Gun culture or parenting culture?

[2aguy]

Oh but we absolutely do.

Having a sick culture doesn't mean every last person subscribes to it. Nor does it mean those who do will always act on it.

But it does mean when some loser feels powerless and seeks revenge for it, everything they've been taught since birth tells them, grab an AK and mow down some children or some shoppers or some random crowd. Once in a while, they follow through on it.

Wait a minute, who is teaching them to grab an AK and kill everybody in sight? I live in this country, and I don't feel that way; none of my friends feel that way; none of my family feels that way!

We have over 315 million people in this country, and once a year or so, one of our 315 million people goes nuts and kills a bunch of people. You call that a culture? I call it an anomaly.

Again ---- as I just posted ---- it doesn't mean literally everybody does it.

What it means, plain and simple, is that everybody's encouraged to do it. By treating Almighty Gun as a god instead of a weapon.

No.....we do not encourage it. The only one close to encouraging it is the MSM, and I wouldn't even charge them with doing it.

When we get a nut with a gun, our police respond. They kill the suspect in many cases, or the kook realizes that he has no way out and kills himself. How is that encouraging more of that kind of activity?

If they are taken alive, they are locked up in prison or a mental facility the rest of their lives. Some like Dylann Roof are sentenced to death.

Saying we encourage mass killings is like saying we promote recreational drug usage. And in fact, we do promote recreational narcotics more than killing people with guns.

Yes "we" DO encourage it. You may not consider yourself personally involved but "we" means the culture --- the values of death taught from birth by endless war toys, endless TV shows and movies, endless hero worship comic books etc etc etc. I certainly don't encourage it either but that doesn't mean I turn a blind eye to the sensory blitz that exists and thrives without (and despite) my influence.

So again --- if the mother isn't giving the kid this idea... and let's stipulate for the sake of argument that the father is not present........... from where exactly is he going to derive this conclusion, if not the myriad sources I have cited? Where? This is I believe your whole question in your title.

In this particular case, she almost did condone her kid carrying a gun. She certainly doesn't seem to have a problem with it.

When I was a child, we used to watch westerns. The old west and people who lived and died by the gun. Yet never a problem with kids and guns like we have today. We used to watch the Three Stooges. They used to take hammers and hit each other over the heads with them. That doesn't mean we were encouraging kids to be hammer murderers.

Television and movies have minimal (if any) influence on young criminals. Knowing they can get away with something is encouragement.

Kids are influenced by a lot of things--mostly their peers. But it's up to the parents to make sure that their children don't act on those influences. Sitting back and saying "They have to learn their own lessons" is just completely irresponsible. A father in the home willing to kick your ass for even the thought of having a gun is a very strong deterrent.

And war movies, and westerns........but what we didn't have was rap music and thug culture........rap music is one of the worst influences on the youth.....

 

[2aguy]

No.....we do not encourage it. The only one close to encouraging it is the MSM, and I wouldn't even charge them with doing it.

When we get a nut with a gun, our police respond. They kill the suspect in many cases, or the kook realizes that he has no way out and kills himself. How is that encouraging more of that kind of activity?

If they are taken alive, they are locked up in prison or a mental facility the rest of their lives. Some like Dylann Roof are sentenced to death.

Saying we encourage mass killings is like saying we promote recreational drug usage. And in fact, we do promote recreational narcotics more than killing people with guns.

Yes "we" DO encourage it. You may not consider yourself personally involved but "we" means the culture --- the values of death taught from birth by endless war toys, endless TV shows and movies, endless hero worship comic books etc etc etc. I certainly don't encourage it either but that doesn't mean I turn a blind eye to the sensory blitz that exists and thrives without (and despite) my influence.

So again --- if the mother isn't giving the kid this idea... and let's stipulate for the sake of argument that the father is not present........... from where exactly is he going to derive this conclusion, if not the myriad sources I have cited? Where? This is I believe your whole question in your title.

In this particular case, she almost did condone her kid carrying a gun. She certainly doesn't seem to have a problem with it.

When I was a child, we used to watch westerns. The old west and people who lived and died by the gun. Yet never a problem with kids and guns like we have today. We used to watch the Three Stooges. They used to take hammers and hit each other over the heads with them. That doesn't mean we were encouraging kids to be hammer murderers.

Television and movies have minimal (if any) influence on young criminals. Knowing they can get away with something is encouragement.

Kids are influenced by a lot of things--mostly their peers. But it's up to the parents to make sure that their children don't act on those influences. Sitting back and saying "They have to learn their own lessons" is just completely irresponsible. A father in the home willing to kick your ass for even the thought of having a gun is a very strong deterrent.

The problems started when Reagan funneled drugs into the inner cities.

View attachment 122729

Ronald Reagan left office in 1988. It is now 2017. That means Reagan has been out of office for almost 30 years. And we've also had 16 years of Democrat leadership since he left office.

Crime began sharply declining shortly after the Reagan spike and continues to today.

as more Americans bought, owned and carried guns.....

 

[2aguy]

Wait a minute, who is teaching them to grab an AK and kill everybody in sight? I live in this country, and I don't feel that way; none of my friends feel that way; none of my family feels that way!

We have over 315 million people in this country, and once a year or so, one of our 315 million people goes nuts and kills a bunch of people. You call that a culture? I call it an anomaly.

Again ---- as I just posted ---- it doesn't mean literally everybody does it.

What it means, plain and simple, is that everybody's encouraged to do it. By treating Almighty Gun as a god instead of a weapon.

No.....we do not encourage it. The only one close to encouraging it is the MSM, and I wouldn't even charge them with doing it.

When we get a nut with a gun, our police respond. They kill the suspect in many cases, or the kook realizes that he has no way out and kills himself. How is that encouraging more of that kind of activity?

If they are taken alive, they are locked up in prison or a mental facility the rest of their lives. Some like Dylann Roof are sentenced to death.

Saying we encourage mass killings is like saying we promote recreational drug usage. And in fact, we do promote recreational narcotics more than killing people with guns.

Yes "we" DO encourage it. You may not consider yourself personally involved but "we" means the culture --- the values of death taught from birth by endless war toys, endless TV shows and movies, endless hero worship comic books etc etc etc. I certainly don't encourage it either but that doesn't mean I turn a blind eye to the sensory blitz that exists and thrives without (and despite) my influence.

So again --- if the mother isn't giving the kid this idea... and let's stipulate for the sake of argument that the father is not present........... from where exactly is he going to derive this conclusion, if not the myriad sources I have cited? Where? This is I believe your whole question in your title.

In this particular case, she almost did condone her kid carrying a gun. She certainly doesn't seem to have a problem with it.

When I was a child, we used to watch westerns. The old west and people who lived and died by the gun. Yet never a problem with kids and guns like we have today. We used to watch the Three Stooges. They used to take hammers and hit each other over the heads with them. That doesn't mean we were encouraging kids to be hammer murderers.

Television and movies have minimal (if any) influence on young criminals. Knowing they can get away with something is encouragement.

Kids are influenced by a lot of things--mostly their peers. But it's up to the parents to make sure that their children don't act on those influences. Sitting back and saying "They have to learn their own lessons" is just completely irresponsible. A father in the home willing to kick your ass for even the thought of having a gun is a very strong deterrent.

Your fantasy that "we never had a problem with kids and guns like we have today" is flat wrong. I can remember my whole high school being turned upside down because one kid inexplicably came to school armed. This isn't new.

