want my slaughtered son or daughter paraded around the internet. Those of us with children don’t need gruesome photos to remind us of the perils of disarmament or how important our role is or how precious our loved one are; the smiling face of my children is the only thing I need to see to convince me to protect them, and their rights, with my life. There is no photo that could compare with the horror my own mind creates when I consider the awful things that could befall my children if I fail to do my job.

    I can’t help but think that using such photos to advance our own agenda is merely “waving the bloody shirt”. Our arguments are based on reasoned and rational thought; we don’t need gory pictures to drive any message home. We are intelligent enough to understand the dangers without having to disrespect those innocent people who have been murdered.

    1. avatar Carry.45 says:

      This^^^x2.4bil

      I’d like to believe that the majority of people who read this blog wouldn’t want to see images of someone else’s loved ones gruesome murdes. Alas, I’m an idealist.

    2. avatar Logez says:

      Couldn’t have said it better myself.

  8. avatar Spectre_USA says:

    A link with a tersely worded warning would seem in order.

    I, for one, would not click on it, and I have no desire to see the demise of others, especially children.

    Others, for their own reasons, may, but that should be an option, IMHO…

  9. avatar Ralph says:

    Let me get this straight — it’s okay to show dead babies but not live Israeli supermodels?

    Perhaps you might want to consider reordering your priorities, no?

    1. avatar Jeff the Griz says:

      Thank you Ralph, your comment is making me feel extremely guilty for laughing out loud after reading about the heinous murders.

  10. avatar Ed Rogers says:

    Gruesome images are a harsh reality. If TTAG doesn’t include them, will antis claim you’re glossing over the truth about guns?

    Although I believe you should post them, it should be after the jump. That way we may choose (or not) to view them. Also, someone in public could wait until a more appropriate time…

    1. avatar Timmy! says:

      Unfortunately, “after the jump” only works when one is reading the stories from the home page. I, for example, make the first jump then use the little “arrow in a half circle” over there on the left side of the screen to go to the previous post. I have little knowledge of what is supposed to be hidden “after the jump.” Sure, I see a hypertext of the headline but if it doesn’t say, “Blah, blah, headliney stuff… and by the way there’s a picture of some dude’s brains on the wall as well,” I’d never know until it pops up in my face. Link them with a warning but don’t rely on “after the jump” for protection, please.

  11. avatar Anon says:

    One thing that helped galvanize people in the US during WWII was FDR’s decision to show pictures of our dead troops on the beaches and other areas during the Pacific Theater.

    It was the right thing to do.

    From Forbes magazine, 2013:
    In 1999, Americans learned that 98,000 people were dying every year from preventable errors in hospitals. That came from a widely touted analysis by the Institute of Medicine (IOM) called To Err Is Human. This was the “Silent Spring” of the health care world, grabbing headlines for revealing a serious and deadly problem that required policy and action.

    As it turns out, those were the good old days.

    According to a new study just out from the prestigious Journal of Patient Safety, four times as many people die from preventable medical errors than we thought, as many as 440,000 a year.

    So, moronic doctors post anti gun letters and opinions. The A%$holes should look at their house, many, many glass walls.

    We should show photos of dead people leaving a hospital, as many as 1,205 PER DAY.

  12. avatar Accur81 says:

    Having seen more than my share of death, I say show the photos. The articles should be somber, and of course the comments should also respectful. Photos are evidence. Truth. Perhaps add a link and a warning if you must.

    Sure, the antis can’t handle gruesome photos. They don’t do well with facts, truth, or meaningful conversations either. Don’t write your articles for them. Write them for those of us with minds and wills strong enough to face reality, and armed enough to effect positive change within it.

    1. avatar Toby in KS says:

      I agree. The “truth” is not a Disneyland daydream.

      The truth is real. It bleeds. It hurts. It can’t be brushed aside. It needs many witnesses so the guilty cannot go unnoticed. It needs real, emotional responses; calls for justice.

      Lets not candy-coat the truth or hide it behind curtains. Display it. Let it soak in.

