PDA

View Full Version : Dad gives son riffle for 11th birthday



mrveggieman
03-25-2013, 09:22 AM
Your thoughts:

www.youtube.com/watch?v=_vh5gamsWFA&feature=youtube_gdata_player

ensbergcollector
03-25-2013, 09:37 AM
the reaction by the police in this case is frightening. how many people instead of calling a lawyer would have just done what they were told even though they had no reason to?

mrveggieman
03-25-2013, 09:42 AM
the reaction by the police in this case is frightening. how many people instead of calling a lawyer would have just done what they were told even though they had no reason to?


Agreed. Normally I agree with a lot of what's said on the David Pakman show but I despise their anti gun attitude on there and asking why did this guy call a lawyer. So because he wants to exercise his second amendment right he should forfiet his 4th amendment rights. However taking and distributing a pic of his son holding the gun was way over the top and he was begging for trouble. Just like the preacher man who took a pic of himself in the tub with his granddaughter. Some things should remain private withing families and are not for public consumption.

MadMan1978
03-25-2013, 10:26 AM
Give a 12 year old a rifle? Are you flipping stupid???
Great point made ...his lawyer is a specialist in 2nd amendment rights?

This goes to tghe head of the class of bad parenting 101!

mrveggieman
03-25-2013, 10:34 AM
Give a 12 year old a rifle? Are you flipping stupid???
Great point made ...his lawyer is a specialist in 2nd amendment rights?

This goes to tghe head of the class of bad parenting 101!

I can somewhat agree with you. Althought I am totally against the "sport" of hunting I think that it is ok to take your kids out target shooting if they are mature enough and you taught them about the dangers and responsibilities of firearms. That being said giving your child his own riffle may have been over the top and taking a picture of it was the icing on the cake. However he did not break any laws and I have no problem with him speaking to an attorney who specializes in the second amendment. If you do not know your rights or have someone who can explain your rights to you the gov't will walk all over you.

Wickabee
03-25-2013, 10:57 AM
We should probably ban all pictures because someone somewhere will be mortified by it.

I grew up in a hunting town. Rifles aren't the problem and teaching kids properly about guns is probably better than sheltering them completely. You all know what side of this debate I'm on, but to call it bad parenting is stupid and ignorant.

habsheaven
03-25-2013, 11:08 AM
Rifles may not be the problem, but the kid's age is. Could he not have started him out with some training wheels first, maybe a pellet gun? Reminds me of the pageant mothers applying makeup/hair/clothes to their 5 year olds. Teaching them about all of it is fine, but is it AGE appropriate? That picture exemplifies the problem with the gun culture in America.

Wickabee
03-25-2013, 11:23 AM
Rifles may not be the problem, but the kid's age is. Could he not have started him out with some training wheels first, maybe a pellet gun? Reminds me of the pageant mothers applying makeup/hair/clothes to their 5 year olds. Teaching them about all of it is fine, but is it AGE appropriate? That picture exemplifies the problem with the gun culture in America.
I didn't actually watch the video (prefer to read, frankly) so I was unaware he's never had a pellet gun before this. My bad.

For the record, when I was eleven, several of my friends had their own rifles. It was always in dad's case and it was only used supervised for target shooting or hunting. Giving the kid a rifle isn't had parenting so long as it comes with education and is kept safely by the parent.

Sheltering your child from everything you personally don't like is bad parenting. I'm not saying go by you kid a gun, I'm saying don't judge parents on one thing, especially when there is nothing wrong with said act (in this case, gift giving) in and of itself.

MadMan, to call this guy a bad parent, you must be a great parent, right?

boba
03-25-2013, 11:49 AM
My parents actually bought me a semi auto 22 for chirstmas when I was 12 and took pictures of me with it. Nearly every kid where I live gets a 22 around 11-12-13, I don't see what the big deal is, maybe it's because this one looks like an assault rifle.

It's not like 11 year olds couldn't have had proper trianing, a lot of kids start shooting pellet guns when they are 8 (like me) and it's not like he's going to be shooting this without the close supervision and guidance.

Wickabee
03-25-2013, 11:54 AM
My parents actually bought me a semi auto 22 for chirstmas when I was 12 and took pictures of me with it. Nearly every kid where I live gets a 22 around 11-12-13, I don't see what the big deal is, maybe it's because this one looks like an assault rifle.

It's not like 11 year olds couldn't have had proper trianing, a lot of kids start shooting pellet guns when they are 8 (like me) and it's not like he's going to be shooting this without the close supervision and guidance.

Exactly. Giving the kid a gun is NOT bad parenting. Letting him play with it unsupervised would be. Letting him keep it in his room would be. Letting him shoot the cat would be. But just giving him the gun as a present is NOT bad parenting.

If it was a handgun, I might feel differently, but this is quite obviously a hunting/target gun. For all the talking "the left" does about "the right" being paranoid, they're looking pretty paranoid themselves in this thread.

boba
03-25-2013, 12:02 PM
Exactly. Giving the kid a gun is NOT bad parenting. Letting him play with it unsupervised would be. Letting him keep it in his room would be. Letting him shoot the cat would be. But just giving him the gun as a present is NOT bad parenting.

If it was a handgun, I might feel differently, but this is quite obviously a hunting/target gun. For all the talking "the left" does about "the right" being paranoid, they're looking pretty paranoid themselves in this thread.

Exactly. And I guess it might be worth pointing out that this gun is actually more safe than most 22 rifles as it has an adjustable stock.

centrehice
03-25-2013, 12:08 PM
The gift is not age appropriate, or life experience appropriate. I just see no need for combat rifles in the hand of civilians unless your own country is under attack with an enemy on the ground, but that's just me. It's one of those gifts that has no reason to be given.


Married men go to the peelers and it's within their constitutional rights to do so, but how many actually own one, or take one home?

*** I know what you are going to say. A certain pretty girl at the local already has all your cash *** does not mean you should bring her home for breakfast.

Appropriate choices are not made when raising children, and here is a perfect example of another one. Get the kid a set of contact lenses so that he doesn't look like such a Melvin.

Wickabee
03-25-2013, 12:14 PM
It's a hunting rifle, not a combat rifle. Give your head a shake, man.

Or maybe learn something before talking. I've never fired a gun in my life and I know taking that thing into combat would make sure you wouldn't get shot. You'd simply die of embarrassment as you comrades and enemies got together to laugh at you.

Maybe the fact that there are still people who can't tell the difference between hunting gear and military weaponry is the problem.

And topping it off by calling the kid a Melvin is really classy, Hice. Why don't you just go down there, demand they send ol' 4 eyes out and you can push him around.

MadMan1978
03-25-2013, 12:17 PM
Exactly. Giving the kid a gun is NOT bad parenting. Letting him play with it unsupervised would be. Letting him keep it in his room would be. Letting him shoot the cat would be. But just giving him the gun as a present is NOT bad parenting.

If it was a handgun, I might feel differently, but this is quite obviously a hunting/target gun. For all the talking "the left" does about "the right" being paranoid, they're looking pretty paranoid themselves in this thread.

No it just shows how kill thirsty this culture is! Shows me the right cars more about owning weapons and giving a 12 year old a rifle over the right to live! I am surprised it was a AR15! NOW you can stop blaming video games and Movies for the behaviour of children and teens. At all Begins at home!

centrehice
03-25-2013, 12:20 PM
It's a hunting rifle, not a combat rifle. Give your head a shake, man.

Or maybe learn something before talking. I've never fired a gun in my life and I know taking that thing into combat would make sure you wouldn't get shot. You'd simply die of embarrassment as you comrades and enemies got together to laugh at you.

Maybe the fact that there are still people who can't tell the difference between hunting gear and military weaponry is the problem.

And topping it off by calling the kid a Melvin is really classy, Hice. Why don't you just go down there, demand they send ol' 4 eyes out and you can push him around.


Good grief, calm down.

This is what a hunting rifle looks like:

http://media.liveauctiongroup.net/i/7633/9302285_1.jpg?v=8CC883A48A8CCA0

deansayso
03-25-2013, 12:24 PM
No it just shows how kill thirsty this culture is! Shows me the right cars more about owning weapons and giving a 12 year old a rifle over the right to live! I am surprised it was a AR15! NOW you can stop blaming video games and Movies for the behaviour of children and teens. At all Begins at home!

Giving a kid a gun and training them properly is where it all begins. Lack of respect for a weapon = lack of respect for human life. When I took hunter's safety course when I was 10 they drilled into our brains that you cannot take a bullet back after it's fired. You need to respect the gun and use it properly. If no one is shown how to shoot a gun, they will not know how to use it. It's just like pulling a random guy off the street and asking him to build you a house. He will start in on it but have no idea what he is doing or why and the house will fall down.

boba
03-25-2013, 12:26 PM
The gift is not age appropriate, or life experience appropriate. I just see no need for combat rifles in the hand of civilians unless your own country is under attack with an enemy on the ground, but that's just me. It's one of those gifts that has no reason to be given.


Married men go to the peelers and it's within their constitutional rights to do so, but how many actually own one, or take one home?

*** I know what you are going to say. A certain pretty girl at the local already has all your cash *** does not mean you should bring her home for breakfast.

Appropriate choices are not made when raising children, and here is a perfect example of another one. Get the kid a set of contact lenses so that he doesn't look like such a Melvin.

HAHA, do you know what a 22 rifle is? It's pretty much one step up from a pellet gun, no kick, no power. The ar-15 style just makes it safer for young men to use.


No it just shows how kill thirsty this culture is! Shows me the right cars more about owning weapons and giving a 12 year old a rifle over the right to live! I am surprised it was a AR15! NOW you can stop blaming video games and Movies for the behaviour of children and teens. At all Begins at home!

You've never lived in the country or the mountains before have you?


btw here is a video of a man shooting this same gun, start watching at 4:30
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6c1anh90dt0

centrehice
03-25-2013, 12:28 PM
I just looked at the photo, I had no idea it was a 22.

boba
03-25-2013, 12:29 PM
Good grief, calm down.

This is what a hunting rifle looks like:

http://media.liveauctiongroup.net/i/7633/9302285_1.jpg?v=8CC883A48A8CCA0

^ this gun is way more dangerous then the gun the kid is using as it looks to me to be a 30 aut 6. Even if it is a 22, it's still more dangerous because it doesn't have an adjustable stock.

Wickabee
03-25-2013, 12:33 PM
Good grief, calm down.

This is what a hunting rifle looks like:

http://media.liveauctiongroup.net/i/7633/9302285_1.jpg?v=8CC883A48A8CCA0

Hey, I'm not the one bullying a non-present 11 year old on the internet.

Also, I'm not the one who needs to calm down. Your buddy madman, the ever present reminder why rightists hate the left and think they're annoying and have no point, is the one who needs to stop calling people bad parents. Maybe you guys wouldn't give that gift. I wouldn't buy my daughter a Barbie since I agree it sets unrealistic standards for girls. My wife disagrees and I'm going to be the one to give in because I know I can use that model to teach her that body image will always be an issue, especially for women, and that these sorts of things are just dolls, not something to strive for.

You guys would divorce her and shelter your kids so that when they did come across it, they'd have zero knowledge and zero context. THAT is bad parenting.

habsheaven
03-25-2013, 12:36 PM
I just watched the video. I think everyone in the story acted responsibly. I would only question what the motive of the parent was in posting the picture on a social network? You would think he was just updating friends and family until you realize that his lawyer is a 2nd amendment specialist. Seems to me the father was looking for attention and found it.

