Democrats Need to Drop the Gun-Control Issue

[Coyote]

I recently changed my stance on gun-control. I think it's a dead-end and only harms the Democratic Party.

Guns and the violence that accompanies it are too embedded in American culture, they enshrined it in their Constitution for Christ's sake.

Moreover, Americans are too fearful to ever put down their guns, so the Democrats need to wise up and just drop the issue.

At the very least change their stance and go full-bore in the opposite direction, I say flood the country w/guns and ammunition, let them buy weapons till their wallets burst.

However, at the same time, they need to promote gun safety and consequences for the lack thereof. Every gun owner should be insured, if not, they should be held financially and criminally liable if/when necessary.

Also, keep better track of them, that goes w/the previous sentence.

Let people get and keep their guns to theirheartscontent, but let's all be safe about it.

Guns should be handled like cars. Maintain a registry, pass a basic gun safety and knowledge test, show you can hit something, and be licensed and insured.

Driving isn't a right.

Doesn't matter.

NO right is unlimited.

How about not being a 2nd amendment zealot and consider some win win solutions? Nah. That would take common sense and I wouldn't expect that from someone who's only solution is MORE GUNS and MORE GUNS - it's a big industry after all.

 

[2aguy]

I recently changed my stance on gun-control. I think it's a dead-end and only harms the Democratic Party.

Guns and the violence that accompanies it are too embedded in American culture, they enshrined it in their Constitution for Christ's sake.

Moreover, Americans are too fearful to ever put down their guns, so the Democrats need to wise up and just drop the issue.

At the very least change their stance and go full-bore in the opposite direction, I say flood the country w/guns and ammunition, let them buy weapons till their wallets burst.

However, at the same time, they need to promote gun safety and consequences for the lack thereof. Every gun owner should be insured, if not, they should be held financially and criminally liable if/when necessary.

Also, keep better track of them, that goes w/the previous sentence.

Let people get and keep their guns to theirheartscontent, but let's all be safe about it.

Guns should be handled like cars. Maintain a registry, pass a basic gun safety and knowledge test, show you can hit something, and be licensed and insured.

Driving isn't a right.

Doesn't matter.

NO right is unlimited.

How about not being a 2nd amendment zealot and consider some win win solutions? Nah. That would take common sense and I wouldn't expect that from someone who's only solution is MORE GUNS and MORE GUNS - it's a big industry after all.

We have win win solutions.....when someone uses a gun to commit a crime, we arrest them and put them in jail and then prison...

Win Win....what you want is to limit the Right of owning and carrying a gun to the point no one is capable of getting through the Red Tape, pay the taxes and fees and mandatory insurance and pass the massive training requirements.....so that few if any normal people can own and carry guns....that is what you mean by win win solutions.....

My way works, yours doesn't.....my way targets and stops actual criminals, your way disarms normal Americans in the face of violent criminals and future, out of control government.

 

[hadit]

Since the vast majority of legal gun owners will never commit a crime or shoot anyone I would say violence does not accompany gun ownership. And violence is certainly not enshrined in the Constitution.

Most undocumented immigrants don't commit violent crimes... but you want to round them all up.

The crime and violence in this country are social ills and have nothing to do with people who legally own guns.

Again- most people who are killed with guns are killed by people they know. A gun in the home is 43 times more likely to kill a household member than a bad guy.

The thing is, I agree, if you limited gun ownership to responsible people, you wouldn't have a problem.

Except if you did that, most people wouldn't really want them.

The gun industry wants the bad guys in that three block radius to have lots of guns so you get scared and want them, too.

A lot of gang members know the person they're shooting at. So do drug dealers. Face it, take away criminal on criminal shootings and we're on par with the rest of the world, PLUS we still have guns.

 

[Coyote]

I recently changed my stance on gun-control. I think it's a dead-end and only harms the Democratic Party.

Dems can't win on gun control because their proposals are beyond stupid! Heaping gun control laws onto already law abiding gun owners accomplishes none of the gun control objectives. Meanwhile the criminals and mentally ill IGNORE gun control laws. This is why law abiding gun owners tell gun control advocates to fuck off!

Meanwhile, 1 in 6 ADULTS are diagnosed with mental illness in this country. Many of them own guns, I suspect.

"Mental illnesses are common in the United States. Nearly one in five U.S. adults live with a mental illness (51.5 million in 2019). Mental illnesses include many different conditions that vary in degree of severity, ranging from mild to moderate to severe."

Mental Illness

An overview of statistics for mental illnesses. Mental illnesses are common in the United States. One in six U.S. adults lives with a mental illness (43.4 million in 2015). Mental illnesses include many different conditions that vary in degree of severity, ranging from mild to moderate to severe.

www.nimh.nih.gov

Or just druggies and alcoholics can go on a shooting spree or kill a spouse. I made the point when we first got married, no guns in the house.

