Comments

You must log in or register to comment.

VenturaDreams t1_j5pnwld wrote

This reads more like the gun is melting chocolate than what I'm guessing is supposed to be blood.

42

[deleted] t1_j5q3vfo wrote

I was just about to ask what the chocolate meant..

5

Majinsei t1_j5qnhyg wrote

Jajajajaja I think was chocolate in frist moment

2

GIRLSLIKEMELIKECRYPO t1_j5phd7h wrote

So I live in Baton Rouge, La- we just had a shooting at a nightclub here that injured 12. They are looking into security as there were guards in place who let someone in with a gun. This piece reminds me of that…I saw the gun and security and was like woah!!

24

Rough-Due t1_j5q0iqq wrote

I see the letters jumping/dancing. Like the concept too!

6

Duffman66CMU t1_j5pqfsu wrote

I see the kiddiness of the magnets, but also see it as a comment on the mental immaturity of needing a gun to feel secure.

5

Stickfigurewisdom OP t1_j5py7ld wrote

Thank you so much for that insight! Fear and insecurity are so common in human existence, it’s only natural that we would reach for something to make us feel better. But that doesn’t usually work

6

Djinnwrath t1_j5q0lnm wrote

I like how the colorform implies the childishness required to think guns are a good solution for anything.

3

ValhallaGo t1_j5q8z7a wrote

Ukraine probably disagrees with your logic.

5

Djinnwrath t1_j5q9pkt wrote

I'm ok with the military having guns.

−1

ValhallaGo t1_j5qe2m7 wrote

Neat. And what happens when average people have to defend themselves?

You’re probably going to say something about how average people can’t stop a major military, right?

But like… Afghanistan and Iraq and Vietnam have shown otherwise. The Taliban (and various affiliated groups) held out for twenty years. So yeah I think average people can do a lot.

9

Djinnwrath t1_j5qecda wrote

The average person is not going to be more able to defend themselves with a gun.

Technology has changed.

−5

ValhallaGo t1_j5qfnck wrote

How has technology changed since we pulled out of Afghanistan?

I’m asking this as former signals intelligence that was deployed to Afghanistan.

How has technology changed?

6

Djinnwrath t1_j5qhi13 wrote

Tell you what, you can have a pile of guns, and I'll have a pile of drones and vertical strike missiles.

−1

ValhallaGo t1_j5qin69 wrote

Well, how did that work out in Afghanistan?

Spoiler: it didn’t.

We had twenty years and all the drones and all the ordinance couldn’t solve the issue.

I’m not singling out america here, mind you. Every conventional military struggles against guerrilla warfare.

8

RedditSpyAccount t1_j5qsynx wrote

There have been several examples of the US having superior technology and still not accomplishing their mission objectives.

5

Djinnwrath t1_j5qthvg wrote

lol, 1) most of that was in the past, technology has changed, and 2) let's see billy bob with his personal arsenal of ARs hide in a 2 foot tall tunnel system for a year.

0

RedditSpyAccount t1_j5qu8ma wrote

In the past? Are you dense? The US pulled out of Afghanistan after 20 years in 2022.

7

OnlyRosin t1_j5pgrkv wrote

This piece makes me think of a song by Kendrick Lamar called Cartoon.

It isn't about children but innocence and lack there of.

2

doonieburg t1_j5q9iw2 wrote

Hits different for me, in the USA with 39 mass shootings in 24 days.

2

citznfish t1_j5qgsjh wrote

"insecurities" would be better ;)

2

firenfox t1_j5poa4l wrote

All I see is chocolate like one of those Easter bunny candies

0

Fire_Mission t1_j5r5vnj wrote

My favorite! Chocolate 1911! A tasty classic.

0

BackRowRumour t1_j5p0cxv wrote

I hate leaving negative comments, but this feels like a straight line comment of blood on kids. Bit obvious for such a serious issue.

−14

Stickfigurewisdom OP t1_j5p1g5f wrote

Thank you for your feedback. Imagine what it must be like to be a kid today. I can’t, but when I showed this in LA, some high school students really responded to it.

