Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > New Jersey
 [Register]
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.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Closed Thread Start New Thread
 
Old 04-11-2013, 10:19 AM
 
Location: Lower east side of Toronto
10,564 posts, read 12,818,961 times
Reputation: 9400

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Gunluvver2 View Post
I am a 66 year old Man and I have been involved with firearms since at least age four. Of the three deaths from firearms one was an accidental discharge that killed the brother of a fellow classmate my Junior year in High School. Around that same time the Father of a classmate used a firearm to commit suicide. The next personal acquaintance that died from a firearms accident was the brother of a friend's wife. He had a revolver fall out of his holster and land on the hammer causing the gun to fire and a bullet hitting him in the head. Note that shortly after trigger transfer bars became common, preventing this type of accident.

Yes three tragedies is horrible and all three of the deaths I mentioned should have never happened but they did. However during my 66 years I remember dozens of people killed in farm accidents (how many city slickers are killed in farm accidents?) and maybe hundreds of people killed in automobile and motorcycle accidents. Would you outlaw ownership of farm equipment? Automobiles? Wait a minute. As a farm boy I remember at least two people that died from injuries by livestock. Outlaw farm animals also?

Newsflash people. Life always ends in death. Logic would suggest that we should have UNIVERSAL BIRTH CONTROL. If Birth Control was 100% effective no new people would be born thus saving billions of lives. I am surprised some do gooder politicians haven't suggested this.

GL2
You are a modern old fella - look at that typing...commuter literate hugh? The point here is you are a bright man. Most people are not as intelligent or wise as you. Can you legislate against people being born stupid? Of course not. I was not suggesting outlawing anything. I mentioned that I was Canadian and all I remember about the passed era was that guns were not a big deal or a problem. When guns are portrayed as objects of power and control by the film industry for 30 solid years - the stupid people are receiving the worst kind of training regarding firearms.

"Life always ends in death" _You realize that- I realize that..because - younger people do not realize that. They think that death is so far away that it does not exist..We who are over 60 can see if from here...Don't expect this wisdom in today's youth.

I see your point - the avoidance of death is a life long effort. Whether it be accidental death - sickness or violence. Self protection is based on human awareness. Smart people live longer.

 
Old 04-11-2013, 10:21 AM
 
Location: Savannah GA/Lk Hopatcong NJ
13,404 posts, read 28,726,919 times
Reputation: 12067
Quote:
Originally Posted by Badfish740 View Post
Enough already. A child is dead due to the negligence of another child's parents. That's it. It's a horrible and very preventable (which makes it worse) tragedy. One child lost his life, his parents will be forever scarred, another child's life is ruined before it's really even begun, and his parents will also be forever scarred. Why this has to be a pro/anti gun issue is beyond me. What if the 4 year old had pushed the 6 year old into the pool and (assuming he couldn't swim) he drowned? What if he had hit him in the back of the head with a baseball bat? Or stabbed him in the chest? The issue here is that the parents of the 4 year old clearly were not supervising either child AT ALL. How you let two children under age 10 run around completely unsupervised to the point that one picks up a loaded gun and shoots the other is inconceivable. Is that an issue for anyone here or is this simply another garden variety city-data political p***ing match?
A voice of reason has spoken...amen
 
Old 04-11-2013, 10:28 AM
 
Location: NJ
2,210 posts, read 7,026,248 times
Reputation: 2193
Quote:
Originally Posted by nybbler View Post
Personal responsibility means being responsible for what you do. Not being responsible for what others do. And certainly not being responsible for what other people who have done bad things to you (like steal your gun) do. Obviously a 4 year old cannot be responsible, so someone else must be responsible for him. But the general principle that one is responsible for what others do with one's possessions is not one of personal responsibility.
Personal responsibility includes taking responsibility for ones possessions and what one does with them. Who on earth can justify "losing" a deadly weapon? If a weapon is stolen, it wasn't secured properly, if used by someone the gun was sold or gifted to without proper safeguards then there is a responsibility there.
When a dog bites a child, the owner is responsible. When you lend your car, they come under your insurance. Guns are designed purely to kill and yet you seem to think owners should take less responsibility than pet and car owners.
 
Old 04-11-2013, 11:00 AM
 
3,984 posts, read 7,075,803 times
Reputation: 2889
The Atlantic Cty prosecutor is taking over the case because the grandparents were both police in Ocean Cty. Not sure what the son does besides own lots of loaded firearms, not locking them up & not supervising his kid....AKA, the Idiot's Trifecta.
 