If someone is a stalker, with a restraining order - can't infringe on his rights to get a gun.

If someone is mentally ill - can't infringe on his rights either.

Someone here had no problem with little kids having guns.

This is nuts.

 

[2aguy]

I recently changed my stance on gun-control. I think it's a dead-end and only harms the Democratic Party.

Guns and the violence that accompanies it are too embedded in American culture, they enshrined it in their Constitution for Christ's sake.

Moreover, Americans are too fearful to ever put down their guns, so the Democrats need to wise up and just drop the issue.

At the very least change their stance and go full-bore in the opposite direction, I say flood the country w/guns and ammunition, let them buy weapons till their wallets burst.

However, at the same time, they need to promote gun safety and consequences for the lack thereof. Every gun owner should be insured, if not, they should be held financially and criminally liable if/when necessary.

Also, keep better track of them, that goes w/the previous sentence.

Let people get and keep their guns to theirheartscontent, but let's all be safe about it.

Guns should be handled like cars. Maintain a registry, pass a basic gun safety and knowledge test, show you can hit something, and be licensed and insured.

Driving isn't a right.

Doesn't matter.

NO right is unlimited.

How about not being a 2nd amendment zealot and consider some win win solutions? Nah. That would take common sense and I wouldn't expect that from someone who's only solution is MORE GUNS and MORE GUNS - it's a big industry after all.

The number of guns isn't the issue.....27 years showed us this...

Over the last 27 years, we went from 200 million guns in private hands in the 1990s and 4.7 million people carrying guns for self defense in 1997...to close to 400-600 million guns in private hands and over 19.4 million people carrying guns for self defense in 2019...guess what happened...

https://crimeresearch.org/2020/10/n...n-issuing-permits-because-of-the-coronavirus/


-- gun murder down 49%

--gun crime down 75%

--violent crime down 72%

Gun Homicide Rate Down 49% Since 1993 Peak; Public Unaware

Compared with 1993, the peak of U.S. gun homicides, the firearm homicide rate was 49% lower in 2010, and there were fewer deaths, even though the nation’s population grew. The victimization rate for other violent crimes with a firearm—assaults, robberies and sex crimes—was 75% lower in 2011 than in 1993. Violent non-fatal crime victimization overall (with or without a firearm) also is down markedly (72%) over two decades.


More guns did not mean more gun crime......gun crime and gun murder went down...

This changed in 2015....why? Not because people own guns.....it changed because the democrat party began a campaign to attack and hobble the police......we now have more gun crime not because more people own guns...but because the police can't, and won't do their jobs for fear of persecution by the democrat party and it's allies......

 

[Coyote]

I recently changed my stance on gun-control. I think it's a dead-end and only harms the Democratic Party.

Guns and the violence that accompanies it are too embedded in American culture, they enshrined it in their Constitution for Christ's sake.

Moreover, Americans are too fearful to ever put down their guns, so the Democrats need to wise up and just drop the issue.

At the very least change their stance and go full-bore in the opposite direction, I say flood the country w/guns and ammunition, let them buy weapons till their wallets burst.

However, at the same time, they need to promote gun safety and consequences for the lack thereof. Every gun owner should be insured, if not, they should be held financially and criminally liable if/when necessary.

Also, keep better track of them, that goes w/the previous sentence.

Let people get and keep their guns to theirheartscontent, but let's all be safe about it.

Guns should be handled like cars. Maintain a registry, pass a basic gun safety and knowledge test, show you can hit something, and be licensed and insured.

Driving isn't a right.

Doesn't matter.

NO right is unlimited.

How about not being a 2nd amendment zealot and consider some win win solutions? Nah. That would take common sense and I wouldn't expect that from someone who's only solution is MORE GUNS and MORE GUNS - it's a big industry after all.

We have win win solutions.....when someone uses a gun to commit a crime, we arrest them and put them in jail and then prison...

Win Win....what you want is to limit the Right of owning and carrying a gun to the point no one is capable of getting through the Red Tape, pay the taxes and fees and mandatory insurance and pass the massive training requirements.....so that few if any normal people can own and carry guns....that is what you mean by win win solutions.....

My way works, yours doesn't.....my way targets and stops actual criminals, your way disarms normal Americans in the face of violent criminals and future, out of control government.

Ooops. You lose. Or rather someone loses, you know, the dead guy.

The one you have to WAIT until he's KILLED before you do anything.

Brilliant right?

But for some bizarre reason, you seem to think having a registry (which infringes on no right in away shape or form)...being required to display some basic knowledge that you know how to handle a deadly weapon (who's sole purpose is for killing something) safely - is an infringement.

Yet...hmmm....I'm not allowed to engage in bigamy, if my religion requires it...in fact there are a lot of things I can't do in the name of religion. Either my rights are being infringed upon or....no right is unlimited.

