http://gunssavelives.net/anti-gun-h...ning-in-broken-toy-gun-to-school-authorities/ And people wonder why pro gun folks fight so hard for their rights...this story just tells you what the world would look like if they had their way.
As Holder said in 1995, the socialists have to brainwash children into thinking guns are inherently evil. http://gunssavelives.net/blog/the-p...ithin-two-generations-is-happening-right-now/
Handgun control advocate here. This is ridiculous. What a waste of time. They are toys for God's sake. That said, please continue your regular caricaturized bashing.
When I was 17, in my senior year in HS in So. Cal., there was a bit of an issue going on. Some kids in my school had died. I knew who was responsible, and I was helping local authorities to get them caught. The Principal and I had a talk. During that talk, I pulled the Ruger .357 Mag. Security Six from my waist band and laid it on his desk. He understood the gesture perfectly well. It meant that I was committed to this, and on the right side. He eyed the gun, but didn't stray at all from our discussion. At the end of our talk, I put the gun back in my pants, and went about my day. There was a time in this Country when Men were Men. The grown Men understood that the young Men would have to bear responsibility for our Society. The young were nurtured in their understanding along the way. Examples such as the topic of this thread are clear evidence that we have lost the whole concept.
In Chicago of all places, who would of ever thought? I sometimes ask myself, are libs more scared of guns or logic and facts?
All antis have been brainwashed into believing it is the gun...they don't let logic and facts stand in the way.
That's sad but true. A good friend of mine is a lib and I swear that his eyes glaze over and a look of confusion sets in whenever I bring up an irrefutable fact. It's like trying to explain brain surgery to a monkey.
Sorry - this is from a site that is "pro-gun" and could possibly be and probably is a astro turf site for the armaments industry - anyone else would think "Based mush" but the pro-gunners just eat it up
Then prove it to be untrue. You cannot just dismiss something just because the story came from a potentially biased source. Otherwise, I can dismiss the vast majority of all of the stories on the television news channels and the print news outlets. Since you are the one impugning the validity of this story, then it is up to you to do the research and prove it to be wrong. I personally do not think that it is so far-fetched for a student to be suspended for a toy gun, since we have already seen stories of students being suspended for eating FOOD that was shaped like a gun http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2013/03/18/student-suspended-for-pop-tart-gun_n_2903500.html. This is the insane new world that we live in now, where common sense has officially been pronounced dead.
And these stories sell newspapers. In other words are they a "beat up" because the journalists know that they will garner outrage. Have you also thought that maybe, just maybe if there were fewer gun injuries in schools schools would not be so paranoid See we do not see those stories over here and I think it is because our gun injury rate is so low - mind you id a kid came to school with a real gun they, the parents, the neighbours and just about anyone within a five block radius would be asked why? But let us look at some of the main players here because I really doubt this is just about a plastic gun
You are changing the subject entirely. There is no doubt that stories like this "garner outrage" (and rightfully so). That's not what you originally said however. Your original contention was that this website that showed the story was biased (you specifically called it "astro turf site for the armaments industry"), thereby impugning the validity of the story. Gun injuries in schools are very rare, and certainly should not garner any paranoia whatsoever. I find it hard to believe that you are seemingly defending this level of extreme paranoia where children are unable to own toy guns or even chew a pop tart in the shape of a gun without being suspended from school. I know the term "insane" is used a lot, but this is, without exaggeration, this action by the school meets the defintion of insanity. This story is not about guns. It is about a child bringing into school a plastic toy gun that has no resemblance to a real gun and being suspended for doing so. This story is about punishing an 11-year-old boy for being an 11-year-old boy. The same thing would happen here. What's your point? It's not about a plastic gun. It's about the absurd punishment of suspending an 11-year-old boy for having a non-firing plastic gun.
White people who own guns for self defense are obviously racists! Whenever a white person's home is attacked and invaded by Obama yoots, the home owner should: 1. Allow the yoots to enter and steal whatever they want. 2. File a police report. 3. Notify the insurance company. Thank you.
.........thought you didn't believe in God.................... - - - Updated - - - they are afraid of everything that does not bear the Government seal of approval...........
You make me LOL, here we have an article that can be validated, regardless of who published it and like always you anti-gunners attack the source because you have no real defense for the actions I was commenting on. Then to top it off your kind use sites like huffpo to validate your beliefs and you call what we use as information as astro-turf sites. That is definitely a kettle meet pot moment. Continuing on and hoping you could respond to the OP here is a link to the copy of the document submitted to the Chicago school district in which Rutherford was acting on behalf of the mother at her request, and once again I'll state plainly, And people wonder why pro gun folks fight so hard for their rights...this story just tells you what the world would look like if they had their way. I could only imagine what we would look like if we followed your advice. Just like Australia, our violent crime rate would be going up instead of down. SHEESH Whoops...Link https://www.rutherford.org/files_images/general/02-06-2014_Letter-to-Price.pdf
Our local school system (maybe state) has a rule called safe harbor. It means if the kid turns in their contraband weapons or other items to a teacher/administrator before they are caught/turned in by another student, the item is simply confiscated, and there are no repercussions. This is so that Boy Scout who puts a pocket knife in his coat pocket, but forgets to take it out after a campout, isn't punished. It would also fit for the above case.
