Kids are drawn to guns

[RandallFlagg]

The study wasn't rigged. Kids should be more drawn to the candy than to the shiny weapon on another table. The fact that they ignored the candy and went straight to the gun, even after being told of its dangers, shows that parents need to be more vigilant and hide the guns away from the prying eyes of their kids.

I had a .410 shotgun when I was 8. I have been around guns all my life and have them today. I have NEVER killed any human being that my government didn't order me to or to save my life and that of my fellow soldiers.

My Father taught each and everyone of his kids the dangers of firearms as soon as we could walk. Firearms are for killing!!!!! Only a complete and utter moron wouldn't understand that.

That doesn't mean that with the proper training and respect for the weapon it can't be used to put food on the table, defending your property and used for sport shooting.

Only idiotic parents that choose to stick their heads into the sand and pretend that they don't exist are laboring under the ridiculous belief that their kids will never see or hear about guns. Jesus - have you see the X-Box games that our kids play!?!?!?

Wake the hell up.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Then they deserve what they get for not paying HEED, don't they? Consequences...Learn it, Live It, KNOW IT.

Great! So a kid deserves to die because they didn't follow instructions? Brilliant! Fantastic! Excellent!

No one deserves to die, but it still happens.

 

[Dr Grump]

No parents should be teaching their kids about guns from day one just like the do other dangers like poisons in the cabinet, the electrical outlet and crossing the street. Of course teaching them respect for authority, the property and lives of others has to go hand in hand with everything else. The schools have a responsibility to reinforce those teaching in a social setting, do you disagree?

The study proved that if kids are left alone with a gun, they are going to go and pick it up. Obviously their lessons on gun safety are having no effect, wouldn't you say?

You put a shiny taboo unfamiliar object on a table with candy and then are surprised that kids want to go figure out what it is? Really?

The kids knew what the gun was you idiot. They even got a safety lesson in handling one before the adults left..

 

[Dr Grump]

Well then, if you are a pro choice liberal, when you revise your stances on abortion, you can lecture him about killing kids. Got it?

Nice strawman. And I am both anti abortion and pro choice...

 

[OriginalShroom]

What a crock of a test. Anyone who had children knows that it takes multiple lessons, multiple times telling a child something before they learn that lesson.

How many times did you, as a parent, have to twin your child not to touch that hot stove?

How many times were you, as a child, have to be told that stove was hot? Did you learn the first time?

Or were you once of those that had to burn your fingers to learn?

My son is 21 and I have been teaching him about guns since he was 6. I still have to reminds him on occasion to always clear a gun himself when handed one even if he saw it being cleared.

 

[Political Junky]

The study wasn't rigged. Kids should be more drawn to the candy than to the shiny weapon on another table. The fact that they ignored the candy and went straight to the gun, even after being told of its dangers, shows that parents need to be more vigilant and hide the guns away from the prying eyes of their kids.

All of two kids went for the unloaded gun, Noomi. Second, the gun was unloaded. Two, the gun didn't sprout to life all by itself and start massacring the kids. Three, the Yale study this was based on defined anyone "20 and younger" as a child. So, why conduct a flawed experiment on a flawed study? To push gun control.

Remember now, I'm not but 6 years out of childhood according to that study, and that I'm prone to injure myself with one if it is left unloaded on a table.

The research, which was published on Jan. 27 in Pediatrics, looked at a nationally-representative sample of hospitalizations at more than 4,000 medical centers that occurred in 2009 for children and adolescents under 20 years of age.

Firearms hospitalize about 20 U.S. kids a day: Study - CBS News

Sorry, Noomi, not buying it. The math is wrong. The assertions are not even scientifically rooted.

Thank God, they had the good sense to use unloaded guns in the experiment. It's irrelevant, btw.

 

[TemplarKormac]

Well then, if you are a pro choice liberal, when you revise your stances on abortion, you can lecture him about killing kids. Got it?

Nice strawman. And I am both anti abortion and pro choice...

Nice non sequitur. Care to get back on topic?

 

[TemplarKormac]

The study wasn't rigged. Kids should be more drawn to the candy than to the shiny weapon on another table. The fact that they ignored the candy and went straight to the gun, even after being told of its dangers, shows that parents need to be more vigilant and hide the guns away from the prying eyes of their kids.

All of two kids went for the unloaded gun, Noomi. Second, the gun was unloaded. Two, the gun didn't sprout to life all by itself and start massacring the kids. Three, the Yale study this was based on defined anyone "20 and younger" as a child. So, why conduct a flawed experiment on a flawed study? To push gun control.

