Every Sunday (KST), articles will be posted here on TL about stories, great and small, of love, hope, kindness, beauty, and the enduring human spirit. These articles, introduced in the title with a ♥, reminds us why, despite everything, life is still beautiful! Everyone is encouraged to contribute stories too, and not just on Sundays.
To combat the devastation caused by illegal assault rifles in Africa's war zones, founder of Ethos water, Peter Thum, announced today the launch of Fonderie 47. Based in New York City, Fonderie 47 removes AK47s from war zones and transforms them into rare jewelry, watches and accessories.
In partnership with NGOs working in Africa, Fonderie 47 already has destroyed more than 6,000 assault rifles. The sale of each piece of Fonderie 47 jewelry funds the destruction of more assault rifles.
Fonderie 47 sprung from the experiences that founders Peter Thum and John Zapolski had in Africa, where each has traveled extensively. They have seen assault rifles in the hands of children and witnessed firsthand the problem of assault rifles and how it hinders many aspects of development across Africa.
"A transformation is needed to break this cycle of violence in Africa. To this end, we are turning the power of the AK47 against itself," said Peter Thum, cofounder of Fonderie 47. "Not only do we destroy these weapons, but we invert what they stand for by remaking them into wearable art."
In collaboration with leading designers, including New York City based jeweler Philip Crangi and Swiss designer Roland Iten, the world's premiere designer of mechanical luxury for men, Fonderie 47 is creating exceptional handcrafted and limited edition jewelry and accessories.
Fonderie 47's initial pieces include a limited series of men's cufflinks, custom-made men's rings, and hand-made earrings for women. The items currently are sold at private events around the world. Sales of each item, along with donations from individuals and foundations, fund programs to destroy more assault rifles in Africa.
"While we create rare objects, their true value emanates from the principles, purpose, ideas, and skill that go into them. The pieces are not merely beautiful – they have real impact on the world. To us, that is the measure of an object's – and a person's – character," said Peter Thum.
On November 27 2011 12:50 Soap wrote: And how exactly selling them for a fortune hinders their production? What a terrible idea.
They could sell them for a fortune and not destroy any guns at all, why is that such a bad idea. At least they are trying to make the world a better place, every bit counts. What a terrible post you made.
Anyone have a link to their other products or a place these things can be purchased? Cant seem to find anywhere.
Edit: Those are cuff links
Edit 2: For anyone wondering, their main site asks for a serial number. I used the number 87538336 to get in... but there is pretty much 0 information there anyway. >.<
Edit 3: Wow, apparently if you let the intro video end, they give you a number. --- So much effort wasted. ./sigh Im done editing now.
On November 27 2011 12:50 Soap wrote: And how exactly selling them for a fortune hinders their production? What a terrible idea.
They could sell them for a fortune and not destroy any guns at all, why is that such a bad idea. At least they are trying to make the world a better place, every bit counts. What a terrible post you made.
How does it prevent those guns from simply being replaced? If anything it fosters gunrunning.
Guns are an instrument, not the cause. Even if all guns but one were removed, it would mean the last armed man gets to rule.
Besides I wonder how those are acquiring those weapons, I can't picture militias voluntarily turning in theirs or NGOs raiding arsenals.
On November 27 2011 12:50 Soap wrote: And how exactly selling them for a fortune hinders their production? What a terrible idea.
They could sell them for a fortune and not destroy any guns at all, why is that such a bad idea. At least they are trying to make the world a better place, every bit counts. What a terrible post you made.
How does it prevent those guns from simply being replaced? If anything it fosters gunrunning.
Guns are an instrument, not the cause. Even if all guns but one were removed, it would mean the last armed man gets to rule.
Besides I wonder how those are acquiring those weapons, I can't picture militias voluntarily turning in theirs or NGOs raiding arsenals.
Sir, this is such a dark outlook on life, and an outright distrust on humanity. There are good people too you know, and if enough people do good, AK47, and war, will be history.
On November 27 2011 12:50 Soap wrote: And how exactly selling them for a fortune hinders their production? What a terrible idea.
They could sell them for a fortune and not destroy any guns at all, why is that such a bad idea. At least they are trying to make the world a better place, every bit counts. What a terrible post you made.
How does it prevent those guns from simply being replaced? If anything it fosters gunrunning.
Guns are an instrument, not the cause. Even if all guns but one were removed, it would mean the last armed man gets to rule.
Besides I wonder how those are acquiring those weapons, I can't picture militias voluntarily turning in theirs or NGOs raiding arsenals.
Sir, this is such a dark outlook on life, and an outright distrust on humanity. There are good people too you know, and if enough people do good, AK47, and war, will be history.
Holy shit, barf bag for me and a reality check for my friend here, please.
On November 27 2011 12:50 Soap wrote: And how exactly selling them for a fortune hinders their production? What a terrible idea.
They could sell them for a fortune and not destroy any guns at all, why is that such a bad idea. At least they are trying to make the world a better place, every bit counts. What a terrible post you made.
How does it prevent those guns from simply being replaced? If anything it fosters gunrunning.
Guns are an instrument, not the cause. Even if all guns but one were removed, it would mean the last armed man gets to rule.
Besides I wonder how those are acquiring those weapons, I can't picture militias voluntarily turning in theirs or NGOs raiding arsenals.
Sir, this is such a dark outlook on life, and an outright distrust on humanity. There are good people too you know, and if enough people do good, AK47, and war, will be history.
Converting AK47s to jewelry sends the message that violent and destructive things can become beautiful and peaceful. It's a good message.
While this is a great idea, I feel that it is just that, and idea. I applaud Mr. Thum for his efforts to try and end suffering in war torn regions, he will have to make a lot of jewelry to have any sort of impact.
And lets not forget that the only way he is getting his hands on these Ak's is because people are willing to hand them over. Now some of these might be handed over by a faction who just won a tribal war and feels that getting rid of the weapons will disarm the conquered.
Plus major nations will still sell weapons to anyone fighting a political enemy or opponent of theirs.