The TV westerns you mention, however, are exactly part of that culture I described. They then led to, and were reinforced by, the accompanying TV commercials:

​

Is all this implanting the idea "go out and strafe some innocent bystanders"? No it's not. Subliminal seduction is far more subtle and indirect than that. It's merely implanting the idea that "shooting shit is cool". That leaves the next step up to the developing mind. If that mind is beset by anxiety circumstances ------ it's going to reflect back to the values it was taught from infancy.

Not at all unlike the way some admired movie character seen being "cool" by casually smoking cigarettes is not directly telling the viewer "go forth and buy cigarettes". It's the power of suggestion that closes that deal. Again the viewer is left to think, "well I want to be cool, and cigarettes are apparently cool, so how can I get some? I have to buy them". And voilà.

Then after the commercial makes its implant it's back to the TV program where the whole morality play teaches, in every single episode, that the good guy with a gun vanquishes the bad guy with a gun, and that's how it works, and the earth smells of roses forevermore, hallelujah. And be sure to tune in tomorrow where we'll reinforce this same lesson all over again, and sell you more guns.

Now that --- is a gun culture.

No, moron.....in the past, kids brought rifles to school to hunt after school and to participate in shooting competitions and clubs...and no one had an issue with it...what we have today is rap music and the thug culture that goes with it....

 

[2aguy]

Your fantasy that "we never had a problem with kids and guns like we have today" is flat wrong. I can remember my whole high school being turned upside down because one kid inexplicably came to school armed. This isn't new.

He doesn't know Billy the Kid was a kid

18 when he killed his first man.

Not exactly a kid

Still committed crimes and carried a gun before 18

and carried a gun before 18

got a link of him using them?

Maybe he didn't. I just looked it up and it turns out towns in the Wild West had the toughest gun control laws in the nation, and so there actually wasn't much gun crime.

and you know you are lying now.......the West wasn't wild because everyone carried a gun......and those gun laws....only worked when the law abiding followed them...the criminals didn't follow them....as Tombstone and their gun control laws show....

Here you go...read up on the actual Tombstone situation and how the criminals actually ignored the gun control laws....killing land wounding the Earps....

Gunfight at the O.K. Corral - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

One of many people who ignored Tombstone gun control....and he was a good guy....

Joyce ordered Holliday removed from the saloon but would not return Holliday's revolver. But Holliday returned carrying a double-action revolver. Milt brandished a pistol and threatened Holliday, but Holliday shot Joyce in the palm, disarming him, and then shot Joyce's business partner William Parker in the big toe

-----

Boyle later testified he noticed Ike was armed and covered his gun for him. Boyle later said that Ike told him, "'As soon as the Earps and Doc Holliday showed themselves on the street, the ball would open—that they would have to fight'...

------

Later in the morning, Ike picked up his rifle and revolver from the West End Corral, where he had deposited his weapons and stabled his wagon and team after entering town. By noon that day, Ike was still drinking and once-again armed in violation of the city ordinance against carrying firearms in the city.

--------

Tom McLaury's concealed weapon[edit]

Outside the court house where Ike was being fined, Wyatt almost walked into 28 year-old Tom McLaury as the two men were brought up short nose-to-nose. Tom, who had arrived in town the day before, was required by the well-known city ordinance to deposit his pistol when he first arrived in town. When Wyatt demanded, "Are you heeled or not?", McLaury said he was not armed. Wyatt testified that he saw arevolver in plain sight on the right hip of Tom's pants

----------

Billy and Frank stopped first at the Grand Hotel on Allen Street, and were greeted by Doc Holliday. They learned immediately after of their brothers' beatings by the Earps within the previous two hours. The incidents had generated a lot of talk in town. Angrily, Frank said he would not drink, and he and Billy left the saloon immediately to seek Tom.

By law, both Frank and Billy should have left their firearms at the Grand Hotel. Instead, they remained fully armed.[2]:49[57]:190

--------

Virgil testified afterward that he thought he saw all four men, Ike Clanton, Billy Clanton, Frank McLaury, and Tom McLaury, buying cartridges.[79] Wyatt said that he saw Billy Clanton and Frank McLaury in Spangenberger's gun and hardware store on 4th Street filling theirgun belts with cartridges


Hmmmmmmmm...doesn't seem like the Tombstone gun control laws worked so far...

Virgil initially avoided a confrontation with the newly arrived Frank McLaury and Billy Clanton, who had not yet deposited their weapons at a hotel or stable as the law required.

------------

At about 2:30 pm he saw Ike, Frank, Tom, and Billy gathered off Fremont street. Behan attempted to persuade Frank McLaury to give up his weapons, but Frank insisted that he would only give up his guns after City Marshal Virgil Earp and his brothers were disarmed.[81]

-----------

Citizens reported to Virgil on the Cowboys' movements that Ike and Tom had left their livery stable and returned to town while armed, in violation of the city ordinance.


Gun control only works for those who will obey the laws...law abiding citizens....so any gun control will completely fail at disarming criminals and mass shooters.

 

[TheDude]

Few examples why:

1. Responsibility displacement. People, especially liberals expect govt. and corp. to take care of them & their children.

2. Entitlements & poor values. You're entitled to tell your teacher to fuck off without repercussions. A crime gets you a slap on the hand in states like California. Aaron Hernandez is some kind of fucking hero, or at least be provided empathy for talking his life. Unreal.

3. If I talked back to my father he'd knock my block off. Do that today and liberal institutions come calling.

 

[Pogo]

Again ---- as I just posted ---- it doesn't mean literally everybody does it.

What it means, plain and simple, is that everybody's encouraged to do it. By treating Almighty Gun as a god instead of a weapon.

No.....we do not encourage it. The only one close to encouraging it is the MSM, and I wouldn't even charge them with doing it.

When we get a nut with a gun, our police respond. They kill the suspect in many cases, or the kook realizes that he has no way out and kills himself. How is that encouraging more of that kind of activity?

If they are taken alive, they are locked up in prison or a mental facility the rest of their lives. Some like Dylann Roof are sentenced to death.

Saying we encourage mass killings is like saying we promote recreational drug usage. And in fact, we do promote recreational narcotics more than killing people with guns.

Yes "we" DO encourage it. You may not consider yourself personally involved but "we" means the culture --- the values of death taught from birth by endless war toys, endless TV shows and movies, endless hero worship comic books etc etc etc. I certainly don't encourage it either but that doesn't mean I turn a blind eye to the sensory blitz that exists and thrives without (and despite) my influence.

So again --- if the mother isn't giving the kid this idea... and let's stipulate for the sake of argument that the father is not present........... from where exactly is he going to derive this conclusion, if not the myriad sources I have cited? Where? This is I believe your whole question in your title.

In this particular case, she almost did condone her kid carrying a gun. She certainly doesn't seem to have a problem with it.

When I was a child, we used to watch westerns. The old west and people who lived and died by the gun. Yet never a problem with kids and guns like we have today. We used to watch the Three Stooges. They used to take hammers and hit each other over the heads with them. That doesn't mean we were encouraging kids to be hammer murderers.

Television and movies have minimal (if any) influence on young criminals. Knowing they can get away with something is encouragement.

Kids are influenced by a lot of things--mostly their peers. But it's up to the parents to make sure that their children don't act on those influences. Sitting back and saying "They have to learn their own lessons" is just completely irresponsible. A father in the home willing to kick your ass for even the thought of having a gun is a very strong deterrent.

Your fantasy that "we never had a problem with kids and guns like we have today" is flat wrong. I can remember my whole high school being turned upside down because one kid inexplicably came to school armed. This isn't new.

