Dad Brings Gun to School (video)

tude dog · Post by **tude dog** » Fri May 10, 2013 12:08 pm

The anti-gun folk cling on to Sandy Hook, squeezing it for the last bit of blood, hoping to reignite the early panic. The rest of the world moved on.

MICHIGAN DAD DECIDES TO OPEN CARRY .45-CAL. HANDGUN AT HIS DAUGHTERâ€™S SCHOOL

Seeking to make a point about firearms, a Michigan man decided to open carry his .45-cal. handgun at his daughterâ€™s school and later uploaded the footage to YouTube. The father says he made sure to first notify the school, the Michigan State Police, the county sheriff and other local law enforcement officials that he would be exercising his right to carry a gun.

The man behind the video told TheBlaze on Wednesday that he was not legally required to alert police or school officials that he would be carrying a gun. But rather than risk causing a panic, the man decided to let them know he would be legally carrying a firearm on school property.

THE BLAZE

I dunno what it is with open carry people and their videos.

AnneBoleyn · Post by **AnneBoleyn** » Fri May 10, 2013 2:01 pm

"The anti-gun folk cling on to Sandy Hook, squeezing it for the last bit of blood, hoping to reignite the early panic. The rest of the world moved on."

The parents of the dead children of Sandy Hook will never move on. There will always be a missing part of their hearts, their souls. It is hard enough to move on from natural death, to spend the rest of your life without that person. We are all survivors but some get to endure bigger burdens. I guess they should just make lemonade.

Try giving snarkiness a rest. Even if you disagree on principle, you can still refrain from being nasty about it. That's your burden.

tude dog · Post by **tude dog** » Fri May 10, 2013 3:10 pm

AnneBoleyn;1426664 wrote: "The anti-gun folk cling on to Sandy Hook, squeezing it for the last bit of blood, hoping to reignite the early panic. The rest of the world moved on."

The parents of the dead children of Sandy Hook will never move on. There will always be a missing part of their hearts, their souls. It is hard enough to move on from natural death, to spend the rest of your life without that person. We are all survivors but some get to endure bigger burdens. I guess they should just make lemonade.

Try giving snarkiness a rest. Even if you disagree on principle, you can still refrain from being nasty about it. That's your burden.

My comments were in no way disrespectful of the families who suffered from the murders at Sandy Hook.

I was speaking of those who seek to use that tragedy for political gain. Politically the murders have pretty much lost momentum. Nonetheless, with nothing better to promote their cause, the likes of Slate.com and Mother Jones, among others continue to use them for whatever they are worth.

Of course the families affected are forever wounded and deserve all of our compassion.

AnneBoleyn · Post by **AnneBoleyn** » Fri May 10, 2013 3:24 pm

My comments were in no way disrespectful of the families who suffered from the murders at Sandy Hook.

Of course the families affected are forever wounded and deserve all of our compassion.
Nicely said.

I was speaking of those who seek to use that tragedy for political gain. Politically the murders have pretty much lost momentum. Nonetheless, with nothing better to promote their cause, the likes of Slate.com and Mother Jones, among others continue to use them for whatever they are worth.

The parents have no voice on their own. They are begging to be "used". They have a cause & they live the momentum. Gabby Giffords lives the momentum. Brady lives the momentum. Every side of an argument will use examples that support their POV.

The man in the video, IMO, is a sociopath. He deliberately puts himself out there, wanting to provoke & offend. His actions were totally unnecessary except to stroke his own ego by attempting to inflame others. For no good reason, as his rights are not being threatened in any way except in his own mind. Very childish, an attention seeker.

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Fri May 10, 2013 3:33 pm

Why shouldn't an event like Sandy Hook not to used politically anyway? That's what we do in life - we take events and use them to help reshape our society. What does your side do? They take misfortunes of people who have been victims of crimes and use them for their "protection" agenda.

This entire whining about riding the events of Newtown being sinful is a strawman argument.

ETA: But it gets lapped up by people who can't think for themselves.

tude dog · Post by **tude dog** » Fri May 10, 2013 4:36 pm

AnneBoleyn;1426682 wrote: The man in the video, IMO, is a sociopath. He deliberately puts himself out there, wanting to provoke & offend. His actions were totally unnecessary except to stroke his own ego by attempting to inflame others. For no good reason, as his rights are not being threatened in any way except in his own mind. Very childish, an attention seeker.

Among pro-gun people there is a lot of discussion on open carry, conceal carry and such videos. Some would agree with you, in that this guy just wanted to get attention.

I see it as he called everybody to not cause a ruckus. What he did was show that it was no big deal. Now that the ice is broken, I hope he does it every time he picks up his daughter. No body got upset, no panic, which has been my experience the times I openly carry a gun. In fact seems most people never seem to notice.

BTW, though legal, don't open carry very often, and usually in a town not close to where I live.

Post by **LarsMac** » Fri May 10, 2013 6:58 pm

Don't really get this guy's point.

Nobody EVER needs to know when I am carrying a gun.

Unless, of course, I need to use it.

Bruv · Post by **Bruv** » Sat May 11, 2013 1:16 am

As an Englishman I find the arguments 'for' and the 'need to' frightening.

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Sat May 11, 2013 2:13 am

Bruv;1426701 wrote: As an Englishman I find the arguments 'for' and the 'need to' frightening.They don't want to have that discussion, they run from it. Notice how the discussion of open carry is a forward moving one for gun enthusiasts, it assumes we're alright with the guns being out there and now have to become used to seeing them displayed on a regular basis. It's a smooth slight of hand by the gun lobby. People who make these arguments are following what the NRA advises as a way to take on the issue.

tude dog · Post by **tude dog** » Sat May 11, 2013 5:51 am

LarsMac;1426695 wrote: Don't really get this guy's point.

