Legal Issues

Video Advocates Kids Steal Parents’ Guns and Take The Firearms to School

Home schooled kids, aged 14 and 11

Indian film director and screenwriter Rejina Sincic released a staggeringly dangerous and foolish public-service-announcement video that advises kids to steal their parents’ guns, take the guns to school, and attempt to turn the firearms in.

Not only does advocating and glamorizing such actions break nearly every meaningful gun-safety rule, but such efforts by a youngster would also almost certainly expose him or her to probable criminal sanctions, starting with felony theft of a firearm.

Sincic released the anti-gun PSA under the title of “Stop Gun Violence.” The description of the YouTube video says, “Violent crimes have been committed by children who wrongfully had access to firearms. Society as a whole should take stricter measure to keep guns out of hands of children.” The response to the video has apparently been so negative that Sincic closed comments on her YouTube production:

Alan Gottlieb, Chairman of the Citizens Committee for the Right to Bear Arms, called the video a “public disservice announcement” in a press release on 23 December 2014: “The series of crimes depicted in this video is simply astonishing. We’re talking about felony theft of a firearm, illegal possession of a handgun by a minor, having a gun in a school, illegal concealed carry by a minor, brandishing and maybe one or two other crimes, depending upon the jurisdiction.” But Sincic is apparently immune to criticism: In an interview with Vocativ, Sincic says she was caught off guard by the reaction. “I’m not telling kids to commit felonies,” she says. “My message is that kids should not have access to guns in their house. Kids should feel safe and their schools should be safe zones. I made this video for that purpose.” In The Washington Post, Eugene Volokh explains that the PSA’s creators probably wouldn’t be held liable for any copycat mischief: “I’ve gotten several e-mails about this ad, and one reader asked: If a child does what the protagonist did—would the filmmakers be criminally punishable or subject to civil liability?… The answer is likely no.”

What gets you the most about Sincic’s video? Let us hear your thoughts in the comment section.

The Mission of Cheaper Than Dirt!'s blog, The Shooter's Log, is to provide information—not opinions—to our customers and the shooting community. We want you, our readers, to be able to make informed decisions. The information provided here does not represent the views of Cheaper Than Dirt!

Comments (102)

  1. So, let’s suppose the child stole the gun and took it to school. Than what?
    What is the school going to do with it? – She failed to think about that.

    The creator of the video exhibits the lack of forethought to envision future outcomes or repercussions. (Must not know how to play chess.)
    – The school has to turn this over to the police or return the stolen property or they become co-conspirator in a felony.
    – The police are obligated to return stolen property that is recovered, or they too are libel (possibly willful destruction of private property).
    – The child will face numerous charges, (no tolerance policy).

    I fail to see how her comments about her intentions of the video relate to the action in the video (logic fail). She is just trying to cover her butt to avoid confrontation (as most liberals do).

  2. Am I missing something? But What on Earth does Eating a Pop-Tart, have to do with Gun Violence. At home or Any Place??

    1. Isn’t it obvious? When a pop tart even superficially resembles a firearm (I’m still not sure how that works. You have to have a pretty disturbed imagination to see a child eating a pop tart and come to the conclusion that the child is trying to make it look like a gun) it’s just a heartbeat away from that child producing a real gun and opening fire on his classmates. That teacher obviously had no choice but to take action against the active pop-tarter in order to ensure the safety of the other children.

    2. @ Booby G.

      For a Teacher too Overreact over Edible Doodling is one thing. But for my Child to Live in a House Environment of Fear, is another. My Childhood wasn’t the Greatest in the World either. But a least I talked to my Children as Often and about Anything that made them feel Uneasy. To help them Overcome there Doubt’s and Fear’s. At least, I Locked-Up my Guns, like the way you would with Household Chemicals around Small Children. I made EVERY effort possible to Separate my Gun’s for my Children. Children are still Children, No matter how many times you say NO. Curiosity is the Ever Present Hand that Looms in the Background. And you can’t Separate Curiosity from Children, it’s just Human Nature. But you can Limit their Exposure too it.

