Police: 7-year-old fatally shot by father outside gun store in Pennsylvania

[Ravi]

Why take a child to a gun shop to begin with?

 

[jtpr312]

Why take a child to a gun shop to begin with?

Why not take a child to a gun store?

 

[peach174]

A loss of another Innocent life by accidental gun fire is indeed a tragedy.
Accidents happen, not just by guns.Accidents are just that accidents. It is one of the facts of life.
113,000 children have been killed by gun accidents since 1979.
What is a real tragedy, is the loss of innocent children's lives by abortion.
47 million children have been aborted since roe vs wade.
Guns are legal, abortion is legal.
I say abortion has harmed more Innocent lives than guns.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

Why take a child to a gun shop to begin with?

Why not?

 

[eflatminor]

Why take a child to a gun shop to begin with?

Why would you take a child into a car dealership? Both sell items that are potentially dangerous.

Or are you suggesting children should be kept ignorant to all that is potentially dangerous?

 

[Pogo]

Why take a child to a gun shop to begin with?

Why would you take a child into a car dealership? Both sell items that are potentially dangerous.

Or are you suggesting children should be kept ignorant to all that is potentially dangerous?

Or is he suggesting children should be, I dunno, protected from lethal situations by their parents?

Why taking the kid to a car dealership is a false comparison: a car in a lot isn't going to suddenly lurch forward at a child in a split second. Why else: cars are made to transport, not to destroy. Ergo the only danger a kid in a dealership is in from one of the products doing what it was designed to do is to be transported somewhere.

Sheesh. All this rationalizing bending over for Almighty Gun to justify the needless death of a 7-year-old. The issue morphs into not the danger of guns, but the fatalistic rationalizations of "he could have been killed by a car, a blunt instrument, etc". All of which still produce a dead 7-year-old, but that's OK because it protects what's really important: the Holy Name of Almighty Gun.

Bob Costas didn't go far enough; we're not just a "gun culture", we're a "death culture'.

 

[eflatminor]

Why take a child to a gun shop to begin with?

Why would you take a child into a car dealership? Both sell items that are potentially dangerous.

Or are you suggesting children should be kept ignorant to all that is potentially dangerous?

Or is he suggesting children should be, I dunno, protected from lethal situations by their parents?

Why taking the kid to a car dealership is a false comparison: a car in a lot isn't going to suddenly lurch forward at a child in a split second.

Nor do firearms. SomeONE must pull a trigger.

Why else: cars are made to transport, not to destroy. Ergo the only danger a kid in a dealership is in from one of the products doing what it was designed to do is to be transported somewhere.

Yet, cars do destroy...far more people than firearms in the hands of civilians. Further, what cars are designed to do doesn't change the fact that driving in that car is statistically dangerous for the child.

Sheesh. All this rationalizing bending over for Almighty Gun to justify the needless death of a 7-year-old. The issue morphs into not the danger of guns, but the fatalistic rationalizations of "he could have been killed by a car, a blunt instrument, etc". All of which still produce a dead 7-year-old, but that's OK because it protects what's really important: the Holy Name of Almighty Gun.

Bob Costas didn't go far enough; we're not just a "gun culture", we're a "death culture'.

You have a plan to un-invent firearms? If no, I'll teach children to respect them and use them safely, just as I would with a car.

 

[Lonestar_logic]

Why take a child to a gun shop to begin with?

Why would you take a child into a car dealership? Both sell items that are potentially dangerous.

Or are you suggesting children should be kept ignorant to all that is potentially dangerous?

Or is he suggesting children should be, I dunno, protected from lethal situations by their parents?

Why taking the kid to a car dealership is a false comparison: a car in a lot isn't going to suddenly lurch forward at a child in a split second. Why else: cars are made to transport, not to destroy. Ergo the only danger a kid in a dealership is in from one of the products doing what it was designed to do is to be transported somewhere.

Sheesh. All this rationalizing bending over for Almighty Gun to justify the needless death of a 7-year-old. The issue morphs into not the danger of guns, but the fatalistic rationalizations of "he could have been killed by a car, a blunt instrument, etc". All of which still produce a dead 7-year-old, but that's OK because it protects what's really important: the Holy Name of Almighty Gun.

Bob Costas didn't go far enough; we're not just a "gun culture", we're a "death culture'.

I take it you don't own a gun.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

What are you even trying to prove? That it is pointless to require people to be trained?
If so that would be stupid. I am sure among trained gun owners the accidental shooting rate is lower. It doesn't mean that accidents don't still happen.

I am trying to prove that Mike K is an idiot. Do you want to make the same stupid assertions so I can bet you too?

No, I have actually witnessed first hand when a trained professional has made a mistake regarding a gun.
When I was 14 I watched bullet fragments be removed from my brothers face.. But you can continue to act like a know it all, it's always fun to watch.

I am arguing that no one, even trained professionals, is perfect, and you think I am stupid. That sounds like the typical response of a person suffering senile dementia.

