Gun control becomes mind control in public schools

[iamsoandso]

You mean this guy?

[video=youtube_share;Hvm1gHQDHm0]http://youtu.be/Hvm1gHQDHm0[/video]

LOLOLOL!

r.o.f.l.,,reminds me of a cousin i met online doing genealogy(we came from Germany 1751),,i was explaining to him that we were exiled from Israel after ad70 by the Romans,(i knew this from dna testing),he at first was really happy,until i brought up the jew/word,then he became hostile,,,i then found pictures of him he had sent me (swastikas,kkk ect.), so i tried to explain his own genealogy to him,he became more violent,i suggested he research his own family tree before he becomes further involved in such groups,he continued in his violence,,,,so i told him "well,,the next time you decide to hate a Jew you can stick your tongue out at yourself when your shaving",,,he's never responded,,

 

[iamsoandso]

get it?,,,Charley (Daniels),,,as if "Daniel" is not Jewish?

 

[AgeofKnowledge]

The Mexican government finally starts to come to it's senses with regards to gun control and begins to allow law abiding moral Mexican citizens to arm themselves again. Mexico's gun murder rate spiked since strict gun control was implemented and most of that was a result of illegally armed criminal gangs running amok in an unarmed civilian society.

Mexico has very strict gun control laws but Mexico's National Institute of Statistics and Geography (INEGI) and National Public Safety System Executive Secretariat (SESNSP) report that Mexico has an average of 16,867 murders a year right now with 50% of them due to illegally armed criminal groups and that they increased 37% from 2006 to 2012 and continued to rise in 2013. Organizations external to the Mexican government claim the actual number may be double that.

(Note: The 90 percent number bandied around by the press was derived from a flawed June 2009 U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) report to Congress on U.S. efforts to combat arms trafficking to Mexico).

There has clearly been a long and well-documented history of arms smuggling from the U.S., Central and South American countries, China which is the 2nd largest manufacturer of firearms in the world, and other countries which include South Korea, Israeli, and Russia and the eastern bloc; however, it is important to recognize that while the U.S. is a significant source for certain classes of weapons and ammunition the U.S. is not the primary source for the military grade weapons used by Mexican cartels and illegally armed crime groups in Mexico which account for 50% of all gun murder in Mexico. In fact, the Mexican government itself is reporting that only 17 percent of guns found at Mexican crime scenes have been traced to the U.S..

Mexico's population is just over 112 million or around a third of ours and has many more gun murderers per year than the U.S.. The primary reason for this is that citizens are unable to stop it because of Mexico's very strict gun control laws. Law abiding citizens in Mexico are just powerless victims unable to provide the necessary counterweight to stop what's happening in that country. That's finally begun to change.

This is a very smart move by the Mexican government. Here's why. Most of the groups are "good guys" that is members of their community organizing to fight crime and cartels. These consist of both indigenous communities and Mexican citizens. However, a minority of the groups are recently formed, well-armed groups are not comprised of members of these communities, and a few may even be fronts for the cartels.

The Mexican government is going to legitimize the good groups and weed out the bad ones. They are requiring every member and their weapons to be listed with the Defense Department, and the army will apparently oversee the groups, which the government said "will be temporary" meaning that at some point years in the future when the cartels and crime is under control they will be disbanded. Any criminals caught fronting in the groups will be immediately arrested by the Army.

Mexico Legalizes Vigilantes, Nabs Cartel Leader - ABC News

 

[AgeofKnowledge]

Some people just can't handle the truth... lol.

r.o.f.l.,,reminds me of a cousin i met online doing genealogy(we came from Germany 1751),,i was explaining to him that we were exiled from Israel after ad70 by the Romans,(i knew this from dna testing),he at first was really happy,until i brought up the jew/word,then he became hostile,,,i then found pictures of him he had sent me (swastikas,kkk ect.), so i tried to explain his own genealogy to him,he became more violent,i suggested he research his own family tree before he becomes further involved in such groups,he continued in his violence,,,,so i told him "well,,the next time you decide to hate a Jew you can stick your tongue out at yourself when your shaving",,,he's never responded,,

 

[AgeofKnowledge]

Liberal fascism claims another victim.

