Gun control for kids

[blastedbugler]

This week :-
Alaska - 5 yo girl shot & killed by her 8 yo brother.
Kentucky - 2 yo girl shot & killed by 5 yo brother
Crickett brand .22 rifle designed for children, with design colours, incl pink for girls.
Sold as " My first rifle ".
Rifles given to the kids as a gift.
As an Aussie I must be missing something here.
Is this just the culture.
Please explain.
Don ( Aussie )

Thanks for the comments.
Certainly a wide cross section of views.
Maybe Australians are over controlled but that is how we wanted it.
We have a choice & the decisions are ours.
eg drinking age is 18, bycycles & motorcycles mandatory helmet.
To me it just seemed a great loss for the parents of the kids.
Whether there is someone at fault or an accident, it would be hard to bear.
Don ( Aussie )

More from blastedbugler

I dont pretend to tell Americans what is right or wrong about their lifestyle or Government.
In a demoracy we all get to choose & then agree or disagree with what we end up.
At least we are still free to speak up & that is something that we all must cherish.
As an Aussie, where guns are not such a part of everyday life, I am just trying to comment on what it is that I dont understand.
Like everything there is always two sides to every story.
And as comment has been made, I will continue to put up a point.
Like everyone I enjoy a good discussion.
I dont even mind if you try to shoot me down in flames.
Don ( Aussie )

[Serk]

All 4 of my kids have Crickett My First Rifle's. The girl's rifles are the hot pink ones. My older daughter got hers when she was 4 and the triplets got their's by 16 weeks gestational age. (I.E. Way before they were born.)

Here's one major difference though - When we're not out shooting them with the kids under heavy adult supervision, the rifles live locked up in my gun safe. (Actually, the triplets haven't even seen theirs yet, I'll wait until around age 4 or when I judge they're mature enough to use the rifles under supervision before letting them handle them at all.)

This isn't a case of guns being bad, or even really of kids being bad. These are tragic cases of parents being negligent.



And here she is at age 8 firing an M4 style AR15:



Letting kids use guns is a good thing, it teaches responsibility, cause and effect, the advantages of practice and becoming proficient, not to mention for later use the fundamentals of self defense, but at those ages they child should not have unfettered access to the firearms.

[MarkT]

If there's any truth to this - it's anecdotal.  You get whacko's in every population.  Whatever happened there, that doesn't represent the responsible gun-owners or any other community.  Clearly some adult(s) f'd up, most significantly by allowing the kid(s) gun access w/o or inadequate supervision.  Now watch, the anti-gunners will point to this as justification for their agenda.

[Trynt]

This week :-
Alaska - 5 yo girl shot & killed by her 8 yo brother.
Kentucky - 2 yo girl shot & killed by 5 yo brother
Crickett brand .22 rifle designed for children, with design colours, incl pink for girls.
Sold as " My first rifle ".
Rifles given to the kids as a gift.
As an Aussie I must be missing something here.
Is this just the culture.
Please explain.
Don ( Aussie )

Explanation:  Anyone who provides a 5 yr. old  (or 8 yr old IMHO) with access to a firearm is a complete and utter moron. Some people should not be allowed to breed, because there is no cure for stupidity.

Hunting and firearms training is available (in my state) at the age of 12.  At that age, some require smaller firearms appropriate to their stature.  AND. . . you are being sexist to think that girls don't or shouldn't use firearms because of their gender.

[cookiedough]

IMO,  guns for anyone under 10 or for most age 12,  shouldn't be allowed period, but that is just me.   Even the most careful and knowledgeabel child under 10 can very easily make a mistake and kill someone accidentally of course.  I just hope the people who allow age 4-9 year olds shoot guns under adult supervision of course better be 110% sure those kids do not have access to the keys or combo to the gun safe.  Kids that age are curious and are not developed mentally to fully understand the consequences of using a firearm. 

There is a reason age 12 for hunter education in our state is there although as of last year the DNR was allowing a special deer hunting season for kids age 10 w/o  hunter's education yet as long as with their parents and ONLY one gun allowed between the child and parent.   Not too many 10 year olds that I know of can handle a 20 gauge or deer rifle not fitting their smaller frame properly. 

[Willow]

This week :-
Alaska - 5 yo girl shot & killed by her 8 yo brother.
Kentucky - 2 yo girl shot & killed by 5 yo brother
Crickett brand .22 rifle designed for children, with design colours, incl pink for girls.
Sold as " My first rifle ".
Rifles given to the kids as a gift.
As an Aussie I must be missing something here.
Is this just the culture.
Please explain.
Don ( Aussie )

Please be kind enough to post traffic fatality statistics and explain whether it's just the culture that refuses to adopt and enforce 25 mph speed limits which would dramatically if not totally eliminate those deaths.  Feel free to pull those statistics from either the USA or Australia. 

[old2soon]

This week :-
Alaska - 5 yo girl shot & killed by her 8 yo brother.
Kentucky - 2 yo girl shot & killed by 5 yo brother
Crickett brand .22 rifle designed for children, with design colours, incl pink for girls.
Sold as " My first rifle ".
Rifles given to the kids as a gift.
As an Aussie I must be missing something here.
Is this just the culture.
Please explain.
Don ( Aussie )

Do you have access to alcoholic beverages there?? Do people die as a result of drunk driving there?? Is alcohol banned under a certain age?? Do people under age still manage to get alcohol?? T I A. RIDE SAFE.

