Loading...
Welcome to Anarcho-Punk.net community ! Please register or login to participate in the forums.   Ⓐ//Ⓔ

Kids with guns - locked and loaded

Discussion in 'General political debates' started by ungovernable, Jul 14, 2010.

  1. ungovernable

    ungovernableAutonome Staff Member Uploader Admin Team Experienced member


    4,337

    63

    24

    Aug 21, 2009
    Male, 34 years old
    Canada United States
    Damn i couldn't find the full documentary in english but here is a preview:

    http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp ... 7#29804534

    [video]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d5Dfu1roK2M[/video]

    this documentary shows a bunch of kids from 7 years old to 12 years old firing war weapons like Ak-47, M16 and other weapons currently used in irak. This is fucking ridiculous, especially when the journalist goes to the school with the kids, they ask them questions like "what would you do if you find a gun in your parent's closet" and they answer "i would take it"... you clearly see those kids dont have the maturity to play with big guns like that but their parents keep feeding it to them, they even made a pink M16 for the young girl !!! How fucking ridiculous !!!

    THIS is exactly what happens without gun control.

    And by the way:

    other interessing facts:
    http://www.kidsandguns.org/index.asp
     

  2. dinscurge

    dinscurgeActive Member Forum Member


    49

    0

    0

    Jul 8, 2010
     
    they just need to learn how to lock a door, or a get a safe, dont just randomly load it and put in the couch. no just put it in your bedroom and lock the door a 5yr old wont be able to bust the door down or pick the lock(usually).
     
  3. Saering

    SaeringExperienced Member Experienced member


    96

    0

    0

    Dec 18, 2009
     
    That's not a lack of gun control. That's just stupidity, negligence, and laziness.
     
  4. ungovernable

    ungovernableAutonome Staff Member Uploader Admin Team Experienced member


    4,337

    63

    24

    Aug 21, 2009
    Male, 34 years old
    Canada United States
    when 7 years old kids are allowed to shoot ak47 and think it is a toy, there is definatly a problem of gun control somewhere. Kids shouldnt be allowed to own/use guns at that age.

    When i was a kid i knew where my parents were hiding the keys of everything in the house. It's so easy. And a mistake happens so easily, you just have to forget to lock the door or let the gun in your car or your closet and voila, the kid can use it.

    It is very irresponsible to load a house full of guns when you have kids..
     
  5. dinscurge

    dinscurgeActive Member Forum Member


    49

    0

    0

    Jul 8, 2010
     
    it is a valid point and i respect it but thats a film made by the media, those are extreme cases of neglect/stupidity. and its illegal to own a rifle under 18, or a pistol under 21 (atleast in my state) + whats new about people thinking dangerous things are toys? i.e. 16 yearolds with cars, idiots on 3/4wheelers, and motorcycles, they are statistically more dangerous in the us than guns are. of course its still bad behaviour, but then again its not that hard to double check the door to make sure its locked, i mean if someone was serious about their childs safety its totally possible to keep doors locked and keys on them and stuff. + if you dont have guns theres not much to rebel with when the government gets overpowering.
     
  6. ungovernable

    ungovernableAutonome Staff Member Uploader Admin Team Experienced member


    4,337

    63

    24

    Aug 21, 2009
    Male, 34 years old
    Canada United States
    But those peoples in the documentary, they made a special version of war weapons like AK47 and M16 for their young girl, the war weapon is pink and looks like a toy... Maybe its illegal to own the weapon but its not illegal to use it or have a shooting license. So their parents just owns the gun for them but they can still use it... what the fuck is the point of knowing how to use a war weapon used to kill peoples in irak when you are at the age of playing with toys and water guns ??

    There is a big difference, do i really have to explain ? Cars are not war weapons, and cars are useful in life unlike guns they are not necessary... Learning to drive is OK, but learing to use a gun at 7yo just like it was a toy is stupid. What you are saying is the same argument we always hear from the mouth of gun nuts.

    To me your argument sounds like the gun nuts argument "guns dont kill people, people kill people"

    500 dead kids a year because of guns, so i guess this is a big problem and a lot of persons commit mistakes. Simply keeping guns away off children would solve the whole problem.

