Grrl Power #327 – Ask a self evident question…
I’ve had this page in my head practically since I started the comic. Its tough to sit on them for that long, but it just made more sense to have it happen on the second day at the earliest. Granted, Sydney had to play along a little. I don’t mean she immediately understands what Maxima’s doing and rolls with it, I mean she specifically had to not get it in order for the gag to work, so I sort of poke fun at that with the “going to keep staring this direction” word bubble.
Normally Maxima doesn’t make a habit of pointing her gun at recruits, and obviously Sydney will be taught never to point a gun at anyone unless there’s a pretty good chance she’ll need to shoot them, but I thought I’d say that Max gets away with it because besides outranking everyone, her finger isn’t on the trigger naturally, and more importantly, her pistol is single shot break action and she doesn’t keep it loaded. With her speed, she can load it faster than most people can cock a hammer. She can even do it one handed, just let go of the gun in mid air and pop a bullet in the chamber before it has a chance to fall more than a centimeter.
There was no way to make this a single page comic. If I really had to I maybe could have cut 3 of the panels and maybe even combined the first two, but it would have lost something and still wouldn’t have fit on a single page, so it had to be a double. Unfortunately it put me two days behind and I’m not caught up yet because of A-kon, though fortunately I didn’t fall any further behind. I still have my buffer but I will probably never actually use up my buffer. That’s for like if I break my hand or something. Not that I have enough of a buffer to ride that out, I just don’t want to use it up if for no other reason than it would take me about 4 weeks to get an extra page ahead again. That’s why I haven’t updated the vote incentive yet this month. I do have two pieces that are half finished I could use but I’d like to have them a little further along before I post them.
I’m mostly pleased with the art on this page, (I could nitpick nearly all of it of course because artists are hyper self critical like that) so maybe it’s dumb, but my favorite panel is the one with the ballistics gel dummy. It just really looks like ballistics gel to me, especially with the old bullets and the spawled trails behind them.
The firing range BTW is in the basement, one level above the garage where the machine shop and the few ground vehicles the team uses are kept. Regular parking is in a proper parking garage next to the building
Here’s the link to the new comments highlighter for chrome, and the GitHub link which you can use to install on FireFox via Greasemonkey.
I may have missed it when reading through the comments, but.. has no one else picked up on the fact the target dummy has y-fronts on it? with mutliple bullet holes showing it is a specifically targeted area? (Panel 6).
Scary enough with guns, but with Max’s finger? Just plain OW.
Edit: Codebracker beat me to it :)
Yeah, I too saw the training target with a jock strap on it and some bullet holes too. Take it ether we got a few man haters, or a few girls who use it as a way to vent at bad dates.
That was kind of obvious. There’s two confirmed feminists there. Maxima seems to hate men for some reason except as eyecandy, and Dabbler seems to be the sort who enjoys power over men. Sydney might sort of be on the fence between them. I also notice how when Sydney asked Dabbler that if being a succubus was like Dabbler being forced to have sex to live and thus rape – she didn’t ask if it was rape for the guys, while Dabbler was bouncing on a prisoner’s lap, no less.
Maxima seems to hate men
Can you link to the comic that evidences that?
for some reason
I think the only “reason” may be that you’re imagining it.
Max doesn’t hate men. She hates being made to feel that her looks are more important than her abilities as a military commander and superhero. Dabbler loves everybody, and Sydney likes guys just fine.
Riiiiight. And I am certain that all the female bosses who have passed Maxima over for promotion or failed to consider her intellectual contributions to a team based on her looks as well as all the women who cannot manage to look her in the eye while speaking with her have made “being made to feel” something which is all about her looks has made this a completely gender neutral association for her.
That’s not to say that she would never have encountered a woman who stared at her tits or never had a female boss who trivialized her contributions or never had a male boss who considered her contributions based only upon their merits, because that’s not how the world works. But really, who are you trying to kid here? The vast majority of Maxima’s negative experiences with that sort of thing would be association with men.
We didn’t see a female reporter who looked like Leisure Suit Larry saying to Maxima “isn’t it a bit hot in here,” after all.
Of course it would. But she would have a problem with those men in particular. I still maintain that she doesn’t hate the gender as a whole.
That game predates the internet. I remember it back when I had a top of the line 386 33mhz with 512k ram…running dosshell 6.2
Yeah. I remember playing it on the Commodore 64, back when THAT was considered top-of-the-line in home computing…
Cassette tape program loading…Gaaaah!
My father actually used punch card programming in a materials testing lab…
In the earliest days of “super-computers,” that utilized vacuum tube technology (before the invention of transistors), they had to use punch-coded paper tape. It was the ONLY means of user-interface & data readouts available. Punch cards were the next step after that.
Yes, I’ve got formal education & professional experience in both programming and hardware technology…
This comes from Maxima’s profile on the Cast page:
“She is a beautiful and exotic woman, and the attention she draws has poisoned her
somewhat to the opposite gender. She wants to be taken seriously, and despite her power and abilities, every time she sees a man checking her out, it makes her feel like none of that matters to them and all they see is an exotic sex doll, and it contributes to her rabid feminism.”
So to everyone talking in this comment threat, this is the Word of God on Maxima’s dislike for men.
No, that does not say that Maxi hates men, just that who they look at her contributes to her feminism (not all feminists hate men)
You must have missed the “poisoned her somewhat to the opposite gender” part. It at the very least implies a lot more distrust and dislike than can be automatically associated with the simple word “feminist.”
Granted, but I think the repeated point in this comment thread is that none of this amounts to “hate”. Hate is a very strong word, and should only be used with exact specific evidence, especially given the history of people minimizing feminist causes by calling them all “men-haters”. Declaring Maxi “hates” men because she is “poisoned to the opposite gender” or a “rabid feminist” is a leap, and not a justified one, IMO. I think the other commenters on the thread are just asking that we be careful throwing around “hate” given the many unfortunate connotations associated with it.
Well said.
does not equate to “man hater”. If it were “poisoned against the opposite gender” you would have a stronger case. However the “somewhat” indicates a lesser degree than you are claiming.
How that ‘poisoning’ is manifested, we have to judge by her words and actions. Not a single one of which corroborates ‘man hater’. What it does corroborate is a dislike of misogynists. As confirmed by the “…rabid feminist”.
Maxima’s relations with the male cast have been perfectly equitable. Of particular note, bear in mind that Math is tolerated by her, despite exhibiting sexist behaviour. Which indicates that, although she personally dislikes such, so long as her female subordinates are comfortable with the environment, she will allow him leeway.
We have seen, from the super wedgie incident, that Maxima will not hesitate to take action, if she feels it is necessary. If she truly were a man hater, she would seize on the excuse to punish him But she does not.
Whilst her subordinates are all happy and comfortable with their work environment, Maxima allows banter and horseplay. Despite being cynical about the motivations and behaviour of sexist men.
As a ‘rabid feminist’ though, I have no doubt that she will stomp hard on anything which exceeds rowdiness and approaches sexual harassment. Note Maxima’s prime target for that is Dabbler! Who, in case you had not noticed, is FEMALE.
I agree, completely. If this thing had a +1 feature, you’d get one from me.
I would like to add that since Maxima only hates misogynists, anybody saying that means that she hates men, that person is stereotyping all men as misogynists, which is misandrist when you think about it, and therefore such a person hates men.
I would say, from the official descriptions and her actions in the strip so far, that it is not “man hater,” but more along the lines of “assumes men are lecherous idiots until proven otherwise.”
Not a bad rule of dew claw, for anybody to use.
That’s actually more along the lines of the kind of juvenile joke you could fully expect soldiers of any stripe to cook up. Also, it looks like it’s been there awhile, as opposed to the oft-replaced ballistic torso, so those holes may very well just be your expected stray shots rather than deliberate targeting.
Soldiers can be very much kids at heart. Kids that gets to play with live weapons and explosives and multi-million dollar weapon systems but…. yeah.
One of the biggest mistakes any officer can make is let soldiers get bored. That is the time when questions like “what will happen if we lob a grenade into the porta-potty?” gets answered.
or how funny would it be to put a charged capacitor into a urinal.
It’s similar to Rockhound’s quote from the Movie Armageddon:
“Why do I do this job? The pay is good, the scenery changes & they let me play with explosives.”
The main difference between his job & the military is that the military’s pay isn’t that good, so you get your morale boosting wherever you can find it…
Missed it the first couple times through.
Looks like a call to HR to me… sexual harassment, re: hostile work environment.
The target dummy doesn’t draw a paycheck, is not an employee & has no legal standing to file a formal complaint…
My wife worked in a prison. One of the stories they told while she was in training was there was the start of a fight in the prison yard. One of the guards patrolling outside the fence in a pickup keyed the mic on his PA system and racked a shotgun. Everyone hit the deck. A little intimidation goes a long way to preventing some problems.
