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.
So a three year old is on its own. Let the chips fall where they may in the safety and caution department. Okay...gotchya.
I think we all agree the parents allowed the gun to be in reach of the child, I'm sure they're having their own issues at this time. Who knows what happened she may have come across it by accident, we don't know. It most certainly should have been more secure, what if the child had drank bleach would we ban all bleach?
I never said the bolded statement. Read my posts...what part of me having "mixed" feelings on gun rights for BOTH sides of the argument do you not get? Just because I'm not fully "PRO GUNS!" doesn't mean I support banning guns either like a "leftist" or whatever asinine labels instantly get thrown around when someone has the nerve to question people and their guns. I have a friend is very much 100% pro gun. He buys and sells guns daily. He, however, can have a calm, rational debate on the issue, which I'm able to respect.
Your post proves that my assumption about you is correct. Sadly you've upheld every stereotype of "gun lovers" in just a few paragraphs. You can't even have a debate on the issue, which is sad. You instantly have become defensive and basically just spout off.
So as it stands now, if someone "legally" has a gun on them, you're not concerned at all about their mental state? They must be of a superior class (on your same level, of course) mentally, they'd never use their "legal" weapon for something they shouldn't, right?
Once again, I'm more concerned about the person's mental state, versus what he or she is carrying. Never assume everyone you pass in society in "logical and reasonable." In fact, if I see someone with a gun, I'm instantly a bit more concerned at how they react to any situation. Will they react rationally or will they just pull their weapon to be that super extra "tough guy?"
Last June, I was walking in Downtown Pittsburgh around 1 PM on a Friday. It's busy...people are going to and from lunch. Two gentleman were having a LOUD, verbal argument, naturally attracting attention to themselves. Nothing was physical...until one pulled a gun. It wasn't fired, but the fact that it was pulled, in public, alarmed everyone in sight. Was his gun legal, that I cannot answer. What I can say, is that not everyone is of the same mental state and I am not okay with anyone who has a heartbeat easily being able to legally own a gun. There was just a family murder suicide here in suburban Pittsburgh. The father killed his daughter and himself but failed to kill his wife and son with a legally owned gun. I suppose it's safe to assume he was of fine mental state, based on your logic, right? I guess we're just fortunate this legal gun owner didn't take that and do something like this in public. Not everyone who legally owns a gun is rational and uses it "wisely" like you seem to want to imply. I will gladly acknowledge both sides of the debate--you don't seem to be able to do that.
(1) What constitutes someone not being mentally stable enough to own a gun then? You realize psychology is not an exact since, you can't run a blood test to determine if someone is crazy or not. (2) By the way, we already have a process in place through the court system that determines ones competence, why doesn't the current process work? Why should someone loose their civil rights without due process (a psychologist deciding you are unfit is not due process)? (3) Who decides what disorders prevent someone from owning a gun?(4)Why are certain disorder more dangerous than others? Should someone with a mild case of autism not be allowed to own a gun? If not, why not? How about someone who is on an anti depressant because a loved one died? They are just going through a little rough patch in their life, should they loose their civil rights as well? (5) If you tie gun ownership to mental health many people would not seek treatment causing even more problems.
(6) You have good intentions, but you do not understand the full consequences of these regulations you want put in place.
(7) And a gun is just as useful for personal protection and less dangerous than many of the items mentioned, but you do not bat an eye at someone owning any of those things. Did you forget what happened in Boston with presure cookers?
(8) I get defensive because you and people like you come in here like everyone is crazy because people do not think your "reasonable restrictions" are a big deal and we should just "compromise" and use "common sense." The thing is, I have been "compromising" my civil rights since the 1930's. You are just the newest person to be for gun ownership but just not certain guns, and not certain gun accessories and you can't take them anywhere to protect yourself, and you need to she a shrink to purchase them, and you need to pay for that shrink becuse its not right for tax payers to foot the bill, but I support gun ownership.
1. This is open for debate. Remember I said I could see both sides of the argument?
2. Nothing in the current "process" takes into account a person's mental stability.
3. Once again, this is open for debate. Remember I said I could see both sides of the argument?
4. This is a pretty easy answer. Mild OCD and Dissociative Identity Disorder aren't really in the same ballpark and require different forms of treatment; the latter requiring much more intense, daily treatment.
5. Why? Because they want to own a gun regardless if they have OCD or Dissociate Identity Disorder and the fact that they need to treat said conditions before legally owning a firearm will upset them further?
6. Once again, said consequences are open for debate. Remember I said I could see both sides of the argument?
7. I addressed this earlier. How is a gun less dangerous than bleach, for example? A gun is not a multi-purpose device. Bleach and pressure cookers are. You described a gun as a "couple pound chunk of steel and plastic" in a previous reply. Once again, that, to me, is a stapler. Something that has one use and can instantly take a human life deserves a bit more precaution.
