Toddler shoots 2 other children at Michigan day care

Discussion in 'Free Thoughts' started by origin, Sep 28, 2017.

  1. sculptor Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,524
    <----- frugal shooter
    I prefer to use a bullet on a deer to one on a target
    however
    Investing a bullet on a target assures that the weapon is still capable of putting the bullet where I want it.
    The weapon is zeroed to the kz which is 40 to 60 yards out.
    I do not like wounding the prey. I do like it when the deer falls where he/she was standing when I shot.

    ..........................................................................
    If you do not know the difference between a rifle and a gun, perhaps it is better if you do not shoot/fire either.
     
  2. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. Tiassa Let us not launch the boat ... Staff Member

    Messages:
    34,744

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!


    Click for thematic congruousness.

    In 2015, Christopher Ingraham of the Washington Post brought us the headline that, "American toddlers are still shooting people on a weekly basis this year"↱, and ... oh, shit, sorry; that's the 2017 headline, from yesterday. The 2015 headline reads, "People are getting shot by toddlers on a weekly basis this year"↱.

    How many people do you think would disagree about idiots and incompetency?

    That doesn't answer the question of what to do about it any more than the rise in mass killings over the years has also seen a lot more people willing to acknowledge that one has to be sick to do that in the first place. For some reason, the sickness got close enough to people who had previously refused its existence as some manner of liberal excuse for criminals to have more rights than victims, and all that political bullshit. Great. So, now we recognize that homicide is kind of grotesque in this way, but what are we going to do about it?

    Meanwhile—

    —just what liberties do you so fear for that you would engage in such self-denigrating fallacy?

    Really, you're not helping. Then again, that seems to be the thing about firearm safety: It's a nice thought and all, but no, not even the so-called "responsible gun owners" are actually willing to be helpful. These people want the problem of firearm violence in society. The whole point isn't about the right to bear arms, it's about the right to kill people. And if this is the price everyone else must pay so that some people can feel their right to arbitrarily kill other human beings isn't somehow abrogated, well, it's not surprising.

    I mean, really, we might all hope for appropriate resolutions, but—

    IMHO Using examples of the actions of the mentally challenged or mentally ill as a means of abrogating other's rights is disingenuous on a good day. And simply dishonest on any other day.

    —priorities sometimes have a way of making even simple statements about licenses and criminal charges disingenuous on a good day and simply dishonest any other. It shouldn't be a matter of hoping, but settling that question might abrogate someone else's right to arbitrarily kill, so we don't.

    And it's why blustery sarcasm is pretty much all such bloodlusting self-interest has left. Because we do need to figure something out. And we do need to charge more of these incidents as crimes. But the big obstacle there are people like you rushing to raise straw men in order to remind us who the real victims are.
    ____________________

    Notes:

    Ingraham, Christopher. "American toddlers are still shooting people on a weekly basis this year". The Washington Post. 29 September 2017. WashingtonPost.com. 30 September 2017. http://wapo.st/2xR3TQu

    —————. "People are getting shot by toddlers on a weekly basis this year". The Washington Post. 14 October 2015. WashingtonPost.com. 30 September 2017. http://wapo.st/1Gf8rzJ
     
  4. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. StrangerInAStrangeLand SubQuantum Mechanic Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,189
    ^^^
    The difference in numbers is huge.

    <>
     
  6. Guest Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. StrangerInAStrangeLand SubQuantum Mechanic Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,189
  8. sideshowbob Sorry, wrong number. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,011
    From what I can tell, the number of guns and cars in the USA is similar.
     
  9. StrangerInAStrangeLand SubQuantum Mechanic Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    13,189
    ^^^
    The numbers of people being hurt & killed. And the property damage.

    <>
     
  10. Gawdzilla Sama Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    645
    Excellent trigger discipline.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  11. Gawdzilla Sama Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    645
    It's called "false equivalence". Look it up.
     
  12. Michael 345 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,669
    Nobody got the rifle out of Heston's hands yet? Surely he's been dead long enough for them to be cold?

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  13. sideshowbob Sorry, wrong number. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,011
    So cars, which have a thousand uses, kill more people than guns, which are only useful for killing.
     
  14. sideshowbob Sorry, wrong number. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,011
    I looked it up. It doesn't seem to be relevant. Please explain.
     
  15. Gawdzilla Sama Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    645
    Go back and read it now that you've looked it up. Sorry I wasn't more explicit earlier.
     
  16. Bells Staff Member

    Messages:
    22,185
    Right..

    Is that why there are guns aimed directly at the 'child market' in the US?

    In May last year, a two-year-old girl was shot dead by her five-year-old brother with a small rifle made specifically for children. The accidental shooting happened in Cumberland County, Kentucky, when the boy was playing with a gun purchased from a company in Pennsylvania called Keystone Sporting Arms, which, in 2008, produced around 80,000 rifles for children. The guns, which sell under the model names Cricket and Chipmunk, were originally advertised on a "Kid's Corner" on the company's website (it has since been removed), which showed children firing them at rifle ranges and on hunting trips. The guns are produced in bright blue, pink and rainbow colours and marketed like toys, under the tag line "My First Rifle".

    The grandmother of the children saw it as something that, well, just had to happen, because apparently, it was simply her time to go to heaven.

    The victim’s grieving grandmother, Linda Riddle, said: “It was God’s will. It was her time to go, I guess. I just know she’s in heaven right now and I know she’s in good hands with the Lord.”

    That the 5 year old brother was given a gun as a present, a gun capable of actually shooting and killing someone is really beside the point. After all, it is apparently normal to give a 5 year old a gun for their birthday. The gun he got was a "Cricket", aimed just for his age range.. But hey, tough luck to his sister. It was simply her time to go. And no, the parents weren't charged. The gun had been left in a corner of the living room, the mother was not aware it was even loaded and was deemed an accident.

    So, who was criminally negligent? The parents? Or the manufacturers who make guns aimed directly at children?
     
  17. birch Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,093
    That's completely insane that a company like that is allowed to exist.
     
  18. Michael 345 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,669
    Seems grandmother lacks sanity with such a mindset

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  19. Bells Staff Member

    Messages:
    22,185
    Why?

    The 2nd Amendment has no age limit.

    They have even released one long gun for children, that comes with a tripod and scope.

    Well, to be fair.. the child's rights to arms is more important than his 2 year old sister's right to not be shot and killed.

    The parents should have just made sure the 2 year old sister had a gun as well, since you know, more guns = safer society.
     
  20. Michael 345 Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,669
    I'm thinking would I be surprised if she told the child's mother to have another child as a replacement as you know god loves children

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  21. sideshowbob Sorry, wrong number. Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,011
    Nope. I'm still not seeing any connection. Why not just try to explain yourself?
     
  22. billvon Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    12,793
     
  23. sculptor Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    4,524
    A contrary argument could be made hinging on the prefatory clause.
     

Share This Page