Woman Accidentally Shot Dead by Two-Year-Old Boy in Wal-Mart

originally posted by: DrJunk
a reply to: seeker1963

Yup, I eat meat. In your vague SHTF scenario, I guess I will be going without meat or whatever because I don't have a gun..? It doesn't make sense, and I don't understand what that has to do with my question.

I am calling you out for NOT answering my question but deflecting it! If you are man/woman enough to actually back up your "sentence", shoot me a U2U and I will come back on this thread to answer it!

Otherwise, you have pretty much proved your purpose.......I tried to get you to defend your statement, but you blatantly kept telling me I was off topic!

originally posted by: NavyDoc
Certainly that is their intended purpose and you obviously agree that they deter crime. Thus, one can only infer that the upset about all homicides is based on a sympathy for the criminals that they deter and stop.

It is for the humans that they injure and kill. Was the mother a criminal? What crime was deterred or stopped?

As for a negligent accident? The issue is the negligence, seem to disregard, not the object. Had she left bleach in the cart and wandered off, and the kid drank it and died, would you be calling to ban bleach or would that fatality be acceptable to you since, (thank Gawd) it wasn't a gun?

When bleach is used in a way consistent with its intended purpose, no one is killed.

This child didn't misuse the gun. The gun functioned correctly. A woman died because a consumer product worked in a manner consistent with it's purpose.

originally posted by: seeker1963
I am calling you out for NOT answering my question but deflecting it! If you are man/woman enough to actually back up your "sentence", shoot me a U2U and I will come back on this thread to answer it!

Otherwise, you have pretty much proved your purpose.......I tried to get you to defend your statement, but you blatantly kept telling me I was off topic!

What exactly are you talking about? I feel that I already answered your question.

What about my statement do you feel needs defending? I am truly baffled here.

originally posted by: cavtrooper7
If the 2 year old was capable of firing the gun it had to be loaded and cocked to do so.
Culprit: CCW owner.
Darwin failure with a gun.

I don't know how a 2 year old has the finger strength to pull the trigger.. Hell my younger son when he was 8 couldn't pull the trigger on my .25 bodyguard.

a reply to: Xtrozero

i think most triggers now are around 5lbs pull but adjustments can be made easy and require no saftey at that weight

originally posted by: deadeyedick
a reply to: Xtrozero

i think most triggers now are around 5lbs pull but adjustments can be made easy and require no saftey at that weight

Many small pistols used for concealment also have a long trigger pull plus the 5 -7 lbs.

multiple posts for some reason

Misfire

originally posted by: Leonidas
Guns don't kill people, two-year-old's kill people...

Thanks ... that is the one I will quote when I need it. It is very strong Kung-Fu when the debate is going south.

No, a woman was killed because she was negligent in the handling and use of the consumer product, just as if she forgot to put the parking brake on a car or disabled the kickback safety on a chainsaw.

A firearm is extremely safe if not handled negligently. This is no different than leaving a kid in a car by himself and he released the parking brake. No consumer product is safe from deliberate misuse or criminal negligence.

The fault lies with the negligence of the user, not the device. I've never had a gun go off "accidentally."

originally posted by: NavyDoc
No a woman was killed because she was negligent in the handling and use of the consumer product, just as if she forgot to put the parking brake on a car or disabled the kickback safety on a chainsaw.

A firearm is extremely safe if not handled negligently. This is no different than leaving a kid in a car by himself and he released the parking brake. No consumer product is safe from deliberate misuse or criminal negligence.

The fault lies with the negligence of the user, not the device. I've never had a gun go off "accidentally."

The gun wasn't misused. It was used in a manner consistent with its intended purpose. It's not like the kid ran her over with a car, or cut her up with a chainsaw. He shot her with a gun.

Firearms are inherently deadly. We already went over this. If they weren't dangerous, they wouldn't be useful as either a weapon or a crime deterrent.

originally posted by: DrJunk

originally posted by: NavyDoc
No a woman was killed because she was negligent in the handling and use of the consumer product, just as if she forgot to put the parking brake on a car or disabled the kickback safety on a chainsaw.

A firearm is extremely safe if not handled negligently. This is no different than leaving a kid in a car by himself and he released the parking brake. No consumer product is safe from deliberate misuse or criminal negligence.

The fault lies with the negligence of the user, not the device. I've never had a gun go off "accidentally."

The gun wasn't misused. It was used in a manner consistent with its intended purpose. It's not like the kid ran her over with a car, or cut her up with a chainsaw. He shot her with a gun.

Firearms are inherently deadly. We already went over this. If they weren't dangerous, they wouldn't be useful as either a weapon or a crime deterrent.

The firearm was not intended to be in the hands of a 2 year old. To say that it was used "in an manner consistent with it's intended purpose," is not only moronic but untrue and an outright falsehood.

An automobile is not intended to be used by a two year old either and letting a two year old behind the wheel is also criminal negligence.

Giving a two year old access to either is criminal negligence and the fault of the adult responsible, not the object.

I know liberals do not believe in personal responsibility and love to use unfortunate incidents to further their agenda, even if it is no more than washing their hands in the blood of innocents, but this issue is one of negligence, plain and simple.

originally posted by: Leonidas
Guns don't kill people, two-year-old's kill people...

Coincidently, making it illegal for a two year old to hold a gun didn't prevent this tragedy?

originally posted by: NavyDoc
The firearm was not intended to be in the hands of a 2 year old. To say that it was used "in an manner consistent with it's intended purpose," is not only moronic but untrue and an outright falsehood.

