3 year old dead in 'Merica after shooting himself with pistol

MadsL · 20-08-2013 11:50PM

Strawberry Milkshake wrote: »

Right! Who had MadsL mentioning his friend on the 59th post?

Collect your winnings on your way out.

Sorry MadsL

Quite alright. However, those who take this silly line about how this is never justified and that is never justified, pretty much leave women living along with some very stark choices.

In my friend's case, she had been stalked for a couple of weeks.

wil · 20-08-2013 11:52PM

MadsL wrote: »

Most boys come out of the womb pointing a finger and going pew! pew!

If there is a gun in the house, lock it up.
Teach the child how to be safe, never touch it without an adult, go get an adult.
Teach the child to shoot if there is a gun in the house, that way they understand the difference between a toy and the real thing.
Again, never touch without an adult.
If you find one, stop, don't touch, go tell an adult.

These aren't hard rules for a 3 year to understand. Much the same as never touch the oven. Don't stick your fingers in the socket.

Agree with most of this (in the context of America) but teaching your child should absolutely not ever absolve the adult responible for the gun, if they have been reckless.

The electric socket is a good example. My kids a provide a good risk analysis.
Each understands what they are told. One accepts as told, the other puts fingers in socket to confirm.
Apparently I was also caught putting wires in socket as a kid, so theres a bit of Darwin in the genes.

Expecting small kids to appreciate and follow rules absolutely without the usual care and supervision is maliciously asking for grief. Accidents happen but some "accidents" should never. The greater the power, in this case over life, the greater the responsibility.

No amount of training , especially concerning a child as young as 3, should be expected to counter the natural inquisitive nature and boundary testing of small children. All you can do is teach them and hope it gives them the tools to deal with a situation you may not have control over - such as an idiotic/drunken/druggie/insane relative/friend/visitor leaving a loaded gun lying around.:eek:

1ZRed · 20-08-2013 11:53PM

Americans are retarded as it is at the best of times, but when it comes to guns they really have gone full retard.

So many are dying because of guns because they think it's their god given right for everyone and their dog to have one, all with piss-poor regulation too.

What the fúck is their obsession with them anyway?

MadsL · 20-08-2013 11:54PM

Dave0301 wrote: »

From your posts, it is obvious you have a pro gun stance. Which is your right to have and all that, good to see you're very conscientious about the safety aspect.

I can't help but feel tho, that the availability of guns to the average Joe state side leads to people believing they need one.

I have been in countries with armed and unarmed forces, stayed in some pretty rough places, but never felt the need to carry a fire arm. Why? Because the odds of someone going through all the trouble of illegally obtaining a firearm to shoot me isn't really worth the trouble.

Where as, if the criminal thinks i am armed, well then he needs to be armed too!

I'm not following your logic? How do we put everyones guns back in the box and say right now play nice? You think it is a "trouble" to get a gun in the US???

Clandestine · 20-08-2013 11:55PM

This is simply a case of bad parenting

Guns should not be banned, the right to bear arms is guaranteed in the
Second Amendment which should be respected.

http://americangunfacts.com/

Zambia · 20-08-2013 11:57PM

While this is very sad, a mistake was made and a child died.

The gun owner will no doubt be charged and hopefully this remains a rare event.

The overwhelming majority of gun owners I meet are super safety conscious, the firearm is on them when loaded or unloaded and in a safe.

MadsL · 21-08-2013 12:01AM

wil wrote: »

Agree with most of this but teaching your child should absolutely not ever absolve the adult responible for the gun, if they have been reckless.

Absolutely agree. You may have noted my comments about the adult.

Love2u · 21-08-2013 12:05AM

MadsL wrote: »

The policeman putting food in the mouth of the innocent child by going out to work perhaps?

No argument with you there.

I wasn't doing detective work, I was merely pointing out that most guns bought new are too heavy a trigger pull for a child to pull. For example, I have taken a 110 lb girl shooting who simply did not have the hand strength to pull the trigger on a revolver we were shooting.

This child should have had to:

Unlock the case
Chamber a round (3 not strong/able enough to rack the slide)
Figure out the safety
Pull trigger

That is 4 things a 3 year should not have been able to do. Not only did this muppet leave the gun out, he left it loaded, safety off, with (I presume) a lightened trigger.

I've no interest in your gun knowledge or gun theory's. Thank you.

pablomakaveli · 21-08-2013 12:07AM

MadsL wrote: »

I'm sorry, are you doubting that handguns are used in hunting now? Or what?

I'm doubting that possibly needing a high calibre pistol as a last resort when being charged by a boar your hunting is a valid reason for widely available handguns.

