Guns, Guns, Guns -- Through The Eyes Of A Child
Guns on the Land, to protect property.
Guns on the Farm, stray animals to scare, not to do any harm.
Guns in the Bedroom for bums in the night-- just until someone can get to the lights.
Guns in the Kitchen--banging the pot with a spoon, don't scare off the moose, bears, and coons.
Guns in the Car when traveling far, but mainly we're told for those guys who just left the bar.
Guns in the Schools, I don't know many things, but I am no fool; that's our President's new rule.
Guns in the Hall, like in the Mall- guard carries--big and bald.
Guns in the Classrooms, Mr. Wilks hides under his shirt; not Ms. Hill, she keeps hers under the flap of her skirt.
Gun on the Bus, the driver warns, there will be no fuss.
Guns at the Church on Sunday? Someone must keep watch when we pray, I say.
Guns in my Dreams, rapid loud popping sounds all around; I awake with tears and screams.
Guns are all I see; Guns Everywhere! I told mom, I don't like guns; I just want to have fun. Mom said we'll do it, the first light of the sun. by CM
Comments
-
Today kids eat Tide pods. Wimps. My kids never thought to be scared of a gun. I grew up and never imagined being afraid of a gun. I was taught to respect the danger there. But afraid of it? Concerned by it? Never crossed the mind of anyone I knew.
Yeah, the neighbor man got drunk and scared his wife and kids half to death shooting up the living room one snowy night. Kids spent the night at our house. No one got hurt.
I think this cartoon speaks to the matter.
Ever been in a war? A war-torn land? America. Phsaw. It ain't nothin'.
-
@C_M_ said:
Guns on the Land, to protect property.
Guns on the Farm, stray animals to scare, not to do any harm.
Guns in the Bedroom for bums in the night-- just until someone can get to the lights.
Guns in the Kitchen--banging the pot with a spoon, don't scare off the moose, bears, and coons.
Guns in the Car when traveling far, but mainly we're told for those guys who just left the bar.
Guns in the Schools, I don't know many things, but I am no fool; that's our President's new rule.
Guns in the Hall, like in the Mall- guard carries--big and bald.
Guns in the Classrooms, Mr. Wilks hides under his shirt; not Ms. Hill, she keeps hers under the flap of her skirt.
Gun on the Bus, the driver warns, there will be no fuss.
Guns at the Church on Sunday? Someone must keep watch when we pray, I say.
Guns in my Dreams, rapid loud popping sounds all around; I awake with tears and screams.
Guns are all I see; Guns Everywhere! I told mom, I don't like guns; I just want to have fun. Mom said we'll do it, the first light of the sun. by CMI don't know if you've seen the movie A Christmas Story. But back in the day it was BB Guns that did all of the above.
-
Really? For example, you woke up with tears and screams to the popping of your BB gun? Man. What did bubble gum do to you?
PS. I wasn't allowed to take my BB gun to church or school. The problem wasn't the gun, though, it was the distraction.
-
@GaoLu said:
Really? For example, you woke up with tears and screams to the popping of your BB gun? Man. What did bubble gum do to you?PS. I wasn't allowed to take my BB gun to church or school. The problem wasn't the gun, though, it was the distraction.
No, my world was far more simple. We didn't deal with what kids deal with today. The most offensive weapon we ever heard of was a zip gun. If I ever did go to church, I packed a squirt gun in a shoulder holster under my top coat.
-
@C_M_ said:
Guns on the Land, to protect property.
Guns on the Farm, stray animals to scare, not to do any harm.
Guns in the Bedroom for bums in the night-- just until someone can get to the lights.
Guns in the Kitchen--banging the pot with a spoon, don't scare off the moose, bears, and coons.
Guns in the Car when traveling far, but mainly we're told for those guys who just left the bar.
Guns in the Schools, I don't know many things, but I am no fool; that's our President's new rule.
Guns in the Hall, like in the Mall- guard carries--big and bald.