The TV westerns you mention, however, are exactly part of that culture I described. They then led to, and were reinforced by, the accompanying TV commercials:

​

Is all this implanting the idea "go out and strafe some innocent bystanders"? No it's not. Subliminal seduction is far more subtle and indirect than that. It's merely implanting the idea that "shooting shit is cool". That leaves the next step up to the developing mind. If that mind is beset by anxiety circumstances ------ it's going to reflect back to the values it was taught from infancy.

Not at all unlike the way some admired movie character seen being "cool" by casually smoking cigarettes is not directly telling the viewer "go forth and buy cigarettes". It's the power of suggestion that closes that deal. Again the viewer is left to think, "well I want to be cool, and cigarettes are apparently cool, so how can I get some? I have to buy them". And voilà.

Then after the commercial makes its implant it's back to the TV program where the whole morality play teaches, in every single episode, that the good guy with a gun vanquishes the bad guy with a gun, and that's how it works, and the earth smells of roses forevermore, hallelujah. And be sure to tune in tomorrow where we'll reinforce this same lesson all over again, and sell you more guns.

Now that --- is a gun culture.

No, moron.....in the past, kids brought rifles to school to hunt after school and to participate in shooting competitions and clubs...and no one had an issue with it...what we have today is rap music and the thug culture that goes with it....

You just confirmed my whole point, shit-for-brains. Maybe you should have actually read it.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Wait a minute, who is teaching them to grab an AK and kill everybody in sight? I live in this country, and I don't feel that way; none of my friends feel that way; none of my family feels that way!

We have over 315 million people in this country, and once a year or so, one of our 315 million people goes nuts and kills a bunch of people. You call that a culture? I call it an anomaly.

Again ---- as I just posted ---- it doesn't mean literally everybody does it.

What it means, plain and simple, is that everybody's encouraged to do it. By treating Almighty Gun as a god instead of a weapon.

No.....we do not encourage it. The only one close to encouraging it is the MSM, and I wouldn't even charge them with doing it.

When we get a nut with a gun, our police respond. They kill the suspect in many cases, or the kook realizes that he has no way out and kills himself. How is that encouraging more of that kind of activity?

If they are taken alive, they are locked up in prison or a mental facility the rest of their lives. Some like Dylann Roof are sentenced to death.

Saying we encourage mass killings is like saying we promote recreational drug usage. And in fact, we do promote recreational narcotics more than killing people with guns.

Yes "we" DO encourage it. You may not consider yourself personally involved but "we" means the culture --- the values of death taught from birth by endless war toys, endless TV shows and movies, endless hero worship comic books etc etc etc. I certainly don't encourage it either but that doesn't mean I turn a blind eye to the sensory blitz that exists and thrives without (and despite) my influence.

So again --- if the mother isn't giving the kid this idea... and let's stipulate for the sake of argument that the father is not present........... from where exactly is he going to derive this conclusion, if not the myriad sources I have cited? Where? This is I believe your whole question in your title.

In this particular case, she almost did condone her kid carrying a gun. She certainly doesn't seem to have a problem with it.

When I was a child, we used to watch westerns. The old west and people who lived and died by the gun. Yet never a problem with kids and guns like we have today. We used to watch the Three Stooges. They used to take hammers and hit each other over the heads with them. That doesn't mean we were encouraging kids to be hammer murderers.

Television and movies have minimal (if any) influence on young criminals. Knowing they can get away with something is encouragement.

Kids are influenced by a lot of things--mostly their peers. But it's up to the parents to make sure that their children don't act on those influences. Sitting back and saying "They have to learn their own lessons" is just completely irresponsible. A father in the home willing to kick your ass for even the thought of having a gun is a very strong deterrent.

And war movies, and westerns........but what we didn't have was rap music and thug culture........rap music is one of the worst influences on the youth.....

It is, but hardly responsible for the gun carrying thugs today. Entertainment is just that--entertainment. Anybody who takes action on such entertainment is screwed up in the head in the first place.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

I found a local gun story that I wanted to share because the accused is a minor. Kids with guns are not all that unusual (especially here in Cleveland) but what I found most telling is the response of the mother.

In short, this kid was arrested for having BB gun in a public park (very similar to the Tamir Rice situation) a year earlier. The judge went easy on the kid, but now the 16 year old was busted having a real loaded gun. Here are some quotes from the mother:

"He has to learn the right way. I can't stop him." When the I TEAM asked where he got the gun this time, his mother said, "I don't know. Don't know. He was using it for protection. He was walking down the street and people would shoot at him. Nowadays, that's what you need for protection. I don't consider it a good thing."

That mom says she did talk to her son before the Parma BB gun incident and after it. Didn’t matter. She said, “Kids these days need to learn their own lessons. He's learning his lessons."

Teen caught with BB gun at Parma park now busted with gun; mom says she can’t stop him

With the path this kid is on, it's more than likely he'll be dead or in prison for murder the next decade. Then the left will blame the guns.

Another thing that struck me: she said "I don't know, and I can't stop him." Not "We can't stop him" as if there was a father figure around. This woman practically justified her son illegally carrying a likely stolen gun underage. When he gets older and arrested for shooting somebody, I'm sure the mother will once again respond to a news interview by saying "My baby didn't do nutting wrong, he's a good boy." If he gets gunned down in the street, well........then I guess he "learned his own lessons."

Single teenage girls who are raising young males without fathers.....that is the primary of violent crime in this country.

Absolutely. As I stated earlier in this thread, I listen to the police scanner in my city. Most of the calls are about children--half of which are called in by the mother.

Our city had to create an ordinance that any more than 3 calls per year would result in fees to the homeowner on their property tax for additional police aid. They did this because of black mothers who use the police as surrogate fathers. They can raise their male children fine up to the age of puberty, and after that, they are unable to control them because of the lack of a father figure.

The OP is proof positive of this. The mother herself claimed in the report that she can't control her own 16 year old. Because of her inabilities, she now leaves disciplinary action to the police instead of doing it herself. Very common in the black community unfortunately.

 

[Ray From Cleveland]

Really? You mean it was the right that promoted single-parent families? It was the right that told women to give up their husband for a job? The right promoted that???

Well if it's a society problem and the mother was correct in saying he needed the gun for protection, why not give every 16 year old in the ghetto a gun for protection? After all, it's not a parenting issue now is it?

Maybe.......just maybe if this kid had a father around, he might not be in trouble today. Maybe.....just maybe, with a husband and father, they would be able to afford a nicer area to live with two incomes.

The world changed. The world went from being a subsistence farming world of near slaves, or surfs or whatever you want to call them. People for thousands of years worked the land, lived under a powerful landlord who was, for the slaves/surfs/underlings, above the law. He was only below the law when it came to those who were higher up.

But the world changed. Along came industry. Along came a migration away from the farms. Suddenly things were changing in a manner that went away from what the Church new and how to deal with. However under the subsistence farming world, people worked a lot, had as many kids as they could. They didn't have time to go fucking around too much, and their world was so small that everyone would know about it. The cities changed this, they changed a lot.

What you're talking about seems to be the right wishing to keep everything as it was. Perhaps. And they did desire married people. However they also desired people working massive amounts of hours. The two don't fit together.

Were liberals pushing for change? Sure they were. The American Revolution was a push for change, the Constitution was change. Did this change have an impact on family life? Sure it did. But are you suggesting that we should have remained subsistence farmers, living miserable lives, just so that we'd stay married?