    You are quoting gun nuts arguments again. Plus it doesnt have anything to do with the fact that guns should be kept away from children.
     
  7. dinscurge

    dinscurgeActive Member Forum Member


    49

    0

    0

    Jul 8, 2010
     
    there is no use at 7 or w.e. but your argument sounded like if you have children you shouldnt have guns which i believe is wrong, you just have to make sure to lock your door/lock the safe. i.e. my dad had guns when i was a child, the safe was always locked he always had the keys in his pocket from habit, and he locked the door when he went into his room. (unrelated side note, its not the real war weapons its a ak47/ar15 which cannont fire fully automatic i.e. the versions that cops have) you just have to double check everything, not defending the people in the video they were pretty stupid, but thats not everyone, alot of people are responsible about it also. i mean according to their study only 1.7m homes have guns unlocked with children, but theres like 30m houses with guns, if just 1/3 of them had children theres like 8.3m houses with them locked in safes
     
  8. vAsSiLy77

    vAsSiLy77Experienced Member Uploader Experienced member Forum Member


    1,816

    1

    15

    Jun 21, 2010
     
    Actually living with three young girls, I absolutely agree with ungov's argument: It's impossible to hide something from children living in the same appartment/house. With time, they will learn to find every secreted key, hidden code and they will open locked doors and safes, just to see whats hidden there.
    Curiosity is just a part of their necessary development/evolution - so it's just too risky to have children and guns in the same appartment/house. Curiousity killed the kitten...
    Even if they know that guns are deadly, 'cause everybody told them, children will always play/analyse/handle guns, for them the possibility of getting killed/seriously hurt by a gun is just too abstract - and they are too young to realize the risk.
    You really can't prevent them finding keys, codes, whatever (discurge, you too knew where your father kept his keys and I bet your knowledge about ak47/ar15 comes out of your curiosity about the things your father kept hidden... 'cause that's the same way I got interested in arms too) - so the only secure way to deal with the problem is:
    NO GUNS IN THE VICINITY OF CHILDREN!
    Reading the list of heartbreaking cases made me think of the obvious majority of victims: BOYS...
    Brainwashed from early age by the media with role models like cowboys, soldiers, detectives, cops, whatever, boys take a firearm as extension/symbol/accessoire of their beginning "manhood" - "you're only strong enough to defend yourself with a gun..."
    They lack the experience of reality, taking the role model from the screen seriously, play with toy guns - and find a real gun...
    The comparison of cars and guns isn't that unfitting, 'cause youngsters tend to use both of them as status symbols of their maturity, in reality they're just brainwashed kids... dangerous for themselves and others, in the news they call it "accident"...
     
  9. Saering

    SaeringExperienced Member Experienced member


    96

    0

    0

    Dec 18, 2009
     
    You don't need to hide codes and such, there are safes and lock boxes for this stuff. Can't hide the code? well memorize it, bad memory? electronics with passwords. If a lil kid can get to your guns then your not doing jack shit to stop them.
     
  10. Radicalvoice89

    Radicalvoice89Member Forum Member


    18

    0

    0

    Jul 14, 2010
     
    Honestly I believe that there shouldn't be gun control at all. If you think about it, those that have guns, that are responsible with those weapons, would not allow their children to even know about the weapons in the first place. I believe that every person should have a gun because, (using Switzerland as a model) crimes rates would dramatically decrease. The majority of people in Switzerland have a respect and reverence for a weapon that can take a life in an instant. My theory is that it is only natural selection that those accidental gun deaths happen. It is a cold way to look at it, but it is only natural. Yes, that one death is tragic but, on the other hand... How does that effect you personally in anyway? People should be able to have guns all they want. Because they want, and simply for that reason.
    However, they should absolutely understand and respect what these weapons do, and how they effect the lives of those around them. Which comes from education and more importantly experience. Do you think a veteran from a war that they unwillingly fought in (WWII, Korea, or Vietnam) would not educate their children accordingly? Unfortunately their are those who use guns as a patriotic symbols and nationalist displays, and don't teach their children the proper respect for the weapons. These are the mindless masses, who don't appreciate the weapons as devices, designed for the sole reason to kill. A man who has taken the life of another understands what these weapons can do. To himself, his friends, his family, and his enemy. He knows that they are for survival only. And he will teach that to his children. Its not a matter of control, but rather education.
     