MadMan1978
03-25-2013, 12:38 PM
HAHA, do you know what a 22 rifle is? It's pretty much one step up from a pellet gun, no kick, no power. The ar-15 style just makes it safer for young men to use.



You've never lived in the country or the mountains before have you?


btw here is a video of a man shooting this same gun, start watching at 4:30
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6c1anh90dt0



I grew up in Falls Village CT pop of 1800 maybe
I know more about country then you will ever know. And yes the family and other family members all owned HUNTING rifles.

WHERE DOES IT END? Whats next?

habsheaven
03-25-2013, 12:41 PM
Hey, I'm not the one bullying a non-present 11 year old on the internet.

Also, I'm not the one who needs to calm down. Your buddy madman, the ever present reminder why rightists hate the left and think they're annoying and have no point, is the one who needs to stop calling people bad parents. Maybe you guys wouldn't give that gift. I wouldn't buy my daughter a Barbie since I agree it sets unrealistic standards for girls. My wife disagrees and I'm going to be the one to give in because I know I can use that model to teach her that body image will always be an issue, especially for women, and that these sorts of things are just dolls, not something to strive for.

You guys would divorce her and shelter your kids so that when they did come across it, they'd have zero knowledge and zero context. THAT is bad parenting.Wickabee - trust me, just let your daughter play with the darn Barbie. No need to make a lesson out of it. Keep the serious discussions about body image for the constant bombardment of media that she is going to encounter. Now back to the regular topic. lol

Wickabee
03-25-2013, 01:01 PM
Wickabee - trust me, just let your daughter play with the darn Barbie. No need to make a lesson out of it. Keep the serious discussions about body image for the constant bombardment of media that she is going to encounter. Now back to the regular topic. lol

It's not like I'm gonna be on her about it 24/7. Not everything is all or nothing.

If you want to leave stuff like body image, which is at the heart of many mental issues for women, to the media and have your kids learn what they teach, that's your business and I won't say two words about it. Personally, I see my kids as my responsibility and will teach them as I see fit.

As for posting the picture on a social site, why does anyone post any picture anywhere. I doubt he was looking for attention but was simply posting a picture of his kid, smiling on his birthday and showing off his new gift. If it was a RC car, there'd be no question, but because it's a gun and others made a stink, he must have been using his son's birthday to make a political statement.

Man, the accusations are flying in this one, even from the guy who admits they acted responsibly. Who's looking for political attention? Seems to me like everyone but him. Remind me never to post pictures from my daughter's birthday. Jeez.

Wickabee
03-25-2013, 01:09 PM
I grew up in Falls Village CT pop of 1800 maybe
I know more about country then you will ever know. And yes the family and other family members all owned HUNTING rifles.

WHERE DOES IT END? Whats next?
Either that's complete bull or you're insane. If you did grow up country, you'd realize that hunters and hunting rifles aren't even part of the problem. If you didn't you'd scream "WHERE DOES IT END?" like the issue of gun violence has anything to do with hunting. What's next, "THINK OF THE CHILDREN!"?
So dramatic with no point. Not liking this theme.

habsheaven
03-25-2013, 01:44 PM
It's not like I'm gonna be on her about it 24/7. Not everything is all or nothing.

If you want to leave stuff like body image, which is at the heart of many mental issues for women, to the media and have your kids learn what they teach, that's your business and I won't say two words about it. Personally, I see my kids as my responsibility and will teach them as I see fit.

As for posting the picture on a social site, why does anyone post any picture anywhere. I doubt he was looking for attention but was simply posting a picture of his kid, smiling on his birthday and showing off his new gift. If it was a RC car, there'd be no question, but because it's a gun and others made a stink, he must have been using his son's birthday to make a political statement.

Man, the accusations are flying in this one, even from the guy who admits they acted responsibly. Who's looking for political attention? Seems to me like everyone but him. Remind me never to post pictures from my daughter's birthday. Jeez.First bold: Wick, check it again. That's not what I said. Second bold: HIS lawyer is an EXPERT on the 2nd amendment, what are the odds? It wasn't an accusation, more speculation than anything.

Wickabee
03-25-2013, 01:47 PM
First bold: Wick, check it again. That's not what I said. Second bold: HIS lawyer is an EXPERT on the 2nd amendment, what are the odds? It wasn't an accusation, more speculation than anything.

The odds? In the US? I would guess finding a second amendment lawyer is about as tough as finding a divorce or accident lawyer.

Wickabee
03-25-2013, 01:50 PM
I read. You said to leave any teaching about body image to the media and that I shouldn't bother. If there's something you forgot to add, please let me in on it. If not, I fail to see what mistake you made. Or were you saying wait until she sees a Barbie commercial or some magazine ad? If so, you didn't really say that, but whatever.

habsheaven
03-25-2013, 01:56 PM
I read. You said to leave any teaching about body image to the media and that I shouldn't bother. If there's something you forgot to add, please let me in on it. If not, I fail to see what mistake you made. Or were you saying wait until she sees a Barbie commercial or some magazine ad? If so, you didn't really say that, but whatever. Yes, I really did say that. You just can't read anything I say in a positive manner. SMH.

Wickabee
03-25-2013, 02:05 PM
Yes, I really did say that. You just can't read anything I say in a positive manner. SMH.

I read it perfectly fine. Unfortunately, tone of voice doesn't carry through type. You should know by now that I can't hear or see you, so I can only go by your words. Your words said leave it for the media.
The difference here is I went by your words, and even managed to interpret what you meant over the words you used, and you sit there and tell me I read it wrong. I looked for a solution, you passed blame. I look for positive, you point out the (nonexistent) negative, and then say I'm the negative one. Forgive me if that makes little sense.

Back to topic, since none of this was my point and I've once again allowed myself to by dragged down into a semantics argument, my point still stands. Sheltering is bad parenting. Teaching is good parenting. Why you needed to sidetrack onto Barbie when that was just an example is beyond me, but I'm no expert on the thought processes of others, so I'm not going to smack my head (is: I won't call you an idiot in a veiled manner) because it's unnecessary and, frankly, pointless.

habsheaven
03-25-2013, 02:40 PM
I read it perfectly fine. Unfortunately, tone of voice doesn't carry through type. You should know by now that I can't hear or see you, so I can only go by your words. Your words said leave it for the media.
The difference here is I went by your words, and even managed to interpret what you meant over the words you used, and you sit there and tell me I read it wrong. I looked for a solution, you passed blame. I look for positive, you point out the (nonexistent) negative, and then say I'm the negative one. Forgive me if that makes little sense.

Back to topic, since none of this was my point and I've once again allowed myself to by dragged down into a semantics argument, my point still stands. Sheltering is bad parenting. Teaching is good parenting. Why you needed to sidetrack onto Barbie when that was just an example is beyond me, but I'm no expert on the thought processes of others, so I'm not going to smack my head (is: I won't call you an idiot in a veiled manner) because it's unnecessary and, frankly, pointless.Here is exactly what I said. "Keep the serious discussions about body image for the constant bombardment of media that she is going to encounter." How you interpreted that to mean "leave it to the media", is beyond my comprehension? Who would your daughter have "discussions" with, you or the media? How do you confuse "constant bombardment" with "discussion"? Trying to converse with you is TOXIC. Even when I try to give you some friendly advice you twist it into an attack. Back to the topic and your point. Yes, teaching is definitely better than sheltering. What is being taught in this situation is the question and more to the point at what age it is being taught.

Wickabee
03-25-2013, 04:08 PM
Here is exactly what I said. "Keep the serious discussions about body image for the constant bombardment of media that she is going to encounter." How you interpreted that to mean "leave it to the media", is beyond my comprehension? Who would your daughter have "discussions" with, you or the media? How do you confuse "constant bombardment" with "discussion"? Trying to converse with you is TOXIC. Even when I try to give you some friendly advice you twist it into an attack. Back to the topic and your point. Yes, teaching is definitely better than sheltering. What is being taught in this situation is the question and more to the point at what age it is being taught.
Oh, so you only want the media to determine when I teach my kids. That's no better, really.

Also, Barbie is part of the constant media barrage. Actually, calling it a media barrage is misleading. It's a societal barrage that has way too much power because parents aren't teaching their kids anything until the 6 o'clock news tells them to.

So fine, I got it wrong, my bad. I still think you're off base for the same reasons and I still think you're hellbent on arguing semantics every time I post.

centrehice
03-25-2013, 05:24 PM
How did this discussion end up at Barbies?

Barbies don't take lives, and don't require training, permits, or a sound mind - that's all I will say in the matter.

Wickabee
03-25-2013, 06:13 PM
How did this discussion end up at Barbies?

Barbies don't take lives, and don't require training, permits, or a sound mind - that's all I will say in the matter.

It got to Barbie because I used it as an example and Habs thought it was the point, apparently.

I'll also say that "age appropriate" is a misnomer. Appropriate has nothing to do with age and everything to do with maturity. My guess is that kid is more mature than some people on these boards.

ensbergcollector
03-25-2013, 07:40 PM
i was given my first .22 when i was ten. it taught me responsibility with a firearm as well as respect for guns and what they can do. What is better for a kid growing up in a house with guns? to be ignored and not taught until they are adults or for them to be given gradual responsibility so that they can learn as they grow?

habsheaven
03-25-2013, 09:38 PM
i was given my first .22 when i was ten. it taught me responsibility with a firearm as well as respect for guns and what they can do. What is better for a kid growing up in a house with guns? to be ignored and not taught until they are adults or for them to be given gradual responsibility so that they can learn as they grow? So your parents bought you a .22 at the age of ten and from that point on you learnt responsibility and respect for guns? Perhaps you should have learnt to respect them before you were given one of your own? To answer your question though. I will ask my own. This kid growing up in a house of guns is is probably also growing up in a house of alcohol, sex and possibly tobacco. Should this kid be exposed to those things too in an attempt to teach them responsibility? Surely they can start learning to handle their liquor gradually rather than being exposed to it all at once when they are legal and supposedly mature enough for it.

FioreSA
03-25-2013, 09:49 PM
one thing to note, the kid has his finger straight and off the trigger.

the kid also has the rifle pointed upward and away. these are signs that he has saftey training.

owning a firearm is a responsibility and from that picture, the kid is looking responsible. Teaching children responsibility and educating them about firearms is good parenting and not bad.

i'm for this, provided that saftey and respect are taught, which they look like they are. Having a gun safe is also another indication that this is responsible.

ensbergcollector
03-25-2013, 09:52 PM
So your parents bought you a .22 at the age of ten and from that point on you learnt responsibility and respect for guns? Perhaps you should have learnt to respect them before you were given one of your own? To answer your question though. I will ask my own. This kid growing up in a house of guns is is probably also growing up in a house of alcohol, sex and possibly tobacco. Should this kid be exposed to those things too in an attempt to teach them responsibility? Surely they can start learning to handle their liquor gradually rather than being exposed to it all at once when they are legal and supposedly mature enough for it.

no, i was taught responsibility both before and after. I had shown responsibility which led to me receiving a .22 when i was 10. when i was 15 i was given my shotgun and deer rifle.

let me ask you a question. at what age should a kid be exposed to and allowed to use different types of guns? should kids have no exposure until they are 18 and they can do whatever they want with them? would that lead to responsible gun habits and practices?

habsheaven
03-25-2013, 11:03 PM
no, i was taught responsibility both before and after. I had shown responsibility which led to me receiving a .22 when i was 10. when i was 15 i was given my shotgun and deer rifle.

let me ask you a question. at what age should a kid be exposed to and allowed to use different types of guns? should kids have no exposure until they are 18 and they can do whatever they want with them? would that lead to responsible gun habits and practices?