But hey, as long as he doesn't come for my Remington he can destroy all the guns he wants.
On November 27 2011 12:50 Soap wrote: And how exactly selling them for a fortune hinders their production? What a terrible idea.
They could sell them for a fortune and not destroy any guns at all, why is that such a bad idea. At least they are trying to make the world a better place, every bit counts. What a terrible post you made.
How does it prevent those guns from simply being replaced? If anything it fosters gunrunning.
Guns are an instrument, not the cause. Even if all guns but one were removed, it would mean the last armed man gets to rule.
Besides I wonder how those are acquiring those weapons, I can't picture militias voluntarily turning in theirs or NGOs raiding arsenals.
On November 27 2011 12:50 Soap wrote: And how exactly selling them for a fortune hinders their production? What a terrible idea.
They could sell them for a fortune and not destroy any guns at all, why is that such a bad idea. At least they are trying to make the world a better place, every bit counts. What a terrible post you made.
How does it prevent those guns from simply being replaced? If anything it fosters gunrunning.
Guns are an instrument, not the cause. Even if all guns but one were removed, it would mean the last armed man gets to rule.
Besides I wonder how those are acquiring those weapons, I can't picture militias voluntarily turning in theirs or NGOs raiding arsenals.
Sir, this is such a dark outlook on life, and an outright distrust on humanity. There are good people too you know, and if enough people do good, AK47, and war, will be history.
Holy shit, barf bag for me and a reality check for my friend here, please.
Wait, I don't want to be confused here, but please speak plainly. Is this sarcasm or what?
On November 27 2011 12:50 Soap wrote: And how exactly selling them for a fortune hinders their production? What a terrible idea.
They could sell them for a fortune and not destroy any guns at all, why is that such a bad idea. At least they are trying to make the world a better place, every bit counts. What a terrible post you made.
How does it prevent those guns from simply being replaced? If anything it fosters gunrunning.
Guns are an instrument, not the cause. Even if all guns but one were removed, it would mean the last armed man gets to rule.
Besides I wonder how those are acquiring those weapons, I can't picture militias voluntarily turning in theirs or NGOs raiding arsenals.
Sir, this is such a dark outlook on life, and an outright distrust on humanity. There are good people too you know, and if enough people do good, AK47, and war, will be history.
Holy shit, barf bag for me and a reality check for my friend here, please.
You're right that in the large scale of things this will do nothing. Who cares. Take your pessimism elsewhere. I personally think this story is very uplifting and believe that what they are doing is pretty cool.
On November 27 2011 13:14 NuKedUFirst wrote: Interesting how they don't make other guns into jewelry too.. I don't think I would ever wear that.. seems bulky, etc.
I would never wear that ugly crap. The rifles should be recycled rather than waste valuable energy and machining resources on producing this useless junk.
Lets be honest here, this is cute, but does absolutely nothing at all in terms of educating people or helping to stop the war. It is similar to a billionaire donating computers to a third world school without the complementary education requirements. The net effect is totally zero, if not negative.
On November 27 2011 12:50 Soap wrote: And how exactly selling them for a fortune hinders their production? What a terrible idea.
They could sell them for a fortune and not destroy any guns at all, why is that such a bad idea. At least they are trying to make the world a better place, every bit counts. What a terrible post you made.
How does it prevent those guns from simply being replaced? If anything it fosters gunrunning.
Guns are an instrument, not the cause. Even if all guns but one were removed, it would mean the last armed man gets to rule.
Besides I wonder how those are acquiring those weapons, I can't picture militias voluntarily turning in theirs or NGOs raiding arsenals.
Sir, this is such a dark outlook on life, and an outright distrust on humanity. There are good people too you know, and if enough people do good, AK47, and war, will be history.
Uh, sure, but this does no good at all. If I start buying cocaine am I going to curb consumption? No, at best if I buy a lot of it the prices will rise momentarily and stimulate production.
On November 27 2011 12:50 Soap wrote: And how exactly selling them for a fortune hinders their production? What a terrible idea.
They could sell them for a fortune and not destroy any guns at all, why is that such a bad idea. At least they are trying to make the world a better place, every bit counts. What a terrible post you made.
How does it prevent those guns from simply being replaced? If anything it fosters gunrunning.
Guns are an instrument, not the cause. Even if all guns but one were removed, it would mean the last armed man gets to rule.
Besides I wonder how those are acquiring those weapons, I can't picture militias voluntarily turning in theirs or NGOs raiding arsenals.
Sir, this is such a dark outlook on life, and an outright distrust on humanity. There are good people too you know, and if enough people do good, AK47, and war, will be history.
Uh, sure, but this does no good at all. If I start buying cocaine am I going to curb consumption? No, at best if I buy a lot of it the prices will rise momentarily and stimulate production.
May I remind you that the story specifically says these: 1. Recycle AK47 and sell as high-end jewelry 2. implicitly, it means sell it to high-end market, to Philanthropists and billionaires who can shell out for a cause, with a "token" to show for it. 3. and the money being used in efforts to reduce AK47s further.
So your cocaine example is way off, though it gave me huge lol (I imagine you trying to consume all those cocaine in order to save the youth of South America LOL).
According to this article I googled, the image is actually a bracelet that can be broken down into cufflinks, and reassembled back into a bracelet. Pretty cool.
On November 27 2011 13:19 Dr. Strange wrote: Lets be honest here, this is cute, but does absolutely nothing at all in terms of educating people or helping to stop the war. It is similar to a billionaire donating computers to a third world school without the complementary education requirements. The net effect is totally zero, if not negative.
Exactly! More nonsensical belief that weapons are the source of conflict and suffering. Weapons are merely means to an end. Improving education, funding, infrastructure and resisting corrupt governments are the only hopes for change.
This is more self-stroking marketing. Selling the idea that purchasing these things implies your helping ending wars across the world is basically what you're all looking at here.
On November 27 2011 13:25 yakitate304 wrote: According to this article I googled, the image is actually a bracelet that can be broken down into cufflinks, and reassembled back into a bracelet. Pretty cool.