Nobody EVER needs to know when I am carrying a gun.

Unless, of course, I need to use it.

I believe his point is it's really no big deal.

It's like once conceal carry is legalized, the anti's arguments of blood in the streets, road rage shootouts etc. proved to be fear mongering. Openly carry a gun into school children do not scream and run about in panic. Not a lot different than when in a grocery store or park.

The merits, or lack of when it comes to open carry take up lots of space on gun sites. Once started seems they never stop.

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Sat May 11, 2013 6:15 am

tude dog;1426723 wrote: I believe his point is it's really no big deal.

It's like once conceal carry is legalized, the anti's arguments of blood in the streets, road rage shootouts etc. proved to be fear mongering. Openly carry a gun into school children do not scream and run about in panic. Not a lot different than when in a grocery store or park.

The merits, or lack of when it comes to open carry take up lots of space on gun sites. Once started seems they never stop. This is a sophistic argument circulated by the gun lobby. Children usually don't go screaming and running when they see guns being carried for the most part because they're trusting of the adults who they see carry them. That is unless and until the children either experience or witness abuse at the hands of those likely to carry guns (men). That's what makes children easy targets, the trust factor.

The argument boils down to whether or not our children and society in general should have the right to have a trusting attitude towards each other. The gun lobby works overtime convincing us that due to what even they term as a minor problem (violent crime) we should not be trusting of one another and carry weapons. They've convinced many of those who subscribe to their newsletters of this, and so, one has to wonder why that is. Could it be that permitting oneself to be fed something on a consistent basis breeds and maintains the fear? It doesn't take a brain surgeon to figure that one out.

gmc · Post by **gmc** » Sat May 11, 2013 8:19 am

To use a colloquialism he's just playing the big man. A social inadequate that needs a gun to make himself feel good.

Post by **LarsMac** » Sat May 11, 2013 8:44 am

Well, sure, no kids ran around screaming.

The administration had advanced notice the guy was coming.

I can hear the announcement on the PA:

"Attention please, everyone. Agatha mindbender's father is coming to the school, today, and he's bringing his gun. Everyone, please remain calm. No yelling and screaming. We do not want Mr Mindbender to become confused and shoot anyone, now, do we? Thank you."

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Sat May 11, 2013 9:08 am

LarsMac;1426734 wrote: Well, sure, no kids ran around screaming.

The administration had advanced notice the guy was coming.

I can hear the announcement on the PA:

"Attention please, everyone. Agatha mindbender's father is coming to the school, today, and he's bringing his gun. Everyone, please remain calm. No yelling and screaming. We do not want Mr Mindbender to become confused and shoot anyone, now, do we? Thank you.":wah:

"Oh, and Johnny, today might be a good day to leave those lunch boxes alone."

Bruv · Post by **Bruv** » Sat May 11, 2013 11:59 am

I might have this all wrong, but.......the idea was to openly carry a gun into a school 'just because it's allowed'?

To reinforce his right to openly carry a gun?

The result that noone overly noticed is then deemed a victory ? For who ?

Next time a bad guy enters the school grounds and makes his way into the depths of the school with a gun on each hip.....the kids will just smile as he passes, thinking he is Ethans father on a visit

Post by **LarsMac** » Sat May 11, 2013 10:47 pm

I have owned firearms, pretty much my entire life.

I have no use for anyone who wants to show off theirs, or try to make a point at other folks' expense.

I don't much care that you may have the right to strap a hogleg on your hip and prance around town with it. Just 'cuz you can, don't make it a good idea.

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Sun May 12, 2013 4:18 am

LarsMac;1426783 wrote: I have owned firearms, pretty much my entire life.

I have no use for anyone who wants to show off theirs, or try to make a point at other folks' expense.

I don't much care that you may have the right to strap a hogleg on your hip and prance around town with it. Just 'cuz you can, don't make it a good idea.And so the point from the other side is: is this person a good enough decision maker that he should have guns in his possession? His behavior in this situation may be revealing that when he feels strongly (emotional) enough about something he goes just a step or two beyond where many others would be more descrete, and it might only take one or two steps for a situation to become chaotic and unsafe. Does a person such as this hold the community at large as more important than his need to make a personal point for the good of a minority? Some might now make the case that he should at least be evaluated.

It all gets very messy and is an undue burden upon the society as a whole when you multiply even this one guy by tens of millions throughout the country. We have so much to focus on as a county, why be burdened with this crap of who guns should and shouldn't be available to? It's obvious that not everyone should have access to firearms and the availability of them appears to be reaching a point to where there are more laying around out there than that not only does not benefit society but is endangering it. America needs to take a real close look at herself and make a cultural change for its own good.

Ahso! · Post by **Ahso!** » Sun May 12, 2013 4:26 am

tude dog;1426723 wrote: I believe his point is it's really no big deal.

It's like once conceal carry is legalized, the anti's arguments of blood in the streets, road rage shootouts etc. proved to be fear mongering.Openly carry a gun into school children do not scream and run about in panic. Not a lot different than when in a grocery store or park.

The merits, or lack of when it comes to open carry take up lots of space on gun sites. Once started seems they never stop.Really? What's revealing about these Strawman arguments you attempt to advance is that anytime "the anti" side as you put it, point to "blood in the streets", or in this case blood in the school, they're accused by your side of "exploiting tragedy". So, you see, your arguments add up to one strawman after another. You can't have a meaningful discussion if one side is going to cry foul when evidence is presented.