IMO, it should be a gradual progression and I think 10 is too young for anything more than a pellet gun. If society deems 16 to be the age to begin trusting children with a vehicle, I don't think it is too much of a stretch to expect children to be kept away from weapons that can kill until they are a similar age.

xpucksx
03-25-2013, 11:17 PM
hopefully the kid only hurts himself or his parents when he messes up and fires the thing off wrong, or when a non gun responsible person breaks into the home and gets a hold of the gun...

it's not the responsible people that do the damage with all of these guns, and unfortunately, the responsible and knowledgeable ones are out numbered 1000-1 here in the states...

Wickabee
03-25-2013, 11:38 PM
Am I alone in assuming it will be stored the same as, and with, dads guns?

xpucksx
03-26-2013, 12:02 AM
while we all hope they will be stored in a gun safe, there are multitudes of instances where gun safes are breached.

To me, the bigger issue to this whole thing is that "if you surround yourself with water, you WILL get wet." There is no failsafe for idiocy and stupidity, and as long as there is one uneducated moron in the world, we are all in danger. The chnce for chaotic volatility is still there. This kids level of gun education is moot if his friend from down the street gets hold of the gun somehow and accidentally fires it off, or drops it. The only way to assure the calm is to take away the unstable element, which is the gun, or more specifically, the ammo

boba
03-26-2013, 01:37 AM
I'm shocked at the response this has gotten. I mean, if this is so irresponsible and dangerous where are all the stories of kids shooting others or themselves, a ton of kids get-shoot guns at a young age. 12 year olds are very capable, and if you give young people responsibilities they will exceed. It all goes back to the dumbing down of our kids now. Not too long ago the average naval officer was 12-18.

habsheaven
03-26-2013, 07:48 AM
I'm shocked at the response this has gotten. I mean, if this is so irresponsible and dangerous where are all the stories of kids shooting others or themselves, a ton of kids get-shoot guns at a young age. 12 year olds are very capable, and if you give young people responsibilities they will exceed. It all goes back to the dumbing down of our kids now. Not too long ago the average naval officer was 12-18.As far as I can tell we STILL have kids armed with guns fighting wars around the world. Are you suggesting a 15 year old naval officer is a good thing? Are we dumbing down are kids in the areas of tobacco, sex and driving too?

Star_Cards
03-26-2013, 09:17 AM
I didn't watch the video, but I don;t really have an issue with the gift. Now, that's assuming that the kid is restricted of it's use and isn't sleeping with it under his pillow or carrying it around like a favorite toy. I don't know for sure, but I think it's a safe bet that he is not. I'd assume that the parents only allow him to use it under supervision and it's not being stored in his room. I assume it will be stored properly with his dad's gun. As long as this is the case I don't have an issue a parent giving a gun to his child.

Wickabee
03-26-2013, 09:51 AM
while we all hope they will be stored in a gun safe, there are multitudes of instances where gun safes are breached.

To me, the bigger issue to this whole thing is that "if you surround yourself with water, you WILL get wet." There is no failsafe for idiocy and stupidity, and as long as there is one uneducated moron in the world, we are all in danger. The chnce for chaotic volatility is still there. This kids level of gun education is moot if his friend from down the street gets hold of the gun somehow and accidentally fires it off, or drops it. The only way to assure the calm is to take away the unstable element, which is the gun, or more specifically, the ammo
I think the much larger societal issue here are the people willing to write someone off as a bad parent based on an assumption.

GroundSupport
03-26-2013, 10:36 AM
Good For Dad.

This is America. Better to train his kids right when they are young.

mrveggieman
03-26-2013, 10:42 AM
hopefully the kid only hurts himself or his parents when he messes up and fires the thing off wrong, or when a non gun responsible person breaks into the home and gets a hold of the gun...

it's not the responsible people that do the damage with all of these guns, and unfortunately, the responsible and knowledgeable ones are out numbered 1000-1 here in the states...


Dude are you serious? Let's hope and pray no one gets hurt in the name of your political agenda.

habsheaven
03-26-2013, 10:47 AM
Good to see the gun culture in the States is alive and thriving. Keep up the good work dad!

Wickabee
03-26-2013, 10:55 AM
Dude are you serious? Let's hope and pray no one gets hurt in the name of your political agenda.

But screaming that he's a bad parent based on a gift is ok?

ensbergcollector
03-26-2013, 10:58 AM
Good to see the gun culture in the States is alive and thriving. Keep up the good work dad!

this isn't about gun culture in the states. from the invention of guns as hunting tools until about 20 years ago this would be common practice and not only was it accepted, it was expected and led to responsible gun ownership.

society is crap, why should society get to deem when it is appropriate for a person to have a gun? I know ten year olds that I would trust with a gun more than numerous adults. It isn't about age. Shooting is more about maturity, education, and responsibility then it is about age. I feel safer hunting with a responsible 12-13 year old then a 25 year old with no training who just went and bought a gun because he could.

Wickabee
03-26-2013, 11:06 AM
this isn't about gun culture in the states. from the invention of guns as hunting tools until about 20 years ago this would be common practice and not only was it accepted, it was expected and led to responsible gun ownership.

society is crap, why should society get to deem when it is appropriate for a person to have a gun? I know ten year olds that I would trust with a gun more than numerous adults. It isn't about age. Shooting is more about maturity, education, and responsibility then it is about age. I feel safer hunting with a responsible 12-13 year old then a 25 year old with no training who just went and bought a gun because he could.

Dude! Yes

Except for the bit about society. Society has to decide these things or we have anarchy. Society changed it's mind over the years, but failed to put any thought into the process. That's why we have people who buy gifts and post proud pictures of their children being called bad parents. Society doesn't think, it reacts.

mrveggieman
03-26-2013, 11:13 AM
But screaming that he's a bad parent based on a gift is ok?

I personally didn't think he was a bad parent for teaching his son about firearms I just disagree with him putting his son on display on a social networking site with the pic of him holding the gun.

Wickabee
03-26-2013, 11:17 AM
I personally didn't think he was a bad parent for teaching his son about firearms I just disagree with him putting his son on display on a social networking site with the pic of him holding the gun.

So a father, proud of his son and the fact that his kid loves his gift posting a picture of his son is wrong.

You're insane if you truly believe that. Really flippin'' crazy. If he shouldn't post that picture, then he shouldn't post any picture ever. I sure won't from now on. People like you take everything and twist it into something sinister. Your mind is warped, not his, if you think posting that picture is wrong. Seriously twisted.

mrveggieman
03-26-2013, 11:21 AM
So a father, proud of his son and the fact that his kid loves his gift posting a picture of his son is wrong.

You're insane if you truly believe that. Really flippin'' crazy. If he shouldn't post that picture, then he shouldn't post any picture ever. I sure won't from now on. People like you take everything and twist it into something sinister. Your mind is warped, not his, if you think posting that picture is wrong. Seriously twisted.

I personally couldn't give a damn about what pics that man posts of his son online. However he (just like the preacherman that we previously discussed) should not be shocked when everyone else makes a stink about it.

GroundSupport
03-26-2013, 11:21 AM
So a father, proud of his son and the fact that his kid loves his gift posting a picture of his son is wrong.

You're insane if you truly believe that. Really flippin'' crazy. If he shouldn't post that picture, then he shouldn't post any picture ever. I sure won't from now on. People like you take everything and twist it into something sinister. Your mind is warped, not his, if you think posting that picture is wrong. Seriously twisted.

Says who? You?

Have you ever shot a rifle before? Killed Game and fed your family for weeks/months?

Protect yourself against criminals and tyranny?

Wickabee
03-26-2013, 11:28 AM
Says who? You?

Have you ever shot a rifle before? Killed Game and fed your family for weeks/months?

Protect yourself against criminals and tyranny?

Mum...you do realize I'm arguing against the anti gun brigade in this thread, right?
You do realize I'm the one saying he's not a bad father for buying his kid a rifle, right?
You do realize I'm the one person assuming it will be properly stored and used for hunting and targets, right?

So now you realize why that post is really stupid, right? To be honest, I have no idea how that's even a response to what I said. Can anyone help me with that? It's just a bunch of random words witty some question marks.

I will say, though, you're what's wrong with debate in America. You don't even know what argument you're in and who you're arguing against. Maybe read the thread, figure out the most basic of basics, then come back and explain why your post makes no sense whatsoever.

Crap, my post wasn't even about guns it was about pictures. Epic fail on your part.

habsheaven
03-26-2013, 11:38 AM
this isn't about gun culture in the states. from the invention of guns as hunting tools until about 20 years ago this would be common practice and not only was it accepted, it was expected and led to responsible gun ownership.

society is crap, why should society get to deem when it is appropriate for a person to have a gun? I know ten year olds that I would trust with a gun more than numerous adults. It isn't about age. Shooting is more about maturity, education, and responsibility then it is about age. I feel safer hunting with a responsible 12-13 year old then a 25 year old with no training who just went and bought a gun because he could.If you haven't noticed, that gun culture you speak of has changed over the last 20 years. The gun he is holding would have looked like a hunting rifle, not something off of a video game used to mow down his enemies. You ask, "why should society get to deem when it is appropriate"? Are you serious? That's the essence of what "society" is. Without society, you have chaos. Maybe dad can loan his responsible son the car so he can drive it to the store and buy some more ammo. The brain of a 12 year old is a long way from being fully developed. Too many people confuse a well-mannered, responsible child as being mature. Just as age doesn't define maturity, neither does behaviour. If it did, your stance shouldn't change if it's a well-behaved 6 year old either, right?

boba
03-26-2013, 11:49 AM
If you haven't noticed, that gun culture you speak of has changed over the last 20 years. The gun he is holding would have looked like a hunting rifle, not something off of a video game used to mow down his enemies. You ask, "why should society get to deem when it is appropriate"? Are you serious? That's the essence of what "society" is. Without society, you have chaos. Maybe dad can loan his responsible son the car so he can drive it to the store and buy some more ammo. The brain of a 12 year old is a long way from being fully developed. Too many people confuse a well-mannered, responsible child as being mature. Just as age doesn't define maturity, neither does behaviour. If it did, your stance shouldn't change if it's a well-behaved 6 year old either, right?

So you're more worried about how the gun looks than the safety of the gun. 20 years ago that "gun that looks like a hunting rifle" was a lot more dangerous than this gun. This is one of the safest guns you can use, and for it to be this safe, it needs to look like it does, adjustable stock, air releasing barrel ect.

Wickabee
03-26-2013, 11:52 AM
So you're more worried about how the gun looks than the safety of the gun. 20 years ago that "gun that looks like a hunting rifle" was a lot more dangerous than this gun. This is one of the safest guns you can use, and for it to be this safe, it needs to look like it does, adjustable stock, air releasing barrel ect.

Funny how putting a little thought into it instead of just reacting brings people to reasonable conclusions like this.

habsheaven
03-26-2013, 12:09 PM
So you're more worried about how the gun looks than the safety of the gun. 20 years ago that "gun that looks like a hunting rifle" was a lot more dangerous than this gun. This is one of the safest guns you can use, and for it to be this safe, it needs to look like it does, adjustable stock, air releasing barrel ect.
No, I'm more worried about the message this father is giving to his son (who may come to him in two weeks to ask about puberty) that says you are ready to handle a weapon that can kill. I'm more worried about what it takes to impress him on his 15th birthday. I'm more worried about him growing up "clutching" his guns when presented with disappointments in life.