    3. Good for you. I’m not sure we’re talking about the same thing. I was being sarcastic about the teacher who got the kid punished for eating a pop tart by claiming that the pop tart looked like a gun.

  3. I am impressed! You don’t know the kid in the video and have never met him, but just by watching him in the video and with the few words he says you can tell that he has no mental issues! That’s amazing!

    And what happens when someone who DOES have mental problems listens to the video, ends up in the school with their parents gun and then decides to do something other than give it to the teacher?

  4. So the left wants kids to steal their parents’ guns and take them to school? That just happened a few years ago. The school was Sandy Hook.

    1. Ironic isn’t it that Sandy Hook was the very reason this idiot made this video.

    2. @ Don P.

      I know that every state has different DMV Laws, but I don’t think that even Rhode Island. Issues 12-year old’s with Driver’s Licenses.

    3. Why would a kid need a Driver’s License to stick a handgun in their backpack and bring it to school?

    4. @ Bobby G.

      The kid in the video looks to be about 12-years old. The Shooter at Sandy Hook was quite a bit older.

    5. @ Bobby G.

      The kid in the video, didn’t have Mental Issues, He was afraid of living with a gun in the house. And went to his Teacher, probably because he thought he couldn’t talk to his parents about the issue. The Sandy Hook shooter, Had Mental Issues.

    6. If that is indeed your point then why were you inquiring about him not having a Driver’s License? As for mental issues, he has a huge one. He is a 12 year old child, incapable of making wise decisions and easily led to make poor decisions. Just in case my point escaped you it was that this video was made after Sandy Hook, in a deeply misguided effort to prevent further such shootings, but the underlying message of the video (steal your parent’s gun, bring it to school, and turn it in to your teacher) was to encourage a child to bring a gun to school. The logistics of how that may happen are essentially irrelevant.

    7. @ Booby G.

      If that’s true. And, Their No Interactive Communications in the Family Structure, which is a Bad Sign. If a Child can’t Communicate with his/her Parents or Vise/Versa. Your going to have nothing but problems, until the child comes of age. And moves out of the house or goes to prison.

    8. Once again your point is unclear and escapes me. What’s even murkier is how it relates to the initial comments that Don P and I made which you seemed to take exception to. Your poor spelling isn’t helping your clarity. I would agree with what I think you are trying to say. Any child that would follow the advice given in this video and steal their parent’s gun is definitely a problem child.

  5. With respect to the comments by Bobby G. and Dave W., I recommend that everyone who is concerned about the state of things in this country today, obtain and read a copy of “None Dare Call It Treason … 25 Years Later”, by John A. Stormer. You will learn in detail, how things came to be the way they are in this country, and what the ultimate objective is. The book is not in print at this time, but is available through Amazon.com. (A hint: the subversion has been going on for about 120 – 130 years.)

  6. Not to give the creator of the PSA a pass on stupidity, but, I have heard people on our side of the issue make stupid statements and act irresponsibly. Anyone can believe they are doing something positive and cross the line between good intent and stupidity. Remember Smokin’ Joe and his double barrel shotgun advice?

  7. Yes, because we all know that pesky gun in his backpack is just singing its siren song of, “Take me out and shoot meeeeeeeeeeeeeee” since we all know it’s the gun’s will to do bad things, not the shooter’s will.

  8. Maybe the video should teach the kid not to put his finger on the trigger as he is stealing his parents’ firearm. And he sat through the entire class with it in his backpack. I really question the intelligence of the individual who produced this.

  9. In California, whenever I purchase a firearm I must either bring a lock with me, or provide evidence that I have a safe, or a lock will automatically be included in the bill. I do not have a problem with that. I do not feel requiring a safe is viable. It’s been hard enough to come up with the funding for the weapon (firearm, state and local tax, transfer fee, background check) and ammo. I can afford a lock, but a safe is a bit more than fits the budget. (In my case, I was able to afford a safe, but many people can’t.)