I find it kind of creepy that this guy wants to take guns used to kill people from a hell hole and turn it into lavish jewellery for western rich people to wear.
I mean, the world already thinks we're evil. That sounds almost hilariously, cartoonishly evil, even if the intention is of course to destroy guns. Just food for thought!
Not sure how much of these are actually parts of old AKs. It seems like the metals used in each are a lot different. Though I suppose the copper-looking parts in the jewelry could be from the bullets.
I'm a little bit unsure about this. Unless I missed something, the only information stating where they got the guns from is by "removing them from warzones". But how are they removing them from warzones? Are they taking no longer functioning weapons and recycling them?
Or, are they taking them from people who would otherwise use them? If so, are they disarming one side of a conflict while being unable to disarm another side? Surely that can't help the situation.
edit - also there is a measure of redundancy in their goal, as AK-47s are already fashion accessories in several war-torn areas of the world. Just look at how they pimp those things out with gold and rare types of wood inlays and whatnot. They already are forms of jewelery.
Are they donating the profits to organizations that are helping with the situation in Africa? If so then this is awesome. If they are just keeping the profits as profits seems unethical.
On November 27 2011 13:46 Najda wrote: Are they donating the profits to organizations that are helping with the situation in Africa? If so then this is awesome. If they are just keeping the profits as profits seems unethical.
This is the guy who's water company sells water to help children in Africa but only $0.05 of every bottle sale goes to it. Also the bottles are made by pepsi but aren't made from any recycled plastic like pepsi's other bottles are.
On November 27 2011 12:50 Soap wrote: And how exactly selling them for a fortune hinders their production? What a terrible idea.
They could sell them for a fortune and not destroy any guns at all, why is that such a bad idea. At least they are trying to make the world a better place, every bit counts. What a terrible post you made.
How does it prevent those guns from simply being replaced? If anything it fosters gunrunning.
Guns are an instrument, not the cause. Even if all guns but one were removed, it would mean the last armed man gets to rule.
Besides I wonder how those are acquiring those weapons, I can't picture militias voluntarily turning in theirs or NGOs raiding arsenals.
Sir, this is such a dark outlook on life, and an outright distrust on humanity. There are good people too you know, and if enough people do good, AK47, and war, will be history.
Uh, sure, but this does no good at all. If I start buying cocaine am I going to curb consumption? No, at best if I buy a lot of it the prices will rise momentarily and stimulate production.
May I remind you that the story specifically says these: 1. Recycle AK47 and sell as high-end jewelry 2. implicitly, it means sell it to high-end market, to Philanthropists and billionaires who can shell out for a cause, with a "token" to show for it. 3. and the money being used in efforts to reduce AK47s further.
So your cocaine example is way off, though it gave me huge lol (I imagine you trying to consume all those cocaine in order to save the youth of South America LOL).
I guess a metaphor was too much, let me simplify.
You acquire guns, sell them (as jewelry) and use the money to acquire more guns. Note the "acquire guns" part. If somehow combatants give them for free (check nra.org and see how much law abiding first world citizens are fond of turning their weapons over) they'll be run over by who doesn't. If they are being paid for, then you're just a second hand customer.
On November 27 2011 12:50 Soap wrote: And how exactly selling them for a fortune hinders their production? What a terrible idea.
They could sell them for a fortune and not destroy any guns at all, why is that such a bad idea. At least they are trying to make the world a better place, every bit counts. What a terrible post you made.
How does it prevent those guns from simply being replaced? If anything it fosters gunrunning.
Guns are an instrument, not the cause. Even if all guns but one were removed, it would mean the last armed man gets to rule.
Besides I wonder how those are acquiring those weapons, I can't picture militias voluntarily turning in theirs or NGOs raiding arsenals.
Sir, this is such a dark outlook on life, and an outright distrust on humanity. There are good people too you know, and if enough people do good, AK47, and war, will be history.
Uh, sure, but this does no good at all. If I start buying cocaine am I going to curb consumption? No, at best if I buy a lot of it the prices will rise momentarily and stimulate production.
May I remind you that the story specifically says these: 1. Recycle AK47 and sell as high-end jewelry 2. implicitly, it means sell it to high-end market, to Philanthropists and billionaires who can shell out for a cause, with a "token" to show for it. 3. and the money being used in efforts to reduce AK47s further.
So your cocaine example is way off, though it gave me huge lol (I imagine you trying to consume all those cocaine in order to save the youth of South America LOL).
I guess a metaphor was too much, let me simplify.
You acquire guns, sell them (as jewelry) and use the money to acquire more guns. Note the "acquire guns" part. If somehow combatants give them for free (check nra.org and see how much law abiding first world citizens are fond of turning their weapons over) they'll be run over by who doesn't. If they are being paid for, then you're just a second hand customer.
No, I'm quite fine imagining you sniffing your cocaine for a cause thank you very much.
On November 27 2011 13:54 ggggbabybabybaby wrote: This is the guy who's water company sells water to help children in Africa but only $0.05 of every bottle sale goes to it. Also the bottles are made by pepsi but aren't made from any recycled plastic like pepsi's other bottles are.
On November 27 2011 13:54 ggggbabybabybaby wrote: This is the guy who's water company sells water to help children in Africa but only $0.05 of every bottle sale goes to it. Also the bottles are made by pepsi but aren't made from any recycled plastic like pepsi's other bottles are.
On November 27 2011 12:50 Soap wrote: And how exactly selling them for a fortune hinders their production? What a terrible idea.
They could sell them for a fortune and not destroy any guns at all, why is that such a bad idea. At least they are trying to make the world a better place, every bit counts. What a terrible post you made.
How does it prevent those guns from simply being replaced? If anything it fosters gunrunning.
Guns are an instrument, not the cause. Even if all guns but one were removed, it would mean the last armed man gets to rule.
Besides I wonder how those are acquiring those weapons, I can't picture militias voluntarily turning in theirs or NGOs raiding arsenals.