Yeah, we could give every 16 year old a gun for protection, and then perhaps we could give them 10 ounces of crack cocaine so they don't have to go stealing in order to get their fix. Yeah, that'll work, then we can lock them up for possessing the thing we just gave them too, and then they'll be safe in prison, right? Because prisons are safe places....

Come off it.....

Me come off of it? Maybe take your own advice.

People didn't leave the farmlands fifteen years ago. That was many years ago and we've had cities long before I was born, yet never a problem back then.

So what changed? For one, allowing kids to think they have rights over adults, but more importantly is the single-parent households. Single-parent households are directly related to poverty. There is nothing good about them when it comes to children.

There have always been problems.

Parenting is part of the issue here. Parents who don't know how to bring their kids up effectively. Again, the world has changed, it's become more complex and the family unit has often broken down.

My family come from different sides of the country, I had grandparents over there, grandparents over the other way, and I didn't live anywhere near either of them. In the past the grandparents, aunts, other females would have been around to support, to teach, to look after those kids. But that has changed.

Then you have kids being more free because parents are working more. After school I was free for 3 hours, no one was around to tell me what to do.

Parenting goes out of the window if parents aren't around. This is my point.

But there are other issues. How do you teach people to bring up their kids? Because the right is demanding that we don't even touch on the subject. That we leave people alone to struggle to do it on their own, and then slam them later when they do it badly. Kids need support, but then people want to leave them be and then slam them when they turn into criminals.

I'm sorry, but if you set up the conditions for them to fail, and then slam them, and liberals, when they do fail, it's ridiculous. And no, this isn't me saying liberals are completely clear of failing such people. There are issues there too, what I'm talking about is the right creating conditions for the family to fail, for kids to fail, and then complaining that they are failing.

When did the right demand that we don't touch on the subject of parenting? It's the right that has been advocating two-parent families since the left started to promote the opposite. It's the right that's been promoting morality and even religion in schools compared to the left that's obsessed with not hurting anybody's feelings by giving a failed grade.

How did your parents learn about parenting? How did mine? Parenting is natural; you don't need to take a course on it.

Several years back I had a neighbor who bought a portable basketball hoop. Before you know it, every kid from five blocks around was here. It was a nightmare. I even had to call the cops a few times because they would start right after school, and play into the night.

My questions was, WTF are the parent(s) of these kids that they allow them to stay out all night playing basketball instead of being home at dark doing their homework? It wasn't one or two nights a week, it was every day and night that it didn't rain.

Nobody has to teach you to have your kid home at a certain hour to do homework. That's a no brainer.

The problem is single-parent homes. Understandably, some relationships just don't work out and there is nothing a couple can do. But many of these kids are raised from young on with only one parent. And if their kid (like the OP) gets his hands on a gun, is it because we are a gun society or is it that the parent(s) are not doing their job?

My money is on the latter.

Well, it seems to happen a lot on here when I discuss the matter.

Yes, the right promote two parents, they promote morality, they promote religion.

The problem is that they're promoting morals from religion, trying to get everyone to be a part of their religion, and the morals aren't based around what should happen in a modern society, but morals from an older era.

And then they're willing to be extremely contradictory. They'll push anti-abortion rhetoric until the cows come home, but will they be teaching people how to bring up a child? No, they won't. Will they be demanding that people don't work too much in order to be able to bring their kids up? No, they won't. This is the problem with religious morals as opposed to sensible morals.

You think parenting is natural. Well you see, here's the problem. It isn't. There are basics.

When you see kids with a coke in one hand, a cake in the other and chips in their backpack, and this is the food sustaining them through the day, you know that someone isn't on the natural parenting course.

You complain about parenting, then say it's natural. If it were natural, you wouldn't be complaining about it.

Again, a "no-brainer" and yet too many people are acting without too much of a brain.

Do you think all those kids were single parent families? Probably not. Both my parents worked. That doesn't help you deal with kids. You need to think about things, you need education. But apparently it's so natural that so many people don't do it.

How do you prevent single parent families? Again, many on the right will simply say that they can't get involved in educating kids into how relationships should work, this would be "indoctrination" and all that crap. Then they will bitch and moan at single parent families.

It doesn't make sense.

You cannot prevent single parent households, but you can surly be against them.

Where are the road signs promoting two parent families? Where are the television commercials on promoting two parent families like there are for drugs, global warming, and gun restrictions? Where are the radio ads or courses in school about two parent families? There are none. they don't exist.

The right promotes morals of an older era? So WTF is wrong with that? There were many advantages of that older era which include kids not wanting (or thinking they need) guns to survive. They include the value of two parent families.

The OP is about the stance a mother of a troubled teenager. How many other mothers do we have like this one? And when we look at the increasing gun violence in ghettos, are the guns responsible, or are the parent(s)?

 

[Dragonlady]

I found a local gun story that I wanted to share because the accused is a minor. Kids with guns are not all that unusual (especially here in Cleveland) but what I found most telling is the response of the mother.

In short, this kid was arrested for having BB gun in a public park (very similar to the Tamir Rice situation) a year earlier. The judge went easy on the kid, but now the 16 year old was busted having a real loaded gun. Here are some quotes from the mother:

"He has to learn the right way. I can't stop him." When the I TEAM asked where he got the gun this time, his mother said, "I don't know. Don't know. He was using it for protection. He was walking down the street and people would shoot at him. Nowadays, that's what you need for protection. I don't consider it a good thing."

That mom says she did talk to her son before the Parma BB gun incident and after it. Didn’t matter. She said, “Kids these days need to learn their own lessons. He's learning his lessons."

Teen caught with BB gun at Parma park now busted with gun; mom says she can’t stop him

With the path this kid is on, it's more than likely he'll be dead or in prison for murder the next decade. Then the left will blame the guns.

Another thing that struck me: she said "I don't know, and I can't stop him." Not "We can't stop him" as if there was a father figure around. This woman practically justified her son illegally carrying a likely stolen gun underage. When he gets older and arrested for shooting somebody, I'm sure the mother will once again respond to a news interview by saying "My baby didn't do nutting wrong, he's a good boy." If he gets gunned down in the street, well........then I guess he "learned his own lessons."

There is more to it than a parenting problem. There's a society problem.

In what world do kids think they need weapons to protect themselves? Well, in a society that is failing to protect people, to instill morals into kids and all of that.

The right love to say how it's the parents' fault. The problem is that the right will also push the very same parents to work 80 hours a week so the rich can get richer. They also don't place any responsibility on schools to help deal with all the issues out there. So, the right essentially like to create the environment for this kind of thing, and then bitch and moan that the parents aren't doing anything about it.

Really? You mean it was the right that promoted single-parent families? It was the right that told women to give up their husband for a job? The right promoted that???

Well if it's a society problem and the mother was correct in saying he needed the gun for protection, why not give every 16 year old in the ghetto a gun for protection? After all, it's not a parenting issue now is it?

Maybe.......just maybe if this kid had a father around, he might not be in trouble today. Maybe.....just maybe, with a husband and father, they would be able to afford a nicer area to live with two incomes.

Zero tolerance programs and minimum sentencing. You voted for it and thought it a good idea. But in a country where white people get probation and black people go to jail, THIS is why there are no black fathers around. You can't send all the young black men to jail and then bitch that children have no fathers.

And that is a lie......those in jail are there because they deserve to be there especially the violent criminals....

