4yo shoots mom in the back

[Luddly Neddite]

Woman tells Putnam County deputy that son, 4, shot her in back while she was driving
A gunshot fired from inside a pickup truck in Putnam County went through the driver’s back and out the front of her torso Tuesday afternoon. When a deputy asked the injured woman what happened, she said her 4-year-old son did it. Less than a day earlier, a Facebook post, which may belong to the victim, talked of letting a 4-year-old boy shoot targets.


Looks like he doesn't need much practice. If she plans to live long enough to see him drop out of the 6th grade, she probably shouldn't get him his own gun.

 

[Geaux4it]

And this matters just why?

-Geaux

 

[Luddly Neddite]

And this matters just why?

-Geaux

It matters because if the kid were a better shot, she'd be dead. What's gonna happen when he gets to kindergarten or first grade? He'll likely be a much better shot by then. If so, she's a goner.

And consider the bills for pickemup truck repairs.

This is an important issue - to Darwin.

Try to keep up.

 

[MisterBeale]

And this matters just why?

-Geaux

It matters because if the kid were a better shot, she'd be dead. What's gonna happen when he gets to kindergarten or first grade? He'll likely be a much better shot by then. If so, she's a goner.

And consider the bills for pickemup truck repairs.

This is an important issue - to Darwin.

Try to keep up.

 

[Geaux4it]

And this matters just why?

-Geaux

It matters because if the kid were a better shot, she'd be dead. What's gonna happen when he gets to kindergarten or first grade? He'll likely be a much better shot by then. If so, she's a goner.

And consider the bills for pickemup truck repairs.

This is an important issue - to Darwin.

Try to keep up.

My mistake. I thought this thread was about something important. Not my problem

-Geaux

 

[1stRambo]

Woman tells Putnam County deputy that son, 4, shot her in back while she was driving
A gunshot fired from inside a pickup truck in Putnam County went through the driver’s back and out the front of her torso Tuesday afternoon. When a deputy asked the injured woman what happened, she said her 4-year-old son did it. Less than a day earlier, a Facebook post, which may belong to the victim, talked of letting a 4-year-old boy shoot targets.


Looks like he doesn't need much practice. If she plans to live long enough to see him drop out of the 6th grade, she probably shouldn't get him his own gun.

Yo, shit happens BOZO? Life goes on! Get him a 45 Colt, that way next time he shoots someone? They won`t get up!

"GTP"

 

[defcon4]

It would be great if people checked/searched existing threads on the same issue before posting it. How manieth thread is this about the story?

 

[frigidweirdo]

Someone did some research and believes they found this woman's facebook page, and she's pro-guns. But she can't keep guns in a safe enough place, even with a 4 year old around.

The point being, some people are just stupid, and they're more likely to be pro-gun when they're stupid.

 

[defcon4]

Someone did some research and believes they found this woman's facebook page, and she's pro-guns. But she can't keep guns in a safe enough place, even with a 4 year old around.

The point being, some people are just stupid, and they're more likely to be pro-gun when they're stupid.

Where you live in serfdom you don't need to worry about it.

 

[AmericanFirst1]

Someone did some research and believes they found this woman's facebook page, and she's pro-guns. But she can't keep guns in a safe enough place, even with a 4 year old around.

The point being, some people are just stupid, and they're more likely to be pro-gun when they're stupid.

If she is stupid she is probably a libtard.

 

[MikeK]

This is one more example of why some level of training and testing should be required for all gun owners.

And for those who might feel such a requirement would involve a significant hardship, the fact is it wouldn't be nearly as imposing as the requirement for obtaining a driver license.

In terms of cost, there must be training facilities made available on a non-profit basis for a nominal fee subsidized by government. This requirement should eliminate the need for most gun restrictions, thus reducing the cost of enforcement to compensate for the nominal cost of training.

Training will eliminate the majority of gun misuse and accidents -- and it will enable a productive increase of armed citizens to counteract the rising terrorist threat.