High school senior jailed, kicked out of school and may lose Army dream because of pocket knife in car:

High school senior jailed, kicked out of school and may lose Army dream because of pocket knife in car | Fox News

 

[pickles]

How sad, they jail this young man for this, claiming zero tolerance.
Yet today on the news a young man who murdered another was relieced after 17 months, claiming tolerance and understanding for him.
What an upside down world we live in.

God bless
pickles

 

[AgeofKnowledge]

When you take firearms away from the law abiding public as Mexico did, you leave them defenseless against the criminals and their gangs, cartels, and mafias.

What's happening in Mexico as a result is despicable to the nth degree. Mexican criminal cartels are now stealing little children from the unarmed populace and selling their organs. They are also using children's hearts as part of their initiation ceremony.

Drug dealers in Mexico 'made to eat children's hearts' to prove their loyalty to Knights Templar leader El Chayo - Americas - World - The Independent

When you make yourself defenseless to criminals, bad things follow. Liberals, make a note of it.

 

[Annata]

Kids reportedly punished, even suspended, for having a nerf gun, or even talking about a nerf gun, for having a lego gun, or even a paper gun, or playing cops and robbers with fingers, or making a gun hand gesture.

You can read about it here in an article by Jon Rappoport:

What’s behind the punishment for fake guns in schools?

It just seems that the gun control agenda has now become mind control in our public schools.

As Jon Rappoport says in his article:

"What we’re seeing here is a mandate to change the culture. Teach these kids that any reference to, symbol of, or thought about guns is wrong."

I guess that's another reason to homeschool: so that you, the parent, can decide what to teach your children and how, instead of letting them be brainwashed by public school political agendas.

Been doing this in the locale I live for years, and lo and behold, gun homicide is virtually non-existent. Here, guns are bad, just like knives are bad. While I think the control of toys is a bit excessive, I can't overstate the social value of stigmatizing lethal weapons.

To hear the argument in this thread about kids going to war as a form of justification for letting a child use guns is just shocking.

Show a ten year old child a picture of the reality of what guns do to people and I'll guarantee that child will make a decision to never touch them.

People are taught how to handle one, perhaps, and taught that 'guns aren't bad', but that's conditioning. A child's reflex to visceral stimulus, before they are conditioned, will tell you all you need to know about the innocent mind and dangerous weapons.

Children shouldn't be allowed near guns, ever.

 

[Elizabeth619]

Been doing this in the locale I live for years, and lo and behold, gun homicide is virtually non-existent. Here, guns are bad, just like knives are bad. While I think the control of toys is a bit excessive, I can't overstate the social value of stigmatizing lethal weapons.

To hear the argument in this thread about kids going to war as a form of justification for letting a child use guns is just shocking.

Show a ten year old child a picture of the reality of what guns do to people and I'll guarantee that child will make a decision to never touch them.

People are taught how to handle one, perhaps, and taught that 'guns aren't bad', but that's conditioning. A child's reflex to visceral stimulus, before they are conditioned, will tell you all you need to know about the innocent mind and dangerous weapons.

Children shouldn't be allowed near guns, ever.

And as long as people blame guns for crimes people will never get to the root of the issue. An object cannot cause feather. Whether it be a firearm or a knife. The force causing the reaction can. Gun aren't bad, but people are.
And my 12 has known how to use a firearm since he was 9. He has never killed anyone either. So if guns are so bad then mine must be defective it's never killed anyone.

 

[Annata]

And as long as people blame guns for crimes people will never get to the root of the issue. An object cannot cause feather. Whether it be a firearm or a knife. The force causing the reaction can. Gun aren't bad, but people are.
And my 12 has known how to use a firearm since he was 9. He has never killed anyone either. So if guns are so bad then mine must be defective it's never killed anyone.

