Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Those would be the safety programs that liberal anti gun nuts do everything they can to block, right? Maybe if those safety programs were actually widely implemented instead of vilified, children would be safer. But that won't happen because the lefts real agenda is to eliminate guns, not safety.
There are, of course, plenty of liberals who own firearms for protection, hunting, marksmanship, etc. What exactly do "liberals" do in order to prevent a private organization like the NRA from having gun safety programs? Specifically, I mean...not in the RW e-mail universe. Because that makes no sense at all: People lobbying for gun safety would wholly support such programs. There is a hunting course for young people at a local junior college, and no one has complained to date. I grew up in a family where the men hunted, and I've had squirrel, rabbit, venison, pheasant and quail. However, at no time did I know where the shotguns, rifles and handguns were kept. Never. And seriously...exactly who do you think is going to come and disarm you? There is no way that the military, National Guard, ATF, state police, county police or local police are going to obey an order (which no politician has suggested) to disarm their friends and family...ain't gonna happen. It's just another paranoid delusion used to keep the right wing gun nuts barking mad. Clearly, it works like a charm.
There are, of course, plenty of liberals who own firearms for protection, hunting, marksmanship, etc. What exactly do "liberals" do in order to prevent a private organization like the NRA from having gun safety programs? Specifically, I mean...not in the RW e-mail universe. Because that makes no sense at all: People lobbying for gun safety would wholly support such programs. There is a hunting course for young people at a local junior college, and no one has complained to date. I grew up in a family where the men hunted, and I've had squirrel, rabbit, venison, pheasant and quail. However, at no time did I know where the shotguns, rifles and handguns were kept. Never. And seriously...exactly who do you think is going to come and disarm you? There is no way that the military, National Guard, ATF, state police, county police or local police are going to obey an order (which no politician has suggested) to disarm their friends and family...ain't gonna happen. It's just another paranoid delusion used to keep the right wing gun nuts barking mad. Clearly, it works like a charm.
Orwell described a world where children turn on their parents and become informant's against their parents for the state/ new world order. tat is what the left wants and since the average leftist and a political tv watching sheep know nothing of how totalitarian structures function historically nor have they ever read the works of orwell nor do they know his history and academic works of eric blair/Orwell.
Progressives and oligarchs have agendas and the left are mental marshmallow's who will do what ever they are told that triggers their intense fear and programing.
this is exactly what I was thinking while watching, thank you!!
It is hard to tell what point they were trying to make. I do not think it could be proven that his parents were irresponsible or responsible gun owners. If you notice the kid goes right into the room and straight to the chest drawers and pulls out the gun. So I am thinking the parents could have had discussions with him about the gun, the reason for it, and for him never to touch it. It was not like the kid found it by accident or rifled the room.
The kid most likely was heavily indoctrinated by the anti any type of gun teachers and others and turned on his parents who were only looking for some kind of protection for them selves and his sorry a$$. The parents should do 2 things, it is legal for them too own gun and they should go down to the school and demand it be giving back. The second is take that sniveling brat and whip his a$$ for rifling through their personal belongings.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shankapotomus
So your point is once a parent informs a child never to touch something, the obligation then falls upon the child to behave correctly however poorly a parent stores a weapon?
You realize that invalidates the entire concept of "legal guardian", right?
sigh oh my god
somebody just shoot me
this is a situation where the child should be severely punished for stealing from his parents. was the improperly stored? perhaps, but that still does NOT give the child the right to take his parents things, EVER. theft is still theft.
And that happened under the Bush 43 administration. You're comparing apples and oranges in using a hysterical response to the after effects of a major natural disaster to illustrate what is perceived to be a far-reaching plan to disarm ALL Americans. But hyperbole is stock-in-trade for neo-cons.
So your point is once a parent informs a child never to touch something, the obligation then falls upon the child to behave correctly however poorly a parent stores a weapon?
You realize that invalidates the entire concept of "legal guardian", right?
:
No, I do not realize that. That kid is certainly old enough to have been properly trained on how to handle a gun. He can probably also bathe himself without much risk of drowning.
What if instead the kid took the parents illegal drugs and took too much and died; the same point made. Basically you have to believe the parents and the kid are stupid with the gun. Maybe not with the drug; they just may have thought it safe when it wasn't like many who die from overdoses all the time.
And that happened under the Bush 43 administration. You're comparing apples and oranges in using a hysterical response to the after effects of a major natural disaster to illustrate what is perceived to be a far-reaching plan to disarm ALL Americans. But hyperbole is stock-in-trade for neo-cons.
Bush had no input in the orders to the LA National Guard or NOLA Police. So you attempt to distract failed.
But, you're right, it never happened. And you even gave an excuse as to why it did.
What if instead the kid took the parents illegal drugs and took too much and died; the same point made. Basically you have to believe the parents and the kid are stupid with the gun. Maybe not with the drug; they just may have thought it safe when it wasn't like many who die from overdoses all the time.
Or what if he drowned in the bathtub because his Mommy did not bathe him anymore.
Bush was Commander In Chief, not that he ever did anything that wasn't pre-approved by Cheney, Rumsfeld and Rove. It happened on his watch and he was a dismal failure. Nothing says "dim bulb" like saying, "Heck of a job, Brownie," while there was a serious crisis going right under his nose. Never make someone's frat brother head of FEMA, totally w/o qualifications. People DIED because of that stupidity.
As for the AG of Maryland's remark regarding ASSAULT RIFLES, I fail to see what that has to do with either a national (and fictional) grab of ALL guns, or any kind of national policy to do so.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