Oh god, yes, a pump-action shotgun being chambered is the most terrifying sound in the world, because EVERYBODY KNOWS WHAT IT IS. You don’t even have to have it loaded to scare the piss out of people with that sound. That’s why a pump-action shotgun is the best choice for home defense. Getting a home invader to leave peacefully is WAY better than having to actually shoot them.
Which is why someone who doesn’t know much about guns might pump a shotgun, eject a perfectly good round from the chamber, and threaten their opponent w/ the now-empty gun.
Given the complete non-existence of single shot pump-actions, the opponent will have no way of knowing it was the last round.
And really, if you were going to keep a shotgun about with one round in it, why would that round be in the chamber?
The problem is if that was going to BE your last round. A defense shotgun will usually hold 10-15 shells. Did you rack the slide for emphasis 14 times or 15?
Tell you the truth, in all the confusion I lost count myself.
There’s only a handful that hold that many. A TYPICAL pump weapon holds between 6-10.
Friend’s carried 8 which he alternated with Rubber and Buckshot.
Unless you are some kind of real dummy or you have no choice due to the weapon design , you do NOT store an autoloading gun with a round in the chamber.
It is possible, and preferred, to load a pump action shotgun until the magazine is full and the chamber is empty. This is the safe way to store a loaded gun, as nothing will happen if the trigger is accidentally pulled.
Racking the slide will put the first round in the chamber.
Even then, everybody knows that pump action shotguns are multi-shot. Even if you waste one shell by ejecting it by accident, how many are there left? Plenty enough to not want to be the FIRST, SECOND, or THIRD person who pisses off its wielder.
*Checks.* Okay. Maxima has her finger OFF the trigger when pointing it at Sydney. She only fails a few general gun safety rules, and probably not the big ones.
Also, yeah. Fear of guns has gotten ridiculous in some circles.
Yeah but the fear is well founded though fear of motor vehicles should as high if not higher since those kill a lot more people on average.
I’m not sure I can entirely agree, N0083–not that guns aren’t something to be wary of, and guns in the hands of some people downright terrifying, but there seem to be some people who think that guns are somehow psychically drawing people in and will jump up and shoot all on their own, and that’s ridiculous.
Unless you have super strength, it’s hard to use a car in a fight. Cars are only dangerous when they have time to speed up, so it’s difficult to intimidate someone with a car without actually driving it at them.
Although it sometimes occurs to me while driving that hitting pedestrians would be a very easy way to kill a lot of people, if that were something I wanted to do. I hope that’s a normal thought to have. Maybe I’ve driven on pavements in GTA too much.
You can run someone over once you hit a whopping 12-15 mph on average. Most people cant exactly outrun it at that point, and even whats his name, Usain Bolt, fastest runner on earth hit 27mph in a dead sprint. My truck sucks for acceleration and I could run his ass down in 5 seconds flat. Especially as he couldnt exactly maintain that for much more than about 20 meters.
Assuming the victim cooperates by staying where the truck can get him.
If you KNOW some loon is trying to run you down, there are always options – even as simple as using a tree or power pole as cover.
Yeah, a vehicle still in acceleration is pretty easy to dodge if you face it and don’t give away which way you’re going to go, then just take off in the direction it came from and find somewhere too small for it to fit and sturdy enough to stop it, like inside a building. By the time they stop, turn around and get started again, you’re long gone.
Well, they put the word “Ram” on the side, right next to the driver’s door…That’s a pretty good indication that they’re after your @$$.
Then again, they also put “Dodge” on the front, so at least you have some kind of warning. It has something to do with Rules of Fair Play, I think…
Jasper Carrot used to read out genuine motor insurance claims, as a part of his gig. One went something like this:
“… I mounted the curb, going towards a little old lady. She dodged to the, left. So I adjusted my steering. Then she dodged to the right. Then I hit her.”
Depends on your definition of “a lot”, N0083rP00F – in the US those figures aren’t that far apart.
2013 mortality figures from the CDC (www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/nvsr/nvsr64/nvsr64_02.pdf):
Deaths (all ages) due to land motor vehicles: 35,369
Deaths due to intentional self-harm (suicide) by discharge of firearms: 21,175
Deaths due to assault (homicide) by discharge of firearms: 11,208
So deaths due to firearms 32,000 and deaths due to motor vehicles 35,000 – only about 10 percent difference.
Also worth noting that there are roughly as many cars on the road as there are legal drivers. Speaking statistically, the average car is far less likely to ever kill someone than the average gun.
And most of those automotive related fatalities were accidental while all of the firearm related fatalities were intentional.
A very salient point. There were only 505 accidental firearms deaths that year. The fact is that if you want to kill someone, chances are good a firearm will be the easier job to do that with than a motor vehicle.
Technically “don’t point it at anything you don’t want dead” is the “biggest” gun safety rule and the one Maxima definitely breaks here.
I think her point though was that “Just because you can exsplode stuff with your finger doesn’t mean that people will realize that you are willing to kill them while you’re pointing your finger at them…. Where people know immediately that if they see a gun pointed at them that you’re willing to kill them.” (TLDR; Guns telegraph the intent to kill more efficiently than a pointed finger. A point well illistrated by Halo not making the connection that Maxima was basically pointing a weapon at her head well before she drew the gun.)
I see a few points that may have been made here…
* a gun is more threatening than a pointed finger, even if said finger can generate blasts big enough to destroy tanks.
* noting the large hole bored through the target: backstops can be less substantial with a gun. If your beam can confetti a tank, then you want something more substantial than a tank behind your target before you fire your beam… And a crisis may not give you that mountain of a backstop. No backstop? No shooting.
Sydney and Maxima can both fly, so they can (almost) always count on being able to use the ground as a backstop.
Rules #1 & 2 when handling a firearm,
Treat a weapon as if it is loaded even if you are 1000% sure it is unloaded.
NEVER point a weapon at another person unless you are ready to kill or injure them.
There have been numerous incedents where people have been killed because the did not follow those 2 rules.
And for a military combat officer and the range master to do this is a total breakdown of all standards of U.S. government sanctioned firearm train protocols.
And both can and should be given at the very least a dishonorable discharge for flagrant violations of the law and said safety protocols.
Actually, Hariman, pointing a loaded gun at someone IS violating one of the big 2, as Dr. Revenge points out. A colonel in the Army would know this.
Maxima is very much aware of that (and so is DaveB, for that matter. Having put up a gun safety notice, in the art for this room, including the rule). And, as a result of which, you can be sure that this kind of demonstration will have been planned in detail. Lt Colonels do not take a dump without a plan.
The protocols will have been formulated and agreed with the relevant parties. And will likely have been signed off by Colonel Faulk, given that such behaviour, by an officer acting under their own initiative might be called into question. You will note that Maxima sought the permission of the officer in charge of the firing range (Peggy), before initiating the training. Albeit in their own casual way.
This is no different to any other training exercise, where soldiers point real guns at each other, in simulated combat. Both that kind of training, and what Maxima has done above (albeit done in a quirky and amusing way) are preparing troops, in a way to ensure their maximum readiness for their role.
Pointing a possibly loaded weapon at somebody is wholly against regulations. Using a confirmed unloaded weapon, in training, is permitted.
If you check Dave’s blog above you will see that Maxima’s gun is NOT loaded, and never is. Doubtless (as confirmed by another comment by Dave) her dial is set to maximum reaction speed. Which means that even if a ninja had managed to load Maxiama’s weapon, AND she accidentally pulled the trigger (note her finger is NOT on it), then she could still just lean forwards and grab the bullet in mid-air.
yeah, it took me just as long as Sydney to get it… :) I’m glad guns aren’t a thing here.
Yeah, we’d all hate for a woman or minority to have such an easy way to protect themselves from a group trying to oppress them, or to have such an effective deterrent from that oppression… or, wait, is that something we do want?
We have this wonderful concept called police. We find they work quite well.
I would advise a lone woman to flee and get the help of the police, rather than engage a hostile group in a gunfight. If she is living in a country where things are desperate enough to have resort to that, they will probably be armed too. The odds of her surviving a direct confrontation do not sound favourable.
Yorp, as big of a fan of police as I am, I still understand that crime prevention isnt their thing. The saying, “When seconds count, cops are only minutes away” is a bit insulting, but also very true. Unless your mugger is utterly insane and attacking people outside the police station, your odds of running off and finding a cop before whatever crime happens takes place are really low. Cops are more there to track down and catch the criminal after the fact.
