Meet & talk to fellow OstoMates 20,331 members

CHILD PROTECTION

Posted by christiesdad, on Thu Dec 20, 2012 1:41 pm
It was bound to happen.  Following the tragedy at New Town, Conn. the wierdo are after their kneejerk reactions and trying to make some big bucks from parents fears.

It seems that some clown has invented a wrist watch that the children can wear  and IF kidnapped, can just push a button and it responds like one of those devices that finds your stolen car.   I suppose that the ones for finding your stolen car are great, but can you imagine little Johnnie or Suzie with one of those devices? Especially in school and around his buddies? Even though they are told not to push the button unless something bad happens to them---the temptation to grab his buddie's button would be irrisistable.  Remember school and on shot day all the guys punching their buddies on the arm that got the shot?  Every time one kid got mad at another kid he would push the button, especially if there was a little fear involved.

Now it is also, bullet proof back packs for kindergarteners or at least an insert that you can buy for $300.00 to put in the back pack.

The children DO need protection!!  But not this way.  Placing armed guards in all the schools is the only way it is going to work.  I imagine most of the would be terrorist would be a lot more respectful of a man/woman with a gun that a kid with a dick tracy watch
Reply by mild_mannered_super_hero, on Thu Dec 20, 2012 5:26 pm
                                 
christiesdad wrote:


The children DO need protection!!  But not this way.  Placing armed guards in all the schools is the only way it is going to work.  



what about when they are on a field trip, or school outing, or visiting another school. the answer is to arm the teachers and principal. they are already "on the payroll", they are at all school functions already, they know the kids, they know the parents and school building and property, and would spot any strangers quicker. you dont have to be a rocket scientist to see the solution, its already in use in israel.....its already PROVEN TO WORK.  what doesnt work is "gun free zones" .
Reply by christiesdad, on Thu Dec 20, 2012 9:13 pm
                                 
mild_mannered_super_hero wrote:
                                 
christiesdad wrote:


The children DO need protection!!  But not this way.  Placing armed guards in all the schools is the only way it is going to work.  



what about when they are on a field trip, or school outing, or visiting another school. the answer is to arm the teachers and principal. they are already "on the payroll", they are at all school functions already, they know the kids, they know the parents and school building and property, and would spot any strangers quicker. you dont have to be a rocket scientist to see the solution, its already in use in israel.....its already PROVEN TO WORK.  what doesnt work is "gun free zones" .


Right again MMSH,  I am not arguing  with you,  I agree with you.  But that idea about a Dick Tracy watch, c'mon,  and bullet proof back packs.  what parent is going to send their child to school under those conditions.  Not to mention the fear in the childs head.
Reply by three, on Thu Dec 20, 2012 9:13 pm
                                 
mild_mannered_super_hero wrote:
                                 
christiesdad wrote:


The children DO need protection!!  But not this way.  Placing armed guards in all the schools is the only way it is going to work.  



the answer is to arm the teachers and principal . . . its already in use in israel . . .its already PROVEN TO WORK . . . what doesnt work is "gun free zones" .


I did not check the accuracy of the following statements which I copied verbatim from an online forum:

• A 1997 high school shooting in Pearl, Miss., was halted by the school's vice principal after he retrieved the Colt .45 he kept in his truck.

• A 1998 middle school shooting ended when a man living next door heard gunfire and apprehended the shooter with his shotgun.

• A 2002 terrorist attack at an Israeli school was quickly stopped by an armed teacher and a school guard.

• A 2002 law school shooting in Grundy, Va., came to an abrupt conclusion when students carrying firearms confronted the shooter.

• A 2007 mall shooting in Ogden, Utah, ended when an armed off-duty police officer intervened.

• A 2009 workplace shooting in Houston, Texas, was halted by two coworkers who carried concealed handguns.

• A 2012 church shooting in Aurora, Colo., was stopped by a member of the congregation carrying a gun.

