Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

Toddler shoots parent dead in Super Market

Options
1…5681011…13

Comments

  • Options
    #212
    Egginacup
    Site Banned Posts: 2,922 ✭✭✭Egginacup


    Tugboats wrote: »
    Has George Bush and Iraq been mentioned yet?

    The very fact that you said that, and that it was thanked is an illustration in "slag off those who expose the utter dumbness that we defend"


  • Options
    #213
    2011
    Moderators, Home & Garden Moderators, Technology & Internet Moderators, Regional East Moderators Posts: 12,552 Mod ✭✭✭✭2011


    aaakev wrote: »
    Your ether making things up or are misinformed.

    Which part of the post of mine that you quoted is made up or misinformed?


  • Options
    #214
    Highflyer13
    Closed Accounts Posts: 954 ✭✭✭Highflyer13


    http://mashable.com/2015/01/01/cups-song-guns/

    Merica. **** yeah! Woooooooo. USA USA USA!


  • Options
    #215
    MadsL
    Registered Users Posts: 20,299 ✭✭✭✭MadsL


    Egginacup wrote: »
    The very fact that you said that, and that it was thanked is an illustration in "slag off those who expose the utter dumbness that we defend"

    What dumbness are you exactly attacking here?

    Is it the ownership of guns in the US?
    People also own guns in Ireland.

    Is it the type of guns?
    People own many of the same guns in Ireland.

    Is it the public carrying of guns?
    It is not illegal to carry a licensed gun in Ireland?

    Perhaps you could be a little more precise as to the "utter dumbness" that you are complaining about.

    What we appear to have here is a failure of a safety device. To whom do you ascribe fault? The manufacturer or the purchaser?


  • Options
    #216
    Egginacup
    Site Banned Posts: 2,922 ✭✭✭Egginacup


    MadsL wrote: »
    The obvious answer is that assaults and abductions are not unusual in public places. A friend of mine, a woman in her 50s, had to fight off someone who snatched her bag in a Walmart parking lot the other day.

    The alternative that you are positing is that one should not bring children anywhere there is a risk. In whch case you are never putting them in the car since they also have a risk of death being in the car.

    I don't much blame a mother for carrying when alone with her child, I do blame her for being careless with her purse.

    This kind of justification is not only puerile but infantile. All you are doing is digging your heels in and attempting to defend the nonsensical just because you took a stance that is proven to be cretinous.
    By your logic you could excuse some fool driving his kids to school in a panzer because his bog standard car doesn't provide enough armour against would-be panzerfaust wielding thugs.

    If the streets are so dangerous...and if you know this then aren't you negligent in allowing kids to walk them?
    If the biggest fear out there is rape resulting in the need to be armed then wouldn't it be prudent to take multiple defensive measures, e.g. a chastity belt on all women, first and then a gun as a backup?


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #217
    GalwayGuitar
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 194 ✭✭GalwayGuitar


    Egginacup wrote: »
    This kind of justification is not only puerile but infantile. All you are doing is digging your heels in and attempting to defend the nonsensical just because you took a stance that is proven to be cretinous.
    By your logic you could excuse some fool driving his kids to school in a panzer because his bog standard car doesn't provide enough armour against would-be panzerfaust wielding thugs.

    If the streets are so dangerous...and if you know this then aren't you negligent in allowing kids to walk them?
    If the biggest fear out there is rape resulting in the need to be armed then wouldn't it be prudent to take multiple defensive measures, e.g. a chastity belt on all women, first and then a gun as a backup?

    What have you been smoking? A gun is the most effective anti rape device though.


  • Options
    #218
    Egginacup
    Site Banned Posts: 2,922 ✭✭✭Egginacup


    MadsL wrote: »
    What dumbness are you exactly attacking here?

    Is it the ownership of guns in the US?
    People also own guns in Ireland.

    Is it the type of guns?
    People own many of the same guns in Ireland.

    Is it the public carrying of guns?
    It is not illegal to carry a licensed gun in Ireland?

    Perhaps you could be a little more precise as to the "utter dumbness" that you are complaining about.

    What we appear to have here is a failure of a safety device. To whom do you ascribe fault? The manufacturer or the purchaser?

    Why are you bringing up Ireland?


  • Options
    #219
    MadsL
    Registered Users Posts: 20,299 ✭✭✭✭MadsL


    Egginacup wrote: »
    This kind of justification is not only puerile but infantile.

    Insulting me now?
    All you are doing is digging your heels in and attempting to defend the nonsensical just because you took a stance that is proven to be cretinous.
    More insults. Are you saying a woman should not be allowed to have all legal forms of self-defence available to her when in public, including a concealed weapon if carried in accordance with her State law?
    By your logic you could excuse some fool driving his kids to school in a panzer because his bog standard car doesn't provide enough armour against would-be panzerfaust wielding thugs.