  13. avatar Kurt says:

    No. TTAG should not link to, nor host, this sort of content. I understand the sentiment, but it is possible to empathize with the grieving parents without having to actually see the pictures of dead kids.

    For those folks who feel obligated to view them for whatever reasons, there’s always search engines and 4chan (and, I guess bestgore). TTAG should not be another clearinghouse of this sort of stuff.

    Not that one fewer viewer matters too much, but I would stop reading TTAG if you chose to go down this path.

    1. avatar Chrispy says:

      I’m in total agreement, there are enough websites out there that host plenty of stuff that I just don’t want to see on TTAG.

      I say link to it at most, but please don’t start including content that will require a pop-up asking my DOB to view this site.

  14. avatar Mack Bolan says:

    For the same reason that the MSM wont show decapitation videos and the carnage left by the “religion of peace” is EXACTLY why these types of pictures and video need to be posted here. It’s truth about guns, and whitewashing it is quite frankly playing into the progressive hands.

    Personally I think the “This is what happens to a disarmed society” should be a picture category with exactly these types of photos.

  15. avatar Ralph says:

    I don’t think we want to see pictures of Al Gore, much less gun gore.

  16. avatar cmeat says:

    all you need to see is “night in fog.”
    i would not shy away from graphic images here. you will attract gorehounds though.
    the images i would like to see are the recent ones of people in the news like big mikey with a mouthful of scrilla and a fistful of pipe. not as damning evidence, just as a reality check.
    you would think trayvon was eleven.

  17. avatar uncommon_sense says:

    I favor linking to the photos. People need a chance to prepare themselves mentally before looking at graphic photos. And extremely graphic photos could be psychologically harmful to young viewers.

  18. avatar JR_in_NC says:

    Having seen what I consider more than my share of ‘gun gore’ in general and dead children in particular, I have no interest in looking at such pictures.

    I’m not saying don’t post them. I’m saying if they are posted in articles or linked, I won’t open those articles or click those links.

    Your site does not revolve around me, however.

  19. avatar James Long says:

    Show the link. “You shall know the truth and the truth shall make you free.”

  20. avatar Mark N. says:

    1. The Peshawar massacre has nothing to do with US Gun laws or the effects of a disarmed populace, given that Pakistan is awash with guns that are freely bought from local producers (and on top of which, this school was run by the Army and at least in theory had guards).
    2. Gore is easy to find on the Internet. I am a fan of LiveLeak, as it posts stories that one will not find on the major news media, a well as different interpretations of the news (i.e., propaganda) from both sides. Pictures of slaughtered Peshawar children are posted there today, a well as many dead bodies from the Syria/Iraq conflicts.
    3. Many of our veterans have witnessed first hand such incidents, and photographs might be extremely disturbing for those with PTSD.
    4. I don’t think the reality of so-called “gun violence” advances the gun rights agenda.

  21. avatar LarryinTX says:

    Sorry. Your presentation of such photos would be taken by the media at large as a celebration of what those wonderful guns can do, let’s have more of them. Look how good that .45 blew this kid’s head off! Here, a 9mm was not as effective, stick with us and see what YOU want to buy.

    Really bad idea.

  22. avatar Former Water Walker says:

    Show them. The reality of the religion of peace. Like the slaughter of jews the other week and the images of blood everywhere. Or the reality of murdered babies. In no way is it anti-gun.

  23. avatar TT says:

    Don’t show them. Photographs are not reality, and often not even truth. People who like to look at pictures of dead people can find plenty easily enough. If you want reality, go hunting.

  24. avatar Gearmoe says:

    “Should we show gun gore?” No. Why? It serves no purpose to promote a better understanding, to educate or improve public safety.

    Gore panders to fear and therein increases unfounded propaganda against the firearm. The result of the fear and reactions are all which matter. Society has proven to lack logic and rational thinking, favoring sensationalized media spin and emotional hysteria.

    So no, I am not in favor or displaying gore.

