How would you feel if your son found your gun and decided to shoot kids

I was raised in a home where my dad kept all the guns in the hall way closet along with shells are cartridges on the shelf. I was going hunting with him probably by the age of 8, had my own ,410 shotgun by 10 or 11 and I hunted rabbits and squirrel with it. I went deer hunting back in our woods around the age of 14.

What did I do with my guns once I grew up and got married and had kids. Basically the same thing my dad did. I took my boy out hunting and made sure he first cleaned his gun once he returned and then cleaned whatever he shot. The two girls weren't interested.

Now I have 8 grandkids, the guns are still in the hallway closet and they leave them alone. My grandson who had a tour in Afghanistan has borrowed by 30.06 and my 12 gauge to go hunting.

Now I could tell you stories about my youth, taking my .410 to school to go hunting with classmates after. Having the teachers with gun racks in the back of their pickups park in the school parking lot unlocked. About myself age 12 or there abouts going into town to the western auto and buying my own shells for the .410. But you probably wouldn't believe a single one.

 

That sort of thing - as well as fatal accidents with guns - happens far too often, though some with an acute gun fetish are loathed to admit it. If you feel you need a gun, you have a responsibility to protect your family and others from it. That means locking it away securely, keeping it unloaded, storing ammunition elsewhere. That might not allow it to be much use against those imaginary murderous interlopers that arrive unexpectedly, but it avoids your blaming yourself and others blaming you for a preventable tragedy.

 

I was just playing a Republican trying to be facetious.

You are right about the 'can't win' part. Don't show remorse, they give you the needle. Show remorse, they give you the needle. It's one of the more macabre games us American folks like to play frequently.

 

You are partially correct sir. Yes it is my responsibility to make sure my gun doesn't fall into the wrong hands but sensible precautions are easy to take and still have the weapon ready to hand if needed. There are a number of well constructed and inexpensive (compared to the purchase price of a good gun) safes that are specifically designed for the purpose. I have a combination safe with a specially designed lock that can be easily operated (by the person with the combo) even in the dark yet quite secure against unauthorized persons whether they be children or casual thieves. While it could be opened by a determined theif that is true of even bank vaults. My guns are either locked inside or on my person, never ever anywhere else. Long guns not in a safe have gun locks and are of course not loaded while stored and ammunition is stored separately. Reasonable precautions and education are the keys to gun safety.

 

Your life seems all memories by this point. The Republicans not being a bunch of right wing bigots and gun obsessed (*)(*)(*)(*)(*)(*)(*)s is a memory too

Are you really asking that question? I will say what seems fairly obvious to anyone. A car, besides weighing around two tons and being difficult to operate by children, is something with actual real everyday utility for everyone, not just those who imagine murderers everywhere and/or like to kill their own meat just for the thrill of killing something. Oh, and it's not MEANT fo be used JUST for killing, in fact, that's a decidedly secondary purpose and actually rather difficult to accomplish efficiently, unlike with a gun.

Another guy who remembers, so you lived history, so what? It's still history. To quote a book all conservatives loved, That Was Then, This Is Now.

Here's the thing about that, Smith and Wesson (I believe, or another one, not sure) were working on a gun that could only be fired by it's owner, or other legitimate users. Now you'd think that all the gunnies would just love this. Besides just making the gun safer it would make it useless to a thief, or home invader, making it much less likely to attract a thief or be turned on its owner. Now the manufacturer did say this was going to be difficult, because of reliability issues, but they wanted gun owners to help in that and many other ways.

Do you know what the (*)(*)(*)(*)(*)(*)(*)s gun owners did? They threatened to boycott the company. That's right, they made it clear that a safer gun wasn't what they wanted and SW better not even TRY to make one. I mean, how can you make money doing straw purchases for gangs if they won't be able to use the guns you sell them? They don't do that?? Well what other possible reason could they have for threatening SW over this then?

Gun owners love to make noises about reasonable precautions and suchlike. Some, like many on here, may be sincere, I dunno, but scratch a gun advocate and you'll find a psychopath in many cases.

 

WT actual F did I just read?

