The Cherokee, famously, were perfectly happy to leave Georgia and Florida on the grounds that “Hey its not like we really recognize a claim to the land you guys can just have it” and never once contested the confiscation of land, much less by taking it all the way to the Supreme Court and winning an unenforceable injunction against their forced removal.
The differences are heavily overstated, primarily as a means of dismissing native people as “primitive” and necessarily subservient to the arriving colonists. The main difference with the Cherokee was simply geographic. They lived in land not heavily settled until later in the colonization process and had more time to acclimate to western legal norms. It didn’t save them, but it gave them these neat little anecdotes that we can pretend made them “some of the good ones”.
Well I hope it was clear that I wasn’t even remotely implying they/we are primitive and should be subservient. I am Cherokee, and Choctaw. My great grandmother, and great grandfather are on the final rolls of the Dawes Act.
Gonna be straight, the hand guard doesn’t scream MAGA, but it’s kinda borderline fudd-y. :P A carbon fiber M-LOK hand guard and a low-profile gas block would be better, unless you’re reeeeaaaaaalllllly attached to that A2 front sight post.
I still prefer the 30 round magazines, since they’re cheap, easy to find, and are better for making it through high round count matches without lots of reloads. :)
As an aside to all of that, when I talk to younger people at matches–I’m probably about your age, maybe a little older–many of them are in favor of things Dems say that they’re in favor of (except gun control). I think that’s one of the sticking points for a lot of the younger rednecks in rural parts of the country.
Imma be dumb here, but I think the holes in the hand guard are M-LOK? Not looking to attach tools there in any case.
low-profile gas block
Uh, you lost me, but I’m listening. LOL, this is why I went with a plain Ruger Whiteout. Still learning, but didn’t want to fuck up rolling my own.
And yes, I’m loving the A2 sight. Practicality aside, I saw this on sale and thought, “Huh. M16 in Star Wars? Sold.” The light is a normal Olight I happened to have, but it glares on the front sight. Can’t find it again, but someone posted a nice adapter that would throw it out further. Know what I’m talking about? Couldn’t find one at the time.
Apolopgies for this wall; I’m literally autistic, and guns have been one of my particular areas of interest for, um, 40-odd years.
That style of hand guard, AFAIK, doesn’t accept M-LOK or keymod accessories. I can’t be sure though; what you’d be looking for is something like this -> aeroprecisionusa.com/ar15-atlas-s-one-m-lok-handg… The slots are what the M-LOK mounts go into. (Aero Precision is kinda pricey, IMO.) The added benefit is that it floats your barrel; it’s only connected to the upper receiver, and not the barrel, so you can get slightly better accuracy out of it.
You can get the metal parts of the rifle cerakoted white, if that’s of interest to you.
You can get a gas block that fits under your hand guard. That allows your hand guard can go all the way to the end of your barrel which gives you more options for mounting accessories and hand positioning. Gas blocks come in a variety of styles, but a fixed and pinned (e.g., held on with a roll pin) block will work for almost everyone. An adjustable gas block may be better for people that are running silencers, since that affects gas pressure in the system, but I have no direct experience with them since silencers are $$$. If you replace the hand guard with an M-LOK hand guard, you’ll need to replace the front sight with a low profile gas block.
I’m personally not a fan of iron sights because my eyes suck. I use an LPVO and a canted red dot, and that’s worked very well for me. I can reliably hit targets out to 340y (or, that’s the longest I’ve shot to, and that was at a match), and there’s no way in hell I’d be able to to that with irons.
FWIW, AR-15s are basically like Legos for adults; they’re almost infinitely modular, and most parts work just fine with other parts as long as they’re from reputable manufacturers.
I don’t know about Olight adapters specifically, but I’ve seen LEP heads for Surefire bodies. IIRC the Blazer LEP Z-Bolt is good to at least 300y, and it’s bright. There’s very little spill; it’s very, very focused. I’ve shot out to 150y with a Streamlight ProTAC; it’s not great at that distance, but it works. It’s got a lot of spill and decent throw, so you still have peripheral sight.
And the early explosion of bundle sites. Fanatical was BundleStars, Indie Gala, and ton others that had weekly, then bi-weekly and then seemingly daily bundles.
Ferries are pretty nice, we recently used them for a NL -> EN -> WA -> IE -> SCO -> NL trip and they were nice. Some of them had plenty of entertainment and felt quite nice, others a bit more run down but still fine. The best was taking the overnight ones, you sleep on board and disembark fresh and ready to go in the morning at your destination and costs less than having a separate hotel night.