    I still believe that proper parental guidance combined with proper safety training, along with a combination of not advertising having weapons and keeping them out of sight and out of reach is a better answer.

    Remove the mystery of this magical instrument and replace it with respect (something th

  10. Just in case anybody is interested. Wackenhut Corporation of Coral Gables, Florida funded this video. They are G4S Secure Solutions Company and they do American Securities, founded in 1954 by three former FBI agents. Also video was may in or around September 13, 2014.

  11. Indian film director? Maybe foreigners ought to make public “service” flicks about their own country’s shortcommings?

  12. In Florida where I live, it is against the law to let a minor have access to a loaded gun or an unloaded gun where ammo is accessable. This may sound draconian, but I think it is a good law. The amount of kids killed by gun that they found in the home has greatly dropped. All it takes is one kid shooting themselves to set off the anti-gun nuts. If you first purchase is a gun, you second purchase should be a safe. If you have kids in the house, either have the gun in your possession or in a safe. There are plenty of sub $200 quick access safe around. Stop the anti-gun madness before it starts.

    1. I think these laws are a poor replacement for common sense and responsibility, not that they don’t have their own merit. However, the jury is not out on the effectiveness or the cause and effect here. A compelling arguement that may have led to the drop in these accidental shootings may be contributed to a growing availability and affordability of various models of gun safes.

      Responsible gun owners are far more likely to be conscious of current laws, yet are also quite likely to not need the government to tell them what they already know. The problem rests with the irresponsible, who will likely remain irresponsible. It’s so much like the rest of the gun laws aimed at minimizing “gun violence”, yet they only punish or hinder responsible gun owners, while criminals will continue to be…. well, criminals (rendering these such laws worse than useless).

  13. In California, a BB gun/pellet gun is a “firearm”. A blowgun is a deadly weapon. Martial arts fighting instruments are as well. When was the last time a deranged person armed with anything similar walked into a school and killed people? This is how asinine this whole thing has become. I wonder what is next? straws and spitballs?

    I do not know what the author of this PSA had intended. I don’t think it was intended to promote breaking the law so much as it was to give the impression that kids don’t feel safe in their own homes as long as their parents possess firearms. Of course, it is highly unlikely that kids were polled to see that they feel that way.

    The entire anti-gun position is designed to convey false images which support their position. False data. False impressions like this one. Even the president with his “it’s a mandate of the people” in support of his every agenda item.

    Today, while there is a clear swing in opposition to gun control/bans, the anti-gunners are trying to defang the NRA by claiming that pro-gun is a very small minority. As Hillary said, ‘the NRA is a minority seeking to force their views upon the majority by terrorism’. I wonder how the Europeans feel about their gun bans and restrictive laws, today. In France, there are Muslim controlled areas (ghettos) which French police will not enter. Similar ghettos can be found in England, and even in the USA. I think the American people are beginning to see the light.

    Admiral Yamamoto, educated in the USA, told the Japanese Imperial Staff that he could plan and execute the attack on Pearl Harbor, but he could only guarantee the success for about six months. He also stated that the USA could never be successfully invaded because Japanese troops would be met by a rifle behind every bush.

    1. @DaveW I would have to agree Dave, that this anti-gun, everyone is required to be a victim nut job, did not poll any children whose parent keep guns in the home and ask them if they felt safe, but I did. My children, without hesitation, in this crazy screwed up world, replied, “Dad, I would NOT feel safe at home if I did NOT have access to your firearms.”

    2. My kids are grown and gone, however, my stepson is a hunter, and my daughter holds a degree in Administration of Justice, trained for law enforcement and is armed. Of my three granddaughters, the youngest one wanted a Daisy lever action BB rifle, and one wanted a Beretta 92fs BB gun. The youngest LOVES guns. Like me, when I was 10 and my grandfather started teaching me (Dad was flying Air Sea Rescue missions out of Iceland), the girls started being trained at a young age. They know the rules of safety, and they don’t have that inquisitiveness of many kids. To them, a gun is simply a tool, not some magical instrument of mystery.