People commit murder, guns just happen to be a particularly vicious, destructful and easy means to achieve it. Just because your son has never killed anyone, you advocate that as logic for him to use a gun?

You call yourself christian, and advocate a 9 year old to use a gun.

What is wrong with you?

If guns are stigmatized in youth, the youth are massively less likely to view guns as an acceptable possession, much less use them to kill someone.

Show your son a picture of a man with his head blown off, since you think he's old enough and mature enough to use a gun, cause he should be old enough and mature enough by your logic to see the damage they can inflict on another person. Show him what they can do.

It's like saying 'the atomic bomb at nagasaki didn't kill anyone', and while it's technically true, it misses the point entirely. The bomb is an extremely, extremely dangerous weapon, just like a gun is, and both should be stigmatized to extinction.

 

[Elizabeth619]

People commit murder, guns just happen to be a particularly vicious, destructful and easy means to achieve it. Just because your son has never killed anyone, you advocate that as logic for him to use a gun?

You call yourself christian, and advocate a 9 year old to use a gun.

What is wrong with you?

If guns are stigmatized in youth, the youth are massively less likely to view guns as an acceptable possession, much less use them to kill someone.

Show your son a picture of a man with his head blown off, since you think he's old enough and mature enough to use a gun, cause he should be old enough and mature enough by your logic to see the damage they can inflict on another person. Show him what they can do.

It's like saying 'the atomic bomb at nagasaki didn't kill anyone', and while it's technically true, it misses the point entirely. The bomb is an extremely, extremely dangerous weapon, just like a gun is, and both should be stigmatized to extinction.

You have no right to judge whether I'm a Christian or not. You certainly have no right to judge how I parent my child. I'd rather educate my child on firearms and safety and teach him exactly how powerful they can be. I understand you live in an area where you're conditioned to believe guns are evil but that gives you no right to judge others who live differently. I certainly don't condemn anyone who chooses not to have a gun so you probably should keep your mouth shut before you make a bigger fool if yourself. Just because you dontnahreebwithnsomeome doesn't give you the right to judge them. You're not God. Go read your bible before you even think of addressing me again. And NEVER judge my parenting again!

 

[Elizabeth619]

Stupid autocorrect. "Just because you don't agree with someone"

 

[GodIsSalvation]

Way I see it we hear the common phrase in the gun debate:

"guns aren't bad people are bad"

Well how much worse then is it of bad people owning guns?

Let's be clear a gun is a non-living tool. But to say a gun cannot be used for bad is as dishonest as saying a gun cannot be used for a tool of good.

Now first for me personally, I do not own a gun, and I don't ever plan on owning a gun. I have seen both sides of this debate in my own personal community and world. On one hand I know many of my friends own guns, and they are pretty ethical and responsible in their ownership of the gun using them primarily for hunting purposes and recreation. On the other hand last year one of my friends was shot, and honestly seeing what a gun did to my friend and seeing what someone who has been shot walking around is heart-wrenching beyond words. I can try to use words to describe it, but its trulyl something you have to see and experience for yourself to trully understand its horror.

Now I accept the law of the land is that guns are legal, and like I said I have no problem with a responsible citizen owning a gun. What I think gun advocates and decriers alike need to realize is there are so many guns in this world regardless of any nations legality concerning them that the gun isn't disappearing from Earth anytime too soon. However, the gun advocates can go a lil haywire themselves, seeing every gun control policy as bad.

I think what we need here is gun legislation and a learning of ethical and responsible gun ownership whether you own a gun or do not own a gun. That is very clear. So I don't think every piece of gun control legislation or policy is bad. In this specific case of the Zero Tolerance Gun Policies at schools I think this is a good move. For one even if you advocate owning a gun, remember kids aren't allowed to own guns by your own words. And secondly if you do not like owning a gun, I think it is fair to promote a culture in schools where the kids are young of trying to teach young people that guns aren't toys, they aren't some sort of play thing.