Old 04-11-2013, 11:10 AM
 
Location: Ontario, NY
3,515 posts, read 7,782,351 times
Reputation: 4292
I would be very surprised if some charges are not filed against the parents for failing to secure the firearm and keeping loaded weapons in the house.
 
Old 04-11-2013, 11:21 AM
 
19,126 posts, read 25,327,931 times
Reputation: 25434
Quote:
Originally Posted by tahiti View Post
I wouldn't take someone with the screen name "abortionluvver" seriously either. Your screen name is only designed to inflame. I love the mangling of the English language in the name too.

And with that, on ignore you go.
Ditto!

 
Old 04-11-2013, 11:36 AM
 
Location: Elsewhere
88,575 posts, read 84,777,093 times
Reputation: 115100
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kracer View Post
"Maybe the NRA will come out and recommend that every house be guarded by an armed law enforcement officer to avoid such a tragedy." - best comment I have seen in a while....."

If you were really concerned you would demand schools use the NRA "Eddie the eagle " safety program directed to young kids.

There is fire safety, Dare, sex ed but heaven forbid we 'arm' our children with knowledge that might save their lives in just such a situation.
That wouldn't have done much good--this kid was only four years old--too young to be in school.
 
Old 04-11-2013, 03:15 PM
 
Location: NJ
23,550 posts, read 17,223,445 times
Reputation: 17589
Default child killers

Just to maintain some perspective on child killers.....

"Preschoolers and kindergartners are most likely to start these fires, typically by playing with matches and lighters, and are most likely to die in them."

"In 2005-2009, children playing with fire started an estimated 56,300 fires that were reported to U.S. fire departments, causing an estimated 110 civilian deaths, 880 civilian injuries and $268 million in direct property damage."


Apparently children are not as innocuous as you might believe. Imagine how many people would die if schools did not have a fire safety week!!!

This story is an unimaginable tradgedy but it seems that personal responsibility or lack thereof is the common denominator among this case and fire deaths and many more situations where children run amuck. All the legislation passed will save probably as many lives as chance.

If responsibility is surrendered to bask in the safety of laws, the tradgedies will cantinue.


"Children playing with fire






Store matches and lighters out of children's reach and sight, up high, preferably in a locked cabinet. Read all of NFPA's children playing with fire safety tips.

In 2010, U.S. fire department responded to an estimated 44,900 fires that were started by someone, usually a child, playing with fire. These fires caused 90 civilian deaths, 890 civilian injuries and $210 million in direct property damage.
Source: NFPA's latest estimates of children playing with fire -2010 (PDF, 131 KB)

Facts & figures
  • Preschoolers and kindergartners are most likely to start these fires, typically by playing with matches and lighters, and are most likely to die in them.
  • In 2005-2009, children playing with fire started an estimated 56,300 fires that were reported to U.S. fire departments, causing an estimated 110 civilian deaths, 880 civilian injuries and $268 million in direct property damage.
  • Most fire-play fires (77%) started outside, but most associated deaths (97%) were in home structure fires.
  • Almost half (46%) of people who start reported home fires by playing were five years old or younger.
  • Two out of five (40%) child-playing home structure fires began in the bedroom.
  • Mattresses and bedding were the items first ignited in 24% of child-playing home structure fires and 29% of associated civilian fire deaths."
 
Old 04-11-2013, 03:16 PM
 
Location: High Bridge, NJ
3,859 posts, read 9,978,149 times
Reputation: 3400
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kracer View Post
If you were really concerned you would demand schools use the NRA "Eddie the eagle " safety program directed to young kids. There is fire safety, Dare, sex ed but heaven forbid we 'arm' our children with knowledge that might save their lives in just such a situation.
These kids were four and six. They didn't need gun safety training, fire safety training, drug or sex education, they simply needed adults who cared enough to supervise them and be aware of what they were doing. THIS IS NOT ABOUT GUNS. These kids could just as easily have run out into the street and been hit by a car. In my home in addition to guns, I have many kinds of power tools, chainsaws, knives for everything from cleaning fish to carving a turkey, highly flammable liquids and gases (gasoline and propane), and poisonous chemicals for all sorts of purposes (cleaning, killing rodents, etc...). The one thing that all of these have in common is that I WOULD NEVER LET MY CHILD HAVE ACCESS TO THEM UNSUPERVISED.
 