 

[2aguy]

I recently changed my stance on gun-control. I think it's a dead-end and only harms the Democratic Party.

Dems can't win on gun control because their proposals are beyond stupid! Heaping gun control laws onto already law abiding gun owners accomplishes none of the gun control objectives. Meanwhile the criminals and mentally ill IGNORE gun control laws. This is why law abiding gun owners tell gun control advocates to fuck off!

Meanwhile, 1 in 6 ADULTS are diagnosed with mental illness in this country. Many of them own guns, I suspect.

"Mental illnesses are common in the United States. Nearly one in five U.S. adults live with a mental illness (51.5 million in 2019). Mental illnesses include many different conditions that vary in degree of severity, ranging from mild to moderate to severe."

Mental Illness

An overview of statistics for mental illnesses. Mental illnesses are common in the United States. One in six U.S. adults lives with a mental illness (43.4 million in 2015). Mental illnesses include many different conditions that vary in degree of severity, ranging from mild to moderate to severe.

www.nimh.nih.gov

Or just druggies and alcoholics can go on a shooting spree or kill a spouse. I made the point when we first got married, no guns in the house.

If someone is a stalker, with a restraining order - can't infringe on his rights to get a gun.

If someone is mentally ill - can't infringe on his rights either.

Someone here had no problem with little kids having guns.

This is nuts.

No.....you idiot....the guns were locked up in their home....locked up....not sitting on the drive way.

If someone is a stalker, if the police can't deal with them, that is on you shitheads...meanwhile, you prevent the women from being able to get a gun to stop the stalker.......

And the mentally ill? You are an idiot...we already have laws that allow us to commit people who are dangerous to themselves or others......that also allows us to take their guns...we have those already......you just want to be able to classify normal gun owners as crazy so you can just take their guns...

Everyone wants to stop dangerous people from getting guns. The hot new policy option before this committee is Red Flag laws, which take away the guns of people deemed dangerous to themselves or others. But there is a much more effective alternative already in place.

They are known as Baker Act statutes (Pennsylvania’s is called the “Mental Health Procedures Act”), and have been around since the early 1970s. They allow police, doctors and family members to have someone typically held in most states for a 72-hour mental health examination based upon a simple reasonableness test – little more than a guess or a hunch. The hold in Pennsylvania is up to 120 hours.



These laws focus on mental illness, and they require that the individual be evaluated by mental-health-care experts. If a person can’t afford a lawyer, a public defender is provided. While judges can involuntarily commit an individual they believe is a danger to themselves or others, there is a range of options they can take, with the threat that other options can be followed up with involuntary commitment.

However, instead of using these laws, 17 states have now adopted Red Flag laws, with 13 states passing them since the shootings at the high school in Parkland, Fla. While Red Flag laws are often discussed in terms of mental illness and they are frequently used in connection with concerns about suicide, only one state’s law even mentions mental illness and none of the states requires that a mental-health expert be involved in evaluating the person.

And, unlike Baker Act statutes, these new laws don’t offer safeguards, such as providing a public defender for individuals who can’t afford a lawyer or covering their legal costs. When faced with legal bills that can easily amount to $10,000 for a hearing, few think that owning a gun justifies these costs.

John Lott: We don’t need Red Flag laws – we have the tools in place to help the mentally ill and protect people’s rights

Baker Act statutes are a better alternative. They require an evaluation by a mental-health expert and a public defender is provided if needed.

broadandliberty.com

 

[2aguy]

I recently changed my stance on gun-control. I think it's a dead-end and only harms the Democratic Party.

Guns and the violence that accompanies it are too embedded in American culture, they enshrined it in their Constitution for Christ's sake.

Moreover, Americans are too fearful to ever put down their guns, so the Democrats need to wise up and just drop the issue.

At the very least change their stance and go full-bore in the opposite direction, I say flood the country w/guns and ammunition, let them buy weapons till their wallets burst.

However, at the same time, they need to promote gun safety and consequences for the lack thereof. Every gun owner should be insured, if not, they should be held financially and criminally liable if/when necessary.

Also, keep better track of them, that goes w/the previous sentence.

Let people get and keep their guns to theirheartscontent, but let's all be safe about it.

Guns should be handled like cars. Maintain a registry, pass a basic gun safety and knowledge test, show you can hit something, and be licensed and insured.

Driving isn't a right.

Doesn't matter.

NO right is unlimited.

How about not being a 2nd amendment zealot and consider some win win solutions? Nah. That would take common sense and I wouldn't expect that from someone who's only solution is MORE GUNS and MORE GUNS - it's a big industry after all.

We have win win solutions.....when someone uses a gun to commit a crime, we arrest them and put them in jail and then prison...