I'd say really if we are to attempt to make more effective gun policy in America both sides of the Gun Debate got to come together in promotion of putting guns back where they belong which is as a tool that should be handled with utmost responsibility or not handled at all. This I feel is the only way in which it be possible to curb the tremendous amount of gun violence in America which in fact is a solid fact.

 

[Elizabeth619]

I totally agree that one needs safety courses before purchasing a firearm. I'm certainly not gonna let my kid play with a gun. A gun is never a toy and when he held it and shot it he never wanted to touch it again.

 

[faroukfarouk]

I'm suspicious of the idea that measures should be taken whereby the only people with guns are the dangerous criminals.

We had a shooting today in Ontario. A man apparently shot a policeman and the police returned fire and killed the gunman. Immediately the bleeding heart liberal commentary started to the effect of, Oh how could this poor, downtrodden cop-shooter be so unreasonably treated as to be shot at when he was only shooting at the police....

Pray for the policeman's recovery and for all who put themselves in harm's way to protect us all.

 

[GodIsSalvation]

I totally agree that one needs safety courses before purchasing a firearm. I'm certainly not gonna let my kid play with a gun. A gun is never a toy and when he held it and shot it he never wanted to touch it again.

Heh I have never shot an actual gun myself, but I could see how such be for kids. I am very glad by your statement, and I'm going to judge you right here on parenting style in relation to Gun Ownership and Gun Control going by your words here on this topic, so brace yourself. I judge you to be good and responsible and especially in your parenting I deem that to be how a parent if they are goign to be a gun owner should be teachign their kid, but maybe just give a little more thought to the pro-Gun Control side for a moment here.

I can see both sides of this debate pretty easy. Really the American Gun Ownership and Gun Control Debate is flawed because I feel most people feel it is so heavily poltiicized that people err in think if you are for one you are against the other. I would argue that responsible Gun Ownership (such as what you are doing) is actually compatible with Gun Control (which I favor.)

Let me illustrate this with three of my friends for examples. All are gun owners and all have 3 opinions on Gun Control. Plus you got my outside opinion, the non-gun owner.

My friend Mad Dog M his whole family is all gun owners and hunters, he told me he shot his first gun at something like age 8-10 or so. Funny thing is he is a very liberal upper-class Democrat guy. Ironically he is the most anti-gun control of us. Owns guns, but because he's grown up around them they don't phase him too much. For a long time he pretty much make us all nervous carrying his gun around everywhere And he has a huge arsenal of weapons. For years he kinda play around with them, pulling them out and all that. Don't think I'm condemning him though because with my two other friends that I will describe below they helped correct his error and helped him become a more responsible Gun Owner. I personally even though I respect your right to own guns, I don't want to see your gun which was his error we corrected.

Now my other friend JJ he's sorta the gangsta wigger type. He just owned a pistol illegally for years. Politically wise, he don't give a damn about politics or the law of man in the first place, so he was not really a responsible Gun Owner nor did he really give a crap about Gun Control. So clearly his problem is two-fold that he should not own a gun and that she should learn to respect gun control a bit more. Now this is my same friend that got shot last year. Like I said, I can't even really describe in words the pain of how it felt from just me seeing him move around all feeble (gotta understand this is the best fighter in our community, it's like seeing hercules rendered into a feeble old man is the best way I can describe it.) After that of course, its like if he even see a gun he will now feel the anxiety that I myself feel whenever I see someone brandishing a gun, even if they aren't intending to shoot no one, but are essentially just playing with it. So he gave up his illegal pistol and now he recognizes the merit of gun control policy and is very advocative of it, though he still respects the rights of someone to responsibly own a gun (as long as you ain't going to play with it and keep it safely holdstered or locked away.)

