Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Firearms safety opinions please!

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by The Exorcist View Post
    They should be subjected to the same punishment that families who raise kids that went to join ISIS, or committed acts of domestic terror.
    In other words, no penalty at all.
    Quis Custodiet Ipsos Custodes? Who is watching the watchers?

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by Combat Engineer View Post
      Leaving 3 loaded weapons in reach of 5 year old is not responsible home defense. How about the adult being responsible enough to know that they need to keep them in a location where the 5 year old can't reach them and yet still available for home defense?
      I am 100% with you on this point. The man is a fireman, he should know a little bit about the consequences of poor judgement.
      If the children had gone outside to play and fallen into a smoldering fire pit left unattended, I think public opinion would be different.
      Leaving four weapons fully loaded with rounds in the chamber within reach of a child is unacceptable.
      There are cable locks, trigger locks, and other ways to secure them. With great freedoms come great responsibility.
      Dispite our best intentions, the system is dysfunctional that intelligence failure is guaranteed.
      Russ Travers, CIA analyst, 2001

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by Urban hermit View Post
        I am 100% with you on this point. The man is a fireman, he should know a little bit about the consequences of poor judgement.
        If the children had gone outside to play and fallen into a smoldering fire pit left unattended, I think public opinion would be different.
        Leaving four weapons fully loaded with rounds in the chamber within reach of a child is unacceptable.
        There are cable locks, trigger locks, and other ways to secure them. With great freedoms come great responsibility.
        The need for rapid access is the silliest argument. If you live in an area that is so dangerous that you need that rapid access to a locked and loaded weapon there is only ONE logical place. In an accessible holster on YOUR person. Not complicated. Loaded and chambered weapons in another room are not available for rapid access, they are in the other room. Jeeze.
        “The time has come,” the Walrus said,
        “To talk of many things:
        Of shoes—and ships—and sealing-wax—
        Of cabbages—and kings—
        And why the sea is boiling hot—
        And whether pigs have wings.”
        ― Lewis Carroll

        Comment


        • #19
          Sad,since your quoting U.S.statistics,what part of our country is"Chubbuck"?
          I find the fact that children in this country frequently kill themselves by pulling a television set down on top of themselves while playing.
          A firearm puts meat on the table for some families.What is a T.V.good for?
          Punish,no get a gun safe and get rid of your T.V.'s
          The history addict asked me,"Where did you fought?"
          Me...Damn..."I'm not sure."

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by hankwill View Post
            Sad,since your quoting U.S.statistics,what part of our country is"Chubbuck"?
            I find the fact that children in this country frequently kill themselves by pulling a television set down on top of themselves while playing.
            A firearm puts meat on the table for some families.What is a T.V.good for?
            Punish,no get a gun safe and get rid of your T.V.'s
            Read the link. Idaho suburb near Pocatello.

            Yes, they do and your point?

            Secure your weapons appropriately and secure a heavy TV if it can fall. No reason not to do both. It is not an either or situation.

            If you invite guest into your home you are responsible to provide a secure environment for them.

            If you have children, your own or others, you are responsible to provide a safe environment for them

            Nothing complicated about it.
            “The time has come,” the Walrus said,
            “To talk of many things:
            Of shoes—and ships—and sealing-wax—
            Of cabbages—and kings—
            And why the sea is boiling hot—
            And whether pigs have wings.”
            ― Lewis Carroll

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by Half Pint John View Post
              Well Ron you must be older than stone if you remember hanging the rifle over the fire place.
              I still do it and yes I am older than stone and I agree that responsible adults should keep firearms out of sight and reach of small children.

              Trying hard to be the Man, that my Dog believes I am!

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by Half Pint John View Post
                Of course it was an accident. The child didn't plan on shooting some one or at least I hope not. However the parents are guilty of gross negligence.


                the rest of your post is about a silly as one of your 5 year olds
                Gross negligence?!! Yea, rrriiiiggghhhttt....

                They didn't put the gun in the kid's hand. They didn't tell the kid he could play with it. That's gross negligence.