8. I'm not acting like anyone is crazy--you're unable to have a discussion in regards to the issue and feel that anyone who even questions people's "right" to tote around deadly weapons freely is crazy. It's rather obvious you support gun ownership, so if there's nothing to hide when it comes to owning a gun, why is such a big deal to examine the circumstances around legally owning a gun? Everything is open to debate--including "civil rights." There once was a time that women and African Americans didn't have civil rights. That was debated and changed.
Back in 05 into 06 crossing the USA with my wife on a motorcycle I most often asked directions when i needed to open carry armed men. (1) I knew they would not be fear a male in all black leather.
I carried in all 40 states i was in. I just refuse to give up my RIGHTS, (2)and don't care my permit is valid in only 1/2 these states. Oh that's 40 states and one 3rd world with in our borders.
My chitty day came and went long ago with the bad guy living but far from well. And yet in another instance my father in law a Kodak Engineer and his 2nd wife a lawyer were stabbed to death in and about their home.
There is no way I am going anywhere with out 1 gun and usually 2.
1. I'm glad you were so confident about that? I'm glad they didn't get nervous and hastily pull their gun on you in defense. But, since they're "open carry armed men," they must instantly be some of the most rational folks on the planet, right?
2. Blatantly going against the validity of a permit, regardless of your stance on the issue is not something to be proud of. Following the legality of a situation is necessary for all individuals, regardless of which side of the debate he or she is on.
You tell me. If having guns is so important to you, you tell us how you propose to keep them away from three-year-olds.
The same way you keep household cleaners, medicines, matches, razor blades, and other things dangerous for children away from three year olds -and alas with the same less-than-perfect success.
The same way you keep household cleaners, medicines, matches, razor blades, and other things dangerous for children away from three year olds -and alas with the same less-than-perfect success.
To think some can't figure this out surprised there aren't more deaths of toddlers.
I think toddlers probably die more being in the hands of human beings, than any item like chemicals or guns.
I guess the gun nuts are hell bent on outing their own. Chances are that this child would have had the opportunity to shoot herself at home as well, being that are parents are obviously as dumb as a box of rocks.
I would blame this on stupidity on the parent's part, not so much the gun.
I never said the bolded statement. Read my posts...what part of me having "mixed" feelings on gun rights for BOTH sides of the argument do you not get? Just because I'm not fully "PRO GUNS!" doesn't mean I support banning guns either like a "leftist" or whatever asinine labels instantly get thrown around when someone has the nerve to question people and their guns. I have a friend is very much 100% pro gun. He buys and sells guns daily. He, however, can have a calm, rational debate on the issue, which I'm able to respect.
Your post proves that my assumption about you is correct. Sadly you've upheld every stereotype of "gun lovers" in just a few paragraphs. You can't even have a debate on the issue, which is sad. You instantly have become defensive and basically just spout off.
So as it stands now, if someone "legally" has a gun on them, you're not concerned at all about their mental state? They must be of a superior class (on your same level, of course) mentally, they'd never use their "legal" weapon for something they shouldn't, right?
Once again, I'm more concerned about the person's mental state, versus what he or she is carrying. Never assume everyone you pass in society in "logical and reasonable." In fact, if I see someone with a gun, I'm instantly a bit more concerned at how they react to any situation. Will they react rationally or will they just pull their weapon to be that super extra "tough guy?"
Last June, I was walking in Downtown Pittsburgh around 1 PM on a Friday. It's busy...people are going to and from lunch. Two gentleman were having a LOUD, verbal argument, naturally attracting attention to themselves. Nothing was physical...until one pulled a gun. It wasn't fired, but the fact that it was pulled, in public, alarmed everyone in sight. Was his gun legal, that I cannot answer. What I can say, is that not everyone is of the same mental state and I am not okay with anyone who has a heartbeat easily being able to legally own a gun. There was just a family murder suicide here in suburban Pittsburgh. The father killed his daughter and himself but failed to kill his wife and son with a legally owned gun. I suppose it's safe to assume he was of fine mental state, based on your logic, right? I guess we're just fortunate this legal gun owner didn't take that and do something like this in public. Not everyone who legally owns a gun is rational and uses it "wisely" like you seem to want to imply. I will gladly acknowledge both sides of the debate--you don't seem to be able to do that.
Great post. I agree and have similar mixed feelings. I don't assume that a gun owner is automatically a responsible person, that he or she knows how to shoot, that a criminal won't be able to easily steal the gun, or that he or she is mentally stable. He could whip out a gun and accidentally shoot someone next to him, or there could be a struggle and the gun could go off. There is a story this morning about another "helpful" armed neighborhood watcher--this one linked to four rapes he committed at gunpoint. Pretending that people who are armed are any more responsible, capable or level-headed than anyone else is foolish.
Maybe I could just complain about the nra so that I can add a relevant response to this thread
You don't care about communicating clearly.
We get it.
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.
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.