Sir, this is such a dark outlook on life, and an outright distrust on humanity. There are good people too you know, and if enough people do good, AK47, and war, will be history.
Uh, sure, but this does no good at all. If I start buying cocaine am I going to curb consumption? No, at best if I buy a lot of it the prices will rise momentarily and stimulate production.
May I remind you that the story specifically says these: 1. Recycle AK47 and sell as high-end jewelry 2. implicitly, it means sell it to high-end market, to Philanthropists and billionaires who can shell out for a cause, with a "token" to show for it. 3. and the money being used in efforts to reduce AK47s further.
So your cocaine example is way off, though it gave me huge lol (I imagine you trying to consume all those cocaine in order to save the youth of South America LOL).
I guess a metaphor was too much, let me simplify.
You acquire guns, sell them (as jewelry) and use the money to acquire more guns. Note the "acquire guns" part. If somehow combatants give them for free (check nra.org and see how much law abiding first world citizens are fond of turning their weapons over) they'll be run over by who doesn't. If they are being paid for, then you're just a second hand customer.
No, I'm quite fine imagining you sniffing your cocaine for a cause thank you very much.
Don't get me wrong, I like very much your initiative to bring some light to the cesspool that General usually is, and the other thread is great, but if you really want to help Africa please request the thread to be closed to not spread this further.
If they go and steal guns from people that would discourage people from investing in an AK 47, (if you knew it would be stolen, but stealing AK 47s is difficult).
If they are being bought from warzones, then it is just a funding for militas(which can go to buying more AK47s).
If they are being turned in once an area is no longer a "warzone" and people feel safe to just give up their AK47s, but then the problem is solved.
I'm guessing it is probably #1.. sort of, they probably take AK47s that have been seized by "police". The problem is some of the "police" are worse than militias in warzones. (at least if they are strong enough to take away AK47s)
#2 strategy has been tried in cities in America to counter gang/criminal violence ie turn a gun in , get money. It hasn't really worked as far as I remember, people that want to commit violence just take the money and get another gun.
It might be a way to help fund "police" that aren't as bad as the rebels that they are fighting, ie gun interdiction efforts, but if they are paying people More for the guns than a new gun would cost, its a bad idea.
On November 27 2011 12:50 Soap wrote: And how exactly selling them for a fortune hinders their production? What a terrible idea.
They could sell them for a fortune and not destroy any guns at all, why is that such a bad idea. At least they are trying to make the world a better place, every bit counts. What a terrible post you made.
How does it prevent those guns from simply being replaced? If anything it fosters gunrunning.
Guns are an instrument, not the cause. Even if all guns but one were removed, it would mean the last armed man gets to rule.
Besides I wonder how those are acquiring those weapons, I can't picture militias voluntarily turning in theirs or NGOs raiding arsenals.
Sir, this is such a dark outlook on life, and an outright distrust on humanity. There are good people too you know, and if enough people do good, AK47, and war, will be history.
Uh, sure, but this does no good at all. If I start buying cocaine am I going to curb consumption? No, at best if I buy a lot of it the prices will rise momentarily and stimulate production.
May I remind you that the story specifically says these: 1. Recycle AK47 and sell as high-end jewelry 2. implicitly, it means sell it to high-end market, to Philanthropists and billionaires who can shell out for a cause, with a "token" to show for it. 3. and the money being used in efforts to reduce AK47s further.
So your cocaine example is way off, though it gave me huge lol (I imagine you trying to consume all those cocaine in order to save the youth of South America LOL).
I guess a metaphor was too much, let me simplify.
You acquire guns, sell them (as jewelry) and use the money to acquire more guns. Note the "acquire guns" part. If somehow combatants give them for free (check nra.org and see how much law abiding first world citizens are fond of turning their weapons over) they'll be run over by who doesn't. If they are being paid for, then you're just a second hand customer.
No, I'm quite fine imagining you sniffing your cocaine for a cause thank you very much.
Don't get me wrong, I like very much your initiative to bring some light to the cesspool that General usually is, and the other thread is great, but if you really want to help Africa please request the thread to be closed to not spread this further.
Ladies and Gentlemen, may I introduce you to our distinguished Mr. White Knight!
If Ethos or whoever is marketing these actually gave a shit, they wouldn't sell them as 'high-end jewellery', more as something your average normal-income-earning person both can use, wear and afford. More market, more money, more AK-47's they can turn into jewellery.
Instead, he is just making money from moronic upper-class people who want to feel like they are contributing to something. He has to produce less jewellery which means less guns which means more mark-up which means more expensive jewellery and less sold. This shit is like a drop in the ocean and it's the wrong way to go about it.
On November 27 2011 14:18 GettinMyFill wrote: If Ethos or whoever is marketing these actually gave a shit, they wouldn't sell them as 'high-end jewellery', more as something your average normal-income-earning person both can use, wear and afford. More market, more money, more AK-47's they can turn into jewellery.
Instead, he is just making money from moronic upper-class people who want to feel like they are contributing to something. He has to produce less jewellery which means less guns which means more mark-up which means more expensive jewellery and less sold. This shit is like a drop in the ocean and it's the wrong way to go about it.
I thought of this too however, they can only afford so many/ only so many are available so it comes off as more prestigous. But yeah it would be better because more guns destroyed and therefor more profit.
On November 27 2011 12:50 Soap wrote: And how exactly selling them for a fortune hinders their production? What a terrible idea.
A wise man once said: it's the thought that counts
don't be a douche, cool idea for a good cause!
No it's not. It's a terrible thought that demonizes the weapon instead of the people using the weapons for evil. It's like melting down forks to create bicycles to speak out against obesity.
"Not only do we destroy these weapons, but we invert what they stand for by remaking them into wearable art." What can a machine possibly stand for? It's the person who utilizes that machine who can stand for something.