                It is negligent to leave dangerous things lying about where a young, and curious, child might find them.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by SRV Ron View Post
                  Years ago, this would have been the exception rather then the rule. Why? Because parents were more responsible back then even when the gun was hanging above the fireplace mantle. In addition to being secure, kids were taught real guns were not a toy. They were also taught not to be afraid of them, allowed to shoot them, and how to handle them safely. They were also allowed to have BB guns and did not shoot their eyes out or those of their playmates. The knew the difference between a cap gun and a real one.

                  So, what has changed?

                  Parents becoming irresponsible. Kids not being taught gun safety. Kids being taught to be paranoid about guns. Kids watching way too much mind poison TV with all of its violence and playing too much violence video game. Kids living in crime ridden neighborhoods. And, parents in those neighborhood leaving loaded handguns where unsupervised kids, that have had no gun safety or handling training at all, have easy access to them and can accidentally kill a sibling, the starting thread example, or take that gun to school and deliberately kill a classmate.
                  These things happened in the past. My 77-year old husband is blind in one eye because his older brother shot him with a BB gun 70 years ago in a game of cowboys and Indians. Not only is my husband vision-impaired but his brother bore a huge burden of guilt until the day he died about shooting his brother. Current culture has absolutely nothing to do with such things.

                  As a genealogist I have spent a great deal of time reading old newspapers and reading accounts of shootings, murders and accidents. There is not much new under the sun, except fewer kids get kicked in the head by horses and mules or fall into an open fire or a well. Everything else is pretty much on a par.

                  I think that the parents should be charged with child endangerment and pay the penalty for that crime. I also think that they should maybe lose custody of their kids if they are shown to have a consistently non-safe environment (loose and loaded weapons in a child’s reach) that they are raising them in.
                  Homo homini lupus

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by Jannie View Post
                    These things happened in the past. My 77-year old husband is blind in one eye because his older brother shot him with a BB gun 70 years ago in a game of cowboys and Indians. Not only is my husband vision-impaired but his brother bore a huge burden of guilt until the day he died about shooting his brother. Current culture has absolutely nothing to do with such things.

                    As a genealogist I have spent a great deal of time reading old newspapers and reading accounts of shootings, murders and accidents. There is not much new under the sun, except fewer kids get kicked in the head by horses and mules or fall into an open fire or a well. Everything else is pretty much on a par.

                    I think that the parents should be charged with child endangerment and pay the penalty for that crime. I also think that they should maybe lose custody of their kids if they are shown to have a consistently non-safe environment (loose and loaded weapons in a child’s reach) that they are raising them in.
                    What's changed is that we now have a culture of "zero tolerance" and lawyers. Every accident is no longer an accident but an opportunity to sue and claim the party involved was negligent because they didn't adopt a zero tolerance approach to safety, or whatever.

                    It wouldn't have mattered if the gun were locked in a safe, had a trigger lock, and was unloaded and somehow the kid got ahold of it and shot his friend playing with it. There'd still be a lawsuit and there'd still be an argument it wasn't accidental.

                    The only option in the minds of lawyers and safety nut goobers today is to eliminate all unsafe activity totally. It is an absurd position.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post
                      What's changed is that we now have a culture of "zero tolerance" and lawyers. Every accident is no longer an accident but an opportunity to sue and claim the party involved was negligent because they didn't adopt a zero tolerance approach to safety, or whatever.

                      It wouldn't have mattered if the gun were locked in a safe, had a trigger lock, and was unloaded and somehow the kid got ahold of it and shot his friend playing with it. There'd still be a lawsuit and there'd still be an argument it wasn't accidental.

                      The only option in the minds of lawyers and safety nut goobers today is to eliminate all unsafe activity totally. It is an absurd position.
                      You're the only one bringing up a civil suit. This is about criminal charges.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by johns624 View Post
                        You're the only one bringing up a civil suit. This is about criminal charges.
                        It's the same thing. It's like DUI laws that automatically put a drunk driver at fault regardless of normal fault finding. In many states in the US (if not all) a driver who is legally drunk could be sitting at a red light at a dead stop, get rear ended, and end up at fault for the accident.

                        It is a zero tolerance mentality coupled with a "do something" mentality. This was an accident. Criminal charges are just stupid. Sure, the parents are libel for damages and should have to pay out for them but to heap criminal charges on top of that...?