Guns in the Classrooms, Mr. Wilks hides under his shirt; not Ms. Hill, she keeps hers under the flap of her skirt.
Gun on the Bus, the driver warns, there will be no fuss.
Guns at the Church on Sunday? Someone must keep watch when we pray, I say.
Guns in my Dreams, rapid loud popping sounds all around; I awake with tears and screams.
Guns are all I see; Guns Everywhere! I told mom, I don't like guns; I just want to have fun. Mom said we'll do it, the first light of the sun. by CMInteresting, but not reality. Most kids I know are fascinated by guns.
-
@davidtaylorjr said:
Interesting, but not reality. Most kids I know are fascinated by guns.
On one hand, this is why teachers with guns should NOT be in the classroom. On the other hand, it not a fascination with guns if your classroom was shot-up and you've lost your playmate, etc.-- have we forgotten Sandy Hook?
Many children are traumatized by the live experience and from the reporting of it. But above all, knowing that they are coming in the classroom very soon. These are children, not adults. Don't expect all of the children to buy into the rationale of the state and the NRA.
@GaoLu said:
Today kids eat Tide pods. Wimps. My kids never thought to be scared of a gun. I grew up and never imagined being afraid of a gun. I was taught to respect the danger there. But afraid of it? Concerned by it? Never crossed the mind of anyone I knew.For good or for ill, this was your experience with guns. But what about the child or children whose experience this is not? Are they to be called "chicken", "weirdos" or "strange" because of their distaste for guns?
Yeah, the neighbor man got drunk and scared his wife and kids half to death shooting up the living room one snowy night. Kids spent the night at our house. No one got hurt.
One family's grace and mercy to escape the "neighbor man...shooting up the living room one snowy night" is the exception; not the rule. Just because one, even in the same family, get over an experience, doesn't mean the same for another.
So, no; a child's encounter with guns is not just one of life's experience and needs to just get over it or through it. One child fascination with guns is another child's traumatization. Let's be considerate of the little ones. CM
-
@C_M_ said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
Interesting, but not reality. Most kids I know are fascinated by guns.
On one hand, this is why teachers with guns should NOT be in the classroom. On the other hand, it not a fascination with guns if your classroom was shot-up and you've lost your playmate, etc.-- have we forgotten Sandy Hook?
Many children are traumatized by the live experience and from the reporting of it. But above all, knowing that they are coming in the classroom very soon. These are children, not adults. Don't expect all of the children to buy into the rationale of the state and the NRA.
You mean the Constitution, not the NRA.
@GaoLu said:
Today kids eat Tide pods. Wimps. My kids never thought to be scared of a gun. I grew up and never imagined being afraid of a gun. I was taught to respect the danger there. But afraid of it? Concerned by it? Never crossed the mind of anyone I knew.For good or for ill, this was your experience with guns. But what about the child or children whose experience this is not? Are they to be called "chicken", "weirdos" or "strange" because of their distaste for guns?
Nobody said that. That's very different if they were directly a victim of gun violence.
Yeah, the neighbor man got drunk and scared his wife and kids half to death shooting up the living room one snowy night. Kids spent the night at our house. No one got hurt.
One family's grace and mercy to escape the "neighbor man...shooting up the living room one snowy night" is the exception; not the rule. Just because one, even in the same family, get over an experience, doesn't mean the same for another.So, no; a child's encounter with guns is not just one of life's experience and needs to just get over it or through it. One child fascination with guns is another child's traumatization. Let's be considerate of the little ones. CM
Using children as political pawns, new low.
-
@davidtaylorjr said:
Using children as political pawns, new low.
No, David. Have I not spoken the truth about guns in child's life?
In what way am I "using children as political pawns"?
@davidtaylorjr said:
@C_M_ said: Many children are traumatized by the live experience and from the reporting of it. But above all, knowing that they are coming in the classroom very soon. These are children, not adults. Don't expect all of the children to buy into the rationale of the state and the NRA.
You mean the Constitution, not the NRA.