[bigguy]

Cherry picking events doesn't make any real point.
TEN MYTHS ABOUT GUN CONTROL

MYTH 3:"Since a gun in a home is many times more likely to kill a family member than to stop a criminal, armed citizens are not a deterrent to crime."

This myth, stemming from a superficial "study" of firearm accidents in the Cleveland, Ohio, area, represents a comparison of 148 accidental deaths (including suicides) to the deaths of 23 intruders killed by home owners over a 16-year period. 2

Gross errors in this and similar "studies"--with even greater claimed ratios of harm to good--include: the assumption that a gun hasn't been used for protection unless an assailant dies; no distinction is made between handgun and long gun deaths; all accidental firearm fatalities were counted whether the deceased was part of the "family" or not; all accidents were counted whether they occurred in the home or not, while self-defense outside the home was excluded; almost half the self-defense uses of guns in the home were excluded on the grounds that the criminal intruder killed may not have been a total stranger to the home defender; suicides were sometimes counted and some self-defense shootings misclassified. Cleveland's experience with crime and accidents during the study period was atypical of the nation as a whole and of Cleveland since the mid-1970s. Moreover, in a later study, the same researchers noted that roughly 10% of killings by civilians are justifiable homicides. 3

The "guns in the home" myth has been repeated time and again by the media, and anti-gun academics continue to build on it. In 1993, Dr. Arthur Kellermann of Emory University and a number of colleagues presented a study that claimed to show that a home with a gun was much more likely to experience a homicide.4 However, Dr. Kellermann selected for his study only homes where homicides had taken place--ignoring the millions of homes with firearms where no harm is done--and a control group that was not representative of American households. By only looking at homes where homicides had occurred and failing to control for more pertinent variables, such as prior criminal record or histories of violence, Kellermann et al. skewed the results of this study. Prof. Kleck wrote that with the methodology used by Kellermann, one could prove that since diabetics are much more likely to possess insulin than non-diabetics, possession of insulin is a risk factor for diabetes. Even Dr. Kellermann admitted this in his study: "It is possible that reverse causation accounted for some of the association we observed between gun ownership and homicide." Law Professor Daniel D. Polsby went further, "Indeed the point is stronger than that: 'reverse causation' may account for most of the association between gun ownership and homicide. Kellermann's data simply do not allow one to draw any conclusion."5

Research conducted by Professors James Wright and Peter Rossi,6 for a landmark study funded by the U.S. Department of Justice, points to the armed citizen as possibly the most effective deterrent to crime in the nation. Wright and Rossi questioned over 1,800 felons serving time in prisons across the nation and found:

81% agreed the "smart criminal" will try to find out if a potential victim is armed.
74% felt that burglars avoided occupied dwellings for fear of being shot.
80% of "handgun predators" had encountered armed citizens.
40% did not commit a specific crime for fear that the victim was armed.
34% of "handgun predators" were scared off or shot at by armed victims.
57% felt that the typical criminal feared being shot by citizens more than he feared being shot by police.
Professor Kleck estimates that annually 1,500-2,800 felons are legally killed in "excusable self-defense" or "justifiable" shootings by civilians, and 8,000-16,000 criminals are wounded. This compares to 300-600 justifiable homicides by police. Yet, in most instances, civilians used a firearm to threaten, apprehend, shoot at a criminal, or to fire a warning shot without injuring anyone.

Based on his extensive independent survey research, Kleck estimates that each year Americans use guns for protection from criminals more than 2.5 million times annually. 7 U.S. Department of Justice victimization surveys show that protective use of a gun lessens the chance that robberies, rapes, and assaults will be successfully completed while also reducing the likelihood of victim injury. Clearly, criminals fear armed citizens.

2 Rushforth, et al., "Accidental Firearm Fatalities in a Metropolitan County, " 100 American Journal of Epidemiology 499 (1975).
3 Rushforth, et al., "Violent Death in a Metropolitan County," 297 New England Journal of Medicine 531, 533 (1977).
4 Kellermann, et al., "Gun Ownership as a Risk Factor for Homicide in the Home," New England Journal of Medicine 467 (1993).
5 Polsby, "The False Promise of Gun Control," The Atlantic Monthly, March 1994.
6 Wright and Rossi, Armed and Considered Dangerous: A Survey of Felons and Their Firearms (N.Y.: Aldine de Gruyter, 1986).

[Valkorado]

With all due respect, I don't think citizens of other nations should concern themselves too much with our gun rights.  Obviously, they never had such freedoms or they lost them somewhere along the way.  I don't see American patriots letting that happen here.

That said, the cited examples were parental negligence.  Responsible gun ownership includes proper supervision and storage.

[gregc]

  I am sure your country has cars, it has kids, the kids parents bought them bikes to ride. Does your country mandate helmets for kids on bikes.   How many parents let their kids ride bikes without helmets?  unsupervised.  Bet I could pick some  news reports about kids killed or injured while on their bikes with out helmets.  Then say what is with your country?   
  Kids are going to be kids anywhere in the world, it is the parents job to keep them in line.  You don't blame the bike when the kids get hurt, why blame the gun ?   Blame the PARENTS for not doing their job, guns should be out of reach and access to any kid.