There are no black fathers around because the democrats created the Great Society which gave out welfare as it kicked husbands out of the family of poor Americans.....we now have teenage girls who get government money every time they have a child ....and if they have a husband....they lose that money.....and yet you morons don't understand that ass backwards incentive program......that is why no fathers are around...then the young males raised by the single teenage girls become violent socipaths because the revolving door of boyfriends teach them violence and crime...not self control and resposiblity....


Try that book...."Life At the Bottom," seeing it happening in Britain might show you how it happens here.....

No Ray baby, it wasn't Democrats and feminists that destroyed the black family, it was Reagan's War on Drugs, and minimum sentencing, which caused the rate of incareration to quadruple from 1980 onward:

http://sentencingproject.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/Trends-in-US-Corrections.pdf

https://www.nap.edu/read/18613/chapter/4

Federal Prison Population Spiked 790 Percent Since 1980

But thanks for reinforcing those Republican talking points about how the poor did it to themselves.

 

[baileyn45]

I found a local gun story that I wanted to share because the accused is a minor. Kids with guns are not all that unusual (especially here in Cleveland) but what I found most telling is the response of the mother.

In short, this kid was arrested for having BB gun in a public park (very similar to the Tamir Rice situation) a year earlier. The judge went easy on the kid, but now the 16 year old was busted having a real loaded gun. Here are some quotes from the mother:

"He has to learn the right way. I can't stop him." When the I TEAM asked where he got the gun this time, his mother said, "I don't know. Don't know. He was using it for protection. He was walking down the street and people would shoot at him. Nowadays, that's what you need for protection. I don't consider it a good thing."

That mom says she did talk to her son before the Parma BB gun incident and after it. Didn’t matter. She said, “Kids these days need to learn their own lessons. He's learning his lessons."

Teen caught with BB gun at Parma park now busted with gun; mom says she can’t stop him

With the path this kid is on, it's more than likely he'll be dead or in prison for murder the next decade. Then the left will blame the guns.

Another thing that struck me: she said "I don't know, and I can't stop him." Not "We can't stop him" as if there was a father figure around. This woman practically justified her son illegally carrying a likely stolen gun underage. When he gets older and arrested for shooting somebody, I'm sure the mother will once again respond to a news interview by saying "My baby didn't do nutting wrong, he's a good boy." If he gets gunned down in the street, well........then I guess he "learned his own lessons."

I don't know where this kid is, but anyone want to bet that he's never met his father and the neighborhood he lives in will freak out if he or anyone else is arrested? Those damn police.

 

[Rustic]

I found a local gun story that I wanted to share because the accused is a minor. Kids with guns are not all that unusual (especially here in Cleveland) but what I found most telling is the response of the mother.

In short, this kid was arrested for having BB gun in a public park (very similar to the Tamir Rice situation) a year earlier. The judge went easy on the kid, but now the 16 year old was busted having a real loaded gun. Here are some quotes from the mother:

"He has to learn the right way. I can't stop him." When the I TEAM asked where he got the gun this time, his mother said, "I don't know. Don't know. He was using it for protection. He was walking down the street and people would shoot at him. Nowadays, that's what you need for protection. I don't consider it a good thing."

That mom says she did talk to her son before the Parma BB gun incident and after it. Didn’t matter. She said, “Kids these days need to learn their own lessons. He's learning his lessons."

Teen caught with BB gun at Parma park now busted with gun; mom says she can’t stop him

With the path this kid is on, it's more than likely he'll be dead or in prison for murder the next decade. Then the left will blame the guns.

Another thing that struck me: she said "I don't know, and I can't stop him." Not "We can't stop him" as if there was a father figure around. This woman practically justified her son illegally carrying a likely stolen gun underage. When he gets older and arrested for shooting somebody, I'm sure the mother will once again respond to a news interview by saying "My baby didn't do nutting wrong, he's a good boy." If he gets gunned down in the street, well........then I guess he "learned his own lessons."

There is more to it than a parenting problem. There's a society problem.

In what world do kids think they need weapons to protect themselves? Well, in a society that is failing to protect people, to instill morals into kids and all of that.

The right love to say how it's the parents' fault. The problem is that the right will also push the very same parents to work 80 hours a week so the rich can get richer. They also don't place any responsibility on schools to help deal with all the issues out there. So, the right essentially like to create the environment for this kind of thing, and then bitch and moan that the parents aren't doing anything about it.

Really? You mean it was the right that promoted single-parent families? It was the right that told women to give up their husband for a job? The right promoted that???

Well if it's a society problem and the mother was correct in saying he needed the gun for protection, why not give every 16 year old in the ghetto a gun for protection? After all, it's not a parenting issue now is it?

Maybe.......just maybe if this kid had a father around, he might not be in trouble today. Maybe.....just maybe, with a husband and father, they would be able to afford a nicer area to live with two incomes.

Zero tolerance programs and minimum sentencing. You voted for it and thought it a good idea. But in a country where white people get probation and black people go to jail, THIS is why there are no black fathers around. You can't send all the young black men to jail and then bitch that children have no fathers.

And that is a lie......those in jail are there because they deserve to be there especially the violent criminals....

There are no black fathers around because the democrats created the Great Society which gave out welfare as it kicked husbands out of the family of poor Americans.....we now have teenage girls who get government money every time they have a child ....and if they have a husband....they lose that money.....and yet you morons don't understand that ass backwards incentive program......that is why no fathers are around...then the young males raised by the single teenage girls become violent socipaths because the revolving door of boyfriends teach them violence and crime...not self control and resposiblity....


Try that book...."Life At the Bottom," seeing it happening in Britain might show you how it happens here.....

No Ray baby, it wasn't Democrats and feminists that destroyed the black family, it was Reagan's War on Drugs, and minimum sentencing, which caused the rate of incareration to quadruple from 1980 onward:

http://sentencingproject.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/Trends-in-US-Corrections.pdf

https://www.nap.edu/read/18613/chapter/4

Federal Prison Population Spiked 790 Percent Since 1980

But thanks for reinforcing those Republican talking points about how the poor did it to themselves.

Liberal/progressive values are right out of the toilet, they destroy families from within you sick fucking bitch…

 

[frigidweirdo]

The world changed. The world went from being a subsistence farming world of near slaves, or surfs or whatever you want to call them. People for thousands of years worked the land, lived under a powerful landlord who was, for the slaves/surfs/underlings, above the law. He was only below the law when it came to those who were higher up.

But the world changed. Along came industry. Along came a migration away from the farms. Suddenly things were changing in a manner that went away from what the Church new and how to deal with. However under the subsistence farming world, people worked a lot, had as many kids as they could. They didn't have time to go fucking around too much, and their world was so small that everyone would know about it. The cities changed this, they changed a lot.

What you're talking about seems to be the right wishing to keep everything as it was. Perhaps. And they did desire married people. However they also desired people working massive amounts of hours. The two don't fit together.

Were liberals pushing for change? Sure they were. The American Revolution was a push for change, the Constitution was change. Did this change have an impact on family life? Sure it did. But are you suggesting that we should have remained subsistence farmers, living miserable lives, just so that we'd stay married?

Yeah, we could give every 16 year old a gun for protection, and then perhaps we could give them 10 ounces of crack cocaine so they don't have to go stealing in order to get their fix. Yeah, that'll work, then we can lock them up for possessing the thing we just gave them too, and then they'll be safe in prison, right? Because prisons are safe places....

Come off it.....

Me come off of it? Maybe take your own advice.

People didn't leave the farmlands fifteen years ago. That was many years ago and we've had cities long before I was born, yet never a problem back then.

