A 6-year-old kindergartner sparked an uproar at his Massachusetts school when he was spotted brandishing a tiny plastic Lego gun on the school bus last week.
Mieke Crane, the child’s mother, insists that officials at Old Mill Pond Elementary School in Palmer overreacted when another student saw the toy, which is slightly bigger than a quarter, and alerted the driver Friday.
‘She [driver] said he caused quite a disturbance on the bus and that the children were traumatized,’ Crane told the local station WGGB.
I’m so glad the child didn’t bring aboard any high-capacity Lego magazines, either. Here’s the size of what he was brandishing:
Tiny weapon: A 6-year-old kindergarten student was slapped with detention for bringing this Lego gun, which is only slightly larger than a quarter, on a school bus
This isn’t unprecedented, as it also happened to a NYC 4th grader as well 3 years ago:
An extremely menacing and traumatizing sight: A 2″ Lego policeman with a clearly “oversized” assault weapon
Patrick Timoney, a 9-year-old student at PS 52 in Staten Island, N.Y., was in the school cafeteria Tuesday playing with LEGOs when he was taken to the principal’s office and threatened with suspension. One of his toys was a LEGO policeman that holds a 2-inch plastic gun. The school has a no-tolerance policy when it comes to toy guns.
~~~
“You don’t traumatize a child who loved to go to school, who wanted to be early every day to school, you don’t make him cry, you don’t make him fill out statements,” she told WNBC, holding back tears. “You don’t do it.”
Pat Timoney, the boy’s father and a retired police officer, was also upset, saying that he’s dealt with people who use imitation weapons as a way to threaten others and commit crimes, and that this situation is different, considering the pinky-size gun in question.
Even worse is 5 year old Joseph Cardosa who dared to build (out of colorful bricks) a more “life-sized” Lego gun and bring it to school, earlier this year (also in a Massachusetts school):
Joseph Cardosa, 5, holds a replica of the Lego gun he created during his Hyannis West after-school program. Cape Cod Times/Christine Hochkeppel
Legos can transport kids to imaginary worlds — and get them in real trouble. A 5-year-old boy is facing suspension after building a Lego gun at his Massachusetts school. Hyannis West Elementary warned Joseph Cardosa’s parents that their son would be suspended from its after-school program if he had another gun incident. Yes, even if the firearm was pieced together from colorful plastic bricks. Joseph’s parents are aghast. “It’s not like he’s designing a machine gun,” his dad says. The principal says the school needs to maintain a safe environment: “While someone might think that making a Lego gun is just an action of a 5-year-old, to other 5-year-olds, that might be a scary experience.” [Source]
Without meaning to insult a 5 year old, that looks nothing to me like a gun. It could be anything. Just use your imagination.
I suppose it’s all in the way you’re “brandishing” it. After all, it’s the thought behind it that’s criminal, right? Good thing he didn’t start brandishing a banana menacingly in the school cafeteria.
If Joseph built a colorful assault rifle like this kid and brought it to school- that would have really traumatized everyone:
Is common sense and sanity no longer the norm?
Now this guy, on the other hand, means serious toy-building business:
[youtube]http://youtu.be/Mmh2jIgvonM[/youtube]
I’m sure this has got to be the handiwork of a nerdy lone-builder.
Back to the original story:
In the aftermath of the incident, the school sent a letter home to parents explaining what happened and stressing that there was no actual firearm aboard the bus, and that the students were never in any danger.
The missive was accompanied by a photo of the black toy gun showing its actual diminutive size.
Crane’s son has been forced to write a letter of apology to the bus driver. He was also given detention Tuesday and could be temporary stripped off his busing privileges.
A former fetus, the “wordsmith from nantucket” was born in Phoenix, Arizona in 1968. Adopted at birth, wordsmith grew up a military brat. He achieved his B.A. in English from the University of California, Los Angeles (graduating in the top 97% of his class), where he also competed rings for the UCLA mens gymnastics team. The events of 9/11 woke him from his political slumber and malaise. Currently a personal trainer and gymnastics coach.
When you login first time using a Social Login button, we collect your account public profile information shared by Social Login provider, based on your privacy settings. We also get your email address to automatically create an account for you in our website. Once your account is created, you'll be logged-in to this account.
DisagreeAgree
Connect with
I allow to create an account
When you login first time using a Social Login button, we collect your account public profile information shared by Social Login provider, based on your privacy settings. We also get your email address to automatically create an account for you in our website. Once your account is created, you'll be logged-in to this account.
When I was in grade school, many of the boys would come to school during Halloween dressed as cowboys or soldiers and carry the plastic fake guns, on the school bus and in school itself.
When I was in high school, many of the boys would drive to school with hunting guns in their vehicles, particularly in the back window of their pickup trucks where everyone could see them.
When I was in high school, one of our teachers brought a real handgun to school for use as a teaching aid, and shot it on school grounds as well.
No parent, no teacher, no student, ever said anything negative about any of that either.
kevino
10 years ago
One of my nephews asked where I first learned to shoot, and I told him that my first experience was at the range they built at my school. My nephew replied, “I’ll bet they don’t do that now.” Sadly, I’m sure he’s right.
RE: “She [driver] said he caused quite a disturbance on the bus and that the children were traumatized [by a Lego gun].”
Traumatized!? Really!? Our ancestors crossed oceans in small, leaky boats. They endured brutal weather conditions and Indian attack crossing the Great Plains in wagons.
We, as a people, aren’t going to make it, are we? As wimps like these kids grow up and become the majority, I can see them cowering helplessly in their houses as police shutdown an entire city to look for a loan suspect.
Oh, wait, that already happened. If this is the future of the country, we are so screwed.
bike mike
10 years ago
I remember in the late 1950’s I took a German world war II rifle to school for show and tell. By best friend and neighbor helped me carry it because neither he or I could pick it up alone, we were about 5 & 6 at the time. As I recall we had the bayonet attached for the show and tell program.
Budvarakbar
10 years ago
@kevino: You may have that right – “loan” suspect that is – as in someone who owes $5.00 in tax — ah — I know ya really meant “lone” ha ha
Budvarakbar
10 years ago
@kevino: Government indoctrination centers — get some little kids conditioned to freak out at anything that expresses “strength” — the only one traumatized in fact was probably the damm fool bus driver acting out ’cause if she didn’t and some little twit reported her – it would be the end of her job — and probably black listed for life from contact with children.
Nan G
10 years ago
I used to know a family who forced their little boy to lie about his birthday when he was young.
(If you were born in Dec. you went to school with kids who were all older than you, but by saying he was born in Jan. he was able to go to school as the oldest instead.)
As an adult this ”man” went nutty if you asked him his age or his birthday.
So, young children can be trained to be ”traumatized” by the sight of even a play gun or even a hand in a gun shape.
And, apparently, many families are busy turning their children into just such hysterics.
I have to wonder what they will be like when grown up.
This incident is the latest in a growing line of extraordinarily strong reactions by school officials to things students have brought to school — or talked about bringing to school — that are not anything like real guns.
At D. Newlin Fell School in Philadelphia, school officials reportedly yelled at a student and then searched her in front of her class after she was found with a paper gun her grandfather had made for her. (RELATED: Paper gun causes panic)
In rural Pennsylvania, a kindergarten girl was suspended for making a “terroristic threat” after she told another girl that she planned to shoot her with a pink Hello Kitty toy gun that bombards targets with soapy bubbles.
In Sumter, South Carolina, a six-year-old girl was expelled for bringing a clear plastic Airsoft gun that shoots plastic pellet to class for show-and-tell. The expulsion was later revoked.
Remember, these are the people who claim that they teach critical thinking.
At D. Newlin Fell School in Philadelphia, school officials reportedly yelled at a student and then searched her in front of her class after she was found with a paper gun her grandfather had made for her.
Check out the kid’s paper gun:
How menacing is that? Seriously, that kid could have gotten a self-inflicted paper cut.
A fifth grader at a South Philadelphia elementary school made the mistake of pulling out a gun constructed out of paper in class last week.
An official at D. Newlin Fell School searched the student, Melody Valentin, in front of her entire class, reports FOX 29. After the search failed to turn any more weapons (paper or non-paper), the staffer intensely scolded the little girl – also in front of the whole class.
~~~
“He yelled at me and said I shouldn’t have brought the gun to school and I kept telling him it was a paper gun but he wouldn’t listen,” the fifth grader told the station. Describing the paper firearm, the girl’s mother, Dianna Kelly, said it looked similar to a folded sheet of paper. The little girl’s grandfather had made it for her the day before, she added. Valentin told FOX 29 that she had put it in her pocket and forgotten about it. She said she only got it out to throw it away. She added that her classmates had jeered her and called her a “murderer” after the incident.
Back in the day we used to shoot spit wads through straws in the middle of history class (Douglass Elementary, 4th grade, Mr. Dickenson’s class, on the Air Force Aacademy).
Understandably, that would be grounds for some punishment.
arthurus
10 years ago
@Budvarakbar: I read it as LOAN and did not think it misspelled or inappropriate. It has been done. Late student loan . SWAT. California..
The recent absurd incidents are not intended to create a safe environment, they are intended to brainwash children into an unreasoning pathological fear of firearms. A reward/punishment system has been set up to direct school employees to take these crazy and despicable actions.
If you want children to be safe from drowning, you teach them to swim – because water is everywhere. You don’t try to condition them to be terrified of water. None of this is making children safer. None of it.
Cui bono? Who benefits from introducing attempts to instill an irrational fear in children as part of the curriculum? I don’t accept that this is just the result of cowardly bureaucrats deciding individually to show that they’ve taken action, however useless. This is a larger game.
I believe the desired outcome of this sort of conditioning is to raise a generation of adults who stand around like sheep and wait to be rescued. The sort who won’t make any trouble when their rights are taken away one by one. The sort who stood around meekly on a London street while two men boasted of decapitating a man and waved their bloody knives around. Armed police only took 20 minutes to arrive.
Yellowhorse
10 years ago
Think about it.
This whole idiotic thing is to rid the USA of it’s idea that we can protect ourselves without the help of “Big Brother”. The idea is to scare and plant the fear of guns in our kids heads.
Why do you think these overeducated idiots hate the NRA so much? 2 reasons; First, the NRA destroys their argument that guns are dangerous. Guns are not dangerous, people are dangerous. Second, the NRA has a wonderful educational safety program named Eddie Eagle to train kids about guns and gun safely. The idiot left would rather risk a child’s life than to train them in the proper way to treat guns.
Smorgasbord
10 years ago
Was the Lego rifle loaded with Lego rounds? If so, that would be a problem. If it wasn’t, then it is just a TOY GUN.
I was in the car listening to prager on the radio give mention to this blog:
I cannot stand toy guns. I can’t stand to look at them.
I know young boys love to play with them, and even when they aren’t allowed in homes, they still find ways to turn things — from crayons, a paperclip and a stick — into a gun shape. Heck, I’ve even seen a piece of Play-Doh get shaped into a gun.
I’ll tell you what: I’ll never go into a store and actually purchase a pretend gun for my child.
As parents, I know we should avoid using the word “never”. However, this is non-negotiable.
I might not be able to stop my children from pretending an object is a weapon, but I can control whether they play with an actual replica of one.
Recently, I was at the playground with other moms and their children when I noticed a little boy about 5 years old holding a pretend rifle. He pointed the rifle in people’s faces and yelled, “BAM!” in hope of frighting them. When he aimed at my 4-year-old daughter, I became angry. My daughter was terrified and began crying. We have taught her to never be around guns, and if she is unsure about whether a gun is pretend or real to ask a grownup.
She truly thought the gun was real. I was proud of her for following my instructions but angry that a little boy was pointing rifles at people and thinking that was a proper game to play.
You know….even if you personally don’t agree with the existence of guns- especially if you hate and fear them- the fact of the matter is that they exist in the world and aren’t going away. Therefore, if you are afraid of them, then you should go out and learn everything you can about them- from safety in handling to usage in firing. It demystifies firearms and brings a deeper respect and understanding not only of what they’re capable of doing, but also what their limitations are.
She’s done her little girl no favors in educating how to live in a world where guns are a reality; and it’s a sort of male abuse to deny her boys the ability to be boys and play with imaginary guns, regardless of whether they imagine themselves to be the cops or the robbers; cowboys or Indians; or just mindlessly aiming at people and pulling the imaginary trigger. It’s make believe.
And as far as her point in the part of her blogpost that I did not include in my block quote, instead of living with heads-in-the-sand ignorance, the problem should be addressed through gun education and safety to be able to distinguish between toy guns and real guns; and for parents to have the wisdom to know how guns should be stored in the household.
When I was about 5 or 6, to this day I remember my dad bringing me to my parent’s bedroom, pointing to the top shelf in the closet and letti g me know that a 22 rifle was there in the black box and that I was to leave it alone. Maybe I was just a good kid, but I knew that rifle was off-limits to me unless my parents allowed me to shoot with it under their supervision. It never crossed my mind to regard it as a “toy” for me to play with.