    Are you seriously saying than no reinforced vehicles drive people like celebrities or diplomats around both Ireland and the US. I believe even someone with a divine connection used one in 1979 on a visit to Ireland. What was it called? Ah yes...the popemobile.
    If the streets are so dangerous...and if you know this then aren't you negligent in allowing kids to walk them?

    Walk them? Have you ever visited the US? When was the last time you saw a child walking alone?
    If the biggest fear out there is rape resulting in the need to be armed then wouldn't it be prudent to take multiple defensive measures, e.g. a chastity belt on all women, first and then a gun as a backup?

    I think you have a very warped view of risk and appropriate precaution. One of us personally knows someone who prevented her rape by using her gun, and it probably isn't you. Yeah, she carries to this day. Would you like to be the one to try taking that right from her?


  • Options
    #220
    Sheep Lover
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,730 ✭✭✭Sheep Lover


    "Just popping out for some milk love, have you seen my assault rifle and hand grenades anywhere? "


  • Options
    #221
    MadsL
    Registered Users Posts: 20,299 ✭✭✭✭MadsL


    Egginacup wrote: »
    Why are you bringing up Ireland?

    Because you appear to be pointing at the US and saying "look at this dumbness" whilst being unware that similar legal positions exist in Ireland.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #222
    Egginacup
    Site Banned Posts: 2,922 ✭✭✭Egginacup


    GalwayGuitar wrote: »
    What have you been smoking? A gun is the most effective anti rape device though.

    No a gun is NOT the most effective anti-rape device. Fitness, ability to batter your assailant, some martial art skill and aggression is the most effective defence against rape.


  • Options
    #223
    Egginacup
    Site Banned Posts: 2,922 ✭✭✭Egginacup


    MadsL wrote: »
    Because you appear to be pointing at the US and saying "look at this dumbness" whilst being unware that similar legal positions exist in Ireland.

    If that's how you perceive it then that's your prerogative.


  • Options
    #224
    GalwayGuitar
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 194 ✭✭GalwayGuitar


    Egginacup wrote: »
    No a gun is NOT the most effective anti-rape device. Fitness, ability to batter your assailant, some martial art skill and aggression is the most effective defence against rape.

    Right and if your assailant has 100 pounds on you and is a foot taller?

    I can never understand why feminists always seem to be against guns.


  • Options
    #225
    MadsL
    Registered Users Posts: 20,299 ✭✭✭✭MadsL


    Egginacup wrote: »
    If that's how you perceive it then that's your prerogative.

    Perhaps if you answered the questions put to you I could adjust my perception of your argument.

    Let's try again..

    "Are you saying a woman should not be allowed to have all legal forms of self-defence available to her when in public, including a concealed weapon if carried in accordance with her State law?"

    Pretty straightforward question, is it yes or no?


  • Options
    #226
    moneyman
    Registered Users Posts: 1,337 ✭✭✭moneyman


    I usually disagree strongly with MadSL on everything gun-related. However, the fact that his opposition here is Egginacup has left me in limbo, as the latter is generally spectacularly wrong about everything.

    Must be some sort of boards glitch.


  • Options
    #227
    MadsL
    Registered Users Posts: 20,299 ✭✭✭✭MadsL


    moneyman wrote: »
    I usually disagree strongly with MadSL on everything gun-related. However, the fact that his opposition here is Egginacup has left me in limbo, as the latter is generally spectacularly wrong about everything.

    Must be some sort of boards glitch.

    I aim to please.

    *tips hat*


  • Options
    #228
    Manic Moran
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 16,267 Mod ✭✭✭✭Manic Moran


    Sheep Lover wrote: »
    "Just popping out for some milk love, have you seen my assault rifle and hand grenades anywhere? "
    darkpagandeath wrote: »
    If everyone was armed this would never of happened..........
    strobe wrote: »
    What if the mother had of been carrying an assault rifle? Had it outgunned? Pew pew!
    shruikan2553 wrote: »
    If everyone carried 2 guns this would have never happened. Thanks Obama.
    Gatling wrote: »
    Im sure they'll say if the employees all had guns they could have prevented it some how
    pmasterson95 wrote: »
    Murica........the guns are fine and kill no one.....its the toddlers.....thats why muricans need guns to protect themselves and there freedom from gun toting babies
    sonofenoch wrote: »
    She should have had a 2nd gun.....they could have had a shootout like real cowboys and injuns

    What really irks me about Boards is that this sort of ludicrous hyperbole is accepted in 'discussions' about a fairly serious topic. Nobody has ever made such claims. Nobody is ever going to make such a claim. However, fine, since people are incapable of supporting an opinion, let's build complete strawmen and mock them. The only people being mocked on what is presumably Ireland's largest discussion forum are, I would suggest, the people of such type quoted above. Jokes/puns etc are fine. But if you're going to go after a society of which you are probably (a) not a member, and (b) generally ignorant (usually as a result of a combination of (a) and disinterest in the subject matter anyway), try to come up with better reasons. Some folk on here who dislike the American philosophy on firearms have actually made cogent argument. It ain't hard.