 

[Pogo]

Nor do firearms. SomeONE must pull a trigger.

Well apparently not, unless you're saying the guy in this story deliberately blew his son away.

You have a plan to un-invent firearms? If no, I'll teach children to respect them and use them safely, just as I would with a car.

Nope, I'm not that clever, although when the time machine is perfected we can go back there. Teaching children to respect and safely use them is laudable, and necessary. But that's not the question here; the question was "why would you take a 7-year-old to a gun shop in the first place?"

On a side note I'd just like to note that E♭m is a hard key to play in. Especially for a

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Why take a child to a gun shop to begin with?

Why take a child to an auto parts store?

Why take a child anyplace?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

Why take a child to a gun shop to begin with?

Why would you take a child into a car dealership? Both sell items that are potentially dangerous.

Or are you suggesting children should be kept ignorant to all that is potentially dangerous?

Or is he suggesting children should be, I dunno, protected from lethal situations by their parents?

Why taking the kid to a car dealership is a false comparison: a car in a lot isn't going to suddenly lurch forward at a child in a split second. Why else: cars are made to transport, not to destroy. Ergo the only danger a kid in a dealership is in from one of the products doing what it was designed to do is to be transported somewhere.

Sheesh. All this rationalizing bending over for Almighty Gun to justify the needless death of a 7-year-old. The issue morphs into not the danger of guns, but the fatalistic rationalizations of "he could have been killed by a car, a blunt instrument, etc". All of which still produce a dead 7-year-old, but that's OK because it protects what's really important: the Holy Name of Almighty Gun.

Bob Costas didn't go far enough; we're not just a "gun culture", we're a "death culture'.

No car in the entire history of the world has ever not had the parking brake and rolled over a child?

Thanks for the laugh.

 

[eflatminor]

Nor do firearms. SomeONE must pull a trigger.

Well apparently not, unless you're saying the guy in this story deliberately blew his son away.

Someone pulled a trigger. That's what it takes for a gun to go off. Whether someone did that deliberately or not is beside the point.

You have a plan to un-invent firearms? If no, I'll teach children to respect them and use them safely, just as I would with a car.

Nope, I'm not that clever, although when the time machine is perfected we can go back there. Teaching children to respect and safely use them is laudable, and necessary. But that's not the question here; the question was "why would you take a 7-year-old to a gun shop in the first place?"

The same reason you'd take them into a car dealership. To get them comfortable with the idea of what car is, what they look like, how they work, why to respect them, and what safety procedures must be adhered to.

On a side note I'd just like to note that E♭m is a hard key to play in. Especially for a

Okay.

 

[Pogo]

The same reason you'd take them into a car dealership. To get them comfortable with the idea of what car is, what they look like, how they work, why to respect them, and what safety procedures must be adhered to.

With a seven-year-old??

I actually went to a car dealership at that age, and I guarantee you it had nothing to do with finding out what cars looked like or safety procedures. Nor was there ever any danger of a DeSoto suddenly cranking itself up and charging me. Which absolutely is what happened in this case; the gun went off when the man set the gun down on the console. He didn't pull any trigger. In this case, people didn't kill people, gun killed people.

And irony of ironies, the kid was buckling his seat belt at the time.

 

[eflatminor]

...the gun went off when the man set the gun down on the console. He didn't pull any trigger. In this case, people didn't kill people, gun killed people.

Nope. You're simply wrong. Unless the firearm has a serious defect in it's construction, someone MUST pull the trigger in order for it to discharge. There is nothing to suggest this firearm was manufactured, or tinkered with, in such a way that would cause it to fire without pulling the trigger.

The guy left a round in the chamber. Tragic mistake. However, the gun didn't just "go off", either he or the kid, pulled the trigger.

 

[Pogo]

...the gun went off when the man set the gun down on the console. He didn't pull any trigger. In this case, people didn't kill people, gun killed people.

Nope. You're simply wrong. Unless the firearm has a serious defect in it's construction, someone MUST pull the trigger in order for it to discharge. There is nothing to suggest this firearm was manufactured, or tinkered with, in such a way that would cause it to fire without pulling the trigger.

The guy left a round in the chamber. Tragic mistake. However, the gun didn't just "go off", either he or the kid, pulled the trigger.

OK well unless you were in the truck with them you'll have to take it up with the PA state police:

State police Lt. Eric Hermick said Sunday the father had secured a rifle in the back of the truck and placed his pistol on the console when the handgun went off. Hermick said police are reviewing surveillance video from the store, which helped lay out the chain of events; the video is not being released.

"It is very clear-cut exactly what transpired here," Hermick said of what he called clearly an accident. "As he's laying it down, it discharges."

I wasn't stating opinion there.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

The same reason you'd take them into a car dealership. To get them comfortable with the idea of what car is, what they look like, how they work, why to respect them, and what safety procedures must be adhered to.

With a seven-year-old??