Now my friend we call him the Corporal, cause he is a military vet of Afghanistan and he comes from a long line o military veterans. Obviously as a veteran and a member of a military family he is the most entitled to his rights to own a gun and he exercises that right. He is actually politically very Republican and conservative, but ironically is probaby the biggest gun control advocate of all of us. His main problem is that as a big gun control advocate and militarist his viewpoint is sort of a Starship Troopers point of view that only ex-military and government should own guns. Now this isn't too bad a view point in my personal opinion as a non-gun owner, but I gotta be truthful and realistic because you ain't gonna take all of the guns out of America, much less the world. Where his view is reconciled is quite simple and he is really the one that got Mad Dog to stop playing with his guns so much. Basically we all were debating this topic last year and came to the conclusion that the non-miltary and non-government citizens can own guns, but they need to be more strict on their gun control view point and not carry around guns and not play with them.

As for myself politically I hate both Democrat and GOP Party and am somewhat a Globalist Moderate by political ideology. I've never owned a gun and before JJ got shot I was mostly anti-gun control policy. That is where I went wrong was being too anti-gun control. How I reconciled this was our 4-way debate which gave me my current view. So today I still just don't own a gun and never will but now I advocate responsible gun control measures because of these three people.

 

[AgeofKnowledge]

You understand that criminal organizations in Mexico or stealing children from unarmed Mexican law abiding citizens and harvesting their organs for sale and using their little hearts for prospects into their criminal organizations to eat as part of their initiation ceremony right?

Am I getting through?

Guns are GOOD in the hands of law abiding citizens. Put more guns in those hands along with the necessary training and continuing education in firearm safety and criminal law so they know the what's and how's.

 

[GodIsSalvation]

You understand that criminal organizations in Mexico or stealing children from unarmed Mexican law abiding citizens and harvesting their organs for sale and using their little hearts for prospects into their criminal organizations to eat as part of their initiation ceremony right?

Am I getting through?

Guns are GOOD in the hands of law abiding citizens. Put more guns in those hands along with the necessary training and continuing education in firearm safety and criminal law so they know the what's and how's.

Meh this is the argument typical of the Pro-Gun side.

The Pro-Gun Theory is that if everyone in the world owned guns the world be safer. But this is a flawed argument. Cause you forgot that all those Mexican cartels and criminals got guns too.

Let's use Syria as an example. The Assadist forces have guns under their laws they are the only lawful abiding citizens allowed to own guns. However the Assadist forces brutally massacred their own people in 2010. So under Pro-Gun Theory if the Anti-Assadist forces had guns too there'd be no conflict. Here's the problem. The Anti-Assadist forces do have guns. The truth about Syria is both sides got guns and are brutally killing the crap out of eachother and destroying Syria, all its people, and themselves in probably the most violent war of the 21st Century to date.

 

[AgeofKnowledge]

It's an observable and statistical fact that putting guns in the hands of law abiding citizens reduces both the scope and the depth of criminal activity and criminal organizations for the simple reason that they don't want to get shot by a well armed populace in the commission of crime.

The reality is that wherever the law abiding citizenry is disarmed, criminal perpetrators continue to be well armed. And what we observe is that when only the criminals have guns, they can operate at will amongst the disarmed law abiding citizens doing pretty much whatever they want as long as long as they avoid law enforcement. But when law abiding citizens are armed and properly trained, their ability to operate is greatly curtailed.

Now Syria is in the midst of a bloody civil war. What's happening in Syria does not extrapolate. Your example is as foolish as trying to say that because the Manson family murdered people, therefore we can't have families anymore lest all families go around murdering people. That's how ignorant and foolish your example is.

Read this: The New Government War On U.S. Gun Owners ~ Help Fix America First

Mexico provides a much better example. Mexico's population is just over 112 million or around a third of ours and has many more gun murderers per year than the U.S.. But this wasn't always so. Gun murder shot upward after the law abiding citizenry were disarmed by the government yielding exactly the opposite result intended.