So what changed? For one, allowing kids to think they have rights over adults, but more importantly is the single-parent households. Single-parent households are directly related to poverty. There is nothing good about them when it comes to children.

There have always been problems.

Parenting is part of the issue here. Parents who don't know how to bring their kids up effectively. Again, the world has changed, it's become more complex and the family unit has often broken down.

My family come from different sides of the country, I had grandparents over there, grandparents over the other way, and I didn't live anywhere near either of them. In the past the grandparents, aunts, other females would have been around to support, to teach, to look after those kids. But that has changed.

Then you have kids being more free because parents are working more. After school I was free for 3 hours, no one was around to tell me what to do.

Parenting goes out of the window if parents aren't around. This is my point.

But there are other issues. How do you teach people to bring up their kids? Because the right is demanding that we don't even touch on the subject. That we leave people alone to struggle to do it on their own, and then slam them later when they do it badly. Kids need support, but then people want to leave them be and then slam them when they turn into criminals.

I'm sorry, but if you set up the conditions for them to fail, and then slam them, and liberals, when they do fail, it's ridiculous. And no, this isn't me saying liberals are completely clear of failing such people. There are issues there too, what I'm talking about is the right creating conditions for the family to fail, for kids to fail, and then complaining that they are failing.

When did the right demand that we don't touch on the subject of parenting? It's the right that has been advocating two-parent families since the left started to promote the opposite. It's the right that's been promoting morality and even religion in schools compared to the left that's obsessed with not hurting anybody's feelings by giving a failed grade.

How did your parents learn about parenting? How did mine? Parenting is natural; you don't need to take a course on it.

Several years back I had a neighbor who bought a portable basketball hoop. Before you know it, every kid from five blocks around was here. It was a nightmare. I even had to call the cops a few times because they would start right after school, and play into the night.

My questions was, WTF are the parent(s) of these kids that they allow them to stay out all night playing basketball instead of being home at dark doing their homework? It wasn't one or two nights a week, it was every day and night that it didn't rain.

Nobody has to teach you to have your kid home at a certain hour to do homework. That's a no brainer.

The problem is single-parent homes. Understandably, some relationships just don't work out and there is nothing a couple can do. But many of these kids are raised from young on with only one parent. And if their kid (like the OP) gets his hands on a gun, is it because we are a gun society or is it that the parent(s) are not doing their job?

My money is on the latter.

Well, it seems to happen a lot on here when I discuss the matter.

Yes, the right promote two parents, they promote morality, they promote religion.

The problem is that they're promoting morals from religion, trying to get everyone to be a part of their religion, and the morals aren't based around what should happen in a modern society, but morals from an older era.

And then they're willing to be extremely contradictory. They'll push anti-abortion rhetoric until the cows come home, but will they be teaching people how to bring up a child? No, they won't. Will they be demanding that people don't work too much in order to be able to bring their kids up? No, they won't. This is the problem with religious morals as opposed to sensible morals.

You think parenting is natural. Well you see, here's the problem. It isn't. There are basics.

When you see kids with a coke in one hand, a cake in the other and chips in their backpack, and this is the food sustaining them through the day, you know that someone isn't on the natural parenting course.

You complain about parenting, then say it's natural. If it were natural, you wouldn't be complaining about it.

Again, a "no-brainer" and yet too many people are acting without too much of a brain.

Do you think all those kids were single parent families? Probably not. Both my parents worked. That doesn't help you deal with kids. You need to think about things, you need education. But apparently it's so natural that so many people don't do it.

How do you prevent single parent families? Again, many on the right will simply say that they can't get involved in educating kids into how relationships should work, this would be "indoctrination" and all that crap. Then they will bitch and moan at single parent families.

It doesn't make sense.

You cannot prevent single parent households, but you can surly be against them.

Where are the road signs promoting two parent families? Where are the television commercials on promoting two parent families like there are for drugs, global warming, and gun restrictions? Where are the radio ads or courses in school about two parent families? There are none. they don't exist.

The right promotes morals of an older era? So WTF is wrong with that? There were many advantages of that older era which include kids not wanting (or thinking they need) guns to survive. They include the value of two parent families.

The OP is about the stance a mother of a troubled teenager. How many other mothers do we have like this one? And when we look at the increasing gun violence in ghettos, are the guns responsible, or are the parent(s)?

Why do you need commercials promoting two parent families? For me that would seem to be a massive waste of money.

Certainly I've seen problems with this kind of promoting where people believe something will happen, and then they don't work at it.

What is needed is education. Where people talk and discuss the issues, try and make sense of the world they live in, try and understand what the issues are in relationships so they can enter into them with knowledge, with a thought process, with a sense of what is right and what is wrong.

The same with parenting. What food should kids eat? How much TV and computer games should they play? How do they want their kids to turn out? What issues are there? Things like this should be taught in education to make people aware. You do this and you'll see lower single parent families, less problems with kids, better educational achievement.

Saying that it's all natural and people should just know it, when they clearly don't, isn't going to get you anywhere.

What is wrong with morals of an older era? Well... they represent a different world. People turn off, these morals aren't about them any more. So what are their morals? Well they don't really know, so there aren't really any morals.

What morals are there in the Bible about the internet? None, because it didn't exist. The world has changed, until you accept that everything else changes with it, you'e going to be fixing the aircon unit as if it were a paper fan. It isn't going to work.

Yes, I know what the OP is about, and it's like asking a question which ignores the actual problem. So I'm talking about the actual ways to solve the actual problem, rather than pretending the problem is really simple and the solution too.

 

[frigidweirdo]

I found a local gun story that I wanted to share because the accused is a minor. Kids with guns are not all that unusual (especially here in Cleveland) but what I found most telling is the response of the mother.

In short, this kid was arrested for having BB gun in a public park (very similar to the Tamir Rice situation) a year earlier. The judge went easy on the kid, but now the 16 year old was busted having a real loaded gun. Here are some quotes from the mother:

"He has to learn the right way. I can't stop him." When the I TEAM asked where he got the gun this time, his mother said, "I don't know. Don't know. He was using it for protection. He was walking down the street and people would shoot at him. Nowadays, that's what you need for protection. I don't consider it a good thing."

That mom says she did talk to her son before the Parma BB gun incident and after it. Didn’t matter. She said, “Kids these days need to learn their own lessons. He's learning his lessons."

Teen caught with BB gun at Parma park now busted with gun; mom says she can’t stop him

With the path this kid is on, it's more than likely he'll be dead or in prison for murder the next decade. Then the left will blame the guns.

Another thing that struck me: she said "I don't know, and I can't stop him." Not "We can't stop him" as if there was a father figure around. This woman practically justified her son illegally carrying a likely stolen gun underage. When he gets older and arrested for shooting somebody, I'm sure the mother will once again respond to a news interview by saying "My baby didn't do nutting wrong, he's a good boy." If he gets gunned down in the street, well........then I guess he "learned his own lessons."

There is more to it than a parenting problem. There's a society problem.

In what world do kids think they need weapons to protect themselves? Well, in a society that is failing to protect people, to instill morals into kids and all of that.

The right love to say how it's the parents' fault. The problem is that the right will also push the very same parents to work 80 hours a week so the rich can get richer. They also don't place any responsibility on schools to help deal with all the issues out there. So, the right essentially like to create the environment for this kind of thing, and then bitch and moan that the parents aren't doing anything about it.

Really? You mean it was the right that promoted single-parent families? It was the right that told women to give up their husband for a job? The right promoted that???