[musclehead]

we aren't supposed to judge muslim by the actions of a few terrorists, we ask that you don't judge millions of responcible gun owners by the actions of a few nuts.

now, children are supposed to be supervised at all times, how did the children get the guns-n-ammo?

classic example of bad parenting

I started shooting at the tender age of 6, in my life I have had two misfires. I feel I'm pretty responcible as it has been 3 decades since my last misfire....

[Jess from VA]

Even an unsupervised child of 4-5 with an unloaded Cricket at best has a big club.

How can a parent be so utterly ignorant and negligent to allow a child to have a loaded firearm unsupervised?

Mandatory sterilization followed by conviction and prison for reckless endangerment resulting in death should be the minimum for such malfeasance.

You'll notice that almost none of these accidents ever involves a parent getting shot, just some other playmate or sibling.

[FryeVRCCDS0067]

We're a country of nearly 316 million people. It's sad that the things you mentioned happened but lets put it in perspective. 48 people have been killed by garage doors in America in the past 10 years as far as I can tell. That would be 4.8 people per year. One recent one was a 3 yearold. http://www.gadailynews.com/news/national/154569-3-year-old-killed-by-garage-door.html That's sad but it hardly means it's some kind of trend requiring the government to step in and control who gets to own garage doors.

Accidents and tragedy's can happen anytime, anywhere, even to responsible people.

My son Joe drove a car through the back of a barn when he was around 3. My son Andy went to school with a kid who was badly scared from biting into an electrical cord as a baby. Andy had another friend whose nickname was Bushhog because he crashed an atv into the bushhog his Dad was operating and lost 1/2 of one foot.

I knew two kids growing up who had well healed gunshot wounds. One shot himself lengthwise down the leg with a 22, the other was shot on Halloween by a crazy old man who was constantly harassed by kids.

Point is, these were all freak occurrences which did not require some new "protect us from evil garage doors, electrical cords, bushhogs and barns" act of congress.

Life's messy, some of us reading this now will probably not be alive next year. And if I'm one of em, I've got one request.

Don't turn my death into some Safety Nazi crusade to protect anyone by reducing someone's personal choices and/or freedom. If I'm killed because myself or someone else had freedom to do something stupid then so be it. Learn from it, laugh about it, whatever you want. Just don't reduce our freedom one iota because of it.

Everybody dies, young, old, rich, poor, we've all got one thing in common, death will eventually reach out, tap each of us on the shoulder and ask us to dance. If you make life so safe that no one can get killed by accident then you've actually made life so safe and boring that living it would be pointless and death would be a welcome release.

[IamGCW]

This week :-
Alaska - 5 yo girl shot & killed by her 8 yo brother.
Kentucky - 2 yo girl shot & killed by 5 yo brother
Crickett brand .22 rifle designed for children, with design colours, incl pink for girls.
Sold as " My first rifle ".
Rifles given to the kids as a gift.
As an Aussie I must be missing something here.
Is this just the culture.
Please explain.
Don ( Aussie )

Thanks for the comments.
Certainly a wide cross section of views.
Maybe Australians are over controlled but that is how we wanted it.
We have a choice & the decisions are ours.
eg drinking age is 18, bycycles & motorcycles mandatory helmet.
To me it just seemed a great loss for the parents of the kids.
Whether there is someone at fault or an accident, it would be hard to bear.
Don ( Aussie )

http://www.who.int/mediacentre/factsheets/fs347/en/

Child drowning statistics from a number of countries are particularly revealing:

Australia: drowning is the leading cause of unintentional injury death in children aged 1-3 years.


Why does Australia allow H2O near their young.  Perhaps it should be outlawed.  Just saying.

Gil

[Denny47]

I guess all matches should be banned and confiscated due to children playing with them, catching the house on fire and killing their families

[Daddie O]

Did the OP anywhere mention banning guns or blaming guns?  I didn't think so.  He was just curious about the culture of giving guns to very young children, and horrified by it's effects.  This thread immediately turned to bashing the OP and stating statistics about garage doors and automobiles and other bullshit knee-jerk "muh guns, muh freedom" posts.

Obviously it was careless parents that left loaded weapons in easy reach of children that thought that guns were okay to play with.  I have never seen a gun convicted of murder or negligence.  I also don't think a 4 year old is mentally capable of responsible gun ownership.  In addition to losing their children, I think the parents should spend some time in jail for child endangerment, and negligence resulting in death.  Their felony convictions should make it illegal for such irresponsible parents to ever own guns again.

[Detn8er]

Did the OP anywhere mention banning guns or blaming guns?  I didn't think so.  He was just curious about the culture of giving guns to very young children, and horrified by it's effects.  This thread immediately turned to bashing the OP and stating statistics about garage doors and automobiles and other bullshit knee-jerk "muh guns, muh freedom" posts.

Obviously it was careless parents that left loaded weapons in easy reach of children that thought that guns were okay to play with.  I have never seen a gun convicted of murder or negligence.  I also don't think a 4 year old is mentally capable of responsible gun ownership.  In addition to losing their children, I think the parents should spend some time in jail for child endangerment, and negligence resulting in death.  Their felony convictions should make it illegal for such irresponsible parents to ever own guns again.