  14. I think many comments here reflect the thinking of people who were brought up in a different age. An age when courts were more conservative. When parents disciplined their kids for getting into things which were not theirs, and for crossing red lines in the sand.

    Sadly, times have changed. Many more parents today have no idea what their kids are doing. They let their kids get away with anything, and say they do so out of love and respect for the kids’ privacy.

    Gone the days when kids grew up doing things which I would consider natural. Imaginative games of cops and robbers, cowboys and Indians, army, have all been killed by political correctness. Fathers no longer teach their sons how to shoot and hunt the way they did.

    Politicians have always had their own best interests at heart since George Washington, but, they still cared about the nation which allowed them to prosper. Today, even those who claim to be conservatives and pro-American are questionable.

    Schools are not teaching. They are indoctrinating. Even Obama admitted he hung out with Marxist professors in college.

    Even worse, the progressive numbers are growing because the younger people don’t know the difference between what is and what was. (France and other EAU nations are learning)

  15. This has to be illegal, if I was to tell a kid to take a gun to school for any reason I would be liable for child endangerment and your telling me this guy is not…who is suckin what!!!!!!!!

  16. Yeah. Otherwise, that’d be in conflict with their ideas that guns turn good people bad. It’s a stupid and ignorant movie, but some of the reactions here aren’t too much better.

    1. Encouraging a minor to commit larceny is contributing to the delinquency of a minor. Theft of firearm is a felony. Which one does this guy want to be charged with. Then again, whoever airs this video may, (I’m not sure) be an accessory.

  17. It is clear that the author of this article has missed the point of this video entirely. The purpose of this video was capture the idea that gun ownership leads to gun violence and that by removing guns, you would reduce violence related to guns. Whether you agree with this message or not, (I do not) this video is not meant to be taken literally. If you thought Ms. Sincic was advocating for children to turn in their parents guns… all I have to say is wow… just wow.

    1. IF, IF, IF, IF, THAT IN FACT WAS HER POINT IN MAKING THIS TRASH SHE MISSED THE MARK. She may want to consider another line of work. The vast majority of comments I have read here and on other sites are regarding that the the video is an attempt to turn kids against there parents, demonizing guns and getting them to do something dangerous and illegal. I’m sure now that was not her intent.

    2. The video does exactly that, advocate felony theft and a host of other crimes. To not see that or stick you head in the sand, wow just wow.

  18. Rejina Sincic lives in my home state Kalifornia and of all places San Fransicko. She is a big time anti-gun advocate but she is also one of these folks that immigrates to the US then proceeds to complain about how Americans have to many freedoms, to many rights, and just have it outright to good. Hypocritically she owns an independent film company in SF called Rejina Productions. Although she has cut off any commenting on this video, comments are still open at rejinaproductions@gmail.com

  19. That has to be by far the most backwards, dangerous and downright idiotic video I have ever seen. From the very beginning it shows a kid with no respect or knowledge of safe gun handling as he picks it up with his finger on the trigger. Then to even suggest that kids should touch or for any reason take a gun out of the house is absolutely horrifying and dangerous.
    Then take it to school!!! Come on!
    Another prime example of an anti thinking they are smarter than gun owners and actually causing the worst possible thinking and actions regarding gun safety. Thank God this has been brought to my attention, I would NEVER want my kids to see this kind utterly ridiculous reasoning portrayed.
    The rules of gun safety, like all rules need to be taught and learned. But there are right ways and wrong ways and this is wrong in so many ways. I hope the person who made this film is stopped before someone gets hurt, killed, or locked up because of this video!

  20. Let’s see? How many charges may be levied against her??
    1) Attempting to entice a minor to commit a crime, the felonious act of theft?
    2) Attempting to entice a minor to commit act that is possibly dangerous to themselves and/or others?

    She also leaves herself open to suit in the private for damages for:
    1) Anything any minor does due to her encouragement to commit a a dangerous and/or criminal act could (and should) make her liable for damages both restorative and punitive.