Perhaps you could write a treatise on your handgun or other gun control ideas. Maybe I've missed it, but a think your own thread on the subject would be in order. Please include exactly what weapons, types and caliber that need controlled and also the laws you want to infringe on Constitutional rights. You may also use any pseudo-intellectual babble to explain how the word "infringe" now means something different now than it did in 1789. Please explain how these ideas will suddenly curtail gang murders, that account for at least half of all murders in the US---and about 80% of the murders in the most violent urban cities---like Chicago.
I'm not really interested in epic gun debates anymore. It isn't that important to me. There are far greater issues facing the country than whether or not guns need to be more heavily regulated. I'll give you a CliffNotes version, and I may or may not respond, depending on how much cares I have when you get back to me: 1. I'd like to repeal the 2nd Amendment and replace it with a law that says the federal government may not pass any legislation dealing with guns, be it to curtail their ownership or to propagate it. I know, I know, it's your right, but the Constitution allows for such repeals, and you'll just have to deal with that. 2. I'd like to see gun laws dealt with on a municipal or state level. What works in one place doesn't work in another. There doesn't appear to be much of a need to regulate guns in rural Arizona, for instance. I'd also like for people to respect the wishes of smaller communities to deal with problems as they see fit. If a community wants no regulations on guns, that should be well within their ability to legislate. If a community wants to ban handguns, they should be allowed too. In my mind, gun ownership just isn't important enough to liberty to embody it as a right in the Constitution. 3. Giving the police the ability to arrest anyone with a handgun will most certainly result in getting gangsters off the street. It is damned obvious. Since simply possessing a handgun is a crime, you'd be able to break up gangs with little to no difficulty. And once they are in the system, there is a good chance they'll never get out. Which is great. This is how every other Western nation in the world is able to have terrible ghettos just like the US, without the associated gun violence.
Nothing to deal with her....you can like in one hand and wish in the other and guess what...both of your hands would be empty, nothing would change. People have been discussing with you about your opinion and the political correctness of it...it doesn't really matter because the 2nd amendment ain't going anywhere....you'll just have to deal with that...eh? Like to see all you want. The framers set limits on government authority over certain things....guns was one therefore what you propose has been failing in court decisions on a regular basis no matter what you think is important. Sorry for you eh! You lose this one in the courts as well.....limiting police powers has long been upheld as constitutional in many different areas of the law. Political correctness aside...have you ever backed a winning strategy?
I was asked what I'd like to see happen. That's what I'd like to see happen. The likelihood of it happening is non-existent, I certainly agree with that assessment. I don't really care though. What you do with guns isn't a big concern of mine. Statistically, gun deaths are like, what, 1% of the total deaths per year in the US? No biggy.
Thank you for your imput. As you are of a completely different mindset on the natural right of humans to protect themselves, there is no need to discuss this right in the context of the law. Laws will not be effective anywhere where there are large groups of people who are morally debased and do not, and will not follow them. Your ideas of state and local control of guns, as worthy as you think they are, will not work then, as they do not work now. It is already a federal crime for a convicted felon to have a gun in his possession. Why are so many of these felons arrested and then so very few ever get convicted---and even fewer serve time? The Feds have shown very little interest in enforcing laws that prohibit felons from obtaining guns: http://www.politifact.com/wisconsin...es-criminal-charges-fraction-gun-denial-case/ Worse are so many local juristdictions. One can easily see that a community that allows gangbangers to rule the streets will also not want them be convicted, let alone prosecuted most of the time: The districts of Eastern New York, Central California, and Northern Illinois ranked 88th, 89th and 90th, respectively, out of 90 districts, in prosecutions of federal weapons crimes per capita last year, but it wasn't always this way. All three districts fell lower on the list than they had been in years past. In 2010, for example, Chicago was 78th in federal weapons prosecutions. These cities also have some of the nation's most restrictive gun laws, as well as the most active mayors in championing gun control. New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg, Chicago Mayor Rahm Emanuel and Los Angeles Mayor Antonio Villaraigosa are all members of the national Mayors Against Illegal Guns campaign. http://www.usnews.com/news/blogs/wa...new-york-prosecuted-fewest-federal-gun-crimes It is obvious to me at least, that all the wonerful gun laws in the world won't make a difference if the criminals are not going to be punished. This is why crime remains high in Mexico, with its draconian gun laws. The gangsters in the US you think are being punished are getting right back out again, if they even get in prision to start with. Your ideas: No sale.
Police already have the ability that you speak of. Gang members are not carrying legally. They don't obtain CCW's, therefore they can be arrested when caught with guns. It's damned obvious. Why are there still gangs?