  11. chaos-ad

    chaos-adExperienced Member Experienced member


    55

    0

    0

    Jul 9, 2010
     
    i hope this ungovernable guy dosent say he is a anarch..since from what ive seen he is promoteing gun control. and a couple other factors on the vid is that its british. the land of cameras and nearly impossible gun laws. its the media i dont think that needs explaining...ah WTH :lmao: they are trying to get people to watch it..by makeing it seem SO threatening and SO "look how bad these people are" that it brings in viewers because people want to watch that. if it bleeds it leads
     
  12. vAsSiLy77

    vAsSiLy77Experienced Member Uploader Experienced member Forum Member


    1,816

    1

    15

    Jun 21, 2010
     
    Just to express the opinion that it's wrong to keep guns in surroundings occupied by children isn't promoting gun control - it's just a humane point of view facing the "innocent" victims - children who died 'cause of the world they've to live in.
    It's also a question of everyday experience too - I won't let my lil' girls play with matches AND the box - it's only for their and everybody else's safety, call that repressive?
    Gun control isn't working, 'cause the corrupt system isn't really interested, but the weapon industry is in the opposite - so what's a few dead, if there are many more brainwashed enough from an early age and ready to join the cops or the army when they come up on age - to play a bit more... children with guns on the playground Iraq...
    I guess you're right about the media, it's just another liberal excuse to offer a horror story for the evening entertainment and I guess it will change nothing.

    (to radicalvoice89) - I think crime rates in switzerland are low 'cause of the high social standard, which is held high artificially by the really repressive use of immigration laws - the less people with problems there are, the less problems they will make. But if you loose your job, the swiss will deport you out of the country to prevent you from doing crimes just to survive, and they don't give a shit on your right to decide where to live - what about that?
    And what about solidarity instead of dschungle-law ("natural selection"...) - for me Anarchism is the way to abolish the inhuman survival-of-the-fittest-system, 'cause I just don't want to be witness to media exploited neverending crimes against humanity. Each of this stupid dead kids is a reason to fight the system that produces them - and at last I don't want to be shot by a kid not old enough to realize what he does too.
    That's where I am affected personally, living in a world full of media controlled mindless masses - and 'cause of this everyday experience I still don't see a reason for the personal possession of killing tools, not under these circumstances we all suffer today.
     
  13. Radicalvoice89

    Radicalvoice89Member Forum Member


    18

    0

    0

    Jul 14, 2010
     
    vAsSiLy77,

    Thank you very much, I did not know that about Switzerland! However, that still does not change my views on the handling of weapons. I would say we have to varying ideologies of anarchy, because you hold that natural selection is inhuman. However, I feel that natural selection is only natural, it is above humanity, not below it. I believe that you are absolutely correct in saying it is inhuman, but it is visible throughout the evolution of our species and currently every other species on the planet. Are we not just animals that can think? I feel that we NEED natural selection to further our species, as humans, and NOTHING more. I believe that through a process of education and natural selection peace will come to the world, because all of the idiots have been removed.

    Secondly, yes we should fight the system that produces the stupid kids of course! But as of now (which, from my perspective, is all we have) those children who have died are inconsequential to us. It's a tragedy to be certain but, it does not change our world. Also, how would you get shot by a child who does not realize that he is holding a loaded firearm and aiming at you? More importantly, why would you not have a way to defend yourself?

    I don't see a reason for the existence of weapons designed to kill humans, but that does not change the fact that they are here and will be for a very long time so, i feel that if I have one I am slightly better prepare for defense of my survival alone. And besides what else are you going to use if the governments finally knock the last screw lose and declare martial law, or civil war breaks out and our opportunity for revolution arises? Not to mention those mindless creatures out there are all, programmed to think that we are "crazy chaotic people who like to fuck shit up"
     
  14. Saering

    SaeringExperienced Member Experienced member


    96

    0

    0

    Dec 18, 2009
     
    Make no mistake, Ungov is passionate about his beliefs, but his English isn't perfect so i doubt he means it should be heavily regulated by government, if that's what your getting at.