It helps to know the history of the OP.....He usually throws a gun comment in a post even when it is only about a ride or such......It's his way of going nanner nanner boo boo to U.S. and our 2ND amendment rights.... He seems to think things are better down there since the great gun confiscation took place.....news reports and stats seem to say he is wrong.

[Daddie O]

I fully agree with our 2nd amendment rights, but not to the exclusion of other rights.  Those children that were killed had the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.  Those rights got taken from them by parents who were exercising their right to bear arms without exercising the responsibility that comes with it.

Is it any wonder that foreigners scratch their head when they read a story about a parent too busy feeding grease to their dogs to supervise a young child with a gun?  Doesn't it make you scratch your head too?

[musclehead]

I fully agree with our 2nd amendment rights, but not to the exclusion of other rights.  Those children that were killed had the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.  Those rights got taken from them by parents who were exercising their right to bear arms without exercising the responsibility that comes with it.

Is it any wonder that foreigners scratch their head when they read a story about a parent too busy feeding grease to their dogs to supervise a young child with a gun?  Doesn't it make you scratch your head too?

that is bad parenting, we'd shake our heads if the toddler was killed with a knife, a car, or a toilet plunger. but since it was a gun it will get lots of press.

[G-Man]

Liberals believe that all guns are potential accidents waiting to happen and gun owners are potential killers.  Plain and simple.

[lacon]

Like Serk said above - My son-in-law picked up a Cricket for my grandaughter about 2 months before she was born.  (My daughter said no pink guns allowed though)  He wrapped it up for the baby shower & afterwards we took it out in the back yard & tried it out.   Probably baby showers are not done that way in Austrailia.

I see the libs are mad about the way the recent Senate vote went on gun control & vowing to get organized & come back.   Sort of intolerant when it comes to 2nd amendment rights I guess.  We had better be ready for the next assault.

[Daddie O]

Liberals believe that all guns are potential accidents waiting to happen and gun owners are potential killers.  Plain and simple.

Guns are potential accidents waiting to happen.  That's why we keep our guns in gun safes instead of leaving them laying around in reach of children.  We don't keep our knives in knife safes, or our toilet plungers in toilet plunger safes.  Some of you are ridiculous.

[Willow]

Did the OP anywhere mention banning guns or blaming guns?  I didn't think so.  He was just curious about the culture of giving guns to very young children, and horrified by it's effects.  This thread immediately turned to bashing the OP and stating statistics about garage doors and automobiles and other bullshit knee-jerk "muh guns, muh freedom" posts.

Daddie O, you may want to pay attention to history and context before you go off half cocked (pun intended) as the self appointed patron (pun intended) of correct thinking.

As for posters being ridiculous, when you go into the ridiculing "muh guns, muh freedom" you don't come off as particularly bright.  Come to think of it, it has all the earmarks of just another not-so-well-thought-out bullshit knee-jerk post.

Don't let yourself be just another knee jerk.   

[lacon]

I love guns.  Motorcycles too.  I've bought several nice M1 Garands from the CPM.  Reports are that they are about  a year or two away from depleting the supply from the government, so might be able to pick up a few more before they are only available from the private sector.  When they are gone, each of my grandchildren will  be given the best ones from my stash to remember me by. 

[Detn8er]

Did the OP anywhere mention banning guns or blaming guns?  I didn't think so.  He was just curious about the culture of giving guns to very young children, and horrified by it's effects.  This thread immediately turned to bashing the OP and stating statistics about garage doors and automobiles and other bullshit knee-jerk "muh guns, muh freedom" posts.

Daddie O, you may want to pay attention to history and context before you go off half cocked (pun intended) as the self appointed patron (pun intended) of correct thinking.

As for posters being ridiculous, when you go into the ridiculing "muh guns, muh freedom" you don't come off as particularly bright.  Come to think of it, it has all the earmarks of just another not-so-well-thought-out bullshit knee-jerk post.

Don't let yourself be just another knee jerk.   

[musclehead]

Liberals believe that all guns are potential accidents waiting to happen and gun owners are potential killers.  Plain and simple.

Guns are potential accidents waiting to happen.

my guns potentiality for accidents are slim and none. I have no children in my house and I have a liberty safe. accidents happen, some are avoidable. nobody here thinks that this was an unavoidable accident, sometimes accidents take the lives of innocents, regretable but all part of life...

[czuch]

OP, youre missing something here. How many criminals are able to come across guns there?
I had a friend who would go down under November through March. When his mates came up over the first thing they wanted to do was go plinkin. 
Ya cant put todays morals and values on 100 year old history and you cant make everywhere Austrailia, or America.
You can, however turn it all into Uganda if youre not careful.           

[Jeff K]

My Daughter has a Lil buckaroo. She has been shooting since she was 10
My Granddaughter has a Cricket.
When she comes, we go to the range, she puts on her safety gear, she shoots at paper, gets rewarded with more ammo for score, it keeps her aiming and practicing instead of just making noise.
They both follow all range rules and do it very well.

Her and My soon to be step Grandson both get to shoot ONLY if they are doing well in school. Unfortunately only one of them gets to go this time. Good Job Ethan.

Ethan is a bit older than Cecilia. He gets to shoot the big guns if he qualifies with the .22. Again it keeps them concentrated on developing their skills not just planting lead.

