2nd Amendment Protest

i agree i dont think it should be part of a regular curriculim but to have it AVAILABLE, to children who are most likely to be around guns is not a bad thing! when i was a kid in suburbia my town offerd a program for any one who wanted to send there kids, but it wasnt connected to the school!

 

I was pretty sure we were on the same page,

be well,

 

Mellow

Again you make my point – something needs to be done – but what I’ve being trying to point out is that many don’t seem to be giving such social, economic, cultural and political problems much thought (let alone looking for ways to correct them), instead they look to guns as a means to ride out or deal with the symptoms arising from these problems.

To quote someone else that has noticed this Joan Burbick in the book Gun Show Nation - “One of my old friends who is an ex-Vietnam vet, a Navy pilot, said to me one night, “Whenever I get mad at the government, I go out and buy a gun.” And to me, that’s a form of mimicking political action. One is left only with a gun in one’s closet. One has not changed or affected the government at all”

 

........"And what the child wants never enters the equation? For fuck's sake, did it not occur to you that having kids learn basic gun safety might be a good thing? That it might beneficial to foster a society of responsible gun owners?".....

Dude. Fuck giving the government any more leeway with our kids! It's difficult enough being a parent. Now take our ability to control yet one more fascet of their growing up education. It's the PARENTS responsibility, not the school's! Supposing you lived in a community where people were strict vegetarians and pacifists who don't believe in guns. Now force (let) your kids "study" guns in school. It opens up a whole new can of worms for the folks at home. Hey once they get to be adults, on their own, making their own rules, they want to start studying guns, so what? Just NOT in public school!


....."All their lives, kids are told to "say no to drugs". And then they come on Hip Forums with a post like, "hey guys i just took a boxx of cold meds with some antihisamines and some of my moms sleeping pills and a shot of jack and im trying to get a high like weed but im having truble breething can NE1 help?

Would teaching kids to be responsible around drugs work better? (of course, this will take some major paradigm shift type changes to occur.)

We teach kids to stop, drop and roll, and we teach them not to play with matches. We train them in monthly fire drills. We have fire escape plans, and fire extinguishers, and fire sprinklers, and special fire exits, and fire codes to make sure all of the above is up to snuff. Now then, it is certainly a horrible thought that a child might be burned alive, and society recognizes this and undertakes vast, pervasive, redundant measures to prevent it.

Now, nobody wants to think that a child might be shot, but when it comes down to considering the possibility, we'd rather bury our heads in the fucking sand and pretend that the kids won't ever see or encounter such an eeeevil device as a gun (kind of like we do with drugs. See example above.)".....

Yea, and again, it's the parent's responsibility. MOST kids are smart enough to know that the school system and their teachers don't know everything. So they tend NOT to pay too much attention to anything they don't want to. But give those kids permission to study guns in school and they very well MAY start hanging out with kids who "do" guns, when before maybe they didn't hang with other kids who were into guns.

The BEST education a kid can get about anything is from first hand experience. 'Round here, almost everybody hunts. You can get a hunting permit when you are 10. You are either into it or not from childhood. School has nothing at all to do with it. NOBODY turns their kids loose in the woods with a gun without making sure they have good basic safety knowledge. They learn responsibility AT HOME. They HAVE to take regular gun safety courses ANYHOW to get that permit. It's already a done deal. The rate of gun accidents in these parts is almost 0. It IS ZERO for gun accidents and kids.

Kids also do not listen to all that "drug education" in the school system. And they also don't listen to their parents, GENERALLY. Because it's B.S. It's all fear based. NOT reality based.

And the drug thing is a lot different than the gun thing you know. If drugs were seen by society as acceptable for their kids like the guns apparently are, the kids would actually GET a real education in regards to drugs and bad overdoses would probably not happen as often...
I never hid anything from my kids including when other people around us were doing things like shooting up. My kids NEVER forgot the lessons they learned by WATCHING... They are adults now and not one of them is a junky, nor an alcoholic, nor a pill head.



....."I think we've already recognized that your perfect hoplophobe world vision is impossible to implement, so why not try something totally different, instead of just paying lip service to change while desperately clutching your childish fear-steeped bigotry against guns?".....