    Forgive me if i misunderstand what your saying (or what context you say it in for that matter) but id say the deaths of the these children should be attributed more to the parents rather than the kids. Now I'm not sure I'm getting the gist of what your saying here but I'm pretty sure you said you have different views than vAsSiLy77 because he holds that natural selection is inhuman, but completely agree with him?

    Also i think the reason for the existence of weapons designed to kill humans is simply to kill humans. If anything i think they initially came about for hunting purposes, but eventually were used as a means of killing humans in times of conflict, once weapons are used by humans to kill humans it only makes sense for the opposing group to arm themselves. In today's world weapons tend to help people defend themselves against all sorts of people, robbers, muggers, rapists, and hopefully tyrants, who themselves tend to be armed. And since its much simpler to stab/shoot someone than beat them to death i guess it could be said that weapons tools, tools for killing yes but tools nonetheless and came about to make killing easier.
     
  15. ungovernable

    ungovernableAutonome Staff Member Uploader Admin Team Experienced member


    4,337

    63

    24

    Aug 21, 2009
    Male, 34 years old
    Canada United States
    It is still dangerous and irresponsible. It is easy to forget to hide the key and let it in a old pair of pants or just hide it somewhere where the kids would find it. It takes only one day when the parents will be drunk and forget the keys somewhere or something like that and the kids can have access to the locker. Trust me i know what i'm talking about, my dad used to put his alcohol in a locker ;)

    Wow you are fucking crazy, thats one of the most ridiculous argument i ever heard. Did you get that from the national rifle association or something ??? You give a gun to everyone and you think there would be less crimes ??? The crimes would just be easier to commit !!

    People believe they need guns just because the politic of insecurity by the government. They keep talking about insecurity and makes you believe you need more security, so thats how they can pass new security laws. Without insecurity illusion, no need for guns.

    Seriously dude, there is more guns than cars in the USA, it's a fact.

    Now just imagine how worse it would be in an anarchist society full of guns with absolutly no control.

    Anyway in an anarchist society there would be absolutly no reason to own guns, you just don't need them.

    .......

    The will of god?

    Wow you are fucking disgusting, thats fucking sick. How does the povrety affect you personally ? Hunger in africa ? Third world exploitation ? Wars everywhere in the world ? You have a typically "brainwashed american" mentality, aka you only care about what personally affect you. I hope you don't call yourself an anarchist.

    I want a nuclear bomb in my garage, because i want to : it's a good reason

    Yeah right, try to tell that to street gangs, bikers, neo-nazis, nationalist revolutionaries, mafias, killers, etc....

    Conflicts happen all the time and it is just too easy to kill someone with a gun, you just have to pull a trigger and it's over. Conflicts happen all the time and it gets out of control too quickly.

    Your speech about war veteran is stupid, now you are saying you have to kill to understand what a weapon can do ? Or that only veterans can be educated or educate others ?


    Oh so now a kid who thinks anarchism is chaos is going to tell me what anarchism stand for ? Start by understand what anarchism is, then come back talking to me.

    Gun control definatly isn't against anarchism principle, as long as communities vote for gun control and the majority of the population wants it.

    If you are going to opposite against a community where the majority of the population voted for gun control, then YOU are the one that shouldn't call himself an anarchist.

    Humanity CHOSEN to create guns and not control them.

    A car accident is natural selection. A disease is natural selection. Your children killing themselves because of the lack of gun control the state has created IS NOT.


    The children who die of hunger in africa, the children war soldier, the people who die of hunger, the homeless people, war victims, poor people, etc etc.... they are all inconsequential to us, it doesnt change "our world". So why care ?
    Seriously you are disgusting, this is definatly not an anarchist point of view, you sound like the typical brainwashed american who only care about HIS privileges, HIS life, and what happens to HIM. And this is exactly why the majority of americans don't care about what happens in the rest of the world, because they have good social condition where they live.

    :ecouteurs: :ecouteurs: :ecouteurs: :ecouteurs: :ecouteurs:

    Why would you care about your survival ? Natural selection, remember... :lmao:

    Weapons during a revolution and weapons in a post-revolutionnary society is two very different concept.

