Revisiting the "gun sight" issue-- for the last time I promise

So, the whole "are those crosshairs of a gun or surveyor's marks on that map from Sarah Palan's camp" issue has been niggling at me all day. I tried to google "surveyor's marks" and guess what had clogged the system? Yep.

So, thrown back on my own resources, I consulted someone who would know: a man who has a degree in cartography, has worked with surveyors and generally is more cool-headed than I am about these things. Here's his response:

Ms. Flewelling,

You asked for my professional opinion on the symbol used on Ms. Palin's map referenced in the website cited below. As a cartographer and member of the mapping profession let me offer the following opinion.

Sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.

The symbol (shaded circle centered over horizontal and vertical lines bisecting one another) is variously called target, cross-hairs, sighting graticule, or registration mark. It is used in surveying, printing, and as a generic symbol in cartography. Gun sights also have many forms open, aperture, and telescopic. The crosshairs of the Palin map are typical of the sighting mechanism used in telescopic sighting mechanisms. Those sighting mechanism are also used in surveying instruments such as theodolites, total stations and levels.

Given Ms. Palin's familiarity with hunting rifles and lack of formal training or professional licensing in land surveying I doubt that her use of the aforementioned symbol is a surveyor's mark. However, casual examination of a granola box or any other cereal, with or without, would show the printer's color registration marks and may have influenced the choice of symbol found on her map. Even then, I doubt the message of the map was that America should get its diversity of colors to align into a single harmonious picture.

Doug

Thank you, Dr. Flewelling. I still maintain that the "Don't retreat, reload!" declaration is telling, as is her referring to the marks on Twitter as "bulls eyes." So there you go.

I also reiterate that I don't think any of that caused the Arizona shooting, although the fact that her camp removed the map minutes after the shooting does make me wonder. It appears that the gunman is probably severely mentally ill, and, speaking as a person with sad and first hand knowledge of psychotic breaks, the young man was not in control of his actions. That doesn't make it any less horrifying, but let's keep things in perspective. And let me state that the vast majority of the mentally ill ARE NOT VIOLENT, at least against anyone but themselves. If, however, he starts quoting Palin, then I would change my opinion. But he hasn't to my knowledge so for now I rest on my current opinion.

As for the debate on civility in public discourse, we DO need to fix that! A million times yes! If this horrible tragedy makes people more mindful of what they say, then so much the better, but don't conflate the causes.