[musclehead]

My Daughter has a Lil buckaroo. She has been shooting since she was 10
My Granddaughter has a Cricket.
When she comes, we go to the range, she puts on her safety gear, she shoots at paper, gets rewarded with more ammo for score, it keeps her aiming and practicing instead of just making noise.
They both follow all range rules and do it very well.

Her and My soon to be step Grandson both get to shoot ONLY if they are doing well in school. Unfortunately only one of them gets to go this time. Good Job Ethan.

Ethan is a bit older than Cecilia. He gets to shoot the big guns if he qualifies with the .22. Again it keeps them concentrated on developing their skills not just planting lead.

there's a life lesson, work hard get rewarded. 

[IamGCW]

Did the OP anywhere mention banning guns or blaming guns?  I didn't think so.  He was just curious about the culture of giving guns to very young children, and horrified by it's effects.  This thread immediately turned to bashing the OP and stating statistics about garage doors and automobiles and other bullshit knee-jerk "muh guns, muh freedom" posts.

Obviously it was careless parents that left loaded weapons in easy reach of children that thought that guns were okay to play with.  I have never seen a gun convicted of murder or negligence.  I also don't think a 4 year old is mentally capable of responsible gun ownership.  In addition to losing their children, I think the parents should spend some time in jail for child endangerment, and negligence resulting in death.  Their felony convictions should make it illegal for such irresponsible parents to ever own guns again.

He did say "Thanks for the comments".  I took that as an invitation.  Others may have also. 

Gil

[Daddie O]

Did the OP anywhere mention banning guns or blaming guns?  I didn't think so.  He was just curious about the culture of giving guns to very young children, and horrified by it's effects.  This thread immediately turned to bashing the OP and stating statistics about garage doors and automobiles and other bullshit knee-jerk "muh guns, muh freedom" posts.

Daddie O, you may want to pay attention to history and context before you go off half cocked (pun intended) as the self appointed patron (pun intended) of correct thinking.

As for posters being ridiculous, when you go into the ridiculing "muh guns, muh freedom" you don't come off as particularly bright.  Come to think of it, it has all the earmarks of just another not-so-well-thought-out bullshit knee-jerk post.

Don't let yourself be just another knee jerk.  

History has nothing to do with it.  The context is this thread.  Maybe you should start by reading the OP's post, and follow that by reading the responses.  See if they don't fit the "muh guns muh freedums" stereotype.  Nothing knee-jerk about it.  It is what it is.  If you can't see the OP was wondering if it is something to do with our culture that allows very young children have unsupervised access to guns, then I can't help you any more with reading comprehension.  If you can't see that his nationality was being attacked for either giving up freedoms or never having them in the first place, and then being accused of wanting to take all your guns from you, again I can't help you further with comprehension.  If you didn't see people start to make comparisons about gun deaths and deaths by garage doors and toilet plungers, then I could understand you being confused about why I would say some people are ridiculous.

Willow, I suggest you free your mind from blindly accepting right wing conspiracy as gospel truth, and then thinking that anyone who sees through the facade as not bright, or not having thought things through.  Patron of correct thinking?  Is that the pot calling the kettle black?  I think so after you tell me what I should do and what I should think.  Yes, I do ridicule the small minded individual that thinks the government is just pining to take away your right to bear arms, and sees every tragic death by a gun as ammunition for a "damn libruhl"  to take away his gun.  All the "damn libruhls hate muh guns" talk is such bullshit.  I am liberal, I own a gun.  Tens of millions of liberals own guns.  Matter of fact I seem to remember a little thing called "The Civil War" where the closed minded bigots of the south got their asses handed to them by progressive northerners with guns.

[Willow]

History has nothing to do with it.  The context is this thread.  Maybe you should start by reading the OP's post, and follow that by reading the responses.  See if they don't fit the "muh guns muh freedums" stereotype.  Nothing knee-jerk about it.  It is what it is.  If you can't see the OP was wondering if it is something to do with our culture that allows very young children have unsupervised access to guns, then I can't help you any more with reading comprehension.  If you can't see that his nationality was being attacked for either giving up freedoms or never having them in the first place, and then being accused of wanting to take all your guns from you, again I can't help you further with comprehension.  If you didn't see people start to make comparisons about gun deaths and deaths by garage doors and toilet plungers, then I could understand you being confused about why I would say some people are ridiculous.

Willow, I suggest you free your mind from blindly accepting right wing conspiracy as gospel truth, and then thinking that anyone who sees through the facade as not bright, or not having thought things through.  Patron of correct thinking?  Is that the pot calling the kettle black?  I think so after you tell me what I should do and what I should think.  Yes, I do ridicule the small minded individual that thinks the government is just pining to take away your right to bear arms, and sees every tragic death by a gun as ammunition for a "damn libruhl"  to take away his gun.  All the "damn libruhls hate muh guns" talk is such bullshit.  I am liberal, I own a gun.  Tens of millions of liberals own guns.  Matter of fact I seem to remember a little thing called "The Civil War" where the closed minded bigots of the south got their asses handed to them by progressive northerners with guns.