An automobile is not intended to be used by a two year old either and letting a two year old behind the wheel is also criminal negligence.

Guns are designed and engineered to be used to kill.
Gun is used to kill.

Automobile is designed and engineered for travel.
Automobile is used to kill.

See a difference here?

We regulate automobiles, why not guns?

a reply to: NavyDoc

I have never heard of a toddler killing someone with a car. Does this happen on a regular basis in the US - like school shootings or small children accidentally shooting and killing themselves or someone else?

originally posted by: DrJunk

originally posted by: NavyDoc
The firearm was not intended to be in the hands of a 2 year old. To say that it was used "in an manner consistent with it's intended purpose," is not only moronic but untrue and an outright falsehood.

An automobile is not intended to be used by a two year old either and letting a two year old behind the wheel is also criminal negligence.

Guns are designed and engineered to be used to kill.
Gun is used to kill.

Automobile is designed and engineered for travel.
Automobile is used to kill.

See a difference here?

We regulate automobiles, why not guns?

Guns are perfectly safe when not used negligently. A gun was not designed nor intended to be in the hands of a toddler. A gun handled appropriately will kill no one accidentally. They don't operate themselves, you know. See the difference here?


We regulate guns more than automobiles. Ever have to have a background check and a clean criminal history to buy a car?

originally posted by: NavyDoc
Guns are perfectly safe when not used negligently. A gun was not designed nor intended to be in the hands of a toddler. A gun handled appropriately will kill no one accidentally. They don't operate themselves, you know. See the difference here?


We regulate guns more than automobiles. Ever have to have a background check and a clean criminal history to buy a car?

I don't know how to debate someone that insists that guns are perfectly safe.

Guns are the instrument of death for over 10,000 people a year in this country.

Perfectly safe.

originally posted by: th2356
a reply to: NavyDoc

I have never heard of a toddler killing someone with a car. Does this happen on a regular basis in the US - like school shootings or small children accidentally shooting and killing themselves or someone else?

Happens quite often, much more than the firearm "accident" as describe here.

Kid releases parking brake and bus rolls over bus driver

A car doesn't have to be moving to be dangerous. Your station wagon isn't going to be involved in a pileup while it's in the driveway, but parked cars are also potentially deadly. And as many as 220 children per year are killed in nontraffic automobile accidents: Some are strangled by a window when they're leaning out and they (or someone else) inadvertently lean on a rocker-type power switch. Others, playing alone in the car, somehow release the emergency brake or move the gear-shift lever, setting a car in motion. Still other children climb through fold-down rear seats into the trunk -- then push the seat backs up and get trapped inside. Finally, at least 30 kids die each year when their parents leave them in the car and they suffocate from overheating. "Children should never, ever be left alone in an automobile -- not even for a minute," says Terrill Struttmann, executive director of Kids in Cars, an education and advocacy organization he and his wife started after their 2-year-old son was killed by a car set in motion by two kids playing alone inside.

www.parents.com...

City lawyers declined to file criminal charges yesterday against an 8-year-old Brooklyn boy who climbed into a school bus Monday and released the emergency brake, sending the bus rolling down the block until it struck and pinned an 8-year-old girl, killing her.

www.nytimes.com...

originally posted by: DrJunk

originally posted by: NavyDoc
Guns are perfectly safe when not used negligently. A gun was not designed nor intended to be in the hands of a toddler. A gun handled appropriately will kill no one accidentally. They don't operate themselves, you know. See the difference here?


We regulate guns more than automobiles. Ever have to have a background check and a clean criminal history to buy a car?

I don't know how to debate someone that insists that guns are perfectly safe.

Guns are the instrument of death for over 10,000 people a year in this country.

Perfectly safe.

They are perfectly safe if not misused. Not a single firearm of mine has "accidently" gone off in 30 years of collecting. You simply cannot delineate, or refuse to delineate, between misuse and negligence and the actual firearm itself. have an experiment. Buy a gun, load it, put it on a table and watch it. I can guarantee it will not do anything until someone touches it.

Firearms do not "cause" a single death anywhere. It is the person behind it. Again, I understand that liberals do not believe in personal responsibility and therein lies most of our societal problems.

originally posted by: NavyDoc

originally posted by: DrJunk

originally posted by: NavyDoc
Guns are perfectly safe when not used negligently. A gun was not designed nor intended to be in the hands of a toddler. A gun handled appropriately will kill no one accidentally. They don't operate themselves, you know. See the difference here?


We regulate guns more than automobiles. Ever have to have a background check and a clean criminal history to buy a car?

I don't know how to debate someone that insists that guns are perfectly safe.

Guns are the instrument of death for over 10,000 people a year in this country.

Perfectly safe.

They are perfectly safe if not misused. Not a single firearm of mine has "accidently" gone off in 30 years of collecting. You simply cannot delineate, or refuse to delineate, between misuse and negligence and the actual firearm itself. have an experiment. Buy a gun, load it, put it on a table and watch it. I can guarantee it will not do anything until someone touches it.

Firearms do not "cause" a single death anywhere. It is the person behind it. Again, I understand that liberals do not believe in personal responsibility and therein lies most of our societal problems.

If a gun is used properly and for its intended purpose someone ends up dead.

I'm sorry, how is that a "safe" use?