Didn’t work out too bad for Josh Welch. He got a two day suspension for chewing a pop tart into the shape of a gun. The NRA has gifted him with a Lifetime Membership… a value of about $550.
I dunno… a couple of days off from school, more than 15 minutes of fame and a Lifetime NRA membership. Not too bad of spoils for the moment.
They’ve had fundraisers since an attorney is attempting to get the two day suspension off of his records. I suppose that’s a worthy quest. But then since they seal these juvenile records, not sure it could come back to bite him as an adult. I could be wrong…
A five-year-old Maryland boy was interrogated until he wet himself and suspended for 10 days after school officials caught with playing with a “cowboy-style cap gun,” the Washington Post reports, citing the child’s family and lawyer.
School officials interrogated the boy for two whole hours until he “uncharacteristically” wet his pants, the boy’s mother said.
He’s “all bugs and frogs and cowboys,” she said.
“I have no problem that he had a consequence to his behavior,” said the mother, who has requested anonymity to protect the boy’s identity.
“What I have a problem with is the severity,” she said, adding that the school’s handling of the situation was unacceptable.
The family’s attorney has asked for the school to reverse its suspension decision and to expunge the boy’s record.
“If the punishment stands, it would become part of the boy’s permanent school record and keep him out of classes the rest of the school year,” the WaPo notes, citing the family. “He would miss his end-of-year kindergarten program at Dowell Elementary School in Lusby.”
Yes, this is real life.
A “disciplinary conference” is scheduled to review the situation on Friday.
The Washington Post details how everything went down [emphasis added]:
According to the family, the boy’s friend had brought a water gun on the bus a day earlier. On Wednesday, unbeknown to his parents, the boy stowed his cap gun — from Frontier Town near Ocean City — inside his backpack as he left for school.
He told his mother after the incident that he had “really, really” wanted to show his friend.
The mother was called by the principal at 10:50 a.m. and was told that her son had the cap gun and pretended to shoot someone on the bus. She said that both the kindergartner and his first-grade sister, sitting nearby on the bus, disputed that account.
The mother said the principal told her that if the cap gun had been loaded with caps, it would have been deemed an explosive and police would have been called in.
School officials said the boy was suspended for being in possession of a “look-alike gun.”
The boy’s mother is a high school teacher in Calvert who “strongly supports the school system and loves the teachers at her son’s school” and she and her husband are active in the community.
But support for the school aside, she says the interrogation process was over the line.
“The school was quite obviously taking it very seriously, and he’s 5 years old,” she said. “Why were we not immediately contacted?”
“Kids play cowboys and Indians,” the family’s attorney added, saying the boy’s age is important in this situation. “They play cops and robbers. You’re talking about a little 5-year-old here.”
CJ reminds everyone of this Holder quote:
“What we need to do is change the way in which people think about guns, especially young people, and make it something that’s not cool, that it’s not acceptable, it’s not hip to carry a gun anymore, in the way in which we changed our attitudes about cigarettes.” – Eric Holder, 1995
They’re indoctrinating the next generation to become future gun control advocates and true believers. If they can’t get anti-gun legislation passed on the big stage now, they are investing in the youth of tomorrow to get it done in the future by exercising zero tolerance in the schools.
Parents in Polk County, Florida are outraged after learning that students in area schools had their irises scanned as part of a new security program without obtaining proper permission.
Students at three facilities — an elementary school, a grade school and a high school — had their eyeballs scanned earlier this month as part of a ‘student safety’ pilot program being carried out by Stanley Convergent Security Solutions.
“It simply takes a picture of the iris, which is unique to every individual,” Rob Davis, the school board’s senior director of support services, wrote home to parents in a letter dated May 23. “With this program, we will be able to identify when and where a student gets on the bus, when they arrive at their school location, when and what bus the student boards and disembarks in the afternoon. This is an effort to further enhance the safety of our students.The EyeSwipe-Nano is an ideal replacement for the card based system since your child will not have to be responsible for carrying an identification card,” he added.
Hankster58
10 years ago
LIBERAL STUPIDITY at it’s FINEST!!! Now, why don’t the SAME LIBERAL POS’s…. use that SAME.. ZERO TOLERANCE YARDSTICK.. on HOLDER, LERNER, and OBAMA???
Two faced FRAUDS…..
Smorgasbord
10 years ago
@Ditto: #18
This is one way for the federal government to be able to identify people. I’m guessing that the information went into a federal database somewhere. I wouldn’t have a problem with it for my kids, except it should be up to the parents to decide if it is done on their child.
It wouldn’t be any different than schools or parents having kids fingerprinted in case the kid is kidnapped.
Smorgasbord
10 years ago
@Hankster58: #19
Just like the rest of the world uses Metric measurements, and we use our own, so the liberals have two different measuring systems to measure wrongdoing.
LOS ANGELES (CBSLA.com) — The Los Angeles Unified School District is taking part in a program to educate middle and high school students about how to share their HIV and STD statuses with their cell phones.
Health teachers in grades 7 through 12 had access to information regarding the services provided by Qpid.me since the program debuted earlier this year, LAUSD officials said.
Described by district officials as a sex education prevention resource accessed by secondary health teachers, Qpid.me allows users to obtain, store and privately share their health records and HIV/STD statuses.
While it is not part of the district’s health education curriculum, the website is being offered as an added sex education resource by displaying Qpid.me posters in classrooms to encourage students to utilize the tool as a supplement, officials said.
One of the methods used to educate students on Qpid’s services is a three-minute YouTube video that shows how to obtain STD results for former Miss California 2009 Tami Farrell.
After urging students to take out their phones, the video’s narrator asks, “How often are you allowed to use your cell phone in class?”
Students are then shown how users can text message a code to receive information that, in this case, shows Farrell tested negative for HIV, and chlamydia.
The free service allows students as young as 12 years old to find a “teen-friendly” testing location, access their results online, and then confidentially share their status if they choose.
I thought the far-left wanted the government to stay out of our bedrooms. The problem I see here is adults assuming with great delusion that middle and high school age kids will be able to share this very personal information with their close friends and with an implication that everything will go hunky-dory.
We have all been to junior high and high school, and we should know full well that in many cases this information will be abused to humiliate and harass that child, rumors and lies will be spread all over the school, and this kind of bullying may very likely lead to the kid committing suicide.
Hunter Spanjer says his name with a certain special hand gesture, but at just three and a half years old, he may have to change it.
“He’s deaf, and his name sign, they say, is a violation of their weapons policy,” explained Hunter’s father, Brian Spanjer.
Grand Island’s “Weapons in Schools” Board Policy 8470 forbids “any instrument…that looks like a weapon,” But a three year-old’s hands?
“Anybody that I have talked to thinks this is absolutely ridiculous. This is not threatening in any way,” said Hunter’s grandmother Janet Logue.
“It’s a symbol. It’s an actual sign, a registered sign, through S.E.E.,” Brian Spanjer said.
S.E.E. stands for Signing Exact English, Hunter’s sign language. Hunter’s name gesture is modified with crossed-fingers to show it is uniquely his own.
“We are working with the parents to come to the best solution we can for the child,” said Jack Sheard, Grand Island Public Schools spokesperson.
That’s just about all GIPS officials will say for now.
Meantime, Hunter’s parents say that by Monday, lawyers from the National Association of the Deaf are likely to weigh in for Hunter’s right to sign his own name.
Despite whatever rules and regulations may exist, some Grand Islanders we spoke with said they don’t think it’s right to make a three year-old change the way he says his name.
“It’s his name. It’s not like he’s going to bring a gun to school when he’s three years old,” commented Dana Schwieger.
“I find it very difficult to believe that the sign language that shows his name resembles a gun in any way would even enter a child’s mind,” Grand Island resident Fredda Bartenbach reflected.
But for now, that’s a discussion between the Spanjers and Grand Island Public Schools officials.
Even though it’s a year old, apparently, this story is gaining traction again in the conservative blogosphere, even though the issue resolved itself in the child’s favor.
The best nugget in that lefty link is another golden nugget– from last month- so ridiculous, even the liberal writer won’t defend it:
Seven year-old Christopher Marshall was suspended from his Suffolk, Virginia elementary school for pointing a gun at a classmate, and making what he described as “a machine gun noise.”
Christopher’s father, a former Marine, says his son was just pretending to be a Marine, while his “victim” was being “a bad guy.”
School spokesperson Bethanne Bradshaw explained, to a local TV station, that the school has a “zero tolerance policy” for weapons, and “A pencil is a weapon when it is pointed at someone in a threatening way and gun noises are made.”
That’s true, the last time I pointed a pencil at a mugger and made gun noises, I got my ass kicked. The guy wasn’t even impressed by my spot-on cocking sound effect, which was a helluva lot more convincing than the gun noises that Christopher made
You know what they say: The pencil is mightier than the gun
I honestly, simply can not fathom why parents don’t demand these “educators” be replaced with people with some damn common sense. When you look at how badly this nations schools are failing to teach even the basics, parents should be hopping mad.
Smorgasbord
10 years ago
@Wordsmith: #23
I read about this. Does this mean that if I am giving someone directions, I can’t point which way to go, because my hand might look like a gun to someone? If I just use a clenched fist to point, am I suggesting to someone that I want to fight? How far will these liberals go to try to control EVERY part of our lives?
Thinking about sign language, if it were taught in all the developed countries, look how easy it would be to communicate to most people in most countries.
Smorgasbord
10 years ago
@Ditto: #24
If the parents are watching the propaganda media, they probably don’t know what is going on. Even conservatives who don’t check into what is going on in their schools or their government, don’t know what is going on.
A California elementary school will hold a toy gun exchange Saturday, offering students a book and a chance to win a bicycle if they turn in their play weapons. Strobridge Elementary Principal Charles Hill said children who play with toy guns may not take real guns seriously. “Playing with toys guns, saying ‘I’m going to shoot you,’ desensitizes them, so as they get older, it’s easier for them to use a real gun,” Hill said. “If we want older kids to not think guns are cool, we need to start early.”
Nan G
10 years ago
@Wordsmith: Sounds like they listened to Obama’s speech ending the war the other day.
Magical thinking.
Obama simply declares an end to the war even as our enemy is still in the field levying a war against us!
Who is Obama’s ”audience?”
Obviously not our enemy.
It is just us.
Obama seems to believe that victory consists in only convincing one’s countrymen that “we won.” He’s tried this before when he actually said, ”we won.”
However, historically war is not declared won unless one side has convinced the enemy that he lost.
These administrators in CA must actually believe that , if they hide the word, idea, picture, model of handguns from children that those children will NEVER imagine using a gun.
Got news for the administrators: well before a child ever gets to Kindergarten he/she has been exposed to images and toys, even real guns thousands of times….on TV, in movies, at play and at home.
Obama has a solution for that, too.
Take children away from families except when they are asleep.
12 hours a day/12 months a year from age 2 or 3 up til after age 16 if the child stays in prison (I mean school) that long.
Hankster58
10 years ago
@Wordsmith:
Funny, all the kids I knew “played Army” etc with toy guns, and not ONE of my childhood friends has committed a crime…. Perhaps, it’s all in the MINDSET….. hmmm… Conservatives are all about UPHOLDING the law……
Liberals tend to want to BREAK DOWN the law, and Constitution, and Personal responsibility etc…. since they all go hand in hand. I’d be willing to go out on a limb, and state that the VAST MAJORITY of career Criminals are LIBERALS….
Another one by way of CJ (an update to a story dated on March):
Suspension over gun-shaped toaster pastry is now permanent mark on kid’s record
This week brought more bad news for Joshua Welch, the Baltimore-area second-grader who was suspended for two days because his teacher thought he shaped a breakfast pastry into something resembling a gun.
School officials have denied an appeal to have the suspension expunged from the boy’s permanent record, reports The Baltimore Sun.
Robin Ficker, the attorney representing Welch and his family, said he will now take the matter to the Anne Arundel County school board. Under local regulations, he has 30 days to do so.
“If this school can’t educate a seven-year-old without putting him out of school, how are they going to deal with 17-year-olds?” Ficker said, according to The Sun.
At the time, Welch told Baltimore FOX affiliate WBFF that his goal was to turn the prefabricated delicacy into a mountain, but that didn’t really materialize.
“It was already a rectangle. I just kept on biting it and biting it and tore off the top of it and kind of looked like a gun,” he said.
“But it wasn’t,” the boy astutely added.
Tom
10 years ago
My freedoms feel so assaulted. All idiocy like these examples aside, is it really wrong to teach children that guns are dangerous? Are gun owners in America really so overwhelmingly responsible, that it’s completely ridiculous to teach children that guns aren’t toys? I’ve got an idea. For every funny liberal overreaction to guns, how about I post an example of some careless gunowner’s “mistake”. Let’s see who runs out of examples first. Game? Here, I’ll try to catch up, then you can go.
these initial examples all courtesy of of this article
On Wednesday, a two-year-old Texas boy named Trenton Mathis accidentally shot and killed himself with a handgun he found sitting on his great-grandfather’s nightstand. According to the website of KLTV, Mathis had gone into his great-grandparents’ bedroom in search of chewing gum. Instead, he found a loaded 9 mm handgun, which he used to shoot himself in the face. Mathis was pronounced dead at a Tyler, Texas hospital. He would have turned three years old in July.