Remember now, I'm not but 6 years out of childhood according to that study, and that I'm prone to injure myself with one if it is left unloaded on a table.

The research, which was published on Jan. 27 in Pediatrics, looked at a nationally-representative sample of hospitalizations at more than 4,000 medical centers that occurred in 2009 for children and adolescents under 20 years of age.

Firearms hospitalize about 20 U.S. kids a day: Study - CBS News

Sorry, Noomi, not buying it. The math is wrong. The assertions are not even scientifically rooted.

Thank God, they had the good sense to use unloaded guns in the experiment. It's irrelevant, btw.

Thank god you liberals were using kids to prove a political point, as you always do.

 

[M14 Shooter]

All of two kids went for the unloaded gun, Noomi. Second, the gun was unloaded. Two, the gun didn't sprout to life all by itself and start massacring the kids. Three, the Yale study this was based on defined anyone "20 and younger" as a child. So, why conduct a flawed experiment on a flawed study? To push gun control.

Remember now, I'm not but 6 years out of childhood according to that study, and that I'm prone to injure myself with one if it is left unloaded on a table.



Firearms hospitalize about 20 U.S. kids a day: Study - CBS News

Sorry, Noomi, not buying it. The math is wrong. The assertions are not even scientifically rooted.

Thank God, they had the good sense to use unloaded guns in the experiment. It's irrelevant, btw.

Thank god you liberals were using kids to prove a political point, as you always do.

Anti-gun loons can only argue from emotion, ignorance and/or dishonesty.

 

[BDBoop]

The study wasn't rigged. Kids should be more drawn to the candy than to the shiny weapon on another table. The fact that they ignored the candy and went straight to the gun, even after being told of its dangers, shows that parents need to be more vigilant and hide the guns away from the prying eyes of their kids.

All of two kids went for the unloaded gun, Noomi. Second,the gun was unloaded. Two, the gun didn't sprout to life all by itself and start massacring the kids. Three, the Yale study this was based on defined anyone "20 and younger" as a child. So, why conduct a flawed experiment on a flawed study? To push gun control.

Remember now, I'm not but 6 years out of childhood according to that study, and that I'm prone to injure myself with one if it is left unloaded on a table.

The research, which was published on Jan. 27 in Pediatrics, looked at a nationally-representative sample of hospitalizations at more than 4,000 medical centers that occurred in 2009 for children and adolescents under 20 years of age.

Firearms hospitalize about 20 U.S. kids a day: Study - CBS News

Sorry, Noomi, not buying it. The math is wrong. The assertions are not even scientifically rooted.

Second and two? Lemme guess. Manic phase?

Noomi is correct. You, not so much.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

The study wasn't rigged. Kids should be more drawn to the candy than to the shiny weapon on another table. The fact that they ignored the candy and went straight to the gun, even after being told of its dangers, shows that parents need to be more vigilant and hide the guns away from the prying eyes of their kids.

All of two kids went for the unloaded gun, Noomi. Second,the gun was unloaded. Two, the gun didn't sprout to life all by itself and start massacring the kids. Three, the Yale study this was based on defined anyone "20 and younger" as a child. So, why conduct a flawed experiment on a flawed study? To push gun control.

Remember now, I'm not but 6 years out of childhood according to that study, and that I'm prone to injure myself with one if it is left unloaded on a table.

The research, which was published on Jan. 27 in Pediatrics, looked at a nationally-representative sample of hospitalizations at more than 4,000 medical centers that occurred in 2009 for children and adolescents under 20 years of age.

Firearms hospitalize about 20 U.S. kids a day: Study - CBS News

Sorry, Noomi, not buying it. The math is wrong. The assertions are not even scientifically rooted.

Second and two? Lemme guess. Manic phase?

Noomi is correct. You, not so much.

The study defines kids as anyone under 20.

Want tot ell me again how Noomi is right?

 

[asaratis]

No parents should be teaching their kids about guns from day one just like the do other dangers like poisons in the cabinet, the electrical outlet and crossing the street. Of course teaching them respect for authority, the property and lives of others has to go hand in hand with everything else. The schools have a responsibility to reinforce those teaching in a social setting, do you disagree?

The study proved that if kids are left alone with a gun, they are going to go and pick it up. Obviously their lessons on gun safety are having no effect, wouldn't you say?

You put a shiny taboo unfamiliar object on a table with candy and then are surprised that kids want to go figure out what it is? Really?