Win Win....what you want is to limit the Right of owning and carrying a gun to the point no one is capable of getting through the Red Tape, pay the taxes and fees and mandatory insurance and pass the massive training requirements.....so that few if any normal people can own and carry guns....that is what you mean by win win solutions.....

My way works, yours doesn't.....my way targets and stops actual criminals, your way disarms normal Americans in the face of violent criminals and future, out of control government.

Ooops. You lose. Or rather someone loses, you know, the dead guy.

The one you have to WAIT until he's KILLED before you do anything.

Brilliant right?

But for some bizarre reason, you seem to think having a registry (which infringes on no right in away shape or form)...being required to display some basic knowledge that you know how to handle a deadly weapon (who's sole purpose is for killing something) safely - is an infringement.

Yet...hmmm....I'm not allowed to engage in bigamy, if my religion requires it...in fact there are a lot of things I can't do in the name of religion. Either my rights are being infringed upon or....no right is unlimited.

Wrong.....90% of murderers have long histories of crime and violence that should have them locked up for life.......but democrats keep letting them out.

You shitheads keep bringing up a registry as if registration of guns is a new concept....in every country where assholes like you were allowed to register guns, assholes like you then used the registry to ban and confiscate guns...without exception.......

The Criminology of Firearms
In 2004, the National Academy of Sciences reviewed 253 journal articles, 99 books, 43 government publications and some empirical research of its own about guns. The Academy could not identify any gun restriction that had reduced violent crime, suicide or gun accidents.

Why don't gun bans work? Because they rely on voluntary compliance by gun-using criminals. Prohibitionists never see this absurdity because they deceive themselves into thinking that, as Katherine Christoffel has said: "[M]ost shootings are not committed by felons or mentally ill people, but are acts of passion that are committed using a handgun that is owned for home protection."

Christoffel, et al., are utterly wrong. The whole corpus of criminological research dating back to the 1890'sshows murderers "almost uniformly have a long history of involvement in criminal behavior," and that "[v]irtually all" murderers and other gun criminals have prior felony records — generally long ones.

While only 15 percent of Americans have criminal records, roughly 90 percent of adult murderers have prior adult records — exclusive of their often extensive juvenile records — with crime careers of six or more adult years including four major felonies.


Gerald D. Robin, writing for the Academy of Criminal Justice Sciences,notes that, unlike ordinary gun owners, "the average murderer turns out to be no less hardened a criminal than the average robber or burglar."

 

[Coyote]

Maybe if this idiot had been required to take a basic gun safety course, her kid might not have shot her other kid because he wouldn't have gotten ahold of the gun in the first place.

2-year-old child finds gun, accidentally shoots sibling in head

The woman’s 2-year-old daughter and 9-year-old son were left outside in her car while she and her boyfriend were allegedly inside visiting with a friend.

www.wapt.com

You could even treat it like you do driving - start in highschool, offer optional classes to learn to shoot, learn to be safe, learn the protocals.

 

[Coyote]

I recently changed my stance on gun-control. I think it's a dead-end and only harms the Democratic Party.

Dems can't win on gun control because their proposals are beyond stupid! Heaping gun control laws onto already law abiding gun owners accomplishes none of the gun control objectives. Meanwhile the criminals and mentally ill IGNORE gun control laws. This is why law abiding gun owners tell gun control advocates to fuck off!

Meanwhile, 1 in 6 ADULTS are diagnosed with mental illness in this country. Many of them own guns, I suspect.

"Mental illnesses are common in the United States. Nearly one in five U.S. adults live with a mental illness (51.5 million in 2019). Mental illnesses include many different conditions that vary in degree of severity, ranging from mild to moderate to severe."

Mental Illness

An overview of statistics for mental illnesses. Mental illnesses are common in the United States. One in six U.S. adults lives with a mental illness (43.4 million in 2015). Mental illnesses include many different conditions that vary in degree of severity, ranging from mild to moderate to severe.

www.nimh.nih.gov

Or just druggies and alcoholics can go on a shooting spree or kill a spouse. I made the point when we first got married, no guns in the house.

If someone is a stalker, with a restraining order - can't infringe on his rights to get a gun.

If someone is mentally ill - can't infringe on his rights either.

Someone here had no problem with little kids having guns.

This is nuts.

No.....you idiot....the guns were locked up in their home....locked up....not sitting on the drive way.

If someone is a stalker, if the police can't deal with them, that is on you shitheads...meanwhile, you prevent the women from being able to get a gun to stop the stalker.......

And the mentally ill? You are an idiot...we already have laws that allow us to commit people who are dangerous to themselves or others......that also allows us to take their guns...we have those already......you just want to be able to classify normal gun owners as crazy so you can just take their guns...

Everyone wants to stop dangerous people from getting guns. The hot new policy option before this committee is Red Flag laws, which take away the guns of people deemed dangerous to themselves or others. But there is a much more effective alternative already in place.

