Originally Posted By: rocky mtn bill
Craig....

....A question for you: 'Based on behavior" by whom? Of course criminal behavior should be deterred. That's the whole point here. The problem to be addressed is how in hell to do it. Whoever taught our kids to feel emotional pleasure in allowing selective criminality??? What does any of this verbage possibly mean?

Behavior by whom? Criminals. The thirty-nine visits to the place of residence were for reports of possible criminal behavior. The school disciplinary file must be as thick as an old phone book. Why isn't there the will to see the signs of criminal behavior, and why didn't it flag the legal purchase of a firearm? Of course, there were many more indications of criminal type behavior. But, do law abiding citizens have to pay for the likelihood that a criminal will not follow firearm acquisition or use laws? According to you, they must?

Verbage? Who taught our children to use the term 'dreamers' when the law says they are illegal aliens? Didn't you see the tv videos last week of a walk through a sanfrancisco tent city with flows of human excrement and all manor of criminal behavior? Do our kids see criminal behavior, or are they conditioned to see a righteous statement and yet another program to throw money at? How come our kids are conditioned, taught, to imagine rights for criminals and not our Constitution?

That second note you posted shifts back to more of that divisiveness that comes as no surprise. I never said I resent the kids. But, if they want, or more importantly are given a voice, by media exploitation, for antigun policy, should they retain the protection of their age? Our children should not be taught that illegal use of a firearm is a civil rights issue. It's extremely offensive to equivocate that with true civil rights accomplishments. Our grandchildren deserve much better, and make no mistake about it, inaction is much better for them than to feed ideological egos with the knee jerk flavor of the week.