Ok we will put you down as “let her die in a blaze of glory”. I will stick to the “try and run away”. Proximity to the police is not the important thing. Getting away and living is the key part. In due course, the police then get given descriptions of the group and get to work.
Though, of course, her odds of getting away are far better in a society where the aggressors are not likely to be armed with guns.
As always I point out I am not advocating that Americans should give up their guns. They are ingrained in your society. But just don’t try to convince Europeans that life is better resolving problems with gunfights.
We may enjoy Westerns, but we rather like them kept 4,000+ miles West.
Yorp, I think the point isn’t to NOT try and run away. The point is that, sadly, many times the built in delay between needing assistance from the police and being able to do it can be drawn out to potentially many times the duration of the criminal encounter (IE, mugging, beating, etc.)
This is not to say violence should be your first resort by any means, as I agree that getting police intervention without the need for violence is best.
FYI, this is not pro or anti gun, just a comment on the lamentable, but unavoidable, reality that is the delay between crime and police response in almost all cases I have read about.
-A gun is uncomfortably likely to end up in the hands of the ATTACKER, since most people aren’t badass action heroes who are totally cool and calm when a completely and utterly taken by surprise in your everyday life.
-Suicide rates SKYROCKET in homes that have guns. You’re way more likely to either end up killing yourself or having someone else in your home try to kill themselves with your gun than you are to ever need that gun for real self-defense.(No, suicidal people aren’t bound to kill themselves no matter what. Not even close)
The best self-defense for your home is a nice, sturdy door and hinges. Get bars for the windows if you’re particularly paranoid.
Most home invaders want as easy a target as possible. Just having the lights on tremendously reduces chances of home invaders.
I know loosely 1000 ways to kill someone just from what I watched on tv. About 50 ways to commit suicide I learned through the internet indirectly. Guns just happen to be the easyer way to hurt people at the moment. One that as pointed out is common for criminals.
In areas with high civilian gun ownership gun violence actually is lower then in areas where guns are banned. In lower population, more isolated areas, where much of the population at least has a minor understanding of how to use a gun and ownership of one. Murder rates in general are tiny. The best deterrent to gun violence is to somehow makes guns not exist, or encourage education and ownership on a level that the average criminal would be hesitant to actually threaten someone.
Also the suicide rate thing is a correlation causality thing. Like when they used to claim super hero comics encouraged violence. Or now when they make the same claim about video games. It might have influenced things but most of the people who do it would have anyway. Blocking one thing isn’t going to stop those events from happening. A lot of stuff happened for them to reach that point. A gun in the house doesn’t make them kill themselves. Them wanting to kill themselves makes them kill themselves. It just happened to the be the easyist way to do it at the time, if it wasn’t around they would have just used something else. No amount of wishing it was different will change that.
Causality – the gun doesn’t make them more likely to commit suicide, it makes it more likely they will succeed.
A lot of suicide attempts are done on impulse. Studies have shown, for instance, that suicide rates went down with the transition from bottles of painkillers to blister packs where each pill has to be popped out individually – the time this takes gives people time to reconsider.
Also, of course, there are guns and guns. This is just yet another reason why, if you do own a gun, you don’t keep it loaded etc etc
@Paddy
Do you know what to call an unloaded defense firearm? A club.
Oh, and one of a decent number of studies over the last few decades that continues to support the causation hypothesis:
Miller, Matthew; Barber, Catherine; Azrael, Deborah; White R. Firearms and suicide in the United States: is risk independent of underlying suicidal behavior? American Journal of Epidemiology 2013 Sep 15;178(6):946-55.
So, first, the whole ‘thousand ways to kill someone I learned from the TV’ is a rather poor anecdote, once which I don’t doubt is a vast exaggeration if not an outright lie just to make your point.
You’re also basing your entire understanding purely on America, where guns have more or less always been a close commodity. Because they’re ever-present, the escalation is different when compared to other parts of the world. For a criminal or group thereof wielding guns in a gun-legal area, the threat response to them is going to be equal to the power they can use because it’s gun to gun. For criminals wielding guns in an area where they aren’t legal, threat-response will be weaker because guns are still easy to obtain close by in other parts of the country, but cannot be held by civilians.
However, look at it in a European setting – the UK is a good example – guns are simply illegal bar hunting rifles for animals – meaning that for the vast majority, guns are not the go-to for violence or defence. Therefore, the escalation very rarely goes there, and even then it can start to be counted as exceptional to the law as it goes outside conventional bounds for crime of that method.
It is worth noting that this is not my propaganda – because of this I don’t see gun legalisation as good or bad, just present.
Though to be fair, guns are a really efficient tool for killing… I could understand where keeping guns away from suicidal people would decrease the number of successful suicide attempts, as said people might be inclined to try a less effective way of ending themselves that buys time for intervention…
Friend of a friend tried to kill himself by driving into oncoming traffic. As sad as it is a gun would have been a better choice.
Many people have pointed out the response times involved but sometimes police are the oppressors themselves. The American gun control movement evolved from Southern Democrats trying to get guns out of the hands of black people.
I don’t know where you’re from, but in Australia crime prevention is very much something police are interested in and pursue. Between school visits, working with researchers, and many, many other activities, the police force in Australia spends a pretty good chunk of their time preventing crimes. Hell, even patrolling is crime prevention at least in part; anyone who is considering e.g. robbing a house and sees some cops walk by is less likely to do it (all else being equal).
And we get by just fine without feeling the need for everyone to carry a gun. In fact, our homicide rate per 100,000 people is like a quarter of the US’s, so while direct comparisons like that are problematic due to many other factors being involved, it’s certainly worth considering.
Ok ok, crime prevention is an overly broad term that encompasses more than I meant. When I say crime prevention im talking more about, “Hey 911? Yeah, there is a guy busting down my door! Send help!” “Ok, a cop will be there in 10 minutes.” And thats about the best response you can expect, more rural areas you could be waiting an hour before cops can get there. So being able to defend yourself is important. Im not saying everyone needs to go out and buy the biggest dirty harry gun they can find, im just saying that, “let the police handle it” is not often the best way to get through someone attempting a crime on you.
Here is a suggestion, after calling the cops shout out the window “the cops are on their way”. You will find that most burglars rather like conducting their business undetected. And if they still persist in trying to get in, I advise going out a door, or window, on the other side of the property.
It may not be dignified, but it is far better than confronting a maniac, who is not bothered by the prospect of still being in the house, when the cops arrive. Presumably they are either spaced out on drugs, or are armed to the teeth and happy to die.
Feeling macho, that you can defend your house, is probably not much consolation, as you are being wheeled through to the ER, with bullet holes through your lungs. Sure, you have the consolation that you got the other guy too. As everything starts to get dark…
We have this thing that happens here called “Home Invasions” where groups of criminals, usually armed, will enter an occupied dwelling for the purpose of robbery and violence. If you yell out to those people that the cops are coming, it will simply ensure your death. The criminals don’t care, they will be gone in 5 minutes and the police won’t be there for 45, if you are lucky, more like 1 to 3 hours more realistically.
Yup. Common in the United States. Extremely rare in Europe. All you are doing is highlighting problems that result from different cultures and social policies. So not really advancing your cause.
Isn’t he? Are you from the UK then? Tell me, how is the ban on longish knives progressing? How do you plan on opening blister packs once it does? Is it part of your culture that necessitates banning metal wedges?
They can be of any length they need to be. It is the killing tip at the end that is the key part. You make it long enough to open blister packs, but short enough that it does not rupture internal organs. Cunning design can do that.
In a society without guns, knifes are the most commonly used weapons in assaults. And most of those are domestic ones, rather than switchblades or the like. Thrusting attacks, with pointed knives, are significantly more likely to kill than slashing attacks.
It is interesting to note that this policy is exceptional, in that it has no lobby group speaking up against it.
Doctors and surgeons love it. Less of their patients will die.
Chefs love it. Their workplace will be safer. Plus they do not use the points.
Shops love it. The cost per knife will be fairly similar. And they anticipate that sales will increase, as people opt to make their homes safer for their families.
The general public aren’t bothered. They will not have their existing knives taken away. If anything they might get offered a knife-swap scheme, where they can take in their old knives and get a brand new one, for free. At taxpayers expense of course, but that would be costed to see if the bulk buying would save enough lives to justify the cost. If not it would just be a gradual swap over, at people’s own pace.
Are metal wedges banned? I certainly would prefer a rubber one myself, as it would avoid scratching up things nearby. And I can’t think of any domestic use I would need a metal one for.
Besides which, stubbing my paw on a metal one would hurt!
But, if I lived in as dangerous area as you, I would consider using a gun too. Especially if I had a family to protect. Evacuating a household would be more problematic than just nipping out on my own.
