It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

5-year-old Kentucky boy fatally shoots 2-year-old sister with gift rifle

page: 24
22
<< 21  22  23    25  26  27 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on May, 3 2013 @ 12:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by eriktheawful

More children die in motor vehicle accidents than by firearms in the US, and by a wide margin.


Do we have an age requirement to drive?

Do we test drivers?

Do we liscense them?

Do we demand safety measures? Seat belts? Car seats?

Do we register drivers?

Are guns neccessary to commute to work?

Are cars principle use to shoot things/people?

Do more people own cars than guns and use them more often?

I am confused by how you think comparing cars is relevant and what action you think that comparison demands?

That we regulate guns the way we do cars? Sure...good idea.


Originally posted by eriktheawful
While even one child's death can be intolerable, the fact of life is: children die.


So eff it then? Again what is your point?


Originally posted by eriktheawful
......how about we make a deal?

You get the government to stop slaughtering the lives of innocent children over in the middle east via drones.......

And then I'll consider giving up any firearm and actually trusting the federal government.


First ...you are not being asked to give up your gun...What was asked was background checks to limit criminals and the mentally ill from purchasing guns. You have forfieted your frontal lobe to Wayne Lapierre.

Second...trading innocent lives for US foriegn policy is something terrorist's demand...you might ponder the that "deal".
edit on 3-5-2013 by Indigo5 because: (no reason given)

edit on 3-5-2013 by Indigo5 because: (no reason given)




posted on May, 3 2013 @ 12:59 PM
link   
reply to post by 3mperorConstantinE
 


I could not agree more this is due to stupid people not guns. No matter how many laws are passed stupid people will still be stupid and hurt or kill others.

The media only picked up on this because it is great of the anti-gun movement and it is selling like hotcakes. If it had not been a gun we would not have heard of it but most likely something of this sort would have happened regardless.

Raist



posted on May, 3 2013 @ 01:04 PM
link   
reply to post by JuniorDisco
 


In this case the parents were also breaking the law. It is called negligence and child endangerment. They left children unsupervised with a loaded gun. No amount of laws would have stopped more than likely because you cannot fix stupid. The parents were nothing but stupid in this.


A little bit of common sense and gun safety goes a long way. This rifle had potential to make a great gift and make for a life of happiness. But instead some stupid moron of a parent leaves the thing sitting around loaded instead of storing it in a nonfunctioning fashion. It is very easy to do with this rifle and takes mere seconds.

Raist



posted on May, 3 2013 @ 01:07 PM
link   
reply to post by JuniorDisco
 


In many cases guns are just as useful if not more so than cars. It depends on the person and their needs.

Raist



posted on May, 3 2013 @ 01:07 PM
link   


States with the highest gun ownership rates have a gun murder rate 114% higher than those with the lowest gun ownership rates.

Also, gun death rates tend to be higher in states with higher rates of gun ownership. Gun death rates are generally lower in states with restrictions such as assault-weapons bans or safe-storage requirements.

Owning a gun has been linked to higher risks of homicide, suicide, and accidental death by gun.
• For every time a gun is used in self-defense in the home, there are 7 assaults or murders, 11 suicide attempts, and 4 accidents involving guns in or around a home.
• 43% of homes with guns and kids have at least one unlocked firearm.

In 2010, nearly 6 times more women were shot by husbands, boyfriends, and ex-partners than murdered by male strangers.
• A woman's chances of being killed by her abuser increase more than 7 times if he has access to a gun.
• One study found that women in states with higher gun ownership rates were 4.9 times more likely to be murdered by a gun than women in states with lower gun ownership rates.


www.motherjones.com...



posted on May, 3 2013 @ 01:10 PM
link   



posted on May, 3 2013 @ 01:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by thisguyrighthere

Originally posted by EarthCitizen07

I just don't see why AP rounds are a good idea for civilians and are a bit too dangerous imo.


You still havent defined armor piercing. Steel core handgun ammo? Any rifle caliber? .50 BMG's?

These two items, AP ammo and the armor of which is only so far defined in your head, are dynamic meaning that virtually any ammo is or is not armor piercing.

Loose definitions and vague notions are what are wrong with nearly every law on the books.
edit on 3-5-2013 by thisguyrighthere because: (no reason given)


I would like to see all AP rounds banned. Anything that is designated as such for sale. Caliber is irrellevant.

I would rather qualified civilians owning and using automatic weapons than anyone that passes NICS background checks being able to buy AP rounds. Short Barrelled Shotguns are also a bad idea because they spread their payload too wide thus increasing the chance of hitting unintended targets aka collateral damage.