Saylor Slone Martine, a 15-year-old Oklahoma girl who, last weekend, was shot and killed when a semi-automatic handgun owned by her parents accidentally discharged, hitting her in the head.
Neengnco Chong, a two-year-old Minnesota boy who was accidentally shot and killed in December by his four-year-old brother, with a handgun his father stored next to a mattress
Travin Varese, a two-year-old Louisiana boy who was accidentally shot and killed by his older brother in January
Skyler Daniel Boring, a 17-year-old Tennessee boy who was accidentally shot and killed earlier this week in what was apparently a “war game” gone wrong
Margaret “Maggie” Hollifield, a 10-year-old Virginia girl who was accidentally shot and killed at her home this month by an unnamed boy
Kinsler Davis, a two-year-old Texas boy who accidentally shot and killed himself earlier this month with a handgun he found hidden in his father’s bedroom. “All the information indicates this was a tragic accident,” the local police chief told the press.
Why the devil would you have a real firearm in pink?!
All idiocy like these examples aside, is it really wrong to teach children that guns are dangerous?
My focus is on the idiocy. 🙂
There’s nothing wrong at all with teaching children to respect firearms and know the difference between toys and the real thing. A number of these deaths could have been preventable.
1. By educating children
2. By not being a careless, irresponsible gun owner
Guns exist in society. Disarming children of familiarity and real gun education doesn’t make them any safer. Telling children they are not allowed to even form their hand into the shape of a gun- does nothing except bury heads in the sand.
As you well know, when it comes to accidental deaths, what is a greater threat to children? Cars or firearms? Swimming pools or firearms?
Accidental death rate amongst children have been on the decline for the past decade, I think; but when it comes to preventable accidents, why are firearms so obsessed over? Why no school kid hauled off and suspended for pretending like his glass of water during lunch period is a swimming pool? Why doesn’t a school ban kids from uttering “vroom, vroom” noises? Or pushing a carrot across the cafeteria table like a race car?
Tom
10 years ago
Ah, Tom…. I fail to see the comparison
The comparison is that you’re highlighting one extreme possible outcome of school efforts – or lack thereof – to educate children on the dangers of firearms. I’m highlighting the opposite extreme outcome.
My focus is on the idiocy.
Yes, your focus is on that rather than the much more prevalent attempts at responsible education. Some would call that cherry picking. You only give one side of the story, and for what purpose? One guess: to drum up anger and resentment at educators who are making good-faith attempts to teach children that guns – regardless of what their parents think – aren’t fun toys to leave around the house and play with. If you gave a balanced assessment and pointed out the idiocy on both sides, perhaps I would draw a different conclusion. Of course the idiocy on the Left in this particular situation results in a confiscated toy and the chance for outraged parents to grandstand about the Second Amendment. The idiocy on the Right results in hundreds of dead children a year perishing in preventable accidents.
There’s nothing wrong at all with teaching children to respect firearms and know the difference between toys and the real thing.
But your post is likely to impart the opposite conclusion. It’s all about Liberal overreach, without the balancing perspective of what underlies the efforts. How are your readers supposed to react to this? How might this color their feelings when they hear their own childrens’ schools are attempting to offer education on firearms?
Guns exist in society. Disarming children of familiarity and real gun education doesn’t make them any safer. Telling children they are not allowed to even form their hand into the shape of a gun- does nothing except bury heads in the sand.
I don’t disagree with any of that – but of course, you’re cherry picking a ridiculous example as a stand-in for all education efforts. Here’s a question: how much of the educational burden on gun safety has been pushed onto the State in the form of school education due to the lack of sensible gun laws? If gun owners had to obtain a license and part of that was passing a simple safety test proving they understand the most basic tenants of gun safety, wouldn’t that actually be much more effective? Imagine if no one had to pass a driving test to drive a car. Isn’t it likely the State would have no choice but to start teaching drivers ed in schools? Rather than government overreach, what we’re seeing is the abdication of responsibility from gun owners (those, at least, who block sensible gun laws) and the shifting of that responsibility to the State. This isn’t a nanny state power grab; this is a direct outcome of irresponsibility on the part of many gun owners and the cold hard facts of hundreds of preventable deaths.
As you well know, when it comes to accidental deaths, what is a greater threat to children? Cars or firearms? Swimming pools or firearms?
I’ve already been down this road many times with Retire05. What is the point of this comparison? Because more children are killed in car accidents, we shouldn’t try to prevent gun accidents? Are you willing to advocate for the same education and licensing of gun owners that we have for car ownership?
Accidental death rate amongst children have been on the decline for the past decade, I think; but when it comes to preventable accidents, why are firearms so obsessed over?
Of course accidents will happen. But can we say we’re doing everything we can to minimize gun accidents as a society? The difference between gun and car accidents are that all car owners are licensed and tested before they can drive; cars have mandatory – and to the manufactures, very costly – safety regulations; cars that aren’t safe can be unilaterally pulled off the street; car manufactures can be held liable for unsafe products that lead to injury or death. Can the same be said for guns, and gun manufactures? Why not?
The comparison is that you’re highlighting one extreme possible outcome of school efforts – or lack thereof – to educate children on the dangers of firearms. I’m highlighting the opposite extreme outcome.
I’m not highlighting “possible outcome” but shining a magnifying glass on the actual intent- an intent that you appear to agree with as being “idiotic”, while also wanting to excuse it as “good faith” effort and intention (“heart is in the right place” reasoning).
So I still am seeing apples and broccoli here.
My focus is on the idiocy.
Yes, your focus is on that rather than the much more prevalent attempts at responsible education. Some would call that cherry picking. You only give one side of the story, and for what purpose?
Because sometimes a blogpost isn’t about covering the entire gamut of 2nd Amendment rights and gun control laws in an attempt to address the issue that concerns you, but is about bringing focus to one aspect of an issue and pointing out the idiocy.
Rather than reading into the post what you wish to see addressed, read the post for what it is. A chance for venting over liberal idiocy. I owe you no apologies for “balance” by inclusion of “right wing idiocy”. That’s not the purpose of this post.
A comparison challenge for you here would be in pointing out an equivalent “preponderance” of conservative principals and teachers forcing conservative indoctrination in the school system. Can you find any?
One guess: to drum up anger and resentment at educators who are making good-faith attempts to teach children that guns – regardless of what their parents think – aren’t fun toys to leave around the house and play with.
What amazes me here is that your passion on this issue clouds your ability to see past your own partisan lens.
I don’t doubt these educators have “good-faith attempts” and intent (Democrats aren’t evil…just wrong). That’s beside the point. But what you are revealing about yourself is the not uncommon criticism from the right that liberals think they know best what’s good for society. Please look at the above blockquote through an objective lens and tell me that you are capable of seeing your own partisan views saturating that comment.
If you gave a balanced assessment and pointed out the idiocy on both sides, perhaps I would draw a different conclusion.
Tom, fer crissakes….you’re on a right-wing blog. As you know, I do my fair share of criticism of my fellow conservatives on this site when I think they’ve gone off the deep end; and occasionally, I do posts where I try to weigh in with a balanced perspective. Well this ain’t one of those! I’m not trying to write a scholarly dissertation here meant to solve America’s gun issue.
Rather than really engaging the content of the post itself, your partisan passion on the issue wants to reshape the battlespace into the one you wish it to be.
Of course the idiocy on the Left in this particular situation results in a confiscated toy and the chance for outraged parents to grandstand about the Second Amendment. The idiocy on the Right results in hundreds of dead children a year perishing in preventable accidents.
Who on the right doesn’t believe in educating children on gun safety? On the need to be responsible gun owners, especially with children in the house?!
The liberal solution of these “educators” isn’t to actually educate these children on guns. It’s to stick their heads in the sand and pretend guns don’t exist in the world, rather than confront it head on. What you end up is with my comment #15 link:
He pointed the rifle in people’s faces and yelled, “BAM!” in hope of frighting them. When he aimed at my 4-year-old daughter, I became angry. My daughter was terrified and began crying. We have taught her to never be around guns, and if she is unsure about whether a gun is pretend or real to ask a grownup.
She truly thought the gun was real.
In my opinion (goes with saying), that mom is doing her daughter a disservice. Real education would be to teach her daughter the difference between a real gun and a toy gun; instead, there’s a good chance that thanks to the mother, this girl overreacted.
If there’s something you are deathly afraid of, then you should go about learning everything you can about that thing; not seek ways of avoidance in hopes you will never encounter it. If I’m afraid of firearms, don’t believe in them, don’t ever want to carry and use one, I’d still want to know everything I can about it. That’s empowerment. It removes the mystique surround firearms. In the end, they’re “just” bullet shooters. It’s not an all-powerful magic wand. They can’t harm you (aside from maybe some powder burns) if they’re not actually aimed at you. If there’s no ammo, it’s just a blunt weapon. Education and intimate handling teaches a more realistic respect and also an understanding of their limitations. Yes, it is possible to defend yourself against someone holding a firearm. Unfortunately, there are many martial arts instructors out there who teach the most ridiculous defenses, probably because they themselves have never handled a firearm before.
There’s nothing wrong at all with teaching children to respect firearms and know the difference between toys and the real thing.
But your post is likely to impart the opposite conclusion. It’s all about Liberal overreach, without the balancing perspective of what underlies the efforts. How are your readers supposed to react to this? How might this color their feelings when they hear their own childrens’ schools are attempting to offer education on firearms?
If I ever write a serious piece of journalism meant to be published in Time magazine or an op-ed in the NYTimes, I’ll be sure to have you critique the rough draft. 😉
Perhaps what we need to know here, based upon what you wish this post to be rather than the type it is, is what the administrations in these schools actually are doing in terms of gun education. Is there any, aside from pushing a the liberal perspective that guns are bad and only lead to evil violence? Without actually educating on gun safety?
What you might deem as reasonable and balanced from these educators, sounds more like liberal indoctrination and partisan views. Most people probably think their views sound reasonable and centrist to them, rather than far right or far left and biased.
Guns exist in society. Disarming children of familiarity and real gun education doesn’t make them any safer. Telling children they are not allowed to even form their hand into the shape of a gun- does nothing except bury heads in the sand.
I don’t disagree with any of that – but of course, you’re cherry picking a ridiculous example as a stand-in for all education efforts.
Again, Tom: This isn’t a dissertation study on ALL schools and how they are attempting to deal with gun safety and education for their students. It’s a blogpost pointing out liberal idiocy that I disagree with. I make no apologies about not including the whole wide range gamut of related stories, critical of the right, that might make you feel better.
Here’s a question: how much of the educational burden on gun safety has been pushed onto the State in the form of school education due to the lack of sensible gun laws? If gun owners had to obtain a license and part of that was passing a simple safety test proving they understand the most basic tenants of gun safety, wouldn’t that actually be much more effective?
I don’t know where you live. But we have that in California.
Do you believe that we have an epidemic of gun violence, Tom? What percentage of gun violence is due to homicides, what percentage to suicides, and what percentage due to accidental shootings (with the remembrance that other items cause greater accidental deaths to children than firearms)? Which is greater, suicides or homicides due to firearms?
Imagine if no one had to pass a driving test to drive a car. Isn’t it likely the State would have no choice but to start teaching drivers ed in schools? Rather than government overreach, what we’re seeing is the abdication of responsibility from gun owners (those, at least, who block sensible gun laws) and the shifting of that responsibility to the State. This isn’t a nanny state power grab; this is a direct outcome of irresponsibility on the part of many gun owners and the cold hard facts of hundreds of preventable deaths.
I don’t mind licensing; but where to draw the line? You can blame a lot of bad parenting for raising the next generation of miscreants and criminals. Should the state give out licenses before you can become a parent? Might solve some societal problems, you know….
Who is educating these educators on what should and should be taught to school kids on gun safety and education, that isn’t all about pushing a liberal fear and belief and opinion about the evils of firearms?
As you well know, when it comes to accidental deaths, what is a greater threat to children? Cars or firearms? Swimming pools or firearms?
I’ve already been down this road many times with Retire05. What is the point of this comparison? Because more children are killed in car accidents, we shouldn’t try to prevent gun accidents?
How is it not obvious?!
If what you fear is accidental deaths of children, and firearms rank down the list, and your primary concern is the safety of children from accidental deaths, then ranking above firearms (not saying it is not a concern at all) should be your advocacy for education on the dangers and risks posed to children by vehicles, swimming pools, lakes, seas, and the oceans; poisons and fires, suffocation from sticking one’s head in a plastics bag, etc. After all, those things statistically pose a greater risk. Where’s the priority?
Yet somehow, it’s all about guns…..why?
But can we say we’re doing everything we can to minimize gun accidents as a society?
We can always do more. 🙂
But the right solution is what?
The difference between gun and car accidents are that all car owners are licensed and tested before they can drive; cars have mandatory – and to the manufactures, very costly – safety regulations; cars that aren’t safe can be unilaterally pulled off the street; car manufactures can be held liable for unsafe products that lead to injury or death. Can the same be said for guns, and gun manufactures? Why not?
