ForumGarden

The Brady Campaign is endorsing this http://www.pledge.org/?p=The+Pledge

Oh no no no - that entire A = B is just completely lacking in logic.

"The Pledge encourages young people to take a proactive stance in reducing gun violence". Good, so they should, I'm delighted, all it takes is a promise on their part and permission from their local authority to do what they promise. They need to be enabled if they're to combat gun violence.

"never carry a gun to school"?

How on earth can they "take a proactive stance in reducing gun violence" if they're unarmed when someone violent with a gun shows up?

The only possible way they can "take a proactive stance in reducing gun violence" is to promise to go to school legally armed at all times and to react legally and proactively toward anyone displaying gun violence tendencies.

Every school massacre in living memory has relied on the targeted "young people" being unarmed.

Go on, try to explain to me the benefit of going unarmed in a society where criminals regularly use guns, or more particularly the benefit of going unarmed to school in a society where there's a national game of high-score shootings on campus. A school campus is about the only place in America outside of Amish territory where a shooter can keep reloading and firing without meeting anyone else who's armed and able to stop him, that's why schools are the place that high-score shooters play their game. It's a totally safe space for them for the ten or twenty or thirty minutes they need.

That pledge is grooming victims.

I can see people being worried about having lots of armed "young people" at school because young lads can get heated when they argue, I have a solution for that too. The change in the local laws to allow "young people" to carry concealed weapons on a school campus can be restricted to just the girls. No girl, as far as I know, ever illegally shot anyone on a school campus and certainly none have ever played high-score shootings on one. If the law allows just the girls to be armed on campus, and the girls "promise to go to school legally armed at all times and to react legally and proactively toward anyone displaying gun violence tendencies", then American campus life might finally be safer than now.

spot;1030715 wrote: Oh no no no - that entire A = B is just completely lacking in logic.

"The Pledge encourages young people to take a proactive stance in reducing gun violence". Good, so they should, I'm delighted, all it takes is a promise on their part and permission from their local authority to do what they promise. They need to be enabled if they're to combat gun violence.

"never carry a gun to school"?

How on earth can they "take a proactive stance in reducing gun violence" if they're unarmed when someone violent with a gun shows up?

The only possible way they can "take a proactive stance in reducing gun violence" is to promise to go to school legally armed at all times and to react legally and proactively toward anyone displaying gun violence tendencies.

Every school massacre in living memory has relied on the targeted "young people" being unarmed.

Go on, try to explain to me the benefit of going unarmed in a society where criminals regularly use guns, or more particularly the benefit of going unarmed to school in a society where there's a national game of high-score shootings on campus. A school campus is about the only place in America outside of Amish territory where a shooter can keep reloading and firing without meeting anyone else who's armed and able to stop him, that's why schools are the place that high-score shooters play their game. It's a totally safe space for them for the ten or twenty or thirty minutes they need.

That pledge is grooming victims.

I can see people being worried about having lots of armed "young people" at school because young lads can get heated when they argue, I have a solution for that too. The change in the local laws to allow "young people" to carry concealed weapons on a school campus can be restricted to just the girls. No girl, as far as I know, ever illegally shot anyone on a school campus and certainly none have ever played high-score shootings on one. If the law allows just the girls to be armed on campus, and the girls "promise to go to school legally armed at all times and to react legally and proactively toward anyone displaying gun violence tendencies", then American campus life might finally be safer than now.


This is an interesting perspective. On the surface it seems kind of over the top. But in reality it makes some sense. There is just one thing. OK .....so the girls are all armed, the boys arent. One girl finds out her boyfriend is cheating on her....hell hath no fury....and the boys all unarmed? So there is a point of danger. But on the other hand maybe boys would be so scared that they would not DARE step out of line.

School shootings have nothing to do with kids having access to firearms. In fact, this generation has less access to firearms than at any point in our history.

Stupid, selfish, ignorant parents who put their carreers and interests before their kids are the ones producing the kids responsible for these shootings.

