"Great. Just What the Anti-Gun Nutties Need"

[Billy the Great Khan]

Oh... I wasn't aware that your ten million figure encompassed the scope of human history since the dawn of time... Lol

Oh no, it encompasses this very moment. I was just extrapolating that it's a common convention in society, and has been for a very long time, you Fudd.

 

[maineman]

Do you use the term "extrapolate" everytime you just pull a number out of your ass?

 

[USFREEDOM911]

some of the replies mentioned that the parent was negligent for giving the five year old a gun and then leaving him unsupervised? Please give me the post numbers of those replies (plural) so that I might go back and review them.

Here you go.

The only one trying to prove a point is you by you giddily dancing on this girls grave in an effort to further your agenda.
Unfortunately they were not responsible gun owners if they left a loaded .22 in a corner whether there were children around or not

Lost on you is the tragedy that this is and that this poor young boy must live with this the rest of his life. You are scum worse than Al Queda.

Here is a question for you dick breath. Would Obamas background checks have prevented this?

This is not the "Same tired response..." as the parallel is there. The thing that ties these two incidents together is that both households were "irresponsible" and adults in both households should be held accountable.

What is the same and is becoming tiresome is that some people [gun banners] have to draw the same conclusion everytime something like this happens. Something like this would not have been prevented by the bill that was recently shot down in the Senate. Something like this would only have been prevented by an out and out gun ban...which is the true agenda of many of the "background check" supporters, IMO.

I hope they get that surviving child the proper counseling. He'll need it in the coming years.

No one was sacrificed to any constitutional amendment. This child died because of parental stupidity or neglect. It has nothing to do with any background checks or gun laws.

Hold on. You call someone who leaves a loaded gun in the presence of 2 small children a "responsible gun owner", you claim that background checks could have prevented this, and you have the gall to complain about a lack of honest debate??

What you have done is take an isolated incidence of parental ignorance or neglect and try to make it about all gun owners and about a failed piece of legislation. That is a far cry from honest debate.

Negligent homicide is there for such purposes.

The same charges as if they had left poinsons out or dangerous chemicals, knowing that children would have access to them - parental neglect.

the same charges if a kid falls into a pool. maybe negligence or child endangerment? i dunno

These people left a loaded firearm leaning in the corner and left the kids unattended in the same room. And you think these people would use a trigger lock?

I am not making a wild assumption. I am using their own behavior as a guide to predicting what they would do. You, on the other hand, are assuming they would be so careless and so negligent, but would use a trigger lock if required by law. Yeah, I think there is a huge difference.

Only if they used it. And nothing in that article shows that they would have used it. In fact, their careless storage of the gun and the fact that they never checked to see if the single shot rifle was loaded before leaving it easily accessible to a pair of small children shows extreme neglect on their part. If they were that neglectful, expecting that they would take the time to put a lock on the rifle is lunacy. They had already ignored one law. You think an additional law would have helped?

 

[USFREEDOM911]

why is three years old significantly different than five? Obviously, the comment about cribs was rhetorical... I would have thought you might have honestly figured that out. Silly me.

UH-There's a 2 year significant difference.

 

[Howey]

Here you go.

Bit I'm sure they all claimed to be responsible gun owners. Sounds like we need some kind of gun control to keep guns out of the hands of all them.

 

[maineman]

You're a fucking idiot.
What do you think some of the replies that you recieved meant, when they just happened to mention that the parent was negligent?
Or did your mental impairment block out those parts; because it destroys your asinine thought process.

I have only posted in THIS thread about this incident. I posted a link to a CNN article. None of the posts you have copied here are from this thread or are replies to ME in any way. What the fuck are you talking about?

 

[maineman]

UH-There's a 2 year significant difference.

that's right. Five year olds are SO SIGNIFICANTLY much more mature and responsible than three year olds. We should feel totally safe entrusting them with deadly weapons because of the powerful wisdom and restraint and judgment they have acquired before they get to kindergarten. Why don't you start a petition to give them the right to vote? The argument back in the 60's was, if 18 year olds are old enough to go fight and die, they should have the vote. Well... if five year olds are mature and responsible enough to bear arms in a well regulated militia - and shoot their baby sisters - they probably should have the vote, too... right? lol

 

[USFREEDOM911]

I have only posted in THIS thread about this incident. I posted a link to a CNN article. None of the posts you have copied here are from this thread or are replies to ME in any way. What the fuck are you talking about?

That wasn't what you asked and now you're moving the goal posts, in an effort to appear knowledgable.
What you asked was:

some of the replies mentioned that the parent was negligent for giving the five year old a gun and then leaving him unsupervised? Please give me the post numbers of those replies (plural) so that I might go back and review them.

And they were furnished to you.

 

[USFREEDOM911]

that's right. Five year olds are SO SIGNIFICANTLY much more mature and responsible than three year olds. We should feel totally safe entrusting them with deadly weapons because of the powerful wisdom and restraint and judgment they have acquired before they get to kindergarten. Why don't you start a petition to give them the right to vote? The argument back in the 60's was, if 18 year olds are old enough to go fight and die, they should have the vote. Well... if five year olds are mature and responsible enough to bear arms in a well regulated militia - and shoot their baby sisters - they probably should have the vote, too... right? lol

MY-MY; it's obvious that your local change has done very little to make a difference in your anger management problems.
You've got a little spittle on your chin.......right........there.