Everyone arguing about the economic feasibility or whatever of continued production of these is reading way too far into it. Its a cute art project that is mean't to be symbolic...not something bent on making loads of money. And no it is not really going to make a dent in the problem
That being said, I find the choice of the AK-47 interesting. While much of the western world would view the weapon as a symbol of of destruction and turmoil, there is also many people that see it as a symbol of freedom, and the fight against oppression (i.e. guerillas fighting against western imperialism or whatnot)...I dont see this doing much to change the minds of people with this view.
On November 27 2011 14:42 sheaRZerg wrote: Everyone arguing about the economic feasibility or whatever of continued production of these is reading way too far into it. Its a cute art project that is mean't to be symbolic...not something bent on making loads of money. And no it is not really going to make a dent in the problem
That being said, I find the choice of the AK-47 interesting. While much of the western world would view the weapon as a symbol of of destruction and turmoil, there is also many people that see it as a symbol of freedom, and the fight against oppression (i.e. guerillas fighting against western imperialism or whatnot)...I dont see this doing much to change the minds of people with this view.
What about a pumpkin carving tool?
In fact, if the purpose of this thread is to "reminds us why, despite everything, life is still beautiful!", then I think this video does a better job than the OP. Something that can be used to commit terrible acts, being used for safe, light hearted fun without first being destroyed is a beautiful thing.
The idea that violence should be fought by simply reducing the means to violence is a very misguided, and often dangerous, idea.
Usually such efforts serve to increase and centralize the power of governments, regimes, and gangs over the people, which in despotic regions such as Africa can be an enormous hindrance to future revolutions, such as occurred recently in Libya, and therefore a potential hindrance to progress and human rights.
Violence in modern nations is diminished through law, education, reform, culture. However, if those in power stand in the way of such progress, often force must be met with force. Trying to achieve progress by turning back technology is a naive and simplistic mentality.
On November 27 2011 14:42 sheaRZerg wrote: Everyone arguing about the economic feasibility or whatever of continued production of these is reading way too far into it. Its a cute art project that is mean't to be symbolic...not something bent on making loads of money. And no it is not really going to make a dent in the problem
That being said, I find the choice of the AK-47 interesting. While much of the western world would view the weapon as a symbol of of destruction and turmoil, there is also many people that see it as a symbol of freedom, and the fight against oppression (i.e. guerillas fighting against western imperialism or whatnot)...I dont see this doing much to change the minds of people with this view.
The real danger is that it makes the problem worse. If they are paying militia members 150 for a weapon that can be acquired on the black market for 100, then they are just funding militia members.
If they are giving militia members 50 for something that can be acquired for 100, or if they are only buying weapons from governments that seized the weapons, then there is some potential benefit. (but it is muted, and they may be funding human abuse government police forces)
On November 27 2011 12:50 Soap wrote: And how exactly selling them for a fortune hinders their production? What a terrible idea.
They could sell them for a fortune and not destroy any guns at all, why is that such a bad idea. At least they are trying to make the world a better place, every bit counts. What a terrible post you made.
How does it prevent those guns from simply being replaced? If anything it fosters gunrunning.
Guns are an instrument, not the cause. Even if all guns but one were removed, it would mean the last armed man gets to rule.
Besides I wonder how those are acquiring those weapons, I can't picture militias voluntarily turning in theirs or NGOs raiding arsenals.
Sir, this is such a dark outlook on life, and an outright distrust on humanity. There are good people too you know, and if enough people do good, AK47, and war, will be history.
I know there are good people and I'm just fine with those people having AK-47s. In fact, I encourage it.
On November 27 2011 12:50 Soap wrote: And how exactly selling them for a fortune hinders their production? What a terrible idea.
They could sell them for a fortune and not destroy any guns at all, why is that such a bad idea. At least they are trying to make the world a better place, every bit counts. What a terrible post you made.
So if i buy a knife from some thug on the street for $100, sand it down, paint it gold, and sell it for $1 million as jewlery... I'm doing a good thing?
I disagree. They should destroy the guns and make something useful for free. That would be a true act of selflessness. They aren't trying to make the world a better place, they're trying to make money and using a ploy to make it look like they're trying to make the world a better place, and you're falling for it.
I would imagine that the steel used in Soviet-era rifles would not be suitable for reforging into jewelry. The most remarkable thing about the concept art in the OP is that it looks like parts of the pieces are slices out of a full metal jacket. It's a recipe for lead poisoning.
They probably use miniscule amounts of the weapon, if they even use a weapon at all because its hard to audit that claim. It's a pretty good deal, they stand to make a ridiculous profit because of the value-added appeal to emotion advertisements like this bring to their product.
On November 27 2011 12:50 Soap wrote: And how exactly selling them for a fortune hinders their production? What a terrible idea.
They could sell them for a fortune and not destroy any guns at all, why is that such a bad idea. At least they are trying to make the world a better place, every bit counts. What a terrible post you made.
So if i buy a knife from some thug on the street for $100, sand it down, paint it gold, and sell it for $1 million as jewlery... I'm doing a good thing?
I disagree. They should destroy the guns and make something useful for free. That would be a true act of selflessness. They aren't trying to make the world a better place, they're trying to make money and using a ploy to make it look like they're trying to make the world a better place, and you're falling for it.
Why should they do something that is "a true act of selflessness"? I don't agree with this particular endeavor but do you realize that often, in the process of making money, you are making the world a better place? For example, think of all the lives Steve Jobs enriched while making huge profits.
On November 27 2011 14:48 Blasterion wrote: What is it suppose to be?
I think it's spose to be a cuff.
I hope this doesn't catch on. Sell extravagant gun jewelery to westerners telling em its for a good cause. But in the end, it just creates more business for gun manufacturers.
On November 27 2011 12:50 Soap wrote: And how exactly selling them for a fortune hinders their production? What a terrible idea.
They could sell them for a fortune and not destroy any guns at all, why is that such a bad idea. At least they are trying to make the world a better place, every bit counts. What a terrible post you made.
So if i buy a knife from some thug on the street for $100, sand it down, paint it gold, and sell it for $1 million as jewlery... I'm doing a good thing?