Well, how often are the accidental injuries and death due to a design or manufacturing defect in a firearm product? Is there greater frequency amongst car manufacturing defects as cause of injury than there is with gun manufacturers?
A comparison challenge for you here would be in pointing out an equivalent “preponderance” of conservative principals and teachers forcing conservative indoctrination in the school system. Can you find any?
That challenge assumes that you’ve proven a pattern of state sanctioned liberal indoctrination, when all I see are isolated incidents. When teachers in the bible belt pray in public schools, and it becomes a story on the Left, do those incidents prove a systematic conservative bias in public schools? The fact of the matter is that I live in a much more dangerous society because a minority group representing a minority opinion on gun legislation (even among gun owners) holds sway through a combination of big money lobbying interests and the vagaries of congressional redistricting. Anything that helps reinforce their position, which isn’t founded on any sort of objective data about gun safety, but rather the fallacious notion that there is an imminent gun grab, is something that affects me directly and I feel I have a right to address.
What amazes me here is that your passion on this issue clouds your ability to see past your own partisan lens.
I don’t deny strong feelings on this issue. And I intend to share my opinions, here if you’re willing to entertain them, or elsewhere.
If I ever write a serious piece of journalism meant to be published in Time magazine or an op-ed in the NYTimes, I’ll be sure to have you critique the rough draft.
I apologize if my comments came across as personal. I assure you, I believe you always aim in your posts for a very high standard. On this one issue, however, I have to push back. It’s my honest opinion that your position, while certainly well expressed and held I’m sure for the best reasons, is mistaken
Perhaps what we need to know here, based upon what you wish this post to be rather than the type it is, is what the administrations in these schools actually are doing in terms of gun education. Is there any, aside from pushing a the liberal perspective that guns are bad and only lead to evil violence? Without actually educating on gun safety?
I don’t know where you live. But we have that in California.
The idea that you can point to a state’s gun laws to prove the failure of gun legislation is a fallacy because guns are easily transported. This is why Federal legislation is necessary. Any state that happens to have rigorous gun legislation is a hostage to its neighbors’ more permissive laws as well.
Do you believe that we have an epidemic of gun violence, Tom? What percentage of gun violence is due to homicides, what percentage to suicides, and what percentage due to accidental shootings (with the remembrance that other items cause greater accidental deaths to children than firearms)? Which is greater, suicides or homicides due to firearms?
I never said this is just about homicides, although – as a non-owner – that’s the area that affects me the most. The inherent danger of firearms can be gleamed from suicides and accidents as well. I suggest you read this Harvard School of Public Health data on the relationship between guns and suicide, which points out, among other things, these disturbing findings:
The preponderance of current evidence indicates that gun availability is a risk factor for youth suicide in the United States.
….
After controlling for poverty and urbanization, for every age group, across the United States, people in states with many guns have elevated rates of suicide, particularly firearm suicide.
….
States with higher levels of household gun ownership had higher rates of firearm suicide and overall suicide.
….
The vast majority of adolescent suicide guns come from parents of other family members.
….
The case-fatality rate for suicide attempts with guns is higher than other methods.
Across the Northeast, case fatality rates ranged from over 90% for firearms to under 5% for drug overdoses, cutting and piercing (the most common methods of attempted suicide).
I don’t mind licensing; but where to draw the line?
You draw it the same place you draw it for any other legislative matter, where it’s appropriate and sensible. The idea that this is an all or nothing proposition is simply NRA propaganda. You need a license to drive a car; you have to drive the speed limit, and wear a seatbelt in a car that probably contains an airbag as well: these are all the direct result of State intervention. So why didn’t the Big Government nanny state try to legislate accidental car deaths down to zero, legislate you right to travel by car away, legislate the car industry into oblivion? Because they stopped, more or less, where it’s appropriate and sensible. You acknowledge you agree with an incremental measure, but you seemingly won’t support it because of a fear that is baseless and without precedent. Let me state this for the record: the right of Americans to privately own guns isn’t going away. That fear is simply NRA marketing. Unfortunately for everyone, there are many people in America who fear something that will never happen, and are allowing that fear to paralyze them and prevent them from supporting something they know is both right and necessary.
If what you fear is accidental deaths of children, and firearms rank down the list, and your primary concern is the safety of children from accidental deaths, then ranking above firearms (not saying it is not a concern at all) should be your advocacy for education on the dangers and risks posed to children by vehicles, swimming pools, lakes, seas, and the oceans; poisons and fires, suffocation from sticking one’s head in a plastics bag, etc. After all, those things statistically pose a greater risk. Where’s the priority?
At the risk of sounding redundant, I have never claimed that we can legislate the risk of accidents down to zero, or that we need to rank one type of accident over another. But where appropriate, we certainly should do something when it’s in our power to minimize accidents. Your list actually is very useful to my point, as most of your examples of accidents have actually been somewhat successfully addressed by government. Do you not believe there would be even more deaths on the road without seatbelts and airbags and speed limits? So where is the outrage on the Right over having to wear a seatbelt or take a driver’s test?
Well, how often are the accidental injuries and death due to a design or manufacturing defect in a firearm product? Is there greater frequency amongst car manufacturing defects as cause of injury than there is with gun manufacturers?
It’s not just about defects in products, although clearly gun manufactures currently have much less motivation to make safer products than say, Ford has to not make another Pinto. This is about implementing safety measures and mandating background checks, licensing and training. Technology exists for guns that is analogous to a seat belt in a car, but car manufactures have no reason to incur the additional costs to make their products safer, and seemingly little motivation to do so on their own.
arthurus
ON 11,
I could have swear it was LONE,
like lone ranger.
he type LOAN suspect would sound to me like a SUSPECT to LOAN for a fee.
just playing
bye
Tom
there is no such a thing LIKE A CONSERVATIVE INDOCTRINATION,
that only belong to HITLER AND OBAMA for the YOUNG STUDENTS OF AMERICA.
they will have to be DEBRIEF and IT WILL TAKE A LOT OF TIME BECAUSE THOSE CREEPS STARTED ON PRE SCHOOL KIDS. SINCE OBAMA BEGAN HIS FIRST TERM, WITH THE SCHOOL TEACHER AND HIS repetitive CAMPAIGNS,.
what a shame
Wordsmith
THIS IS MOST OUTAGEOUS and the more the worse,
the solution is to lock the WHITE HOUSE so no one would be allowed
to continue that indoctrination, which has gone already too far and the CHILDREN WILL CARRY THE SCAR ALL THEIR LIVES UNLESS THEY HAVE A SHRINK TO REVERSE THAT MINDSET NEFARIOUS ON THEIR FUTURE. I fear for the future of the AMERICAN YOUTHS TRANSFORMED INTO OBEDIENT ROBOT,
clear the WHITE HOUSE, let it run by the GENERALS until the NEXT ELECTION.
A follow up on gun suicide. If you were unfortunate enough to have an adolescent son who was troubled and likely suicidal, wouldn’t you be extra careful about locking up your guns? I hear over and over how ‘guns don’t kill people, people kill people”; or “If someone really wants to murder someone or kill himself, he doesn’t need a gun. he can use a knife” . A person who truly believes those statements would have no reason to secure that firearm around a suicidal person, because it’s irrelevant – the person can kill himself regardless if he really wants to. But I bet you would worry more about that gun than the kitchen knives, and secure that gun, because you’re an intelligent and sensible person. The minute you acknowledge that to yourself is the minute you admit that guns really do possess a degree of inherent danger, that they are, in order of magnitude, much different than something like a knife.
Tom
THERE is no indoctrination from CONSERVATIVES
they are themselves as you see is what they are,
they have STRONG VALUES and it’s real AMERICAN,
they are the best of all and you can trust their words, as oppose to the bullshit you get
with the other.
that’s why I’m here.
they don’t bragg on their superior intelligence and gift of perception.
so I took it on myself to do it for them.
that’s why you come here yes.
That challenge assumes that you’ve proven a pattern of state sanctioned liberal indoctrination, when all I see are isolated incidents.
I don’t feel like it’s that isolated. Perhaps you only see them as isolated, just as you might believe the liberal bias in mainstream media and in Hollywood entertainment is mostly conservative paranoia. You might not be able to see the bias, because you agree with some of the bias as “reasonable sounding” and not liberally slanted.
Honeycutt, an incoming senior at California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo – one of the top research institutions among the public system’s 23 campuses –documented widespread leftist political bias across a majority of academic disciplines at his and three other nearby universities through a large-scale online faculty survey and by looking up campus leaders’ party affiliations through the registrar of voters.
The research found conservative academics are outnumbered by liberal ones by a 5 to 1 margin.
What’s more, conservative professors surveyed reported that they experienced hostility from peers because of their viewpoints, and tended to avoid outing themselves as conservatives to ensure they were not harassed or intimidated.
The survey was massive in scope: of the 2,339 questionnaires sent out, 644 professors responded representing nearly 80 academic disciplines.
Recently there was also the “isolated” incident of USC Professor Sragow being recorded calling the Republican Party “racist” and “stupid”.
My own college experience is ripe with examples of liberal professors who occasionally let their biases slip out; and on other occasions let it hang out blatantly and unashamedly.
But back to public schools and the influence upon younger minds…
When Howard Zinn’s “A People’s History of the United States” is standard fare consumption in many classrooms across the country, you don’t think there is liberal indoctrination happening?! I’ll go even a step further and ask if you don’t think there is a skewed, anti-American indoctrination happening there? Or is it balanced history?
You don’t perceive the National Education Association and the American Federation of Teachers as having a bias and activism in a leftward direction? In the classroom as well as flexing political muscle and influence, legislatively? Individual teachers themselves might not be majority liberal; but unions? In many states, who controls the state’s board of education, department of education, and curriculum committees? Liberal educators, no?
When teachers in the bible belt pray in public schools, and it becomes a story on the Left, do those incidents prove a systematic conservative bias in public schools?
Can you link me to a story of this occurrence? Didn’t a couple of landmark Supreme Court rulings in the 60s put an end to school prayer in public schools?
Personally- and I realize others may feel differently- as a non-religious conservative, prayer doesn’t bother me. I don’t feel threatened by it. And if I attended a school where it was majority Muslim, I’d feel no less bothered if those who chose to do so, took their moments of prayer.
I’d be offended if “Under God” were taken back out of the Pledge of Allegiance; or if “In God We Trust” were removed from our currency.
What amazes me here is that your passion on this issue clouds your ability to see past your own partisan lens.
I don’t deny strong feelings on this issue. And I intend to share my opinions, here if you’re willing to entertain them, or elsewhere.
I actually enjoy reading your comments and that of others on your side of the aisle and wish we had more liberal readers here.
If I ever write a serious piece of journalism meant to be published in Time magazine or an op-ed in the NYTimes, I’ll be sure to have you critique the rough draft.
I assure you, I believe you always aim in your posts for a very high standard.
Haha….actually, I don’t think I’ve written a “very high standard” post for quite sometime. My blogging habits have waned, as has my following news items of the day as closely as I would like to. So I often settle for the frivolous and easy-make posts. 🙂
It’s really hard for me to accept the premise that liberals are somehow failing in terms of education when the Right is downright hostile towards the pursuit of knowledge and actively fighting against research into the topic.
“Failing” isn’t my criticism. I’d say it’s the attitude you just expressed in the bold part of the quote. And it’s this kind of attitude that I believe educators in the system who are liberal have: “We know best, and we aren’t creating policy based upon personal politics but upon sound judgment.” It’s the lack of self-awareness that also affects journalists who believe they are impartial in their news-reporting, that I find frustrating.
The idea that you can point to a state’s gun laws to prove the failure of gun legislation is a fallacy because guns are easily transported. This is why Federal legislation is necessary. Any state that happens to have rigorous gun legislation is a hostage to its neighbors’ more permissive laws as well.
Speaking of which, the recent killer at SMC out here where I live pieced together his AR-15 by purchasing individual parts across the internet. 🙁
I never said this is just about homicides, although – as a non-owner – that’s the area that affects me the most.
Did you mean accidents or, in fact, homicides? :/
Because you came into this post citing stats on accidental shootings.
The inherent danger of firearms can be gleamed from suicides and accidents as well. I suggest you read this Harvard School of Public Health data on the relationship between guns and suicide, which points out, among other things, these disturbing findings:
Noted and known.
I think it’s pretty obvious that firearms make suicides “easy”, because it can happen very quickly, in a moment of decision where when you pull that trigger, there is no “second-guessing”. What’s done is done.
You acknowledge you agree with an incremental measure, but you seemingly won’t support it because of a fear that is baseless and without precedent. Let me state this for the record: the right of Americans to privately own guns isn’t going away. That fear is simply NRA marketing. Unfortunately for everyone, there are many people in America who fear something that will never happen, and are allowing that fear to paralyze them and prevent them from supporting something they know is both right and necessary.
I think your passion for the issue is lumping me in with my fellow right-wingers. I haven’t written nor debated extensively on the issue.
I can see it’s a topic that you feel strongly about, based upon past comments I’ve seen from you on it.