Translation? Cliff notes? Something?

 

If you read the posts, the scenario was one in which the car was intentionally used as a weapon. Therefore it was the primary use in that situation. And, although efficiency isn't really the issue, a car driving through a crowd could kill more people faster than a gun could. My point stands. Dead is dead. But I can see that you are just scared of guns (probably imagining murderers everywhere), and won't understand that the weapon is not as important as the intent.

 

again, please make a more genuine attempt to provide real poll options. Try offering an 'other' because, again, your poll options don't allow for my views.

 

true, but the question arises is what happened? What happened to society that would go from no school shooting to a bunch? It certainly isn't guns, there were far less restrictions back then when society wasn't doing what it is doing today, so where has society gone wrong? What happened to our society that would change it from one where no school shooting occurred to today when you have a whole lot of them?

 

We are not all memories, we simply do not trust your kind. Safer gun, and this is a quote for your memory, “and whether there are laws requiring police to lock their guns up so a terrorist can’t walk up behind them at the donut shop and chop their head off with a big knife the abnormal brain found and take their gun,” it has a lock on it. The police though need a really quick lock. There is nothing that can prevent the technology but a law against it.

The simple fact is, and I repeat, we do not trust your kind. So when you say, “our life seems all memories by this point,” because you are simply trying to insult, we remember those who wanted a mandatory law for a safer gun, we know what your kind really wants, we the people to be defenseless in the face of a loss of the Bill of Rights.

We remember what Edward Kennedy said, “Now is not the time,” because we do have memories and know what he was referring to during the Carter administration. We remember what he said about the Second Amendment too.

And yes I would like for there to be safer gun technology, but not forced by law, I don’t mind taggants as being mandatory, because I am not afraid of fingerprints.

You see unless you are willing to put a lock on certain Muslims, call a Jihadist a Jihadist, can identify the flag of the enemy ideology and do something about the fifth column, your argument for mandatory gun locks really fails with those who have actually read the Koran...

The brain is the problem usually. Just like with “Turned loose too soon” in the eighties US News and world report, you know like the nutjob with a gun and the law that keeps him in the institution after being released to kill again, Cynthia Tucker has done a full page spread to try and remove that law, just like full page spreads to release a guy who shoved a knife in the heart of a woman begging for her life. There are people who just don’t belong on our streets.

And the problem with the effective safer gun technology is that if a law abiding citizen needs a gun sometimes picking up another one on the battlefield is necessary. That is scary, that we want to be able to pick up someone else’s gun. Electronics is probably needed for the father’s gun to fit the child in the household whose father has just been killed by an intruder, and the intruder not be able to use it. We just don’t trust your electronics.

This is what we face, pay attention, this is nothing but memories.

We put up with a certain amount of death, from vaccines and drugs, from Muslims, from Christians, from “liberals,” from godless atheists, from a guy walking into a theater to kill his girlfriend with a can of gasoline, and we don’t put a lock on gasoline, because we don’t want to be living in a locked up world. We know “liberals” and Democrats have guns too, we have heard them popping them off in their hood in rapid fire for no reason whatsoever.

“We have to get back to the place we were, where terrorists are not the focus of our lives, but they're a nuisance.''

And that is all that a certain amount of death is, a nuisance, but it could be less if your kind focused on the ideology behind a terrorist and criminal and went to war against it like we once went to war against the Klan. Instead you focus on the holy elevation of thugs like Martin and Brown, and cater to racist lynch mob mentality of no justice (of the mob) no peace.

Some of us cringe when we hear people say they want to prevent something from ever happening again. The very first reaction from your kind is to attack the availability of what to us are defensive measures and not the belief behind the bad guys.

Yes, guns are meant to kill. And so is your bad brain. So let’s lock that up?

If your kind supported impeaching Obama and Clinton for their violations of oath of office with regard to freedom of speech in the Benghazi affair, or would have cared before the second term, we might trust you better.

We have no reason whatsoever to believe your kind really cares about the Bill of Rights.

 

I can explain it to you, but I can't understand it for you.

