this post was submitted on 17 Oct 2024
157 points (97.0% liked)

Everett True Comics

947 readers
1 users here now

A place to appreciate the twentieth century comic character Everett True of "The Outbursts of Everett True." Feel free to check out the sticky.

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Printed 118 years ago today in the Spokane Press. Image cleaned up, see the original.

Found on the Library of Congress site.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Vorticity@lemmy.world 38 points 2 years ago (3 children)

I honestly think he had every right to do that in that situation. Kid aims a gun at you and gets a spanking? Kid got of light...

[–] samus12345@lemmy.world 20 points 2 years ago (1 children)

It was surprising to see Everett say he didn't have the right to spank him when he beats the shit out of guys all the time with nary a thought.

[–] Seleni@lemmy.world 24 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Kids back then were seen as property of their parents (in case you were wondering where that idea comes from when it pops up now and again today), and thus technically their discipline was also the province of their parents.

[–] Flocklesscrow@lemm.ee 7 points 2 years ago

Where is the follow up comic of Everett slapping the parents around?

[–] samus12345@lemmy.world 0 points 2 years ago (1 children)

But isn't beating someone up also a violation of their rights?

[–] Seleni@lemmy.world 11 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Kids didn’t have rights, any more than a dog or horse or chair did. They were seen as property. Both by the law and by custom.

[–] samus12345@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago (1 children)

In this case, the rights refer to the adult who "owned" them.

[–] Seleni@lemmy.world 3 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Right, hence him saying ‘I know I haven’t any right to do this’. He was infringing on their rights, with them not present to object.

[–] samus12345@lemmy.world 2 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

Yes, and he's also infringing on their rights when he beats them up, yet has no problem with it.

[–] BlemboTheThird@lemmy.ca 7 points 2 years ago (2 children)

I'm guessing it's a BB gun, but still not good to point at people

[–] MangoPenguin@lemmy.blahaj.zone 8 points 2 years ago (2 children)

Yeah it makes no difference, a gun is a gun.

[–] Flocklesscrow@lemm.ee 9 points 2 years ago

That's Gun 101.

[–] Steve@startrek.website 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

Not really true in practice. Airsoft and paintball are guns in form and function but they are intended to be aimed at people for fun.

[–] MangoPenguin@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 2 years ago

Even with Airsoft/Paintball you would practice gun safety, and not point them at people who are not part of the event, or who are but are not actively ready to participate.

[–] shadowedcross@sh.itjust.works 5 points 2 years ago

Could still fuck your eyes up.

[–] comfortablydumb@lemmy.ml 1 points 2 years ago (1 children)

I think he was pointing the gun at the bird.

[–] vrighter@discuss.tchncs.de 4 points 2 years ago* (last edited 2 years ago)

there's a person too close. He should not be aiming at the bird either