Wickabee
03-26-2013, 12:35 PM
No, I'm more worried about the message this father is giving to his son (who may come to him in two weeks to ask about puberty) that says you are ready to handle a weapon that can kill. I'm more worried about what it takes to impress him on his 15th birthday. I'm more worried about him growing up "clutching" his guns when presented with disappointments in life.

What about this story in particular says all that to you. We have a father who hunts, and likely has taken his son along many times, giving him his own gun. How does that send a message to clutch your guns when disappointed? To me it says clutch your gun when you're hungry.

When I was a kid, my dad bought me a fishing pole. That pole went away with his rods because that's where the rods were kept. Why anyone would automatically assume this guy is going to let him sleep with it is beyond me. However, what is that rod used for? Essentially, to hunt fish. To use an implement to take a life. By getting that fishing pole, was I sent the message that the rod is a weapon? No. I got the message that, from now on, whenever I went fishing with my dad I got to use "my own" fishing rod.

And that's probably exactly what this was. A dad into hunting getting his son into his own hobby and a kid happy to have "his own" gun. Nothing more. Nothing sinister or political about it. You guys are here, though, coming up with anything you can to make this something sinister and political.

Who's really in the wrong there? Honestly, veg is the only one I understand having a problem with this story at all, being what his stance on hunting and eating meat is, but even he's going nuts over someone posting a picture of their happy child on the internet. I will say, if what people assume on here is any indication of how they would act, I'm glad the anti gun brigade is anti gun. You guys would just leave them lying on the front lawn, since that's what you assume everyone else does.

mrveggieman
03-26-2013, 12:40 PM
What about this story in particular says all that to you. We have a father who hunts, and likely has taken his son along many times, giving him his own gun. How does that send a message to clutch your guns when disappointed? To me it says clutch your gun when you're hungry.

When I was a kid, my dad bought me a fishing pole. That pole went away with his rods because that's where the rods were kept. Why anyone would automatically assume this guy is going to let him sleep with it is beyond me. However, what is that rod used for? Essentially, to hunt fish. To use an implement to take a life. By getting that fishing pole, was I sent the message that the rod is a weapon? No. I got the message that, from now on, whenever I went fishing with my dad I got to use "my own" fishing rod.

And that's probably exactly what this was. A dad into hunting getting his son into his own hobby and a kid happy to have "his own" gun. Nothing more. Nothing sinister or political about it. You guys are here, though, coming up with anything you can to make this something sinister and political.

Who's really in the wrong there? Honestly, veg is the only one I understand having a problem with this story at all, being what his stance on hunting and eating meat is, but even he's going nuts over someone posting a picture of their happy child on the internet. I will say, if what people assume on here is any indication of how they would act, I'm glad the anti gun brigade is anti gun. You guys would just leave them lying on the front lawn, since that's what you assume everyone else does.

The guy has every right to post whatever picture he likes but when you post pics on the web don't be suprised when people are critical of them. And you are right I am totally against hunting (but not firearms and shooting in general) or the killing of any animal that is not in self defense.

Wickabee
03-26-2013, 12:43 PM
The guy has every right to post whatever picture he likes but when you post pics on the web don't be suprised when people are critical of them. And you are right I am totally against hunting (but not firearms and shooting in general) or the killing of any animal that is not in self defense.

So if I give my daughter a rod and reel for Christmas and post a picture online, I should expect blowback? I mean, this is a hunting rifle. It's meant to kill animals. So is a fishing rod.

So if I do that, I should expect to be called a bad parent and stupid for posting the picture?

That's the single STUPIDEST (us, that's yelling) thing I've heard today outside of the new Benghazi thread.

mrveggieman
03-26-2013, 12:47 PM
So if I give my daughter a rod and reel for Christmas and post a picture online, I should expect blowback? I mean, this is a hunting rifle. It's meant to kill animals. So is a fishing rod.

So if I do that, I should expect to be called a bad parent and stupid for posting the picture?

That's the single STUPIDEST (us, that's yelling) thing I've heard today outside of the new Benghazi thread.

People have posted pics of them taking their kids to church and have gotton blowback. It's the internet stuff happens. You do have to right to post within reason whatever you like of yourself and your kids online but just because you have the legal right to do something dosen't always make it the right thing to do.

xpucksx
03-26-2013, 01:39 PM
Dude are you serious? Let's hope and pray no one gets hurt in the name of your political agenda.

I am serious in the fact that I hope that no innocent people are caught up in the obvious ignorance and stupidity of this decision. And it has nothing to do with a ploitical agenda, i has to do with the fact that i am sick of people in this country suffering at the hands of other peoples jack-assery, with guns, drinking, fraud...it doesn't matter to me what the medium is

Do you know what other countries arm their children? Hmmmmm....IRAN, PAKISTAN, AFGHANISTAN, SOMALIA, YEMEN, SYRIA, ....I thought that only crazy terrorists did stuff like this.

xpucksx
03-26-2013, 01:51 PM
So if I give my daughter a rod and reel for Christmas and post a picture online, I should expect blowback? I mean, this is a hunting rifle. It's meant to kill animals. So is a fishing rod.

So if I do that, I should expect to be called a bad parent and stupid for posting the picture?

That's the single STUPIDEST (us, that's yelling) thing I've heard today outside of the new Benghazi thread.

I will preface this by saying that I am with you on 100% of the topics posted here...and I see your point

but you can't kill massive amounts of people indiscriminately and off the cuff with a fishing rod. The potential for thoughtless chaos is much different. At least for me, that is the issue. It is not an issue of supplying food to your family etc. It is an issue of reactionary decisions and how they can effect others.

Wickabee
03-26-2013, 02:13 PM
I will preface this by saying that I am with you on 100% of the topics posted here...and I see your point

but you can't kill massive amounts of people indiscriminately and off the cuff with a fishing rod. The potential for thoughtless chaos is much different. At least for me, that is the issue. It is not an issue of supplying food to your family etc. It is an issue of reactionary decisions and how they can effect others.
No I understand that point. What I don't understand is the thinking that this is irresponsible and the automatic assumption that because the gun is now "his" he's going to take it to school and the mall. The thinking that giving him a hunting rifle sends some sort of message about actual gun violence makes no sense to me.
What bothers me most is how willing some people are to call the father a bad parent because he bought his kid a hunting rifle. It's use is the same as that fishing rod I got. There is nothing to suggest he is an irresponsible gun owner or that his kid will actually be in possession of the gun unsupervised. Those things would make him a bad parent. If the kid was holding liquor, cigarettes or porn, that would make him a bad parent. This gift does not. Most likely it is a successful attempt at bonding with his son.

I also do not understand how posting this picture deserved any blowback. Again, this is a happy moment. A family moment. People looking to turn that into something sinister like a political statement or poor parenting sicken me, quite frankly.

Star_Cards
03-26-2013, 02:22 PM
excellent post. I'm envisioning people thinking this kid is running around the neighborhood with his gun like it's his favorite toy, leaving it in the yard over night like a bike or scooter. lol

maybe, just maybe this gun will help form a stronger bond with his father and teach him responsibility of taking care of the gun, like cleaning it, carrying it correctly when they are taking it to shoot, and strong in the safe and proper places when not in use. I myself have very find memories of fishing with my dad. It's not exactly the same since the implement isn't as dangerous, but there are positives that come from these sorts of things.

habsheaven
03-26-2013, 02:33 PM
excellent post. I'm envisioning people thinking this kid is running around the neighborhood with his gun like it's his favorite toy, leaving it in the yard over night like a bike or scooter. lol

maybe, just maybe this gun will help form a stronger bond with his father and teach him responsibility of taking care of the gun, like cleaning it, carrying it correctly when they are taking it to shoot, and strong in the safe and proper places when not in use. I myself have very find memories of fishing with my dad. It's not exactly the same since the implement isn't as dangerous, but there are positives that come from these sorts of things. So would a puppy. Let me ask you this. What age is too young to have your own gun?

Wickabee
03-26-2013, 02:45 PM
So would a puppy. Let me ask you this. What age is too young to have your own gun?

Is it age or maturity that matters?
Can you put a number to maturity?
If the father bought himself the gun and let the kid, and only the kid, use it when they went hunting, would this still be horrible?

duane1969
03-26-2013, 06:32 PM
I couldn't read this entire thread. Too much lack of knowledge and silliness for me.

1) Educate yourselves. A .22 rifle IS NOT an assault rifle. Because it looks like an assault rifle does not make it an assault rifle. If you take a VW bus and put a Ferrari body on it you do not suddenly have a Ferrari, you have a VW bus that looks like a Ferrari.

2) Calling someone a bad parent because they bought their kid a .22 rifle is a joke. Millions of parents buy their kids 4-wheelers, dirt bikes, go-karts, electric scooters and skateboards every year and those purchases result in the injury, maiming and death of MANY, MANY more kids than the kids that are injured, maimed or killed because their parents bought them a gun. If this guy is a bad parent then anybody who bought their kid any of the aforementioned items is a horrible parent.

3) At least try to know something about the father before bashing him. He is an NRA gun safety trainer. My guess is his kid could handle a gun more safely than every bleeding heart liberal in here combined. Considering most of you still buy into the idiotic concept that guns kill people, I would feel 1000 times more safe around him that around you because he already knows more about guns that you do, so he clearly will be more safe to be around.

habsheaven
03-26-2013, 07:49 PM
I couldn't read this entire thread. Too much lack of knowledge and silliness for me.

1) Educate yourselves. A .22 rifle IS NOT an assault rifle. Because it looks like an assault rifle does not make it an assault rifle. If you take a VW bus and put a Ferrari body on it you do not suddenly have a Ferrari, you have a VW bus that looks like a Ferrari.

2) Calling someone a bad parent because they bought their kid a .22 rifle is a joke. Millions of parents buy their kids 4-wheelers, dirt bikes, go-karts, electric scooters and skateboards every year and those purchases result in the injury, maiming and death of MANY, MANY more kids than the kids that are injured, maimed or killed because their parents bought them a gun. If this guy is a bad parent then anybody who bought their kid any of the aforementioned items is a horrible parent.

3) At least try to know something about the father before bashing him. He is an NRA gun safety trainer. My guess is his kid could handle a gun more safely than every bleeding heart liberal in here combined. Considering most of you still buy into the idiotic concept that guns kill people, I would feel 1000 times more safe around him that around you because he already knows more about guns that you do, so he clearly will be more safe to be around.Perhaps you should try to know something about all the bleeding heart liberals on here before you bash them. The only idiocy I see here is a father that thinks his preteen is man enough to own a weapon that can kill. And to let him pose with a weapon that resembles something more than it is. It's terrible optics and matches up perfectly with the idiotic gun culture this NRA gun safety trainer is bathing himself and his son in.

FioreSA
03-26-2013, 07:52 PM
you know i was in the boy scouts and shot my first .22 at camp wolfbero when i was 12 - 13.....just saying

Wickabee
03-26-2013, 08:11 PM
Perhaps you should try to know something about all the bleeding heart liberals on here before you bash them. The only idiocy I see here is a father that thinks his preteen is man enough to own a weapon that can kill. And to let him pose with a weapon that resembles something more than it is. It's terrible optics and matches up perfectly with the idiotic gun culture this NRA gun safety trainer is bathing himself and his son in.
Again if you think it's really in the kid's possession and not the father's I have to wonder why you think that. My rod was kept with my dad's, why assume this would different. I don't get that.

ensbergcollector
03-27-2013, 09:27 AM
i said before and I will say again. age doesn't equal responsibility or maturity. At 21 anyone without a record can go buy a gun. I feel much safer around a 12 year old who has been raised correctly then a 21 year old with no experience who just happens to be old enough to buy a gun.

mrveggieman
03-27-2013, 09:36 AM
i said before and I will say again. age doesn't equal responsibility or maturity. At 21 anyone without a record can go buy a gun. I feel much safer around a 12 year old who has been raised correctly then a 21 year old with no experience who just happens to be old enough to buy a gun.