16

Stickfigurewisdom OP t1_j5p281s wrote

It’s supposed to be more about innocence than kids, and the loss of any sense of security for children who face school shootings while the adults do nothing

14

SplodyPants t1_j5p61rg wrote

You can always tell someone who's confident in their work by how they take criticism.

9

Stickfigurewisdom OP t1_j5p79fl wrote

Thank you, I think 😊 It’s not easy, but I’m trying

9

SplodyPants t1_j5p8d0j wrote

NP! I meant it as a compliment. The execution was well done and not everyone is gonna like it no matter what you do. You read the criticism and explained your intentions with it. I wish more people were like that.

7

Stickfigurewisdom OP t1_j5panxp wrote

Thank you so much! I was hoping that’s what you meant, and tbh, it’s been a long road to get here. I really appreciate it!

6

sleeper_54 t1_j5s35hh wrote

Taking criticism, well thought out or not, gracefully is a good skill on reddit or anywhere online.

OP seems to have it mastered.

1

crankyape1534 t1_j5pw20z wrote

Well to be fair. School shootings occur (in part) because they are gun free zones. The people that want to make impact choose schools because they know they are poorly defended, and full of innocence. The killers know they will get the public attention with kids and they know hardly anyone if at all will be there to stop their plans.

I feel for kids period because they end up being the target of issues beyond them. Not even speaking to the point of gun rights etc.

−3

Djinnwrath t1_j5q0sog wrote

When there are "good" people with guns there, they still don't stop anything.

6

crankyape1534 t1_j5q3vp1 wrote

Well takes more than just good people with guns. Takes action. Leadership. Courage. That which is lacking.

2

Djinnwrath t1_j5q4n23 wrote

Correct. Which means until we address those issues, harping about guns is pointless.

5

crankyape1534 t1_j5q4qq8 wrote

Well said. So this art piece is useless. It’s about the gun. Guns aren’t the issue. People are.

−1

Djinnwrath t1_j5q4yln wrote

No, guns absolutely are the issue, because solving a wide spread behavioral cultural negative is far more difficult than removing physical objects.

It's the gun owners who are harping.

3

crankyape1534 t1_j5q5mex wrote

Gun owners are “harping” in what way? What do you mean by that? If you mean by discussing guns? I’d say both gun owners and those who don’t want firearms, discuss guns with similar energy. Just differing viewpoints. This art implies guns seem to be the root cause of the issue. Robbing children of their innocence. I say the root issue is people. The mental health of America. Good people doing the right things with guns is great for America. Bad people doing hurtful things with guns is bad for America. Blaming guns doesn’t solve the problem.

0

Djinnwrath t1_j5q63n3 wrote

The root issue is easy access to guns.

And yes blaming guns doesn't solve the issue, removing them would.

2

crankyape1534 t1_j5q7i9p wrote

Removing all guns or removing easy access? It’s a fundamental right in America to be able to bear arms. That said some mentally unhealthy individuals have the means to access weapons. Most cases of masa shooting the guns were purchased legally, but most actual criminals with guns don’t acquire theirs in that same way. Criminals will always get guns, and so will the police etc. law abiding citizens shouldn’t lose guns because the system allows for mentally unwell people to purchase weapons. A lot of mass shooters have been warned about before. A lot even have been tipped off the the FBI. When mentally ill people get weapons and the “good guys” don’t act to prevent violence then bad things happen. If you take guns, mentally ill people will still find ways to get attention and hurt others. Only difference would be law abiding citizens would have their rights and guns taken needlessly. Again. It’s a mental health issue. Not a gun issue.

0

Djinnwrath t1_j5q9cdr wrote

It's only a "fundamental right" because right wing extremists employ purposeful misinterpretation of the second amendment.

An originalist reading of 2A by a court that isn't compromised politically in no way guarantees private individual ownership.