Actually, Daddie, history has everything to do with it.  Blastedbugler has posted repeatedly in the past on the subject.  Context is the continuing conversation in this case that stretches well beyond this particular post.  It appears to me that by Don's own response imbedded as an edit to his post he meant the implication exactly as the respondents took it.  It's interesting that he didn't seem to be as offended as you were on his behalf. 

Daddie O, I suggest you free your mind from blindly accepting left wing conspiracy as gospel truth, and then thinking of anyone who sees through the facade as not bright, or not having thought things through.

I hope you can hear that clearly.  You demonstrate regularly that you are exactly what you ridicule, simply standing at a different window.

Just as a casual observation, you seem to have a real problem with disagreeing respectfully or perhaps just no effort to do so.

Pot calling the kettle black?  Perhaps so.  I wouldn't contest that one way or the other.  Doesn't really let the kettle off the hook, does it?

You have assumed much.  I'm pretty sure I can and do pronounce my equally as well as do you.  I don't necessarily hold the positions you seemed to have decided I embrace.  I guess the assuming much falls right in line with your regularly stereotyping people you don't know.  You'd do well to work your way past that if you really are interested in making your point.  If you're only interested in exchanging insults across the internet then I guess no change is required.

My reading comprehension is just fine.  I appreciate your offer to assist in my improvement but I doubt both my need and your qualification. 

I'm not sure your view of history and mine have much in common concerning the war between the states.  I've done a fair amount of studying that particular event and its times.  I'd like to think I did so with a reasonably open mind.   

Have a nice day, Daddie.  We're into our second day of continuous rain here.  I hope what you have is better.   

   

[Valkorado]

I went back and looked over the posts.  I think people were discussing cultural differences.  Opinions are influenced by culture, and while some expressed opinions were passionate I don't think any were intentionally derogatory to the OP.

[Master Blaster]

I fully agree with our 2nd amendment rights, but not to the exclusion of other rights.  Those children that were killed had the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.  Those rights got taken from them by parents who were exercising their right to bear arms without exercising the responsibility that comes with it.

You might say the same about the millions that are slaughtered with the full approval of the liberals in the name of pro choice.  Using abortion for birth controll is an abomination.   Where is the indignation at this terrible wrong.  Oh I get it, this just dont fit with the mindset of the typical left winger. 

[musclehead]

Did the OP anywhere mention banning guns or blaming guns?  I didn't think so.  He was just curious about the culture of giving guns to very young children, and horrified by it's effects.  This thread immediately turned to bashing the OP and stating statistics about garage doors and automobiles and other bullshit knee-jerk "muh guns, muh freedom" posts.

Daddie O, you may want to pay attention to history and context before you go off half cocked (pun intended) as the self appointed patron (pun intended) of correct thinking.

As for posters being ridiculous, when you go into the ridiculing "muh guns, muh freedom" you don't come off as particularly bright.  Come to think of it, it has all the earmarks of just another not-so-well-thought-out bullshit knee-jerk post.

Don't let yourself be just another knee jerk.  

History has nothing to do with it.  The context is this thread.  Maybe you should start by reading the OP's post, and follow that by reading the responses.  See if they don't fit the "muh guns muh freedums" stereotype.  Nothing knee-jerk about it.  It is what it is.  If you can't see the OP was wondering if it is something to do with our culture that allows very young children have unsupervised access to guns, then I can't help you any more with reading comprehension.  If you can't see that his nationality was being attacked for either giving up freedoms or never having them in the first place, and then being accused of wanting to take all your guns from you, again I can't help you further with comprehension.  If you didn't see people start to make comparisons about gun deaths and deaths by garage doors and toilet plungers, then I could understand you being confused about why I would say some people are ridiculous.

Willow, I suggest you free your mind from blindly accepting right wing conspiracy as gospel truth, and then thinking that anyone who sees through the facade as not bright, or not having thought things through.  Patron of correct thinking?  Is that the pot calling the kettle black?  I think so after you tell me what I should do and what I should think.  Yes, I do ridicule the small minded individual that thinks the government is just pining to take away your right to bear arms, and sees every tragic death by a gun as ammunition for a "damn libruhl"  to take away his gun.  All the "damn libruhls hate muh guns" talk is such bullshit.  I am liberal, I own a gun.  Tens of millions of liberals own guns.  Matter of fact I seem to remember a little thing called "The Civil War" where the closed minded bigots of the south got their asses handed to them by progressive northerners with guns.

well I don't recall anyone on the right side of the aisle advocating a gunless populace. but I can provide you with dozens of qoutes from those on the left side. feel free to google that if you would then tell us "they" don't want "muh guns"

[Daddie O]

History has nothing to do with it.  The context is this thread.  Maybe you should start by reading the OP's post, and follow that by reading the responses.  See if they don't fit the "muh guns muh freedums" stereotype.  Nothing knee-jerk about it.  It is what it is.  If you can't see the OP was wondering if it is something to do with our culture that allows very young children have unsupervised access to guns, then I can't help you any more with reading comprehension.  If you can't see that his nationality was being attacked for either giving up freedoms or never having them in the first place, and then being accused of wanting to take all your guns from you, again I can't help you further with comprehension.  If you didn't see people start to make comparisons about gun deaths and deaths by garage doors and toilet plungers, then I could understand you being confused about why I would say some people are ridiculous.