    How do you stop such irresponsible behavior as this “ditz” exhibited?
    Until they develop a workable IQ transplant just sue them for ALL their “stuff”; when THEY become “responsible” for their acts, and the results of their acts, they begin to learn to behave differently or die in poverty.

  21. And when some kid influenced by this video steals a gun from home or elsewhere and for some reason someone gets hurt or killed as a result, what then?
    Is this person so air headed or so single minded that she cannot conceive of even a couple of the hundreds of circumstances resulting in death or serious injury that would not occur had the firearm not been taken in the first place due to her advocacy? Does she realize the liability she has both legally and morally for her foolish encouragement of minors not legally responsible for their actions?
    Selfish IDIOT!

  22. The height of ignorance, selfishness, and cowardice. This person is hiding behind the veil of “safety” in order to push her hidden agenda with out regard to the children who she is placing in harms way. She lacks the courage to stand for what she believes.

  23. I loved the part where they say they will not be held accountable with any acts of criminal activity occurring due to their video, but these are the same gun haters that want firearms manufacturers to be held accountable for criminal activity and mischief done with their products. The level of hypocrisy is typical of these losers.

  24. When we wonder how low the anti-crowd will stoop, there appears to be no limit. Why would any sensible caring person put kids in such danger? Because they are hoping some kid will shoot someone giving them reason say I told you so. The Bloomberg anti-gun movement has no boundaries. They are quite literally terrorists.

  25. I bet Obama and the rest of his dumb bunch did this to get cause to ban firearms like he and the rest of anti states want.

  26. Seriously, what do you expect from Bloomberg, and the rest of the gun ban crowd. They have no real argument, so they put out crap like this.
    Stupid is as stupid does!

  27. What happens after the kid puts the gun on the teacher’s desk? The teacher is going to hit the PANIC button, lock down the school, bring the police in with their guns drawn. SWAT teams will show up. The kid will be handcuffed and arrested for having a gun in school. THEN the media will get involved and villainize the school, the parents and the police! Oh! and ALL gun owners!! Everyone BUT the IDIOT that put this PSA together. I would love to hear from an officer or lawyer on how many laws this kid broke

  28. You appear not to have worked with laws as I have. You have to prove a list of individual factors like intent, opportunity, ability, etc. It’s not so simple. A child up to a certain age is not responsible for their actions.

    I don’t have space to give you a full course in how it works, but in some homes, a child taking money or using credit cards is an accepted condition. In others, the parents would ground the child. Cops and DAs have to weigh all the factors. Yes, it’s illegal for a child to possess a gun, or to aid and abet a criminal act… but in this case who is really guilty? The maker of the PSA or the parents?

  29. Someone didn’t think this out to well. The kid shows up at school with a gun and that’s the end of his or her education, with no tolerance rules they will be expelled, end of story.

  30. If you believe all gun owners keep their securely lock up this wouldn’t be a problem. If you think this video could endanger some children than the gun control advocates may get more traction.

  31. The question asked is what about the video offends you most. What offends me most is the presumption that having a gun in the house equates to an unsafe environment. Growing up there were several guns in our house and I never felt unsafe. The only unsafe thing about having a gun in the house it what one wi do with it.
    The continued demonization of the object versus the bad actor is what gets me. If this joker really wanted to make a gun safety video he would have done as another poster suggested and have filmed a scenario where a dialog between a responsible adult and a child takes place discussing: that the kids shouldn’t be snooping through mom and dads stuff in the first place but I’d they do, as do many kids, when they come upon a firearm the LEAVE IT ALONE and if they remain curious ask mom or dad about it. Then show the dialogue that should be happening. Nothing wrong with a firearm per se but they are not toys, respect them and do not handle them with out mom and dads supervision. Then show mom, dad and kid (if old enough) going to the range or out hunting, etc. Basically, send the “right” message about firearms and responsibility! That’s the real safety message. But, let’s face it what these anti’s really want to do is indoctrinate a new generation into gear and hatred of firearms. Then, if everyone hates and fears guns anyway, they won’t want to own one and the “problem” is solved. No need to force folks to give up guns. They won’t want one in the first place.