I am just glad that I have 28 countries I can live in, here in Europe, without having to do that. You have my sympathies that you do not even feel safe in your own country.
Like Norway, where a man can go on a rampage, kill 60 some people, and get 21 year sentence when he should be executed?
The exception does not make the rule.
The single black President does not mean that racism is over. Fox “News Entertainment” would have you believe otherwise.
The single white woman who posed as black does not mean that being black does not bring with it more discrimination. Fox “News Entertainment” would have you believe otherwise.
The single nut job in some Scandinavian country does not mean that you’re just as likely to be killed by a firearm in Scandinavia or anywhere else in the world with a stable government as you are in the USA. Even if you might like for us to believe otherwise.
The man felt tyrannised by his government and took up arms against it. His victims were closely associated with it.
Does that sound familiar? He believed he was acting in defence of himself and the rest of his society, and was found to be of sound mind. He is not the only one to disregard the “as a last resort” caveat.
Citing this act of terrorism, in support of the right to bear arms, is nonsensical.
Especially given that the instance of gun crime in Norway is otherwise extremely low. They do not need guns for home defence, or to walk about safely in their streets.
With all this talk about guns and the dangers thereof, I just wanted to post a link to this video that explains the rates of gun murders in the US pretty well. If you’re not in one of the hot spot major cities, then it’s significantly lower than you’ve been led to believe.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pELwCqz2JfE
I’m personally a gun advocate and am rather proud of the fact that I keep myself armed everywhere that it is legal for me to do so and am a crack shot when needed. As a rather petite single woman with a lame leg who has to use a cane to get around, the options of running away or fighting without being armed simply are not available to me. I’ve never shot anyone and sincerely hope I never have to, but I’m not about to disarm myself and leave myself vulnerable.
I do not think anyone here would suggest that you should.
As this is a comic board, the solution I would propose is to use a time machine to show Thomas Jefferson the problem.
US population 1776: 2,500,000
US combat deaths 1775 to 1783: 8,000
8,000 / 9 = 889 US combat deaths per year.
889 / 2,500,000 * 100,000 = 36 US combat deaths per 100,000 population per year (1775 to 1783)
US Population 2012: 314,100,000
US deaths by firearms (including by suicide) 2012: 32,000
32,000 / 314,100,000 * 100,000 = 10 US deaths by firearms per 100,000 (2012).
In peacetime today firearms are killing almost one third as many Americans, per capita, as were dying, during combat, in the American Revolutionary War! There is a disconnect between the ideal of the Right to Bear Arms and the reality that has played out.
I would then point him at Switzerland, which has near to one hundred percent gun ownership, as most adults serve in the militia, and keep their guns at home. But, critically, they do not use them for home defence. For instance many do not even keep ammunition at home.
Neither Switzerland, nor the rest of Europe, are suffering from a higher murder and crime rates, despite not using guns for personal defence. Whilst Switzerland does have gun deaths, they do not approach wartime combat mortality rates!
Being a wise man, I am sure that he would have been able to figure out a change in policy, which could stop the situation from deteriorating the way it has.
Sadly, I do not have that time machine. Nor can I suggest solution in the present day. Guns are an integral part of American society.
I do hope though that Americans will stop espousing the ‘right to bear arms’ as an ideal to aspire to. In it’s current form it is broken. Failing to recognise that causes massive harm to the world, because of the influence the US has as a super power.
Idealising a flawed model:
• Spreads gang culture.
• Promotes armed attacks against one’s own state.
• Influences other countries to adopt the policy inappropriately.
Actually, that’s exactly what you’ve been constantly doing.
So terribly sorry that our vocalization of our pride in standing up for our (and your) God given right to protect ourselves goes against your grain. Perhaps we should instead practice isolationism and leave the rest of you to your own devices. See how you like living in a nice peaceful Muslim extremist society…this time. Last time it was the Nazis, and the time before that the Kaizer. Without us and our “flawed model” you nice peaceful Europeans would have been living under one of several different dictatorships for the last century. You sit around and piss and moan about our guns, our violence, our problems, don’t try and pretend you don’t have plenty of your own. And you sure are glad to see us come running with our nasty guns every time someone is about to kick your ass, again, and take over. That’s it, I’m fucking done.
Just because we don’t die as much as y’all when we go to war doesn’t mean you should take our guns away. ;)
At no point have I advocated that Americans should give up their guns. To the contrary I have repeatedly said that is not my intent. I have simply been countering propaganda which insists that our countries would be better off arming the general public.
Personally I have no paranoia over the Muslims living in my society. One third of my village are ethnic Turkish, many of whom are Muslims. I find them to be very kind people, who exhibit no extremism at all.
Should there be any problems with extremists I would not want armed vigilantes, taking matters into their own hands. That is a matter for the security services and the courts to resolve.
You may have noticed us fighting alongside you, in Iraq and Afghanistan. The door swings both ways. It is what allies do.
I have a habit of speaking out when I see misinformation. However I am sorry that the truth is so upsetting for you.
And that is genuinely said. It is not a passive-aggressive thing. I really want to remain your friend. Unfortunately I do have a track record of placing concern for friends’ welfare over tact. I have had American friends die by firearm, so I do not say these things purely as an intellectual exercise. I speak, from the heart, about something which saddens me.
Please note I honestly do respect the right of individuals, and societies, to choose their own destinies. An essential part of which, though, is to make informed decisions based on the truth. Once I am satisfied that a friend is making a choice, in full possession of the facts, I stand by their decision.
I hope you will forgive me, for being so vocal, on a matter which you are passionate about.
Nothing in my post said that others should carry weapons. Just curious if you even watched the video.
Place I live just happens to be Plano Texas, which was featured rather prominently in that video.
The crime problems have little to nothing to do with the presence of guns. People committing the crimes aren’t being made to do so because they happen to have a gun, one they almost certainly broke the law to obtain.
A blanket ban on guns would be throwing out the baby with the bath water. If you look at statistics among legal gun owners, they are actually quite low. Taking away the rights of those who obey the law to try to restrict those who break and abuse the law only criminalizes otherwise innocent individuals. Those who don’t care about law won’t care about the new laws any more than they do about the current laws.
If I had a time machine, I’d probably use it to make sure you weren’t able to interfere in the founding and establishment of my country to better suit your personal preferences when you don’t even live in this country.
Jeriah I did not need to watch the video, as your line summing it up was in accordance with my general knowledge. I did not find where the deaths occurred to be particularly significant, so ignored that.
I never suggested that should be done. I don’t think it would work either. You are imagining that I have an agenda, which I do not.
So, you would block a wise man being told the truth? Note that I offered no advice nor suggestions, so would be doing no more than providing facts. If you think that gaining factual knowledge, of how policy will actually play out, is something to fear, that implies more about your motives than mine.
I do take your point about it being your country and not mine. Clearly though, I was only talking in a hypothetical. I have no interest in changing your gun policies. As I have repeatedly stated on numerous occasions.
I agree that the first move, man or woman, is to avoid the fight, run away, scream for help. But those are not always an option.
When you need help right now the police are only minutes away.
It’s a bumper sticker comment, but it has truth behind it.
I don’t own a handgun, have no inclination to do so. But I really hate the idea that in Canada I have no right to possess or carry one if I feel I need to.
I will concede that there should be mandatory training before I can do so, but if I am a law abiding adult I don’t think the Government or anyone else should have the right to tell me I can’t possess the means of self defense.
I know that there are parts of the world where guns are a big thing, but I don’t think oppression is really something that you can solve just by shooting it, or the civil rights movement would have been a Hollywood action movie. If nothing else, oppressors tends to be pretty well armed.
I know that this may be surprising to some people, but I walk around with nothing more than my fists and teeth to defend me, like some sort of animal, and I feel pretty safe. Granted, I’m a Person of Whiteness in a European country, but I just feel no need to have the ability to maim and kill people. But whatever floats your boat.
“I know that there are parts of the world where guns are a big thing, but I don’t think oppression is really something that you can solve just by shooting it, or the civil rights movement would have been a Hollywood action movie”
Yes, that didn’t fit the narrative of a non-violent Civil Rights Movement, so it was left out. One of the people cooperating with Dr. King was Reverend Rice. He still did what others like him did. He led the people of his Georgia town in resisting a KKK intimidation drive-by, by superior organization. He had every black family he could muster, that being most of them, with someone outside their door, armed with a long gun of some kind, and any hand guns as back ups held pointing by other family members, through the front windows. Since the KKK Caravan was seldom out of range of more than 100 guns there was no bad news to draw more readers. So it wasn’t news. It wasn’t anti-gun, so it wasn’t part of the already determined narrative. This incident was included in his daughter Condi’s autobiographical publication some decades later. Civil Rights are won using many tools.