They are known as Baker Act statutes (Pennsylvania’s is called the “Mental Health Procedures Act”), and have been around since the early 1970s. They allow police, doctors and family members to have someone typically held in most states for a 72-hour mental health examination based upon a simple reasonableness test – little more than a guess or a hunch. The hold in Pennsylvania is up to 120 hours.



These laws focus on mental illness, and they require that the individual be evaluated by mental-health-care experts. If a person can’t afford a lawyer, a public defender is provided. While judges can involuntarily commit an individual they believe is a danger to themselves or others, there is a range of options they can take, with the threat that other options can be followed up with involuntary commitment.

However, instead of using these laws, 17 states have now adopted Red Flag laws, with 13 states passing them since the shootings at the high school in Parkland, Fla. While Red Flag laws are often discussed in terms of mental illness and they are frequently used in connection with concerns about suicide, only one state’s law even mentions mental illness and none of the states requires that a mental-health expert be involved in evaluating the person.

And, unlike Baker Act statutes, these new laws don’t offer safeguards, such as providing a public defender for individuals who can’t afford a lawyer or covering their legal costs. When faced with legal bills that can easily amount to $10,000 for a hearing, few think that owning a gun justifies these costs.

John Lott: We don’t need Red Flag laws – we have the tools in place to help the mentally ill and protect people’s rights

Baker Act statutes are a better alternative. They require an evaluation by a mental-health expert and a public defender is provided if needed.

broadandliberty.com

Who's preventing the woman from getting a gun to deal with the stalker?

And why should she have to live in fear, always afraid he might be coming at her with a fire arm? Just so he can "have his right"? Ya, I know - more guns is the answer.

 

[2aguy]

I recently changed my stance on gun-control. I think it's a dead-end and only harms the Democratic Party.

Guns and the violence that accompanies it are too embedded in American culture, they enshrined it in their Constitution for Christ's sake.

Moreover, Americans are too fearful to ever put down their guns, so the Democrats need to wise up and just drop the issue.

At the very least change their stance and go full-bore in the opposite direction, I say flood the country w/guns and ammunition, let them buy weapons till their wallets burst.

However, at the same time, they need to promote gun safety and consequences for the lack thereof. Every gun owner should be insured, if not, they should be held financially and criminally liable if/when necessary.

Also, keep better track of them, that goes w/the previous sentence.

Let people get and keep their guns to theirheartscontent, but let's all be safe about it.

Guns should be handled like cars. Maintain a registry, pass a basic gun safety and knowledge test, show you can hit something, and be licensed and insured.

Driving isn't a right.

Doesn't matter.

NO right is unlimited.

How about not being a 2nd amendment zealot and consider some win win solutions? Nah. That would take common sense and I wouldn't expect that from someone who's only solution is MORE GUNS and MORE GUNS - it's a big industry after all.

We have win win solutions.....when someone uses a gun to commit a crime, we arrest them and put them in jail and then prison...

Win Win....what you want is to limit the Right of owning and carrying a gun to the point no one is capable of getting through the Red Tape, pay the taxes and fees and mandatory insurance and pass the massive training requirements.....so that few if any normal people can own and carry guns....that is what you mean by win win solutions.....

My way works, yours doesn't.....my way targets and stops actual criminals, your way disarms normal Americans in the face of violent criminals and future, out of control government.

Ooops. You lose. Or rather someone loses, you know, the dead guy.

The one you have to WAIT until he's KILLED before you do anything.

Brilliant right?

But for some bizarre reason, you seem to think having a registry (which infringes on no right in away shape or form)...being required to display some basic knowledge that you know how to handle a deadly weapon (who's sole purpose is for killing something) safely - is an infringement.

Yet...hmmm....I'm not allowed to engage in bigamy, if my religion requires it...in fact there are a lot of things I can't do in the name of religion. Either my rights are being infringed upon or....no right is unlimited.

The purpose of my guns is to save my life and that of my family......so you are just wrong and stupid.

Americans use their guns 1.1 million times a year not to kill....but to save lives, from rape, brutal beatings, robberies and murders....often without firing a single shot...driving the criminals away, capturing the criminals and holding them for police or for the really stupid criminals wounding them.....of those 1.1 million times guns are used for self defense.....235 criminals pushed the attack to the point they had to be shot, and were unlucky in that the shots fired killed them..

Guns save lives. Guns save innocent lives.

 

[Coyote]

Hey...I just noticed there is a new 2nd A forum....the God's listened to us?

 

[2aguy]

Maybe if this idiot had been required to take a basic gun safety course, her kid might not have shot her other kid because he wouldn't have gotten ahold of the gun in the first place.

