Subject:
|
Re: Using Lego to build weapons? (was Re: The Lego Beretta just won't die)
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Tue, 27 Nov 2001 14:22:03 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
654 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.cad, Carsten Schmitz writes:
> > Anyway... just wanted to share that I've managed to exposed 10's of
> > thousands of people to the AFOL community in the last two weeks. • At least I think i belong to this AFOL community.
> > > [...] I am sorry but I will refuse gladly this kind of PR.
Fortunately, people would still tend to see Lego as a toy and not a weapon
IMHO. (Those who seriously consider Lego a weapon already have serious
issues that this particular model won't affect one way or another.) Folks
tend to associate with form and function rather than materials; i.e. they
don't necessarily associate different creations based strictly on their
ingredients. To rail against the Brick because it was used to construct a
model of a weapon is like blaming marble for the statues of soldiers. To
dismiss orchestra because of John Tesh. To swear off of cartoons because of
Disney. To attack vinyl for those stupid capes on the first-release Star
Wars action figures. To seethe at the sight of human flesh after seeing
Martha Stewart. To hate paint because of that lousy hack van Gogh. (1)
Um...a point. I had a point, here, once. Oh yeah -- I doubt anyone would
look at the "PR" then turn around and link "Carsten" to "murder". Your
image is quite safe from this "PR" you consider negative.
You should feel free to debate the many qualities of handgun control. But
unless you can show that he's harmed anyone -- and I doubt anyone is harmed
by association with Legos -- then please don't attack Jeff (or anyone else)
for his works simply because you have notions about his philosophy. Bad form.
> Why don't you build a model of an anthrax virus?
Erm, I thought you were talking about items designed to kill people. While
I can see the argument that sidearms are designed specifically for homicide
(2), the anthrax virus most likely came about on its own in nature (3).
A model of a virus would be quite a challenge! I've been thinking of
modelling an HIV virus, working on icosahedrons, modelling it with origami,
measuring the angles, and so on. The techniques to pull off such a
structure would ROCK; think of the applications for the space model buffs.
Not to mention the educational qualities of displaying in diorama form, an
HIV paired off against a T-cell. Arguably, an anthrax virus model would
have the same qualities.
Cheers,
- jsproat
1. Joke! :-, (4)
2. perhaps an honorable goal sometimes, perhaps you should debate that...
3. or perhaps it didn't, literal creationists and conspiracy theorists can
debate that...
4. Vincent van Gogh was actually something of a hack by the more common,
non-contemporary meaning. I mean, he produced paintings for money, and he
had experimented with some unconventional techniques because he wanted to
get a certain effect with a minimum of time inventment. He also just
happened to be absolutely brilliant.
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
51 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