1

crankyape1534 t1_j5qb95f wrote

There is no misinterpretation of the 2nd amendment. It is the right to bear arms. We have that right not for hunting or just personal protection. It’s there incase our government is corrupt and takes too much power. We can use guns for hunting etc which is also within our rights, but it’s not a right wing narrative. It’s just the constitution and those who appreciate the rights given. It’s not a right or left things. That’s partisan politics and party line drawing. I know democrats with guns and republicans.

2

Djinnwrath t1_j5qblat wrote

You are incorrect. I will explain.

The whole sentence only makes sense if you read it in it's entirety (you know like a sentence is supposed to be read). If they were separate things as right-wing activists argue then they wouldn't be in the same sentence.

As for the rest of it if you aren't familiar with what surplusage is (how they said the entirety of the first part of the sentence is irrelevant) and how that flies smack dab into the face of the Constitution as it has been read since at the latest 1803 in Marbury v Madison then...

To show what I mean

[[A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, ..., shall not be infringed.]]

See now people owning arms for personal use argument doesn't work for you. You just interpret it your way because you like the right-wing activists ruling. This reading doesn't make any less sense. You don't get to just cut up a sentence to suit your views which is exactly what the right wing activists did.

It's not because if we act like they're separate things then the first part says nothing, does nothing.

[[A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State,]]

If they were separate things this is all the first part says. It says nothing. It's surplusage. That flies in the face of the way the law (all law [except for right-wing activists who read what they want]) has been read since 1803 in Marbury v Madison.

If you read the amendment in a non-right-wing activist fashion as it was in Miller (the way it had been read in the US up until right-wing activists in 2008) it's a collective right not an individual one. Which would mean the Guard is largely what the 2nd it talking about and the Feds can't stop states from having their own militia and arming/training it.

Grammatically two separate non-linked ideas should not be contained in the same sentence without semicolons or coordinating conjunctions.

1

crankyape1534 t1_j5qdx9d wrote

Second amendment: “A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed.”It’s just that simple. Read it how your mind likes and it still doesn’t change the text.

Regardless if you believe in the right or not, it’s still not about guns. Criminals break laws and don’t give two craps about constitutionality. It’s mental health that is the issue. Not right or left. Not guns. Mental health. Until that’s addressed issues will still arise no matter the variable. Even if you did take guns.

1

Djinnwrath t1_j5qe7wl wrote

You need to learn English better

0

crankyape1534 t1_j5qh9aw wrote

Lol even if I do, doesn’t change my point which you can’t refute. Mental illness is the issue. It’s damaged hurt angry people acting out, and yes guns can be used by them to hurt people, but it’s not the guns killing people it’s the damaged people killing people. You want to pin it on guns. It wont change that mental health in America is slipping and people will still find ways to act out or do violence.

2

sleeper_54 t1_j5s3tfg wrote

"Removing guns" will do nothing to remove guns from those who would do evil.

0

Djinnwrath t1_j5s3wq9 wrote

He said while ignoring every other developed nation on the planet.

1

BackRowRumour t1_j5p2mny wrote

I totally agree it must be hard. Depends how you work, but you will find quite a bit of hard hitting information on growing up with threat over time if you check the journals for child PTSD in Ukraine and Israel. I'm more of an academic than an artist, so I thought it might give you more insights to work in.

On a positive note I didn't give you enough credit for clarity and composition, looking at it again. Appreciate the discussion.

2

Stickfigurewisdom OP t1_j5p7heo wrote

Thank you.

7

BackRowRumour t1_j5p8nm0 wrote

You're welcome. I love it when r/Art treats artists like kindergarten kids. I'm being downvoted hard.

Discussion is more valuable to artists than a pat on the head. Even if they don't agree, which OP is welcome to do.

0

Stickfigurewisdom OP t1_j5pa5wj wrote

My favorite joke: An art critic asks an artist, “Do you want to hear my opinion of your art.” The Artist replies, “Sure.” The Critic says, “it’s worthless” “I know, but tell me anyway.”

9