2-year-old child finds gun, accidentally shoots sibling in head

The woman’s 2-year-old daughter and 9-year-old son were left outside in her car while she and her boyfriend were allegedly inside visiting with a friend.

www.wapt.com

You could even treat it like you do driving - start in highschool, offer optional classes to learn to shoot, learn to be safe, learn the protocals.

2/3 of all accidental gun deaths of children are a result of parents who are criminals who have the guns illegally, you fucking doofus........

And how many children die of accidental gun deaths......out of 40 million or more children in the country...?

Fatal Injury and Violence Data | WISQARS | Injury Center | CDC

2019 0-14.....51

2018......

Guns......54


More children die in cars and pools than from gun accidents.......you idiot.

 

[Coyote]

Since the vast majority of legal gun owners will never commit a crime or shoot anyone I would say violence does not accompany gun ownership. And violence is certainly not enshrined in the Constitution.

Most undocumented immigrants don't commit violent crimes... but you want to round them all up.

The crime and violence in this country are social ills and have nothing to do with people who legally own guns.

Again- most people who are killed with guns are killed by people they know. A gun in the home is 43 times more likely to kill a household member than a bad guy.

The thing is, I agree, if you limited gun ownership to responsible people, you wouldn't have a problem.

Except if you did that, most people wouldn't really want them.

The gun industry wants the bad guys in that three block radius to have lots of guns so you get scared and want them, too.

A lot of gang members know the person they're shooting at. So do drug dealers. Face it, take away criminal on criminal shootings and we're on par with the rest of the world, PLUS we still have guns.

The problem is....in criminal related shootings....non-criminals get killed.

Other countries have equal rates of gangs and drug dealers....but not equal rates of deaths. Or police deaths.

 

[Coyote]

Maybe if this idiot had been required to take a basic gun safety course, her kid might not have shot her other kid because he wouldn't have gotten ahold of the gun in the first place.

2-year-old child finds gun, accidentally shoots sibling in head

The woman’s 2-year-old daughter and 9-year-old son were left outside in her car while she and her boyfriend were allegedly inside visiting with a friend.

www.wapt.com

You could even treat it like you do driving - start in highschool, offer optional classes to learn to shoot, learn to be safe, learn the protocals.

2/3 of all accidental gun deaths of children are a result of parents who are criminals who have the guns illegally, you fucking doofus........

And how many children die of accidental gun deaths......out of 40 million or more children in the country...?

Fatal Injury and Violence Data | WISQARS | Injury Center | CDC

2019 0-14.....51

2018......

Guns......54


More children die in cars and pools than from gun accidents.......you idiot.

No indication that she was a criminal with an illegal gun.

 

[2aguy]

Since the vast majority of legal gun owners will never commit a crime or shoot anyone I would say violence does not accompany gun ownership. And violence is certainly not enshrined in the Constitution.

Most undocumented immigrants don't commit violent crimes... but you want to round them all up.

The crime and violence in this country are social ills and have nothing to do with people who legally own guns.

Again- most people who are killed with guns are killed by people they know. A gun in the home is 43 times more likely to kill a household member than a bad guy.

The thing is, I agree, if you limited gun ownership to responsible people, you wouldn't have a problem.

Except if you did that, most people wouldn't really want them.

The gun industry wants the bad guys in that three block radius to have lots of guns so you get scared and want them, too.

A lot of gang members know the person they're shooting at. So do drug dealers. Face it, take away criminal on criminal shootings and we're on par with the rest of the world, PLUS we still have guns.

The problem is....in criminal related shootings....non-criminals get killed.

Other countries have equal rates of gangs and drug dealers....but not equal rates of deaths. Or police deaths.

Those other countries are now experiencing increased violence and gun crime because their welfare states have created fatherless homes....and those fatherless boys are now turning to violence and gangs.

Criminal related shootings happen in tiny areas of democrat party controlled cities......so nomal Americans are as safe or safer than in Europe....

 

[Coyote]

I recently changed my stance on gun-control. I think it's a dead-end and only harms the Democratic Party.

Guns and the violence that accompanies it are too embedded in American culture, they enshrined it in their Constitution for Christ's sake.

Moreover, Americans are too fearful to ever put down their guns, so the Democrats need to wise up and just drop the issue.

At the very least change their stance and go full-bore in the opposite direction, I say flood the country w/guns and ammunition, let them buy weapons till their wallets burst.

However, at the same time, they need to promote gun safety and consequences for the lack thereof. Every gun owner should be insured, if not, they should be held financially and criminally liable if/when necessary.

Also, keep better track of them, that goes w/the previous sentence.

Let people get and keep their guns to theirheartscontent, but let's all be safe about it.

Guns should be handled like cars. Maintain a registry, pass a basic gun safety and knowledge test, show you can hit something, and be licensed and insured.

Driving isn't a right.

Doesn't matter.

NO right is unlimited.