  • Options
    #229
    shruikan2553
    Closed Accounts Posts: 6,113 ✭✭✭shruikan2553


    Manic Moran wrote: »
    What really irks me about Boards is that this sort of ludicrous hyperbole is accepted in 'discussions' about a fairly serious topic. Nobody has ever made such claims. Nobody is ever going to make such a claim. However, fine, since people are incapable of supporting an opinion, let's build complete strawmen and mock them. The only people being mocked on what is presumably Ireland's largest discussion forum are, I would suggest, the people of such type quoted above. Jokes/puns etc are fine. But if you're going to go after a society of which you are probably (a) not a member, and (b) generally ignorant (usually as a result of a combination of (a) and disinterest in the subject matter anyway), try to come up with better reasons. Some folk on here who dislike the American philosophy on firearms have actually made cogent argument. It ain't hard.

    It is a piss take on what we often hear when there is a shooting. The solution is always more guns.


  • Options
    #230
    Nollog
    Registered Users Posts: 5,419 ✭✭✭Nollog


    Venus In Furs wrote: »
    Because a mobile phone and a potentially lethal weapon are *of course* directly comparable.

    You can slowly give an attacker brain cancer over 40 years.


  • Options
    #231
    Heckler
    Registered Users Posts: 3,325 ✭✭✭Heckler


    volchitsa wrote: »
    This woman was a responsible person apparently - in any case a nuclear scientist (scary if she is below the average for acting responsibly!).

    So maybe we need to stop automatically calling people stupid whenever these accidents happen, and accept that people, even responsible people, make mistakes, and that it is unfair to talk about tarnishing reputations, or "irresponsible" vs "responsible" firearms owners?

    Never called anyone stupid. But she was irresponsible. If you argue thats their culture then you have to accept the stupid pointless deaths that happen every year.

    I own guns and wouldn't leave a child within an ass' roar of them. Why did she feel the need to have one at a supermarket ffs. Terrorist attack maybe ? Bull****. This 2nd amendment nonsense is just that. Legislation drafted in the 1700s and people citing it as good cause and their right to have a loaded handgun in a purse. See where your rights got you. A dead mother and a traumatised child. Well done Murka.

    And I stand by responsible and irresponsible. In America its so easy to get a gun a large number of idiots have one. In Ireland the hoops you have to jump through to get a firearm would put anyone, unless they had a good reason for having it, off.

    Anyone who does have a legal firearm here and theres an accident, yes they're stupid and yes they're irresponsible. Accidents and mistakes don't happen with firearms. They are caused. To err is human isn't a defence.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #232
    seamus
    Registered Users Posts: 68,317 ✭✭✭✭seamus


    MadsL wrote: »
    More insults. Are you saying a woman should not be allowed to have all legal forms of self-defence available to her when in public, including a concealed weapon if carried in accordance with her State law?
    That's a tautology, if something is legal to carry, then it's legal to carry.

    I think the question you're trying to ask is, "Are you saying a woman should not have all legal forms of self-defence available to her when in public, including a concealed weapon if carried in accordance with her State law?".
    And of course the answer is no, a person should not be carrying weapons when in public.

    Carrying a weapon just because you're legally permitted to do so and you're scared, is a really bad fncking reason to carry a weapon. By all means carry one when you're running a high risk of needing to use it, but carrying one "Just in case" is highly irresponsible and irrational, and results in incidents like this.


  • Options
    #233
    Grayson
    Registered Users Posts: 16,161 ✭✭✭✭Grayson


    MadsL wrote: »
    I'm open to correction but as far as I am aware the AK in semi-auto form is considered for licencing in Ireland, as is the AR-15. There are AR-15 owners in Ireland, I believe there may be one or two AKs.

    I can live with one or two in private ownership in the whole country. It's a bit crazy to think there are many states in the US where you can just walk in and buy one. Hell, you could fill up a car with guns and ammunition at a gun show.


    Personally i think guns like drugs should be heavily regulated. I'm all in favour of decriminalising marijuana and selling it through licensed premises but I'd never be in favour of allowing the legalisation of say, crystal meth.