Old 04-11-2013, 06:16 PM
 
2,160 posts, read 4,965,307 times
Reputation: 5527
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gunluvver2 View Post
Guns kill a baby and it is national news. A baby falls into a toilet, mop bucket or whatever in the home and nobody other than locals hear about it. Now guess which of the two, drownings or shootings kills more toddlers every year.

http://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/dvs/dea...10_release.pdf

The answer is in table 10 on page 23. . .
The number of deaths is broken down by age: from 1 year to 75. It didn't let me copy & paste in the proper rows and columns. But to summarize the number of children killed by firearm accidents compared to drownings is about six times higher for drownings.

Accidental discharge of firearms (W32-W34)
606 TOTAL
-- (<1 year old)
25 (1-4 years old)
37
(
5-14 years old)
145
(15-24 years old)
107
91
89
50
38
19
5
--
Accidental drowning and submersion (W65-W74)
3,782 TOTAL
39 (<1 year old)
436 (1-4 years old)
251 (5-14 years old)
656
(15-24 years old)
476
409
578
417
276
171
70
3
Logic would say we should ban water in more than two cup containers.

GL2
FIRST OF ALL, toilets, mop buckets and two cup containers aren't specifically designed solely for the purpose of causing death and bodily harm.



SECOND OF ALL, if we are going to consider data from that Table 10. you cited, we should consider the entire table and not just the 2 lines that conveniently support your thesis.

Using only those 2 lines of data, yes, it does appear that 6X as many people (all people total; children + adults) die from "ACCIDENTAL DROWNING AND SUBMERSION" (3,782 TOTAL) than from "FIREARM ACCIDENTS" (606 TOTAL).

If we are only talking about CHILDREN (I highlighted the data for age groups up to and including 15-24 years-old IN RED in your list above), it would be more accurate to state that the number of child deaths from drowning is 1,382, and the number of child deaths from firearm accidents is 207. So it's more like closer to 7X as many children dying from drowning than from firearm accidents.

HOWEVER, and this is a BIG "however", you neglected to cite the data in that Table 10. for all of the FIREARM related deaths as copied below. For the sake of brevity, I only cited TOTAL (adult + children), and the breakdown only as far as the age group of 15-24 years old.


"INTENTIONAL SELF-HARM (SUICIDE) BY DISCHARGE OF FIREARMS" (19,392 TOTAL)

-- (<1 year old)
-- (1-4 years old)
81 (5-14 years old)
2,046 (15-24 years old)



"ASSAULT (HOMICIDE) BY DISCHARGE OF FIREARMS" (11,078 TOTAL)

11 (<1 year old)
43 (1-4 years old)
165 (5-14 years old)
3,889 (15-24 years old)



"DISCHARGE OF FIREARMS, UNDETERMINED INTENT" (252 TOTAL)

-- (<1 year old)
3 (1-4 years old)
14 (5-14 years old)
53 (15-24 years old)



If we add those numbers up, we get 30,722 additional DEATHS BY FIREARM, for a grand total of 31,328 deaths.

Of those 31,328 DEATHS BY FIREARM, a grand total of 6,512 DEATHS are children.


This is a much more honest picture of firearm deaths, than your original proposal that it's really "only" 606 firearm deaths as compared to the 3,782 accidental drownings. Try to think for yourself outside the NRA propaganda that you are eating up with a spoon. It's ludicrous to claim that the NRA has done more for gun safety in this country than anyone else. That's like saying McDonald's obviously really cares about obesity because they offer salads and fruit in their Happy Meals. The NRA cares about gun manufacturers making money.



THIRD OF ALL, no one in this thread is talking about "BANNING" guns. No one is talking about busting through your front door and seizing your precious guns, so don't get hysterical. How many times have you mentioned in this thread how much you "LOVE" your guns? Gun debate aside, that kind of fetishising of an inanimate object is disturbing, and you are doing nothing to mitigate the caricature stereotype of "gun nut".

"Gun control" doesn't equal "Gun ban". Can we try to think about these issues more intelligently than divisive, black & white thinking and partisan "Obama and those abortion & homosexual luvin' Democrats want to take away all your guns and your Constitutional rights, 'Mmmmmurrrrricaaaaaa!" pandering?

Last edited by Docendo discimus; 04-11-2013 at 06:24 PM..
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.


Closed Thread




Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > U.S. Forums > New Jersey
Similar Threads

All times are GMT -6.

© 2005-2024, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Contact Us - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35, 36, 37 - Top