How about not being a 2nd amendment zealot and consider some win win solutions? Nah. That would take common sense and I wouldn't expect that from someone who's only solution is MORE GUNS and MORE GUNS - it's a big industry after all.

We have win win solutions.....when someone uses a gun to commit a crime, we arrest them and put them in jail and then prison...

Win Win....what you want is to limit the Right of owning and carrying a gun to the point no one is capable of getting through the Red Tape, pay the taxes and fees and mandatory insurance and pass the massive training requirements.....so that few if any normal people can own and carry guns....that is what you mean by win win solutions.....

My way works, yours doesn't.....my way targets and stops actual criminals, your way disarms normal Americans in the face of violent criminals and future, out of control government.

Ooops. You lose. Or rather someone loses, you know, the dead guy.

The one you have to WAIT until he's KILLED before you do anything.

Brilliant right?

But for some bizarre reason, you seem to think having a registry (which infringes on no right in away shape or form)...being required to display some basic knowledge that you know how to handle a deadly weapon (who's sole purpose is for killing something) safely - is an infringement.

Yet...hmmm....I'm not allowed to engage in bigamy, if my religion requires it...in fact there are a lot of things I can't do in the name of religion. Either my rights are being infringed upon or....no right is unlimited.

The purpose of my guns is to save my life and that of my family......so you are just wrong and stupid.

Americans use their guns 1.1 million times a year not to kill....but to save lives, from rape, brutal beatings, robberies and murders....often without firing a single shot...driving the criminals away, capturing the criminals and holding them for police or for the really stupid criminals wounding them.....of those 1.1 million times guns are used for self defense.....235 criminals pushed the attack to the point they had to be shot, and were unlucky in that the shots fired killed them..

Guns save lives. Guns save innocent lives.

The PURPOSE of guns is to do one thing: kill something. Animal or human.

If it "saves lives" it also "takes lives". And because of that, it behooves us to make sure people are as responsible and knowledgeable as possible. Doing so does not prevent you from buying a gun (frankly if you can't hit what you're aiming at with it you have no business shooting it and if you don't how to behave responsibly with a gun, you have no business owning one).

 

[2aguy]

Maybe if this idiot had been required to take a basic gun safety course, her kid might not have shot her other kid because he wouldn't have gotten ahold of the gun in the first place.

2-year-old child finds gun, accidentally shoots sibling in head

The woman’s 2-year-old daughter and 9-year-old son were left outside in her car while she and her boyfriend were allegedly inside visiting with a friend.

www.wapt.com

You could even treat it like you do driving - start in highschool, offer optional classes to learn to shoot, learn to be safe, learn the protocals.

2/3 of all accidental gun deaths of children are a result of parents who are criminals who have the guns illegally, you fucking doofus........

And how many children die of accidental gun deaths......out of 40 million or more children in the country...?

Fatal Injury and Violence Data | WISQARS | Injury Center | CDC

2019 0-14.....51

2018......

Guns......54


More children die in cars and pools than from gun accidents.......you idiot.

No indication that she was a criminal with an illegal gun.

The press rarely goes that deep into the story....they drag the body of the dead child to the camera then leave.....

Again....600 million guns in private hands.....over 19.4 million American can carry guns for self defense.........in a country of over 320 million people and over 40 million children......

54 accidental gun deaths...

13 deaths of children 2 and under......

280 children 2 and under drowned......you idiot.....

Guns aren't the problem.......bathtubs and pools are...

 

[2aguy]

I recently changed my stance on gun-control. I think it's a dead-end and only harms the Democratic Party.

Guns and the violence that accompanies it are too embedded in American culture, they enshrined it in their Constitution for Christ's sake.

Moreover, Americans are too fearful to ever put down their guns, so the Democrats need to wise up and just drop the issue.

At the very least change their stance and go full-bore in the opposite direction, I say flood the country w/guns and ammunition, let them buy weapons till their wallets burst.

However, at the same time, they need to promote gun safety and consequences for the lack thereof. Every gun owner should be insured, if not, they should be held financially and criminally liable if/when necessary.

Also, keep better track of them, that goes w/the previous sentence.

Let people get and keep their guns to theirheartscontent, but let's all be safe about it.

Guns should be handled like cars. Maintain a registry, pass a basic gun safety and knowledge test, show you can hit something, and be licensed and insured.

Driving isn't a right.

Doesn't matter.

NO right is unlimited.

How about not being a 2nd amendment zealot and consider some win win solutions? Nah. That would take common sense and I wouldn't expect that from someone who's only solution is MORE GUNS and MORE GUNS - it's a big industry after all.

We have win win solutions.....when someone uses a gun to commit a crime, we arrest them and put them in jail and then prison...

Win Win....what you want is to limit the Right of owning and carrying a gun to the point no one is capable of getting through the Red Tape, pay the taxes and fees and mandatory insurance and pass the massive training requirements.....so that few if any normal people can own and carry guns....that is what you mean by win win solutions.....