I'm glad that wasn't directed at ME. For a minute I thought you might have been slingin' shit MY way.

 

Good point. While we're at it, I wish they'd take the DARE program out of the schools as well. Kids get enough exposure to drugs as it is, the DARE program just makes them more curious.

DARE to think for yourself.

 

DARE to give a kid some help-
DARE to give a kid some hope-
DARE to keep a kid off drugs-
DARE to keep a kid off doooooooooope!

 

Agreed.

That's almost funny, were it not so depressing and frightening, but many Vietnam vets were psychologically damaged, as are many Iraqi vets. The stress of war changes people's way of thinking, as does the stress of survival for the economically disadvantaged, when living literally becomes survival. Mind you, I'm not rationalizing it, I'm just trying to better understand the root cause of it. Nor am I trying to pass myself off as an expert on the subject, which I'm not, obviously.

As for DARE and gun education in school, there's a difference between that and sex education, in the sense that sex is an inherent part of human nature. Drugs and guns need not be.

 

Mellow

“One of my old friends who is an ex-Vietnam vet, a Navy pilot, said to me one night, “Whenever I get mad at the government, I go out and buy a gun.” And to me, that’s a form of mimicking political action. One is left only with a gun in one’s closet. One has not changed or affected the government at all”

That's almost funny, were it not so depressing and frightening, but many Vietnam vets were psychologically damaged, as are many Iraqi vets. The stress of war changes people's way of thinking, as does the stress of survival for the economically disadvantaged, when living literally becomes survival. Mind you, I'm not rationalizing it, I'm just trying to better understand the root cause of it. Nor am I trying to pass myself off as an expert on the subject, which I'm not, obviously.

Funny, depressingly, frightening and true, several people here have basically said the same thing, they haven’t got any political solutions or ideas for reform but they do believe guns will save them from ‘tyranny’.

Hell I even had one guy say that after talking to me he had gone out and bought another gun, as if that was the way to counter my left wing ideas.

Anyway that is the problem as I see it and the basis of the theory that has survived close scrutiny for over a year now.

**

As for DARE and gun education in school, there's a difference between that and sex education, in the sense that sex is an inherent part of human nature. Drugs and guns need not be.

My ideas for a drug policy like my ideas for gun regulation are based on the idea of harm reduction, harm to individuals and harm to society.

The main problem with the present way of dealing with the drug is it is treated as a stand alone problem when it is something much wider and still leave the vast profits from drug trafficking and supply in the corrupting hands of criminals.

I think the best way of dealing with illegal drugs is to take them out of the hands of criminals so that they can be regulated, taxed and controlled. With milder drugs coming under licence and harder drugs coming under doctor’s supervision. The taxes raised would go toward hospitals, rehab programmes and education.

The licences for the legal recreational drugs would go to independents or local community co-ops (not to big companies) so that in many cases the people who had sold the illegal drugs would be licensed to sell the legal ones (dependent on police record). Same with the growing or production of the recreational drugs (dependent on quality).

People might grow their own cannabis for a small fee, but would have to pay a larger fee if they went commercial. Governments could buy opium and coca on the world market.

Crimes such as possession, growing, taking etc would not exist as crimes and so those crimes would no longer be crimes and the crime rate would be lessened.

But it is also important that the drugs policy would not stand alone but be part of a wide ranging holistic approach, which would involve social, economic policies and cultural education. So for example I would try to improve the environments and social conditions of those areas and demographics with the most heavy drug use.

**

 

Once upon a time some folks had the very same thought. That was in the 1770's.

 

The irony is that we as Americans are now the ones susceptible to 'tyranny' (note that I kept it in quotes, because it is more perceived than reality, the reality being that we bring the oppression upon ourselves, with our self-limiting mentality).

One thing I've observed about human nature is that people seem to be drawn to that which they perceive to be taboo, or off limits. The criminal element makes it exciting, sexy even. Legalize drugs, and you remove that element, and an entire industry along with it--from the drug lords to government officials, law enforcement, and the lawyers--it's all a large, well oiled hunk of machinery--to take that away would thwart the fundamentals of capitalism, it would be un-American even.

Legalize prostitution or gambling, same thing.