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post
                          What's changed is that we now have a culture of "zero tolerance" and lawyers. Every accident is no longer an accident but an opportunity to sue and claim the party involved was negligent because they didn't adopt a zero tolerance approach to safety, or whatever.

                          It wouldn't have mattered if the gun were locked in a safe, had a trigger lock, and was unloaded and somehow the kid got ahold of it and shot his friend playing with it. There'd still be a lawsuit and there'd still be an argument it wasn't accidental.

                          The only option in the minds of lawyers and safety nut goobers today is to eliminate all unsafe activity totally. It is an absurd position.
                          This sounds like to me a case of blatant stupidity. Some people think that they can tempt fate and get away with it. And, yes, I do think that some folks should be punished for not anticipating trouble. Some of us admire the prepper culture, which is anticipating trouble and going to crazy means to be prepared for it. Anticipating trouble in a household that does not take adequate precautions with its guns is almost a foregone conclusion.

                          These people were stupid idiots.
                          Homo homini lupus

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post
                            It's the same thing. It's like DUI laws that automatically put a drunk driver at fault regardless of normal fault finding. In many states in the US (if not all) a driver who is legally drunk could be sitting at a red light at a dead stop, get rear ended, and end up at fault for the accident.

                            It is a zero tolerance mentality coupled with a "do something" mentality. This was an accident. Criminal charges are just stupid. Sure, the parents are libel for damages and should have to pay out for them but to heap criminal charges on top of that...?
                            It's a misdemeanor charge and quite appropriate. He willing leave left out the weapons in reach of a child that had no adult supervision. Two minutes of picking up the weapons and securing them while the guest were in his house and nothing would have happened. He wilfully endangered the children. He gets a slap on the wrist for it. Just like he would have if they child had picked up a knife and stabbed the other child.
                            “The time has come,” the Walrus said,
                            “To talk of many things:
                            Of shoes—and ships—and sealing-wax—
                            Of cabbages—and kings—
                            And why the sea is boiling hot—
                            And whether pigs have wings.”
                            ― Lewis Carroll

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by Jannie View Post
                              This sounds like to me a case of blatant stupidity. Some people think that they can tempt fate and get away with it. And, yes, I do think that some folks should be punished for not anticipating trouble. Some of us admire the prepper culture, which is anticipating trouble and going to crazy means to be prepared for it. Anticipating trouble in a household that does not take adequate precautions with its guns is almost a foregone conclusion.

                              These people were stupid idiots.

                              I quite agree. It takes no time at all to secure a firearm.

                              Where to get free gun locks for free...

                              http://www.nssf.org/safety/gunlocks/
                              Credo quia absurdum.


                              Quantum mechanics describes nature as absurd from the point of view of common sense. And yet it fully agrees with experiment. So I hope you can accept nature as She is - absurd! - Richard Feynman

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post
                                What's changed is that we now have a culture of "zero tolerance" and lawyers. Every accident is no longer an accident but an opportunity to sue and claim the party involved was negligent because they didn't adopt a zero tolerance approach to safety, or whatever.

                                It wouldn't have mattered if the gun were locked in a safe, had a trigger lock, and was unloaded and somehow the kid got ahold of it and shot his friend playing with it. There'd still be a lawsuit and there'd still be an argument it wasn't accidental.

                                The only option in the minds of lawyers and safety nut goobers today is to eliminate all unsafe activity totally. It is an absurd position.
                                Originally posted by T. A. Gardner View Post
                                It's the same thing. It's like DUI laws that automatically put a drunk driver at fault regardless of normal fault finding. In many states in the US (if not all) a driver who is legally drunk could be sitting at a red light at a dead stop, get rear ended, and end up at fault for the accident.

                                It is a zero tolerance mentality coupled with a "do something" mentality. This was an accident. Criminal charges are just stupid. Sure, the parents are libel for damages and should have to pay out for them but to heap criminal charges on top of that...?
                                In the first post, you say that America is sue-happy. Then, in the second, you say yourself that the parents are liable. Which one is it? Is suing good or bad?
                                This is at least the second time that you've mentioned how terrible drunk drivers have it. Maybe you need to look in the mirror...

                                Comment

                                Latest Topics

                                Collapse

                                Working...
                                X