The primary reason for this is that citizens are unable to stop the illegally armed criminals, gangs, cartels, and criminal organizations because of Mexico's very strict gun control laws. Law abiding citizens in Mexico are just powerless victims unable to provide the necessary counterweight to stop what's happening in that country. They are powerless to the extent that the cartels simply snatch their children and harvest their organs for sale and they can't do anything to stop it.

It's gotten so bad that Mexico has recently begun loosening up their strict gun policy and allowing some of their citizenry to arm themselves again. In the areas that has occurred, cartel activity went way down. Citizen militias actually helped capture two cartel leaders and put a number of cartel cells into prison and on to the judgment.

The cartels certainly are not snatching children in those areas.

 

[GodIsSalvation]

It's an observable and statistical fact that putting guns in the hands of law abiding citizens reduces both the scope and the depth of criminal activity and criminal organizations for the simple reason that they don't want to get shot by a well armed populace in the commission of crime.

The reality is that wherever the law abiding citizenry is disarmed, criminal perpetrators continue to be well armed. And what we observe is that when only the criminals have guns, they can operate at will amongst the disarmed law abiding citizens doing pretty much whatever they want as long as long as they avoid law enforcement. But when law abiding citizens are armed and properly trained, their ability to operate is greatly curtailed.

Now Syria is in the midst of a bloody civil war. What's happening in Syria does not extrapolate. Your example is as foolish as trying to say that because the Manson family murdered people, therefore we can't have families anymore lest all families go around murdering people. That's how ignorant and foolish your example is.

Read this: The New Government War On U.S. Gun Owners ~ Help Fix America First

Mexico provides a much better example. Mexico's population is just over 112 million or around a third of ours and has many more gun murderers per year than the U.S.. But this wasn't always so. Gun murder shot upward after the law abiding citizenry were disarmed by the government yielding exactly the opposite result intended.

The primary reason for this is that citizens are unable to stop the illegally armed criminals, gangs, cartels, and criminal organizations because of Mexico's very strict gun control laws. Law abiding citizens in Mexico are just powerless victims unable to provide the necessary counterweight to stop what's happening in that country. They are powerless to the extent that the cartels simply snatch their children and harvest their organs for sale and they can't do anything to stop it.

It's gotten so bad that Mexico has recently begun loosening up their strict gun policy and allowing some of their citizenry to arm themselves again. In the areas that has occurred, cartel activity went way down. Citizen militias actually helped capture two cartel leaders and put a number of cartel cells into prison and on to the judgment.

The cartels certainly are not snatching children in those areas.

Lol your example of the Manson Family is ignorant because the Manson Family wasn't even a family, it was a cult of unrelated members led by Charles Manson.

Lol and you calling my example of the Syria Civil War ignroant is likewise hilariously ironic because then you go onto use the Mexican Narco-Civil War as an example.

That's the same as the Syria Civil War, its a Civil War, both sides got guns bro, both Mexican government and Cartel Forces. Crime is going to happen in your country regardless of gun ownership, and I suggest you look at gun crime statistics for America whom is not at Civil War compared to Australia, Britain, Scandanavian countries, etc., and other coutnries not at Civil War with stricter gun control policy and compare their gun crime and gun murder numbers.

Now in the Mexican Civil War, just like the Syrian Civil War both sides got guns. Merely in the Mexican Civil War, the cartels the illegal gun owners started shooting first. In the Syria Civil War the lawful gun owning citizens loyal to Assad started the Civil War by using guns they lawfully and legally own by their laws to shoot their own people. What they didn't expect was that their own people got guns and shot back. And the situation has gotten more turbulent as America and Russia been funnelling guns to both sides and international fighters from all over Earth pouring into the Syria Civil War around the globe to fight on both sides (in fairness to you Syria Civil War is not so much a Civil War like Mexico, moreso a World War inside one country at this point.)