A child has the innate unquestionable right to believe they come first in their parents’ lives. The moment this concept is destroyed, serious irreparable damage is done. It warps their view of their parents, the world and themselves. Depression, self loathing and guilt become an integral part of who that child is and it only gets worse as the child gets older. If they aren’t important to their parents then how can they mean anything to anybody else? They believe they are useless which permanently damages their self confidence.

As these kids grow, years of depression, frustration and confusion began to manifest itself. In my case, it manifested itself as anger. Every time I was insulted, teased or bullied I would respond violently. The slightest personal insult would cause me to physically attack the person it was coming from. I had held it in for too long and could not take it anymore. Because of the way I was raised, a part of me believed every insult that was ever hurled at me which is why it hurt.

When I fought, I fought hard. I would feel such a malevolent level of anger and hate for the person I was fighting that I would literally try to pound the life out of them.

These kids who do these shootings, I understand them. I understand the feelings that can drive a kid to do such horrible things as I have had them myself. Fortunatly, I had a good friend who came into my life right when I needed it most.

The bottom line is this,

The actions, decisions, and thoughts of our children are a direct reflection of our parenting, period.

Targeting guns and making more laws is an immature, knee jerk reaction that will do nothing to address the cause of these shootings. Until we hold the ones who are legally responsible for the actions of these children (the parents) accountable nothing will ever change.

-Erik

I don't always blame the parents by no means.

........all family's are not created equal.



these kids know damn well what they are doing.

for once, instead of the parents paying, have the kids own up to what they have done wrong and let punishment be that of an adults one.

Odie;1051341 wrote: for once, instead of the parents paying, have the kids own up to what they have done wrong and let punishment be that of an adults one.


They're DEAD, Odie! They shoot themselves, they blow their heads off with their shotguns, they don't get captured, that's a major part of their script! How on earth are they going to own up to what they have done wrong?

spot;1051342 wrote: They're DEAD, Odie! They shoot themselves, they blow their heads off with their shotguns, they don't get captured, that's a major part of their script! How on earth are they going to own up to what they have done wrong?


They dont all blow their heads off.

spot;1051342 wrote: They're DEAD, Odie! They shoot themselves, they blow their heads off with their shotguns, they don't get captured, that's a major part of their script! How on earth are they going to own up to what they have done wrong?


not all of them shoot themselves here, but its all blame on parenting here!



solution: treat schools like airports, security everywhere, devices students & anyone entering have to go thru before getting inside.

Odie;1051346 wrote: not all of them shoot themselves here, but its all blame on parenting here!



solution: treat schools like airports, security everywhere, devices students & anyone entering have to go thru before getting inside.


I believe because of past child abuse concerns that we have all gone too far to the other end of the scale. There is no discipline anymore. Kids are taught that everything they do is their parents responsibility and nothing is the kids responsibilty. They think they can do anything and it is mom and dad's fault. Excuses, excuses. I think it is rather cruel to ban parents from disciplining their kids and then to blame those parents when the kids run amok.

wildhorses;1051344 wrote: They dont all blow their heads off.


How exciting. I generalised but not to an unreasonable degree, you need only consider how few (outside of Japan and China where the rules seem to differ) failed to get that bit of the script right.

List of mass murderers and spree killers by number of victims - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia is a useful starting place. See all those "committed suicide" markers? They're what I was talking about. They're an overwhelming majority, don't you think?

Odie;1051346 wrote: solution: treat schools like airports, security everywhere, devices students & anyone entering have to go thru before getting inside.
My understanding is that the US already has that, and that schools would be considered failing in their obligation to the students if they didn't.

spot;1051349 wrote: How exciting. I generalised but not to an unreasonable degree, you need only consider how few (outside of Japan and China where the rules seem to differ) failed to get that bit of the script right.

List of mass murderers and spree killers by number of victims - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia is a useful starting place. See all those "committed suicide" markers? They're what I was talking about. They're an overwhelming majority, don't you think?


Some of them kill themselves. But the ones who dont should be prosecuted as adults for sure.

spot;1051350 wrote: My understanding is that the US already has that, and that schools would be considered failing in their obligation to the students if they didn't.


