You’ll shoot your eye out kid!
Or at least that’s what one Assemblywoman must believe of children that attend gun shows with their family.
Linda Rosenthal (D) has introduced a new bill that would ban children under 12 from attending a gun show in New York state.
Via the Times Union (the sarcasm is fantastic):
The bill was put forward by Assemblywoman Linda Rosenthal, who hails from that trackless wilderness and sportsmen’s paradise known as Manhattan.
“Children should be learning to read and write, not to shoot a firearm,” Rosenthal says in a statement, as if the two skills were mutually exclusive. “Today in New York State, however, a child of any age can gain unfettered access to gun shows. We as a society have placed reasonable restrictions on the ages at which children may watch violent films” — clearly, Rosenthal does not have premium cable — “or play video games that involve hyper-real gunplay; however, there are no age limits on gun shows. My bill will change that.”
Rosenthal, a Democrat, noted Attorney General Eric Schneiderman’s announcement that more gun shows have signed on to his procedural code to strengthen enforcement of existing rules to prevent straw purchases and other violations.
“Along with enhanced procedures for gun show background checks, age restrictions will ensure that children are exposed to guns only after they reach an age where they are capable of grasping the enormity of responsibility gun handling and ownership represents,” said Rosenthal.
Cars too, are dangerous. One has to reach a certain age before they are capable of “grasping the enormity of responsibility” of handling a vehicle. Should car shows be banned too?
Say, Ms. Rosenthal. You represent the Upper West Side of Manhattan in New York City. You mentioned that children should “be learning to read and write”. You know where children find it very difficult to read and write? That’s right … in your home town!
Check out this report from Fox Business:
Sometimes there’s just one number that describes everything you need to know about a topic. We have one of those today and it has to do with education.
If you want to understand the state of education in this country, listen to this: nearly 80% of New York City high school graduates have trouble with basic skills like reading, writing and math. The vast majority do not have the basic skills you would expect of someone half their age.
The news was reported by a local CBS affiliate today. City officials said 11,000 kids who had graduated from the city’s high schools needed remedial courses to relearn the basics before entering New York’s community college system.
Perhaps a little re-shifting of priorities would serve you well, Assemblywoman.
Alex Evans is a 7-year-old boy from Colorado, who thought he could ‘rescue the world’ when he spent his recess throwing an imaginary grenade at some imaginary evil doers.
Instead, Evans got a lesson that the world needs more rescuing than his little mind can possibly wrap itself around right now, when school administrators suspended him for the act because it violated their ‘safe environment’ policy.
I’m not kidding…
Via KDVR (h/t Weasel Zippers):
A 2nd grader has been suspended from school in Loveland for a make believe game he was playing.
The 7-year-old says he was trying to save the world. But school administrators say he broke a key rule during his pretend play.
“I was trying to save people and I just can’t believe I got dispended,” says Alex Evans, who doesn’t understand his suspension any better than he can pronounce it.
“It’s called ‘rescue the world,’” he says.
He was playing a game during recess at Loveland’s Mary Blair Elementary School and threw an imaginary grenade into a box with pretend evil forces inside.
“I pretended the box, there’s something shaking in it, and I go ‘pshhh.’”
The boy didn’t throw anything real or make any threats against anyone. He explains he was pretending to be the hero. “So nothing can get out and destroy the world.”
But his imaginary play broke the school’s real rules. The school lists “absolutes” designed to keep a safe environment. The list includes absolutely no fighting, real or imaginary; no weapons, real or imaginary.
Somebody needs to smack some common sense back into the vacant heads of the adults at schools willing to “dispend” a 5, 6, or 7-year old, when they play with imaginary guns, Nerf guns, or simply point their fingers like a gun.
And the smack needs to be real.
Watch the video of the news report on little Alex Evans.
He has no record to run on. He has little in the way of an agenda for his second term. And he is devoid intellectually of being able to debate in a rational manner. So it seems, President Obama has resorted to childish name-calling.
This is a sitting U.S. President saying this:
FIRST LOOK – Rolling Stone cover, “Obama and the Road Ahead: The Rolling Stone Interview,” by Douglas Brinkley: “We arrived at the Oval Office for our 45-minute interview … on the morning of October 11th. … As we left the Oval Office, executive editor Eric Bates told Obama that he had asked his six-year-old if there was anything she wanted him to say to the president. … [S]he said, ‘Tell him: You can do it.’ Obama grinned. … ‘You know, kids have good instincts,’ Obama offered. ‘They look at the other guy and say, “Well, that’s a bullshitter, I can tell.”
Mind you, this is a President who has perfected the art of bulls******* the American people over the last several weeks with his grand story-telling about the events that transpired in Benghazi.
This is a President who fed the public absolute bulls*** when he claimed he didn’t raise taxes on the middle class, all the while knowing that Obamacare is set to hammer the middle class with such taxes.
