Possibly the most retarded anti-gun ad I've ever seen...

[jeremy1375]

Originally Posted by 1ViciousGSX

How did gun rights violate the kids rights? Your rights and my rights to gun ownership did not cause that trigger to get pulled.

I agree it's a sad situation for all involved, especially for the parents and the brother. Those parents will be held accountable and have to live with it for the rest of their lives.

But this notion that you can regulate society in to a safe haven is rediculous. You want all Americans to give up their rights and freedoms over one person's dumb ass mistake? I know I don't.

Should we outlaw bath tubs because a child can accidentally drown in them?
Should we outlaw bicycles because a child can accidentally fall and break an arm?
Should we outlaw dirt bikes because a tree might get in the way and cause a crash?
Should we outlaw stoves because a child could touch a hot surface and get burned?

Ands so on?

Are building codes, electrical codes, driving laws, ect all infringements on our freedom? Should I be able to build a piece of shit house and sell it to the next guy and be protected by "freedom" when it falls on the next owner?

Your logic is comparing everyday items with firearms. Firearm are not everyday items laying around the house.

[1ViciousGSX]

Originally Posted by jeremy1375

Are building codes, electrical codes, driving laws, ect all infringements on our freedom? Should I be able to build a piece of shit house and sell it to the next guy and be protected by "freedom" when it falls on the next owner?

Your logic is comparing everyday items with firearms. Firearm are not everyday items laying around the house.

Straw man argument.

Regulating how something is built is not the same as outlawing said item.
Making sure a gun doesn't blow up in your hands is pretty smart don't you think.

And I guess it depends on who's house we're talking about with guns just lying around. To some people, firearms are everyday items.

[tpunx99GSX]

Originally Posted by 1ViciousGSX

You know guys, I feel just as bad for the parents as you do, it's nothing any of us want to go through.

But you can not punish the masses because of a few dumb asses. Laws are already in place about child endangerment. But, Darwinism is in effect at times. You can't protect everybody from everything all the time. Can any punishmnt make up for the loss of your child? Those parents have to live with it every day until they die. I'm sure that's punishment enough, wouldn't you think?

I dont think. The problem is that this will happen again. When do you draw the line and start showing that the parents negligence will be punished? Then when a parent who owns guns and does not lock them up, will realize that if an "accident" happens with the kids and the gun, they will be going to jail for a long time maybe they will start to get it that they need a lock box. The same reason normal minded people dont kill others, because there is a consequence besides losing that person. By letting these parents off with nothing even though they were careless sends the wrong message.

[A//// Guy]

Sure, but this is easily preventable. There is a fine line, but regardless, locking up your guns even with even trigger locks should be common sense. Unfortunately not a lot of people have that.

[A//// Guy]

Who said anything about outlawing? Or maybe I missed someones point on that.

Im all for gun ownership, I own 2 as it is. There should be rules set in place if parents do not take measures to lock up their guns. If these are broken, consequences are made. Just as if you were to take someones life running a red light, its an accident sure, but you will face jail time most likely.

[1ViciousGSX]

Originally Posted by A//// Guy

Who said anything about outlawing? Or maybe I missed someones point on that.

Well what else would the gun grabbers want?

It's already against the law for parents to leave a gun where a child can get to it. There are child endangerment laws in place on top of that already. Those parents may or may not be charged with a crime, depends on the prosecutor and the laws in that area.

[AJ]

Originally Posted by 1ViciousGSX

Well what else would the gun grabbers want?

It's already against the law for parents to leave a gun where a child can get to it. There are child endangerment laws in place on top of that already. Those parents may or may not be charged with a crime, depends on the prosecutor and the laws in that area.

No, there are laws about leaving a loaded gun accessible, not just leaving a gun out. And the laws very from state to state.

[1ViciousGSX]

Originally Posted by AJ

No, there are laws about leaving a loaded gun accessible, not just leaving a gun out. And the laws very from state to state.

True

[jeremy1375]

You said outlaw. I did not.