Willow, I suggest you free your mind from blindly accepting right wing conspiracy as gospel truth, and then thinking that anyone who sees through the facade as not bright, or not having thought things through.  Patron of correct thinking?  Is that the pot calling the kettle black?  I think so after you tell me what I should do and what I should think.  Yes, I do ridicule the small minded individual that thinks the government is just pining to take away your right to bear arms, and sees every tragic death by a gun as ammunition for a "damn libruhl"  to take away his gun.  All the "damn libruhls hate muh guns" talk is such bullshit.  I am liberal, I own a gun.  Tens of millions of liberals own guns.  Matter of fact I seem to remember a little thing called "The Civil War" where the closed minded bigots of the south got their asses handed to them by progressive northerners with guns.

Actually, Daddie, history has everything to do with it.  Blastedbugler has posted repeatedly in the past on the subject.  Context is the continuing conversation in this case that stretches well beyond this particular post.  It appears to me that by Don's own response imbedded as an edit to his post he meant the implication exactly as the respondents took it.  It's interesting that he didn't seem to be as offended as you were on his behalf. 

Daddie O, I suggest you free your mind from blindly accepting left wing conspiracy as gospel truth, and then thinking of anyone who sees through the facade as not bright, or not having thought things through.

I hope you can hear that clearly.  You demonstrate regularly that you are exactly what you ridicule, simply standing at a different window.

Just as a casual observation, you seem to have a real problem with disagreeing respectfully or perhaps just no effort to do so.

Pot calling the kettle black?  Perhaps so.  I wouldn't contest that one way or the other.  Doesn't really let the kettle off the hook, does it?

You have assumed much.  I'm pretty sure I can and do pronounce my equally as well as do you.  I don't necessarily hold the positions you seemed to have decided I embrace.  I guess the assuming much falls right in line with your regularly stereotyping people you don't know.  You'd do well to work your way past that if you really are interested in making your point.  If you're only interested in exchanging insults across the internet then I guess no change is required.

My reading comprehension is just fine.  I appreciate your offer to assist in my improvement but I doubt both my need and your qualification. 

I'm not sure your view of history and mine have much in common concerning the war between the states.  I've done a fair amount of studying that particular event and its times.  I'd like to think I did so with a reasonably open mind.   

Have a nice day, Daddie.  We're into our second day of continuous rain here.  I hope what you have is better.   

   

Willow, you can take my words and change right wing for left wing but it doesn't really hold water.  I don't see a right wing conspiracy.  It wasn't me that questioned your "brightness" or having "thought things through", that was you.  As far as having difficulty respectfully disagreeing, it seems it is you that is suffering from a lack of ability.  You veiling calling me a jerk by instead calling me a "knee-jerk" and putting a smiley face with it doesn't actually veil it, nor is it respectful.  Neither is saying someone "appears less than bright", or isn't "qualified" to offer help in comprehension.  Am I wrong and those words were especially respectful?  It's kind of like saying "no disrespect, but you're an a-hole".

I know what context is, but the fact the the OP had made other posts on other threads doesn't make the responses on this thread any less ridiculous.  I'm not offended on his behalf, I am amused at the inability to answer his posts without talking about deaths by toilet plungers and garage doors, or falling into the same tired government conspiracy theories about "they want my guns".  I am not stereotyping people I don't know; I am calling B.S. on people that post B.S.  I know you and I (and many others but not all on this forum) disagree on things, and I know it bothers some people that there are others with dissenting opinions.  Many like to just hear validation and pats on the back, but I like to voice my opposing opinions.  

I doubt your "open mind" can refute that the South lost the Civil War.  Was it not southern slave owning bigots that lost, or did the war end differently in your "fair amount of studying"?  Do you not see that you are so opposed to agreeing that you will even revise the common knowledge of our country's history?

I hope you have a nice day too Willow, and I hope the weather improves for you.  It is 94 degrees here right now, and I'm going for a ride.  Ride safe!

[Daddie O]

I fully agree with our 2nd amendment rights, but not to the exclusion of other rights.  Those children that were killed had the right to life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness.  Those rights got taken from them by parents who were exercising their right to bear arms without exercising the responsibility that comes with it.

You might say the same about the millions that are slaughtered with the full approval of the liberals in the name of pro choice.  Using abortion for birth controll is an abomination.   Where is the indignation at this terrible wrong.  Oh I get it, this just dont fit with the mindset of the typical left winger. 

I don't think there is anything remotely close to a majority that thinks abortion should be used instead of or as birth control in either party.  What I do find odd is that you are so anxious to protect groups of cells that aren't viable on their own, but I bet you are for the death penalty for living breathing human beings.  You aren't really pro-life if you believe in the death penalty are you?  You are actually just pro-birth, and anti-choice.  Typical right winger 

[Daddie O]

Did the OP anywhere mention banning guns or blaming guns?  I didn't think so.  He was just curious about the culture of giving guns to very young children, and horrified by it's effects.  This thread immediately turned to bashing the OP and stating statistics about garage doors and automobiles and other bullshit knee-jerk "muh guns, muh freedom" posts.

Daddie O, you may want to pay attention to history and context before you go off half cocked (pun intended) as the self appointed patron (pun intended) of correct thinking.

