Gun advocates are in a no win situation with many people these days. First, we're told black guns that look military are the reason mass shootings are happening. Now we're hearing kids are getting killed because the guns are bright colors. I don't understand why so many people let their emotions rule them when it comes to firearms.

To the soccer teen(17) who punched a ref and killed him.

 

Should the parents be held negligent? According to a former pro soccer player the parents are to blame.

 

Pedro Lopez, his brother-in-law and a fellow soccer referee, said the teenager made a mistake and isn't solely to blame. He said he's been involved in soccer his entire life, playing and refereeing, and seen a troubling trend emerge.

 

"It's not the ignorance of the child, it's the poor manners of the parents," said Lopez in Spanish, who played soccer professionally. "The yells and insults from the sideline from the parents make kids more violent."

 

Read more: Family of Utah soccer referee who died after punch from player holds vigil | Fox News

ref, I understand where you're headed, but let's keep this thread on topic. Please feel free to start another one about his incident or your broader views on parenting/responsibility problems.

Now you're really digging to the point of absurdity. The parent's actions in the soccer case did not directly lead to the idiot's actions or the official's death. Another big difference the soccer idiot is 17 years old. BIG difference in judgement between a 17 year old and a 5 year old. Leave a gun loaded in front of a 17 year old and he kills someone I don't push for the parents to be prosecuted. I push for the 17 year old to be prosecuted.

Now you're really digging to the point of absurdity. The parent's actions in the soccer case did not directly lead to the idiot's actions or the official's death. Another big difference the soccer idiot is 17 years old. BIG difference in judgement between a 17 year old and a 5 year old. Leave a gun loaded in front of a 17 year old and he kills someone I don't push for the parents to be prosecuted. I push for the 17 year old to be prosecuted.

 

I agree I am stretching it, but if parents ag something on, should they be held accountable and negligent for causing it.

Let's bring this one full circle here one last time. IF you want to discuss the parent issue with the 5 year old, let it fly. Otherwise, for the sake of clarity on the board, start another thread.

Gun advocates are in a no win situation with many people these days. First, we're told black guns that look military are the reason mass shootings are happening. Now we're hearing kids are getting killed because the guns are bright colors. I don't understand why so many people let their emotions rule them when it comes to firearms.

 

In all seriousness - because of stories like this one. Many people can't help it.

 

The notion that a few 2 year-olds as collateral damage is the price we pay to allow our kindergarteners to have deadly weapons probably doesn't sit well with some.

 

Before everyone jumps all over me - I also believe that this first and foremost a parenting/lack thereof issue. But there are those who I GUARANTEE have the above stance.

In all seriousness - because of stories like this one. Many people can't help it.

 

The notion that a few 2 year-olds as collateral damage is the price we pay to allow our kindergarteners to have deadly weapons probably doesn't sit well with some.

 

Before everyone jumps all over me - I also believe that this first and foremost a parenting/lack thereof issue. But there are those who I GUARANTEE have the above stance.

I'd agree if they acted the same when young kids die tragically from bike accidents, skateboard accidents and a plethora of other tragic ways, but let's be honest here; the media, the administration and anti-gun organizations have done a good job of spreading lies and fear and are at the very top of using emotion over logic.

I'd agree if they acted the same when young kids die tragically from bike accidents, skateboard accidents and a plethora of other tragic ways, but let's be honest here; the media, the administration and anti-gun organizations have done a good job of spreading lies and fear and are at the very top of using emotion over logic.

 

RTS, I hear you but respectfully disagree. I just don't subscribe to the media conspiracy theories.

 

When a 2 year-old child dies by drowning or by being left in an overheated car, there is plenty of emotionally charged media coverage. It doesn't happen very often, it's tragic; therefore it's news. And appealing to emotions is, if you haven't figured it out by now, is Journalism 102. Right after who, what, why, when and where. I see no fundamental difference in the way they (2 year-olds killed by guns vs. 2 year-olds drowning or victims of hyperthermia) are reported. Maybe there are big differences; if there are I'm just not sensitive to them.