 

[Indofred]

And this matters just why?

-Geaux

Her FB pages are all about gun freedom and sensible gun use.
I think she's fucked up.

 

[PaintMyHouse]

Exactly as I said, treating guns as "toys" not deadly weapons:

"Jamie Gilt of Puntnam County, Florida, was shot by her 4-year-old son after he got his hands on her .45 caliber handgun while she was driving March 8, 2016. Pictured: Gilt posted a photo to her Twitter account "Got to play with my new toy today! Time to clean it!"
Pro-gun Florida mom shot by 4-year-old son

 

[frigidweirdo]

Exactly as I said, treating guns as "toys" not deadly weapons:

"Jamie Gilt of Puntnam County, Florida, was shot by her 4-year-old son after he got his hands on her .45 caliber handgun while she was driving March 8, 2016. Pictured: Gilt posted a photo to her Twitter account "Got to play with my new toy today! Time to clean it!"
Pro-gun Florida mom shot by 4-year-old son

They say we only need to worry about criminals, but what about the stupid?

 

[Geaux4it]

And this matters just why?

-Geaux

Her FB pages are all about gun freedom and sensible gun use.
I think she's fucked up.

MYOB will cure how you think

-Geaux

 

[Agit8r]

Almost qualified for a Darwin Award...

 

[Geaux4it]

This is one more example of why some level of training and testing should be required for all gun owners.

And for those who might feel such a requirement would involve a significant hardship, the fact is it wouldn't be nearly as imposing as the requirement for obtaining a driver license.

In terms of cost, there must be training facilities made available on a non-profit basis for a nominal fee subsidized by government. This requirement should eliminate the need for most gun restrictions, thus reducing the cost of enforcement to compensate for the nominal cost of training.

Training will eliminate the majority of gun misuse and accidents -- and it will enable a productive increase of armed citizens to counteract the rising terrorist threat.

Not your problem, move on and MYOB

-Geaux

 

[Luddly Neddite]

On her Facebook page, she said something like 'her right to protect her kid trumps others fear'.

And yet, at the time of the shooting, her kid was not buckled in to his kiddy seat.

 

[Luddly Neddite]

This is one more example of why some level of training and testing should be required for all gun owners.

And for those who might feel such a requirement would involve a significant hardship, the fact is it wouldn't be nearly as imposing as the requirement for obtaining a driver license.

In terms of cost, there must be training facilities made available on a non-profit basis for a nominal fee subsidized by government. This requirement should eliminate the need for most gun restrictions, thus reducing the cost of enforcement to compensate for the nominal cost of training.

Training will eliminate the majority of gun misuse and accidents -- and it will enable a productive increase of armed citizens to counteract the rising terrorist threat.

Not your problem, move on and MYOB

-Geaux

Toddlers shot and killed or injured more than 40 people in 2015.

 

[2aguy]

This is one more example of why some level of training and testing should be required for all gun owners.

And for those who might feel such a requirement would involve a significant hardship, the fact is it wouldn't be nearly as imposing as the requirement for obtaining a driver license.

In terms of cost, there must be training facilities made available on a non-profit basis for a nominal fee subsidized by government. This requirement should eliminate the need for most gun restrictions, thus reducing the cost of enforcement to compensate for the nominal cost of training.

Training will eliminate the majority of gun misuse and accidents -- and it will enable a productive increase of armed citizens to counteract the rising terrorist threat.

No.....training is great and should be sought by all gun owners but there can be no mandate. Owning a gun for self defense is a Right, the same Right as voting....and when the democrats tried to use Literacy tests for voting, they were rejected as violating the right to vote.

we have 357,000,000 guns in this country in private hands....

we have about 19,000 non fatal gun accidents...(vs. 35,000 fatal accidents with automobiles)

And we had 505 accidental gun deaths in 2013....

We need to encourage training...but we can't mandate it....that is how the anti 2nd Amendment people will deny the right to lower income citizens....