 

Yup....we have laws here requiring guns to be secured, only the licened owner is permitted to use them...I can go to my brother in laws house right now and his rifles and shotgun will be trigger locked in a locked steel gun cabinet in a locked room, his 16 yr old does not have access to them...

Maximum penalty in canada for not secuing a weapon is 2yrs in prison, 5yrs on subsequent offence...and $2k fine

Kids is the prime reason I disassembled my rifle and shotgun, smashed the assorted pieces with a sledgehammer and tossed the parts in the garbage...I gave the ammo away to friends....

 

That did not clarify anything.

 

If that question was asked when I was young, in the 50s, 60s, I would have thought it daft, to charge the parents for being irresponsible, but we don't live in that society these days. And laws have to reflect the problems in society, especially when life is concerned. So yes, charge the parents, but we have enough convicted felons these days, so don't ruin their lives more by make them felons.

What we are not doing, is going after what is causing this to happen in today's society. And it isn't an inanimate object called the gun, but the human being who would do such an act. We are conditioned by society, the society is producing these killers, so one needs to take a look at what aspects of society is producing them, and a place to start is to look at the 1930s, the 40s the 50s the 60s and compare those popular cultures, the education, to our popular culture and the education today. I think you will find a grave difference and it that difference is the cause.

Of course the modern liberal doesn't recognize the fact of conditioning, and that much of their policies over the years changed society, hence changed the conditioning.

If you watch TCM as I do, you will notice that the standards in the old films did not use violence in the same way film uses it these days. It had a moral context, and ethics and morality was taught in old film. For we knew back then that the environment conditions the youth. And so we were responsible, with this responsibility being forced upon film and tv, for even then greedy capitalists knew that any violence, any sex would make them richer, as appealing to the base side of human nature has always been profitable.

We are now a culture steeped in violence, in a deep self centeredness, a deep selfishness, and you even see it in education. When I was being conditioned in my youth, it was common to hear from teachers, from parents, "who do you think you are"? "You are not better than him or her, simply because your parents are able to buy you nicer things, that you had a car bought for you".... If one cried because he felt his little ego was insulted, or if one got mad over the ego being insulted, we didn't sooth the ego, we told our youth to grow up, and that we were not the center of this universe.

We today, build up the same egos that my generation made fun of, tore down, and tried to teach the youth that other people were just as important as we felt our own self was. I don't see that these days. I see quite the opposite. Does this really matter? Sure it does, for it conditions people. And then we act from our conditioning.

We have as a society lost respect for others, and that does matter. Even our political discourse is infected with the loss of respect, and MSM fuels it. So, if you really want to get rid of much of the violence we see today, with kids shooting kids, change the damn culture, and don't foster it. For until we understand again that conditioning creates values which affect actions, things will only get worse.

 

If I had a gun, my kids wouldn't know it. There is no reason for kids to know there is a gun in the house. Now once they are adults, that's different.

 

I'd feel deeply ashamed of myself, a gun is not something you can leave on the table, loaded. You should keep it in a safe place, accessible only by you and no one else.

 

though i'm long past the point where i need worry about the actions of my adult son, i have always religiously placed all my weapons in a locked closet whenever my granddaughter has come to visit. this is part of being a responsible gun owner. i've also put my knives, even kitchen knives, out of reach and blocked access to electrical outlets where necessary. now should we talk about the theft of weapons by adults, even our adult children? the gun owner can hardly be held at fault for the illegal actions of other adults. though common decency would seem to demand a certain amount of guilt for any harm done, the crime of others would mitigate that to some degree.

 

If you can’t quote a part you don’t understand it is probably futile to even quote your own signature line.

Why jump to the conclusion that the ones we need to potentially prosecute are the parents, they pay taxes to educate their kid, so the first ones we think about prosecuting should be their instructors and Imam’s…who could have taught them wrong.

There needs to be some consistency in the law, and instead of a focus on the the parents we need a little blind justice chick to look at the facts and weigh everything first.