They do have metal detectors in the schools here. Not all of them.....the rougher ones do have them though. It is to protect the other students.

wildhorses;1051351 wrote: Some of them kill themselves. But the ones who dont should be prosecuted as adults for sure.


How very helpful - that'll obviously deter more of them from killing themselves, eh? Instant progress toward fixing the problem, that. Congratulations. As far as I'm concerned, prevention is way higher on the list of desirable ends than how they get prosecuted.

spot;1051353 wrote: How very helpful - that'll obviously deter more of them from killing themselves, eh? Instant progress toward fixing the problem, that. Congratulations. As far as I'm concerned, prevention is way higher on the list of desirable ends than how they get prosecuted.


Prevention is in raising kids to take responsibility for what they do. That they cant always have their own way. And that they must respect others. When kids are raised to think that everything they do is someone else's fault, then they find an excuse to rationalize any activity.

wildhorses;1051375 wrote: Prevention is in raising kids to take responsibility for what they do. That they cant always have their own way. And that they must respect others. When kids are raised to think that everything they do is someone else's fault, then they find an excuse to rationalize any activity.


Bravo. How does that relate to "have the kids own up to what they have done wrong and let punishment be that of an adults one" which is what I reacted to originally and what I've been discussing since?

Would you like to trail around after Hoss or Nomad for a few weeks so we all get the benefit?

spot;1051379 wrote: Bravo. How does that relate to "have the kids own up to what they have done wrong and let punishment be that of an adults one" which is what I reacted to originally and what I've been discussing since?

Would you like to trail around after Hoss or Nomad for a few weeks so we all get the benefit?


Because you said you preferred prevention to punishment...and I am offerring a preventative solution.

wildhorses;1051392 wrote: Because you said you preferred prevention to punishment...and I am offerring a preventative solution.


You'll pardon my suggesting this but I suspect you're raising a non-existent phantom by means of loose wording. You play on "kids". You extent the word from birth to 18 and responsibility varies totally between the one extreme and the other. It's a graded period. At one end you have parental responsibility, at the other you have individual responsibility.

The phantom is this concept that any section of society raises children "to think that everything they do is someone else's fault" at which point "they find an excuse to rationalize any activity". It's a myth. What you describe is your own parody of reality designed to allow you to mock instead of contribute. I don't find it constructive. All I can do is attempt to educate in the face of lying creeps who, inside, actually know they're lying but prefer their own propaganda to any genuine solution. To my mind you're not helping, you're a significant part of the problem.

spot;1051403 wrote: You'll pardon my suggesting this but I suspect you're raising a non-existent phantom by means of loose wording. You play on "kids". You extent the word from birth to 18 and responsibility varies totally between the one extreme and the other. It's a graded period. At one end you have parental responsibility, at the other you have individual responsibility.

The phantom is this concept that any section of society raises children "to think that everything they do is someone else's fault" at which point "they find an excuse to rationalize any activity". It's a myth. What you describe is your own parody of reality designed to allow you to mock instead of contribute. I don't find it constructive. All I can do is attempt to educate in the face of lying creeps who, inside, actually know they're lying but prefer their own propaganda to any genuine solution. To my mind you're not helping, you're a significant part of the problem.


We are not talking about infants. When was the last time an infant went and shot up a school....?

spot;1051403 wrote: You'll pardon my suggesting this but I suspect you're raising a non-existent phantom by means of loose wording. You play on "kids". You extent the word from birth to 18 and responsibility varies totally between the one extreme and the other. It's a graded period. At one end you have parental responsibility, at the other you have individual responsibility.

The phantom is this concept that any section of society raises children "to think that everything they do is someone else's fault" at which point "they find an excuse to rationalize any activity". It's a myth. What you describe is your own parody of reality designed to allow you to mock instead of contribute. I don't find it constructive. All I can do is attempt to educate in the face of lying creeps who, inside, actually know they're lying but prefer their own propaganda to any genuine solution. To my mind you're not helping, you're a significant part of the problem.