What do you mean by "assault rifle"? As a soldier I assume you are familiar with full auto firearms. Well, those are not widely available.

As in a rifle capable of semi-automatic ,automatic fire or both. The AR-15 being an example of a semi-automatic assault rifle available in America.

A friend of mine who prevented her own rape, in her own bedroom by shooting the guy (he survived) would beg to differ. She doesn't hunt by the way.

As unfortunate what happened to your friend i would deem that a rare case. We don't see endemic rapes or murders occuring due to lack of firearms in most European countries so one has to wonder what makes America different. Maybe the gun culture itself has led to more violent crime in the US.

MadsL · 21-08-2013 12:09AM

Love2u wrote: »

I've no interest in your gun knowledge or gun theory's. Thank you.

Someone else asked a question, I answered it.

If you have a problem with that by all means report the post.

Thank you.

wil · 21-08-2013 12:13AM

Clandestine wrote: »

This is simply a case of bad parenting

Guns should not be banned, the right to bear arms is guaranteed in the
Second Amendment which should be respected.

http://americangunfacts.com/

Not sure it indicates anything much about the parents other than a bad/unfortunate choice of who they leave in to their home.

What we feel about guns will have little relevence to gun law and control in the US. It is by far the most gunned up country in the world on the back of an outdated constitution that was meant for a different time and a very powerful and stubbornly obstinate gun lobby.
It could take many generations to reverse the degree of ingrained acceptance of the gun in American culture even if there was a will to do so.

Love2u · 21-08-2013 12:14AM

MadsL wrote: »

Someone else asked a question, I answered it.

If you have a problem with that by all means report the post.

Thank you.

The only problem I have is your obsession with guns :-/.

MadsL · 21-08-2013 12:16AM

pablomakaveli wrote: »

I'm doubting that possibly needing a high calibre pistol as a last resort when being charged by a boar your hunting is a valid reason for widely available handguns.

It is one reason among many why people own handguns. You said handguns were not used for hunting - this was an example.

As in a rifle capable of semi-automatic ,automatic fire or both. The AR-15 being an example of a semi-automatic assault rifle available in America.

What makes it "assault" other than being black and having a handle on top?

As unfortunate what happened to your friend i would deem that a rare case. We don't see endemic rapes or murders occuring due to lack of firearms in most European countries so one has to wonder what makes America different. Maybe the gun culture itself has led to more violent crime in the US.

Really.

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_rap_vic-crime-rape-victims

Rank Countries Amount
# 1 New Zealand: 1.3%
# 2 Austria: 1.2%
= 3 Sweden: 1.1%
= 3 Finland: 1.1%
# 5 Australia: 1%
# 6 United Kingdom: 0.9%
= 7 Netherlands: 0.8%
= 7 Slovenia: 0.8%
= 7 Canada: 0.8%
# 10 France: 0.7%
= 11 Italy: 0.6%
= 11 Switzerland:

All have more rapes than the US.

pablomakaveli · 21-08-2013 12:30AM

MadsL wrote: »

It is one reason among many why people own handguns. You said handguns were not used for hunting - this was an example.

And your best example was an obscure situation where one might be required. That doesn't make it a requirement for all types of hunting.

What makes it "assault" other than being black and having a handle on top?

Thats what they are classed as. Thats not me classing them as that, thats what they are.

And given they're normally used by the military it makes me wonder why a civvie would need to use one.

Really.

http://www.nationmaster.com/graph/cri_rap_vic-crime-rape-victims

Rank Countries Amount
# 1 New Zealand: 1.3%
# 2 Austria: 1.2%
= 3 Sweden: 1.1%
= 3 Finland: 1.1%
# 5 Australia: 1%
# 6 United Kingdom: 0.9%
= 7 Netherlands: 0.8%
= 7 Slovenia: 0.8%
= 7 Canada: 0.8%
# 10 France: 0.7%
= 11 Italy: 0.6%
= 11 Switzerland:

All have more rapes than the US.

And this shows that the US has far more gun crime than Europe. Obviously as a result of widespread availability of guns.

Sir_Badshot · 21-08-2013 12:31AM

OU812 wrote: »

^ This. For the time it was written it was probably one of the most forward thinking of the time.

Unfortunately, interpretation over time & advancements in munitions have meant that it is now a dangerous phrase.

None of these militia ever quote the full section:

"A well regulated militia being nessesary to the security of a free state, the right of the people to keep and bear arms shall not be infringed." - Second Amendment of the U.S. Constitution.