It is a little bit funny that “liberals” will parachute a bunch of weapons into Syria without any background checks or gun locks so bad kids won’t use them, and would scream racism if we suggested prosecuting the anointed one for being a profoundly worse irresponsible gun distributor, but they will send in the FEDS, at the behest of a lynch mob screaming "no (lynch mob) justice no peace," to look for a civil rights violation by the guy that shoots a fight club thug that was mercilessly beating him and to investigate a cop that was attacked by a strong arm robber.

 

Is English not your first language?
Where do "instructors and imams" come into this?
Or taxes?
What is "a little blind justice chick"?

Arming rebels in Syria has absolutely nothing to do with the discussion at hand.

And I'm guessing the last part has to do with the Ferguson MO thing, which again has nothing to do with the topic.

But sure, I'm the one who doesn't understand, yep.

 

1) “How would you feel if your son found your gun and decided to shoot kids?”
2) “Should we begin prosecuting negligent parents when their kids take their guns?”

What is the MOTIVE for the crime? Don’t kids have motives too?

In the first one, “and decided” is the important factor, where did they acquire that morality for the motive?

In the second one, negligence of the parents is not limited to guns. The first option in the poll is, “I would weep for everyone,“ because the kid is innocent and brain washed by an Imam? So a reasonable person could weep because the negligence of the parents was sending their child to a public school where they had to walk through a gauntlet blacks with little fits sticking out of their back pocket, and were beaten up every day after school, or the parents were negligent because they didn’t go up to the school and monitor the classes like ads on TV want parents to monitor their child’s Internet activity. Maybe the negligence was in, parents and teachers and community organizers, not teaching the thug to not attack store clerks or police inside their cruisers. A kid who is not taught right might commit strong arm robbery or shoot kiddies.

Maybe the kid found the gun while strong arm robbing the parents, and the parent’s only negligence was in not shooting their son in the head when he turned around and came back for more.

Maybe the parent was cleaning the gun and was distracted by a phone from the school telling the parent that their child did not show up for school today, and that is when the child found the gun unattended, because they planned it that way.

Maybe the parents were negligent for letting the kid on the Internet, or sending him to private school where the Imam taught him to kill, or to a public school where the teacher taught him that terrorists were “playing by the rules of warfare.”

“Blind justice (concept) is a legal concept regarding the neutrality of the dispensing of justice.”
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blind_Justice

There is no neutrality in assuming the deaths were the result of the parent’s negligence with regard to guns.

Since no specific case was cited, therefore, no specific State laws with regard to guns in the home can be cited for evidence of negligence. The kid could have been 16, the age of my father when he went in the Army and was immediately promoted to sergeant, when the DI lined them up and punched them all in the stomach at Camp Lee Virginia prior to Pearl Harbor, all because he was logging for the WPA in Oregon at the age of 14, after having been given to a family at 12 that got their farm from FDR’s little known land redistribution program, where he lived in a barn and plowed the fields… The views on what age someone should not have a gun may be different depending upon whether your parents were cupcakes or a Drill Instructor at 16.


A “liberal” idea of negligence could be different than someone else’s view, which is why we pass laws, anything else is a civil matter.

The morality of the thug who decides to shoot kids might be influenced by the actions of adults around them. Do the adults give arms to people irresponsibly, are they hypocrites? Kids are impressionable. My father had a dark skinned Indian girlfriend killed in the war, but he was blackballed for doing business with Germany after the war, and had a cross burned in his yard and his car trashed for refusing to discriminate against blacks; where did the punk gunman get his morality for the motive?

If the point of this poll is to take motive out of the equation for deciding what to weep about or do, then it is a retarded poll.

BE A “LIBERAL” ROBOT, motive is not important, only your disarmament is important, now take your pills THX 1138.

 

Blame it on my baby mama.

 

I'd feel the same way as if my son illegally purchased a fire arm and shot kids.

 

Progressives, it would seem, believe American rule of law should accommodate individual "feelings"....just as they've deemed America's "unfair" (more "feelings") economic system should accommodate individual "needs"

 

Which does not in any way address the topic in this thread....great job.

 

Yes, it does. It just wasn't the answer that fits your hilarious agenda.