“Stunned” in this case meaning “recently in receipt of a blow to the head,” then.
See? That would be sarcastic and amusing, were there context.
Algher cited the “youth magazine”. No gun too small, no child too young.
[quote=“Algher, post:14, topic:579010”]
*INSIGHTS, NRA’s monthly magazine for junior members, caters to all ages and skill levels among them. From the youngster eager to learn gun safety…/QUOTE]
Are you starting to get it now?
The parents should be charged with owning a piece of shit gun. I mean, a kindergartener is what, 3 feet tall and a drop from that height caused an AD? I had a Beretta fall down a flight of back stairs , off the edge and two stories to the pavement below and it didn’t fire!
You’d better believe I’m starting to get it.
I could have made my reply a lot longer.
Which is the point of this OP. Apparently the sarcasm thing didn’t work for those incapable of seeing past the end of their own agenda. Pity, that.
Read all of the links, not just the first one or two.
Like I said, the reply could have been a lot longer.
I read all of them. Didn’t see any mention of the NRA in a single one of those links.
I remain unconvinced of the degree to which you have gotten things.
No way am I getting into it with a Moderator. No one thread is worth that.
You are correct. I don’t get it.
Man, I feel like Darth Vader, all of a sudden.
Not that the OP isn’t really, really stupid, but… Joe Camel would probably still be banned even if he taught kids how to smoke safely. Just saying.
It’s a stupid pitting, but I think what he’s trying to say is our gun culture and easy access to guns contributed to this school shooting, and the NRA has helped contribute to that by their advocacy of gun ownership and their opposition to gun control laws. Therefore, the NRA bears some moral responsibility for the shooting.
It’s kind of weak sauce, but there you go.
Exactly.
Weak sauce? Well. The blood is surely not on the hands of gun control advocates, now is it? In amongst those elementary school kids bringing in guns are some who fired the weapons.
Weak sauce? Cleverly wrought but in poor taste.
The problem with this comparison is that there really isn’t a way to “smoke safely,” and there’s never a legitimate need to have a cigarette. It is possible to handle a gun safely, and a gun can be a life-saving tool in the right circumstances.
I think the people primarily responsible are the kid who brought the gun into school and the parents or guardians, who didn’t do a good job of keeping the gun out of the kid’s hands. I mean, I think easy access to handguns and their widespread availability does contribute to the problem, but that’s a damn old fight guaranteed to upset people, and not one I have the energy to participate in right now. But I don’t think anyone, even the NRA, bastards that I think they are, wanted this to happen.
Well, you were talking about kindergarteners.
[STUNNED SARCASM]
Why is Cartooniverse such a huge pederast??!?!?!
[/STUNNED SARCASM]
I’d hesitate to call the kid responsible. He’s, what, six? The one thing that struck me about the links that Cartooniverse posted is that throwing a six year old kid out of school entirely for this sort of thing is ridiculous. Obviously, kids shouldn’t be bringing guns to school in any circumstance, but at that age, they’ve got no real ability to assess the danger in doing something like that, or understand the possible consequences if they get caught.
Yeah, I’m certainly not pro-gun myself. I’ve never so much as laid a finger on a real gun, and it seems to me that quantity of guns in this country directly effects the safety of living here, and not in a good way. On the other hand, I believe in the principle that law-abiding adults should be allowed to do pretty much anything they want, so long as they’re not hurting other people, and that citizens in general shouldn’t have their rights abridged due to the actions of a criminal or irresponsible minority.
In short, I think this country would be better off if there weren’t any guns in it at all. But it would be worse off if we attempted to legislate it into that condition. So long as we have all these guns here, the NRA deserves at least some credit for their efforts to make sure kids understand how dangerous guns are, and what to do if they find one.
Of course he did. Didn’t you know that you should never let facts or reality get in the way of rhetoric?
Agree. So what should the consequence be for those gun owning parents that allow their kids not only to get their hands on a loaded gun, but to take it to school? That’s a pretty serious transgression, and I’m asking because I really don’t know. Is it a felony? What’s the point of claiming to be a responsible gun owner if you don’t face serious consequences for being an irresponsible gun owner?
The ability to destroy a planet is insignificant next to the potential of the Banhammer. 
I blame the parents for allowing a 6 year old child to have access to a loaded gun. I don’t have children. I am a life time NRA member. I don’t leave guns just laying around because I know that I am responsible for my weapons. If someone breaks into my home and steals a gun, then shoots someone while holding up the local liquor store, I am responsible for the misuse of my weapon.
As Argent Towers pointed out, the NRA Eddy Eagle program teaches children to NOT touch a gun.
Responsible gun owners know that they are responsible for any bullet that gets fired from one of their guns.
If my gun is not on my body, its locked up. I don’t even carry my glock in my purse, because I sometimes put my purse down and walk away. I am personally responsible for my weapons and I am personally responsible for where the bullets go.
The parents should have very heavy sanctions falling on their heads now.
Gun owner/advocate here and totally agree.
OP, the story is bad enough. Why not just pit irresponsible gun owners? That would have been a much better (and real) thread than your knee-jerk NRA bullshit, [Stunned Sarcasm] notwithstanding.