“Granted, I’m a Person of Whiteness in a European country, but I just feel no need to have the ability to maim and kill people.”
That’s nice. The main reason for carrying a gun is to not have to kill people. Indeed, that is the use guns are put to about 2.8 million times a year here in the US. But again, that, and the fact that it’s 80 times more often than anyone getting killed by a gun here, isn’t part of the narrative, much less that it’s 240 times the rate without suicides included.
If you want to go ahead killing 32,000 Americans a year with guns, please feel free to go ahead. But kindly respect that other countries do not want to do the same.
The way I see it, the use of firearms in the world of the comic is to imply force, pointing a finger is to imply direction akin to how we would view the subject. Even if the finger could be used as a weapon its how we perceive the threat. Yorp I agree with you that when threat is implied running away from the problem is not always the solution. However every avenue I have come across in either the private (security) or public (police) sectors emphasises on de-escalation of a situation is always your primary concern. That is something that people who are anti guns or pro guns rarely take into account. You will rarely be able to pull a gun out and be effective with someone who already has a gun pointed at you. In the country were I live if you were to pull a knife on me in an alley and I pull a gun and shoot you. I would be under the laws of self defense. However if you were to follow me down an alley with a couple other people and shout hateful and obscene things at me and I drew a weapon on you I would be charged with premeditated murder. It is the responsibility of the person to always take into account how to remove themselves from the situation. If I can talk my way out of the problem I will always go down that avenue. But as I learnt in high school some bullies will only go away once you bloody their nose. So I tend to stand up for others being bullied because no one should have to draw a gun to feel safe and as always there is safety in numbers.
This reminds me of a family story, actually. Well, a friend-of-family’s story.
See, he is currently retired National Guard, but when this took place, he wasn’t yet retired. He was teaching gun safety courses. And one day, he was…mugged. At gunpoint. He escaped uninjured, but the story really starts when he was down at the police station making a report. The cop interviewing him asks him what caliber the gun was, and he says, “I don’t know. It looked like a sewer pipe when it was pointed at my HEAD.”
The kind of jerk cop goes off and comes back after a while, and somewhat scornfully says, “It was only a .22, you know.”
So my honorary-uncle looks down at the desk, where the cop’s own .22 is and says, “I see.” And then he scoops up the gun, lightning fast, and points it at the cop’s head. “So what caliber is THIS?” he bellows, and suddenly there are a lot of upset but frozen cops in the area, including one with a gun pointed at his head. My honorary-uncle sets the gun back down carefully and sits back down.
The now wide-eyed kind of a jerk cop says, “…I…see what you mean now,” he says weakly.
My honorary uncle escaped charges being filed, btw, only because the cop he was talking to insisted they be dropped and took some blame, so I’m guessing he got the “kind of a jerk” knocked out of him by that.
I know this particular phenomenon to be true because I have walked around a corner into my father’s den when he was showing one of his guns to my cousin. Dad keeps them locked up safely and unloaded, and they weren’t expecting me to be there, so my cousin had the gun up and pointed downrange for them, empty and with the cylinder tilted out to the side. The thing STILL looked like a goddamn canon when it was pointed right at me, even though because it was a revolver with the cylinder out, I could SEE that it wasn’t loaded.
Well DONE, sir.
You got that right. I never had a gun pointed at me, but my dad did long ago before he joined the navy. He wasn’t thinking “I know this caliber.” He was thinking “Crap!, Crap! Crap!” (Toned down from what he really said). He quit KFC after that.
Emphasis on “story”. Sorry, but I don’t believe it for a second. Pull that shit in a cop shop and they’re all “frozen”? No. Just no. The reality would be a lot of angry officers with weapons drawn all shouting at your “honorary uncle” to drop the weapon NOW. And then everyone’s all calm and forgiving after he puts the snatched weapon down? Again, the reality would be honorary-uncle being tackled to the ground by at least one officer and cuffed before he could draw his next breath.
The impact of the “What the fuck?” moment cannot be understated. Assuming the story is true, the ‘uncle’ likely put the gun down before the rest of the room finished processing what just happened.
[shrug] Okay, you try grabbing a cop’s gun in a room full of cops and let me know how that goes.
Just don’t be black when you do it.
That’s far enough over the line I think color is no longer much of a consideration. Maybe you get shot 100 times instead of 8.
That sounds about right
or a white male, but definitely not a Native American male or a Hispanic male since unlike black or white males a disproportionate amount of their population are killed by police.
Oh, grab a cop’s holstered gun and it’ll end VERY badly. This is only possible if the gun was sitting on the desk (which makes the cop a moron, but still) like the story says. Regardless, this had to have happened VERY quickly, and the guy’s still lucky he didn’t get shot.
WHEN it happened and WHERE is a significant factor, though. American cops USED to be WAY less paranoid and trigger-happy in the past in most places decades ago.
…and now we know why (classic) Doctor Doom carries a gun.
He carries a gun not for intimidation reasons, but because most foes simply aren’t worth wasting further effort on, should they be so foolish as to attempt to start trouble with the Lord of Latveria.
After all, one does not use a kiloton nuke to chase away a stray animal.
Love the ballistics gel dummy.
Congratulations Max, you just helped prove that you’re new recruit is about a dumb as a sack of hammers. Booth in not being a little scared at what you just did with that one finger and not getting the hint when you pointed it at her, and for her look away that entire time like a complete simpleton. (Though I get the joke. Still.)
That made negative amounts of sense… I’m kinda offended by how little sense that made. Holy f**k I am so lost.
Maxima’s trying to point out that even though her finger could be considered a lethal weapon, people may not consider it to be a threatening gesture for her to point at them. Anyone who knows what a firearm is, however, is likely to understand the idea behind having one pointed at them. Granted, Sydney’s reaction is not everyone’s, but Max is trying to make a point to Sydney, not someone more sensible.
I’m talking about the whole “learning to shoot a gun” stuff: it’s pointless! Shoehorned in, even!
Like the author wanted to validate all of that creepy gun knowledge he has, & hoped no one would notice.
A threat? You could shout a threat & it’d be more effective & save everyone time, money, & the effort of it all. It’s like designing an anti-gravity pen, instead of using a freakin’ pencil… oh wait |:l
This comment amuses me because I have very little gun knowledge. 90% of what I do know I gleaned while researching the subject for the comic.
That makes more sense now that I think about it…
*Wild speculations at your reasoning aside, it still doesn’t make sense to learn guns. To hold a gun in any useful way (relevant to superpowers) means half a decade of training at very least. & if it was just about intimidation, why know how to use it?
~Unless it’s one of those “Basic equipment” things where even the janitor has to have a method of self defense for emergency situations. Legally, and in such a dangerous line of work, that makes sense.
*No, guns aren’t for self defence! Tasers & mace are for self defence! & you can’t train the janitor with a lethal weapon, that’s an unsustainable budget plan!
> I say ‘doing’ as though it rhymes with ‘boing’ because it’s funny.
*~SHUT UP
(this conversation continued on for a while in my head, so I cut it short)
Notice how Sydney didn’t not react to a weapon pointed at her face capable of nuclear sized blasts that can level cities (Max’s finger), but the moment she saw the gun she jumped. And Sydney knows what Max’s finger is capable of. The point Max was going after was that a pointed gun is far more threatening and intimidating and a person’s pointed finger. Do you really think Sydney would have gotten the point so firmly if max had just stated it…. its Sydney after all.
Made little sense to me too. Would have made more sense if she pointed at her first, then fired at the dummy. But this just makes it look like there is more than one dummy she’s pointing at.
Can someone explain what Peggy and max are doing with the 1 2 3? It kinda looks like Rock Paper Scissors but if that’s the case max one and yet is still doing the demonstration.
Maybe they were trying to determine who got to explain it to Sydney?
It’s the countdown to Maxima doing her demonstration as they’ve likely had the question asked enough times before that she does what she does as a regular response to someone going ‘why carry guns when we can do all this?’. Which is demonstrate that even people who’ve seen her unleash a tank-destroying attack with a thought there’s no outward sign of that that people are trained to fear/respect (well other than school officials who think pointing a finger gun at a kid is the same as waving a real gun around), but pull out the very puny damage in comparison gun and everyone immediately feels threatened.
They enjoy doing the demonstration, so the winner of rock paper scissors gets to do it. Though I’m guessing Peggys method would have been rather different.
I bet maxima would have taken her shot and pointed at sydney like before, but then peggy would have had her gun drawn behind sydney for when she turned.
Brownie points for requiring change of undergarments due to demonstration.
Oh man…read this one several times, and I laugh at the end every time. I love that ending line.
i love that Peggy and Maxima solved their delema of who teaches like adults, with rock paper scissors.