This is a President who presided over the longest stretch of unemployment of 8% in history, while telling the American people that if he passed his stimulus it would never go above 8%.
If children have instincts that help them to identify a bulls******, they’d be running for the hills from you, Mr. Obama. You are not Presidential material, you’re barely an accomplished snake-oil salesman. And soon, you’ll be gone.
That’s no bulls***.
Gawker may have never produced such an offensive article in their long offensive history as the one they posted on Friday by Cord Jefferson.
The title says it all:
Born This Way: Sympathy and Science for Those Who Want to Have Sex with Children
Not once in the lengthy piece does Jefferson refer to the act in it’s proper terminology – rape. Worse, he categorizes the act of raping children as a ‘sexual orientation’, treating it as a harmless choice no different than homosexuality, as opposed to a violent crime.
The article is sick and disgusting on so many levels. It begins with a sympathetic story involving a man named Terry, who has been convicted of raping his seven-year-old niece. Fitting with the theme that this was a sexual act and not a crime, Jefferson attempts to create sympathy for the rapist – portraying him as a religious man who was the victim of an abusive marriage, and describing what happens with his niece as an actual ‘relationship’.
As Jefferson explains, “it’s not easy to listen to Terry talk about the time he had sex with a seven-year-old girl”. I would imagine it would be infinitely harder to listen to the little girl’s version. Or her parents story.
Terry, Jefferson then explains, “fell for his niece and began a sexual relationship with her”.
The rest of the story is rather graphic.
The problem here is that the author doesn’t seem able to comprehend the difference between rape and sex, and he is rationalizing the behavior of pedophiles. As an example, at one point Jefferson describes the rapist’s mindset – “I had the thought that I would never hurt her and that she would grow up trusting me.”
This is such a typical behavior by pedophiles that it’s hard to imagine anyone could write such a statement without recognizing it as “grooming”, a technique used by child rapists to gain the trust of their child victims.
Noel Sheppard of NewsBusters also points out that Jefferson wonders why pedophiles “don’t enjoy the same kind of tolerance” as other people who may simply be attracted to “busty women” or “tall men”.
Holy hell! In what parallel universe does a sane individual not recognize the difference between being attracted to busty women and small children?
Sheppard also points out that a case for tolerance can be made, according to the article, because ‘Jesus would embrace pedophiles’.
Warner Todd Huston points out in his analysis that this simply isn’t so:
Gawker writer Cord should be ashamed of himself for having said that Jesus would “embrace” pedophiles. As the website Poor Richard’s News notes (by way of Newsbusters), the Bible does not excuse pedophilia..
But whoever causes the downfall of one of these little ones who believe in Me—it would be better for him if a heavy millstone were hung around his neck and he were drowned in the depths of the sea! — Matthew 18: 6
“Jesus died for the forgiveness of sin, not the embrace of it,” the site notes. “The Bible is very clear that while all sins can be forgiven, Jesus never ever embraces the sin itself. He made no bones about the punishment for harming a child.”
There is a special section in hell for child rapists, no doubt.
Gawker needs to apologize for this piece immediately and let the public know that Jefferson’s pro-pedophilia platform will not be tolerated in their pages again.
Terminate this sick, sick man immediately.
The shocking part here is that they ever actually had God in the platform to begin with.
Guess what? God’s name has been removed from the Democratic National Committee platform.
This is the paragraph that was in the 2008 platform:
“We need a government that stands up for the hopes, values, and interests of working people, and gives everyone willing to work hard the chance to make the most of their God-given potential.”
Now the words “God-given” have been removed. The paragraph has been restructured to say this:
“We gather to reclaim the basic bargain that built the largest middle class and the most prosperous nation on Earth – the simple principle that in America, hard work should pay off, responsibility should be rewarded, and each one of us should be able to go as far as our talent and drive take us.”
I suppose it would be difficult to include God in a platform that also “opposes any effort” to stop abortion.
Democrats at the 2012 Democratic National Convention are set to approve a platform today that is unambiguously pro-abortion and opposes any effort whatsoever to stop any abortions. The platform also calls on forcing Americans to pay for abortions at taxpayer expense.
The platform Democrats will approve rejects efforts to stop forcing taxpayers to fund Planned Parenthood, the nation’s largest abortion business and supports the Obama HHS mandate that forces religious groups to pay for and refer women for abortion-causing drugs under Obamacare.
Here is an excerpt of the exact wording on their abortion stance:
The Democratic Party strongly and unequivocally supports Roe v. Wade and a woman’s right to make decisions regarding her pregnancy, including a safe and legal abortion, regardless of ability to pay. We oppose any and all efforts to weaken or undermine that right.
And so it is… Democrats are waging a War on God, Catholics, women, and children.
(c) 2013 MenRec.com - Site Maintained by Grassfire Lab