I agree taxation and regulation is the way to go, but that'll never happen in this country, too many powerful people make a living off the way things are. Get this: I live next to a University, and the most commonly committed crime is posession of marijuana. We're talking on average twenty arrests per week, in a community of thirty thousand or so. They get more people for marijuana than all other crimes put together, and these are upper class kids, kids whose parents can afford to send them to college...and a lawyer...and court fees...and a fine...

I can't believe I live in a country where I can legally rot my liver out on alcohol, and put my family through hell in the process, yet if I were caught growing a pot plant for my own personal use, I would stand to lose my house and my kids.

My take on guns and the 2nd amendment is it's the government's way of throwing us a bone and leading many of us to believe we have some sense of empowerment and freedom, when in fact guns have nothing to do with it, it's all perception.

Then there's the machismo view, as pointed out earlier, where guns are seen as an extension of manhood, the size of the gun being proportional to, well, you get the idea. Hey, I've got small guns, what does that say about me? Does the fact that I have a number of guns make up for that fact that they're small? And relative to what the government's got, anything American citizens can get legally under the 2nd ammendment is tiny in comparison, what does that say about them?

 

Lol, I know a lot of guys like that. I like small caliber rifles myself, but I never associate them with my manhood. Plus girls can like guns too, what does that say about them?

 

The second amendment states that "A well regulated Militia, being necessary to the security of a free State, the right of the people to keep and bear Arms, shall not be infringed."
I love how everybody always forget that first part of the ammendment, where it states "A well regulated militia." If you show me your official militia, you can keep your weapon. The writer's of the constitution wrote this at a time where they had just won a war by the use of militias (and the help of French naval forces), due to the lack of a federal military because America wasn't actually a country yet. There is no possible way that hey intended it for the use of everyday citizens.

Personally I am against the use and manufacture of all guns. No good could come from the barrel of a gun.

 

Who regulates the militia? Plus the Constitution is for the people, not the states, not the goverment, the people. I am my official militia, the Second Amenment says so.

 

Finally someone who makes since..

You can take and make laws all day long.
People will still find ways to break them.
We will still find something to bitch about.
We all just keep argueing amungst ourselves.
Rather than coming up with a solution.

Take responsiblity for ourselves and the knowledge we pass on to our children.
Thats the problem.

We need to remember that before guns people used knives, stones, and sticks..
People died from that also..
You cant blame the equipment...
People kill people.

 

The Bill of Rights, which the Second Amendment is part of, where meant for the individual person and not any goverment entity.

 

I KNOW someone has already said this

but "the right of a well maintained militia" to keep and bear arms.

second ammendment doesn't mean you get guns.

 

Peter Sith has an Article..@ www.huffingtonpost.com

Stating
The Supreme court those apposed to Bush, Cheney et al on America in 2001.
There taking up enterest in a case that asks if the ban on owning a handgun in The Distric of Columbia was unconstitutional..

Antonin Scalia shoots ducks with Cheney..

How do you think that decisions going to go?

Givin the attention both parties are recieving and the touchyness of our people and our discust for either of them.
Dont you find it all a little to neat and packaged to?
Why not bring up something thats going to rall up the media and take the focus off the real issues like ,Poverty,War,....Education..New Energy Sources
Things People realy need to focus on inorder for us to survive.

Not to mention devide us by creating an arguement such as you see here.

 

Let me take a guess...you were debate team champ in high school weren't you? I only ask because your skills of forming a logical, well-founded basis to your points are incredible!


"second amendment doesn't mean you get guns"

Someone oughta put that shit up there with some other memorable quotes, and fast!

If only you were here when this thread started, Dave, we could have settled this issue LOOONG AGO man!!! Thanks for enlightening us all!

 

This is another eneresting page..


www.rutherford.org
Check out: Neal Shaffers..Article..

 

Its not a coincidience that the second ammend ment is the (2nd) ammendment..
FRee Speech, Fredon of assembly, and Freedom ofreligion are the corner stone of a free society..


Quote:A well regulated militia being nessasary to the security of a free state..
There for:
The Right of the people to keep and bar arms shall not be in fringed.

Who makes up these militias?????????????????????????