• At the recent mall shooting in Portland, Ore., the gunman took his own life minutes after being confronted by a shopper carrying a concealed weapon. 2500 times last year alone legal gun owners stopped violent crime when confronted with it long before any police assistance.
Reply by mooza, on Fri Dec 21, 2012 7:35 pm
mms you dont live in Isreal and im sure you dont want your country to be that way they are at war with neighbours USA isnt !!!! just my 2 bobs worth . Crazy people everywhere guns Illegal here but there still are many people who can get licence easy i dont believ in guns but if i had intruder i doubt i could pull a trigger and wouldant trust myself with any gun at all (for my sake ) LOL
Reply by christiesdad, on Fri Dec 21, 2012 11:45 pm
                                 
mooza wrote:
mms you dont live in Isreal and im sure you dont want your country to be that way they are at war with neighbours USA isnt !!!! just my 2 bobs worth . Crazy people everywhere guns Illegal here but there still are many people who can get licence easy i dont believ in guns but if i had intruder i doubt i could pull a trigger and wouldant trust myself with any gun at all (for my sake ) LOL


Mooza,  you are right in your observation,  there are a lot of people owning hand guns with no experience in handling them.  If you don't have that experience, it is a real possibility that you would freeze up and have the gun taken away and used on you. And you don't get that experience on a shooting range There is more to it than just having a gun.  You must be willing and ready to use it.
Reply by KennyT, on Sat Dec 22, 2012 7:18 am
The arguments from those here only justify the position of the anti gun brigade and reinforce the belief that more guns is tantamount to creating total further fear within the innocent. You guys really need to take a long hard look at yourselves and realise that these school shootings are happening predominantly within your country and your young. (not you Mooz)

Go ahead get more guns, shoot more people and kill more. Then Groundhog Day will roll over. Find a solution without the need to get more people to shoot more people. Typical of those like the NRA and those that find the gun to be the solution to stop those with guns.
Reply by kmedup, on Sat Dec 22, 2012 12:55 pm
I don’t get it; I just don’t get it.  More guns in the hands of untrained people – you ask for?  The weapon that was used in the school killings was a weapon of mass destruction and some Americans want to put these in the hands of educators?  Or via a police office in EVERY SCHOOL!  
I am an educator.  Shame and reactive rather than pro-active!

What next – doctors, fireman, priests, heck, why not just arm everyone who qualifies for a driver's license? Bullet-proff backpacks?  Is there something in the air there?  

How about everyday people walking on the street with varieties of guns, ready to shoot, like some Middle east countries?  There are more gun shops than MacDonald’s and supermarkets together, in the USA , according to statistics, and  400 gun shops within the New Town vicinity.  Hello???  

Could it be that the sale of weapons is a billion dollar industry and lobbied strategically?  Capitalism at its finest – eh!  Closed caskets at many funerals because the little bodies were shot to hell?  

The “right to bear arms” when it was historically written, I would think, did not consider - machine guns.  Draconian. Sorry, but gun lingo is not even in my vocabulary.  Even US police officers don’t carry the weapon the school killer used. No background checks either.  And, I hear you can even buy a gun at Walmart?
Most of the world is appalled at the fact that gun sales soared after that slaughter.  Sorry but like the Middle East, Americans are killing their own. I just don’t get it. There are more killings in America in one week than there are in many other countries  in one year.  

Does wearing a “piece” make one feel important, cool, protected, intelligent – enlighten me please?

Are we talking Honey-Boo Boo country from sea to sea? I expect people will not like what I have just said, but I come from a country where guns are prohibited (except for hunting animals).  We have killings, yes, but, in most cases, have learned from them.

I just don’t get it!
Reply by three, on Sat Dec 22, 2012 3:09 pm
I saw a photo of a mother outside a school carrying a sign with the following question:

If a child throws a rock at another child on the playground, is the solution to make sure every child carries a rock in his/her pocket?
Reply by KennyT, on Sat Dec 22, 2012 4:37 pm
Of course not.
Reply by KennyT, on Sat Dec 22, 2012 5:45 pm
Wonderful post Karen. It will all be lost on those pro gun people who believe the only way to find some sort of resolution to this problem is to issue more guns. This astounds me.