I actually went to a car dealership at that age, and I guarantee you it had nothing to do with finding out what cars looked like or safety procedures. Nor was there ever any danger of a DeSoto suddenly cranking itself up and charging me. Which absolutely is what happened in this case; the gun went off when the man set the gun down on the console. He didn't pull any trigger. In this case, people didn't kill people, gun killed people.

And irony of ironies, the kid was buckling his seat belt at the time.

It was his gun, he took it to the shop to sell it. I could be wrong, but I am pretty sure most gun shops do not have loaded weapons for sale. this would be more like you getting out of your father's car at the dealership and it rolling over you because he did not set the parking brake than having a car insert the key into the ignition, start up, shift into gear, and roll over a customer. In other words, to make your analogy accurate, the gun that shot the boy would have to have loaded itself, cocked itself, released the safety, and pulled the trigger.

But idiots will be idiots.

 

[Quantum Windbag]

...the gun went off when the man set the gun down on the console. He didn't pull any trigger. In this case, people didn't kill people, gun killed people.

Nope. You're simply wrong. Unless the firearm has a serious defect in it's construction, someone MUST pull the trigger in order for it to discharge. There is nothing to suggest this firearm was manufactured, or tinkered with, in such a way that would cause it to fire without pulling the trigger.

The guy left a round in the chamber. Tragic mistake. However, the gun didn't just "go off", either he or the kid, pulled the trigger.

OK well unless you were in the truck with them you'll have to take it up with the PA state police:

State police Lt. Eric Hermick said Sunday the father had secured a rifle in the back of the truck and placed his pistol on the console when the handgun went off. Hermick said police are reviewing surveillance video from the store, which helped lay out the chain of events; the video is not being released.

"It is very clear-cut exactly what transpired here," Hermick said of what he called clearly an accident. "As he's laying it down, it discharges."

I wasn't stating opinion there.

It discharged because the trigger was released.

 

[eflatminor]

...the gun went off when the man set the gun down on the console. He didn't pull any trigger. In this case, people didn't kill people, gun killed people.

Nope. You're simply wrong. Unless the firearm has a serious defect in it's construction, someone MUST pull the trigger in order for it to discharge. There is nothing to suggest this firearm was manufactured, or tinkered with, in such a way that would cause it to fire without pulling the trigger.

The guy left a round in the chamber. Tragic mistake. However, the gun didn't just "go off", either he or the kid, pulled the trigger.

OK well unless you were in the truck with them you'll have to take it up with the PA state police:

State police Lt. Eric Hermick said Sunday the father had secured a rifle in the back of the truck and placed his pistol on the console when the handgun went off. Hermick said police are reviewing surveillance video from the store, which helped lay out the chain of events; the video is not being released.

"It is very clear-cut exactly what transpired here," Hermick said of what he called clearly an accident. "As he's laying it down, it discharges."

I wasn't stating opinion there.

Nothing the State Police said support the idea that the gun magically discharged on its own. The adult can say whatever he wants but it does not change the facts. If this firearm discharged "as he's laying it down", it's because he, accidentally I'm sure, pulled the trigger in the process of laying it down. Firearms just don't go off. Hermick is right, that it was an accident, but he never claimed it discharged on its own.

Anyone with a modicum of understand of how firearms operate knows this.

The father also violated a sacred rule of firearm safety, he allowed the muzzle to point at something he didn't intend to destroy.

While I wasn't in the vehicle at the time, I assure you SOMEONE pulled the trigger.

 

[Pogo]

Nope. You're simply wrong. Unless the firearm has a serious defect in it's construction, someone MUST pull the trigger in order for it to discharge. There is nothing to suggest this firearm was manufactured, or tinkered with, in such a way that would cause it to fire without pulling the trigger.

The guy left a round in the chamber. Tragic mistake. However, the gun didn't just "go off", either he or the kid, pulled the trigger.

OK well unless you were in the truck with them you'll have to take it up with the PA state police:

State police Lt. Eric Hermick said Sunday the father had secured a rifle in the back of the truck and placed his pistol on the console when the handgun went off. Hermick said police are reviewing surveillance video from the store, which helped lay out the chain of events; the video is not being released.

"It is very clear-cut exactly what transpired here," Hermick said of what he called clearly an accident. "As he's laying it down, it discharges."

I wasn't stating opinion there.

Nothing the State Police said support the idea that the gun magically discharged on its own. The adult can say whatever he wants but it does not change the facts. If this firearm discharged "as he's laying it down", it's because he, accidentally I'm sure, pulled the trigger in the process of laying it down. Firearms just don't go off. Hermick is right, that it was an accident, but he never claimed it discharged on its own.

Anyone with a modicum of understand of how firearms operate knows this.

The father also violated a sacred rule of firearm safety, he allowed the muzzle to point at something he didn't intend to destroy.

While I wasn't in the vehicle at the time, I assure you SOMEONE pulled the trigger.

OK well as I said, take it up with the State Police They investigated; you didn't. Denial goes a long way but it's rhetorically worthless.