Kids and guns at the NRA

reply to post by Gazrok

Originally posted by Gazrok
EDIT - Sorry BH, I'm still trying to figure out how, but somehow it EDITED your post instead of copying it to use for quotes.

I tried to go back in the browser, but alas. My apologies. - Gazrok.

Ah! So this is how you win a debate, huh? I can't edit it as it's past the time limit.

Don't worry about it. My posts here are as inconsequential as anyone else's. Really, this is just mental masturbation for us all. The problem is much deeper and more complex than we know. There's something terribly wrong with our society. Neither "side" of this debate has all the answers. It's just not that simple.

reply to post by ConspiraCity

Wow, the op is so brainwashed

SO, not agreeing with something the NRA does means one is brainwashed? Good lord, so many of you cant get one line into the conversation without turning it into a juvenile attack.

I go to sleep every night and guess what? None of my guns magically grew legs and decide on their own to do something bad

Does this have anything to do with the topic at hand? Did I not make it clear that I am a gun owner myself? Can you not separate the idea of disagreeing with the NRA from being anti-gun? Its funny, I get called brainwashed, yet people like you carry on a pattern of programmed response when it comes to ANY criticism of the NRA. Ironic, really.

. I'm sick of this mentality that guns are only for killing.

Never said anything of the sort. I called them a tool, which is what they are.

They are a great hobby, I go to a shooting range and shoot at paper, steel and clay..

So do I. What is your point and how is it relative to this topic?

reply to post by spock51

Interesting thread. I find it quite heinous to market anything to children. Children should not be making those kinds of decisions without parental oversight.

I agree 100%.

Any of the breakfast cereals that DIRECTLY advertise to children are a good example. How many people's lives have been adversely affected by the ingestion of copious amounts of sugar? Diabetes, blindness; even death due to the long term effects of excessive sugar consumption. Not to mention the staggering costs involved in the treatment of those ailments. Side note: Did you know that the "fat" removed from so called "healthy" fat free foods is replaced by sugar?

Not just sugar, but processed sugar. The worst possible kind.

And I have NEVER seen the sugar lobby make any effort to train people in the safe and proper way of consuming their product.

This is true, though there are regulations in place, such as the food pyramid, that are there to at least promote knowledge

The OP seems only concerned about guns, though. Which begs the question: "Does captaintyinknots feel as outraged about other products, known to be dangerous if not handled properly, being marketed to kids?"

This thread is about a specific article that I came across, which is why it is focused on guns, as they were the topic of that article. As I have already stated, numerous times in this thread, I feel that the targeting of children as a marketing subgroup is disgusting, whether it be the NRA, The Obama Admin, or consumer goods.

If so, we are in agreement. If not, I find his failure to be as outraged about, say, the sugar lobby pushin' their product at kids, as he is about guns to be quite.........illogical........ and very telling.

Ive made it quite clear multiple times, so no worries.

One need not say the actual words to convey the meaning and intent of the argument. Words are but a tiny fraction of the means humans employ to communicate. Op, how DO you feel about the unrestrained hawking of dangerous products to kids? Or do you just think the problem is confined to guns?

I think its been made clear.

reply to post by captaintyinknots

Originally posted by captaintyinknots
Good lord, so many of you cant get one line into the conversation without turning it into a juvenile attack.

This is precisely why the discussions on this topic here will never go anywhere. If you say ONE THING against the NRA, you are labeled as "anti-gun" (and assumed to be rabid) and if you say ONE THING supporting the second amendment, you're labeled as "pro-gun" (and assumed to be rabid)... There is no room for someone who doesn't buy either extreme. I'm tired of being slammed into the "anti-gun" extremist camp just because I think it's stupid to give a 3-year-old a lifetime membership to the NRA.

I wonder why I even open these threads...

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
reply to post by captaintyinknots

 

This is precisely why the discussions on this topic here will never go anywhere. If you say ONE THING against the NRA, you are labeled as "anti-gun" (and assumed to be rabid) and if you say ONE THING supporting the second amendment, you're labeled as "pro-gun" (and assumed to be rabid)... There is no room for someone who doesn't buy either extreme. I'm tired of being slammed into the "anti-gun" extremist camp just because I think it's stupid to give a 3-year-old a lifetime membership to the NRA.

I wonder why I even open these threads...

