Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
yes but pit bulls and swimming pools kill kids too
why the priority given to disarming homeowners
why the millions spent on this goal
armed ghetto hood rats responsible for lots of kid death
where is your outrage
The amount of carelessness displayed by these gun owners is stunning, one grand parent leaving loaded guns around the house. Another job well done by the NRA fighting gun safety, access to loaded guns comes first safety of children second.
So, the gun is at fault, but not the parents, who gave a 12 year old a gun to scare coyotes, or the parent who hid the gun under the couch, or the parents who hid a gun in the closet...
Nope, it's all the guns fault...those guns jumped up and did everything...
Exactly. Stupid parents raise children who do stupid things. I was raised around guns. Lots of guns. Many of which were never locked up. Me and my 2 brothers managed to survive our childhood without getting shot or shooting anyone else. We respected guns. We never touched them without our parents being there. We never EVER pointed them at another human being. And we were taught that they were not toys.
Another job well done by the NRA fighting gun safety, access to loaded guns comes first safety of children second.
If you are depending on the NRA to provide safety to your children, then you cannot in all honesty consider yourself a responsible parent.
Access to loaded guns and safety are not competing requirements, the US army has access to loaded guns in general they are very safe with their use. The vast majority of gun owners too have access to loaded guns and in general they are very safe with their use. I'm sure you can pull up some stats, but bear in mind there are a conservative 70-80M lawful gun owners in the US and unknown numbers of unlawful gun owners, so you better have something that's approaching 1M+ examples to prove that they are not in general safe with their use.
On the NRA they have mostly agreed with gun safety measures that have proven and effective results, and fought gun safety measures with unproven or ineffective results. That's their job.
yes but pit bulls and swimming pools kill kids too
why the priority given to disarming homeowners
why the millions spent on this goal
armed ghetto hood rats responsible for lots of kid death
where is your outrage
Where in the article does it mention disarming gun owners, this is about common sense gun reporting an allowing minor access to loaded guns. Good thing the NRA doesn't have a pool safety division, they would be arguing against fences around swimming pools because it violates the constitution.
If you are depending on the NRA to provide safety to your children, then you cannot in all honesty consider yourself a responsible parent.
Access to loaded guns and safety are not competing requirements, the US army has access to loaded guns in general they are very safe with their use. The vast majority of gun owners too have access to loaded guns and in general they are very safe with their use. I'm sure you can pull up some stats, but bear in mind there are a conservative 70-80M lawful gun owners in the US and unknown numbers of unlawful gun owners, so you better have something that's approaching 1M+ examples to prove that they are not in general safe with their use.
On the NRA they have mostly agreed with gun safety measures that have proven and effective results, and fought gun safety measures with unproven or ineffective results. That's their job.
The NRA has used faulty data and done everything they could to make sure the Center for Disease Control would not have funding to study accidental gun deaths, you would hope that their organization would want good data. The focus of the article was under reporting of accidental gun deaths particularly by minors, if correct it pushes accidental gun deaths into the top for children. Why guns are not addressed as a consumer safety product is an excellent question.
Agree with you on the NRA, no one should use them as an example to provide safety.
Quote:
Gun rights lobbyists have also helped keep firearms and ammunition beyond the
reach of the Consumer Product Safety Commission, which has the power to regulate
other products that are dangerous to children. The N.R.A. argues that the
commission would provide a back door for gun control advocates to restrict the
manufacture of firearms. Proponents of regulation say guns pose too great a
hazard to exclude them from scrutiny.
“We know in the world of injury control that designing safer products is often the most efficient way to reduce tragedies,” said Dr. Kellermann, the co-author of the boys-and-guns study, who is a dean at the
Uniformed Services University of the Health Sciences. “Why, if we have childproof aspirin bottles, don’t we have childproof guns?”
The amount of carelessness displayed by these gun owners is stunning, one grand parent leaving loaded guns around the house. Another job well done by the NRA fighting gun safety, access to loaded guns comes first safety of children second.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goodnight
Where in the article does it mention disarming gun owners, this is about common sense gun reporting an allowing minor access to loaded guns. Good thing the NRA doesn't have a pool safety division, they would be arguing against fences around swimming pools because it violates the constitution.
You obviously chose to ignore this:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Rick Roma
There's a reason the NRA is against storage laws. In MA we have a storage law. What do you suppose happens with violations of the storage law?
Of course you can. But only one of the many things that kills children is a weapon whose purpose is to kill.
Next specious argument?
It's not specious. A gun's purpose isn't for a child to kill himself. A pool's purpose isn't for a child to kill himself. A gun used properly is no less safe than a pool used properly. So there is no specious element to the argument.
Meanwhile back to your position, look it's pretty simple, either you care about deaths, or you care about the means of death. If you care about deaths then you don't care about guns there are much much bigger fish to fry, if you care about means then you care about guns, but lets be intellectually honest and drop the arguments about the numbers of people dying, they're just a facile attempt to cover your belief that certain means of death are not acceptable.
Here ya go! This is about the best response I have heard, I have not read forward of this posting, but I'll bet you are not given a response.
What you are stating is selective outrage (or fake outrage).
Great post!
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.