Well if it's a society problem and the mother was correct in saying he needed the gun for protection, why not give every 16 year old in the ghetto a gun for protection? After all, it's not a parenting issue now is it?

Maybe.......just maybe if this kid had a father around, he might not be in trouble today. Maybe.....just maybe, with a husband and father, they would be able to afford a nicer area to live with two incomes.

Zero tolerance programs and minimum sentencing. You voted for it and thought it a good idea. But in a country where white people get probation and black people go to jail, THIS is why there are no black fathers around. You can't send all the young black men to jail and then bitch that children have no fathers.

And that is a lie......those in jail are there because they deserve to be there especially the violent criminals....

There are no black fathers around because the democrats created the Great Society which gave out welfare as it kicked husbands out of the family of poor Americans.....we now have teenage girls who get government money every time they have a child ....and if they have a husband....they lose that money.....and yet you morons don't understand that ass backwards incentive program......that is why no fathers are around...then the young males raised by the single teenage girls become violent socipaths because the revolving door of boyfriends teach them violence and crime...not self control and resposiblity....


Try that book...."Life At the Bottom," seeing it happening in Britain might show you how it happens here.....

No Ray baby, it wasn't Democrats and feminists that destroyed the black family, it was Reagan's War on Drugs, and minimum sentencing, which caused the rate of incareration to quadruple from 1980 onward:

http://sentencingproject.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/01/Trends-in-US-Corrections.pdf

https://www.nap.edu/read/18613/chapter/4

Federal Prison Population Spiked 790 Percent Since 1980

But thanks for reinforcing those Republican talking points about how the poor did it to themselves.

And again, this is too simple an argument.

Yes, locking people up doesn't help a family. But why were people being locked up? Well, because they were taking drugs. Are fathers on drugs good fathers? Almost never. So why were they taking drugs, what led to this situation?

Well ghettos. They exist, and they exist for a reason, and the reason is the rich fucking over the poor and not making sure education, opportunities etc extend fairly to all. This is a complex issue in itself, with many side issues. The way education is funded, the way education unions work, the way people see the role of schools, what schools are teaching, after school programs and the lack of them, a sense of them and us within society, especially within black communities, believing the way to solve it is to have black role models on TV that live in massive mansions like the Fresh Prince.

There are so many problems and so little desire to fix them.

 

[talksalot]

I found a local gun story that I wanted to share because the accused is a minor. Kids with guns are not all that unusual (especially here in Cleveland) but what I found most telling is the response of the mother.

In short, this kid was arrested for having BB gun in a public park (very similar to the Tamir Rice situation) a year earlier. The judge went easy on the kid, but now the 16 year old was busted having a real loaded gun. Here are some quotes from the mother:

"He has to learn the right way. I can't stop him." When the I TEAM asked where he got the gun this time, his mother said, "I don't know. Don't know. He was using it for protection. He was walking down the street and people would shoot at him. Nowadays, that's what you need for protection. I don't consider it a good thing."

That mom says she did talk to her son before the Parma BB gun incident and after it. Didn’t matter. She said, “Kids these days need to learn their own lessons. He's learning his lessons."

Teen caught with BB gun at Parma park now busted with gun; mom says she can’t stop him

With the path this kid is on, it's more than likely he'll be dead or in prison for murder the next decade. Then the left will blame the guns.

Another thing that struck me: she said "I don't know, and I can't stop him." Not "We can't stop him" as if there was a father figure around. This woman practically justified her son illegally carrying a likely stolen gun underage. When he gets older and arrested for shooting somebody, I'm sure the mother will once again respond to a news interview by saying "My baby didn't do nutting wrong, he's a good boy." If he gets gunned down in the street, well........then I guess he "learned his own lessons."

There is more to it than a parenting problem. There's a society problem.

In what world do kids think they need weapons to protect themselves? Well, in a society that is failing to protect people, to instill morals into kids and all of that.

The right love to say how it's the parents' fault. The problem is that the right will also push the very same parents to work 80 hours a week so the rich can get richer. They also don't place any responsibility on schools to help deal with all the issues out there. So, the right essentially like to create the environment for this kind of thing, and then bitch and moan that the parents aren't doing anything about it.

According to the LEFT, women who stay home and raise their kids are FREELOADERS.

 

[TheOldSchool]

I found a local gun story that I wanted to share because the accused is a minor. Kids with guns are not all that unusual (especially here in Cleveland) but what I found most telling is the response of the mother.

In short, this kid was arrested for having BB gun in a public park (very similar to the Tamir Rice situation) a year earlier. The judge went easy on the kid, but now the 16 year old was busted having a real loaded gun. Here are some quotes from the mother:

"He has to learn the right way. I can't stop him." When the I TEAM asked where he got the gun this time, his mother said, "I don't know. Don't know. He was using it for protection. He was walking down the street and people would shoot at him. Nowadays, that's what you need for protection. I don't consider it a good thing."

That mom says she did talk to her son before the Parma BB gun incident and after it. Didn’t matter. She said, “Kids these days need to learn their own lessons. He's learning his lessons."

Teen caught with BB gun at Parma park now busted with gun; mom says she can’t stop him

With the path this kid is on, it's more than likely he'll be dead or in prison for murder the next decade. Then the left will blame the guns.

Another thing that struck me: she said "I don't know, and I can't stop him." Not "We can't stop him" as if there was a father figure around. This woman practically justified her son illegally carrying a likely stolen gun underage. When he gets older and arrested for shooting somebody, I'm sure the mother will once again respond to a news interview by saying "My baby didn't do nutting wrong, he's a good boy." If he gets gunned down in the street, well........then I guess he "learned his own lessons."

There is more to it than a parenting problem. There's a society problem.

In what world do kids think they need weapons to protect themselves? Well, in a society that is failing to protect people, to instill morals into kids and all of that.

The right love to say how it's the parents' fault. The problem is that the right will also push the very same parents to work 80 hours a week so the rich can get richer. They also don't place any responsibility on schools to help deal with all the issues out there. So, the right essentially like to create the environment for this kind of thing, and then bitch and moan that the parents aren't doing anything about it.

According to the LEFT, women who stay home and raise their kids are FREELOADERS.

According to the RIGHT, they're cattle.

 

[talksalot]

I found a local gun story that I wanted to share because the accused is a minor. Kids with guns are not all that unusual (especially here in Cleveland) but what I found most telling is the response of the mother.

In short, this kid was arrested for having BB gun in a public park (very similar to the Tamir Rice situation) a year earlier. The judge went easy on the kid, but now the 16 year old was busted having a real loaded gun. Here are some quotes from the mother:

"He has to learn the right way. I can't stop him." When the I TEAM asked where he got the gun this time, his mother said, "I don't know. Don't know. He was using it for protection. He was walking down the street and people would shoot at him. Nowadays, that's what you need for protection. I don't consider it a good thing."

That mom says she did talk to her son before the Parma BB gun incident and after it. Didn’t matter. She said, “Kids these days need to learn their own lessons. He's learning his lessons."

Teen caught with BB gun at Parma park now busted with gun; mom says she can’t stop him

With the path this kid is on, it's more than likely he'll be dead or in prison for murder the next decade. Then the left will blame the guns.

Another thing that struck me: she said "I don't know, and I can't stop him." Not "We can't stop him" as if there was a father figure around. This woman practically justified her son illegally carrying a likely stolen gun underage. When he gets older and arrested for shooting somebody, I'm sure the mother will once again respond to a news interview by saying "My baby didn't do nutting wrong, he's a good boy." If he gets gunned down in the street, well........then I guess he "learned his own lessons."

