Thread: Guns in schools

Originally Posted by Ryan

Do you gauge the content of a man's character based on his grammar?

With only their written word on this forum to judge them by, how else?

Originally Posted by systolic

With only their written word on this forum to judge them by, how else?

Maybe their character, intent or mannerisms? I guess most of us dont think you're a great guy because you have good grammar.

@Pauli i like your work mate

Some dick opposed the guns in schools thing on the basis that it may scare or traumatise refugee students.
I take a different view on that one.
A kid who has been unfortunate enough to witness the harm that firearms can do to fellow humans, is more likely to have a healthy respect for them (firearms), rather than a fear of.
Apologies for any grammatical errors

Originally Posted by Pengy

Some dick opposed the guns in schools thing on the basis that it may scare or traumatise refugee students.
I take a different view on that one.
A kid who has been unfortunate enough to witness the harm that firearms can do to fellow humans, is more likely to have a healthy respect for them (firearms), rather than a fear of.
Apologies for any grammatical errors

Apology not accepted. Go back and finish the last sentence with a full stop or something.

This grammar shit is getting old.

Originally Posted by Sasquatch

This grammar shit is getting old.

Too right. It's more what they write and how they write. Love my mate @kotuku's stuff, has me laughing till my ribs hurt most of the time.

Originally Posted by Sasquatch

This grammar shit is getting old.

I fully agree. Some of the spelling and punctuation is appalling.

I for one, simply can't take anyone seriously who writes like an eight year old.

Originally Posted by systolic

I fully agree. Some of the spelling and punctuation is appalling.

I for one, simply can't take anyone seriously who writes like an eight year old.

I am sure there is a tiny, insignificant place in your world, where your opinion may be highly valued.

How about you fuck off there you pretentious phallus.

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

Originally Posted by systolic

I fully agree. Some of the spelling and punctuation is appalling.

I for one, simply can't take anyone seriously who writes like an eight year old.

But being grammatically incorrect is ok? ah hang on, I'll fix it for ya...

...I for one, simply cannot take anyone THAT writes like an eight year old seriously.
or is it...
I for one, simply cannot take seriously, anyone who writes like an eight year old.
But you may have almost got away with just putting a comma in between 'seriously' and 'who", perhaps? but nah, you wouldn't get your punctuation wrong on a public forum now would you?

Or you could get over yourself because we know what you meant even though you didn't type it out absobloodylutely perfectly.

Originally Posted by R93

I am sure there is a tiny, insignificant place in your world, where your opinion may be highly valued.

How about you fuck off there you pretentious phallus.

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

Charming.

@Pauli good to hear

Originally Posted by Pengy

Some dick opposed the guns in schools thing on the basis that it may scare or traumatise refugee students.
I take a different view on that one.
A kid who has been unfortunate enough to witness the harm that firearms can do to fellow humans, is more likely to have a healthy respect for them (firearms), rather than a fear of.
Apologies for any grammatical errors

I saw that dick make that statement on the news and my first thought was how did he treat kids who had lost someone to a motor accident? Were they traumatised every time they saw a car? You would probably find that if these kids were that badly traumatised that an gradual introduction to the understanding that it was the Soldier (and I use that word very loosely in this context) who did the damage and that this is what would require counselling to deal with said trauma.

I sent this email to Nikki Kaye after her comments.

Hello Nikki Kaye

I am passing some feedback and offering you the chance to clarify your views regarding the comments on the Army introducing firearms to students in conjunction with a leadership programme.

I have been following the results of this programme for a number of weeks now and all of the positive feedback from those involved. In fact there was no negative response at all until the comments by yourself and the Greens representative. I have seen the results of smaller introductions and teaching students responsibility and leadership qualities in a similar manner. And all of a sudden its "Guns in schools" I am hoping that this is an editing of your original comment by a media that I have experienced similar things with. (They dont appear to let the truth get in the way of a good headline and they seem to like scaremongering whenever they can)

Introducing young people to things like leadership and responsibility and allowing them to come into contact with firearms in a safe and supervised environment is not "Guns in schools". That quote makes it sound like armed police at the gates and teachers with carry permits. Panic mongering at its best. To be clear, we live in a relatively safe society and we do not need that type of"Guns in schools" such as the examples prior. However, we live in an outdoor society where we are legally allowed to do things like hunting and target shooting as sports and enjoy many other freedoms. With this in mind, teaching our youth responsibility and leadership, and showing them these sorts of things in a manner that takes the fascination away from these items as well as allows them to make better decisions if they come into these situations. Replace the word "Guns" with "Alcohol" or "Sexual activity" and think about the parallels for a second. Do we now have "Drugs in schools" because we teach kids about them? Do we now have "Sex in schools" because we teach them how to avoid pregnancy or STD's. Are you saying we should not teach kids personal responsibility? Personal responsibility is, from my experience, one of the core subjects that is so poorly taught that when these young adults are out in public now, we are seeing the consequences of not teaching it well. They are getting hurt and killed because that have not learnt behavioral boundaries. They know that there are no consequences for their actions because they have not been taught any.