    1. Sorry for the typos in the above. Got to love these iPhones with their ridiculously small touch pad keyboards and their “artificial intelligence” that auto corrects your words for you. Ugghhhh!

    2. @ John.

      Yeah, don’t you just love it when I tell’s you the word you were looking for. Isn’t the word you were looking for, and still get’s it wrong anyway…

  32. wow. This is hardly a PSA. It’s obviously an anti-gun statement. Whatever your stance is on firearms ownership and gun control the last thing you should be doing is telling kids, of all people, to steal guns, of all things, and take them to school, of all places.

  33. Even if you are anti-gun you should be disgusted by this piece of garbage. It is totally embarrassing, nearly criminal but typically of the progressive socialist..
    ALSO VERY TYPICAL:
    “I smell a rat here,” says Ladd Everitt, a spokesman for the Coalition to Stop Gun Violence. “To me, this reeks of something that’s been planted.”
    THEY are not only liars and garbage peddlers they continue to refuse to stand up and take responsibility for anything. O course you really can’t blame them … it’s just the sheep following the shepherd.

  34. There are so many things wrong with this video, it’s almost not worth commenting on. First he rummages his mom’s drawers, then he fingers the trigger, etc.

    TERRIBLE EXAMPLE OF WHAT TO DO…

  35. Kind of like the Manson comment, they want gun manufacturers to be held accountable for shootings because they made the weapons but it dosent apply to their cause. With that line of thinking I guess Hitler waze t responsible for the the war in Europe because he did not fire the first shot.

    1. Amazing! The dummy that wrote this has the kid handling the gun, then carrying it in his back pack, and then taking it out of his back pack and putting it on the teacher’s desk. Then he states, “I don’t feel safe carrying this”. LOL He didn’t feel safe, but did all that when he could have not touched it at all if he felt unsafe. Shows the anti-gun mentality!

  36. When I was his age, I would not EVEN have dreamt to rummage through my parent things. This is what is wrong in America

    1. If you think this is what is wrong with the country your out of touch. This is just a video full of propaganda no kid is going to take serious well except maybe yours if they don’t know better.

      She has 1200 followers who cares about this video. Preaching to the quire does not make for much impact.

    2. Propoganda—not taking it seriously?

      Hmmm, go tell that to the French, and what France is going through right now. After all, it was nothing more than “propaganda” that fueled those incidents, and those “adults” followed through with things.

      Do you really think that IF adults can be manipulated to do that, that easily naive kids can’t? If you believe that, you are a fool.

  37. Let me get this straight: The video tells a kid to steal? The last I heard, it was illegal to steal. Therefore, the video author(s) are implicitly involved in something the law calls, “Accessory Before the Fact,” defined by the Cornell University Law School:

    “A person who aids, abets, or encourages another to commit a crime but who is not present at the scene. An accessory before the fact, like an accomplice, may be held criminally liable to the same extent as the principal. Many jurisdictions refer to an accessory before the fact as an accomplice.”

    I see no difference between encouraging a kid to steal a gun or steal a car. Either way, it’s stealing, and there should be punishment meted out for the video producers, who in essence are conspiring with kids to break the law. Of course, with our looney legal system (i.e., the best lawyer wins), these video producers will never be punished, IMO. BTW, I am not an attorney.

    1. You would be right EXCEPT the kid depicted in the PSA lives in the same house. Also, there is the question of INTENT. Apparently, the kid’s intent is not to steal, but, rather, to create a sense of living in a safe environment. At least in California, the parents would be in far more trouble than the kid or the videographer

    2. Just because the kid resides in the same house does not give him license to steal items of value from his parents, no matter what premise he feels justifies that theft.

    3. So, YOUR daughter or son in YOUR house can go into your wallet and take all the CASH and CREDIT CARDS out of YOUR WALLET, go spend on it and it’s NOT ILLEGAL SIMPLY BECAUSE THEY LIVE IN THE SAME HOUSE?