At this point I honestly regret making this thread. I truly thought that a decent conversation could be had on this subject, because it is not about gun control. It is about the way guns are marketed in this country. I thought, even differing views could be discussed in an adult manner.

Alas, it seems a lost effort and a moot point.

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
reply to post by captaintyinknots

 

Originally posted by captaintyinknots
Good lord, so many of you cant get one line into the conversation without turning it into a juvenile attack.

This is precisely why the discussions on this topic here will never go anywhere. If you say ONE THING against the NRA, you are labeled as "anti-gun" (and assumed to be rabid) and if you say ONE THING supporting the second amendment, you're labeled as "pro-gun" (and assumed to be rabid)... There is no room for someone who doesn't buy either extreme. I'm tired of being slammed into the "anti-gun" extremist camp just because I think it's stupid to give a 3-year-old a lifetime membership to the NRA.

I wonder why I even open these threads...

So true.
The extremists really make it hard to be moderate on issues anymore.

reply to post by ownbestenemy

1: Treat all firearms as loaded
2: Never put your finger on the trigger unless you intend to fire the weapon
3: Never aim at what you are not willing to kill.

Unfortunately, those basic rules are not always taught to young children (even when people retain firearms in the home) and it leads to accidental deaths.

Sadly, you are right, these basic rules aren't being taught enough or taken seriously. In another thread, someone had posted that someone speaking an an NRA event suggested they place guns in all their kids rooms.

Was this not on the same day as that story about the 5 year old killing his 2 year old sister with his gun?

I think, to some extent, the NRA is "Alex Jones'ing it up" (yes, i'm keeping that term around until it catches on, i like it.) You don't go to a town that just had a mass shooting and hold a pro gun rally, you have to know it's in bad taste. But that's the plan, to marginalize all responsible gun owners, so only the looney ones get coverage.

Mandatory training for guns at the youngest age possible.

But here's the thing. A 5 year old with a gun? That kid can't drive a car, can't drive a boat, can't buy a beer. Why? Because at that age, they simply aren't RESPONSIBLE enough.

This isn't to say no kids are, plenty are, and you never hear of them shooting their sister.

The NRA is doing more harm than good, in my opinion, and makes it extremely easy to look at anyone who is "pro gun" as a gun nut.

Same way Alex Jones has made it very easy to marginalize patriots and truth seekers are conspiracy loving gun nuts ready to fire at the first badge they see. And.... it's working... and it's happening, daily.

Don't let your NRA take your guns away, and irresponsible actions are doing just that.

Originally posted by Benevolent Heretic
Seems like a certain segment of the population is using their children to make a political point. Bravo!

I wonder how people would feel if these parents were sticking cigarettes in the mouths of their 4-year-olds to show that they have the freedom to do so...

Mean like those people who marched kids on stage, and say here pass the bill to make them 'safer' ??

It's for the children!!!


Least they don't get rid of them because it's 'inconvenient'.

reply to post by neo96

Originally posted by neo96
Mean like those people who marched kids on stage, and say here pass the bill to make them 'safer' ??

Yes. Just exactly like that.

reply to post by captaintyinknots

I hope you see that that is not what bothers me, but rather the overall stigma that the NRA is pushing these days.

Let me address a few of your points. I guess I should have done that to begin with.

This is about creating another generation of brand-loyal gun consumers. Look again. Its all sponsored by crimson trace and other manufacturers.

To hold large events you need big money sponsors in the same or similar industry (guns). This looked like a really great event…well funded…well put together. I think it’s great and I don’t have a problem. I don’t think the NRA was pushing any brand…sponsorships were likely open to whoever wanted to pony up! That’s business.

On top of that, I find it to be HIGHLY irresponsible to put handguns in children this young's hands. I find it even more irresponsible to market these things to kids.

I think the best way to groom responsible gun owners and avoid accidents is by starting early. Personally, I’d much rather my kids be interested in going to the range with me and/or competing in marksmanship events than surfing the web or playing video games. Maybe that’s just me…

And, third, no, I dont think it is a good thing to continue to perpetuate the current culture on guns-that is, that they are cool, that they are hip, that they are anything but a tool that is all about life or death.

Guns are cool!! Again, I’d rather my kids be into guns with me than playing video games, doing drugs, partying, etc. Shooting is quality family time and it teaches responsibility.