No, David. I meant NRA. The Constitution doesn't cover AR-15s.
@GaoLu said: Today kids eat Tide pods. Wimps. My kids never thought to be scared of a gun. I grew up and never imagined being afraid of a gun. I was taught to respect the danger there. But afraid of it? Concerned by it? Never crossed the mind of anyone I knew.
For good or for ill, this was your experience with guns. But what about the child or children whose experience this is not? Are they to be called "chicken", "weirdos" or "strange" because of their distaste for guns?
Nobody said that. That's very different if they were directly a victim of gun violence.
I didn't say, anybody said. It was a question. A rational person should anticipate or allow for some children to not be receptive to guns (real or imagined). How will the school relate to those or allow others to treat them? This was the intent behind my earlier question. CM
-
@C_M_ said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
Using children as political pawns, new low.
No, David. Have I not spoken the truth about guns in child's life?
In what way am I "using children as political pawns"?
By putting forth a narrative that is not a universal reality.
@davidtaylorjr said:
@C_M_ said: Many children are traumatized by the live experience and from the reporting of it. But above all, knowing that they are coming in the classroom very soon. These are children, not adults. Don't expect all of the children to buy into the rationale of the state and the NRA.
You mean the Constitution, not the NRA.
No, David. I meant NRA. The Constitution doesn't cover AR-15s.
Actually it does.
@GaoLu said: Today kids eat Tide pods. Wimps. My kids never thought to be scared of a gun. I grew up and never imagined being afraid of a gun. I was taught to respect the danger there. But afraid of it? Concerned by it? Never crossed the mind of anyone I knew.
For good or for ill, this was your experience with guns. But what about the child or children whose experience this is not? Are they to be called "chicken", "weirdos" or "strange" because of their distaste for guns?
Nobody said that. That's very different if they were directly a victim of gun violence.
I didn't say, anybody said. It was a question. A rational person should anticipate or allow for some children to not be receptive to guns (real or imagined). How will the school relate to those or allow others to treat them? This was the intent behind my earlier question. CM
I believe fear of guns is conditioned, not inherited.
-
@davidtaylorjr said:
@C_M_ said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
Using children as political pawns, new low.
No, David. Have I not spoken the truth about guns in child's life?
In what way am I "using children as political pawns"?
By putting forth a narrative that is not a universal reality.
No, David. It's not "universal" that teachers carry guns in the classroom. It is only proposed by the US President, Donald J. Trump. This is what I was addressing. You don't see or hear about teachers having guns in the classroom in Canada, Israel, Qatar, Japan, South Korea, etc. It's only in the USA, endorsed by the NRA.
Do you or Mr. Trump consider that there are some cops that can't shoot straight? Some of them freeze up in the moment of action. Innocent people get hit and died. You expect a teacher to switch from instructor-mode to Warrior? How is a teacher supposed to live with him or herself if a student is shot by the teacher? I guess you, Mr. Trump and the NRA would chalk it up as "collateral damage."
David, you need to get real with this nonsense proposal and call it for what it is. You will not do this until you place your child or children in that classroom. When you do, would you like authorities to knock on your door or inform you in the School's gym that there was a shooting today at the school? Would you like them to tell you your child was "collateral damage" as one of the dead? CM
@davidtaylorjr said:
@C_M_ said: Many children are traumatized by the live experience and from the reporting of it. But above all, knowing that they are coming in the classroom very soon. These are children, not adults. Don't expect all of the children to buy into the rationale of the state and the NRA.
You mean the Constitution, not the NRA.
No, David. I meant NRA. The Constitution doesn't cover AR-15s.
Actually it does.
Again, it does NOT! CM
I believe fear of guns is conditioned, not inherited.
Regardless, they don't belong in the classroom! American school children are pawns for politicians to be re-elected. NRA, stop using children. CM
-
NRA using children? That is a wild stretch.
-
@C_M_ said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@C_M_ said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
Using children as political pawns, new low.
