Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)

Does This Gun Control PSA Go Too Far?

Posted by   + Show Post

Does This Gun Control PSA Go Too Far?

by Lindsay Ferrier

Moms Demand ActionThe group Moms Demand Action just released a new PSA calling for stricter gun control laws. It's provocative and some question whether it goes too far.

The ad shows a mother helping her son get ready for school. First, he puts on a t-shirt with a bull's-eye on it, followed by a hoodie with another bull's-eye in the center. Before sending her son off to school, the boy's mother puts a kevlar vest over him with another bull's-eye on the front.

The message Moms Demand Action is trying to convey is at the end of the PSA. "Is This the New School Uniform? Send Congress a message. Pass gun control today or lose my vote tomorrow."

The PSA will definitely get people's attention -- but is it too much? Watch it yourself and tell us what you think.


I have to admit, this video gave me a lump in my throat and brought tears to my eyes. It was an uncomfortable reminder of all the feelings I experienced as a mother to elementary school-aged children in the wake of the Sandy Hook shootings.

I feel a little bit like that mom myself, sending my kids off to school each day. School no longer feels like an entirely safe place for them to be, and I hate that I can't be there to protect them.

I don't know whether stricter gun control laws will keep incidents like the Columbine and Sandy Hook shootings from happening again, but this ad definitely airs the viewpoint of Moms Demand Action loud and clear.

And if you're wondering about this group, we reported on them for Moms Matter not long ago. Here's our video:


The PSA brings up a lot of questions. Are stricter gun control laws the answer? Would they prevent school shootings, or will people always find ways to kill, regardless of the laws that are in place? And does this PSA go too far for your comfort?

What do you think?

by on Aug. 30, 2013 at 8:24 AM
Replies (11-19):
buttersworth
by Bronze Member on Aug. 31, 2013 at 12:53 AM
1 mom liked this

What do i think? Oh, I'm sure someone really wants to know what i think. Unfortunately not enough for me to get fair representation in our legislature. See, i don't own a gun. I never wanted one. But i understand the 2nd Amendment, and i want that Amendment preserved. At the risk of students, you might ask? Definitely NOT.  However, i don't believe events have happened strictly as reported. What is under-reported beneathe all the guns rhetoric, are the prescription drugs that all those shooters were on. SSRIs, where the inserts of the manufacturers themselves supposedly say this kind of behavior can come as a side effect. That's what I've heard, and I'm inclined to believe it simply because of the pharmaceutical commercials on tv and the plethora of side effects always listed.

in other words, i think real events happened, that were tragic, but happened because individuals were manipulated -probably along with much of the media, the supposed facts- to promote the anti gun agenda. Crisis plus reaction equals solution. this is basic Hegelian philosophy that i read about in high school. The outcome desired is created out of a desired (by some sick individuals in power) scenario.

public fervor over gun control would never be at the level it now is without tragic circumstances related to guns.

but if we lose our 2nd Amendment, we lose a basic freedom that ensures our national sovereignty as well as our personal sovereignty and safety. the very children we love and want to protect would be even more vulnerable if our citizenry as a whole was categorically disarmed. Why else has our country not been invaded full scale on foot since the revolutionary war?  because behind every household front door, an American could possibly be owning a gun. and no other country i know of is like ours'.

if parents are that worried abotu their children's safety, then they ought to home school them. that is the safest bet. 

Godgaveme4
by Member on Aug. 31, 2013 at 1:04 AM
1 mom liked this
I get a different message from the targets. Our children are targets when we send them into gun free zones.

It is already against the law to have a gun on school grounds. It is already against the law to kill someone. Seems like it is covered.
jobseeker
by Bronze Member on Aug. 31, 2013 at 11:12 AM
2 moms liked this

Even IF we took every legal registered gun from every legal permitted citizen, there would still be guns floating around our cities and towns.  

Criminals buying guns from other criminals do not apply for permits, or subject themselves to background checks.


JoJoBean8
by Silver Member on Sep. 1, 2013 at 12:51 PM

Yes that goes way to far.

JoJoBean8
by Silver Member on Sep. 1, 2013 at 12:52 PM

Very interesting. Tfs

Quoting kcangel63:

Found something. I KNOW... it's WND. Find me others. I'm mobile. It's hard. LOL



...But in a number of high-profile cases, the link has been reported:

Kip Kinkel was withdrawing from Prozac and had been prescribed Ritalin when he murdered his mother and stepfather then shot 22 classmates, killing two, in 1998.

Christopher Pittman was withdrawing from Luvox and from Paxil when he killed his paternal grandparents in 2001.

Elizabeth Bush, who fired at fellow students in Williamsport, Pa., in 2001, wounding one, was on Prozac.

Jason Hoffman, was on Effexor and Celexa when he opened fire at his El Cajon, Calif., high school, wounding five.

Shawn Cooper of Notus, Idaho, was on antidepressants when he fired a shotgun on students and staff.

T.J. Solomon, on antidepressants, wounded six at his Conyers, Ga., high school.
Eric Harris was taking Luvox when he and fellow student Dylan Klebold killed 12 students and a teacher and wounded 24 others before turning their guns on themselves at Columbine High School in Colorado.

At Virginia Tech in 2007, where 32 were murdered, authorities found “prescription medications related to the treatment of psychological problems had been found among Mr. Cho’s effects,” according to the New York Times.

Read more at http://mobile.wnd.com/2012/12/psych-meds-linked-to-90-of-school-shootings/#RXv2IV4j4htlGfRP.99


Lorik1969
by Member on Sep. 1, 2013 at 4:49 PM
1 mom liked this
Another interesting statistic, according to the CDC:

"In 2010, 10,228 people were killed in alcohol-impaired driving crashes, accounting for nearly one-third (31%) of all traffic-related deaths in the United States.1"

So, in one year, more people, by a large margin, are killed by alcohol than all of the school shootings, workplace shootings, etc. combined. Why isn't the government pushing for tighter restrictions on alcohol?
I would have to say that not only does the picture go too far, the entire movement does.
joey125
by Silver Member on Sep. 1, 2013 at 11:06 PM
I think they have gotten much stricter regarding dwi, s They lowered the blood levels, and some think perhaps 2 drinks may get you a dwi. I think this particular situation is going too far, I would not want to subject my children to this, its frightening and really makes no sense. However, I still see nothing wrong with tighter background checks and a ban on high capacity magazines.
JanetMonroe1991
by Member on Sep. 2, 2013 at 12:01 AM

I think everyone should have a gun, that way when a republican stands up and tells you that you can't get healthcare for you and your child because they are cutting all the progarams for it so those dollars can go to fund whatever they think is more important you can respond by pulling out your NRA sponsered gun and shooting them to death. You get healthcare in Jail and your child gets healthcare in foster care.  Sounds like a win win to me. 

Ednarooni160
by Eds on Sep. 2, 2013 at 6:04 AM

This IS going to far..and when her child gets hurt by someone..kid or otherwise..well..YOU (mom) did put the bulls eye there.

Add your quick reply below:
You must be a member to reply to this post.
Join the Meeting Place for Moms!
Talk to other moms, share advice, and have fun!

(minimum 6 characters)