Weapons in Foster Homes

[Deltaboy1984]

Well then the STATE can keep them and take care of them.

 

[Mrs. Armoredman]

Well this throws another log on the fire that is my hatred of all things government.




I hear that. I have no trust or faith in our goverment. They can't seem to take care of anything themselves.

 

[Zundfolge]

I guess one thing that REALLY ticks me off is that rifelry can be used as a way of reaching out to youth and helping set them on the straight and narrow. Lots of life lessons there.

But the state, in their infinite wisdom, instead would rather push a political agenda against arms instead of see to it that young boys are raised into men and young girls raised into ladies.

 

[BullpupBen]

The only thing that the government is good at taking care of is itself.

 

[jeepmor]

The only thing that the government is good at taking care of is itself.

And it's industry captains. Socialism is obviously for the rich, not the common man. Our current economic issues are a keen indicator supporting this philosophy.

Damn, I wanna be a CEO with a golden parachute on the "unknown" list of benefactors to the latest debacle.

No coverup there, no, not one bit.

jeepmor

 

[Thin Black Line]

Well then the STATE can keep them and take care of them.

I understand that anger. Keep in mind, though, that all states have varying
rules on firearms in licensed foster homes.

I think as the economy gets worse and child neglect rises (due to poverty,
drugs, combination of many factors), we'll either see more kids go into care
or the state will have to ignore its own "minimum standards of care" (yes,
that is a real term) when it comes to parenting.

The state will have to leave kids in cr@ppy situtations with their own parents,
open orphanages again (larger scale of so-called "care"), or loosen some of
its standards for foster care licensing. Child welfare could find itself back
in the 1940s real quick. Depending on the state, there were large institutions
operating thru the 1980s and 1990s until they closed. Supposedly, this was
to provide kids with a more home-like atmosphere, but there were a lot of
institutional requirements and licensing standards which made them far more
costly than a foster home.

I remember one state where it cost me more to board my cat on a daily
basis than the per diem was for a child in foster care. Yet, the cheapest
institutional rate for the same child was comparable to a standard non-city
hotel room at the time.

So as the economy worsens, you might see foster home licensing standards
change to where the whole firearm issue is conveniently "ignored", but the
daily rate would be barely enough to feed and clothe the kid let alone leave
you enough to buy a box of ammo at the end of the month.

The old saying that "you don't become a foster parent for the money" has
been and always will be true. I respect them for what they're willing to do.

 

[rmmoore]

I'm no sure about that Thinblackline. After the communists took over Russia, and the economy (given what it was at the time) went south, I don't recall them "relaxing" ANY government rules for the betterment of the children, or in any of the other "Socialist" paradise's that appeared in the 20th century. For that matter, do you ever recall OUR government relaxing a program, it's authority, or rules for ANYTHING that was social in nature, to help ANYONE, other than itself? When (ok, "if") the economy tanks, good old "Uncle" isn't going to relax any rules, or leave any children in a home whether it's truly a bad situation or NOT!!!!! If there's even a hint of an issue the kids are gone, or perhaps not even that is required anymore. I have a friend in Child Services and the stories she's told me make me want to puke, or worse.

Afterall, who better to care for and indoctrinate (oops, I meant 'raise') our children the the government? Can't have all those freedom loving, liberty preserving, gun-toting zealots raising their OWN children to further this outdated idea of individual responsibility and independance (yeah, remember, OB said the Constitution was an outdated document before the election. Think about THAT). Mindless, faceless zombies for the socialist worker machine; "afterall, we're just a, another brick in the wall":banghead:

 

[rmmoore]

Oops, I forgot to mention, no matter bad the economy is, no matter how bad WE are suffering, the government has all the money it needs to run things, foster homes, orphanages, ect. If they run out, well hell, they'll just print some more!!! They own the presses after all. And if it REALLY, REALLY goes to hell in a handbasket, we'll just reorganize our entire economic structure and at that point, GAME OVER boys and girls. Our history as a free Nation (if we're even really one now) is GONE, forever, poof, we've disappeared. Don't want to be a downer the day after Christmas and all, but we've GOT to open our eyes and see the forest through the trees. And this isn't a repub or demo thing, with VERY FEW exceptions, they're all republicrats as far as I'm concerned. At what point is enough, enough?

 

[Thin Black Line]

Romanian orphanages in the 1990s violated their own basic rules. It got
some media attention here in the US. The Romas looked into doing a US
style foster care system and to make child adoption legally easier. The
Russians did this, too, for a while.