[1ViciousGSX]

Originally Posted by jeremy1375

You said outlaw. I did not.

I'm sorry, exchange "outlaw" with "removed from your possession for your own protection".

Are you guys really that scared of a gun? Seriously?

[jeremy1375]

Originally Posted by 1ViciousGSX

I'm sorry, exchange "outlaw" with "removed from your possession for your own protection".

Are you guys really that scared of a gun? Seriously?

I am arguing that you shouldn't be able to possess a gun unless you've displayed competence and understanding of said gun. What else is a "well regulated" militia if everyone is not trained? It's an unregulated militia which is not constitutional.

You argue the value of life being important to be an important country virtue. Kids dies, it's darwinism.

Any point bringing up regulation or comparison to any of subject is moot point or straw man argument.

Bring some substance to the table.

[JET]

Originally Posted by jeremy1375

I am arguing that you shouldn't be able to possess a gun unless you've displayed competence and understanding of said gun. What else is a "well regulated" militia if everyone is not trained? It's an unregulated militia which is not constitutional.

You argue the value of life being important to be an important country virtue. Kids dies, it's darwinism.

Any point bringing up regulation or comparison to any of subject is moot point or straw man argument.

Bring some substance to the table.

2 kids per DAY drown in pools. I don't see anyone shouting for pools to be regulated and the parents prosecuted if a child drowns. I have also seen instances where kids were saved because there was a firearm available to them so they could stop the perpetrator.

[1ViciousGSX]

Originally Posted by JET

2 kids per DAY drown in pools. I don't see anyone shouting for pools to be regulated and the parents prosecuted if a child drowns. I have also seen instances where kids were saved because there was a firearm available to them so they could stop the perpetrator.

+1

[jeremy1375]

Originally Posted by JET

2 kids per DAY drown in pools. I don't see anyone shouting for pools to be regulated and the parents prosecuted if a child drowns. I have also seen instances where kids were saved because there was a firearm available to them so they could stop the perpetrator.

http://www.cpsc.gov//PageFiles/12222...or%20Pools.pdf

[1ViciousGSX]

Originally Posted by jeremy1375

I am arguing that you shouldn't be able to possess a gun unless you've displayed competence and understanding of said gun. What else is a "well regulated" militia if everyone is not trained? It's an unregulated militia which is not constitutional.

You argue the value of life being important to be an important country virtue. Kids dies, it's darwinism.

Any point bringing up regulation or comparison to any of subject is moot point or straw man argument.

Bring some substance to the table.

So tell us, if it were King Jeremy day, what would you do? What would you put in place that removes all chance of an accident without infringing on our rights to gun ownership and use? How would you regulate gun ownership so that when it comes time for somebody to protect their families they don't get shot in the back while trying to enter a code in their lock box?

[jeremy1375]

Originally Posted by 1ViciousGSX

So tell us, if it were King Jeremy day, what would you do? What would you put in place that removes all chance of an accident without infringing on our rights to gun ownership and use? How would you regulate gun ownership so that when it comes time for somebody to protect their families they don't get shot in the back while trying to enter a code in their lock box?

There is no such thing that removes all chance of anything. But, there are steps that can be taken with just about anything to decrease the occurrence of harm. For example safety standards are required for cars. Safety is constantly evolving in the automotive industry. Air bags and shoulder seat belts are mandatory now. Your odds of surviving a crash are much greater now than 25 years ago. Smart guns are one solution to your question and are the next evolution in gun safety, but have significant push back from the NRA because there is some implied argument that nothing can be touched with guns.

[1ViciousGSX]

How about this. Let's talk about all the people who have saved their families, their children, and themselves from harm by having a gun.
Let's think about the fact that if somebody was kicking in your door to rob you, beat you, rape and kill your wife or daughter in front of you, etc, would you rather have a gun or not? Because this happens every damn day in this country. I'd bet AJ would like to keep his for this reason.

[AJ]

Originally Posted by 1ViciousGSX

I'd bet AJ would like to keep his for this reason.