As for posters being ridiculous, when you go into the ridiculing "muh guns, muh freedom" you don't come off as particularly bright.  Come to think of it, it has all the earmarks of just another not-so-well-thought-out bullshit knee-jerk post.

Don't let yourself be just another knee jerk.  

History has nothing to do with it.  The context is this thread.  Maybe you should start by reading the OP's post, and follow that by reading the responses.  See if they don't fit the "muh guns muh freedums" stereotype.  Nothing knee-jerk about it.  It is what it is.  If you can't see the OP was wondering if it is something to do with our culture that allows very young children have unsupervised access to guns, then I can't help you any more with reading comprehension.  If you can't see that his nationality was being attacked for either giving up freedoms or never having them in the first place, and then being accused of wanting to take all your guns from you, again I can't help you further with comprehension.  If you didn't see people start to make comparisons about gun deaths and deaths by garage doors and toilet plungers, then I could understand you being confused about why I would say some people are ridiculous.

Willow, I suggest you free your mind from blindly accepting right wing conspiracy as gospel truth, and then thinking that anyone who sees through the facade as not bright, or not having thought things through.  Patron of correct thinking?  Is that the pot calling the kettle black?  I think so after you tell me what I should do and what I should think.  Yes, I do ridicule the small minded individual that thinks the government is just pining to take away your right to bear arms, and sees every tragic death by a gun as ammunition for a "damn libruhl"  to take away his gun.  All the "damn libruhls hate muh guns" talk is such bullshit.  I am liberal, I own a gun.  Tens of millions of liberals own guns.  Matter of fact I seem to remember a little thing called "The Civil War" where the closed minded bigots of the south got their asses handed to them by progressive northerners with guns.

well I don't recall anyone on the right side of the aisle advocating a gunless populace. but I can provide you with dozens of qoutes from those on the left side. feel free to google that if you would then tell us "they" don't want "muh guns"

You know America has over 300 million people in it, and in that number I am sure there are some that think the America should be gunless.  Is it anything remotely close to a majority, or is it such a minority that it is laughable?  I mean really, look at the last attempt at gun control legislation.  It couldn't even pass the democratically controlled senate.  You really think they are close to passing laws to make our society gunless?  This is what I am talking about when I say right wing conspiracy theories.

[Lawdog]

Man that is deep (Daddie o and Willow) love to get you two face to face and watch the debate.

I have 3 children and guns have been in my home all their lives. I started teaching them about gun safety when they started walking. My older two have their own guns (they got them at the age of 8 and 9 for X-mass that year) and go with me to the gun rang any time I will take them. They love shooting and have a great time. We are a gun family even The Boss and hoping to get my youngest started this summer
All the firearms and ammo in my home are under multiple layers of security. I am a parent first gun loving bike riding A-hole second. If you have to ask why I love riding then I can't explain why I love my time on the gun range. To me the answer would be about the same you are a gun person or you are not.
Hope everyone can have a good ride this weekend (even thou mine does not start until Monday) I plane on riding the Dragon (hwy 129) when my weekend starts.     

[Willow]

Willow, you can take my words and change right wing for left wing but it doesn't really hold water.  I don't see a right wing conspiracy.  It wasn't me that questioned your "brightness" or having "thought things through", that was you.  As far as having difficulty respectfully disagreeing, it seems it is you that is suffering from a lack of ability.  You veiling calling me a jerk by instead calling me a "knee-jerk" and putting a smiley face with it doesn't actually veil it, nor is it respectful.  Neither is saying someone "appears less than bright", or isn't "qualified" to offer help in comprehension.  Am I wrong and those words were especially respectful?  It's kind of like saying "no disrespect, but you're an a-hole".

I know what context is, but the fact the the OP had made other posts on other threads doesn't make the responses on this thread any less ridiculous.  I'm not offended on his behalf, I am amused at the inability to answer his posts without talking about deaths by toilet plungers and garage doors, or falling into the same tired government conspiracy theories about "they want my guns".  I am not stereotyping people I don't know; I am calling B.S. on people that post B.S.  I know you and I (and many others but not all on this forum) disagree on things, and I know it bothers some people that there are others with dissenting opinions.  Many like to just hear validation and pats on the back, but I like to voice my opposing opinions.  

I doubt your "open mind" can refute that the South lost the Civil War.  Was it not southern slave owning bigots that lost, or did the war end differently in your "fair amount of studying"?  Do you not see that you are so opposed to agreeing that you will even revise the common knowledge of our country's history?

I hope you have a nice day too Willow, and I hope the weather improves for you.  It is 94 degrees here right now, and I'm going for a ride.  Ride safe!

I guess we'll have to respectfully agree to disagree on what holds water.

Yes, you are correct.  My insinuation that you're not qualified to help me with my reading comprehension was probably just about as disrespectful as your stating that I was beyond your ability to help.

I'm pretty sure that the representatives of the CSA surrendered at the end of the war to the representatives of the USA.  I guess we do agree on that.  Where are viewpoints may be miles apart is the idea that the sides were represented by gun toting liberals from the north and by bigoted conservatives from the south.

I'm certainly going to let you have the final word if you choose to.  I've pretty well exhausted what I intended to say and I'm going to conceded there's no chance in my breaking through your they-do-but-I don't mentality.  That and you obviously type much faster than I.  

Enjoy your ride.