  25. avatar Tom in Oregon says:

    I guess I’m kind of immune. I’ve seen a lot of dead people, in all kinds of conditions, from all different mechanisms.
    I vote to link them. It will show what barbaric animals the killers are.

  26. avatar John in Ohio says:

    Link ’em. I agree.

  27. avatar Brody Bushman says:

    I discovered TTAG while looking for reviews for my first gun purchase. That was 2+ years ago and I now visit this site multiple times a day.
    If I had seen a bunch of photos of shot up kids that first visit I would have thought you all were a bunch of psychos and never have come back.

    1. avatar Carry.45 says:

      I would have thought the same. Let’s not scare off potential future readers.

  28. avatar jug says:

    When we are not honest enough to own up to, and spread the truth, we be our own worst enemy.

    Good doesn’t come from keeping bad or evil secret.

  29. avatar Chip Bennett says:

    I don’t need images of carnage to know that murdering children is wrong, or to understand the evil that would perpetrate it.

    1. Well you don’t and I don’t but all the uninformed voters that are responsible for policy decisions that create an atmosphere that allows the carnage to take place, need to see the harm they really cause. Why is it that PBS will air a knee replacement surgery in all its bloody gore or The Doctors will show a cyst being removed from a woman’s vagina on daytime television, but even though the Progressives (and Libertarians) claim abortion is just a medical procedure, they won’t ever…ever…EVER show the “patients” the gory truth? There are laws in some States that require the “mother” see an ultrasound before making a final decision to have an abortion. How about making her watch an actual abortion?
      I’m not just going off topic to further an agenda. I just think the analogy is the same with gun control and its effects.

      1. avatar John in Ohio says:

        even though the Progressives (and Libertarians) claim abortion is just a medical procedure,

        Not all libertarians… Most of those that I’ve known consider it murder. However, of that group I’ve known, a majority didn’t believe that the federal government ought to be involved. There seemed to be a split as to if local government ought to be able to intervene.

        IMHO, the number of libertarians supporting abortion might be growing. However, it certainly isn’t inclusive of all libertarians.

        1. Hence the use of parentheses around Libertarian. Libertarians tend to take a Swiss neutrality on abortion but my experience on TTAG has shown that here, the self proclaimed Libertarians argue vehemently against my pro-life stance. I am sure one could find a Progressive who is pro-life but my generalities are useful.

        2. avatar John in Ohio says:

          I now understand and can’t disagree. Thanks.

  30. avatar Billy says:

    A little goes a long way…

  31. avatar Deuce says:

    I don’t care either way. I don’t need to see pictures of the aftermath because I’ve already seen it before. It doesn’t bother me much and I don’t think it will have the effect you want for the same reason it doesn’t bother me. You have to dehumanize the person you’re looking at. You either look at them as an “it” or you don’t. The people that don’t do that are going to be bothered and not appreciate being shown those images, doesn’t matter if it’s for their own good or not.

  32. avatar Big B says:

    I check out this site to look at gun stuff and read about gun stuff. If I want to look at carnage, I will look elsewhere. We don’t need it here.

  33. avatar Grindstone says:

    We don’t need gore to know the reality of death. It does not have a place here.

    Also, lots of wannabe toughguys here. Go back to getting your jollies at rotten.com.

  34. avatar Hannibal says:

    Unnecessary in most cases and often disturbingly prurient. There’s a reason ‘bestgore’ puts sex alongside gore.

    1. avatar Yellow Devil says:

      Circle of life?

  35. avatar Another Robert says:

    I don’t think so. 1. It would backfire, just as it would backfire on the antis if they went extra-full retard and started showing photos of spree shooting victims. 2. We don’t base our case primarily on fear, hate, and extreme emotions, we base it on logic and facts and positive emotional appeal.

  36. avatar Tyler says:

    Whether anyone is or isn’t bothered by the pictures, the fact is they are a reality in our world. It’s not peddling an emotional response, for the sake of getting emotions high, it is the disgusting results of what evil can do. I say linking them is fine.