I think both countries ended up stopping the adoption of their children by
foreigners...and no more TV crews in their orphanages.

Gov't can change rules and print more money whenever it likes.

If conservative gun-owners end up being 90% of potential foster care
applicants (and lobby the state as such), I think you would find gov't
responsive to this given the right circumstances.

It's kind of like the necessity speech Clooney's character gave in Three Kings.

 

[Thin Black Line]

What great timing on this topic:

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20081226/ap_on_re_us/meltdown_juvenile_justice

Cash-strapped states cut juvenile justice programs
By Jim Davenport, Associated Press Writer – 48 mins ago

COLUMBIA, S.C. – State budget cuts are forcing some of the nation's youngest criminals out of counseling programs and group homes and into juvenile prisons in what critics contend is a shortsighted move that will eventually lead to more crime and higher costs.

Tennessee, South Carolina, Kentucky and Virginia are among states that have slashed juvenile justice spending — in some cases more than 20 percent — because of slumping tax collections. Youth advocates say they expect the recession will bring more cuts next year in other states, hitting programs that try to rehabilitate children rather than simply locking them up.

"If you raise a child in prison, you're going to raise a convict," said South Carolina Juvenile Justice Director Bill Byars, credited with turning around a system once better known for warehousing children than counseling them and teaching them life skills.

Now, he's been asked to draw up plans to trim an additional 15 percent from a juvenile justice budget already cut $23 million, or 20 percent, since June as part of the state's effort to pare $1 billion from its $7 billion budget.

All five of the system's group homes — which generally house less-violent offenders and give them more individual attention — have been shuttered. Also gone are some intensive youth reform and after-school programs in detention facilities.

The story is similar in other states. Kentucky is nixing a boot camp-style program developed by the National Guard. Virginia is losing behavioral services staff and a facility that prepares children to go home after serving time, along with smaller camps and community programs. Juveniles in those programs will return to traditional correctional facilities.

"It's not like we're going to say, 'OK, let's close a juvenile detention center,' or something like that," said Gordon Hickey, spokesman for Virginia Gov. Timothy M. Kaine. "We have to reduce spending across the state, and the governor looked at suggestions and recommendations from all departments. He certainly realizes that all of these reductions have consequences. The idea is to limit the damage as much as possible."

Among the programs being cut in South Carolina is one that Lex Wilbanks, an 18-year-old arrested four years ago on drug and gun charges, credits with giving him back his future.

Before moving to the program run by Florida-based nonprofit Associated Marine Institute, which provides intensive counseling and wilderness camps in several states, Wilbanks spent four months in a regular juvenile detention center.

"When you did something wrong or you fight or you disrespect staff, they just throw you into lockdown," Wilbanks said. "They just throw you in and make them fight to survive. You're just making them a hardened criminal."

In South Carolina, only 22 percent of offenders who go through the institute's program later break the law, less than half the recidivism rate for juveniles in large state facilities, Byars said.
....
Juvenile facilities see an array of major and minor criminals. Gun, drug, sex and assault offenders may share sleeping quarters and classes with teen pranksters sentenced for disrupting schools or destroying property. Terms can last weeks or, in extreme cases, until youths become adults and are transferred to adult prisons.

Generally, less violent offenders make it to the smaller group homes, and experts say social pecking orders are easier to defuse in those settings compared to prisons where gangs try to form and fight for control.

Sheila Bedi, executive director of the Washington-based Justice Policy Institute, said housing children can cost as much as $600 per child daily. But the expenses can be much higher when children emerge hardened from big youth prisons, commit more crimes and end up in adult facilities.

"The truant comes out learning how to steal a car," Bedi said. "You cannot expect a child to come out of that situation with the ability to make better life decisions."

 

[taliv]

i haven't read any of the previous responses, but well, I for one would not want my guns going to foster homes. if you're not responsible enough or you can't afford to feed and care for your guns, then you shouldn't have that many guns. take some to a gun show and sell them to someone who will care for them.

also, it's ok to abuse some guns, particularly black ones (I AM NOT A RACIST! SOME OF MY BEST FRIENDS ARE BLACK GUNS). but you should try to clean them up a bit afterwards and replace any worn or broken parts.

but i see people all the time, particularly old widow women, who leave their dearly departed's shotguns rusting in some closet somewhere for 10 years. that should be a crime. one of these days, when we elect a real president, the ATF will focus on these sorts of heinous gun crimes. and welfare recipients will be able to get Government Eezox.