    Likewise, hunting guns etc should be legalised and regulated. Bigger stuff should be very heavily regulated, it not banned outright.


  • Options
    #234
    aaakev
    Registered Users Posts: 3,088 ✭✭✭aaakev


    Grayson wrote: »

    Likewise, hunting guns etc should be legalised and regulated. Bigger stuff should be very heavily regulated, it not banned outright.

    thats exactly how it is now in ireland


  • Options
    #235
    Grayson
    Registered Users Posts: 16,161 ✭✭✭✭Grayson


    aaakev wrote: »
    thats exactly how it is now in ireland

    the whole "right to bear arms" (we'll ignore the militia bit) gives people the wrong idea. You might have a "right" to a hunting rifle, but that doesn't mean that you have the right to own artillery.

    See, rights are weird things. people get confused between human rights and civil rights all the time. I'm not even going to go into a discussion about how rights even come about or whether or not they're real.

    The problem in the US is that the Right to bear arms is written into the constitution and there's very little actually in there. It's pretty much one little phrase. The two biggest problems are the words "right" and the fact that it's in the constitution which many Americans hold to be the most sacred document in the world.
    Touching gun rights in the US is probably as controversial as abortion.
    Speaking of which, we've seen recently the confusion that offers in abortion when a couple of lines are written into a constitution.


  • Options
    #236
    Grand Moff Tarkin
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 862 ✭✭✭Grand Moff Tarkin


    Egginacup wrote: »
    No a gun is NOT the most effective anti-rape device. Fitness, ability to batter your assailant, some martial art skill and aggression is the most effective defence against rape.

    When we lived in New York a young lady living two floors up from us was nearly assaulted by an idiot who was looking to have his way with her. What saved her life was the handgun she had been trained to use at an early age.


  • Options
    #237
    aaakev
    Registered Users Posts: 3,088 ✭✭✭aaakev


    Grand Moff Tarkin wrote: »
    When we lived in New York a young lady living two floors up from us was nearly assaulted by an idiot who was looking to have his way with her. What saved her life was the handgun she had been trained to use at an early age.

    When was this now? I thought handguns were restricted in nyc, open to correction on that though!


  • Options
    #238
    Grand Moff Tarkin
    Banned (with Prison Access) Posts: 862 ✭✭✭Grand Moff Tarkin


    aaakev wrote: »
    When was this now?

    Going back a good fifteen years ago. Pre 9/11 very different to what it is like now.


  • Options
    #239
    seamus
    Registered Users Posts: 68,317 ✭✭✭✭seamus


    Grand Moff Tarkin wrote: »
    When we lived in New York a young lady living two floors up from us was nearly assaulted by an idiot who was looking to have his way with her. What saved her life was the handgun she had been trained to use at an early age.
    Nice anecdote, but it doesn't prove that a concealed carry weapon is an effective anti-rape device. I imagine most random sexual assaults start with a full-on punch in the face, leaving the victim dazed and without their purse; where their gun is.


  • Options
    #240
    Manic Moran
    Moderators, Society & Culture Moderators Posts: 16,267 Mod ✭✭✭✭Manic Moran


    seamus wrote: »
    Carrying a weapon just because you're legally permitted to do so and you're scared, is a really bad fncking reason to carry a weapon. By all means carry one when you're running a high risk of needing to use it, but carrying one "Just in case" is highly irresponsible and irrational, and results in incidents like this.

    Since one can never know ahead of time when one might be handy, it seems a little difficult to assess ahead of time when you're running a high risk of needing to use one. This death occurred in Walmart. Did not the Tuscon shooter decide to go on his little spree outside of Walmart? The Trolley Square Mall shooter in, well, a shopping mall? Those are, of course, the very rare, high-profile incidents of mass shootings. CCWs have come in handy anywhere from churches (eg New Life Church shooting cut short by a parishoner) to cyber-cafes http://abcnews.go.com/US/florida-man-71-shoots-alleged-robbers-internet-cafe/story?id=16800859 (71-year old customer stops armed robbery).

    Yes, absolutely a risk/benefit analysis must be undertaken by any individual contemplating going about his daily business armed, but to make a blanket statement about irresponsibility is irrational in itself.


  • Advertisement
  • Options
    #241
    FISMA
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,616 ✭✭✭FISMA


    Grayson wrote: »
    Bigger stuff should be very heavily regulated, it not banned outright.

    Why?

    Most crime and deaths are due to hand-guns. Most hand gun deaths are self inflicted - suicides.

    All rifles combined kill less that fists & clubs. More people die in the States because their car hit a deer, elk, or moose than all rifles combined.

    Out of the tens of thousands of firearm deaths in the States, rifles cause about 1% of deaths. The "bigger stuff," almost zero.


Advertisement