    And you are not going to make a revolution just by giving a weapon to everyone and fighting the biggest army in the world without any sense of organisation. Take the spanish revolution for example, or the zapatists... The armed struggle is federated through organisations and syndicates. I already explained all that on another topic, i don't feel like explaining it again, especially for someone like you i think there is no hope of understanding anything...

    No such thing as government in an anarchist society. But yes, i do believe guns should be heavily regulated.

    Canon powder was designed for war. First guns were designed for war and were sold to the army as soon as it came out. Guns are designed for war and for killing people.



    Guns are the biggest symbol of oppression, controlling people, and enforcing authority. Don't call me a fake anarchist for opposing to them.
     
  16. Radicalvoice89

    Radicalvoice89Member Forum Member


    18

    0

    0

    Jul 14, 2010
     
    Fuck this. Really? Shit, if not an anarchist what the hell I am. I don't give a fuck about the world and the world doesn't give a fuck about me or you. Its all a fucking joke! So what does it matter if one kid dies, I'm still here and that's all that matter's. What purpose do you or I have in life? Not one. So the longer I live the more I will make an impression on the ones that are close to me. If we keep caring about what other people do then there will always be tyrants trying to stop other people from doing the things they want. I am saying that fuck yeah crime will happen, it is not utopia at all. It's the damned state of nature, "nasty, brutish and short." More importantly why do you care about that starving kid in Africa? You cannot personally save him from death. It is terrible to think that, yes because of capitalism, religion, and governments, this happens. But without a government it would still happen. Boo Fucking Hoo. I am not a god damned bleeding heart trying to save everyone. That is impossible. But what I can do is promote Individualistic anarchy or more importantly MY OWN theory of anarchy, because that is what it is. The freedom to do whatever I want, whenever, where ever, and however, I want. Worrying about others is respectable but, I prefer to look after myself.

    Natural is not god in any means. Its observing the fucking world around and realizing that you are nothing more than an ant in the grand scheme of things and accepting it. Fuck it, no one cares anyways. The natural order of things will prevail, not some man made thing. When I say natural order, I mean we are born, we live, and then we die. What we do in between is not dictate by any power at all. Only what keeps us alive and happy.

    There is no doubt in my mind that there will be utter chaos after a revolution, but that has happened in the majority of revolutions throughout history. What is to say differently? Save only for the fact that once the chaos dies, there will be peace. There will be peace, because every man woman and child that lived through the chaos would understand and be horrified, by what the weapons we have made can do to each other. Even after the chaos would end peace be brought about, there would still be guns, for hunting and survival. I like guns. I would never use one on another human being unless I was being threatened. So what? You have your way of living, so leave mine alone.

    Ungovernable. Why does it matter to you? You're right I only care about MY life and MY "rights," so fucking what? That does not change the way I feel about government, religion, economics, history and this whole fucking system! I hate the fact that the institutions that dictates what happen in this world exist, and I would give my fucking life to change it. I am anarchist, you just have different views. I would appreciate it if next time you step the fuck off. This site is supposed to be accepting, no? Well tearing apart my argument in such a way really hurts yours. You sound very elitist and condescending, on site promoting anarchy and equality of man. There won't be any patronage here. So, thank you for your opinion. But you have your opinions and I have mine. I think is necessary for people to respect others and opinions, cause we are all in this together and arguing and putting each other down will get us no where. And with all due respect
    Fuck You.
     
  17. ungovernable

    ungovernableAutonome Staff Member Uploader Admin Team Experienced member


    4,337

    63

    24

    Aug 21, 2009
    Male, 34 years old
    Canada United States
    :lmao: :lmao: :lmao: :lmao: :lmao: :lmao: :lmao:

    How the hell can you claim to be an anarchist when you don't care about the social conditions of others ?

    In other words you care only about YOUR freedom ? Well guess what, that's called liberalism not anarchism.

    It doesn't matter if you die of hunger and homelessness in the streets because of capitalism, i don't care, at least i will still be here and that's all that matters !

    Ridiculous.

    Because i'm an anarchist, and anarchists are concerned about the social conditions of the whole world, not just their's.

    What is the difference between you and an african kid ? Why should we care about our freedom and social conditions and not their's ? Maybe you are a nationalist ?