 

This administration, I grant you, wants to tighten up guns. Soon after the Newtown tragedy, a 20-something point plan was proposed. Many, many reasonable people agreed with just about all of it. Where are we with that?

 

And to be brutally honest, I am not familiar with anti-gun organizations. I couldn't name one of them. Just not on my radar, I guess.

 

I just think that there are a lot of people who are wired to think in the way I described in Post #97. Maybe we're back to the whole "nature vs. nurture" debate.

It doesn't have to be media to have preconceived notions about guns. They're everywhere. We have a poster in this very thread who thinks it's the fault of the manufacturer because of the color of the gun.

It doesn't have to be media to have preconceived notions about guns. They're everywhere. We have a poster in this very thread who thinks it's the fault of the manufacturer because of the color of the gun.

Revisit post #69 for a more accurate statement of where I stand. It's more nuanced than your paraphrase. Manufacturing lethal weapons is one thing, but marketing them in "my-pretty-pony-pink" for the kindergarten crowd borders on insane. This marketing tactic, by the way, is not dissimilar to when a big tobacco company got in trouble over "Joe Camel." My views are well-conceived, not preconceived. I used to enjoy trap shooting in my younger days.

Revisit post #69 for a more accurate statement of where I stand. It's more nuanced than your paraphrase. Manufacturing lethal weapons is one thing, but marketing them in "my-pretty-pony-pink" for the kindergarten crowd borders on insane. This marketing tactic, by the way, is not dissimilar to when a big tobacco company got in trouble over "Joe Camel." My views are well-conceived, not preconceived. I used to enjoy trap shooting in my younger days.

Yes and all of the hot chicks in the Miller Lite commercials are gonna be the ones that I'll be sleeping with if I drink Miller Lite, correct? You fail to make a viable argument against the cricket rifle, who by their very nature are made for young shooters/hunters. I'm glad you enjoyed shooting trap. Great sport, no doubt. If you left your trap gun loaded in the corner with the safety in the fire position and someone, let's say a 5yo shot someone with it, you'd be negligent. I don't understand where the disconnect is for you. Again, the gun had to be purchased by someone of age, presumably an adult.

I'd agree if they acted the same when young kids die tragically from bike accidents' date=' skateboard accidents and a plethora of other tragic ways, but let's be honest here; the media, the administration and anti-gun organizations have done a good job of spreading lies and fear and are at the very top of using emotion over logic.[/quote']

 

If a parent allows their child to ride their bike or skateboard without protective gear , they SHOULD be held liable. I'm not sure what the laws are everywhere else, but in Louisville, bike helmets are a law....which is really ironic as motorcyclists do not have to wear helmets...but I digress...

If a parent allows their child to ride their bike or skateboard without protective gear , they SHOULD be held liable. I'm not sure what the laws are everywhere else, but in Louisville, bike helmets are a law....which is really ironic as motorcyclists do not have to wear helmets...but I digress...

 

Any guess as to why this is? Presumption that most bike riders will be younger than most motorcyclists?

 

Seems like a disconnect to me, also.

Yes and all of the hot chicks in the Miller Lite commercials are gonna be the ones that I'll be sleeping with if I drink Miller Lite' date=' correct? You fail to make a viable argument against the cricket rifle, who by their very nature are made for young shooters/hunters. I'm glad you enjoyed shooting trap. Great sport, no doubt. If you left your trap gun loaded in the corner with the safety in the fire position and someone, let's say a 5yo shot someone with it, you'd be negligent. I don't understand where the disconnect is for you. Again, the gun had to be purchased by someone of age, presumably an adult.[/quote']

 

I have no issues with responsible gun ownership. But I would NEVER allow my children to have toy guns. I made sure they knew that guns were dangerous weapons, and not to be taken lightly. I understand what Two to place is saying, and agree that it's another layer of the issue. But, the core issue, the one that cannot continue and why I am for harsher gun laws, is that many adults are not responsible gun owners. Too many kids are killed or kill due to the irresponsibility of their parents gun ownership and the parents are rarely held responsible.