That's how deceptive proponents argue with studies. They devise a human test with a predicted or known outcome, then present the results as a new scientific study.

 

[TemplarKormac]

All of two kids went for the unloaded gun, Noomi. Second,the gun was unloaded. Two, the gun didn't sprout to life all by itself and start massacring the kids. Three, the Yale study this was based on defined anyone "20 and younger" as a child. So, why conduct a flawed experiment on a flawed study? To push gun control.

Remember now, I'm not but 6 years out of childhood according to that study, and that I'm prone to injure myself with one if it is left unloaded on a table.

Firearms hospitalize about 20 U.S. kids a day: Study - CBS News

Sorry, Noomi, not buying it. The math is wrong. The assertions are not even scientifically rooted.

Second and two? Lemme guess. Manic phase?

Noomi is correct. You, not so much.

The study defines kids as anyone under 20.

Want tot ell me again how Noomi is right?

When all she (BDBoop) can do is attack my grammar, she has zero to say that is relevant to the discussion. Hence why she's on my ignore list.

 

[Politico]

Guns make noise and inflict damage.

It's no wonder kids like them.

No their parents let them play call of duty all day so they don't have to parent them. That's why they like them.

 

[Plasmaball]

It's amazing how partisan people are being in this thread. Regardless if you think the test was rigged, educating children about guns and gun safety is a very smart thing to do. Kids know what guns are. They are in movies, cartoons, comics, etc. They are smarter than you think, but they still need to be taught.

People are too busy whining about 2nd amendment rights when the reality is...well... shut up about it...This is about educating kids and not stripping you of your rights you cry babies.

Fucking knee jerks.

 

[The Rabbi]

It's amazing how partisan people are being in this thread. Regardless if you think the test was rigged, educating children about guns and gun safety is a very smart thing to do. Kids know what guns are. They are in movies, cartoons, comics, etc. They are smarter than you think, but they still need to be taught.

People are too busy whining about 2nd amendment rights when the reality is...well... shut up about it...This is about educating kids and not stripping you of your rights you cry babies.

Fucking knee jerks.

You missed not only the OP but the point of the entire thread, didnt you? I'll bet you didnt read one word of it. You're a fucking pile of rocks.

 

[Dr Grump]

Well then, if you are a pro choice liberal, when you revise your stances on abortion, you can lecture him about killing kids. Got it?

Nice strawman. And I am both anti abortion and pro choice...

Nice non sequitur. Care to get back on topic?

Typical Neocon - changes the subject then accuses the normal one of getting off topic...

 

[Dr Grump]

It's amazing how partisan people are being in this thread. Regardless if you think the test was rigged, educating children about guns and gun safety is a very smart thing to do. Kids know what guns are. They are in movies, cartoons, comics, etc. They are smarter than you think, but they still need to be taught.

People are too busy whining about 2nd amendment rights when the reality is...well... shut up about it...This is about educating kids and not stripping you of your rights you cry babies.

Fucking knee jerks.

You missed not only the OP but the point of the entire thread, didnt you? I'll bet you didnt read one word of it. You're a fucking pile of rocks.

LOL...says the guy who made post 38 in this thread. Too funny..
I see you haven't gotten any smarter since I've been away

 

[RetiredGySgt]

It's amazing how partisan people are being in this thread. Regardless if you think the test was rigged, educating children about guns and gun safety is a very smart thing to do. Kids know what guns are. They are in movies, cartoons, comics, etc. They are smarter than you think, but they still need to be taught.

People are too busy whining about 2nd amendment rights when the reality is...well... shut up about it...This is about educating kids and not stripping you of your rights you cry babies.

Fucking knee jerks.

Except the study claims education does not work as do several of your buddies in this thread. Perhaps next time you should actually read the OP and the comments.

 

[C_Clayton_Jones]

One of my comrades in arms lost a child due to the fact he left a loaded shotgun in the house, without any child safeties on it.

His young son found it and began playing with it and ended up blowing his daughter to pieces.

Saddest. Funeral. Ever.

There is nothing wrong with someone pointing out that you need to fucking lock up your guns if you have kids, dipshit. It doesn't mean one is against guns.

What kind of idiot is opposed to gun safety education for parents?

The OP would be such an idiot.

And once again the OP’s thread premise fails with yet another hasty generalization fallacy.

A single story by ABC is in no way ‘representative’ of ‘the left’ in general; nor is it ‘evidence’ of the myth of a gun control ‘agenda.’

Otherwise, the OP is nothing more than liar and tedious partisan hack.