I am glad we are going into specifics for a change, not that mainstream politicians will listen to us anyway. Its just that the all or nothing arguement gets tiring after a while. Fanaticism is not good!



posted on May, 3 2013 @ 01:20 PM
link   
reply to post by EarthCitizen07
 
If the government is involved, chances are that the definitions will be vague and they will end up making all ammo illegal, if certain parties had their way.
Again, it isn't something that will disappear by passing a law.
Tungsten penetrators are as far away as the local welding supply store. People that reload ammo can load a solid steel or a lead bullet with a tungsten penetrator just as easily as another 'legal' bullet.



posted on May, 3 2013 @ 01:21 PM
link   
reply to post by EarthCitizen07
 


Caliber is absolutely relevant. A bullet does not have to be labeled "armor piercing" to be armor piercing and plenty of bullets that are not labeled as such can and do perform said function.

You just want to ban words on a box then? Or you dont understand what it means to pierce armor at whatever level you are defining armor?

This reeks of that 80's Black Talon nonsense where nobody knew what they hell they were talking about but it was okay because completely imaginary fears told them all how to act.

You'd like to see "all AP rounds banned"? That accounts for virtually every hunting round in existence.
edit on 3-5-2013 by thisguyrighthere because: (no reason given)



posted on May, 3 2013 @ 01:25 PM
link   
reply to post by Indigo5
 





Do we have an age requirement to drive? Do we test drivers? Do we liscense them? Do we demand safety measures? Seat belts? Car seats? Do we register drivers?

Yet cars are still out there killing children.



Are guns neccessary to commute to work?

Cars aren't necessary to commute to work either.



Are cars principle use to shoot things/people?

Can cars stop a tyrannical government from abusing the US Constitution?



posted on May, 3 2013 @ 01:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by butcherguy

Can cars stop a tyrannical government from abusing the US Constitution?


Thats a mute point as it is already happening


Your to late by about 12 year!

Anyway you gun wont stop that tank or apache helicopter.

You should have kept up with training as militias and makeing sure they were supplied well.



posted on May, 3 2013 @ 01:37 PM
link   
reply to post by cklein61
 


Once again, a 5 year old cannot own a gun. It does not matter what the story or parents say it is illegal.

You have to be 18 to buy/own a rifle/shotgun and 21 to buy/own a handgun. In the states that allow CC you have to be 21 for that as well.

If you do not know the laws there is little sense in arguing them.

Raist



posted on May, 3 2013 @ 01:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by thisguyrighthere
reply to post by EarthCitizen07
 


Caliber is absolutely relevant. A bullet does not have to be labeled "armor piercing" to be armor piercing and plenty of bullets that are not labeled as such can and do perform said function.

You just want to ban words on a box then? Or you dont understand what it means to pierce armor at whatever level you are defining armor?

This reeks of that 80's Black Talon nonsense where nobody knew what they hell they were talking about but it was okay because completely imaginary fears told them all how to act.

You'd like to see "all AP rounds banned"? That accounts for virtually every hunting round in existence.
edit on 3-5-2013 by thisguyrighthere because: (no reason given)


Hunting rounds are not designated as AP rounds though and probably for good reason I would say. Are you trying to make things artificially abstract or what exactly? AP rounds do penetrate deeper than FMJ rounds do and FMJ rounds do penetrate deeper than JHP.

I am just giving ideas of what i believe reasonable gun control should be. For everyone this definition varies.



posted on May, 3 2013 @ 01:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by EarthCitizen07

Hunting rounds are not designated as AP rounds though and probably for good reason I would say. Are you trying to make things artificially abstract or what exactly? AP rounds do penetrate deeper than FMJ rounds do and FMJ rounds do penetrate deeper than JHP.

I am just giving ideas of what i believe reasonable gun control should be. For everyone this definition varies.


Designated as or not they still do.

I get that you're just brainstorming or whatever but you must realize that without being specific in scope and definition you're just making a mess and coming across as another "shoulder things that go up" lunatic.

I can send a .338 lap right through a number of vests and it's not designated as AP.

See the problem?



posted on May, 3 2013 @ 01:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by EarthCitizen07

Originally posted by thisguyrighthere
reply to post by EarthCitizen07
 


Caliber is absolutely relevant. A bullet does not have to be labeled "armor piercing" to be armor piercing and plenty of bullets that are not labeled as such can and do perform said function.

You just want to ban words on a box then? Or you dont understand what it means to pierce armor at whatever level you are defining armor?

This reeks of that 80's Black Talon nonsense where nobody knew what they hell they were talking about but it was okay because completely imaginary fears told them all how to act.

You'd like to see "all AP rounds banned"? That accounts for virtually every hunting round in existence.
edit on 3-5-2013 by thisguyrighthere because: (no reason given)


Hunting rounds are not designated as AP rounds though and probably for good reason I would say. Are you trying to make things artificially abstract or what exactly? AP rounds do penetrate deeper than FMJ rounds do and FMJ rounds do penetrate deeper than JHP.