We drum into our children "Stranger danger" so if they are tempted with lollies by a stranger they know what to do, which is contrary to their natural desire for sweets. We teach them road safety, because you can imagine what would happen if we taught a kid to ride a bike then simply ignore the dangers. We should also take the mystery out of items that they may come across in life that may fascinate them so rather than knowing how to use them, they know how to behave around them. And I am not talking just firearms. This can also apply to power tools as well as stoves and other household appliances, or fireplaces. If we protect them from stoves, we can avoid the risk that they might get burns, but the down side is when they do try to cook something like chicken we run the risk of food poisoning. All of these things are items that can hurt children, if they are not shown what to do when they encounter them. And all of these things are items that our children will come into contact with. Kids are smart, and keen to learn if we can engage their interest. But nothing engages their interest in something as fast as us telling them they are not allowed to see it. And then they will likely make poorer decisions when they encounter them.

I have witnessed myself the differences between children who have, and have not had exposure to this sort of thing. Those that have had this introduction are in a far better and safer position than someone who has not. They are less inclined to misbehave and far less inclined to pick it up and treat it like a toy. I would want to know that if a child of mine ever came across a firearm that was not supervised, that they would make someone aware of it rather than want to follow their natural curiosity and pick it up and have a look at it or play with it. (This scenario should never ever happen, but neither should so many other things.) They can only learn these safe behaviors if we teach them.

Safety, and their attitudes towards it, with today's children and youth is paramount. In fact it has been paramount forever but has been allowed to slip of recent times. How do we teach safe attitudes towards potential hazards in life that will approach our youth in the future when we refuse to show them? Do we put our heads in the sand and say it wont happen? From simple things like road safety, cycling, health and well being including teen STD's and pregnancy, and the other things they will come into contact with. We need to teach our youth these things along with responsibility and how to approach them.

With the election fast approaching I am hoping that this does not have a negative effect on your potential voters.

Thank you for taking the time to understand this.
Your appreciatively

Originally Posted by timattalon

I sent this email to Nikki Kaye after her comments.

Hello Nikki Kaye

I am passing some feedback and offering you the chance to clarify your views regarding the comments on the Army introducing firearms to students in conjunction with a leadership programme.

I have been following the results of this programme for a number of weeks now and all of the positive feedback from those involved. In fact there was no negative response at all until the comments by yourself and the Greens representative. I have seen the results of smaller introductions and teaching students responsibility and leadership qualities in a similar manner. And all of a sudden its "Guns in schools" I am hoping that this is an editing of your original comment by a media that I have experienced similar things with. (They dont appear to let the truth get in the way of a good headline and they seem to like scaremongering whenever they can)

Introducing young people to things like leadership and responsibility and allowing them to come into contact with firearms in a safe and supervised environment is not "Guns in schools". That quote makes it sound like armed police at the gates and teachers with carry permits. Panic mongering at its best. To be clear, we live in a relatively safe society and we do not need that type of"Guns in schools" such as the examples prior. However, we live in an outdoor society where we are legally allowed to do things like hunting and target shooting as sports and enjoy many other freedoms. With this in mind, teaching our youth responsibility and leadership, and showing them these sorts of things in a manner that takes the fascination away from these items as well as allows them to make better decisions if they come into these situations. Replace the word "Guns" with "Alcohol" or "Sexual activity" and think about the parallels for a second. Do we now have "Drugs in schools" because we teach kids about them? Do we now have "Sex in schools" because we teach them how to avoid pregnancy or STD's. Are you saying we should not teach kids personal responsibility? Personal responsibility is, from my experience, one of the core subjects that is so poorly taught that when these young adults are out in public now, we are seeing the consequences of not teaching it well. They are getting hurt and killed because that have not learnt behavioral boundaries. They know that there are no consequences for their actions because they have not been taught any.

We drum into our children "Stranger danger" so if they are tempted with lollies by a stranger they know what to do, which is contrary to their natural desire for sweets. We teach them road safety, because you can imagine what would happen if we taught a kid to ride a bike then simply ignore the dangers. We should also take the mystery out of items that they may come across in life that may fascinate them so rather than knowing how to use them, they know how to behave around them. And I am not talking just firearms. This can also apply to power tools as well as stoves and other household appliances, or fireplaces. If we protect them from stoves, we can avoid the risk that they might get burns, but the down side is when they do try to cook something like chicken we run the risk of food poisoning. All of these things are items that can hurt children, if they are not shown what to do when they encounter them. And all of these things are items that our children will come into contact with. Kids are smart, and keen to learn if we can engage their interest. But nothing engages their interest in something as fast as us telling them they are not allowed to see it. And then they will likely make poorer decisions when they encounter them.

I have witnessed myself the differences between children who have, and have not had exposure to this sort of thing. Those that have had this introduction are in a far better and safer position than someone who has not. They are less inclined to misbehave and far less inclined to pick it up and treat it like a toy. I would want to know that if a child of mine ever came across a firearm that was not supervised, that they would make someone aware of it rather than want to follow their natural curiosity and pick it up and have a look at it or play with it. (This scenario should never ever happen, but neither should so many other things.) They can only learn these safe behaviors if we teach them.

Safety, and their attitudes towards it, with today's children and youth is paramount. In fact it has been paramount forever but has been allowed to slip of recent times. How do we teach safe attitudes towards potential hazards in life that will approach our youth in the future when we refuse to show them? Do we put our heads in the sand and say it wont happen? From simple things like road safety, cycling, health and well being including teen STD's and pregnancy, and the other things they will come into contact with. We need to teach our youth these things along with responsibility and how to approach them.

With the election fast approaching I am hoping that this does not have a negative effect on your potential voters.

Thank you for taking the time to understand this.
Your appreciatively

Kudos.