Your list actually is very useful to my point, as most of your examples of accidents have actually been somewhat successfully addressed by government. Do you not believe there would be even more deaths on the road without seatbelts and airbags and speed limits? So where is the outrage on the Right over having to wear a seatbelt or take a driver’s test?
Don’t forget motorcycle helmet laws; driver distraction laws….smog checks for the sake of environmental safety…
Richard Wheeler
10 years ago
@Tom: Bees is the poster child er insect of an indoctrinated Conservative. She spews the party line with impunity—totally over the top, beyond nonsensical fealty. A real hoot that if taken seriously would paint the worst possible picture of Conservatism.
Word Both extremes,right and left, should be taken with a large grain of skepticism.
Richard Wheeler you have enough to say, talk for your side,
and tell us how pure they are,
hell they are screwing on their own, OBAMA
screw HILARY ELECTION IN 2008 by 100,000 votes she had over him. he stole all those years from her,
which nerve did I touch ? get mad ,
and break things your own things,
not our chairs at FLOPPING ACES,
and don’t touch my friends CONSERVATIVES,
this AMERICA NEED THEM MORE THAN EVER TO FIX THE BROKEN AMERICA, you and your ilks try so hard to destroy,
YOU WON”T EVER BE ABLE TO DO IT.
you are being watch,
and number 3 wipe your nose
I don’t feel like it’s that isolated. Perhaps you only see them as isolated, just as you might believe the liberal bias in mainstream media and in Hollywood entertainment is mostly conservative paranoia. You might not be able to see the bias, because you agree with some of the bias as “reasonable sounding” and not liberally slanted.
….
My own college experience is ripe with examples of liberal professors who occasionally let their biases slip out; and on other occasions let it hang out blatantly and unashamedly.
I don’t see your gripe as “conservative paranoia”. I recall a particularly insightful comment by a guy I don’t see around here anymore (Larry W) on the topic of so-called MSM liberal bias. His point was essentially, there is nothing stopping conservatives from going into journalism, but perhaps it doesn’t interest them as much as other professions. The same can be said for education perhaps, or for why the military might attract more conservatives. Perhaps conservatives should ask why a healthy number of educators and journalists tend to see the world through what might be labelled a ‘liberal lens” rather than simply lamenting it. Personally, I can tell you that I attended Catholic school though 12 grade and after that a large public University, so I’ve never experienced anything approaching liberal indoctrination. The way I look at it, if you’re surprised there is liberal bias at Smith, or conservative bias at Liberty University, you didn’t do your homework before applying to schools.
Can you link me to a story of this occurrence? Didn’t a couple of landmark Supreme Court rulings in the 60s put an end to school prayer in public schools?
I wasn’t trying to insinuate that teachers praying is the norm and sanctioned in the bible belt. My point is there aremanyoccurrences which could be framed on the Left as conservative indoctrination in the same way as a conservative might frame isolated incident of a teacher in Massachusetts overreacting about a Lego. As an aside, I’m actually much more worried about ongoing conservative legislative attempts to break down the separation of Church and State (and be used as a pretext to teach Creationism as opposed to evolution), but that’s a detour. I guess you can say bias is truly in the eye of the beholder.
“Failing” isn’t my criticism. I’d say it’s the attitude you just expressed in the bold part of the quote. And it’s this kind of attitude that I believe educators in the system who are liberal have: “We know best, and we aren’t creating policy based upon personal politics but upon sound judgment.” It’s the lack of self-awareness that also affects journalists who believe they are impartial in their news-reporting, that I find frustrating.
Fair point. I’m not here to defend intellectual arrogance. At the same time, while liberals may overreach – and the soundness of their principles are certainly open to debate – there s nothing I can point to in modern American liberalism as being a common principle or refrain that’s completely hostile to science and empirical thinking. There are multiple deep-seated, prevalent examples of that very thing I can offer you emanating from the modern American Right, all of which, incidentally, would qualify as deal-breakers for me personally if I were shopping for a ideology: the afore mentioned religious hostility to science, as evidenced by attempts to place “creationism “ or “intelligent design” into schools; quack theories used to justify homophobia; climate change denial; and this “guns don’t kill people” obtuseness which makes it impossible to have an intelligent debate with certain individuals on firearm regulation. There may be liberal overreach, but I don’t believe that label should apply to a belief in standards of education that are rooted in science rather than religious mysticism and cultural myopia.
I think it’s pretty obvious that firearms make suicides “easy”, because it can happen very quickly, in a moment of decision where when you pull that trigger, there is no “second-guessing”. What’s done is done.
Yes, guns are much more effective. which is a shame. And my point is simply that guns are dangerous tools designed to kill and they are everywhere. They should be approached legislatively no differently than any other dangerous item. They should be harder to obtain than less dangerous items, and easier to obtain than more dangerous ones. And that’s hardly the case now. As someone who seems to have a nuanced approach to this issue, perhaps you can explain why this is such a difficult concept fro some on the Right to grasp?
And I’m going to have to disagree with you that teaching children that guns are dangerous is pushing a “liberal fear” about firearms being “evil”. We teach children a host of things are dangerous, from fire to crossing the street, without moralizing.
I think your passion for the issue is lumping me in with my fellow right-wingers. I haven’t written nor debated extensively on the issue.
Haha….actually, I don’t think I’ve written a “very high standard” post for quite sometime. My blogging habits have waned, as has my following news items of the day as closely as I would like to. So I often settle for the frivolous and easy-make posts
Some of your most powerful stuff is in the comments section. I do applaud your willingness to tangle with liberal or conservative. Please keep up the good work.
Richard Wheeler
10 years ago
@Tom: Tom I would echo your praise of Word though I know he’s wary of accepting it. Feels it hurts his cred with fellow Conservs.lol
I always enjoy your posts.
I recall a particularly insightful comment by a guy I don’t see around here anymore (Larry W)
I miss his comments. As far as I can tell, the last time he posted a comment was here (#13):
I got so sick of the vituperative name calling on this blog (worse than it’s ever been), that I’ve stopped being a regular reader/contributer.
Great points regarding bias and fields of interest that political stripes might gravitate to.
I don’t have a problem with liberal journalism; just in the facade of non-partisanship. I think it’d be less deceptive for journalists to just be open about their own personal leanings. Transparency. Admitting your political leanings doesn’t mean you can’t report as non-partisanly as you are capable of doing, if the straight news is what you are attempting to cover. Denying your biases, when they are clearly bleeding through in your reporting, is just dishonest to yourself and your readership.
His point was essentially, there is nothing stopping conservatives from going into journalism, but perhaps it doesn’t interest them as much as other professions.
I don’t know how much this is the case. There was clearly a market for news of a more conservative lens filter, by the success that FOX enjoyed when it first came about.
Most artists seem to lean to the left. Liberals make great music. I love Springsteen’s music, even as I shirk and squirm when he talks politics.
Speaking of school prayer, in all my experience, I’ve never had a Muslim try and convert (let alone kill) me. I’ve had plenty of Christians and a couple of Mormons try and convince me to let Christ into my life.
if you’re surprised there is liberal bias at Smith, or conservative bias at Liberty University, you didn’t do your homework before applying to schools.
I’d be curious to know your take on this story (just a random find):
Question: What is the difference between Christian seminaries and American universities?
Answer: Christian seminaries announce that their purpose is to produce committed Christians. American universities do not admit that their primary purpose is to produce committed leftists. They claim that their purpose is to open students’ minds.
This month Florida Atlantic University (FAU) provided yet another example of how universities have become left-wing seminaries.
An FAU professor told his students to write “JESUS” (in bold caps) on a piece of paper and then step on it.
One student who did not, a junior named Ryan Rotela, complained to the professor and then to the professor’s supervisor. He explained that he had refused to comply with the professor’s instructions because to do so would have violated his religious principles.
Two days later, Rotela was told not to attend the class anymore. The university then went on to defend the professor in an e-mail to a local CBS TV station: “Faculty and students at academic institutions pursue knowledge and engage in open discourse. While at times the topics discussed may be sensitive, a university environment is a venue for such dialogue and debate.”
You wrote:
My point is there are many occurrences which could be framed on the Left as conservative indoctrination in the same way as a conservative might frame isolated incident of a teacher in Massachusetts overreacting about a Lego
But these “isolated incidents” need to be called out. Is it worthy of national attention? Not if they are in fact small, isolated incidences. The locals can take umbrage and influence change in the schools they bring their children to. However, these stories of the ridiculous deserve ridicule, imo. And being a conservative on a conservative blog, I don’t see the moral outrage and equivalence to compare these stories to that of school prayer or irresponsible gun owners (and who knows their politics?) and children involved in accidental shootings. The topic isn’t about those.
There may be liberal overreach, but I don’t believe that label should apply to a belief in standards of education that are rooted in science rather than religious mysticism and cultural myopia.
When it comes to math and the sciences, I don’t think political bias matters to a greater degree than it does when teaching social studies and literature choice. Also, is the sciences populated mostly by those on the left? And even so, are scientists above impartiality in their research? I ask, because I remember on another thread, linking to a couple of things regarding scientists who have put their biases into their research. Scientists, after all, are not infallible to human biases and personal self-interests. Their research is not always conducted with objectivity in mind.
How much do you perceive the right as being “hostile to science”? Is it only in regards to religious conservatives? Is it in regards to maybe a more narrow topic than simply the broad category of “science”, but in regards to a red-hot political button issue like climate change?
As someone who seems to have a nuanced approach to this issue, perhaps you can explain why this is such a difficult concept fro some on the Right to grasp?
Hmmm…I’ll have to think about that one.
And I’m going to have to disagree with you that teaching children that guns are dangerous is pushing a “liberal fear” about firearms being “evil”. We teach children a host of things are dangerous, from fire to crossing the street, without moralizing.
Guns are dangerous; and part of that danger is in not teaching people how to properly handle and respect them. That should be part of any education, as well. There’s a common sense difference between a pop tart shaped like a gun and an actual gun. Overreaction responses only adds to the hysteria and ignorance.
they want to talk to the TALIBAN,
ya, today the TALIBAN killed AMERICANS again
right before the meeting.
nuke them once and for all.
the survivors will run and never come back.
Transparency. Admitting your political leanings doesn’t mean you can’t report as non-partisanly as you are capable of doing, if the straight news is what you are attempting to cover. Denying your biases, when they are clearly bleeding through in your reporting, is just dishonest to yourself and your readership.
That’s definitely true. The issue, I think, is that most mainstream journalists, as professionals, abide by a code of journalistic ethics and standards. So accusations (by others, not you) that they are actively and dishonestly biased are accusations against their integrity as professionals. Now we all know that Op-Ed bias exists – openly – and it’s perfectly possible that decisions at the highest levels impact the stories that journalists pursue – or even how those stories are communicated. But the entire “lamesteam media” trope is half baked. Take the New Yorker, obviously editorially a liberal leaning publication. If their reporting on politics and foreign affairs is someone materially skewed it should be easy to prove.
I’d be curious to know your take on this story (just a random find):
I would say it’s wrong if it’s true. Like I said, I never experienced anything like that. I think it’s totally fine, by the way, for professors to have strong views, as long as they’re open and honest. College should be a time where people explore different ideas and are challenged. And it would not shock me at all if more college professor types are liberal. But the idea that American colleges, at a marco level, have somehow been turned into factories of liberal indoctrination seems far-fetched and insulting on multiple levels. Are educators that uniformly complicit, and students that uniformly simple-minded and willing to conform? When did this start? Why didn’t it work to stop two Reagan and three Bush elections? If this is all about the youth vote going Democratic, there are many more obvious reasons than college indoctrination. For example, on immigration, gay marriage, the war on drugs, young people are much more likely to side with positions held by Democrats.
However, these stories of the ridiculous deserve ridicule, imo. And being a conservative on a conservative blog, I don’t see the moral outrage and equivalence to compare these stories to that of school prayer or irresponsible gun owners (and who knows their politics?) and children involved in accidental shootings.
I agree with you that you have a right to call attention to whatever you feel warrants it, and I’ve agreed these are ridiculous incidents. I don’t actually agree with tactics like that, by the way. My problem is potentially viewing these incidents as somehow analogous, or harbingers of, overreach in terms of gun regulation. Oh, they came after my son’s lego, now they’re coming after my AK. I don’t think that was your intention, but these types of gripes on the Right seem to always lead some to apocalyptic conclusions.
And even so, are scientists above impartiality in their research? I ask, because I remember on another thread, linking to a couple of things regarding scientists who have put their biases into their research. Scientists, after all, are not infallible to human biases and personal self-interests. Their research is not always conducted with objectivity in mind.
There is as fallacy I see over and over on the Right that if something can’t be proven in whole, it’s wide open to interpretation. I’m not going to insult you with recounting the scientific method, but that’s simply not a logical concluison. There are many open questions in theoretical mathematics (hundred year old questions are still solved to this day), but that doesn’t prove that math is wrong, or shouldn’t be taught. Evolution and climate change are theories that have been put to the test by thousands of scientists. Just pointing out an aspect where there isn’t consensus isn’t a reason to call an entire theory questionable, and then try to substitute an alternate theory which has zero scientific basis and say,
“hey, we can’t prove either one, so they’re both essentially equal”.