  37. avatar Garrison Hall says:

    You’ve named the site “The Truth About Guns”. If you can speak truth to power without showing gratuitous pictures of gore, good taste and journalistic responsibility demands that you do so. If photos don’t help tell the story then their inclusion is gratuitous and unnecessary. On the other hand people who demand to be shielded from images that challenge their denial of the truth need to see what they’re hiding from. Death caused by bad people doing bad things is ugly. People who try to convince themselves that such things can’t happen need to see for themselves. I spent some time searching for a video of an ISIL beheading. It was as vulgar as I thought it would be. But, having seen it, having watched those cavorting bags of scum celebrating the act, I now know what ISIL is and what it stands for.

  38. avatar Arod529 says:

    Over protection and the unwillingness to face reality is one of the main problems with our country’s society. Don’t further ignorance and delusional ideas of life. Show the truth.

  39. avatar Matt in Idaho says:

    It should have been a dgu, NO.

    dgu of the day, YES.

  40. avatar Roymond says:

    The site is “TRUTH About Guns”. People being shot up when some misuse guns is part of the truth.

    Some people can grasp the truth merely by reading about it; others need the visuals. Others may need the visuals but can’t handle them. So while we can’t join the “bury it” agenda, it shouldn’t be splattered up front — thus, link.

    I would suggest, though, that in the case of children the faces be blurred so there is no recognition possible. It’s plenty to know that a set of little bodies were done harm by the people we want to protect against; seeing individual faces isn’t necessary and could be incendiary.

  41. avatar Branwyn says:

    Being emotionally affected by the sights of gory murdered children is not a personality flaw or a failing. Personally, when I’m casually browsing the internet (and this is one of my favorite sites for doing so), I don’t want to be struck over the head with something that’s going to make me upset, make me unable to eat, and interrupt my sleep, no matter how much it agrees with my philosophy about the importance of self defense. I’m not especially sensitive… I work in the medical field and served as an EMT for several years; I have seen gore, both in images and in real life. I have faced tragedy. However, I’m currently pregnant with my first child, and with the magnitude of that responsibility on my shoulders and the hormonally-induced emotional vulnerability, coming across such horrible images could seriously affect my quality of life for days afterward.

    If you feel you should include images as part of the whole “truth about guns,” fine -link to them. Put plenty of “graphic images” warnings on the link and let people make up their own minds. Putting them behind the cut is not good enough; those of us who don’t wish to subject ourselves to the emotional upheaval aught to still be able to read the articles, and when browsing from my phone I often don’t get to read the whole headline or the text after it until I click on them because my phone cuts them off.

    I am a gun owner and avid 2A supporter; I don’t need graphic images to “keep my resolve strong” or any such thing. I like this site a lot, but not enough to keep coming here if it comes as a package deal with subjecting myself to images that are going to cause me pain and anguish.

    1. avatar Chrispy says:

      Perfectly said

  42. avatar Mark Lloyd says:

    Having watched many beheading videos, which are truly ghastly, and worked ER security with many trips to the morgue, looked at an aquaintence of mine up close with a real nice bullet hole in the side of his head, plus many other death encounters, gore isn’t the issue. Yes sanitizing it is to some extent counterprodutive, but the overall benifit is by far outweighed by an abundance of negatives. No media outlet shows graphic aftermath. I wouldn’t even link to it. It’s tacky and in poor taste to do so and TTAG is representing an already villified group.
    Maintain higher standards than to stoop to shock and awe gore. In the end, doing so will prove to be counter productive and regretted mistake.

  43. avatar 2hotel9 says:

    Link them, with warning. I have seen first hand the results of death by weapons fire, auto, industrial accidents and house fires, all of which are terrible to see. Does not mean they should be hidden away or sanitized.

    People are squeamish about viewing the dead, especially those killed by violence. And yet without people being confronted with the reality of terrorism they will continue to ignore it and it will continue to grow unchecked.

    A picture is worth 1000 words. That is not just some smarmy greeting card crap, it is undeniable reality.