I am just giving ideas of what i believe reasonable gun control should be. For everyone this definition varies.


Almost all rifle rounds will penetrate almost all body armor at close range. And armor piercing rounds *ARE* banned. Including quite a few rounds that *arent* armor piercing rounds....



posted on May, 3 2013 @ 01:44 PM
link   

Originally posted by crazyewok

Originally posted by butcherguy

Can cars stop a tyrannical government from abusing the US Constitution?


Thats a mute point as it is already happening


Your to late by about 12 year!

Anyway you gun wont stop that tank or apache helicopter.

You should have kept up with training as militias and makeing sure they were supplied well.

Ahhh, so it is too late, so the Constitution is no longer valid?

I would like to paraphrase what you said: 'We are already under a tyrannical government.... (here's the part that gets me)
'

I fail to see what is funny.



posted on May, 3 2013 @ 01:48 PM
link   

Originally posted by Raist
reply to post by cklein61
 


Once again, a 5 year old cannot own a gun. It does not matter what the story or parents say it is illegal.

You have to be 18 to buy/own a rifle/shotgun and 21 to buy/own a handgun. In the states that allow CC you have to be 21 for that as well.

If you do not know the laws there is little sense in arguing them.

Raist


Yes they cannot own it LEGALLY but negligent parents allow them easy access to it regardless.

I saw posters say the parents shouldn't be punished for their stupidy anymore because they probably regretted it by now. Yeah ok, lets forget about criminal negligence in the name of liberty or whatever nonsense one wants to believe.

I think the attitude of teaching kids about "gun safety" at a very young age is counter-productive. I shot for the very first time when I was 12 years old(perhaps older) and I had a clue as to what I was doing, barely that is. I can't imagine what 5 or 8 year olds think.



posted on May, 3 2013 @ 02:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by thisguyrighthere

Originally posted by EarthCitizen07

Hunting rounds are not designated as AP rounds though and probably for good reason I would say. Are you trying to make things artificially abstract or what exactly? AP rounds do penetrate deeper than FMJ rounds do and FMJ rounds do penetrate deeper than JHP.

I am just giving ideas of what i believe reasonable gun control should be. For everyone this definition varies.


Designated as or not they still do.

I get that you're just brainstorming or whatever but you must realize that without being specific in scope and definition you're just making a mess and coming across as another "shoulder things that go up" lunatic.

I can send a .338 lap right through a number of vests and it's not designated as AP.

See the problem?


What do you think should be banned then?

Just curious is all....



posted on May, 3 2013 @ 02:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by EarthCitizen07


What do you think should be banned then?

Just curious is all....


Me? Nothing. I'm against prohibition.

If it doesnt harm anyone other than the user or anyones property then it shouldnt be banned or illegal.



posted on May, 3 2013 @ 02:05 PM
link   
reply to post by EarthCitizen07
 


So what laws are you going to pass to make sure it does not happen?

The parents already broke the law. They were negligent and they endangered their children. They are responsible for the death of their daughter. I think they should be punished. I say this because as a responsible gun owner they have people wanting to infringe on my rights.

You cannot fix stupid, you can only punish it. No laws will prevent this, none what so ever. Stupid will always be with us. They already broke existing laws, they should be punished.

As for your idea of teaching gun safety to children and at 12 you had no idea what you were doing that is because you stated late.

I started far earlier and did just fine. By twelve I knew more about guns than many adults. I was far safer than many adults. I already had had a hunter safety course as well.

As I mentioned several times, and at the bottom of page 7 went over the rifle, my son uses the exact same rifle. It is stored in a nonfunctioning manner. No amount of hitting it handling it or whatever will make it work without me putting it into a functioning manner. Not only that but I am also using the built in locking mechanism that comes with the rifle.

My son is 6. He is a great shot, and he handles the rifle better than many adults. He already knows and can tell you about how to hold the gun correctly and safely as well as why it is important. The only time he gets to shoot the gun is if I am there with him and I have my arms around him. I have control of the situation since I am the adult. It is my responsibility to make sure my son is safe and does things in a safe manner. I load the gun, I set the firing pin, and he aims and pulls the trigger. Until all of that he still treats the gun as if it were loaded and keeps it pointed at the ground until he gets his target.

This is a firearm not a toy. Any adult that is not responsible with them and with their children deserve punishment. Yes losing a child is hard, it sucks and take a long time to get used to, I understand child loss. That does not mean we should go soft on them and let them off though. They are at fault for this happening, they brought this on themselves by not caring enough to watch their kids and not keep the gun loaded and ready to fire. This gun has to have the firing pin set back and the pull strength is more than the 5 year old could have done. These parents killed their own child by their actions or lack thereof.

A little bit of common sense and following of the gun safety rules would have prevented this.

Raist



new topics

top topics



 
22
<< 21  22  23    25  26  27 >>

log in

join