Well I am not helping your side of the argument ...thats for sure...

spot;1051350 wrote: My understanding is that the US already has that, and that schools would be considered failing in their obligation to the students if they didn't.


we don't here.........would cost millions.

some have a security guard at the door......that doesn't do anything.

need detectors for anyone entering.

Odie;1051574 wrote: we don't here.........would cost millions.Well, thinking about it - aren't you in Canada?

Erik;1050316 wrote: School shootings have nothing to do with kids having access to firearms. In fact, this generation has less access to firearms than at any point in our history.

Stupid, selfish, ignorant parents who put their carreers and interests before their kids are the ones producing the kids responsible for these shootings.

A child has the innate unquestionable right to believe they come first in their parents’ lives. The moment this concept is destroyed, serious irreparable damage is done. It warps their view of their parents, the world and themselves. Depression, self loathing and guilt become an integral part of who that child is and it only gets worse as the child gets older. If they aren’t important to their parents then how can they mean anything to anybody else? They believe they are useless which permanently damages their self confidence.

As these kids grow, years of depression, frustration and confusion began to manifest itself. In my case, it manifested itself as anger. Every time I was insulted, teased or bullied I would respond violently. The slightest personal insult would cause me to physically attack the person it was coming from. I had held it in for too long and could not take it anymore. Because of the way I was raised, a part of me believed every insult that was ever hurled at me which is why it hurt.

When I fought, I fought hard. I would feel such a malevolent level of anger and hate for the person I was fighting that I would literally try to pound the life out of them.

These kids who do these shootings, I understand them. I understand the feelings that can drive a kid to do such horrible things as I have had them myself. Fortunatly, I had a good friend who came into my life right when I needed it most.

The bottom line is this,

The actions, decisions, and thoughts of our children are a direct reflection of our parenting, period.

Targeting guns and making more laws is an immature, knee jerk reaction that will do nothing to address the cause of these shootings. Until we hold the ones who are legally responsible for the actions of these children (the parents) accountable nothing will ever change.

-Erik


Then shoot the parents..not other people's kids when they are in no position to defend themselves.

spot;1051349 wrote: How exciting. I generalised but not to an unreasonable degree, you need only consider how few (outside of Japan and China where the rules seem to differ) failed to get that bit of the script right.

List of mass murderers and spree killers by number of victims - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia is a useful starting place. See all those "committed suicide" markers? They're what I was talking about. They're an overwhelming majority, don't you think?


Spot.. There was a school girl who gunned down her school friends in a playground in America. I will try to find a link. It was what inspired the 'I Don't like Monday's' song by the 'Boomtown Rats' in the 70's. The lyrics are based on what the girl said when asked why she had done it.. She replied 'I don't like Monday's'.

It's the best i can find. It's a conflicting story but there is rumour to what i have just posted.

snopes.com: I Don't Like Mondays

Sorry!!! Just read it all... It is true.

Odie;1051346 wrote: not all of them shoot themselves here, but its all blame on parenting here!



solution: treat schools like airports, security everywhere, devices students & anyone entering have to go thru before getting inside.


The kids who do the shooting obviously need to be dealt with. However, whomever is responsible for the upbringing of that child (biological parents, foster parents, ect.) is responsible for the actions of that child. If they where held accountable as well I bet parents would start making their kids more of a priority instead of simply raising them on their spare time.

These days, people seem to think they can raise their kids as if it where some part time hobby. Yet they expect their kids to grow into productive members of society and act all surprised when their kids start acting out. It shows how incredibly ignorant, selfish and foolish we have become.

The Pledge encourages young people to take a proactive stance in reducing gun violence.



Would the children know what a proactive stance is? Perhaps some proactive education would be useful. Do all the children actually get any kind of training for using guns? I don't think this can be presumed in all cases.

oscar;1051909 wrote: It's the best i can find. It's a conflicting story but there is rumour to what i have just posted.

snopes.com: I Don't Like Mondays

Sorry!!! Just read it all... It is true.


Well done, you've found a female school shooter from 1979. Admittedly she didn't kill any children but she did shoot up a school from her bedroom window across the street.

oscar;1051897 wrote: Then shoot the parents..not other people's kids when they are in no position to defend themselves.