I disagree. They should destroy the guns and make something useful for free. That would be a true act of selflessness. They aren't trying to make the world a better place, they're trying to make money and using a ploy to make it look like they're trying to make the world a better place, and you're falling for it.
I feel TerlocSG nailed it here.
On November 27 2011 14:54 OsoVega wrote: Why should they do something that is "a true act of selflessness"? I don't agree with this particular endeavor but do you realize that often, in the process of making money, you are making the world a better place? For example, think of all the lives Steve Jobs enriched while making huge profits.
Steve Jobs didn't operate under the guise of philanthropy.
What this guy is doing is deceptive. I don't think he's under any moral obligation to commit "a true act of selflessness", but he's trying to use a charitable cause as a marketing ploy. I'd say he's in some...shaky...moral ground.
A noble effort to bring some uplifting discussion to general, but I think this story failed the cause.
On November 27 2011 12:50 Soap wrote: And how exactly selling them for a fortune hinders their production? What a terrible idea.
They could sell them for a fortune and not destroy any guns at all, why is that such a bad idea. At least they are trying to make the world a better place, every bit counts. What a terrible post you made.
So if i buy a knife from some thug on the street for $100, sand it down, paint it gold, and sell it for $1 million as jewlery... I'm doing a good thing?
I disagree. They should destroy the guns and make something useful for free. That would be a true act of selflessness. They aren't trying to make the world a better place, they're trying to make money and using a ploy to make it look like they're trying to make the world a better place, and you're falling for it.
On November 27 2011 14:54 OsoVega wrote: Why should they do something that is "a true act of selflessness"? I don't agree with this particular endeavor but do you realize that often, in the process of making money, you are making the world a better place? For example, think of all the lives Steve Jobs enriched while making huge profits.
Steve Jobs didn't operate under the guise of philanthropy.
What this guy is doing is deceptive. I don't think he's under any moral obligation to commit "a true act of selflessness", but he's trying to use a charitable cause as a marketing ploy. I'd say he's in some...shaky...moral ground.
A noble effort to bring some uplifting discussion to general, but I think this story failed the cause.
Fair enough but "Sales of each item, along with donations from individuals and foundations, fund programs to destroy more assault rifles in Africa". I think that those are ridiculous programs to be donating to but as far as I can tell, at least there's no deception.
On November 27 2011 15:27 FallDownMarigold wrote: Does each watch contain a unique serial number corresponding to a unique rifle? I'm wondering if that's what the number sequences are.
Because there is an accurate, complete, and accessible database of all AK-variant weapon serial numbers made both during and after the Soviet era by all client states as well as Russia herself.
this isn't going to influence AK-47 production but i have to say the website is less than helpful and though the cufflinks are pretty cool in my opinion and the rings look fucking baller, there is no info other than to send your own in and i'm not hot on that idea.
On November 27 2011 15:27 FallDownMarigold wrote: Does each watch contain a unique serial number corresponding to a unique rifle? I'm wondering if that's what the number sequences are.
Because there is an accurate, complete, and accessible database of all AK-variant weapon serial numbers made both during and after the Soviet era by all client states as well as Russia herself.
Don't be an ass hole. The reason I ask is because all weapons are made with a unique serial number. This number is engrained into the weapon. Think before you speak, it avoids letting yourself look incredibly stupid.
The fact that you mention the unlikelihood of a "database" just proves how confused you are. Database? WTF? Here's what you'd do: You collect your AK47s. Chop off the serial number chips. Include them in the watches. Now, my question was whether or not they included the original serial numbers, or if those number sequences on each watch are something fake/different. The reason for the question is because I am curious how "legit" and "nice" these watches are, and that is obviously a factor.
On November 27 2011 15:27 FallDownMarigold wrote: Does each watch contain a unique serial number corresponding to a unique rifle? I'm wondering if that's what the number sequences are.
Because there is an accurate, complete, and accessible database of all AK-variant weapon serial numbers made both during and after the Soviet era by all client states as well as Russia herself.
Don't be an ass hole. The reason I ask is because all weapons are made with a unique serial number. This number is engrained into the weapon. Think before you speak, it avoids letting yourself look incredibly stupid.
'Engrained into the weapon?' Something makes me think you have no idea about how weapons are made.
To be very specific, the AK-variants are notoriously hard to identify. A multitude of factories in the Soviet Union and the client states produced these weapons at the lowest possible costs; the objective was to make as much of them as possible to send to the client states to bolster their fight against the imperialist powers. This is ignoring the fact that many states, as well as non-state actors, got their hands on the plans and specifications for these rifles and made them independently.
There exists no "accurate, complete, and accessible database of all AK-variant weapon serial numbers made both during and after the Soviet era by all client states as well as Russia herself."
The only one potentially looking incredibly stupid here is you for overreacting to fact and responding with ad hom.
Edit: I'll respond to the second part of your post because I guess you are frenetically trying to make a better argument.
On November 27 2011 15:27 FallDownMarigold wrote: The fact that you mention the unlikelihood of a "database" just proves how confused you are. Database? WTF? Here's what you'd do: You collect your AK47s. Chop off the serial number chips. Include them in the watches. Now, my question was whether or not they included the original serial numbers, or if those number sequences on each watch are something fake/different. The reason for the question is because I am curious how "legit" and "nice" these watches are, and that is obviously a factor.
Because there is no database, the manufacturers of these jewelry pieces cannot be held accountable as to whether or not their claims are legitimate. To satisfy your 'provide me with a serial number' condition, I'd just make one up. How can you verify if its real? You can't.
Jesus Christ. Re-phrasing the question and ignoring the off-topic bullshit: Are those wooden number sequences on the watches unique numbers corresponding to the original serial numbers that could have have placed on the original AK-47s at the time of their production -- regardless of the fact that some rifles could have been made without numbers? If not, what are these numbers and why are they included on the watches in that way?