The app of course needs access to the Internet, through your WiFi or mobile Internet. However, depending on the app, phone OS and the security configuration of your local network setup it could have access to other devices as well.
But that’s usually on purpose or by accident of the user. In court, one valid question could be if TikTok tries to make use of such a configuration, and for what reasons.
So I think the question itself is not that bad, if it got a clarification / follow-up question like the above.
In all seriousness: yes. Any app or even website can scan your local network and attempt to access other devices. This is apparent in the fact that dedicated network scanner apps like Fing don’t require any permissions to scan your network, therefore any app can if it wanted to.
I would bet that the people of the time saw themselves as very civilized for not simply wiping the native population out.
Like, when the Mongols sacked Baghdad just 250 years before the European ships started arriving in the Americas: “Most of the residents were massacred during and after the siege, with civilian casualty figures ranging in the hundreds of thousands.” The end of the Mongol period was when Timur / Timurlane resulting in the deaths of 20 million people. That’s just a century before the Europeans started conquering the new world.
Maybe the Europeans of the 1500s to 1800s thought of themselves as kind and enlightened in that they made treaties with the natives instead of just massacring them. Maybe they thought of themselves as exceptionally kind because they actually assigned land to the natives, instead of simply taking all the land for themselves.
Instead of thinking of the European colonial forces as an especially brutal and rapacious group, maybe it’s better to think of that entire time period as brutal.
Also, as an aside, the natives are always portrayed as being peaceful, gentle people who are victims of the awful Europeans. But, we know that they were fighting amongst themselves before the Europeans arrived. The Europeans found native villages surrounded by palisades. There were already native groups who had been driven off their land by other native groups. They were massacred, but that was more a function of diseases and technology, rather than a difference in character.
In the Spanish empire IIRC they were all given citicenship, so yes it could have been handled better, even in that era. In fact, the latino ethnicity is the result of the mix between the natives and the colonizers, which happened because they were integrated.
Thanks, can you provide a source for that? Was that true for indiginous people in the Spanish colonies in the Americas in the 16th and 17th century already? Cause these people were not better off. Spain’s colonial rule was as brutal and genocidal as any other. The common whitewashing myth goes that the indigenous population of South America ‘was reduced’ to large parts in this era due to not being immunologicaly prepared to the ‘flu’. Well, they were not ‘immunologically’ prepared to the metal swords and armour and the bullets of the conquistadores. Many of those who survived were killed by working themselves to death in the forced labour system in notorious Spanish silver mines (see e.g. Potosí). Let’s be careful not to portray Spanish colonialism as being something ‘civilized’* by the omission of this, but maybe that wasn’t your intention.
*Well maybe it was civilized, depending on your view on civilization.
I recommend reading this section of the “Spanish colonization of the Americas” Wikipedia article, which has plenty of sources. Obviously they weren’t saints, but, at the time, they were “the dawn of human rights” (cited in the article) and took Christian values very seriously, which is also why they converted all the population forcefully. There’s no denying that, but, as a silver lining, education and religion were almost one and the same, and they did build many universities, schools, etc.
When I visited the United States, they always tried to paint it as “they were all equally bad” when it came to colonizers in the museums I went to. However, I feel like that is because the “situation” with natives was way worse in North America than it was in South America.
In most cases they weren’t that bad, the population wasn’t high enough for it to get too dirty and most people had plenty of living space. Only in later era do cities become dirty and extremely overpopulated. The exception would be sieges, but in them all people would suffer to some extent.
That’s because the idea of the middle ages attend from the imagination of people in the nineteenth century. This is when people started theorizing about history.
Cities in the nineteenth century were absolutely filthy, because of industrialization and were busting at the seams.
Now they learned about this ‘dark ages’ when people were backwards and uneducated. For sure conditions were worse and more filthy collar to our current enlightened society, no?
Regarding the first, homelessness was illegal, and you could be in a lot of trouble (including execution) for being out after curfew. People lived in catacombs and tunnels to avoid detection, and if they were half as bad as described, it was a hellish life.
The second, if I recall correctly, there was a tax to enter the city. Even for “citizens” going out for the day or whatever
So if you were desperately poor, you couldn’t even hunt for work outside the city without commiting to stay away until you could pay to reenter. So there became a trap where people were too poor to leave, too poor to get a legal residence, and had to find somewhere the guards wouldn’t hassle them.
I’m sure some of this is a bit different, but if it’s even close, it’s a brutal trap to be stuck in
memes
Active
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.