There is more to it than a parenting problem. There's a society problem.

In what world do kids think they need weapons to protect themselves? Well, in a society that is failing to protect people, to instill morals into kids and all of that.

The right love to say how it's the parents' fault. The problem is that the right will also push the very same parents to work 80 hours a week so the rich can get richer. They also don't place any responsibility on schools to help deal with all the issues out there. So, the right essentially like to create the environment for this kind of thing, and then bitch and moan that the parents aren't doing anything about it.

According to the LEFT, women who stay home and raise their kids are FREELOADERS.

According to the RIGHT, they're cattle.

Lefty women have actually used the term "freeloader" for stay-home moms. Who says women are cattle?

 

[frigidweirdo]

I found a local gun story that I wanted to share because the accused is a minor. Kids with guns are not all that unusual (especially here in Cleveland) but what I found most telling is the response of the mother.

In short, this kid was arrested for having BB gun in a public park (very similar to the Tamir Rice situation) a year earlier. The judge went easy on the kid, but now the 16 year old was busted having a real loaded gun. Here are some quotes from the mother:

"He has to learn the right way. I can't stop him." When the I TEAM asked where he got the gun this time, his mother said, "I don't know. Don't know. He was using it for protection. He was walking down the street and people would shoot at him. Nowadays, that's what you need for protection. I don't consider it a good thing."

That mom says she did talk to her son before the Parma BB gun incident and after it. Didn’t matter. She said, “Kids these days need to learn their own lessons. He's learning his lessons."

Teen caught with BB gun at Parma park now busted with gun; mom says she can’t stop him

With the path this kid is on, it's more than likely he'll be dead or in prison for murder the next decade. Then the left will blame the guns.

Another thing that struck me: she said "I don't know, and I can't stop him." Not "We can't stop him" as if there was a father figure around. This woman practically justified her son illegally carrying a likely stolen gun underage. When he gets older and arrested for shooting somebody, I'm sure the mother will once again respond to a news interview by saying "My baby didn't do nutting wrong, he's a good boy." If he gets gunned down in the street, well........then I guess he "learned his own lessons."

There is more to it than a parenting problem. There's a society problem.

In what world do kids think they need weapons to protect themselves? Well, in a society that is failing to protect people, to instill morals into kids and all of that.

The right love to say how it's the parents' fault. The problem is that the right will also push the very same parents to work 80 hours a week so the rich can get richer. They also don't place any responsibility on schools to help deal with all the issues out there. So, the right essentially like to create the environment for this kind of thing, and then bitch and moan that the parents aren't doing anything about it.

According to the LEFT, women who stay home and raise their kids are FREELOADERS.

Really? Who is the spokesman for the left who said this? I certainly didn't. And you're talking with me rather than "the LEFT".

 

[TheOldSchool]

I found a local gun story that I wanted to share because the accused is a minor. Kids with guns are not all that unusual (especially here in Cleveland) but what I found most telling is the response of the mother.

In short, this kid was arrested for having BB gun in a public park (very similar to the Tamir Rice situation) a year earlier. The judge went easy on the kid, but now the 16 year old was busted having a real loaded gun. Here are some quotes from the mother:

"He has to learn the right way. I can't stop him." When the I TEAM asked where he got the gun this time, his mother said, "I don't know. Don't know. He was using it for protection. He was walking down the street and people would shoot at him. Nowadays, that's what you need for protection. I don't consider it a good thing."

That mom says she did talk to her son before the Parma BB gun incident and after it. Didn’t matter. She said, “Kids these days need to learn their own lessons. He's learning his lessons."

Teen caught with BB gun at Parma park now busted with gun; mom says she can’t stop him

With the path this kid is on, it's more than likely he'll be dead or in prison for murder the next decade. Then the left will blame the guns.

Another thing that struck me: she said "I don't know, and I can't stop him." Not "We can't stop him" as if there was a father figure around. This woman practically justified her son illegally carrying a likely stolen gun underage. When he gets older and arrested for shooting somebody, I'm sure the mother will once again respond to a news interview by saying "My baby didn't do nutting wrong, he's a good boy." If he gets gunned down in the street, well........then I guess he "learned his own lessons."

There is more to it than a parenting problem. There's a society problem.

In what world do kids think they need weapons to protect themselves? Well, in a society that is failing to protect people, to instill morals into kids and all of that.

The right love to say how it's the parents' fault. The problem is that the right will also push the very same parents to work 80 hours a week so the rich can get richer. They also don't place any responsibility on schools to help deal with all the issues out there. So, the right essentially like to create the environment for this kind of thing, and then bitch and moan that the parents aren't doing anything about it.

According to the LEFT, women who stay home and raise their kids are FREELOADERS.

According to the RIGHT, they're cattle.

Lefty women have actually used the term "freeloader" for stay-home moms. Who says women are cattle?

To social conservatives, women aren't much at all.

 

[Trump.Stamped]

I found a local gun story that I wanted to share because the accused is a minor. Kids with guns are not all that unusual (especially here in Cleveland) but what I found most telling is the response of the mother.

In short, this kid was arrested for having BB gun in a public park (very similar to the Tamir Rice situation) a year earlier. The judge went easy on the kid, but now the 16 year old was busted having a real loaded gun. Here are some quotes from the mother:

"He has to learn the right way. I can't stop him." When the I TEAM asked where he got the gun this time, his mother said, "I don't know. Don't know. He was using it for protection. He was walking down the street and people would shoot at him. Nowadays, that's what you need for protection. I don't consider it a good thing."

That mom says she did talk to her son before the Parma BB gun incident and after it. Didn’t matter. She said, “Kids these days need to learn their own lessons. He's learning his lessons."

Teen caught with BB gun at Parma park now busted with gun; mom says she can’t stop him

With the path this kid is on, it's more than likely he'll be dead or in prison for murder the next decade. Then the left will blame the guns.

Another thing that struck me: she said "I don't know, and I can't stop him." Not "We can't stop him" as if there was a father figure around. This woman practically justified her son illegally carrying a likely stolen gun underage. When he gets older and arrested for shooting somebody, I'm sure the mother will once again respond to a news interview by saying "My baby didn't do nutting wrong, he's a good boy." If he gets gunned down in the street, well........then I guess he "learned his own lessons."

There is more to it than a parenting problem. There's a society problem.

In what world do kids think they need weapons to protect themselves? Well, in a society that is failing to protect people, to instill morals into kids and all of that.

The right love to say how it's the parents' fault. The problem is that the right will also push the very same parents to work 80 hours a week so the rich can get richer. They also don't place any responsibility on schools to help deal with all the issues out there. So, the right essentially like to create the environment for this kind of thing, and then bitch and moan that the parents aren't doing anything about it.

That's fucking bullshit. Most people I know working 80 hours a week are doing that because they didn't get the education they should have. There are plenty of good paying jobs out there being filled by educated people immigrating to this country. Parenting is the issue 90% of the time. Blaming the left or the right is a childish immature argument. Parents are failing and this generation is a fucking mess.

So, you don't get the education you should do because you didn't have that parental support when you were a kid, and you work all the hours you can and don't give your kids the support they need, and they don't get the education they need.... doesn't seem to be a cycle here? You get born on the wrong side of the tracks, well, you're just going to end up making the mistakes your parents, grandparents etc made.....

And no one gives a fuck about changing it either, because those who CAN change it, well, they don't care because it isn't their kids getting fucked up.

So it is parenting. I agree. It ain't the government, and the government can't fix it.