How much do you perceive the right as being “hostile to science”? Is it only in regards to religious conservatives? Is it in regards to maybe a more narrow topic than simply the broad category of “science”, but in regards to a red-hot political button issue like climate change?
I think the Right is quite demonstratively hostile to science, yes. I would say the religious right is likely the main driver, but there is probably a cultural aspect as well relating to this concept we discussed before about universities being perceived as liberal places. On climate change, for the life of me, I have no idea what that is all about. Is it as simple as the money oil companies have poured into propaganda, or is it something else? One theory i have is that accepting climate change is accepting the idea of radical change to our lives, and that’s not something anyone wants to deal with, but particularly conservatives. People who have faith in science are forced to confront the reality, but ultimately people believe what they want to believe.
Looks like a collapsible stock to me!
WTF is right.
Magazines you ignoramus!
I remember back when I was young.
When I was in grade school, many of the boys would come to school during Halloween dressed as cowboys or soldiers and carry the plastic fake guns, on the school bus and in school itself.
When I was in high school, many of the boys would drive to school with hunting guns in their vehicles, particularly in the back window of their pickup trucks where everyone could see them.
When I was in high school, one of our teachers brought a real handgun to school for use as a teaching aid, and shot it on school grounds as well.
No parent, no teacher, no student, ever said anything negative about any of that either.
One of my nephews asked where I first learned to shoot, and I told him that my first experience was at the range they built at my school. My nephew replied, “I’ll bet they don’t do that now.” Sadly, I’m sure he’s right.
RE: “She [driver] said he caused quite a disturbance on the bus and that the children were traumatized [by a Lego gun].”
Traumatized!? Really!? Our ancestors crossed oceans in small, leaky boats. They endured brutal weather conditions and Indian attack crossing the Great Plains in wagons.
We, as a people, aren’t going to make it, are we? As wimps like these kids grow up and become the majority, I can see them cowering helplessly in their houses as police shutdown an entire city to look for a loan suspect.
Oh, wait, that already happened. If this is the future of the country, we are so screwed.
I remember in the late 1950’s I took a German world war II rifle to school for show and tell. By best friend and neighbor helped me carry it because neither he or I could pick it up alone, we were about 5 & 6 at the time. As I recall we had the bayonet attached for the show and tell program.
@kevino: You may have that right – “loan” suspect that is – as in someone who owes $5.00 in tax — ah — I know ya really meant “lone” ha ha
@kevino: Government indoctrination centers — get some little kids conditioned to freak out at anything that expresses “strength” — the only one traumatized in fact was probably the damm fool bus driver acting out ’cause if she didn’t and some little twit reported her – it would be the end of her job — and probably black listed for life from contact with children.
I used to know a family who forced their little boy to lie about his birthday when he was young.
(If you were born in Dec. you went to school with kids who were all older than you, but by saying he was born in Jan. he was able to go to school as the oldest instead.)
As an adult this ”man” went nutty if you asked him his age or his birthday.
So, young children can be trained to be ”traumatized” by the sight of even a play gun or even a hand in a gun shape.
And, apparently, many families are busy turning their children into just such hysterics.
I have to wonder what they will be like when grown up.
February of this year:
@Wordsmith:
Check out the kid’s paper gun:
How menacing is that? Seriously, that kid could have gotten a self-inflicted paper cut.
Thank God they thwarted that potential massacre!
Back in the day we used to shoot spit wads through straws in the middle of history class (Douglass Elementary, 4th grade, Mr. Dickenson’s class, on the Air Force Aacademy).
Understandably, that would be grounds for some punishment.
@Budvarakbar: I read it as LOAN and did not think it misspelled or inappropriate. It has been done. Late student loan . SWAT. California..
A trip down memory lane: http://life.time.com/history/gun-control-1956-edition-teaching-firearm-safety-in-indiana-photos/
The recent absurd incidents are not intended to create a safe environment, they are intended to brainwash children into an unreasoning pathological fear of firearms. A reward/punishment system has been set up to direct school employees to take these crazy and despicable actions.
If you want children to be safe from drowning, you teach them to swim – because water is everywhere. You don’t try to condition them to be terrified of water. None of this is making children safer. None of it.
Cui bono? Who benefits from introducing attempts to instill an irrational fear in children as part of the curriculum? I don’t accept that this is just the result of cowardly bureaucrats deciding individually to show that they’ve taken action, however useless. This is a larger game.
I believe the desired outcome of this sort of conditioning is to raise a generation of adults who stand around like sheep and wait to be rescued. The sort who won’t make any trouble when their rights are taken away one by one. The sort who stood around meekly on a London street while two men boasted of decapitating a man and waved their bloody knives around. Armed police only took 20 minutes to arrive.
Think about it.
This whole idiotic thing is to rid the USA of it’s idea that we can protect ourselves without the help of “Big Brother”. The idea is to scare and plant the fear of guns in our kids heads.
Why do you think these overeducated idiots hate the NRA so much? 2 reasons; First, the NRA destroys their argument that guns are dangerous. Guns are not dangerous, people are dangerous. Second, the NRA has a wonderful educational safety program named Eddie Eagle to train kids about guns and gun safely. The idiot left would rather risk a child’s life than to train them in the proper way to treat guns.
Was the Lego rifle loaded with Lego rounds? If so, that would be a problem. If it wasn’t, then it is just a TOY GUN.
I was in the car listening to prager on the radio give mention to this blog:
You know….even if you personally don’t agree with the existence of guns- especially if you hate and fear them- the fact of the matter is that they exist in the world and aren’t going away. Therefore, if you are afraid of them, then you should go out and learn everything you can about them- from safety in handling to usage in firing. It demystifies firearms and brings a deeper respect and understanding not only of what they’re capable of doing, but also what their limitations are.
She’s done her little girl no favors in educating how to live in a world where guns are a reality; and it’s a sort of male abuse to deny her boys the ability to be boys and play with imaginary guns, regardless of whether they imagine themselves to be the cops or the robbers; cowboys or Indians; or just mindlessly aiming at people and pulling the imaginary trigger. It’s make believe.
And as far as her point in the part of her blogpost that I did not include in my block quote, instead of living with heads-in-the-sand ignorance, the problem should be addressed through gun education and safety to be able to distinguish between toy guns and real guns; and for parents to have the wisdom to know how guns should be stored in the household.
When I was about 5 or 6, to this day I remember my dad bringing me to my parent’s bedroom, pointing to the top shelf in the closet and letti g me know that a 22 rifle was there in the black box and that I was to leave it alone. Maybe I was just a good kid, but I knew that rifle was off-limits to me unless my parents allowed me to shoot with it under their supervision. It never crossed my mind to regard it as a “toy” for me to play with.
Didn’t work out too bad for Josh Welch. He got a two day suspension for chewing a pop tart into the shape of a gun. The NRA has gifted him with a Lifetime Membership… a value of about $550.
I dunno… a couple of days off from school, more than 15 minutes of fame and a Lifetime NRA membership. Not too bad of spoils for the moment.
They’ve had fundraisers since an attorney is attempting to get the two day suspension off of his records. I suppose that’s a worthy quest. But then since they seal these juvenile records, not sure it could come back to bite him as an adult. I could be wrong…
Another one linked by CJ:
CJ reminds everyone of this Holder quote:
They’re indoctrinating the next generation to become future gun control advocates and true believers. If they can’t get anti-gun legislation passed on the big stage now, they are investing in the youth of tomorrow to get it done in the future by exercising zero tolerance in the schools.
And yet schools think this is perfectly fine:
Schools scanned students’ irises without permission
LIBERAL STUPIDITY at it’s FINEST!!! Now, why don’t the SAME LIBERAL POS’s…. use that SAME.. ZERO TOLERANCE YARDSTICK.. on HOLDER, LERNER, and OBAMA???
Two faced FRAUDS…..
@Ditto: #18
This is one way for the federal government to be able to identify people. I’m guessing that the information went into a federal database somewhere. I wouldn’t have a problem with it for my kids, except it should be up to the parents to decide if it is done on their child.
It wouldn’t be any different than schools or parents having kids fingerprinted in case the kid is kidnapped.
@Hankster58: #19
Just like the rest of the world uses Metric measurements, and we use our own, so the liberals have two different measuring systems to measure wrongdoing.
Does anyone see the problem here?:
LAUSD Students Share HIV/STD Statuses Via Text Message
I thought the far-left wanted the government to stay out of our bedrooms. The problem I see here is adults assuming with great delusion that middle and high school age kids will be able to share this very personal information with their close friends and with an implication that everything will go hunky-dory.
We have all been to junior high and high school, and we should know full well that in many cases this information will be abused to humiliate and harass that child, rumors and lies will be spread all over the school, and this kind of bullying may very likely lead to the kid committing suicide.
I forgot about this story, from last year:
Even though it’s a year old, apparently, this story is gaining traction again in the conservative blogosphere, even though the issue resolved itself in the child’s favor.
The best nugget in that lefty link is another golden nugget– from last month- so ridiculous, even the liberal writer won’t defend it:
You know what they say: The pencil is mightier than the gun
@Wordsmith:
I honestly, simply can not fathom why parents don’t demand these “educators” be replaced with people with some damn common sense. When you look at how badly this nations schools are failing to teach even the basics, parents should be hopping mad.
@Wordsmith: #23
I read about this. Does this mean that if I am giving someone directions, I can’t point which way to go, because my hand might look like a gun to someone? If I just use a clenched fist to point, am I suggesting to someone that I want to fight? How far will these liberals go to try to control EVERY part of our lives?
Thinking about sign language, if it were taught in all the developed countries, look how easy it would be to communicate to most people in most countries.
@Ditto: #24
If the parents are watching the propaganda media, they probably don’t know what is going on. Even conservatives who don’t check into what is going on in their schools or their government, don’t know what is going on.
Oh, goodie…..toy gun buyback program……
Drudge:
@Wordsmith: Sounds like they listened to Obama’s speech ending the war the other day.
Magical thinking.
Obama simply declares an end to the war even as our enemy is still in the field levying a war against us!
Who is Obama’s ”audience?”
Obviously not our enemy.
It is just us.
Obama seems to believe that victory consists in only convincing one’s countrymen that “we won.” He’s tried this before when he actually said, ”we won.”
However, historically war is not declared won unless one side has convinced the enemy that he lost.
These administrators in CA must actually believe that , if they hide the word, idea, picture, model of handguns from children that those children will NEVER imagine using a gun.
Got news for the administrators: well before a child ever gets to Kindergarten he/she has been exposed to images and toys, even real guns thousands of times….on TV, in movies, at play and at home.
Obama has a solution for that, too.
Take children away from families except when they are asleep.
12 hours a day/12 months a year from age 2 or 3 up til after age 16 if the child stays in prison (I mean school) that long.
@Wordsmith:
Funny, all the kids I knew “played Army” etc with toy guns, and not ONE of my childhood friends has committed a crime…. Perhaps, it’s all in the MINDSET….. hmmm… Conservatives are all about UPHOLDING the law……
Liberals tend to want to BREAK DOWN the law, and Constitution, and Personal responsibility etc…. since they all go hand in hand. I’d be willing to go out on a limb, and state that the VAST MAJORITY of career Criminals are LIBERALS….
Another one by way of CJ (an update to a story dated on March):
My freedoms feel so assaulted. All idiocy like these examples aside, is it really wrong to teach children that guns are dangerous? Are gun owners in America really so overwhelmingly responsible, that it’s completely ridiculous to teach children that guns aren’t toys? I’ve got an idea. For every funny liberal overreaction to guns, how about I post an example of some careless gunowner’s “mistake”. Let’s see who runs out of examples first. Game? Here, I’ll try to catch up, then you can go.
these initial examples all courtesy of of this article
Ah, Tom…. 🙂 I fail to see the comparison. I have two more recent examples you can pile onto your list:
4-Year-Old Boy Accidentally Shoots and Kills Army Special Forces Father
Tmorej Smith, 3, Killed After Reportedly Mistaking Pink Handgun For Toy
Why the devil would you have a real firearm in pink?!
My focus is on the idiocy. 🙂
There’s nothing wrong at all with teaching children to respect firearms and know the difference between toys and the real thing. A number of these deaths could have been preventable.
1. By educating children
2. By not being a careless, irresponsible gun owner
Guns exist in society. Disarming children of familiarity and real gun education doesn’t make them any safer. Telling children they are not allowed to even form their hand into the shape of a gun- does nothing except bury heads in the sand.
As you well know, when it comes to accidental deaths, what is a greater threat to children? Cars or firearms? Swimming pools or firearms?
Accidental death rate amongst children have been on the decline for the past decade, I think; but when it comes to preventable accidents, why are firearms so obsessed over? Why no school kid hauled off and suspended for pretending like his glass of water during lunch period is a swimming pool? Why doesn’t a school ban kids from uttering “vroom, vroom” noises? Or pushing a carrot across the cafeteria table like a race car?