The founders of the country believed that the people should possess the arms so they could defend their liberty from oppressive government. They were brilliant - they knew that government cannot be trusted.

If only the government had weapons then they could push the citizens around and there wouldn't be anything they could do about it. With arms they are citizens, without them they are subjects.

It was foremost a reaction to coming from under English rule, being able to defend themselves. And also having the option to overthrow an oppressive government.

Also when it was written, muskets were the order of the day.

Great Post.

wil · 21-08-2013 12:32AM

Zambia wrote: »

While this is very sad, a mistake was made and a child died.

The gun owner will no doubt be charged and hopefully this remains a rare event.

The overwhelming majority of gun owners I meet are super safety conscious, the firearm is on them when loaded or unloaded and in a safe.

While this may be your experience, the sheer numbers of guns produce a less than rare 500 to 900 accidental gun deaths per year.
What is odd though, seems that only a fifth are from handguns

I suppose in terms of 30,000 odd THIRTY THOUSAND gun deaths per year, that is almost a statistical blip.:eek:.

Gun deaths in the US is around 10 times that of Ireland and other EU countries. That is the price they pay to bear their arms.
Wild west indeed.

jimmycrackcorm · 21-08-2013 12:36AM

I don't understand the furore over this. We've had three year olds killed in this country because they went out onto the road and were knocked down because a gate wasn't locked.

wil · 21-08-2013 12:41AM

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

I don't understand the furore over this. We've had three year olds killed in this country because they went out onto the road and were knocked down because a gate wasn't locked.

and I'm sure that happens in other countries too, the discussion is on the "accidental" though I prefer "reckless" death of a child due to guns, not gates.

Elbaston · 21-08-2013 12:41AM

I used to be leaning more towards gun control in America (I know how they'd listen),but after a little thinking Im not so sure.

The govt there, although in the greater scale arguably reasonable, has a plentiful supply of sinister aspects.

The likes of factory prisons, the huge money involved in lobbying, and the **** the intelligence services have and still do get up to...

(importing cocaine to their own country in order to fund a revolution without permission is one that comes to mind...and this sht is actually real..not conspiracy forum stuff)

... make me wonder if they actually can trust their govt. I think its different here because of scale, if some mad stuff goes down here its mad in the Irish scale and it gets on the national papers, over there a huge corporation just plows over it with money, private media and politicians they own, and it gets a small column at best - certainly not on a national level.

If the reasoned gun owners as well as the imbecile/batsht insane gun owners had an argument for pro-weapon politics its shown in the large scale danger and corruption of sections of the govt.

tldr; in america walmart and the cia will bum you in public and no-one will care, so maybe guns are actually a good idea. Jo duffy is ineffective in the us.

Sir_Badshot · 21-08-2013 12:41AM

jimmycrackcorm wrote: »

I don't understand the furore over this. We've had three year olds killed in this country because they went out onto the road and were knocked down because a gate wasn't locked.

Are you serious man?

MadsL · 21-08-2013 12:43AM

pablomakaveli wrote: »

And your best example was an obscure situation where one might be required. That doesn't make it a requirement for all types of hunting.

OK, lets just take a minute here.

You said that there was no need for handguns in hunting. I gave you an example. You now say it is obscure. Would you like a list of all the uses of a handgun in the backcountry??
Sure, there is a whole genre of long barrelled, scoped handgun hunters.

Thats what they are classed as. Thats not me classing them as that, thats what they are.

By who? CNN?
I think you might be thinking of "Assault Weapon" as defined by the Assault Weapons Ban.
Most definitions of Assault Rifle talk about the ability to switch to full auto. Those really are NOT widely available in the US.

And given they're normally used by the military it makes me wonder why a civvie would need to use one.

Assault Rifle or an AR-15? If you mean the AR-15, here's a very good set of reasons by the mod of the Military forum.

Manic Moran wrote: »

The closest to this is the most popular selling rifle in the US over the past few years. Popular because it is customisable, modular, capable, versatile, reliable, usable by anyone from ten year old girls to body builders.

The AR-15.

If you are only to have one firearm, that's the one to have.

And this shows that the US has far more gun crime than Europe. Obviously as a result of widespread availability of guns.[/QUOTE]

Obviously. Glad you have it all figured out. Best we not talk about how suicides and gang related violence is included in those figures.

Sir_Badshot · 21-08-2013 12:46AM

MadsL wrote: »

OK, lets just take a minute here.

You said that there was no need for handguns in hunting. I gave you an example. You now say it is obscure. Would you like a list of all the uses of a handgun in the backcountry??
Sure, there is a whole genre of long barrelled, scoped handgun hunters.

