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.
No. I am not. I am saying that everybody is negligent.
Naturally, I would not give my 5-year old my chain saw, the keys to my car, or a gun. These people were negligent and it resulted in a tragedy. In my eyes, they were also stupid for giving a gun to the kid. But they did - that is their decision - and their pain.
When you give an unsupervised 5 year old a loaded gun or the keys to a car the life of the child is at risk, that is not a a careless act,it is specifically and purposely endangering the life of a child and others. You are confusing negligence with a premeditated act.
As soon as they can hold and aim a gun, understand what it is, and how deadly it can be. The exact age varies by the individual, but most 5-year-olds are perfectly capable of being instructed in firearms safety and firing guns under supervision.
The child was unsupervised, no 5 year old should be left with a loaded gun unsupervised.
As soon as they can hold and aim a gun, understand what it is, and how deadly it can be. The exact age varies by the individual, but most 5-year-olds are perfectly capable of being instructed in firearms safety and firing guns under supervision.
That's funny, the 5-year-olds I see have trouble managing the locks on their bikes, let alone a gun.
There are over 100 children accidentally shot to death every year, and another 3,000 or so injured.
That's a lot of kids being accidentally injured or killed by guns. And these deaths, unlike motor vehicle deaths or something like that, are 100 % preventable. Just don't have guns around children.
And a 5-year-old might be able to hold a gun, but their fine motor control, not to mention emotional control or common sense is very low at that age. I wouldn't introduce my child to gourmet cooking and sushi knives at age 5 either, even if he or she could do it, it's just not a good idea.
Why is the anti gun people keep making it out like lil johnney is handed a loaded gun and sent to play. This in not reality. Most of these accidents are preventable but accidents still happen. Happens with adults too. Happens with other objects other than guns too.
When you give an unsupervised 5 year old a loaded gun or the keys to a car the life of the child is at risk, that is not a a careless act,it is specifically and purposely endangering the life of a child and others. You are confusing negligence with a premeditated act.
Sure, if you intend to let that unsupervised five-year old drive a car or when you intend to let the unsupervised five-year old shoot a gun.
I don't think this applies here. As far as anyone knows, the parents did not simply hand the gun to the kid with the instructions to simply aim and fire whenever he felt like it, particularly with no adults around...
The problem with wanting to regulate such stupidity is simply that you are apt to need a regulation for everything.
Should we regulate access to guns? Seems reasonable - guns endanger children's lives.
Should we regulate that small children should not live in houses with pools? Seems reasonable - pools endanger children's lives.
Should we regulate whether a person can smoke in their own house if there are kids around? Seems reasonable - cigarette smoke endangers children's lives.
Should we regulate what type of food parents can feed their kids? Seems reasonable = unhealthy food endangers children's lives.
You see, I don't need any of those laws:
I don't have a gun in the house since I have a small child.
I do have a pool - and my child learned to swim before she turned three. Even if I had been negligent (which I tried not to be), I took the necessary steps to prevent her from getting harmed by the pool.
I don't smoke but if I did, it certainly wouldn't be in my house or around my (or any) kid.
I feed my kid the best I can - I wish she ate broccoli, but it's a losing battle.
To what degree are we willing to have our safety concerns override personal responsibility?
The child was unsupervised, no 5 year old should be left with a loaded gun unsupervised.
Exactly. But you don't need a law for that - it's just common sense. Perhaps these parents knew this as well but as anyone with small children knows, it only takes a second of distraction and something bad can happen...
The only solution is good parenting and the exercise of good judgment, similar to how all other items and activities are handled by parents. Provided that children are supervised, trained, and given a gun only when they are ready to handle it, accidental shootings like this one will be even rarer than they are now. Face it: even today very few 2-year-olds are accidentally shot and killed by other children.
Indeed. If you expose your child to potential risks, then you need to step up to the plate and make sure nothing bad happens.
Sure, if you intend to let that unsupervised five-year old drive a car or when you intend to let the unsupervised five-year old shoot a gun.
I don't think this applies here. As far as anyone knows, the parents did not simply hand the gun to the kid with the instructions to simply aim and fire whenever he felt like it, particularly with no adults around...
The problem with wanting to regulate such stupidity is simply that you are apt to need a regulation for everything.
Should we regulate access to guns? Seems reasonable - guns endanger children's lives.
Should we regulate that small children should not live in houses with pools? Seems reasonable - pools endanger children's lives.
Should we regulate whether a person can smoke in their own house if there are kids around? Seems reasonable - cigarette smoke endangers children's lives.
Should we regulate what type of food parents can feed their kids? Seems reasonable = unhealthy food endangers children's lives.
You see, I don't need any of those laws:
I don't have a gun in the house since I have a small child.
I do have a pool - and my child learned to swim before she turned three. Even if I had been negligent (which I tried not to be), I took the necessary steps to prevent her from getting harmed by the pool.
I don't smoke but if I did, it certainly wouldn't be in my house or around my (or any) kid.
I feed my kid the best I can - I wish she ate broccoli, but it's a losing battle.
To what degree are we willing to have our safety concerns override personal responsibility?
Your deflecting, the parents gave a five year old a loaded gun, yes pools, bicycles and many other things cause injury but iving a 5 year old a loaded gun. Pools, bicycles at least have a sensible use for a 5 year old, guns do not.
As soon as they can hold and aim a gun, understand what it is, and how deadly it can be. The exact age varies by the individual, but most 5-year-olds are perfectly capable of being instructed in firearms safety and firing guns under supervision.
With the bolded part added, I agree with your second sentence. Without the bolded part, I don't think so.
I disagree with your first sentence. As the parent of a small child who has lots of other children (including five-year olds) come over, I am very sure that most have absolutely no clue how deadly a gun can be. They do not even grasp the concept of death. Most simply think it's something that makes others sad - and that's all.
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.