That is exactly what I have a problem with. Listen I will support and defend the second amendment (along with all my other consitutional rights) to the death but it makes 0 sense that someone has to pass a written and road test to prove that they can safely operate a motor vechicle but there is no testing required for a firearm.

Wickabee
03-27-2013, 10:02 AM
Would anyone be up in arms if he gave his kid a car?

habsheaven
03-27-2013, 10:05 AM
i said before and I will say again. age doesn't equal responsibility or maturity. At 21 anyone without a record can go buy a gun. I feel much safer around a 12 year old who has been raised correctly then a 21 year old with no experience who just happens to be old enough to buy a gun. Age doesn't equal responsibility or maturity to a certain extent. It is a major factor though, especially when it comes to the developmental stage of a young person's mind. It is easy to confuse "good behaviour under controlled circumstances" as "maturity". There are reasons we have laws limiting minors access to certain products. If there are no laws in place to prohibit 11 year olds from owning weapons capable of killing, we all know why. It's not because it wouldn't be right; it's because the politicians wouldn't enact anything that might harm their career.

xpucksx
03-27-2013, 10:07 AM
2) Calling someone a bad parent because they bought their kid a .22 rifle is a joke. Millions of parents buy their kids 4-wheelers, dirt bikes, go-karts, electric scooters and skateboards every year and those purchases result in the injury, maiming and death of MANY, MANY more kids than the kids that are injured, maimed or killed because their parents bought them a gun. If this guy is a bad parent then anybody who bought their kid any of the aforementioned items is a horrible parent.

BUT, I have NEVER heard of an incident where someone got hold of a skateboard (or dirtbike;go-kart;scooter;baseball bat...whatever) and killed multiple amounts of people at one time in a reactionary and ill-planned manner. The issue for me is not the age or pre-training that people receive. It is the fact that a gun makes killing impersonal. It is too much power in the hands of ANYONE, trained or not. Most people who kill with a gun DO NOT have to actually be part of the moment where the victim actually dies...they don't have to experience the fear, pain and helplessness when the victims ability to survive is compromised, and the victim realizes it. Shooting something is the weakest, least "manly" way to take a life. The shooter is too afraid to actually have to face the fact that they are snuffing out a life. Shooting is VERY selfish in any situation...



3) At least try to know something about the father before bashing him. He is an NRA gun safety trainer. My guess is his kid could handle a gun more safely than every bleeding heart liberal in here combined. Considering most of you still buy into the idiotic concept that guns kill people, I would feel 1000 times more safe around him that around you because he already knows more about guns that you do, so he clearly will be more safe to be around.

A. we are only "bleeding hearts" because of all of the right wing pro-gun nuts flooding our country with guns that criminals then get a hold of and shoot at us with.

B. I know that my father, who is a Vietnam Vet and was a Marine Corps drill sargeant would NEVER allow me to have a gun untill I had received the proper LIFE TRAINING....meaning that even though I knew how to handle the gun itself, and had received all of the proper training (at the time. This was a while ago), at 13, I DID NOT have the proper maturity level, and moral boundaries to temper me from doing stupid stuff with the gun. Hell, at 43, there are MANY times where I am driving, and I could shoot somebody I am mad at... the fact that I DON'T own a gun, or really ever want to, have probably saved many lives! I don't think most of the gun nuts have THIS kind of training....self-control. I know my limits, and how I react to situations.

"Guns don't kill people, People kill people" is the biggest cop out in the history of time. Admit that it is wrong and lets stop the madness...

ajcorleone
03-27-2013, 10:09 AM
I will agree with one thing ther are a TON of bleeding heart liberals here.
Perhaps you should try to know something about all the bleeding heart liberals on here before you bash them. The only idiocy I see here is a father that thinks his preteen is man enough to own a weapon that can kill. And to let him pose with a weapon that resembles something more than it is. It's terrible optics and matches up perfectly with the idiotic gun culture this NRA gun safety trainer is bathing himself and his son in.

deansayso
03-27-2013, 10:13 AM
"Guns don't kill people, People kill people" is the biggest chicken-**** cop out in the history of time. Admit that it is wrong and lets stop the madness...


Really? I have guns and have had 0 urge to kill another human. I have never put myself in the position to kill another human.
People kill people. Guns are just a medium. Just like knives, swords, arrows, fists, glass bottles, poison, automobiles, airplanes, etc...

duane1969
03-27-2013, 10:13 AM
Perhaps you should try to know something about all the bleeding heart liberals on here before you bash them. The only idiocy I see here is a father that thinks his preteen is man enough to own a weapon that can kill. And to let him pose with a weapon that resembles something more than it is. It's terrible optics and matches up perfectly with the idiotic gun culture this NRA gun safety trainer is bathing himself and his son in.

A pellet gun can kill, a bow can kill, a baseball bat can kill, a pocket knife can kill, a rock can kill...if your only issue is with potential lethality then I guess we need to lock all kids up in padded rooms until they are 18 to protect them from themselves and protect society from them.


That is exactly what I have a problem with. Listen I will support and defend the second amendment (along with all my other consitutional rights) to the death but it makes 0 sense that someone has to pass a written and road test to prove that they can safely operate a motor vechicle but there is no testing required for a firearm.

Actually a lifelong test is required to own a gun. You must live your entire life free of crime, criminal irresponsibility and with good citizenship to purchase and own a gun. A person can be legally insane with an extensive criminal record and still get a drivers license and buy a car.

Wickabee
03-27-2013, 10:15 AM
Would we be having this discussion if it was a car?

mrveggieman
03-27-2013, 10:16 AM
A pellet gun can kill, a bow can kill, a baseball bat can kill, a pocket knife can kill, a rock can kill...if your only issue is with potential lethality then I guess we need to lock all kids up in padded rooms until they are 18 to protect them from themselves and protect society from them.



Actually a lifelong test is required to own a gun. You must live your entire life free of crime, criminal irresponsibility and with good citizenship to purchase and own a gun. A person can be legally insane with an extensive criminal record and still get a drivers license and buy a car. The legally insane person still has to prove that he knows how to drive a car. No one is asking anyone to prove that they know how to use a firearm.


Response in bold.

deansayso
03-27-2013, 10:18 AM
Would we be having this discussion if it was a car?

Probably...but a car endangers everyone else on the street. If it was a professional drivers son getting a car then I would have no problem with it. If it was joe blow giving his son a car then yes.

I have been driving since I was 10, but I lived in the country too...

Wickabee
03-27-2013, 10:19 AM
Response in bold.

Wait. The car won't start if you don't have a licence? Or is it possible for an unlicenced person to take a car out on the road and kill people?

Wickabee
03-27-2013, 10:20 AM
Probably...but a car endangers everyone else on the street. If it was a professional drivers son getting a car then I would have no problem with it. If it was joe blow giving his son a car then yes.

I have been driving since I was 10, but I lived in the country too...

My dad gave me a car when I was 14. Driving age is 16. What's the problem exactly?

habsheaven
03-27-2013, 10:25 AM
A pellet gun can kill, a bow can kill, a baseball bat can kill, a pocket knife can kill, a rock can kill...if your only issue is with potential lethality then I guess we need to lock all kids up in padded rooms until they are 18 to protect them from themselves and protect society from them.

That's your only response? Comparing a gun to a rock? Too ridiculous to even comment.

Actually a lifelong test is required to own a gun. You must live your entire life free of crime, criminal irresponsibility and with good citizenship to purchase and own a gun. A person can be legally insane with an extensive criminal record and still get a drivers license and buy a car.

By "lifelong test" you mean 11 years right? The kid is 11. He hasn't even finished developing his mind or body, let alone had the time to start going on crime sprees. Responses in bold.

duane1969
03-27-2013, 10:26 AM
Response in bold.

So if a person proves they can load a gun, pull the trigger and hit a target then they are viable to be licensed to purchase and own a gun? My 11 year old will be happy to hear that.

For the record, taking a written test and driving test does not prove that you can safely operate a vehicle. If it did then auto accidents would not be the #1 killer of teens ages 16-19.


My dad gave me a car when I was 14. Driving age is 16. What's the problem exactly?

I grew up on a farm and was driving the farm pickup when I was 11. I guess my dad was a majorly irresponsible parent...

duane1969
03-27-2013, 10:29 AM
Responses in bold.

He doesn't own the gun, his dad does. If you knew anything about US gun laws you would know that the gun was purchased and is owned by his dad. Getting you panties twisted because you have some silly idea in your head that this kid is riding around the neighborhood with his .22 strapped over his shoulder is preposterous.

"Giving the gun" to his son essentially means that his son can shoot it and consider it his, but it can not legally be owned or possessed by him until he is 18.

And if you bothered to read the article then you would know that the father keeps all guns in gun safes. The police who came to his house demanded to inspect his guns that were locked in his gun safe. So the son doesn't even have access to the gun unless his dad is around.

habsheaven
03-27-2013, 10:29 AM
So if a person proves they can load a gun, pull the trigger and hit a target then they are viable to be licensed to purchase and own a gun? My 11 year old will be happy to hear that.

For the record, taking a written test and driving test does not prove that you can safely operate a vehicle. If it did then auto accidents would not be the #1 killer of teens ages 16-19.



I grew up on a farm and was driving the farm pickup when I was 11. I guess my dad was a majorly irresponsible parent...Yes, your dad was. It would have became very apparent had you flipped the car or the tractor into a drainage ditch and been killed as a result.

Wickabee
03-27-2013, 10:30 AM
"My" car sat in the driveway. I could wash it, work on it, whatever I wanted. But it stayed in the driveway. If I had wanted to go joyriding, I'd have to get the keys from my dad and, while it may have been possible, it would have been too difficult to be worth it.

Now, was my dad irresponsible?

xpucksx
03-27-2013, 10:33 AM
Actually a lifelong test is required to own a gun. You must live your entire life free of crime, criminal irresponsibility and with good citizenship to purchase and own a gun. A person can be legally insane with an extensive criminal record and still get a drivers license and buy a car.

so you are telling me that every Crip, Blood, Ganster Disciple, Arayn Nation Brother, MS-13, depressed suicidal teenager, drug addicted bank robber etc have sat and taken the test to get the guns that they use to commit their crimes? I could go buy a gun in 200 different places RIGHT NOW without taking ANY kind of test. You are sadly deceived if you think that this "regulation" is anything other than a big joke

the weak "system" we have here in America - the one that NRA people think is "adequate"- is where the failure is.

We just have to face up to the facts that the whole gun thing is a failed mess in our country. The rest of the world is laughing while we kill ourselves off because of fear, ignorance, worship of some outdated law/piece of paper, and greed and selfishness. As long as the NRA is around and has the monetary power they do, we are still going to be the butt of the worlds jokes, and then we become JUST LIKE the people that the NRA and Right wing nuts fear...

Wickabee
03-27-2013, 10:36 AM
so you are telling me that every Crip, Blood, Ganster Disciple, Arayn Nation Brother, MS-13, depressed suicidal teenager, drug addicted bank robber etc have sat and taken the test to get the guns that they use to commit their crimes? I could go buy a gun in 200 different places RIGHT NOW without taking ANY kind of test. You are sadly deceived if you think that this "regulation" is anything other than a big joke

the weak-a***d "system" we have here in America - the one that NRA people think is "adequate"- is where the failure is.