      Wow, IF you think that—you need to go back to school, and start from the basics.

      Plus, correct me if I am wrong, but isn’t it illegal in EVERY STATE for a minor to be in possession of a firearm? And, how many states make it illegal for a minor in possession of an illegal firearm to bring said firearm into a school, and clearly wait until AFTER class to turn it in; if he truly didn’t feel safe, he would have 1.) called the police, 2.) brought it directly to the office, 3.) disposed of it after disassembling it and throwing the various parts in different trash receptacles. After all, once disassembled, it’s nothing more than a door stop.

      So many things wrong with this video message!

  38. Let me get this straight: The video tells a kid to steal? The last I heard, it was illegal to steal. Therefore, the video author(s) are implicitly involved in something the law calls, “Accessory Before the Fact,” defined by the Cornell University Law School:

    “A person who aids, abets, or encourages another to commit a crime but who is not present at the scene. An accessory before the fact, like an accomplice, may be held criminally liable to the same extent as the principal. Many jurisdictions refer to an accessory before the fact as an accomplice.”

    I see no difference between encouraging and a kid to steal a gun or steal a car. Either way, it’s stealing, and there should be punishment meted out for the video producers, who in essence are conspiring with kids. Of course, with our looney legal system (i.e., the best lawyer wins), these video producers will never be punished, IMO. BTW, I am not an attorney.

  39. Several of you hit some damn important issues here. Most important is the underlying message that it is ok to defy your parents for the greater good and, your parents are wrong and your government is right. It’s part of a whole Hitler Youth thing.
    How about break into you parents liquor cabinet and bring his booze to school.
    Someone mentioned the law suit that would result from a kid taking the old man’s gun and shooting himself or someone else. I think we can be fairly sure the producer of this monstrosity took that into consideration. However the socialists are very good at spinning the facts and if a kid did take dads gun to turn it in and accidently injured himself rest assured it would be Dads fault, the guns fault, lack of laws fault, NRA fault, the second amendments fault and probably Gods fault but not the fault of the producer who was only doing good. Remember it is not the rioter’s fault that they are destroying buildings, it is the cops fault for doing his job…..

    1. @ Mc Ruger.

      I’m fairly certain that CTD, showed this video to their own employee’s before posting it. I think they were trying to “gauge” a responds of their employee’s, and what they got is a “mixed Pro/Con” responds. Now the “gauging” our responds, and their probably going to get something fairly close on how there employee’s responded to the video…

  40. But yet children get suspended for cutting a pop tart in the shape of a gun….

    That being said, the parent WAS irresponsible leaving it accessible to a kid.

    1. Rather than blaming the killer, Peter Dreier, a Professor of Politics with Occidental University has essentially blamed the NRA for the deaths of the two NYPD police officers, Wenjian Liu and Rafael Ramos.

      Using that sort of logic, the child that chewed the pop tart into a scary ‘L’ shape should not have been punished but rather the school or the parents should have been responsible. Who made the pop tart accessible to the child? Did the parents make the pop tart accessible or was the school responsible for that?

    2. The parents probably supplied him with the pop tart… But he was under the school’s supervision when he bit it into the shape of a gun.

    3. I still find it mystifying that any sane, reasonably intelligent adult could interpret a child eating a pop tart as potential gun violence. This so called teacher was attempting to punish this child for a thought crime. He was thinking about guns, or so we are told, and we simply can’t have that.

  41. This is a great example of hostile activism. The activist is so brainwashed or think their cause is so pure that it’s worth breaking laws or encouraging others to do so. Some of these activists think that their cause or thought at the time should be forced upon someone else because they think it’s right.

  42. I was raised by parents who did not believe in guns. Their efforts worked on my 112 year older brother but not on me.

    The people of this country are not entitled usless they are dependent. The essential difference between the “liberal” and “conserv ative” mindset is simple: LIberals subscribe to “done for us” and conservatives subscribe to “done by us”. Yep – that simple.