By who? CNN?
I think you might be thinking of "Assault Weapon" as defined by the Assault Weapons Ban.
Most definitions of Assault Rifle talk about the ability to switch to full auto. Those really are NOT widely available in the US.

Assault Rifle or an AR-15? If you mean the AR-15, here's a very good set of reasons by the mod of the Military forum.

And this shows that the US has far more gun crime than Europe. Obviously as a result of widespread availability of guns.

Hang on , are you basically saying its OK to buy M16's at B&Q?

I like to shoot, like guns etc. ****1ng pi$$e$ me off when people split hairs between a semi / full auto AR.

Just admit that you want a device that kills efficiently, and dont dress it up in mumbo jumbo.

MadsL · 21-08-2013 12:52AM

wil wrote: »

Gun deaths in the US is around 10 times that of Ireland and other EU countries. That is the price they pay to bear their arms.
Wild west indeed.

Which EU country has a raging drug war spilling over its borders?

Sir_Badshot wrote: »

Hang on , are you basically saying its OK to buy M16's at B&Q?

Where did I say that? Full auto firearms are heavily restricted, so an M-16 is really not available (nor should it be) however a AR-15 is just a rifle, all the black scary stuff is cosmetic (and to a degree practical for lugging it about) It goes trigger-bang trigger-bang just like any other rifle.

You can buy hammers in B&Q - they also make a mess of people if you hit them with one.

MadsL · 21-08-2013 12:54AM

Sir_Badshot wrote: »

I like to shoot, like guns etc. ****1ng pi$$e$ me off when people split hairs between a semi / full auto AR.

Just admit that you want a device that kills efficiently, and dont dress it up in mumbo jumbo.

If I am hunting of course I want something that kills efficiently, why would anyone want animals to suffer unnecessarily.

It is not splitting hairs, there is a BIG difference between an AR and an M-16.

Full auto AR? You can make one, but you can't buy one.

Sir_Badshot · 21-08-2013 12:58AM

MadsL wrote: »

Which EU country has a raging drug war spilling over its borders?

Where did I say that? Full auto firearms are heavily restricted, so an M-16 is really not available (nor should it be) however a AR-15 is just a rifle, all the black scary stuff is cosmetic (and to a degree practical for lugging it about) It goes trigger-bang trigger-bang just like any other rifle.

You can buy hammers in B&Q - they also make a mess of people if you hit them with one.

Well, I admit you did not say thatat all, but you get my drift?

One half of me is with you, but I squirm in an uncomfortable way when I hear these stories of firearm misuse/accident/massacre...

I believe in the right to bear arms but I think USA gone to far.

Elbaston · 21-08-2013 12:58AM

Sir_Badshot wrote: »

I like to shoot, like guns etc. ****1ng pi$$e$ me off when people split hairs between a semi / full auto AR.

ah likes to shooot me some guuns, the biiiiger tha better.

they done make loud noises. yeee haw.

Sir_Badshot · 21-08-2013 12:59AM

Elbaston wrote: »

ah likes to shooot me some guuns, the biiiiger tha better.

they done make loud noises. yeee haw.

Dont suk my cok buddy

Nero707 · 21-08-2013 01:00AM

I don't really see the point of guns myself, the only uses of them for normal citizens in America is protection and hunting. I would prefer if they just changed the law so that they were only allowed handguns. Why would you need an assault rifle to protect your home, who the hell is attacking it, a army? And it would make hunting an challenge of some sort, rather than it being easier than clipping your toenails.

MadsL · 21-08-2013 01:00AM

Sir_Badshot wrote: »

Well, I admit you did not say thatat all, but you get my drift?

One half of me is with you, but I squirm in an uncomfortable way when I hear these stories of firearm misuse/accident/massacre...

Yep, but you don't get to hear the stories of gangs/drug wars shooting each other EVERY day.

I believe in the right to bear arms but I think USA gone to far.

Either it is a right or it isn't.

The Irish situation is absurdly complicated for shooters.

Sir_Badshot · 21-08-2013 01:02AM

Nero707 wrote: »

I don't really see the point of guns myself, the only uses of them for normal citizens in America is protection and hunting. I would prefer if they just changed the law so that they were only allowed handguns. Why would you need an assault rifle to protect your home, who the hell is attacking it, a army? And it would make hunting an challenge of some sort, rather than it being easier than clipping your toenails.

A handgun is infinity more dangerous in a normal social situation.

3 year old dead in 'Merica after shooting himself with pistol

Comments