We just have to face up to the facts that the whole gun thing is a failed mess in our country. The rest of the world is laughing while we kill ourselves off because of fear, ignorance, worship of some outdated law/piece of paper, and greed and selfishness. As long as the NRA is around and has the monetary power they do, we are still going to be the butt of the worlds jokes, and then we become JUST LIKE the people that the NRA and Right wing nuts fear...
Did you just compare an 11 year old kid to the Krips and Bloods?

habsheaven
03-27-2013, 10:37 AM
He doesn't own the gun, his dad does. If you knew anything about US gun laws you would know that the gun was purchased and is owned by his dad. Getting you panties twisted because you have some silly idea in your head that this kid is riding around the neighborhood with his .22 strapped over his shoulder is preposterous.

"Giving the gun" to his son essentially means that his son can shoot it and consider it his, but it can not legally be owned or possessed by him until he is 18.

And if you bothered to read the article then you would know that the father keeps all guns in gun safes. The police who came to his house demanded to inspect his guns that were locked in his gun safe. So the son doesn't even have access to the gun unless his dad is around. Why did you quote my "responses in bold" and then not address either of them? And no I didn't read the article because the "article" was a video. I watched the whole video and am aware of all the facts but thanks for re-iterating them. And please keep the images of my panties out of your head along with your assumptions of what I am imagining.

Wickabee
03-27-2013, 10:40 AM
So my dad was irresponsible for buying me a car and not letting me drive it until I got my licence.
I think that's really stupid, but whatever.

xpucksx
03-27-2013, 10:52 AM
Did you just compare an 11 year old kid to the Krips and Bloods?

No, not at all. I was focusing on duane bringing up the lame "test" that people supposedly take to get guns here in America...though I think the average age of many gangs are right around 12-13. That is definitely the age that kids get into gang activity, so it is not that far fetched

Wickabee
03-27-2013, 10:56 AM
No, not at all. I was focusing on duane bringing up the lamea**d "test" that people supposedly take to get guns here in America...though I think the average age of many gangs are right around 12-13. That is definitely the age that kids get into gang activity, so it is not that far fetched

Yeah, but you're comparing Compton and East LA with wherever this kid lives. I'm guessing the demographics there are much different from inner city Detroit.

And I have to say, anyone calling the father irresponsible on the information available is self righteous and judgemental. There I said it.

duane1969
03-27-2013, 11:03 AM
so you are telling me that every Crip, Blood, Ganster Disciple, Arayn Nation Brother, MS-13, depressed suicidal teenager, drug addicted bank robber etc have sat and taken the test to get the guns that they use to commit their crimes? I could go buy a gun in 200 different places RIGHT NOW without taking ANY kind of test. You are sadly deceived if you think that this "regulation" is anything other than a big joke

the weak-a***d "system" we have here in America - the one that NRA people think is "adequate"- is where the failure is.

We just have to face up to the facts that the whole gun thing is a failed mess in our country. The rest of the world is laughing while we kill ourselves off because of fear, ignorance, worship of some outdated law/piece of paper, and greed and selfishness. As long as the NRA is around and has the monetary power they do, we are still going to be the butt of the worlds jokes, and then we become JUST LIKE the people that the NRA and Right wing nuts fear...

Aside from the fact that you have gone totally off point, the people that you mention are not restricted by gun laws and do not buy their guns legally, so no amount of gun laws, restrictions or prohibitions will prevent them from being who and what they are. And if you think the Constitution is an outdated piece of paper then you and I have nothing more to discuss.

Regardless of your opinion about guns, your repeated use of offensive language is in violation of site rules. If you can not discuss the matter without cursing then I suggest you not discuss it at all.

duane1969
03-27-2013, 11:03 AM
so you are telling me that every Crip, Blood, Ganster Disciple, Arayn Nation Brother, MS-13, depressed suicidal teenager, drug addicted bank robber etc have sat and taken the test to get the guns that they use to commit their crimes? I could go buy a gun in 200 different places RIGHT NOW without taking ANY kind of test. You are sadly deceived if you think that this "regulation" is anything other than a big joke

the weak-a***d "system" we have here in America - the one that NRA people think is "adequate"- is where the failure is.

We just have to face up to the facts that the whole gun thing is a failed mess in our country. The rest of the world is laughing while we kill ourselves off because of fear, ignorance, worship of some outdated law/piece of paper, and greed and selfishness. As long as the NRA is around and has the monetary power they do, we are still going to be the butt of the worlds jokes, and then we become JUST LIKE the people that the NRA and Right wing nuts fear...

Aside from the fact that you have gone totally off point, the people that you mention are not restricted by gun laws and do not buy their guns legally, so no amount of gun laws, restrictions or prohibitions will prevent them from being who and what they are. And if you think the Constitution is an outdated piece of paper then you and I have nothing more to discuss.

Regardless of your opinion about guns, your repeated use of offensive language is in violation of site rules. If you can not discuss the matter without cursing then I suggest you not discuss it at all.

xpucksx
03-27-2013, 11:07 AM
Yeah, but you're comparing Compton and East LA with wherever this kid lives. I'm guessing the demographics there are much different from inner city Detroit.


no, they actually probably are much the same, and I really was not comparing the particular kid in the picture to anything in my comments to Duane. I was trying to call out the misconception that most righties/NRA types have that everyone follows the laws of the country and does what they are supposed to.

..and it is funny that Compton is actually starting to shed the "gangsta" image it once had from what I have read. And my girlfriend is from Detroit, and she states that most parts of inner city Detroit are 10x more scary than you would want to know....

..and it is sad that the whole gang "demographic" is now relevant to pretty much any area of the US where more than 10 people live together. The gang thing is no longer just a big city problem, and is , in fact, much worse in impoverished rural areas sometimes than in urban centers anymore

Wickabee
03-27-2013, 11:07 AM
Aside from the fact that you have gone totally off point, the people that you mention are not restricted by gun laws and do not buy their guns legally, so no amount of gun laws, restrictions or prohibitions will prevent them from being who and what they are. And if you think the Constitution is an outdated piece of paper then you and I have nothing more to discuss.

Regardless of your opinion about guns, your repeated use of offensive language is in violation of site rules. If you can not discuss the matter without cursing then I suggest you not discuss it at all.

Oh...um...

Seriously though, it is outdated. This very amendment claims a militia is necessary to the security of a free state. That's true, unless that state now has an army.

You do, militias aren't necessary to protect the security of the state (not your security from the state) and the second amendment is, in reality, totally outdated and should have been stricken as soon as you had a standing army.

If you have a problem with any of that, or think I'm trying to get your guns taken away, I'll refer you to the novela I wrote yesterday:
http://www.sportscardforum.com/threads/1906348-Set-back-for-President-Obama-as-assult-weapons-ban-is-dropped/page9

Wickabee
03-27-2013, 11:13 AM
no, they actually probably are much the same, and I really was not comparing the particular kid in the picture to anything in my comments to Duane. I was trying to call out the misconception that most righties/NRA types have that everyone follows the laws of the country and does what they are supposed to.

..and it is funny that Compton is actually starting to shed the "gangsta" image it once had from what I have read.

..and it is sad that the whole gang "demographic" is now relevant to pretty much any area of the US where more than 10 people live together. The gang thing is no longer just a big city problem, and is , in fact, much worse in impoverished rural areas sometimes than in urban centers anymore

Yeah, East LA is really picking up that torch.

But I disagree. While I can't say there is no gang activity in the suburbs, can you really say it's equal to that of inner cities? It's no longer just a big city problem, but it is still predominantly a big city problem. Look at the picture of the kid standing there in his hunting gear holding his gun. Do you seriously think that kid fits into the threats you're talking about? I sure don't.

No, this is a lot of people trying to use a kid's birthday present for their own political gain. This is people against something who saw that something and lost their crap. It's like watching cavemen experience fire for the first time, or the first few minutes of 2001: A Space Oddyssy (terrible movie, by the way).

It's kind of funny, but it's just as detrimental to real discussion as the "DON'T TOUCH MY GUUUUUUUUUNS!" types are. Not saying anything about you or anything like that, just how I see it. But it is how I see it.

duane1969
03-27-2013, 11:16 AM
Oh...um...

Seriously though, it is outdated. This very amendment claims a militia is necessary to the security of a free state. That's true, unless that state now has an army.

You do, militias aren't necessary to protect the security of the state (not your security from the state) and the second amendment is, in reality, totally outdated and should have been stricken as soon as you had a standing army.

If you have a problem with any of that, or think I'm trying to get your guns taken away, I'll refer you to the novela I wrote yesterday:
http://www.sportscardforum.com/threads/1906348-Set-back-for-President-Obama-as-assult-weapons-ban-is-dropped/page9

The term militia does not have to mean an organized group of armed people, that is the armed forces. A militia is armed citizens who come together to defend their community when called upon and a militia can only exist if the citizens have arms. Do we need a militia now? No. Does not needing something now mean that we will never, ever need it? No. Prior to the Revolutionary War I am sure that most citizens saw no need for arms, doesn't mean they didn't eventually need them.

xpucksx
03-27-2013, 11:22 AM
Aside from the fact that you have gone totally off point, the people that you mention are not restricted by gun laws and do not buy their guns legally, so no amount of gun laws, restrictions or prohibitions will prevent them from being who and what they are. And if you think the Constitution is an outdated piece of paper then you and I have nothing more to discuss.

Regardless of your opinion about guns, your repeated use of offensive language is in violation of site rules. If you can not discuss the matter without cursing then I suggest you not discuss it at all.

first...I apologize for the cursing and will refrain from doing that. I really like and respect the parameters of this forum for the fact that it monitors that, and got sort of carried away.

I don't see how I have gotten off point as this thread is discussing the gun problem in the country based on the video/story of the father giving his young son the gun. In fact, you just completely proved the point I was trying to make by typing what I put in bold above...my point being that the regulations that are deemed "acceptable" by the NRA types are completely ineffective for preventing gun violence

I wholeheartedly respect the entire structure that this country was set up on, and am consistently in awe of what it did for govenmental and societal structure in the hitory of time, but also don't live in the clouded world that the structure is outdated, doesn't need to be flexible, and change with the times. I still strongly feel that even the founding fathers themselves would be very dissapointed with the fact that we have not consistently updated the tenets of the rule structure to fit the modern day advances that have made our society what it is.

NOW, we are off topic

Wickabee
03-27-2013, 11:26 AM
The term militia does not have to mean an organized group of armed people, that is the armed forces. A militia is armed citizens who come together to defend their community when called upon and a militia can only exist if the citizens have arms. Do we need a militia now? No. Does not needing something now mean that we will never, ever need it? No. Prior to the Revolutionary War I am sure that most citizens saw no need for arms, doesn't mean they didn't eventually need them.
Militias aren't necessary to your nation's security. That's all there is to it. Again, read what I wrote yesterday, this isn't an argument to take guns. It's an argument to change your constitution so it ACTUALLY says what so many claim it does, but does not. Your arguments are built on fallacy. Your constitution doesn't say what you think it does.

shrewsbury
03-27-2013, 11:29 AM
again, ever see Red Dawn?

xpucksx
03-27-2013, 11:30 AM
Yeah, East LA is really picking up that torch.

But I disagree. While I can't say there is no gang activity in the suburbs, can you really say it's equal to that of inner cities? It's no longer just a big city problem, but it is still predominantly a big city problem. Look at the picture of the kid standing there in his hunting gear holding his gun. Do you seriously think that kid fits into the threats you're talking about? I sure don't.