How can you get a high-score if you're limited to just shooting your parents?

Duh.

spot;1052144 wrote: Well done, you've found a female school shooter from 1979. Admittedly she didn't kill any children but she did shoot up a school from her bedroom window across the street.


I was being sardonic Spot. I should have added these when i said shoot the parents, :rolleyes::rolleyes:

As for the link, i am only following my mentor which is to find a link to back up what i said, and i did. :sneaky::sneaky:

Grizzled_Bear;1030692 wrote: The Brady Campaign is endorsing this The Pledge and Day of National Concern


The Pledge and Day of National Concern

The Student Pledge Against Gun Violence will be observed in schools throughout the country on October 24th, 2007, a Day of National Concern about Young People and Gun Violence. The Pledge encourages young people to take a proactive stance in reducing gun violence.



The Pledge is a national observance giving students throughout the country the chance to sign a voluntary promise that they will:


never carry a gun to school

never resolve a dispute with a gun

use their influence with their friends to keep them from resolving disputes with guns

The Pledge will be followed by an acknowledgment of the importance of individual decisions, multiplied.

My knee-jerk reaction was that this is a pointless feel-good gesture. In my area, the only ones who will take the pledge are unlikely to do any of the three things in the promise. However I can see how it might be helpful in more rural areas.

Accountable;1053743 wrote: The Pledge and Day of National Concern

The Student Pledge Against Gun Violence will be observed in schools throughout the country on October 24th, 2007, a Day of National Concern about Young People and Gun Violence. The Pledge encourages young people to take a proactive stance in reducing gun violence.



The Pledge is a national observance giving students throughout the country the chance to sign a voluntary promise that they will:


never carry a gun to school

never resolve a dispute with a gun

use their influence with their friends to keep them from resolving disputes with guns

The Pledge will be followed by an acknowledgment of the importance of individual decisions, multiplied.

My knee-jerk reaction was that this is a pointless feel-good gesture. In my area, the only ones who will take the pledge are unlikely to do any of the three things in the promise. However I can see how it might be helpful in more rural areas.


LOL! you're initial reaction was spot on. What a bunch of pointless bullsh1T! We might as well have them pledge to wipe themselves after they take a crap.

Seriously, this is nothing more empty feel good garbage. Our public education system is a pathetic joke.

I'm not sure if students should be allowed to have guns in schools, but I do think that every instructor and teacher should have a gun in their class room. It is ridiculous to me to propose that guns should be banned completely in schools. This would leave everyone defenseless to criminals and psychos who will prey on the unarmed. If guns were outlawed then criminals would still find ways to get guns. This would leave sane law abiding citizens completely unable to defend themselves.

My son's school teaches him to shoot . *shrugs*

There's a bizarre conjunction of news today.

Soccer parents wince at prospect of guns at games (that's the history, and the link with this thread since the Brady Campaign was contesting her lawsuit)

Gun-toting soccer mom is shot dead

and

Carrying a gun increases risk of getting shot and killed - science-in-society - 06 October 2009 - New Scientist which I was reading an hour earlier.

Charles Branas's team at the University of Pennsylvania analysed 677 shootings over two-and-a-half years to discover whether victims were carrying at the time, and compared them to other Philly residents of similar age, sex and ethnicity. The team also accounted for other potentially confounding differences, such as the socioeconomic status of their neighbourhood. Despite the US having the highest rate of firearms-related homicide in the industrialised world, the relationship between gun culture and violence is poorly understood. A recent study found that treating violence like an infectious disease led to a dramatic fall in shootings and killings.

Overall, Branas's study found that people who carried guns were 4.5 times as likely to be shot and 4.2 times as likely to get killed compared with unarmed citizens. When the team looked at shootings in which victims had a chance to defend themselves, their odds of getting shot were even higher.

Oh, and we're now one week into Domestic Violence Awareness Month.

The answer is simple. They get on the school busses naked. No clothes, no stupid backpacks. Naked until they get home. Teachers too. Everybody naked. Naked football. Naked basketball. Naked cheerleaders. AAARRRGGHH!