No, David. Have I not spoken the truth about guns in child's life?
In what way am I "using children as political pawns"?
By putting forth a narrative that is not a universal reality.
No, David. It's not "universal" that teachers carry guns in the classroom. It is only proposed by the US President, Donald J. Trump. This is what I was addressing. You don't see or hear about teachers having guns in the classroom in Canada, Israel, Qatar, Japan, South Korea, etc. It's only in the USA, endorsed by the NRA.
Actually Donald Trump wasn't the one that first suggested it. In fact, there are school districts that already do. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/03/01/us/armed-teachers-guns-schools.html
Do you or Mr. Trump consider that there are some cops that can't shoot straight? Some of them freeze up in the moment of action. Innocent people get hit and died. You expect a teacher to switch from instructor-mode to Warrior? How is a teacher supposed to live with him or herself if a student is shot by the teacher? I guess you, Mr. Trump and the NRA would chalk it up as "collateral damage."
This is all sensational talk, but is just hypothetical founded in hyperbole.
David, you need to get real with this nonsense proposal and call it for what it is. You will not do this until you place your child or children in that classroom. When you do, would you like authorities to knock on your door or inform you in the School's gym that there was a shooting today at the school? Would you like them to tell you your child was "collateral damage" as one of the dead? CM
Once again, sensational hyperbole, not founded in fact.
@davidtaylorjr said:
@C_M_ said: Many children are traumatized by the live experience and from the reporting of it. But above all, knowing that they are coming in the classroom very soon. These are children, not adults. Don't expect all of the children to buy into the rationale of the state and the NRA.
You mean the Constitution, not the NRA.
No, David. I meant NRA. The Constitution doesn't cover AR-15s.
Actually it does.
Again, it does NOT! CM
It most definitely does. How does it not cover the AR-15? Burden of proof is on you. It doesn't list specific weapons, but the intent was to be able to carry out war. So please, by all means, show how the Constitution does not cover the AR-15 which, last I checked, was within the definition of "Arms."
I believe fear of guns is conditioned, not inherited.
Regardless, they don't belong in the classroom! American school children are pawns for politicians to be re-elected. NRA, stop using children. CM
Why do they not belong in the classroom? You keep saying that and giving sensational ideas of what could happen in a worst-case scenario, but have yet to say a real valid reason why this should not happen.
-
@davidtaylorjr said:
Do you or Mr. Trump consider that there are some cops that can't shoot straight? Some of them freeze up in the moment of action. Innocent people get hit and died. You expect a teacher to switch from instructor-mode to Warrior? How is a teacher supposed to live with him or herself if a student is shot by the teacher? I guess you, Mr. Trump and the NRA would chalk it up as "collateral damage."
This is all sensational talk, but is just hypothetical founded in hyperbole.
Bro. David Taylor jr.,
I guess Sandy Hook was "all sensational talk" and "hyperbole?" What is it going to take for you to wake up on the matter of guns, children, school, and the NRA-- DEATH to your DOOR?
You appear to be more responsible than what you're saying here in these forums. Please, wake up. Think-wife, children, family, etc.- you are to set the example for others. Be Spirit driven and not politically persuaded. Your freedom is in Christ; not your US Constitution, supported by the NRA. LOVE LIFE! CM
PS. You and I should be compiling a list of Children/School Safety Measures that don't include guns. Our exchanges should lead to something positive. Let's do it for the children. No guns! No guns! No guns! No guns! No guns! CM
-
@C_M_ said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
Do you or Mr. Trump consider that there are some cops that can't shoot straight? Some of them freeze up in the moment of action. Innocent people get hit and died. You expect a teacher to switch from instructor-mode to Warrior? How is a teacher supposed to live with him or herself if a student is shot by the teacher? I guess you, Mr. Trump and the NRA would chalk it up as "collateral damage."
This is all sensational talk, but is just hypothetical founded in hyperbole.