My way works, yours doesn't.....my way targets and stops actual criminals, your way disarms normal Americans in the face of violent criminals and future, out of control government.

Ooops. You lose. Or rather someone loses, you know, the dead guy.

The one you have to WAIT until he's KILLED before you do anything.

Brilliant right?

But for some bizarre reason, you seem to think having a registry (which infringes on no right in away shape or form)...being required to display some basic knowledge that you know how to handle a deadly weapon (who's sole purpose is for killing something) safely - is an infringement.

Yet...hmmm....I'm not allowed to engage in bigamy, if my religion requires it...in fact there are a lot of things I can't do in the name of religion. Either my rights are being infringed upon or....no right is unlimited.

The purpose of my guns is to save my life and that of my family......so you are just wrong and stupid.

Americans use their guns 1.1 million times a year not to kill....but to save lives, from rape, brutal beatings, robberies and murders....often without firing a single shot...driving the criminals away, capturing the criminals and holding them for police or for the really stupid criminals wounding them.....of those 1.1 million times guns are used for self defense.....235 criminals pushed the attack to the point they had to be shot, and were unlucky in that the shots fired killed them..

Guns save lives. Guns save innocent lives.

The PURPOSE of guns is to do one thing: kill something. Animal or human.

If it "saves lives" it also "takes lives". And because of that, it behooves us to make sure people are as responsible and knowledgeable as possible. Doing so does not prevent you from buying a gun (frankly if you can't hit what you're aiming at with it you have no business shooting it and if you don't how to behave responsibly with a gun, you have no business owning one).

Yes it does.

 

[2aguy]

I recently changed my stance on gun-control. I think it's a dead-end and only harms the Democratic Party.

Guns and the violence that accompanies it are too embedded in American culture, they enshrined it in their Constitution for Christ's sake.

Moreover, Americans are too fearful to ever put down their guns, so the Democrats need to wise up and just drop the issue.

At the very least change their stance and go full-bore in the opposite direction, I say flood the country w/guns and ammunition, let them buy weapons till their wallets burst.

However, at the same time, they need to promote gun safety and consequences for the lack thereof. Every gun owner should be insured, if not, they should be held financially and criminally liable if/when necessary.

Also, keep better track of them, that goes w/the previous sentence.

Let people get and keep their guns to theirheartscontent, but let's all be safe about it.

Guns should be handled like cars. Maintain a registry, pass a basic gun safety and knowledge test, show you can hit something, and be licensed and insured.

Driving isn't a right.

Doesn't matter.

NO right is unlimited.

How about not being a 2nd amendment zealot and consider some win win solutions? Nah. That would take common sense and I wouldn't expect that from someone who's only solution is MORE GUNS and MORE GUNS - it's a big industry after all.

We have win win solutions.....when someone uses a gun to commit a crime, we arrest them and put them in jail and then prison...

Win Win....what you want is to limit the Right of owning and carrying a gun to the point no one is capable of getting through the Red Tape, pay the taxes and fees and mandatory insurance and pass the massive training requirements.....so that few if any normal people can own and carry guns....that is what you mean by win win solutions.....

My way works, yours doesn't.....my way targets and stops actual criminals, your way disarms normal Americans in the face of violent criminals and future, out of control government.

Ooops. You lose. Or rather someone loses, you know, the dead guy.

The one you have to WAIT until he's KILLED before you do anything.

Brilliant right?

But for some bizarre reason, you seem to think having a registry (which infringes on no right in away shape or form)...being required to display some basic knowledge that you know how to handle a deadly weapon (who's sole purpose is for killing something) safely - is an infringement.

Yet...hmmm....I'm not allowed to engage in bigamy, if my religion requires it...in fact there are a lot of things I can't do in the name of religion. Either my rights are being infringed upon or....no right is unlimited.

The purpose of my guns is to save my life and that of my family......so you are just wrong and stupid.

Americans use their guns 1.1 million times a year not to kill....but to save lives, from rape, brutal beatings, robberies and murders....often without firing a single shot...driving the criminals away, capturing the criminals and holding them for police or for the really stupid criminals wounding them.....of those 1.1 million times guns are used for self defense.....235 criminals pushed the attack to the point they had to be shot, and were unlucky in that the shots fired killed them..

Guns save lives. Guns save innocent lives.

The PURPOSE of guns is to do one thing: kill something. Animal or human.

If it "saves lives" it also "takes lives". And because of that, it behooves us to make sure people are as responsible and knowledgeable as possible. Doing so does not prevent you from buying a gun (frankly if you can't hit what you're aiming at with it you have no business shooting it and if you don't how to behave responsibly with a gun, you have no business owning one).

So....you then have no problem with a fee to vote, a test to vote, .....right?