this post was submitted on 17 Oct 2024
153 points (96.9% liked)

Everett True Comics

877 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 1 year 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 10 months 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 10 months 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 10 months 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 10 months ago

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

[–] samus12345@lemmy.world 0 points 10 months ago (1 children)

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

[–] Seleni@lemmy.world 11 points 10 months 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 10 months ago (1 children)

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

[–] Seleni@lemmy.world 3 points 10 months 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 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months 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 10 months 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 10 months ago (2 children)

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

[–] Flocklesscrow@lemm.ee 9 points 10 months ago

That's Gun 101.

[–] Steve@startrek.website 1 points 9 months 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 9 months 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 10 months ago

Could still fuck your eyes up.

[–] comfortablydumb@lemmy.ml 1 points 10 months ago (1 children)

I think he was pointing the gun at the bird.

[–] vrighter@discuss.tchncs.de 4 points 10 months ago* (last edited 10 months ago)

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