Bro. David Taylor jr.,
I guess Sandy Hook was "all sensational talk" and "hyperbole?" What is it going to take for you to wake up on the matter of guns, children, school, and the NRA-- DEATH to your DOOR?
Yes actually, the gun control talk surrounding Sandy Hook was sensational and Hyperbole. It definitely was. It didn't look at the fact that the guns were stolen after he killed his mother. Gun control wouldn't have stopped Sandy Hook.
You appear to be more responsible than what you're saying here in these forums. Please, wake up. Think-wife, children, family, etc.- you are to set the example for others. Be Spirit driven and not politically persuaded. Your freedom is in Christ; not your US Constitution, supported by the NRA. LOVE LIFE! CM
PS. You and I should be compiling a list of Children/School Safety Measures that don't include guns. Our exchanges should lead to something positive. Let's do it for the children. No guns! No guns! No guns! No guns! No guns! CM
I'm not in favor of no guns so I think there are positive measures that can be taken that do not include banning guns.
-
@davidtaylorjr said:
@C_M_ said:
You appear to be more responsible than what you're saying here in these forums. Please, wake up. Think-wife, children, family, etc.- you are to set the example for others. Be Spirit driven and not politically persuaded. Your freedom is in Christ; not your US Constitution, supported by the NRA. LOVE LIFE! CMPS. You and I should be compiling a list of Children/School Safety Measures that don't include guns. Our exchanges should lead to something positive. Let's do it for the children. No guns! No guns! No guns! No guns! No guns! CM
I'm not in favor of no guns so I think there are positive measures that can be taken that do not include banning guns.
David,
You have just declared a royal impasse! Please, reconsider and end your love-affair with guns and let's get to work. We have much to do with brainstorming for Children/School Safety Measures. CM -
@C_M_ said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@C_M_ said:
You appear to be more responsible than what you're saying here in these forums. Please, wake up. Think-wife, children, family, etc.- you are to set the example for others. Be Spirit driven and not politically persuaded. Your freedom is in Christ; not your US Constitution, supported by the NRA. LOVE LIFE! CMPS. You and I should be compiling a list of Children/School Safety Measures that don't include guns. Our exchanges should lead to something positive. Let's do it for the children. No guns! No guns! No guns! No guns! No guns! CM
I'm not in favor of no guns so I think there are positive measures that can be taken that do not include banning guns.
David,
You have just declared a royal impasse! Please, reconsider and end your love-affair with guns and let's get to work. We have much to do with brainstorming for Children/School Safety Measures. CMYes, and you can do that without gun control. I do love guns. They are fun and serve good purposes. You don't need to ban them or even restrict them to make kids safe. You realize that you did not need one shred of more gun law to prevent what happened in Parkland right?
-
“How shall I give thee up", David? How shall I deliver you from relying on guns? You are joined to your idols (guns). Lord, have mercy on the children! CM
-
@C_M_ said:
“How shall I give thee up", David? How shall I deliver you from relying on guns? You are joined to your idols (guns). Lord, have mercy on the children! CMIt's more like Lord have mercy on your ridiculous hyperbole and narrowminded view on how to fix the problem by focusing on anything but the actual problems.
-
Bro. David,
In view of your mindset and the world-- "'Que Sera, Sera'. 'Whatever will be, will be'."It's morally sad, to say for the teachers, innocent children, and grieving parents in the USA, endorsed by the NRA, "the future is up in the air, and whatever is going to happen, is going to happen." CM
-
@C_M_ said:
Bro. David,
In view of your mindset and the world-- "'Que Sera, Sera'. 'Whatever will be, will be'."It's morally sad, to say for the teachers, innocent children, and grieving parents in the USA, endorsed by the NRA, "the future is up in the air, and whatever is going to happen, is going to happen." CM
Except that isn't what I have said at all.
-
@davidtaylorjr said:
@C_M_ said:
Bro. David,
In view of your mindset and the world-- "'Que Sera, Sera'. 'Whatever will be, will be'."It's morally sad, to say for the teachers, innocent children, and grieving parents in the USA, endorsed by the NRA, "the future is up in the air, and whatever is going to happen, is going to happen." CM
Except that isn't what I have said at all.