The LOUD pro-gun crowd is just on wrong on the subject as the anti-gun crowd. Both are extreme positions.

I've been called worse!

To every action there is always an equal and opposite reaction. Believe me, no matter how extreme the anti-gun nutters get they will be met with an equal and opposite reaction.

Originally posted by captaintyinknots
reply to post by spock51

 

Interesting thread. I find it quite heinous to market anything to children. Children should not be making those kinds of decisions without parental oversight.

I agree 100%.

Any of the breakfast cereals that DIRECTLY advertise to children are a good example. How many people's lives have been adversely affected by the ingestion of copious amounts of sugar? Diabetes, blindness; even death due to the long term effects of excessive sugar consumption. Not to mention the staggering costs involved in the treatment of those ailments. Side note: Did you know that the "fat" removed from so called "healthy" fat free foods is replaced by sugar?

Not just sugar, but processed sugar. The worst possible kind.

And I have NEVER seen the sugar lobby make any effort to train people in the safe and proper way of consuming their product.

This is true, though there are regulations in place, such as the food pyramid, that are there to at least promote knowledge

The OP seems only concerned about guns, though. Which begs the question: "Does captaintyinknots feel as outraged about other products, known to be dangerous if not handled properly, being marketed to kids?"

This thread is about a specific article that I came across, which is why it is focused on guns, as they were the topic of that article. As I have already stated, numerous times in this thread, I feel that the targeting of children as a marketing subgroup is disgusting, whether it be the NRA, The Obama Admin, or consumer goods.

If so, we are in agreement. If not, I find his failure to be as outraged about, say, the sugar lobby pushin' their product at kids, as he is about guns to be quite.........illogical........ and very telling.

Ive made it quite clear multiple times, so no worries.

One need not say the actual words to convey the meaning and intent of the argument. Words are but a tiny fraction of the means humans employ to communicate. Op, how DO you feel about the unrestrained hawking of dangerous products to kids? Or do you just think the problem is confined to guns?

I think its been made clear.

It has indeed been made clear. Thank you for your courteous and timely response.

For my kids' tenth birthday they are going to get .22 rifles, 11th? Hunting shotguns, and as they get older the more guns i will buy them.


My dad did this with me, and his dad before him, and none of us has accidentally or purposely killed someone due to misuse or malicious intent no matter how old or young.

It is all about education, and responsibility.

It is also about if that kid goes near the gun safe when not permitted you slap them to teach them not to get into them other than when they are to be used to appropriate use, not just to show off to friends.

Then you explain to them the importance of gun safety when it comes to using it or not using it.

Gun safety also includes being responsible about even the general ownership of the firearm.
It is not responsible to pull it out at a party, loaded or not, to just show off to your friends.

Gun safety isn't just instruction to prevent accidents, and to prevent the idea to use it maliciously, but it is also a mindset that is aware of why it is even in the property of the owner including it's situational functionality.

reply to post by captaintyinknots

They are a lobbyist group.

And so are La Raza and Maldef. What's your point?

reply to post by xEphon

The extremists really make it hard to be moderate on issues anymore.

So now anyone who defends the 2nd amendment is extremist? See, this is what happens when the Progressives run the media.

My ancestor fought in the Revolutionary War at age 14 so you can make ridiculous assertions freely.

reply to post by captaintyinknots

I am not saying children should not be taught about guns.

I dunno, are you saying that the NRA should not allow children to accompany their parents to a legal gun show where there are no bullets in the guns and most guns are behind cases? Is that what you mean by the NRA discrediting themselves?

reply to post by Benevolent Heretic

I'm tired of being slammed into the "anti-gun" extremist camp just because I think it's stupid to give a 3-year-old a lifetime membership to the NRA.

I'm with you on that. To me, a kid has to be in double digits before I'd consider gun training, and even then, only under CLOSE supervision and with only one round at a time....fully reinforcing SAFETY above all else. Also, it depends on the kid, not all 10 year olds are ready, but rarely is a younger child ready either. (and if they are, waiting won't hurt them).

In any case, a firearm should never be loaded and unlocked where a child can get to it, without a parent's involvement. A $10 trigger lock would have prevented EVERY damn story here on ATS about a kid in single digits killing themselves or another. Ten dollars + an ounce of responsibility....that's it.