Welcome to City-Data.com Forum!
U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
 [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)
 
Old 05-01-2013, 08:58 PM
 
Location: Long Island
56,859 posts, read 25,787,282 times
Reputation: 15431

Advertisements

Quote:
Originally Posted by Fuselage View Post
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.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 05-01-2013, 09:02 PM
 
Location: Long Island
56,859 posts, read 25,787,282 times
Reputation: 15431
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patricius Maximus View Post
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.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-01-2013, 09:04 PM
 
10,553 posts, read 9,603,414 times
Reputation: 4784
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patricius Maximus View Post
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.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-01-2013, 09:05 PM
 
Location: Walton County, GA
1,242 posts, read 3,463,473 times
Reputation: 1049
Quote:
Originally Posted by ellemint View Post
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.

Gun and Shooting Accidents - Accidents and Tragedies
And there are hundreds of thousands not.

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.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-01-2013, 09:09 PM
 
Location: southern california
61,290 posts, read 87,094,098 times
Reputation: 55549
i dont think our young people are mature enough to handle firearms.
post military service ???? yes of course.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-01-2013, 09:10 PM
 
1,519 posts, read 1,223,093 times
Reputation: 898
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goodnight View Post
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?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-01-2013, 09:11 PM
 
1,519 posts, read 1,223,093 times
Reputation: 898
Quote:
Originally Posted by Goodnight View Post
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...
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-01-2013, 09:13 PM
 
1,519 posts, read 1,223,093 times
Reputation: 898
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patricius Maximus View Post


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.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-01-2013, 09:15 PM
 
Location: Long Island
56,859 posts, read 25,787,282 times
Reputation: 15431
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fuselage View Post
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.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 05-01-2013, 09:19 PM
 
1,519 posts, read 1,223,093 times
Reputation: 898
Quote:
Originally Posted by Patricius Maximus View Post
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.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
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.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:


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 > General Forums > Politics and Other Controversies
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