David, given your advocacy for guns and the NRA, you don't have too. In short, one doesn't have to eat a whole cow, to know that he has eaten beef. CM
-
@C_M_ said:
“How shall I give thee up", David? How shall I deliver you from relying on guns? You are joined to your idols (guns). Lord, have mercy on the children! CMWhat a religious emotion based non-sense ... before being so "concerned" about others, have a look at the beam in your own eye ... you display a rather ridiculous and close narrow minded view on how to supposedly fix the problem by putting the focus on anything but the actual problem.
(observation from on outside on looker) -
C_M_....maybe it is just me, but your tone now doesn't sound like the C_M_ we heard from before. What changed?
-
@C_M_ said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@C_M_ said:
Bro. David,
In view of your mindset and the world-- "'Que Sera, Sera'. 'Whatever will be, will be'."It's morally sad, to say for the teachers, innocent children, and grieving parents in the USA, endorsed by the NRA, "the future is up in the air, and whatever is going to happen, is going to happen." CM
Except that isn't what I have said at all.
David, given your advocacy for guns and the NRA, you don't have too. In short, one doesn't have to eat a whole cow, to know that he has eaten beef. CM
The only ones saying whatever happens happens are the ones who want more gun control. Let's just let the shooter come with nobody to stop them.... Yeah, that makes so much sense.
@Wolfgang said:
@C_M_ said:
“How shall I give thee up", David? How shall I deliver you from relying on guns? You are joined to your idols (guns). Lord, have mercy on the children! CMWhat a religious emotion based non-sense ... before being so "concerned" about others, have a look at the beam in your own eye ... you display a rather ridiculous and close narrow minded view on how to supposedly fix the problem by putting the focus on anything but the actual problem.
(observation from on outside on looker)Exactly
@GaoLu said:
C_M_....maybe it is just me, but your tone now doesn't sound like the C_M_ we heard from before. What changed?He's a troll.
-
@davidtaylorjr said:
@C_M_ said:
@davidtaylorjr said:
@C_M_ said:
Bro. David,
In view of your mindset and the world-- "'Que Sera, Sera'. 'Whatever will be, will be'."It's morally sad, to say for the teachers, innocent children, and grieving parents in the USA, endorsed by the NRA, "the future is up in the air, and whatever is going to happen, is going to happen." CM
Except that isn't what I have said at all.
David, given your advocacy for guns and the NRA, you don't have too. In short, one doesn't have to eat a whole cow, to know that he has eaten beef. CM
The only ones saying whatever happens happens are the ones who want more gun control. Let's just let the shooter come with nobody to stop them.... Yeah, that makes so much sense.
@Wolfgang said:
@C_M_ said:
“How shall I give thee up", David? How shall I deliver you from relying on guns? You are joined to your idols (guns). Lord, have mercy on the children! CMWhat a religious emotion based non-sense ... before being so "concerned" about others, have a look at the beam in your own eye ... you display a rather ridiculous and close narrow minded view on how to supposedly fix the problem by putting the focus on anything but the actual problem.
(observation from on outside on looker)Exactly
@GaoLu said:
C_M_....maybe it is just me, but your tone now doesn't sound like the C_M_ we heard from before. What changed?He's a troll.
We should never judge others' motives. It's like the habitual liar never trusts anyone else because he assumes all are just like him.
-
@Dave_L said:
We should never judge others' motives. It's like the habitual liar never trusts anyone else because he assumes all are just like him.
You're right. Some need to be reminded of Matt. 7:1-2, on judging.
This is what individuals whose argument or opinions can't stand on its own merits. They resort to name calling, etc. For the non-christians, they curse (foul language). For some Christians, they come as close as possible to cursing without using the actual words of the non-christians. It's called "Kosher cussing." No, it's not biblically endorsed. Those who do this, they need a "timeout" and prayer. CM
-
@C_M_ said:
This is what individuals whose argument or opinions can't stand on its own merits. They resort to name calling, etc.You make a much-needed point, CM.