I do know that the small rural town where one of my rock bands practice has a larger percentage of teen and pre/teen gang involvement than the city I live in. Another medium sized "county seat" type town north of us is completely run by two different drug cartel involved gangs...

thanks to the mass media outlets glorifying the culture over the past 20 years and poor parenting situations, the gang thing really is sort of prevalent everywhere now. Kids who are neglected and bored will try to find "family" somewhere"

once again, i am off topic...stupid adult ADD

Wickabee
03-27-2013, 11:41 AM
I don't think this is off topic at all.
I disagree that, overall, gangs are just as bad or worse in rural areas than cities. I believe there are anomolies, like the area you live as you describe it, but overall the gang problem is still predominantly a city one.
We also may be having different conversations. There's about 100,000 or so people in my city (I'm actually "surrounding area") and by Canadian standards is a mid sized city. By American standards, I'm sure it would be a small city. We have gang problems here, but very few actual shootings. A gang head got popped in the street last summer and it was major headline news for months. In most US cities it would be on page 6 in less than a week.
Basically, I can't agree that the demographics are the same in East LA as they are in Lincoln NB (NB is Nebraska, right? I'm talking about Lincoln, Nebraska).

mrveggieman
03-27-2013, 11:49 AM
I don't think this is off topic at all.
I disagree that, overall, gangs are just as bad or worse in rural areas than cities. I believe there are anomolies, like the area you live as you describe it, but overall the gang problem is still predominantly a city one.
We also may be having different conversations. There's about 100,000 or so people in my city (I'm actually "surrounding area") and by Canadian standards is a mid sized city. By American standards, I'm sure it would be a small city. We have gang problems here, but very few actual shootings. A gang head got popped in the street last summer and it was major headline news for months. In most US cities it would be on page 6 in less than a week.
Basically, I can't agree that the demographics are the same in East LA as they are in Lincoln NB (NB is Nebraska, right? I'm talking about Lincoln, Nebraska).

NE=Nebraska. :thumb:

Wickabee
03-27-2013, 11:50 AM
Crap!
I apologize to all 7 Nebraskans (it is Nebraskans, right? Not Nebraskaers or Nebraskaites?).

duane1969
03-27-2013, 11:52 AM
Militias aren't necessary to your nation's security. That's all there is to it. Again, read what I wrote yesterday, this isn't an argument to take guns. It's an argument to change your constitution so it ACTUALLY says what so many claim it does, but does not. Your arguments are built on fallacy. Your constitution doesn't say what you think it does.

OK, for arguments sake, take militias out of the Constitution (technically the Bill of Rights). If we remove "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State" out it doesn't affect my right to keep and bear arms "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."

Furthermore, eliminating the entire 2nd Amendment doesn't dissolve my right to own a gun. We have many, many rights that are not set forth in the Constitution. All the 2nd Amendment does is give people a solid basis to protect their gun ownership rights. Eliminating it would not immediately result in everyone having to turn over their guns anymore than eliminating the 3rd Amendment would suddenly mean that people would have to start housing military personnel.

Wickabee
03-27-2013, 11:59 AM
OK, for arguments sake, take militias out of the Constitution (technically the Bill of Rights). If we remove "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State" out it doesn't affect my right to keep and bear arms "the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
You're right. If that first part isn't there, it doesn't affect the second part. But it is there and one has to think for a reason. If you had read what I wrote, you'd see that I think taking the part about a militia out is acceptable. Since you didn't read, you think I don't want you to own a gun. That's the problem you're having. You're basing your argument about the constitution on the fallacy that the part about militias is meaningless and you're basing your argument against me on the fallacy that I don't want you to have a gun. You're simply ignoring what's right in front of you. How is that productive in any way?

It's not. You should try basing arguments on fact not fallacy.



Furthermore, eliminating the entire 2nd Amendment doesn't dissolve my right to own a gun. We have many, many rights that are not set forth in the Constitution. All the 2nd Amendment does is give people a solid basis to protect their gun ownership rights. Eliminating it would not immediately result in everyone having to turn over their guns anymore than eliminating the 3rd Amendment would suddenly mean that people would have to start housing military personnel.

I agree. Unfortunately, I'm not trying to take your guns away. How many times do I have to say this before you believe it, Duane? You were reading earlier tody...why did you stop?

I DON'T WANT TO LEAVE YOU WITH NO GUN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Do you get it yet, or are you seriously this simple?

duane1969
03-27-2013, 12:28 PM
[/I]
I agree. Unfortunately, I'm not trying to take your guns away. How many times do I have to say this before you believe it, Duane? You were reading earlier tody...why did you stop?

I DON'T WANT TO LEAVE YOU WITH NO GUN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Do you get it yet, or are you seriously this simple?

For every one liberal that doesn't want to take away guns there are 50 that do.

Former NYC Mayor Ed Koch wants to ban all guns
http://www.wnd.com/2013/01/ex-nyc-mayor-ban-all-guns/

In 1996 Obama answered a questionnaire where he said that he supported a ban on the manufacture, sale and possession of handguns.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1207/7312.html

Danny Glover supports the abolishment of all privately owned guns.
http://www.sodahead.com/united-states/actor-danny-glover-america-should-abolish-personal-guns-true-or-false-danny-glover-is-an-idiot/question-3539049/?link=ibaf&q=Danny+Glover+ban+all+guns

A Dept. of Justice memo outlines gun bans and mandatory gun confiscation
http://www.infowars.com/doj-memo-outlaw-and-confiscate-all-guns/

I could go on with many, many more links but I won't. No Wick, YOU may not want to take my guns, but there are PLENTY of liberals who would not hesitate to have the Fed knock on my door and take them all or imprison me if I refused to give them up.

Wickabee
03-27-2013, 12:30 PM
That exact attitude you're displaying right now exists on both sides and is the exact reason people continue to argue instead of doing anything. In short, you're part of the problem right now or rather, your attitude is.

mrveggieman
03-27-2013, 01:16 PM
For every one liberal that doesn't want to take away guns there are 50 that do.

Former NYC Mayor Ed Koch wants to ban all guns
http://www.wnd.com/2013/01/ex-nyc-mayor-ban-all-guns/

In 1996 Obama answered a questionnaire where he said that he supported a ban on the manufacture, sale and possession of handguns.
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/1207/7312.html

Danny Glover supports the abolishment of all privately owned guns.
http://www.sodahead.com/united-states/actor-danny-glover-america-should-abolish-personal-guns-true-or-false-danny-glover-is-an-idiot/question-3539049/?link=ibaf&q=Danny+Glover+ban+all+guns

A Dept. of Justice memo outlines gun bans and mandatory gun confiscation
http://www.infowars.com/doj-memo-outlaw-and-confiscate-all-guns/

I could go on with many, many more links but I won't. No Wick, YOU may not want to take my guns, but there are PLENTY of liberals who would not hesitate to have the Fed knock on my door and take them all or imprison me if I refused to give them up.


1996 Duane. Come on man (In my Keyshawn Johnson voice). Please join the rest of us in the year 2013. President Obama does not and I mean repeat does not want to take away anyone's second amendment rights.

http://cnsnews.com/news/article/white-house-obama-has-strong-record-support-2nd-amendment-rights

Zimbow
03-27-2013, 07:58 PM
1996 Duane. Come on man (In my Keyshawn Johnson voice). Please join the rest of us in the year 2013. President Obama does not and I mean repeat does not want to take away anyone's second amendment rights.

http://cnsnews.com/news/article/white-house-obama-has-strong-record-support-2nd-amendment-rights

You're right veg!;

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RkUpp22fHyw

FioreSA
03-27-2013, 08:07 PM
cept he wants to ban the only firearm i have. i'm a honorably discharged Marine with no criminal record and no mental illness. I never fired a firearm til bootcamp (except once at boy scout camp,...

habsheaven
03-27-2013, 08:33 PM
No, you would then be disarmed out of CHOICE. YOUR CHOICE.

FioreSA
03-27-2013, 10:15 PM
cept i made that CHOICE when it was legal....

will i be reimbursed for my 1750$ i spent on my rifle? probably not.

that is the government taking my weapon from me. I already own it, it may become illegal, then i lose it.

aka i was disarmed.

once again the rifle just looks and feels the same but doesn't function the same.

if my rifle becomes illegal, please explain to me how this is not taking my weapon from me and disarming me. I have options right? turn it in or risk a felony? i see this is as taking my rifle. I served in afghanistan, i fought for this country, i know how to handle my weapons responsibly.

you're right I CHOSE a weapon. A style I feel comfortable with, it was a legal purchase. I had it imported to a FFL carrier, then did a background check with said FFL, waited 72 hours after and picked up my weapon. It was a purely legal transaction.

having to give up the weapon like some states are requiring and being out all of my hard earned taxed dollars. just sucks.

but you're right i'm not being disarmed. I just lose my weapon and have to buy a new approved one, til that gets banned. lemme see I want to buy my good ol benalli shotgun ...wait that's gonna be banned too? well i'll go buy my grandfathers m1 garande, o wait i can only get 1 or 2 models the rest are illegal? guess i'll go buy my great grandfathers colt from wwi....o wait i can't have that either.

gotta love it. I see the gangs around where I live, having something I know how to use provides me with a sense of peace as I am confident with my ability with it and can protect my family if necessary (hopefully i never have to fire it except to zero it). but i'm the bad guy right? cause those guys out there sure as hell are gonna turn there's in right? specially since some are already felons. owning a gun when your a felon is against the law....sure stopped them.

would i be scared if the combat veteran next door to me had a "military look-a-like" rifle? Nope, i would feel much safer. Going back to the milita thing that still does have a purpose even if it isn't needed. I know first hand what fire superiority is and having an autodated single shot weapon or a shotgun when a rifle is needed, is nearly worthless.

Do I see people invading America? No. Do I see the government turning on it's people? No. Do I see a gang trying to take over turf and property, possibly. Neighborhood watch is a nice thing, but I live at least 5 - 10 minutes from any police. I know from experience that those 5 - 10 minutes can be a lifetime. I'd rather have potentially (if a threat is imminent) armed neighborhood watch rather than a cellphone and a prayer.

I have seen with my own eyes a meth user completely viciously attack a lady on the street. During that time I WISHED I had a weapon. That lady went to a hospital and is fine today, but it coulda been a whole lot worse.

Also back on topic about the kid, why don't we talk about the stories about the 11 and 12 year old with pink rifle stoping the intruder....betcha the parents were happy to have taught her how to use a firearm.

matt_curren
03-28-2013, 12:59 AM
1) the assault weapon ban is probably a dead issue
2) if it did get enough steam to somehow become law, it is only a ban on the manufacture and sale of those types of guns, people who alredy have them would not be "disarmed"

sheesh - up in arms over a non-issue. It is amazing to me that because someone has talked about some form of gun control, you have already made the leap to the FACT you are going to be out $1700 because the feds are going to go door-to-door confiscating your great granfathers ww1 pistol.