Some of the toughest decisions an adult has to make may need to be solved randomly. If there is one space left in the lifeboat, and have to make an instant decision, but find you are out of coins, Rock Paper Scissors is a perfectly sensible way to do it.
Kind of sad final words to put on the tombstone though.
“I knew I should have chosen lizard.”
Because everyone goes for Spock and lizard poisons Spock.
rock paper scissors lizard Spock?
should we surmise that rock kills lizard? (because of Kirk’s ‘granite gun’ vs the Gorn?)
how exactly do the rules apply there?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_PUEoDYpUyQ
Another fairly obvious reason for them to carry guns is that it gives them a less lethal way of handling a threat. This is why frangible ammo exist. Imagine trying to drop someone with a hostage, or even in a crowded room when your only power is Maxima’s plasma focus.
Considering maxima has shown she is literally faster than a speeding bullet, she could go full speed, blink out of existence then reappear with the perps weapon fully dismantled on the ground at her feet, the hostage is already outside in an ambulance. Honestly, there really arent a lot of actual combat scenarios where a gun is the better option for maxima. Other than what she demonstrated, its an effective way to show a nonbulletproof person that they need to surrender now.
I am confused, up there…
*points paw at thread above*
you were advocating that guns are a good thing. Now you are saying Maxima should not have one?
Well, I think she should! Don’t forget that this is a super-hero story. She is bound to come up against foes who are immune to her powers. And, even in a realistic setting this will hold true. Villains who see that they are inferior to her will avoid her. Whereas the ones who can beat her can risk a confrontation.
Electromagnetic Man can dampen all energy that comes near him, including Maxima’s energy blast. Approaching him, as you suggest, the then finds out that even the electrical energy in her brain and body is dampened! Pulling back, she finds herself badly weakened.
She tries lifting up nearby objects, to hurl them at Electromagnetic Man, but he easily side-steps her feeble attempts.
Just as well she has a gun. It may now be hard for her to lift it, but at least it is an effective weapon. And one her foe is not immune to.
Yep, guns give more options, and may especially synergise well w various powersets:
– Many of their powersets do not include ranged attacks.
– Achilles with a gun can draw more aggro than Achilles without.
– The bigger and stronger members can use firepower with a lot of weight and kick (Stalwart in particular might play The Heavy well). Could get a bit 90s though.
– Heatwave and Jiggawatt might have options for foes immune to their powers
– If any of them should be depowered, weakened, injured etc it may give them a more effective option than they’d otherwise have. (Especially relevant to those whose power depends a bit on circumstance, eg Varia)
Guns for Heatwave and Jiggawatt? Not such a great idea. Heatwave in flight and/or attack mode give off plenty enough heat to cook off the primers in her ammo. All of it, nearly simultaneously. Seriously bad day. While modern ammunition is less likely to go off when exposed to electricity, it can still happen. And at 1.21 gigawatts, I’d say the odds would be pretty good that it would do so.
Oh, and a little factoid for non-shooters, when a round of ammunition “cooks off”, such as in a house fire or by some idiot throwing it into a camp fire (it happens :( ) the bullet tends to stay in place and the casing goes flying, becoming the projectile. Equal and opposite reactions, and the case has less mass.
Ooh, interesting factoid. Thanks.
Perhaps some form of non-volatile ranged weapon, then.
I could definitely see Jiggawatt with a crossbow, if it came to that, but I wonder how that would translate when she jumps from place to place in lightning form. I’m not as sure about Heatwave. She strikes me as the kind who might grudgingly train, but not carry. (Opinion, not fact.)
Neat tidbit about the casing. I didn’t know that.
“(Stalwart in particular might play The Heavy well)”
Considering that he’s already demonstrated (on Vehemence’s foot) that he can get as heavy as the space shuttle, I agree that he could do very well in Team fortress 2.
;)
I dunno. What kind of sammich does he like?
Guessing from Sydney’s point of view, I’d conjecture that Stalwart’s favorite sammich has lots of beefcake in it.
Guns are a good thing for self defense for people who arent immune to nukes and faster than a speeding bullet, able to obliterate tanks by farting too hard. Maxima is a super duper powered super hero. A gun is of limited use to someone like her. I was just pointing out that in a hostage scenario, which we have already seen in this comic, maxima didnt need a damn gun. Her pulling a gun would have done nothing to foil the crime any faster or easier than she already did. I will admit that there very well could be a scenario where a gun IS a useful tool for her. Im just pointing out that given her suite of powers, those occasions are really really rare. Like superman needing a handgun. Sure he COULD use one, but why?
You missed my caveat. I wasn’t using Maxima as the example, but rather a hypothetical someone who’s “only power is Maxima’s plasma focus”. Take “Atomic Bomshell” as your example if you have trouble with that.
“She was another character who was briefly in Arc-SWAT as a secondary heroine, but not for long. At some point I realized I would actually need villains for the comic and I set her aside for that roster. After all someone whose only power is blowing stuff up surely makes a better villain than hero.”
– DaveB
So yeah, you seldom see someone someone on the superheros roster who’s superpower is “rotting voice” for reasons, but if you did they’d carry a gun.
You have missed the point of the comic.
Max carries a gun because it is of use.
It is of use to her because it is easier for her to point a gun at a perp and say ‘hand in the air’ and get the desired response than it is for her to get the response by just pointing and asking for hands in the air.
She may be a walking ‘nuclear deterrent’, but if people don’t see a threat they will ‘call her bluff’ and lean too late that she wasn’t bluffing.
Hopefully whatever that elephant gun is loaded with doesn’t react strongly to magnetic fields. (kinda think the gun itself might… )
The gun might, but she has backed away from him, so would not be affected. The .577 T-Rex is a copper monolithic solid projectile. Which would not be affected by a magnetic field.
Unless its Magneto who is apparently strong and subtle enough to somehow affect just about everything eventually…
Interesting fact; with a strong enough magnetic field, you can levitate almost anything. Like an apple for instance. Or mice apparently:
https://gizmodo.com/5356473/nasas-new-super-magnet-is-so-strong-it-could-make-lab-rats-levitate
Copper is not ferrous, but it would be a lie to say that it’s not affected by magnets.
Copper is a conductor, allowing magnets to induce a current in it. The current can in turn be used to apply a force to the magnetic field. Regenerative brakes work on this.
I’ve seen a pseudo-levitation built using how copper reacts to magnetic fields.
Give me detailed control of magnetic fields, and I can design them to deflect all but the heaviest of incoming fire made of conducting materials.
I should have read beyond the headline summary on the source I googled.
That seemed enough but, looking at the video, below that, I concede that a super may well be able to do as you suggest.
However Electromagnetic Man has not developed that power-stunt yet. :-P
Should he survive being hit by T-Rex slugs, Maxima can ask the manufacturers, or Arc-SPAQ, for lead versions of the bullet. Just in case he escapes, or serves his time, and re-enters society.
Same trick ought to work on any conductive material. Lead included. Water with some impurities, and even graphite to a limited extent (resistance to the magnet is inverse to its conductivity), but it won’t work on that wood steak.
That’s right, Electromagnetic man is really a vampire.
Wood steak? They tricked him into breaking his teeth?
8-)
However, Electromagnetic Man is planning to get right to work on developing that power stunt, once he’s released from the hospital…
I love it and I can see how it was hard to sit on it for so long, but glad you did. It fits well here. I found the full extent of Sydney’s thickness a little strange, I mean she JUST SAW what Maxima did with the finger and did feel at all uncomfortable when Maxima immediately pointed it at her. I figure Sydney should jump at that (even she, reasonably, fully trusts Maxima on anything like this). If Maxima had pointed her finger first- with no reaction- then pointed the gun and THEN shot the finger, I wouldn’t have a nit to pick.
But it is a nit. It took me a bit to figure out what was only a little off on my first read.
But most important THANK YOU for the effort in doing the double page today. The pace is perfect this way, so thank you for the extra effort!!!!
It is worth noting that a number of commentators have failed to pick up on that. Some people recognise it as a threat. Others take it as a gesture, and are just as confused as Sydney. At first.
Maxima has gotten used to this reality over the years. If she has to make it clear to someone that she is prepared to kill them, she must get that message across 100% of the time. Not 80% or even 90% of the time.
Fail to make her warnings credible, and she could find herself facing a prison sentence for unlawful killing. Cops are required to make their warnings unmistakable.
We do have that kind of ingrained perception of guns as hair trigger death dealers that will go off if you drop them, or call them bad names. See CplDiablo’s reaction below. That’s absolute basic gun safety people hammer in. Which is good, but I’d rather have someone with Maxima’s trigger discipline chops level a gun at my head as above than spend twenty minutes at a shooting range with some people.
Still, “Is gun, is not safe.” Don’t try this at home, etc.
Actually, I wonder. . . . Max’s base strength is probably high enough that any normal weapon IS a hair trigger for her. I bet the trigger pull on her gun is hard enough that it’d be completely inoperable for anyone without superhuman strength.
A lot of that false perception has been proliferated by Hollywood & the “Saturday Cowboy Western Shows). what a lot of people tend to forget is that Hollywood is, in truth, a small minority sub-culture that focuses the careers & lives of people on the manufacture & sale of fantasy & fiction. Even when they show that it’s “based on a true story,” it WILL be embellished with “dramatization” & “creative license.”
Don’t get me wrong about this; I enjoy a good piece of entertainment for what it is, but when these self-cloistured people step outside of their carefully-constructed lives & start making “political & social commentary,” trying to pass it off as how the mainstream real-world public should think & behave, that’s when I just turn around & walk the f**k away from them.
Ah, Americans and guns, I forget what a different attitude you guys have.
That’s kind of vague. I don’t know if you are talking about the comic or the commentors. (and not all of the U.S. commentors fall into the same camp on this)
Soooo, does this mean that Peggy also has some way of pointing a lethal weapon that doesn’t look like pointing a lethal weapon?
The rock scissors paper is meant to imply they each have their own answer to Sydney’s question, though off the top of my head I hadn’t figured out what Peggy’s version would be.
My vote goes with, max still shoots her finger and points, but peggy is behind sydney with her gun drawn when she turns to see what max is pointing at.
Sydney’s inability to dial it down would be a good start.
It might be a way of deciding between show and tell.
I think the contest was who got to point the gun. I personally think the most effective way would have been to have Peggy pointing the gun, after Max did the whole pointed finger thing.
Max is this super powerful human who has just demonstrated what her pointed finger can do, while Peggy is just a normal human, but yet Sydney would have freaked over Peggy pointing a gun at her while totally missing the point of Max pointing a finger at her.
Max in panel 4
“Dis gon b gud.”
I have one question about the gel targets. Arc staff have a name for everything. Do they refer to them ‘Adam’ or ‘Jamie’?
Note: The finished gel torsos tend to degrade fairly quickly, especially under hot conditions. They probably have to make a set of new ones every morning, if not due to melting, then due to accumulated damage.
*thinking about the possibility of an edible version of ballistics gel dummies… Gummy Dummies
That could be fun, here’s a tutorial on the making of some edible gummy that is stable at room temperature: https://www.eat-the-evidence.com/gummy/basic-gummy-recipe-and-tutorial/
This made me think of Schlock Mercenary. In case someone doesn’t know it – it’s a sci fi comic about a mercenary company in space.
The comic I’m referring to is: https://www.schlockmercenary.com/2008-05-24
Narrator:Aboard Troop Transport Onesy, launching from the Touch-And-Go.
Ebbirnoth:Look sharp, and look tough. Your weapons ain’t just for show, but they do need to show.
Nick:What about TAG, an’ the tanks? They’ve got bigger, scarier guns than us. Shouldn’t they be doin’ the showin’ off?
Ebbirnoth:They will be, but not everybody is smart enough to know that a weapon the size of a house is actually a weapon.
Nick:I’m smart enough to know that.
Ebbirnoth:Good point. But I don’t want to get shot just because I didn’t believe anyone could be dumber than you.
better question: why do the guns need ammo for the tank confetti ones?
I… don’t understand your question?
I think they mean: Use the guns to intimidate with the implication of lethal force but if it comes down to it actually USING lethal force then use their powers. I’m not quite sure what that gains them either Yorp. I guess if the ammo was really heavy or something… *shrugs*
Sometimes you want to blow a soccer-ball-size hole through the target’s chest and explode the wall behind him. Sometimes you want something with somewhat less impact.
I liked the ballistics gel dummy too (and the jock strap tacked up just below it, for those real critical hit shots!) :)
It just demonstrates how some people could qualify for a Darwin Award without actually dying. Pissing off someone who’s holding a gun at you could be construed as “acting appropriately stupid” to make the qualification.
Don’t worry evilpuma you got a wry smile from some of us, reading your comment. Your smiley did make your humorous intent clear.
Umm…. not that I could say I have never looked at the serious side, of a comical comment. And the Darwin Awards are funny themselves.
Pretty sure a ballistics gel dummy has never shot back though. So I doubt that would apply here.
:-D
I wonder how many floors up Ariana is.
As well guns are more pinpoint, quiet, and non-lethal than deatomizing rays and such. A a Lot less Aoe kickback too.
Ok a couple of things.
1. MOST IMPORTANTLY, NEVER POINT YOUR WEAPON AT ANYTHING YOU DO NOT INTEND TO KILL.
2. Isn’t Sydney supposedly reset in occasions of surprise to put up her shield?
She was holding her shield orb and had already dove for cover behind one of the shooting cubbys (im not sure what the proper term is)
And if you look closely at the top left hand corner of the panel, you can see the edge of the shield bubble apparently surrounding both Sydney and the overturned table.
Why carry guns?
Because guns are scary looking.
Fingers and brightly colored glowy balls are not scary looking.
Some exceptions may apply…
Such as fingers attached to the right person can be pretty scary and when, where, and who’s balls are brightly colored and glowy.
Not if the person doesnt know that the finger can shoot plasma bolts, or if the person doesnt know that the glowy ball has the power of a star.
Pretty sure everyone knows that guns fire bullets, and bullets generally can kill people. Or at least hurt people (some exceptions may apply…)
Yes, the fingers belonging to the ex-NFL lineman nee proctologist are plenty frightening…
ESPECIALLY, if his balls are brightly colored and glowy.
To paraphrase an old adage….
“God may have made made man, but Samuel Colt made some more equal to others”
A badass attitude and bigass muscles is still a poor match for a 200-grain lead slug
The panties on the target is probably one of those in-house jokes that is so common amongst elite units.
We had a picture of a nuclear mushroom cloud with an O-2A (Cessna Skymaster) orbiting it with the caption of “Two, you want to hit 200 meters north of one’s mark.”
(A Romad, JTAC or FAC, you will know what I mean)
I figured it was to better control their power as those with ranged powers may cause more collateral damage. That and not everyone of them can shoot lazers from their fingertips.
Slight anatomy problem, but I noticed it right away and it really buts me: Maxima’s arm is really short in the panels that she’s pointing at Sydney…
Yikes. O_O Okay, well, I hope Max checked to make sure no-one was inside that area before she shot. Wasn’t Shawn in there a few pages ago?
Great expressions, as always, but Max looks weird in panel 3. I understand she’s looking sideways at Peggy, but something still seems off. May be the shadows? n__n;
24-karat maniac. I love it! XD
That was one of the things I started to nitpick in my comment before I rolled it back to just “I could nit pick this” Max is looking away from the camera, just past profile angle, so it’s like a 5/8 angle. Most faces are drawn straight on, profile, somewhere in between, like 1/4. Finding a 3/4 rear view for reference is challenging but possible, but I couldn’t find a 5/8 type view to save my life. I even loaded up an episode of Fringe to see if I could pause the screen on Olivia turning away from the camera but after half an hour of skimming I had to get back to drawing. So yeah, that one looks a little weird. Next time I’ll probably try loading up a 3D model.
Interesting. Do you base Maxima’s facial structure on Olivia Dunham’s, at least somewhat? I’m a huge fan of Fringe, and Olivia certainly has that military look.
Maxima is some mix of germanic and scandanavian. I don’t really base Max on her specifically, but she’s a good candidate. Strong jaw and importantly, she sometimes wears her hair back. On problem when looking for reference of unusual angles is when I do find what I need, the woman’s hair is spilling over her face/jaw/shoulders/etc and the picture’s no good.
*!* That reminds me. I remember you mentioning awhile back in commentary (or in the comments, cannot recall which) that you were having trouble with Maxima’s coloring while she was wearing her hat because of how reflective her skin is. I was wondering if something like a styrofoam head spray-painted with a high-gloss metallic paint would help? It might not have the same specific facial features as Maxima, but it could be positioned however you need, and given whatever props are needed for a scene?
I think I’d be better off dabbling in a good 3D program. Gold paint on styrofoam wouldn’t really convey the right texture I think. I can fake it with a multiply layer or something similar in the meantime.
Fair enough. :)
I actually do like the little meta-joke with Sydney looking away, but I don’t think you need it. With Max’s speed she could have easily pulled the gun while Sydney turned away, or even blinked.
Also, I really love the way you do Max’s hair.
I love it!
And it speaks more to Sydney’s mindset, than to Maxima’s capability. Which really is the whole point of the scene, and that panel is emphasising it.*
Then there is the comedy. Whilst you acknowledge that it is a joke, you may not appreciate that it is building the timing for the ‘punch line’. For those who ‘get it’ (obviously including yourself), we are going ‘Sydney, wake up, you are missing the point’. And every panel she keeps missing it, heightens the ‘when is the penny going to drop?’ feeling.
Then, when the suspense is at it’s peak, you get the gun in the face, and Sydney’s expression, plus all that follows. I hope that aspect of the scene is played out, to it’s full dramatic and comedic effect, in the movie!
Plus it is a slice of life moment. We all have times when we are sure there is something that we are missing. Sydney is just verbalising this.
We have already had one person comment that this is their favourite page. And I suspect that almost ** all of us will find that this page will grow on us, each time we do a re-read.
* And the very fact that even with this emphasis, a lot of people failed to grasp the point, goes to prove just how easy it is to misconstrue intentions. We are humans, used to human actions, like pointing. But the formula gets changed when super humans are in the mix.
** With the exception of those who dislike the faluting of firing range safety rules. And I can fully sympathise with them disliking that, as it does not sit easy with me either. It does break the super hero as a role model convention.
However I have confidence that Maxima, as a super hero, has taken every precaution. Sydney is in no danger. As such it does not overly impact my enjoyment. And Dave has indicated that he will emphasise the firing range safety issue in a later comic. So even that is good.
Got to say this page got me thinking a bit and looking back at the bank robbery setup scene, where they used loaded guns/live ammo pointed at civilians as a training exercise/example deal. Also questioning possible PTSD flashbacks from when Sydney was -actually shot at- and Max caught the bullet. All things considered, given that setup situation, this seems extremely tame from a proper gun handling scenario ;)
Sorry about the timing on this, but it was posted no more than maybe an hour or so before I found it. It would fit in a lot better with the past couple of pages, where some of the commenters were talking about Stan Lee doing cameos here.
Without further ado, https://acidsquirrel.com/post/77348
You know, I have to wonder if, after 6 months or so of training, Sydney’s reaction would be slightly modified. Probably still dive first, with shield. But then she might do a three orb converge on weapon and crush it. Or a Lighthook wraparound and squeeze bend upward.
Side note: I really liked the flying boot left behind when she dived…
I think Sydney’s instincts are spot on actually. Her protocol is clearly:
1) Disengage sufficiently such that hostiles are not in close proximity.* This is to ensure that they remain outside the shield, when it is raised.
2) Summon Forb and raise shield.
3) Assess situation. Sydney is instinctively good at this, and Archon need to capitalise on that. Plus ensure that it always stays in the priorities.
4) Take appropriate response.
Of course a default option such as ‘2.5 summon tentacle orb’ could be drilled into her. Perhaps even doing both orbs at once. But, unlike a soldier readying her rifle, as her most likely best response (in most situations), Halo has several equally good options.
There is no point reducing response time, for the other options, by putting in the delay of ‘release tentacle orb’, before initiating the more appropriate response.
Sydney need only practice something like this, if her shield proves to not be effective under some circumstances. Then improving her offensive response time becomes critical. But that has to be especially carefully measured, when operating in a policing role.
* This is a point that her training needs to improve. In this case she was not adequately aware of her immediate surroundings and crashed into the table. The room has a lot of clear area she could have backed into, if she was not so panicky.
Thinking on it, disengaging and summoning the Forb simultaneously would be best. Which may be what Sydney already does. Raising the shield should still wait, until clear of hostiles.
as for your suggested alternatives…
1) ballsy crush
i don’t think her balls have that much power. The range limit aside…
if they had enough power to crush a metal object, why is there a fly orb? why don’t she just grab 2 random balls and have them lift her?
2) hentorb
light hook wasn’t able to lift, or really anyhow affect V.
while V was much stronger than steel at the time, which means it is not a definitive proof that it can’t crush a gun, it is a definitive proof that lighthook has its limits.
Aside from “denied” and “anvil’s orbital drop” we have no sign, that lighthook’s streangth is sufficient.
Speak loudly and carry a big stick which is actually a front for a nuclear finger.
When Maxima “gives you the finger,” you’re already in serious trouble…
Can you picture the team on a mission and in the middle of it all, Sydney starts firing away at random,yelling: “Take that and that,and that..!” Would ANYONE try to stop her???
Yes. Every effort would be taken to subdue her, without harming her. Retreating to a safe distance, if that was not possible. Then trying to negotiate and discover why she was behaving in such a deadly fashion.
But, as with any negotiation procedure, if lives are being taken, or are clearly and immediately at risk, Peggy would put a bullet in her brain. If Sydney is killing other friends and colleagues, she would have no choice, in a purely realistic setting.
However, this is a super hero comic. So I suspect that it would instead play out as her shooting the hand holding the PPO. And the other one, if Sydney persisted. Needless to say a real sniper would be unlikely to attempt such a Hollywood action.
Of course, if Sydney is able to shoot with her shield up, then that is another matter. One that would probably take Maxima or Dabbler to resolve.
“maxima or dabbler”
what seemed like what was supposed to be her max strength, resulted in a “tectonic punch”.
if V’s body caused the terrain to take only lets say 10% of the actual force, then i still don’t think it would be able to pierce the shield. and even if it did, she would be useless afterwards, so another member would have to continue, BEFORE her shield comeback.
as for dabbler, we know that her greatest weapon, (aside from her boobs), is her cunning.
well, we know that dabbler was not able to analyze them.
to go against her shield, i think it would take a super of a high lvl with a very specific power.
or, if you have time, just take someone durable enough to block all PPOs, untill her air start t run low.
Here is the thing:
I think Maxima is a closet Maxima fangirl.
She likes to come off all military and professional, but underneath it all, she loves to take risks (which she considers to be non-risks, but scary to others) and show off her powers (including in ways that irritate her bosses).
I am thinking she considered the possibility that Sydney might start blasting away with the PPO (unlikely, since she has kept a level head in worse scenarios) and figured that if it happened, she could handle it.
It’s scary, because she is very close to being someone ARC-SWAT would normally be sent out to stop or at least curtail/intimidate: it’s a good thing she is on ‘our’ side.
She does indeed pull stuff that should get her sued or arrested and expect to walk or fly away clean.
She is arrogant and overconfident and not a perfect commander or flawless person. Yet she is still a good person and a good friend.
In my opinion, all of this makes her a more interesting character.
And hotter — *OOF!* (gets punched by Maxima: good thing Kitsune are nearly invulnerable spirits…)
I tend to agree. I imagine her discipline and rigidity are guard rails she’s put up to keep herself from getting carried away while having fun. Under more controlled circumstances, you can see a fun-loving person in her, but her persona suppresses a large number of her impulses.
I love this page. Mainly because I play Shadowrun. Sure, you might be a combat mage able to unleash devastating spells, or an adept able to punch a hole in a tank, but those are nonvisual thing until the violence actually happens. A weapon not only distracts from your true capabilities (and gives you options for when those abilities might not be working), but it is a very visual deterrent. The guy with the gun is more intimidating than the guy with empty hands. Even if he can punch a hole in a tank. Until you actually see him do that, the gun is an easily understood threat.
I know it’s been said a million and a half times before, but: Sydney makes the best faces EVER. You could probably do a strip of just her emoting, and we’d laugh our collective ass off.
It can’t be said too much. :-)
Sydney’s expressions absolutely carry this scene. Although Maxima plays the ‘straight man’ to the hilt. Plus Ariana’s cut away panel is funny in it’s own right. And they are all stunningly well done.
I only omit Peggy because she is merely good. I think she was at her very best when she first appeared in this room. And, on the page after that, with her, “You are really not” line.
In fact, my only criticism is that DaveB might be pushing himself too hard! This is a double pager which has clearly had a staggering amount of work put into it. All to good effect mind.
Indeed. He pretty much always pushes himself too much, all for our benefit and optional monies.
And Arianna’s first thought was “dammit, what did she do now?”
I know alot of people are calling Sydney’s tentacle orb the least lethal weapon in her arsenal of powers, but is anyone else curious about how a poke from the point of the tentacle would compare to a bullet?
Based off of how quickly it is implied the tentacle can move (quick enough to catch someone flying into the air, or quick and dexterous enough to write “event horizon comics” before someone could stop her obvious plug) and how strong it is (throwing Anvil with great force), I’d assume that the force of a tentacle poke would be at least as strong as a rubber bullet, if not harder. If she could sharpen the tip to an actual point it could easily become lethal, even at rubber bullet force.
I’m also curious about how much force she could deliver with a tentacle based boxing glove ( or something.)
Sigh. This is what I get for not practicing HTML in 10 years.