Name-calling against people with whose arguments one disagrees is a form of surrender. In result, the practice - which is surprisingly prevalent in these Christian forums - says "I can't diminish your argument, so I'll diminish you." Name-calling is one of an intemperate advocate's last rhetorical stands before changing the subject, claiming victory in the midst of the residual chaos of his or her point of view, or simply abandoning the argument altogether.
By the time name callers have begun hurling their labels, they're too invested in what by then is for them a confrontation to step back, acknowledge error, and/or take back the names. The result is impolite, unproductive thread participation, the magnitude of which is amplified if the person on the other end of the exchange chooses to engage in name calling as well.
I have a recurring pipe dream that all name calling would stop immediately were everyone to apply the Golden Rule to their forum exchanges: Respond to others as you would have them respond to you. That's a pipe dream, in part because many name calling aficionados seem not to believe there's anything wrong with the practice.
-
Mmmm.
-
@Bill_Coley said:
@C_M_ said:
This is what individuals whose argument or opinions can't stand on its own merits. They resort to name calling, etc.You make a much-needed point, CM.
Name-calling against people with whose arguments one disagrees is a form of surrender. In result, the practice - which is surprisingly prevalent in these Christian forums - says "I can't diminish your argument, so I'll diminish you." Name-calling is one of an intemperate advocate's last rhetorical stands before changing the subject, claiming victory in the midst of the residual chaos of his or her point of view, or simply abandoning the argument altogether.
It is hardly a form of surrender. I just don't believe in political correctness and call it like I see it. In other words, I'm more honest.
By the time name callers have begun hurling their labels, they're too invested in what by then is for them a confrontation to step back, acknowledge error, and/or take back the names. The result is impolite, unproductive thread participation, the magnitude of which is amplified if the person on the other end of the exchange chooses to engage in name calling as well.
This is so full of junk it's ridiculous. And sometimes I have taken back names when appropriate Bill so this is hogwash.
-
@davidtaylorjr said:
He's a troll.
Ouch! "Who put your cat's tail under my rocking chair?" These were my first thoughts. However, on second thought, David, are you having a bad day? Are you unhappy about something?
The name-calling (here and elsewhere) needs to stop, here and now! "Troll", does it mean something good? Is this something you or a member of your family want to be called? If it means something bad, why project it on me? Do you not care how I feel? If you think it's true, why here? Do you want me to change or just to shame? You don't know how to you use the PM envelope or you just wanted to be nasty? Are you the "Troll" Detective of CD?
Calling me a "Troll", is this your way to supposedly silent my participation, voice, views, or make me change? Perhaps, this is your form of humor or light moment? I am sure you know how effective you are using such. It's more reflective of who you are than anything else. I think you know of a better path forward; or at least, you have been taught over the years.
I don't expect you to answer each of these questions here. However, I would like you to think about WHAT you are saying; WHERE you are saying it, and TO WHOM? Are you, your thoughts; or your thoughts, you? How shall I take your words?
Have I said something to you that requires a personal public apology, do the mature thing and say so. Emulating your US President in name-calling is one trait I suggest you don't adopt. Let's be expressive in our sharing and disagree as we sometimes do. However, let's put away pettiness and name-calling. Let's make room for others to participate without the fear of being called a "Troll" or some other name you or your family member wouldn't like; even if true. We all have our moments of weakness, but let's be bigger than them.
If more needs to be said on this particular matter, may I suggest we do it with PM and let fresh thoughts continue to flow freely? Do it for the good of CD. Thanks for your consideration. CM
![[Deleted User]](https://secure.gravatar.com/avatar/fcddec765be35f238a0844bd23f54b59/?default=https%3A%2F%2Fvanillicon.com%2F8ce8323767a20f0f45db140c4cd2cea1_200.png&rating=g&size=200)