I'm just as much for sport/stress relief as it is for self protection. I've also had a gun in my hands or around me in various ways since I could pee outside and hope the wind wasn't blowing back at me. My kids will knows their guns, and it will be their choice to ever want to use one. My daughter is already old enough that when I have one apart for cleaning on my desk, she knows what it is (even as it's in pieces) and that that she doesn't touch it. I have faith in my daughter, but that doesn't mean I'd ever leave a gun out for her to get her hands on. I don't need government telling me this or checking on me to ensure I'm doing this.

I know the laws, i abide by them. And when it comes to protecting my family and being smart/safe, I go a step further. Sadly the family we keep discussing didn't. Either they didn't go through the proper training with the kids (who are old enough to go to the range with an adult and learn), didn't secure it enough (obviously), or just wasn't ready for having a gun in the house themselves. Doesn't change what happened, the tragic result, and their life long struggle with their decisions now.

Gun buying is at an all time high. Shooting is now a sport in many schools and is growing in popularity. As with anything else, gun control isn't perfect, but to me it comes down to one thing, circling back to the self defense question quoted here... Gun control, and more regulation that some want to see may stop me from having a gun but it won't stop the criminal from having one. Till that day comes, I take the right to protect my family. A right people have died to protect. A right people on this site have signed up and gone to war to protect.

[jeremy1375]

Originally Posted by AJ

I don't need government telling me this or checking on me to ensure I'm doing this.

If training were required for gun use in much the same way it's required for motor vehicle operation, how would that be a bad thing if it helped ensure those who don't know what they're doing to get educated?

Originally Posted by AJ

Gun control, and more regulation that some want to see may stop me from having a gun but it won't stop the criminal from having one.

No background check or paperwork is required for private gun sales. Seems to me like any criminal can just go buy a gun with no trouble whatsoever. How would closing that loophole not make it harder for a criminal to get a gun?

[AJ]

Originally Posted by jeremy1375

If training were required for gun use in much the same way it's required for motor vehicle operation, how would that be a bad thing if it helped ensure those who don't know what they're doing to get educated?

There is a difference here. A car is something used on the public roads, in fact, that training is specific to use in public. Use, every day. A gun is not. A gun is as private an item as a Playboy magazine if I choose for it to be. Self defense wise, if I can't get to my gun I always have a knife or 3, a rolling pin, baseball bat, and if needed a rolled up Playboy mag to beat someone senseless with.

And you know what, how many people have you seen on the roads and wondered how the hell they passed. But there they are. And drinking and driving. Cell phones and texting. Poorly prepped cars in bad weather. These are the aspects of danger. These are the items you can make a case for similar to gun control. It's the use of an item. How a person acts and makes decisions. Drinking and driving killed a family member of mine and I'm thankful no one else. But I won't want your right to drive taken away cause you are a more responsible driver any more than I want my gun rights taken away due to someone not being responsible. What I want are more options (and I mean options) for training, which there is a lot more of now, better help for mental health, and more $ to focus on the criminal aspects in our own communities.

Originally Posted by jeremy1375

No background check or paperwork is required for private gun sales. Seems to me like any criminal can just go buy a gun with no trouble whatsoever. How would closing that loophole not make it harder for a criminal to get a gun?

http://www.civilresponse.net/04/2014...les-minnesota/

There are laws in place, and ways as a private party seller to protect yourself in a private sale. In your transaction, that criminal buying a gun is generally doing so from another criminal. And if not, may of purchased the gun legally years before falling on hard times and becoming someone intent on using it unlawfully. Or simply, guy broke into a house a stole it. Broke into a gun store and stole it. Was one of the many temp UPS workers who steal packages over the holidays. The thing is, regulations won't stop that. It simply tells those will ill intent that once they get away with the action of getting a gun there is less chance someone is on the other end to stop them. And don't say the cops will be there. Cause in most cases they aren't there till it's too late and you just hope you're alive to tell the story.