These poor children were shot with a semi automatic weapon and how do people propose to stop someone with one of those? Maybe if he did not have access to one of these disgraceful weapons then maybe the carnage would have been reduced, but putting more weapons into circulation is surely not the answer. It is for the gun lobby and the fools from the NRA who wash over these incidents and not only want to keep the status quo but incredibly want to increase the amount of killing machines out there in the States. Absolutely ridiculous and all this will do is escalate your problems and lead to more killing.

The next time this occurs the NRA will rub their hands in glee and see an opportunity and not the loss and people with guns will resist any changes with the laws. The Constitution was written over 200 years ago and those falling back on that old chestnut need to wake up and smell the roses. Your young are being slaughtered but you sit back and expect your rights to be protected. What about the rights of the young and defenceless? Time for you people to take a long hard look at this I am afraid or the carnage will continue.
Reply by mild_mannered_super_hero, on Sat Dec 22, 2012 7:08 pm
                                 
kmedup wrote:
  

The “right to bear arms” when it was historically written, I would think, did not consider - machine guns.


    Even US police officers don’t carry the weapon the school killer used.


No background checks either.



And, I hear you can even buy a gun at Walmart?



ok, i`ll take these 1 at a time

1: a machine gun was not used in this or ANY school shootings i am aware of. legally owned machine gun crime is non-existant

2: from what i have heard, a glock handgun was used, that is the STANDARD firearm of most American police agencies

3: you cannot buy a gun anywhere in the usa WITHOUT a background check. re-read that ...NO ONE CAN BUY A NEW GUN AT ANY PLACE WITHOUT A BACKGROUND CHECK.
the guns used in this instance were STOLEN from the legal owner{who he killed}.

4: Walmart sells most types of rifles and shotguns, just like they sell hammers and baseball bats.....WHY WOULDNT THEY...its a store.

if you want to debate me, lets get the facts straight... i welcome the chance to educate you.
Reply by KennyT, on Sat Dec 22, 2012 8:21 pm
Come on MMSH you must be kidding. Semi automatic guns were used in most of the shootings in the States involving schools including this one and for that matter does it really matter what type?Oh and that makes it right that he stole the guns from his mother? That just supports my argument even more. I should just let you write this. Typical response from someone who denies the gun does not do the damage.

You only support anti gun people by your reply that you can buy guns at Walmart. Come over to this side because every time you sprout your agenda you only support our view. No further comment needed. Thanks for your help.

Ok lets debate it. You keep going on about debating the issue. Here is the issue. Your youth is being slaughtered over and over again but you like the nuts in the NRA want more guns out there but you can come up with no sane reason why. You have more killings over there in a week than we would have in almost a year but your inane comeback is to claim your country is so much bigger but you fail to state that in comparison our rate of death per capita is way lower than yours. Just easier to do that eh? Since 1996 we have not had one massacre of any sort and this is due to the gun amnesty and buy back scheme instigated by John Howard. He is on the opposite side of my political beliefs but I applaud him for his action as it more than halved the death rate by shooting. You on the other hand propose to have more guns in circulation. Fine idea if you want more dead but that is secondary to having the right to shoot people.

You MMSH are only interested like the NRA in your rights and not the rights of the innocent who are slaughtered by the use of these obscene machines. You are holding onto a tenuous grip on the Constitution without a thought for those killed and maimed each year and for those left behind to suffer the grief for their lost ones. As long as you don't change the gun laws it does not matter how many are killed. Let the crazed gunmen into your schools and kill as many as they can because they have access to these stupid guns that serve no purpose other than thrill machines for people who should not be in ownership of them. Please what purpose do people need to possess these guns? Tell me MMSH.

