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.
Defining the difference between those activities that need to be regulated in some fashion is going to become more and more difficult as evidenced by the silliness on here.
Some cannot seem to understand that a 'one size fits all' approach to something dangerous and tying it to a document written over 200 years ago before automatic weapons were even thought of is just plain nuts.
The founding fathers and 2nd amendment shouldn't even enter the equation with much the same approach being taken towards gun handling as driving a car, a minimum age should be mandatory BUT just as living on the farm negates to some extent the help of a younger child driving a tractor, combine or grain truck with the proper training, so too should this aspect of firearm exposure have some leeway.
Taking of a kiddie to a range for the express purpose of firing an UZI by parents who mayhaps don't know from which end the slug exits, should be regulated, as adults charged with the responsibility to determine the experiences their child be exposed to because they are minors should be determined by others if they themselves have no freak'n idea of what constitutes a hazardous behaviour on the part of so-called experts.
The firearms regs. are only going to be impacted negatively by any happenstance like this due to people pushing the envelope of common sense way out there.
So in your post you go with the "one size fits all approach is not good" then follow it up with a one size fits all approach.
Maybe just let people make decisions for themselves, I know, crazy talk.
Didn't realize a law is needed for every time someone doesn't have common sense.
Pretty soon everything will be made illegal because of the swaths of idiots that live amoung is.
Yes, those pesky laws about not letting kids drive the family SUV down the freeway!
And those ridiculous child endangerment laws that make it a crime to put kids in cages like dogs or have them play in traffic!
When will we LEARN that some dead kids here and there are part of the good old American way?? It's fine if a six year old plows head-on into your family because some supposed adult thought they should try to drive a car.
Or operates an Uzi, loses control, and drills holes in another human's skull in the process.
Let's just use "common sense" and make there be no legal restrictions or consequences on ANYTHING to do with small children! Won't that work out swell.
Yes, those pesky laws about not letting kids drive the family SUV down the freeway!
And those ridiculous child endangerment laws that make it a crime to put kids in cages like dogs or have them play in traffic!
When will we LEARN that some dead kids here and there are part of the good old American way?? It's fine if a six year old plows head-on into your family because some supposed adult thought they should try to drive a car.
Or operates an Uzi, loses control, and drills holes in another human's skull in the process.
Let's just use "common sense" and make there be no legal restrictions or consequences on ANYTHING to do with small children! Won't that work out swell.
Really? Maybe pick an example that is as common as the topic dieing discussed. Like making it illegal for a child to bounce a ball because one kid died from getting hit in the head by the ball. Or make it illegal for a child to be in a grocery store because one child knocked something off the shelf causing someone to trip and die.
You are talking about passing laws because one bad thing happened once. Might as well make abortion illegal because people die while receiving an abortion. I really wish freedom wasn't given away so easily.
Really? Maybe pick an example that is as common as the topic dieing discussed. Like making it illegal for a child to bounce a ball because one kid died from getting hit in the head by the ball. Or make it illegal for a child to be in a grocery store because one child knocked something off the shelf causing someone to trip and die.
You are talking about passing laws because one bad thing happened once. Might as well make abortion illegal because people die while receiving an abortion. I really wish freedom wasn't given away so easily.
"Really?" You say, and then proceed to list examples that are ridiculous and not even remotely in the same ballpark as what happened.
Bouncing a ball or going to the grocery store are NOT in the same category of risk and inapproporiateness for a nine year old kid as shooting an Uzi!
Yes, risk happens everywhere in life. But we try to at least do our best to make sure that the activity is APPROPRIATE and the risk is REASONABLY MINIMIZED. Going to the grorcery store and playing with a ball are appropriate activities for a child that can be managed with reasonably minimal risk.
A kid shooting a high-powered automatic weapon is as appropriate as a kid driving a car - i.e., NOT AT ALL! Both are dangerous tools that are well above the capacity of small kids to safely operate, for the sake of themselves and others around them. Neither is in any way necessary as part of a small child's daily life or upbringing.
It's really beyond idiotic to suggest that a kid doing something inappropriate like shooting off an Uzi is the same as a kid doing something appropriate like playing with a ball, and it demonstrates complete cluelessness as to what is appropriate for a child.
Kids are not adults. Stop pretending that when we put safeguards in place to keep small kids from doing dangerous adult activities that we are somehow "taking away freedom."
Maybe just let people make decisions for themselves, I know, crazy talk.
Worked so well in this case.
9-year-olds can't make binding decisions for themselves, her parents pretty clearly thought there was some sort of competent risk analysis behind the policy allowing prepubescent girls to shoot submachineguns, and the evidence points pretty clearly indicate that the operators of "Bullets and Burgers" were either reckless or incompetent.
Call me a sentimental old fool, but I have no problem with guarding 9-year-olds from the outcome of (supposedly) adults making bad decisions on that involve the kids.
"Really?" You say, and then proceed to list examples that are ridiculous and not even remotely in the same ballpark as what happened.
Bouncing a ball or going to the grocery store are NOT in the same category of risk and inapproporiateness for a nine year old kid as shooting an Uzi!
Yes, risk happens everywhere in life. But we try to at least do our best to make sure that the activity is APPROPRIATE and the risk is REASONABLY MINIMIZED. Going to the grorcery store and playing with a ball are appropriate activities for a child that can be managed with reasonably minimal risk.
A kid shooting a high-powered automatic weapon is as appropriate as a kid driving a car - i.e., NOT AT ALL! Both are dangerous tools that are well above the capacity of small kids to safely operate, for the sake of themselves and others around them. Neither is in any way necessary as part of a small child's daily life or upbringing.
It's really beyond idiotic to suggest that a kid doing something inappropriate like shooting off an Uzi is the same as a kid doing something appropriate like playing with a ball, and it demonstrates complete cluelessness as to what is appropriate for a child.
Kids are not adults. Stop pretending that when we put safeguards in place to keep small kids from doing dangerous adult activities that we are somehow "taking away freedom."
9 year olds can drive, just not on public roads.
Maybe worry about things that happen more than once every decade.
Even if a law was passed it would be completely un enforceable. It hits all the boxes for feel good legislation that does nothing.
9-year-olds can't make binding decisions for themselves, her parents pretty clearly thought there was some sort of competent risk analysis behind the policy allowing prepubescent girls to shoot submachineguns, and the evidence points pretty clearly indicate that the operators of "Bullets and Burgers" were either reckless or incompetent.
Call me a sentimental old fool, but I have no problem with guarding 9-year-olds from the outcome of (supposedly) adults making bad decisions on that involve the kids.
What other bad decisions do you want to take away from people? Vaccines? Mandated medical treatments?
So in your post you go with the "one size fits all approach is not good" then follow it up with a one size fits all approach.
Maybe just let people make decisions for themselves, I know, crazy talk.
Yeah, maybe let each parent decide for themselves whether their 9 year-old kid can drive a crotch rocket at 90 mph down the expressway..."common sense" according to extremist conservative whackjobs. No crazy talk there!
Yeah, maybe let each parent decide for themselves whether their 9 year-old kid can drive a crotch rocket at 90 mph down the expressway..."common sense" according to extremist conservative whackjobs. No crazy talk there!
I have seen much younger than 9 year olds on motorcycles. Amazingly, they didn't not die. You should get out more often.
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.