The comparison is that you’re highlighting one extreme possible outcome of school efforts – or lack thereof – to educate children on the dangers of firearms. I’m highlighting the opposite extreme outcome.
Yes, your focus is on that rather than the much more prevalent attempts at responsible education. Some would call that cherry picking. You only give one side of the story, and for what purpose? One guess: to drum up anger and resentment at educators who are making good-faith attempts to teach children that guns – regardless of what their parents think – aren’t fun toys to leave around the house and play with. If you gave a balanced assessment and pointed out the idiocy on both sides, perhaps I would draw a different conclusion. Of course the idiocy on the Left in this particular situation results in a confiscated toy and the chance for outraged parents to grandstand about the Second Amendment. The idiocy on the Right results in hundreds of dead children a year perishing in preventable accidents.
But your post is likely to impart the opposite conclusion. It’s all about Liberal overreach, without the balancing perspective of what underlies the efforts. How are your readers supposed to react to this? How might this color their feelings when they hear their own childrens’ schools are attempting to offer education on firearms?
I don’t disagree with any of that – but of course, you’re cherry picking a ridiculous example as a stand-in for all education efforts. Here’s a question: how much of the educational burden on gun safety has been pushed onto the State in the form of school education due to the lack of sensible gun laws? If gun owners had to obtain a license and part of that was passing a simple safety test proving they understand the most basic tenants of gun safety, wouldn’t that actually be much more effective? Imagine if no one had to pass a driving test to drive a car. Isn’t it likely the State would have no choice but to start teaching drivers ed in schools? Rather than government overreach, what we’re seeing is the abdication of responsibility from gun owners (those, at least, who block sensible gun laws) and the shifting of that responsibility to the State. This isn’t a nanny state power grab; this is a direct outcome of irresponsibility on the part of many gun owners and the cold hard facts of hundreds of preventable deaths.
I’ve already been down this road many times with Retire05. What is the point of this comparison? Because more children are killed in car accidents, we shouldn’t try to prevent gun accidents? Are you willing to advocate for the same education and licensing of gun owners that we have for car ownership?
Of course accidents will happen. But can we say we’re doing everything we can to minimize gun accidents as a society? The difference between gun and car accidents are that all car owners are licensed and tested before they can drive; cars have mandatory – and to the manufactures, very costly – safety regulations; cars that aren’t safe can be unilaterally pulled off the street; car manufactures can be held liable for unsafe products that lead to injury or death. Can the same be said for guns, and gun manufactures? Why not?
@Tom:
I’m not highlighting “possible outcome” but shining a magnifying glass on the actual intent- an intent that you appear to agree with as being “idiotic”, while also wanting to excuse it as “good faith” effort and intention (“heart is in the right place” reasoning).
So I still am seeing apples and broccoli here.
Because sometimes a blogpost isn’t about covering the entire gamut of 2nd Amendment rights and gun control laws in an attempt to address the issue that concerns you, but is about bringing focus to one aspect of an issue and pointing out the idiocy.
Rather than reading into the post what you wish to see addressed, read the post for what it is. A chance for venting over liberal idiocy. I owe you no apologies for “balance” by inclusion of “right wing idiocy”. That’s not the purpose of this post.
A comparison challenge for you here would be in pointing out an equivalent “preponderance” of conservative principals and teachers forcing conservative indoctrination in the school system. Can you find any?
What amazes me here is that your passion on this issue clouds your ability to see past your own partisan lens.
I don’t doubt these educators have “good-faith attempts” and intent (Democrats aren’t evil…just wrong). That’s beside the point. But what you are revealing about yourself is the not uncommon criticism from the right that liberals think they know best what’s good for society. Please look at the above blockquote through an objective lens and tell me that you are capable of seeing your own partisan views saturating that comment.
Tom, fer crissakes….you’re on a right-wing blog. As you know, I do my fair share of criticism of my fellow conservatives on this site when I think they’ve gone off the deep end; and occasionally, I do posts where I try to weigh in with a balanced perspective. Well this ain’t one of those! I’m not trying to write a scholarly dissertation here meant to solve America’s gun issue.
Rather than really engaging the content of the post itself, your partisan passion on the issue wants to reshape the battlespace into the one you wish it to be.
Who on the right doesn’t believe in educating children on gun safety? On the need to be responsible gun owners, especially with children in the house?!
The liberal solution of these “educators” isn’t to actually educate these children on guns. It’s to stick their heads in the sand and pretend guns don’t exist in the world, rather than confront it head on. What you end up is with my comment #15 link:
In my opinion (goes with saying), that mom is doing her daughter a disservice. Real education would be to teach her daughter the difference between a real gun and a toy gun; instead, there’s a good chance that thanks to the mother, this girl overreacted.
If there’s something you are deathly afraid of, then you should go about learning everything you can about that thing; not seek ways of avoidance in hopes you will never encounter it. If I’m afraid of firearms, don’t believe in them, don’t ever want to carry and use one, I’d still want to know everything I can about it. That’s empowerment. It removes the mystique surround firearms. In the end, they’re “just” bullet shooters. It’s not an all-powerful magic wand. They can’t harm you (aside from maybe some powder burns) if they’re not actually aimed at you. If there’s no ammo, it’s just a blunt weapon. Education and intimate handling teaches a more realistic respect and also an understanding of their limitations. Yes, it is possible to defend yourself against someone holding a firearm. Unfortunately, there are many martial arts instructors out there who teach the most ridiculous defenses, probably because they themselves have never handled a firearm before.
If I ever write a serious piece of journalism meant to be published in Time magazine or an op-ed in the NYTimes, I’ll be sure to have you critique the rough draft. 😉
Perhaps what we need to know here, based upon what you wish this post to be rather than the type it is, is what the administrations in these schools actually are doing in terms of gun education. Is there any, aside from pushing a the liberal perspective that guns are bad and only lead to evil violence? Without actually educating on gun safety?
What you might deem as reasonable and balanced from these educators, sounds more like liberal indoctrination and partisan views. Most people probably think their views sound reasonable and centrist to them, rather than far right or far left and biased.
Again, Tom: This isn’t a dissertation study on ALL schools and how they are attempting to deal with gun safety and education for their students. It’s a blogpost pointing out liberal idiocy that I disagree with. I make no apologies about not including the whole wide range gamut of related stories, critical of the right, that might make you feel better.
I don’t know where you live. But we have that in California.
Do you believe that we have an epidemic of gun violence, Tom? What percentage of gun violence is due to homicides, what percentage to suicides, and what percentage due to accidental shootings (with the remembrance that other items cause greater accidental deaths to children than firearms)? Which is greater, suicides or homicides due to firearms?
I don’t mind licensing; but where to draw the line? You can blame a lot of bad parenting for raising the next generation of miscreants and criminals. Should the state give out licenses before you can become a parent? Might solve some societal problems, you know….
Who is educating these educators on what should and should be taught to school kids on gun safety and education, that isn’t all about pushing a liberal fear and belief and opinion about the evils of firearms?
How is it not obvious?!
If what you fear is accidental deaths of children, and firearms rank down the list, and your primary concern is the safety of children from accidental deaths, then ranking above firearms (not saying it is not a concern at all) should be your advocacy for education on the dangers and risks posed to children by vehicles, swimming pools, lakes, seas, and the oceans; poisons and fires, suffocation from sticking one’s head in a plastics bag, etc. After all, those things statistically pose a greater risk. Where’s the priority?
Yet somehow, it’s all about guns…..why?
We can always do more. 🙂
But the right solution is what?
Well, how often are the accidental injuries and death due to a design or manufacturing defect in a firearm product? Is there greater frequency amongst car manufacturing defects as cause of injury than there is with gun manufacturers?
@Wordsmith:
That challenge assumes that you’ve proven a pattern of state sanctioned liberal indoctrination, when all I see are isolated incidents. When teachers in the bible belt pray in public schools, and it becomes a story on the Left, do those incidents prove a systematic conservative bias in public schools? The fact of the matter is that I live in a much more dangerous society because a minority group representing a minority opinion on gun legislation (even among gun owners) holds sway through a combination of big money lobbying interests and the vagaries of congressional redistricting. Anything that helps reinforce their position, which isn’t founded on any sort of objective data about gun safety, but rather the fallacious notion that there is an imminent gun grab, is something that affects me directly and I feel I have a right to address.
I don’t deny strong feelings on this issue. And I intend to share my opinions, here if you’re willing to entertain them, or elsewhere.
I apologize if my comments came across as personal. I assure you, I believe you always aim in your posts for a very high standard. On this one issue, however, I have to push back. It’s my honest opinion that your position, while certainly well expressed and held I’m sure for the best reasons, is mistaken
It’s really hard for me to accept the premise that liberals are somehow failing in terms of education when the Right is downright hostile towards the pursuit of knowledge and actively fighting against research into the topic.
The idea that you can point to a state’s gun laws to prove the failure of gun legislation is a fallacy because guns are easily transported. This is why Federal legislation is necessary. Any state that happens to have rigorous gun legislation is a hostage to its neighbors’ more permissive laws as well.
I never said this is just about homicides, although – as a non-owner – that’s the area that affects me the most. The inherent danger of firearms can be gleamed from suicides and accidents as well. I suggest you read this Harvard School of Public Health data on the relationship between guns and suicide, which points out, among other things, these disturbing findings:
You draw it the same place you draw it for any other legislative matter, where it’s appropriate and sensible. The idea that this is an all or nothing proposition is simply NRA propaganda. You need a license to drive a car; you have to drive the speed limit, and wear a seatbelt in a car that probably contains an airbag as well: these are all the direct result of State intervention. So why didn’t the Big Government nanny state try to legislate accidental car deaths down to zero, legislate you right to travel by car away, legislate the car industry into oblivion? Because they stopped, more or less, where it’s appropriate and sensible. You acknowledge you agree with an incremental measure, but you seemingly won’t support it because of a fear that is baseless and without precedent. Let me state this for the record: the right of Americans to privately own guns isn’t going away. That fear is simply NRA marketing. Unfortunately for everyone, there are many people in America who fear something that will never happen, and are allowing that fear to paralyze them and prevent them from supporting something they know is both right and necessary.
At the risk of sounding redundant, I have never claimed that we can legislate the risk of accidents down to zero, or that we need to rank one type of accident over another. But where appropriate, we certainly should do something when it’s in our power to minimize accidents. Your list actually is very useful to my point, as most of your examples of accidents have actually been somewhat successfully addressed by government. Do you not believe there would be even more deaths on the road without seatbelts and airbags and speed limits? So where is the outrage on the Right over having to wear a seatbelt or take a driver’s test?
It’s not just about defects in products, although clearly gun manufactures currently have much less motivation to make safer products than say, Ford has to not make another Pinto. This is about implementing safety measures and mandating background checks, licensing and training. Technology exists for guns that is analogous to a seat belt in a car, but car manufactures have no reason to incur the additional costs to make their products safer, and seemingly little motivation to do so on their own.
arthurus
ON 11,
I could have swear it was LONE,
like lone ranger.
he type LOAN suspect would sound to me like a SUSPECT to LOAN for a fee.
just playing
bye
Tom
there is no such a thing LIKE A CONSERVATIVE INDOCTRINATION,
that only belong to HITLER AND OBAMA for the YOUNG STUDENTS OF AMERICA.
they will have to be DEBRIEF and IT WILL TAKE A LOT OF TIME BECAUSE THOSE CREEPS STARTED ON PRE SCHOOL KIDS. SINCE OBAMA BEGAN HIS FIRST TERM, WITH THE SCHOOL TEACHER AND HIS repetitive CAMPAIGNS,.
what a shame
Wordsmith
THIS IS MOST OUTAGEOUS and the more the worse,
the solution is to lock the WHITE HOUSE so no one would be allowed
to continue that indoctrination, which has gone already too far and the CHILDREN WILL CARRY THE SCAR ALL THEIR LIVES UNLESS THEY HAVE A SHRINK TO REVERSE THAT MINDSET NEFARIOUS ON THEIR FUTURE. I fear for the future of the AMERICAN YOUTHS TRANSFORMED INTO OBEDIENT ROBOT,
clear the WHITE HOUSE, let it run by the GENERALS until the NEXT ELECTION.
@Wordsmith:
A follow up on gun suicide. If you were unfortunate enough to have an adolescent son who was troubled and likely suicidal, wouldn’t you be extra careful about locking up your guns? I hear over and over how ‘guns don’t kill people, people kill people”; or “If someone really wants to murder someone or kill himself, he doesn’t need a gun. he can use a knife” . A person who truly believes those statements would have no reason to secure that firearm around a suicidal person, because it’s irrelevant – the person can kill himself regardless if he really wants to. But I bet you would worry more about that gun than the kitchen knives, and secure that gun, because you’re an intelligent and sensible person. The minute you acknowledge that to yourself is the minute you admit that guns really do possess a degree of inherent danger, that they are, in order of magnitude, much different than something like a knife.
@ilovebeeswarzone:
So how do you explain yourself, my friendly little buzzy bee?