  44. avatar Chrispy says:

    Personally, I look through this website multiple times a day at work. I come here for news, and reviews. I really get a kick out of the hunting stories too. This website isn’t something that I am afraid to show my family, friends, and my young nephews. I will keep coming back as long as I can still say those things.

    But when seriously gruesome images start making their way into TTAG, I won’t be able to visit anymore, nor will I want to.

  45. avatar Logez says:

    You’re ridiculous and crazy. I think we can all imagine what happened without seeing pictures of mutiliated children. This post is truly disturbing and you’re kind of a sick f#%$ for even seriously asking the question and posting this on the site.

    1. avatar 2hotel9 says:

      And yet another apologist leftard toddles through. HuffPo must be linking here again.

      1. avatar Logez says:

        NOPE. I check this site daily and am a gun owner and 2A supporter as I’m sure you are. I’m just not an extremist as many people that view/comment here are. And your bashing definitely does NOT help the pro 2A agenda. Taking a negative attitude towards people who share many of the beliefs you do will surely not work wonders. Maybe think before opening your mouth and spouting negativity rather than taking the time to articulate your opinions into something meaningful.

        1. avatar 2hotel9 says:

          Nope. You are yet another leftard crawling on your knees and begging mercy from muslim scum, all the while preaching surrender. Toddle along, dhimi.

  46. avatar styrgwillidar says:

    One death is a tragedy; one million is a statistic.

    Joseph Stalin

    I don’t see the point in showing them an TTAG in that most of us have already accepted the idea that there are evil people in the world, and the consequences of that. It would be a ‘preaching to the choir’ kind of thing, we’re aware of and acknowledge it. Link to those images if you think that the occasional lurker not aware of realities might wander through.

  47. avatar 357M28 says:

    Don’t(stop) Do(stop) This(stop). We already know the destructive power of a round. We don’t need unwanted attention.

  48. avatar Matt says:

    I believe that gore that is the result of DGUs, terrorist attacks, murders, etc etc does contain value because it gives you a very real and visceral sense of what being a victim of violence can hold for you as well as what you may be inflicting on another even in the course of legitimate violence such as a DGU. No one should have any allusions as to what the outcome could be if they are in a similar situation and pictures that depict the carnage in the aftermath of violence provide exactly that value. As someone above state, we are very removed form death in our society. Many people’s conception of what a violent death entails is based on actions movies not reality. I hold gore of this nature in a purely educational light is applied correctly. Pictures or video of this nature should not be used to shock or to be that edgy news site, but to provide the unfettered and ugly truth. To that end, providing a choice to a reader by putting it behind a link is great and probably the better route to avoid alienating your readership.

    Rather than disgusting and repulsing, me gore of this nature strengthens my convictions to die on my feet rather than be a victim, largely because I view it in this educational manner.

  49. avatar Ethan762 says:

    Unedited video of footage of the Harrison Bergerson beheading back around 2003 was what got me INTO guns – looking evil in the eye literally changed me forever. I am now an NRA instructor and 2A activist. Because of THAT video, my entire extended family now own firearms (I was the first in 2 generations), and have CCW permits.

    YES. By all means – Look reality in the eye. The Statist’s utopian ideals evaporate in the face of the naked, unedited Truth.

  50. avatar Ethan762 says:

    Unedited video of footage of the Harrison Bergerson beheading back around 2003 was what got me INTO guns – looking evil in the eye literally changed me forever. I am now an NRA instructor and 2A activist. Because of THAT video, my entire extended family now own firearms (I was the first in 2 generations), and have CCW permits.

    YES. By all means – Look reality in the eye. The Statist’s utopian ideals evaporate in the face of the naked, unedited Truth.

  51. avatar JD says:

    only effective if viewer can discern fact from fiction…if they’re already emotionally immature as Sigmund Freud postulated (hoplophobia), it’s hard to say, only a Ph.D psychologist might predict the outcome. Anti’s thrive on misplaced fear, but are smart enough to avoid potentially offending target audience.

Write a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

button to share on facebook
button to tweet
button to share via email