P.S. Yes, AK-47s do have serial numbers, at least in some cases. Thus my question is perfectly fine, and you need not attack it simply because you think AK-47s don't have SNs. I literally have no care whatsoever as to whether or not a database exists that validates the SNs on these watches. WTF. I'm simply wondering what the numbers themselves are from. http://www.ak-47.us/AK47_Markings.php [Plenty of examples of internationally-made AK-47s with SNs]
Oh God, those poor Kalashnikovs. What kind of a monster would do this!?
Give them to me instead, I'll keep them far away from Africa, and they can be my babies. :3 I want to give my Mosin a more modern cousin to hang out with.
On November 27 2011 16:22 FallDownMarigold wrote: P.S. Yes, AK-47s do have serial numbers, at least in some cases. Thus my question is perfectly fine, and you need not attack it simply because you think AK-47s don't have SNs. I literally have no care whatsoever as to whether or not a database exists that validates the SNs on these watches. WTF. I'm simply wondering what the numbers themselves are from. http://www.ak-47.us/AK47_Markings.php [Plenty of examples of internationally-made AK-47s with SNs]
Your link shows rifles made in the United States for the domestic market. OP clearly explains that the jewelry maker claims to take them out of conflict areas, presumably outside of the United States. Strangely, not all weapons made in the last hundred years were made in the United States under the requirements of the Gun Control Act.
On November 27 2011 16:22 FallDownMarigold wrote: P.S. Yes, AK-47s do have serial numbers, at least in some cases. Thus my question is perfectly fine, and you need not attack it simply because you think AK-47s don't have SNs. I literally have no care whatsoever as to whether or not a database exists that validates the SNs on these watches. WTF. I'm simply wondering what the numbers themselves are from. http://www.ak-47.us/AK47_Markings.php [Plenty of examples of internationally-made AK-47s with SNs]
Your link shows rifles made in the United States for the domestic market. OP clearly explains that the jewelry maker claims to take them out of conflict areas, presumably outside of the United States. Strangely, not all weapons made in the last hundred years were made in the United States under the requirements of the Gun Control Act.
Dude what is your problem? I am not debating with you on Gun Bullshit. I want to know what those nice-looking, wooden, unique number sequences are embedded in the watches. Take your gun history else where, this thread is not the place for it and I'm not interested in it. If you don't think they are serial numbers, why don't you answer the question instead of being such an ass?
On November 27 2011 16:16 MenSol[ZerO] wrote: it may not be the answer but at least they are doing something
They're doing something, worsening the situation. The only people that are being helped are themselves and the gun makers. As for the people the program was meant to help? Now they'll have an economy based around guns. Which means more guns.
On November 27 2011 16:22 FallDownMarigold wrote: P.S. Yes, AK-47s do have serial numbers, at least in some cases. Thus my question is perfectly fine, and you need not attack it simply because you think AK-47s don't have SNs. I literally have no care whatsoever as to whether or not a database exists that validates the SNs on these watches. WTF. I'm simply wondering what the numbers themselves are from. http://www.ak-47.us/AK47_Markings.php [Plenty of examples of internationally-made AK-47s with SNs]
Your link shows rifles made in the United States for the domestic market. OP clearly explains that the jewelry maker claims to take them out of conflict areas, presumably outside of the United States. Strangely, not all weapons made in the last hundred years were made in the United States under the requirements of the Gun Control Act.
Dude what is your problem? I am not debating with you on Gun Bullshit. I want to know what those nice-looking, wooden, unique number sequences are embedded in the watches. Take your gun history else where, this thread is not the place for it and I'm not interested in it. If you don't think they are serial numbers, why don't you answer the question instead of being such an ass?
I thought we were discussing the ability to verify the claims of the makers of this product. For products such as this, which articulate a just cause in order to justify the sales of their products, verifiability is very important. Without the ability to verify their claims, there is a risk that it could simply be a money-making venture clothed in the skin of what can potentially be a good cause. It erodes the credibility of organizations with similar ideas and the movement as a whole.
I don't see how this helps Africa at all, if you remove every rifle they will start chopping at each other with machetes. You actually undermine those kids chances for survival, because a kid with a knife is a much easier pray for whoever rapes the village.
On November 27 2011 16:22 FallDownMarigold wrote: P.S. Yes, AK-47s do have serial numbers, at least in some cases. Thus my question is perfectly fine, and you need not attack it simply because you think AK-47s don't have SNs. I literally have no care whatsoever as to whether or not a database exists that validates the SNs on these watches. WTF. I'm simply wondering what the numbers themselves are from. http://www.ak-47.us/AK47_Markings.php [Plenty of examples of internationally-made AK-47s with SNs]
Your link shows rifles made in the United States for the domestic market. OP clearly explains that the jewelry maker claims to take them out of conflict areas, presumably outside of the United States. Strangely, not all weapons made in the last hundred years were made in the United States under the requirements of the Gun Control Act.
Dude what is your problem? I am not debating with you on Gun Bullshit. I want to know what those nice-looking, wooden, unique number sequences are embedded in the watches. Take your gun history else where, this thread is not the place for it and I'm not interested in it. If you don't think they are serial numbers, why don't you answer the question instead of being such an ass?
I thought we were discussing the ability to verify the claims of the makers of this product. For products such as this, which articulate a just cause in order to justify the sales of their products, verifiability is very important. Without the ability to verify their claims, there is a risk that it could simply be a money-making venture clothed in the skin of what can potentially be a good cause. It erodes the credibility of organizations with similar ideas and the movement as a whole.
Well that is actually a much more interesting and useful discussion than I intended to elicit with my question. I simply wanted to know about the artistic qualities of the pieces, without any consideration whatsoever for the story behind them. I saw that they were gun-derived wrist pieces, which intrigued my artistic side. In particular, I noticed the compatibility between the wood and the metal. Upon closer look at the wood, I noticed seemingly random numbers. Assuming that all parts of the watch are derived from gun parts, the most logical possibility is that the numbers are numbers from the AK-47, and not numbers added for no reason (in line with the understanding that watch parts come from gun parts). What are numbers usually called when found on guns? I figured "serial number" worked, so I used that. Do you now understand my interest and my question with regard to these watches? I haven't yet considered anything about the cause, etc. I think they're nice looking, and I'm curious about a particular part on them (the numbers).