    We are not a free people because some supreme being endowed us as such. These concepts register no more with liberals than meteors hitiing the backside of the moon. Conservatives on the other hand realize that only by accepting responsibility and not throwing the welfare of our loved ones to chance can we maintain the necessary strength to preserve ourselves and our good fortune.

    It is not my opinion that democrats and liberals are willing to become wards of others and take advantage of others; it is their political platform for Go’s sake.

    Here is a case in which one sends a kid to school with a gun. Really? If a kid does not want a gun in his house aand he has been raised so stupidly as to not go to a paent, relative, or any adult whom he respects to share his concerns, that child is just one more helpless ignorant problem. Again liberal themes aretypical most workable in the imagination.

  43. The thing I find most troubling about this video is its underlying message. That message is “Your parents cannot be trusted to ensure your safety, but your teacher can”. This smacks of Soviet era practices of encouraging children to inform the state about their parent’s activities and I find it truly chilling.

    1. @ Bobby G.

      It can also be said that there’s a lack of, or virtually no communication and/or interaction in the family structure. If you child can do this, your no parenting correctly…

    2. While you are correct, I think you miss a side of the issue. Kids today spend more time with their progressive teachers and their peers, along with the hypnotic impact of television programming which is heavily anti family than they do with their parents. Much of this started with something called The Children’s Television Workshop which produced politically correct programs like Sesame Street which began with having every race represented, and today, every sexual view. It’s hard for parents in this day and age to compete with the other sources of influence.

    3. Dictatorial governments have always been quite good at turning children against their parents. A commie adage goes, “give me a child until age 8 and he will be a communist for life”. Between birth and 8 are the formative years when young minds are most impressionable and most easily molded. One reason why it will take a huge effort to turn the nation from the anti-constitution course it is on today. The minds which were altered in the 1960s are the minds which fill the heads of Obama, Holder, and so many more. Worse yet, the same progressive minds of the 1960s are the ones who teach our children today.

    4. Just like the music of every generation, each generation faces problems with their offspring. That’s a natural evolution. What is really evil is when there are people who seek to take control of other peoples’ children and indoctrinate them to reject the values of their parents.

  44. It’s an interesting video to say the least. But from my perspective I wold have had “tighter” safeguards in place, then to leave a gun where it is accessible to just about anyone…

    1. Heartily agree. When my children were very small, we “match-proofed” the home, and took other precautions. Children are naturally inquisitive. Being in law enforcement, guns were a natural in our home, and the kids were far too young to have logical discussions with. So guns were stored really high up. (This was in the days before gun locks and safes were common in homes.) Anyone who has kids, or watches those family video shows, knows well that very young children are capable of getting out of cribs and getting into kitchen cupboards, etc.

  45. While it might be true the make would not be penalized for making the video, that could easily change if, while following the advice of the video, there was an accident. Then I could see the parents suing. Of course, in these times, the parents would likely be charged/sued if the situation took place in a state like California where it is a crime to store a weapon where a child or other prohibited person has access to it.

    Under Freedom of Speech, the video would probably get a pass in the present liber climate. At the same time, it’s just as bad advice as Smokin’ Joe telling his wife to grab the double barrel and fire off a couple of rounds from the patio. It’s irresponsible.

    1. I wonder if this video was actually made in a school building in California, or if the ‘gun parts’ were in a studio. Seems it would be a felony under the federal gun rules to have a gun on public school property even for instructional videos. In Texas, the guns are required to be inaccessible to people under 17, but any American over 10 should have been trained to keep their hands off other people’s stuff. A kid as old as the one in the video should be trained as a safe, crack shot long before he reaches this age.

  46. well the video was released just in time for the Filmmaker to win the 2014 Idiot of the Year award… by a wide margin!

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Time limit exceeded. Please click the reload button and complete the captcha once again.

Your discussions, feedback and comments are welcome here as long as they are relevant and insightful. Please be respectful of others. We reserve the right to edit as appropriate, delete profane, harassing, abusive and spam comments or posts, and block repeat offenders. All comments are held for moderation and will appear after approval.