Tom
THERE is no indoctrination from CONSERVATIVES
they are themselves as you see is what they are,
they have STRONG VALUES and it’s real AMERICAN,
they are the best of all and you can trust their words, as oppose to the bullshit you get
with the other.
that’s why I’m here.
they don’t bragg on their superior intelligence and gift of perception.
so I took it on myself to do it for them.
that’s why you come here yes.
I don’t feel like it’s that isolated. Perhaps you only see them as isolated, just as you might believe the liberal bias in mainstream media and in Hollywood entertainment is mostly conservative paranoia. You might not be able to see the bias, because you agree with some of the bias as “reasonable sounding” and not liberally slanted.
Recently I came across this article.
I suppose another isolated, cherry-picked story here:
Recently there was also the “isolated” incident of USC Professor Sragow being recorded calling the Republican Party “racist” and “stupid”.
My own college experience is ripe with examples of liberal professors who occasionally let their biases slip out; and on other occasions let it hang out blatantly and unashamedly.
But back to public schools and the influence upon younger minds…
When Howard Zinn’s “A People’s History of the United States” is standard fare consumption in many classrooms across the country, you don’t think there is liberal indoctrination happening?! I’ll go even a step further and ask if you don’t think there is a skewed, anti-American indoctrination happening there? Or is it balanced history?
You don’t perceive the National Education Association and the American Federation of Teachers as having a bias and activism in a leftward direction? In the classroom as well as flexing political muscle and influence, legislatively? Individual teachers themselves might not be majority liberal; but unions? In many states, who controls the state’s board of education, department of education, and curriculum committees? Liberal educators, no?
Here’s another cherry-picked isolated incident:
Wis. 8th Grade Crossword Puzzle Definitions: Conservatism = ‘Restricting Personal Freedoms,’ Liberalism = ‘Personal Freedom for Everyone’
And another one here.
You wrote:
Can you link me to a story of this occurrence? Didn’t a couple of landmark Supreme Court rulings in the 60s put an end to school prayer in public schools?
Personally- and I realize others may feel differently- as a non-religious conservative, prayer doesn’t bother me. I don’t feel threatened by it. And if I attended a school where it was majority Muslim, I’d feel no less bothered if those who chose to do so, took their moments of prayer.
I’d be offended if “Under God” were taken back out of the Pledge of Allegiance; or if “In God We Trust” were removed from our currency.
I actually enjoy reading your comments and that of others on your side of the aisle and wish we had more liberal readers here.
Haha….actually, I don’t think I’ve written a “very high standard” post for quite sometime. My blogging habits have waned, as has my following news items of the day as closely as I would like to. So I often settle for the frivolous and easy-make posts. 🙂
“Failing” isn’t my criticism. I’d say it’s the attitude you just expressed in the bold part of the quote. And it’s this kind of attitude that I believe educators in the system who are liberal have: “We know best, and we aren’t creating policy based upon personal politics but upon sound judgment.” It’s the lack of self-awareness that also affects journalists who believe they are impartial in their news-reporting, that I find frustrating.
Speaking of which, the recent killer at SMC out here where I live pieced together his AR-15 by purchasing individual parts across the internet. 🙁
Did you mean accidents or, in fact, homicides? :/
Because you came into this post citing stats on accidental shootings.
Noted and known.
I think it’s pretty obvious that firearms make suicides “easy”, because it can happen very quickly, in a moment of decision where when you pull that trigger, there is no “second-guessing”. What’s done is done.
I think your passion for the issue is lumping me in with my fellow right-wingers. I haven’t written nor debated extensively on the issue.
I can see it’s a topic that you feel strongly about, based upon past comments I’ve seen from you on it.
Don’t forget motorcycle helmet laws; driver distraction laws….smog checks for the sake of environmental safety…
@Tom: Bees is the poster child er insect of an indoctrinated Conservative. She spews the party line with impunity—totally over the top, beyond nonsensical fealty. A real hoot that if taken seriously would paint the worst possible picture of Conservatism.
Word Both extremes,right and left, should be taken with a large grain of skepticism.
Richard Wheeler you have enough to say, talk for your side,
and tell us how pure they are,
hell they are screwing on their own, OBAMA
screw HILARY ELECTION IN 2008 by 100,000 votes she had over him. he stole all those years from her,
which nerve did I touch ? get mad ,
and break things your own things,
not our chairs at FLOPPING ACES,
and don’t touch my friends CONSERVATIVES,
this AMERICA NEED THEM MORE THAN EVER TO FIX THE BROKEN AMERICA, you and your ilks try so hard to destroy,
YOU WON”T EVER BE ABLE TO DO IT.
you are being watch,
and number 3 wipe your nose
@Wordsmith:
I don’t see your gripe as “conservative paranoia”. I recall a particularly insightful comment by a guy I don’t see around here anymore (Larry W) on the topic of so-called MSM liberal bias. His point was essentially, there is nothing stopping conservatives from going into journalism, but perhaps it doesn’t interest them as much as other professions. The same can be said for education perhaps, or for why the military might attract more conservatives. Perhaps conservatives should ask why a healthy number of educators and journalists tend to see the world through what might be labelled a ‘liberal lens” rather than simply lamenting it. Personally, I can tell you that I attended Catholic school though 12 grade and after that a large public University, so I’ve never experienced anything approaching liberal indoctrination. The way I look at it, if you’re surprised there is liberal bias at Smith, or conservative bias at Liberty University, you didn’t do your homework before applying to schools.
I wasn’t trying to insinuate that teachers praying is the norm and sanctioned in the bible belt. My point is there are many occurrences which could be framed on the Left as conservative indoctrination in the same way as a conservative might frame isolated incident of a teacher in Massachusetts overreacting about a Lego. As an aside, I’m actually much more worried about ongoing conservative legislative attempts to break down the separation of Church and State (and be used as a pretext to teach Creationism as opposed to evolution), but that’s a detour. I guess you can say bias is truly in the eye of the beholder.
Fair point. I’m not here to defend intellectual arrogance. At the same time, while liberals may overreach – and the soundness of their principles are certainly open to debate – there s nothing I can point to in modern American liberalism as being a common principle or refrain that’s completely hostile to science and empirical thinking. There are multiple deep-seated, prevalent examples of that very thing I can offer you emanating from the modern American Right, all of which, incidentally, would qualify as deal-breakers for me personally if I were shopping for a ideology: the afore mentioned religious hostility to science, as evidenced by attempts to place “creationism “ or “intelligent design” into schools; quack theories used to justify homophobia; climate change denial; and this “guns don’t kill people” obtuseness which makes it impossible to have an intelligent debate with certain individuals on firearm regulation. There may be liberal overreach, but I don’t believe that label should apply to a belief in standards of education that are rooted in science rather than religious mysticism and cultural myopia.
Yes, guns are much more effective. which is a shame. And my point is simply that guns are dangerous tools designed to kill and they are everywhere. They should be approached legislatively no differently than any other dangerous item. They should be harder to obtain than less dangerous items, and easier to obtain than more dangerous ones. And that’s hardly the case now. As someone who seems to have a nuanced approach to this issue, perhaps you can explain why this is such a difficult concept fro some on the Right to grasp?
And I’m going to have to disagree with you that teaching children that guns are dangerous is pushing a “liberal fear” about firearms being “evil”. We teach children a host of things are dangerous, from fire to crossing the street, without moralizing.
Sorry to drag you into this then. 🙂
@Wordsmith:
Some of your most powerful stuff is in the comments section. I do applaud your willingness to tangle with liberal or conservative. Please keep up the good work.
@Tom: Tom I would echo your praise of Word though I know he’s wary of accepting it. Feels it hurts his cred with fellow Conservs.lol
I always enjoy your posts.
@Tom:
I miss his comments. As far as I can tell, the last time he posted a comment was here (#13):
Great points regarding bias and fields of interest that political stripes might gravitate to.
I don’t have a problem with liberal journalism; just in the facade of non-partisanship. I think it’d be less deceptive for journalists to just be open about their own personal leanings. Transparency. Admitting your political leanings doesn’t mean you can’t report as non-partisanly as you are capable of doing, if the straight news is what you are attempting to cover. Denying your biases, when they are clearly bleeding through in your reporting, is just dishonest to yourself and your readership.
I don’t know how much this is the case. There was clearly a market for news of a more conservative lens filter, by the success that FOX enjoyed when it first came about.
Most artists seem to lean to the left. Liberals make great music. I love Springsteen’s music, even as I shirk and squirm when he talks politics.
Speaking of school prayer, in all my experience, I’ve never had a Muslim try and convert (let alone kill) me. I’ve had plenty of Christians and a couple of Mormons try and convince me to let Christ into my life.
I’d be curious to know your take on this story (just a random find):
You wrote:
But these “isolated incidents” need to be called out. Is it worthy of national attention? Not if they are in fact small, isolated incidences. The locals can take umbrage and influence change in the schools they bring their children to. However, these stories of the ridiculous deserve ridicule, imo. And being a conservative on a conservative blog, I don’t see the moral outrage and equivalence to compare these stories to that of school prayer or irresponsible gun owners (and who knows their politics?) and children involved in accidental shootings. The topic isn’t about those.
When it comes to math and the sciences, I don’t think political bias matters to a greater degree than it does when teaching social studies and literature choice. Also, is the sciences populated mostly by those on the left? And even so, are scientists above impartiality in their research? I ask, because I remember on another thread, linking to a couple of things regarding scientists who have put their biases into their research. Scientists, after all, are not infallible to human biases and personal self-interests. Their research is not always conducted with objectivity in mind.
How much do you perceive the right as being “hostile to science”? Is it only in regards to religious conservatives? Is it in regards to maybe a more narrow topic than simply the broad category of “science”, but in regards to a red-hot political button issue like climate change?
Hmmm…I’ll have to think about that one.
Guns are dangerous; and part of that danger is in not teaching people how to properly handle and respect them. That should be part of any education, as well. There’s a common sense difference between a pop tart shaped like a gun and an actual gun. Overreaction responses only adds to the hysteria and ignorance.
Sorry for taking my time in responding. 😉
@Richard Wheeler: Thank you, Richard.
they want to talk to the TALIBAN,
ya, today the TALIBAN killed AMERICANS again
right before the meeting.
nuke them once and for all.
the survivors will run and never come back.
@Wordsmith:
That’s definitely true. The issue, I think, is that most mainstream journalists, as professionals, abide by a code of journalistic ethics and standards. So accusations (by others, not you) that they are actively and dishonestly biased are accusations against their integrity as professionals. Now we all know that Op-Ed bias exists – openly – and it’s perfectly possible that decisions at the highest levels impact the stories that journalists pursue – or even how those stories are communicated. But the entire “lamesteam media” trope is half baked. Take the New Yorker, obviously editorially a liberal leaning publication. If their reporting on politics and foreign affairs is someone materially skewed it should be easy to prove.
I would say it’s wrong if it’s true. Like I said, I never experienced anything like that. I think it’s totally fine, by the way, for professors to have strong views, as long as they’re open and honest. College should be a time where people explore different ideas and are challenged. And it would not shock me at all if more college professor types are liberal. But the idea that American colleges, at a marco level, have somehow been turned into factories of liberal indoctrination seems far-fetched and insulting on multiple levels. Are educators that uniformly complicit, and students that uniformly simple-minded and willing to conform? When did this start? Why didn’t it work to stop two Reagan and three Bush elections? If this is all about the youth vote going Democratic, there are many more obvious reasons than college indoctrination. For example, on immigration, gay marriage, the war on drugs, young people are much more likely to side with positions held by Democrats.
I agree with you that you have a right to call attention to whatever you feel warrants it, and I’ve agreed these are ridiculous incidents. I don’t actually agree with tactics like that, by the way. My problem is potentially viewing these incidents as somehow analogous, or harbingers of, overreach in terms of gun regulation. Oh, they came after my son’s lego, now they’re coming after my AK. I don’t think that was your intention, but these types of gripes on the Right seem to always lead some to apocalyptic conclusions.
There is as fallacy I see over and over on the Right that if something can’t be proven in whole, it’s wide open to interpretation. I’m not going to insult you with recounting the scientific method, but that’s simply not a logical concluison. There are many open questions in theoretical mathematics (hundred year old questions are still solved to this day), but that doesn’t prove that math is wrong, or shouldn’t be taught. Evolution and climate change are theories that have been put to the test by thousands of scientists. Just pointing out an aspect where there isn’t consensus isn’t a reason to call an entire theory questionable, and then try to substitute an alternate theory which has zero scientific basis and say,
“hey, we can’t prove either one, so they’re both essentially equal”.
I think the Right is quite demonstratively hostile to science, yes. I would say the religious right is likely the main driver, but there is probably a cultural aspect as well relating to this concept we discussed before about universities being perceived as liberal places. On climate change, for the life of me, I have no idea what that is all about. Is it as simple as the money oil companies have poured into propaganda, or is it something else? One theory i have is that accepting climate change is accepting the idea of radical change to our lives, and that’s not something anyone wants to deal with, but particularly conservatives. People who have faith in science are forced to confront the reality, but ultimately people believe what they want to believe.