Can you please explain why there is more killings in schools in your country than in any other country in the world? Debate that as well. You and your pro gun lobby continue on with this inane argument that it is not the gun but the person holding it but you conveniently forget that it is the fact they have the gun. Tell the parents of those children lost in the shooting that it was not the gun that killed their child. You continue to state that you would debate the issue well step up and instead of pushing your pro gun barrow face up to the facts which seem to conveniently evade you at times.

Oh and one more thing as far as your earlier jibe of me being a Liberal and being programmed to believe and have no thoughts of my own I am afraid that may be the opposite.You may need to get a bigger mirror mate. One more thing is yes I "feel" as you stated as if that is something that Liberals should be ashamed of. Well I for one would never be ashamed of that but rather proud while you watch your young killed while you and your cronies sit back twirl your fingers and blame everything but the gun.I for one will put human life in front of guns anytime.
Reply by christiesdad, on Sun Dec 23, 2012 12:16 am
Adolf Hitler
Mouselini (can't spell his name, that Italian guy!)
Idi Amin
Caligula
Atilla
Hirohito
Yamamoto
Jim Jones
To name a few, have all been responsible for mass murders.  Some with the gun, some with the sword, some with poison some simply by being the honorable man in charge, at least to their country, and just ordering the carnage to be dealt on people they did not like.   You have not mentioned one of these heinious characters in your post, why is that?  I imagine had you lived in their times, you would have risen to the subject of banning their "method of choice"in the slaying innocent men,women and children.  Guns, bombs,swords, spears,poison.  No you would have not or you might have found yourself in harms way for criticizing them.  I am sure that your words would not been amusing to those people mentioned above.  And yet you allow yourself the luxury of criticizing the United States for their stand on the control of the gun with absolute impunity. Why?  Because those with the gun, and the willingness  to use them have guarrented you the right to condem them for their use of the gun.  It seems as though you like the idea of men like MacArthur, Eisenhower, Patton using the gun to give you certain inalienable rights and used the gun to insure that no one deprived you of those rights as long as you can tell them, ok that's enough now, lose the guns,  I don't like them.
As far as the NRA goes, they are simply an advocate for freedom to do as one sees fit and have no authority over gun control or no gun control.
Nah, Kenny,  your beef is with the United States and not the gun control issue at all.  As long as it has to do with the USA, you are against it.  Hell, you probably are against motherhood and apple pie.  An old American standard.
But....keep it up, at least it makes for stimulating conversation.

However I do agree with you on one point.  There is absolutely no need to allow Ar-15's or AK-47's in the hands of civilians.  nor any gun with a round capacity of over 6.  If you can't get the job done with 6 rounds,  you should not have a gun in the first place.
Reply by christiesdad, on Sun Dec 23, 2012 12:26 am
                                 
mild_mannered_super_hero wrote:
                                 
kmedup wrote:
  

The “right to bear arms” when it was historically written, I would think, did not consider - machine guns.


    Even US police officers don’t carry the weapon the school killer used.


No background checks either.



And, I hear you can even buy a gun at Walmart?



ok, i`ll take these 1 at a time

1: a machine gun was not used in this or ANY school shootings i am aware of. legally owned machine gun crime is non-existant

2: from what i have heard, a glock handgun was used, that is the STANDARD firearm of most American police agencies

3: you cannot buy a gun anywhere in the usa WITHOUT a background check. re-read that ...NO ONE CAN BUY A NEW GUN AT ANY PLACE WITHOUT A BACKGROUND CHECK.
the guns used in this instance were STOLEN from the legal owner{who he killed}.

4: Walmart sells most types of rifles and shotguns, just like they sell hammers and baseball bats.....WHY WOULDNT THEY...its a store.

if you want to debate me, lets get the facts straight... i welcome the chance to educate you.


Another view: As a matter of fact, SWAT teams do carry automatic weapons!
* Please, do not post contact information like email, Facebook or Twitter accounts, or phone number. These will be removed by the Administrator.
All times are GMT - 4 Hours
Currently online: 26    
3 members & 23 visitors
marty (m)