On November 27 2011 12:46 Vilonis wrote: I hope that this saves at least one life. Thats all it really takes to be worth it.
Wow. Quite aptly said.
Oh my God please just stop. Removing a pile of AK-47s is not going to stop atrocities across the big blue marble. Oh no, we're running low on AK-47s, guess we have to give peace a chance.
Let these business assholes turn their balls into trinkets in a jar and sell those, to help fight the use of rape as a weapon in nations like the Congo and just recently in Libya.
Same logic! And just as meaningless.
I'm sorry, I just couldn't help myself.
"If it could just help save one life..." knowing full well that it does NOT. People will convince themselves on anything as long as it makes them feel less guilty about being so lucky as to not live in a fucked up war-torn nation while the majority of the world suffers.
On November 27 2011 17:10 stevarius wrote: Why remove a valuable tool and replace it with a piece of junk item to be worn on the body that serves no useful purpose?
Because guns are emotional objects and it's easy to twist the image of them into evil things that must be destroyed.
this is fucking stupid, and most likely more a marketing gimmick than it is an attempt to help africans. yeah, so helpful, you buy guns from some warlord for a few dollars and then turn around and sell them to guilty white people for thousands. apparently, charity is a profit-driven industry.
Interesting but doesn't this concept have a fatal flaw? i.e. all its doing is making more demand for AK47's, making them more valuable and giving more money to the arms dealers that provide them?
What if this would push the price for ak 47s up so that the guerillas and rebells and whatnot wouldn't be able to afford them? I know it won't due to this being too small volumes but for discussion purposes let's pretend it could. Wouldn't that be a good thing? I don't know
This is a sad part in a circle of deceit. I doubt the creator of those jewelrys has bad intentions, neither do most NGOs who collect weapons.
But what it comes down to is unarmed townsfolk getting bullied out of their rights by mercenaries and military troops. And that is not the sad part. The sad part is promoting those disarmament programs as something ending the violence, yet all it does is promote misery even further and making a profit out of it.
Buying jewelry like that or donating to NGOs promoting disarmament of ordinary people will directly lead to their abuse by those who simply don't care or even orchestrate those disarmament programs. The people hungry for power and control will never give up their weapons. I don't promote giving everyone a weapon, but there are (more and more) regions on this world where you need all the protection you can get. Disarmament programs might work with gangs in cities, but not in areas controlled by militia (no matter what uniform they wear).
On November 28 2011 00:43 polluxtby wrote: What if this would push the price for ak 47s up so that the guerillas and rebells and whatnot wouldn't be able to afford them? I know it won't due to this being too small volumes but for discussion purposes let's pretend it could. Wouldn't that be a good thing? I don't know
Not really, more demand == more production. It just means that the people that make and distribute these arms can afford to produce more and further their agendas. The only person that really benefits from this initiative is group responsible for supply, who I would imagine already have enough fingers in every other illegal pie going anyway.
The whole idea of this just screams hipster to me. I'm already passing judgement on the snobby rich bastards that will buy this stuff as a way to express generosity and care for people who lack deep pockets; whilst still remaining fashionable, and picking up girls because they care.
That said. I absolutely approve of what they're doing here. I like that they're helping the world a better place by getting rid of weapons in third world countries, and its a smart, ecological business model. So, very cool, I hope these AK jewelries become more popular than blood diamonds.
Such a waste of a beautiful work of engineering and making it into ugly looking jewelry.
But yeah as said above I doubt it has an intention of directly removing the weapons by making them into jewelry, but more to raise funds and awareness to tack the problem more direct and seriously.
I'm sceptikal For every AK47 taken 2 more could be bought by the ones who sold their weapon to this company. It just creates a bigger demand for weapons. They just ditch faulty weapons for cash.
Things have a way of working out this way. Especally in chaotic violent countries. A rich hipster way to feel good about themselves and safe the world to only indirectly feul the fire even more. These initiatives are just naieve and trendy. I think Founderie know they don't help solve the problem. They don't care as long as the consumer thinks it does help.
I'm sorry but the feel good story is a commercial lie and you bought into it.
They have a neat sales pitch, but ultimately melting down a few weapons won't actually change anything. They're selling the idea of doing good and helping humanity, so they'll probably make a fair amount of money with these.
It seems macabre to wear a bracelet made from an assault rifle that was formerly used to murder villagers. Wouldn't do it myself, but good luck to them reducing the supply of assault rifles in war-torn areas.
meh not actually going to accomplish anything in the grand scheme. Other then make the rich yuppies who can afford these things feel like they are saving the world.
My concern would be that this would increase the demand for fire arms, so wouldn't more be made anyway? and the manufacturers of the ak's would make even more money. I'm a little skepticle cause these won't be cheap, so i agree that it will only make people that are buying think they are helping, while the makers of the bracelet might be making it off rich, and the makers of the ak's getting more money as well. Plus it would mean newer firearms for the rebels to use. Cause either way, their money will be allocated to guns. Money doesn't stop criminals from getting and abusing guns.
Just read KaasZerg's post a couple before me and i share the same opinion.
Pathetic, you cant solve the problems in Africa by starving them of weaponry, the UK are one of the largest suppliers of weaponry to anyone with the money to buy it!
We need to help Africa out with their dire economic problems (which we put them in) and kill off the route of their conflict, rather than simply stopping them from getting guns, all that does it make them use cheap explosives and melee weapons! China has started funding programs to try and stabalize Africa somewhat, so far they have been working far more effectively than anything the West has ever done, I really don't think reducing the gun usage will solve anything, but it is a nice idea and I don't want to put down the ideas of someone trying to help
Hmm, I'm always skeptical of these things. More money to make. IMO What were they gona do? Use ak 47 in todays warfare? Lets make them expensive jewlery
EPT![[image loading]](http://i.imgur.com/mVDmI.jpg)
Happy Sunday TL!