    Typical shitty brainwashed american mentality : if it's too far away, you don't care about social injustice because you can't see it with your own eyes. You realize how bad it is only when it affect your life.

    I think you just don't know what anarchism is. Without government and without unequality, of course this wouldn't happen anymore. How the hell can povrety exist if everyone is equal ? If everyone have the same social conditions there would be no such thing as "povrety" because everyone would have the same degree of life.

    Then you are not an anarchist.

    Oh i see, you are an egoist and egocentrical individualist and you only care about yourself. "Doing whatever you want whenever, where ever and however" wow what a childish definition of anarchism.

    Your mentality is totally stupid and definatly incompatible with anarchism collectivism and equality.

    Wow now you are just being an idiot. No one single anarchist revolution ended up with chaos. Of course a revolution is a "civil war" but it means a class war and a war against the counter-revolutionary. It is not chaos because anarchism means ORDER without power. The circled A stands for anarchy inside ORDER. So stop with your chaos bullshit.

    If you think a revolution will end in "utter chaos" why the fuck do you fight for anarchism ? Oh yeah i forgot, because you care only about your personal freedom and chaos gives you the opportunity to do whatever you want.

    You don't need war weapons for hunting or survival.

    I have a nuclear bomb and other chemical bombs in my garage because i like nukes and chemicals. So what ? You have your way of living, leave mine alone!

    :ecouteurs: :ecouteurs: :ecouteurs: :ecouteurs: :ecouteurs: :ecouteurs: :ecouteurs:

    Please, don't ever call yourself an anarchist again.

    Re-phrase that:
    You would fight against it only if it affects your personnal life.

    No.

    No, we are not forced to accept anything, especially shitty egocentrical and egoist philosophy. You can shove that up your ass.

    You are crying because i critize your point of view and then you say i am the one who doesn't accept others point of views. What a joke.

    Yes this site promotes equality, and you don't give a fuck about equality, you care only about your personnal life not other's. This isn't equality. This isn't freedom. This is YOUR freedom, YOUR social conditions. Anarchist equality is a collectivist term.

    You are a fucking joke man.

    You say it is necessary to respect others and opinions and in the same phrase you tell me "fuck you".

    You are a fucking hypocritical bastard and you are very contradictory. On top of all, you refuse to listen and i don't think you will learn anything from this website. You are just a kid frustrated by authority who wants to do whatever he want and you have no real intention to fight for collective social change and fight for EVERYONE's freedom, then you are angry when someone tells you what anarchism is all about. You are not an anarchist, in fact you probably never read a book on anarchism in your whole life.

    You have a lot to learn.

    "Radical voice", my ass.
     
  18. Radicalvoice89

    Radicalvoice89Member Forum Member


    18

    0

    0

    Jul 14, 2010
     
    Maybe you're right.
     
  19. ungovernable

    ungovernableAutonome Staff Member Uploader Admin Team Experienced member


    4,337

    63

    24

    Aug 21, 2009
    Male, 34 years old
    Canada United States
    Sarcasm ? Or real progress ?


    Bakunin said:
    "Other's freedom extend mine to infinite"

    and:
    "The oppression or unequality of the people or a simple individual is oppression and unequality of everyone and we can't violate the freedom/equality of only one individual without breaking the freedom and equality of everyone"

    and he also said:
    "I am only free when all humans around me, men and women, are also free. Other's freedom is far from being a limit or a negation of my freedom, it is the opposite: it's the necessary condition and the confirmation"


    "The free individual, completely free in all modes of operation, that is what we all ask, and when there are some who reject the organization, who say they do not care about the community, stating that the egoism of the individual must be his only rule of conduct that adoration of his ego and should take precedence over humanitarian considerations - believing it to be more advanced than others - those never dealt with the psychological and physiological organization of man, have not realised their own feelings, they have no idea of the life of modern man, what are its physical, moral and intellectuals needs"
    -Kropotkine

    Success is always individual but misery is always collective..
     
  20. vAsSiLy77

    vAsSiLy77Experienced Member Uploader Experienced member Forum Member


    1,816

    1

    15

    Jun 21, 2010
     
     
Loading...