Is it even possible to have adult conversations on anything anymore?

habsheaven
03-28-2013, 07:54 AM
cept i made that CHOICE when it was legal....

will i be reimbursed for my 1750$ i spent on my rifle? probably not.

that is the government taking my weapon from me. I already own it, it may become illegal, then i lose it.

aka i was disarmed.

once again the rifle just looks and feels the same but doesn't function the same.

if my rifle becomes illegal, please explain to me how this is not taking my weapon from me and disarming me. I have options right? turn it in or risk a felony? i see this is as taking my rifle. I served in afghanistan, i fought for this country, i know how to handle my weapons responsibly.

you're right I CHOSE a weapon. A style I feel comfortable with, it was a legal purchase. I had it imported to a FFL carrier, then did a background check with said FFL, waited 72 hours after and picked up my weapon. It was a purely legal transaction.

having to give up the weapon like some states are requiring and being out all of my hard earned taxed dollars. just sucks.

but you're right i'm not being disarmed. I just lose my weapon and have to buy a new approved one, til that gets banned. lemme see I want to buy my good ol benalli shotgun ...wait that's gonna be banned too? well i'll go buy my grandfathers m1 garande, o wait i can only get 1 or 2 models the rest are illegal? guess i'll go buy my great grandfathers colt from wwi....o wait i can't have that either.

gotta love it. I see the gangs around where I live, having something I know how to use provides me with a sense of peace as I am confident with my ability with it and can protect my family if necessary (hopefully i never have to fire it except to zero it). but i'm the bad guy right? cause those guys out there sure as hell are gonna turn there's in right? specially since some are already felons. owning a gun when your a felon is against the law....sure stopped them.

would i be scared if the combat veteran next door to me had a "military look-a-like" rifle? Nope, i would feel much safer. Going back to the milita thing that still does have a purpose even if it isn't needed. I know first hand what fire superiority is and having an autodated single shot weapon or a shotgun when a rifle is needed, is nearly worthless.

Do I see people invading America? No. Do I see the government turning on it's people? No. Do I see a gang trying to take over turf and property, possibly. Neighborhood watch is a nice thing, but I live at least 5 - 10 minutes from any police. I know from experience that those 5 - 10 minutes can be a lifetime. I'd rather have potentially (if a threat is imminent) armed neighborhood watch rather than a cellphone and a prayer.

I have seen with my own eyes a meth user completely viciously attack a lady on the street. During that time I WISHED I had a weapon. That lady went to a hospital and is fine today, but it coulda been a whole lot worse.

Also back on topic about the kid, why don't we talk about the stories about the 11 and 12 year old with pink rifle stoping the intruder....betcha the parents were happy to have taught her how to use a firearm.My point still stands. You are not disarmed. You just have to choose a legal weapon. Of all the guns in the world (and the apparent fact that an 11 year old can manage to learn how to use a gun) you should be able to adjust to something legal. As for the "pink rifle" hero; we could talk about her but when we do can we talk about all the kids that die from gun accidents? Finally, if you truly think your everyday safety requires owning a multi-shot rifle I pity you. It must be a very heavy burden to live under such constant stress. Unless of course you are exaggerating the danger you face daily.

xpucksx
03-28-2013, 12:29 PM
cept i made that CHOICE when it was legal....

will i be reimbursed for my 1750$ i spent on my rifle? probably not.

that is the government taking my weapon from me. I already own it, it may become illegal, then i lose it.

aka i was disarmed.

once again the rifle just looks and feels the same but doesn't function the same.

if my rifle becomes illegal, please explain to me how this is not taking my weapon from me and disarming me. I have options right? turn it in or risk a felony? i see this is as taking my rifle. I served in afghanistan, i fought for this country, i know how to handle my weapons responsibly.

you're right I CHOSE a weapon. A style I feel comfortable with, it was a legal purchase. I had it imported to a FFL carrier, then did a background check with said FFL, waited 72 hours after and picked up my weapon. It was a purely legal transaction.

having to give up the weapon like some states are requiring and being out all of my hard earned taxed dollars. just sucks.

but you're right i'm not being disarmed. I just lose my weapon and have to buy a new approved one, til that gets banned. lemme see I want to buy my good ol benalli shotgun ...wait that's gonna be banned too? well i'll go buy my grandfathers m1 garande, o wait i can only get 1 or 2 models the rest are illegal? guess i'll go buy my great grandfathers colt from wwi....o wait i can't have that either.

gotta love it. I see the gangs around where I live, having something I know how to use provides me with a sense of peace as I am confident with my ability with it and can protect my family if necessary (hopefully i never have to fire it except to zero it). but i'm the bad guy right? cause those guys out there sure as hell are gonna turn there's in right? specially since some are already felons. owning a gun when your a felon is against the law....sure stopped them.

would i be scared if the combat veteran next door to me had a "military look-a-like" rifle? Nope, i would feel much safer. Going back to the milita thing that still does have a purpose even if it isn't needed. I know first hand what fire superiority is and having an autodated single shot weapon or a shotgun when a rifle is needed, is nearly worthless.

Do I see people invading America? No. Do I see the government turning on it's people? No. Do I see a gang trying to take over turf and property, possibly. Neighborhood watch is a nice thing, but I live at least 5 - 10 minutes from any police. I know from experience that those 5 - 10 minutes can be a lifetime. I'd rather have potentially (if a threat is imminent) armed neighborhood watch rather than a cellphone and a prayer.

I have seen with my own eyes a meth user completely viciously attack a lady on the street. During that time I WISHED I had a weapon. That lady went to a hospital and is fine today, but it coulda been a whole lot worse.

Also back on topic about the kid, why don't we talk about the stories about the 11 and 12 year old with pink rifle stoping the intruder....betcha the parents were happy to have taught her how to use a firearm.

1. I totally agree with you on the whole gang thing, and I have always felt that American street gangs are the only "terrorists" we should really worry about...yet we ™™™™™foot around and it has gotten out of control. the gang problem is also something whose solution is much bigger than just the gun thing....

2. on the flip side. the reason those gangs have the fire power they have is because somewhere in the world (USA) Joe Average thinks he needs a military level assault rifle to make him feel like a bigger man (along with his 44oz soda, 200"LCD tv and V35 Ford f-950)...bigger is better right?...so the gun companies manufacture hand cannons and assault rifles because they know they can make a profit. These are then usually purchased legally, or illegally depending on where you are, but then get stolen, sold pawned.....whatever, and end up in the underground where the gangs get them...sort of like the Jihad driven terrorists form the Middle East. I think that many on the Gun Control side are saying that if there wasn't a demand for these guns, they would not get made, and therefore not fall into the hands of the criminals

3. havnig a gun, and gun smarts does not make you safer...it just makes you feel safer. just like having a Ford V35 F-950 does not allow you to climb mountains with your truck...it just makes you feel like you can. All of the gun safety and training in the world can't stop someone driving by in a car and shooting you; or coming up behind you and shooting you; or sniping from a roof, or around the corner of a building, or shooting into your house while you are watching tv
the thing is, the bad guys are going to shoot...unless they don't have the means to do it. Unfortunately now it is out of control....too many arms are in the wrong hands but I still don't feel like putting MORE arms, and ones that are more powerful out there is helping the problem

Wickabee
03-28-2013, 12:33 PM
™™™™™foot

The site censor does this, but "tard" is perfectly acceptable? Nice work, SCF.

xpucksx
03-28-2013, 12:49 PM
The site censor does this, but "tard" is perfectly acceptable? Nice work, SCF.

hmmm...didn't even think of the word I typed as a "bad word"...

Wickabee
03-28-2013, 12:52 PM
hmmm...didn't even think of the word I typed as a "bad word"...
Being that it relates to a lightfooted cat, it's not...

Also totally off topic, have you ever seen an F-950? They're inSANE!

mrveggieman
03-28-2013, 01:05 PM
hmmm...didn't even think of the word I typed as a "bad word"...

Instead of using that term you used I like to use what my uncle used to say to me way back when. He used to tell me to stop shuckin' and jivin.

xpucksx
03-28-2013, 01:06 PM
Being that it relates to a lightfooted cat, it's not...

Also totally off topic, have you ever seen an F-950? They're inSANE!

yeah. The quad wheels on the back. It sits about 30 feet in the air...it has an elevator that gets you up to it. It can tow small islands...I think it even has a flip down 200" LCD tv in the back for the 3D DVD system...

Wickabee
03-28-2013, 01:08 PM
Instead of using that term you used I like to use what my uncle used to say to me way back when. He used to tell me to stop shuckin' and jivin.

aaaaAAAAWWWWW SHUCKY DUCKY!


Sorry, just had a Herman Cain moment there.

Wickabee
03-28-2013, 01:10 PM
yeah. The quad wheels on the back. It sits about 30 feet in the air...it has an elevator that gets you up to it. It can tow small islands...I think it even has a flip down 200" LCD tv in the back for the 3D DVD system...

I once watched an F-750 drag against a Mac cab. That was the longest 1/8 mile race I' ve ever watched. The F-750 lost.

FioreSA
03-28-2013, 08:32 PM
2. on the flip side. the reason those gangs have the fire power they have is because somewhere in the world (USA) Joe Average thinks he needs a military level assault rifle to make him feel like a bigger man (along with his 44oz soda, 200"LCD tv and V35 Ford f-950)...bigger is better right?...so the gun companies manufacture hand cannons and assault rifles because they know they can make a profit. These are then usually purchased legally, or illegally depending on where you are, but then get stolen, sold pawned.....whatever, and end up in the underground where the gangs get them...sort of like the Jihad driven terrorists form the Middle East. I think that many on the Gun Control side are saying that if there wasn't a demand for these guns, they would not get made, and therefore not fall into the hands of the criminals

once again the rifle I own now isn't a military level assualt rifle, it isn't even close. It just looks like one and feels like one. It does not function the same as the weapon I carried in the USMC.

looks don't mean functionality.

i'll use your example of the 200" LCD, say the "military" has 200" LCD screens and it is illegal to own one as a cilivian, but you can buy a 200" LCD that displays at 50" and that is Legal. Then the government goes you know what those TVs are too big, lets make it so everyone only has a 22" tv and anyone that has a bigger one is a criminal, starting now.

FioreSA
03-28-2013, 08:47 PM
just leaves a really sour taste in my mouth to take my rights away, when i put up my life to defend them. Taking over a thousand dollars away from me then telling me that, i didn't lose anything. then offering me a weapon that is a piece of trash pretty much.

bet if they went any racecare is deadly or any car that has a spoiler, rpm tacometer, racing stripes, bucket seats, or manual transmission. if you don't get rid of it you are a criminal. o but hey you can have this nice little Fiat, but you gotta buy it. O ya we aren't reimbursing you for that car you bought either, it is illegal now, you'd be pissed to.

specially when the government loaned you a racecar for 4 years and taught you how to race with it.

matt_curren
03-28-2013, 09:10 PM
So you are just going to ignore the fact that nobody is going to take your gun away and nobody anywhere is talking about taking your gun away. OK then.

Wickabee
03-28-2013, 09:10 PM
If you, personally, get to keep your weapon, how do you, personally lost a thousand dollars?

xpucksx
03-28-2013, 11:11 PM
once again the rifle I own now isn't a military level assualt rifle, it isn't even close. It just looks like one and feels like one. It does not function the same as the weapon I carried in the USMC.

looks don't mean functionality.

i'll use your example of the 200" LCD, say the "military" has 200" LCD screens and it is illegal to own one as a cilivian, but you can buy a 200" LCD that displays at 50" and that is Legal. Then the government goes you know what those TVs are too big, lets make it so everyone only has a 22" tv and anyone that has a bigger one is a criminal, starting now.

but...even though your gun is not military grade, there ARE guns of that level available to the public, on the open market. And that is not right.

and like many have mentioned, no one is coming to get your gun. Scared conservatives have been crying about that for 30 years, and it has not or will not happen.

Zimbow
03-28-2013, 11:37 PM
but...even though your gun is not military grade, there ARE guns of that level available to the public, on the open market. And that is not right.

and like many have mentioned, no one is coming to get your gun. Scared conservatives have been crying about that for 30 years, and it has not or will not happen.

That's what the people in Louisiana thought too during the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina.